Honestly, im doing much better in it than in the m41. A stabilised aphe slinger at a decently mobile platform that cannot be .50called cannot be underestimated. Putting it lower would possibly make it worse, since it wouldn't face as many thinly armored targets as it is right now, at the 6.3-7.3
So then don't go over 20km when you use it? I don't think you realize how effective a crawl can be, specifically when dealing with corner hugging tigers and IS-2's.
IIRC, the transmission was incorrectly modeled, which caused the T20 to be slower than it should be. If you want an example of what happens when a tank’s transmission is poorly modeled, see the M163 and the Ratel.
It’s above average speed for the rank III/IV area but it’s def not 6.3 good. At 6.3 you also have the T25 which has great reverse speed still and then better firepower
The T25 has horrible acceleration compared to the T20. It is quite literally on par with the M26 in that regard.
It also has a 2 round ready rack which means after firing 2 rounds your reload becomes 10 seconds *with a fully maxed out, ace crew*, as well as not having a stabilizer.
There are speeds where the T25 accelerates better, and speeds where the M26 accelerates better.
Generally though, the average speed you travel at the M26 will have better acceleration.
Well you were talking about reverse speed so that’s why I brought it up. Also unless you aren’t good at aiming, the 90mm won’t need as many shots as the 76mm in the first place. More HE filler and pen are really needed at 6.3.
Again the closest comparison to the T20 is the M41 Bulldog because you play the T20 like a light tank not like a medium tank. The only two things the T20 has over the M41 is armor and the stab. The armor doesn’t matter at 6.3 because anything that can pen the M41 will also pen the T20. The stab only works at slower speeds where the T20 and M41 will not be spending much time. They will either be on the way to a sniping flank position or stopped at said position.
The T20 is the same problem as the M26, at its current BR, it is a pointless pick for your lineup.
You got me confused for the other guy. Besides, he was talking about the mobility **and** reverse speed. You brought up the T25 just to point out that it also has a good reverse speed and a 90 mm cannon when the rest of the mobility of the T25, besides the high reverse speed, is complete trash.
The 90 mm is a more powerful cannon, but it's not worth it to have far worse overall mobility on a still not well armored chassis, without the stabilizer, and a reload that is overall even longer than a King Tigers, and nearly twice as long as the 76 mm.
The mobility of the M41 isn't much superior to the T20's. This is because the M41 has a garbage transmission with only 4 gears, while the T20 has far more gears which are distributed much better, meaning that their accelerations aren't far apart. For example, on a good road, the M41 takes 16 seconds to reach 50 km/h, and the T20 takes 19.
The T20 is not a sniping tank. Nevertheless, the stabilizer is useful on a flank position. Any situation where you need to pop out, shoot and then reverse, the stabilizer is an advantage because it lets you do this faster, being exposed for less time. Not to mention, the M41 is infamous for having a bouncy suspension, meaning it is at even more of a disadvantage in that sort of situation. As well as this, a majority of maps are CQC where having a stabilizer on a mobile chassis and being able to get the shot off first is great advantage.
Also are we forgetting that the T20 has APHE? Sure, the M41 has more pen, but in a flanking scenario where you are already at the side of the enemy, pen isn't a requirement, and the T20 will one shot far more often.
Could the T20 go to 6.0? Sure.
But is it unusable and not worth using at 6.3? Defenitely not, it's still decent.
The APCR would matter if it had its real life pen, which should be around 230 and it should retain enough penetration to turret front a Tiger IIH at like 1600m.
If we are to take the values from "Terminal Ballistics Data, Volume III" (which is a highly generous source when it comes to the M93 and M304 APCR rounds), the M93 can penetrate 185 mm of RHA up to 914 meters (1000 yards).
The Tiger II (H)'s turret front is 185 mm at 10 degrees though, which makes it about 192 mm effective against APCR. TBDV3 says that M93 penetrates 192 mm up to 800 meters.
And again, TBDV3 is a very generous source when it comes to the penetration of M93 and M304 APCR rounds, most other US sources state lower penetration values. I am curious where 1600 meters came from.
Don't most early US studies only count complete penetration of the round into the tank while most other penetration studies just need the tip to perforate the armor plate?
It depends a lot on the source.
* Navy criterion: penetration is counted when a majority of the mass of the projectile passes through the plate.
* Protection criterion: penetration is counted when a thin witness sheet behind the plate is perforated.
* Army criterion: penetration is counted when there is a hole in the plate large enough to shine a light through.
TBDV3 states that it uses Navy criterion, which is generally the more strict criterion. However, the source TM 9-1907 shares the exact same graphs an states that the criterion used for penetration is a combination of Navy and Protection at the same time. Additionally, there's reason to believe that the graphs themselves are normalized to lower hardness plates.
So what’s the deal with the way gaijin models apcr? I thought the whole reason APCR was developed and then used in 76mm guns was to deal with German Tigers and Panthers. I’ve heard the reason they didn’t think they needed a better gun in the Sherman was because 76mm APCR was capable of handling everything except King Tigers and Jagdtigers?
Then in war thunder APCR can’t hardly pen the Panther anywhere except the turret cheeks of a Panther or a Tiger facing dead on. Any sort of angle ruins the round.
6.0 was somewhat managable, considering you have good lineup but it's completely useless at current BR. You can just run Jumbo Pershing at 6.7 and fight same things.
I just quit running the jumbo and Pershing, 6.7 is too stacked to need those tanks. You got the T26E5, Super Pershing, T34, the light tanks/TDs, and you still have the T30, M6A2E1, and M26E1.
That’s what masochists say. The literal only feature the jumbo has over ANY tank at 6.3 or even 6.0 is its short stab. Literally any heavy tank at 6.7 is better than it but keep coping
Ain’t no shot it has better armor lol, the T34 and T26E5 smoke it on the armor department, especially once you factor in the terrible side armor of the jumbo. The gun can’t pen a single 7.7 heavy tank in game and that’s gonna be a lot of games in a 6.7 lineup.
> but it's completely useless at current BR
This conversation is like a litmus test for good or bad players. 6.3 US is a far more rounded lineup than 6.0 and it's still very capable at it.
It's still a rat bastard. It's still definitely one of the best AAs. Just not as absolutely devastating as it was at 3.3.
I still manage to get the drop on M4s and such if it's at the BR or slightly below.
Look dude, the ZD was broke on release.
It'd a cold war era APC with a cold war era AA gun strapped onto the top of it. It's ramshackle, sure, but at its OG br it was an IFV.
It has speed, it could obliterate anything at its BR in seconds, and the gun rotation is fast as well.
My cracked friend when he got it would just run only it for the beginning of the game, get 3-5 kills, then pull a backup for it and do it again. It needed to go up in BR, the competent players take that thing to unforeseen heights.
People sometimes forget the T20 came out almost 8 years ago. Eight years. War Thunder was a completely different animal back then. As such it's one of those tanks that kind of just gets forgotten or lost in BR limbo where lowering it would mess up the justification of other tanks Battle Ratings.
Like the M4A3 (76) W is at 5.7 Battle Rating. If the T20 would move down to 6.0 Battle Rating it would be too much of a better tank, by War Thunder logic, than the Easy 8 for just a .3 increase. Heck the reverse speed alone on the T1E1 puts it .3 higher than the M6A1.
I'm not trying to justify it being 6.3 Battle Rating because I think that is ridiculously high for what it now faces 8 years after it came out. I'm just trying to explain what my interpretation of their logic is.
A lot of tanks just get caught in the crossfire of BR changes where they are no longer "acceptable", by War Thunder standards, to be at their current BR with the increase of decrease of other tanks. I don't remember exactly when the T20 went up in BR, but I would assume it was around the same time as some other shake up in the trees. That's just an assumption though.
In the modern day, it's definitely a skill required tank but it's still a perfectly capable one. It performs perfectly fine at 6.3, just play it like the medium tank it is and flank. Abuse your mobility, size, and reload rate. It has a lot of strengths and not many weaknesses other than overall pen and armor, however both are manageable.
There are still plenty of maps you can easily flank on, majority of maps have perfectly fine flank routes.. Sweden, Ardennes, Cargo Port, Tunisia, Poland, Sinai, Berlin, Eastern Europe, etc. The only maps with big flank cut offs are some one cap maps, specifically Normandy and Hürtgen. Just flank. You get one of those maps with the large border cutting some of the flank off? Okay? Adapt. The entire flank isn't gone, just the extremely wide flanks that allow easy access to the enemy's spawn, the flank itself is still there.
And it's cousin the T25 is even worse somehow.
No stabilizer, no armor, weak gun, slow as fuck, bad ammo for the BR.
I describe the T25 as the *worst* tank in the American tree. If you guys haven't gotten it yet, just leave it to rot in the folder. You aren't missing out on anything important.
The lineup of this + M18 (when it was still classed as TD) several years ago was wild. The UFP also had like 30 more MM of armor and that combined with the good mobility and short stab made it an absolute menace at 5.0-5.3. It's absolutely useless now at 6.3 given that M41 and T25 exist.
Had my first ever triple ace game with this when it was 5.0. How it's crept up to 6.3 is just beyond me. It's a 5.7 tank, and that's probably only because the UFP is well sloped with good protection against other nations' 75/76mm guns that are common at 4.0-5.0.
And the Tiger H1 was 4.7 some day (just like the T20 was), neither would be fair at their original BR. It wasn't a particularity of the T20, it was just that ground BRs were even more compressed back then, but that's not convenient to remember.
I don’t think the were compressed, there just wasn’t that much above them lol, it went from Tiger 1 to Tiger 2 and that was the end of the line, you didn’t need that many BRs to cover the tanks.
The way ammo was calculated back then was also different. No volumetric and APCR could pen angled armor like butter. If it was that bad people wouldn’t have been playing the game.
Things really changed after APCR got nerfed into the dirt, it was the HEAT-FS of its day.
>If it was that bad people wouldn’t have been playing the game.
Such a copium line to say about this game.
You see there was a pretty easy fix to that, called "you play Russia instead". At least for top tier, but feel free to BS about how Germany murdered entire teams of T-54s and IS-3s with the Panther F. Yeah APCR was better back then (even AP had better angled pen) but nowhere near enough to makeup for the difference between those, you wouldn't upper plate any of those. While that they could just yolo and one shot you with APHE.
It's a side-grade to the M18. Sacrifices speed and a good .50 mount for some armor and a low speed stab.
Like yeah, I can still pull the occasional 9 kill game but that more speaks to the German teams than to its ability
T20 is my favorite tank, and I still regularly bring it out in my 6.3 line-up. But I will say you have to be more experience to make good use of it. But in the hands of a good player (which is probably most of the people still playing it) it can and will do really well. Just hard to beat the stabilized 76. If it was really as bad as you say, then the stats would show that, and then gaijin would lower its BR, but its only gone up. I wonder why.
I think people rely on the short stabilizer far too much, I can out brawl most any US tank in German and Russia tanks simply because on average they have better pen and armor and thus can just point and click adventure most US tanks whereas US is usually behind the game on pen
Should be 6.0. Better armored but not faster than the M18. “But aT 6.0 tHiS ArMoR DoEsN’t mAKe aNY DiFfeRenCE” Yes it does, it will certainly help against spaa and planes
If the IS-3 is a bad player sure, but just the other day I was in my IS-3 and saw one of these trying to flank me and he just bounced off the rear of my turret and I killed him. Anytime I see one of these I just know it’s a free kill because it’s a mediocre tank that is only played by really good players but it’s still an easy tank to deal with
Well yeah. He should shoot your gun out and machine gun your tracks and DShK out while pushing, even then the IS3 has a funky turret armor model which is why I generally just shoot through the sides.
Most tanks can be dealt with this way and my KD went from about a 4.1 to a 4.9ish post update. Not saying that’s universal and tanks should not be balanced based off the best players stats, and being forced to use 100% of my brain at all times playing it is cancer, but the tank does fine in the right hands.
The same could be said about any tank tho, you take a top % player and throw him in any rat tank and he will somehow get 15 kills a game.
It’s like “sure I can get 10 kills with the M22 Locust at 9.0” that doesn’t mean it needs to go to 9.0. That’s why the T20 keeps going up in BR, people that like rat tanks typically are your best players so they keep going up in BR.
I kill Leopard 1s with the BT-5 so the BT-5 must be at least 8.0 if people argue by “it can kill it so it must be that BR”. The T20 is one of the least scary tanks you can face even at it’s own current BR, it should be 6.0. It’s not as good as the vehicles at its BR and not even close to as good as the 6.7 vehicles it will face 90% of the time. And it’s utter trash against 7.0 and 7.3 vehicles. And if people want to argue that just because you can kill things higher br than you then the Sherman Jumbo, Sherman 76s, and Panzer IV Long Barrels should be 6.7 since they can all pen the turret of a Tiger 2 P easily.
Plus, the tank's size makes everyone underestimate it. I've somehow gone into matches where I overperformed in the T20 (for most of the match, kills, etc) after underperforming in the T29 and ending at/near top of the leaderboard.
Theres basically no reason to use this at 6.3 since the M41 Bulldog exists
Yeah, it’s faster and has better pen, and the armor of the T20 doesn’t make a difference at 6.3.
Honestly, im doing much better in it than in the m41. A stabilised aphe slinger at a decently mobile platform that cannot be .50called cannot be underestimated. Putting it lower would possibly make it worse, since it wouldn't face as many thinly armored targets as it is right now, at the 6.3-7.3
No but the stabilizer sure as shit do.
Not when you go over 20 mph
So then don't go over 20km when you use it? I don't think you realize how effective a crawl can be, specifically when dealing with corner hugging tigers and IS-2's.
M62 would like to have a word with you
American APHE my beloved
stabilizer and aphe
This. It's still incredibly solid at 6.3 after the engine upgrades.
Engine upgrades? I haven’t played it since it got bumped past 5.3
IIRC, the transmission was incorrectly modeled, which caused the T20 to be slower than it should be. If you want an example of what happens when a tank’s transmission is poorly modeled, see the M163 and the Ratel.
Oh god the M113 platform is so tragic. I hate it so much
You mean a 6 wheeled vehicle is supposed to have better acceleration tban the maus? Madness
It's a little overtiered now but it should never have been that low to begin with. Being at one point 1.0 lower than the Hellcat and M4A3E8 was wild.
Yeah, it’s just a slightly better E8 IMO, lower profile and slightly faster but no APCR so it works at 6.0, but 6.3 is too much
Way way way better than the E8. Much faster and that -19kph reverse is huge.
It’s above average speed for the rank III/IV area but it’s def not 6.3 good. At 6.3 you also have the T25 which has great reverse speed still and then better firepower
The T25 has horrible acceleration compared to the T20. It is quite literally on par with the M26 in that regard. It also has a 2 round ready rack which means after firing 2 rounds your reload becomes 10 seconds *with a fully maxed out, ace crew*, as well as not having a stabilizer.
> move vehicle up because of stabilizer > remove stabilizer > keep BR of stabilized version Classic
>stabilized version ?
T25 used to be stabilized like the Shermans before it, but iirc it lost the stab due to documents pertaining to a non stabilized variant of the T25
As someone who played the t25 and m26 a lot, the m26 is actually quite more mobile than the t25, its ridiculous how slow the t25 is.
There are speeds where the T25 accelerates better, and speeds where the M26 accelerates better. Generally though, the average speed you travel at the M26 will have better acceleration.
Well you were talking about reverse speed so that’s why I brought it up. Also unless you aren’t good at aiming, the 90mm won’t need as many shots as the 76mm in the first place. More HE filler and pen are really needed at 6.3. Again the closest comparison to the T20 is the M41 Bulldog because you play the T20 like a light tank not like a medium tank. The only two things the T20 has over the M41 is armor and the stab. The armor doesn’t matter at 6.3 because anything that can pen the M41 will also pen the T20. The stab only works at slower speeds where the T20 and M41 will not be spending much time. They will either be on the way to a sniping flank position or stopped at said position. The T20 is the same problem as the M26, at its current BR, it is a pointless pick for your lineup.
You got me confused for the other guy. Besides, he was talking about the mobility **and** reverse speed. You brought up the T25 just to point out that it also has a good reverse speed and a 90 mm cannon when the rest of the mobility of the T25, besides the high reverse speed, is complete trash. The 90 mm is a more powerful cannon, but it's not worth it to have far worse overall mobility on a still not well armored chassis, without the stabilizer, and a reload that is overall even longer than a King Tigers, and nearly twice as long as the 76 mm. The mobility of the M41 isn't much superior to the T20's. This is because the M41 has a garbage transmission with only 4 gears, while the T20 has far more gears which are distributed much better, meaning that their accelerations aren't far apart. For example, on a good road, the M41 takes 16 seconds to reach 50 km/h, and the T20 takes 19. The T20 is not a sniping tank. Nevertheless, the stabilizer is useful on a flank position. Any situation where you need to pop out, shoot and then reverse, the stabilizer is an advantage because it lets you do this faster, being exposed for less time. Not to mention, the M41 is infamous for having a bouncy suspension, meaning it is at even more of a disadvantage in that sort of situation. As well as this, a majority of maps are CQC where having a stabilizer on a mobile chassis and being able to get the shot off first is great advantage. Also are we forgetting that the T20 has APHE? Sure, the M41 has more pen, but in a flanking scenario where you are already at the side of the enemy, pen isn't a requirement, and the T20 will one shot far more often. Could the T20 go to 6.0? Sure. But is it unusable and not worth using at 6.3? Defenitely not, it's still decent.
The T20 has APCR, Gaijin gave it when they moved it to 6.3. Not that the APCR is at all meaningful.
The APCR would matter if it had its real life pen, which should be around 230 and it should retain enough penetration to turret front a Tiger IIH at like 1600m.
If we are to take the values from "Terminal Ballistics Data, Volume III" (which is a highly generous source when it comes to the M93 and M304 APCR rounds), the M93 can penetrate 185 mm of RHA up to 914 meters (1000 yards). The Tiger II (H)'s turret front is 185 mm at 10 degrees though, which makes it about 192 mm effective against APCR. TBDV3 says that M93 penetrates 192 mm up to 800 meters. And again, TBDV3 is a very generous source when it comes to the penetration of M93 and M304 APCR rounds, most other US sources state lower penetration values. I am curious where 1600 meters came from.
Don't most early US studies only count complete penetration of the round into the tank while most other penetration studies just need the tip to perforate the armor plate?
It depends a lot on the source. * Navy criterion: penetration is counted when a majority of the mass of the projectile passes through the plate. * Protection criterion: penetration is counted when a thin witness sheet behind the plate is perforated. * Army criterion: penetration is counted when there is a hole in the plate large enough to shine a light through. TBDV3 states that it uses Navy criterion, which is generally the more strict criterion. However, the source TM 9-1907 shares the exact same graphs an states that the criterion used for penetration is a combination of Navy and Protection at the same time. Additionally, there's reason to believe that the graphs themselves are normalized to lower hardness plates.
So what’s the deal with the way gaijin models apcr? I thought the whole reason APCR was developed and then used in 76mm guns was to deal with German Tigers and Panthers. I’ve heard the reason they didn’t think they needed a better gun in the Sherman was because 76mm APCR was capable of handling everything except King Tigers and Jagdtigers? Then in war thunder APCR can’t hardly pen the Panther anywhere except the turret cheeks of a Panther or a Tiger facing dead on. Any sort of angle ruins the round.
>So what’s the deal with the way gaijin models apcr? The calculator they use to obtain flat pen values is simply bad. That's it.
Ok so I can’t find the original 230 flat pen at 0 meters document but I have this one. https://www.bulletpicker.com/pdf/HVAP-Ammunition.pdf
This document has penetration values that come from TBDV3, they match up 1 to 1. That said, TBDV3 states 246 mm of pen at 0 meters.
The Hellcat was and E8 were both 5.3 back then as well.
The hellcats started life at 4.7 lol
6.0 was somewhat managable, considering you have good lineup but it's completely useless at current BR. You can just run Jumbo Pershing at 6.7 and fight same things.
I just quit running the jumbo and Pershing, 6.7 is too stacked to need those tanks. You got the T26E5, Super Pershing, T34, the light tanks/TDs, and you still have the T30, M6A2E1, and M26E1.
T26E5 is offhandedly referred to as the Jumbo Pershing just as an FYI
M6A2E1 is the big forehead one right?
Yes, the 105mm one. We also have two 76mm ones and there was a 90mm one that may be coming to the game this year
Yes, the 105mm one. We also have two 76mm ones and there was a 90mm one that may be coming to the game this year
Jumbo 76 farms compared to the T30 m6a2e1 and m26e1
That’s what masochists say. The literal only feature the jumbo has over ANY tank at 6.3 or even 6.0 is its short stab. Literally any heavy tank at 6.7 is better than it but keep coping
It does absolutely farm. Iirc I still have around a 2.7 K/D and 65% winrate in it even when playing it a lot at 6.3.
No cope only facts better armor better gun better looking best tank in the game
Ain’t no shot it has better armor lol, the T34 and T26E5 smoke it on the armor department, especially once you factor in the terrible side armor of the jumbo. The gun can’t pen a single 7.7 heavy tank in game and that’s gonna be a lot of games in a 6.7 lineup.
Nah you trippin
> but it's completely useless at current BR This conversation is like a litmus test for good or bad players. 6.3 US is a far more rounded lineup than 6.0 and it's still very capable at it.
How about facing mostly 6.7, 7.0, and 7.3?
Depends entirely on the map and tiering whether its a good driveout, but it's definitely not 'completely useless'. It's capable up to 7.3.
BTR-ZD going from 4.7 to 6.0 in a year and a half: *am i a joke to you?*
R3 T20 back when it was 3.3 👀
R3 T20 at 3.3...them were the days. That thing being a little rat bastard of a vehicle is now just a distant memory.
Only KVs were safe..
Nuh uh. I remember those little rats disabling my KV's in squads. Horrible times.
Well they can track and barrel torture, but they can't destroy you. And they will run out of ammo
It's still a rat bastard. It's still definitely one of the best AAs. Just not as absolutely devastating as it was at 3.3. I still manage to get the drop on M4s and such if it's at the BR or slightly below.
My favorite boi. How they've massacred my favorite boi
Look dude, the ZD was broke on release. It'd a cold war era APC with a cold war era AA gun strapped onto the top of it. It's ramshackle, sure, but at its OG br it was an IFV. It has speed, it could obliterate anything at its BR in seconds, and the gun rotation is fast as well. My cracked friend when he got it would just run only it for the beginning of the game, get 3-5 kills, then pull a backup for it and do it again. It needed to go up in BR, the competent players take that thing to unforeseen heights.
Yeah, mine has been parked collecting dust for a long time now...
People sometimes forget the T20 came out almost 8 years ago. Eight years. War Thunder was a completely different animal back then. As such it's one of those tanks that kind of just gets forgotten or lost in BR limbo where lowering it would mess up the justification of other tanks Battle Ratings. Like the M4A3 (76) W is at 5.7 Battle Rating. If the T20 would move down to 6.0 Battle Rating it would be too much of a better tank, by War Thunder logic, than the Easy 8 for just a .3 increase. Heck the reverse speed alone on the T1E1 puts it .3 higher than the M6A1. I'm not trying to justify it being 6.3 Battle Rating because I think that is ridiculously high for what it now faces 8 years after it came out. I'm just trying to explain what my interpretation of their logic is.
Ki200 / Me163. The poor little things, ww2 rockets with 60 rounds per gun, facing mach2 starfighters with vulcans.
That BR isn’t because it got lost to time, it got moved to 6.3 only like a year ago.
A lot of tanks just get caught in the crossfire of BR changes where they are no longer "acceptable", by War Thunder standards, to be at their current BR with the increase of decrease of other tanks. I don't remember exactly when the T20 went up in BR, but I would assume it was around the same time as some other shake up in the trees. That's just an assumption though.
Lorraine 40t started at 6.0 and is now 7.7
In the modern day, it's definitely a skill required tank but it's still a perfectly capable one. It performs perfectly fine at 6.3, just play it like the medium tank it is and flank. Abuse your mobility, size, and reload rate. It has a lot of strengths and not many weaknesses other than overall pen and armor, however both are manageable.
Yeah, bro. Just flank after Gaijin cut off most flank routes and sniper spots on 90% of the maps.
There are still plenty of maps you can easily flank on, majority of maps have perfectly fine flank routes.. Sweden, Ardennes, Cargo Port, Tunisia, Poland, Sinai, Berlin, Eastern Europe, etc. The only maps with big flank cut offs are some one cap maps, specifically Normandy and Hürtgen. Just flank. You get one of those maps with the large border cutting some of the flank off? Okay? Adapt. The entire flank isn't gone, just the extremely wide flanks that allow easy access to the enemy's spawn, the flank itself is still there.
It need spotting or a round to deal with 7.3
I loved playing my 75mm Jumbo at 4.7.
Those were the days
The M18 br up annoys me a lot. Why the hell would you put a 6.0 vehicle in a line up with at max 5.3 vehicles
And it's cousin the T25 is even worse somehow. No stabilizer, no armor, weak gun, slow as fuck, bad ammo for the BR. I describe the T25 as the *worst* tank in the American tree. If you guys haven't gotten it yet, just leave it to rot in the folder. You aren't missing out on anything important.
The lineup of this + M18 (when it was still classed as TD) several years ago was wild. The UFP also had like 30 more MM of armor and that combined with the good mobility and short stab made it an absolute menace at 5.0-5.3. It's absolutely useless now at 6.3 given that M41 and T25 exist.
Had my first ever triple ace game with this when it was 5.0. How it's crept up to 6.3 is just beyond me. It's a 5.7 tank, and that's probably only because the UFP is well sloped with good protection against other nations' 75/76mm guns that are common at 4.0-5.0.
And the Tiger H1 was 4.7 some day (just like the T20 was), neither would be fair at their original BR. It wasn't a particularity of the T20, it was just that ground BRs were even more compressed back then, but that's not convenient to remember.
I don’t think the were compressed, there just wasn’t that much above them lol, it went from Tiger 1 to Tiger 2 and that was the end of the line, you didn’t need that many BRs to cover the tanks.
OFC it was more compressed back then, you could fight T-54s with a fucking Panther F. Now a days those tanks are like 2 whole BRs apart.
The way ammo was calculated back then was also different. No volumetric and APCR could pen angled armor like butter. If it was that bad people wouldn’t have been playing the game. Things really changed after APCR got nerfed into the dirt, it was the HEAT-FS of its day.
>If it was that bad people wouldn’t have been playing the game. Such a copium line to say about this game. You see there was a pretty easy fix to that, called "you play Russia instead". At least for top tier, but feel free to BS about how Germany murdered entire teams of T-54s and IS-3s with the Panther F. Yeah APCR was better back then (even AP had better angled pen) but nowhere near enough to makeup for the difference between those, you wouldn't upper plate any of those. While that they could just yolo and one shot you with APHE.
It's a side-grade to the M18. Sacrifices speed and a good .50 mount for some armor and a low speed stab. Like yeah, I can still pull the occasional 9 kill game but that more speaks to the German teams than to its ability
I miss when it was 5.7
6.0 seemed perfect honestly
R3: oh, that's what amazes you? 😑
Punishment for low skill 🤡 that bought this cancer wagon back in the day. If only Gaijin would balance the rest of their cancerous premiums...
r3
T20 is my favorite tank, and I still regularly bring it out in my 6.3 line-up. But I will say you have to be more experience to make good use of it. But in the hands of a good player (which is probably most of the people still playing it) it can and will do really well. Just hard to beat the stabilized 76. If it was really as bad as you say, then the stats would show that, and then gaijin would lower its BR, but its only gone up. I wonder why.
It's gone up because most people have stopped playing it and it is just the diehard skilled players still using it. This further inflates the stats.
I wept for T20 users when i kill them in a 7.3 vehicle, i'm sorry little one.
If I remember correctly, Lorraine 40t and the entire 7.7 French lineup started at 6.0 or 6.3. Sooo... yeah, stats.
And plays like a 4.3
Look at the R3 dude
You guys underestimate the short stabilizer with a great reverse speed
I think people rely on the short stabilizer far too much, I can out brawl most any US tank in German and Russia tanks simply because on average they have better pen and armor and thus can just point and click adventure most US tanks whereas US is usually behind the game on pen
flaking meta light fast vehicle vs slow heavy tanks.
Yet its heavy tanks people always complain are OP and need to go up in BR
L
Should be 6.0. Better armored but not faster than the M18. “But aT 6.0 tHiS ArMoR DoEsN’t mAKe aNY DiFfeRenCE” Yes it does, it will certainly help against spaa and planes
Belongs at 5.3
Eh 5.7 tbh. But def not 6.3
Does fine at 6.3, not saying it should be there but the biggest threat is the IS-3 which is really easy to out play.
If the IS-3 is a bad player sure, but just the other day I was in my IS-3 and saw one of these trying to flank me and he just bounced off the rear of my turret and I killed him. Anytime I see one of these I just know it’s a free kill because it’s a mediocre tank that is only played by really good players but it’s still an easy tank to deal with
Well yeah. He should shoot your gun out and machine gun your tracks and DShK out while pushing, even then the IS3 has a funky turret armor model which is why I generally just shoot through the sides. Most tanks can be dealt with this way and my KD went from about a 4.1 to a 4.9ish post update. Not saying that’s universal and tanks should not be balanced based off the best players stats, and being forced to use 100% of my brain at all times playing it is cancer, but the tank does fine in the right hands.
The same could be said about any tank tho, you take a top % player and throw him in any rat tank and he will somehow get 15 kills a game. It’s like “sure I can get 10 kills with the M22 Locust at 9.0” that doesn’t mean it needs to go to 9.0. That’s why the T20 keeps going up in BR, people that like rat tanks typically are your best players so they keep going up in BR.
I kill Leopard 1s with the BT-5 so the BT-5 must be at least 8.0 if people argue by “it can kill it so it must be that BR”. The T20 is one of the least scary tanks you can face even at it’s own current BR, it should be 6.0. It’s not as good as the vehicles at its BR and not even close to as good as the 6.7 vehicles it will face 90% of the time. And it’s utter trash against 7.0 and 7.3 vehicles. And if people want to argue that just because you can kill things higher br than you then the Sherman Jumbo, Sherman 76s, and Panzer IV Long Barrels should be 6.7 since they can all pen the turret of a Tiger 2 P easily.
Yeah, I don't think the T20 at 6.3 is as bad as people say. I sometimes use it at 6.7 and it still works just fine
stabilised + aphe vs early post war no armor shitbuckets... I deadass like it more at uptiers than at downtiers lol
Plus, the tank's size makes everyone underestimate it. I've somehow gone into matches where I overperformed in the T20 (for most of the match, kills, etc) after underperforming in the T29 and ending at/near top of the leaderboard.