Jump to content


The FV4202 Visit and inspection

fv4202 Medi tanks British vehicles HESH Armour

  • Please log in to reply
1447 replies to this topic

saml6131 #381 Posted 04 July 2013 - 06:20 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 8583 battles
  • 3,808
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011
Alright, lets rechristen him the Prince of Mischief.

DrMechano #382 Posted 07 July 2013 - 01:24 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 23756 battles
  • 393
  • Member since:
    05-29-2012
I take it you guys read 'that blog' and seen the response about the FV4202...

And I quote:
"ingame FV4202 does correspond to real life data the developers have, apparently there will be no FV4202 changes."

Which is flat out lies, we KNOW the turret is better armoured, we KNOW the Cupola is smaller, that is what the visits to Bovington out and out proved.

So in other words the fact it is a British tank strikes again and Historical Accuracy goes right out the freaking window when it suits them.

Seriously screw you WG, I'm now just sitting here waiting for War Thunder to add ground forces because if you're going to out and out lie to our faces...what is the point?

Edited by DrMechano, 07 July 2013 - 01:24 AM.


D_Diamond #383 Posted 07 July 2013 - 03:57 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 12209 battles
  • 98
  • Member since:
    09-08-2010
-

Edited by Octea, 17 July 2013 - 11:47 AM.


Kyphe #384 Posted 07 July 2013 - 05:37 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 16253 battles
  • 2,023
  • Member since:
    03-26-2011

View PostOctea, on 07 July 2013 - 03:57 AM, said:

I think that FV4202 is a great medium , It needs no improvement at all . at least not for me I mean .
Every beta test I am playing with FV4202 . And getting great performance with this one . It fits exactly my play style . That's why I want to research it .
But the Centurions (Both) are really bad tanks . I think they actually should be reworked right now , and not the FV4202 .
If you think that this would make FV4202 better than now , Then thank you for your effort . But I doubt that WG won't nerf some other specifications of the FV4202 to improve It .

Excuse me lad, but you do not really have a clue how this plays in real games, I have played it on the test server too like many other tanks but that only gives you the vaguest impression of how it will perform in normal matches use so declaring it is fine to people who have played it on the real server is a bit ridiculous

D_Diamond #385 Posted 07 July 2013 - 07:39 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 12209 battles
  • 98
  • Member since:
    09-08-2010

View PostKyphe, on 07 July 2013 - 05:37 AM, said:

Excuse me lad, but you do not really have a clue how this plays in real games, I have played it on the test server too like many other tanks but that only gives you the vaguest impression of how it will perform in normal matches use so declaring it is fine to people who have played it on the real server is a bit ridiculous

I agree about the differences between the servers , But still for me the E50M and BatChat are the same as in normal matches in the main game server .
Can you please describe what makes this medium imbalanced ? For me this medium seems to be the ideal .

Edited by Octea, 08 July 2013 - 09:25 PM.


nacktesZERHACKTES #386 Posted 07 July 2013 - 08:47 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 30488 battles
  • 469
  • Member since:
    08-08-2011
- ingame FV4202 does correspond to real life data the developers have, apparently there will be no FV4202 changes

In your face bitch :blink:

saml6131 #387 Posted 07 July 2013 - 08:53 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 8583 battles
  • 3,808
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011

View PostOctea, on 07 July 2013 - 07:39 AM, said:

I agree about the differences between the servers , But still for me the E50M and BatChat are the same as in normal marches in the main game server .
Can you please describe what makes this medium imbalanced ? For me this medium seems to be the ideal .

The low top speed, the lack of turret armour, the HESH round being unreliable.

It's not a bad medium tank, its just that the others are usually better in 90% of the battle you'd be in. Compare it to the Leopard 1, and the only advantages it has over the L1 is 1 degree of gun depression and "armour".

The low top speed is managable, but if it gets the turret armour it should have (And the weakspot is made smaller) then it can work as a hull down tank, something the Centurions had to do and something the other medium tanks wouldn't be able to do.

That would be its role, its main strength. At the moment, it doesn't have one as there is always another medium tank that can do it better.

GoldMountain #388 Posted 07 July 2013 - 03:45 PM

    Captain

  • Beta Tester
  • 20209 battles
  • 2,336
  • Member since:
    01-06-2011

View Postsaml6131, on 04 July 2013 - 02:23 PM, said:

You stick the Chieftain tank in as a tier 10 heavy tank and lots of people would go for it, possibly spending lots of money in the grind.

Everyone knows what the Chieftain is and would probably go for it thinking that its OP. Even if the grind is bad (Something like the Chieftain prototype with large weakspots, bad mobility and high module damage will probably make it a hard tank to grind so many people would skip it through free xp.

Well, with the number of prototypes available, the devs could easily accommodate tiers 8-10 with chieftain tanks alone.... Just a matter of balancing them
Hope the FV4202 changes do come, despite SerB either trolling us or ignoring Chally's data he sent them
Did he ever get a reply?

I am doubtfull of an armour change so soon, but the tank should have it's cuploa hight reduced and the tank resized to fit the correct dimensions

Edited by Celestia, 07 July 2013 - 03:46 PM.


del504082484 #389 Posted 07 July 2013 - 04:12 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 22525 battles
  • 554
  • Member since:
    07-03-2012
WG are known for their buillsh!t, they say one thing, and its final.. then they change their minds. One minute there will never be a Chieftain prototype in the game ever, the next they start gathering information about it for future updates. I will consider training my FV crew for the Chieftain when ever they add it, but I am sure that it is Serb's sick Russian "humor" and we will get a tank that is not as good as the other tier 10 tanks, though I know there will still be people who will come here and defend it with the same old "l2p noobs"

It will be very interesting to see what they tell The_Challenger, perhaps something like "sorry Richard, but the careful measurements from your visit to the fv4202 are wrong, and the very small, unconfirmed information and partial guesswork, must be correct, much love, Serb"  

,!,, :trollface: ,,!,

Edited by UnFriendly83, 07 July 2013 - 04:13 PM.


The_Challenger #390 Posted 07 July 2013 - 04:30 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Military Specialist
  • 5605 battles
  • 1,852
  • [WG] WG
  • Member since:
    01-19-2012
Guys don't get too concerned (yet !) we were only having correspondence yesterday concerning this. I am still optimistic  :smile:  I will of course keep you updated.

Cabouse1337 #391 Posted 07 July 2013 - 05:53 PM

    Private

  • Beta Tester
  • 24398 battles
  • 32
  • [DIE] DIE
  • Member since:
    09-19-2010
Out of curiousity how can the Cheiftain not be in the Medium Branch when all MBT's we have seen ingame have been mediums the FV4201 is too light to be a heavy tank. And as for the whole thing with no changes to the 4202 give the chally some time as it is clear their data and the actual findings are missmatched. Btw great to finally meet you Challenger at Bovington shame I didnt get to meet Clanmcwood.

Ranzir #392 Posted 07 July 2013 - 05:57 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 50118 battles
  • 384
  • Member since:
    07-04-2011
Chieftain fits heavy better imho: Chieftain had strong armor, big gun (for wot med) and relatively slow speed, so in wot classification of tanks it would be closer to heavy than med. Also biggest reason is FV215b, tank that has lowest wr in Tier 10, has basically no redeeeming features and same hull is also used for tier 10 TD. So if any tank needs replacing FV215b is front of the line.

saml6131 #393 Posted 07 July 2013 - 06:02 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 8583 battles
  • 3,808
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011
The Chieftain weighs 56 tonnes. Of course its heavy enough to be a heavy tank.

More specifically, the Prototype varient also had a poor engine so its overall speed would be low. If it were to be a medium tank, it would be as much of a medium tank as the Matilda 2 is.

Although I can see why it would follow the medium branch. It was an MBT and meant to replace the Centurions, but its more of a heavy tank than it is a medium tank.

great_kahn #394 Posted 07 July 2013 - 08:07 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 21454 battles
  • 781
  • Member since:
    06-07-2012
Dont worry lads, we have the challenger in our corner.  :glasses:

Tigger3 #395 Posted 07 July 2013 - 08:17 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 13610 battles
  • 1,539
  • Member since:
    02-01-2012

View Postsaml6131, on 07 July 2013 - 06:02 PM, said:

The Chieftain weighs 56 tonnes. Of course its heavy enough to be a heavy tank.

More specifically, the Prototype varient also had a poor engine so its overall speed would be low. If it were to be a medium tank, it would be as much of a medium tank as the Matilda 2 is.

Although I can see why it would follow the medium branch. It was an MBT and meant to replace the Centurions, but its more of a heavy tank than it is a medium tank.

People seem to get a little hung up about the weight as a classification of a tank, most countries it was the role undertaken by the tank that actually gave it its classification.

M13/40 Med was lighter than the M3 Light
Panther was a german Med but the Soviets classed it as a heavy.
T55 was a soviet Med but in the West it was classed as an MBT
Centurion started life as a heavy cruiser then medium then universal/MBT
Conqueror was heavy then TD (source Fletcher - will dig out the actual book)
M26 Pershing was heavy and reclassified as medium.

Jibraill #396 Posted 07 July 2013 - 09:40 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 30287 battles
  • 195
  • Member since:
    11-09-2012
After having fv4202 since december, i was waiting every patch for improvements on this tank ( my stats with it are a bit bad cause it was my first tier 10 med ), but patch after patch this game just disspoints me, and sometimes i am frustrated when 1v1 with a tier 10 med tank i loose 90% of the time cause of low dpm and loader/gunner hits. I start to feel sorry for the time and money i invested in this game that lost its purpose.

StClement #397 Posted 08 July 2013 - 01:05 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 16609 battles
  • 1,453
  • Member since:
    01-14-2013

View PostThe_Challenger, on 07 July 2013 - 04:30 PM, said:

Guys don't get too concerned (yet !) we were only having correspondence yesterday concerning this. I am still optimistic  :smile:  I will of course keep you updated.

^^^This.^^^
The Brit line is niche and not exactly gaining in popularity. For the English speaking community it's a useful tool to play the game on a harder setting: for WG it's a low profit offshoot. Let them (WG) read and inwardly digest the information provided. There's not much advantage to themselves in getting their programmers beavering away on a rarely played and obscure tier X, but there might be some in placating the small- but still significant and fairly vocal- English speaking community. Make us feel loved and listened to, we might keep playing the game (and spending gold). So maybe 'softly, softly, catchee monkey' might be better than 'YOU SUCK, WG!!!'

It's unlikely there will be anything next patch, that's already been worked on. If there's still nothing the patch after, well maybe that might be the time to kick off, big style?

Homer_J #398 Posted 08 July 2013 - 07:18 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Moderator
  • 33120 battles
  • 36,607
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

View Postgreat_kahn, on 07 July 2013 - 08:07 PM, said:

Dont worry lads, we have the challenger in our corner.  :glasses:

Hope he has better luck than the Chieftain had with the T110E5.

clanmcwood #399 Posted 08 July 2013 - 09:15 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 22251 battles
  • 1,292
  • [-VIC-] -VIC-
  • Member since:
    02-29-2012
Interesting that I have had a Dev from the RU server message me asking for more info on this. He said if everything was put on the thread, I told him to check his inbox for the report from Richard, also gave a paragraph on angled armour design and the use and implementation of mantless turrets being the future of tank design and asking him to "please tell me if this is a bad design and should be weak in game" and if that is the case, how the come its now the normal design for modern tank turrets. ( i said it nice though)  :teethhappy:

Funny we get trolled with the "NO change" comment and yet they are asking for more info.

It sounds as if he has not seen the info submitted by Richard yet.

View PostHomer_J, on 08 July 2013 - 07:18 AM, said:

Hope he has better luck than the Chieftain had with the T110E5.

The difference there is NO physical prototype of the T110E5 we can prove physical measurements where the yank spanky tank was only ever in blue prints

"Fear Naught" men, the battle is not over yet.

Edited by clanmcwood, 08 July 2013 - 09:28 AM.


Soft_Kitty_Warm_Kitty #400 Posted 08 July 2013 - 09:19 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 22054 battles
  • 1,000
  • [TEC] TEC
  • Member since:
    10-03-2011
As a non-believer I am about to go down onto my hands and knees and pray the Dev's and WoT get it right and soon  :unsure:




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users