Yeah i feel better now that 10.3 will be less modern mbts. So sugestion is kinda pointless
I still think the KPZ-70 should move up to 9.7, now that a lot of other vehicles have moved up in BR (including the superior Leopard 2K).
The MBT-70 can finally not be inferior if that was the case, and the XM803 would still be worth it at 9.0.
No, They are completely fine at 9.3
1 Like
If only the MBT-70 were the same as the KPZ-70…
The MBT gets better atgm reload while Kpz gets better apfsds/heat reload
1 Like
The ATGM it gets sucks. There is no reason to use it over the APFSDS (especially when it gets a LRF).
The KPZ-70 is much better overall.
In this thread: a lot of people grossly overestimating these tanks’ ability
1 Like
MBT-70 is pretty terrible, especially at the moment. It will become mediocre after the BR changes.
XM803 is balanced at the moment. It will become good after the BR changes.
KPZ-70 is pretty good at the moment, and will become very good after the BR changes.
The KPZ-70 is almost just as manueverable as the Leopard 2K, gets a 20mm, and has a 6.0s reload instead of a 6.7s reload (that most vehicles get around this BR).
The only issue is the round (and the somewhat lackluster armour), which is just about as good as the T-62’s round, or the Object 122’s (which both sit at 8.7), or just about as good as the M735 shot that the XM-1 (GM) gets. This round can pen most things weakspots, coupled with the reload and mobility, makes it a very good vehicle.
thing is that the MBT-70 is still an okay tank… I don’t see why is needs moved Kpz-70’s reload is unfair tho
Well yeah, definitely after the BR changes it will.
The KPZ should not be the same BR as the MBT-70, though. It should be 0.3 higher.
So I think the KPZ-70 should be moved up to 9.7, where the 2K used to be.
Or we could do it the other way:
Keep the KPZ-70 at 9.3, and move down the MBT-70 to 9.0, and the XM-803 to 8.7 (or keep it at 9.0 and make it be slightly inferior to the MBT-70).
In which case, that’s somewhat reasonable. But I don’t think making the XM-803 8.7 (may be far too good), or making it inferior to the MBT-70 is the best option here.
I enjoyed the KPz-70, I carry a bunch of HEAT shells especially in large maps to nuke targets hiding behind cover thinking they won’t be hit lol
It’s a good vehicle, and now it’s going to be even better since a lot of the tougher opponents you’d face in an uptier are moving up by 0.3, effectively making them rarer to fight against, or completely removing them from the match-maker entirely.
The small differences between the MBT70 and KPZ70 do not make one of them terrible and one pretty good.
1 Like
The 20mm also extremely effective against first spawn helicopters and could reliably defend itself against CAS that dive to shoot mg/rockets, because this thing could reverse as quickly as moving forward, only thing that feels a bit underwhelming is the apfsds.
2 Likes
1.5s reload difference makes a lot of difference.
7.5s makes you the slowest reloading vehicle out of every single 9.3.
Think about it, even the T-64s / T-72s out-reload you (7.1s reload). And for what? A mediocre round?
6.7s is average - most 9.3 vehicles reload at this rate.
6.0s reload is very good for 9.3.
And the better reload isn’t the only thing that makes the KPZ-70 different to the MBT-70.
The KPZ-70 has a better engine (albeit marginal). So it has a hp/ton of 29.01 instead of 28.53.
The KPZ-70 also gets a lot more smoke grenades (16 instead of 8), and drops them by 2 instead of 4. So you get 8 pops of smoke with the KPZ-70, while you only get 2 pops of smoke with the MBT-70 (albeit the pops of smoke on the MBT-70 are larger since you use 4 instead of 2).
All these differences definitely sums up to a reasonable 0.3 BR difference.
Not enough to call one bad and one pretty good. My fights aren’t often decided by reload rate.
They don’t sum up to a 0.3 difference with the current levels of BR compression. It would if they decompressed more than what they’re doing.
1 Like
So you think the slightly better engine and the 20mm that the MBT-70 gets should warrant a 0.3 BR difference between it and the XM803?
And reload rate often can decide between whether you die or not, and whether you can get a number of kills in one go.
Now that the 2K is being moved up to 10.0, and so is pretty much everything else at 10.0+, it’s a good time to move the KPZ-70 to a BR where it doesn’t make the MBT-70 largely inferior.
I am personally undecided. The engine difference is much greater here and the 20mm does have a lot of utility.
It can but it usually doesn’t for me. Far more often it’s other stuff.
I wouldn’t be so opposed to moving these tanks up if they fixed the dart but that isn’t going to happen because gaijin
I wouldn’t be vouching for the KPZ-70 to move up to 9.7 if the BR changes didn’t move up pretty much everything it used to face in an uptier. If it went to 9.7, it would just face the same things as it does now, albeit it would now be at the same BR as the T-64B and Merkava Mk.2D (which its mobility had been nerfed).
The Merkavas can be penned through the UFP either way, and the T-64B doesn’t pose much of a difference to the regular T-64A for the KPZ-70 (other than the LRF and the ERA LFP). The KPZ-70 must still play the same way against it as it does with the T-64A.
T-64B has better FCS and better sight zoom, which makes targeting so much easier and quicker, the zoom level of the T-64A and T-72A is just downright horrible lol I was literally pixel hunting at enemy >1km
1 Like