Heavy tanks, especially super heavies just kinda don't belong. If they get down tiered, they're invincible because no one has access to firepower that can reliably kill them from the front or even the side. If they get uptiered, they get destroyed from any direction. They're big, slow, and expensive and the sacrifice that their designs made aren't really worthwhile if it takes you 2 minutes to get to the battlefield only to die in one hit. They're breakthrough tanks meant for the end of WWII and the beginning of the Cold War, they smash anything that was designed before them, but can't compete with ammunition that was designed after them. They get to perform their intended role when downtiered, but that intended role was to be an invincible fortress on tracks. They're just incredibly hard to balance because balance was never in its design.
Heavy tanks suffer the most from br compression. Most heavies do just fine at their own br where they can bounce shells but still be killed. They can be balanced but it would require gaijjin actually putting effort into their game and not just blindly balancing based on player stats
" If they get down tiered, they're invincible because no one has access to firepower that can reliably kill them from the front or even the side. If they get uptiered, they get destroyed from any direction. " and I think this is fine. If you like Heavy Tanks you bring them in a BALANCED lineup and only spawn them when the map and tiering dictates just like with niche TD's.
Heavies is just a bully or be bullied at this point, whenever I play my 6.7 T34 heavy US, if I get downtiered to like 6.3 or 6.0 with tigers, panthers, and lekpz 41, I literally stomped everyone and then when I meet TOWs and ATGMs on uptier, I wanna stomp my head. Also not to mention that Heavies cost an arm and leg when you die because some guy sniped you with a 7.3 russian premium cause no bias
They could always buff APCR so that lower BR medium tanks could compete with higher BR heavy tanks. For some reason, most APCR rounds in War Thunder have lower penetration values than they historically did. For example, in War Thunder, the M4A3E2 (76) W has the M93 APCR round with 186mm of penetration at 100m range. It should actually have 239mm of penetration at that range according to primary sources. Another tank in the game, the T-44, has the BR-367P APCR round with 203mm of penetration at 100m range. The real life round had almost 250mm of penetration. None of these vehicles have any chance of frontally penetrating a high BR super heavy tank, such as the Maus, but if they had APCR rounds with historical penetration values, they absolutely could.
finally someone has brought this style of video essay to war thunder, i have been waiting for this. lovely stuff m8, hope u got a spacesuit bc ur channel about to go to the moon
how bout this: HEATFS sucks beacause it is inconsistent playing against it makes you think its op playing with it makes you think its useless the real problem is Gaijins penetration model
@@explodingonc2782 while i must admit im not an expert, i think that HEAT shells should always work, just like heavy tank transmission never breaks down
The real issue is that people see heatfs and look at the pen value and explosive value and inherently misunderstand heat or heatfs and they think that it will be this insta-kill round that no matter where you shoot it will give you a kill. This is just false both irl and ingame. If you know where to shoot it will take you at most 2-3 shots to kill a tank, the first usually disabling the tank, so heatfs does work, it just works differently than other projectiles. That´s not to say you won´t be able to one shot with heatfs, because you will most definetely be able to aswell.
I think the main problem people have with HEATFS and ATGMs is that a lot of time they can negate the only good quality that some vehicles may have, which is the armor, since a good amount of the heavies that meet HEAT slingers usually have poor mobility, a slow to reload gun or both, and having no room for error in a machine that can barely move or takes ages to be in a position to fight back is annoying at best. I don't think HEATFS or ATGMS are broken, but I understand why people would find infuriating to play russian roulette whenever they want to play a heavy tank in Effective HEAT Warhead range, even more so if they don't have access to a .50 Cal MG on the roof that moves independently to the turret in case a sardine-can-mobile appears.
No like literally, you are right, if you don’t have a roof mounted mg to save you, that can actually pen armor, then you do get screwed. Literally for example, just yesterday playing the is6, my barrel got taken out, I retreat to repair, aml pops up, I just spray em and he dies.
The heavy tanks that run into this problem are more than capable of holding their own against whatever they're up against. The things you mentioned make them even more vulnerable to CAS for which there is no real strategy of defense. That's what we should be focusing on.
heatfs is fine when fighting vehicles of its own era where mobility was seen as king, but when matched against chunky mid-late war tanks and tank destroyers like the Elefant or even the Tiger 2s it just turns what used to be a heavy tank into a fat, slow box that might as well be made of cardboard, taking its main asset when fighting wartime vehicles and turning it into a massive liability.
@@danieldeak9141 they had em historically for self defense reasons, but I definitely do think that certain vehicles with very potent APDS should have that taken into account when the BR is chosen, the Gepard is a prime example
@@cheesecakedoublepeanutbutt6511 technically there is an rng element of player decisions others make, but otherwise yeah it's skill-based from what you do based on what you see the enemy do or assume they might do
You tell this to people crying about repair costs and they cry and shit their pants about how the game is predatory and Gaijin want money then you tell them about free premiums and they go into complete denial
I've been playing since 2014/2015 when it was only Germany and Russia. Then the US came and it was awesome. Then atgms came. Like the fire nation, everything changed.
I get what you're saying but when I'm in my bmp fighting tigers and panthers it's basically no contest. You're faster so you get the good positions first then as soon as they show up you spam heatfs and atgms at the target until they die. 9 times out of 10 you just aim near the barrel so it takes out the breach then they are essentially helpless.
@@CrabbyPattyMoox okay what about the ones that can hide behind a hill, completely safe, and destroy an IS-4M from 2km plus away? Should those be in that range or should they be moved up and given something like scouting?
@@CrabbyPattyMoox Reaction time everything. The only reason why a 76 sherman is even REMOTELY competitive with a Tiger, is because of the stabilizer, which allows better reaction time. The only reason why the M60 is a lower BR than the M60 AOS, is because the stabilizer grants faster reaction time. You are delusional if you dont think reaction time isnt a factor. BMPs and Marders dont need to worry about reaction time. The ATGM can self correct its course. If we compare the time it takes for a Tiger or US T34 to go from 20kmh to stationairy, and compare it to the time it takes for a Marder/BMP to go from 20kmh, stationairy, and then fire, its NO CONTEST. The suspension doesnt matter for the Marder. Their reaction time is simply BETTER. The US conducted a study, where they had a large number of M1 Abrams, go against a smaller number of dune buggies with ATGM's attached. Mind you these were M1 Abrams. They had a sophisticated FCS, meaning shooting a moving target is point and click. They had signficiantly more protection They were STABILIZED and had a similar reaction time to these dune buggies. Not only did these dune buggies get more kills, they also had LOWER CASUALTIES. This is a video game and not real life, so there are differences, but my point remains. So tell me again. especially with what we see in Ukraine, are you genuinely saying that Marders and BMPs deserve their spot at that BR? HEATFS is unreliable and is a decent counter to german/US/Soviet heavies. But ATGMs especially, are a different beast. Saying ATGMs are of similar caliber to regular ass rounds, is just ignorance.
@@KillerSniper55 Super heavy cold war tanks are basically useless on long range maps. Anything with an ATGM or a laser rangefinder can kill anything else at that battle rating. You probably shouldn't bring out a heavy tank on a super long range map where it's only ever possible to get those rare 2km+ shots, but if you do, consider not sitting out in the open. Most long range maps are completely garbage and don't have any sort of cover like big Poland or big Eastern province. The only big map with cover that I can think of right now is Red Desert. Again, maybe don't bring out Heavy tanks in a long range map where they're useless. In close range however, the IS-4m is very powerful. Most all conventional rounds have a difficult time doing any damage, and ATGMs (and APDSDS) are a more reliable way of destroying the IS-4m. With a lot of the early ATGMs, its still easy to miss and can be difficult to one shot the IS-4m. So yes, ATGMs are fine where they are because most maps don't have you sniping that far with ATGMs. Most ATGMs are fairly slow. You can see them coming from that range and reverse behind cover. At long ranges, ATGMs are king. That is the best scenario for an ATGM. To sneakily crossmap an enemy tank. But that doesn't happen every single game. At closer ranges, ATGMs are less effective because anything with a stabilizer or good suspension can destroy whatever's carrying an ATGM.
HEAT-FS isn't broken. But some vehicles are very poorly balanced, and would need to either go down in BR or only have a max uptier range of 0.7. Case example; T-10M. Very strong heavy tank, incredibly good. Gets uptiered into XM-1, T-72, T-64B territory, where it starts to struggle a tiny bit. But at it's actual BR, it's very fun to play and balanced.
its like the survivability onion. one of the first layers are "dont be seen", then there are dont be hit, dont be penetrated, and lastly, dont be killed. HEATFS really only focuses on the "penetration" part. if you can avoid everything before that, you're good.
"don't be seen" "don't be hit" that's the two things a heavy tank and the main vehicles suffering from modern tanks at low BRs are worst at. So this just compiles on the idea that the main vehicle that suffers from the BR of these atgm/heat(fs) vehicles is also the one lacking any precursor to prevent the issue of getting shot to begin with. The meta of the game is fast tanks this coincides with your statements as they are true yes. But heavy tanks just were not designed made for that type of combat. They were designed with the guns of their era in mind not ones from 5 ,10 or 20+ years in the future.
@@moopynova bruh you just wrote a fat a paragraph about something i know and aware of, what i want is the glory days of where an IS4 and a maus dominted a corridor, idk that was extremely fun and please dont go on about the survivability onion like some tank expert.
@@n1hilanth314 ? I'm agreeing with you here . Heavy tanks are bad cos or heatfs etc so it's always just better to play a light tank. My fav tank is the black prince heavy for Brit at 6.0 I doesn't see many atgm or heat at this br so you can brawl real good but some heat do exist and they just pop up and ruin it.
I dont get the hysteria of the btrzd, to me its just a wirbel with slightly better stats at the cost being able to be machine gunned, like russias spaa line is practically garbage after the dual milk truck and to the zsu 57 so having a midline doesnt seem bad
the thing is back in the day, before the RU251 and such you had to actually flank a heavy tank, not face it head on and lol pen it anyway, thats the only advantage heavies had its their armor, and when someone so easily negates it without having to remember any weak spot without having to flank or abuse the long reload of said heavies it becomes very unfair, whats the point of playing this slow moving slow reloading tank fi anyone can lol pen it with heat ? i saw some people mention the onion and how you shouldnt get hit in the first place, well thats kinda hard when you are in a big fat slow heavy tank whose only viable play style is to spearhead the attack, heatfs made that playstyle no longer viable.
Play around your teammates and realize that your Heavy clown cheeks are useless in a full uptier like it or not. It's your lost anyway. I will still enjoy clapping those heavy cheeks with HeatFS and ATGM anytime of the day The super Heavies at 7.7 and the T-10 are already a lost case.
@@Haaton-of-the-Basement What part of you comment disproves what this guy said? You just said play around team and realise that you´ll die anyway... How is that balanced? Playing around team is something that all tanks need to do. The strength of heavies literally was to be less dependant on team and soak up some more damage for them. You don´t even need a full uptier to get clapped, heatfs already at 6.3. I could literally use a lekpz m41 at 7.7 and still be fine, but not a heavy. And how is it "his lost"? (It´s loss btw, not lost). If you are saying he will die anyway then what´s the point for him to play that?
@@danielzaba9913 a heavy tank at 6.3+ can still survive Heat-FS, Heavy mains are dummies, but i can say that the majority who use Heat-FS are braindead hitting the same exact spot expectting the tank to destroy. So playing around your teammates can help brush off that one annoying ants. However, those at 6.7 should realize that if they get a full uptier, they better off not playing heavies cause ATGMs are spammed left and right and get easily penned. The Uptier system shouldn't be 1.0 in the first place. My typo mistake. I didn't noticed i wrote "Lost" instead of "Loss" thanks for correcting.
One major problem with HEATFS that I have is it hitting the smallest possible obstacles and detonating without a hit. Another issue is against russian T 34s. Since they have large storages of fuel in the side armor. My HEATFS just hits the fuel and disappears. Doing no damage
My biggest thing is that I'm in late WWII vehicles (Both German and US, same tier at 6.7) yet I face cold war or near modern tanks/IFVs at a full uptier that have HEAT-FS/APDS/ATGM/APFSDS. I've seen warrior IFVs or Bradleys as a Tiger II H and T26E5 in RB. I have no effective counter other than camping and trying to waggle my turret to avoid my barrel being shot out while backing out. That's my gripe right now.
What do you mean you have no counter? Yeah, if you get hit then you're dead. The REAL counter is just shooting them. The cannon velocity on the long 88 is really good, so aiming is a little easier.The Pershing Jumbo has amazing explosive filler. Any center-mass hit on an IFV will kill it. If they're in a hull-down position and you got caught out in the open, then they played correctly. Just because you can be killed doesn't mean that the opposition is OP. Once you unlock the Marder and the Bradley's, you'll have a better appreciation for what's happening.
@@CrabbyPattyMoox I don’t think the opposition is OP. I can respect the amount of skill needed to land a shot with HEAT-FS especially at distance. My qualm is being matched with more advanced vehicles that are anachronistic to the timeframe my vehicles are in. Something I see often is BMP-1 with the 9M14 or 9M113 (mid 60s) fighting a Tiger IIH (1945). I’m definitely trying to get better but when you just get an ATGM up the ass from a kilometer away, just doesn’t seem right.
I don’t like using HEAT because most of the time the round hits a tree or fence or wall and just explodes and if it doesn’t do that, most of the time the round doesn’t do any damage or very little.
you mentioned that the scorpions main role was heatfs delivery but I have found that if you can get to a good position the aphe is much more reliable and with its small size and speed it can get to good positions easily
Great video, had this very same discussion with a friend the other day. When in that early HEAT-FS/ATGM BR range I usually carry some form of APCBC or APHE round (when available) as my primary shell for the post pen damage. At that 7.0-8.3 area the overwhelming majority of vehicle can get penned and one-shot by this type of ammunition. While HEAT-FS is good against heavily armored targets, it is inconsistent in how much damage it does and can get detonated on debris and foliage. Your analysis was spot on.
Was playing 6.7 America, had bulldog, t34, super Pershing, and the the first heavy tank I forgot the name of. An is3 and is6 completely recked our team because nobody could kill it.
Cos the APHE while can one shot IF you pen which if it’s against Russian post war or any heavy’s with sloped armour is extreamly hard front on and heatfs is very unreliable and as shown in the video sometime do jack all or detonate early cos their was a tree in the same postcode as you
@@bruhmoment3719 The IS 3 is still a very strong tank, so is the is6. Not all heavies are like that. But your team and probably you too (no offense) didn´t really know where to hit it, or your team was just getting wrecked and he had a lot of support. I can understand an is3 going against a T26E5 being strong, maybe even a little unbalanced but if anybody had competent heatfs, cas or went for the barrel, it would have probably resulted in a kill. I know for a fact that heatfs of that br 6.7 can pen anything there even from the front.
Funny enough, the chicken coop on the M46 does not stop HEAT-FS when I fire it at them, but when i use em, BMP's and Marders just seem to not pen somehow
I see the points you are making, but heres the thing. most heavy tanks need to make many sacrifices for their armor. for example, the russian's lose gun depression and have a long reload, but still have decent speed. the americans just lose a bunch of speed, etc. and most ATGM and HEATFS vehicles dont need to pay that much for their guns. two commonly complained about vehicles, m48 and leopard 1, the m48 has incredibly good armor, and can simply bully heavy tanks that cant pen it reliably and dont have the speed to avoid or flank it. so it is a fairly one sided fight of being unable to pen it, and it being able to pen you, and it also having better speed at the same time. at lower BRs you still have to worry about certain enemies, like very powerful SPGs that could easily take you out, but said SPGs dont have much speed or armor and are usually easily avoided or taken out. so it feels a lot more fair. and i get the whole not getting shot is the best defense, whats the point of heavies if you cant take a hit? you are killed just as easy as any other tank, but other tanks have better speed and usually better guns. Also, the first death to the m26 was because you are using the IS 6 wrong, and the m26 got incredibly lucky. maybe if you actually showed a half decent angle of the t29 shooting you and not a 3 milisecond clip, it would make more sense and prove a point. but from the 2 milisecond clip, to me it just looks like you got shot in the side or back of the turret. one of the skills of using heavies is defending your weakspots, like your sides... so of course you died. the main issue of HEATFS is that it makes your entire tank a weakspot that you cant defend other then not getting hit, and at that point you are just an incredibly slow medium tank. Incredibly lucky shot by that super pershing. maybe you should have spent more then like 4 matches playing to prove your point since the first APHE death was you overangling, the 2nd APCR death was showing weaker side armor, and the 3rd APHE death was just pure luck on the enemies part. last death. no ones acting like solid shot cant take out your barrel. that happens and yeah its annoying, but thats not the point. and the ATGM and HEATFS missing was just one of the biggest skill issues ive seen yet so dont use that to prove your point. even a vaguelly competent player would have taken you out there. especially since the IS 6's crew are so compacted so most HEATFS and ATGMs will oneshot you. Im not saying they should be moved down. that would be unfair. i just think some sort of way to seperate ATGM and HEATFS vehicles would be more fair. lets take a look at some heavies and normal tanks that dont use HEATFS. lets take the T32/T34/T29 vs the IS 6. comparable heavies. the T32 and T29 can likely just oneshot the IS 6 thru the mantlet, and the IS 6 can shoot the LFP or MG port of the t32/t34/t29. pretty fair, the IS 6 gets a smaller weakspot, but the T32/T34/T29 can hide their weakspot by being hulldown. and most medium tanks can also pen the weakspots. just a skilled heavy user will know how to make those weakspots hard to hit, but not impossible. you could also just flank the heavy so yeah. not too hard. you are saying "oh if there wasnt HEAT and ATGMs they would just be invincible" but thats not the case. just flank it or shoot the weakspot. ive oneshot a lot of heavies just using conventional ~ww2 era tanks with standard APHE just by hitting the weakspot (i main RB). its not that hard. the only heavy tank that i feel like isnt balanced vs normal tanks without HEATFS and ATGMs is the Maus, which you basically need HEATFS and ATGMs to take out due to its ridiculously thick armor all around. and the E100 also i guess. but thats two tanks (might i add, incredibly rare tanks), and i honestly think basically every other heavy apart from those two are easily fair and can be killed by non-heatfs/ATGM vehicles. you proved my point in the first few matches. also the AVRE doesnt have APHE it only has HESH.
Thanks for commenting on my video! I love that discussion is still happening here, and I'm having a lot of fun with this video even a year later. I noticed near the end of your comment you said: "you are saying "oh if there wasnt HEAT and ATGMs they would just be invincible" but thats not the case. just flank it or shoot the weakspot." This is a HEATFS video. Not a heavy tank video. More of my point in this video is that HEATFS is not overpowered. Heavy tanks are not invincible, and they cannot be killed by ONLY HEATFS/ATGMs. The thing you said about heavy tanks not being invincible and that all you have to do is flank, is kind of what I was showing with my four games in the IS-6. In fact, you pointed out those very games earlier in your comment saying that I only died in the IS-6 because I showed my weakspot/played poorly. Yeah, you get killed in the heavy tank more often not from HEATFS, but getting shot in the side/rear/weakspot. I could have chosen better games, but I wanted to use the first couple that I played. Your first paragraph makes so many assumptions that I just don't agree with. The M48 has too much armor? It can "bully" heavy tanks? The only thing US heavies sacrifice is speed (etc. ???)? Most HEATFS vehicles don't need to sacrifice for their firepower? Unfortunately my video is more ranty than I would have liked and I didn't make a lot of my points very clear. Definitely caused a lot of confusion here and there. Case and point: the AVRE bit. I was making a joke about how the AVRE only has besh, but now that I've shot it with my APHEBC it has that too, then it promptly explodes. The delivery was terrible lmao, I just read it straight faced.
@@CrabbyPattyMoox actually, thank you for the suprisingly nice response. I mostly made the point on HEATFS vs heavies since that is mostly what people complain about. no one really complains about HEATFS vs light tanks or medium tanks since well, an APHE round would also pen and oneshot. so heatfs is actually worse in that scenario since it might take several shots. so thats why i was specifically talking about it vs heavies since that is the context for why most people think it is broken. the US heavies only sacrificing speed bit was because i was trying to summarize basically the entire later half of the US heavy line from 6.7-7.7. things like the t26e5 has poor pen but good armor and speed, the t26e1-1 has more weakspots but a much better gun, t34 has a longer reload and no HE filler, t32 has a good reload and HE filler, M103 has a poor reload and no HE filler. but overall they are all a bit slow for their BR considering the faster mediums that are most common, and even compared to other nations heavy tanks. so yeah, a bit of an overgeneralization there on my part but the point being they all sacrifice either speed, reload, or HE filler for their armor. The m48 can just hulldown and be pretty well protected especially vs the weaker heavy tank guns, while still being able to pen said heavies everywhere. and due to the weird armor slivers for the m48s hull, and the strange angles, it is suprisingly strong due to volumetric making shots that should easily pen, just bounce. but again, it can pen heavy tanks basically anywhere frontally. and most heavy tanks have a very compact crew so often you will take out 2-3 of the crew. and at that point its likely immobilized and unable to fire, then an easy shot to the other side takes it out. so even if the heavy does shoot first, it likely just bounces. comparing APHE and HEATFS, both alone are about equal. APHE can oneshot, but needs to aim for weakspots. but is very effective for flanking vs sides of enemies. HEATFS cant usually oneshot, especially from the side, but you can point and click nearly anywhere and pen. so all you need to do is aim in the vague direction of important modules (driver, gunner, ammo, breech, whatever.) and you can cripple the enemy tank long enough to reload and finish them off. usually the 2nd shot will take them out if you aim for the rest of the crew. so HEATFS is quite strong as is, but its also the fact that it is on very strong tanks at low BRs. like the M48, very strong armor as explained earlier, good speed, and has that round. so when fighting heavy tanks, you make them essentially useless which simply isnt fun. also things like the leopard which have great speed and gun handling, and also have a suprising amount of armor frontally that can bounce shells somewhat often (nowhere near as good as the m48. but still enough to mention) plus several others. So HEATFS is mostly complained in the BR 6.7 to 7/8 BR ranges. before chemical protection appears, it can basically pen any tank anywhere. and yes, it will very rarely oneshot, you just need to aim in the vague direction of the driver, breech, gunner, etc and you will completely cripple them long enough to reload and finish them off. or just aim for an ammo rack which works too. and for some reason, it is also on incredibly strong tanks at shockingly low BRs. which is why people complain about it. Sorry if my earlier comment came off as a bit... strongly worded. as needing to deal with these exact scenarios of trying to use a heavy tank VS heatfs in uptiers is suprisingly common and the video sounded very mocking/rude in tone to people who say it is strong or have difficulty fighting it. since it is HEAVILY spammed in the ~7.3-7.7 BR ranges and any lower BR tank unlucky enough to get uptiered into that area. HEATFS before that range is usually alright, and after that range it falls off due to chemical protection, but at that specific BR range it is just incredibly powerful.
It’s not really that powerful dude HEATFS is give and take, you get more pen but less post-pen damage. If you think spawning in heavies means you can’t be penned from the front then you’re just gonna get your shit clapped, the game is designed to have counters to heavily armored vehicles. Which was kind of the entire point of the video. And the M48 has weak spots just like any other vehicle just because you bounce trying to shoot upper front plate doesn’t mean it’s overpowered.
@@mbiller26 As a heavy main, user, and enjoyer, i never expect to be invincible. one of the main skills you need to use heavies effectively is knowing what can and cant pen you. nearly every heavy tank has weakspots. and these can be penned by most tanks at their BR. another skill a heavy player needs is how to hide/make this spot hard to hit. The m48 does have weakspots yes, but very small and easy for the m48 user to hide. so while you need to stop and take the time to aim on the small to hit weakspots, it has already crippled half of your crew because it can just point and click anywhere and completely disable your tank. do i even need to mention the M60 that basically cant be penned anywhere except the smallest dots on the bottom of the mantlet? also volumetric always makes that shot bounce anyways so yeah. Im perfectly fine with incredibly strong counters to heavies. like incredibly strong guns that can point and click and kill heavies. stuff like the ST.Emil. its fair and balanced since its poorly armored and slow making it easily avoidable. strong counters like this are good since they can stop good heavy players. otherwise every other match would have heavies in enemy spawn. HEATFS is much like this, a point and click gun. while it admittedly cant always oneshot heavies like a ST.Emil can, it can still pen and have enough post pen to take down half the crew and disable the enemy tank. While i may seem biased as a heavy user/main, but i do occasionally play HEATFS tanks (not often since it feels wrong to use something so ridiculously strong. and they are also kinda boring). and it is insane how point and click it is. just aim at the UFP and get the driver and entire turret and then second shot takes out the rest while they cant fight back. I just dont understand. everyone treats HEATFS like the worst round imaginable due to its "lack of post pen damage" and then it gets put onto incredibly strong chassis with good armor and speed at lower BRs and consider it fair and balanced. its almost like people forget it still has a huge beam of instant death it launches into any tank that can completely disable most tanks with a hit anywhere in the vague vicinity of something important.
HEATFS is such a mixed bag. If you only get shot by it, it does seem unfair, but once you have to use it (either because it's the only round you get or the overall best one the vehicle has), you start to learn why it's not so magical. One of the first things you need to learn when using it is "what is the best component to disable first?". It's so rare to one shot and volumetric can make ammo shots a real risk so I often have to assume an ammo rack is a no-go and disable the enemy first. I could go for the gunner, but could he replace that crew member faster than I can kill the rest of the crew? I could go for the breech, but what if I'm in a light vehicle and he has a heavy MG or a good reverse speed? I could go for an engine or track, but can he turn his hull or turret faster than I can get a second shot off and what if his gunner or breech/barrel survive my second shot? This is especially true with 90mm or smaller HEATFS due to such a lack in post pen damage meaning you often need to take more time to figure out what you are going to do. As mentioned, this is also not factoring in the fact that it may do nothing because why not or the fact that touching any object in the world will detonate it. If I have the option between APDS and HEATFS, I almost always prefer APDS with a few HEATFS for the "just in case" moments. The AML-90 is one of my absolute favourite vehicles but if there is one thing I can promise, it's not because of the HEATFS.
Tanks like is6 uses fancy angles in armor therefore using thinner plates giving a bit of mobility. So instead of using like 300mm of raw steel on a heavy tank but no angles, you could use 200~250mm of raw steel angled at say, 52 degrees you would get equal, if not better effective armor.
yet since the plate is angled, you would have to use more material to cover the same height then if you used a flat plate, nearly negating weight savings (its a delicate ratio)
FINALLY , someone gets me , many go to WT thinking "oh i have the tiger or IS or Jumbo and expect to survive all the hit they get , no matter what play , youre going to get destroyed by snother tank, you sir got yourself a subscriber
6:53 I used to use TOW-2Bs a lot like this, then I realized it works much better if the missile goes at least 1m above the target becasue for some reason it has much higher chance to overpressure or just genereally do more damage. Don't ask the reasoning behind that I just know it works.
Me an Italian main who sits around 6.3 in my cars, knowing full well that HEATFS is very on/off on "Will it explode", and constantly exploding in my own tank. -One example would be yesterday in a SIM battle, I brought out the FIAT 6614, shot a Tiger II in the turret, and then he proceeded to turn his gun at me and kill me.
Found this video As a lover of PT-76B i agree with everything Also reminded me of how i didnt pen a panzer 4 with HEATFS frontally Skill issue Love the video keep it up
Heat FS 1shots my tiger II H every time I get hit by it. I get where you are coming from but I kinda loose the will to play after getting cross maped by an atgm as well. I was getting 1 shot spawn camped from 1.37 km away by an atgm buggy. It’s no fun.
As a Sweden player I feel extremely hurt you said nothing about the Ikv 103 and the HEATFS it gets at 4.7. Joking, of course, I'm not hurt at all, it's the gimmick of the tank and that's almost all it has going for it, but the Ikv 91 after it is a very good example of the HEATFS dilemma: it is the only shell it gets, but it has everything save armor going for it. In fact, its armor is the biggest problem with it as it can be penetrated with LOW CALIBER machine guns from the front. And the shell rarely kills in one shot unless you nail the ammo the first time, so you're forced to the back or sides of the map in a sniping position, which is almost forced because it even gets a laser range finder. You have to pop a shot off, and if you don't kill immediately, you have to run back, then fire again and hope you don't get hit by anything. The shell is excellent because it retains the pen over extreme distance, which is where you're forced to play at. It forces players to be far more passive, and a passive playstyle is often more hated because nobody likes having to fight on another person's own terms. It's not so much the shell as it is the tanks, I think.
You make a very good point. However shells and tanks go hand in hand as they mostly have what they used historically. The Ikv 103 and the swedes in general is a perfect example of hard to balance tanks that were much more advanced than WW2 tanks, but they still perform similar. The Ikv 103 specifically struggles a bit at it´s own br, but would be very good at lower br´s because of how annoying you are forced to play it and how annoying getting killed by it is. The Ikv 91 imo is a totally different animal, while it does force you to snipe or camp very often, it is very good at what it does, which is fulfilling the light tank role. I don´t think people are annoyed at the tank per say or even at the heatfs. They are rather annoyed at the br it meets it because the tank creates a very annoying result in the player because it forces camping, and an even more annoying effect on the victims, especially in downtiers which can´t really survive it´s shots or snipe-brawl with it very well. Maybe placing the tank at a br where it meets more IFV´s and similar light or medium tanks could actually be better for it, as it could pen them and also reduce stress in the victim´s it faces and the player that uses it as they could play more on equal terms. I don´t think that fighting against a passive player and playing on their terms is particurarly what annoys people, it´s rather not being able to compete in such a playstyle against the ikv or similar tanks around the 6.0-7.0 bracket.
the only problems worth mentioning is that we need either repair or fire research for free when we bought a tank. or make those 2 in the same research box
Back when I played WT often I would mostly play British tanks. The tortoise was my favorite. It may have been incredibly slow, but it had incredible armor and a gun good enough to let you duke it out with the heavies (if you knew where the weak spots are). It did have a flat bit on the front that could be penetrated so it wasn't invincible but it had many crew members so it could take quite a few shots before going down. If you were smart you could even angle its armor while reloading to give it even more resilience. As a result of all this I could help break through the enemy lines and even act as cover for allies who could form a line behind me as I slowly advanced toward the enemy at range. However, I could still be overwhelmed or disabled and have the tanks weaknesses exploited by experienced enemies. But all of this tank's strengths were completely negated by HEATFS. All of the tortoise's armor was useless against anything that shot HEATFS since they could penetrate the tank anywhere. Against stuff like tiger 2's, shermans, ferdinands and is-2's this thing was able to hold its own if I played well but if a ru-251 showed up then I was done for unless I could kill it before it got a shot off. I'm sorry if I sound like I'm ranting a bit but I honestly don't know what these heavy and super heavy tanks are supposed to against tanks armed with HEATFS. I mean it would be one thing if the heavies just got out maneuvered leaving their sides exposed but when you get your frontal armor penned by something with HEATFS and a 5 second reload it makes you wonder what's the point in bothering with heavies in the first place?
Well, you could always shoot those pesky little HEATFS slingers. I think it's ok that there are some tanks that can destroy the Tortoise, because like you pointed out, it takes several tanks working together to destroy just one Tortoise. You either have the ability to kill the Tortoise, or you have the ability to just shoot the muzzle brake. Tanks shouldn't be invincible. In a full down tier, the Tortoise is king. It's a pain to fight and it seems all but invincible. In a full uptier, the Tortoise can get slapped around pretty easily if it's not careful. And I think that's about right for War Thunder "balance" at 6.7. It's a compressed battle rating with all sorts of new things introduced like HEATFS, laser rangefinders, ATGMs, and thermals. It's really tough to balance all these new things coming together all at once. I don't like the cop-out of just: "split the tech trees into two different time periods" because it doesn't seem right for War Thunder. It also doesn't seem right to also just lazily say: "just decompress the battle rating." There's a lot of different ways to make War Thunder better, but I don't think complaining about HEATFS is helpful.
@@CrabbyPattyMoox I agree, complaining about HEATFS isn't going to fix anything. And a tank should not be invincible. But I do still believe that a tank should still be able to depend on its strengths to get it through a battle. I mean you can get many light tanks to work at uptiers thanks to their speed. And tank destroyers can work well too thanks to their powerful gun. Even mediums can perform well because they often still have enough speed and firepower to get around enemies and avoid being hit. But heavies can't really rely on their armor when they get uptiered and don't have the greatest speed so flanking isn't a great option either. So, they just have to rely on their firepower in which case you might as well just get a TD instead. And the issue with just shooting the HEAT slingers is that they often have little to no armor so shots just over penetrate (I'm a british main so I can't rely on apbc to kill all the crew inside or heat to hull break). So if I ever want to just kill a heat slinger then I need to aim at just the right spot for a one shot while they are moving at rapid speed and if I miss/overpen/not hit the right spot then I'm dead. IDK, maybe I have bad luck, maybe I'm just bad. But it is pretty disheartening when one mistake leads to you getting slowly picked apart by HEAT.
>Anti-air tanks suck Laughs in Swedish, in Wirbelwind, in Contraero, in Tunguska and in Shilka simultaneously. >Some ammo sucks >flashback to sherman grinds with AP Yeah, okay. you've got a point there.
Damn a this point I'm so OG that I remember the days when the Leo 1 was top tier at 7.7, and we called HEATFS "CHEATFS" cause it was perfoming like IRL. Those where the days bro ngl
The only times I really note dying to someone using a HeatFS shell is when they are a mile away and it hits a part of my tank that should be fine but overpressure kills my crew. Really annoying
While I agree that HEAT(FS) and APDS aren't a problem per se, I have to disagree with your overall conclusion. 6.7+ heavy tanks are completely unbalanced and not fun to play (most of the time), because you can't play them in their intended role of breakthrough or damagesponge. I think heavy tanks should be nearly invincible if played correctly because that is the skill part of playing a heavy. Just look at the 5.0 +-1 BR range it has a pretty good "rock paper scissors" like balance: Heavy > medium/SPAA/light, medium > light/SPAA, TD > heavy/medium, light > TD, SPAA > light. Light tanks are hard to place since they are so diverse. And when you reach ~7.0 this nice balance gets thrown out the window because half of the enemy team can kill you without really aming. The only option you have is to fulfill another role, and the next best role is TD (or medium if you play russia). But then one question arises: why even bother playing a heavy if you can play any other tank which will perform better?
this is the main problem, heavy tanks were made to fight AP, APC, APCBC and HVAP rounds, which they were VERY good against from the front, which is represented in the game, however, you now throw in these small, fast vehicles, which with their high mobility and smaller size have higher survivability, with ammo that makes your armor useless
The funny thing is poor expectations happened also in real life by some ace tankers, pilots, or hell even naval vessels at times could have gotten cocky. Not realizing that's how they would perish. Although this does add a lot more context to the term "Get good scrub" or "Quit being a noob and get good"
Only times i heard people complain about HEATFS has been when it has been with very particular vehicles as their volume of fire trumps everything as long as you have situational awareness I can't express how much pleasure it gives me to pop three IS-Zits in a row with the T114 even if i feel disgusting afterwards
i've found the rattel 90s heatfs to be very consistent at one shotting in my time playing, which i damn well hope it does the rattel has barely any mobility or armour, you fuck up and you're dead in it, like most other early heatfs vehicle
i agree i remember praising the IS3 and people saying its trash in most matches because "it gets pen by heatfs anyways" first thing you do if you see an enemy get rid of the most dangerous one with it and that's it even most of heatfs wielders at 7.3 or above are light tanks wich makes them easy to kill i enjoyed playing the IS3 a lot tbh
People don't have a problem with the ammo types in particular, the problem arises when you have to face technology that comes from 25 years in the future with your measly early 40s production tank designed in the late 30s.
My WW2 Sherman can kill the R3. It's not the most fair comparison, but like I said in the video: if the tanks are balanced correctly, I don't care what time period they're from.
My problem is when I’m playing a WW2 heavy tank which I want to do some brawling with, getting slapped from across the map by heatfs from a tank that has 1964 in the name…
Thank you I am tired of even bothering to explain to people that 'big pen' is not close to being op, actual monkeys just see big number and think op op
>Play one of the best post-war heavy tanks in the game. >Do well. >Make a video mocking people who complain that heavy tanks are weak. I'd really like you see talk about HEAT-FS the same way while playing Tiger II or IS-2 and being killed "firing squad style" by an Ontos, a Type 60 or any other lawnmower with recoilless gun before you properly get out of your spawn area every second or third battle. IS-6 is not a fair vehicle to compare other vehicles to - it has the same mobility as the M48, is smaller (lower to be exact, which is the most important dimension when it comes to detectability), and has a .50 cal on top. There's a reason we don't see heavy tanks anymore these days. That reason is HEAT-FS - the fact that something like the Type 60, M50 Ontos, T114, R3 T106 FA or the U-SH 405, so either an armored 4×4 or basically a tankette can destroy a couple of tanks in the matter of seconds made armor, so also tanks that relied on it, obsolete (that's why Leopard and AMX-30 are paper-thin). And no, throwing the _"skill issue"_ answer at every problem people have with the game (which is exactly what you did here) doesn't fix it, nor is it an answer. It just mean that you don't know what you're talking about or don't know the problem.
I hear so many people complaining about the Tiger II(h) I figured I should spend some time with it and see what it's really like. You're right, I'll use the other stuff and see what happens. I think that heavy tanks should be able to be killed, and if that's by HEATFS, then so what? I don't think they should be strong and I don't think that they are weak. They are/should be balanced. I think I did a little more in the video than just say "skill issue."
@@CrabbyPattyMoox OK, fair, this video was more than just a _skill issue_ argument. I'm just very "allergic" to it, sorry. As for the heavy tanks having to be balanced, yes I definitely agree, they should be. But there are plenty of historically accurate (or rather period correct) guns that can do so. Examples I remember include: German long 75mm, American 90mm, 17 pounder, but there are also a lot of French and Italian guns powerful enough. My idea of how the "HEAT-FS vs Tiger" issue could be solved is to separate WW2 vehicles from the post-war ones. Although to not ruin tech trees like France or Sweden, that would have to apply to post-war technologies: HEAT-FS, two plain stabilizer, APDS (unless British or Swedish). So there would be two separate matchmakers: - WW2, - Post-war, and three vehicle categories: - WW2 - pretty self-explanatory: vehicles like T-34, M4 Sherman or Panther would play only with other vehicles from its category. - Post-war - again, simple: vehicles with stabilised guns (minus Shermans of course), armed with HEAT-FS or ATGMs could play only other post-war vehicles. - Mixed - that's a bit more complex: this is a way not to ruin the balance of mainly France and Sweden: it would consist of that are post-war but don't include any new technologies in their design, for example the EBR (1954), Pvkv m/43 (1946), Concept 3 or M42 Duster as well as vehicles that were designed during the WW2 but served well past it, like the IS-3 or M19 MGMC. These vehicles could play either with WW2 or post-war vehicles.
@@CrabbyPattyMoox I don't mean splitting them up when it comes to research the way they did with naval. They would be the way they are now, just with a "red line" drawn in the middle, so that vehicles from one side of the line couldn't meet those from the other side in battle.
@@CrabbyPattyMoox My issue with heat vs heavy tanks is that a heavy tank was designed purely on the concept that its armour would be capable of resisting most rounds that hit it - Just cos 20 years later someone made a tank that was utter shit why does it get put back in time to fight something that it can beat? why do shit vehicles get a free handicap to prop them up? Strap a hellfire to a bicycle and shove it a 6.0? I guess you could compare it to giving a bad runner a 50m head start in the Olympics 100m to make it fair for him to have a chance to win at the expense of the others athletes that have to start on the starting line and run the full race. There should be a place for these strange unique vehicles but does it have to come at the expense others that are where they belong within their tech trees? I'm not saying I have the answers and by the look of the arguments no one not even gijan has the answers. But I seem to only see either end of the argument as if its black and white. I would suggest a game mode for WW2 only players so they can play heavy tanks and not have to worry about the meta that has risen of light tanks overtaking the game. Sometimes I like to play my warrior or BMP but id also like the chance to duke it out with a IS4 and Conqueror now and again but you don't get that anymore and its a real shame. this problem extends beyond ground into air with missiles and Mach jets vs subsonic no missile jets but that another issue that discussed enough elsewhere.
cool video anyways, I'm patiently waiting for your channel logo to become an official war thunder decal...you clearly deserve a content creator partnership.
I applied for the partnership, but I didn't have enough subs or views. I'll re-apply when I get up to 5k subscribers. Hopefully by that time I'll have a better logo too lol.
The best armor against cheatfs is distance. A lot of early cheatfs will have lower muzzle velocity when compared to full caliber shells or apds, and playing to that strength helps greatly, especially considering how fast velocity drops off when using cheatfs
The thing is, most high tier heavy tanks (6.0+) have quite high repair cost so the fact that there exists a shell which compleatly negates their only good thing makes the repair cost just outrageus, like 7k for a stock IS-4 when most things can just flank you with their speed, pen your god damn front with anything while youre stuck there with your 200mm of pen and bad optics and you dont even have a good reload! And the Tiger 2H has 6k repair cost AND YOU CANT EVEN BOUNCE ALL APHE SHELLS FROM THE FRONT! And yes, i realize that the problem is heavy tanks being far too uptiered but HEAT doesnt exactly help that problem
tiger II has a 8 sec reload and can bounce nearly anything but HESH and BIG HE in my experience my only deaths from APHE will be from the cheek and sides at the point doesn't matter if its AP APCR APHE HEAT HESH APDS I'd be dead from being flanked...which is thankfully a rare occasion but you have to remember T-34 85's 76w's IS-2'S most of the SU series will kill a II from the front if it's hit in the cheek.....and from what I've seen anything Russian is a Bias machine that bounces everything and lets you laugh at your foe until they hit the one or two spots that are not angled slopped or thick as hell
7:29 I would say something like: damn, I wish I had gotten a light little armor-less sardine can with a gun strapped to it instead of this heavy ass 150mm front armored metal box, since I would get oneshotted anyway. I mean at least with my light little shit I can get there faster instead of driving for 5 minutes to get blasted from the front! Oh wait, there are no light little armor-less sardine cans with a gun strapped to it at 5.3!
i think one of the real problem is veteran player playing against rookies to stop chasing away new players and then some sort of matchmaking process where good player play against good/average and noob play vs noob/average, some sort of balanced matchmaking would keep salt away from the battlefields and people would enjoy the game, noob don't get smashed, good player stop losing bc they are alone in a team, less frustration overall...
The later WW2 tanks should be balanced the same way 3.7/4.0 is balanced. At that tier every tank has its strength. The heavy tanks like Kv1 and Churchill feel like breakthrough tanks that can hold a street, but ONLY as long as they have SUPPORT. For support the mediums fill that role such as Sherman’s, PZ4s, T34s. They can pack a punch and fight well, but work best when a heavy is tank for them. Then Light Tanks should be set up in such a way that they are used for scouting or rushing objectives early while having an ok gun for damaging an unsuspecting target while using speed to escape. Tank Destroyers are the only tank that should be capable of penning any tank effectively because that is their entire purpose ever other tank should have difficulty with other tanks that is where the knowledge a player has comes in. It is your job as the player to know what the weak spots are on enemy tanks and what tanks to just avoid altogether. No tank from the WW2 era in game would be unkillable if it only fought other WW2 tanks. Sure it may be harder for some tanks, but just get good and learn your tank and what you can pick a fight with and what you can’t pick a fight with. The game should not be set up in a way that makes it pointless to play a Heavy or Medium because it will just be killed in one hit by someone camping in their spawn with ATGMs or a Heli that just spammed rockets into you from miles away. It is total BS to try and support the balance of Gajin at the 6.0-7.0 area. WW2 and Post WW2 should be separate because they are two separate time periods with separate tank doctrines.
fun when an m-51 across the map can kill my gunner and driver in a single shot, then wipe the rest of my crew in the next one. (just because it doesnt one shot doesnt make it bad)
I think the main issue is a big part of gaijins balancing is the fact they balance based on player stats, which is why the German m48 nearly ended up at 6.7 while the American one which is worse stayed at 7.3
Bruh, the british rank 4 along with france's rank 4 are 7.3 and 7.7, german teams are so bad they moved up all the competition to the tiger II and moved down their fucking bullshit 105mm mbt to 7.3
"ATGMs typically show up at lower brs on vehicles that can't do much else." *Laughs in Japanese 6.3-7.0* I should also note that HEAT slingers were PURPOSE BUILT to kill soviet heavies. That's why they exist, because armor was getting to thick and nobody wanted to try to fit a heavy enough cannon to go through it (aside from those weirdos in Britain)
Just split it, any tank past 1953 fights post war tanks. Anything before then fights late WWII tanks and keeps to themselves. That solves the whole debate of heatfs demolishing late war tanks or late war tanks being uptiered to post war tanks. It also keeps heatfs and atgms somewhat contained to vehicles with comparable ability to deal with it or those that can use it, and post war vs late war keeping the semi historical combat that war thunder hopes for. Splitting it isn't because of the over used complain but just to make it overall better for both sides.
I think it is more about the power disparity at the 6.3-7.3 bracket at least in my opinion. I think it is comical to have some shit like the BMP-1 which is an insanely good tank only .3 above the T44-100 which is honestly just a workable tank at the BR. This goes for almost every late war to early cold war tank at this bracket. Leopard 1s and M48 Pattons facing shit like Pershings and Tiger 2s I don’t think is ok in any regard. Trying to deny that the early cold war tanks have a massive advantage despite being placed at roughly the same BR due to 6.3-7.3 basically being a black hole that sucks everything in is egregious at best. So at the end of the day, BR decompression needs to come one way or another. In its current state, there is a massive power gap between tanks at this BR that frankly cannot go on.
İ just miss old armor vs armor situations, like maus vs is 4, is 6, i rarely encounter such situations anymore. Eighter you got bombed or missiled from nowhere.
Yeah, only past 6.3 (and the M36B1). I don't think it's a big problem if they're high enough in the battle rating to keep them balanced with other tanks.
I get your point but your argument with you dying to HEATFS only after 4 games is so bad. The thing is that guys you killed could penetrate you, you killed them not because of strong attributes of your tank(armour) but because you had better planning and situational awareness also few time was just luck. Thus it has nothing to do with the topic, it doesnt prove HEATFS is balanced. In the beginning you tell about how each class sacrifices something, but the thing is HEATFS is not bound to one class, this shit is multiclass, so light tank that sacrificed armour and firepower suddenly have firepower. Trade suddenly gone. Its true HEATFS has shit damage, but it doesnt matter, in ~70% cases HEATFS kills breach/gunner, and then in those cases ~70-80% means you dead in the next 1-2 shots.
That's also kinda the point. Gun handling and situational awareness is what does most of the work for ALL types of tanks. If you got killed by a HEATFS slinger, it's usually from somewhere you weren't even looking. Yes, other tanks CAN pen me. In the IS-6, pretty much anything can shoot it in the sides under the track. The point of armor is that you are more LIKELY to bounce. It's not guaranteed invulnerability, but it's enough to warrant a higher br increase. And because the armor is so good, it should be facing tanks with firepower that can actually do something to the IS-6. The tradeoff at 7.0 for HEATFS slingers is that they can kill anything, but anything can kill them too. I did mention that other tank types also have HEATFS, and that the shot is taken into account to put those tanks at higher battle ratings. The M56 and the M48 have the exact same HEATFS shot, but because the M48 has more armor and goes a little slower, it is at a higher battle rating. Light tanks don't always 100% sacrifice firepower, in fact, most light tanks have pretty decent firepower. All of their stats are taken into account for balance and put at the appropriate br. If light tanks really did have terrible firepower, they would be at a lower br. The Concept 3 and the Ratels have similarly terrible armor and high mobility, but because the Ratel has HEATFS it's at a higher br. The then you have the Rooikat, which has technically better armor, but equally horrible in practice. It gets a big firepower buff and is much higher in the battle rating. Light tanks aren't the only vehicle type that are buffed in terms of great firepower. They are significant because they have the earliest form of HEATFS in the game. So, to keep the game balanced, the very weakly-armored HEATFS slingers are put at lower battle ratings. I understand that every HEATFS hit is very likely to do damage. But because it doesn't do a lot of damage, it gives you more opportunities to be saved by a teammate, or for you to survive. Bottom line: you got shot by another tank and it killed you.
@@CrabbyPattyMoox the 4 games you played didnt really prove anything, the heatfs players didnt actually shoot you or just missed, you woulda most likely died 4/4 times had you actually been shot by the heatfs players, yeah you can get killed by apcbc so what?
What tank I really hate is the marder A1. Thermals, a great main canon, and good mobility all at 7.7 while the Bradley exists at 8.0 with a worse canon, atgm system, and chassis.
HEAT-FS can only really be a devastating shell if given to a tank that can give a quick follow up shot, like the TURM III, or basically anything that has less than a 5 second reload, the only thing that can save the shell is simply volume of fire, and at that point its not even the HEAT-FS that is making said tank powerful
@@kevincho1187 the turm 3 is pathetically easy to kill, huge ammo rack in the turret, 2 crew members sitting in a line, paper thin armor, its like most tanks at its tier, shoot first to win
Almost every match someone is in all chat at the start whining about being Uptiered instead of just making balanced lineups, adapting, and getting Rank Doesn't Matter rewards. Heavy Tanks are by design (IRL and in-game) at their best in a down-tier. So bring a good lineup and spawn it in when it's the right circumstances.
People complaining with their IS-6 should never be listened, those are just inexperienced kids, taking everything for granted. 7.0 is too generous from gaijin tbh, should've been 7.3 like the IS-3 back then
@@farbodghorbani1268 with it's 300mm pen top shell? sure damn will. the maus is like the only heavy tank at that br range of 6.0-8.0 i enjoy alongside the t26e5 and is2 1944
Heavy tanks, especially super heavies just kinda don't belong. If they get down tiered, they're invincible because no one has access to firepower that can reliably kill them from the front or even the side. If they get uptiered, they get destroyed from any direction. They're big, slow, and expensive and the sacrifice that their designs made aren't really worthwhile if it takes you 2 minutes to get to the battlefield only to die in one hit. They're breakthrough tanks meant for the end of WWII and the beginning of the Cold War, they smash anything that was designed before them, but can't compete with ammunition that was designed after them. They get to perform their intended role when downtiered, but that intended role was to be an invincible fortress on tracks. They're just incredibly hard to balance because balance was never in its design.
Heavy tanks suffer the most from br compression. Most heavies do just fine at their own br where they can bounce shells but still be killed. They can be balanced but it would require gaijjin actually putting effort into their game and not just blindly balancing based on player stats
Fr heat spamming at my front as a Tiger 2 waiting the momento death comes but It taked like 1 minute till i die but i get tortured in this time lol
" If they get down tiered, they're invincible because no one has access to firepower that can reliably kill them from the front or even the side. If they get uptiered, they get destroyed from any direction. "
and I think this is fine.
If you like Heavy Tanks you bring them in a BALANCED lineup and only spawn them when the map and tiering dictates just like with niche TD's.
Heavies is just a bully or be bullied at this point, whenever I play my 6.7 T34 heavy US, if I get downtiered to like 6.3 or 6.0 with tigers, panthers, and lekpz 41, I literally stomped everyone
and then when I meet TOWs and ATGMs on uptier, I wanna stomp my head.
Also not to mention that Heavies cost an arm and leg when you die because some guy sniped you with a 7.3 russian premium cause no bias
They could always buff APCR so that lower BR medium tanks could compete with higher BR heavy tanks. For some reason, most APCR rounds in War Thunder have lower penetration values than they historically did. For example, in War Thunder, the M4A3E2 (76) W has the M93 APCR round with 186mm of penetration at 100m range. It should actually have 239mm of penetration at that range according to primary sources. Another tank in the game, the T-44, has the BR-367P APCR round with 203mm of penetration at 100m range. The real life round had almost 250mm of penetration. None of these vehicles have any chance of frontally penetrating a high BR super heavy tank, such as the Maus, but if they had APCR rounds with historical penetration values, they absolutely could.
finally someone has brought this style of video essay to war thunder, i have been waiting for this. lovely stuff m8, hope u got a spacesuit bc ur channel about to go to the moon
Thanks Zoltan!
@@CrabbyPattyMoox did you join the CC discord yet?
@ZoltanSultan No, what's that?
@@CrabbyPattyMoox its basically a bunch of war thunder content creators
I think
how bout this:
HEATFS sucks beacause it is inconsistent
playing against it makes you think its op
playing with it makes you think its useless
the real problem is Gaijins penetration model
Lmao IRL Yugoslav tests found that 90mm HEAT wouldn't go off when hitting the T-55's UFP at a horizontal angle.
Maybe it's not all Gaijin's fault, HEAT ammunations are not very consistent in real life as well
@@explodingonc2782 while i must admit im not an expert, i think that HEAT shells should always work, just like heavy tank transmission never breaks down
adding rng to a shell that already feels like rng would make it even worse to use :)
The real issue is that people see heatfs and look at the pen value and explosive value and inherently misunderstand heat or heatfs and they think that it will be this insta-kill round that no matter where you shoot it will give you a kill. This is just false both irl and ingame. If you know where to shoot it will take you at most 2-3 shots to kill a tank, the first usually disabling the tank, so heatfs does work, it just works differently than other projectiles. That´s not to say you won´t be able to one shot with heatfs, because you will most definetely be able to aswell.
I think the main problem people have with HEATFS and ATGMs is that a lot of time they can negate the only good quality that some vehicles may have, which is the armor, since a good amount of the heavies that meet HEAT slingers usually have poor mobility, a slow to reload gun or both, and having no room for error in a machine that can barely move or takes ages to be in a position to fight back is annoying at best.
I don't think HEATFS or ATGMS are broken, but I understand why people would find infuriating to play russian roulette whenever they want to play a heavy tank in Effective HEAT Warhead range, even more so if they don't have access to a .50 Cal MG on the roof that moves independently to the turret in case a sardine-can-mobile appears.
Maus noises
No like literally, you are right, if you don’t have a roof mounted mg to save you, that can actually pen armor, then you do get screwed. Literally for example, just yesterday playing the is6, my barrel got taken out, I retreat to repair, aml pops up, I just spray em and he dies.
@@M_D_D_ I had similar case with those pesky italian recoilless and sweden rocket car
This!
The heavy tanks that run into this problem are more than capable of holding their own against whatever they're up against. The things you mentioned make them even more vulnerable to CAS for which there is no real strategy of defense. That's what we should be focusing on.
heatfs is fine when fighting vehicles of its own era where mobility was seen as king, but when matched against chunky mid-late war tanks and tank destroyers like the Elefant or even the Tiger 2s it just turns what used to be a heavy tank into a fat, slow box that might as well be made of cardboard, taking its main asset when fighting wartime vehicles and turning it into a massive liability.
“anti-air tanks suck”
the falcon with buffed belts taking 4/5 seconds to reload: *allow me to introduce myself*
well it sucks as an anti air compared to every other at 8.0.
Still takes 24 seconds to reload. Alot better than the almost 4 minutes it used to take though
AA vehicles should not have APDS belts.
They are Anti Air, not anti tank.
@@danieldeak9141 they had em historically for self defense reasons, but I definitely do think that certain vehicles with very potent APDS should have that taken into account when the BR is chosen, the Gepard is a prime example
@@danieldeak9141 and here comes the Sidam! Literally 60 rounds that you will shoot up in 2 seconds
"You lost. Get Better." It baffles me how many people in War Thunder just don't want to get better.
I once said something like "War Thunder is mostly skill-based" on reddit and get downvoted to hell lol
Noooo my invincible tiger faces postwar tanks tiger 2 to 4.7 pls
@@cheesecakedoublepeanutbutt6511 technically there is an rng element of player decisions others make, but otherwise yeah it's skill-based from what you do based on what you see the enemy do or assume they might do
You tell this to people crying about repair costs and they cry and shit their pants about how the game is predatory and Gaijin want money then you tell them about free premiums and they go into complete denial
not just in WT, literally all games now
I've been playing since 2014/2015 when it was only Germany and Russia. Then the US came and it was awesome. Then atgms came. Like the fire nation, everything changed.
I get what you're saying but when I'm in my bmp fighting tigers and panthers it's basically no contest. You're faster so you get the good positions first then as soon as they show up you spam heatfs and atgms at the target until they die. 9 times out of 10 you just aim near the barrel so it takes out the breach then they are essentially helpless.
Me when I'm in a 7.3 IFV destroying 6.7 and 5.7 tanks in a full downtier (they can kill me in one shot if I get hit)
@@CrabbyPattyMoox okay what about the ones that can hide behind a hill, completely safe, and destroy an IS-4M from 2km plus away? Should those be in that range or should they be moved up and given something like scouting?
@@CrabbyPattyMoox Reaction time everything.
The only reason why a 76 sherman is even REMOTELY competitive with a Tiger, is because of the stabilizer, which allows better reaction time.
The only reason why the M60 is a lower BR than the M60 AOS, is because the stabilizer grants faster reaction time.
You are delusional if you dont think reaction time isnt a factor.
BMPs and Marders dont need to worry about reaction time. The ATGM can self correct its course.
If we compare the time it takes for a Tiger or US T34 to go from 20kmh to stationairy, and compare it to the time it takes for a Marder/BMP to go from 20kmh, stationairy, and then fire, its NO CONTEST.
The suspension doesnt matter for the Marder. Their reaction time is simply BETTER.
The US conducted a study, where they had a large number of M1 Abrams, go against a smaller number of dune buggies with ATGM's attached.
Mind you these were M1 Abrams.
They had a sophisticated FCS, meaning shooting a moving target is point and click.
They had signficiantly more protection
They were STABILIZED and had a similar reaction time to these dune buggies.
Not only did these dune buggies get more kills, they also had LOWER CASUALTIES.
This is a video game and not real life, so there are differences, but my point remains.
So tell me again. especially with what we see in Ukraine, are you genuinely saying that Marders and BMPs deserve their spot at that BR?
HEATFS is unreliable and is a decent counter to german/US/Soviet heavies.
But ATGMs especially, are a different beast. Saying ATGMs are of similar caliber to regular ass rounds, is just ignorance.
@@KillerSniper55 Super heavy cold war tanks are basically useless on long range maps. Anything with an ATGM or a laser rangefinder can kill anything else at that battle rating. You probably shouldn't bring out a heavy tank on a super long range map where it's only ever possible to get those rare 2km+ shots, but if you do, consider not sitting out in the open. Most long range maps are completely garbage and don't have any sort of cover like big Poland or big Eastern province. The only big map with cover that I can think of right now is Red Desert. Again, maybe don't bring out Heavy tanks in a long range map where they're useless.
In close range however, the IS-4m is very powerful. Most all conventional rounds have a difficult time doing any damage, and ATGMs (and APDSDS) are a more reliable way of destroying the IS-4m. With a lot of the early ATGMs, its still easy to miss and can be difficult to one shot the IS-4m.
So yes, ATGMs are fine where they are because most maps don't have you sniping that far with ATGMs. Most ATGMs are fairly slow. You can see them coming from that range and reverse behind cover. At long ranges, ATGMs are king. That is the best scenario for an ATGM. To sneakily crossmap an enemy tank. But that doesn't happen every single game. At closer ranges, ATGMs are less effective because anything with a stabilizer or good suspension can destroy whatever's carrying an ATGM.
well the bmp 1 should be at 8.0 where the other atgm things are
HEAT-FS isn't broken. But some vehicles are very poorly balanced, and would need to either go down in BR or only have a max uptier range of 0.7. Case example; T-10M. Very strong heavy tank, incredibly good. Gets uptiered into XM-1, T-72, T-64B territory, where it starts to struggle a tiny bit. But at it's actual BR, it's very fun to play and balanced.
I sure like driving my Tiger 2 for five minutes just to get one shot by a Milan from across the map. So fun. Great gameplay.
I agree
But there is this thing called bad maps from where u can spawn camp or shoot from spawn to spawn that i hate and teaming that i face a lot
Yes, bad maps are horrible and a completely different topic.
its like the survivability onion. one of the first layers are "dont be seen", then there are dont be hit, dont be penetrated, and lastly, dont be killed. HEATFS really only focuses on the "penetration" part. if you can avoid everything before that, you're good.
ill keep that in mind next time i play the MAUS
"don't be seen" "don't be hit" that's the two things a heavy tank and the main vehicles suffering from modern tanks at low BRs are worst at. So this just compiles on the idea that the main vehicle that suffers from the BR of these atgm/heat(fs) vehicles is also the one lacking any precursor to prevent the issue of getting shot to begin with. The meta of the game is fast tanks this coincides with your statements as they are true yes. But heavy tanks just were not designed made for that type of combat. They were designed with the guns of their era in mind not ones from 5 ,10 or 20+ years in the future.
@@moopynova bruh you just wrote a fat a paragraph about something i know and aware of, what i want is the glory days of where an IS4 and a maus dominted a corridor, idk that was extremely fun and please dont go on about the survivability onion like some tank expert.
@@n1hilanth314 ? I'm agreeing with you here . Heavy tanks are bad cos or heatfs etc so it's always just better to play a light tank. My fav tank is the black prince heavy for Brit at 6.0 I doesn't see many atgm or heat at this br so you can brawl real good but some heat do exist and they just pop up and ruin it.
@@svehnis2360 Have you thought about not justifying an unbalanced system by saying "don´t play it"?
"Anti air tanks suck"
Falcon, BTR-ZD, ZSU-57-2, and R3: Hello there
I dont get the hysteria of the btrzd, to me its just a wirbel with slightly better stats at the cost being able to be machine gunned, like russias spaa line is practically garbage after the dual milk truck and to the zsu 57 so having a midline doesnt seem bad
the thing is back in the day, before the RU251 and such you had to actually flank a heavy tank, not face it head on and lol pen it anyway, thats the only advantage heavies had its their armor, and when someone so easily negates it without having to remember any weak spot without having to flank or abuse the long reload of said heavies it becomes very unfair, whats the point of playing this slow moving slow reloading tank fi anyone can lol pen it with heat ? i saw some people mention the onion and how you shouldnt get hit in the first place, well thats kinda hard when you are in a big fat slow heavy tank whose only viable play style is to spearhead the attack, heatfs made that playstyle no longer viable.
Play around your teammates and realize that your Heavy clown cheeks are useless in a full uptier like it or not. It's your lost anyway. I will still enjoy clapping those heavy cheeks with HeatFS and ATGM anytime of the day
The super Heavies at 7.7 and the T-10 are already a lost case.
@@Haaton-of-the-Basement you sound like the same people who cry everytime they get their shit pushed in by the Object 279.
what uptiers?! The problem i have id that you dont need uptiers when the heat fs vics are at your br (6.7 for most heavies)
@@Haaton-of-the-Basement What part of you comment disproves what this guy said? You just said play around team and realise that you´ll die anyway... How is that balanced?
Playing around team is something that all tanks need to do. The strength of heavies literally was to be less dependant on team and soak up some more damage for them. You don´t even need a full uptier to get clapped, heatfs already at 6.3.
I could literally use a lekpz m41 at 7.7 and still be fine, but not a heavy.
And how is it "his lost"? (It´s loss btw, not lost). If you are saying he will die anyway then what´s the point for him to play that?
@@danielzaba9913 a heavy tank at 6.3+ can still survive Heat-FS, Heavy mains are dummies, but i can say that the majority who use Heat-FS are braindead hitting the same exact spot expectting the tank to destroy. So playing around your teammates can help brush off that one annoying ants. However, those at 6.7 should realize that if they get a full uptier, they better off not playing heavies cause ATGMs are spammed left and right and get easily penned. The Uptier system shouldn't be 1.0 in the first place.
My typo mistake. I didn't noticed i wrote "Lost" instead of "Loss" thanks for correcting.
One major problem with HEATFS that I have is it hitting the smallest possible obstacles and detonating without a hit. Another issue is against russian T 34s. Since they have large storages of fuel in the side armor. My HEATFS just hits the fuel and disappears. Doing no damage
My biggest thing is that I'm in late WWII vehicles (Both German and US, same tier at 6.7) yet I face cold war or near modern tanks/IFVs at a full uptier that have HEAT-FS/APDS/ATGM/APFSDS. I've seen warrior IFVs or Bradleys as a Tiger II H and T26E5 in RB. I have no effective counter other than camping and trying to waggle my turret to avoid my barrel being shot out while backing out. That's my gripe right now.
What do you mean you have no counter? Yeah, if you get hit then you're dead. The REAL counter is just shooting them. The cannon velocity on the long 88 is really good, so aiming is a little easier.The Pershing Jumbo has amazing explosive filler. Any center-mass hit on an IFV will kill it. If they're in a hull-down position and you got caught out in the open, then they played correctly. Just because you can be killed doesn't mean that the opposition is OP. Once you unlock the Marder and the Bradley's, you'll have a better appreciation for what's happening.
@@CrabbyPattyMoox I don’t think the opposition is OP. I can respect the amount of skill needed to land a shot with HEAT-FS especially at distance. My qualm is being matched with more advanced vehicles that are anachronistic to the timeframe my vehicles are in. Something I see often is BMP-1 with the 9M14 or 9M113 (mid 60s) fighting a Tiger IIH (1945).
I’m definitely trying to get better but when you just get an ATGM up the ass from a kilometer away, just doesn’t seem right.
1:31 that the part where you cripling wrong man it op
I don’t like using HEAT because most of the time the round hits a tree or fence or wall and just explodes and if it doesn’t do that, most of the time the round doesn’t do any damage or very little.
Absolutely loved the animations while you were explaining it, got a new sub!
you mentioned that the scorpions main role was heatfs delivery but I have found that if you can get to a good position the aphe is much more reliable and with its small size and speed it can get to good positions easily
Great video, had this very same discussion with a friend the other day. When in that early HEAT-FS/ATGM BR range I usually carry some form of APCBC or APHE round (when available) as my primary shell for the post pen damage. At that 7.0-8.3 area the overwhelming majority of vehicle can get penned and one-shot by this type of ammunition. While HEAT-FS is good against heavily armored targets, it is inconsistent in how much damage it does and can get detonated on debris and foliage. Your analysis was spot on.
Was playing 6.7 America, had bulldog, t34, super Pershing, and the the first heavy tank I forgot the name of. An is3 and is6 completely recked our team because nobody could kill it.
Cos the APHE while can one shot IF you pen which if it’s against Russian post war or any heavy’s with sloped armour is extreamly hard front on and heatfs is very unreliable and as shown in the video sometime do jack all or detonate early cos their was a tree in the same postcode as you
The first heavy tank? Jumbo or the T26E5? which is also a Super Pershing...
@@Haaton-of-the-Basement i am dumb, i meant t26e5 sorry
@@bruhmoment3719 The IS 3 is still a very strong tank, so is the is6. Not all heavies are like that. But your team and probably you too (no offense) didn´t really know where to hit it, or your team was just getting wrecked and he had a lot of support.
I can understand an is3 going against a T26E5 being strong, maybe even a little unbalanced but if anybody had competent heatfs, cas or went for the barrel, it would have probably resulted in a kill. I know for a fact that heatfs of that br 6.7 can pen anything there even from the front.
Funny enough, the chicken coop on the M46 does not stop HEAT-FS when I fire it at them, but when i use em, BMP's and Marders just seem to not pen somehow
I see the points you are making, but heres the thing.
most heavy tanks need to make many sacrifices for their armor. for example, the russian's lose gun depression and have a long reload, but still have decent speed. the americans just lose a bunch of speed, etc. and most ATGM and HEATFS vehicles dont need to pay that much for their guns. two commonly complained about vehicles, m48 and leopard 1, the m48 has incredibly good armor, and can simply bully heavy tanks that cant pen it reliably and dont have the speed to avoid or flank it. so it is a fairly one sided fight of being unable to pen it, and it being able to pen you, and it also having better speed at the same time. at lower BRs you still have to worry about certain enemies, like very powerful SPGs that could easily take you out, but said SPGs dont have much speed or armor and are usually easily avoided or taken out. so it feels a lot more fair. and i get the whole not getting shot is the best defense, whats the point of heavies if you cant take a hit? you are killed just as easy as any other tank, but other tanks have better speed and usually better guns.
Also, the first death to the m26 was because you are using the IS 6 wrong, and the m26 got incredibly lucky.
maybe if you actually showed a half decent angle of the t29 shooting you and not a 3 milisecond clip, it would make more sense and prove a point. but from the 2 milisecond clip, to me it just looks like you got shot in the side or back of the turret. one of the skills of using heavies is defending your weakspots, like your sides... so of course you died. the main issue of HEATFS is that it makes your entire tank a weakspot that you cant defend other then not getting hit, and at that point you are just an incredibly slow medium tank.
Incredibly lucky shot by that super pershing. maybe you should have spent more then like 4 matches playing to prove your point since the first APHE death was you overangling, the 2nd APCR death was showing weaker side armor, and the 3rd APHE death was just pure luck on the enemies part.
last death. no ones acting like solid shot cant take out your barrel. that happens and yeah its annoying, but thats not the point. and the ATGM and HEATFS missing was just one of the biggest skill issues ive seen yet so dont use that to prove your point. even a vaguelly competent player would have taken you out there. especially since the IS 6's crew are so compacted so most HEATFS and ATGMs will oneshot you.
Im not saying they should be moved down. that would be unfair. i just think some sort of way to seperate ATGM and HEATFS vehicles would be more fair. lets take a look at some heavies and normal tanks that dont use HEATFS. lets take the T32/T34/T29 vs the IS 6. comparable heavies. the T32 and T29 can likely just oneshot the IS 6 thru the mantlet, and the IS 6 can shoot the LFP or MG port of the t32/t34/t29. pretty fair, the IS 6 gets a smaller weakspot, but the T32/T34/T29 can hide their weakspot by being hulldown. and most medium tanks can also pen the weakspots. just a skilled heavy user will know how to make those weakspots hard to hit, but not impossible. you could also just flank the heavy so yeah. not too hard. you are saying "oh if there wasnt HEAT and ATGMs they would just be invincible" but thats not the case. just flank it or shoot the weakspot. ive oneshot a lot of heavies just using conventional ~ww2 era tanks with standard APHE just by hitting the weakspot (i main RB). its not that hard. the only heavy tank that i feel like isnt balanced vs normal tanks without HEATFS and ATGMs is the Maus, which you basically need HEATFS and ATGMs to take out due to its ridiculously thick armor all around. and the E100 also i guess. but thats two tanks (might i add, incredibly rare tanks), and i honestly think basically every other heavy apart from those two are easily fair and can be killed by non-heatfs/ATGM vehicles. you proved my point in the first few matches.
also the AVRE doesnt have APHE it only has HESH.
Thanks for commenting on my video! I love that discussion is still happening here, and I'm having a lot of fun with this video even a year later.
I noticed near the end of your comment you said: "you are saying "oh if there wasnt HEAT and ATGMs they would just be invincible" but thats not the case. just flank it or shoot the weakspot."
This is a HEATFS video. Not a heavy tank video. More of my point in this video is that HEATFS is not overpowered. Heavy tanks are not invincible, and they cannot be killed by ONLY HEATFS/ATGMs. The thing you said about heavy tanks not being invincible and that all you have to do is flank, is kind of what I was showing with my four games in the IS-6. In fact, you pointed out those very games earlier in your comment saying that I only died in the IS-6 because I showed my weakspot/played poorly. Yeah, you get killed in the heavy tank more often not from HEATFS, but getting shot in the side/rear/weakspot. I could have chosen better games, but I wanted to use the first couple that I played.
Your first paragraph makes so many assumptions that I just don't agree with. The M48 has too much armor? It can "bully" heavy tanks? The only thing US heavies sacrifice is speed (etc. ???)? Most HEATFS vehicles don't need to sacrifice for their firepower?
Unfortunately my video is more ranty than I would have liked and I didn't make a lot of my points very clear. Definitely caused a lot of confusion here and there. Case and point: the AVRE bit. I was making a joke about how the AVRE only has besh, but now that I've shot it with my APHEBC it has that too, then it promptly explodes. The delivery was terrible lmao, I just read it straight faced.
@@CrabbyPattyMoox actually, thank you for the suprisingly nice response. I mostly made the point on HEATFS vs heavies since that is mostly what people complain about. no one really complains about HEATFS vs light tanks or medium tanks since well, an APHE round would also pen and oneshot. so heatfs is actually worse in that scenario since it might take several shots. so thats why i was specifically talking about it vs heavies since that is the context for why most people think it is broken.
the US heavies only sacrificing speed bit was because i was trying to summarize basically the entire later half of the US heavy line from 6.7-7.7. things like the t26e5 has poor pen but good armor and speed, the t26e1-1 has more weakspots but a much better gun, t34 has a longer reload and no HE filler, t32 has a good reload and HE filler, M103 has a poor reload and no HE filler. but overall they are all a bit slow for their BR considering the faster mediums that are most common, and even compared to other nations heavy tanks. so yeah, a bit of an overgeneralization there on my part but the point being they all sacrifice either speed, reload, or HE filler for their armor.
The m48 can just hulldown and be pretty well protected especially vs the weaker heavy tank guns, while still being able to pen said heavies everywhere. and due to the weird armor slivers for the m48s hull, and the strange angles, it is suprisingly strong due to volumetric making shots that should easily pen, just bounce. but again, it can pen heavy tanks basically anywhere frontally. and most heavy tanks have a very compact crew so often you will take out 2-3 of the crew. and at that point its likely immobilized and unable to fire, then an easy shot to the other side takes it out. so even if the heavy does shoot first, it likely just bounces.
comparing APHE and HEATFS, both alone are about equal. APHE can oneshot, but needs to aim for weakspots. but is very effective for flanking vs sides of enemies. HEATFS cant usually oneshot, especially from the side, but you can point and click nearly anywhere and pen. so all you need to do is aim in the vague direction of important modules (driver, gunner, ammo, breech, whatever.) and you can cripple the enemy tank long enough to reload and finish them off. usually the 2nd shot will take them out if you aim for the rest of the crew. so HEATFS is quite strong as is, but its also the fact that it is on very strong tanks at low BRs. like the M48, very strong armor as explained earlier, good speed, and has that round. so when fighting heavy tanks, you make them essentially useless which simply isnt fun. also things like the leopard which have great speed and gun handling, and also have a suprising amount of armor frontally that can bounce shells somewhat often (nowhere near as good as the m48. but still enough to mention) plus several others.
So HEATFS is mostly complained in the BR 6.7 to 7/8 BR ranges. before chemical protection appears, it can basically pen any tank anywhere. and yes, it will very rarely oneshot, you just need to aim in the vague direction of the driver, breech, gunner, etc and you will completely cripple them long enough to reload and finish them off. or just aim for an ammo rack which works too. and for some reason, it is also on incredibly strong tanks at shockingly low BRs. which is why people complain about it.
Sorry if my earlier comment came off as a bit... strongly worded. as needing to deal with these exact scenarios of trying to use a heavy tank VS heatfs in uptiers is suprisingly common and the video sounded very mocking/rude in tone to people who say it is strong or have difficulty fighting it. since it is HEAVILY spammed in the ~7.3-7.7 BR ranges and any lower BR tank unlucky enough to get uptiered into that area. HEATFS before that range is usually alright, and after that range it falls off due to chemical protection, but at that specific BR range it is just incredibly powerful.
It’s not really that powerful dude HEATFS is give and take, you get more pen but less post-pen damage.
If you think spawning in heavies means you can’t be penned from the front then you’re just gonna get your shit clapped, the game is designed to have counters to heavily armored vehicles. Which was kind of the entire point of the video.
And the M48 has weak spots just like any other vehicle just because you bounce trying to shoot upper front plate doesn’t mean it’s overpowered.
@@mbiller26 As a heavy main, user, and enjoyer, i never expect to be invincible. one of the main skills you need to use heavies effectively is knowing what can and cant pen you. nearly every heavy tank has weakspots. and these can be penned by most tanks at their BR. another skill a heavy player needs is how to hide/make this spot hard to hit.
The m48 does have weakspots yes, but very small and easy for the m48 user to hide. so while you need to stop and take the time to aim on the small to hit weakspots, it has already crippled half of your crew because it can just point and click anywhere and completely disable your tank. do i even need to mention the M60 that basically cant be penned anywhere except the smallest dots on the bottom of the mantlet? also volumetric always makes that shot bounce anyways so yeah.
Im perfectly fine with incredibly strong counters to heavies. like incredibly strong guns that can point and click and kill heavies. stuff like the ST.Emil. its fair and balanced since its poorly armored and slow making it easily avoidable. strong counters like this are good since they can stop good heavy players. otherwise every other match would have heavies in enemy spawn.
HEATFS is much like this, a point and click gun. while it admittedly cant always oneshot heavies like a ST.Emil can, it can still pen and have enough post pen to take down half the crew and disable the enemy tank.
While i may seem biased as a heavy user/main, but i do occasionally play HEATFS tanks (not often since it feels wrong to use something so ridiculously strong. and they are also kinda boring). and it is insane how point and click it is. just aim at the UFP and get the driver and entire turret and then second shot takes out the rest while they cant fight back.
I just dont understand. everyone treats HEATFS like the worst round imaginable due to its "lack of post pen damage" and then it gets put onto incredibly strong chassis with good armor and speed at lower BRs and consider it fair and balanced. its almost like people forget it still has a huge beam of instant death it launches into any tank that can completely disable most tanks with a hit anywhere in the vague vicinity of something important.
Are you just using chat gpt? This is getting out of hand lol. Come join my discord and we can discuss more there
HEATFS is such a mixed bag. If you only get shot by it, it does seem unfair, but once you have to use it (either because it's the only round you get or the overall best one the vehicle has), you start to learn why it's not so magical. One of the first things you need to learn when using it is "what is the best component to disable first?". It's so rare to one shot and volumetric can make ammo shots a real risk so I often have to assume an ammo rack is a no-go and disable the enemy first.
I could go for the gunner, but could he replace that crew member faster than I can kill the rest of the crew? I could go for the breech, but what if I'm in a light vehicle and he has a heavy MG or a good reverse speed? I could go for an engine or track, but can he turn his hull or turret faster than I can get a second shot off and what if his gunner or breech/barrel survive my second shot?
This is especially true with 90mm or smaller HEATFS due to such a lack in post pen damage meaning you often need to take more time to figure out what you are going to do. As mentioned, this is also not factoring in the fact that it may do nothing because why not or the fact that touching any object in the world will detonate it. If I have the option between APDS and HEATFS, I almost always prefer APDS with a few HEATFS for the "just in case" moments.
The AML-90 is one of my absolute favourite vehicles but if there is one thing I can promise, it's not because of the HEATFS.
Exactly, HEATFS is not THE shot to use, it's just another one that exists
Tanks like is6 uses fancy angles in armor therefore using thinner plates giving a bit of mobility. So instead of using like 300mm of raw steel on a heavy tank but no angles, you could use 200~250mm of raw steel angled at say, 52 degrees you would get equal, if not better effective armor.
yet since the plate is angled, you would have to use more material to cover the same height then if you used a flat plate, nearly negating weight savings (its a delicate ratio)
FINALLY , someone gets me , many go to WT thinking "oh i have the tiger or IS or Jumbo and expect to survive all the hit they get , no matter what play , youre going to get destroyed by snother tank, you sir got yourself a subscriber
WW2 HEAVY TANKS SHOULD NOT SEE HEATFS, MISSILE SLINGER
I am absolutely loving your videos, such a breath of fresh air in the wt community with your opinions and quick form videos
6:53 I used to use TOW-2Bs a lot like this, then I realized it works much better if the missile goes at least 1m above the target becasue for some reason it has much higher chance to overpressure or just genereally do more damage. Don't ask the reasoning behind that I just know it works.
Me an Italian main who sits around 6.3 in my cars, knowing full well that HEATFS is very on/off on "Will it explode", and constantly exploding in my own tank.
-One example would be yesterday in a SIM battle, I brought out the FIAT 6614, shot a Tiger II in the turret, and then he proceeded to turn his gun at me and kill me.
Same here
heat is inconsisnent, dats why u aim for weakspots like gunner or ammo, ammo not detonating is cancer tho
Found this video
As a lover of PT-76B i agree with everything
Also reminded me of how i didnt pen a panzer 4 with HEATFS frontally
Skill issue
Love the video keep it up
Heat FS 1shots my tiger II H every time I get hit by it. I get where you are coming from but I kinda loose the will to play after getting cross maped by an atgm as well. I was getting 1 shot spawn camped from 1.37 km away by an atgm buggy. It’s no fun.
"how about if you didn't get shot, you wouldn't have f**king died!" lmfao
Those who say heat-fs is op should just try to play PT-76B. It has stabilizer and 200mm heat-fs. It should be very broken at 5.3br !!
"next guys an AVRE. He has HESH, but also APHE-BC"
Since when?
That was a bit. The APHEBE in question was from the IS-6. So the AVRE has HESH, but when I shot him he also earned himself some APHEBC lol
@@CrabbyPattyMoox Yea that makes sense, just a bit poorly worded
As a Sweden player I feel extremely hurt you said nothing about the Ikv 103 and the HEATFS it gets at 4.7. Joking, of course, I'm not hurt at all, it's the gimmick of the tank and that's almost all it has going for it, but the Ikv 91 after it is a very good example of the HEATFS dilemma: it is the only shell it gets, but it has everything save armor going for it. In fact, its armor is the biggest problem with it as it can be penetrated with LOW CALIBER machine guns from the front. And the shell rarely kills in one shot unless you nail the ammo the first time, so you're forced to the back or sides of the map in a sniping position, which is almost forced because it even gets a laser range finder. You have to pop a shot off, and if you don't kill immediately, you have to run back, then fire again and hope you don't get hit by anything. The shell is excellent because it retains the pen over extreme distance, which is where you're forced to play at. It forces players to be far more passive, and a passive playstyle is often more hated because nobody likes having to fight on another person's own terms. It's not so much the shell as it is the tanks, I think.
You make a very good point. However shells and tanks go hand in hand as they mostly have what they used historically. The Ikv 103 and the swedes in general is a perfect example of hard to balance tanks that were much more advanced than WW2 tanks, but they still perform similar. The Ikv 103 specifically struggles a bit at it´s own br, but would be very good at lower br´s because of how annoying you are forced to play it and how annoying getting killed by it is.
The Ikv 91 imo is a totally different animal, while it does force you to snipe or camp very often, it is very good at what it does, which is fulfilling the light tank role. I don´t think people are annoyed at the tank per say or even at the heatfs. They are rather annoyed at the br it meets it because the tank creates a very annoying result in the player because it forces camping, and an even more annoying effect on the victims, especially in downtiers which can´t really survive it´s shots or snipe-brawl with it very well. Maybe placing the tank at a br where it meets more IFV´s and similar light or medium tanks could actually be better for it, as it could pen them and also reduce stress in the victim´s it faces and the player that uses it as they could play more on equal terms.
I don´t think that fighting against a passive player and playing on their terms is particurarly what annoys people, it´s rather not being able to compete in such a playstyle against the ikv or similar tanks around the 6.0-7.0 bracket.
the only problems worth mentioning is that we need either repair or fire research for free when we bought a tank. or make those 2 in the same research box
This is a video about HEATFS. I didn't have anything else that I wanted to talk about. Still don't.
Back when I played WT often I would mostly play British tanks. The tortoise was my favorite. It may have been incredibly slow, but it had incredible armor and a gun good enough to let you duke it out with the heavies (if you knew where the weak spots are). It did have a flat bit on the front that could be penetrated so it wasn't invincible but it had many crew members so it could take quite a few shots before going down. If you were smart you could even angle its armor while reloading to give it even more resilience. As a result of all this I could help break through the enemy lines and even act as cover for allies who could form a line behind me as I slowly advanced toward the enemy at range. However, I could still be overwhelmed or disabled and have the tanks weaknesses exploited by experienced enemies. But all of this tank's strengths were completely negated by HEATFS. All of the tortoise's armor was useless against anything that shot HEATFS since they could penetrate the tank anywhere. Against stuff like tiger 2's, shermans, ferdinands and is-2's this thing was able to hold its own if I played well but if a ru-251 showed up then I was done for unless I could kill it before it got a shot off.
I'm sorry if I sound like I'm ranting a bit but I honestly don't know what these heavy and super heavy tanks are supposed to against tanks armed with HEATFS. I mean it would be one thing if the heavies just got out maneuvered leaving their sides exposed but when you get your frontal armor penned by something with HEATFS and a 5 second reload it makes you wonder what's the point in bothering with heavies in the first place?
Well, you could always shoot those pesky little HEATFS slingers. I think it's ok that there are some tanks that can destroy the Tortoise, because like you pointed out, it takes several tanks working together to destroy just one Tortoise. You either have the ability to kill the Tortoise, or you have the ability to just shoot the muzzle brake. Tanks shouldn't be invincible. In a full down tier, the Tortoise is king. It's a pain to fight and it seems all but invincible. In a full uptier, the Tortoise can get slapped around pretty easily if it's not careful.
And I think that's about right for War Thunder "balance" at 6.7. It's a compressed battle rating with all sorts of new things introduced like HEATFS, laser rangefinders, ATGMs, and thermals. It's really tough to balance all these new things coming together all at once. I don't like the cop-out of just: "split the tech trees into two different time periods" because it doesn't seem right for War Thunder. It also doesn't seem right to also just lazily say: "just decompress the battle rating." There's a lot of different ways to make War Thunder better, but I don't think complaining about HEATFS is helpful.
@@CrabbyPattyMoox I agree, complaining about HEATFS isn't going to fix anything. And a tank should not be invincible. But I do still believe that a tank should still be able to depend on its strengths to get it through a battle. I mean you can get many light tanks to work at uptiers thanks to their speed. And tank destroyers can work well too thanks to their powerful gun. Even mediums can perform well because they often still have enough speed and firepower to get around enemies and avoid being hit. But heavies can't really rely on their armor when they get uptiered and don't have the greatest speed so flanking isn't a great option either. So, they just have to rely on their firepower in which case you might as well just get a TD instead.
And the issue with just shooting the HEAT slingers is that they often have little to no armor so shots just over penetrate (I'm a british main so I can't rely on apbc to kill all the crew inside or heat to hull break). So if I ever want to just kill a heat slinger then I need to aim at just the right spot for a one shot while they are moving at rapid speed and if I miss/overpen/not hit the right spot then I'm dead. IDK, maybe I have bad luck, maybe I'm just bad. But it is pretty disheartening when one mistake leads to you getting slowly picked apart by HEAT.
This video was pretty funny lol.
>Anti-air tanks suck
Laughs in Swedish, in Wirbelwind, in Contraero, in Tunguska and in Shilka simultaneously.
>Some ammo sucks
>flashback to sherman grinds with AP
Yeah, okay. you've got a point there.
Damn a this point I'm so OG that I remember the days when the Leo 1 was top tier at 7.7, and we called HEATFS "CHEATFS" cause it was perfoming like IRL. Those where the days bro ngl
Gah I remember the days when france got added and its rank 4 actually was rank 4 and not rank 5
The only times I really note dying to someone using a HeatFS shell is when they are a mile away and it hits a part of my tank that should be fine but overpressure kills my crew. Really annoying
"war thunder is a video game about balance" youre a funny man
It should be. It's clearly not aiming for historically accuracy, but instead, trying to balance tanks based on performance to be "eSports Ready"
While I agree that HEAT(FS) and APDS aren't a problem per se, I have to disagree with your overall conclusion. 6.7+ heavy tanks are completely unbalanced and not fun to play (most of the time), because you can't play them in their intended role of breakthrough or damagesponge. I think heavy tanks should be nearly invincible if played correctly because that is the skill part of playing a heavy. Just look at the 5.0 +-1 BR range it has a pretty good "rock paper scissors" like balance: Heavy > medium/SPAA/light, medium > light/SPAA, TD > heavy/medium, light > TD, SPAA > light. Light tanks are hard to place since they are so diverse. And when you reach ~7.0 this nice balance gets thrown out the window because half of the enemy team can kill you without really aming. The only option you have is to fulfill another role, and the next best role is TD (or medium if you play russia). But then one question arises: why even bother playing a heavy if you can play any other tank which will perform better?
this is the main problem, heavy tanks were made to fight AP, APC, APCBC and HVAP rounds, which they were VERY good against from the front, which is represented in the game, however, you now throw in these small, fast vehicles, which with their high mobility and smaller size have higher survivability, with ammo that makes your armor useless
WeLl ClEaRlY yOu GoT oUtPlAyEd
The funny thing is poor expectations happened also in real life by some ace tankers, pilots, or hell even naval vessels at times could have gotten cocky. Not realizing that's how they would perish. Although this does add a lot more context to the term "Get good scrub" or "Quit being a noob and get good"
This much sense should not be allowed 😂
I must admit I am guilty of getting pissed off with the old chem round...
4:44
I wish it had APHE. 165mm APHE sounds like lobbing a bomb at others.
Oh wait, that's HESH.
Only times i heard people complain about HEATFS has been when it has been with very particular vehicles as their volume of fire trumps everything as long as you have situational awareness
I can't express how much pleasure it gives me to pop three IS-Zits in a row with the T114 even if i feel disgusting afterwards
i've found the rattel 90s heatfs to be very consistent at one shotting in my time playing,
which i damn well hope it does the rattel has barely any mobility or armour, you fuck up and you're dead in it, like most other early heatfs vehicle
i agree i remember praising the IS3 and people saying its trash in most matches because "it gets pen by heatfs anyways" first thing you do if you see an enemy get rid of the most dangerous one with it and that's it even most of heatfs wielders at 7.3 or above are light tanks wich makes them easy to kill i enjoyed playing the IS3 a lot tbh
Another upload Poggers I have 0 idea Abt HEATFS cuz im only at br 3.7
People don't have a problem with the ammo types in particular, the problem arises when you have to face technology that comes from 25 years in the future with your measly early 40s production tank designed in the late 30s.
My WW2 Sherman can kill the R3. It's not the most fair comparison, but like I said in the video: if the tanks are balanced correctly, I don't care what time period they're from.
I mean yeah its funny that the panzer 4 h can do that now and curbstomp early t34s
My problem is when I’m playing a WW2 heavy tank which I want to do some brawling with, getting slapped from across the map by heatfs from a tank that has 1964 in the name…
Thank you I am tired of even bothering to explain to people that 'big pen' is not close to being op, actual monkeys just see big number and think op op
"AA sucks"
WZ305: *Hello There*
Ayoooooo this man really just ended the argument with "git gud"
Heatfs is scary at early cold War era.. But top tier heatfs stock grind is hell
Oh I thought this was going to be the pain of starting rounds vs era
>Play one of the best post-war heavy tanks in the game.
>Do well.
>Make a video mocking people who complain that heavy tanks are weak.
I'd really like you see talk about HEAT-FS the same way while playing Tiger II or IS-2 and being killed "firing squad style" by an Ontos, a Type 60 or any other lawnmower with recoilless gun before you properly get out of your spawn area every second or third battle. IS-6 is not a fair vehicle to compare other vehicles to - it has the same mobility as the M48, is smaller (lower to be exact, which is the most important dimension when it comes to detectability), and has a .50 cal on top.
There's a reason we don't see heavy tanks anymore these days. That reason is HEAT-FS - the fact that something like the Type 60, M50 Ontos, T114, R3 T106 FA or the U-SH 405, so either an armored 4×4 or basically a tankette can destroy a couple of tanks in the matter of seconds made armor, so also tanks that relied on it, obsolete (that's why Leopard and AMX-30 are paper-thin).
And no, throwing the _"skill issue"_ answer at every problem people have with the game (which is exactly what you did here) doesn't fix it, nor is it an answer. It just mean that you don't know what you're talking about or don't know the problem.
I hear so many people complaining about the Tiger II(h) I figured I should spend some time with it and see what it's really like. You're right, I'll use the other stuff and see what happens.
I think that heavy tanks should be able to be killed, and if that's by HEATFS, then so what? I don't think they should be strong and I don't think that they are weak. They are/should be balanced.
I think I did a little more in the video than just say "skill issue."
@@CrabbyPattyMoox OK, fair, this video was more than just a _skill issue_ argument. I'm just very "allergic" to it, sorry.
As for the heavy tanks having to be balanced, yes I definitely agree, they should be. But there are plenty of historically accurate (or rather period correct) guns that can do so. Examples I remember include: German long 75mm, American 90mm, 17 pounder, but there are also a lot of French and Italian guns powerful enough.
My idea of how the "HEAT-FS vs Tiger" issue could be solved is to separate WW2 vehicles from the post-war ones. Although to not ruin tech trees like France or Sweden, that would have to apply to post-war technologies: HEAT-FS, two plain stabilizer, APDS (unless British or Swedish).
So there would be two separate matchmakers:
- WW2,
- Post-war,
and three vehicle categories:
- WW2 - pretty self-explanatory: vehicles like T-34, M4 Sherman or Panther would play only with other vehicles from its category.
- Post-war - again, simple: vehicles with stabilised guns (minus Shermans of course), armed with HEAT-FS or ATGMs could play only other post-war vehicles.
- Mixed - that's a bit more complex: this is a way not to ruin the balance of mainly France and Sweden: it would consist of that are post-war but don't include any new technologies in their design, for example the EBR (1954), Pvkv m/43 (1946), Concept 3 or M42 Duster as well as vehicles that were designed during the WW2 but served well past it, like the IS-3 or M19 MGMC. These vehicles could play either with WW2 or post-war vehicles.
I like the tech tree the way it is. It would be unnecessary to split up the tree.
@@CrabbyPattyMoox I don't mean splitting them up when it comes to research the way they did with naval. They would be the way they are now, just with a "red line" drawn in the middle, so that vehicles from one side of the line couldn't meet those from the other side in battle.
@@CrabbyPattyMoox My issue with heat vs heavy tanks is that a heavy tank was designed purely on the concept that its armour would be capable of resisting most rounds that hit it - Just cos 20 years later someone made a tank that was utter shit why does it get put back in time to fight something that it can beat? why do shit vehicles get a free handicap to prop them up? Strap a hellfire to a bicycle and shove it a 6.0? I guess you could compare it to giving a bad runner a 50m head start in the Olympics 100m to make it fair for him to have a chance to win at the expense of the others athletes that have to start on the starting line and run the full race. There should be a place for these strange unique vehicles but does it have to come at the expense others that are where they belong within their tech trees? I'm not saying I have the answers and by the look of the arguments no one not even gijan has the answers. But I seem to only see either end of the argument as if its black and white. I would suggest a game mode for WW2 only players so they can play heavy tanks and not have to worry about the meta that has risen of light tanks overtaking the game. Sometimes I like to play my warrior or BMP but id also like the chance to duke it out with a IS4 and Conqueror now and again but you don't get that anymore and its a real shame. this problem extends beyond ground into air with missiles and Mach jets vs subsonic no missile jets but that another issue that discussed enough elsewhere.
this channel is so under-rated. I really like your style of videos, all I can say is that you shall continue doing these nice videos! :)
cool video
anyways, I'm patiently waiting for your channel logo to become an official war thunder decal...you clearly deserve a content creator partnership.
I applied for the partnership, but I didn't have enough subs or views. I'll re-apply when I get up to 5k subscribers. Hopefully by that time I'll have a better logo too lol.
@@CrabbyPattyMoox can't wait
The best armor against cheatfs is distance. A lot of early cheatfs will have lower muzzle velocity when compared to full caliber shells or apds, and playing to that strength helps greatly, especially considering how fast velocity drops off when using cheatfs
1:33
Well German engineers just said
“Fuck it”
And went for armor and gun
(Yes I mean maus)
Just hide behind some thick bushes and heat can’t hurt you.
The thing is, most high tier heavy tanks (6.0+) have quite high repair cost so the fact that there exists a shell which compleatly negates their only good thing makes the repair cost just outrageus, like 7k for a stock IS-4 when most things can just flank you with their speed, pen your god damn front with anything while youre stuck there with your 200mm of pen and bad optics and you dont even have a good reload! And the Tiger 2H has 6k repair cost AND YOU CANT EVEN BOUNCE ALL APHE SHELLS FROM THE FRONT! And yes, i realize that the problem is heavy tanks being far too uptiered but HEAT doesnt exactly help that problem
All tanks that have good passive protection have higher repair cost
Reason: Idiots do better in more forgiving vehicles
tiger II has a 8 sec reload and can bounce nearly anything but HESH and BIG HE in my experience my only deaths from APHE will be from the cheek and sides at the point doesn't matter if its AP APCR APHE HEAT HESH APDS I'd be dead from being flanked...which is thankfully a rare occasion but you have to remember T-34 85's 76w's IS-2'S most of the SU series will kill a II from the front if it's hit in the cheek.....and from what I've seen anything Russian is a Bias machine that bounces everything and lets you laugh at your foe until they hit the one or two spots that are not angled slopped or thick as hell
thank you for regurgitating these takes 4 years after the problem was introduced
What's the problem?
Man, I rarely struggle in my Tiger 2. A lot of the people who complain about heatfs tend to just want invincible heavies
But It is a fact that It is annyoing when they penetrator your front plate and kill the gunner
4:42 is the aphebc a meme? afaik it only has hesh
yes, poorly done joke
Funny how quickly everyone goes from hating heatfs for penning everything to hating using heatfs on stock nato tanks
as someone who is classified as a low rank good player, I agree that people just need to get good. and so should I get even better.
7:29 I would say something like: damn, I wish I had gotten a light little armor-less sardine can with a gun strapped to it instead of this heavy ass 150mm front armored metal box, since I would get oneshotted anyway. I mean at least with my light little shit I can get there faster instead of driving for 5 minutes to get blasted from the front! Oh wait, there are no light little armor-less sardine cans with a gun strapped to it at 5.3!
"AA's suck" *Laughs in ZSU-57-2*
i think one of the real problem is veteran player playing against rookies to stop chasing away new players and then some sort of matchmaking process where good player play against good/average and noob play vs noob/average, some sort of balanced matchmaking would keep salt away from the battlefields and people would enjoy the game, noob don't get smashed, good player stop losing bc they are alone in a team, less frustration overall...
The later WW2 tanks should be balanced the same way 3.7/4.0 is balanced. At that tier every tank has its strength. The heavy tanks like Kv1 and Churchill feel like breakthrough tanks that can hold a street, but ONLY as long as they have SUPPORT. For support the mediums fill that role such as Sherman’s, PZ4s, T34s. They can pack a punch and fight well, but work best when a heavy is tank for them. Then Light Tanks should be set up in such a way that they are used for scouting or rushing objectives early while having an ok gun for damaging an unsuspecting target while using speed to escape. Tank Destroyers are the only tank that should be capable of penning any tank effectively because that is their entire purpose ever other tank should have difficulty with other tanks that is where the knowledge a player has comes in. It is your job as the player to know what the weak spots are on enemy tanks and what tanks to just avoid altogether. No tank from the WW2 era in game would be unkillable if it only fought other WW2 tanks. Sure it may be harder for some tanks, but just get good and learn your tank and what you can pick a fight with and what you can’t pick a fight with. The game should not be set up in a way that makes it pointless to play a Heavy or Medium because it will just be killed in one hit by someone camping in their spawn with ATGMs or a Heli that just spammed rockets into you from miles away. It is total BS to try and support the balance of Gajin at the 6.0-7.0 area. WW2 and Post WW2 should be separate because they are two separate time periods with separate tank doctrines.
fun when an m-51 across the map can kill my gunner and driver in a single shot, then wipe the rest of my crew in the next one. (just because it doesnt one shot doesnt make it bad)
You got sniped... ACROSS THE MAP! by an M-51? (get shit on lmao)
@@CrabbyPattyMoox leave me alone it was arcade
@@idkk1086I don’t think that makes it better
"Tank Destroyers have beeg firepower but sacrifice Mobility for it"
Jagdpanther and Jpz-4-5: "oh?"
I think the main issue is a big part of gaijins balancing is the fact they balance based on player stats, which is why the German m48 nearly ended up at 6.7 while the American one which is worse stayed at 7.3
Bruh, the british rank 4 along with france's rank 4 are 7.3 and 7.7, german teams are so bad they moved up all the competition to the tiger II and moved down their fucking bullshit 105mm mbt to 7.3
"ATGMs typically show up at lower brs on vehicles that can't do much else." *Laughs in Japanese 6.3-7.0*
I should also note that HEAT slingers were PURPOSE BUILT to kill soviet heavies. That's why they exist, because armor was getting to thick and nobody wanted to try to fit a heavy enough cannon to go through it (aside from those weirdos in Britain)
Just split it, any tank past 1953 fights post war tanks. Anything before then fights late WWII tanks and keeps to themselves. That solves the whole debate of heatfs demolishing late war tanks or late war tanks being uptiered to post war tanks. It also keeps heatfs and atgms somewhat contained to vehicles with comparable ability to deal with it or those that can use it, and post war vs late war keeping the semi historical combat that war thunder hopes for. Splitting it isn't because of the over used complain but just to make it overall better for both sides.
HeatFS round in the T92 is my go to tank!
Honestly the only time I have a issue with it is when I’m at top tier with heatfs stock
I think it is more about the power disparity at the 6.3-7.3 bracket at least in my opinion. I think it is comical to have some shit like the BMP-1 which is an insanely good tank only .3 above the T44-100 which is honestly just a workable tank at the BR. This goes for almost every late war to early cold war tank at this bracket. Leopard 1s and M48 Pattons facing shit like Pershings and Tiger 2s I don’t think is ok in any regard. Trying to deny that the early cold war tanks have a massive advantage despite being placed at roughly the same BR due to 6.3-7.3 basically being a black hole that sucks everything in is egregious at best. So at the end of the day, BR decompression needs to come one way or another. In its current state, there is a massive power gap between tanks at this BR that frankly cannot go on.
İ just miss old armor vs armor situations, like maus vs is 4, is 6, i rarely encounter such situations anymore. Eighter you got bombed or missiled from nowhere.
4:41 the arve has apcbc?
nvm you said you worded it poorly
@@pyrothefryer7619 yup
Most people think heavy tanks are god of war. In reality they are canon fonder for medium tanks.
Nothing on battlefield is invincible.
2:28 the IT-1 has decent ammounts of armor actually , apcbc will struggle to pen and autocannons cannot pen it and 50cal planes cant strafe it
That's why it's also at the highest br on that short little list I gave.
@@CrabbyPattyMoox what about the wiesel
@@n1hilanth314 wiesel is a little shitbox that has the best missile and is also easiest to hide which is why it belongs at 1.0 obviously.
He forgor about Italy, pretty much has only heatfs
Yeah, only past 6.3 (and the M36B1). I don't think it's a big problem if they're high enough in the battle rating to keep them balanced with other tanks.
True
I also meet Italian tanks so rarely that I'm almost never killed by them.
I get your point but your argument with you dying to HEATFS only after 4 games is so bad. The thing is that guys you killed could penetrate you, you killed them not because of strong attributes of your tank(armour) but because you had better planning and situational awareness also few time was just luck. Thus it has nothing to do with the topic, it doesnt prove HEATFS is balanced.
In the beginning you tell about how each class sacrifices something, but the thing is HEATFS is not bound to one class, this shit is multiclass, so light tank that sacrificed armour and firepower suddenly have firepower. Trade suddenly gone.
Its true HEATFS has shit damage, but it doesnt matter, in ~70% cases HEATFS kills breach/gunner, and then in those cases ~70-80% means you dead in the next 1-2 shots.
That's also kinda the point. Gun handling and situational awareness is what does most of the work for ALL types of tanks. If you got killed by a HEATFS slinger, it's usually from somewhere you weren't even looking.
Yes, other tanks CAN pen me. In the IS-6, pretty much anything can shoot it in the sides under the track. The point of armor is that you are more LIKELY to bounce. It's not guaranteed invulnerability, but it's enough to warrant a higher br increase. And because the armor is so good, it should be facing tanks with firepower that can actually do something to the IS-6. The tradeoff at 7.0 for HEATFS slingers is that they can kill anything, but anything can kill them too.
I did mention that other tank types also have HEATFS, and that the shot is taken into account to put those tanks at higher battle ratings. The M56 and the M48 have the exact same HEATFS shot, but because the M48 has more armor and goes a little slower, it is at a higher battle rating.
Light tanks don't always 100% sacrifice firepower, in fact, most light tanks have pretty decent firepower. All of their stats are taken into account for balance and put at the appropriate br. If light tanks really did have terrible firepower, they would be at a lower br. The Concept 3 and the Ratels have similarly terrible armor and high mobility, but because the Ratel has HEATFS it's at a higher br. The then you have the Rooikat, which has technically better armor, but equally horrible in practice. It gets a big firepower buff and is much higher in the battle rating.
Light tanks aren't the only vehicle type that are buffed in terms of great firepower. They are significant because they have the earliest form of HEATFS in the game. So, to keep the game balanced, the very weakly-armored HEATFS slingers are put at lower battle ratings.
I understand that every HEATFS hit is very likely to do damage. But because it doesn't do a lot of damage, it gives you more opportunities to be saved by a teammate, or for you to survive. Bottom line: you got shot by another tank and it killed you.
If heatfs went over your head like the point of this video you'd be invincible
yeah this video was not great
@@Optimusprime56241 why?
@@CrabbyPattyMoox the 4 games you played didnt really prove anything, the heatfs players didnt actually shoot you or just missed, you woulda most likely died 4/4 times had you actually been shot by the heatfs players, yeah you can get killed by apcbc so what?
What tank I really hate is the marder A1. Thermals, a great main canon, and good mobility all at 7.7 while the Bradley exists at 8.0 with a worse canon, atgm system, and chassis.
My boy seemed really pissed about the HEATFS clownfiesta.
This!!!! People have full ammo in king tigers and complain about heatfs
HEAT-FS can only really be a devastating shell if given to a tank that can give a quick follow up shot, like the TURM III, or basically anything that has less than a 5 second reload, the only thing that can save the shell is simply volume of fire, and at that point its not even the HEAT-FS that is making said tank powerful
Turm 3 shoulsnt be in the game its a shitty op premium and it seems impossible to balance imo
@@kevincho1187 the turm 3 is pathetically easy to kill, huge ammo rack in the turret, 2 crew members sitting in a line, paper thin armor, its like most tanks at its tier, shoot first to win
what?? it can be devastating if you just know where to hit or get lucky in general
Couldnt agree more, dont blame the tank or the round, blame how you play
Me who cries in my m103 as my loader is taken out by heatfs and get shot from 2k because of laser range finders and atgms
and?
Almost every match someone is in all chat at the start whining about being Uptiered instead of just making balanced lineups, adapting, and getting Rank Doesn't Matter rewards.
Heavy Tanks are by design (IRL and in-game) at their best in a down-tier. So bring a good lineup and spawn it in when it's the right circumstances.
People complaining with their IS-6 should never be listened, those are just inexperienced kids, taking everything for granted.
7.0 is too generous from gaijin tbh, should've been 7.3 like the IS-3 back then
Simple fact of the matter is, if you die you're bad. Just don't die!
Thank you! Someone finally said it...
6:30
Maus: yeah thank you how in tf am I going to kill a cold war tank, in down br or higher br?!
With its cannon(s)
@@CrabbyPattyMoox IQ200
German main iq levels at room temperature as usual
@@kevincho1187 play the maus yourself and you'll understand my pain...
@@farbodghorbani1268 with it's 300mm pen top shell? sure damn will. the maus is like the only heavy tank at that br range of 6.0-8.0 i enjoy alongside the t26e5 and is2 1944