And the 8.0-9.0 range too. Air could probably get to 16.0 without causing any issues, because 13.0, and 7.0-10.0 are all fairly compressed.
@SPANISH_AVENGER
Are you still facing T-62M1s and Chieftain Mk10s in Leopard 2A4?
Are you still facing XM-1s in T-72B3 and Challenger 2?
Are you still facing Leopard 2A5+s in AMX-40 and Leopard 2K?
Overall armor means something. New thin strips don’t mean a whole lot, especially on the stronger parts of tanks.
This is why T-80U is better than T-80BVM in protection. The new strip along the UFP of T-80B doesn’t do anything major when the turret’s still the same protection.
If 2A7HU had a better LFP and idler wheel protection, or even the armor of Strv 122A, I’d consider it.
However, with top BR prioritizing mobility and lethality over armor according to Statshark data [which is why people love T-80BVM over T-80U and T-90M], I’d have to see the playerbase intentionally slow down to make mobility less important.
It does not help that according to military trials mobility in War Thunder is heavily over-performing on Abrams, Leopard 2, T-80s, T-90s, etc… pretty much everything that isn’t Leclerc and Type 10 are over-performing by amounts that are minor to major; maybe to account for the lack of regen steering.
@Ion_492
A large jump? Let’s look at on of the the smallest jumps that involves a 0.7 difference: Panther D vs Panther G.
10% more armor on its weakspots, and a significantly faster turret traverse.
The difference between 2A5 and 2A7V: 5% more penetration, and the strongest part of the hull armor increases by 50%. Weakspots stay the same.
Okay let’s talk about Leopard 2A4M/PL vs the 12.0 Leopard 2s using DM53.
The strongest part of the hull increases by up to double.
The cannon breach size drops by half. The overall weakspot area drops by ~20%.
The round penetrates ~10 - 30% less overall which is the difference between penning the ERA protected UFP of a T-80U/T-90A or bouncing.
Whereas the difference for the Panther’s weakspot buff is Jumbo penning or bouncing the only consistent weakspot of the Panther from the front.
Opinion
Opinion
Just because decompression finally mildly improved after many years it doesn’t mean it’s not still predominantly present.
“Thin strips”? Leopard 2A7’s modules effectively reduce the pennable area by 50%- and the previously “stronger” part was 450mm KE, incapable of withstanding any shell at that BR- while it’s 670mm KE with the new armor. The difference is HUGE- goes from glass to immune.
While the armor is worse than Strv 122A’s because of some nonsensical claims by the devs, it’s still functionally the same. 670mm KE or 750mm KE, no shell will penetrate either in most circumstances anyway.
Thing is, as I said earlier; that “strongest part” is glass when naked (450mm KE), and becomes entirely immune with that 50% increase (670mm KE).
2 Likes
If I’m using DM23, DM33, 3BM42, etc I’m not going to fire on the UFP of beak-turreted Leopards to begin with as I’d prioritize ammo, crew, and gun modules as I do with all tanks. I learned this universal tactic from rather decent content creators over 6 years ago now.
Even now with Leopard users bringing less ammo to prevent ammo racks as much as possible, I’m not going to aim for UFP when it’s a higher chance that they only brought 21 rounds of ammo than significantly more.
And on CQC maps that extra UFP armor means nothing anyway where side armor protecting the idler wheel matters most, and overwhelming targets with numbers.
I understand your perspective and I 100% agree with your perspective on my backburner takes; the reason why it’s not my current take is evidence coming out that T-80U over-performs in acceleration by double. Abrams over-performs by an amount. And so forth…
Until players stop using their mobility and until players stop prioritizing small maps to play on because they hold the most flanking routes, our shared take is on my personal back burner.
I DO NOT want to have the mobility take, I dislike it. It’s not my opinion but one others found evidence for and I have to use until a point where it’s no longer the status quo.
so basically better in every way? i think the thing that makes 10.7 feel so bad sometimes isnt the 4 11.7 tanks but the swarm of 11.3 tanks you have to deal with.
6 Likes
I know tank swarms first hand.
In 2020 - 2021 when Abrams players did it, and again more recently where Abrams and Leopard players do it.
T-80BVM players did it a couple times as well.
Tank swarming is THE tactic and I don’t like that it is, and when players stop doing it I get to have a nice breathe.
And instead of claiming there’s compression I’d prefer people acknowledge that many if not most of these tanks are over-performing in acceleration and mobility, and push for a more realistic implementation; adding regen steering for tanks that have it alongside that realistic implementation would be nice as well to account for the drastic nerf many of these tanks would get [T-80U accelerating half as quickly would be quite the nerf, and others could be just as drastic].
It is an opinion and you hold it so I’d say it is your opinion. You havent shown any ‘evidence’ you just claim there is some. And evidence doesnt automatically indiacte a fact as it could be cherry picked or taken out of context
the problem isnt players swarming but the amount of tank on each team at what br, for example since there are currently only 3 11.3 MBTs in the game, if you get uptiered from 10.7 into The US and Japan while both team will have 4 11.7 tanks The US/JP team will aslo have a bunch of 11.3 tanks.
For tanks from even 8.0 thoughout 12.0 I’d love to see the consequences of realistic tank mobility that may change the top meta away from mobility before I bring back my armor take from its backburner.
I want that to be THE take cause I know how armor is important in real life because of mobility issues that real-life tanks have to deal with that many if not most in War Thunder don’t have to deal with.
@SPANISH_AVENGER
We should aim for correcting the tanks and considering our shared take after mobility is fixed in War Thunder. That’s my thoughts.
@ThiccoIai
The documents of the Swedish trials detailing acceleration data are on one or multiple topics. I only remember the Centurion and T-80U specific results, but there were more.
And there are more military trials that showcase tanks that are over-performing in War Thunder currently.
i just cant see the the devs doing a wide reaching rework of mobility and changing the balance of the entire game instead of just adding a higher br, tho id would love to see a mobility and armor rework for top tier to shakeup the meta a bit, i just cant see it happening
These concepts should not be mutually exclusive anyway!
Real life data doesnt show how tanks perform compared to each other in game
Fighting Type 90’s genuinely puts me in a bad mood. Especially in the ZTZ-99-II/III, these things are trash.
1 Like
gotta love that apfsds though
gO pLaY wOrLd oF tAnkS
2 Likes
Funny reading this topic with Alvis ignored. Just people arguing with themselves.
When in doubt - AFT09 the suckers.
Worst case is. If you start arguing with him he drags you down to his level of arguments and beats you with experience.
Air is worse. So much more worse.
1 Like