that makes more sense
i watched the whole thing…
1 Like
Precisely. Just because one tank can pen the other under a very specific set of circumstances, doesn’t mean the two are balanced against one another.
I’m seeing the War Thunder mentality in this thread, the same mentality which rationalised WWII tanks facing post war designs they couldn’t hope to match, and then calling it well balanced!
1 Like
True but players also bring the war thunder mentality in another way- this forget this isn’t War Thunder, so we have smaller maps, no 3rd person, and infantry capable of threatening tanks.
The reality of Enlisted’s gameplay is much different and something like a tank destroyer wouldn’t work unless it camps in the spawn all game.
*you misspelled based as negative
Yes, however, if both tanks are roughly equal in terms of survivability against infantry, aka, closed off, roughly equal mobility, etc, using war thunder to compare them is very much a valid metric.
For example the T-28 would be inferior to the Pz4f1 in that metric. However, due to the infantry being around, it is now equal thanks to the MG turrets.
1 Like
So long as the T-28 can plausibly pen the Panzer.
Mmmmm *you misspelled weirdo as based
Every thing under the panzer 5 won’t be a problem for any tank…
Tell that to the late Pz3s that are impervious to brittish 2pdr or soviet 45mm cannons.
1 Like
The T-28 can pen a Panzer IV frontally with little difficulty, which I know from personal experience, as I played both T-28s extensively in War Thunder. The design may be obsolete, but the Panzers have poor armour in the early war years, and even poorer armament when faced with the T-34.
However, it reloads slower, and has worse mobility, when compared to the Pz4f1. That’s why the 2 MG turrets balance it out as its better against infantry that way, while being slightly worse in direct combat againts a 4f1
The 2 pounder can still destroy them at 500- meters…
2pdr penetrates up to 89mm at 10m and 0 degrees with the best shell, going down to 69mm at 30 degrees and 100m. However, the historically used shell only penetrates 80/65 using the same range/angle values. The frontal armor of late pz3’s are strenghtened with 20mm add-on armor, making it 70mm thick in total, not counting the added effectiveness due to them being spaced out, leading to the 2pd being unable to penetrate it if angled.
So it still can XD
In reality, that’s effectively spitting distance where tank warfare is concerned. To get within 500m, you had to hope the other guy was distracted, or a poor shot!
1 Like
Not if angled.
And you have to get within 100m to really do something
Unless the difference is massive or it’s as slow as the T-26 that it can’t maneuver, it’s a non-issue imo.
Why are you arguing for the T-34-76 to have a 30s reload
That’s on par with your coke bottle optics suggestion
Gtfo of here with that goober shit
1 Like
The difference is small enough for it to be made up by the MG turrets
30 seconds would be historical. And you guys want the T-34 to begin with because that was historical.
That said, maybe read the complete convo: