Seems you’re just a victim of your own confirmation bias, unfortunately.
I don’t see much else people complaining about the BR changes
1 Like
The T-34-85 is both very mobile and has excellent protection for its level of mobility.
Like the M4A3 it’s a great blend of armor, firepower and mobility.
The M18 isn’t all that more mobile and it achieves its mobility by being extremely vulnerable, while having no advantage in firepower.
My argument is about that the T-34-85 being is an excellent tank for 5.7 and that there’s no reason why it shouldn’t struggle against a whole BR higher heavy tank when facing them from the front.
Since that’s what the topic is about.
My original intention was not to ask T3485 to reduce its BR, but to give T3485zis53 the strength it should have, such as setting the turret as variable thickness armor like T3485d5T
As for the question of whether Tiger King H should go to 7.0, I have discussed it under another topic. It has been proven that most people believe that vehicles such as IS2 (1944) and M26 should be 0.3BR lower than Tiger King H
Germany 5.7 has just one Tiger unless you shell out for the kinda expensive premium pack. It’s not worth it to stay at 5.7 when you get another Tiger and 3 (better) Panthers at 6.0.
There’s no excellent protection, the T-34-85 is basically a light tank against anything that has a cannon at the very same BR and even in a downtier, how can you not understand that? It’s literally just a worse M4A3 76 that gets penned by any main cannon at its own BR while being forced to fight at the same level as other tanks. Flanking is the only thing it can do, but if someone ever pre-aims at it, it’s over, it doesn’t have smoke grenades or shells to retreat or get around. Only reason it excels is because of braindead Germany players with zero situational awareness and because its post-pen makes it easily one shot vehicles (if only APHE fix was implemented). It’s a tank that belongs at 5.3 or 5.0 along with the D-5T version atmost. At 5.7, it doesn’t even have an actual downtier BR, it’s forced to face uptiers.
The M18 is all that more mobile, having a miles better acceleration and being able to get to critical points on maps much faster than anyone else can. It can also use its gun depression to overcome the lack of armor. CAS is a bigger problem for it, but it’s something to consider when playing it, not something that causes the vehicle to become worse especially when it has all the tools to avoid CAS.
these are mediums tho, not comparable in role to KTs. I will admit that T-44 being at 6.7 is tad bit too high tho. Havent noticed any difference with Pershing.
Cant speak on IS2, its been ages since i last played it and how it fares in current BR placement.
I feel thats more about the fact that KT, even with incredibly bad turret in my opinion, IS unfair opponent for most 5.3 tanks.
It isnt all rainbow and sunshine with german tanks tho. Kugel and Panther II were moved to 7.0 which left the 6.7 lineups with proper AA (unless you happen to own Coelian, which lot of new players dont) and medium tank.
1 Like
One of the most undertiered vehicles, thats why.
These AA vehicles (Ostwind, Ostwind 2, Coelian) aren’t that good vs air. Considering their anemic pen they’re also bad vs. ground. Its difficult to hit a plane with that RoF, except its approaching you. Real autocannons are better: Wirbel, Sdkfz 22, Zerstorer 45, Kugelblitz.
Deal with it
1 Like
Some people prefer sustained firewpower of twin 37mms over the burst of Wirbel or Zestorer.
Im indifferent in that regard, but Coelian has one crucial advantage over Wirbel or Zerstorer - its fully enclosed and as such not easily strafable.
That alone makes it so much better for me. And its 6.7 unlike Kugel.
1 Like
The flag of a medium tank will not bring any bonus to the M26
In fact, the M26 is as bulky as many heavy tanks, with a Power to weight ratio of only 12, while the Tiger H1 is 11.3, Tiger E is 12.2, and Tiger King is 10. This shows that the M26 is not as flexible as other medium tanks.
I cannot accept the statement that heavy tanks are stronger than medium tanks. Both T44122 and IS21943 are at 6.3, while IS2 is not stronger than the former, indicating that this logic is not valid
It is normal and reasonable for tanks such as the 105 Tiger King and Black Panther II to operate at 7.0BR, as the combat effectiveness of the T29 and 105 Tiger King is similar
But this does not mean that the Tiger King H should be lower than the BR of the 105 Tiger King, because the penetration depth of the 88mm gun is only 14mm lower than that of the 105mm gun, but the loading is 5 seconds faster, indicating that the Tiger King H has better ability to deal with a large number of enemies
49mm pen or whatever it is…its absolutely bad, its rank I or rank II level. You can’t even take out tanks from the rear or side.
GRB SPAA’s are good when they’re able to put up alot lead into the flight path of any plane and when they’re useful killing at least medium tanks in an ambush role. Some even in an offensive role. The 37mm SPAAs are bad in both roles.
Other nations have these magic pen of around 70+mm you need to take on med tanks at early rank III BRs. Ostwind 1 with its 37mm @50mm pen is good at its BR of 3.3, despite already a bit too low penetration compared to others.
However, Ostwind 2 and the Coelian at their super high BRs (5.3 lol and 6.3 lol) are total trash with that little pen. 50mm pen at slow firing auto (fast single shot) is a thing around BR 3, not 6. At this BR other nations already have 70 to 100mm pen on their AA vehicles.
Consider i usually dont rank AAs by their anti-tank capability and their AA capability are what matters.
And, again, sustained firepower is prefered by some players over burst potential.
3 Likes
class of vehicle is irrelevant, its the playstyle player needs to adapt for vehicle. and pershing plays like medium.
vehicle can be strong no matter the class. but there are many classes where heavy tanks boast better protection and/or firepower for their BR than medium tanks of said BR. even with your example of T-44-122 and IS-2, they might have same firepower but IS-2 has objectively stronger armor.
Yes, I admit it
IS2 (1943) did not have strong protection, the front of the turret and the commander’s tower of the IS2 (1943), which only have a 100mm protection level, and the crotch only has a 130mm protection level
Which is more than T-44-122.
I can only say that this is controversial. If we insist on explaining it, we can only say that when IS21943 flips the body upside down, the protection is more reliable than T44122, because T44122 also has a large 200mm main armor belt on the front
After all, assuming that T44122 is covered in grass on the front, it will be difficult for the enemy to target areas with weak protection