If the KV-2 is 3.7, why not?
Strv M/42 EH and Lago I exist, and are fairly good.
A FW190 has sufficient penetration to top down the M-51. The roof armor of a cast-hull Sherman isn’t very thick. I have personally experienced this.
People rarely bring HE. Even if they do, it doesn’t make the M-51 any less vulnerable to other tank destroyer options. The M-51 is slower than a King Tiger with penetration on par with other tank destroyers of the BR range. Its armor is that of a 3.3 Sherman and the gun handling is atrocious.
They already fight those things constantly with vehicles like the B2 and B1 having HEAT-FS with 380mm of penetration. Generally speaking, against 5.0 vehicles, you’re usually better off using APHE. Your entire argument is “Penetration scary”, but that doesn’t make sense because people don’t spam APCR. Standard HEAT is slow, hard to aim, and does little damage. You need to be extremely precise to get consistent damage out of the vehicle.
M36B2 can keep up with Hellcats at points. They carry a gun off of a 6.7 and have access to high velocity HEAT-FS shells. They’re extremely potent at range and their armor is pretty good for a tank destroyer of their weight class.
Type 87 RCV needs some help too. IG 8.7, or 8.3 at least, would balance it.
9L arn’t that much better, i like r60m’s more because of the guidance off the rail time and better maneuverability is realy handy at times
Standard HEAT is slow, hard to aim, and does little damage. You need to be extremely precise to get consistent damage out of the vehicle.
Yes, this exactly. HEAT, even HEAT-FS in postpen is meh. Having that high pen on HEAT at that BR isnt even unheard of, the Ikv sits at 4.0 with ~400mm pen HEAT-FS.
Now I know you’re not serious
1 Like
My point stands that you’d be better off with an APHE shell most of the time compared to HEAT-FS at 6.0
The whole argument against the M-51 is “penetration scary”, and it’s so stupid.
I’m glad some people agree.
Yup.
99.9% of the time I would take APHE over HEAT/HEAT-FS, its just that massive.
People really need to stop looking at Shell types and start looking at other hard factors when it comes to vehicles. If you only look at things on paper, you get the wrong impression of vehicles.
This game doesn’t need many BR changes, it needs BR decompression. This game would be much more enjoyable if the BR spread was increased, maybe to like 18.0, or just make it so that you cant see vehicles a full BR above or below you.
2 Likes
I don’t think the AMX-30 DCA should be moved up to 8.7. It’s not stabilized unlike all other SPAA, so it can’t just go tank hunting (like run and gun) as the Gepard or Type 87 can, France also lacks any SPAA from 5.3 to 8.0. The AMX-10P from 5.3 while usable isn’t as effective against jets as it would at where it’s BR is set. The only advantage it possibly has is a larger ammo count than some others, even then, the reload speed isn’t all that impressive as it takes essentially a minute to reload.
7 Likes
The kv-2 has worse armour, survivability, mobility and reload thats why its 3.7
3 Likes
or give it its MILAN and make it a french IFV
Eland Is alright but the Fox is just more useful, if fox is going yo 7.7 then it makes sense
the SMT while not as great as the other things at 12.7 is still a menace, compared to the 29G its heavier yes, but it has a much improved radar, RWR and has more than the 60 countermeasures on the G which is much needed, while having identical missile armament
the Barak II While Yes worse than the F-16C, is not a too much worse, it still rates well, and has more countermeasures so that it can have less worry about using too much against the IRCCM Missiles we see at top tier, but is more CAS Oriented so it gets a BR increase for that (Try and argue that it shoudl go down when we have the Tornado and MLD at the same BR, or the Su-22M3 and F-5E),
Probabally a compression issue if anything
While they are not the best they are certainetly not THAT bad, if the 104A/C go to 9.7 or 10.0 which they deserve) that means then they would be on the same BR or 0.3 below as the 104J that has 6 AIM-9Ps which is 3x the missiles they can carry and more than 4x as effective
they need to go up but the H to 4.3? i wouldnt say so, their better than the G but not 0.7 better, keep it 0.3 above
Its hte B variant and not the A Variant, It is much improved, Like having 3 Mk103s (wing ones having more ammo) and 2 20mm 151s, While the Tech tree ones can have 2 20mm 151s and 1 Mk103 with less ammo than the wing guns on the B, in additon to have that armament you have to use the 335 that cannot carry bombs, so its both tech tree planes merged together and then some, having better engines, more ammo, and with its speed and airspawn it is a menace for bomber hunting, and the MK103s and extremely potent CAS even before the SC500 and SC250s are taken into account
Disagree with all but hte Su-11 which is still great
The F-89 may have an afterburner but the M24 cannons are terrible, and it compresses like a pig, and then the Su-9 is just a noticeably worse Su-11
No.
Casemates: (Not Foch or 122.54, I cannot comment on them at all)
They do not need to be raised, lowered if anything, they are slow pigs, yes htey have good armour, and a decent gun, but they have large weakspots or a huge reload, yes hte Jagd may be better than the ferdi, but it trades that for the massive reload and worse mobility, which wasnt great to begin with, I cannot say about the 268, ive never seen it much (Good indicator of it not being great) , the Tortoise is damn right painful, slowest of all the casemates you listed, with the largest weakspot,
Heavies:
Tiger IIs are very strong but i do not think they shoudl be moved up until there is real decompression same case with the T34
An then the Conq and M103,
yes stabilsier(Conq) and a decent gun., but they are not reliable, their turret armour is great, but their hull is severely lacking especcially compared to IS-4 and Maus, they have comparable reloads with a much less reliable Cannon, APDS and HEAT-FS are just a lot less reliable then APHE, APDS loves to shatter, and desite hte conq having 502mm pen, on its 120mm it seems to deal no damage, and the M103 has no stab but gets HEAT which is more reliable than APDS, and gets the option to go to a full caliber shell, with decent pen, unlike the conq, but it still isnt APHE and just APBC, not to mention these things will need to fight 9.0s if moved to 8.0, which is the BR of the XM-803, Leo A1A1, TAM 2IP, T-62M-1 which these will have little chance against, their slow reload and their low speed with a weak hull prevents them from absolutely dominating in a downtier, there is a reason you see so few
already been through this, yes its penetration is better, but it does not mean it is better, they all sacrafice something for the 17 Pndr (Firefly - Short Stop, Challenger - Huge ass turret, Avenger, Weak Armour, and relatively large) and the 77mm OQF Mk.2 is NOT COMPARABLE to the 17 pounder, it looks similar but has pen similar to the 76mm M1 without APHE, only difference is the APDS which has it own host of issues, and even then the Comet has a long reload, and the Concept is weakly armoured with terrible gun handling, and hte Achillies, its just an M10 that trades the HE filler for more pen, which at its BR is nice to deal with KVs, but its not all you will fight and the M10s 76mm is more than enough for 3.3, and the Sentinel is worse (If slightly) than the Panther D, and then you have the Black Prince, its already suffering enough as it is, bassically a Churchill 7 with a 17 pounder, not special, 100% NOT 6.3 material, its inferior to the IS-2, and is probabally comaparable to the Tiger 1, And is even outclasssed severly at its own BR by the KV-220, (Sure at face value 135mm pen is shit, but the angle performance is mental), and due to the fact it can stil lbe penned by a panther, due ot churhcills not being able to angle effectively and with its terrible speed, its on par with the panthers, and lets not even talk about the Italian Firefly which would be the same BR as the Panther D and KV-122 (Bassically an IS-2 with less reliable armour at 1.0 below)
sure the 262 is not great, but it can be overcome with skill, it has no buisness being the same BR as the Spit 22 and lower than the Spit 24, not to mention the 50mm 262 is already at 6.7 and is great in downtiers with a very low rate of fire cannon,
the A1A1 is mostly fine as is, sure its pen is low, but if we compare it to the cheif10 its much more manoeverable with effectively the same hull armour (for what the guns at the BR care about) and actually fits the meta, being nimble while being protected from most autocannons frontally, and which it is not equivalent to the Cheif3 or 5 what so ever
No. Flat plates at the BRs it sits is rather rare, and the onyl one that can really see flat plates is the Charioteer, which has no gun elevation or depressiom, a .50 calable turret and a relatively long reload for the BRs mediums,
like said earlier a straight lie,
No. Just no, the 4202 is leagues slower than the Centurion, while having the classic british reverse, the turret armour is relatively strong, but the hull isnt much different, its worse than the centurion, and should stay below as a result
giving strong missiles to platforms that balance better without it is how we get the Yak–38, A-10, Su-25BM, Bucc S.2, A-6E, Jaguar IS and the Sea Harriers, they are better balanced where they are withteh R-3S in additon the MiG-19PT would be fine at 9.7 as is, like the other 9.3 supersonics, there is a reason they have not recieved them
it is thebest 11.3 at the moment if we are being realistic, giving it R-73 is a jump but it shoudl do fine there, it and the F-14A are roughly equivalant in a dogfight (though the F-14 should win most times) but R-73s would clap hard, and with them not being HMD they may be balanced as their full potential isnt unlocked
Reasonable, bassically just a lower BR worse WZ305 with its proxy
leave the 9L for the ICE its fine at 10.7, its a worse F-4E (no sparrows and less ground strike ordinance) and its BR should reflect that
AIM-9E yes, 9J? no, the 9Bs right now are a joke, 9Es are decent, but 8 9Js would be very strong though it would be 6 in practical terms, leave it at 10.3 if the Flight model wasn’t trashed i may have agreed, but its flight model no just doesnt match the capability of the 9J, give it 9E and keep it at 10.3
i see why you want to do this, the russian 10.0 needs something done and the Leo 2A4 may be the best 10.3 MBT so far
Germanys only tank bar the Vilkas and the FlaRakPz so it would not really destroy any luneips, all 10.0s are lights which can deal with uptiers, and will allow use of the Su-22UM3K as CAS, same with the F-4F
the Russian 10.0 is still more than strong enough to do with 10.3 or 10.7 and at 10.7 you have the 2S6 (needs to go up) and the T-90A
the Abrams is also the US’ only 10.3 bar the SPAA, (and LOSAT) if the IPM lost its M900 it would be fine, anything else can be uptiered easily being a light tanks, or the 120S which is a M1A1/A2 turret ammo which is competent, if they gave it the better engine it could go up aswell,
China doesnt really have a 10.0 lineup, it wouldnt ruin much, will also allow the use of the F-5s for CAS
the only real issue here is the Vickers Mk.7 there is No 10.7s or anything near it, with the next ones being the Challenger 2s at 11.3, it owuld be better to leave this alone and add the Vickers Mk.7/2 as a seperate vehicle at a different BR plus the Vickers Mk.7 is bassically a Leo 2A4 that trades turret armour reliablility for a bit more pen, and with the leo 2 s in your suggestion getting DM33 this would mean nothing and be a plain worse Leopard 2 with slighly more modern sights
Good change, as prevously said the russian 10.0 needs a lot of rebalancing
sure they are aehistorical, but the F-5 isnt a menance because noone can touch it with missiles, its a menace due to its turn rate and retention while also being supersonic, it going to 10.0 would only make it an issue more, just keep the countermeasures and keep at 10.3 or move to 10.7
it is a bit sad tbh, might be better to have a MiG-17F / PF Foldered with the MiG-17, like hte MiG-15bis is with the normal 15, with the Shenyang, Lim 5P and PF in italy its just a copy paste away
Yep Totally agree, the normal 27Rs are still better than the best sparrows, though R-73 with HMD is a lot, maybe consider moving them to 12.3
its worse than the other options at 12.0 due to its missile count and speed and in most cases worse turn, maybe wait until R-77 until this change happens
3 Likes
Yes I agree. The AMX-30 DCA is the worst radar gun SPAA. The Gepard type SPAAs are so much better.
The only advantage the DCA has is a better vertical radar search angle, but it doesn’t have a dedicated tracking radar and it lacks IFF which severely limits your effectiveness when the skies are teeming with planes
11 Likes
No
None of those need to be moved. All of them will be OP at the Brs that you listed.
Severe Copium Detected
1 Like
most of the countries use a similar weight and size round at top tier which was the parameters used by gaijin for the american reload buff, its at the point where a level 1 crew with an abrams has a better reload than a level 150 leo crew with the same size round and very similar weight. the change should have happened to ALL the nato countries since their rounds are all extremely similar
The Object 435 having the same reload rate as the T-62 tanks is ridiculous.
As far as I can tell, the T-62s have rammers or some other sort of loading assist and the Object 435 doesn’t.
CM11 ammunition loading speed data is provided by WT data personnel in Taiwan, China, China, who are CM11 loaders
1 Like