cuz you can, look
but as i said isn’t that reliable bc of the mg and if hes slighly angles this weakspot dissapear
cuz you can, look
but as i said isn’t that reliable bc of the mg and if hes slighly angles this weakspot dissapear
Only the German shells have enough gaijin BIASED boost to actually pen the right cheek. The USA isn’t given or has not been provided the magical & magnetic angle penetrating shells you speak of in your tiger 2.
At the moment though, Us USA players just want to survive all the way through an 11.7 br match first. Once we can achieve that with the help GAIJIN and the very little BIASED BOOST given to us. I will make sure our next achievement will be the magical GAIJIN BIASED BOOSTED anti-tank ammunition described.
original reply-
I would say it’s happened to me before but the weather conditions had to be perfect outside, I made sure to stand because I can’t be sitting down or throws off the in game- mid flight - shell gyro and on TOP OF ALL THAT- I was praying to the gaijin lords to “please let this round successfully punch a hole in this commi’s turret cheek” ,
Uncle Sam called my phone to tell me my rent was due and he wanted to be paid with COMMI TEARS!!! lol
But usually all of that still does nothing. Maybe one day we can convince GAIJIN to give us some of those BIASED BOOSTED vehicles.
88 mm APCBC uses the exact same calculator to get its flat pen as the 90 mm does. The slope performance is also shared among all APC and APCBC rounds.
88 mm APCBC has more pen simply because it has:
T41 APCBC
Pzgr.39/43
There is no “bias” in this regard.
Look mate, I’m going to tell you this as a German main: when someone complains in such melodramatic terms about how one of the Big Three suffers, there is basically no way to continue the discussion productively.
I see this behaviour in other German mains a lot, who complain in way too dramatic a fashion rather than just knuckle down, learn the vehicles, and most importantly have fun. You’re displaying the same type of attitude.
From an outside perspective, if you asked me what the US ground tree is lacking, my first thought would be “a mid tier SPAA”. And for Germany I would say “a light tank between the Puma and the LeK”. But all Big Three tech trees are incredibly strong at almost every BR. They always will be. Gaijin bases their decisions mostly around them.
When I look at what minor nations have to work with, it’s hard to ignore the conclusion that there are other priorities we need to tackle.
Tables has already provided the technical answer, I just want to give you a reality check. We’re both players in a multiplayer game. We both benefit from many trees being strong and fun to play, because even if you don’t play a vehicle yourself, you’ll play against it, which is literally part of your game experience anyway.
I don’t know what you think this tribalism and antagonism towards other people based on what they play, could possibly achieve for the T32, but if you’re really that upset about it all I can say is that thankfully WT is a video game and not real life.
Take a step back, breathe in, and have a good day. We’re here to have fun. No other reason to play a videogame.
Mate, this really doesn’t have anything to do with only the t32. This original discussion was based on arguably unbalanced BR’s. But my attitude has been a growing snowball to this point with this games devs and others.
The t32 was the front running discussion on should it be lowered or not when I showed up. Listening to people complain about an “over” armored USA tank get lowered .3 BR. Might have made me want to teleport through this phone to slap someone. Considering nearly every tank I battle against is considered over armored to USA PLAYERS and to others…lol I did not tell myself this is unfair while I was grinding- I saw it as a challenge to get GUD as some say. I never thought about the disadvantages in certain situations until recently with sep v2 brought into the picture and it began clicking.
But I need to take a break.
then this discussion on a decently armored tank with a OKAY gun getting lowered to a BR where it would still fight against tanks with- the same if not better armor and better firepower had filled my frustration limit to top lol.
Some People, I believe do not want to loose an advantage they may have in a certain BR range which could result in a more balanced experience for another nations players.
Idk though, I don’t have the answers only questions and guesses.
Oh well though. I’m out. Pce
After further evaluation, It should still be at 7.0…. Although, it takes me a min to get back into this slow game play(from 11.7)
Have you used the t32 in a while?
Since last time I used there was no BR changes in its range.
Wait… are you using apcr?
Seems like a positioning issue
Still no :)
America whines !!
T41 main and t44 when needed
I was halfway up the train tracks that cross straight through the map - can’t remember the where/name of map.
I’m been destroyed a few times from missiles.(bmp’s,marauders)
My cas(A2D) sometimes has been taken out by radar lock spaa
I’ve been pen’d through the frontal turret and hull quite a few times….
I can 1 shot lightly armored vehicles frontally and can rarely damage any decently armored tanks frontally -which is a problem when trying to capture an objective. Having time to aim for weak spot is a must.
These still have the advantage in head to head -
.Maus, IS3, is4, type 62, sometimes tiger 2 & jadpanther or whatever it’s called) lol
I have taken out plenty of tiger 2’s with turret shots. As they have also taken me out. I have yet to beat an is3 or IS4 head to head.
It’s an okay tank. Armor is decent. Cannon/shells are underpowered vs the competition. Aiming is almost always needed with the cannon as weak spots are really tiny with t41 shot.
I rank it at 7.0 so far. Could change, I’ll keep you updated
I don’t have some of these problems in the T29 or t34
You mean like fighting a Tiger II H with the 76mm M4, M18 or Jumbo?
The Tiger II H fighting US 5.7s is even more OP than the T32 fighting German 5.7s.
Well, Tiger II H doesn’t have +142mm of side turret armor. It’s also way less mobile, with just 10 hp/t.
Compared to 14 hp/t which is on par with a lot of medium tanks.
So what? It’s frontally immune to all but 1 US 5.7 tank and has the best gun BR for BR in the game.
You mean the Tiger 2H that can be penned through the cupola with a 76mm m62 shell that will kill the commander and gunner every time? Or the Tiger 2H that can be penned through the machine gun port in the hull by the same shell? Both possible at 1000m. That compared to the 88mm PzGr 39/43 having to hit the absolutely tiny gunner optic to even have a chance of penetrating the T32? Thats worse? While you line up that tiny shot on the T32, it will send a shell right through your turret cheeks on the Tiger 2H Every time. Imagine the 75mm guns of the Panther lining up on the same weak spot on the T32 while it can pen your tank anywhere for a kill. Yea, it isn’t worse for 5.7 US.
Only the bottom half of the cupola can be penetrated by M62 (roughly 100 mm CHA at 30°).
That won’t work. Tiger II MG port has an additional plate of armor behind it. Rounds like M62 will only kill the MG gunner.
Besides that, good luck hitting these spots accurately at any distance past 200 meters. Not only do you have to get the range right, you also have to get lucky enough for the 76 mm to hit (maximum dispersion on the 76 mm cannon is 0.075° vertical and horizontal, as it stands).
You mentioned the MG port of the Tiger II, but don’t mention the MG port of the T32, which is larger, easier to hit, and deals actually reliable damage.
There’s also the lower front plate, on the edges.
Because the US 76 mm having to aim for the lower half of an already small profile cupola to have to actually deal damage while the Tiger II can click on your tank isn’t at all comparable, surely.
Besides the 75 mm of the Panther still has those weakspots I’ve already mentioned of MG port and lower front plate corners. And the Panthers 75 mm quite literally has less than half the maximum dispersion of the US 76 mm (0.027°) and way higher MV meaning that hitting those targets is a lot easier.
I don’t agree with the T32 going to 6.7 but your reply is very missleading and inaccurate.
Ah, my aim was not to mislead, but I did make an error. In my haste to see things before work I didn’t notice that I pen tested the T32E1. That would also be the reason I didn’t mention the mg port as it doesn’t have it. Either way, I still stand by the fact the T32 shouldn’t go any lower than it is right now.
Ok? The T32 can be penned through the MG port, the lower glacis cheeks, the drivers hatch, the shot trap and through the lip in the turret roof.
If the small areas vulnerable to the 76mm are good enough to keep the Tiger II H at 6.7, then the small areas on the T32 and the worse gun performance should make it 7.0, at the most.
Facts!!
What do you mean, so what? It’s slower to get into position and easier to outmanuver and kill from the side or when the turret is turned. They are not comparable.
And the T32 is easier to kill from the front, while having inferior firepower.
The T32 has nearly double the armor of the Tiger 2H on the turret face and cheeks, making it much harder to kill from a hull down position. While the T32 does have a slower reload and slightly lower pen for the apcbc round than the Tiger 2H, the apcr round has much more penetration on the T32. The HE shell is also much better on the T32. The T32 also has a .50 cal for light vehicles compared to the Tiger 2H with a 7.92mm. The ammo stowage is located lower on the T32 and the ready racks are harder to hit because of the thicker turret armor.
There are also performance reasons on why it is at the BR it is at as well, but I can’t speak on that because I don’t have those statistics. They are also important to the BR rating of vehicles. It is fine at 7.3 and it has plenty of reasons why it is there compared to the Tiger 2H.