no, ive done it in spawn
im not a big fan of SPAA being much good at anti-tank beyond throwing tracks or obliterating light tanks unless it was built to also kill tanks to be honest. You get issues like what happened when the Falcon had full APDS belts
For how big and slow the Sidam is, it wouldn’t be all that bad
Any other br suggestions?
That’s wrong.
Hm okay.
I’m Kv-1 enjoyer, 4.7 is fine and Pe-8 is 4.7 too. By the way yeah, P-47D should move to 4.7 too
7.3 is ok. Why go down if you want KTH in 7.0/7.3 ? Is-3 was made to be superior and it’s fine at 7.3
Yeah sure, you’re complaiting about armor is more an issue, T-54 1947 is fine at 7.7. T-54 1949 could be back to 7.7, but 1951 is ok at 8.0
nope.
Conqueror 7.7, only frontal with additionnal armor modification, but you’ve 2 big weakspot in from : lower glassis and this :
Centurion mk10 : 8.0 is correct. You want to move this vehicule ? you need to move ALL of Centurion variants, excuse, ALL medium and MBT tanks in 8.0 - 9.0 area.
i’m gona stop here : you’re a russian main :
This is no sense. Yes, we’ve vehicles that need more adjustments in BR, more USSR vehicles by the way, and the main problem isn’t the vehicles: you’re the problem. Change your mine, reset the movement HOW TO PLAY, after 13,000 games accumulated, what you’re proposing is terrible and no sense.
Ps: do not flag comments if you don’t like reality.
5 Likes
IS-3 to 7.0? yeah, sure.
I mean, T26E5 does indeed have 7.3 quality armor…
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.
2 Likes
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
1 Like
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.
3 Likes
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
Although I don’t totally agree with you, I removed the centurion from the list for the time being.
I don’t consider 2.0 as bad
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.
Nor does BVM on the same level as Challenger 2E Leclerc and other 12.0 that not Uparmored Leopard
When it was the top and i was grind the BVM with it along with other i had in my line up sometimes after that I stop playing Russia since then.
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)
Tiger 105 is higher than the Object 279 lol
1 Like
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.
Does it really?
Can you screenshot the ammo and show me. I don’t personally have that tank sadly.
@БЕИ