Because it performs fine, I know you responded to me in 3 seperate messages with a metric boatload of arguments, but I’ll do my best to respond here;
-
No, I am not joking, the 90mm heat is extremely inconsistent, and only 1-shots on ammo, with armor eating the shell about half the time, this jankiness compounds at range where the T-10’s advantage increses further, none of the 7.0s without heat can even pierce the T-10M frontally without pixel hunting on odd spots, up to 7.7 most apds up to 105mm caliber has a rough time penning, which is fine, because the tank is a 8.3 heavy with medium levels of mobility and a stab.
-
Yeah, having AP shells be absorbed by volumetric is annoying, I’d like them to rework the armor system again at some point.
-
The T-10M is a soviet style heavy, emphasizing angled protection over thickness, so it’s going to be more of an assault-heavy than a traditional style heavy, so yeah, I don’t think it should do the job of a conventional heavy with the benefits of a medium, as for your last point on that post about it struggling in uptiers;
I know 90mm heat isn’t known for it’s fantastic post pen damage, but a lot of Soviet heavys actually suffer a lot against Chemical munitions not just because it’s negating the one thaing that’s supposed to help me but also because soviets heavys are pretty tightly packed, so any Heat shell that hits has a high chance of crippling you or just hitting ammo. If you don’t want your T-10M to be a powder keg you really have to limit how much ammo you bring too 15 shells or less, and even then your crew are still very vulnerable to any heat shell that pens as there all tightly packed. In a funny way the T-29 despite being weaker to conventional shells is actually better at tanking chemical rounds due to how large and spread out the crew compartment is, and that fact that it has more crew ofc. Ontop of this I can’t stress you have a 17 sec reload, and god forbid something happens to your loader.
If this heavy were too be at 8.0, yeah it would Definitely be strong, but you still couldn’t drive around like a heavy tank because there would still be a very high chance that any tank you run into would be able to pen you. Ok, so now I have the playstyle of a stabilized medium tank, that still pretty strong, except not exactly because I have a slow reload compaired to almost every other tank around me, and this is really gonna limit my ability to actually rack up the kills and play aggressive like I need too since I can’t really camp behind a hill, and if I’m in a situation we’re I’m fighting two or more tanks, I’m at a unique disadvantage over say something like a leopard with a 7 second reload, as the second I shoot at one target, anyone who’s paying attention can just rush me, as they have atleast 17 seconds to knock me out. Factor in the usual Soviet issues of no gun depression, cramped crew compartment, and I feel that there’s a pretty strong case that this tank is more deserving to be amoungst 8.0’s more than 8.3.
My main argument is that this is a heavy tank that even in a downtier is gonna struggle to trust it’s armor, but has the potential to still be a strong fighter thanks to its stabilizer and powerful APHE and decent mobility. Since it’s a heavy tank, it deserves to have a strong presence on the battlefield, and while its armour is insufficient against most ammo, it’s other features help make up for this. It’s hard to say how the new match maker is gonna play out, but even with a lot of other tanks moving up, my key concern is that the vast majority of tanks from 7.0 up have ammo that can take out a T-10M without having to sweat too much, all the while having a faster reload or better mobility(often both) and this leaves the T-10M as a lame duck, with some cool potential but overall lacking performance when compaired too its piers.
Sorry for the great wall of text…
I normally do this in mine, 15 doesn’t seem like much, but when I’m playing it as an “assault heavy”, point refills are plentify, plus the one thing that people didn’t bring up for some reason, the Reload, is why I’m never usually firing more than 15 rounds to begin with. I’ll believe you that the T-29 is good with chemical munitions I own it but it’s got other issues that keep it at 7.0.
Anyways, the main point is that the tank is weak at 8.3, and I disagree because I believe that the only thing making it “weak” is are the uptiers it faces super frequently, so I think a better approach is to raise the BR cap and move things up based on tech so that the T-10M (Among other vehicles with only some modern tech) isn’t clubbed into oblivion by the likes of stolen T-72s, XM-1s, and all of Chinese 8.7. So instead of letting it face off things at an awkward struggle bus br, just address the artificial weaknesses, if other superheavies are an issue (only one I genuinely see as a problem is the maus), throw them up to 8.0 post-decompression so they don’t eat 6.7 alive.
Also, I talked about how soviet heavies aren’t really “heavies” like other nations build them past the KV series, they’re mobile siege guns that trade armor thickness for speed and have a built in angled profile to make up for this, alongside a massive main gun that spells death for anything it pierces, and in a downtier, the T-10M is just that, just because of this thread I brought it out with my 8.3 lineup, it can definitely absorb a lot of shots through wiggling and smart placement, and I had no trouble using the aphe to nuke the lightly armored vehicles that dominate the BR range, the only thing that was a serious issue was the reload, but I’ll accept the blame for my overly aggressive playstyle killing me.