No, I have not. In fact I’ve implied several times that the “job” of APCR is to go through thick, flat armor. The only case of an APCBC round doing this “job” better than APCR is with the 100 mm BR-412P APCR and BR-412D APCBC, since Gaijin’s calculator actually makes it so 412P has lower flat penetration that 412D.
My argument is that this job is so niche that it ends up not being useful, specially due the disadvantages that come with APCR. The only exceptions to APCR rounds that can be useful are the ones of the Jumbo 75, and the 90 mm M304, for the reasons I have stated.
I disagree. The frontal armor is trolly, its got a good gun with great gun depression, and its overall pretty maneuverable. Yeah its an acquired taste, but I don’t think it needs to be downtiered.
Yes, but since the T1E1/M6A2 90 was brought up, it seemed fitting to put that forum topic there, since it has better and more accurate information on these vehicles in general, such as the sources that talk about the armor of these vehicles.
It’s only been brought up because the guy is having trouble with it and people want to pick on discrepancies, rather than actually admit the reason that people are pointing to in here…
The 90, and even the 105, were only used for testing, the 76 and 37 were the actual basis.
You could suggest unlockable maingun mods to make the 90/105 a thing, but that’s nothing for this thread…
It won’t help the issue of the player dying, and ignoring the points put forth in here.
BRs are based on efficency.
The Panther Ds armor allows it to survive getting shot from the front, making it possible to retaliate.
But what when you just need to shoot a tank? The slow traverse greatly reduces the tanks ability to quickly fire at targets or utilize brawling or flanking tactics.
Vehicles have a variety of attributes and being the best in one or two categories doesn’t mean much when others are much worse.
Likewise, underperforming in a category compared to vehicles of the BR range has no bearing without examining the strenghts.