M13/40 vs M14/41

[MADX0]

Been looking at both charts and there is almost no difference between them beside the engine (+2km/h top speed) and driver port (+20mm armor)... also higer reaload (0.2s) and slower gun traverse speed (-1.3°/s)...
What am I missing that is worth a 0.7 br increase?

[Blitzkrieg Wulf]

Could ask that about a lot of similar vehicles... Ki-49, Tu-2... etc.

Really the only logical answer, to some degree, is to artificially fill in holes.

[MADX0]

Originally posted by Blitzkrieg Wulf:

Could ask that about a lot of similar vehicles... Ki-49, Tu-2... etc.

Really the only logical answer, to some degree, is to artificially fill in holes.

Its ok(ish), but make it 0.3 not 0.7 like the M15/42 that has a slightly better ammo and engine and +20mm armor on the turret...

Thats for sure a vehicle I'll use untill spaded and throw in a corner... like so many other poorly battle rated vehicles

[Illusionyary]

There's a lot of vehicles like this with marginal improvements at a lot higher BRs. See the Ki-84s or the Panthers.

[MADX0]

Originally posted by Illusionyary:

There's a lot of vehicles like this with marginal improvements at a lot higher BRs. See the Ki-84s or the Panthers.

Dont wanna call bias on this... but it seems to be more common with Axis vehicles...

[Scheneighnay]

Well the 13/40's predecessor, the 11/39, is 1.3 for some reason despite being worse in every way.

Italian ground BRs are still a mess, but the 14/41 is good enough by Italian standards that I never had an issue with it compared to everything else in the tree. The 13/40 has pretty trolly armor for reserve too.