USSR: Worst Mid-Tier Lineup?

Game Discussion General Discussion
,
1

So I’ve been playing a lot of mid-tier Ground RB at 6.0 and though USSR is usually accused of being OP (and maybe they are at high tier, idk), I feel like they might have one of most mid lineups at around that BR range, at around 5.7-6.7. Obviously, talking about major nations since there are plenty of abysmal minor nations.

To start off with, both the 5.7 t34-85 and m4 (76) are terrible medium tanks that are completely outclassed by the Panthers even considering their lower BR. They have appalling armour at that BR and mid guns. However the 76mm is far better than the Russia 85mm, due to having a faster rate of fire, far lower dispersion which can snipe weak points from over half a km away, and importantly, having a stabiliser. When I am playing German medium and heavy tanks Shermans feel quite dangerous due to their ability to snipe weakspots instantly while the Russian guns feel completely impotent, always bouncing, despite being similar in theory. A t34-85 basically has no chance against a panther against whom it has to stop completely to get a good shot off, while the Panther has good enough suspension to shoot the t34’s UFP without stopping. When I am playing a Panther t-34s are basically just a tasty snacc. Along with that, the Sherman has better far better gun depression and .50 cals, and overall is just far better even if the t34 has slightly better mobility.

Comparing heavy tanks, the IS-1 suffers from the same impotent gun (which they are still using with the 6.7 t44 for some reason) and lack of gun handling, while the armour isn’t that great. I suppose it has a slight advantage in being more trolly against higher-calibre guns than the jumbos’, but it still suffers from large weakspots like the LFP and the turret cheeks which can be penned by relatively small-calibre guns. Even if it does the dumb reverse trick, it still leaves the turret to be shot at. On the other hand, the Tiger and Jumbo have far fewer weakspots when angled correctly and have far better effective firepower; even the 75mm Jumbo is dominant in CQC due to its ability to quickly snipe barrels and such, and the 88mm KwK36 is a great all-round gun with a longer effective range. And if they go hull-down, especially the jumbo and the Tiger E, they are basically invulnerable to a probably the majority of guns they are likely to face.

As for the IS-2s, they gun has good pen of course but it’s really hampered by the reload and gun handling, which really does not compensate adequately. Who exactly wants to play the IS-2 (1944) when you could play a King Tiger? If anyone has watched Spookston’s latest video on the IS-2, having a powerful gun does not protect against your shell getting Gaijin’d due to the inconsistent and broken volumetric mechanics, and in that case you really don’t want such a slow reload.

As for light tanks, the pt-76b is just a terrible little thing. I suppose it has a low skill floor due to being able to pen anything but it has a terrible speed for a light tank and the shell does basically no damage so the skill ceiling is really low as well. At least the USSR has better TDs than USA but is completely outmatched by Germany’s TD lineup.

Overall I think that Germany probably has the best mid-tier lineup, though USA might surpass it if you include all the CAS as well. Germany has 4 versatile medium heavy tanks at 6.0 as well as a plethora of TDs and SPAA to support. USA has good light tanks which have good synergy with their CAS spam, as well as their jumbos which are extremely dominant in CQC. The USA lacks the number of ground vehicles compared to Germany but if you include CAS and maybe some premiums/backups it is very strong.

When I am playing a game as Germany, fighting with USA against USSR feels like an auto-win, as usually the russia players just rush in and die. When you face USA you have to contend with a million light tanks taking up all the good positions before you can get to them and then spotting you, which alerts the 10 million CAS planes to you, which they spam in the second wave.

Anyway not really making this thread cause I want to make a strong point or have things changed; just wanted to state my observations.

1 Like
2

I personally found Russia to not be outstanding in any field and had given up grinding it at around ~6.3 - but none of the higher rank vehicles were particularly fetching to me, either.

For all the kvetching on the forums (usually from very delusional US players) - Russia feels very mediocre all-around.

3

As a dedicated War Thunder Sweden main, I’d like to point out that Russia’s dominance is largely due to its numerical superiority. The perception of Russia being overpowered can largely be attributed to the poorly implemented and buggy volumetric system, which is yet to be rectified. This system struggles with armor complexities, such as nooks and crannies and overlapping armor, leading to odd behaviors. This confusion is often what frustrates players facing Russian tanks. If this issue were addressed, it would become apparent that most Soviet tanks are actually quite mediocre.

after that I know people would go after German tanks being OP since they would perform extraordinarily Better since their cannon would pretty much lol-pen anything since they chells wont be as affected by a random piece of sider skirt or etc…

Swedish tanks have never been favoured by the volumetric system since we don’t have any armour to begin with, huh.

3 Likes
4

This is one reason, I feel like that across the board, russian has the best support vehicles in the form of planes and later on helicopters.

The PE-2s are incredible frontline bombers and their Yak fighters are absolute UFOs below 3000m, where most of the fighting happens in GRB.

Their anti air is insane too. Fast firing 25mms and 30mms on relatively mobile chassis with the abilitly to kill most mediums and even some heavies.

This pattern continues to the higher ranks too. The Pantsir and the 2S6 are top of the class anti air wise, the KA-5x and Mi-28 NM are the pinnacle of helis in the game, being able to kill both air and ground at an insane efficiency. The SU25-SM3 is the arguably most broken shit ever.

Coming back to OPs post, the soviet lineup is decent. The Mediums are good all-rounders with sometimes really trolly armor, the heavies have rounds with very good pen and massive fillers. SPAA is great. TDs are decent. Nothing russia has is top of the line, but everything is at worst average bar some very specific exceptions.

5

And volumetric is a thing that only/predominately affects Russian tanks because…?

I’ve had Western vehicles eat my shells via volumetric just as many, if not more times than Russian vehicles? Just the fact that you seem to have gotten multiple likes very quickly further reinforces my belief that there are many delusional players on the forum (especially surrounding the USSR in-game).

The Leopard 1’s mantlet is one of, if not the most common “shell shattering” volumetric black holes for APDS, for example.

Here are some videos that I’ve recorded myself with more examples of how Western vehicles have design elements that specifically affect volumetric - which is the exact opposite of your, frankly, insane connotations:

Here’s a video of me shooting a Challenger 1’s side armor with my 105mm DTW shell. It’s a ~500mm penetrating shell, only slightly weaker than M900 - the strongest 105mm shell in the game and one I find to even spall more than 125mm at times:

I shot his side armor, and because there’s a “lower side” and a protruding “upper side” for the superstructure, the resulting seam between the armor is a massive volumetric hole. This is also very prominent on German Panthers and Tigers, for example.

And Russian tanks at high tiers don’t have this, and only have a single plate for their side armor, with no separation. Meaning they do not benefit from this volumetric oversight. Again - the exact opposite of your implication.

1 Like
6

Here’s another video of me shooting an Abrams directly into the side (with the same 500mm penetrating APFSDS), but because of his turret ring overlapping with the side armor, inducing volumetric bugs - 99% of my shell’s penetrating power is lost and I don’t even kill one crew member. And I then die.

Not only do you constantly see the same delusional American mains complaining about the turret ring, making this video quite funny - but the Abrams has an integrated turret ring that overlaps with the armor, a design element not present on Russian high tier vehicles. Which have one simple armor plate, that doesn’t induce nowhere near as many volumetric bugs.

I frankly don’t think you’ll ever actually change your mind and correct your mistakes, as many “western”-oriented posters are quite adamant in their false beliefs - no doubt because the “russian bias” mythos is constantly reinforced online through social channels such as reddit, youtube (and its personalities), and this very forum.

But I just find it very sad.

1 Like
7

Russian Mid-tier, mostly from 5.7 to 6.7 then especialy the hell BR 9.0 - 11.0.
The lack of penetration and “OK-ish” mobility force the Russian player has to play carefully and focus on more positioning but most of them bring the whole rush-B mindset from the 3.7 - 5.0 BR (since KV-1 and T-34 armor is strong and quite good mobility at that BR).

This br bracket is the zone where good player can do exceptional while newbie just suck at it, plus now they are now need to learn how to shoot the weakspots (which is the thing newbie suck at it and never learn, they will switch tech-tree rather then improving the skill), plus this is where CAS from other nation starts to being overwhelm while Russian only acces to good CAS loadout with “Strike Aircraft” rather then other just bring fighter and still has better or the same loadout (AU-1, P-47, Wyvern, …), also, the AA in USSR TT at this BR range is TD and not even “closed-hatch” like (Skink, Wirblewind, Ostwind, …).

Plus, M18 everywhere, they just rushes cap, jump into AU-1/AM-1 then play both CAS and AA roles for the US.

Also, with the BR decompression and volume metric, IS-2 (both varitant) now being a joke, no light tank, no good mobility to rush cap, …

But from my view, suffering at this BR improve the skill a lot, it forces you to play passively and get better at positioning rather then runnning around, 122/85 APHE still decent with the filler and angle pen, allow us to flank better (after crawling through the whole bunch of FOX, M18, AML-90, …), bring this playstyle untill 11.0, then we can rush again with T-80 till top-tier.

1 Like
8

look, I’m not denying it. its just what I noticed. playing mainly Sweden means that I mostly get one tapped and i mainly face Soviet tanks. Thanks for the info but please just chill Jesus, I’m not all knowing.

Or i do notice that on the turret of the panthers where i shoot my APDS from my Strv 74, and nothing.

My main vehicle for Sweden is the Ikv 103 its small, fast and has a gun that is effective until 7.7 or so.
I usually have the Ikv 103 at 5.0 - 7.0 because its HEAT has no issue dealing with most things, when im playing that thing its often. Hit = kill because no matter how great the enemy think their armour is that my HEAT will lol pen it. Only thing that sucks playing the Ikv 103 is the lack of a MG

9

what about IS tanks? feels like just the smallest angle on those things will just delete any HEAT round and take 0 damage
Hell, they tend to survive a direct hit from Sturmtiger’s 380mm sometimes

10

I’ve also played Sweden. Up to 5.7. Which is the BR I hope you’re referring to.
As Swedish tanks are very survivable and have very good armor from 8.0 onwards. Just the Strv 103 comes to mind.

You’re talking about ONE vehicle that you’re playing - the Ikv 103. One of the most overpowered vehicles in the entire game because it’s extremely fast and has 400mm HEATFS (not HEAT) at 4.0. A shell that will penetrate everything. It isn’t affected by survivability or reload because it’s an open-top tank destroyer with 8mm of armor.

And the Swedish Strv EH at 2.7 is one of the most heavily armored vehicles at that BR.
So you’re clearly not talking about low tier. And it’s not mid-high tier. And the Swedish top tier is the most armored vehicle in the game (Strv 122B+).

1 Like
11

Yea, i play the Ikv 103 at 5.7, then bring the Trumpet gun. or Spj and use it standing behind a hill on a target far away and smile in satisfaction when i finally knock it out

12

while it’s quite armored , it really doesn’t matter when the majority of vehicles can actually pen those very spots with ease
55mm of armor doesn’t really protect against 80-100mm of pen usually

13

Put this on the start next time so I dont have to read that much

14

Wouldnt say it’s horrible, for the most part teammates are.

Out of all of them PT76B is probably the worst vehicle to pick.
If you have problems with Panthers you could pick ISU’s, or go to SU-100 just a BR higher, it’s wonderful.

15

The T-34-85s are excellent tanks, I’m having a blast playing the 2 Chinese ones, which are identical, except one has a 12.7mm DShK.

The gun is great, reload is decent, mobility is good, and armour is not amazing, but can occasionally bounce shots. I’ve had some excellent 8-10 kill games with them, sometimes without deaths.

I have no idea why you think they’re “terrible”. Maybe they just don’t suit your play style?