Proposed ground RB battle rating changes

[Mr_Mistick]

@UniqueScorpions

T77E1 3.7 > 3.3 (it is purely a slightly better armored m16 GMC with 2 additional guns. Shouldn’t need a 1.0 br gap.)

M19a1 4.0 > 3.7 (better than the T77E1 if your aim is really good, but often isn’t a great SPAA.)

Skink 5.3 > 5.0 (good armor for an SPAA but the very limited belt size shouldnt set it at 5.3, 5.0 is optimal)

T20 6.3 > 6.0 (it’s by far a worse T25 at a higher br for some strange reason, and I don’t think a low speed vertical stabilizer is sufficient for a higher br.)

T92 7.0 > 7.3 (Tends to bounce or eat shells, fast, small, very easy to bush and hide, potent HEATFS)

T26E5 6.7 > 7.0 (7.3 quality armor at 6.7, with a good reload and good penetration being better than most 6.7s with ease)

T34 6.7 > 7.0 (spreading out the heavy tanks, getting better rewards, but good gun / armor. Able to pierce anything, while blocking many hits. 5.7s can hardly kill it, same as T26E5)

T30 6.7 > 7.0 (better T34 at the same BR, with a larger cannon, good pen, insane HE filler, able to overpressure many tanks easily.)

M551(76) 7.0 > 7.3 (stabilized very potent light tank, with a decent damage APDS, than can kill every 6.7-7.3 frontally with ease).

T29 7.0 > 7.3 (A go to, to bully tanks, great from 6.0 - 7.7, most 6.0-6.3 tanks hardly can kill these T34, T30 included, good reload and great penetration with APHE).

M50 6.7 > 7.3 (small size, quiet engine, ability to rapid fire 6 rounds, very easy to bush up).

Germany:

VK30.02 5.0 > 5.3 (should never have been able to see 4.0 tanks no matter how bad its turret traverse is. Also way too powerful of a gun for 4.0-4.7 with armor to match).

Panther D 5.3 > 5.7 (makes sense as a step up from the VK being 5.3, while having better armor).

2 Tiger pack OST/west 5.7 > 6.0 (preforming well, add on armor drastically increases survivability, with a good cannon).

Panther F 6.0 > 6.3 (three folders panthers at the same br doesn’t make a lot of sense, the turret armor is also somewhat better than the other panthers, with a harder to snipe barrel.)

Tiger II (H)s 6.7 > 7.0 (USA heavy dispersion happening, thus Germany gets it too, and the Tiger II is equal to the T34, and T30 in terms of performance).

Tiger II 10.5 CM 7.0 > 7.3 (devastatingly good gun, with a harder to hit turret face, due to bigger cannon breech)

Luchs 7.3 > 7.7 (better Wiesel but bigger with a 360 degree turret rotation.)

Pzh2000 7.7 > 8.0 (even with no thermal, by far the best arty in game with a 5.0 sec auto loader for the first 4 rounds, subsequent loads are 7.5 secs )

Df105 8.0 > 8.3 (10 shot HEAT mag, with a 5 sec load time, can bounce early APFSDS, and eats auto cannon rounds).

Raketenautomat 8.0 > 8.3 (massive magazine of devastating ammo, with great pen and low drop).

RakJPz 2 (HOT) 8.3 > 8.7 (being practically equal to the IT-1 in its ability to hide behind hills and not take damage, while having a better atgm for less armor.)

Gepard 8.3 > 9.0 (often used to zoom to a flank and wipe half a team due to great APHE, and it’s APDS can kill the heaviest of tanks, also way too good of an aa for just 8.3, it can easily down helicopters, and planes with ease).

Turm III 8.3 > 8.7 (very powerful medium tank with a 5.0 sec reload and auto cannon, and great gun depression, often it’s so open it will be hit with little to no damage).

Begleitpanzer 57 9.3 > 10.0 (pretty much a IRST lock-less 2s38, being faster and better armored at a whole br lower. This can often reduce all enemy CAS like it didn’t exist, especially helicopters, which makes it surprisingly under br’d still. The TOW is usable for long range hits, or as a back up weapon.)

Leopard 2A5 12.0 > 11.7 (other than the squadron vehicle and premium vehicle, there is no true 11.7 tank, making the TT leo2a5 better than purchasable and researched squadron vehicles, if it was moved to 11.7.)

Russia:

T-34 E STZ 4.0 > 4.3 (no need for two T-34s at the same br, the STZ also has a smaller turret).

KV-1(Zis-5) 4.7 > 4.3 (the Sweden one is 4.7 with a far better turret and same gun, making little sense why they are identical in BR placement.)

IS-3 7.3 > 7.0 (terrible reload, somewhat slow, bad gun depression, terrible performance, terrible shell unable to deal with many things at 8.3, 8.0, or 7.7, can deal with some 7.3s, heavies are a bit of a problem though).

IS-6 7.7 > 7.3 (terrible reload, bad gun depression, gunner optics are a big weak point aams as roof hatches, bad penetration, not equal to other 7.7s in performance, being typically equal to or slightly better than the IS-3, not enough to warrant a br difference).

T-54 (1947) 7.7 > 7.3 (absolutely terrible vehicle, other than armor, gun handling sucks, shell is okay, turret traverse is like a panther D. The cons make fighting vehicles with HEAT-FS a living hell, as your armor was made to stop AP, APHE, etc).

T-54 (1949) 8.0 > 7.7 (same as above)

T-64A (1971) 9.3 > 9.0 (has worse gun elevation degrees a second vs br 1.0 tanks, has armor that may stop early HEAT-FS, but will not stop APFSDS nearly at all. its pros are: good turret armor, pretty decent gun, and low profile. Cons: slow, slow reload, bad bull armor, easy to 1 hit kill.)

2s25 9.3 > 9.7 (speedy with a good gun, lacking thermals and survivability, spreads out the vehicles).

Krizantema-S 9.7 > 10.0 (ability to use radar to detect tanks, mostly sees 10.3 / 10.7 matches anyways. Has 2 good ATGMs, and gen 3 thermals. Lacks good survivability)

T-72B 10.3 > 10.0 (pretty much a T-72A but at a br where everyone fires APFSDS, absolutely terrible to play when you can’t rely on a single part of your tank like: speed, reload, armor. The only good thing is the gun).

2s38 10.3 > 10.7 (decent jack of all trades, lacks armor though, however it probably shouldn’t see 9.3s)

All T-80U, UM2, UE, UK, UD, BVM (T80U or newer) reload corrected to 6.0 seconds. (Historically accurate, cyclogram data literally even says 6.0 seconds.)

Thats battle reload, aka announcing each step, spotting and aiming taken into account, technical reload is cyclogram, aka what we should have in game for each vehicle. But we dont, not for soviet vehicles, not even medium reload time for NATO MBTs now, 9 RPM as in Greek tender. T-80UD (6EC43) states battle reload time of 7-9 RPM, with it’s cyclogram stating average technical reload time of 6 seconds. When you consider T-80U/D have more advanced and stabilised commander sights it does make sen…

Britain:

Skink 5.3 > 5.0 (same reason as USA

G6 6.7 > 6.3 (locked turret that can only traverse roughly 20 degrees left or right of the center of the tank. It has little armor and is a massive target).

Fox 7.7 > 8.0 (insane mobility and lethality, able to cross an entire map in the span of 15-25 seconds, with a gun that can kill most tanks).

Conquerer 7.7 > 8.0 (excellent armor and gun)

ZA35 8.3 > 8.7 (faster gepard meaning quicker easier flanks).

Japan:

Heavy tank no.6 6.0 > 5.7 (lacking add on armor, and smoke launchers, which are useless, block gun depression).

Type 61 6.7 > 7.0 (great penetration, all around a good tank, but poor armor).

ST-A3 6.7 > 7.0 (6.0 sec auto loader is too good for manually loaded tanks around).

Ho-Ri prototype 6.7 > 7.0 (extremely good armor for a 6.7, decent reload, good speed, and devastating cannon).

Type 60 SPRG 6.7 > 7.0 (rattier M56, easier to hide as well, as being .50 cal proof).

Type 99 7.3 > 7.7 (auto loaded arty with the biggest amount of HE filler in its shell, should’ve never been able to see 6.3s).

Ho-Ri production 7.3 > 7.7 (a better Ho Ri prototype, being able to bounce / take absurd amounts of damage rivaling the maus. Very good mobility, and a very good gun).

China:

CM-25 8.7 > 8.3 (there is literally no reason why it shouldn’t be the same br as the other M113A1s)

Object 122MT 8.7 > 9.0 (a far better T-62, boasting better armor, with enhanced mobility, and the ability to fire 4 ATGMs rapidly along side its main gun).

AFT09 9.0 > 9.3 (can launch 4 ATGMs in rapid succession and is decently fast).

Italy:

Pzh2000Hu 7.7 > 8.0 (same reason as German one)

Sidam 25 8.3 > 8.0 (absolutely terrible aa, worse than ZSU-23-4, Gepard, M163, etc).

Dardo 10.0 > 9.7 (fast firing auto cannon, but worse protection than the Bradley, very poor atgm storage leading to being hit in empty space and detonating. No IRST lock, very poor survivability, this and the Vcc80/30 are the same br. Moving this to 9.7 gives a decent 9.7 lineup for Italy).

KF41 11.0 > 10.7 (has an APS but is a worse puma in survivability)

Freccia (fix spike LR consistency vs tanks, and perhaps give it the option of a stock APDS belt)

Aubl 74 / HVG reload buff 6.0 secs > 3.5 secs (only logical If 120mm cannons can reload in 5.0 seconds, it doesn’t make sense how / why a 60mm cannon loads in 6.0 seconds. Lending itself to being one of the worst reloads for one of the worst cannons in the game).

M300 spall damage increased by 16% (this would help out both the Vcc80/60 and justify its 9.3 br change, and also help out the Aubl 74/ HVG)

France:

AMX 50 (TO/90) 8.0 > 7.7 (being slightly faster, with less armor and penetration than the somua, with a APHE round, it never made sense to move this to 8.0 after its battlepass ended, as 8.0 and up it struggles to fight a lot of vehicles if they’re stabilized, well armored, etc.)

Somua SM 7.7>8.0 (can go 3v1 easily in downtier, with a skinny gun, and all around being a jack of all trades with good pen.)

M4 (FL10) 5.0 > 5.3 (better than most Sherman’s, while having a 10 round magazine and a 5.0 sec load time, make this a nasty tank to encounter).

Sweden:

Bkan 6.7 > 7.0 (fast firing gun, Proxy)[

U-SH 405 8.0 > 8.3 (a much faster and quieter rakentenautomat).

Pbv 501 6.7 > 7.3 (should never be a BMP-1 below 7.3 regardless of not having an atgm, as the main gun is quite good.)

T-54 8.0 > 7.7 (same reason as Soviet one)

Pbv 302 (Bill) 8.7 > 8.3 (these atgm launcher systems are absolutely terrible to play / spade. It’d be easier to eat one’s own hands).

Itpsv Leopard 8.7 > 9.3 (being a better, and better armored Gepard, it’s strange it’s only been one br higher. 9.3 is a good fit for it though.)

LvKv 9040c 10.3 > 10.0 (long load times after all first stage ammo is fired, also stacking two AAs at the same br doesn’t help.)

Alright, this post singlehandedly made me actually join the forums. While I agree that we need decompression most of these are baseless and it shows that you haven’t played most of the vehicles you mention. I decided to stop by your profile on StatShark and you are a good player albeit again, you haven’t played most vehicles/have a bias towards some. Let’s dissect

USA

T77E1, M19A1, Skink, I have no personal opinion about as I haven’t played them. Dunno
T20, haven’t played it either but I have seen some CRAZY KDs in it so I’m unsure.

T92. It’s perfectly fine at 7.0, it’s a strong tank but not strong enough to warrant 7.3, the APDS is inconsistent and HEAT doesn’t do much damage. Its survivability is hit or miss, generally nothing different from other tanks around its br.

T26E5, fine where it is, armor isn’t everything and in other areas it’s pretty lackluster. The gun is pretty bad, the mobility is average. It goes fine with its competition at 6.7

T34, fine where it is, long reload, solid shot, it strong but again doesn’t warrant an uptier. While I would prefer it over the KT the KT doesn’t struggle against it and excels in other categories. T34 armor isn’t hard to play against if you know weakspots

T30, lmao, I see you haven’t played it. I haven’t either but it’s just a m109 with armor. Imagine a KV-2 at 6.7, it’s not op, it’s just a gimmick.

M551, haven’t played the event variant but have played the tech tree. I think it’s fine where it’s at. The gun is very mediocre and doesn’t do much. Dies to a machine gun.

T29, strong vehicle but doesn’t warrant 7.3, it’s one of my highest KD vehicles at like 4.3 but that’s only because of dumb enemies which seem very plentiful at 6.7-7.0. Its strength is that the matchmaker constantly gives it downtiers. Killing the t29 has never been an issue for me when playing KT or is-2.

M50, Seems like a bit much, should be 7.0 due to its weaknesses

Germany

VK30.02, agreed, could see an uptier as its mobile and has a great gun

Panther D, agreed it is too good for 5.3 and the turret rotation isn’t hard to figure out if you move your darn hull!

Tiger pack, Bad take it’s pretty much the same as the H1, sure they might get extra tracks more here and there or 1mm effective wood but in the end we all end up shooting cupola

Panther F, seems you haven’t played it much/at all. It’s not as great as you state it is. Fine at 6.0

Tiger II (H) fine where it is. 5.7 struggle against this more than the US heavies.

Tiger 105, fine where it is as it’s the perfect counter to T29

Luchs, lmao, lmfao even. Fine where it is

Pzh2000, agreed

DF105, fine where it is. Strong? Yes, but not enough to warrant an uptier

Raketenautomat, agreed

RakJPz (Hot) haven’t played so I don’t know. Perhaps you’re right

Gepard, fine where it is. 40 APDS is nothing to brag about and they pop like a balloon at a needle factory

TURM III, agreed

Begleit, while I’m a hater and I think it’s very strong it doesn’t warrant a downtier, in fact I think the PUMA could go down a bit to 9.7

Leopard 2a5, it does just fine where it is. It’s a leopard, look at other tanks that are 12.0 and are worse than it.

Russia

T34E, fine where it is, same weakspots as all but a bit faster. Nothing special, tell me why the PZ-4 are still 3.7 instead of 4.0

KV-1 zis, haven’t touched it in ages, dunno about it. The KV-1e/b could go to 4.3

IS-3, lol, just fine at 7.3

IS-6, no, its armor is insane against conventional guns. It has a faster reload than the IS series, it’s pretty mobile. It’s fine at 7.7 due to the volumetric hell it is.

T-54 (all) haven’t touched in ages too. I guess it would be fine as they a rent anything special

T-64a, played like 3 battles with it and it’s pretty meh, I agree.

2s25, it’s fine at 9.3, you still retain all the weaknesses said the t72 with the benefit of better mobility and a better shell. It’s an easy kill if seen. Fine where it’s at

Krizantema, the radar is a gimmick and barely works, I never end up using it. SACLOS nerf made its missiles shit even though they are beam riding. Fine where it is.

T-72B, it could go down. T80UD should go up to 10.7 though

2s38, agreed

Britain

Same as US for skink

G6, agreed

Fox, actually won’t bother it as it does better in uptiers lmao. Sure I guess

Conqueror, I see you haven’t played this one. The DS in APDS stands for Dog Shit, the conq has a shell that will tickle your enemy and only does well against big armored heavies. The armor is exploitable, it’s a mid vehicle that requires you to use your brain to its full power. Shell shattered mate

ZA35, haven’t played, seen crazy stuff with it so it could go up

Japan

Type 61 & STA3, all fine at 6.7, they have strengths but the weaknesses drag them down a lot.

Ho-Ri prototype, you have not played this one and this take is bad, it should arguably go down just due to how mid it is compared to 6.7 competition.

Type 60 SPG, if the M50 goes up this thing can go up too

Type 99, fine where it is, big HE doesn’t mean it’s insane, it’s like every HE slinger and it’s balanced at 7.3

Ho-Ri production, my best KD at 5, I agree but I’ll be sad my sealclubber will be gone:(

China

I have no experience with China so I shan’t provide an opinion on it

Italy

Pzh2000, yeah

SIDAM, agreed

Dardo, agreed

KF41, agreed

Freccia, spikes are fine, in fact they are very strong. They shouldn’t be a insta kill every time, they are quite unfair in the meta too.

Aubl 74, seems like a personal bias, it’s fine as is. Bad post pen but it’s an excellent flanker

France
AMX-50 90, agreed along with the BatChar 25t

Somua SM, it’s fine where it is. Just like most 7.7 it clubs 6.7 and gets clubbed by 8.7. Its mobility nerf hit it pretty hard, terrible armor anywhere but the front makes it very easy to destroy even at a slight angle.

M4 FL10, haven’t played so idk

Sweden

Bkan, agreed

U-SH, I’m kinda split about this one so I’m unsure

Pbv, haven’t played

Itpsv leopard, Should just get replaced with T55 marksman

Lvkv 9040C, agreed

[UniqueScorpions]

You missed the point. A higher tier heavy tank cannot do much to a lower br tank destroyer.

I usually take spaded into the equation. But it has to be remembered stock vehicles exist

[UniqueScorpions]

@Mr_Mistick

Alright, this post singlehandedly made me actually join the forums. While I agree that we need decompression most of these are baseless and it shows that you haven’t played most of the vehicles you mention. I decided to stop by your profile on StatShark and you are a good player albeit again, you haven’t played most vehicles/have a bias towards some. Let’s dissect

Check my profile in game. I have played almost all of these. But as I said, it’s a working list, and I’m taking peoples suggestions into account

Also, in terms of the Aubl 74 HVG, I am exposing a problem. The Rarden on the Fox does more damage than the Aubl, even though the Aubl fires APFSDS, and is larger by 30mm
It’s a 60mm cannon with a longer reload than any 105, or 120

[TheDudesRug]

@UniqueScorpions

You missed the point.

eh, you keep changing your point. I’m done with you and this topic. Muting both.

[UniqueScorpions]

Lmao because I have a point? Very childish.

You must consider many variables when decided a vehicles br.

Such as:
Like what vehicles it can face
It’s capabilities
It’s stats
It’s learning curve

[UniqueScorpions]

@Forum Moderators
How can I make colored text for my original post? I see some people can do reds and greens. I just want to make it easily visible.

[Gura_Gawr]

you cannot use red, its for moderators only
all other colours are available

[UniqueScorpions]

How do you do it though?

[Gura_Gawr]

How do you do it though?
use the painter icon next to change size of test button

or type it manually color=# means HEX code so for example
Dark Blue #0013ff

[luque13]

It does have nice thermals and a commander thermal sight but yes agree it’s not great.

[UniqueScorpions]

Well, what are the actual cons vs pros?
And video of the speed? I don’t own it so I cannot test it.

I did add a change in the list for a reload buff.

[jspene]

Pros:

Mobility is still decent even being underpowered (about as fast as the FV4030/3 in battle conditions)

Good armor profile, UFP is ~370mm thick and the LFP is very small. Turret cheeks are comparable to Leopard 2A4.

DM63 is a good shell, since it’s classed as a long rod it spalls more

Because of the shape of the gun mantlet compared to the turret, hull down positions conceal a bit of the turret too. Kinda like the HSTV-L to a far lower degree.

Cons:

Its heavier than the 2A4 but has a weaker engine, and the acceleration is pretty bad.

The armor, while good, is still pretty easily penned by most things. DM13, DM23, DM33 105 all go through even the strongest part of the tank

No machine gun

Mediocre horizontal traverse

Long reload

[UniqueScorpions]

Well I can definitely see a reload buff being good, I’m not sure decreasing its br is necessary. It has to be played in the right scenarios: hull down.

As a good example, the Krisentema is an very situational vehicle.

[jspene]

The thing is Britain already has a far better hull down sniper at the same BR: the Chally Mk 2. So the only appeal to play it would be to have a pseudo Leopard 2 since you don’t need a sniper. Which it fails at.

But I agree about the BR change not really being necessary, but the reload definitely is. Hell, it could go to 5.0 seconds to bring it in line with the Abrams and to justify the higher BR than the currently better Leopard 2AV

[An_Pigeon]

Unfortunately it also has 2 things dm63 and legacy stats from when it was dropped

[An_Pigeon]

It has a better round and thermals and unfortunately has legacy stats.

Its fine at 10.3 imo but ive not used it much as you can see on my stats.

I had to make a 10.3 lineup to accomodatw it