CHI NU II
Ground RB
4.3->4.0
literally just a japanese panzer IV but slightly slower and less armored its only advantage is a 10MM pen bonus but that makes zero sense to be at 4.3 you cant just decide a vehicles placement off KD alone should not be facing 5.3s when 1.0 tanks can pen it frontally
its got a 50mm front plate to panzer IV-Hs 80MM and the panzer IV H is lower and still considered unarmored
Type 95 Ro-Go
jp_type_95_heavy
Arcade Battle BR: 1.3 → 1.0
Realistic Battle BR: 1.3 → 1.0
70 mm Reload Speed: 4.0 s → 3.5 s
Correct missing shoulder-stop stabilizers to both guns (Bug Report)
Rationale
Compared to the Nb.Fz. and T-35, the Ro-Go falls short massively in terms of firepower. The 70 mm has some of the lowest shell velocities in-game, while the 37 mm is too underpowered to compensate.
The Ro-Go’s armor is modest, and the mobility is poor, so it would not become a toxic vehicle at 1.0 by any stretch of the imagination, but it would become a more appealing purchase.
Type 2 Ho-I
jp_type_2_ho_i
Reload Speed: 5.9 s → 3.3 s
Add Type 1 (APHE) Bug Report
Rationale
Other vehicles with low velocity 75 or 76 mm howitzers like the T-28 (1938), M8 HMC, or early Panzer IV’s have aced reload speeds of 3.3-4 seconds, but the Ho-I’s is longer than even many higher velocity 75 mm guns. This should not be the case, as the Ho-I’s rounds are shorter and lighter than the German short 75 mm rounds, and more accessible than those of the Panzer IV’s due to the convenient bustle ammunition rack. The Ho-I has a need for better reload too due to the abysmal HEAT shell muzzle velocity, which makes misses at range more frequent and punishing.
The Type 1 APHE shell already found on the Ho-Ni’s, Chi-Nu’s, and Chi-To’s was also adapted to lower velocity cartridges, such as that of the Ho-I’s gun. It would be fairly analogous to the K.Gr.rot Pz. round the Panzer IV’s use in terms of penetration and filler.
Type 3 Chi-Nu
jp_type_3_chi_nu
Reload Speed: 6.0 s → 5.0 s Bug Report
Add Type 95 (APHE) Bug Report
Rationale
The Chi-Nu currently has an unusually long reload despite the relatively spacious turret and proper bustle rack. While most of its competition at 3.3 has moved up, it still has to face them consistently, where the arbitrarily longer reload still hampers its capabilities. It’s more in need of a fire rate buff than the Panzer IV’s are, and it makes more sense for it to receive it based on the vehicle’s internal layout.
It should also have the option to use the Type 95 APHE round from the Ho-I, which was adopted for more powerful cartridges.
German RB Ground BR’s:
- Sd.Kfz.234/2: 3.7 up to 4.0, and Rank III. This is the German equivalent of the Chaffee and would fill the gap of a Rank III scout.
Type 5 Na-To
jp_type_4_na_to
Reload Speed: 6.5 s → 5.0 s
Replace Type 4 (APCR) with Type 4 (AP) Bug Report
Rationale
Despite having a very open compartment with two dedicated loaders, the Na-To has a rather poor reload compared to other SPGs with similar guns, such as Marder III H or M10.
The Type 4 APCR round is a fictious and should be replaced with the actual Type 4 AP round.
I think that the armor protection of the Somua SM is only barely adequate, and is clearly weaker than that of other tanks at the same battle rating. Armor protection does not only refer to frontal armor – the side armor of the Somua is very fragile and can be easily penetrated by various types of fire. In terms of protection, it even performs worse than some medium tanks at lower BRs. As for its mobility, it only accelerates faster forward than other heavy tanks; its sluggish reverse speed and turning speed prevent it from handling many urban combat situations. Only its firepower is quite excellent. Overall, its combat effectiveness is not particularly outstanding.
I believe it could even be lowered to 3.7. Its protection level is slightly higher than that of the Panzer IV F2, but lower than that of the Panzer IV H. The Panzer IV F2 is at BR 3.3, while the H is at 4.0, so 3.7 would be a reasonable choice for the CHI-NU 2. The only reason it currently appears better in statistics is that the players using it tend to be more skilled on average.
The SOMUA SM is modeled extremely incorrectly atm. The armor is double what it should be on the front, on top of the lack of an MG port weakspot.
Tornado F3 and ADV both only have air to air weaponry. they have no air to ground ordnance. The IDS series has no guided weaponry only dumb bombs. So the IDS series going down kinda make sense. But whyare the SU-33, SU-27, J-11, F-16, and F-15A going down to 11.7 as well
Proposal for Reducing Reload Speed: Chi-Nu II
Reload speed reduction:
Rationale:
According to testing, there is evidence of the 75 mm Type II Model II possessing a reload speed of at least 10 rounds per minute. Both the basic and aced crew reload times should be decreased, as a result
Type 3 Chi-Nu II
jp_type_3_chi_nu_75cm_type_5
Arcade Battle BR: 4.3 → 4.0
Realistic Battle BR: 4.3 → 4.0
Reload Speed: 6.5 s → 6.0 s
Replace Type 4 Kou (APHE) with Type 4 (AP) Bug Report
Rationale
The Chi-Nu II is currently 4.3 while the L/48-armed Italian Pz.IV G sits at 4.0. The Chi-Nu II is worse in protection, mobility, and reload, all in exchange for more APHE filler. Its trade-offs are sufficient to warrant being it at the same BR as the Italian Pz.IV G, if not lower.
The ammunition has a more accessible placement than in the later Panzer IV’s, so it should not have noticeably worse fire rate.
Type 4 Chi-To [Both Variants]
jp_type_4_chi_to
Reload Speed: 6.5 s → 6.0 s Bug Report
Replace Type 4 Kou (APHE) with Type 4 (AP) Bug Report
Rationale
Both Chi-To’s have excessive reload times that don’t make sense when compared to other vehicles with similarly power guns like the late Panzer IV’s, Fireflies, or 76 Shermans. The bustle rack should enable a comparable rate of fire.
reason i say it there is cause it does have one other thing it reacts a bit a quicker the gun is a bit better at turning
I don’t see that. Aren’t its turret traverse and gun elevation speeds the same as those of the Panzer IV H and F2?
SAV-20.12.48
Ground RB
4.0-> 4.7
zero reason to be its br genuinely insane tank above average filler same pen as a KV1 ZIS 5 and has a 1.2 second reload and is highly mobile can hold corners amazing well and can over pressure tanks up to 5.7 with its HE round its literally still broken its just a vehicle that encourages seal clubbing
If the above-mentioned changes are made, its classification should be changed to medium tank, and its BR lowered to 7.3. This doesn’t seem much different from the AMX‑50/100.
11.2 for F2 11.5 for chi nu and same vertical its kinda noticeble not really i noticed it but i think its closest equal is not the F2 but the G model which has a 80mm front plate but a 30mm turret face so its basically the oppistie so 3.7 could happen but i think we should go to 4.0 see how it does there then see if it can go lower
Unfortunately, when looking at vehicle performance from the big data perspective, the impact of player skill level is just too significant.
Proposal for Reducing Reload Speed: Chi-To
Reload speed reduction:
Rationale:
According to testing, there is evidence of the 75 mm Type II Model II possessing a reload speed of at least 10 rounds per minute. Both the basic and aced crew reload times should be decreased, as a result. Additionally, similar vehicles like the Pz.IV J possess a lower reload, despite the Chi-To being 4.7
