Yeah against Min-maxers Japan is not good at all. Japan is good faction against the average player when you go against Min-maxers you know they have all the advantages your best option is just to stack rifleman squads 
“Bruhtsuuuuru.”
That doesn’t mean anything
Because going to camp 200 meters away within the gray zone.
What’s unusual about this game is that the tank’s frontal armor has become the most important.
In War Thunder, you could aim for the flanks, but in this game, that’s impossible.
Because only be inside the gray zone
Japan is only sort of highly regarded because they have, on average, better players than other factions and that’s pretty much it. Well the sword thing is also there ig but the most important thing is that they have better playerbase especially on high BR in general compared to something like Soviet on high BR which are notoriously filled with bad players as we all know by now.
3 Likes
What you dont like it ? its one of the best ground attackers in the game its amazing aircraft for a ground attacker only US has better. Japan is faction that dont have real ground attacker its ground attacker is in a fighter squad and the fighter is in a ground attacker squad Japan BR V is total mess. Its vehicles and air force has no logic at all.
USSR needs just better tanks at BR V and a second ground attacker option.
2 Likes
If there’s a brain, that’s only natural.
So… Japan only got type Hei in br5.
No real CAS, no br5 smg (Tokyo was correctly placed at 4, imo) NO ASSAULT RIFLE, no tank…
But that guy ciena mayo insists soviets suffer.
I suppose type Hei is very very scary. Eh.
2 Likes
Yeah Japanese players are better for USSR and US it took them 5 years to learn to build rally points… 
That’s BR V Japan spam riflemen squads and Kikka suicide attacks. Since if you decide to go on air to air battles with the Kikka you are not helping you team its just score play and there is no one else to bomb the point… so yeah Japan is very strange faction.
Right.
If can suppress only the aircraft, JP is advantageous in all other respects.
At least this statement is correct.
The USSR needs a Tank and an Attacker.
Of course, JP also needs an Attacker.
The current JP is because Kikka has to put on a one-man show against the US.
1 Like
Japan needs many things but USSR its easier to fix since 1 new tank at BR V will fix a lot of problems.
4 Likes
Hmm, well,
Of course, JP is needed for some things, but the only essential thing is Attacker.
What’s needed is more, like an AR with 30-round magazines and a heavy mortar, but it’s not essential.
It’s the difference between something that needs to be added, and something that is absolutely necessary because there is an immediate balance issue.
Of course, it would be great if everything gets added, but in my opinion, I don’t think that will come out anytime soon, so it’s only best to add the urgent things right away.
That is also true of the T-44-100 in the main topic.
Something needed right now
1 Like
Well everyone has a right of opinion he is like this I already get used to him
1 Like
How about just adding IS with 100 mm gun instead of this
1 Like
I get the wehraboo cope but as a person who also maining germany, I’ll be honest something like panther II, even though it’s completely made up, would be kinda cool
It is a pity that the British squandered these precious artifacts by simply melting them all down for scrap steel.
Had they survived, museums housing these wrecks would at least have seen their visitor numbers double.
Yeah, but they were super bare bones.
This game is completely different from War Thunder. Tank combat resembles duels between cowboys, where armour thickness and gun penetration are the deciding factors, while mobility advantages are greatly diminished. DF is actually aware of this; vehicles such as the BT‑76, Chaffee and Hellcat have all been down‑tiered by one battle‑rating compared to WT.
Take the Berlin map as an example. Wilhelmstrasse is short and straight‑lined, offering few routes for long‑range flanking. Combined with the threat from anti‑tank infantry, most engagements take place at close quarters, essentially head‑on duels. A tank’s performance largely hinges on its reload speed and armour protection.
The IS‑2 suffers greatly under these conditions. Its long reload puts it at a severe disadvantage in close‑quarters fighting, and there are no large‑sized maps like those in War Thunder to allow long‑range sniping or cover‑based manoeuvring. Following the high‑explosive shell rework, the 122 mm HE round has become far less effective against ground‑based targets. Frankly speaking, a Panzer III M spamming 50 mm HE ammunition can potentially achieve higher overall damage output over a match than the IS‑2. Due to its slow reload, the IS‑2 often eliminates only a few enemies while letting others escape. German vehicles can also use machine‑guns to mow down infantry, whereas on the IS‑2‑1944, the commander’s death results in immediate loss of vision, and there is no backup loader.
There is an old inside joke within the War Thunder community: the IS‑2’s reload time is slower than the enemy’s vehicle‑repair time. If it fails to destroy an opponent with one shot, the enemy can repair, reload and counter‑attack. Many players joke that it is one of the most‑frustrating heavy tanks of the late‑WWII era.
In War Thunder, the IS‑2 meta has improved. The Tiger E and IS‑2, both formerly at 5.7, would meet in 6.0 battles, avoiding frequent encounters against the Tiger I and Ferdinand. In this title however, both variants of the IS‑2 alongside the T‑34‑100 remain stuck at BR5, even though their effective performance ceiling is roughly BR4. The gameplay experience is poor. It is hard to understand why DF keeps ignoring the lack of suitable Soviet tanks at BR5.
There are not many viable tank options for the Soviet side at BR5. Are we supposed to expect the T‑44, armed with its 85 mm gun delivering only 135 mm penetration, to penetrate the frontal armour of the Tiger 2 across a river? Or the thinly‑armoured SU‑100‑P to duel the Tiger 2 point‑blank?
All things considered, the T‑44‑100 really needs to be added to the tech‑tree, much the same way Japan relies on the Hori to fill gaps; there are no better alternatives.
1 Like