Nope, the best way for IS-6 is to delete the BR471D shell and move back to 7.3, it is totally worse than T-10A
I don’t have access to Spookston’s sources, but they appear to partially disagree with those used by the online sources I’ve found. According to them:
- The first T29 pilot was completed July 1945 and send to Milford Testing Ground to gather info. The first production T29 was delivered in 1947, but the pilot vehicles continued to be used in testing until the project was cancelled. In fact, AFAIK all the production T29s had E level modifications done to them, so the base T29 in game is likely modeling one of those pilots delivered in 1945.
- The T30 pilots, being ordered at the same time, were delievered not long afterwards, and remained in testing alongside the T29 pilots throughout the mid/late 40’s.
- The T34 was a direct continuation of the project, with it’s pilots (three known to exist, two based on T30 chassis’s, one on a T29 chassis) being delivered for testing in 1947. This date is known due to problems with the gun causing the hospitalization of two crew members due to fumes being ejected into the turret along with the ammo, causing a flareout. This actually led to the aspirator style bore evacuator, which became common on post war vehicles.
He does not go on to say that the 120mm was only mounted on the T34 in 1954, because that makes no sense. The T43, a development of the T34 with a slightly redesigned gun and reworked, lightened chassis, was greenlit in 1948, saw it’s first pilot made in 1951, and production starting in 1952. This is the project that eventually led to the M103.
Not for no reason. The thing was an absolute monster on release, thanks to it’s bugged armor and way lower BR. Plus a lack of HEAT shells to counter it.
It’s no longer widely considered a monster at it’s current BR, but people remember how it used to be, which is why there’s so much resistance to lowering it. Leaving it where it is but buffing the reload would likely be acceptable to the majority.
Type 10s are already top tier, there’s nowhere else for them to go until Gaijin starts adding speculative tanks like the T-14 and the 140mm armed prototypes.
That shell isn’t even that good. You have to be absolutely perfect side face to kill a maus.
Let alone other targets are still quite strong against it.
2s38 10.3->10.0
I’m going to go with Spookston on this, he does his Hw, and anytime I’ve had to look up his Hw, it seems to be correct.
From I’ve found online, the T34s design specs were changed in 1945, as it was merely a design then. Since the family of tanks were all supposed to be the same other than the caliber of gun, I’m sure an officer questioned logistics and whatnot of a 155mm.
Yes, they used the T29 as a test vehicle until the m103, but the T29 in game is a later version, as the OG had no muzzle brake, along with other features.
T30 had an upgraded power plant, which eventually was re-gunned into a 120mm T53
(I just looked up what Spookston said, and it’s correct).
But anyways, date is irrelevant, as gaijin doesn’t go by dates, my whole point was, the USA tree typically gets vastly newer tanks at lower brs. Other nations have similar instances (pretty much all of Sweden), but as a main nation, with these powerful vehicles with good stats, and being younger than other tanks…
I don’t see why it hasn’t gone up, other than it being incorrectly played by bad players.
-
HEAT-FS as early as 5.7 has made the armor of the IS-6 irrelevant.
Not to mention it’s very easy to kill, not hull wise frontally, but TL;DR is has its weaknesses. -
then we would make new BRs for them. Yes they might be 12.0 and 12.7 or something. But hey, at least there can be no argument over how realistic they are.
You are more than welcome to watch replays of me to see if I camp or not. I can tell you that I do not.
1 Like
Although i know it was removed from the list and I’m a little late to the party but Cent mk 10 at 8.3 is wild, by far the slowest and most cumbersome MBT at its br of 8.0 and mediocre armour at best, and conq being moved up to 8.0 is also goofy, where it can face APFDS that treats it like a light tank, and 8.7 tanks already demolish it, like a lot of people have already pointed out most of these changes just lead to recompression which is not good for the game, i sure dont want to face an IS3 in a tiger 1.
1 Like
Idk what the argument is, but the finnish kv1 is a MUCH better zis-5. It has rounded corners, yes, but you have a far far stronger turret that even the panther can struggle to pen. If you slightly wiggle the turret it’s pretty much immune to the German 75, which the zis’ turret is not
1 Like
If a panther struggles that is an actual skill issue im sorry, the panther doesn’t struggle to pen the Zis 5 or the A i know cause ive never non penned in my panther D, i have 185mm pen, the Zis-5 can angle to 127mm armor, the A can get about 110 occasionally at which point i still to straight through. Regardless the KV-1s almost cant even hurt me point blank so god forbid im further than 100m
This ia the weakest panther and only if i dont angle and only if im closer then 50m can a KV-1 even attempt to hurt me. For a .3 increase ill take the panther armor lmao
Look, no offense but if you said the panzer IV gun struggled id say sometimes it fails to pen but saying a panther can non pen is pure fiction unless they have no idea where they are aiming.
1 Like
Here you go. As you can see, a lot of the 1942’s turret is impenetrable. Additionally, the bottom left corner that is green is a volumetric nightmare, as well as the 2 spots on the mantlet to the right of the gun in the picture, an the three spots on the left bulging cheek. The top right spot is also very easy to cover by wiggling. I do suggest that you maybe take another look.
2 Likes
I guess i am blessed by the snail, regardless i still hold my opinion that its not that big of a deal, especially considering the 60mm gun sight which has allowed me in my Spaa to kill them frontally twice. The cheeks where the mantlet are are the biggest weakspots and if people aim too far on the side of course they are gonna die from volumetric again. I have no problems killing them, people should take the time to learn this niche vehicles and their weakspots. Even in. Basic KV-1B/E you can kill the KV-1A through the turret using the 60mm hole lol.
I won’t deny it might be volumetric i still dont agree that its better than my Zis-5. Again its more so preference than bias, i prefer the box design since you can actually angle it more. Additionally anyone who is smart will just drivers port or bottom plate a KV-1A so this entire argument is moot when encountering a semi smart player.
Well you can kill them in the gunner port easily with smaller caliber guns, but a panther may be too big of a caliber.
In terms of effectiveness from high to low:
Kv-1C (Germany) 5.0
Kv-1b (Germany) 4.0
Kv-1 1942 (Sweden) 4.7
Kv-1 Zis-5 (Russia) 4.7
Kv-1E (Russia) 4.0
For the lack of add on armor on the KV-1 Zis-5 or the lack of the better turret, it shouldn’t be at 4.7, 4.3 was perfectly fine.
KV-1 Zis-5 5 has higher hull armor than the KV-1A which is why it has the add on armor. Tbf the KV-1 armor is entirely fictional since gaijin need its BR to be lower. It should be over 100mm-120mm thick on the turret. The chassis should also be 75mm not 70mm again they are both fine at 4.7 moving the Zis-5 would just mean we get yet another nigh invincible KV for the 3.x lineup to deal with except this KV actually has a good gun.
Additionally the KV-1A has no lineup. It has 2 lives max with only a plane being 4.7 so unless you think an entire 1 plane and 1 tank lineup is worthy of the Zis-5 needing to go down id call you crazy lol. If they get as many vehicles as russia does at 4.6 maybe it should let the Zis-5 go down, until then absolutely not.
KV-1E:
KV-1 Zis-5
KV-1 (1942)
All of these vs a Sherman at 3.7
The KV-1 Zis-5 is the easiest to kill. Followed by the KV-1E which trades its gun for slightly more armor. Then lastly the KV-1 (1942) which is the best of both worlds, sitting at the same br as the Zis.
Really dont see the argument, shoot the cheeks or go for the 60mm hole in the turret, its a easy shot imo but again i fight these things fairly often in the M4A2 so i dont have to much of a hard time. Druvers port is a more reliable weakspot than the machine gun port imo so again no problem. Only one thats strong is the KV-1E which might i remind you the KV-1A was to replace. The turret was supposed to be over 105mm but due to weight of the turret on the turret ring they reduced the armor down to 90mm, the nodle in game is the early version so its technically a fake vehicle since finlands KV-1A has the heavier turret. So maybe they should fix the vehicle weighing more than it should as another buff. Again i dont really think the A is better than the Zis, the roof gun is definitely an advantage but cant help that.
The Sweden one is by far better, if you look at the penetration areas instead of ignoring the clearly obvious difference between photos.
Yes they all share the same hull weaknesses but the turret differences are quite immense.
1 Like
Some of the areas that say you cant oen, you very much can so i dont always trust the armor viewer. Again ill still take the Zis-5 considering it also gets a lineup which imo is more important than 1 vehicle i can kill in a spaa with 60mm pen
Okay, you take the Zis 5 I’ll take the 1942, I’ll use the sherman, we’ll see if your theory lives up to it
Theory to what? Preference? I find the vox turret better for angling, you prefer the KV-1A for not angling whats the point here? Besides the point is instantly mute when a smart player just shoots the breach when they angle, not that armor analysis will tell you that 90% of the time despite being able to pen.
Your theory that the square turret out preforms the rounded one