It’s relatively okay at 8.7.
The problem is that it can’t be 9.0 either as there are better tanks at 9.0 and massively better tanks at 9.3.
2 Likes
at 8.3 armor is entering the phase of being either completely fake or volumetric incarnate so it’s not that big of a deal. also you have a cupola so even if a geppy couldn’t side-on you they’d still win
Depends the t55 cupola is very fucky to pen, in a 1 on 1 engagement the t55 will have time to kill the gepard before the gepard can pen. even tho armour diffrences are small, it stil helps with some more
That’s something I have already noted, and the advantages of M60A1 do make up for it.
I have played both and I have found them very equal.
Neither of them need to move up really.
You can basically ignore T-55A having APFSDS, especially when that APFSDS has same performance as DM13 and it’s a short rod penetrator in game, basically meaning it’s still worse than smth like full rod APFSDS.
And again unlike T-55A you will have easier time playing with M60’s neutral steer, much better depression, better reload and coincedence rangefinder making sure you never miss, so unless you really want to have lower profile theres no big advantages on T-55A.
And if you mention 35’s they just kill everything, they just plainly dont care. It is the issue of their balance, not of T-55A/M60A1.
There’s vehicles lover BR than T-55A/M60A1 with APDS amd stabilizers, it’s Centurions and their copies (STRV(81/101) located as low as 7.7 and 8.0. All those BR’s make sense.
Additionally theres vehicles like ZTZ-59 with DM23, one plane stab, LRF and essentually K5 as low as 8.3
T-55A has no business being at 9.3. If APFSDS and stabilizer is too much for you to handle fighting against then maybe you should go lower BR ranges until you’re at least comfortable facing one or the either.
1 Like
Another 8.3 with stabilizer, DM23 (way better than 3BM25 by pen and damage) and even LRF.
STRV104 is same things at higher BR but with ERA which really doesnt matter enough to give higher BR.
i can see your points, and 9.3 is of course too high. but i still think it is one of the 3 best vehicles at the BR. the players just drag the winrate down, just as with any russian tank.
and the nato 105 apds is very good, but the t55’s darts are better.
I think you’re simply overreacting over it. 8.7 is also a BR of vehicles much better than T-55A (often featuring actual darts and LRF). For example smth like AMX-30B2 and Object 122TM do deserve 8.7. M60A1 RISE as well. Wouldnt say T-62 does again for the fact of zero improvements from T-55A.
You wont really notice huge difference between APDS and short rod APFSDS. But you can definitely see a huge gap between short rod APFSDS and regular APFSDS.
(short rod APFSDS have way worse damage and often bad performance at angle/rico)
So it’s in situation where you either dont touch it or maybe give game decompression, however I dont see the need for decompression here exactly.
I mean this moreso goes back to the gepard being broken to shit and needing to get nerfed, which I agree with
My hot take is that proper tanks with ERA should not be able to see the first vehicles with heat-fs as a stock round and an unlockable standard round later. Few things are more annoying than playing a stock olifant and encountering one of the m60s with ERA. My first ever kill with the olifant was one of these j-ing out of pity. (Before you ask, no I wasn’t shooting the same spot every time, I was actively changing where I was shooting while working around ERA that was there and by the end the shots just weren’t doing anything)
try turret ring
my olifant isn’t stock anymore so I don’t have this problem and if I was at an angle to shoot the turret ring I would have shot the turret ring
8.7 is really cool because it’s either losing to a team of americans in the t58 or getting america on your team in a full uptier against the soviets and losing. It’s uniquely awful and is still somehow more enjoyable than low tier right now
T14 → 5.0
someone explain to me… why a better Churchill VII is at a lower BR than the Churchill VII? The frontal armor isn’t as good but you can actually like, move in the T14 which makes up for it? Stabilized 75, genuinely explain to me why it’s 4.7 but the VII isn’t.
Leo 1A5 should get DM 63. This is because it would be more balanced as it has no armor, no great mobility, can be .50 cal to death, okayish gun handling. So adding a round that can pen more things and the fact that it gets constant up-tiers, the DM 63 would be a needed buff. And no it wouldn’t be game breaking in a down tier as it’s DM 33 already can pen most things.
Sure, along with a BR increase to 9.7. The 1A5s are already perfectly good and balanced 9.3 vehicles, any significant buffs they get should be paired with a BR increase.
3 Likes
Do you play L1A5s daily?
It’s like the new T-90M.
The Predator gets more ERA, and some add on armor pieces.
Played my C2A1 a little before the BR changes to see why they were considering moving it to 9.0 and I found a perfectly fine middle of the pack 9.3 tank.
Predator gets the exact same amount of ERA.
It gets ERA on the lower hull. Pretty sure the Rise does not.
Preadator definitely receives additional tracks and things too for armor. Not that it may matter against most shells.
Well that explains a lot. Well L1A5 can be HMG to death, the auto-cannon vehicles can pen it frontally and it’s mobility and armor aren’t as good as other tanks at it’s br. It’s basically a light tank that can’t scout and has bad mobility. And giving L1A5 a round that pens 9mm more and has ever so slightly better ballistics will only make it more reasonable to stay at 9.3 and not be Type 74(F) with worse armor and a little bit better dart.