Thats the problem and he claims Japanese tanks are not worse maybe in BR V they are not in every other BR for sure Japan has the worst tanks.
its super ‘’’ fair ‘’ … they are ‘‘balanced’’
They are not TT, but both Chi-ha with 57mm and 47mm are solid enough BR 1 tanks, at least. But yea Japan is kinda cooked on BR 1 as the tank performance goes if you don’t have those.
1 Like
They are just as good as U.S. tanks. The chi nu 2 has 85kg of explosive in aphe (20 more than u.s. tanks), and penn 146mm @100m, shermans only get 100, only the m10/18 get that much penn but are paper vehicles with open top. It’s hands down better than equivalent br3 U.S. equipment.
The ho i aphe has 460kg? Explosive (Not sure if that’s an error cause that’s crazy) with 40mm penn and the heat gets 90mm penn, and it gets solid HE rounds. M8 scott is the only thing that gets heat and again it’s open top. It’s performs extremely well in br2 against U.S. once again.
They are not. They have APHE not APC or APCBC unlike US tanks or German tanks and suffers massively against sloped armor. Also, they reloads rather slow and with armors made of paper. I believe they have almost flat 50mm on both hull and turret. Also they are lacking the coaxial MG on the turret only coaxial MG on the hull then even that MG has very low capacity so has to be reloaded very often. Even the mobility on them are not that good. All those adds up which makes these tank really undesirable to use compared to something like Sherman which is sooo much better in many ways.
1 Like
Just cause the number is higher doesn’t suddenly make the tank better, 140mm of pen on a Japanese tank isn’t better than 100mm of pen on an American tank. It’s not the number that matters it’s the interactions, both tanks will still one shot each other, but one has better armor for downtiers and infantry, better HE, a faster reload, and better Mgs
1 Like
not only there is neither fighters or ground attackers to compensate for the lack of TT tanks… since in the TT is only trash. I would have understand if we had amazing fighters like the soviets or good ground attackers like Germany but no nothing xD Don’t bother with the Bandit he is allies main he cant see the other faction problems he only knows is bad to fight Panthers with BR III Allies vs BR IV Germany but goes blind when you have Japan BR II vs BR III USSR KVs or BR III Japan vs BR III USSR or BR III Japan vs BR IV USSR where you have IS-1 and ISU-152.
Even when we need him to help the Allies faction he is useless not even voting to help us out :
AP-4C (F4U-1C) back to BRIV - Suggestions / Battle Rating - Enlisted — official forum
He wants F4U in BR IV but did he ever voted no…
1 Like
Chi nu 2 takes out the kv1 with ease
And KV 1 takes Chi Nu with ease however even lower BRs dont have problem taking out Chi nu 2 try taking KV 1 with Japan BR II… better go vote on the poll at least you will do something positive then continue denying the problem that Japan has no armor.
Well, japan doesn’t have to fight germany, so i guess that’s a valid point, but it’s really only a point because u.s. tanks aren’t that great. I will still argue more AP filler is better though. Not having a MG in the turret doesn’t really bother me that much, think people here give it more value than it really has.
Ho-i has 90mm pen, kv1 is only 75 frontal with no slope. Might take a few shots but can still kill the gunner before you die.
It’s been a suggestion for 2 years. I’ve voted on it in the past. Devs know people want it back, voting here ain’t going to do anything about it.
See no point arguing with you…that’s why the allies faction always will be a lost cause.
Right after talking bout a difference in HE filler between the Sherman and the Chi-Nu
1 Like
Maybe you’re just bad with their equipment? What other conclusion is there when you claim ki-100 is an average plane and that the tanks are bad. Along with seeing how i don’t struggle any where near the levels you claim playing japan it’s the only thing that makes sense.
More filler equals more damage to a tank’s interior, more crew dead/better chance of killing the whole crew and better chances of blowing the tank. To me this is far more important to survival than a turret mg. You can work around not having one. Can’t really work around not blowing the tank as much.
Nothing to do with the equipment its the playerbase… as you can see freeloaders like you made the allies the kid noob faction…that like to have easy mode all the time having the best equipment but the easy mode is almost over.
So now you’re saying Japan’s equipment is fine? 
you really threw your whole argument out the window there.
Send a screenshot of your japan battles and win rate.
Well obviously you cant read 
Equipment matters very little when clearly one faction has better players then the other and will win even if it has worse equipment since the allies are literally the faction with the most noobs and you are a perfect example of that.
How this is important the win rate depends on the team. The only thing that depends on you is your K/D ratio and also is not solid indicator of nothing since this depends on the class you play the most. All I see is childish arguments.
You are a perfect example why people given up on the allies faction with such players… I told you its the playerbase the biggest problem with the Allies they have the best equipment in every BR outside of BR I and BR IV that are not very popular BRs however the playerbase is cancer.
Literally the best tanks from BR 1 - BR 3 are US/UK tanks tho. Only recently that M4A3 105 got moved up to BR 4 so they are less oppressing now but M4A2 75mm, judging from the roll call stats still one of the best tank on BR 3.
On BR 1 M5A1 Stuart is one of the best tank in the game that only Panzer 3 J on BR 1 might be better than the Stuart due to the 50mm gun and 5 men crew members.
On BR 2, M8 scott is a very solid vehicle as well. Also not many people knows this but 57mm HE that US/UK using got some really busted stats and it’s almost as powerful as some of the 75mm HE which means that Crusader is actually incredible BR 2 vehicle. Only BR 4 tanks are lacking. BR 5 tanks are good enough. At least much much better than the Soviet BR 5 tanks honestly.
And now you look at the Japan. From BR 1 to BR 4 it’s constantly fiiled up with trash level tanks. Only Ho-I is okay(even then it has much slower reload speed than the M8 scott so it’s not even close for HE/HEAT spam), only BR 5 is somewhat okay due to the imaginary tank called Ho-ri but that’s about it. Still casemated TD with terrible awareness since it doesn’t have a commander hatch.
This is only theoretically possible. In actual in-game situation Ho-I versus KV-1, because KV-1 has an insane amount of overlapped parts on the turret and the fact that side armor is also 75mm, against angled KV-1 the Ho-I will only have a very small section of turret on KV-1 that can be penetrated with it’s HEAT. And since it’s HEAT, even penetrating the turret won’t disable KV-1 properly. At best just killing the gunner or loader. KV-1 will likely recover and return fire which kills Ho-I in one shot instead.
In fairness, Ki-100 is really good airplane i’d go far as to say that it’s BR 4 airplane rather than BR 3 airplane.
This would have been true if US tanks were all stuck with solid AP shots but they are not. Except the guns like 37mm or BR 2 75mm guns, they can kill just as good if not better due to what USA usually fighting. Cramped japanese tanks with paper armor from BR 1 - BR 4, german tanks have no armor till BR 4. There’s a reason that 75mm Sherman performs so well in Enlisted.
You need barely any HE filler to one shot a tank consistently, it’s only worth brining up if we’re comparing solid shot to APHE
There is usually 1 to 2 people who carry the team for all nations. It matters because if you have a low/lower win rate then it clearly shows it’s not soley because of the good player base and therefore you struggle with their equipment