For me br is fine as it is now
3 Likes
i swear this has devolved from a talk about the m-51’s status to a talk about realism in the game 💀
1 Like
M-51 relative to IS-4 should be at 8.0.
Relative to T-54/T-55A or Leopard 1/AMX-30 it should be at 7.7.
Relative to T-55AMD-1 or T-55AM-1 it should be at 7.3.
Imo BRs should be decompressed in such a way, that:
IS-4 can stay at 7.7
M-51 can be higher than IS-4
M-51 can be lower than AMX-30 and T-54/T-55A
M-51 can’t meet T-55AMD-1.
The stance that I don’t have a meltdown when some shitbox pseudo-TD manages to get their gun on my T/KT and pen it? I’m proud of that stance. If I was unbeatable in my T/KT I’d be super bored.
1 Like
Whaddabout TAMs??? Object 906s, IS-7s, Pvrbvs and the like?
1 Like
Hydrogen bomb vs coughing baby.
1 Like
i’m dying brub 😭
the sherman wouldn’t even need to use its main gun to turn the ha-go into a pile of ashes
2 Likes
Woah.
Next thing You are going to say is that earth is flat
2 Likes
Historical matchmaking players are so ridiculous lmao
imagine facing a T-55 in your M41
1 Like
Stuff like TAMs and Object 906s should move up, IS-7 not really. IS-7 is not that different from T-10M, apart from (insane) reload and reverse speed. It’s also very rare.
PzIV was used throughout the war, not just early.
You realize how that’s impossible to create, right? You’d be either in a 2v2 every game all the time or you’d be queuing for 3 days straight.
1965 tank vs 1947 tank??? does that sound balanced to you at all?
That’s a matchup that makes the most sense, this is what a compromise between historical accuracy and game balance means.
It’s like that right now and I don’t see any queue time problems.
T-54s at 8.0 have 1949 and 1951 in the name. T-55A was introduced in 1963, Leopard 1 1965. It’s a very reasonable compromise.
I guess it could be M48 vs T-54s, Leopard 1 vs T-55A. Further decompression.
Just out of curiosity,
do You know that You can play a Tiger H1 vs T-34-85 without M-51 in SB games?
WTLineup 4_1 line up to be exact.
Then you clearly aren’t seeing this realistically and there’s no point in debating with you.
Something that the game already does. What you want is to absolutely ruin the balance of the game when it favors you.
Do you have any idea what you’re talking about now, or are you just rambling?
1 Like
T34, T29 and T32 will slaughter them
1 Like
These are not that much of a problem.
Only the E1 variant, which is currently at 7.7 next to the IS-4 and Maus. Regular T-32 has weakspots, but is much stronger than IS-2 or Tiger 2, it should be somewhere in between like it is now at 7.3.
I truly have no clue what you mean. The game is basically already balanced correctly apart from some odd tanks like M-51, M56, M41, SU-122-54 (lmao) etc, and it has been working for years.
Honestly no, but I correctly remember there was always something unhistorical to negate your armor. In 4_1 it was the French 75mm, which doesn’t care about your angling in a Tiger 1 at close range with it’s 200mm of pen.
Honestly it’s not that bad, since irl there was Firefly and here you have M4A4 SA50, but at the same time I expect more from sim. EBR 1954 and ARL-44 should just go up though. Also Tiger 2 can’t escape the M-51 in sim.
I kind of forgot about ground sim, since you have to wait for rotations and for that reason I don’t play it.
Edit: M4A1 FL10 should also go up, autoloader with such a gun is too much. I have trouble thinking of a BR for it though, it’s not as mobile as AMX-13 and the gun is not as good as M-51’s obviously. I guess 6.7 would do or 6.3 just to not meet IS-4s and Mauses.
My honest reaction to that information
1 Like
Balanced
Literally machine gun the crew, skill issue.
Shoot it anywhere
probably cupola
2 Likes
Works really well, especially with american 90mm
1 Like
T-34 and T-29 will not kill Tiger 2s and IS-2s any easier than they kill each other.