The T20 does not deserve a 6.0 BR

i mean, im going to say it, gaijin hates the entire U.S Tech tree.

1 Like

Yeah, a lot of American tanks in general have a BR that are simply way too high, whereas a lot of German vehicles that are equal or even superior have *very *cushy BR’s by comparison.

Let’s look at the T20 at 6.0 first, since this is what the thread is actually about. It’s got a 4.7 gun, so that’s not why it’s at 6.0. Mobility? Nothing special, so it’s not that. Armour? Useless at that BR. So why is it at 6.0? Especially since the Panther is better than it in every single way that matters. Sorry, but the T20 simply isn’t a 6.0 tank. It’s just not.

As I said, a lot of American tanks are too high in BR. There’s also things like the T25, which let’s be real, isn’t worlds better than the Tiger H1, yet it finds itself at a whole 1.0 BR higher. This applies to some extent to the M26 too, and that’s at 6.3 as well, or 6.7(!) in AB, then again, there’s been a lot of weird BR changes in AB that don’t make a lot of sense, like the T-44, which was completely fine at 6.3 before they inexplicably put it to 6.7, and now it’s a lot less useful.


Panther doesn’t have a -18kph reverse speed. In fact it’s one of the worst.
It also doesn’t have a low speed stabilizer and 6s reload rate.

While the acceleration is worse than the M4A3 the reverse speed and lower profile is a big benefit.

Again completely wrong. The T25 improves uppon the Tiger H1 in almost any regard.
No cupola weakspot, fast turret traverse, more frontal armor, incredible reverse speed and a powerfull APCR round that is actually usable.

A Tiger can’t compete at 6.3 because it has no means to deal with any +6.3 vehicles on even ground. They all outperform it in any category. The T25 is at least even in some categories, better in others.

1 Like

I don’t think M4/T26 excels at sniping, but it is mediocre for sure. One thing to note, that thing has to stay hidden in a hull down position, because it’s hull armor is far from being effective, which means you are almost like a slow light tank.

When I think again, the whole tank screams of mediocrity, nothing in particular stands out.
No stabilization, on-par gun handling, reload and mobility, meh armor, okay-ish shell. I don’t see a single reason why it should be a BR step higher than Panther A, that is just hilarious.

No reason why IS-3 should be at 7.3.
At 7.0 - 8.0 it can and will see many 90/105mm HEAT slingers that will basically negate it’s only advantage, armor.
You will just need to cope with the fact every tank is strong in full downtiers and weak in full uptiers, that’s how the game works.


What’s that suppose to mean? What is a light tank in your definition?

The Panther has 100mm armor at the gun mantled, the M4/T26 has like 150-200mm.
The 90mm is also much more deadly than the Panthers 75mm.
Mobility is practically the same.
The Panther excels in long range fighting due to the strong hull armor, the M4/T26 when it’s hull down.
Other than that the 90mm is better because of it’s high post-pen damage, making it more likely to take out a vehicle in one shot.

So the M4/T26 is the better vehicle.


How many medium tanks at 4.3 (not even 3.7, but 4.3) can frontally bounce a Dicker Max round?

I know this question sounds like a non sequitur, but it isn’t. Most medium tanks are balanced in a way that makes them frontally vulnerable to many threats at their BRs, and especially to derp-gun tank destroyers.

The T-44 gets a rare reprieve by the standards of medium tanks, at least when it comes to conventional, war-time ammunition. Its upper front plate is strong enough to bounce Jagdtiger APHE rounds, unless it is completely unangled. That is a lot of frontal protection for a medium tank. You already think the Panthers are under-BR’d, so let me ask you this: what BR would you put them at, if their upper front plates were immune to the IS-2 or Su-100? Because that would be the nearest equivalent. I doubt you’d be happy leaving them at 6.3 in that circumstance…

The T-44’s gun does begin to struggle at that BR. However, it must be noted that in relation to its extraordinary frontal protection, it retains incredible mobility. That’s two out of three criteria where it’s a great tank. If the gun was also great, it would be almost unstoppable.

The survivability is enhanced by the fact that, while the LFP is a pretty reliable one hit kill, the turret weakspots are often the subject of volumetric shenanigans. The end result is that the T-44 is bad at killing stuff frontally, but is also not trivial to kill frontally, and it has the tools to flank competently, which is what it excels at.

It’s fine at 6.7.

As for Panthers, I think the A is undertiered, the G is fine where it is, and the F is overtiered. Panther A should definitely be higher than it is.

But, while good, Panthers are also not as good as people who play against them, make them sound.

Exactly. Panthers excel at getting quickly to a good firing position and then utilising distance, but this is rarely an option in WT. Most frequent ways to die in a Panther are: a bomb you lack the mobility to dodge (you have a much easier time of surviving CAS in Tigers), and the constant track-barrel torture that comes with facing tanks with a STAB.

Who gets the first shot and lands it, usually dictates the engagement. And this is one area where the Panthers’ weaknesses are emphasised.

Really, in battlefield role terms, Panthers are mobile tank destroyers, and Tiger Is are the true mediums of the German tree at those BRs.

The reason why the A is undertiered (imho) is precisely that its amazing turret rotation and great mobility minimise those weaknesses.

1 Like

But the Panther A is pretty much identical to the Panther G, in case you haven’t noticed that it’s engined was nerfed to the the same 600 HP like the G and F. Turret rotation speed is now identical.

1 Like

Damn. You can tell I’ve only played 5.7 occasionally in the last few months (and that I almost never bother with the F, so lacked the metric of comparison).

Even with the engine governor being uniform for all three, I would still rather take the A and G over the F at 6.0 any day, to be honest. I really dislike the F.

I really like the F :)
But maybe more for historical reasons than actual performance.

If the M4/T26 was in the German tree, it would be 5.0 or 5.3. The Panther mantlet may be thinner but is heavily rounded and constantly eats even 90mm AP.

The M4/T26 is taller and far more wobbly than the Panther, is flat out missing ammunition it should have and the ammunition it does have is nerfed. There is nothing about this tank that justifies a 6.0 BR.


Well, light tank should be something that’s light obviously, meaning it trades armor for speed. Although M4/T26 has armor (numerically speaking), it’s efficiency is pretty low, since common AP rounds at it’s BR will cut straight through it. That’s why I said that.
On the other hand, Panther A has way better frontal armor, while also having on-par mobility.

True, but for post-pen effect to take place, you firstly need to pen your enemy, and that’s what 75mm does better.

One thing to note, Panthers don’t have as cramped interior so plenty of times when I get through it’s turret weakspot with 90mm round, I kill only 3 crew members. Also, it has access to smoke grenades which helps in tricky situations to conceal his already small weakspots.

You don’t need long range to have effective hull armor with Panther, already at ~300m it will stop most rounds fired from other medium tanks. So even at closer, CQC ranges, it’s hull will be able to eat some rounds.

As I said earlier, those tanks should be equal in BR every day of the week.


Well, that’s a load of bull.

Yeah but at least it can get penetrated by weaker shells.

Irrelevant to the current performance. Even though I would like to have that sweet 90mm APCR to take out German 6.7 vehicles from the front.

Why not? It’s practically a Tiger E turret with better traverse speed on a more mobile chassis.
On one hand a stabilized 76mm is not enough firepower for 6.0 but on the other a 90mm is also not good enough?

1 Like

I would much rather have strong hull and trolly turret than paper hull and strong turret. With latter, you are a much easier target to kill overall.

Doesn’t change the fact that the 90mm is much more deadly, resulting in getting more kills.

It’s absolutely true. The VK 3006 is at a lower BR than the Panther D, despite being more mobile. Meanwhile, the T25 is at the same BR than the M26.

The M4/T26 is not slightly inferior to the M26 or T25. It’s worse in every way but turret armor.

The Tiger E is as good as it possibly can be. It has its APCR. It has its large filler shell. It has its upgraded shell. It has smoke launchers. Its mantlet armor is very effective against the majority of tanks it faces. Angling its hull makes it strong against most tanks it faces. It’s faster forward. It’s faster in reverse. It has neutral steering. It’s also a relatively stable platform.


I assume you mean VK 30.02 (M)?

Either way, I’d like to also point out that while the VK 30.02 (M) is more mobile than the Panther D, the same does not apply to any meaningful degree when it comes to the T25 and M26. The T25 has neutral steering and a faster reverse, sure, but the M26’s reverse speed is already plenty good, and the T25 actually has worse acceleration than the M26 up to about 35 km/h.

That’s not to mention that the T25’s mantlet is only as good as it is right now because it’s copy pasted from the M26’s, and there is already a bug report on how it should be roughly 25.4 mm thinner.

1 Like

Which is practically useless. At which point are you really going to use it that would be a game changer?
I had a game where I used the M36 to destroy two Ferdinands with APCR. What’s the equivalent with the Tiger? There’s almost never a case where you would load APCR over APHE.

Yet is hardly reaches that speed because it’s underpowered and has lower acceleration.
Why even make that argument? It’s like saying my bicycle can go 50kph downhill.
It’s in no world an argument for the Tiger having a superior trait over the M4/T26.

1 Like

My two cents on the Tiger’s armor is that when engaging it from the front the entire bottom half of the tank is shielded by the composite armor called a transmission. This results in most american midtiers having to aim at a pretty small UFP with overlapping armor and volumetric fuckery. This makes the Tiger an even bigger nuisance in medium to long range.

The T20 doesnt have a frontally mounted transmission to catch bad shots. But most german midtiers always has any weak lower plate protected by the transmission. They’re also incredibly stable gun platforms that can point click with ease.


I don’t deny that, 90mm has better damage potential.
Only problem is, you’ll have to be a perfect shot, while also not getting trolled, just to be able to effectively deal with Panther hordes.
On the other hand, Panther can deal with M4/T26 hordes much easier, simply aim at or around center mass and it’s a kill, almost no aiming is required. This is why I believe Panther is a better vehicle overall for vast majority of situations.