I do not see why the 251/9 should be B.R 3, This machine has a short barrel 75mm, Much like many of the B.R 2 german tanks. Without the protection the german tanks offer.
This thing should be B.R 2 at best alongside the UC. As it has no reason to be B.R 3 due to it’s poor ability to harm tanks of B.R 3-5. Which is reallistically the reason you wanna bring this thing, To harm tanks and have the fire power of a tank.
This thing is a glass cannon making it worst then the tanks of B.R 2 Germany, A single shot from a T-28 could knock this thing out, AP or HE.
22 Likes
Logic goes out the window as soon as the Russian side of the forum doesn’t get what it wants.
4 Likes
All these cretins do is whine about something… Why anyone takes them seriously, is beyond me. Honestly, it’s why I even bother with the forums right now. They might whine to nerf the Pershing before it even gets here or something…
8 Likes
I’d not be shocked.
Personally as a Japanese main. I like the idea of Pershing vs HO-RI battles.
It will be fun to see. But at the same time I’m unsure the HO-RI will do very well due to how large it is and how the maps are.
2 Likes
This thing is even worse because the canon reload time has been nerfed compared to the other short 75mm canons, it’s like 6s and more reload between each shot instead 3,3s, it’s literally the reload speed of a Tiger I. Don’t also forget the MG42 has instant overheating after you shoot for 2 sec for no reason so yes it should be BR II again and not BR III.
But as alway some babies allies are crying for every single things and devs are listening (like the removing of the MG42 on the D-day hills, because it wasn’t still enough easy for them by capturing point in 3 sec and having 250 tickets between each point captured)
9 Likes
Eh, I don’t see that boding well… Jap mains or whatever on here are going nuts, and they seem to be going off the deep end in the game too. But, till we see the results.
Meh. It would also be kinda shady if you can all of a sudden have effectively unlimited number of 75mm gun equipped spawn vehicles for the germans just farming BR 1 & 2 most of the time.
If the allieds would have gotten a 75mm m3, that should be on br3 too.
2 Likes
The original 251/9 that started service in 1942 didn’t have an MG 42, while the one in game is the 1944 variant, yes the addition of a MG is rather marginal. I think it would be cool if they add the original 251/9 as well, for BR 2, probably into the research tree. There’s nothing wrong with variants, it’s more content and there are so many wide variants, models, modifications of vehicles (and guns) in game.
Also I’m just saying we already have a few vehicles armed with MG 42s for early BR (I’m counting BR 3). Why can’t they just move the MG 42 to BR 3 as well. It’s at least a bit more historical since it saw service in Stalingrad and Tunisia
But what is the diffrence between an APC that removed all of its benches in favor of a gun ( and thous becoming a tank destroyer) to that?
Tank riding was a thing so every single tank could be concidered an APC then.
More up gunned APC would not improve the game as it would just mean more vehicle spam.
2 Likes
I dunno man. Maybe the fact that tank riding =/= apcs where soldiers can teleport into while the # of tanks is restricted to equal number out of gentlemens agreement.
I’m saying that it would be unfair to give germans effectively an OK low tier TD (as opposed to Boys-ATR joke-tier TD for allies) which is not subject to normal tank vehicle restrictions and can be used to safely gank low levels with additional bonus teleport properties.
The complaining is again rather missing the mark and the big picture.
1 Like
I’m just saying most of said vehicles aren’t insurmountable, even at early BR.
2 Likes
That’s fine. Not a really good reason to break the vehicle balance on those tiers by giving Axis a spawn vehicle without number restrictions which can front pen most of those low tier vehicles as well.
I think tier 3 is totally fine for it. I personally have it in my tier 5 axis setup as well.
1 Like
The difference you’re not seeing is at least the Universal Carrier can be used at BR 2, sure it sucks but it can still destroy tanks like the Puma and Panzer 2. Versus the Stummel which is literally useless at BR 3 and struggles to pen Sherman’s, and that’s not even mentioning T-34’s.
Universal Carrier never gets uptiered, while the Stummel is constantly uptiered.
3 Likes
Which seems to sound like perfect balance then. Both vehicles rather suck as TDs at their respective tiers, which is fine because they are not primary TDs. And you can pen T34 turret cheeks based on my testing.
Just take your Stummel out for a spin in practice and see which BR2 allied/soviet vehicles you can frontally pen with it (my testing → most of them). I really cannot agree that making this BR2 would be somehow a better solution than current setup.
PS. You can still end up low tiered with the Stummel. You just cannot gank low tiers with it with 100% guarantee.
So the Stummel getting constantly uptiered to BR 5 due to it being BR 3 while the Universal Carrier sits comfortably in BR 2 without that worry is balance to you? That’s hilarious.
3 Likes
Honestly its fine at BR 3, what is not fine is that BR 3 can get uptiered to BR V.
They really need to introduce ± 1 BR, hopefully it is done shortly after the steam release.
8 Likes
Yeah. I have it in my BR5 axis lineup. It’s a fun vehicle, works for me - don’t feel the urgency to complain about it. Try not having the expectation that every vehicle is somehow meta-optimized for maximum efficiency, maybe that helps?
If you cant see major imbalance risk of giving one side an unrestricted number of APCs that can easily deal frontally with the dedicated opposition tanks of BR 1-2, please don’t waste my time by concern trolling about balance.
Axis suffers. 
And we can end it at that.
No, you just don’t know the definition for the word balance, and don’t you dare lump me into the “axis suffers” group you pleb.
1 Like
I completely agree, this is an ill-conceived decision
you need to take into account the fact that this armored personnel carrier is worse than Tanks and another 75 mm guns do not cause damage in 40% of cases, then we can say that this is a meaningless decision
1 Like
Clearly i know it better than you, if you honestly think from firepower perspective stummel and bren carrier are equal and both should be BR2.
Now, if you have a problem with the fact that BR 3 vehicles get matched with BR5 - that impacts every other vehicle in the BR. And yeah, it sucks.
