The site that I refer to is supposedly looking at the game data. There’s is a possibility that its outdated, or just doesn’t do what it says.
but supposedly 38mm max pen.
also…
Either Warthunder wiki isn’t the same as ingame, OR you get 15mm more pen than I do for same ammunition LOL (not home, cant check)
Probably just shooting potatoes instead of proper quality munition.
The tanks in Enlisted are not the same as the tanks in War Thunder. Due to the widely different gameplay and the limited amount of tanks available, changes had to be made for balance.
The panther’s 75mm can pen 135mm. You might need to angle your hull against them.
Haha, tiger 2 : “I am a joke”
Things will likely be different once all the campaigns are mixed and players are matched by their equipment.
“More likely”
Tiger is overrated espc at dense urban maps.
Slow as f… and killable by any infantry from flanks.
My best scores are always from panzer 4’s or panthers
People seems to thinks it as a cadillac of tanks, its just a crude slow dinosaur
I like Tigers more than Panthers. Panthers can be so easily killed by bombs or EP. They just can’t dodge because of really bad reverse speed.
The biggest problem with tigers is when player is overconfident with them. But they certainly aren’t worse than Panthers or PZ IV. At least for me.
Diamond your tiger and it should be good at distance. That’s about right.
Enlisted balance, the same reason wy more than half of semi-automatic and automatic gun work like an overglorified shotgun
Your explanation is well developed but still not justify the fact that I took hitkill from panther after playing months to unlock an is2.
Your explanation confirms that is a balancing issue
Yep, IS-2 is definitely underpowered. That’s a well known fact.
Plus “balance” adjustments by the devs.
yeeeeeeah of course. It was foult of game rng that soviets armour plates were broken to pieces only couse cinetic force, without penetration. And rng made that smaller caliber gun of sherman had better penetration, not poor quality of ammunition. 
Т 34 57
Iam talking about T-34-85 vs M4A2
76?
I say that Soviet designers made such guns to break through fortifications. A larger caliber gives a better HE. The m4a2 76 had remarks about the strength of HE, so they still used M3 guns
No, ZiS-S-53 was never made to break through fortifications. That woud be retarded. To make it more obwious we can add that basis of 85mm was AA gun. It had simillar path as nazi flak 18. And HE rounds werent so often used as games show us. At least not on t-34-85. You confused the concept with IS2. T34-85 was created for AT role.
idk why you put it here, but ZiS-4 has lower armour pen than ZiS-S-53.
Argument that T-34-85 was made for pillbox bousting and T-34-57 for AT role is just wrong, if you wanted to say that.
Again, reason that higer caliber AT ROLE GUN was less effective in armour piercing than smaller yankees 76mm was just production technology and quality of dedicated ammunition.
not if you have low quality HE rounds. If so, effects might be worse than those achievable with smaller guns, but equipped with better ammo. This applies to all types of rounds.
What does that mean? You think Panther should not be able to kill IS-2???
Plenty of cases of that happening to German armour too
What?? 
