I suppose it is just naivety in believing that these nations will get a separate TT.
Which is not going to happen.
2 Likes
All I was asking for were numbers, but you donât have any real number, just some weird measurement that is not scientific. Deal with it if the numbers donât correspond to your weird alternate reality.
Then it is your ignorance to accept that Japanâs current BR5 flaws are tanks, launchers and attacker planes, and two of them are easily fixable.
Okay, letâs first take a look at how we will strengthen the Japanese 5BR, whether it will be importing German weapons, or using blueprints, or directly strengthening existing weapons.
Then, we should see whether this match in the Pacific could return to normal
In âThunder of Warâ, there are plenty of planes left, both attackers and fighters that can be simply added to Japan. And either remove carrier launch or adjust air spawns to balance it out.
There are also multiple launcher options such as a 220mm GL that is referred to in the forum as well as an improved version of the Type 4 with improved penetration.
The only issue remains with tanks, but that cannot be changed because all Japanese tanks share the same design flaws, which are still durable.
It should be pointed out that the strength of the aircraft in game is related to the mounting capability by DF, sadly.
And in terms of tanks, it is due to discrimination in Japanâs weapon development.
And Japanese Attacker Planes have payloads varying from a couple of 250kgs to 800kg bombs and at least many Army Fighter Planes can equip 2x250kg bombs which should be enough.
Lol
Oh, stop crying over the Japanese tech tree. If blue tanks from the Warp and machine guns with almost negligible recoil are considered a form of discrimination, then so be it. Objectively speaking, this is one of the many historical legacy issues left over since the combined campaign. The fact that the DF hasnât completely resolved it is indeed its problem. The Japanese tech tree may not be complete, but it is by no means weak.
2 Likes
I do agree.
The most important aspects of Japanese tree are clearly strong.
It has good smgs accros all BRs. It has good AT weapons. It has the best SF rifle in the game.
Moreover, the Pacific maps are by no means friendly to tanks. So thatâs not really a important aspect.
Lol the only good at weapon Japan has is the type97 at rifle which only works for low br.
It is only unfriendly to maneuver, which is not really important in game consider most of the tank in game are just camping in the grey zone.
Type 5 and type 4 are also decent. They can take out br 1-3 tanks from the front and high br tanks from the side. Also fast reloads
1 Like
Type 4 struggles to pen m4a2 from the front while type 5 doesnât have a sight. Not that good compare to m1 bazooka.
Not that fast compare to M1 bazooka and PIAT.
They can easily take out any US tank head-on, the only exception being the Jumbo and the super pershing.
Iâd really like to know how much experience you have with the tank on Pacific maps xD
2 Likes
There is literally many open area and elevated position in Pacific that are very suitable for grey zone camping.
Iâm beginning to doubt whether you even played Pacific at all.
Yeah, there are a lot of positions like that. But most of them donât really cover the full area of objective. So the camper like that can be pretty easily ignored by defenders. There are like only Âą2 exceptions.
On the other hand, these positions usually have no cover, the tank is clearly visible and has nowhere to hide.
You can easily destroy it by randomly placing an AT cannon somewhere outside its tunnel vision. Or just by sniping with any other tank.
Tanks just donât play a big role on Pacific maps.
(And btw. The Ho-Ri tank is made for camping, not active gameplay. So if anything, in that role itâs far better than the American tanks.)
Anyone who says the Japanese TT is weak has no idea what heâs talking about.
1 Like
In reality defender wonât just hide at such place for long since they need to get out and fight enemy that are at places that can be target by tank.
I wonder why players complaint about tank camping on Normandy hills if it was that easy to take out?
Itâs not like Japan having ho-ri on every br.
Yes.
But any good player simply parks his bots in a safe area of the objectives.
And go hunt the enemies on his own while his bots prevent the enemies from capping the objectives.
Campers are easy to counter in the Pacific. Thatâs just a fact. Since most objectives are perfectly suited for this.
Because they can literally see enemy default spawns from those positions? Maybe thatâs why?
You clearly have no idea what are you talking about. Itâs mind blowing to me that you are even comparing it.
It doesnât matter. At lower BRs, tanks of both sides have such bad armor that they can easily be destroyed by anything. Ho-I is overall as good as M8 scott. BR3 tanks are instantly countered by 3-5 mm queue
Youâre simply wrong and unable to admit it. Youâre making arguments that maybe in theory sounds reasonably. But in reality, theyâre just nonsense. Itâs not how it works.
There is no point in debating with someone who is unable to admit that they are wrong. Only arguing for the sake of arguing.
You are acting like we have many good player in game.
If tank tunnel vision is that bad, they shouldnât able to do it.
Lol lame excuse, this clearly shows that you canât even debate and trying to get away by calling other peopleâs point nonsense.
And in terms of tanks, it is due to discrimination in Japanâs weapon development.
what discrimination what real world BR4 BR5 tanks could be added that have not.
example the tiger one is fiction or heavy four or five or whatever made-up name is being used,