It DOES struggle with Panzer IVs atm, so adding another undertiered machine to it is basically kicking a dead body.
As much as i love Chi-Nu 2 its obvious it doesnt need a lowerage of BR. Which then brings us to a question of how a better armored and a little-bit more mobile CHi-Nu 2 deserves 3.3 and 3.7 :/
The only argument you can make is the gun that is better on chi-nu, yes, however its as little better as panzer is better mobile. And otherwise its all worse.
ah yes, it must be the guy who only has 3 tanks on his top-15 most played machines, and there is Tiger 2 with 2kd ratio while other two have negative to tell me Tiger 2 doesnt need a raise… ofc, sure thing.
Tiger 2 is in one way better than 105. Especially if we`re talking SLA16 against 105.
105mm cannon is less reliable, especially against cardboard, and has longer reload, while not giving much better damage and penetration.
the angled pen sure. I believe we discussed that already, and come to conclusion that .3 difference is viable for that angled pen and a little better damage of the cannon. But then again, them H and G have additional armor, G has smokes.
.7 and 1.3 br difference? its extremely diabolical towards Chi-Nu 2. And the fact is, CHi-Nu2 feels extremely well to play. And ill say them IV G and IV H also play pretty damm well with 4.3 lineup. I mean i just dont understand.
I dont fear any enemy at low tier, and feel pretty confident with even a CHi-Nu 1. But hell man, having CHi-Nu 1 at the BR where there is Pz IV F2 that is all the same but with better gun is crazy.
Thats debatable tbh. VK is mobile and has greatest cannon at the rank, having armor that is viable. Su-85M has regular gun for the rank and good armor with one critical con - its mask is a weakzone. So every other guy trying to shoot off your cannon has pretty many chances to destroy you with oneshot.
Tho i do believe both those tanks are well at their BRs.
Su-85M has 1-shot wonder gun and armor that stops Panther gun if you work with it even a tiny bit.
Mantlet is not a “weak zone”, in reality the area that actually deals damage is small, and if you miss - sorry, bounce. LFP and cupola are my go to targets, depending on the weapon I’m using and angle. But out of these 2, only LFP delivers serious damage and can quite reliably 1-shot.
VK is bigger, the turret doesn’t turn and for 85mm it’s like paper. On the plus side, it looks like Panther, so people may shoot turret and randomly bounce. But if they don’t bounce, your transmission is gone, and you are dead, because sure as hell fragments from turret shot can take out a steel shaft inside thick steel cover.
Overal, vs 4.0 Sherman VK at 300m is just “shoot the turret 80-90mm area”, and Sherman will shoot first as VK has glacially slow traverse and hull traverse is also kinda meh.
VK has straight line speed so you can get into dangerous position with 0 support more quickly, then get outmaneuvered and outreloaded.
Still, I sometimes think VK should go to 5.3, but now my 5.0 lineup at least has 2 5.0 tanks - KV-1C and VK and I consider KV-1 to be much better. Why? Vs most targets better reload beats more penetration, and since 7.5cm gun damage is meh, I can follow up quicker. I can also outreload KV-85, turret traverse is way better and getting a bit angled doesn’t mean death.
Generally, the whole “better reload and armor beats penetration” is true also in the Pz IV vs M4 pair. M4 struggles with some armored targets but generally these targets struggle vs M4 too (with exceptions like Su-152, but these also die from the front for whatever reason).
Do you have problems facing Pz IV? Because I surely don’t. IV H is a less mobile sidegrade of IV G.
Composito and Chaffee are way better tanks than any Pz IV.
Damn, angled 3.0 M4A3 105 can tank German 7.5cm gun while reliably 1-shotting Pz IV with HE or HEAt to the UFP or turret front.
IVH is not more mobile. It’s actually less mobile.
And once again, in a world of m10 being 3.3 and M4A2 being 4.0, how about we stop crying about Pz IV, which is hard to deal with fot literally no one, and try to see the bigger picture?
I’m not struggling against Pz IVs at all. The Chi-Nu II, Chi-To and Chaffee just shred them no problem.
I usually prefer taking the Pz. IV H/J into uptiers myself. Sure, the armor’s paper-thin and it’s kinda underpowered. But that KwK 40 in a proper rotating turret is a massive advantage.
I take Chaffee into uptiers no problem.
Pz IV works in up tiers, as the gun is useful. The platform is pretty damn bad. I do just fine at 6.0 with 151 penetration on Tiger E. So it’s clear that kwk 40 will also work even at higher BR.
But vs same BR targets Pz IV is nothing special. You sometimes have easier time than others to aim. But everyone has easy time penetrating you. Gun handling is not superior, so Pz IV will lose most duels.
And it’s also horrible vs CAS and artillery.
Chi Nu II probably works at 4.3 about as well as it would work at 4.0 since it gets penetrated by everyone anyway, while the gun is very good (better than kwk) so same playstyle applies.
Chi Nu II at least can go through M4A2 hull unless it uses uneven terrain to its advantage and the gun is much more likely to 1-shot the target.
And just a little description of current balance.
M4A4 is going down the road, angled at maybe 10 degrees.
I fire my Stug IIIGs gun at his hull, because theoretically all I need is center mass shot.
Bounce, because he hit a bump on the road and my “powerfull” gun failed to pen.
He fires, hits random spot, BOOM, dead as my strongest spot is still butter to US 75mm below 250m.
Then I take Turan, I hear Sherman driving, I stop, wobble, wobble, Sherman hears me thanks to engine scouting and just fires on the move since he can penetrate me ANYWHERE WITHOUT >>>>NG AIMING.
How the HELL IS THAT BALANCED?
And here people moan and whine that Pz IV H is too low?
COME ON!!!
Its the same phenomenon we have at higher BRs arouund 7-8ish BR. Ppl simply dont rate stabilizers as important factor. But it is. Even the M4 stabilizer, which is restricted to rather low speed is in fact a massive advantage on most map types. If more maps would be long range ones, it wouldn’t matter alot. But WT is as it is…stabbed gun is crazy op when opponents won’t have access to this feature. Panzer IV vs M4 is hopelessly in favor of M4 on all those cqc maps.
They really need to rework how stabilizers work. For modern vehicles, they are mostly fine, but a lot of interwar and WW2 vehicles with shoulder-stops and earlier stabilizers are a bit overturned because they are essentially laser accurate under certain speeds.
They should reduce, rather than eliminate vibrations, and their effectiveness should scale to the speed instead of cutting off over an arbitrary speed limit.
if long range maps where a thing at these brs it be horrible as no one but germany has High velocity guns with good accuracy shermans and T34s dont have very good zoom at all
I would be pretty fine with VK gaining 5-7 tons.
Leave it at 5.0 so my KV has a TD friend with big gun, haha.
BTW it’s funny Ostwind II is 5.3 when it has worse firepower than 3.3 BR double 25mm milk truck (thanks to real sh*tter 3.0, 25mm with like 20g of TNT deals same damage as 37mm M-geschoss which BTW has wrong explosive and like 25g of TNT equivalent too little). It could go to 5.0 and nothing would change.
PG87 is 5.7 with like twice the firepower and waaay better mobility.
AMX 13 at 5.0 has insane range, yes, only 1 gun, but 94 penetration and being able to shoot aircraft across the map is substantial.
SUB I-II rofltomps aircraft and can kill tanks pretty well, Ostwind II has nothing on it, they are same BR.
Something is iffy with early stabs, thats right. I’m no expert, but when you read WW2 accounts, Shermans still had to stop before firing. Reads like they mainly used the stab to aim the optics on target while still moving, stopped, fired the gun.
You also see this in old newsreels and like all war movies. If M4 truly had shoting while driving capabilitry, it should have been a widely known and shown signature featture. Ingame its no issue to place pinpoint shots at speeds below the threeshold.
I mean, yeah, but if you’re flying a German plane, you have to get close. And this is suicide vs milktruck.
Of course milktruck is in a way worse spot vs planes with high velocity guns, but still.
My point is, Ostwind II is a damn bad SPAA for 5.3 and at 5.0 it would slightly reduce the 4.0-5.0 hole.
Flakpanzer M42 would be much better for German TT to fill this gap. One of the vehicles with extreme “no armor = best armor feature” and it got over 70mm pen. US one is even one BR lower than Ostwind II (lol), but it would be good at 5.3 as well. Especially cause of the pen. 72mm vs. 49mm is a massive difference in WT. Its also very fast and mobile. Unlike the Ostwinds… (Unlike Ost II it was a real service vehicle in Germany, too).
I hate the fact you can hit T-34 side 20 times and take out fuel tank and make 2 guys orange with M42.
But still, at least some proper SPAA, still way worse than milktruck at killing planes unfortunately.
In WT these vehicles are best hunting enemy tanks. Dual autocannons with over 70mm pen and top speed of 72km/h is king. You can kill alot stuff with it. Especially at 4.0 (lol once again). Germany needs this thing.
