Jump to content


Thunderbolt - ripp off


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

Sijamski_Mrmot #1 Posted 29 July 2017 - 03:17 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 35302 battles
  • 26
  • [PATKA] PATKA
  • Member since:
    06-18-2012

Rokeri S Moravu

Turio Ljubisa pivo da se 'ladi

Onomad Ljubisa kosio livadu
pa prileg'o da odmori u debelem 'ladu
dok potok zubori i cvrkucu ptice
svrnula Darinka da umije lice

I taman se nag'la vode da za'vati
kad li joj se zabezeknut pogled sunovrati

Ref. 2x
Turio Ljubisa pivo da se 'ladi
pa zaboravio flasu da izvadi, evribadi

 

 

Attached Files

  • Attached File   Thunderinitialstats.jpg   392.12K

Edited by Sijamski_Mrmot, 29 July 2017 - 03:35 PM.


Enforcer1975 #2 Posted 29 July 2017 - 03:20 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 20760 battles
  • 10,865
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014

Iirc that's the armor including the mantlet so nothing wrong there.

Check yourself. http://tanks.gg/tank/thunderbolt/model?vm=live


Edited by Enforcer1975, 29 July 2017 - 03:20 PM.


Baldrickk #3 Posted 29 July 2017 - 03:20 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 30142 battles
  • 14,306
  • [-TAH-] -TAH-
  • Member since:
    03-03-2013
It hasn't been changed

Unkel_Dolan #4 Posted 29 July 2017 - 03:23 PM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 27159 battles
  • 2,694
  • [NOPAN] NOPAN
  • Member since:
    12-14-2010


HaZardeur #5 Posted 29 July 2017 - 03:23 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 33473 battles
  • 1,188
  • Member since:
    08-14-2010


cro001 #6 Posted 29 July 2017 - 03:24 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 29529 battles
  • 1,920
  • Member since:
    10-21-2012
V A R I O U S  A R M O R  Z O N E S

Sijamski_Mrmot #7 Posted 29 July 2017 - 03:29 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 35302 battles
  • 26
  • [PATKA] PATKA
  • Member since:
    06-18-2012
No, the tank HAS been changed ppl, whoever plays it knows it. It gets penetrated much more lately. And when i bought it and payd for it, it clearly stated 177/63/63 in turret specs, now it states 63/63/63, even though it shows 170+mm on many sites when you check armour (e.g. tanks.gg) its now gets much more easily penetrated by tanks which bounced it before. I play Jumbo long time and that was one of the reasons i got Thunder also (better turret armour specs). Those are now CHANGED, disregard the sites which show 170+... its NOT the same and its NOT a "balancing"...

HidesHisFace #8 Posted 29 July 2017 - 03:29 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 17851 battles
  • 1,299
  • Member since:
    05-12-2012

Just checked the armour values.

 

Thunderbolt VII has not been changed since the introduction. The mantlet is still 178mm thick as it always was.

The thing is - the game tends to ignore mantlet armour when displaying the armour values in the garage - it doesn't take moving pieces (like mantlet or tracks), spaced armour plates and so on into consideration. It is literally just a small technical crap that you are crying about. Crap that has no influence in the game.

 

Take Panzer III J for example - listed armour value is 30mm on turret front. But in practice, it is 80mm effective simply because of the mantlet armour.

 

Regular Sherman - 63mm listed, but mantlet goes between 89 and 153mm effective. I could list almost every single tank in the game that has big enough gun mantlet like this.

 

And by the way - nobody gives a damn about you "FEELING" that the tank is worse than before - no empiric data, no problem.


Edited by HidesHisFace, 29 July 2017 - 03:33 PM.


Sijamski_Mrmot #9 Posted 29 July 2017 - 03:31 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 35302 battles
  • 26
  • [PATKA] PATKA
  • Member since:
    06-18-2012

View PostHidesHisFace, on 29 July 2017 - 02:29 PM, said:

Just checked the armour values.

 

Thunderbolt VII has not been changed since the introduction. The mantlet is still 178mm thick as it always was.

The thing is - the game tends to ignore mantlet armour when displaying the armour values in the garage - it doesn't take moving pieces (like mantlet or tracks), spaced armour plates and so on into consideration. It is literally just a small technical crap that you are crying about. Crap that has no influence in the game.

 

Take Panzer III J for example - lister armour value is 30mm on turret front. But in practice, it is 80mm effective simply because of the mantlet armour.

 

Regular Sherman - 63mm listed, but mantlet goes between 89 and 153mm effective. I could list almost every single tank in the game that has big enough gun mantlet like this.

 

And again, im sorry i dont have prtscrn, the mantlet values IN GARAGE were 177/63/63

HidesHisFace #10 Posted 29 July 2017 - 03:35 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 17851 battles
  • 1,299
  • Member since:
    05-12-2012

View PostSijamski_Mrmot, on 29 July 2017 - 03:31 PM, said:

 

And again, im sorry i dont have prtscrn, the mantlet values IN GARAGE were 177/63/63

 

It was likely a display bug that WG fixed later (if it really happened) - to make it consistent with other tanks that DO NOT list the mantlet value. Doesn't influence the actual stats of the vehicle at all.

Sijamski_Mrmot #11 Posted 29 July 2017 - 03:37 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 35302 battles
  • 26
  • [PATKA] PATKA
  • Member since:
    06-18-2012

View PostHidesHisFace, on 29 July 2017 - 02:35 PM, said:

 

It was likely a display bug that WG fixed later (if it really happened) - to make it consistent with other tanks that DO NOT list the mantlet value. Doesn't influence the actual stats of the vehicle at all.

 

Ok, lets say its just a bug...

_Bundesheer_ #12 Posted 29 July 2017 - 04:04 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 29583 battles
  • 2,114
  • Member since:
    08-20-2011
I don't understand sh1tty language.

Frostilicus #13 Posted 29 July 2017 - 04:08 PM

    Major

  • Clan Diplomat
  • 22458 battles
  • 2,869
  • [-ZNO-] -ZNO-
  • Member since:
    07-12-2011

View PostSijamski_Mrmot, on 29 July 2017 - 02:37 PM, said:

 

Ok, lets say its just a bug...

 

Not really a bug, more like another way of presenting the data, which has been corrected to stay in line with the more normal way of representing these values...




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users