2 Likes
Hilarious…“When will the UI get updated - It will never get updated”
Yh its deffinitly not just the US, just they have the most extreme example by far.
The t34s at 5.3 vs 6.3
When the T34s gun already handles pretty good- going 1.0 BR up is no bueno for a vertical stabalizer… now faces up to 7 3 beasts with same ammo- can hit a few more targets maybe- but the bounce factor will eclipse the gain.
Find earliest BR of said gun. Does the tank have any redeeming feature vs previous version= 99% of time no it doesnt.
Makes it pretty easy to find where the peak of the nations are.
Well that depends and also proves (in a way i hope) what i was yapping about. The armor of the t34-85 at 5.3 or 5.7 already isnt the best and even there only works if you manage to angle very well. Which you rarely will be able to if you get ambushed and for sniping theres way better tanks anyhow. So already pretty bad armor (45 mm front plate, tho already angled) wont make much of a difference if enemies at higher BRs on average sport better rounds. As long as its enough to protect from MG rounds, maybe even some autocannons it’s perfect. More would just slow the thing down and increase turret rotation time. Ppl that can put the short stop stab to max use sure do know how to use that advantage. But also its a pretty new vehicle (dunno if its BR was even changed after introduction) so the BR might be adjusted soon.
If its at a higher BR in almost every case it has what r u talking about? Maybe sometimes the advantages dont justify that much of a higher BR but they are always better than the lower BR ones with the same gun. Otherwise those BRs would get adjusted over time due to mysterious snailtistics. That would be like claiming the IS-3 ain’t better than the Is-2? Or the Hellcat not being better than the 76 Jumbo? But for real i didnt check every possible example of these same gun higher BR cases but having played through almost all tech trees im quite confident thats the case (maybe except a very small amount of tanks in form of premiums). Like, let’s take the KV-122 at 5.3 as an example. While its gun sure can be useful if uptiered, at its BR and even more so when downtiered it is completely overkill vs almost every target you can see while a Pz4s gun at 4.0 can already lolpen almost everything. Every 6 seconds. Do you think the Kv122 would be better or worse if it had the Pz4s 75mm KwK40 with 6 second reload? (Just a hypothetical mind game…oh wait actually not: Hello Kw1c 756)
Also the t34-85 STP is on rank 14/15 in K/D and K/S out of all 38 6.3 vehicles so its doing just fine. Probably much better on flat urban maps than on hilly and long range maps but every tank has to deal with being better in certain circumstances
1 Like
Better is fair but MM not so much
Cant really go off KD as are the 5.3s being played in 5.7 line ups for eg so wont get the better lobbies.
5.3 US m36 vs 5.7 = roof
Sherman 5.3 v s 5.7- bit of armour
Now its gone from a chilled line up in a fair MM to pain as its sucked into the 6.7 BR hole. I’m not even saying stuff should be moved its just the way the game is.
Hello everyone,
I recently purchased the UK F-4J with Golden Eagles and, after playing it for a while, I feel that it is noticeably weaker than the American F-4S, despite both aircraft sitting at the same battle rating.
One of the main problems, in my opinion, is the missile loadout. The UK F-4J does not have particularly strong missiles for its BR, which puts it at a disadvantage against many aircraft it regularly faces. Compared to the F-4S, which benefits from better overall capabilities and missile performance, the difference feels quite significant.
At the same time, the US tech tree also has an F-4J variant that feels very similar, yet performs better , because it does have AIM-7F while staying at the same BR.
Because of this, I wanted to ask the community:
- Are there any plans to improve the UK F-4J (for example, better missiles or performance changes)?
- Is a BR reduction being considered?
- Do other players feel that the UK F-4J is balanced at its current BR?
Thanks for reading.
“COMMUNITY” does not like critique
- No.
- No.
- No.
1 Like
To most of the dudes who want to downtier the Jumbo
both you and your opponent aim for weakspots, is it that hard to understand?
“bit it sick in iptiiers mimimi”
A lot of heavies do that or your armor falls or/and your cannon falls, it is your fault for taking a Jumbo to 6.7 and expect no difficulty curve, pick another vehicle.
Your tactic is the exact same, barrel, track, track, flank and shoot. What can your opponent do? Pray that it can nail your weakspot, or you know, you can land in a weakspot too and cripple it.
The M3 cannon can destroy modules in 1 shot, can destroy a barrel a 1 shot, a track in 1 shot and slither inside a tank via a weakspot in the hull.
both you and your opponent aim for weakspots, is it that hard to understand?
Is the heavy tank that doesn’t pack a punch, if you want to down it, present a decent and solid argument please, you are making even myself look smart.
Small rant
This damn thread has been flooded with the most miserable arguments to down the JUMBO AND COBRA.
BECAUSE COBRA KING IS THE SAME DAMN FORSAKEN TANK AS JUMBO.
Why are people treating them like different tanks?
1 Like
Just LMAO
1.Aim at weak Spot like yes we all wait for you and other 10 people to tell use because we don’t know
2.Angry much …
3.Yes enemy waiting still, not moving even the shell is hilarius m/s make it amazing
4.We was waiting for you to explain , how to play Jumbo and Cobra , You need to make Tutorial for us Plebs , you seems so amazing that seriusly i don’t know what to do with me self .
it’s literally in the part you quoted, you have a 75mil with a stabilizer and incredible frontal armor, which results in an above average window of time to disarm your opponent and flank it.
Jumbo doesn’t perform well at distances, but if it needs to, it can cross sightline if needed.
Also if “weakspot don’t matter”, we can send KV-8 to 3.3 since the cannon sucks, side armor is the same as a base KV-1 and the drivers viewport is a worse weakpot than a mg port for shermans
not sure what youre getting at but whatever.
- No sense much?
tiny rant
Unrelated to the current ongoing discussions, but it is my hope that someday every nation will be restricted to its actual, historically fielded munitions and capabilities. This would be far better than the endless homogenisation we see driven by ‘technical compatibility’ and developer discretion to patch up gap deficiencies.
The issue isn’t even cloning the physical vehicles; it is the arbitrary allocation of weapons. We should make every vehicle’s armament a 1:1 match to what that specific nation actually owned, operationally deployed, or at the very absolute least, officially ordered and planned to field.
That is exactly why the BR system exists. It should balance vehicles based on their real performance, not artificially inflate or deflate them with fictional loadouts. It’s time for Gaijin to drop the ‘ultimate realism’ marketing tag when they’ve gone so far beyond actual history for the sake of matchmaking convenience.
1 Like
tldr: british :(
1 Like
Look, the T-34-57 (1943) is 4.7 BR, with 143 mm penetration at 100 meters. OP Russian tank. 15 deaths, 70 kills, and an 87% win rate. And this tank is 4.7. Logic? Nah.
It wasn’t OP before the mid tier BR changes but it may be now
Because pen means something.
Its OP. i play now with this tank. And is OP. TOOOOOOOO MUCH OP
Nah
1 Like
Has very similar pen to Panzer 4 H which is 2 steps below in BR.
Has slightly better reload but less post-pen-damage.
How you figure it is undertiered?
Global stats on statshark show Kills-per-spawn = 0.76 and kills per death = 0.86.
Nothing about that screams OP.
The T-34 STZ at 4.3 has better stats…