And the T29 would have a ~7.7 gun (if you can say that) and decent reload for it at the sacrifice of the ~7.3 armour / mobility / gun handling.
The T29’s armour and mobility is nothing crazy but it’s still usable at 7.3.
The gun handling and gun depression are still pretty good all things considered. It’s definitely not like the IS-3’s.
For the sake of this comparison, say the Tiger II is 7.0. The T29s gun, even with a buffed reload, is worse than the Long 88, as while it does have overpressure, the reload is more than 50% longer. It’s about a 7.0 gun imo.
As for the rest of the tank, it’s decently fast for a heavy but nothing special, and the armor is honestly kinda lacking for its weight. When compared to the Tiger II, you are not safe from low pen guns, which is imo the more important part of armor. And if you compare it to the T32, the turret looks like paper in comparison.
I’d say as is and buffed the T29 is a strong 7.0.
1 Like
It used to be like what, 10 secs? I can’t recall what it used to be, but I never aced it, only experted it.
But yes a lot of people on the forums don’t like logical discussion, they just like to use their dictation.
As per my new thread regarding the bugged machine gun port on the Tiger II.
Theres a few contrarians in there being trolls. And where im going with this, is that I’ve learned a vast majority of the forum users have 0 idea what they’re talking about.
And when it has come to making / updating this list, I’ve tried my best to remain bias free. (Unlike some users in here)
1 Like
Used to be 12.5s aced. Now it’s 14.9s.
The IS-3 is still terrible imho.
I’d much rather take a T26e5
I do often bully IS-3s with it.
But another reason I think at least the T34 should got to at 7.0
Is currently:
The T26E5, T34, T30, and T26E-1 are all sitting at 6.7
The T26E1 is justified for being a 6.7 easily.
T30 I can kind of see it.
T26E5 WAS going to be 7.0 finally until the USA / nato mains all cried on the forums about it.
The T34 though has the pen to justify its 7.0 br adjustment.
1 Like
I think that’s a fair comparison.
I believe the Tiger II SLA has similar performance as the unbuffed T29, though I’m not sure about if the T29 was buffed. Maybe this is what you mean by a ‘strong’ 7.0?
While the Tiger II has much better hull armour and smoke grenades, its turret armour is much weaker, and its gun depression is worse but a noticeable degree. This makes the T29 a monster when hull-down, which its high-pen, one-shot APHE, better acceleration,and better reverse speed is suited for.
That being said, in CQC, I’d say the SLA may still be better than a buffed T29.
2 Likes
I mean, the T29 definitely has the better performance… but not like a lot of German players have a good amount of intelligence. (Neither do the USA players, tool pretty good clips this week of me killing someone in front of one of their team mates, and they just didn’t see me somehow while staring at me)
I don’t think penetration alone doesn’t really warrant a 7.0 BR increase, especially because it’s just AP.
Your killing potential is very much gimped against a lot of tanks and situations to the point where you somewhat have to play like the Conqueror (which is very passive). This is especially the case in uptiers, where you will definitely not kill tanks like the Somua, Conqueror, T-44s, T-54s, etc anywhere near as consistently as something like the T29’s, or pretty much any tank with APHE.
1 Like
I never played the conquerer passively.
And I have like a 3.0 KDr in it.
The Tiger II (H) SLA has much more potential because of the 7.5s reload, but the T29 can one-shot pretty much anything it sees with relative ease.
It’s probably why the T29 is doing better.
Oh I don’t disagree the reload speed is the best advantage to any tank in game.
Hence why I was talking about the T-34-100 the other day.
Where it HAS to rely on its gun and reload, since its armor isn’t stopping anything, and its mobility is mediocre at 6.3
Not sure how you’ve been able to play it like that because its 15.0s reload, with unreliable APDS, and very weak LFP makes it an easy target for most things.
1 Like
Well, compared to other mediums with good guns, it’s not too bad. In fact, I’d say it’s one of the better ones.
The T-44-122’s mobility is considerably better, but its 23.3s reload is much to be desired, especially considering its armour isn’t that reliable either.
1 Like
I think IS-3 deserves to be 7.3 though. I wouldn’t say it should be the same BR as the T26E5.
1 Like
Its acceleration is good, top speed leaves some to be desired.
And yes, that’s why I strongly dislike the T44-Fm because it’s weak armor (and this one is slower than the T44)
1 Like
I had a few clips of me 3v1’ing IS-3s with my solo T26E5 and winning.
I didn’t even start dying in it until it was almost spaded and I got too cocky
And I didn’t even have an expert crew. I think their level is like 25?
If both were reverted to their old state (SLAs old engine) (T29s old reload) I think the Sla just takes it overall. While the Tiger IIs turret is rather weak, it’s a worthy trade off for what it gets over the T29. Now the T29 is faster and has .50s, but the Long 88 is just insane. On top of this it’s eerily stable and faces quite a few weak guns that heavily struggle to pen it.
1 Like
Oh yeah and I forgot to say, I do believe the Long 88 is still a good chunk better than T29s 12.5s gun.
While ovp can be nice the Long 88 one taps 9/10 times, has better ballistics, and 7.5s vs 12.5s is just not really a comparison atp. As for the pen the T29s extra pen, it’s only really useful against the Maus, which the Sla doesn’t face.
1 Like