I think 9.0 is the spot for it. Fits in right with the Object 279.
2 Likes
Yes, because the thing that oneshots everything by shooting it in the tracks, is a volumetric shithole, with a rangefinder, is DEFINITELY only worth 9.0. Send the thing to 13.0 MINIMUM. It’s a vehicle that shouldn’t be in the game and should be treated as such. Utterly neuter it. Make it unplayable. 8.7 is genuinely unplayable right now if you aren’t an american player because between the T58 and the 2 XMs it shares a BR with, you won’t FUCKING BELIEVE who most of your games are against!!! (psst: it’s america). If a vehicle fucks the matchmaker that badly, it SHOULD be completely killed in viability. At least the current plague of japanese players in low tier is going to end in september.
Well, at 9.0, you start having vehicles with: ESS + Thermals, LRF, good APFSDS, and a two-plane stablizer.
The T58 would still be very strong at 9.0, but its main advantage would now only be sitting in a corner and camping (maybe pushing corners slowly & carefully to keep the gun somewhat stable in case you need to immediately shoot). It cannot shoot on the move very easily (but others at 9.0 can), it cannot kill tanks from >800m very easily without having to manually rangefind and set the range or having to use trial and error (but others can at 9.0), It wouldn’t be able to see through ESS because it has no thermals (but some 8.7s and 9.0s can), its armour at 9.0 starts to become meaningless with the introduction of DM33 and the common use of DM23 / 600mm+ pen ATGMs:
Spoiler
Thankfully, the gunshield on the T58 isn’t insane (unlike the Tiger II’s), so you can usually pen it even with mediocre APDS:
Maybe 9.3 (???) but that is a stretch in my opinion.
I’d honestly say move it up to 9.0 or artificially nerf its reload speed to something more manageable (like 4s).
1 Like
2.5 second reload it doesn’t matter
This is the problem. If the T58 is strong at all the matchmaker is completely screwed. The entire BR bracket is rendered unplayable because the amount of people queuing to play and abuse the t58 is going to skew the matchmaker. It’s the same phenomenon happening in low tier right now except permanent.
It may not matter for one enemy but you only have 6 rounds in your autoloader. How many chances are you going to take with the trials and errors for the second or third enemy?
Strong doesn’t necessarily mean overpowered. The main mechanic of the T58 is essentially: What if we remove the mobility, LRF, and proxy shell of the PZH2000 but give it autocannon protection, a 6-round 2.6s reload autoloader, a better HE(SH) shell, and much better gun handling?
It can do very well in CQC but it struggles at ranges, and can’t get to new positions without having the chance of being caught lacking.
If it just didn’t have a 2.6s reload then things would be very different.
Or, they could just increase the time it takes to load ammo into the autoloader. That would mean it would have to stay in cover for a while before it can be full operational again. That and moving it to 9.0 seems reasonable.
If it didn’t have a 2.5 second reload it wouldn’t be overpowered enough to warrant being moved up significantly and as such wouldn’t be utterly ruining the matchmaker.
Faced it with 2S25 multiple times, never had issue with it
Since the time it takes for the autoloader to reload is a rigid value, the replenishment rate might be the only value we have some wiggle room to fiddle with for balance purposes.
If I’m reading the datamine correctly, it’s currently a 4 second delay + a 15 second replenishment time. Maybe can bump the replenishment time up to 18~20 seconds?
1 Like
The single consolation I have is that it’s comically easy to kill with artillery vehicles thanks to being an oscillating turret vehicle. Getting that shot off is a different question entirely but it’s very easy to kill them when I can
The armor sucks sure, but it’s got the best reloading 105mm in the game for a manual loader, and the Heat 8 times out of 10 will one hit a vehicle.
That’s what I said 🥹
Seriously though I did warn EVERYONE that it was going to ruin 7.3 - 9.0
And it did.
I’m not sure if I’m misunderstanding you but most 105mm manual reloads are 6.7s and some (like the IPM1 / M1 Abrams) are even 5s.
The M-51’s 7.5s reload is by no means fast for a 105mm.
It really depends on the vehicle though. Some squishy light tanks or relatively cramped tanks (like the Jumbo / IS-2), for sure.
Tanks like the Tiger II, Tiger E, Jagdpanther, KV-220, etc…
They usually take more than a shot or two to kill, ay least from my experience.
Also depends on whether you can see their hull or not. 9/10 times you aren’t going to one-shot hull-down tanks unless you manage to hit their turret ammo (if they do have turret ammo that is). That’s another reason why the Tiger II’s 7.5s reload 237mm pen 100g equiv TNT shell is so good. 100g of TNT inside most turret crew compartments is usually enough to kill the entire crew and knick a hull crew member or two.
1 Like
M247 is scary at every BR xD
1 Like
AMX-32 has like nothing that makes it outstanding or unique at 9.7, it’s practically a everything worse MBT-70 at same BR for 50~ more angled pen.
Which still sucks when you compare it to DM33/63 slingers at lower BR.
AMX-32 (105) isnt just worse than that with even less speed and very poor armour which leaves you even more 20/23mm-able but the round is even closer to DM23 in performance when you’re at BR where shooting DM33 is nothing unique.
AMX-32 (105) and AMX-32 should both be downtiered, with AMX-32 (105) going to 9.0 since it’s also not supposed to have a thermal (which at 9.0 ot would make it more bearable). AMX-32 has nothing above any 9.3’s to be suddenly higher BR than them.
Needless to say AMX-40 is outperformed by Leo 2K of same BR by mile as well.
1 Like
MBT-70 doesn’t have thermals nor ESS, which is quite helpful against tanks with no thermals.
MBT-70 has a 7.5s reload whereas the AMX-32 can have up to a 6.7s reload.
The MBT-70’s APFSDS is classified as a short-rod APFSDS whereas the AMX-32’s APFSDS is classified as a long-rod APFSDS. This, along with the extra ~50mm more angled pen, gives the AMX-32’s APFSDS much better post-pen spalling.
The MBT-70 gets better gun handling, a flexible 20mm turret, better acceleration, gun depression, and better armour.
The KPZ-70 gets even better mobility, a 6s reload, and more smoke grenades than the MBT-70, so I think the KPZ-70 should definitely be 9.7.
I agree that the AMX-32 (105) could go to 9.0 if it had its thermals removed to be fair. It’s equal or worse than the AMX-32 (120) in every way, like you said.
Well, I’d say that a lot of 9.3s should go up to 9.7 too. The KPZ-70, Olifant Mk.2, Gal Batash, CM11, OF-40 (MTCA), AMX-30 Super, and possibly the Tam 2IP, Type 16 (FPS), XM-1 (GM) / XM-1 (Chrysler) and ZTZ96.
I agree, and it’s why I’d say the 2K should go up to 10.3.
1 Like
That I could agree, however mostly for XM/MBT-70/Kpz-70, maybe OF-40 MTCA too, as these are the main offenders of the BR, as they essentually perform just like 10.7 MBT’s, just not armour/gun wise. Which isnt as punishing as everything has it worse.
You have to use that very careful, as for whatever reason you can see the engine exhaust particles through the ESS (at least on my end).
MBT-70’s worse reload speed can be ignored when you consider it’s autoloaded and is rarely destroyed (you will most likely die than have it disabled). That and the fact that there’s an accepted bugreport for MBT-70/Kpz-70 to be controlled by only commander only, much like STRV-103.
There I can agree, however yet again you can remember than any 9.3 has better or way better shell than AMX-32 (105), AMX-32 and even 10.0 AMX-40. The post pen damage is also calculated through remaining penetration for long rods, which equals to AMX-32/40’s having also worse damage on top of being mostly unable to go through tanks like T-72A/M1 (also Leopard 2A4 with the dpzer blade equipped (had one moment where dozer blade doubled with the containers I had to shoot through made it impossible for me to penetratate the Leopard 2A4, where DM33 would actually penetrate similar scenario without issues.
They share identical mobility to MBT-70 from my memory.
Leopard 2K could easily be 10.7 if it was made historical via addition of gen 1 thermal or at least the rammer for the loader, speeding the reload up.
Doesn’t matter which version of Heat - all heat is terrible on maps with trees or fences or other types of cover. The fact that it ONLY has heat is what handicaps the m51.
m51 is only used by Israel - a nation that mostly fights in the desert. Unfortunately most of the maps are not desert.
And it doesn’t even have a .50 mg on the roof - just a weak .30 mg.
Make it 6.0 in arcade and GRB.
KPz has 25 more horsepower while also being lighter than MBT70
I was talking more WW2ish tanks.
It got a pretty long round, and quick reload for a good payoff.
I know not everyone like heat, but it’s honestly goated since it blows apart light tanks and spaa just by touching them.
And with how much pen it has? Yeah. It’s good
Compare it to any other 105 similar to it