Bravo, we both play so we are alowed to have an opinion.
Do you have any constrative feedback to get back in topic or I am correct and you just post flaming?
No idea what you are talking about…
Been playing Russian IS1 and T34s…85mm…Tigers and Panthers will withstand shot frequently…and iplayed these also…
Neither is “easy mode”…i have seen that expression a lot…never seen it proved, not even close…
AFAIK it is a reasonable match up and you can find “anecdotal” shot on both sides…
I prefer to play Tigers and Panthers but mostly because the depression on Russian tanks annoys me a bit…neither is “easy mode”.
But i am guessing that in this topic Panthers and Tigers are frail…not sure how…
I replied to you this
They have much more advantage and play “better” due to the situations they get into.
I Agree with you but again it’s becoming irrelavant as Gaijin is removing their advandage by Red taping half the maps.
Were did you read that here?
Russia is easy mode at mid tier, T34-85, IS4, T10, 906 are all overpowered with probably more idr. Tiger 1 and 2 and Panthers even Maus are easier to take out, just gotta avoid shooting at the armor when/where it’s angled relative to you. Same tactic doesn’t work nearly as often against Russian tanks.
At top tier it’s genuinely so boring to play with Russia. 90% of the games they roll through the enemy spawn within 5 minutes and half the enemy team is gone.
There’s a reason the queue for RU GER US is 150 / 20 / 10 during grindy events, people want the easy mode. It’s that simple.
2 Likes
It’s good, but it’s not that good, and it’s balanced at 5.7. Calling it OP is wild, because it’s an equal to the 5.7 Shermans, and there’s no way it’s worthy of 6.0.
I’ve never seen anyone call the IS-4 or T10 super good before.
Unless it got a recent nerf or higher BR the T34 85 has far too good a gun and I remember it being an absolute menace. IS4 and T10 (and IS6) have extremely good armor. Up there with the 279 relatively speaking. Just sealclubbing machines as is tradition.
I’d consider the 85mm equal to the US 76mm, due to the 76mms better ballistics, reload rate, and flat pen. Overall, I’d consider them equal. I just don’t believe that the T-34-85 is worthy of 6.0 when considering the 76mm Jumbos BR (as well as other 6.0/6.3 equivalent tanks).
It’s not close to being as good as the Obj 279s armour. Both of those tanks (and many others in their BR range) are OP in downtiers, but pretty bad in uptiers.
None of those tanks that you originally mentioned are seal clubbing machines in their current state.
Guns shouldn’t be dissociated from their platforms and more importantly from the armor they commonly face, that goes at any BR. T-34-85 is a menace when all context is taken into account.
It’s also why the Abrams having ‘amazing firepower’ acc. to some, or the 2A7 having ‘incredible pen’ doesn’t make them OP when you account for tiny weakspots and >650 stalinium hulls.
Twisting my words as usual. I didn’t say they literally had the same armor, I said relatively speaking. Meaning compared to their opponents/BRs.
Also listing “pretty bad in uptiers” is wild considering it is/should be a given for any other tank, but I guess that counts as a drawback for the protagonists, who expect to be competitive even in uptiers.
But it isn’t OP. I’d consider the M18 (6.0 in RB) a better overall tank because of its mobility and gun handling advantage.
The 2A7 is the best top tier tank from what I’ve heard, and the Abrams does has the best firepower in the whole game. Plus, if you can’t aim for an LFP/drivers port/breech of a soviet tank, you can’t be a good player.
That wasn’t my intention.
It’s particularily bad at 7.X, especially for heavy tanks that are uptiers to face stuff that negates all of their advantages.
You should be competitive in uptiers, just not vastly outclassed like many vehicles are.
This is how most heavy tanks work and i see no issue. Conversely…when they are top tier, they can be close to unstoppable…usually very hard to kill from the front…
If you take a tank destroyer…you are almost as easy to kill in top or bottom tier…but the gun keeps a good effectiveness on most brs :)
It is up to you what to take…although i can see that SOME nation/BR combos are hard pressed if up tiered…including the Russians actually…as they have some BRs that rely on heavy tanks :)
Better mobility and gun handling are only helpful in the hands of a good player. The vast majority of players aren’t good. That’s why Russia overperforms, their tanks are far more forgiving to bad players at any BR.
ROF is less impactful than armor. Like i said before, just look at how much stronger germany got because the 2a7 got more armor, and look at how US didn’t change with better ROF.
First of all driver hatch and breech aren’t reliable on ru tanks. Only the LFP could be called reliable.
Secondly, anyone can aim at a weakspot. The real question at the core of the unbalance is : What is the average time to aim and error margin to shoot a russian tank vs an Abrams?
Answer : There is less room for error and it takes longer to accurately shoot a russian weak spot in a US tank than the other way around, so they win fights more often. Simple as.
That’s not happening at 5.7, because Russia almost always faces the incredibly noob friendly 5.0-6.0 German lineups. That also doesn’t change the fact that the M18 is overall better than the T-34-85.
That’s highly debatable, and it really depends on the specific tank and playstyle that tank has. 7.7 French tanks, Type 10s, and other tanks are so good because of their low reload.
The US will only change when the players get better. Afaik the UK, China and Israel all have worse MBTs, but they aren’t performing anywhere near as bad at top tier. It’s not like they have vastly superior AA, support tanks, or CAS either.
That’s false. A breech shot is quite easy to hit, and will disable the tank (or kill it if they only had 2 crew remaining).
Armour is just one aspect of a tank, and it isn’t the most important part. What the Abrams lacks in armour, it makes up for in other places. Gaijin is also partially to blame because they can barely design a decent map that allows for multiple playstyles.
1 Like
Ignored my argument
Ignored my argument
Ignored my argument
3 strikes yerrr out
1 Like
You can’t just say that to get out of responding.
-
You aren’t wrong by saying that better mobilty and gun handling are only better in the hands of a not bad player, but Russia at 5.7 doesn’t fall into the noob friendly category due to T-34-85s having poor armour and low-penetration guns
-
As I said, ROF vs armour is debatable as to which is better in what situation, and on what tank.
-
The ones you listed are reliable weak spots. You aren’t wrong that the Abrams has easier to hit weakspots, but that’s only one factor of a tank.
3 Likes
You shot a T34E my guy… it has add on armor ontop of its existing armor. Also you hit it at a pretty steep angle given your screen shot, so it probably had just enough pen to do a little damage.
Also, M-10s don’t count. As they are considered/ are open tops, and HE filled round nukes them easily.
also everything else you shot but the T-34 has practically no side armor.
This is just not true. I play most nations up to BR7.7 or so…russia is harder to play in many of these due to bad depression or slower reloads. And the theory that russian tanks have better survivabillity is just a myth…you just have to play russian tanks to see it…you will simply die a lot in any T34, SU vehcile…and also on IS1 and IS2.
There are a few tough russian vehicles…(t34 42, Zis5, some later/rare IS tanks…and perhaps KV1)…but also in other trees…
Russian tanks are only user friendly in early T34s…later than that they all require some skill to be used to full potential. (Unlike Tigers, Panthers and even M4s)
AGAIN…they have bad depressions, so-so mobility, long reloads in some cases…and they DIE AS EASY as any other nation…
1 Like
-
The T34 85 pen and amor is relatively high for the tanks it faces, and its post pen damage is insane.
-
Armor is almost always superior to ROF except in very niche scenarios like hull down long range, again as demonstrated by the fact that Abrams getting a massive buff didn’t do anything to their WR. Even if you believe US players are magically worse worldwide, there would have been a noticeable improvement if ROF mattered generally.
Type 10’s existence doesn’t invalidate that, it has decent pen, mobility, armor and it’s a minor nation so its win rate depend on which major it’s paired with (spoiler : it’s usually with russia. source : me who just got japan top tier) -
It’s the most important factor. Bouncing a round means you get a free shot anywhere on the enemy. Your enemy needing longer to aim means you get to shoot them (and cripple/kill them) before they can even shoot at you.
Both are massive advantages, and they’re a far more fitting explanation to the meta we’re seeing than uS pLaYeR dUmB
2 Likes
Nuclear bunker Driver’s hatch
2 Likes
Imagine roman legionnaires using russian drivers hatches as shields for the ‘‘testudo formation’’…they would probably dominate the world once again even in modern era… lol!
invulnerability mode on