Designed for =/= ingame role.
Just because a thing had a certain role irl, does mean that it should have that role ingame.
4 Likes
Doesn’t. But that’s a playstyle that should be used. if you want to make the best of what you have. Otherwise, you just allow the vehicle to deteriorate. I do agree, that not all vehicles need to be used in that role. Some just excel at it while others excel at really anything, M24 is a really good example of this and why it was in service for over 29 possibly more that aren’t documented.
Or simply… lower its BR instead of trying to justify it being overtired?
Its a game, not a historical sim ffs.
3 Likes
You shouldn’t use irl doctrine and design as an argument for whether something is good or bad in the context of War Thunder. In game, its a vehicle vs vehicle matter, and in that context, the Chi-Nu is inadequate/bad/subpar.
Calling it a “support tank” is more of a euphemism to say its bad and its not viable hence it can’t operate on its own, or “support” role.
2 Likes
I’m not justifying that it should remain at 3.3. I was originally arguing it shouldn’t go to 2.7. Stating that 3.0 would be fine but the problem is it’s a vehicle stuck in a pickle. Go to 2.7 it going to seal club, remaining at 3.3 and it’s going to be seal clubbed.
I could care less what the game calls things. I treat vehicles as support vehicles and I don’t. Cause most of you will use it as a brawler. Which only makes it perform at its worst. Some tanks were never designed to fight tanks. Simple as is. It may excel at this but you need to shuffle your cards.
Yep. Like M18 the light tank and P40 the medium tank.
The in-game classification is what’s relevant.
2 Likes
The P40 is a tricky one. If you’re going by 1940 standards it’s a heavy tank. If you’re going by when it was produced it is indeed a Medium since classifications for tanks in Italy changed by then.
However, if you’re going to go by what the game calls some vehicles then you’re going to treat it as such. Which leads to these RPs.
Ex: Are “Strike aircraft”. There are several I can name that should not belong in this category and are only in this category so that Gaijin doesn’t have to make several more or rename them. Which would cost money since the approval needs to go up the chain of command.
Reason why they are in strike aircraft is, iirc airspawn.
(Bombers get airspawn, strike fighters dont iirc)
Couldn’t get over the lack of pen myself. There’s just far too many things you face frontally (Especially in uptiers) that the gun is helpless against. Mobility is fine, but not good enough to flank to positions where you can get the gun to work, in my experience. To each their own.
I’m really trying to see what you mean here, but I’m struggling. So, in your mind, there are two roles? Brawling and support? Because the way I see it, there are three. Brawling, flanking and sniping. These are each playstyles that vehicles can excel in due to their characteristics. Fast tanks are good a flanking, armored tanks are good at brawling, those with good guns can snipe. Such vehicles can perform these roles regardless of what else is going on, and achieve consistent results.
What defines a good “support” vehicle? If we take the standard definition, it’s a tank that follows it’s team around and “supports” them by engaging distracted tanks. This is something any tank can do. Moreover, it’s something that flankers, snipers and brawlers can also do, and more effectively than a pure “support” tank because they can use their advantages to counter enemy strengths.
The only vehicle I would happily classify as a support tank would be the Marders (And maybe the Wiesel), since their kit is entirely designed for supporting teammates. Just having a slightly better smoke shell is not reason enough to consider the Chi-Nu a better “support” than a Sherman.
1 Like
Yeah, I can agree with that. Still doesn’t change the fact that this game needs to change how air spawns are done so it isn’t tied to just a tag. Similar to how the ground is as well.
Couldn’t get over the lack of pen myself. There’s just far too many things you face frontally (Especially in uptiers) that the gun is helpless against. Mobility is fine, but not good enough to flank to positions where you can get the gun to work, in my experience. To each their own.
I recommend giving it a second chance, maybe in arcade- helps a bit with the pen issue, and its armor is a lot more effective there.
1 Like
What the game calls it would matter as that would give a framework to balance its BR though.
For example, where would the Chaffee be placed if it wasn’t a light tank, but rather a medium? What about the unholy proposition of it being a heavy tank? Tank classifications do matter even if only for the BR placement and knowing what its competitors are capable of.
The issue with playstyles is also very, very complex. I don’t focus on ground enough to have the best way to put it but a support tank will always fall second to any other style as it is team reliant. The ability to be effective should not be dependent on whether you have a teammate or not.
1 Like
Then where would the B1 Bis and Ter be? Both of those are Heavy Tanks. But are at a lower bar.
BR has no input on where vehicles are placed nor what tag their given.
Gaijin goes by the performance of a vehicle and the paper stats of players. That is what determines the battle rating position of a vehicle. It really shouldn’t but that’s what we have sigh…
This at least seems a better split, as it’s highlighting strengths rather than the “good vs bad” implication of the other pair of options.
Specifically, it works because it represents the golden trio of traits: speed, armour, and firepower.
And I’m not disagreeing with that. Rather the sentiment behind my statement was that its a loose guide for where a vehicle could/should be. At the end of the day, capabilities, and stats and numbers make up that real balancing factors but knowing what to balance against would definitely help in making those judgements.
1 Like
Yep. Though it’s not a binary spectrum, there are more aspects that just these to consider. Well armored tanks with long reloads are much easier to push, therefore armored tanks with long reloads (IS-2, etc) are often pushed into more of a sniping role, where they cannot be pushed as easily. Alternatively, they can have guns that struggle against their opponents frontally, and thus have to rely more on flanking to achieve success (T-44, Pershing, etc).
Then there are flexible tanks that can do more than one thing (IS-1 can flank and brawl with success), or vehicles that are tier dependant for their ability to fulfill these roles (Jumbos can brawl in downtiers, but have to rely more on flanking in uptiers).
1 Like
I do definitely agree Japanese ground is objectively the worst in all metrics (excluding uniqueness which Israel takes that instead and CAS in tier I & early II which France takes that title) and it is not even close. I do find it funny that the OP used the Chi-Ha Kai, Chi-He and Chi-Ha LG as examples of why Japanese ground is bad even though i consider them to be the only vehicles in early Japanese ground that i consider passable. The Ha-Go, I-go and the regular Chi-Ha are way better examples on why Japanese ground is so bad
Also part of the problem is that not so much that Japanese tanks are overtiered rather that other nations tanks are undertiered
It’s the ko. The gasoline engine was rated for 118 hp at 1,600 rpm. The maximum output of the otsu was 120 hp. In-game, the I-Go has 118 hp. The I-Go we have in-game is a later mid-production introduced in the later part of 1933, characterized by using a new cupola instead of the old cupola that they had used up until then.
1 Like
I’ll do you one better. Show a tank that was specialized in a “support role,” an already incredibly vague term that could be applied to many duties ranging from reconnaissance to specialized infantry support, instead of just being a tank.
The Chi-Nu was a stopgap measure while the Chi-To and Chi-Ri were being developed, that doesn’t mean that they intended for it to not be a medium tank or else they wouldn’t have replaced all Chi-He production with it.
5 Likes