So why would the Stalinium aliens protect enemy vehicles?
Exactly.
Also, on the other hand, just compare german tanks to japanese ones.
A Chi-Nu and an F2 are at the same BR! While the F2 is better in every way. Of course, the Chi-Nu is not a bad tank, but still, it shows some things…
And i am not even going to compare it to an early Sherman…
Or, just look at the Chi-To tanks. They are at 4.7, while they have the same effectiveness, as a Panzer 4 H or J, a whole BR lower!
Another great example was the german M48 at a lower BR than the american one…
Yet nobody is crying “germany bias”, while there is actually more “evidence” for it.
Of course there is no germany bias, it is just Gaijin balancing a tank from player stats, instead of the tank’s capabilities. And well, german mains are not the brightest players xd.
Sorry but im getting warning signs, just saying
Well they are just a clear example of the “Conqueror-syndrome”. The 57mm T-34 trades everything for higher flat pen, that is just plain useless.
The accuracy is awful, the damage is worse than solidshot, the angle pen sucks.
When i bring the '42 version with my 5.0 lineup, i am doing better with it, than with the 57mm versions.
This can happen because you might play the M-10 in safer mode without taking the same risks like when you play the t-34 knowing that it can hold much better to some hits of the enemy tanks than the m-10 which i think in most cases is one shot kill… The playing style varies to the tanks potentials am i right ?
A hull down M10 is really hard to kill if you don’t have HE btw.
Styles are different for sure, but M10 armor is actually very good in my experience. I have to be more careful with planes and artillery and mind the slow turret traverse of the M10. One big factor is the accuracy and OHK capability of the M10 gun…better than the T34.
M10 is a different TD than most…others are much more vulnerable and/or have slower reloads.
T34 is much more mobile, so i can do other things and go other places. Probably other players will do better with T34 than M10…but both are very good at their present BR.
1 Like
Simply because if fiinish and chinese t-34s would not have the some capabilitis like russian t-34s, it would be the ultimate proof for someone to say there is russian bias in the game , dont you think?
Shot dispersion shouldn’t be making you miss shots at any BR rating over 3.0
The explosive filler of the second shell is great for a gun with a quick reload, it’s not M82 but it’ll kill the gun crew at least.
The penetration is better than other medium tanks at its tier while sporting fast reload, you should be doing side shots mostly anyway which the T-34’s engine allows it to do.
The only problem with the 57 is the same issue with all Russian tanks, gun depression.
Listen to yourself mate ,really
Well, it does.
And it has even worse angle performance, and loses pen much quicker.
Ahm, Panzer 4 a whole BR lower, Chi-To, Firefly, Avenger…
Where the piss poor damage is even worse.
That is not an issue for me. One of my favourite tanks is the KV-85 with only 3 degrees.
The BR-271K which is the shell boasting more explosive filler has increased angled penetration.
The Panzer 4 doesn’t have 145mm of penetration nor the T-34’s speed or reload rate.
The Chi-To has a larger caliber gun with marginally more penetration and suffers from worse reload. Similarly lacking the mobility offered.
Nope, it’s because of shitty mechanic called volumetric shells. if a projectile hits an armor joint or other volume, it will eject and “evaporate” because it has no kinetic energy. I myself came across such a situation when I didn’t penetrate the Shermans, m36 etc. American bias?
1 Like
Yes, it has slightly more angle pen at 60 deg up to 500m. meanwhile the stock round has better angle pen everywhere else. It is still shit tho.
Also, just compare it to the 76mm gun. It has even less angle pen, yet in practice it is much much better at penning angled plates.
With the 57mm, penning the upper plate of a T-34 can be tricky, even at point blank.
While a Zis-5 will just lolpen it from a long range, even if it is angled more.
Which makes no real difference.
Ahm…
5.9s aced vs 5s. Such a huge difference…
Especially when you factor in that the Panzer’s gun is much more reliable, and does more damage.
The stock round is not good because of the less amount of explosive filler. You should use the K shell.
Greater than, equal penetration, much worse mobility, worse reload. Worse armor taking Gaijin’s modeling in to account.
Bigger shell, longer reload.
T-34-57 is the better tank and its BR placement reflects that.
I used both, then realised that the stock is just better. That small explosive filler increase makes no difference in damage,
Yet still a better tank.
Also, stop shifting goalposts.
You brought up the other vehicles nimrod.
I believe most of your issues with the tank stem from your choice to use the worse round.
Less explosive filler, less angled penetration. Use the K round and your performance will improve I guarantee it.
Because you made a statement, that was factually incorrect.
As i said, the stock round is better. The K round only has higher angle pen at high angles, and up to 500m.
The damage difference is basically nothing on them.
You have played the following amont of matches with the soviet 57mm gun:
Arcade:
LVTA: 14
Realistic:
T-34-57: 35
ZIS-30: 23
ASU-57: 10
SU-57B: 1
LVTA: 10
In total, that is 93 matches.
I have played it:
T-34-57 (43): 333
T-34-57:307
ZIS-30: 20
In total, that is 660 matches. It is 7 times more than you have.
Now, to completly debunk your BS, let’s see the penetration analysis:
At point blank, the T-34 upper plate has 93mm effective thickness, while against the normal round, it is just 79mm. This means, it behaves better against angled plates.
The ricochet chances are also lower on the non-K round (48, 63, 71 vs 47, 60, 65)!