Armor on Leo is really bouncy, so I wouldn’t say it is bad. Not to mention that Leo is not made for taking shots.
M46 is not mobile overall.
All of that can be said about other heavies.
Like most of light tanks at that or lower B.R.?
Both are very situational, not good in most cases.
Don’t make me laugh about T95
After I learned how to play it effectively, and wasn’t a noob, my kd in it skyrocketed.
It’s also a 2.34 ;)
It is still nothing special and doesn’t back up what You are saying really.
The m46 isn’t mobile? Someone better tell gaijin. With how much torque it has, it’s typically faster than light tanks and has a good reverse gear.
Secondly, if you bush up the m56 or m50 and act like a bush, its ease kills. Those tanks are also so small, on city maps you can often hide in little cracks nobody would ever think to look.
When compared with Leo 1 as he did, it is not.
Never had a problem with that, my friends also ;).
Says the guy with a 10.0 kd practically in an T18E2, oh maybe I should add that to the list too
So much to dissect here.
1- rushing a corner at speed is barely different for an Abrams vs a Bvm. What you described could happen to either of them. That’s not really a point, it’s just a head canon that the Abrams could make it but the Bvm wouldn’t. The Abrams might live, to some degree that’s correct, but it’s losing its turret ring and hydraulics because any tap to the inside knocks them out. Rounding the corner means nothing if you’re dead in the water once you do. In fact the situation you described could probably be done by any tank except a merkava and Chally because they’re so slow.
2- the LFP being harder in reality is no different then an Abrams or any number of other tanks with turret ring shots. In reality that’s a near impossible shot to make at range on a hull down NATO tank with any sort of repeatability.
3- the t90m could be 12.3, the armada would certainly be higher than that.
It amazed me how You don’t really care about really good vehicles in game and talk about ones that are balanced.
Yes the Leo has slightly better mobility, but that combined with other reasons is why it’s 8.0
Oh so we are all in agreement the m56 and m50 are very easy to use with bushes. And are excellent ambushers.
Also, by your stats, your T29 has a 3.88 kd
Your Is-6 is a 3.19
So ironically enough your own stats prove the T29 is better than the IS-6
It is not slightly but much better mobility, that combined it with 105mm gun that has much better post-pen.
Nope, no one really have a problem with this vehicles even when they are covered with bushes. Please read more carefully next time.
Especially that my T29 stats were made when it was at 6.7 ;).
It is on 7.0 for a reason, that it was too good on 6.7 due to 5.7 having problems with it. At 7.0 it is nothing special.
T-72 / T-90 also for the slow category there. But the faster the tank, such as my type 90, my engine 9/10 will be the thing hits then I can hit the enemy tank back with ease.
Reality is intriguing, but in WT we are assaulting primarily. Abrams is more of a defensive fighter. WT doesn’t have a lot of defensive game modes for tanks. Thus the weaknesses are more exposed. A Hull down tank would be hard to kill in any situation.
Lmao t90m at 12.3? Now we’re talking crazy. I think the Leo2a7s need to go there. But it’s hard to judge as when i play the Leo2a7Hu, I get hit with a brimstone or GBU, or KH-38 about 3 mins into the match. Some sort of CAS gets me.
M46 is good, possibly 7.3 material, Leo is a slightly better tank, but the 90mm gun is pretty good.
The T29 is far better than you’re willing to let on. And I never recall is being 6.7
7.3 won’t kill it, it’d be balanced for once.
They’re basically the same forward speed. Type 90 has worse optics, pretty sure a worse round, Worse armor.
It’s not better in every regard. It’s better at what it does better, which is not everything. It has to fit your playstyle or you won’t do well with it. Like all Japanese top tier tanks.
It is really not.
90mm HEATFS has weak post-pen damage and APHE has small pen.
It is really not and Your own stats show it.
You can see it being 6.7 ;).
It is worse than T32 that sits at that B.R. so no one is going to play it as it will just be a bad tank.
Wonder why no one really plays T32 at 7.3 right?
They are all going to accelerate in a short range from the corner just about the same. Only a Chally and merkava is so slow it won’t make a difference. The speed you’re referring to only makes a distance when stretched out over distance. Not moving 30m to rush a corner.
You have like 50 battles in a type 90. Nowhere near what I do, and at best what you’re saying is anecdotal. At worst it’s disingenuous. I have way more time in all those tanks, and if you’re rushing corners you’re already wrong. You’re probably equally as likely to die in both of those tanks. There isn’t some huge discrepancy at all.
In fact, if you have speed and do it right, you can drift a corner and would be bette protected in that than the type 90 because there’s almost nowhere frontally you can’t pen. Even the turret cheeks are penned by many top tier rounds. Whereas if you present mostly frontally in a t series especially in a quick shot scenario, drifting the corner and taking the shot from them, you are absolutely, 100% better protected than the type 90.
2- Any majority spall lined tank, the argument can be made to go to 12.3. Without a doubt the t90m is better than an Abrams in serious ways. The Abrams has a better reload and faster sprint, reverse. The armor is clearly favored by t-90m and any lost crew especially if you’re not aced to begin with puts the reloads similar.
You can do everything right on a side shot and the t90m can eat 2 shots without dying and taking any real damage. No other tank is doing that, not even a Leo.
A Leo can take one side shot and the spall liner is gone. As I already have proof of this, a t90m can take a side shot and get eaten by era, and then a second shot “eaten” by spall liner. Any hull with spall liner, an argument can be made to go to 12.3.
What sits at 12.0 is not at all evenly dispersed, but if they can be 12.0, then t90m is certainly 12.3 worthy through argument as I said.
it does make concessions to get that armor however. The Leo’s however, do not so there’s no argument that they belong at 12.3 without a doubt.
Just got a nuke in my first game in the Conquerer, sadly didn’t have enough time to drop it.
9 kills
2 assists
2 caps
0 deaths
It was a 8.7 match too
Type 90: 53 mph forward
T-90a: 37 mph forward
Typically I try to find common ground, but that ain’t it chief.
T-90A will have mariginally better armor over the Type 90, but they both have to hit weak points, and the Type 90 has higher accuracy and a faster fire rate, with the ability to reverse away from danger.
That’s just a lie, or you’ve never actually fought or played these tanks
@UniqueScorpions
The T-90A is just mediocre. 10.7 is too low or it needs to lose 3BM60 (and then it would be identical to the Bhishma and also make it entirely uninteresting to play).
I’ve got over 200 games in it and the reason I played it so much was because 3BM60 was really good at 10.7 (the BR it was when I played it). I’d rather not see the round removed so I think 11.0 is fine.
That’s your opinion.
So it was
And my own stats confirm what your stats confirm, the T29 > iS-6
The T32 has Better turret armor but the same hull.
One is premium, the other isn’t. Premiums shouldn’t be better than the TT vehicles unless there is an absolutely necessary reason for it.
That is just how it is in the game, I belive I have much more experience in NATO 90mm with HEATFS ;).
And it was too good at the 6.7 B.R. so it was put at 7.0.
Not really.
This two tanks have different roles at the battlefield.
And because T32 is better it sits at 0.3 B.R. than T29.