stop saying the conqueror can go to 8.0. It’s not 8.0 material you are just insanely overhyping it because you play it a lot. The shell is inconsistent (you can bounce on the maus’s turret cheek, like the part you’re supposed to shoot), HESH is a straight downgrade to HE, and the reload is awful. You don’t have that much gun depression and your turret traverse is not great. Also the ammo stowage that gaijin has decided every stabilized british tank gets with the primary rack being next to the driver.
Now then
Churchill VII → 4.3
No I’m not trolling. This tank is still extremely mid. Sure, your ammo does something now, but here’s the thing. None of the tank’s other flaws have gone away. You’re insanely easy to kill, insanely easy to CBT, intensely weak to CAS, and volumetric pretty much tells you to kill yourself if you ever have to shoot at a Soviet tank frontally. Reminder that even the KV-8 can penetrate the turret roof of a Churchill, and the welded bits are so comically thin that you can die to a 37. I would like to reiterate that Churchills are not hard to kill, you are just bad. You can’t even pen the Panther’s cupola but that high velocity 75 can sure as shit go straight through you pretty much anywhere frontally.
It would be too good at 4.3.
It went from a crappy vehicle to one of the best 4.7 vehicles in GRB. Keep in mind that a lot of 3.7s also got moved up to 4.0, like some T-34s and some Panzer IVs.
Most players don’t know / have a hard time aiming for the forehead of the turret, and you can also just slightly look away from them and have them take a shot at your ~160mm effective turret armour.
You can get CBT’d pretty consistently, sure, but you have so many smoke grenades to cover you, along with the fact that most tanks can’t kill you frontally, and some even from the side (those that have less than ~96mm of penetration, like the KV-1B/E and T 34 747 (r), which are just situated 0.3 BRs lower), not to mention that barely anyone uses / need APCR at these BRs (or even in general).
It’s a mini E-100 at 4.7, with a much faster reload but much less potent round… and the lack of a usable co-axial.
all kv-1s (except maybe the KV-8) can kill a churchill frontally. There’s the turret roof, the welds, longways through the tracks. These tanks are not hard to kill. Not even mentioning their TDs. Panzer 4s have very little issue if you aim intelligently and shermen just outmaneuver you and are volumetric incarnate to shoot at. Now you could say that this would powercreep the NA75, and my response is drop the NA75 to 4.0. I genuinely don’t think the Churchill VII is one of the best 4.7 vehicles. It’s much better than it was before the update, but it’s still a Churchill. I adore churchills and I’ve been having a lot of fun in the VII, but a jumbo this is not. If the turret wasn’t how it was it’d be true 4.7 material, but right now it’s just kinda mid.
If they are close up to you, they can shoot the forehead, but if they are further away, it will automatically ricochet the round. Even up close, you can angle the turret when you are reloading to minimize the chances of them being able to penetrate the forehead (turret roof).
Yes, there are turret welds spots that can be penetrated:
However, most people do not know of this, let alone are able to shoot it consistently, especially if you wiggle your turret and keep moving.
It’s a relatively small weakspot compared to the cheeks of the T14, for example:
I’m not sure what you mean here? I haven’t managed to find any weakspots where you can kill the Churchill VII through the tracks unless you are unangled.
Even then, only 100mm+ rounds can really go through it, and it’s not as reliable or easy to shoot as with other weakspots.
Well, you can get a good shot off on the Churchill VII in the Panzer IV, but you still need to aim well. The Churchill VII can penetrate you (and almost always 1-shot you) almost anywhere, with a 5s reload.
Imagine this but instead of a 0.7 BR difference, the Churchill VII moves down to 4.3 and is now just a 0.3 BR difference.
The sherman is much harder to deal with than a Panzer IV, at least from my experience using M61 shot against them, but the Churchill VII has neutral steering, and 24 degrees of turret rotation speed.
Even if the Sherman manages to flank you, you can almost guarantee that your side is fine (because you have 95mm of side armour for both the turret and hull armour (excluding the fact that the extra track armour on the side gives around ~10mm more KE protection)) and you turn on a dime:
Well, in my opinion, if the Churchill III can be 4.0 with 4s reload 122mm pen AP, with a vertical stabilizer and decent armour, I don’t see why the NA75 can’t be 4.0 with a 5s reload M61 and slightly better turret armour.
It’s like the Cromwell I and Cromwell V. They both are the same vehicle but are exactly different in the same way as the Churchill III and NA75, and yet they are both (correctly I’d say) at the same BR.
I think the Churchill VII’s armour is just that much better than the NA75’s.
The side armour is incredible that even some 4.7s and a lot of 4.3s struggle to penetrate it.
The frontal armour, even when unangled, is ~150mm thick at most, which most tanks can’t penetrate unless they are an SPG (like the Hummel), a SPH (like the M44), or have a really good gun for the BR (like the VK 3002 (M) / Panzer IV/70(A), French / Italian Firefly, etc).
The turret armour could be better but it is still very hard to reliably penetrate, especially when you decide to angle / wiggle it (like with the MAUS / E-100).
The only reason why I’d say it shouldn’t move up to 5.0 is because the mobility isn’t that great, and the weakspots on the turret (like you said) pull it down.
I mean, I can understand that, but I suggest looking at your statistics on it. It seems like you’re doing much better than with other vehicles:
The turret ring and side skirt buff is quite nice against BMPT, but I don’t think it really makes a difference against other MBTs.
You can still ammo-rack it through the turret cheeks with pretty much every 11.7+ round besides the Type 90 / TKX (P)'s 120mm DM33. 😅
However, there’s some strange spots on the cheeks near the mantlet that can definitely be trolly, especially if you’re trying to breech it (for whatever reason):
This, Churchill VII is fine. If anything it might even go up to 5.0 soon depending on how much the winrate goes up now that it has APHE.
Though personally I think the Churchill Mk I, Mk III, and NA75 need to go down.
Churchill Mk I (back down to 3.0):
Sub 50% winrate, sub 1KD. The armour isn’t that impressive for a 3.3, it has less armour than the AVRE at 2.7, the same armour as the 3" Gun Carrier at 3.0, and has far more obvious weakspots than the Mk VII. I would take the Ram I and AC I over the Churchill I every time (and I do). It’s got no mobility to flank and even in a maximum downtier you’re struggling to penetrate M4A3 105’s, Panzer III M’s, StuH’s, etc.
Churchill Mk III (down to 3.7):
Even worse winrate than the Mk I, worse armour than the Mk I but at a higher BR, slower due to increased weight, but you now get a better gun and that’s it. Even then it still has a sub 1KD. There’s also no line up for it. I’d rather take the Ram II or Cromwell I, which are better in almost every way.
NA75 (down to 4.0):
Sub 50% winrate, but we finally got over that 1KD. All the same issues as the Mk III above except you lost the shoulder stab, lost the penetration, lost the rate-of-fire, and gained APHE. Also no lineup, not that 4.0 would fix that but hey at least you have the option of uptiering your 3.7 vehicles if you want to play it.
I agree with moving down the Churchill I, I disagree with moving down the Churchill III, and I agree with moving down the NA75.
The turret armour is good against noobs but not poor against experienced players / lucky shots. ~96mm for most of the turret front is usable against most tanks other than SPHs, SPGs, and the Panzer IVs with the 75mm.
But I can see where the problems begin. The gunner port is a weakspot (albeit somewhat small), and can even be penned by lower caliber APHE due to it only being worth 50mm:
The turret ring is also a problem (albeit still hard to notice unless you are experienced at facing this churchill):
The hull armour is pretty good though. Angled, it can stop most rounds besides SPHs and certain SPGs.
Though there is the lower portion of the side that can also be a problem (again, if someone is experienced enough at defeating churchills):
The mobility is what you’d expect. Not great but at least it’s as good as the Churchill III’s and better than the Churchill VII’s.
Like you already showed, the stats don’t tell a pleasant story.
Winrate can tell you things about how good a tank performs at its BR, but I wouldn’t say it’s a fair comparison considering they are at different BRs, with different environments to deal with.
I disagree with this. The hull armour is the same, and I’d say it’s still usable at 4.0.
Most shermans and KV-1s / T-34s still can’t pen it, and those that can are 0.7 BRs / 1.0 BRs higher.
As for the turret, while the 89mm flat front turret armour is a downgrade to the ~96mm with the Churchill I’s, the flat angles for the turret side armour means that you can effectively angle with it while on reload (like with the Maus):
The right side of the turret actually has better armour than the left side
which allows you to even stop the Panzer IV’s gun:
It’s not as good as you’d probably want it to be, but it’s good enough against most players. You can make it even harder to shoot the weld weakspot on both corners of the turret by wiggling, smoking, and moving too.
That being said, I don’t really expect newer players to know when / how to angle their turrets properly.
Not only that, a lot of 3.3s and 3.7s moved up to 3.7 and 4.0 respectively – including the Panzer IV H.
I don’t really see a need for it to be moved down.
The increase in weight isn’t very substantial. The difference in HP/TON is 0.3, which isn’t anything crazy:
That’s all the Churchill I really lacked anyways (besides more reliable turret armour).
4s reload, 132mm pen APCBC is pretty good for 4.0, along with good gun handling and a vertical stablizer (albeit not as good as the Shermans’).
Back when it was 4.3, it was kinda rough. At 4.0, I’d say it’s at a good BR, especially now that a lot of 3.3 / 3.7s got moved up (like I mentioned earlier). Not only that, the KV-1E / KV-1B got moved up too.
Keep in mind that you are using all-time stats for these vehicles, which don’t reflect current performances.
In May of 2026, it has been performing better:
That’s why I’d like to see the NA75 get moved down. It’s like the Cromwell I and Cromwell V but Churchill edition.
Both the Cromwell I and Cromwell V are at the same BR (which is reasonable in my opinion), so why can’t the Churchills also be the same BR.
I don’t know. I haven’t played the Cromwells yet but I haven’t been doing too badly in the Churchill III even before the KV-1E / B moved up and the 3.3 - 3.7 range got decompressed:
It’s more forgiving in the way that APHE works in War Thunder (being able to penetrate cupolas and doing damage is quite nice). However, its armour is worse than the Churchill III since the corners are rounded, and both sides of the turret are only 77mm thick. It gets no stabilizer nor 4s reload either (basically what you said here):
It should definitely go down to 4.0 in my opinion.
Already explained that most rounds even at 4.0 are around ~90mm - 110mm, excluding the Panzer IV (but that medium is extremely squishy).
Unless you are unangled, it’s not that big of a difference.
With a 4s reload, you generally don’t need to use your turret armour in the first place. If you’re getting swarmed by enemies / lost your loader, then it would start to make sense to use angling.
Well, I’d say 122mm is still good enough in most cases.
4.0 is fucking TERRIBLE for Britain right now. It’s gotten a bit better now that the Cromwell V has APHE but you’re shooting high velocity small rounds or low velocity large-ish rounds in a BR range where you’re going to be seeing quite a lot of Shermen and Soviet stuff. The KV-1 in particular is a rough matchup without the Achilles, and god help you if it’s the finnish KV-1.
The Sherman and StuH(german casemate in general) stuff is a consistent problem until around 4.7 and the 17 pounder gets multiple good chassis to be on. It’s not really that fair of a criticism when that’s not fixed with the next Churchill. It should still probably go down tho it has a 2 pounder lmao.
The Cromwells are VERY solid, and you can kind of play the Churchill III in a similar way to a Cromwell, that being a flanking guy with a good gun. I’ve genuinely gotten very good results (when I enjoyed 4.0 britain) by being a slow flanker in the Churchill III. When you outreload practically everything you see and nobody knows where to shoot you, you’ll get surprisingly good results.
The 57mm does a good job against most tanks (T-34s and Shermans). It just struggles to kill the Jagdpanzer IV, and the 4.3 / 4.7 KV-1s in my experience. That’s fair in my opinion.
The 75mm APHE does a good job against most tanks as well (T-34s and Shermans) but again, struggles to pen the 4.3 / 4.7 KV-1s and the Jagdpanzer IV.
Not with 75mm / 57mm guns (which the Cromwell I / Cromwell V / Churchill III / Churchill NA75 gets).
The only Shermans I can see them still struggle with would be the 105mm Sherman, but nobody really brings them at 3.7 - 4.0 anyways, and maybe the M4A2 (though the gunner-side turret cheek is pretty weak).
Centurion Mk.10 should get L52 and get it’s BR raised to 8.3, it is just better than Leo 1, M60, AMX-30 & T-54 so it’s ammo and BR should be reflected.
The only tank you could consider to be on par at least is Type 59 (T-54A) plainly because of it’s vertical stab.
Then we should have some BR decomression so we can up the 10.0-10.7 a bit so we can move up things like the T-72A/M1, Stingray, Mephisto, TAM, Leo 1A5, All Type 74s, T-55M/AM, Merkava Mk 1/2 at 9.3/9.7
as long as you put the T58 to like 16.0 (not a real BR yet) you can do whatever you want, just get rid of the thing so that BR bracket is remotely enjoyable to play
