For years, it has been sitting at 8.3 without a proper shell, unlike the T55A (which it struggles to penetrate) with its APDS. It cannot penetrate the T-54 at point-blank range, while its chamber mates very often hit their targets, reaching the XM803. T-72, and similar tanks, he can’t do anything to them because he simply can’t penetrate them. If they gave him a gun like the ZBM-8, he would feel confident in his BR, or give him APFSDS that he could fire. He is weak for his br.
Ammunition, weapons or anything that can be changed without being considered ahistorical is up to the developers to be implemented or removed from a certain vehicle on the premisse of balance. I don’t know why are you complaining and comparing Type 69 II A, because it’s technically superior to the T-55A, in raw values its APDS is better than T-55A’s APDS-FS and on top of that T-55A own’s APDS is better than its APDS-FS.
Напишу на русском, бпс у 69IIа пробивает 101мм под 60° чего не хватает чтобы пробить даже т-54 с 10м, ЗБМ-8 пробивает 127мм под 60°, каморник уже не панацея на 8.3, нет возможности противостоять хм-803 и его аналогам против которых часто играешь, единственное чем он лучше т55а это лазерный дальномер, ему нужно улучшить бпс или дать ОБПС с повышением бр
Every time it’s added as a vehicle for sale for the Chinese New Year, I ask the same question on the forum: when are they going to add its historical APDS-FS? So far, I haven’t received any explanation as to why not. I suppose it’s because the developers are lazy and don’t want to waste time on a vehicle that’s only sold once or twice a year by collectors. Developers don’t waste time on vehicles that don’t generate large amounts of money for them.
As you correctly point out, it’s a BR 8.3 with 7.7mm to, at most, 8.0mm ammunition, when with its historical APDS-FS it could be a competent BR 8.3.
An interesting point is that this tank was for a time restricted only to the Chinese server, and its best ammunition was the Soviet 3BM25. When they made it available for purchase, they removed that ammunition (I imagine for historical purposes), but they did not add the APDS-FS that this model would historically have for export.
the Chinese on the M1000A1 of the T-55M under license and under the name DWT2-100
The problem is that it’s Chinese, not Russian. There have been bug reports for years, but the developers don’t want to add this shell for the Type-69IIA
Might be in the minority but as an owner of the tank, I rather it not get the APFSDS round as that would cause it to have a much higher BR. IMO its fine where it is with the munitions it has.
If you want APFSDS from a Type 69, why not just buy the Type 69 II G?
I highly doubt that the APDS-FS round it would historically carry had the same or greater penetration than the Type 83. As a colleague mentioned above, the calculated penetration of the APDS-FS Type 59 would be 311mm at 0º and 0 meters, while the APDS-FS Type 83 penetrates 338mm at 0º and 10 meters. This indicates that, even with the same penetration modifier, this Type 56 would penetrate around 168mm at 60º and 10 meters, which is perfectly adequate for the BR it’s currently in, carrying obsolete ammunition for the BR8.3.
The BRs need to be reworked; the T-55M in 9.0 should be updated to 8.7, and the Type-69IIA with the new APFSDS from 8.3 to 8.7. The advantage of the Type-69IIG in 9.0 would be the ERA plates.
Totally fair, I agree with you but this comes again to developer’s decision, I wish War Thunder were 100% accurate to their vehicles capabilities and so on but most of these characteristics are cut from the final product based on “It’s for balance purposes”.
If it is a 59 type apfsds, there is no need to adjust the BR
He is only superior to Type 71 and inferior to 3BM25
My calculation has errors, so I cannot calculate the penetration depth data of tungsten head APFSDS, so I can only calculate the full tungsten projectile. 311 is only the theoretical maximum value, and the actual value may be between 280-310
not really, its APDS is the worst one among usual APDS. with only 101mm pen in 60°, meaning it can’t pen T series tank’s UPF, while other APDS or APFSDS don’t have this problem.
