The VK.45.01 would not deserve a higher BR, imho. It’s pretty bad. Slow, and can’t be angled because of the pre-angled hull cheeks (behind which your ammo is sitting).
I was a bit baffled that the Befehlswagen Tiger wasn’t going up from 5.7 to 6.0, but then again, it has the same turret as the H1, and is much slower: its only gimmick is the unangled frontal hull armour (and reverse speed), so if it was 6.0, it would probably just not be worth buying, imho.
I bet it still better than T25 in wide performance.
Don’t think so. It has 102mm of flat hull armour that most times you will not be able to angle.
I missed it with one that have 200mm UFP.
That is the 5.7 Befehlswagen, which is indeed very good, but mostly in a trolly way: it has the same pre angled hull cheeks and the H1 turret as its 5.3 predecessor, but gets the bolt-on armour on the UFP. I enjoy it. If players realise they can just shoot your cupola, you die. If they mistake you for an unangled Tiger, you can have some fun 😁
And it definitely better than T25.
You wish 😂😂
T25 is sluggish, have no adequate armor, gun is normal but you can’t use neither as light tank, neither as medium tank, neither as heavy tank. This is just disabled tank. If you want to flank you have M36 or super hellcat if you rich. For armor you have m26 and especially T26E5. As usual you have nothing to respond.
problems are the terrible US teams and not their tanks.
they rush in their M18 to get in planes but sucks at CAS, so they lack points to spawn in anything else.
The 75 jumbo has the same pen as the 5.3 EBR, the EBR has speed so it can flank and get side shots though.
Works both ways. Jumbo has stabilizer, armor and APCR, EBR has speed.
In general nothing really changed for the Jumbo except that it can now see the German 6.7 heavies - and US 6.7 for the French Jumbo.
So in full uptiers it’s just not a great experience.
I had the Jumbo in my 5.7 line-up before it went to 5.7 but I didn’t use it a lot since you generally want the firepower of the M4A3 and M36 when you have to deal with Germany.
It should go back to 5.3
What Gaijin really needs to do is figure out what to do with the 6.7 heavies.
Right now they are being spammed to hell because the last few BR changes all that Gaijin has done is pulled everything that is below 6.7 up in BR without touching most of the 6.7 heavies, all under the pretense of decompression when these actions have heavily compressed those BRs which (at least in my opinion) didn’t need decompression and changes in the first place.
There are multiple ways to decompress BRs beyond just increasing the upper cap.
Frankly, I think the most-unexplored route is adding more digits to the BR range.
We currently use X.3, X.7, and X.0, why not also add X.1, X.2, X.4, X.5, X.6, X.8, and X.9? Then there would be far more slots for a machine to go to where it doesn’t get stuck in the awkward situation of “move it down and it clubs, move it up and its worthless.”
Under such a system, I would start placing the Jumbo 75 at 5.4 BR, and the Jumbo 76 at 5.8-6.1 BR. If APCR got the restorative postpen buff it deserves, the 75 would become more than competent at 5.7-5.9 (180mm pen and good postpen comparable to 75mm AP) and the 76 at the current 6.3 (230mm pen and 76mm AP level damage).
The game needs to define explicitly what “seal clubbing” is in its context, I feel. Because sadly too many people equate “frontally impenetrable” with “overpowered,” when for too many machines this should not be the case. In the 5.7+ BR range there are too many easy ways to pen something that trades all its mobility for armor (and sometimes also firepower), and for the guns which can’t easily pen whatever they please, the atrocity known as track-and-barrel torture exists.
In my eyes, all this compression is being maintained by 1) continued ease of barrel-knocking even at medium-long ranges, 2) comically low postpen of most high-pen shells (APCR, APDS, HEAT, HEATFS), and 3) incorrect pen/postpen mechanics for many shells (APHE doing too much damage, solid AP often doing not enough, APDS shell shattering on skirts nonsense, HESH doing too little postpen, and HE missing the kinetic portion of its armor-penetration entirely).
How does that relate to the Jumbo 75 (and Jumbo 76)? APHE overperformance makes the gun surprisingly potent, causing screams of it being somehow “overpowered” and thus allowing it to remain at a questionable BR. APCR underperformance means that many opponents which should be able to pen it either outright can’t or if they do they do **** all for damage. The Jumbo’s own APCRs not penning things and doing no damage means the thing is totally helpless outside a complete downtier. Then of course the medium-like mobility of Jumbos means they cannot be placed at a BR where they are frontally immune to most things like the name “Heavy Tank” would suggest. Barrel damage should not be a band-aid for the Jumbo to use any more than it should be for uptiered opponents to use against it.
This is a machine I like to play from time to time, both versions, in fact. And I still make it work somehow by playing it like the medium that it actually is. To truly “fix” the Jumbo would require major overhauls to many interlocking game mechanics.
At 5.3 the Jumbo was a useful tool in the box for urban brawling and close up had a chance against 6.3.It seemed balanced.You took it for what it was.Keep the sides against a building and face the enemy spawn where you could.Utilise the good points and work against the bad.
It just seems the feel,common,sense and player feedback are overruled by stats.Mathematicians who don’t play the game vs those who do.Jumbo 75 was sat there at 5.3 for so long.What serious harm was it doing that it was left there so long?
Really I think its the sad truth that the average player defines “I can’t pen it and it killed me” as “overpowered.” The Jumbo and multiple other heavies are crippled to varying degrees by this. Ammo either not penning what it should pen or not dealing enough postpen compounds the problem. BR compression from both too low a cap and not enough slots to fit things into compounds it further. Tiny maps compound it further. Bad objective design compounds it further.
The Jumbo exemplifies too many aspects of how the game just has wrong logic. I would first reclassify it as a medium tank. Second, I would see global rebuffs to APCR, APDS, HEAT, HEATFS, global nerfs to APHE (which in reality below 120mm size did around 10-15% more postpen spall than solid AP of the same size, APCR and APDS actually did more on average than full-calibers from the same guns, funny enough…), and reshuffle a lot of BRs as a result. Third, I would delete the barrel damage mechanic from the game completely since it causes more problems than its worth.
Then after all that dust settles, we would actually know where the Jumbo’s BR is supposed to be. My guess is that its current BR might be where it belongs, if the mechanics of the machine and what it fights functioned as they should.
The main issue is still that a tanks performance heavily depends on up and downtiers.
Even if we imagine that a vehicle will get on average the same amount of up and downtiers, it can mean that one players only gets uptiers while the other only gets downtiers, which ruins the vehicle for one player.
The whole MM is inherently flawed. Why should a Pz IV G sometimes fight Matildas and other times Churchill Mk VIIs?
If we had static MM ranges, a vehicle performance would always be predictable and it can be put into a situation where it doesn’t suck 50% of the time.
Unlocking modules for vehicles is a pain because you need to play it, even though it might not be the best idea to spawn it due to uptiers.
Leaving you with either the choice of playing a vehicle that will haeavily underperform or play something else and not progress with the module unlocks. It’s stupid.
So what if it has APCR? Penetration is irrelevant.
I think the ability to penetrate a Panthers mantlet or a Tigers front isn’t irrelevant.
Why is penetration relevant for American tanks but not for German tanks?