Nah it’s the same radar the marksman gets, you need to go to 10.0+ for better radars. VEAK’s problem is mostly the firerate, if you’re firing less metal into the air your chances of hitting simply go down
1 Like
yea but in 10.7 without thermals is unfair at least give it good reverse speed
When did I ever say that?
While back when you said the Yennisei was worse than the Veak and then I compared the fact that they’re were nearly identical for AT role but the Yennisei was better for air.
Worse mobility on the Yennisei compared to the Veak but better AA and similar TD capabilities given Russia doesn’t fight as many armored tanks.
It may have been a bit after you said the BMP 30mm was weaker than the CV90 which was superior despite that being a lie.
That things armour is better than T-80B and that thing also doesnt get thermals.
The BMP’s 30mm is only better in ROF. Everything else goes to the cv90.
Velocity, AP ability, etc.
it gets even if it didnt have irl
one, 300m/s velocity is a noticable change, but 1120m/s is still so high you wont really notice the difference unless youre at extreme ranges.
and two, the pen of the round is pointless because its not high enough where combating mbts is easier, as such the same weakspots for a russian 30mm apds is the same as the 40mm apfsds, but also it comes with the slight problem of you have 24 rounds which last for 2 seconds of firing, and have a reload time of like 2ish minutes, maybe 3, oh and slightly better post pen damage, not enough to offset the massive firepower difference.
so ya between the swedish 40mm and soviet 30mm, the 30mm is gonna be better in most situations besides extreme ranges where the extra pen and velocity will come in handy. good thing there isnt a general nerf to nato gun accuracy… wait a second, that is the case here.
so effectively the only upside of the swedish 40mm, is the hevt shells. which last you for a whopping 1 second, unless you get extremely lucky and the plane comes in when youre fully loaded and can change the round giving you 1.8 seconds of firing time.
Fire rate, velocity, reload, gun dispersion. It’s all in all just a useless SPAA, Honestly should be removed until it gets its historical ammo values which gaijin has ignored and removed anytime it’s posted.
Just add the ItPsV 90 so that there’s something to take the ItPsV Leopard’s place if it goes up. It’s essentially the same thing but on the less capable T-55AM chassis, which should be much less controversial at the BR.
It’s just a slightly less mobile Wirbelwind that has worse ammunition and RoF and in exchange for not being as vulnerable to strafing, which is partially nullified by the more powerful cannons of many CAS you face around the current BR. It should oc still be noticeably higher in BR than the Wirbelwind since being moderately armored is huge for an SPAA, but this one attribute is being way overvalued at the moment. A BR of 4.7 would be fine.
As for other Oerlikon armed tanks, assuming you are referring to the Crusader II AA and AEC AA, there’s a whole host of bug reports on their inaccuracies that need to be addressed, which would result in both going down in BR in all likelihood.
1 Like
please dont “rate” again tiger 2 105 in 7.3? yeah face more heatfs and in uptier face 8.3 really good idea… u want is8 in 7.0 nut tiger 2 in 7.3 u are somehow russian main? because in much nations u want higher br but for russian vehicles lower…
3 Likes
The disconnect with you is real.
Why cv90 are you referring to? There’s a bunch of them. And the one I played so far, didn’t have much of a reload time if at all. So much, so that in my first game I just ran through the enemy team in a full tier and got a nuke.
And 40mm APFSDS is vastly better than 30mm APDS which constantly likes to shatter.
The 40mm can also pierce a lot more places than the 30mm.
What in the non English are you even trying to say?
If anything, all tank get affected by HEAT-FS, and that’s a poor example, as Soviet heavies all detonate with one heat FS hit, because gaijin puts the ammo literally everywhere in those tanks.
Fun fact, for the longest time, the Is-4 was one of the very very few tanks that had mg ammo modeled, which killed the tank even easier.
Oh btw, I’m an Italian main
better yet, bring in the zsu 57-2 m2. aka the wz305, with radar.
there are only 4 40mm cv90s, all of them have the same shell capacity and shell selection minus the cv9040c getting access to slpprj m/01, while having the same firepower performance because literally nothing with the gun was changed between the different versions.
as for which cv90 i selected for comparison, it was the cv9040b, which is the same br as the bmp3.
and yes the 40mm apfsds is better than the 30mm apds, however that performance doesnt offset the massive problem that is, the Swedish reload problem. also that time you played the cv90 was most likely when gaijin broke the ready rack replenishment system where it was in a usable state for auto loaders. which they fixed like 2 years ago. if youre saying its still good to this day, then youre just lying to yourself and the rest of us because no one in their right mind would say thats a reasonable replenishment rate.
Still a little confused as to why you want to move both of these up, they’re fine where they are, good gun with a good shell on a fairly mobile yet tall and vulnerable chassis. I can see the STA-3 going to 7.0 but its still going to go from a good tank to a mid pick and it will be stuck without a lineup. However, the Type 61 is just a worse M46 which is at 7.0 so it is fine at 6.7, no reason to move it up in my eyes.
I can think of plenty other tanks in the BR range that have good cannons that dont need to move up, the tank also in and of itself acts as an equalizer to more oppresive heavy tanks and heavy TDs such as Ferdinand/Jagtiger etc.
Supposedly the STA-3 could possibly be fine going to 7.0 and Type-61 staying at 6.7, but the most optimal solution would be for BR decompression.
1 Like
Indeed. The more domestic Nordic vehicles, the marrier.
This does relate to a belief of mine that it’s good to consider BR changes in the context of what other vehicles aren’t in the game, but could be added. I see too many people justify unusual BRs on the grounds that changing it would breaks line-ups or creates voids in the tree. It completely ignores that ~70% of the time (a bit nation and era dependent), there’s a viable non-copy-paste vehicle that could fill the gap anyways. Just some food for thought ig.
It’s on Sweden so it will be controversial that’s how it works
It was maybe a year ago when I played? If not sooner.
I didn’t mind it
The m46 is 7.0 as you used as an example.
All those tanks are good tanks. But the M46 feels better balanced.
They’re all a bit squishy but can bounce somethings, they’re all very mobile, and the ST-A (which ever model) one gets an auto loader.
They’re not super super tall. They’re pretty much an M46 like you said, so why aren’t they at the same br?