Why is T-60 so USELESS?

Machinery of War Discussion Ground Vehicle
1

No penetration. Poor damage. Extremely slow reload. How is this on 1.0? Should be 0.3. Did the Soviets really not have any APCR for this gun and why can’t gaijin give it faster reload, if it’s modelled strictly as “balance purpose”? I had to die on T-60 and switch to BT-5 to get 2 times more frags in a minute than I did on T-60 for like, five. Seriously, at least 10 seconds and 45-50 mm worthy pen APCR would be great and balanced, as it would still be not very mobile and have poor traverse.

It’s supposed to be a fun vehicle with rapid fire autocannon and oddly angled armor, but the ammo and reload is just horrible. I could barely penetrate BT-5 sides from a distance. There are overpowered BT-5/BT-7 and then there is this, brings less fun than whole setup of Italian autocannons despite being quick firing

2

Dude it had a modified ShVAK what are you expecting? If it got such a ridiculous belt it would be a 1.3-1.7 tank since gaijin has stated ammo is a balancing factor — not that it ever used APCR…

3

Italian tanks have APCR belt with faster reload and they’re 1.0 (only the AS 42 with quick reload is 1.3). Invalid argument

4

Yes let’s compare the open topped cars with 8 round mags with the heavily angled and roofed tank with crazy fire rate. Speaking of invalid arguments…

1 Like
5

open-topped? GTFO.
image
image

6

Yes, you used the AS 42 as ur example lol

1 Like
7

are you ENTIRELY blind?
image

1 Like
8

Ok make fun of my disabliity. I did read wrong tho. Ok but 1.0 tanks clearly have diiferent capabilities. Compare the L3, M2A2, or FCM36 with the T-70… Lowtier is crazy compressed

9

Italian autocannons have way worse RoF due to T-60’s belt feeding. Their HVAP belt is also half limited compared to German tanks. 1.0 is ok for them, especially L6/40.
BT tanks yeah, they are undertiered.

There is no such thing as 0.3. Stuff like M11/39, Csaba, L3/33CC, Light AA Mk.I, Ha-Go, I-Go Ko, GAZ-AAA (4M), Т-26-4, old French reserves and WWI event tanks are all 1.0.

2 Likes
10

Actually it has 2 options, AP-I cermet core and a rather crude APCR

AP-IC
AP-IC1789×676 367 KB

APCR
APCR1775×789 470 KB

27f6ee81-b6ad-4fcb-a959-f3a3c77f95ae

2 Likes
11

Cement core API I like

1 Like
12

yes, its a ShVAK, it was never intended to be used against tanks. Just AFVs and human soldiers.

13

I feel like small machinegun tank is pretty cool for 1.0, I love using it to delete BTs and other lightly armored stuff in GAB

1 Like
14

could you possibly provide me links to these sources for more detail? I’d report it.
Would end up as a suggestion.
caption

15

it would be cool if it could penetrate it’s own or Panzer III series beyond Ausf. B, or early American tanks - sides of these two in fact, and the other stuff. It loses penetration with range so quickly I couldn’t penetrate SU-5’s gun shield (at around 400 meters)

It is very fun when you end up against less armored targets in close range tho

1 Like
16

Pardon partner, but next time more attention to the text please

17

I’m not sure it’s an acceptable source but it’s from:
https://municion.org/producto/20-x-99-r-russian-shvak/
the more detailed drawing is from an older archive:

here is the original that hasn’t been run through google translate:
20x99REsquemaG
I’m having no luck tracking down the original document
You can also find sites selling the inert AP-I(c) rounds pretty easily

18

we will see if it’s gonna work, thanks

19

No worries, if I find anything else I’ll add it on here.
Good luck with it.

20

saying this like it somehow should be effective at 400m. APCRs of the Panzer 2 are also useless at that distance. I mean lol you have a machinegun, try pushing your way forward at least

1 Like