Oh right, in Enlisted most engagements are only 100–200 meters.
Even if the 57mm solid shot can penetrate at that range, the enemy tank will almost always react and fire back instantly.
British solid-shot rounds have a huge flaw here.
At that close distance, even if you can pierce their armor, the enemy will spot you and blow you up first.
The difference is massive.
The T-34-57 has explosive shells, so it can fire, reload quickly, fire again, and take out the crew before they can react or repair.
And even now, they still haven’t taken the suggestion to arm the M3 Lee with 75mm American shells. I really don’t get it. How are they supposed to sell the Soviet Lend-Lease M3 then?
Within an engagement range of 100-200 meters, a shell will detonate as soon as it hits the ammunition rack. So stop using War Thunder’s data to brag. Feedback divorced from real combat situations is meaningless, understand? This isn’t War Thunder. There are no tank-to-tank firefights at 500 meters, and no modified or mixed use of shells, understand?
I notice the Chi-Ha LG had a Hull traverse Speed Issue, It Stopped Turning. like the Most Japanese Tanks Had a traverse Speed Issue. Except Heavy Tank No.6 and Two Ho-Ri’s TD. its traverse Speed got no Issues.
Glad to see FG42 I and II finally got a partial reload animation, wonder why it isn’t in the patch note. Hope the devs will continue improving weapon animation on other rest (Walther P38, Mauser C96, Type 2 SMG, Type 97, 99 Snipers etc.)
One things
Tokyo Arsenal SMG is being hold on the grip in lobby but on magazine in the game. I wonder why?
FG42 I the tech tree one has a poor texture, the para grenade launcher variant has far better model, can devs do anything about this? Can devs replace the tech tree one with GL model?
You do know it’s possible to bring a br4 thing into a br5 line up right? Nothing is stopping a good gun from being used in a higher tier. This also isn’t a good reason to ignore br4. It needs to be filled out, and with your logic it never will. I quite enjoy playing br4 germany and russia
If you haven’t played War Thunder, could you please not comment on it? It’s really annoying every time you do. The BR system exists for balance—if tanks weren’t important, why not just let AI control them or remove them altogether?
I started playing Belarusian World of Tanks in 2013, Russian War Thunder in 2015, and Enlistment in 2024. In 2025, I tried Hell on Earth. I’ve been searching for the most authentic WWII history game, but you players who don’t even understand WWII history are spouting nonsense about WWII games. Don’t you find that ridiculous? If you really intend to fight me to the end, then so be it. If Russian games fail and go bankrupt, so be it. I’ll go back to playing the single-player WWII history mode of Call of Duty. I don’t want to be friends with arrogant and conceited people like you!
I use all the BR4 guns they have TT weapons, events, battlepass weapons and their planes tanks and type Hei LMG paras.
Back when the Type 4 and Type Hei late were BR4 I had them in the line-up and still do. Though once Japan has a rifle at BR4 I’ll probably switch a whole bunch of them to that.
I’ve got setups for every Japan BR and I actually enjoy BR4 Japan a good amount. As for specifically why? For fun and the challenge of the uptier I enjoy.
Firstly, I didn’t report your comment. Also, where did I show any kind of “wolf warrior” attitude? I didn’t even bring up politics
In addition, I don’t encounter (Chinese) kids in my daily life here. And I never said tanks are extremely important—I just think their BR needs adjustment
It’s strong against BR 2, but even there with stug 3 F germans have multiple now TT tanks that can frontally pen it without any issues? Not sure how good comparison that is. Grb 39 / sturmpistole should also be able pen hull sides as well.
Stug3 G is strong against BR 2, there’s maybe 1 Russian tank at Br 3 (t34-57) with no issues to frontal-pen, BR 4 multiple. Seems fairly reasonable to be vs. letting it be invulnerable against BR 2 and 1 noobs.
