MalikCarr, on Apr 17 2012 - 22:10, said:
I've played both and fully upgraded/kitted out each one. Other than the poor gun, KV-13 is superior in every single way. It turns better, it has a lower profile, it's better armored, has better acceleration...
With D-5T-85BM's great accuracy and aim time but fairly low damage and penetration, what you're given is a tank that is either a dedicated flanker, seeking out to kill enemy artillery or attacking heavy tanks from behind, or - in my preference - a mobile sniper that can easily relocate and pop people from across the map. See for yourself here:
With correct placing, KV-13 can totally terrorize other tanks. I never had battles like this with T-43 - it doesn't have the mobility, and 100mm D-10T's mediocre accuracy and long aim time make it ill-suited for ranged battles.
While I won't speak on whether the KV-13 is better than the T43, don't let the listed armor numbers fool you. Russian tanks are notorious for having weirdly placed armor profiles.
For instance, the KV, at a listed 75mm of armor, has a 75mm, 70mm, and even 35mm chunks of armor dotting the front of it at various places.
It's listed as 120, but odds are it's nowhere near as strong as that on the frontal profile at large.
Sadly, the place where I used to go to get specific numbers is deciding it wants to charge for access to the armor values, but I can almost guarantee that the KV-13's front is a lot weaker than the listed stats. It's merely bouncy.
As an example, here we have the IS-2 armor profile as seen in game
Specifically the top half. The armoring, despite being listed at 120, generally is much less than 120 due to the angling used. It overall ends up being very weak to where the frontal profile at its strongest point is in the 140-150 range (the 71mm sloped part) while the rest is closer to 110-130. This isn't the best example, mind, but the IS isn't exactly a bastion of armor at its tier.
But, more to the point, the KV-13 is more a menagerie of strange angles than it is strong frontal armor. Hell, I had a JPIV using straight AP rounds penetrating it frontally fairly easily (into the turret, mind, from the front) and that's a 132 pen gun. By contrast, the T43 frontal armor is more homogenous and predictable, but less random as a result. It's more reliable even if you merely rely on it being unreliable, and you get a much better gun to compensate.
As a note, my games in the KV-13 are still limited (not even double digits), and the last time I played the T-43 was back in beta before the warpbug was fixed, but I honestly don't think it's fair to say the T-43 or KV-13 are better than each other. Hell, going off
win rates on the NA server, the KV-13 and T-43 perform nearly identically.
EU corroborates this as well. Statistically, the two perform identically. While the KV-13 very likely does have a stronger frontal profile, compared to the guns it will face in tier 7, it's largely meaningless barring sloppy shots, and its tier mates will always have some advantage to get rid of the armor disadvantage.
And, from what I can tell, barring running downhill, the KV-13 isn't fast enough to give it an advantage when it's given poor tiers. The order of importance for stats on a tank are: Weapon > Speed > Armor. Well, the speed of the KV-13, most importantly including acceleration, isn't particularly stellar. Its weapon isn't amazing, and its armor, while good, is the least important feature of any tank, since better weapons destroy armor advantages outright. By comparison, the T-43 has a much better weapon in terms of reliability, should have a bit less speed to compensate for its weaker engine and similar weight, while having armor that can be made on par with careful positioning and exploitation of the frontal slope.
What this all comes down to is, the T-43 is generally better off than the KV-13, because its gun is just that much better, and armor is often meaningless in this game. Due to how sloping works, any tank that can pen the T-43 often can pen the KV-13, and, when push comes to shove, the D10T is more likely to get you out of a sticky situation than the 85mm ever could hope for.
Again, though, I'm not trying to arbitrarily say the KV-13 is worse than the T-43. Far from it. If nothing else, statistically, the KV-13 and T-43 perform quite....identically to each other under the sheer weight of statistics. Given that, if nothing else, if you enjoy the KV-13 over the T-43, then you enjoy that tank over the other. It's a matter of choice. It's no better or worse than saying that the T32 is a better tank than the King Tiger or IS-3. Statistics can show this, but the best tank is the one that suits your playstyle the best, almost exclusively.
So, in case the point was lost in my ramblings, I'm just trying to defend the T-43 from what appears to be a general consensus against it. But, for those who know me, this is par for the course, as I was an ardent supporter of the T34 back when it was still a tier 9 heavy, and often defend tanks others perceive as underpowered by showing what they're capable of and putting my money where my mouth is. When I actually get the T-43 again, however, I'll be certain to update my opinions accordingly.
