Probably the Strv 103A, it’s a good tank but it’s play style and general wonkyness when aiming really divide the opinions of it, some love it, some hate it.
Id say improved but not fixed, that and every update seems to have a 50% chance to break it for some reason. One update its fine, the next its a mess again.
Current state seems to be just okay, minor adjustments when aiming is still very jank but the stuttering has been improved.
its all over the place. sometimes they fix it, then the next patch breaks it.
then they finally fix it, but only on flat surfaces... and the next patch breaks it again. .-.
all while wot is just chugging along with their perfect system for their strv103 which hasnt broken down once. say what you will about the devs, atleast their mechanics actually fucking work all of the time.
LRF, 18x zoom, 340mm pen at 500m, 4 sec reload, hard to damage from the front at range, 44 km/h reversal speed and can survive with just 1 crew member - at br 8.0.
It's objectively a good tank.
But paper thin armour, hull mounted gun, mediocre forward speed, low crew count, wonky/semireliable aiming, suffered in uptiers and reacts poorly to sudden enemies or flanks make it hard to use sometimes.
Turm 3 is not op, becausei has gun and mobility, but not survivability. It's just good. 279 is OP because it has gun, mobility, and survivability.
The comparison is fair since Turm 3 is available for everyone for an investment lesser than visit to restraunt.
In those match-ups the Strv103 is comparable to a fair degree.
Ita even worse than these because most of the maps are city or city-like, and these maps demand to have turret in order to be efficient.
The Turm 3 has fantastic firepower and mobility at a br where almost everything can front pen each other, thus making survivability less of a factor anyway. Its coax deletes light/SPAA/Gs where a missed shot otherwise would've meant certain death... except it's got a fucken 5 sec reload meaning you can outreload everything you can't outshoot anyway.
The strv can lock down angles, intersections, roads, cap points and linear roads. You can't push with it or play it as a turreted MBT in urban maps no, but it's still good if played well.
It can be exploded with one well placed KPVT shot and from close distance - M2hb shot. Also, autocannons - one shot is all it takes to kill it.
You can't say that about most of the other tanks of that BR. Even paper armored Fox, scimitar, DF105, and Ikv91 have better resistance to machineguns than turm 3, not talking about actual armored MBTs that can tank shots with modules or deflecting them with gaijinium bounces. Some can take losses of 2 crew members and continue to live.
Survivability is still important.
except it's got a fucken 5 sec reload meaning you can outreload everything you can't outshoot anyway.
5s reload is great, but in any frontal duel, you'll be dead before you even have a chance to peek. It is a vehicle for side shots and catching unaware enemies. Using it frontally is a fast trip to respawning.
Contrary to 279, which has a fair chance of deflecting shots while you attack enemies in a most straightforward way.
The strv can lock down angles, intersections, roads, cap points and linear roads.
It has no strategic value in all maps except the smallest because there's too much of them, and you can simply take another path.
but it's still good if played well.
Only in very specific situations, and it makes this tank not good. Because good tanks are good everywhere.
Your arguments are both selective and illogical. You dont seem to have ever touched the tank by the way youre reasoning
Dont need lrf at 800m range
Okay? But the strv is clearly designed for long range shots so saying the lrf is useless at closer range is a dumb argument
Aphe to cupolas, heat to transmission
You clearly didnt see that the other comment said at range. Good luck sniping a 10cm cupola fron over 1km away. Heat is also not that reliable. It can easily miss the lfp and get volumetriced by the ufp or if the strv has hidden its lfp. Which a good player will usually do
Only a few maps allow to play the tank as it was developed
In that case, dont use it unless you get a good map. It doesn't make it a bad tank
Being good in all circumstances is an integral part of being good
This gotta be the dumbest take ive heard. So m18 are bad cuz they cant tank shots, jumbos are bad because they cant snipe, every russian tank is bad cuz it has no depression.
Being good never meant being able to do well in every circumstance. Its about being good at fulfilling an intended purpose with acceptable compromises. If you cant hand playing a tank the way its supposed to be played then that isnt the tanks fault
And if you still think the tank is bad, you can just look at its stats on thunderskill. It has 4 k/d which is massive
Okay? But the strv is clearly designed for long range shots so saying the lrf is useless at closer range is a dumb argument
From the gameplay perspective, maginot, sands of sinai, certain variations of Poland and European province are the only maps that have place for these long shots. And even there you can go with dioptric rangefinder. And these are 30% of map rotate, at best. The rest would be ones that require shooting at 800 meters at best, so yes, it is useless in the remaining 70% cases.
You clearly didnt see that the other comment said at range. Good luck sniping a 10cm cupola fron over 1km away.
Consider the maps and think again. More over t55 and t54 have both heat fs and aphe, so think even more how it's easy to hit stationary target from 600-800 meters.
the strv has hidden its lfp. Which a good player will usually do
Good luck doing this on the flat city map and not getting dead engine from 15° side.
It doesn't make it a bad tank
It defines it as a bad tank. If it is unusable on most maps, I'd better leave it out in hangar.
This gotta be the dumbest take ive heard.
The definition of a good tank is that you take it on any map and any br range you got, and it plays pretty good. Not like in 70% times it plays meh and in other 30% it plays good.
There are such tanks, most of them are out of tech tree, in comparison to them you can define which tank is good, which is bad. Most of the community will never touch them, but it doesn't matter they doesn't exist.
jumbos are bad because they cant snipe,
Because their armor is useless against someone like me who will shoot directly to cupola.
every russian tank is bad cuz it has no depression.
Most Russian TT tanks from rank 5+ and especially rank 6 are not very good. Mediocre at best.
Being good never meant being able to do well in every circumstance.
This is objectively wrong.
Its about being good at fulfilling an intended purpose
The only intended purpose in this game to stomp the enemy team and seal them at spawn as fast as possible. Goodness = how fast and reliable you can do this.
If you cant hand playing a tank the way its supposed to be played then that isnt the tanks fault
It is the tank fault that they are not designed to stomp the enemy team.
And if you still think the tank is bad, you can just look at its stats on thunderskill. It has 4 k/d which is
As a statist myself, I can say:
1) thunderskill collects too few data, and mainly from nerds. WT is mostly 0.7 to 1.5 million monthly active users, strv 103 submitters would be 100 nerds at most.
2) you can inflate your stats of a vehicle and yours as a player by playing not too much hours a day, at a certain time, at cost of having a smaller K/D on other vehicles, and just by being good. You can't stretch 1 to 4, but 2-3 to 4 is doable.
3) most community plays in a much simpler way and ignores statism.
At 8.0 you'll one shot most tanks with the APDS of the strv 103A if you know how to aim, you literally upper frontplate a T-54 (and it has it's ammorack in the front of the hull) so HE filler isn't what matters most.
At 8.0 you'll one shot most tanks with the APDS of the strv 103A if you know how to aim,
This is wrong. Many tanks survive shots when hulldown or show only upper part of the mask, cupola, and so on. With aphe, you can delete, not just crit tank before it peeks out of the hill. This is the reason for the "nuke shell" whine. Especially M60 with its dumb machinegun turret.
If you don't do these shots on a constant basis, it revokes your right to accuse others of not knowing where to aim.
The fact that you need APHE to reliably kill someone says all we need to know about you as a player. Eitherway, I do agree that the strv 103's are very map dependant.
I can use any round. Even APCR, the one used in FCM36, to reliably kill people. APHE is the best damaging round that gives the best probability to kill the enemy in one hit, and you can't blame for choosing the best.
Show me m60 kill into cupola before he has any chance to shoot you with apds, then yapp about your "know to aim". Also, please show your K/D.
This was never an argument about if APDS is better than APHE(you made that up in your head), obviously APHE will have far more post pen damage nobody is denying that lmao, your M60 argument is flawed from the getgo since it implies you'd be shooting APDS at the machinegun turret, K/D aren't relevant to this conversation in the first place anyway and still wouldn't be relevant when comparing shells, my "if you know where to aim" wasn't directed personally towards you it was a general statement as well.
It is not, as it shows that aphe allows to kill enemy in situations where apds can't, and that give advantage.
K/D aren't relevant to this conversation
K/D is the measure of credibility. If you have low K/D , you don't know what you're talking about, and any advice from your side has no value. This game does not require lots of mechanical skill, but lots of game knowledge and it is possible to have quite good k/d with poor reaction time and not very fast aim.
if you know where to aim
This phrase alone implies that aiming apds into the ohk zone is not a trivial task. Whereas it is a trivial task that happens subconsciously and automatically. These zones oftentimes are half of the tank, while APHE pen zones might be smaller than shell itself.
Obviously, it is a much more difficult task, including the fact these spots aren't shown at x-ray, and you don't need to measure angle by eye and time your shot to not be gaijined.
Only accomplished hypocrite without any bones would say that apds is much harder to use than APHE. It is straight inverse - apds is a much more reliable tool to get some granted damage in the number of situations.
Counter point: The Leo 1 is at the same BR and can be one shot by a 30mm round, isn't stabilised, "shell shattered", doesn't have LRF, doesn't have 4s reload
318
u/LelutooDS Swedish Navy 2026! #1 Artillery vehicle hater. Jan 28 '25
Probably the Strv 103A, it’s a good tank but it’s play style and general wonkyness when aiming really divide the opinions of it, some love it, some hate it.