When the armor is useless under DM23, I don’t think T55AMD/T55AM need to have same BR as Leopard A1A1, 100MM APFSDS for these 2 tanks are really bad
What vehicle are you referring to then by saying “That’s the entire point of the BR change… To remove one of Germany’s strongest vehicles of a very popular lineup and assist with decompression by shifting the meta.”
The armor is useless against any APFSDS round as is every other tank’s armor at that BR range.
There are other T-55 variants in other trees which APFSDS which clean penetrate does that mean they should be higher simply because they can penetrate?
If T55M got the same armor as T55AMD/T55AM, yes, because it has much better ammo(even better than DM23), by the way, T55am can’t pen ZTZ88’s front hull armor.
Then don’t shoot the upper front plate which is specifically reinforced?
1 Like
100% area could be pen or 50% area could be pen, which is better?
The Type 88s are good tanks. What is your specific point?
As you said, there are other T-55 variants, but none of them have such armor as T55AM or AMD, The only reason why T55AM’s BR is lower than Leopard is because of the shell and the ZTZ88 may solve this issue.
The earliest one that gets to swing those DM23 is the 8.3 M48A2 GA2, this is the ammo type that you need when you encounter an object 279 lol
Point-click > aiming for weak points
Your case of “AM-1 should be at the same BR as A1A1” is falling apart my dude.
No where in this thread have I disagreed that the A1A1’s penetration values aren’t better.
They’re just not relevant to the majority of engagements and only become a problem if you don’t know the tank you’re facing or place your shot badly.
Any round in the game can be shot badly, the AM’s round isn’t so bad that it struggles to penetrate tanks at its BR range and neither does the A1A1’s.
My issue with the A1A1’s BR is and remains Germany’s inability to field a full 8.7 lineup ruining what should be a solid “modernized” cold war BR range and instead drags itself in to battles against modern tanks it was not designed to compete against.
The T-55AMs were designed to fight the A1A1 and the A1A1 was designed to fight the AMs, War Thunder has them at different BRs for no legitimate balancing reason beyond “number higher”.
Bushing up your tanks is a thing for a reason.
Able to pen 90% of tank’s front profile > able to pen 60% of tank’s front profile.
Your chances of placing a bad shot decrease with better round.
As I said earlier, advocate for TAM going up to 9.0. It deserves that BR more than A1A1 deserves 8.7.
Lol dude, this is getting out of hand.
Multiple people already shown you the hard stats in which A1A1 is clearly better than AM-1. That thing deserves to be 0.3 BR higher, you can cope with your toddler excuses as long as you want, but that won’t change the fact A1A1 is better and deserves to be higher in BR.
1 Like
How many times am I going to watch you go around in circles here? You claim the A1A1 is equal to the AM-1, everyone else disagrees and points out the laundry list of ways in which the A1A1 is superior. You ignore them and stick to the lack of thermals (Which isn’t a staple of 9.0), the lack of an LRF (Which on it’s own isn’t crippling), and the fact that while the AM-1 is worse, it’s “close enough to not matter”.
Let’s try this from a different angle. The AM-1 is a bad metric, not only is it one of the strongest 8.7s where it works, it’s also a tank that is largely incomparable with the A1A1 in terms of playstyle. Again, my comparison from early of comparing a Jumbo to a Hellcat hold true.
So let’s try and compare the A1A1 to other 8.7 tanks with the same flanking/sniping playstyle.
You’ve got the AMX-30 B2 and BRENUS. No contest there, stabilizer beats them easily despite their LRF and thermals.
Then there’s the grouping I’ll call the “ERA too late to be relevant” club, featuring the M60A3 RISE, Strv 104, Shot Kal Gimel and the Magach 6 R/B. All of which are so much slower than the Leo that it cripples their ability to position aggressively. They can hold their own when sniping decently well, but when it comes to exploiting vulnerable flanks the Leo easily beats them.
I guess the T-62 also falls into this catagory, being a somewhat mobile tank who excels at longer range engagements? And yeah, there’s just no way that and the A1A1 should ever be the same BR.
Honestly, the best comparision and the closest competition is probably the IVK-90-105, as they share the same gun with the same ammo. However, the Leo is smaller, faster, quicker to accelerate, has better reactionary mobilty, has better armor, and has one more degree of gun depression (And 5 more for gun elevation, more useful than you’d think). The IVK, to it’s credit, has a LRF, and can scout (And get the gimmicky scout drone). Yeah, I’d take the A1A1 every time.
I also don’t know why you’re stuck on Germany “needing” a 8.7 lineup, when almost half the nations can’t anymore. America, UK, Japan, Italy and arguably Israel (3 poor MBTs and one quirky one does not constitute a lineup, IMO) also can’t. Meanwhile, none of the 8.7s would suffer in a 9.0 lineup, and 9.3 Germany is one of the strongest lineups in the game. If you seriously want a 8.7 lineup, advocate for Gaijin to add some 8.7 tanks, don’t try and cram a decently balanced tank down a tier just so you can have a lineup at a given number.
1 Like
The Panther D and the T-34-85 are at the same battle rating.
Asymmetrical gameplay is in the game and is a good thing.
You make all good points but I will not agree that the A1A1 is so much better than the vehicles at 8.7 that it can’t also be 8.7
I disagree on one point.
“You’ve got the AMX-30 B2 and BRENUS. No contest there, stabilizer beats them easily despite their LRF and thermals.”
The AMX-30s are better flankers than the A1A1, they’re beautiful tanks.
Vehicle doesn’t need to be much better in order to be 0.3 BR higher, I already told you that.
Clear differences are there, A1A1 is better than AM-1 and other 8.7 mediums, so it’s logical it should remain one BR step above them.
For flanking you need speed and those tanks aren’t faster than A1A1.
Also, having no stabilization at 8.7 is a big problem and will limit your possible plays.
The AMX-30s are just about on par mobility wise this is what I mean about people over estimating the mobility of the A1A1 shit ain’t that good.
You are pretty much contradicting yourself here.
First you said that AMX-30s are better flankers than the A1A1 which simply isn’t true because their mobility isn’t better, and also they lack stabilization which is far from optimal when fighting with other flanking enemies.
That being said, AMX-30s and A1A1 are at best equal at flanking duties, and in my opinion A1A1 gets the win here because of it’s stabilization.
Let’s see how A1A1’s mobility compare to some other 8.7 mediums:
- A1A1 - 19.6 HP/t : 66km/h
- M60 RISE - 14.1 HP/t : 49km/h
- T-62 - 15.7 HP/t : 51km/h
- Chieftain Mk5 - 13.8 HP/t : 48km/h
- Strv 104 - 13.9 HP/t : 49km/h
A1A1 is much more mobile than your average 8.7 medium, let’s start being real here my dude.
AMX-30 has better reverse, thermals, and a laser range finder.
It is fundamentally better at “flanking”. The Leo A1A1 might arrive at the position 0.1 seconds faster but once there the AMX-30 is flat out better.
“A1A1 is much more mobile than your average 8.7 medium, let’s start being real here my dude.”
Type 74 (E) is 9.0
You are fundamentally wrong. Flanking !== sniping.
You are acting like there will be no opposition on your flanking route to fight. Are you just driving 50m away from spawn and camp there all match ?
?