Why british tanks are so bad???

[Class Xerion 3300]

How it is possible that 37 tons tank with 800 hp engine drive 5km/h in reverse and 35 km/h forward? (fv 4202)
Why cent mk3 is br 7.7?? It is very slow, has bad armor and poor gun ( qf-20 punder is good for tigers and t44, not for t54 and is4)
Can someone explain me why? Please

[✿Sqüirrel✿]

Has better accuracy then most things it faces, has better pen then most things it faces, has a stabilizer where as most things it faces do not.

[mogami_99]

How else would Squire make War Thunder videos?

[Sabaithal]

Someone told me historically most british tanks were mostly designed for anti-infantry use more than anti-vehicle. Haven't confirmed that personally.

[mogami_99]

Originally posted by Sabaithal:

Someone told me historically most british tanks were mostly designed for anti-infantry use more than anti-vehicle. Haven't confirmed that personally.

Tank destroyers are designed to fight tanks. Tanks historically don't want to fight other tanks because the side hiding has the advantage. The fighter bomber is the preferred means of engaging enemy tanks when your side is on the offensive.
Armor is not for the attack it is so on defense you can fight more then one enemy and those pesky infantry don't kill you

[Weltreisender]

Because they were bad IRL

[torindechoza]

Originally posted by Sabaithal:

Someone told me historically most british tanks were mostly designed for anti-infantry use more than anti-vehicle. Haven't confirmed that personally.

no

[Eftwyrd]

Originally posted by Sabaithal:

Someone told me historically most british tanks were mostly designed for anti-infantry use more than anti-vehicle. Haven't confirmed that personally.

the UK doctrine divided tanks between 'infantry' and 'cruiser' tanks

infantry tanks (churchil etc) which were designed to support infantry advances so tend to be interchangeable with other heavy tank concepts, favouring armour over speed because they dont have to outpace the infantry

and cruiser tanks (crusader etc) are the lighter and correspondingly faster manoeuvre element

nothing about the concept prevented them engaging other tanks and is in fact not that different than other nations when you boil it down

for comparison the US primarily used the sherman for infantry support using far more 75mm models than the 76mm because 75mm shermans have a better HE shell for the infantry support role. meanwhile their mobile element are the tank destroyers like the m18 which were meant to be fast enough to redeploy to respond to german armoured spearheads breaking through

what does tend to work against the british in warthunder is their preference for solid AP shells, because in real life you didnt have to kill off a tanks entire crew to 'kill' it.

[Cop Unit 12]

UK tanks in war thunder are overtired for several reasons. The biggest is due to the solid shot round based vehicles. The UK during WW2 mostly abstain from APHE rounds due to their own testing and (possibly) resource limitations. During testing (and real combat) most tank crewmen would abandoned their tank once it was penetrated (or even hit if it was hard enough) and APHE (Unlike war thunder) did not add much kill potential to a round so it made more sense to only have solid shot and HE rounds. HE rounds were for infantry and light vehicles such as Jeeps and trucks, while AP was meant for thicker targets, such as tanks and light fortifications.

Due to the UK focusing on AP, War thunder (Gajjin) has the issue on lack of spall, crew fear and APHE drastically over performing (like the panther's round should be the IS3's APHE penetration affects (this is a over exaggeration possibly)) have made the Commonwealth vehicles require a much higher level of skill to play. THUS only higher skill players mange to get to later UK vehicles leading to them being able to wipe the floor of the less average skilled players of other nations such as Germany. This brings the average Commonwealth vehicle K/D and W/L ratio's much more skewed and overall false but as most of Gajjin game balancing staff does not play their own game they can only look at the stats thus leading most Commonwealth vehicles to be way to high in BR.

Too add to the above the Commonwealth's cold war heavy hitters are now sitting at near useless due to the APDS nerf.

[Turkish Sharpshooter]

Lower right plate... Lower right plate... Oh what we saying? Yeah, no British tanks are good I think. They are hard to destroy and tough enemy

[Cop Unit 12]

Originally posted by Turkish SharpShooter:

Lower right plate... Lower right plate... Oh what we saying? Yeah, no British tanks are good I think. They are hard to destroy and tough enemy

I mean. I am enjoying the Avenger.

[Foxtrot39]

Because brits didn't thought of reverse as combat a mobility element, only as parking tool

Therefore the gearbox they put into those tanks can barely do anything in reverse

Also raw HP doesnt mean good torque, causign the engine to struggle to make use of all its power

[King Hades]

I enjoy the Brits. Few others offer the ability to be downtiered and still pen everything to some reliability.

[French Cat]

Originally posted by mogami_99:

How else would Squire make War Thunder videos?

lmao

[Tremendous Moist, Lord of Wet]

Because all the strengths of the British tanks are actively nerfed by warthunder for the sake of their game balance.

Penetration spalling? Nerfed because Gaijin upholds APHE as the be all end all of ammo. A good example is looking at the gulf in damage between 37-40MM AP and APHE shells. The APHE shells will do 200% more damage than the AP shell because of filler and one shot tanks while sometimes crew men can literally survive a 37mm 1KG AP punching through armor into their chest while the fragments of their hull disappear off to narnia.

APDS? Nerfed because of shell shattering. Never mind that shell shattering is an issue across all ammo(RU 76 shell quality, the original 88 pzgr soft-nose AP shattering, US using Ger fuses for their 75 M61 APHE in North Africa to fix shattering on impact), Gen 1 APDS needed to have shell shattering to 'balance' out the high pen. So UK by virture of being an early adopter of APDS gets nerfed.

The conqueror 120 APDS has a literal 75mm AP shell as a sabot but can still shatter on 30mm plating and will not generate a lot of spalling despite being capable of skewering a tiger 2 from the frontal plate. I guess all that metal in the hull got vaporised in penetration.

[I AM THE LAW!]

Originally posted by Sabaithal:

Someone told me historically most british tanks were mostly designed for anti-infantry use more than anti-vehicle. Haven't confirmed that personally.

well..the ww1 and ww2 ones yea...but not the MBTs.