Literally means nothing. Players have grinded the entire Russian TT and came to the conclusion that the terminator is overtiered.
Don’t forget the Chi-To. At 4.7 I would 100% rather have a T34-57 or an Avenger or a Sherman Ic. It could easily go down to 4.3.
Well like you said, it should be an easy fix.
1 Like
The allure of the chi to is its high pen and damage gun.
It’s like 150 pen and good filler at 4.7?
In theory yes, but there’s many unimplemented reports that are just a matter of changing one number that has barely any balance implications.
Gajin are also likely to take the path of least resistance so to speak, that being the one that more people are asking for. So they would continue to ignore the report unless the playerbase makes it clear they want it corrected.
Oh tell me about it. It took 4-5 years of me posting the reload speed cyclogram data for the T series to get buffed to irl standards.
It’s a very sluggish for a tank that supposedly has 16.7 hp/ton
Pen is 6mm (and less) better than the Pz 4 H and 2 steps higher in BR.
IMO the thing is overtiered by at least 1 step. Should be 4.3
ok but as you can see by my stats I haven’t played any of those additions
no I say it pretty selectively
yeah cause you’re meant to play 6.3 and then 7.3, not 6.7
FV4202 is way too good to be 6.7, it would just be insanely overpowered.
They’re not that bad
underselling these a lot
yeah but that doesnt justify making the fv4202 6.7
Atleast that change actually got implemented. Abrams, M901, B-52, F-117, F-106, and many more have all been left in the dust.
3 of those are off topic entirely.
Chi nu, chi nu kai, chi ri, technically both chi it’s but this is due to compression because they’re on par with some 4.7s but not others, type 87 rcv, type 89, I would include the type 24 but those things are bad because they’re bushmaster 30mm and there is nothing saving those guns, type 74 e,f and g but this is another compression issue.
Pretty much every plane between 3.7 and 6.7 that isn’t the j2m2, m3 and m5, and both b7s, and maybe some low tier shit but that’s kinda pointless.
The kikka mainly thanks to American jets dominating at this br, and ussr 8.0s being broken, ki 200, f5t scu, that’s most of what I can remember off the top of my head.
I mean it’s not as bad as swedish jets which have like 5 total vehicles that are good.
Chi-Nu is in an okay spot now that the likes of the M4A1, T-34, and Pz.IV G aren’t at the same BR as it. It’s just a matter of getting a few historical reports fixed to make it more competitive in the inevitable uptiers.
Turret traverse rate could possibly be buffed to at least comparable levels to the Pz.IVs (it already is on the Chi-Nu II for some reason?).
The crew can also go up to 6 since they had 1 guy there just to pull the ripcord for the gun.
Because Japanese 75 mm shells were compatible across most of their guns, the Chi-Nu could also get the HEAT and overpressure APHE from the Ho-I, which won’t help as much in uptiers, but do give it a bit more flexibility.
Removed:
May add back T-44(FM)
T-44(FM) 6.3 → 6.0 reason: very bad armor / survivability, also a poor gun for 6.3
Its pros are mobility and BR-367 which is understandable for 6.0, but 6.3 is pushing it,
It has far too many weak spots or enemies pen you everywhere.
IS-6 7.7 > 7.3 (terrible reload, bad gun depression, gunner optics are a big weak point aams as roof hatches, bad penetration, not equal to other 7.7s in performance, being typically equal to or slightly better than the IS-3, not enough to warrant a br difference). -irrelevant to move if 6.7s and bumped up-
Type 61 6.7 > 7.0 (great penetration, all around a good tank, but poor armor). -Has HeatFS which is OP for these brs-
ST-A3 6.7 > 7.0 (6.0 sec auto loader is too good for manually loaded tanks around). -Has HeatFS which is OP for these brs-
It is ok on 6.7 compared to what other nations have.
I wonder why T-44 is at 6.7 tho, should be 6.3 max
Because while the gun might be rather poor for its BR, its armour, especially from the front, is better then some heavy tanks around there (notably, if I wanted armour, I’d take a T-44 over an IS-2 every time)
IS-2 (1944) shouldn’t be at 6.7 in the first place…
7 Likes
armor+speed too good when the gun isnt even hampered cause its 6.3
1 Like
T-44 FM poor gun for 6.3 ??? hahahahaha
This guy continues with his only russians can win wet dream lol.
False flagged .)
The regular T-44 does have a poor gun for 6.3, its just not so bad that it really matters at the end of the day cause the armor+mobility are so good
Turret can be penned by all tanks eaisly
1 Like