T-34 are 4.0 because are propaganda on tracks and they are blatanlty op in 3.7.
Wtf?? SU-85 have better protection and fire power.
Yes, after receive lower plate buff.
HAHAHAHAHAHA
Really this is just a nosense after nosense.
This post is how tell you are ultra biased soviet fanboy without tell you are a ultra biased soviet fanboy.
IS-3, BTR-80A and what?
ZSU-23-4M2, which whilst lacking in the anti-tank role, happens to be heavily undertiered and very effective at clearing the skies.
And of course, many Russian vehicles are easily uptierable, the T-44-100 and ZSU-57-2 to name a couple.
Also the Obj 268 and SU-122-54. Both pretty well armoured with very good guns
I call your BS.
Completely different and only thing they have common, is awesome gun what can deal with any threats they face. There is more in common in waffenträger and su100P , and still 100P got a lot better mobility, and both are just fine on br’s where they are.
As well as armor that it never had
Actually, you have it reversed:
I’d rather be sitting behind something of 82 to 85 mm thickness rather than something that is almost half as thick (45 mm). Or, in other words, if the Stug III G is dying so easily, then that obviously points to a problem in the code with this illegitimate mickey mouse game:
Well, there are two issues. First of all, the 76mm can penetrate 80mm quite easily, which in reality it wouldn’t be able to do.
Secondly, the StuG III Gs gun shield is now only 50mm. So even a BT-5 can take it out with the 45mm gun.
The sloped 30mm plates (68°) have an effective armor of 80mm. Most rounds, which barely penetrate 90-100mm, would ricochet from the armor. The spalling might wound the gunner, but that isn’t certain, since most of it would be cought by the the superstructure armor in front of him or get redirected into the floor of the vehicle.
He got some fair points tbh. The T-44 85 mm is a sad tank. The gun is very underwhelming at 6.7.
The suspension and resulting gun bounce is just terrible and negates a lot of the mobility advantages of that tank.
The IS-2 series reload time is almost 3x longer than the Tiger II with similar pen, but the 122 mm shells got more filler that no one with halfway decent aim really needs. I’d take the 88 mm gun in any case.
Where do I find the KV 7? I don’t see it on the tree nor do I see it as a premium…
I think it’s fine. The main issue is Germany’s undetiered BS, namely VK 3002, Pz.IV, and Jagdpanzer.IV/Hetzer.
It was from the ended that just ended.
In the same BR you can face things like FL-10 (182mm of pen with 5 seconds autoloader) M4A176 (Stabilizer 76 gun) Italian Firefly (Same gun and APDS from Centurion MK1) STRV M42 (149mm of pen with 110g of TNT plus 3.0 seconds autoloader).
Panzer IV is made of paper. I prefer face panzer IV much better than Shermans or T-34.
Undertiered ?? specially the Hetzer?? LMAO.
Why every US fanboy in this game only cry about Germany???
Comparing slow paper thin shermans with solid AP, and a Sherman with only 152mm pen to a VK 3002 is wild
I too would prefer to face a singular Pz.IV over a singular Sherman or singular T-34, but when the entire enemy team is Pv.IV, you can’t angle against all of them.
Why are you talking about Germany when you haven’t even played it? Hetzer is goated, and Jagdpanzer IV is extremely oppresive towards tanks with weak cannons, e.g Sherman, T-34, Kv-1, Cromwell, etc. The only thing keeping Jagdpanzer IV in check is tanks like M10 and Su-85 which are strong enough to deal with it. Hetzer, on the other hand, can’t even be penned by a 3-inch, and can easily bounce Soviet 85mm with abit of angling.
US? you mean USSR? This is a Kv-7 discussion, which- and I would know this unlike you, is Soviet.
Brutal skill issue here.
If you exposed your tank against the enemy team, the only problem is you play style not the tank.
What???
And more skill issue here.
Clearly this seal means “Union Soviet” LOL
Brotha really thinks Kv-7 is American 💀💀💀
You reading compression is on par with your playing style LOL. US mains power !!!
I’ve got it but lose all my motivation to play due to burnout lol but the other day I saw someone on Reddit posting his amazing stats playing it and he claims this thing is crazy good, the numbers went like 100-ish kills with only 7 deaths.
The KV-7 should be at 4.3, no questions asked.
Remind me again, how many times was the Russian 45mm found on all low BR tanks nerfed? 11? Thats great!
I really wish they kept it a lower br, 6.3 for the base is2 seems tragic compared to when it was 5.7. tbh I wish it could stay that br
But that is not without reason. The VK.3002 has a horrible reverse speed, and turret rotation speed compared to anything else (including the T-34-85). The armour of the VK. 3002 is not too great either, and is only fairly reliable in a full downtier / guns with less than ~135mm of penetration.
The T-34-85 also has a much more devastating round, with 5.655x as much TNT per round, albeit it has worse flat and angle pen (but is enough to go through the front of almost any tank at the BR anyways). The T-34-85 can use its engine as armour (while using its good reverse speed), allowing it to be fairly immune to APHE from the hull (other than PzGr or getting hit in the turret).
The VK.3002 may be fine at 5.0 (maybe 5.3 if we’re pushing it), but I don’t see how the T-34-85 should go down in BR.
As it should be.
The plane was devastating at 4.0 after it had been given APHE, so increasing its BR to 4.3, which is making it face better SPAA, and be a bit less effective against aircraft, is a warm welcome.
Aren’t you just giving Gaijin more of a reason to increase its BR again?
Why are they still using it at 6.7?
Maybe because it’s still quite effective at that BR, and is very easy to research?
Agreed, although this is the same with the M26.
SU-100 is somewhat rough at 6.0, but it’s somewhat reasonable.
Its UFP can stop M62 shot, which is one of the most common rounds American tanks use. The only problem I see with the armour is that the cupola is only 45mm thick, which means any APHE round can penetrate it and deal splash damage to the crew.
However, I found that it is quite inconsistent, more so than the Tiger H1’s cupola and the IS-1’s.
I can see it being 5.7, but it may be a little too strong. It’s similar to the Su-122P, except it has a much better reload for similar penetration and damage outcome.
Nashorn and SU-100P are vastly different tank destroyers.
The Nashorn is sluggish, with the HP/TON of 12.35 instead of the SU-100P’s 18.53 HP/TON.
This, along with the SU-100P being extremely stable (despite not having a stabilizer), and having an actual turret makes the SU-100P a lot more useful than the Nashorn.
The Nashorn also has only 8km/h reverse speed, whereas the SU-100P has a reverse speed of 24km/h, which is incredibly good.
The slightly better round and 6.7s instead of a 7.5s reload does not compensate nearly enough for the benefits that the SU-100P gets over it.
