I suggest moving the Nashorn to BR3. It is armed with an 88mm main gun, which has identical firepower to the same-type anti-air vehicle currently at BR3. Even the Dicker Max with a more powerful 105mm cannon is placed in BR3. Besides, the Nashorn has thin armor, no turret and a large hull, resulting in poor survivability. It is a typical glass cannon and its overall performance fits the BR3 bracket well, so it does not make sense to keep it at a higher BR.
We need a high-penetration tank to counter the Jumbo, KV series and ISU-152 at BR3.
The Nashorn is a BR III tank, even though it has the 88mm armor rating of the Tiger II, because firepower is the only redeeming feature of this tank destroyer. Otherwise, the Su-122 has more reason to be in BR IV than the Nashorn.
There is no point in picking the Nashorn over a Tiger I H1. The Tiger has roughly the same HE, its AP has less pen but it already has enough to deal with any enemy tank.
At BR3, Nashorn could at least be used as a HE slinger since its 88 calibre HE shells are really powerful.
Don’t say that. Even though the SU-122 is armed with a 122mm gun, its explosive load isn’t enough to deal overpressure damage to the Tiger II and Ferdinand. What’s more, the Panzer IV can also penetrate its armor. Just imagine this: take the KB-2’s 152mm gun, downsize it to a 122mm one, and mount it on a T-34 hull. The resulting vehicle would still be perfectly suited for BR 3, with no real difference.
To some extent, the Dicker Max is actually better armored. There’s no way it should be pushed to BR4 just for two defensive machine guns, trading off firepower and its proper place at BR3. If that logic holds, the Dicker Max would have to go to BR4 too. I really don’t get why some people even want it moved to BR5. They’re probably just stirring things up, hoping the SU-122 gets nerfed and bumped up to BR4 alongside it.
It doesn’t make much difference. The maps are all roughly the same size. Even in tanks, we can use high-magnification binoculars. Such a long view can actually be a downside, since it makes it hard to spot enemy infantry closing in at close range.
its similar, most of the time weaker than a flakbus which sitting together with panzer4 H on br3 is weaker than the TT panzer4 H. this nashorn belongs to br3.
its ridiculous how the su-122 (an overall better vehicle than the nashorn) got righly placed into br3 but the nashorn is br4.
gaijin needs to stop having blatantly wrong BR numbers on almost half the vehicles being added to the game, forcing the community to waste time on convincing gaijin to correct the mistake.
It’s an open-topped vehicle with paper thin armor without turret, i don’t really understand that why Darkflow constantly putting such high BR for vehicles like these in general.
Why not. Achilles should be BR 3 as well. Currently it is a pointless vehicle to use on BR 4 when Firefly is also on BR 4 with APDS. Should be acting like a TD that you could rely on when you get uptiered against +1 BR higher tanks just like other TD type vehicles.
It remains to be seen if they actually have its ROF increased over the tiger 2 or not. The ferdinant should also have the faster firerate aswell but so far the devs refused to aknowledge that.
Let’s compare it directly with the Dicker Max. Both are open-top tank destroyers. This one has slightly thinner armor but two extra machine guns, and its main gun is downgraded from 105mm to 88mm. There’s no reason to put it at BR4.
It belongs at BR3, definitely. Speaking of which, the ISU-152 only has an enclosed hull instead of an open top, yet its firing arc is just a quarter of the Dicker Max’s.
Can they hire a person who plays the game to give away BRs? Yes, this is literally almost sturer emil but +1 br?
Can they also hire someone who will add stuh 42? this isnt funny anymore
