The T62 needs to be 8.3
Compared to object 435, it has the same gun, slightly worse horsepower per ton, slightly slower top speed, and no 14mm top mounted machine gun
It is a sad, naked, and power creeped old timer
5 Likes
no that’s crazy he’s faster than other aa’s so he gets to the flank faster so he should be higher
nope to fast
TKX（P）11.3→11.3
While TKX (P)’s composite armor is thicker than Type 90’s, its coverage is smaller, with the hull and turret lacking the extensive composite protection of Type 90. Defensively, it’s a mixed bag, arguably slightly inferior. Mobility-wise, Type 90’s power-to-weight ratio is 30, compared to TKX (P)’s 27, making it less agile in acceleration and turning.
TKX (P)’s only edge over Type 90 is its high-definition thermal imaging. Otherwise, it lags in mobility and protection, with identical firepower. Keeping TKX (P) at 11.3 offers players two distinct playstyles: aggressive players can choose Type 90 for rushing and flanking, while conservative players can opt for TKX (P) for long-range sniping.
Raising TKX (P) to 11.7 not only severely hampers its playability but also disrupts Japan’s 11.3 ground lineup, significantly reducing the fun and viability of Japan’s near-top-tier roster. This could lead to fewer Japanese ground players and even hurt sales of the Type 90 (B) premium vehicle.
7 Likes
brother the type 90 is a lighter 2a4(in how it trades armor for speed) with a 4 second reload. The pt-16/t14 is literally a type 90 with extremely thin armor at 10.7, yet I don’t see anyone complain about the pt16 despite having the same reload.
AM-1 and AMD same br as T62M-1, why???
throwing in how it hurts type 90 sales is so funny lmao
I feel like they could just remove all of the AP and APDS (and APFSDS if they have it) belt from every SPAA and we would be better off as a whole. They really dont need to be good at AT work.
35mm AAs arent so good at AT, because of their apds. the apit(aphe) is enough to kill almost anything in a few pens. removing the apds wouldnt be a huge change.
the whole sweden 8.7 is going to 9.0 except the itpsv. is it really any worse than the swedens other 8.7 tanks? i dont think so.
I’m afraid that more people will stop playing them if they lose their AT ability, because AA seems like a boring job, if they are unable to defend themselves against enemy tanks then they will sit at the spawn lol one of the reasons we can find Gepards everywhere on the map is because they can defend itself, which also indirectly influence their AA ability due to their position, because their AA effective range wasn’t even great to begin with.
no, its worse than every single 13.0 by landslide
fucking insane
what the hell are you thinking moving the shir 2. its good at 9.7 but it has no lineup, hell its not even the best 9.7. at 10.0 its complete garbage. you’d have to bring it at 10.3
t64b is basically a turms-t without thermals. i cant see a reason to not raise it to 10.0
why on earth does the Strv 103C get moved UP?!
that’s outstandingly diabolical… for once, there is no line up at 9.0 and second, that thing is aweful at 8.7 where the majority has access to stabilized guns and APFSDS…
that’s just rude.
1 Like
I want F-15E, F-16C Block 50, F/A-18C late, F-15I Ra’am, Tornado GR.4 and F-16D Block 40 Barak increase BR for ground RB to 13.0
But Tornado IDS MLU (RET.8) up to 12.0 or 12.3
i dont see a reason to move up any 9.7s they all got iffy lineups. t64b is the strongest one and i never felt too overwhelmed by it, and the strongest one is the only stayign there is wild
it can be easily argued that it is the best 9.7. the other powerful 9.7 are also going up and now they need to add t64b to the list too.
I can get behind that. Facing Amraam every match is unfair as British harriers iis don’t have ASRAAM missiles.
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.