VT-5 has inferior ammunition than M10, and its protection, survivability and mobility are not much better than M10.
Please lower the VT-5 to 11.3 or 11.0, or give it a better 105mm APFSDS round.
11 Likes
The VT-5 is correct around 11.7, but the M10 Booker should be 11.7 at as well.
In angled pen, 601mm vs 566mm. 6% difference.
In comparison, the 2S38 has a 22% difference between its round and HSTVL’s.
And T-80BVM’s round has am 8.6% difference between its round and M829A2’s fired out of an L/44 120mm cannon.
Mobility, VT-5 wins.
However, in top speeds, they’re about the same.
M10 Booker’s armor isn’t configured, so that cannot be addressed at this time.
2 Likes
Yep, in the current implementation with a 5s reload, the Booker definitely shouldn’t be anywhere below 11.3. It has excellent fire power, decent mobility and low survivability. 11.3-11.7 seems
To be a fair placement for such a vehicle
5 Likes
I wonder where the M10 will be placed in the ground tree. Before HSTVL? I think that 11.3 would be okay for it
Yes, it is before the HSTV-L.
I believe both would be fine at 11.0. VT5 is faster and has better survivability + autoloader, but worse round and depression for example.
2 Likes
Or they can fix the armor of the VT-5 and have it at a slightly higher br than the Booker.
1 Like
I’m afraid that the VT-5 is not performing well in 11.7, and I guess it will be suitable for the 11.3 br.
Its armour can be penetrated by most APFSDS or APDS fired by IFV autocannons, and some weakspots on its hull can’t even stop .50 AP rounds by the M2HB or NSVT. Its survivability is not good either, since any penetration will easily lead to fatal explosion or loss of most crew members. The DTW round has only 491mm of 0 degrees penetration, which is one of the worst rounds in 11.7.
I’m sure the Gaijin will not do anything about that.
Placee it anywhere. I will still use it in my top tier line up just like i do with m1128
1 Like
I use the tank a lot, even for 12.0mm, and it’s very effective whether your shell penetrates 700mm or 491mm. The principle is to target sensitive areas, and with a 5-second reload time and its mobility, the VT4 remains very competitive, but I think it should receive a new shell.
DTC02-105 : national
BTA2 : export
The BTA2 is an equivalent of the M900
Since I have the VT5, which is the export version of the ZTQ-15, it should receive the BTA2.
And I’d also like to point out that the DCT-10 125 needs to be corrected to achieve penetration values of over 600 mm because China uses the DTW-125, which is the domestic BT4, and the export VT4, while the uses both the BT4 and the DCT-10E 125.
Guys, seriously, just realize that gaijin isn’t making any effort for China…
And I repeat, the DCT-10 125 has penetration values of over 600 mm !!!
3 Likes
Doesn’t this value stand for 2000m/60° angle line of sight pen? Because if it is so, the value in-game is correct
I have played the VT5 on the live server and the M10 on the dev server. To say this is a massive underselling of the VT5 mobility.
From my experiences in it, the most comparable thing to the M10 mobility wise at it’s BR is the Challenger 1 (both pre and post engine buff), which is not a compliment for a high tier light tank lmao.
I agree with Magik that both at 11.0 would be fine. That or fix the VT5 and put it at 11.3-11.7 while the M10 stays 11.0.
11.3-11.7 makes it completely DOA lmao.
1 Like
Armor being penetrated is failing 3 layers of onion:
Don’t be seen.
Don’t be shot at.
Don’t be hit.
It’s a light tank, of course it’s going to be penned.
0 degree penetration doesn’t matter at these BRs, no tank has more than even 200mm of flat armor at these BRs.