Why is the SU-122 br 2.3? Should have at least 3.0 Relative to comparable machines like the StuH 42 G or M4A3 (105), the SU-122 has much better armor on all sides, it’s hard to penetrate from literally every side, not to mention the roof, and still has a br of 2.3, this is some joke.
Unlike the SU-122, the StuH 42 G and M4A3 (105) can be destroyed, they have some weakspots or flat plates, not to mention that these vehicles can be pierced from above.
This is literally a joke, the M4A3 (105) has 38mm of armor on the side, it will pierce anything there, and it has 10, 19 and 25 mm on the roof, it can at least destroy the engine, StuH 42 G has an even worse situation, because it has 11-17mm of armor on the roof. Now let’s check the SU-122, 20mm of armor on the whole roof, also on the engine, even on the engine it has extra plates in some places, also it has 30mm of armor there.
Of course, you should keep in mind that the physics in War Thunder are broken, and you can see it perfectly on the example of the Pz. IV, which once easily pierced the T-34 anywhere, now ricochets often occur, and from an unangled hull.
Also, the 45mm of armor all over the SU-122 makes this vehicle hard to penetrate, especially when at an angle, and remember this vehicle has a br 2.3. In addition, it has a HEAT round with a penetration of 160mm, StuH 42 G has a maximum of 115mm of penetration and the M4A3 (105) 130mm of penetration. There is a difference in reload, but let’s not balance tanks only through the prism of reload time.
The SU-122 should receive at least BR 3.0, just like vehicles similar to it, which are still much easier to destroy. I remind you that the SU-122 has 45mm of armor on each side and angles, the M4A3 (105) has 38mm on the sides and rear and 50mm on the sides and rear of the turret and the StuH 42 G 30mm on the sides and rear are also much easier to destroy than SU-122 a have a foreign higher br.
It’s just a bizarre situation and it’s worth mentioning that this SU-122 is literally SPAM on br 1.3-3.3.
It really handles higher br vehicles so it should eventually get a higher br, 3.0 so it doesn’t spoil the fun for new players as much.
google tłumacz był używany na potęgę
lepiej tak niż pisać po polsku żeby ludzie z innych państw nie zrozumieli
The 105 Sherman is 100 times better than the SU-122, they are not even comparable, the Sherman also has better armor, faster reload and a .50 cal which makes it one of the most versatile tanks of its BR.
Guess what, the SU-122 has a huge flat plate where the gun is and has bulges around said gun which only have a 20 degree angle. Also the 4mm extra roof armor argument is one of the worst ive seen on these forums.
There is a reason why the SU-122 dropped from 3.0 down to 2.3 in the first place.
105 sherman is easily the best tank at its BR and should have been moved up ages ago. Its frontal armor is either heavily resistand or invulnerable to almost every vehicle of its BR and its very maneuverable with a gun that reliably generates OHKs and doesn’t struggle vs most upteired armor.
SU-122 is laughably OP too. Literal definition of ‘press W’ vehicle. Gun is absurdly strong and your frontal armor is nearly invulnerable to half the vehicles you fight.
Its engine and weight mean you can do this to almost every vehicle of this BR. If you fail a shot, push them and their turret leans back so it can’t depress into any weak point and can’t get away. Sure you break your barrel on shot, but you get the kill every time.
I don’t know if we play the same game, the M4A3 (105) was on 2.7 and now it is on 3.0 much easier to destroy than the SU-122
The reload speed alone can’t tell if a vehicle is good or bad because there are all other aspects, like the armor that the Sherman may have better from the front, but honestly it’s a small difference, the most significant are the sides and the rear, and also, as I mentioned, the roof.
The SU-122 sure has some very small weakspots like the Sherman machine gun port, but it’s quite a small weakspot, and we’re talking about a vehicle with a br 2.3 all the time, so most of the time it comes across vehicles with small caliber cannons, which are often not able to destroy the gun breech, barrel or track with one shot.
Also the 4mm extra roof armor argument is one of the worst ive seen on these forums.
Apparently you have problems with logical thinking because the difference in roof armor is large, in the sherman in the thinnest place above the engine it is 10mm, so it is possible to immobilize it from the roof, in the SU-122 the minimum is 20mm and the maximum is 30mm with additional plates in several places.
I play the low br sometimes so I know what is the biggest cancer and what destroys the game. Also imagine someone completely new to this game, not someone like us after a few, tens of thousands of battles, who enters with some stuart doesn’t know about tanks and doesn’t know where the weakspots are and what he’s supposed to do when he’s shown such a SU-122 frontally to it…
Practically in every battle between 1.3 and 3.3 there will be several such SU-122s. This vehicle is a plague and should eventually be moved higher,
The Sherman 105 has the same effect, it is an overpowered tank which acts like a low tier jumbo, I used it to grind the french tree. It was ridicoulus at 2.7 and still is at 3.0. The SU-122 is a poor mans stuh.
Reload speed is one of the most important stats of a tank, if you think a good tank is only armor and mobility look at the KV-2, its horrible. Infact Gajin themselves are using the reload speed as a balancing factor. The diffrence of a 13 second reload and a 21 second reload is massive, it changes the way a tank is played and limits its killing power. Also the SU-122 is a CASEMATE it has NO turret, NO machineguns.
Man, the sherman has 19.5mm of armor on 90% of its roof, bloody 0.5 mm diffrence!!! That 10mm plate is something you actually have to aim for when strafing which is hard to do when the tank has a damn .50 cal!
What a worthless argument! What a colossal waste of time! A casemate with 45-70mm of frontal armor with no MGs and an 8 second longer reload than the sherman 105mm which has 90-100mm of frontal armor a .50 cal and a turret should not be the same BR! You sir are delusional and I will not waste any more of my time replying to anyone in this thread.
You obviously can’t participate in a reasoned discourse if it’s a waste of your time. This difference in the armor on the roof is gigantic, as I wrote, it allows you to immobilize such a sherman by plane, where you will not do it against the SU-122. I’ve also never seen a sherman fighting multiple opponents have time to become a SPAA as well. Well, saying that the KV-2 is weak is just BIG skill issue. This tank is good, it has a bit long reload but it’s KV so you have armor, personally I did it after 5-9 kills in a battle and you can also destroy mbts. Despite so many battles and so many hours spent in this game, you just have a skill issue. Also no turret on SU-122 is fine, you have many turretless tank destroyers that are much better than tanks, like jgpz4 or 4/70 with excellent armor and cannon or jagdpanther, Ob 268 or something lower br like jpz 4-5, which is fast and has HEAT shells.
You obviously don’t know enough about this game.
You are part of a problem.
The fact that you expect every tank should be easily penned from front, and base the balance around is it weird. As long as there are weak spots that can be exploited, it’s fine.
This game should be more than tanks dueling each other while facing without any sort of tactical maneuverability.
Please show me all of those weak points on a SU122 or Sherman 105 that are exploitabe for the average 2.3 or 2.7 vehicle. They don’t exist.
YOU ARE the problem because you think that if armor doesn’t make you invulnerable then its not effective. Above a certain skill level, speed becomes less important as maps aren’t large enough to facilitate large scale flanking operations. Knowing key positions is more relevant and even heavy tanks can get to those soon after all the lights. Then it comes down to gun and armor, and both the sherman 105 and SU 122 have those. With most low teir maps being urban or highly constrained, its trivial to force front to front engagements.
There is a pretty damn good reason russia 3.7 has been one of the highest win rate blocks in the history of statistics we have for WT. All the way back when the WT API was still up. Armor matters, and being frontally immune to a good portion of the tanks of your own BR is a statistic relegated to only a few tanks in the game. Normally those come with huge weaknesses.
This is me plus a friend new to the game after not playing low teirs for >1 year.
No way in hell i should be doing what i’m doing in any vehicle. While my opponents are inexperienced, thats your average player at 2.3 or 2.7.