Is that a ground vehicle?
Pretty sure this is for ground vehicles
1 Like
Aw :( where’s the one for Naval?
Idk make it. I just do Danish Aircraft stuff
I’ll make one, gimme a day.
2 Likes
Thank you!
You asked for this previously, here it is.
1 Like
One thing I don’t agree with is the T-92 to 7.3. Sure, it’s pretty small and can be hard to see, but it’s not that fast compared with most other light tanks. Also, it suffered on city maps as the small size doesn’t really help when ur trying to go down a narrow street. Also, the heat-fs shell is inconsistent at best, the post-pen isn’t that great
1 Like
You forget its pros though.
Pros:
- Low profile / good gun depression
- good selection of ammo
- mostly a black hole, that can even eat 122mms or 128mms if hit in the transmission.
- mobility on par with other light tanks
Out of the 7.0 light tanks, which there are few, it’s quite good. I never played it right when I played it, but I’ve seen a lot of people do really really good with it.
It does have some good pros, but it also needs good gameplay to get the most out of it, and it is absolute garbage when stock as it only has access to apcr.
1 Like
Yes when it’s stock it’s bad, like most vehicles.
That’s why, in this context, you’re using an expert crew / ace crew and have it spaded.
The T92 is really good in hilly terrain, but decent in flat terrain.
Yeah, but since it isn’t that fast, it can’t do that much on city maps. You can’t pull off crazy flanks or anything, so I tend to just get destroyed on city maps. Idk, maybe I’m playing it wrong, I tend to use it with more of a medium tank style gameplay focusing on positioning
1 Like
Meanwhile, your intial reasoning for pushing it up relied upon a stabilizer and gun you had imagined it had. When disproven, you then resorted to throwing up it’s other advantages against the 5.7s, while ignoring the weaknesses that make it balanced, and say “Well, it still needs to go up”.
If the rest of the advantages it had the whole time made it a 6.0 candidate, why didn’t you propose it should go to 6.3 or higher when you thought it had a stabilizer and a long 90mm equivalent gun?
I’m wracking my brain, trying to think of tanks that can resist the 85mm but cannot resist the 90mm. I listed the obvious ones above already, and it’s a very short list.
At best, the extra pen and angled performance means it’s more forgiving of bad shots, and it’s easier to punish tanks which misplay by over angling. Also, you can snipe with it a bit more, not that you should be in either tank.
Hey, that’s my line.
You are seriously underangling the KV-220 in your screenshot. It has equal front and side armor on the hull, you want to be at or around 45 degrees to your enemy at all times.
Sidenote, I don’t know why the LFP is in green, as it’s ~220mm thick at it’s weakest
As for the turret, pointing at the tiny, pixel wide weakspot on the sides of the turret and pretending it’s a consistent shot is pretty laughable. Doubly so if the KV-220 is waggling the turret, which you should always be doing to make shots on the cupola harder.
“6.0 heavies” is a funny way of saying “The Tiger E”. Also the Black Prince, I guess, but that one is balanced so strangely it’s not a fair comparision.
But, in comparison to the Tiger E, it’s only marginally more mobile (Tiger E has 12.2 hp/t and a higher top speed), it has an arguably equal gun (trading a bit of pen and angled performance for overpressure potential), and it has effectively zero armor in comparison. Sure, the T1E1 is better in soft stats (gun handling, depression), but that’s basically it.
Perhaps a better comparison is the M36B2. You have the same gun, with more mobility, a larger ready rack and better gun handling. Both lack any useful armor, and so must be played as though they have none. The difference is the M36B2 gets a HEATFS round, which is very useful at 5.7, along with being much smaller and easier to hide, while the T1E1 gets a better reverse gear, more trollish armor (That cannot be relied upon, and thus only pays out when you make a mistake) and immunity to strafing. Also a 37mm of dubious usefulness.
Sounds to me like it’s broadly equivalent to another 5.7 vehicle in ability, and that it’s balanced at 5.7.
5 Likes
- I thought it had the stab.
- I understand it’s weaknesses vs pros. It’s 6.0 worthy, but not really 6.3
- I haven’t changed my original argument, bar removing the “it has a stab” unlike most people, I actually am agreeable, and take fact, so when an undisputed fact arrives, and I check it to be true, I accept it.
Common enemies? Panthers, Jumbos (technically you can with the 85mm frontally but it is so hit or miss), some tds.
Not really. That angling works well.
And I’ve been killed in the turret side odd spot by the 90 a few times now…
But for the T1E1 idk I’ve lived a lot more stuff than I should’ve. But then also got 1 tapped by a puma… somehow…
I did kill a few light spgs and spaas earlier with the 37mm after they broke my main gun lol.
Why do I compare it to the Kv-220? I recently got it, and it doesn’t live up to the hype. It’s not as good as the T1E1 but is a higher br.
It does have a 5.0 sec reload aced, and 35 mph forwards speed.
If you bush it up, it’s a complete menace
So, I’m to believe that you don’t consider having a stablilizer to be worth a 0.3 BR increase? Because I don’t know what else I am to take from this. You proposed 6.0 when you thought it had a stabilizer, then learned it didn’t, and yet still believe it’s worth 6.0?
That’s also leaving aside this bit:
And this
When it’s just… the same short 90mm as all other US tanks around that tier.
The American 90mm is incapable of UFP a Panther (despite historical evidence it could with the T33 AP shell), and the turret is an equally volumetric hellscape for the both of them, so the 85mm and 90mm have identical killing power against a Panther.
This isn’t much of an advantage, considering the only one the T1E1 can see is the French 75mm variant, which is very rare in my experience. Also, as I said previously, the 85mm can also do this, just closer, and with less angle.
Would those TDs happen to be the same two I listed (SU-85M/SU-100)? Because if so, I’m not sure you’re exactly disproving my point that the advantage in pen is not as impactful as the numbers suggest. Also, outside the Chinese SU-100, the KV-220 doesn’t face those targets.
I literally showed you better angling that makes you immune to the short 90mm, and your response is “Well, my way still works”?
No point responding to the rest of it. Personal experience versus personal experience. It’s why I don’t base my opinions on how a tank feels, I base it on how it actually is.
That’s exactly what I’m doing, but you keep trying to tell me that I’m wrong XD.
In advance to the rhine yesterday at about 300~ meters, I UFP’d a Panther F with the 90mm. It most certainly can UFP them. No, I didn’t hit a weak point either.
Secondly, my argument for it to go up in br is based on its pros I don’t know how many times I have to tell you that. A stabilizer would increase the br, depending on the vehicle, in this case, the T1E1(90) is balanced at 6.0 even with a stab (which would be ahistorical) but regardless it’s too powerful for 5.7
I misspoke. You can, but it’s not reliable. You have to be quite close, and firing down onto them, and they have to be completely unangled. But guess what? Under similar conditions, the 85mm can also UFP them.
In either case, you’re much better off aiming for the turret or cupola. It’s a far more consistent and forgiving shot, and you won’t be trolled because the Panther’s slightly angled, or on a very slight up slope, or wiggles the hull last second, etc.
To recap, the pros are:
- Slightly more mobile than other 5.7 heavies. I emphasize the slight here. 2 hp/t and a better reverse gear, with a lower top speed, is not like comparing a Hellcat to a Sherman.
- Good gun handling.
- High pen gun (of limited utility due to how few extra targets it allows you to engage)
- 37mm and hull mounted .50s of even more dubious utility.
Meanwhile, the cons:
- No reliable armor of any kind, and no way to increase what armor it has by angling/wiggling.
- Enormous size and profile.
- Small ready rack, and a very slow reload when it’s empty.
Effectively, it’s an enormous glass cannon with decent mobility, gun handling and a good gun, and if I wanted that, why would I pick it over the M36B2?
3 Likes
It’s more honest to say you were incorrect as I said myself previously. The 85mm is far less reliable, and in fact pretty much doesn’t pen it.
I didn’t even take the T1E1 photo right, it sits higher. Which means it’s more likely to UFP, over the lower Russian vehicles with 85mms
It’s only better to aim for the turret with the 85mm, as the 90mm can pen.
The size isn’t really a con. It’s not a light tank. Its small ready rack never seemed to give me a problem in the slightest.
You are really underselling the reverse gear which is quite dishonest.
- it has an HMG for aa
- a crew of 6
- and a cannon with good penetration/ angle pen.
you want to lower the amx 50 (to/90) from 8.0 to 7.7 because it struggles when it meets stabilizer’s. what do you think is going to happen to Somua SM if you make it 8.0 like what.
Bkan to 7.0 is not needed. Its perfect att 6.7
You want to make the Itpsv from 8.7 to 9.3 Maybe not. its not super OP
The U-SH 405 has horrible survivability. It doesn’t need to be changed from 8.0 to 8.3.
KV 1(Zis 5) from 4.7 to 4.3 is unnecessary.
Is-6 from 7.7 to 7.3 is stupid
2 Likes
None of what you have mentioned has been analyzed logically or statistically in your comment.