The Kw I C 756 (r) is also at 5.0
Good penetration with no armor increases or mobility increases
Neither tank over performed and faced 4.0 / 4.3 tanks commonly
Very easy to penetrate both tanks from any range down to 3.3 which they can’t even face
1 Like
Lower half of the cupola and the very small gunner sight.
Compared to the Tiger II (H) which has to shoot… somewhere in the hull.
9 Likes
9.0 is not a viable bracket for late cold war tanks until you have decompressed 9.7 - 10.7
Moving late cold war tanks up in BR without addressing this makes them useless
We’re talking about T-55s there is zero justification for these changes
8 Likes
I got killed by a T-35-85 at 1500 meters in my T32E1 through the shot trap. Does that mean the T32E1 should be 5.7?
1 Like
as someone with a combined like 750 battles in the M4A1 76 and T14 they got near constant down tiers to 3.7
1 Like
How are the Vickers Mk.7, T-90A/S, T-80B and T-72B ('89) better equipped than the Type 90? Almost all listed have inferior penetrating power and rate of fire compared to the Type 90’s JM33. Sure, the T-90A has 3BM60, but the platform is not as exceptional as you might think. ZTZ99 better equipped, hard maybe. You’re neglecting the Type 90’s exceptional mobility and insane rate of fire which allow it to take position and wreak havoc.
5 Likes
Just the fact that the M4A1 (76) had a stabilized 76 mm made it one of if not the best 4.7.
It being 5.0 is fine.
5 Likes
These tanks have an extremely weak cupola that allows you to knock out the entire gun crew that is ignoring that the armor is a flat box and unless you are angled it is very easy to penetrate with guns down to 3.3
There is no justification for its increase and it removes Germany’s access to a full 5.3 lineup
13 Likes
If the game mode you are thinking of is Jet Strike 4v4 in TSS you may have a point, but what we are playing is ARB random battles that doesn’t need to force 1v1 duels.
The difference in top speed is still very important for 9.0BR and lower BRs since top BR was 9.0, which is why Hunter F.1 and J34 is still sitting at 9.0BR even though they are losing duels against Sabres and MiGs.
A good top speed basically means that you can maintain your speed and do BnZ until you run out of fuel against slower enemy, and those differences need to be as minimal as possible like pre supersonic days.
1 Like
M26 was Made to Fight KT-II(H).
But Never they american said they’re equal,…
But as most of you plays a KT-2(H) and the M-26 the exact same way,… you end up dieing much more
3 Likes
It being 5.0 makes it worthless
There are already american 76mms with stabilizers at 5.0
This is the weakest armored sherman in the game and has the worst engine of the three
Why would you bother researching this tank instead of skipping to the 5.3 lineup
1 Like
I have played both, they were very good at 4.7.
And its not easy to pen a Kv-1 if the Kv player is smart.
1 Like
That’s assuming your opponent manages to be absolutely brain dead and shoot the empty spacing where the infantry would sit. The unmanned turret is useful only if the terrain allows for it since it’s common to have cover that isn’t quite tall enough to actually hide the crew behind. The A cap (3-zone) in Abandoned Factory is probably the best case scenario. You also have to turn your eyes off and completely ignore the other details I mentioned such as better firepower on the Begleit (full-size ammo, VT rounds, I-TOW) to claim the VBCI as superior. The mobility also has a huge caveat which is the abysmal turning radius (something that they haven’t fixed yet). I don’t disagree that it has upsides against other 9.3 IFVs, but it also has downsides. Hence it has trade-offs, rather than being superior.
And the proposition for moving up the MEPHISTO and SANTAL would only really be valid if they implement the bug reports that make these vehicles realistic. They would have to actually add a new vehicle, and resolve the bug reports (which takes a long-time, which in the mean-time your nice Premium collects dust).
One of which is to add the HOT-3 to the MEPHISTO (since things like MUSS on the PUMA jam the HOT-2, and the prevalence of ERA craters the efficacy of the HOT-2 as well).
The other of which is to actually fix the Mistral, which would make it actually effective against targets that are not clueless.
So it makes no sense to say that they should up-tier it now, when it is a competitor rather than a superior to existing 9.3s, and that it’s okay because there is a non-guaranteed chance, in an indeterminate amount of time, that maybe in the future, should they feel like it, they might actually add more vehicles to make a 9.7 line-up.
5 Likes
The changes being made to T-69 II G, ZTZ88A/B and ZTZ59D1 are so dumb. They got no busniess being moved up to 9.0 and face turms, m118s, whatever the hell sweden got going on. They did fine at 8.7, and moving them up will only make it a drastically worse experience for the players.
And ZTZ59D1 loosing it’s thermals it’s just outright historically inaccurate
Stop fucking things up for the players you braindead company
16 Likes
No, the M26 was made to mount the 90mm. The development of the T2X series was just the logical development of medium tanks. It had nothing to do with countering any specific tank.
1 Like
This is not true the M26 was made at most to fighter Panthers and Tigers. And even then it wasn’t meant to specifically fight anything, simply was made to provide a significant armor and firepower improvement over the Sherman.
There’s a reason why the T26E4 Super Pershing was made. That one was made to fight the King Tiger.
11 Likes
The KV-85’s turret cheeks are easily penned
Any tank performs well if the player knows what they’re doing
Yes, they were
They were not overpowered
They served a purpose at 4.7
At 5.0 there is no reason to bring them or to bother researching them
2 Likes
IS-2 (1944) went to 6.7 And VIDAR remains at 7.7? Hilarious.
1 Like
R73s at 10.0 is absolutely ridiculous. Decompress BRs or move the Su-25 up…