Type 62 still 6.7 material?

[warner7 81]

Well, the Type 62 recently had a power nerf bringing it to Type 63 standards. It now has lower power to weight ratio compared to the 63, lower top speed and is not amphibious! Is it still 6.7 material? I guess not. Even a T-34-85 can preform better than it now. It needs to go down to 6.0 or even 5.7.

 

Edited March 9, 2023 by warner7

[不是很能抗压 1,265]

Wait for the next br change.

[Kallu609 8]

It never was worth 6.7, it is one of the worst light tanks in the game offering you a bad gun with a terrible turret and armor that only gets you destroyed, at least the shells are not completely worthless but generally it still performs worse than M18 and type 63

[ForestFighters 15]

TBH it is pretty much just a T-34-85 with HEAT-FS.

Armor is worse, mostly in the bouncing random stuff department, as neither has anything but anti-autocannon armor.

Gun is literally identical, with only an admittedly good HEAT-FS shell being notably different.

Mobility-wise it is definitely better, with a p/w ratio of 20.5 compared to 15.53, and a higher top speed (although I have not tested actual mobility with gears and all thoroughly).

I say it should be 6.0, with 6.3 being still plenty usable. At 5.7 it would just be a 100% upgrade to the T-34-85 with no real downsides due to the HEAT round.
The type 63 should stay one BR step below it, as it is already. That thing won't outshine the t-34-85 at 5.7 because it gets murdered by .50cals and it is enormous.

 

Sitting at 6.7 this thing just has no lineup and is not good enough to bring things up to 6.7 for. (And is pointless at 7.3)

[warner7 81]

1 hour ago, ForestFighters said:

I say it should be 6.0, with 6.3 being still plenty usable. At 5.7 it would just be a 100% upgrade to the T-34-85 with no real downsides due to the HEAT round.

Do not forget the trash turret traverse, and light armour 

[Dragonmitri 94]

I really don't like the type 62 and the other 85mm light tanks. The firepower is just awful. The gun has high dispersion, HEAT has lackluster post pen effect and APHE doesn't work frontally at the BR.

 

IMO it should get a reload speed buff, along with the other 85mm light tanks, and a drop in BR to 6.3 so that it has a lineup.

[ForestFighters 15]

3 hours ago, warner7 said:

Do not forget the trash turret traverse, and light armour 

At 5.7+ neither the t-34-85 nor the type 62 have real armor.
In addition, the improved mobility can be used to make up for the turret traverse (as it's not like you need to angle).
Are those stats worse: yes.
Does HEAT overshadow them: IMO yes.
I do not think they should share BR.

[warner7 81]

6 hours ago, ForestFighters said:

At 5.7+ neither the t-34-85 nor the type 62 have real armor.
In addition, the improved mobility can be used to make up for the turret traverse (as it's not like you need to angle).
Are those stats worse: yes.
Does HEAT overshadow them: IMO yes.
I do not think they should share BR.

Good point 

[妃星 40]

I can see the Type 62 going to 6.3 but anything lower it really would not fit in. The gun is actually more comparable to the T-44's ZIS-S-53 (which is also 6.7 but not really because of his gun), personally I really like the 85mm since it OHK anything when it pens but it does require playing more carefully since at 6.7 and higher it is basically useless in frontal engagements. Mobility is very good in my opinion, top speed now is 60kph which is still very good (it's reached on roads but from tests you can get around 40-48kph offroad without much issues). It's a light tank so armor is whatever but it does have protection from 12.7mm which is nice.

 

At 5.7 it would be just... no, it has BR-367 with 164mm pen at 10 m and good angle performance (lower filler than BR-365K/A but it still a good amount of filler), with it's mobility it would be quite the problem for a lot of people, it would still be easily killed, but so is the T-34's that are 5.7 but they don't have the mobility nor the improved round the Type 62 has.

 

As I said in my other post asking about the Type 62, it does require a very specific play style, you cannot play it aggressively like a M18 and alike since it does not have the reverse speed and the turret traverse, and you don't have gun stats to really snipe with it, although it was the way I mostly played with it. Also, I've never used the HEAT-FS shell in this thing, I find it absolute useless as I always have APHE loaded (since it's actually reliable unlike heat which from my experience likes getting eaten by everything), so in order to use it I would have to give away my position since the game does not allow to reload without firing.

From the people I saw playing with it, it's mostly used for ambushing (aside from on guy on Poland who rushed the enemy and brawled with like 5 people), which as also a bit how I used it, staying near forests and peeking out when I saw the sides of enemies, shooting, then retreating back to the forest, had variable success as some maps don't really allow for this kinda of play style.

 

at 6.3 it would have IS-2 1944 as lineup (I personally don't think IS-2 1944 should be in 6.3 but that's another topic) but then type 63 would probably have to go to 6.0 (which in my opinion it deserves as I absolute dislike that thin aluminum box, but Tiger players would cry because of it's 300mm pen HEAT-FS).

 

 

[warner7 81]

On 11/04/2023 at 18:39, YourAverageKiara said:

I can see the Type 62 going to 6.3 but anything lower it really would not fit in. The gun is actually more comparable to the T-44's ZIS-S-53 (which is also 6.7 but not really because of his gun), personally I really like the 85mm since it OHK anything when it pens but it does require playing more carefully since at 6.7 and higher it is basically useless in frontal engagements. Mobility is very good in my opinion, top speed now is 60kph which is still very good (it's reached on roads but from tests you can get around 40-48kph offroad without much issues). It's a light tank so armor is whatever but it does have protection from 12.7mm which is nice.

 

At 5.7 it would be just... no, it has BR-367 with 164mm pen at 10 m and good angle performance (lower filler than BR-365K/A but it still a good amount of filler), with it's mobility it would be quite the problem for a lot of people, it would still be easily killed, but so is the T-34's that are 5.7 but they don't have the mobility nor the improved round the Type 62 has.

 

As I said in my other post asking about the Type 62, it does require a very specific play style, you cannot play it aggressively like a M18 and alike since it does not have the reverse speed and the turret traverse, and you don't have gun stats to really snipe with it, although it was the way I mostly played with it. Also, I've never used the HEAT-FS shell in this thing, I find it absolute useless as I always have APHE loaded (since it's actually reliable unlike heat which from my experience likes getting eaten by everything), so in order to use it I would have to give away my position since the game does not allow to reload without firing.

From the people I saw playing with it, it's mostly used for ambushing (aside from on guy on Poland who rushed the enemy and brawled with like 5 people), which as also a bit how I used it, staying near forests and peeking out when I saw the sides of enemies, shooting, then retreating back to the forest, had variable success as some maps don't really allow for this kinda of play style.

 

at 6.3 it would have IS-2 1944 as lineup (I personally don't think IS-2 1944 should be in 6.3 but that's another topic) but then type 63 would probably have to go to 6.0 (which in my opinion it deserves as I absolute dislike that thin aluminum box, but Tiger players would cry because of it's 300mm pen HEAT-FS).

 

 

yup, 6.3 is what i thought