The Object 685 is light tank, can be found in the Soviet tech tree. It features a Two-Plane Stabilizer, a 6s Autoloader, a laser rangefinder and excellent mobility at only 8.7 while other contemporaries such as the M60A2 or higher in BR such as the Leopard A1A1, don’t feature the same capabilities. As a result I would like to see this tank go up in BR to 9.0 or 9.3.
1 Like
Neither of the listed tanks you mentioned are light tanks.
M60A2 is 8.3.
Leopard A1A1 features a 50% better round and superior turret traverse at the minimum.
The closest to Object 685 is TAM, which is firing a 50% better round, has more gun depression, and could very well be more mobile.
The TAM is easily 0.3 BR better than the Object 685 and it’s currently 9.0.
So if Object 685 went to 9.0, would you support moving multiple other light tanks up by 0.3 as well for fairness?
Ikv-91-105 is another light tank firing a notably better round.
Class 3P and PTL02 are wheeled vehicles firing better rounds, and PTL02 has thermals.
9 Likes
Object 685 isnt that bad IMO, something like Object 906 is way dumber. Two-plane stabilizer with 4.3 second auto loader at 8.0 with great APHE round + HEAT is just retarded. It’s very strong at 8.0 and could easily come up to 8.3 or even 8.7
2 Likes
The autoloader of the 685 is what gives it a far better advantage over the light tanks you mentioned. Even though the round may not be as good, does it really matter when you can fire again in 6s? I’m mainly talking about when it gets downtiers which is pretty common for 8.7 where it has a clear speed advantage, paired with a stabilizer and autoloader over any tanks at a lower BR. It can very well fight against 9.0 light tanks without any challenge.
Well that’s another OP tank…
1 Like
It does matter because Object 685, despite the autoloader, unlike the T-55AM-1 which was the best opposite before the battle rating change to the Object 685. It does matter because most of the time whoever shoots first wins, specially regarding light tank destroyers such as Object 685 in comparison to the TAM which are both very versatile and mobile platforms. Although for the battle rating won’t change anything but just a worse 2S25, I’d rather see this change through a decompression: it’s fair for both parties and would bring a more noticeable impact to vehicles that suffer from these, whatever it is suffering because of the Object 685 to be moved to battle rating 9.0.
1 Like
Your right actually, decompression would be a far better choice so that it doesn’t meet tanks it completely overshadows while not facing tanks far better than it self - everyone would benefit from the change.
The 685 has a bad dart and no gun depression
A 6 second autoloader really isn’t that much of an advantage. Realistically, you only barely outreload the standard NATO 105mm, and you can’t play the same hyper aggressive style that you can with faster autoloaders like the 906 to kill multiple people before they react.
And the 685 gives up a lot of advantages in order to do this. The huge size, lack of armor and poor gun depression really hurt it in this BR bracket, which is rife with APHE spamming autocannons. TURMs love running into 685s, as they beat them in almost every catagory.
1 Like
True, 6s is not that fast but mobility-wise, it’s pretty fast meaning u can flank around before your enemies spot u. The armor is practically useless as anything will pen at this BR, maybe it would be useful to be able to take some hits from autocannons but you shouldn’t be going in head-on engagements or peeking out of cover for too long with the 685 in the first place.
I’ve actually been trying to spade this particular tank in the past week and I have to say it’s one of the best tanks I’ve used, but I think it’s fine at 8.7.
The main problem is its bad dart, low penetration stats and inconsistent post pen damage means you’ll have trouble taking the enemy out with your first shot unless you’re really really accurate. I actually bring around 5 or 6 shots of APHE to finish off crippled enemies simply because I have no idea what a second dart is gonna hit.
The weird ammo position in the autoloader also means your turret will fly away if anything pens it.
Although the 685 does perform well even when I bring it along in my 9.0 lineup I wouldn’t say it deserves a 9.0 unless it gets a dart buff.
1 Like
I would also call the mobility very OK. It’s good for 8.7, but 8.7 is right under where tanks start getting very fast. You have the MBT-70 clones at 9.0/9.3, the XM-1s, the later Leopards, not to mention the wheeled LTs at or around 9.3. The 685 holds up to these kinda tanks, but it’s not particularly special among them.
I was actually shocked to look at the wiki and see a 27.6 hp/t. I suspect the issue is that it only has 4 forward gears, which limits it’s actual output, as it is in no way similar in mobility to stuff like the Leopard 2s.
The problem with this is the gun depression. Bad gun depression like this makes a peekaboo platstyle much harder to pull off, as you’ll need to expose much more of your tank to engage the enemy on rough terrain. It works decently well when you have hard cover to poke in and out of, but that’s far more limiting that the ridgelines typically used by such tanks to move around undetected.
They make me laugh. If the 685 was some uber-bias machine it’d actually be used more.
1 Like
I actually feel like it’s really really above average, it’s probably ignored just because it’s folded and most people just want to get higher in the TT
Real. I haven’t seen one in weeks or months
1 Like
By “bad” APFSDS, is it like the American APFSDS problem, where it simply lacks post pen damage?
That is a valid point, you’re right.
Damage created by APFSDS is primarily a function of how much pen it has. Effectively, the more residual penetration the round has after it pierces a piece of armor, the more spall is produced.
3BM25 has quite low penetration compared to other APFSDS at the tier, meaning it produces less spall when shooting at the same targets. This results in rather inconsistent damage, and more precision needed, even though the round can penetrate the same targets in the same areas as most other darts.
This puts it into a similar catagory to other weak APFSDS, like M375, and the XM-803/MBT-70/Kpz 70’s tediously named one.
2 Likes
Ohhhh I see, so an so an APDS round like the 3BM3 (350mm of pen) found on the T62 would have more spall then the 3BM4 (284mm of pen) APFSDS?
Ik this is a bit off topic, but about the KPZ-70 would you then reccomend using HEAT round as opposed to APFSDS?
Yes. The 115mm is also larger, which is the other major factor that influences spall. There’s also the “type” of APFSDS, but outside specialty rounds like the T95E1’s round, it doesn’t usually factor in
Currently grinding them, and I’d say probably not. The APFSDS round is unquestionably bad, especially for the tier, but it’s at least easy to aim, and doesn’t get trolled by composite or ERA. The HEAT is also very low velocity compared to other rounds at the tier.
Definitely keep a few HEAT rounds around for overpressuring light vehicles though.