Jump to content


Valentine - Tier IV Light Tank

valentine

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
63 replies to this topic

_Knight_Commander_Pask_ #41 Posted 06 December 2012 - 09:10 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 3773 battles
  • 284
  • Member since:
    05-12-2011
The Valentine we get should have 50mm of side armour - as far as I know, every other armour face is more or less accurate. So I reckon the 'historical armour' is gonna be 70mm + magic spaced skirts for the Matilda (as per the LL one), and 50mm side armour for the Valentine.

mahi__mahi #42 Posted 17 December 2012 - 06:22 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 34205 battles
  • 3,069
  • Member since:
    01-21-2012
Hard matchmaking, like the 57mm ? more then the TopGun. Little low Exp. for me.

But good cammo and if u stay behind u can have fun. More an Camper Tank it seems.  :Smile-hiding:

But better then stitchy Matilda :Smile_veryhappy:

spacedskunk #43 Posted 19 December 2012 - 12:06 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 5833 battles
  • 31
  • [ZINC] ZINC
  • Member since:
    05-16-2012
I've had some really mental games in the Valentine certainly a good introduction into the British heavy armoured tanks, what I am loving about is it the gun is sufficient for the MM and it will surprise you on it's potential. Damage over time is fairly good for a tier 4 too. The main disadvantage of this tank is it's manouverability of course however it can turn really well.

Use it's strengths and you're looking at a very good tank for sure, I've certainly done a positive thiwng for my team in all games I've had in it.

Awesome little thing.

mahi__mahi #44 Posted 19 December 2012 - 10:32 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 34205 battles
  • 3,069
  • Member since:
    01-21-2012
Yep but the MM let me see a lot of Tier V and VI, thats sometimes a hard job.

LordGame #45 Posted 05 January 2013 - 09:24 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 7040 battles
  • 138
  • Member since:
    04-10-2011
Personally i think that it's better to go from Valentine to Churchill as you can have some guns unlocked :). I liked the grind a lot.

starlight2098 #46 Posted 07 January 2013 - 01:27 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 12452 battles
  • 258
  • Member since:
    08-26-2011
I personally bought the Premium Valentine a while ago and found it hilarious but inept.  As others have said, it's a miniature Heavy (though I liked the description, "Little Snail.) it can dominate the match, right up into the moment it has a close encounter with artillery or a tank destroyer of any description, against whom it even lacks the mobility and engine power to successfully flank and pin even with surprise.  None the less, the firepower I've seen it take (whilst cringing and wondering why my hitpoints haven't dropped) is beyond impressive.  So it's a fatally flawed little diamond.

When the British line came out for real, I personally chose to go down the Matilda route to see what I was missing (more of the same with an unpleasantly higher profile, but a better gun) rather then playing more of the same, but after reading this topic, I'm tempted to reconsider and see what my premiumtine could have been with a better gun.  A ridiculously reduced 30mm of side armour surely can't be as frustrating as Churchills I and VII are.  Seriously stalled on that line, not looking forwards to Black Prince, whereas I'm already loving the Comet.

appelpower #47 Posted 21 January 2013 - 08:32 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 2169 battles
  • 145
  • Member since:
    09-18-2012
Nah, Matilda's better.
It has more armor: 75/70/55 vs. 60/60/60 on the hull and 75/75/75 vs. 65/60/65 on the turret.
It has a much better gun: 55 damage, 121 penetration, 0.36 accuracy and 28,57 RPM vs. 70 damage, 110 penetration, 0.41 accuracy and 13,33 RPM (seriously, that is a horrible RPM)
It has less mobility, but both are slow so that doesn't matter.
It has more HP: 370 vs. 340

The Valentine has only 3 (small) advantages over the Matilda:
It has a slightly smaller profile (but the Matilda is small as well), the tier 2 and 3 tanks in that line are slightly better (but the grind through them is tiny anyways), and the guns carry over to the Churchill I which has a horrible stock grind (but you still have to research the suspension and turret before mounting them, so it's no big difference).

Cpt_Branko #48 Posted 23 January 2013 - 09:55 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 4875 battles
  • 217
  • Member since:
    11-29-2012
Valentine has unfairly nerfed RPM on it's 6pdr - it makes it worse in almost every respect then the Matilda. It's only advantage is camo on the move and slightly better agility (but both tanks are 24km/h slowpokes, so it's not relevant), it is worse in armour and especially in gun choices, since the 2pdr is far far superior then 13.33 RPM 6pdr, and the Valentine can't use the 2pdr with the littlejohn adaptor - while the Matilda, an older tank, can.

Slythe #49 Posted 24 January 2013 - 08:11 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 31789 battles
  • 112
  • [BAD-A] BAD-A
  • Member since:
    02-25-2011

View PostCpt_Branko, on 23 January 2013 - 09:55 AM, said:

Valentine has unfairly nerfed RPM on it's 6pdr - it makes it worse in almost every respect then the Matilda. It's only advantage is camo on the move and slightly better agility (but both tanks are 24km/h slowpokes, so it's not relevant), it is worse in armour and especially in gun choices, since the 2pdr is far far superior then 13.33 RPM 6pdr, and the Valentine can't use the 2pdr with the littlejohn adaptor - while the Matilda, an older tank, can.

Totally agree. Put the mkXB 2 pdr on the Valentine and it would just as good as the Matilda.

Eruantien_Aduialdraug #50 Posted 28 January 2013 - 08:47 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 12102 battles
  • 370
  • [SNOO] SNOO
  • Member since:
    02-02-2012

View PostCpt_Branko, on 23 January 2013 - 09:55 AM, said:

Valentine has unfairly nerfed RPM on it's 6pdr - it makes it worse in almost every respect then the Matilda. It's only advantage is camo on the move and slightly better agility (but both tanks are 24km/h slowpokes, so it's not relevant), it is worse in armour and especially in gun choices, since the 2pdr is far far superior then 13.33 RPM 6pdr, and the Valentine can't use the 2pdr with the littlejohn adaptor - while the Matilda, an older tank, can.
Also, the Tildy can have a gun rammer (talk about overkill) whilst the Valey misteriously can't... Hmm...

kurcevski #51 Posted 12 February 2013 - 07:51 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 17162 battles
  • 166
  • [RAKIA] RAKIA
  • Member since:
    07-05-2012
Why the heck cant the Valentine have the gun rammer??

Dongfeng_division #52 Posted 14 February 2013 - 01:24 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 51444 battles
  • 2,291
  • Member since:
    07-20-2011
Victory!
Battle: Highway 14. 2. 2013. 12:42:16
Vehicle: Valentine
Experience received: 1.504
Credits received: 54.146
Battle Achievements: Kolobanov's Medal, Top Gun, Sharpshooter, Master Gunner, Mastery Badge: "Ace Tanker"


Edit: Now that I played more with this tank, and it's finally Elite, I'll say that I find it a rather poor tank. When it's top tier it's merely OK, but still worse than many other tier IV tanks. When it's in a tier 5 or 6 game, it's near useless. It's slow, with weak gun, and armor even in tier IV game isn't that great (unlike Matilda's armor).

Best way to see how weak this tank is, is to take one of the overpowered tanks who have same MM as Valentine. They will be able to do 5x more damage than this tank, on average. That's a huge, huge difference.

Edited by Dongfeng_division, 15 February 2013 - 12:13 AM.


Kyphe #53 Posted 15 February 2013 - 03:17 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 16253 battles
  • 2,115
  • Member since:
    03-26-2011

View Postappelpower, on 21 January 2013 - 08:32 PM, said:

Nah, Matilda's better.
It has more armor: 75/70/55 vs. 60/60/60 on the hull and 75/75/75 vs. 65/60/65 on the turret.
It has a much better gun: 55 damage, 121 penetration, 0.36 accuracy and 28,57 RPM vs. 70 damage, 110 penetration, 0.41 accuracy and 13,33 RPM (seriously, that is a horrible RPM)
It has less mobility, but both are slow so that doesn't matter.
It has more HP: 370 vs. 340

The Valentine has only 3 (small) advantages over the Matilda:
It has a slightly smaller profile (but the Matilda is small as well), the tier 2 and 3 tanks in that line are slightly better (but the grind through them is tiny anyways), and the guns carry over to the Churchill I which has a horrible stock grind (but you still have to research the suspension and turret before mounting them, so it's no big difference).

you are forgetting that the val is classed as a light and the tilly is not, that means the val gets a cammo on the move the same as when it is stood still, the tilly is much easier to spot when it is moving than the val

hamstor #54 Posted 16 February 2013 - 10:31 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 15097 battles
  • 678
  • Member since:
    04-10-2012
Just had my most epic run with my little sunshine. I nearly died laughing in the end.

http://mwreplays.com/newreplaysimg/cefc85389a084a04e64f05a69dd7a340.png

appelpower #55 Posted 17 February 2013 - 09:48 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 2169 battles
  • 145
  • Member since:
    09-18-2012

View PostKyphe, on 15 February 2013 - 03:17 PM, said:

you are forgetting that the val is classed as a light and the tilly is not, that means the val gets a cammo on the move the same as when it is stood still, the tilly is much easier to spot when it is moving than the val
Indeed. However, the Matilda has so many advantages over the Valentine that this hardly makes a difference. The Valentine can sneak past enemy lines, but the Matilda can go straight through and tear them apart. The latter helps the team more than the former.

gibbet #56 Posted 21 February 2013 - 03:31 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 19941 battles
  • 225
  • Member since:
    05-27-2011
Valentine should have the gun rammer - like its Lend lease version!

hamstor #57 Posted 21 February 2013 - 03:40 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 15097 battles
  • 678
  • Member since:
    04-10-2012

View Postgibbet, on 21 February 2013 - 03:31 PM, said:

Valentine should have the gun rammer - like its Lend lease version!

The LL Valentine can't mount a Rammer either.  :Smile_smile:

_Knight_Commander_Pask_ #58 Posted 24 February 2013 - 07:22 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 3773 battles
  • 284
  • Member since:
    05-12-2011
I would play my Valentine more, but I swear I only get put into a tier IV match once every five games or so, it's incredibly frustrating. Still, it takes the award for 'Lowest Win-Rate Tank with Ace Tanker Badge.'  :Smile_veryhappy:

The Matilda, however, is on the complete opposite side of the spectrum, with my highest W/R IIIRC (tanks with 100% and two or three battles aside, of course).

Lilldraken #59 Posted 25 February 2013 - 03:44 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 3258 battles
  • 123
  • Member since:
    01-29-2013
I had some of my best games in the Valentine. To date it's the only tank in which I got a de Longlade's medal. In the same game (tier V encounter battle on Sand River, got around 1600xp IIRC) I just missed out on getting a Top Gun because I was loading a shell and someone else got the pesky Crusader who cruised around the cap circle.

The tank is well armoured, turns quickly and has good guns. With that said however, I do believe that the 6pdr L/50's RoF is too slow. I preferred it over the high alpha/low pen 75mm (the damage and penetration difference between them follows their actual capabilities), which has an ever slower ROF (again, true to history, the 75mm shell was much heavier and thus harder to load quickly). A slight buff to the L/50's RoF and DPM would brings its performance closer to the Matilda, which is by far the better tank of the two, with only slightly worse mobility and better armour all round.

If a buff ever comes (which I think is unlikely) or WG decides to put in the Mk X-B 2pdr then I would definitely consider repurchasing it. For now it's a mediocre (but likeable) tank which in the game is worse than its historic predecessor.

EDIT: The later marks of the Valentine had 3 man turrets. While I realise that there is no possibility to increase the number of crew members while modules are being researched, the tank should at least be given a significant boost to RoF after installing the second turret.

EDIT 2: Found a screenshot from that battle. :)

Spoiler                     

Edited by Lilldraken, 25 February 2013 - 09:49 PM.


Freodin #60 Posted 26 February 2013 - 03:15 PM

    Private

  • Beta Tester
  • 17662 battles
  • 7
  • [TTNP] TTNP
  • Member since:
    01-02-2011
I liked my premium LL Val very much... though the gun is a PITA. Had high hopes for the British - the adaptable - variant. At last a gun that cannot only hit but also penetrate things.

And what did we got? Less armour,, less speed, less manoverability, not very efficient guns... and of course it lacks the preferential MM.


I grinded my Churchil via the Mathilda, and only then bought the Val to speed up the research of the guns. Sold the Val as quick as possible.


Why use this tintub when you can drive a Covenanter as a T4 light?





Also tagged with valentine

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users