Type 16 (P) & Type 16 FPS: Add Type 93 APFSDS !
The Type 16 (P) is in need of its missing Type 93 APFSDS round! Currently positioned at 9.3 with the weakest 105mm APFSDS, it previously functioned adequately at 8.7. However, it now consistently faces opponents at 9.7 - 10.3, which is not ideal for a vehicle reliant on mobility and firepower. Moreover, the nerf to M735 hasn’t helped matters.
In comparison, the Rooikat 105 sits at 9.0 in AB and 9.3 in RB, equipped with DM23 and even DM33, far superior to M735. Additionally, it boasts thermal optics like the Type 16 and superior gun handling, it is an equivalent to the tech tree Type 16 at 9.7 even.
So why do modern Japanese AFVs lack access to their domestic ammunition, instead relying on outdated American-made rounds? If adding the Type 93 isn’t feasible, at least consider providing DM23, since the 105mm gun is compatible with NATO rounds. However, I’d much prefer Japanese-made ammunition!
Even if it means increasing their BR to 9.7, because the Type 16 with Type 93 APFSDS is at 9.7, then I’m fine with it. Unless the Type 16 at 9.7 goes back to 9.3 where it should!
Type 16 MCV: 9.7 > 9.3
The Type 16 seems to be over-battle-rated, but the main issue is its lack of lineup support. Japan currently lacks a lineup at 9.7, and it makes me wonder if the developers considered the tech tree before placing it there. Building a 9.7 lineup is impossible without pushing 9.0 vehicles like the Type 74 or Type 89 into 9.7, where they’ll face 10.7 vehicles, which isn’t ideal. Additionally, there’s no incentive to play other Type 16 variants with this Type 16 because they lack access to the Type 93 APFSDS.
If the Type 16 remains at 9.7, there needs to be more vehicles implemented at this BR without constantly pushing existing vehicles into higher BRs. It’s also perplexing that in arcade battles, the Type 16 is at the same BR as the CV 90105, which has a 5-second autoloader.
Type 87 RCV: 9.0 > 8.3
Talking about the Type 16 being overrated, but the Type 87 takes the crown for this matter. How can a vehicle that went from 7.3 to 9.0, while also being nerfed in the process (reduced reverse speed and gunner’s sight changed from variable zoom to fixed 8x), be justified?
At 9.0 BR, there’s a very similar vehicle, the VBC (PT2), another light tank with the same 25mm gun, but fully stabilized and equipped with thermal sight, laser rangefinder, laser warning receiver, better optics and add-on armor that provides full protection against its own APDS round from the front. The Type 87 lacks all of these features.
Especially in arcade battles, playing the Type 87 is painful. Unlike in RB, you will be constantly spotted and flanking becomes impossible. It should go back to 8.3 both in AB and RB, where it could provide support for other vehicles which Japan does have a few there.
Type 87 (P): 7.7 > 7.3
This is by far the worst Japanese vehicle added last year. Firstly, it’s implemented at a BR where there’s nothing around it to form a lineup. At 7.7 BR, what are we supposed to play with? There are either other vehicles from 7.3 or those at 8.3, and I’m not going to push anything from 7.3 just to play this mediocre light tank. Nor is it worth pushing it to 8.3 because it’s so useless
Mainly, it doesn’t even have the same gun as its production model. A 20mm gun with 66 max penetration at point-blank range is rough. Why would I even play this thing at 7.7, knowing that we have the SUB-I-II with the same 20mm gun and about 300 more rounds, sitting at a much lower BR of 5.3? Albeit without a stabilized gun, which is not a big deal breaker for a autocannon.
This vehicle wasn’t implemented in a meaningful way. Even though I’ve already researched it, I never wanted to purchase or play it. It could have been a great addition to the 7.3 lineup, where Japan has a few vehicles but lacks both a light tank for scouting and a SPAAG. The Type 87 P could fulfill this role and would appear to players better when they see that this vehicle at 7.3 has three other 7.3 vehicles to make a competitive lineup with!
