But it also has 5.7 level firepower on the other hand, hahah.
So, just like KV-1E, it’s an awkward tank to balance; with this compression, you either put it so high that its gun becomes completely useless in order not to stomp on lower BR tanks with its armor, or keep it lower so it can function.
I think T26E5 facing 5.7s is indecent… but making T26E5 face 8.0s wouldn’t be the right solution, specially when some 7.7s are already too much.
We just need decompression across the board… some tanks face too weak opponents in downtiers, and too strong opponents in uptiers. The margin of opponent strength within a vehicle’s matchmaking is too large.
It has 6.3 levels of fire power. With a 6.7 reload.
It often gets nukes in games where it is 7.0 or lower.
Thus, being 7.0 would be far more fair.
Decompression across the board would solve some problems while creating others.
The hardest thing for it to do would be kill a maus but many things can rarely kill it. Including the IS-6 or IS-3
But people who haven’t played the IS3 think it should be 7.7, people who have played it think it should be 7.0 similar with the Is-6
I think by far it’s crazy that the maus or e100 can see 6.7
Really? 3BM60 slinger with Gen 2 Thermal LWS and armor at 10.7 same BR as Leopard 2A4 with just DM23?
at this point Challenger 2 (from standard to TES) can be 10.7 too
Fine where they sit at it pretty much IS3/4 counterpart but Caernarvon that need to go down no point sit the same BR as Conqueror
still fine where they sit at they have no APFSDS and even no basic rangefinder
But them facing 8.7 is equally as crazy, that’s the problem with compression…
Like… literally T-55AM-1s, T-55AMD-1s, T-62s, IT-1s, M60A1 RISE (P)s, etc. that’s just crazy!
Them facing the equivalent of current 7.3 and 8.0-8.3 at most would be perfect.
They currently face too strong opponents in uptiers, and too weak opponents in downtiers… that’s why they are “impossibly difficult to balance”; because of compression and compression alone.
What are your stats for the T-90A? It’s pretty bad overall. With its armor and pen being the most desirable features. They could instead bump the top tier to 12.3, to bring the Leo 2a7 up to etc.
Don’t forget the chally will outload, and be faster than the T-90a, along with a faster reverse.
The conquerer is far better than the is-3/4/6 that argument isn’t very valid. It has far higher pen, better armor, and similar speeds. Pretty much it lacks an HMG. I’d bet it also reloads quicker. And it fully stabilized. The first “stabilized” soviet heavy is the T-10A, which lacks anything other than APHE, and is only fitted with a low speed stabilizer.
The Americans also lack any stabilized heavy. Nor do the Germans. So how come the Brit’s get special treatment?
The T-10m is 8.3, because of its similar features to the to the conquerer, while having better munitions. Thus 8.0 is the perfect level for the conquerer
Out reload is pretty much obvious for Challenger even one is that fast Challenger 2 lack hull armor lack penetration but no LWS to boost situation awareness and size of the house also no HEAT no ATGM T-90A fine where they sit at but what should be done is below.
This i agreed
Tanks like T-80BVM Leopard 2A7V and Strv122 have no point sitting same BR as Leopard 2A5 and A6
Was that T-90A stat pre, or post br decompression? Was it also when it was top? As I have played pre, and post br decompression it’s bad. When it was top, I never had it.
The T-80Bvm is not in the same level as the leo2a7…
Nor is the T-90m. I would love to see a historical 6.0 sec correction for many T-80U tanks in game.
The leo2a7s and strv122b should be the only 12.3s as far as I can think as of right now. Which would mean the Leo 2a6 can move to 12.0, 2a5 to 11.7 etc.
I don’t ever recall the T-90A and BVM being on the same level.
The T-80U and T-90A were, but the T-80U was always better even with less pen.
Faster, better turret / armor, faster reload etc.
The T90A is behind 2.1 secs at worst in its reload, compared to nato mbts. Add in reaction time, if you even have the chance to get a shot off, and you’re not likely to even be able to kill your target before they’ve loaded again.
The APS is useless, as all ATGMs in game it sees, it cannot jam effectively.
As for the br placement of the T-80BVM it has its pros and cons, 11.7 would be a good place for it to stay, unless they fix the reload and it’s effectiveness skyrockets, it should stay at its br.
If engagements happened like they do irl, the survivability of the t80bvm would be far greater, lending it to a higher br.
But brawling / cqc leaves the Russians at a disadvantage unless they catch an unaware enemy, which is very rare
No, they’re not lol that where they’re shine
You if think it CQC it where Russian tanks are disadvantage try do it with Challenger 2 Leclerc where their entire frontal hull was green to Russian tanks
the only contender for Russian in CQC is uparmored Leopard which still require both side to aim weak point of each other not entire hull (at this point who with faster reaction win)
Challenger 2 is green to every mbt. And every mbt benefits greatly at range, due to higher dispersion rates.
Russian tanks are good at some points of brawling not all.
The good:
short
good armor
The bad:
speed
reload
reverse
easily one shot
less effective ammo than the bigger nato countries.
The problems arise when playing the T-90M or A, or the T-72s. Due to lower top speed, it’s easier to get a perfect ammo / crew kill on these tanks, if they push a corner.
Also, due to weak spots being very easy to hit, compared to irl, it makes Russian tanks weaker as a 50meter gun battle is extremely rare, even more so, irl mbts go for center of mass / whatever they can hit.
Well. The Tiger II 105 faces many things that can’t kill it.
Vs.
The obj 279 has a lot of things that can kill it, people just tend to shoot at it very poorly.
exactly and i’m telling you that using Challenger 2 against Russian in CQC are no fun even at range hull down a size of gun breach are also make it equal bad as it CQC pretty much you can shoot Challenger 2 anywhere that not turret cheek
Foward speed is very fast some even faster than Leclerc (Leopard is not the fastest western tank)
that trade by you get fix reload around 7.1 to 6.5 without training crew or spend or million SL to get it faster
this is the only thing i can’t blame anyone but Engineer and no one can do anything about it even God above and below can’t do anything about it what can be done? put 30km/h to them that they don’t have irl? (that open the door for more BS)
not only apply for Russian tanks
That exactly the problem every nation facing right game embrace stupid CQC that make most tanks in the game can’t be use more effectively since the game embrance CQC that left only two tanks that able to beat the sht out of each other
Uparmored Leopard
Russain tanks
try use other tanks against one of these heh good luck
I understand the challys aren’t great for cqc, and suffer some problems the Russians do, like the irl reverse gear. (No I don’t think there is a fox to that, that’s also why I said mbts are better at range).
Crew skills for Russian tank do still take effect, but the auto loader should be given its realistic reload, give the fantasy loads of nato (especially abrams tanks). The HSTVL just got a historical buff, but the T-80U (and newer) didn’t get one, and it’s been incorrect for longer.
The T-90 reload / T-72 is already correct.
And in cqc at least the chally can reverse.
I’d rather an expert crew be able to reload quicker. It’s insane how good the abrams is with an expert loader. In a game when fire rate > penetration means everything, you need the fire rate. That’s why so many Fuji’s are all over, they can shoot as much as they need to.
In terms of cqc, the Germans and swedens have the best benefit, followed by USA, as the abrams is so fast you can rush a corner where a poor enemy shot may only take your engine / driver.
The Russian tanks often get hit in the LFP or drivers port and are immediately blown up. (The LFP and drivers port irl are far harder to score a killing single hit blow as the T tanks are all very small compared to nato tanks).
So I would say the Russian tanks are the low end of average when it comes to their abilities.
If T-14 Armata came for Russia, then they could have a 12.3 tank in the form of the T-14
The most benefit against Russia in CQC same goes as Russian that most benefit at CQC against them
because nobody can go crash into each other in CQC like both of them can
and I’m not gonna go CQC againt both in Challenger 2 there is no ways i can win against either Russian or Uparmored Leopard
It is weak spot everyone gonna aim that spot for obvious reason like but compare to other that not Uparmored Leopard it still small same go for Uparmored Leopard everyone will aim under their gun or LFP for obvious reasons
it better that ways than go against uparmored Leopard when your entire hull is green
not when Challenger 2 still exists as Brits only choice
Forget about it that
EMBT or KF-51 level and it gonna end the same as it is now
Only German and Russian can only go against each other while other got left behind.