why does ww2 tanks have to fight cold war tanks

[alibooboo1024]

t29 7.0 usa heavy tank gets uptier fight an t-54 t29 loses ww2 tank should fight ww2 tank not cold war and ww2

[𝒞𝒶𝓈𝓊𝒶𝓁 Sinner]

Well, the alternative is a bad idea in my view. They could separate the "time periods" entirely, but that means that 6.7 is essentially the top tier of WW2, and that's kinda boring imo.

The T29 should have some trouble, but still be able to fight T-54s. Their big advantage will be their lower plate and armor as well as a smaller but faster reloading gun. But that's about it in my view at least.

You have a very big gun, and good armor (unless the T-54 has HEATFS/APDS.) Though I don't have the T29 to tell you how I would beat the T-54, just keep in mind that the T-54 basically has no reverse gear. I'm sure there is also a spot you can shoot with your main gun to pen, or go for their gun and then track hit them with your many, many 50cals.

[Cha Cha Real Rough]

Nah its fine where it is

[Ihatetrainyards]

Originally posted by 『Sinner』:

Well, the alternative is a bad idea in my view. They could separate the "time periods" entirely, but that means that 6.7 is essentially the top tier of WW2, and that's kinda boring imo.

The T29 should have some trouble, but still be able to fight T-54s. Their big advantage will be their lower plate and armor as well as a smaller but faster reloading gun. But that's about it in my view at least.

You have a very big gun, and good armor (unless the T-54 has HEATFS/APDS.) Though I don't have the T29 to tell you how I would beat the T-54, just keep in mind that the T-54 basically has no reverse gear. I'm sure there is also a spot you can shoot with your main gun to pen, or go for their gun and then track hit them with your many, many 50cals.

I personally don't find the idea "boring", for what's "boring" for me is getting seal clubbed by vehicles you can't do anything against unless they make a huge mistake.
Same goes the otherway around, I don't think it's particularly fun to delete King Tigers from 2km away with SACLOS missiles and APDS with no chance to fight back but to each their own.

[Warlock]

I believe your only option right now that fixes this is to join / form a player group, and play Customs with narrower ranges, and have the Game Host have the ability to kick players that bring in the wrong vehicle.

There is at least one Youtuber I know of that does this, creating large Custom Historical battles and making cool videos from it.

[Minamitsu]

I agree this ♥♥♥♥ is so dumb. I go into battle with a slow clunky ww2 tank then get killed by ATGMs. I use a damn sherman from 1944 and get killed by a vehicle from the 70s. So much for the "realistic" battles playlist. They could have just put vehicles in their era and altered spawn costs.

[Toblm]

Originally posted by Minamitsu:

I agree this ♥♥♥♥ is so dumb. I go into battle with a slow clunky ww2 tank then get killed by ATGMs. I use a damn sherman from 1944 and get killed by a vehicle from the 70s. So much for the "realistic" battles playlist. They could have just put vehicles in their era and altered spawn costs.

Got some bad news for you.
Pbv 301.
You can get killed by a Cold War tank at 1.3.

[biomike]

Originally posted by Minamitsu:

I agree this ♥♥♥♥ is so dumb. I go into battle with a slow clunky ww2 tank then get killed by ATGMs. I use a damn sherman from 1944 and get killed by a vehicle from the 70s. So much for the "realistic" battles playlist. They could have just put vehicles in their era and altered spawn costs.

Lets go by era, early war vs early war for an example would be Panzer 2 fighting KV-1 and KV-2 now does that sound fun?
How about immediate post war match, AMX-13(FL-11) vs IS-7 now what tank would you want to be in?
Year and era dont work
Also WWII tanks did see cold war tanks, the 6 day war is a good example of that

[Torva Messor]

Originally posted by alibooboo1024:

t29 7.0 usa heavy tank gets uptier fight an t-54 t29 loses ww2 tank should fight ww2 tank not cold war and ww2

hey bud you DO realize that the t29 isnt a ww2 tank yes? but i also whole heartedly agree ww2 tanks shouldnt be fightin cold war tanks

[Toblm]

Originally posted by Emotional Damage:

Originally posted by alibooboo1024:

t29 7.0 usa heavy tank gets uptier fight an t-54 t29 loses ww2 tank should fight ww2 tank not cold war and ww2

hey bud you DO realize that the t29 isnt a ww2 tank yes?

It is. Sorta. T29 and T30 are VERY late WWII prototypes on the Pershing chassis.
But its the equivalent of complaining that a T-44, Centurion 1 or M26 faces Cold War vehicles.

[Eftwyrd]

imagine thinking a amx13 should be fighting cold war MBTs, if you did the slightest amount of research or had even a basic knowledge of history, or basic reasoning in general... you would know war has never been fair, vehicles are not and have never been designed to be on par with whatever a hypothetical enemy is using.

At every point in history weapons have been designed to be as unfair to your expected opposition as physically possible, bracketing in arbitrary time periods is nothing short of ignorant. If a nation didnt expect to be fighting the best the US or Russia could throw at it in the cold war they didnt spend inordinate resources developing their equals when second rate would do.

Even amongst the superpowers themselves an airborne vehicle was never meant to meet an MBT in a fight so unless you are advocating your 'early tiers' of the cold war bracket be nothing but scout vehicles which noone is complaining are overpowered as low as 3.3 BR against ww2 tanks because they are not actually meant to fight other tanks

and thats discounting simple economics, the reason even the US didnt build nothing but iowa class battleships in ww2 is because they need more than a handful of ships, so distributing their resources among 'lesser' designs actually did the required job better. likewise SPAA exists from the cold war that is literally built to ww2 standards without anything so fancy as radar guidance because it was more important to produce hundreds of them cheaply than just a handful of the most lethal SAM available

History has at every stage been a seesaw of nations one upping each other with little to no stability or what any sane or knowledgable gamer would consider competitive balance in a single year or even short period

once again seeing ignorant gamers lured in by their pop history, war movies and other games without any standards of accuracy into thinking even ww2 itself was in any way 'balanced', try actually looking into what each nation would be able to deploy if you put an arbitrary cutoff of 1941 or 1942 sometimes for 'early war' matches, if you think BR is bad you aint seen nothing

[Dave]

Well the Russian T-54 and 55 were designed in 1945 and came out in 46? And are still in service.

[ZEONesp]

I prefer splited periods too.

[Baylock]

Originally posted by biomike:

Originally posted by Minamitsu:

I agree this ♥♥♥♥ is so dumb. I go into battle with a slow clunky ww2 tank then get killed by ATGMs. I use a damn sherman from 1944 and get killed by a vehicle from the 70s. So much for the "realistic" battles playlist. They could have just put vehicles in their era and altered spawn costs.

Lets go by era, early war vs early war for an example would be Panzer 2 fighting KV-1 and KV-2 now does that sound fun?
How about immediate post war match, AMX-13(FL-11) vs IS-7 now what tank would you want to be in?
Year and era dont work
Also WWII tanks did see cold war tanks, the 6 day war is a good example of that

False. Year and era work. Because just like BR, you can damn well adjust it as needed because we're reasonable human beings and not ramrod rigid qualifiers.

Sick and tired of people intrinsically supportive of their current seal club lineups throwing out these rigid takes based on a few egregiously bad matchups like that's what we actually want to happen and are just going to go "tough it out honey" or something

[biomike]

Originally posted by Alzeid Baylock:

Originally posted by biomike:

Lets go by era, early war vs early war for an example would be Panzer 2 fighting KV-1 and KV-2 now does that sound fun?
How about immediate post war match, AMX-13(FL-11) vs IS-7 now what tank would you want to be in?
Year and era dont work
Also WWII tanks did see cold war tanks, the 6 day war is a good example of that

False. Year and era work. Because just like BR, you can damn well adjust it as needed because we're reasonable human beings and not ramrod rigid qualifiers.

Sick and tired of people intrinsically supportive of their current seal club lineups throwing out these rigid takes based on a few egregiously bad matchups like that's what we actually want to happen and are just going to go "tough it out honey" or something

So you think sending a tank with with just over 100mm of pen and no armor like the AMX-13 vs something like a T-54 is fine? They would be the same era.
Again Panzer 2 and KV-1 same era tell me how you would balance that?
Also what would you so with the Sweden reserves as they got cold war rounds?

[Wandering Flare]

One thing they could do, instead of making an era matchmaking system, is to just create a BR hole by moving everything starting at the "WW2 tank gets uptiered to fight" BR up a 1.0 BR, meaning that late WW2 tanks don't need to be moved down and get downtiered into easy matches and don't get uptiered to fight tanks that slaughter them either.