Chi-Nu → BR 2

Suggestions Battle Rating
1

6325c664f09cd90d87ef7bb646f6464f
6325c664f09cd90d87ef7bb646f6464f2560×1440 5.01 MB

The Chi-Nu is a tank that was added to Japan in the post merge update. It gave Japan a BR 4 vehicle. Yes, this vehicle was originally BR 4, later downtiered to BR 3. But even so, it still struggles to deal with its main opponents, namely the Shermans. And since the Far East campaign was introduced, Japan now also has to fight the Soviets. That means the Chi Nu now has to face KV 1s with 75mm of front armor, and T 34s with sloped armor. All of this makes the Chi Nu even more out of its depth.

Vehicle Stats

Vehicle Name Acquisition Rank Crew Horizontal (°/s) Vertical (°/s) Horizontal Limits Vertical Limits Magnification Sight FOV Main Gun Magazine Ammo Capacity Reload (s) RoF (rpm) Shell Types & Count Horizontal/Vertical Horizontal Vertical Machine Gun Mount Type Magazine Ammo RoF (rpm) Reload (s) Smoke Grenades Vertical Stabilizer + Speed Limit Forward (km/h) Reverse (km/h) Brake Force Damping Power-to-Weight (hp/t) Max Power (hp) Weight (t)
Chi-Nu 105,000 RP III 5 10.4 4.0 ±180° -10°/+20° 1.9x-3.5x 40°-21° 75mm Type 3 Tank Gun — 55 6.0 10 24 APHE, 24 HE, 7 Smoke — — — 7.7mm Type 97 MG Hull / Pintle — 2980 (Hull), 980 (Pintle) 498 3.0 — — 39.01 7.29 75200 90000 12.8 240 18.8
Pz.IV F2 74,000 RP III 5 15.0 4.0 ±180° -10°/+20° 1.9-3.5 40°-21° 75mm KwK40 L43 — — 87 5.9 40 APCBC, 40 HE, 7 Smoke — — — 7.92mm MG34 Coaxial 150 2850 900 8.0 5 — 42.76 7.99 80000 100000 13.2 300 22.7

You could say it’s Japan’s equivalent of the Panzer IV F2, just worse in every aspect. Its power to weight ratio of 12.8 gives it slow forward acceleration, and it takes much longer to reach top speed. With a horizontal traverse speed of only 10°/s and a maximum engine output of just 240 horsepower, it feels absolutely terrible to drive. And that’s not even mentioning the lack of a coaxial machine gun.

It’s fair to say the only reason it’s at BR 3 is its 75mm gun.

Gun Name Used By Shell Type (AP) Muzzle Velocity (m/s) TNT Equivalent (g) Penetration at 10m (mm)
75 mm Type 3 Tank Gun / 75 mm Type 90 Field Gun Type 3 Chi-Nu / Type 1 Ho-Ni I / Type 3 Ho-Ni III Type 1 APHE 668 84.8 103 / 83 / 41
50 mm KwK 39 Pz. III J1 / Pz. III M APC (PzGr 39) 835 28.9 106 / 81 / 37
50 mm KwK 39/1 Sd.Kfz. 234/2 APC (PzGr 39) 835 28.9 106 / 81 / 37

Its pen is about the same as the Puma or the long 50 on the Panzer III. But it doesn’t have anything going for it, no Puma like speed, no add on armor like the Panzer III M. and it also can’t rely on resisting overpressure from 105mm Shermans the way the Panzer III J can.

The only thing it has going for it is good post pen damage from the high filler. But that only matters if you can pen in the first place. Sure, you can go for the driver’s port on early T-34s or the MG port on Shermans, but that means you have to aim carefully. Meanwhile, other tanks at the same BR can just shoot you the moment they see you.

Its HE fragment count and damage are identical to the Ho I. That’s why I think it belongs at BR 2. Plus, BR 2 tanks can already pen its armor, so there’s no risk of it being overpowered at that BR.

Should the Chi-Nu be moved to BR 2?
  • Yes
  • No
0 voters
2 Likes
2

It’s a side-grade to the Ho-I, I’d still take the Ho-I

4

After Chi-Nu II moved down to BR 3, are you still using the Chi-Nu?

  • Yes
  • No
  • I don’t play Japan BR3
0 voters
5

I never used the Chi-Nu before the Chi-Nu II was moved down, it’s just not enough to compete with M4A2s and 105 Shermans.

1 Like
6

I 100% support this. Kinda like germany can choose between infantry fighting panzer 4e and anti tank panzer 3j1

1 Like
7

Honestly all of Japan’s tanks are BR II max, except of a select few that can make it to BR III or is a fake paper tank.

It’s one reason Japan should have permanently capped out their TT at BR III. Even years later unless your using fake equipment or ones with fake stats that are so unrealistic that it’s almost unrecognizable, you don’t stand a chance against any faction 90% of the time without those things. Granted the Japanese faction can pull together a good team that can have consistent wins but that’s on a much lower scale than every other faction in the game. You might get a consistent string of wins every couple months with Japan when you can get consistent wins with all the other factions on a weekly basis. This should raise a lot of red flags, but for some reason they’re being ignored. Japan seriously needs to have its equipment looked at and placed in the correct location, as well as having any missing equipment added to their TT.

Just my personal thoughts on this. It would suck to lose a BR III tank to BR II but if it doesn’t perform it doesn’t perform. This could be said of any of their equipment, even the Germans have some slight suffering that has been consistent throughout the years, The Soviets are missing a few iconic pieces of equipment as well as a less op option for a BR III semi and a BR II LMG that’s not the trash madsen. I don’t even need to comment on the Americans, let’s just say Japan got the worst of every faction. Still missing good planes, a BR IV mortar, and some other tanks and small arms. I would even take lend lease or purchase for Japan, That’s how bad off they are.

3 Likes
8

I think the better option for a BR 2 Japanese tank with a more anti-tank focused gun is the Ho-I that was tested with a long 57mm gun:

There is also the Chi-To first prototype with the same gun that was passed as a suggestion for War Thunder, meaning it could be added/ported sooner rather than later.

Chi-Nu, while outclassed by the long barreled Chi-Nu II, is definitely too strong for BR 2.

2 Likes
9

I am always up for new equipment within the TT, this is a good option. I have been dying to use the 57mm gun on a Japanese tank, sadly all we got so far was the 47mm version that they switched to from a tank that started with a 57.

As much as I hate to say it, even if they messed with the values A LITTLE BIT and didn’t go way overboard when overturning the item id be happy, Japan needs new equipment that don’t have to be so blown out of its stat range that it’s almost like alternative history 2.0.

Buffing/nerfing something ±10% more then it’s real life counterpart I can understand for balance, but doing one sided damage/stat overhauls and not properly testing the +50% buff before it goes live is my issue. That takes the authenticity and validity away from that piece of equipment when it’s meant to represent something that existed (paper or not, preferably no additional paper only designs) And it also tends to make the historical accuracy fanatics go ballistic. Something like this might need a slight adjustment to the 57 mm gun for its pen, but aside from that it would function quite well in BR II.

Edit: for some reason the forum decided to ignore that this was a reply lol. But yes Type 4 early, I think it fits well.

10

Long 75 in br2 lol.

12

Oh, great
What’s the next step? HoNi III lack of turret so it should be BRI?

1 Like
13

The Chi Nu’s medium 75mm gun is far from meeting the standard. Compared to the worst German medium 75mm gun, the 75mm StuK 40 L43 which has 137mm pen, the Chi Nu falls short by about 24%. And when compared to the Sherman’s medium 75mm gun with M61 shot, which has similar pen, the Chi Nu’s APHE shell performs significantly worse than the Sherman’s APCBC. For the Sherman, its pen is enough against the enemies it faces. The same cannot be said for the Chi-Nu.

In my opinion, whether a vehicle meets the BR 3 standard comes down to three factors:

  • armor(KV 1 Churchill III)
  • firepower( Panzer III N Dicker Max Sturmpanzer II 105Sherman)
  • mobility(Cromwell I)

And it doesn’t have the all around performance of the Sherman either.

The Chi-Nu has none of them. smoke grenades, stabilizer, coaxial MG. It’s missing all of it.

When the Chi-Nu faces BR 2 tanks:

Vehicle Shell Type Penetration (mm)
M8 Scott HEAT 89
T28 APHEBC 67
Crusader AP 101
Grant AP 84
Grant AP (M74) 77
T50 APHEBC 70

eea2b2cb015ac6221a101ef1673f7132
eea2b2cb015ac6221a101ef1673f71322560×1440 5.64 MB

The Chi-Nu has purely vertical armor, so its effective front is only 51mm. That means pretty much any common BR 2 tank can go right through it.

Even AP rounds are a huge threat. Sure, AP might only kill one guy, but then one of the four left has to switch to the machine gunner seat. That leaves the loader empty, so the tank loses its high burst output and sustained firepower.

In the current Japan BR 2 lineup, if you don’t use the Ho I, this is what you’re stuck with:

4b37d75b1d6f875348229c5dacd54a85

Most of them are open tops. I’m not saying open tops are bad. They’re not only a way to deal with higher BR tanks, but they’re also tanks Japan actually used back then. So for players who care about historical accuracy, they’re a must have.

With my suggestion, Japan BR 2 could run a lineup like this:

1f060f0dbf2c21c25df9e3f8d9f5d22f

If the devs actually go with my suggestion, Japan at BR 2 could run the Ho I or the Chi Nu, or even both. Some players might even take two of each. These two are some of the only low BR Japanese tech tree tanks that can actually shrug off anti tank rifle rounds to the front.

I think this has to do with Japan not using APCBC. That’s what makes it harder for us to determine the correct BR placement for their equipment :joy_cat: Back then, the Japanese strongly favored APHE shells. I remember reading an article that said Japanese soldiers refused to use shells that had no explosive filler.

1 Like
14

How
image
image

1 Like
15

Know you didn’t even get through my whole post.

Need me to break down the difference between APHE and APCBC for you :joy_cat: ?

16

Chi Nu AP is uncapped, meaning that it has terrible angle performance. Also the sherman has 30% better reload, it’s armor is slighthly thicker and inherently angled. Chi Nu can barely pen a Sherman M4A2 from the front while it stand no chance at surviving sherman APCBC with its 50mm of flat armor. Also Chi-Nu has subpar mobility and no Stabilizer (which can definitely be a life savior in a pinch).

Ch-Nu is more comparable to the Grant/Lee than to the Sherman, even the Chaffee at BR2 is better than this thing.

4 Likes
17

Not really, since Japan now fights USSR. Let’s compare it with the T28E.

Chi Nu- VS T28E
AP round explosive mass: 84.8g vs 150g.
Reload time: 6s vs 5s.
Penetration: 103mm vs 67mm.

T28E clearly have better explosive mass for its AP round and faster reload. It seems like Chi Nu have higher penetration, but raw number is meaningless in this case since US and USSR tank have better armor.
I will say their penetration capability is somewhat similar. Both can pen the hull and turret armor of the br2 tech tree tank they met. They both can’t pen the hull of some br3 tech tree tank they met(T-34, M4A2, Panzer4 H/J) and need to shoot the turret.

So T28E wins in 2 categories and draw in 1 categories. Chi Nu is not that strong.

2 Likes
18

I don’t think the Chi Nu main gun should be considered as a long 75, The German long 75 has considerably more penetration. The Japan long 75 should be the Chi Nu II main gun.

1 Like
19

Different vehicle, same story

When was the last time you’ve seen German Jagdpanzer IV on the battlefield?

The reason for not lowering BR for such vehicles is not a comparison with vehicles from the targeted BR
The issue with lowering BR lies with vehicles from BR -1 from the targeted BR

The Jagdpanzer IV has a similar (slightly better) gun than the Pz IV, and since you get a Panther at the same BR even before the Jagdpanzer IV, it seem pointless on its BR and appears that it could be a fair match for BR III vehicles, but its armor means that BR II vehicles wouldn’t stand a chance against it (on certain maps where the Jagdpanzer can position in the gray zone and you can’t flank it after destroying its tracks)

If you want to suggest lowering BR for something, take into account stuff with a BR -1

20

They were secretly stealing filler from British shells so UK AP’s ended up with nothing.

21

Sure

There are four BR 1 tanks in the Soviet tech tree. Three of them share the same 45mm gun, so they can pen it frontally. The T-60, the starter tank, only has 27mm of pen, but the Chi Nu’s side armor is just 25mm. The T-60 can still use its better mobility to get around the side and go for the engine.

The Allied tech tree has seven BR 1 tanks. Only the M13, the starter, can’t pen it. The other six all have at least 70mm pen, plenty to take on the Chi Nu.

22

No, on the contrary, Chi-Nu has better large-angle performance.
image
image