Overrated as all hell then.
Its more about the stability of the overall tank for gun laying than a slow speed stab. the only tank where i can say its needed the stab to not be an absolute pig to use at low speeds is the cromwell V but thats only because it wants to lurch off at 40mph everywhere
I still think a stabiliser can be a make-or-break in a fair amount of situations. I don’t use the Type 87 RCV usually because the extra damage is just not worth it. The Type 89 is far better and in most situations the Type 87 RCV (P) can be uptiered to the same BR and perform just as well- mostly due to the stabiliser.
this is for low tier where all you see is quick stop stabs. Its not that big of an advantage to make the M4a1 on par with the PZ IV J/H
oh no it definitely isn’t enough to raise the BR to 5.0, but a stabiliser is still a make-or-break in some situations
^even at low tier
ive never really found it to be that big of a deal.
plus its not like german mains will overhype a single thing to try and validate their OP vehicle staying OP is it?
As I see it, it’s convenient to have, however it’s A. -Limited to specific situations- and B. -Almost entirely supplemented by some specific tanks (e.g VK3002) being especially stable.-
The only situation where stabs are really a game changer is when you need extra precision (pretty much all 8.3+ due to lack of APHE) and when you’re especially fast.
Well, he’s also proposing sending it down in BR correspondingly with the reload nerf, so I don’t think his objective is to make the T-34-76 uncompetitive, just to balance it on a different point of equilibrium.
I will note that its armour would be much more formidable at lower BRs, especially combined with meeting more inexperienced players. I think that may be part of the reason why it’s balanced where it’s at instead, so that it plays more like a medium, even if it requires a faster RoF than what was physically possible in reality.
Yeah and technically the Pz III J can see the T-34 1940 😌
Yeah so obsolete that they produced the Pz IV and StuG III till the end of the war.
I think you have a wrong understanding of what obsolete means.
The Pz III was obsolete after 1943, and they turned it into a infantry support tank.
As the 50mm AT gun wasn’t going to cut it anymore.
That’s why the Pz IV replaced it.
And?
What does that have anything to do with how WT should work?
WT is a game about tanks and not an ongoing war between nations.
It’s about vehicles fighting each other, tanks or planes (and ships).
Production numbers have nothing to do what a vehicle should be capable off.
The games balanced can’t be killed because BRs determine a vehicles efficiency.
The only thing that kills that is compression and top tier vehicles that never have to worry about up tiers.
You mean like people in this thread and penetration numbers?
haha
The 88mm on the Tiger produces around 3.3MJ of energy. The 85mm around 2.9MJ.
Both rounds weigh roughly the same with 15-16kg.
It’s obvious you have a poor understanding of tank development during ww2. Go read some books on the subject.
You entirely missed my point about why balancing in this GAME means the reload of some vehicles might not be as realistic as you think it should be.
As AurenKarach pointed out above, the T34 BRs can’t be lowered to accommodate your desired nerf on the T34 ROF due to the fact that it would be impervious to more enemies than it already is.
By the way, what is the reload of the Daimler Mk II light tank with TWO people in the turret?
Also, what is the reload of the M3 Stuart with TWO people in the turret?
And what is the reload of the H.39 light tank with ONE person in the turret?
And what is …
Great argument. Maybe you want to correct me, if I said something wrong, if you think you are so smart.
A bunch of non-sense. As the T-34 1940 is already 3.3.
Maybe you just have a poor understanding of how the game works 😉
people arent seeing the whole picture on both sides true.
If you just look at the gun the archer should be 4.7
however its not on a sturdy, decently armoured platform like the sherman, its on a valentine.
Pz4 long guns are on sturdy decently armoured platforms (H&J) with a gun of better practical performance because of the HE filler.
as ive pointed out before the panzer 4 h/j hull is very comparable in armour to a sherman (not jumbo) with a gun thats got near identical penetration and post pen effect as the one on the 76W sherman
its not a counterpart to an M4a1 75mm, its stupid that its BR makes it so
Its counterparts are at 4.7 and 5.0. simlar stability, armour, gun performance and top speeds. the only difference is the player and balancing off of the player is never a good idea because people are morons.
If we are to make quick stop stabilisers a mountain out of the molehill and say that 20g of TNT nuking a whole tank easily is still insufficient it can face the firefly at 4.7. both unstabilised, one has more pen for zero TNT the other still lolpens everyone for TNT filler
Sherman M4A1/76 vs Panzer IV is better in pen, post pen, movility, armor, secondary armament, turret rotation speed, and have acces to amazing good stabilizer but in teaboo pararell world is equal LMAO!
Really this topic is just the tipical allies fanboys hate against Germany.
Sturdy? Armored? In what world?
vs M3 75mm it has 1/3rd of the filler.
It isn’t. The frontal armor is worse, the side is worse, and angling it is as (in)effective as angling the M4A1 hull.
No, both that gun and the Chi-To’s Type II Model II are better in every way than the german 7.5cm L/48.
M4A1 is strictly superior to Pz IV F2 and even with the Pz IV G. The short-stop stabilizer, actual turret armor, and much shorter reload on an already perfectly usable gun make it so.
I have never had such easy 10 kill games at 3.3 with any Pz IV model as I’ve had in the M4A1 even while using horrible crews.
You can confidently crest a ridge knowing your gun will be more accurate than his, slam on the brakes for a quick shot, and immediately get back behind cover without ever truly stopping. M4A1 even gets -12 depression to make its already good turret even better.
You can move forward at 25kph and be as accurate as someone standing still.
Say you shoot a T-34’s turret. Both the L/48 and M3 will kill the turret crew easily, but only the M3 has enough filler to reliably also get the 2 guys in the hull. The M4’s “weaker gun” just turned a 2-shot kill into a oneshot, which it can do much more easily even on the move thanks to its stabilizer.
Even if it doesn’t kill the hull crew outright, they’ll be more injured and he’ll be slower to move.
4.0 rank 3 not higher.
Typical BS. I played more battles in Jumbo 76 than any panther or Tiger.
4.0 or 4.3 rank 2 would be best imo
massively overrating their armor. They have the worst armor of the 3 “main canon” medium tanks (t-34/m4)
No it isn’t. The sides are even thinner than the shermans generally and the front is only 80mm thick + track armor on the thickest points, which do not cover the entire ufp.
Notably, without a stabilizer.
