I mean, a good chunk of this games playerbase probably doesn‘t bother to take those, especially in lower BRs (which the M8 Scott sees).
yes clearly open tops are much more vulnerable to planes and actually planes have no way to kill closed tops
What other explanation is needed other than the fact the cannon is “OvErPoWeReD” for its BR? Using the 8.8 and Dicker aren’t that reasonable because they are premium… they get that luxury because of that.
My intentions are not to convince you of anything… im voicing my disagreement but naturally since you are opposed to it you’re going to think it’s illogical
if you notice sprinkled in my responses there are moments of realization towards my opinions which i do out of respect and to show yes it may not be the best
Again, plane strafing… so while also mentioning planes you don’t mention that and in my experience is the way i die usually every time i play the dicker max and the way i kill one as well along with any other player who uses an open top… again though this is being a player with some basic knowledge.
No matter how you look at it someone being able to just fire their cannons or well aimed MGs instead of bomb given they even have one is a massive advantage as planes are the main counter to a tank problem and strafing requires minimal to no skill.
As yknow… that ~100mm of armor doesn’t contribute much to its success along with its mg to keep you occupied and the amount of ammo you get… which are arguments that have been used here to be fair.
You need something to be effective against tanks in an uptier? When did the game say you needed that luxury?
Because tanks like the 8.8 and dicker are in 3 when again both have the massive advantage of open and also premium which means they are rare… how can you even think that premium isn’t of something to note? That right there reinforces what i said originally is that you’re bound to think anything i say is wrong and that’s normal.
Then again… marder and italian pasta coffin have outrageously powerful guns for their BRs
and maybe even the M41 which is basically in the same boat as this is reason enough to justify this.
So that right there pretty much makes my point invalid so I digress. It’s mostly the idea of a dummed down upper BR vehicle and it seems too much but i can understand those who want it because it’s iconic.
Say a BF 109 with its 50kgs it’s much easier to kill an m8 scott than an su85 considering you don’t have to use the bomb. you can stay on the move with the su85 and not die to bombs especially the ones you get at the br meanwhile anything open top you are dead the first or second strafe… there is zero survivability.
Yes they can kill you regardless but to me at least they seems much worse… that mostly comes out of the joy when seeing one and knowing i won’t have to use my bombs to kill it though.
Because the main gun is not the only deciding factor that determines the BR of the vehicles. Literally that’s how it works in both Warthunder and Enlisted. To me it seems like you trying to ignore every other factor(Apart from being an open top that is)and obsessed with the main gun alone which again, to me it sounded illogical so naturally i asked you for other explanations other than “The gun is OP”.
Premium vehicles are not necessarily have an advantages(Or luxury in your word)over TT vehicles, yes some of them are actually incredibly overpowered but at the same time many of them are also pretty bad compared to TT vehicles aren’t they?
The reason why i didn’t mention the strafing run from an airplane is that, and i’m being completely honest here, the average player base i usually encounter in matches doesn’t really strafe vehicles let alone even bomb them properly. At least that’s something i’d noticed. Also the enclosed tanks with thin roof armor are also not free from being strafed to death(Panzer 4 comes to my mind for example).
Anyway, open top vehicles being vulnerable to the strafing run is indeed an reasonable take, sure.
Now you are telling me the other factors other than the main gun? Interesting.
I mean… the game literally puts such vehicles in a relatively lower BR in both WT and Enlisted because they(Both the majority of playerbase and devs)deemed it so(Or in your word, needed luxury)and that’s literally how the balancing works?
As for the premium, yes you are right about the part where them being rare. But what i’m trying to say is that we can’t just pretend like it doesn’t matter because it’s uncommon and premium when it comes to the balancing.
And look, i’m not trying to convince you over this either. I know it is nigh impossible to change how people think on stuff like this over some typing alone, especially on the internet. I’m just trying to understand the reasoning behind your opinion because it seems very illogical to me that SU-85 should be on BR 4(Which means same BR as Tiger and Panther, IS-1 and SU-100)instead of BR 3 because the gun is 85mm despite all the disadvantages it has. It doesn’t really make sense to me.
2 Likes
I always thought dicker max had the Tiger 1 88 gun, but instead its a 105mm gun - which is a tiny bit worse than Tigers 88.
Nashorn however has the long 88 of Tiger II.
Also it has MGs apparently. So BR4 is reasonable, but BR3 is pretty over kill.
Nashorn does have an MG but it’s not the coxial MG, it’s the pintle mounted one that the shooter has to be exposed in order to shoot IIRC.
Also i don’t mind it being on BR 3 because it does have it’s short comings like for example, awful gun depression angle(being -5 which is like… soviet tanks gun depression level), the armor is thin but also at the same time, not thin enough to not trigger the fuze of incoming APHE shells AFAIK so it would get blow up instantly when get shot unlike the flak bus.
The gun would be very powerful for BR 3 yes but in enlisted, the main gun being powerful is less consequential than having a great armor all around. The prime example would be KV-1 on BR 3. The 76mm gun on KV-1 is even shittier than the 75mm gun on the Sherman but basically every Soviet BR 3 uses it because it’s that good. Shrugging offs hastily thrown TNT packs and incoming AT launchers when angled is really one of the best feature you can have as a tank in enlisted. Now compare it to the vehicles with paper armor with a great gun, how many people actually uses those paper tanks with a great gun in Enlisted? Yes, only a few of them and there’s a good reason for that.
1 Like
Other tanks are the least significant threat to tanks. The main threat is infantry, then plane bombs, then tanks. And the most significant contributions tanks can make in order is against infantry then tanks then planes. So the main deciding factor shouldn’t be “oh no the cannon has a lot of pen”. It should be the factors that help against infantry. This includes reactibility (turret, reverse speed, machine gun), infantry survivability (frontal armor, side armor, not having exposed crew, acceleratio ) and most importantly infantry killing capabilities (reload, he performance, machine guns). Armor penetration value is not an important factor. Even against tanks armor penetration isn’t that important as the only thing u need is enough and you get diminishing returns the higher ur armor pen is.
So let’s compare su85 anti infantry performance vs kv 1. Su85 has slightly better he performance, and greater acceleration. Meanwhile kv1 has slightly better reload, machine gun, turret, better frontal armor, and better side armor.
So in conclusion, su85 would be a side grade that trades a lot of power in a tanks primary role, anti infantry, in return for greater capabilities in its secondary role, dealing with tanks. So yes it would be balanced in br 3.
yes, anyone against this is a german main who enjoys seal clubbing br3s in their panther/tiger/jagdpanzer from grey zone
1 Like
For once I agree with the Russian main
Every faction has the same number of tanks in the gray zone, Japan has the fewest, probably because most of their tanks are bad, so it doesn’t make a difference.
1 Like
except Soviets which only get KV that can be pierced by several br2 tanks incl long 50mm, several marder variants and HEAT from a short 75, while panthers and tigers can only be penned by 34-57 at the cost of infantry damage
Ok buddy don’t pretend Russia br 3 tanks are weak
4 Likes
Dunno, sig has nothing but gun, yet its BR3.
1 Like
That’s cuz the sig is exponentially stronger firepower than any other tank in the game. It’s the exception not the norm
Sure, if you compare shell on shell.
Yet F1, scott and many others are more than capable to spam lesser rounds the area coverage aint that much different.
1 Like
Even with things like the m8 or whatever the sig trounces them. I don’t think u realize just how strong the sig shells are. And the reload isn’t long at all either
But it’s difficult to destroy the KV-1 with any BR2 tank except for the two marders.
They are the only ones that can easily destroy T-34s and KV-1s, but they don’t have a roof, so that’s a problem
Japan and Germany only have tanks without armor or roof in the BR2 to easily destroy the KV-1, while the T-34 57 is a very good tank.
But even so, that’s not my point. My point is that all factions except Japan have the same number of tanks in the gray zone, I don’t like it when people say that the nation they’re playing against has tanks in the gray zone while their own doesn’t.
1 Like
In what ? shell on shell comparison ?
11second reload, 1 massive shell and absolutely 0 armor or turret.
While the F1 for example has ~3s reload about 4 shells shot while sig still reloads.
1 Like
No it trounces them in aoe over time. The radius plus reload is much stronger than any other tank in the game even the calliope.
The normal rules don’t apply to the sig also. The sheer power of the shell with how forgiving the reload is and how low the velocity allows for tactics that make it so your tank is never exposed to enemy tanks or infantry. Which also helps against planes as you won’t be marked.
The only way you cannot see the sig power is simply if ur playing it wrong. You treat it like other tanks it’s gonna suck. U treat it like an arty piece and its one of the strongest vehicles of the br.