Nah, this is not nothing new specialy between Russia and USA players.
About the topic. Just no T-55A is fine in 8.3 specially when you can buy the 8.0 stabilized T-55.
1 Like
The M728 has a better penetration at 60 degrees - 144mm than the 3BM25’s penetration at 60 degrees - 129mm. The M392A2 has a better penetration at 60 degrees - 134mm than the 3BM25’s penetration at 60 degrees - 129mm.
The ZTZ59D1 has 220mm of cast steel on the front of the turret + ERA, while the T-55A only has 200mm of cast steel. Just 2mm difference?
The M48A2 G A2 has 110mm of cast steel for the turret face and 130mm of cast steel for the UFP.
The M60A1 RISE (P) turret face and cheeks are immune to 3BM25, and the 108mm thick UFP is sloped at 66 degrees.
I am talking about AB mode, not RB.
1 Like
The T-55A, a T-54 with a stabilized gun, along with a slightly faster turret traverse, armed with the 3BM25 faced opponents with better APDS/APFSDS. Are these good? The T-55A doesn’t even have a rangefinder, and when paired with a T-62 at BR 8.7 that doesn’t even have a rangefinder with subpar APFSDS, and the T-55AMD-1, it gets uptired and faces vehicles at BR 9.3 - 9.7 with mostly hard-to-penetrate armor from the 3BM25 with poor penetration at 60 degrees.
1 Like
But with worst APFSDS at BR 8.3 for MBTs or medium tanks and no rangefinder.
1 Like
I have to disagree, despite the T-55A not being that newbie-friendly vehicle, it’s start to be nice and decent when you know how to use it properly, it has a good armor, yet no laser rangefinder but you have to consider that still a good vehicle in close combat situations, the turret and chassis rotate pretty fast for a Soviet vehicle.
Mentioning the Chinese vehicles, they’re just at this BR because yes, you can mostly operate them same way or even better in higher BRs, Type 69 is the better T-54/55, yet, it has APFSDS, Type 71 it’s not good in penetration values, which the HEATFS shows up as a better option until you fight a M60A2 AOS or M60A2 TTS, or anything with ERA,
Mentioning again Type 69, it has a full stabilized cannon, Two Planes Stabilizer, and I don’t know really the reason of such low BR compared to T-55A, but I may guess is Gaijin’s fault with the “player-based skill BR placement”, like they did with Leopard I.
ZTZ59D1 is a “better” Type 59, compared to the Type 69 is just a downgrade in terms of Fire Control System, ZTZ59A is the same thing to ZTZ59D but without ERA at same BR as the Type 59, both D1 and A still uses the Vertical Stabilizer.
Again I don’t know why they’re such lower BR compared to the T-55A, and I think they would perform the same at proper BR. I’ve mentioned the Chinese tanks to point some facts but I still not agree with the possibility of T-55A BR change for something lower.
Is full tabilized tank with APFSDS, basically any other tank have acess to this combo in 8.3, so is fine.
I’m not a newbie, I’ve been playing WT for a long time, and have also completed the Soviet-Russian ground vehicle tech tree. The T-55A has a slightly faster turret traverse speed than previous Soviet-Russian vehicles of the same type, but it’s not better than vehicles of the same type, same level in other countries, frankly it doesn’t help much.
Just because the ZTZ59D1 only has vertical stabilization, is a tank better than the T-55A, has better APFSDS, has rangefinder, is at the same level as the T-55A? The ZTZ59D1 even has ERA. Some other vehicles also have better turret traverse speed, APFSDS, armor,… although not all factors.
M60A1 RISE (P) (AB mode) at BR 8.3, has better armor + ERA, better APFSDS, has rangefinder, has faster turret traverse, has faster reload speed. Wow, that’s pretty cool when T-55A has to engage it at 1000m, right?
In no moment I said you’re a newbie, I said the vehicle is not newbie-friendly, it also doesn’t mean you have played the game for 10 years or something, if you never experienced a vehicle, you should be considered a newbie on it specifically.
And, I mentioned ZTZ59D1, ZTZ59A, Type 59 and Type 69 for comparison, I’m not saying it should stay at the current BR because all of them can still perform good at 8.7 and 8.3. But you can also perform very good with T-55A, I could do some decent matches with it. Usually I only have a vehicle per lineup and I barely uses Backups, so I’m sure it can perform good at 8.3 because 8.7 is a Black hole for downtiers, you’re barely going any further with the T-55A, it’s rare the cases of, where I could remember, me fighting at 9.3.
Mentioning the ERA it seems something you keep repeating, 5 to 30 mm of ERA is nothing against kinetic rounds like APFSDS.
Why do you think Tiger IIs should face T-55s in AB?
Because it has the shell dispersion of a shotgun on top of the APFSDS being bad.
59A uses 100mm D-10, 59D uses 105 L7
both have worse engines, worse stabilisers and even worse turret rotation speeds and in RB the tanks that can stand a decent chance of withstanding 3BM25 around 8.0-8.7 aren’t really common picks.
I got bored of playing in the top tier, so I went back to BR 8.3 to finish crew training, which I had done in BRs above 8.3.
The ERA added to the base armor is no big deal for APFSDS which have good penetration at slopes, but the 3BM25 isn’t that good against sloped armor.
Ah yes the T-55A is totally equal to the AMX-30…
Why do you think T-55A with subpar 3BM25 should face M60A1 RISE (P) in AB?
I have used the ZTZ69 with HEATFS to easily destroy T-54s (1947/1949/1951), and even T-55As, when uptired.
ZTZ59D1 can’t handle 3BM25? Have you tried tilting the armor yet?
Some 8.3 MBTs don’t even have a dart and use APDS/HEAT.
Oh no, my vehicle struggles to lolpen vehicles a full BR higher, what a misery.
T-55A is a perfectly fine 8.3 medium tank and can surely compete with it’s contemporaries.
3 Likes
Also playing AB, you should know rangefinder is disabled, assign a button try it out in testdrive, it’s displayed by default, no rangefinder or LRF in GFAB.
DM23 has 2 mm more flat pen, better angled 190 comparted to 160 iirc;
M728/735 have sub 300mm of penetration;
at 8.0 most have no stab and or dart;
M48A2 G A2 has no stab;
All M48-m60 are as slow as T series while being way taller, most have cuppola weakspot where you can use the D APCBC round with 239mm of pen more then enough.
Angled pen only comes into play when facing higher tiered opponents, even with the “weak” 3BM25, not many can outright resist it, things like OF-40, LEO1, Cent Mk10, Vickers Mk3 and AMX-30 have nowhere near this level of protection, only M60 variants have it. Just shoot these below the rightside of the turret in the hull to hit the ready rack and watch them go poof.
T62’s 3BM4 is free and has better angled pen then 3BM3, i use it.
Would you rather have ~15mm more pen at 60 degrees, or 60mm more at 0 degrees? Your answer should be the latter.
The APFSDS has 2mm more pen.
So less turret armor and slightly more hull armor?
Which still means you can pen the hull, and it’s again a Jumbo situation where the M60A1 RISE (P) has to use terrible rounds in exchange for the armor.
Chieften mk3 is 8.7 doesnt have apfsds or a laser range finder, no 50 cal, is significantly slower all for marginaly better armour so having subpar apfsds and no rangefinder at 8.3 isn’t that crazy.
1 Like
No. T55a is good. 8.0 is leopard 1 a much worse tank, and at 8.7 you got the chieftain, also a worse tank.
What terrible rounds? M728 is a very good round
265mm of pen from a 105mm round is good? Tf