The Merkava uses the exact same engine and transmission armor design. The Merkava was partly built from inspiration of the Strv 103. You’re not seeing the connection for some reason?
No, it’s not my opinion. It’s a turretless, unstabilized, and pathetically armored tank destroyer with terrible ergonomics.
This isn’t your first time making bad takes about tanks, however.
No, it’s not unrelated. They were the same BR and the 103C should return to it.
Not close.
AMX, you’re always griping about Merkava armor in my threads yet you’re saying the Strv 103 has good armor with the same layout fighting similar shells? How?
They dont have a similar armor layout and also they are going against diffrent ammunitions
Also the strv has a relaod advantge in its br
Strv 103 can and will see heat shells
They don’t see most of those at 8.7? I’m not sure why you’re tugging at that when no one has suggested moving the 103C to 7.7 so it does.
The STRV103C does not see WW2 tanks. This point isn’t relevant. Also, I wouldn’t even consider the 103A to be that scary either. It uses APDS, which is highly unreliable. When used properly, it’s potent, but you need to actually be good at the game to use it.
Not remotely. And even if it was, once again, there are 8.7 tanks which are still stronger than it.
Dismissing Protection Analysis without providing any evidence of your own is weird. I am aware that Protection Analysis isn’t perfect, but you should know that DM23 has enough angle performance and penetration to rip straight through that plate. If you’ve played any number of 8.7 matches with decent APFSDS, you’d be aware of this.
I think some of us miss the point. 103A is the biggest offender, not 103C. Although I still agree 103C fits at 9.0.
No, not really. Transmission and Engine at the front behind a relatively well sloped plate.
As for shells, they’re very close to similar. DM23 is still a very common shell.
As someone who has played both the Strv 103, its contemporaries, and vehicles with similar engine/tranmission armor, I can tell you all that you really are overestimating these vehicles.
103C shouldn’t be 9.0 if many 8.7 tanks remain where they are.
Swedish players shouldn’t be punished for playing a vehicle into its specific role.
Strv 103C is much better than T-62, AMX-30B2, Strv 104 etc. It fits in at 9.0. The combination of good armour and fast reload that it has justifies this BR. Also, the cage and the adjustable height make it hard to identify and hit weakspots, even when the tank is not moving.
Well now its maybe ok after the br changes but if it gets downtierd there is many tanks that cant do anything to this like t55a(even the late ones)
Its a problemtic tank cuz its too strong against heat and early russian apfsds but weak against dm23 and above
Point is it doesnt need a buff
This is simply not true.
Insanity
It used to
Even on the br it is now it will eat darts like they are made out of cheese.
103a sees wwii and early post wwii tanks all the time and it can lol pen every single one of them with minimal danger to itself …its engine will absorb 100’s of shots and strangely enough it won’t even catch fire.Only things it has to fear are planes
I dismiss it because it is garbage ,showing weak points where there are none in the game
No, that’s an unfair comparison. The 103C isn’t going to be doing as well in CQC as a turreted tank like the T-62 (which does need a buff) or the 104. The Strv 103C is a turretless tank destroyer that purely shines when used in a hull-down position at long distances.
Those spots are not very common and it makes the vehicle mostly useless on many maps. It also makes them predictable.
You do not need to identify weaknesses on this vehicle in 9.0 matchmaker. 8.0-8.3 DM23 slingers already have the firepower to shrug off any threat it poses even at range. Its purely a defensive sniper.
So? It won’t see them at 8.7.
They don’t. I can say that with confidence because I actively play 8.7. You rarely see them and when I do, I just ammo-rack them instantly. They’re sitting ducks.
If you can’t kill one on the ground, you can also just bomb them. They struggle to reposition comfortably.
I have never had trouble with 103 players until I’m using an APHE slinger or they’re really far away and I’m in the open. That’s the only threat they pose.
Yet the shell itself can still do it regardless of what you say right now. DM23 rips through far more armored opponents.
The small profile of the 103C has disadvantages as well. For one, getting LOS in sniping positions can be hard due to how your aiming works. You can’t use many positions because you aim with your suspension and are very short. The Merkava also has the benefit of large crew space. The Strv-103C is compact and any side shot is a guaranteed death sentence unless you’re helped by a teammate.
Merkava also has big profile bad mobility and longer reload and its 9.7 not 9.0
Ofc there is some cons to small profile but the pros are much better
Asserting that the armour of the Strv 103C is bad at the BR is quite a reminder of how biased you are. Many tanks don’t have DM23 or equivalent shells at 9.0, and DM23 is not a “lolpen” of the 103C by any means. (Elevating the camera with “consider camera vertical angle” on, I paint all tanks green).
That’s a matter of opinion and playstyle. Being shorter and aiming with your suspension makes hillpeaking nearly impossible. You’re also not that small, comparatively. It shares a similar height profile to the T-62.
T series also has small profile
the fact that its harder to detect u is massive and u have great mobility to get to annoying spots too
It is most definitely not. Soviets designed their tanks to be low profile for good reason. And this transfers over to War Thunder gameplay.
No, it’s not “bad”, it’s just not as insane as you claim. It won’t stop shells any more than other decently armored tanks at its BR will. Anybody with the know how is going to shred any vehicle at that BR.
Magach 5, M48A2 G A2, Sho’t Kal Gimel, Magach 6B, Magach 6R, Magach Hydra, ZTZ59D1, Olifant Mk.1, and Strv-104 all have DM23 between 8.0 and 8.7.
At 9.0, this list grows and adds Magach 6M, the Strv-103C itself, TAM, Leopard A1A1 (which should not be 9.0 in this current balance), ZTZ88A, ZTZ88B, WMA301, and the OF-40.
Note that this list ONLY contains DM23.
Vehicles within 8.0 to 9.0 with a dart greater than DM23 include the AMX-30B, AMX-30B Brenus, T-55M, PTL02, PTZ89, T-69 II G, Vickers Mk.11, Cheiftain Mk.10, T-62M-1, Object 120, and M60A3 TTS.
This list does not include any tanks above 9.0 with a limit of 10.0, which would make this list grow even further.
It is not uncommon for a dart round to frontally rip through the 103C’s UFP. You’re surviving based on if the enemy is using a stock vehicle or not at that BR.
The 103C has a horsepower-to-weight ratio of 18.4, which isn’t going to beat a Leopard or AMX-30. It’s good, but not the best.
It is shorter, but not by much. It’s a cupola-level height difference.
It’s time we stop fearmongering a tank that’s extremely conditional and not common.
