T-44 is borderline useless vs a Tiger, unless you can break his smol barrel.
ASU-85 is super situational, being easily killed.
Type 62 is a rare event tank (so it’s very rare to see), I’m not even sure what the type 63 is.
I would say the scariest thing to see would be the T-44-100, okay armor, but the 100mm that is very good and can kill the KT frontally, but still has a long load time and poor turret armor.
That’s crazy talk saying an already super potent tank should meet 5.7s.
I like the IS-6s and understand why their reload is terrible, and everything else, but that’s why these things are balanced by br. Keep in mind, the IS-6 was once a 7.0, no other heavy has been brought up so much. It’s not on par with either the Maus or IS-4 in the slightest. But was it outliers of players? Stats? Etc?
It’s like me playing the T-72B3, it’s slow, not the greatest in armor, but has a decent gun. 97% of abrams players (before top tier abrams premiums were added), kept hitting center mass on my upper plate. Which bounced. Had they tried to aim even the slightest bit, it would’ve been over for me.
I think people facing the Is-6 or IS-3 and saying it’s too good have a skill issue, and haven’t played it. My buddy did the whole of the USA tech tree, and has been working on USSR, I have never heard him get so mad playing tanks. He says the is-3 is a dumpster fire.
And he is a good player for a relatively new one.
I stopped playing the Is-6 since it’s a dead tank, it’s very hard to play now, and it’s even a very rare tank to see. I see more IS-3s or IS-4s than I do IS-6s, or even Mauses.
T-44 has trolly armor and mobility, being very able to track and barrel a Tiger II to death at closer ranges.
And? The advantage of being able to outreload it still applies, doubly so since it has HEAT that isn’t often mained. This means that it will usually bounce APHE off you and then load a HEAT shell, making it all the more critical you kill it before it reloads.
Both are Chinese tech tree vehicles, and not that uncommon.
There aren’t many 5.7s left, and what lineups exist almost always have something that can deal with a Tiger II of any variety.
In fact, due to the worse armor at the tier, it’s even more advantageous to be in the 88mm Tiger II, since a faster fire rate is an even larger advantage.
It also had an invisible armor plate behind the mantlet which blocked pretty much every conventional AP round from getting through. Even after that was fixed, it remained a very mobile and trolly vehicle, with armor that can stand up to any AP/APHE in the game outside the tiny, credit card sized slot that is the gunner’s optics. Again, a weakspot that becomes drastically harder to hit if the IS player has a working brain and keeps moving between shots.
The IS-6 does struggle somewhat with where it is now, but it caused far more struggling when it was at a lower BR. That’s why I’m pushing for the reload buff for it and other heavies at the tier, a way to make it more comfortable without forcing lower tiered vehicles to be mere food for it. Same with the IS-3.
Considering how shameless some BR proposals are, to the point one nation gets the most of compression while doing absurd raises like the ontos going up to 7.3, i’ll quote this from —ironically— a “Russia op” post:
It’ll still be terrible at 8.3, but 7.7 is often in 8.7 or 8.3 matches it seems.
(Or you just get uptiers playing Russia, and no I’m not joking. A whole squad of my buddies had been playing German / USA, getting minor uptiers / downtiers.
The moment I swapped to Russia with another guy, it was constant uptier from there on out).
But, anyways the Is-6 can be killed by the M4 jumbo at 6.3 frontally, m18s, etc. so I can’t ever see it justifying a 7.7 br.
The biggest weakness is by far the gunner optic, followed by the roof hatches, which you cannot hide either, especially if you go to engage a target.
If played properly, it can kill quite a lot. 7.3 would be a sweet spot for it, where it isn’t less effective, but it won’t be able to bully 5.7s anymore.
Oh sure it can! the same way a maus can be defeated by a m36 jackson. These tiny ass never going to happen in a real game “weakspots” are not valid to bring up.
You consistently underrate ussr vehicles and massively overrate usa/ger/other vehicles.
Yeah, because Gaijin is unfair to the USSR tech tree BR ratings. They moved the IS-3 to 7.3 so people would play the BTR. They added the Finnish KV-2 at the same BR as the Soviet one, which doesn’t have a machine gun or the insane cheek armor the Finnish version has, and many more issues I could point out. For example, the T-34-85 has two versions with a gap in BR, and the only difference in the later version is an extra crew member. But the earlier version has Stalium armor, making it pointless to play the other one at a different BR.
No logic found, IS-3 was already 7.3 in the past before BTR came into the game. The 7.0 change just got reverted because they found out it overperformed (obviously)
Blame compression but the things you point out are very small in difference
Did you know that the Chinese have T-34-85 with a extra machingun?
Did you know the chinese have the Dual cannon thing with proxy fuse?
Of course the USSR can’t have a good Heavy tank after the IS-2 which has been made bad from the insane cold war vehicle spam
Gaijin muliple times has said and done in version of tank that fixing a weak spot equales to a BR rase of 0.3br, the finnish one fixed the armor cheek weak spot and added a roof top machinegun
Well, if a T29 can frontally kill the IS-6 with the larger shell, then a long 76 should be more than capable.
And I am not over the main nations, while under rating Russia. I have played all these vehicles except the Ho-ri.
I’ve also played against all the vehicles on the list.
Gaijin uses pros / cons / player stats to balance vehicles. What I’m saying about some, especially the T26e5, is how does that not have good enough stats to be moved? It murders every game that isn’t 7.7, I mean like it’s always 1st on the team slaying everyone.
I personally like the T-35-85E, the little beds don’t always save you from HEAT, but it’s really nice when annoying M-51 players are about.
And yes, I agree… not sure why the Finnish KV-1 is the same br as the Russian one.
As the Finnish ones turret can bounce the M4A3E2 rounds with ease, where as the Russian one cannot.
Does the APDS do the same damage as HE? No. While u in M44 oneshot everything, in M551 ur lucky man when u 3shot things. So is the stabilizer and weak armor the main point why it sits at 7.0? Like okay, then whos argument is invalid.
I mean a lot of top tier tanks especially German DM rounds have more pen than other nation rounds, they are also stabilized and fast. Why are they at same br as other nation tanks when they could have only APHE?
So from what I can see you are just mad that it destroys you frontally in your heavy tank and wants it gone from ur mm. There are more than enough tanks that are also capable of destroying frontally more thing that you can imagine. Does it mean they should be at higher br? No. BR DECOMPRESSION should happen. Not these nonsense “Br change suggestion”.
