I use the M8 in both US and China at higher BRs. Would be greeat for it to have scouting. A shame it lost the stabilizer, but its otherwise great.
1 Like
It’s pointless to discuss protection and firepower as a metric for determining battle rating. It’s never as simple as armour thickness of penetration.
At the end of the day the battlerating comes down to accessibility and user friendliness. The easier a tank is to use, the higher it will sit at battle rating until its usefulness wears out.
The Panzer IV H used to be 4.3 and the Jumbo used to be 4.7. The performance of both vehicles remains almost unchanged despite several major revisions to how the game plays.
I can understand that numbers like penetration, armour thickness and power to weight are easy to discuss but they don’t prove anything when it comes to vehicle performance. They simply don’t tell the whole story.
It’s like players who are constantly arguing for Depleted uranium armour ans APFSDS; It won’t solve anything, if the Abrams gets any upgrades or updates that improve the performance, it’ll overperform for a month or two and then get rebalnced to a higher BR and it’ edge will be rounded off.
Just because you are having an issue with a particular vehicle, doesn’t mean that the community is having an issue.
It is an inferior joke vehicle that belongs at the level of the reserve vehicles. Comparing it to a Puma is too much:
Except for the fact that at one point US tanks got their stabilizers and Pz IVs can’t even compete with a stabilized M24.
So they Pz IVs, which have nothing going for them but a high penetrating gun, went down, while tanks like the 75mm and 76mm Jumbo went up, because the stabilizer made them much more effective in killing vehicles, while before they only had armor going for them.
A Pz IV is never going to kill a Jumbo through the MG port when it has a stabilized cannon and kills it before it can even turn the gun on target.
2 Likes
By which metric?
1.0 should be reserved for the least effective vehicles.
There’s a reason the Sturmpanzer dropped to 1.0.
The freaking Staghound AA went from 1.3 to now, 2.0, because it was super effective in killing Rank 1 vehicles with it’s dual .50cals on a fast traversing turret.
How does it make sense for the M8 LAC to be 1.0 with a single .50cal in addition to a 37mm cannon.
If a vehicle can be killed by .50cals and struggles to kill other Rank 1 vehicles either because:
- The gun lacks penetration
- The vehicle struggles to target others before it gets killed
Then it’s a pretty bad vehicle and 1.0 worthy.
If the vehicle is any better then that, it should already have a higher BR then 1.0.
2 Likes
Except for the fact that at one point US tanks got their stabilizers and Pz IVs can’t even compete with a stabilized M24.
Speak for yourself.
A Pz IV is never going to kill a Jumbo through the MG port when it has a stabilized cannon and kills it before it can even turn the gun on target.
The fact that you insist on describing tank engagements as two vehicles facing each other in a head on speaks volumes about your understanding of the game as it played.
You’ve also avoided or missed the point, vehicle performance is not what decides battle ratings, players performance with said vehicle is what determines battle ratings. I’m not saying that the Pz.IV H or the Jumbo shouldn’t have had their BRs changed, I’m saying that significant changes occured independently of the vehicle performance, If anything the Pz IV has been upgraded with addon armour and better tracks and still gone down while the Jumbo is essentially the same vehicle now as it was when it was originally added to the game.
No it doesn’t, and you have no clue how I understand the game.
And it’s funny that you use that argument to discredit me, while thinking that you are right.
The Pz IV loses against any opponents on the same BR.
It works by punishing mistakes of players driving in front of the Pz IV, that’s it.
So, in which way is a Pz IV going to beat a M24, when the M24 has all the tools to win 90% of the fights that are going to happen in WT?
Unless you challange a Pz IV in a wide open field, you are going to win.
Once the M24 received it’s stabilizer I completely demolished German teams with it, and the only reason it’s not going to change in BR is that nowadys teams are mixed and you are fighting other M24s, Shermans or anything that is more capble than a Pz IV.
That change is older than US tanks receiving stabilizers. It’s ancient history at this point.
It’s not only the Jumbo, but the M6A1, the T14 and the 76mm Shermans that all went up in BR.
Guess what, which vehicle went down? The M10 and Archilles. Because like the Pz IV they are all about the gun penetration but lacking in other ways to be more competetive outside staying at range and sniping.
No it doesn’t, and you have no clue how I understand the game
Sure thing bud
Wow, you are really killing it with your comeback.
That sure showed me who’s right.
What comeback? This isn’t a confrontation, I just disagree with your post and think you have an underdeveloped perspective of the game.
I’m not trying to hurt your feelings.
And I think you have have an underdeveloped ability to judge people.
You literally said:
Replying to a single comment from me about how a Pz IV doesn’t stand a change against a Jumbo when targeting the one weak spot from the front.
How does that one statement turn into me having a underdeveloped understanding of the game?
Maybe it’s you who lacks the understanding that every other vehicle who will not penetrate a Jumbos armor from the front, other than the hull MG port, is going to have an easier time getting the kill, simply because they have better turret traverse, mobility or gun handling. Or hey, even won’t instantly die or get disbabled when getting shot first, due to having effective armor.
Surely you know how the Pz IV is one of the least mobile vehicles in its BR range, with one of the slowest reaction time, due to comperatively slow turret traverse.
If someone crosses your crosshair, it wasn’t because are playing the Panzer IV, its despite it.
Most other vehicles would be able to target and shoot more vehicles per match, simply because they are more mobile and have nearly twice the turret traverse speed in addition to that.
So all that limits the Pz IV to fight at range, to negate its shortcomings while also being able to use its one strenght.
The SU-85M is 5.0, the T-34-85 5.7.
The Jagdpanzer IV is 4.3, the Pz IV H 3.7.
The Jadgpanther is 6.3, the Panther A/G/F 6.0.
Why do you think that is? It’s because the playstyle of the German vehicles doesn’t really change when they lost their turrets. They gained armor to fight more effectively at range, while the T-34-85 is so much more effective in brawling that it is the overall more effective vehicle compared to the SU-85M.
It’s not limited to one specific strenght.
I run the Prem Panzer IV J in a 4.3 lineup (Its not the ‘H’ but close enough) as a back and fight jumbos frequently. If I find myself in the situation you described, I’ve made several mistakes and armour, weakspots and firepower are inconsequential at that point. I find jumbos to be a serious obstacle but not a problem. With a little patience and cunning you can typically get enough of an angle in a head on engagement with a jumbo to shoot the side of the hull behind the tracks which is quite weak. Additionally, and I learned this playing the Jpz IV. You can shoot the MG port weakspot with 75mm gun, it doesn’t always kill the crew, but due to the hempispherical nature of the MG, it’s vulnerable from several angles up until the sides start to become more vulnerable.
The fact that you chose that particular scenario: a lightly armoured medium tank, squaring of against a very well armoured heavy tank in a head on engagements is an indication that you are speaking from personal experience and may often find yourself staring down an opponent which you have no tools as a player to deal with. I have put all of those gymnastics together to come to the opinion that you aren’t doing enough preparation when engaging enemy vehicles since you are describing the game like it’s a series of duels, instead of a series of ambushes. Also, I spend a lot of time in battle avoiding fights I can’t win and either disengaging or waiting for allies (there are more team players out there than people give credit to)
I replied with the ‘sure bud’ as your reply seemed defensive. People don’t get defensive unless they’re vulnerable.
Additionally, Armour and firepower aren’t much of an issue in my playstyle as I only tend to engage players that aren’t aware of my presence or I wait until they’re distracted by another player, or they make a mistake. Sometimes I make the mistake and get wiped out, sometimes I make lots of mistakes but for whatever reason it never occurs to me that it’s the vehicle’s fault.
I say this last bit because the only way I can sympathise with the issues being raised is to play the game on the enemies terms, or into the enemies strengths instead of playing to my own vehicles strengths and coming up with solutions that are based on ambushes and favourable positioning. When I see these topics popup about BR changes and vehicles overperforming and I read the arguments and justifications I honestly wonder if I’m playing the same game.
1.3 or 1.7 is reasonable but the only things I listed that weren’t rank 1 was the m22 and m103 and both of those were to prove a point