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.
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?
BMPT 15.0
BMPT72 14.7
RU only versus RU removed for all other Nation s thank you
I agree however I think the PZH without a laser rangefinder can stay at 7.7. The PZH in general can be harder for the mindless mid tier german mains who are not used to paper thin armour. (going from King tigers to wiesels in 1 br is tough especially when you are used to head ons rather than flanking). Plus the PZH is very big and can’t peak without being shot at. And don’t even get me started with the CAS. I think putting it up a tier with a laser range finder (unlocked) makes it easier for the PZH since not everything has 200mm+ armour
One has slightly better armour than the other, can actually survive some hits. Type61/STA-3 have a worse reverse gear, but better HP/T.
Type61/STA-3 = 18.9 hp/t at 45.1 kmh forward and 8km/h reverse
M46 = 16.38 hp/t at 48km/h forward and 19.3km/h reverse (Note this is with stock modifications so spaded is probably around ~17 hp/t I’d assume)
The major armour difference and reload difference is what would make spcifically the STA-3 (Not Type61) a sidegrade or compromise to the M46, so they could be same BR due to this. (7.0)
Type 61 shares the same reload as the M46 aced, but has the worse armour, top speed and reverse gear, and the mobility increase (mobility as in hp/t) is fairly negligible on part of the Type 61. Thus it is fine at 6.7, but in the event of BR decompression could most likely move up another notch.
Would be nice if the Type 61 had its reload buffed to between that of the STA-3 and M46. Something around 6.5~7.0 seconds.
It does have the ammunition in a rear bustle pointed towards the breech, rather than mounted vertically along the walls towards the turret front like the M46. This means its not a huge leap in logic to justify a little buff. Could possibly apply similar logic retroactively to the STA-1 and STA-2 as well.
I don’t know if this reload buff would be sufficient to bump them up to 7.0, but I figure its an idea worth throwing out there.
They’re already worth br 7.0 they’re very good tanks.
hmm…
I’ll have to play them first to get my opinion (I’m not too far off from them). If your on to something, I can see 7.0 being reasonable, but I still think the Type 61 should get a compensatory reload buff if it does go up.
Oh that’s cool I didn’t know gaijin incorrectly modeled interior components on yet another tank, thanks for the info
Only the STA-3, Type 61 is a worse pick than M46 and STA-3, like Fourche7 said if it got its correctly modeled ammo and a reload buff it could be fine at 7.0 supposedly.
Not really
RU-251 is pretty much the same thing but faster, and a bit shorter. 90mm with heat FS, but a dedicated light tank.
Sta-3 (which ever one has the auto loader) has a stock 6.7 sec reload.
And neither are slouches in forward mobility.
Ngl I think I might get the premium one, it looks enticing
Is there a premium one? Is it unlisted or something? I haven’t seen one at least. Let me know :}
