Jump to content


Fed up with T-22


  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

Volatile_Squirrel #1 Posted 11 April 2016 - 01:13 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 30254 battles
  • 180
  • Member since:
    10-25-2011

Just need to get this off my chest.

 

But I want to know the mindset of someone in WG staff who thought that introducing this thing into game is a good idea.

 

Lets put overpowered tank (yes, even it's description says it is overpowered) into game but lets make it so no casual player can ever get it so that every battle with this thing in it feels rigged. Why? Because... stupid.

 

Yes, it is in line for nerf but hell, they should make it a god damn priority. Together with another jewel of Russian technical ingenuity that never happened, obj. 260.

 

Have a nice day.



Cobra6 #2 Posted 11 April 2016 - 01:19 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16458 battles
  • 16,557
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

I just have to laugh every time I read the description where it says that the T-22 was a prototype for the Obj.907.

 

Yet the Obj.907's armour is pretty much garbage from the side, every shot penetrates from any angle. So the "prototype" is better than the "production model", makes sense...

 

Haven't seen many T-22's to be honest but every time I shot at one they took damage, so I guess the armour is not actually that good if you remember to shoot the flattest angle.

 

Cobra 6



Eila_Juutilainen #3 Posted 11 April 2016 - 01:23 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 21250 battles
  • 3,883
  • [102ND] 102ND
  • Member since:
    11-04-2012

View PostCobra6, on 11 April 2016 - 01:19 PM, said:

I just have to laugh every time I read the description where it says that the T-22 was a prototype for the Obj.907.

 

Yet the Obj.907's armour is pretty much garbage from the side, every shot penetrates from any angle. So the "prototype" is better than the "production model", makes sense...

 

Haven't seen many T-22's to be honest but every time I shot at one they took damage, so I guess the armour is not actually that good if you remember to shoot the flattest angle.

 

Cobra 6

 

The problem with the T-22 is that the tank is pretty much impossible. Like, because of the hull shape, which gives it the amazing side armour, made it even more cramped for crew than your standard Soviet mediums, which are not very ergonomic to begin with. Heck, I've heard that even the engine wouldn't fit.

 

This thing is the definition of fantasy blueprint vehicle.



Cobra6 #4 Posted 11 April 2016 - 01:31 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16458 battles
  • 16,557
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

View PostEila_Juutilainen, on 11 April 2016 - 12:23 PM, said:

 

Like, because of the hull shape, which gives it the amazing side armour, made it even more cramped for crew than your standard Soviet mediums, which are not very ergonomic to begin with.

 

Yeah as we've seen in the videos of Chieftain indeed the Soviet tanker force consisted of Leprechauns and Gnomes anyway with the interior spaces in all their tanks. :teethhappy:

 

Cobra 6



BatelGeuce #5 Posted 11 April 2016 - 01:53 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 27401 battles
  • 2,209
  • [CSA-2] CSA-2
  • Member since:
    09-23-2011
I just love people bitching about tanks they don't have ...

TheMarketGardener #6 Posted 11 April 2016 - 02:43 PM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 18811 battles
  • 2,962
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    01-22-2011

View PostBatelGeuce, on 11 April 2016 - 02:53 PM, said:

I just love people bitching about tanks they don't have ...

 

Just because you dont have it doesn't mean you dont have to deal with it...

Eila_Juutilainen #7 Posted 11 April 2016 - 05:58 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 21250 battles
  • 3,883
  • [102ND] 102ND
  • Member since:
    11-04-2012

View PostCobra6, on 11 April 2016 - 01:31 PM, said:

 

Yeah as we've seen in the videos of Chieftain indeed the Soviet tanker force consisted of Leprechauns and Gnomes anyway with the interior spaces in all their tanks. :teethhappy:

 

Cobra 6

 

I think Leprechauns are still too big.

 

 

View PostBatelGeuce, on 11 April 2016 - 01:53 PM, said:

I just love people bitching about tanks they don't have ...

 

Devs admitted that the tank is too good. That should be the end of any discussion.


Edited by Eila_Juutilainen, 11 April 2016 - 06:00 PM.


Pablo_Amenable #8 Posted 12 April 2016 - 07:16 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 10862 battles
  • 609
  • Member since:
    09-19-2015
I like that idea of this tank, it needs a really weird gameplay (back sidescrape, overangling side), bobs would never think out to do this and they won't care enough to find out where to shoot it... It kinda increases the experience needed to play this tank very much, we could have more tanks like that, nerfed or not

SMR_FV #9 Posted 26 April 2016 - 03:39 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 76997 battles
  • 618
  • [322] 322
  • Member since:
    05-18-2011
Don't worry baddies the precedent has been made with the upcoming nerf of the T-22 which will devalue any reward tank in the future. Why bother getting a tank through toughest missions and challenges to end up having a sub-par piece of trash eye candy? Wargaming has always known how to (mis)treat its playerbase. 

Edited by SMR_FV, 26 April 2016 - 03:39 PM.


siramra #10 Posted 09 May 2016 - 03:43 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 25076 battles
  • 1,185
  • [DUXTR] DUXTR
  • Member since:
    08-21-2011

With all the rigging that went on they should just have removed it. Period

Met 2 players yesterday using it. One was a 1000 wn8 player....no rigging there....Yeah. Still he yoloed around and did 3.6k damage.

The other Battle it was a unicum With 2700 wn8.

I checked both players stats in the tank.

The 1k player did an average of just above 2k in it. Better than 9% of the players

The unicum did 3,7k average in it. Better than 60% of the players.

40% of the players who have it does above 3,7k damage on average.

So clearly this tank underperform. Lol



G01ngToxicCommand0 #11 Posted 29 May 2016 - 11:53 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 37465 battles
  • 751
  • Member since:
    11-03-2011
Well the only nerf the T-22 med really needed was the side hull armour; WG should have nerfed its armour thickness so that it wouldn't be able to reverse sidescrape and it would have been fine and no one would have complained it being OP.

captainpigg #12 Posted 30 May 2016 - 01:59 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 32389 battles
  • 949
  • [F-DIV] F-DIV
  • Member since:
    02-22-2014

View Postatomskytten, on 29 May 2016 - 10:53 PM, said:

Well the only nerf the T-22 med really needed was the side hull armour; WG should have nerfed its armour thickness so that it wouldn't be able to reverse sidescrape and it would have been fine and no one would have complained it being OP.

 

Except that armor is one of the only things in game not subject to balance changes, they keep it as close as possible to how it was built, blue-printed, hell even sketched on a napkin. Wargaming fake tanks are mostly the only exceptions here, E50m, T-28prot, etc. The only real tank I can think of with really incorrect armor is the VK4502b, and it's only around until they can balance it's replacement, any year now.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users