Yes from another post when he and me talked about Me 262 and F-80. He is the one who brought that here in this post. But i won’t deny the fact that i actively participated in an off-topic issue.
I disagree it should move to br IV with the Tiger H1 which should be rank 5 it’s not any worse than the Tiger E other than slightly lower horsepower.
1 Like
It may come off that way, but it’s really just because germany players only see russia, they want their stuff compared to theirs. Where does that leave the allies? Whenever people speak out about doing something for allies, it’s always then, well japan this and that. The game’s natural order of balance is russia, germany, U.S., then japan. And yes, i will admit i tend to not really think about them much, but neither do the german players. At the same time i have the highest win rate with japan. Something around 80+% . Their br3 is absolutely fine, they do well in br5, and i don’t think it’s fair to cripple U.S. just because their br2 and 4 is a little lackluster (not bad though). To clarify, I’m definitely not saying the U.S. is crippled or suffers either. Which i know that’s how you’d take that. It’s just a broad statement saying the decisions shouldn’t be made soley because of Japan’s gaps. I’m not even sure how to resolve Japan’s issues without stirring the pot to begin with.
And germany doesn’t need much at all, so there’s never really anything for me talk about with them other than fiat going to br3, the 109 trop getting a payload, downtiering the 110g2. Pretty minor things in the grand scheme of things. I also realize my opinions probably don’t align with average joes with no premmy/bp/event stuff
Just because I’ve said tiger h1 shouldn’t be in br4, doesn’t mean i hold a double standard, and i certainly have never called them “OP”. I’ve accepted it and don’t care that much. Two things can be true at once. As i said earlier, the game offer lots of methods for dealing with tanks. I don’t cry when i see a br4 tiger, i take care of it.
It has HEAT rounds just fyi. Yes, the downsides are obvious. Was simply pointing out germany has a tank that can kill everything easily.
In terms of br3, what nation doesn’t have a decent tank that can’t frontally penn its hull? None. The only argument for it being too strong is br2. Which i did try to do some tests with ho i but couldn’t figure out where the 76s were before i had to go. It did one shot frontally all the normal shermans. I don’t think the 76 hulls are that much better?
Even if everything I’ve said about the planes isn’t true. We have their stats available. Objectively speaking, 1.35 seconds difference (or whatever it is) in turn time is not SIGNIFICANT. Especially in enlisted. 3-4+ seconds is enough to really be a problem between planes. A little over 1 is barely any difference at all. Also just to clarify, i was wrong and misspoke about 262 being able to pull out of a dive faster. I knew something wasn’t the same between the two making me crash with the f80, and it was the time it takes to pitch down and get on target. The f80 has a much shorter window at the same altitude because of the time it takes to pitch down giving me the illusion it couldn’t pull out as good. Once i adjusted, i realized it does in fact pull out of a dive quicker/easier.
I also agree with this
And who decided that? You?
Yes, Japan has the highest average WR overall in the game. Also has the least amount of players playing it. This is why when you attempt to get a match with “Join any army” option you tends to play as Japan a lot. But you have a wrong idea about why they have a higher WR in general. Soviet has a pretty low WR overall. Now, you think they have a low WR because their equipment is bad or it’s the playerbase being bad? The answer is again, very obvious. Japan doing well is not because of their equipment is superior(especially on BR 4 and BR 3, actually quite the opposite on BR 4)but because they have a better playerbase, that’s it
Yeah for BR 5. So what do you think about BR 4 Japan then. It is arguably the worst of worst and yet you had been saying about how BR 4 US being so terrible which honestly it isn’t.
Man, stop lying would you. That’s not what you had been saying all this time. Do i really have to dig up what you had been saying in this forum previously?
It is more than that. I’m assuming that you are saying that it’s only 1.35 secs difference by looking at the statcard but the statcard can be very misleading. It doesn’t take account the turn ratio when the flaps deployed and even further, flaps also have a several levels to it, landing, combat etc. Also it doesn’t take account that how each planes behave when they are in a low speed that they’d be usually in in a dogfight. So everything’s considered, there are a significant difference between F-80 and Me 262. But enough of this topic as this is an off-topic as OP said and i won’t discuss further at least in here.
I’m well aware of this. Still not the same as AP as HEAT can be blocked by any object along the way(tree being the most common one)and has a poor post pen effect. Yes, even for HEAT as big as this.
Except you do. One of the argument that you had been saying that Tiger 1 shouldn’t be on BR 4 was because BR 3 sherman with 75mm can’t do anything against it. Which would be the same case if Sherman with 76mm downtiers to BR 3 and fights BR 2 tanks. Because it has more protective armor than 75mm shermans.
Both Japanese and German BR 3 tanks with 75mm at long range(there are some maps with large open area that allows this like BoB maps for example). But japan is worse at this since they are using APHE, it starting to having a problem to penetrate Sherman M4A2’s hull at long range. But Sherman will have no problem penetrate them because as you know, both japanese and german tanks have a paper armor on BR 3 with a very few exception like prem Stug 3 G for example.
Glad we can agree on something, finally.
1 Like
Well it’s just kind of easy to see, no? I’m not saying that’s how it should be, but with how the game is and has been over the last few years. It’s always been germany trying to balance with russia, it wasn’t really an issue when we had campaigns, and when the merge happened u.s. had a massive gap with germany. Jumbo fighting king tiger, shermans with no apcbc, etc etc. So therefore the game naturally buffed U.S. to compete better with germany. And then japan was basically left overs that didn’t even have full 1-5 brs. I simply saw the patern and am calling it how i see it.
Obviously. But player base only gets you so far. If there wasn’t viable equipment, the win rate wouldn’t be as high. That was the point, that i do fine with the equipment provided, and i win vast majority of the games, so i don’t tend to think too much about them. I also don’t tend to think too much about TT gaps either, because the game is ever evolving and things are always being added. I also just don’t have the time to go research equipment to suggest. I am usually only outspoken about current items. Which is why i say, i don’t believe a decision should be made solely based on a tree gap.
Yes, it is overall the worst, without a doubt. No argument there. There are lots of br5 planes that need to be downtiered to br4. And yes, they could use a more armored tank, but that’s a whole different discussion. They do have decent TT ARs though which neither u.s. nor russia gets. And all their SMGs are top notch in my opinion with their br2 ones still able compete in br4. I also don’t tend to think much about Japan’s “weakness” because in doing so it throws off balance for the rest of the game. So yes, my priorities tend to align with the other three. Which in turn leads me to speak most about u.s.
Again, two things can be true at once. Am i not allowed to have an opinion without it meaning i believe the u.s. is trash?
If I’ve ever said something like that it’s only been because someone else used the argument first. My opinion on it stems from what it’s compared to in br4 though. Nothing else has as good of armor, as good of a gun, with all the other bells and whistles. Maybe the is1? Which still isn’t as good. And goes back to order of nations (which now japan is fighting russia, they’ll just start comparing to them as well). For sure none of the u.s. tanks and since you care so much about japan, for sure none of theirs are as good. For years the tiger 1 has been a br5 tank. All of a sudden it goes to br4 because of one tiny little weak spot on top? I don’t think so. That doesn’t seem “fair” to me.
We see this all over though? Sherman 76 has a harder time penning panther and tiger than they do it. You do make a lot of good points, and are very knowledgeable with details and functionality. Something I’m not able to do as well. In my mind, the 76s are not true tier upgrades like the panzer 4 to panther is. Either way, i don’t really care if it goes to br3 or not. I originally just wanted to give my input that it made sense to me being more of a side grade. So we can move on from this.
Also, just for the record, i do think the panzer 4s aren’t that great, and would like a different choice for br3 germany. I just don’t agree that all the br4 TDs/stugs should be downtiered.
Alright that’s fair.
I looked it again and apparently i was wrong about the overall WR, Japan actually have the lowest overall WR(This could be a short-term anomaly as the events are going on, people tends to play USSR/USA BR 3 where the equipment are very powerful). Japan particularly have really low WR on BR 3 and BR 4. And the funny thing is that both USA and USSR have the highest win ratio out of all BR on BR 3 and BR 4. I don’t think this is just a coincidence and it makes sense since USA/USSR both considered to have some of the best equipment in the game on that BR out of all factions in the game and both BR 3 and BR 4 japan is kind of lackluster when it comes to the equipment. But i can’t really explain the low WR of Soviet on BR 2 and BR 5 other than the playerbase being lame as they clearly have much better equipment than Japan.
You are saying that Japan BR 3 is fine, which it isn’t honestly. I don’t think fighting Shermans and KV-1 as BR 3 japan would be a… fun experience, with what they have.
The issue was not about having a multiple opinions at once. The issue was that you have an opinions that are seemingly contradicting each others due to how you stated your opinions. But i’ll take your words since you explained that you didn’t mean that and i could have misinterpreted what you said previously.
I think Tiger 1 H is bit overrated. If i’m being honest, Tiger 1 H is a sidegrade of Panther. There aren’t many tanks that can penetrate the Panther’s UFP on BR 4, the only exceptions i know of are Su-100 and Firefly/Achilles with APDS. Whereas Tiger 1 H has a better turret protection but less penetration than the Panther with thicker side armor but vulnerable flat UFP(Can be somewhat mitigated by angling the hull). That being said, honestly i’d agree with you that it is bit unfair that Tiger 1 H got downtiered to BR 4, mainly because some of the other tanks like IS-2 which is just IS-1 with a “better” gun couldn’t get downtiered to BR 4. I believe IS-2(Not 1944 version ofc) belongs to BR 4 with 21 seconds base reload speed and shit ammo but eh, whatever.
Sure. 76mm guns will have a problem penetrate Tiger 1 if the map is one of those large, open BoB maps and Tiger 1 H is just sitting on the grey zone with angling it’s hull properly, i won’t deny this. I’m just concerned that Sherman with 76mm could cause even more problem on BR 2 - BR 3 if it gets downtiered to BR 3 with more armor than the 75mm sherman. This is why i also voted yes for M4A1 sherman with 76mm could go down to BR 3 but not the other 76mm shermans, as M4A1 has the least protection out of all of them at least.
Sure. Panzer IV/70(V) belongs where it is which is BR 4, but Jagdpanzer IV and especially Panzer IV/70(A) could go down to BR 3 i think. While i don’t like how BR 3 Panzer 4 performs, i think they still belong to BR 3.
I play with tanks the least, so i probably don’t have a very accurate accounting in general with how things fair against one another, but i haven’t had any issues with the newly downtiered chi nu ii (149mm penn). Yes, armor isn’t great, but I’ve managed to frontally penn everything pretty easily. The ki-100 is amazing, all their smgs are fantastic with high rpm and very low recoil. They have the newly added BR3 AT launcher with 140mm penn, way better than the m9 bazooka. Type 4 rifle is fine, they also have the hino rifle and the big GL launcher (forget it’s name). They don’t have anything like the mg34 but they have similar MGs to U.S. and russia. Other than not having a decent/good br3 attacker plane what more do they actually need to be considered “fine” in br3? They don’t have a whole lot of variety, not much for event/BP/premmy (the BAR squad is good, their br2 paras come with with great guns for br3, and they got the best U.C. of the bunch), but i feel what they do have works really well here. Can’t forget about the free swords either.
Just looked up the penn of the 76s to see how it compares to chi-nu ii, and funnily enough it’s apcbc also has 149mm. Only the apcr gets 190mm.
People tends to over value Chi-Nu 2 for having high penetration(It uses Type 4 Kou APHE, which has 151mm penetration at pointblank range), but people also tends to forget that the APHE suffers massively from an angled armor. Properly angled KV-1 at range is very hard to kill even with Chi-Nu 2 due to this. It’s not hard to imagine that what would happens when you try to fight KV-1/Sherman with Chi-Nu which is also BR 3 tank ofc. Also, the Chi-Nu 2 itself suffers from very low acceleration due to shitty engine that honestly, sometimes i feels like even the KV-1 has a better mobility than Chi-Nu 2. You can truly feel this when you try to climb up any dirt mounds or something. Chi-Nu 2 is very sluggish and for being this much sluggish, the armor is only 50mm flat for frontal armor and 20mm for side armor, so you can’t even angle in this thing. Chi-Nu 2 acts more like slow TD rather than being a proper medium tank with all things considered. It cannot fulfill the role that KV-1 and Sherman with 75mm plays.
This is the only thing along with the ‘free’ swords that i’d consider that BR 3 Japan has an advantage over USA.
Yea, and i think this is an understatement when USA gets to use XA-38 on BR 3 against Japan BR 3.
Until they are going to fight 30 cal Thompsons and W.A.R ofc
It has more penetration but i’d consider it less effective than the M9 Bazooka because it has much lower projectile velocity plus lengthier reload speed. On top of that, M9 Bazooka has a really good aiming device whereas 90mm launcher, not so much.
It’s fine but that’s it. No winchester m1907 there.
In conclusion, you may correct with your assessment when it’s strictly TT stuff versus TT stuff on BR 3 other than the tanks but when the event/prem stuff getting involved, the USA holds a massive advantage there i think. And i think 30 cal Thompson and stuff like XA-38 are common enough to impact the BR 3 balance there.
As in it’s more likely to bounce off? I’m not sure I’ve ever really seen that happen with a direct shot. I always figured angled armor just adds more depth (increases thickness) and as long as the penn value is higher than the angled armor value it will go through. Is this not how it works? I know shells will ricochet off the ground though.
More likely to bounced off at an armor beyond certain angles + more penetration value reduction penalty at an angled armor. I need Warthunder to explain this better
Notice the angle of attack with a chance of ricochet? This is where the shell starting have % bounce off chance at each certain angles of attack against armor plates. So even when still enough penetration left in your shell, if you hit those plates at those angles, for example hitting 65 degree armor plates with Type 4 Kou it means that your shell will be 100% bounced off on those plates, unless they changed something in Enlisted. There’s also mechanic called overmatch when the shell is big enough then even an extremely angled yet thin armor that usually would bounce off those shells instead that big enough shell would just crush thru those plates and penetrate.
Type 4 Kou, which is being APHE is much less forgiving than the 76mm APCBC against angled armor as you can see here. But to be honest, APHE is much more forgiving in Enlisted because there are not many tanks with an extremely angled armor, unlike Warthunder where some weird prototype tanks with an angled plates are very common.
This most likely only starting to matters in Enlisted when you shoot an angled KV-1 at range or shoot tanks like T-34 at an weird angles. I ran some tests and you are right, in most cases even as being APHE, Chi-Nu 2 will have no problem penetrating the most of BR 3 tanks, sherman included even at range. But KV-1 might still gives a problem if the KV-1 driver knows what they are doing.