Well, it’s the fact that the MBT-70 is doing better while still having an objectively inferior vehicle.
2 Likes
simple, lineups.
german 9.3 lacks 2 major things at this br, first is an IFV, while the tam is usable as a light tank, everyone will agree trying to fight a bmp2 or literally anything with an auto cannon is pretty much a death sentence (the marder 2 would likely fit this spot, maybe, depends on how they implement its weapon system) and the second is spaa, pretty much that the gepard is just helpless at this br and cant really do much,
finally the one thing that keeps rearing its ugly head in the german tech tree, the lack of lineups lower in the brs (mainly 8.3 and for the majority of the time 8.7 until recently) means you youre either skipping directly from 8.0 or running a hodgepodge of tanks, and the fact games will consists of mostly 8.0 players, so you get curbed stomped in games solely because you cant really compete with other nations on a tank vs tank basis and need to make up for this with skill, and it doesnt help either germany 8.0 isnt good either.
2 Likes
Not denying this. I just think that stats should be supplementary factor to vehicle parameters and characteristics so we dont have tiger, sabre and other situations again.
TAM is more than usable as a light tank (especially the TAM 2IP), and I’d argue it’s better than M1296 in most situations.
Germany doesn’t have any 9.3 SPAAs, yes, though I don’t see how not having the best light tank and not having a good SPAA would make the KPZ-70’s stats drop. It’s not like Germany doesn’t have other nations on its side.
So I can see how 8.0 - 8.7 vehicles stats may get tanked as they may get used to fill 9.3 lineups while people are researching, but I don’t see how that is relevant to why the KPZ-70’s stats are noticeably worse than the MBT-70.
2 Likes
It means the KPz might be lined up with tanks above it’s BR. So instead of going into battle as a 9.3 lineup, it might be 9.7.
OR … it’s filling in a 9.3 lineup with 8.7 vehicles, or even 8.3.
Marder 2 will end up at 9.7 or 10.0 depending on gun. Only thing you can have at 9.3 is trashmaster which is known for its damage and firerate. And I would take tam over bushmaster carrier any day.
Your first point is fair, though I’d argue you can make the same case for multiple other vehicles.
Besides, 9.3 Germany isn’t as barren as people are making it out to be.
You don’t necessarily need an SPAA in your lineup, and you have the KPZ-70, T-72M1, M48 Super, and the TAM 2IP / C2A1 / Leopard A1A1 (L/44) to choose from.
If that’s the case, it shouldn’t affect the KPZ-70 stats since it itself isn’t being uptiered. The only metric that may affect it as a result is probably its winrate, but we’re not arguing about that.
OK. Edit - having an arguably “lesser” lineup might result in your team being placed in a poor position - especially if you have many team-mates in same situation. This can affect how your highest BR vehicle does in the battle.
And the other side of that equation?
That’s true though what proportion of the team would have this exact situation? I personally haven’t seen many teams full of these kind of issues.
And something is telling me that it’s something to do with the players rather than the innate gaps in their tech tree:
Few years ago before the stupid movility nerfs, the removal of the most of the sniping positions and continues nerfs for CAS or hide key vehicles behind pay wall “cuz is Germany”.
Well, they’re definitely doing worse than before, but even then, most of their vehicles are still very competitive at their respective BRs.
Not only that, Germany has gotten multiple [unnecessary] BR / reload buffs from the most recent balance changes.
2 Likes
Most of the people specially allies mains tend to exagerate the perform of the Germans vehicles.
Im boring see how people cry and call bad monsters like Jumbo 76 or KV-220 meanwhile complaing about meh tanks like Panzer IV or Leopard 1.
Tiger 2 pre-`production to 6.3 retaining his insane movility nerf is far from be a problem and the realod buff for Panzer IVs is more usefull for italy or Sweden due his rank 3 than Germany.
Meanwhile all IS-2 going down retaining his previous buffs, Soviets and USA receving multiple reload buffs too.
Most of the complains about Germany are more hate form Allies mains the real game issues.
1 Like
I’m definitely not those people 😅
I know how good the KV-220 and Jumbo 76 are.
Nethertheless, I also know that the 6.0 Panthers are still solid, and that both the Tiger H1s and Tiger Es are still exceedingly good… and others that I won’t spend the time mentioning.
Even with the mobility nerf, the previous BR changes made it so that it now faces vehicles (that were 5.3 - 5.7 before) in just a 0.3 / 0.7 downtier.
I’ll give you an example:
Jumbo 75 was 5.3 and the Tiger II (P) was 6.3. (1.0 BR difference, which is fair in my opinion)
Jumbo 75 was then moved up to 5.7 and the Tiger II (P) also went up to 6.7 (still a 1.0 BR difference).
The Tiger II (P) now moved down to 6.3 (now a 0.7 BR difference).
Same with the Panther Dauphine, Jumbo 76, KV-220, etc…
It’s still a monster as it had been in the past.
I’m not sure what you’re trying to say here. How is the vehicles’ rank relevant to balancing here?
They are still miles worse compared to the Tiger II (P).
Their 20.8s reload, gun depression, gun handling, lack of smoke grenades, and one-shot cupola / turret makes it that way. I’d say the IS-2 (1944) should be 0.3 BR lower than the Tiger II (P), and 0.7 BR lower than the Tiger II (H).
That’s true, though that doesn’t exclude Germany from these unnecessary BR / reload buff changes.
I still think the early Tiger 2 is just better than the normal tiger 2 because of the turret getting volumetricy. Less raw armor but now it’s like a KV-1 turret.
To be fair, 105mm DM63 isn’t that much better than DM33. ~9mm of extra penetration doesn’t really make much of a difference – (even less than M774 compared to M833). It would make UFPing T-72s from certain angles easier but DM33 doesn’t really struggle that much anyways.
Would DM63 make the Leopard 1A5 overpowered and warrant a 0.3 BR increase? I don’t think so.
Does the Leopard 1A5 need DM63 to remain competitive? Definitely not 😅
I would rather have an almost 100% guarantee that anything less than ~150mm is not going to penetrate my turret cheeks over gambling with volumetric.
The thing with British low rank tanks is that most of them are implemented very inaccurately, which usually leads to them sitting at unfitting BRs. Crusaders in particular have a lot of bug reports unaddressed, though I’m only including the ones relevant to the Crusader III here:
The armor should be noticeably stronger in places.
(Bug Report Link 1), (Bug Report Link 2), (Bug Report Link 3), (Bug Report Link 4)
It should have internal bulkheads for the driver and engine compartment.
(Bug Report Link)
The engine power should be marginally higher, but Gajin is being stubborn about simple unit conversion for some reason.
(Bug Report Link)
The top speed should be slightly higher.
(Bug Report Link)
It should have rear smoke dischargers that function akin to ESS.
(Bug Report Link)
Individually, most of these don’t change much, but I think the cumulative value of them pushes the Crusader III into 3.3 territory.
However it would instantly make it far better than tanks like the Olifant Mk.2, Gal Batesh and Magach 7C. DM63 was one of their only advantages they had over the Leo 1A5 at 9.3.
That isn’t really true.
Olifant Mk.2 gets access to Gen 2 thermals for both the gunner and commander sight, access to ESS (OP combo with the thermals, sight, round, and reverse speed btw) has slightly better gun depression (10 degrees), more useful turret armour, and fuel tanks that can eat shots.
Gal Batash gets very trolly turret armour (which is enough to stop 3BM25 and DM23 in a lot of cases, and sometimes even DM33, gets access to ESS (for the thermals + ESS combo), LWS, a coaxial 50.cal, a whole lot of smoke grenades, 10 degrees of gun depression, and is mostly immune to autocannons and HEATFS frontally (unlike with the 1A5).
Magach 7C is the same concept as the Gal Batash except it sacrifices the trolly turret armour, LWS, and 1 degree of gun depression for better hull armour (UFP now stops 3BM25 and sometimes M735 / XM578E1), slightly better turret traverse speed.
Which is stuck to the gun, meaning it has abysmal gun handling like the main gun.
Only against really poorly aimed shots, the mantlet and turret rings are still massive and easy pens for even DM23.
The far superior gun handling and mobility of the Leo 1A5 far outweight any of the small advantages that the Gal Batesh has.
And the Magach 7C is just a worse Gal Batesh.