No, it was designed to utilize existing powers but be better for fighting Panthers, but expectations were not met. So it wasnt factually used and was just a step to T-54, just like MBT-70 was a step to M1 Abrams.
"great players gravitate to germany, thus all the “germany suffers” threads. Hehe.
1 Like
And therein lies the problem.
“In terms of performance, the Allies play with vehicles that are far superior (even though counterparts exist).”
You are lying, plain and simple.
I shouldn’t even bother explaining anything to someone who puts the Tiger I and the EBR 1954 in the same category.
The same goes for those who consider the Yak-3—that monstrosity—to be on par with the Bf 109 F-4 series or the P-51 C-10.
And it’s pointless to talk to anyone who equates the Leopard A4—produced in 1985 and capable of using 1989-era ammunition with over 420mm of penetration—with the T-90A, which entered service in 2004 and uses 3B60 ammunition with 580mm of penetration.
I mean, it’s just unbelievable—the guy is actually trying to argue about BR (Battle Rating). Allahım, give me strength!
Through the discussion above, other players—whether they are forum members or not—have been made aware of certain issues within the game.
If there are others who think like I do, please show your support. I will not remain silent in the face of such injustice.
Have a good day.
Main problem of “history lesson” is that it makes him look like he wants the “arms race” so it would be unbearable to play the game at some ratings to then be OP at others. It stands directly against game balance as is.
Maybe you should think more rather than pray. Maybe then you’ll understand balance.
So do the Germans. You think German vehicles don’t get to travel back in time for balance reasons? The Puma does! So does the Pz IV J! So does the JPz 4-5, and the LeK M41, and the PzH 2000, and many many more!
You are conspicuously silent on the fact that Pz 38ts sit well below the BRs of their Barbarossa opposition…
Bad example tho. Those are far less preferable than their WW2 BR companions. Tho… That itself is the point.
It works both ways T-80U is at 11.7 but it was produced in 1985.
In what way are the G-2 and G-14 at absurdly low battle rating lol???
What? They are at the same BRs as German and American equivalents (P-47D-30 is actually 0.3 higher because of air brakes).
Yeah, nobody asking them, but their “suffering” is always everywhere.
1 Like
Folks, it seems things got a bit confusing because I didn’t use any commas.
I mean, you could have figured that out, too.
Folks, the solution to this is simple—at least when it comes to tank battles.
If the game’s World War II-themed setting includes AMX models—which feature 1950s technology, superior mobility, faster aiming, and far better armor penetration—to face off against Tiger IIs,
then you should bring back the Panther II, the 37mm anti-aircraft gun, and the 10.5cm Tiger II variants.
In simulation battles, they’re essentially playing with us like a cat plays with a mouse.
We’re being subjected to absolute torture by tanks like the M48, early T-54 models, and vehicles that are effectively on the level of a Leopard 1.
To hell with these tanks that have autoloader systems.
Honestly, I don’t even bother using tanks in simulation battles where Tiger II(H)s are present; I just hop in a Ju 288 and do some bombing instead. Every time I try to use a tank, I end up being hunted down by these 1950s-era machines. It feels like I’m trying to fight a Leopard 1 while driving a Tiger II.
Instead of adding all sorts of nonsensical vehicles to the game, focus on balancing things properly.
It’s truly shameless that vehicles which entered service during the Cold War are being pitted against tanks from the Tiger I era.
And don’t even get me started on the ammunition—that’s a whole other mess.
While we’re playing with a Leopard A4 (a 1985 model) using DM23 ammo—which entered service in 1989 and has 420mm of penetration—the Soviet tech tree features the T-90A (which entered service in 2004) using 3BM60 ammunition, which was introduced in 2016 and boasts 580mm of penetration. Let me explain the advantage here: while one tank has the benefit of being able to land a damaging shot immediately—without needing to carefully aim—the poor Leopard A4 is forced to target the lower hull. This provides a massive advantage in-game; imagine, for instance, the Leopard 1A5 destroying a tank from 2.5 kilometers away—you’re scoring damage with your very first shot, almost at random, without any need for precise aiming.
There are other models as well, but I won’t go into all of them.
As for your arguments—the game developers made a decision to remove “paper tanks” (theoretical or never-built designs), right?
Sure, it’s one thing for Cold War-era vehicles to dominate the German tech tree, but that shouldn’t mean that equivalent, comparable models are forbidden from being added.
If that’s the case, then why not remove the Stalingrad, Kronstadt, and Sevastopol ships from the game as well?
To hell with your double standards.
Seems like you’re forgetting the mobility difference between the two.
If you’ve ever played and compared those two vehicles with the Sd.Kfz.234/2 even once, you should be able to tell the difference. No… even if you’ve never played them, looking at the specs alone should make it perfectly clear.
The BA-11 only manages around 60km/h forwards and backwards, its 45mm APHEBC penetrates67mm at 100m, the gun depression is only 8°, and the machine gun has a mere 63 rounds per magazine.
The Sd.Kfz.234/2 Puma reaches a maximum of 90km/h both forwards and backwards. The 5cm KwK 39 Pzgr(APC) penetrates 101mm at 100m. The explosive filler in that APC is only 0.1g less than the 45mm APHEBC. On top of that, the ballistics are excellent, it has 10° of gun depression, and the MG42 carries 150 rounds per magazine with a very high rate of fire.
1 Like
There is no WW2-themed setting in War Thunder. It’s a vehicular combat shooter with historical vehicles, but the scenarios are not historical.
Look at where you can use the Puma in SB and against what opposition. Curiously you’re not complaining about that!
1 Like
Frankly, all Soviet tanks have poor reverse mobility—
much like the Panther series.
Interesting.
However, the inclusion of this tank—equipped with this specific ammunition—is blatantly unfair, especially given that other nations have their own counterparts.
I’ve explained this as simply as possible in my previous posts: using T-90As or any vehicle equipped with the 3BM60 round (which entered service in 2016!), you can penetrate a Leopard 1A5 from the front profile, regardless of the angle. The A4 variants, by contrast, don’t have that luxury; they would have to land a precise hit on the lower hull or the gun mantlet.
I’ll admit, the Puma is a solid vehicle. I suppose, from your perspective, it’s simply unacceptable—how could Gaijin do such a thing? How could they place such a capable, modern vehicle in this BR range for simulation battles? After all, the best and most superior equipment should always be on the Allied side, right?
Honestly, I’d actually welcome seeing equivalent vehicles pitted against the Puma; it would make the gameplay more competitive.
And, if you take a look, there are already French, British, and American counterparts available—feel free to log in and check for yourself.
Besides, the Puma is a light vehicle; you can shred it from the side even with 12.7mm machine guns. There are plenty of moments where I find myself wondering, “Maybe I should have just played a Panzer III instead.”
As for the Soviet tech tree—let’s just hold off on that, shall we? We’re already getting thoroughly beaten by Yak-3s, T-90As, T-44s, Yak-1Bs, and those T-34s that seem to perform well beyond their historical era.
In my opinion, you’re being dishonest.
At the very least, these factors should be taken into consideration when it comes to simulation battles.
This thread is literally nothing but fallacies, biases, and hypocrisy. OP just wants anything that he hates fighting to go up in BR while using “historical MM” as an excuse for it while knowing absolutely nothing about history and proving to be a skill issue wheraboo.
OP, pick a time. I will fight as many of your Pz.38(t)s as you can throw at me for 25 minutes straight in a KV-1E without dying once. I dare you to try.
2 Likes
NAH-NAH-NAH-NAH-NAH
No effin way you said that AMX-13 and AMX M4 at 7.0 are SO OP that german 6.7 cant fight them
Autoloader that has barely faster reload than Panthers and Tigers, cut aim angles and armor pen that is basically same but without APHE, and say that is SO MUCH SUPERIOR than Germans is so much german main thing to say.
How exactly the AMX-13 which is worse than Panther A in all ways but mobility at 7.0 is somehow “germany suffer” here?!
How exactly would that… aw eff it its just a rage bait 100%
So the MAUS should use their eyes and have information about its surroundings.
…at the battle ratings that ARE of Leopard 1, and having the Raketenautomat and DF105 there - torture is FAR FAR from the truth.
suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuure. And then get “Fuel tank hit” and oneshot in return.
1 Like
What ? Leo2A4 can’t pen Leo1A5 front plate ?
The suffering ends for germany with t72
What a beast of a tank!