Remove M51

Yes it is ?
Good luck arriving dead last to the battlefield in your paper box just to get ambushed by someone already behind cover exploiting 3rd person camera.

Looks okay to me.

Thats sound to skill issue.

Sure, is german, is fine for you.

Doubt it.
You are too slow to utilize regular playstyles and are forced to more passive ones, which in the end is detrimental to the vehicle’s possible plays.

Are you calling me a German main ?

1 Like

Way worse then a firefly. A 17 pdr actually kills the things it pen’s unlike the m51 crit machine.

1 Like

lol did you send a nuking screen shot in an attempt to flex?

thats gotta be up there with “my dad can beat up your dad”

4 Likes

This affect another tanks too and they sufered BR increase. Gaijin just forgot this underiered beast and need go up asap.

Nop, totally the opposite.

2 nuke screens i think are much better argument than “just shoot and ir dies”.

Much worse vehicles was moved to 6.3 or 6.7 so that thing need move up too.

1 Like

No.

Like ?

You missed what I tried to say dude.
I’m completely fine with SPz LGS moving down from 6.7.

You all discuss if m51 is balanced, but never stopped to consider if it fits in with other tanks at the br. This game is special because of its realism, fighting m51s in ww2 tanks is just anticlimatic. If m51 was really that bad, then let it be bad, why should it ruin ww2 br area. Balance is important, but it also has to be reasonable.

In my opinion everyone who is defending m51 just enjoys killing tigers and panthers in it, there’s nothing more to it.

It is part of the problem with lack of armor meta too.

1 Like

I mentioned some before.

OK, sorry for the confusion.

1 Like

Except they clearly aren’t killing Tigers with it.
If M51 was ruining WW2 tanks it would’ve been moved already.

Play it for yourself, it’s free.

They are because i got killed by them many times.I probably could’ve avoided all those deaths, but i refuse to accept the fact that i can be killed this easily.

I tried it in a test drive and the gun behaves the same as in leopard 1, just slower shells. It’s nuts. It has a great gun, it has a turret with normal rotation, it goes as fast as all the other shermans. I don’t have to play it to determine it’s a very good tank, but i will try it some day, maybe soon. Just to prove a point to myself.

Edit: But you missed the point again, you’re still debating if it’s balanced or not.

It really, really isn’t.

1 Like

Previously, I said that the M-51 was being a little undersold: in the right hands, it can be very good and even nuke worthy. So, obviously your screens don’t surprise me, and gg on them.

But it doesn’t mean it needs to move up. I get nukes with the Jagdtiger, does that mean it should also go up? I got a nuke with a Dicker Max once, do we make that 7.7 as well?

7 Likes

Spookton and Oddbaws both got nuke in Tortoise in public game in an uptier, clearly a broken vehicle I see. It will be fine at 7.0 or maybe 7.3 even 7.7. /s

4 Likes

Exactly my point. When you’ve played for thousands of hours, even if you’re not uber skilled, the experience alone will allow you to extract a lot out of many machines in game and occasionally drop a nuke with them. That doesn’t make them broken.

I strongly disagree with you

So tell me. Where is this realism you’re talking about?

Is it in the fact that the Third Reich and Israel can jointly deploy tanks to stop the mighty armoured Swedish invasion of Alaska, or to do battle with Italy on an Arctic research outpost from the 1980s?

Is it in the fact that we nonchalantly drive tanks into tightly packed urban environments with no infantry support? That artillery (the biggest tank killer IRL) is nonexistent, save for a barrage that lasts a few seconds and only covers a few dozen metres?

What about the lineups? Only two Dicker Max were ever built, but you can have six in one game. You have a problem with M-51s, what about IKVs at 4.0? What about WW2 vehicles that also time travel? Pz IV Hs and Pumas would be much higher in BR if we went by historical date rather than performance, you know that, right?

I find it curious that this doesn’t “ruin” the WW2 brackets for you, just the M-51 does.

Perhaps the realism you mention is in the performance of the vehicles… except it is not. Early T-34s without turret baskets can reload their guns even when the turret is not facing forward. Sturmtigers magically reload in less than a minute, down to 40 seconds if you have an aced crew.

My King Tigers can rotate the turret at its maximum theoretical speed, all the time, even when I’m using the engine to move at top speed. My Jagdtigers can hit 42km/h without any drivetrain component exploding.

We can pixel-hunt for weakspots when aiming, because we have fine motor control over our turrets and guns, while in WW2 laying the gun would require you to go fast at first, then start slowing down until you make the gun stop more or less where the target is. That’s why centre mass shots were very common, and why so many tanks maximised their UFP armour even if they had weakspots elsewhere. Does that “ruin” the WW2 BRs for you?

This is a game where HESH rounds can ricochet (impossible IRL), APCR does arrow-like damage (not true IRL), and the crew doesn’t bail the tank on the first penetrating hit, but stays in and keeps operating it to fight to the (literal) death.

It’s also a game where the kinetic impact of shells is not actually simulated. Have you ever hit an AML with a large-calibre APHE and “the fuze didn’t trigger” so you get an over-penetration? Except a shell that weighs 28kgs and hits the target at a velocity of 940m/s will likely destroy its suspension or structural integrity even if the fuze does indeed not trigger, because all that energy has to go somewhere.

Or maybe it’s realistic that we operate 1930s tanks using a third-person drone-like perspective that rotates 360°, and can comfortably peek behind corners because our barrels have no collision models?

War Thunder is very arcadey. I don’t mean that as criticism, at all. It’s what makes it so accessible. But people underestimate just how arcade it is, because they compare it to WoT (different niche).

What makes WT good, is that it looks and feels realistic even if it isn’t. The tanks move, sound, and feel like they’re real things. You get a real perception of the mass you’re moving, whether it’s agile or slow, and the visual restoration is impeccable. That creates great suspension of disbelief, and is super immersive, but it’s not the same thing as actually being realistic. It would probably be a worse game if it was, or at least it would be unrecognisable.

The other thing that makes WT good is the complexity of its damage model, and the fact that its matches are a mix of very simple core tasks to carry out to win, and very competitive and dynamic execution of that against players that are trying to outsmart you.

If you want a realistic tank game, you don’t play War Thunder, you play IL-2 Tank Crew or, even better, Steel Beasts. That’s really all there is to say about the subject.

13 Likes

Problem is, if you move it higher then it’s only advantage (gun) will become mediocre while it will still keep it’s disadvantages. At that point, it becomes a overshadowed tank.

I don’t even have M-51 but I’m still defending it, because it seems decent for his BR.

BR is based on vehicle’s performance, not year of introduction.

2 Likes

What can be better to kill german main who believed in its invulnerability? M36B2 also good in it.

1 Like