Jump to content


Suggested next new tier VIII premium

not very good

  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

arthurwellsley #1 Posted 05 August 2017 - 09:56 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 51268 battles
  • 2,814
  • [-B-C-] -B-C-
  • Member since:
    05-11-2011

So in the light of M4 Thunderbolt, Tiger 131, and Pudel, I offer you a real life American tier VIII heavy tank;

Yes it's the already ingame Tiger II with USA markings and crew.

 

This Panzer VI 'Tiger II' (Turret Nº 2-11) from the 2.Kompanie, schwere Panzer Abteilung 506 was captured by American troops and restored to a running condition by Company 'B' of the 129th Ordnance Battalion, 7th Armored Division in Gereonsweiler, Germany


Edited by arthurwellsley, 05 August 2017 - 09:56 AM.


Grand_Moff_Tano #2 Posted 05 August 2017 - 10:01 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 1534 battles
  • 10,595
  • [BC28] BC28
  • Member since:
    05-20-2011
That should be Tier VII not VIII.

ThebaldEagle #3 Posted 05 August 2017 - 10:02 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 757 battles
  • 375
  • Member since:
    02-13-2014
So you suggest just another clone tank just what we need.

Grand_Moff_Tano #4 Posted 05 August 2017 - 10:08 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 1534 battles
  • 10,595
  • [BC28] BC28
  • Member since:
    05-20-2011

Personally, and definitely not at tier 8, I'd love to see this being a premium in game, it is basically a Panther II chassis with the Ausf. G turret that the Americans captured.

 



tajj7 #5 Posted 05 August 2017 - 10:09 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 24849 battles
  • 13,836
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

Though it is a clone, In say yes because it gives potential for buffing the actual Tiger 2. Like the Swedish Centurion initially got better turret armour than the Cent 1, but now they have moved that buff across to the Cent 1 so if they made this they might also buff the Tiger 2 at the same time.

 

On a side, did they not have any paint? Why are the allied stars on pieces of material and not actually on the tank? Also did they actually fight in it? I'm surprised a captured Tiger 2 wouldn't have been immediately shipped home for testing and evaluation like Tiger 131. 



Aikl #6 Posted 05 August 2017 - 10:11 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25167 battles
  • 4,253
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

View PostChipmunk_of_Vengeance, on 05 August 2017 - 09:08 AM, said:

Personally, and definitely not at tier 8, I'd love to see this being a premium in game, it is basically a Panther II chassis with the Ausf. G turret that the Americans captured.

 

(...)

 

That would be pretty interesting... at least if the Ausf. G turret wasn't that shitty. In effect it would be like the VK4503 - which arguably is a great tank.

 

View Posttajj7, on 05 August 2017 - 09:09 AM, said:

Though it is a clone, In say yes because it gives potential for buffing the actual Tiger 2. Like the Swedish Centurion initially got better turret armour than the Cent 1, but now they have moved that buff across to the Cent 1 so if they made this they might also buff the Tiger 2 at the same time.

 

On a side, did they not have any paint? Why are the allied stars on pieces of material and not actually on the tank? Also did they actually fight in it? I'm surprised a captured Tiger 2 wouldn't have been immediately shipped home for testing and evaluation like Tiger 131. 

 

Maybe. The Centurion's armor was improved at later marks (though the Strv 81 is by definition an early mark), the Tiger 2 wasn't ...though judging from the alterations to the T-54 and 140 actual armor measurements don't really matter anymore.

 

Interesting observation, I would guess it's either related to the Zimmerit coating (conservation or that their paint couldn't stick) or to quickly restore the tank to German markings in case of attack. Not that Allied air superiority would make that necessary - even in September '44 (this was captured in mid-November) the Allies sometimes used small observation aircraft as ground attack planes because the lack of air threats.

 


Edited by Aikl, 05 August 2017 - 10:30 AM.


CptBarney #7 Posted 05 August 2017 - 10:38 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 18996 battles
  • 3,978
  • [-WR--] -WR--
  • Member since:
    12-09-2013

I would like to see a few more lower tier premiums especially some unusual and werid looking ones.

 

we should try and find the weridiest tanks. Swear the russians had one that looked like an hour glass or something.



Sams_Baneblade #8 Posted 05 August 2017 - 11:10 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 16746 battles
  • 1,198
  • Member since:
    04-24-2012

View PostCptBarney, on 05 August 2017 - 10:38 AM, said:

I would like to see a few more lower tier premiums especially some unusual and werid looking ones.

 

we should try and find the weridiest tanks. Swear the russians had one that looked like an hour glass or something.

 

A LONG time ago, some icons and images were leaked. WG gave up on a lot of those, while others like the AMX 13 57 were implemented.

You can find there the Matilda 1, T-35, panzerJager 35R, a TD based on the T-60,... :) I really wish they implemented most of those vehicles. :(

leggasiini #9 Posted 05 August 2017 - 03:01 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 12446 battles
  • 6,082
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012
Tier 7, not 8. If it was tier 8 it would be hilarously terrible. Tiger II already struggles at tier 8 with 105mm gun, now inagine same 88 L/71 as Tiger I...

arthurwellsley #10 Posted 06 August 2017 - 10:41 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 51268 battles
  • 2,814
  • [-B-C-] -B-C-
  • Member since:
    05-11-2011

How about the "Cuckoo" which saw action with the British;



Grand_Moff_Tano #11 Posted 06 August 2017 - 11:41 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 1534 battles
  • 10,595
  • [BC28] BC28
  • Member since:
    05-20-2011

View Postarthurwellsley, on 06 August 2017 - 09:41 AM, said:

How about the "Cuckoo" which saw action with the British;

 

Cuckoo would make an awesome Tier 6 :D




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users