BR-367 is a post-war ammunition that dates well beyond the prototype date of the STP. It is wholly inappropriate to add it based on Gaijin’s usual historical stance on later ammunition supplies. At 6.3, it will already be a monster of a vehicle. Adding BR-367 will easily warrant a 6.7 Battle Rank, as it allows it to engage head-on rather than acting as a flanker with its stabilized gun. This would be different if the gun lost stabilization at 10-15kmh, but it works above 25kmh. This will ruin the 5.3-6.3 section if not addressed.
7 Likes
does it? as far as i know, speaking strictly in game sense, it should have same short stop stab as M4A3E8, ie. it cuts off above 25kmh.
if the stabilizer is full one, probably yes. But I doubt that.
2 Likes
Ammunition is matter of balance, and I don’t think that the 85 mm Zis-3 has a lot to offer, T-44 is proof of that but even it does have some armor as reason for a rather underpowered gun when compared to most popular vehicles at that battle rating. It’s not surprising you’re complaining about the stabilization when even M4A3 (76) W for example do have a gyroscope stabilization for the vertical angle that is functional at exact 25 Km/H, this is some bad coping, one vehicle isn’t going to ‘ruin’ an entire battle rating range, so why no one talking about XM-246 which still do have some terrible damage model?
4 Likes
oh you see, its no surprise actually since russia needs one hilariously undertiered vehicle with abilities of your choice like full stabilizer (To-55) or both stab and laserrangefinder (pt76-57) and im mainly talking about sim here but counts also for rb in a way, where basically nothing else gets these. But yeah, i guess the pt76-57 from what? 2010? in a bracket with ww2 vehicles is no problem?
Or the to55 fully stabilized as a medium with armor like any other nations heavy tanks and medium tank spawncost? because thats balans?
2 Likes
are you saying that premium are op yes we know it
1 Like
agreed. prototypes should only get the ammo if its direct era. anything later or notably earlier is blatantly wrong and shouldnt be added onto it
2 Likes
u got a point i guess. and by them being premium and tons of people without a clue buying and playing them its also easy to keep their stats so low that its easy to justify them being so low in br, completely ruining them as soon as someone who knows what hes doing is playing them. still kinda interesting that basically in any of the mid tier sim brs, theres one of them running around fully stabilized, decades newer than anything else
1 Like
Three things:
BR-367 is a late war round
The T-34-85 (STP) is 1946 model T-34 (should get 20 extra horsepower)
Gaijin had never implemented tank ammunition based on timeline, just on gun compatibility. For all I care it could get 3BK-2M, move it up to 6.3 and then boom we have nice late T-33-85
6 Likes
Yeah nah, to be honest BR-365A is just as good in a large amount of scenarios
3 Likes
I don’t understand where you’re trying to reach with this commentary, I’m not advocating for undertiered but rather a balanced experience where PT-76-57 and TO-55 has nothing to do with a T-34-85, one has an autocannon, other has more advanced armor and armament and the other is the same T-34-85 with an experimental stabilizer. I won’t be surprised either if T-44 gets BR-367 but I highly doubt it. Mentioning PT-76-57 and TO-55 is rather off-topic. Although I agree that it should more to another line-up than 6_1 or higher so is TO-55 at 8_2_2.
how is that? it has no armor even by 5.7 standards and it’s not m18 with its insane mobility
you get +29 mm of pen and loose half of explosive filler
8 Likes
Lol, lmao even. On T-34. Head-on. Are you gonna take them by surprise, by audacity or pray to Koshkin himself that front armour will bouns incoming attack to warrant such move?
5 Likes
BR367 is not a disaster… 164mm won’t frontally pen that much, while it still has a part in between 30deg-60deg that is worse than the old 365A (now without the A).
The same reason as 100 and 122 D shells aren’t quite much an improvement compared to Bs
4 Likes
aside from the historical argument, giving the STP the BR-367 shouldn’t make too much of a difference especially at 6.3
it has marginally better pen and less explosive filler as well as a longer reload compared to the sherman’s M62 shell at 5.7 but hardly anyone would dare call the 5.7 sherman let alone the jumbo 76 “a monster of a vehicle”
you’re essentially looking at a shermanized T-34 (minus the .50 cal), nothing more, nothing less
Stop ya whining, it’s now 6.3. Same BR as T-34-100 and T-44FM. It’s fine.
I was always going to use it at 6.3, since that is where the lineup is, anyway.
3 Likes
What the fuck are you talking about?
-
BR-367 is worse than BR-365
-
The Jumbo is better than the T-34 Stab and isn’t the best at 6.3.
4 Likes
And since when do medium tanks need armor?
It has armor that protects it from 40mm autocannons, medium tank mobility, medium tank gun, fast turret traverse and now a stabilizer.
It will lose against a 76 Jumbo but can really bully heavy and light tanks due its mobility and stabilizer.
2 Likes
They are pretty equal actually.
The BR-365 is marginal better against sloped armor while the BR-367 is somewhat better against thick armor, even though that rarely comes into play.
So in general the BR-367 is going to pen more targets but also inflicts less damage.
3 Likes
Well, that depends.
In uptiers, when the Jumbos armor doesn’t mean all that much, the better mobility, post-pen damage and angle penetration of the T-34-85 are going to be better.
1 Like
