Well yeah I agree about the mapping but testing with my friend basically showed the same results for the turret, the KV-1A has bigger weakspots frontal and angled. We had one shot go through and just disappear but aside from that every shot either nukes the tank or took the turret crew.
Having played / fought, and tested all the KV’s I know I’d much rather fight a KV-1 Zis over the 1942 or the Kv-1c
Literally doesn’t matter to me I aim for the same spot on the KV-1A as I do the KV-1 Zis-5 because the small flat plates next to the cheek is very easy to hit or the cheeks themselves.
yes, we should uptier them until their armor means nothing and their guns are mediocre
Their guns are quite good as well as their armor. Bumping them all except the Panther II by one br is good
Armor becomes useless if you uptier them higher than they are now. They are already pretty easy to kill so long as you simply don’t aim for the UFP and instead aim for any other part of the tank including any sliver of side armor you are given or the turret
The guns are good but won’t continue to be good when you try to put them at 6.3 and 6.7.
Where are your soviet vehicles that are going up to match these Panthers?
1 Like
Exactly, and my br change list would come with decompression making the max br 13.7, and adjusting a lot more over time. But the strong takes in capability, as well as stats would be the first ones bumped.
Oh sure, let’s make Germany even more vulnerable to CAS while ‘balancing’ tanks. Yeah guys, that makes total sense.
Changed:
- removed:
KV-1(Zis-5) 4.7 > 4.3 (the Sweden one is 4.7 with a far better turret and same gun, making little sense why they are identical in BR placement.)
Turm III 8.3 > 8.7 (very powerful medium tank with a 5.0 sec reload and auto cannon, and great gun depression, often it’s so open it will be hit with little to no damage).
@Mitovskil this is GRB. Not air. I have another post setup for that, as well as naval. Check out my profile and go to them if you wish to put a comment in on that.
Secondly, the PUMA iFV was at 8.3 or 8.7 when it was added to the game, and was arguably a much more egregious vehicle, as its ERA vastly over preformed for the 1st year it was in game, and was actually unkillable, and despite its ammo cooking off you could still fire it, unless you shot it from behind you couldn’t really kill it for a long time.
The PUMA was fixed much faster, not to mention its capabilities were more realistic because it was just at the wrong BR. The BMPT has its accuracy and armor incorrectly modeled; it’s not just a matter of moving it up or down in BR. To be fair, it doesn’t have APFSDS either, but if its accuracy were modeled correctly, I would have no problem accepting that.
Ah, I see now. Just like Gaijin should have added helis to fill the gap between 9.7 and 12.7, right? But they never did. Or like the gap between 11.0 and 12.3 in tanks. Honestly, for me, the PUMA isn’t even an 11.0 tank to begin with; he could easily be at 10.7, just like the Boxer, especially since the PUMA is the only one at 11.0.
Please don’t go off topic and into arguments insulting other users. Either go to PMs or keep it on the topic at hand.
You won’t get a second warning, Keep the topic civil.
1 Like
Didn’t we literally discuss this? The Soviet model is on par if not better for armor than the KV-1A, how is it that you’re still on this idea that the Soviet model should be a lower BR? Talk about biases, where is your evidence that’s its better rather than you just saying nuh uh?
Flakpanzer Gepard 1 with APDS 128mm pen. why is this cancer only on 8.3Br?? he killed me in my T72B and T90A and ZTZ96A and every time front armor. this is crazy on 8.3Br!!!
Only 40 rounds, 20 per gun both fired at the same time
It’s really not the APDS that makes it a monster, it’s the APIT (APHE) that only needs to penetrate once to kill the whole crew
2 Likes
It’s the angeling. As I’ve literally said over and over again.
And I showed and tested that the difference isn’t that big and that on average the KV-1A is worse than the Zis-5 especially when angling because the armor is more thin when angled next to the Zis-5
So looks like moving the Re.2005(VDM) to 6.3 in both air and ground was intentional?
Where is the logic to moving an aircraft to a BR with zero ground vehicles for ground RB?
Why is ground RB BR still being tied to air RB BR for low tier? Anti tank capability and low altitude performance are much more important in ground RB, so BRs should be considered differently.