i am sorry gaijin, but please stop putting vehicles on br’s they simply arnt meant to be on.
its already a stretch to say that the t-34-100 is a 6.3 vehicle. yes, the 100mm helps alot with allowing it to tackle its opponents. because the 100mm at this point is neccesary, to tackle tis opponents. the t-34-85 taran will meet almost the same vehicles as the t-34-100, yet its the 85mm. what is even worse, its the 85mm without the 367 shell, while chronologically it could receive this shell.
its not meant for 6.0. a t-34 should not be forced to take on tiger 2’s. that 45mm of armor simply wont stop anything. the 85mm has to aim for weakspots, while even lower caliber spaa’s can easily counter this tank at that br.
please reconsider it, and simply keep it at 5.7. that stabilizer is only sufficient enough for inside city maps. close quarters. half the time, this tank will get sniped while trying to reach a vantage point.
2 Likes
Then the T34-85 needs to go down as the stabilizer is an advantage, so yes it should stay at 6.0 because the t34-85 is fine at 5.7
11 Likes
Nonsense. A standard T-34-85 is an amazing vehicle at 5.7, if anything one could argue it is undertiered, absolutely not overtiered. Judging by this fact, the exact same vehicle, but stabilized cannot be any lower than 6.0. Having a stabilizer makes a massive difference so it absolutely can’t be at the same BR as standard T-34-85.
Honestly, as you can see by the Taran devblog post, vast majority of players guessed it would end up at 6.3 where it wouldn’t be a weak vehicle at all either, so i guess you should be happy with where it is right now.
6 Likes
skill issue. the normal T34-85 is very much worthy of that BR so a stabilised one more than is capable of it.
4 Likes
the standard 5.7 T-34/8s are good for their BR. BR-365 is nasty round that ignores angles.
With short stop stab, T-34/85 will be better than M4A3E8.
3 Likes
i agree is should be 6.3 same as t20
2 Likes
6.3 would be too high tbh, only if would get BR-367 that T-44 has, but im not sure if that would be out of timeframe.
Then Panther and M4 shermans with the 76 need to go down for balance.
1 Like
t20 is at 6.3 so taran should be also 6.3, itsa tank that goes 55kmh has a stabiliser and a aphe with 164g of tnt with insane angle pen, t20 has a better realod but a much worse aphe
1 Like
Why should a notably worse tank be the same BR as a more mobile tank with better gun depression?
better aphe, better armor (more angle = bigger chance for ricochet)
short stop stab, same as Shermans.
its also better platform than T-34/85
t20 has the same stab as the taran, with worse aphe and worse armor
indeed it has.
its workable, and has better reload than T-34/85.
T20 armor is irrelevant as much as that of T-34/85.
What matter is that T20 has 10° of gun depression, as opposed to T-34/85s 5°, meaning T20 does not have to expose itself as much on hilly terrain.
T20 can work around its shortcomings precisely due to gun depression, something T-34/85 wouldnt be able to.
T-34-100 is fine at 6.3. No stretch at all.
1 Like