Not Even, Ki-200 And A6M Play Vastly Different, And Why You’re Trying To “Chase” A Heavy Bomber Is Also Beyond Me. You Intercept It Or Leave It, The A6M Deals With Other Fighters, Not Exactly A Plane I Suggest Bomber Hunting With.
On The Ki-200s Behalf, Boom-N-Zoom With A Hell Load Of Manoeuvrability To Play Around With. Roughly Use 2min Of Fuel To Get To Roughly 6k, Idle At The Altitude And Intercept Targets, Even If They’re Paying Attention, The Manoeuvrability Allows You To Take Insane Angles On Dives, And Again, The Rocket Engine Is Only Really There To Gain Altitude.
I did not say anything about heavy bombers. I dont think Ki-200 even has any heavy bombers to chase at 8.7. Maybe only Tu-4 if you get full down tier. Anyway did you play Ki-200 ever since its guns were nerfed? Because god it was pain before. Now its unplayable. In uptier there are things that go 1000 km/h faster than you and you can never touch those. Even things that are at its br rn can just run away while you full dive at them.
The Chi-Nu is clearly not 2.7 material. Raw penetration numbers may resemble the German 50 mm KwK39 Panzer III, but it is basically the Japanese equivalent of the first Sherman M4A1 on the US ground force tech tree. Lastly, T-34s are fairly straightforward to defeat, even on the front.
It could compete with first sherman with gun. Not with armour. Same with t-34 its not like you cant pen it from front you can to the turret cheeks but the t-34 can pen you anywere same with the sherman.
Read Back. I Did. It Was Perfectly Playable Before, But As I Mentioned If You Read, Army 30mm Belts Got Nerfed Into The Ground And It’s A Pain To Play Right Now, Just Because Snapshot Shooting, What You’re Supposed To Do With The Ki-200, Isn’t Reliable, Forcing To Either Stay On Tail (Which You Don’t Really Wanna Do) Or Reapproach To Do Another Spark Another Day.
Most early World War II tanks fighting the T-34 have to aim for the turret cheek or ring (excluding Germans), therefore “Chi-Nu” is no exception. Armour-wise, this could be due to historical references to Japanese tank ideology, just as most Allied tanks in World War II were inferior to German tanks in terms of raw firepower and protection (Sherman vs. Panthers), but far more agile.
Sure sherman also has to aim for the cheeks at the T-34 but that thing also has some armour to protect it from firing back. Chi-Nu just does not have that.
Not even talking about russian or french heavys at the tier? Like tell me whats chi-nu good at then? I have it naturally at ace crew just by playing it and yes I do get kills with it. But its simply not fair. + I have to take it to 3.7 to have something close to “line up” and when that gets uptiered. Oh boy it sure is just pure pain.
The same thing goes for Panthers and late-Shermans, doesn’t it? The first US tank to truly surpass the Panthers in terms of raw firepower and frontal protection is around the M26 stage, with a 0.7 battle rating difference. Furthermore, statistically, practically all late-Shermans (with the exception of the one-axis stabilizer and mobility) are quite similar to Panzer IV H. Protection analysis is important, but I do not believe it should be the sole determining factor in battle rating discussions. If protection analysis is the sole determining factor, late-Shermans would be facing Panzer IVs, which is clearly not the case here.
The only thing Chi-Nu lacks is armour (no offence, but expectedly, this was a characteristic of practically all Japanese tanks during World War II due to divergent views of deploying tanks to directly support infantry attacks rather than tank-to-tank battles). Based on my experience with Chi-Nu, it works perfectly fine at 3.3 battle rating. Similar to what the other players have said, while 3.0 is a slightly possible option (although I am slightly opposed to it), a 2.7 battle rating is far too low.
I am talking about 3.3 here. Like can you tell me how is Chi-Nu competative tank given those protection screnshot? What is it good at? If its worse in every possible way than its competation how do you possibly defend its br? How many times you played chi-nu?
5.3 with panthers and late shermans is completly different story and “shermans” is kinda half of american tech tree + many other trees. Still those late shermans like firefly can still penetrate panthers while some shermans like jumbo can withstand panthers shots. Not the case with chi-Nu. It simply cant pen things while the things can pen it while it has 0 other adwantages. I am not really sherman player - never played one and never will I also see panther as a better tank for my playstyle but thats not what we compare here. At br we were talking about the 3.3 all said tanks are simply better in every way than chi-nu. Chi-nu isnt a light tank to use its speed over its lack of armour nor tank destroyer to use its gun its simply medium tank and its the worst medium at the br. In direct combat its simply terrible tank and its br just isnt fair because you have to aim for weak spots and hope for the best while enemy can aim anywere. Its basically Ho-I with better gun. Exept Ho-I is 2.0 tank thats the issue. You said its equal to sherman at its br. It just isnt nor to any other medium at the same br.
Yeah but other medium at the same br can? I am not talking about the heavy tanks. The medium tanks are enough. That they can pen chi-nu anywere and it cant pen them is alone saying its worse.
Indeed most Japanese tanks were often equipped to deal with light gun fire->37mm’s. But when it came to let’s say a Sherman not really unless you are at range and or providing supporting fire. Which is what the Japanese excelled at. Especially in the game. Specifically in game.
US? M4A1 can barely penetrate KV-1 (except for the turret cheek) and ARL-44 (ACL-1) at 1 km.
Soviet? T34 (1940) will not penetrate both at 1 km.
UK? Cromwell V has an even worse main armament ammunition than Chi-Nu.
Italy? P40 has less main gun penetration less than Chi-Nu (unless HEAT is considered), even at point-blank range.
China and France? Both use M4A1 or its rough equivalent.
Sweden? It does not even have a decent 3.3 tank; the Pvkv III has far less penetration at 1 km than the Chi-Nu.
Thats cool. Sherman has about same gun as chi-nu so it cant pen Kv-1 at range. But again. It all comes to sherman begin able to take shot back. Chi-Nu just cant. Because chi-nu has armour of 2.0.
Like I said. I suggested both 3.0 or 2.7. I am fine with both. But it does not belong to 3.3. Same with Na-To that bounce absurdly with the volumetrics and there are just so many better options with better guns or turrets and they would togeder with So-ki make somewhat solid 3.0 lineup worth playing. They would still face better enemys at 3.0 or at uptiers regulary but at least would have chance to have down tier so their armour isnt just for display and can actually survive some of the weakest guns as its really just 2.0 medium armour.
Technically The I-Go We Have Is An “I-Go Otsu”, Even Though The Model Is A:
I-Go Ko (New Body - Mid Production)
But The 120 hp Engine It Has Would Indicate It Being An I-Go Otsu As The Primary Difference Between (Name) Ko & Otsu Is The Gasoline 100 hp vs Diesel 120 hp Engine.
The Body Work On The Vehicle Would Be
“I-Go Ko” Indicates It Has A Gasoline Engine
“I-Go Otsu” Indicates It Has A Diesel Engine
“I-Go (Prototype)” 9 Tons In Weight
“I-Go (Early)” With The Funny Round Turret & Boxier Hull
“I-Go (Mid)” The Model We Have In-Game
“I-Go (Late)” Driver & Hull MG Gunner Switch Position
