Jump to content


The Deathstar to be replaced?


  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

Infektid #1 Posted 15 September 2017 - 06:05 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 40875 battles
  • 687
  • [GOP] GOP
  • Member since:
    12-20-2011

https://thedailyboun...83-replacement/

 

https://thedailyboun...le-replacement/

 

 

 

 

 

There's a possibility that after the Foch 155 and the FV215 there's a new replacement on the way.

 

It makes some sense since the FV215 183 is a completely different tank with different gameplay than the previous tiers on its tech tree.

 

Your thoughts?

 


Edited by Infektid, 15 September 2017 - 06:11 PM.


Folau #2 Posted 15 September 2017 - 06:07 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 15254 battles
  • 2,561
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    05-19-2013
Wonder if WG are making good money off people free exping these lines. They are generally poor/unpopular lines but the idea of someone missing out on something...

pecopad #3 Posted 15 September 2017 - 06:15 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 23570 battles
  • 946
  • [UGN] UGN
  • Member since:
    09-04-2015

It makes no sense to remove this one and leave the other turd....

 

Don't they analyze the stats of tanks to see what lines people are developing?

 

Complete insult to British tanks



Shaade_Silentpaw #4 Posted 15 September 2017 - 06:16 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 22669 battles
  • 376
  • Member since:
    10-12-2015

Definitely makes more sense, and no fat cupola? Might actually be a beast.

 

I'd much rather they make the FV215b 183 an alternate unlock to the FV4005 II though, rather than making it yet another reward tank...



fighting_falcon93 #5 Posted 15 September 2017 - 06:23 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 31229 battles
  • 3,911
  • Member since:
    02-05-2013

Funny how this "branch consistency" is not very consistent itself. So it suits WG to throw out the Deathstar because it's not like the previus tanks in the branch... What about the E5? Last time I checked both the T29 and T32 was kings at hulldown, M103 while a slightly bigger cupola does it quite good aswell, and then BAAAM! E5 with massive cupola that can get penned by every single tier 10. Nice consistency WG...

 

Personally it doesn't matter for me, I already have the Deathstar so for me it's just a free tier 10 tank.

 

But I can see how these changes could be disliked by players grinding the branch. WG have you realised that players invest months into grinding a branch because they want the tier 10, and then when they're half way through you just swap it out? If you want to swap vehicles out then atleast give the old tier 10 to anyone that got to tier 7 or 8 in the branch.


Edited by fighting_falcon93, 15 September 2017 - 06:24 PM.


Homer_J #6 Posted 15 September 2017 - 06:28 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 28771 battles
  • 30,068
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

View Postpecopad, on 15 September 2017 - 06:15 PM, said:

It makes no sense to remove this one and leave the other 

 

The other one exists and fits it's branch.



anonym_YNch2j0j5oJ9 #7 Posted 15 September 2017 - 06:29 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 689
  • Member since:
    09-24-2018

View Postfighting_falcon93, on 15 September 2017 - 07:23 PM, said:

Funny how this "branch consistency" is not very consistent itself. So it suits WG to throw out the Deathstar because it's not like the previus tanks in the branch... What about the E5? Last time I checked both the T29 and T32 was kings at hulldown, M103 while a slightly bigger cupola does it quite good aswell, and then BAAAM! E5 with massive cupola that can get penned by every single tier 10. Nice consistency WG...

 

Personally it doesn't matter for me, I already have the Deathstar so for me it's just a free tier 10 tank.

 

But I can see how these changes could be disliked by players grinding the branch. WG have you realised that players invest months into grinding a branch because they want the tier 10, and then when they're half way through you just swap it out? If you want to swap vehicles out then atleast give the old tier 10 to anyone that got to tier 7 or 8 in the branch.

 

m103 can go hull down? are u joking? pls tell me you are joking...... 

oh you do 1200 dmg per game in ur m103, haven't you noticed the reason why u suck? and maybe learn to play the e5 before u say the cupola is so weak

Tier 6 tanks do more DPG than ur m103 "being quite good as well"



theSwedishTankDriver #8 Posted 15 September 2017 - 06:33 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 24291 battles
  • 952
  • [KITTY] KITTY
  • Member since:
    03-04-2013
Hopefully, but a bit too late.

fighting_falcon93 #9 Posted 15 September 2017 - 06:35 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 31229 battles
  • 3,911
  • Member since:
    02-05-2013

View PostPress2ForSkill, on 15 September 2017 - 06:29 PM, said:

m103 can go hull down? are u joking? pls tell me you are joking...... 

oh you do 1200 dmg per game in ur m103, haven't you noticed the reason why u suck? and maybe learn to play the e5 before u say the cupola is so weak

Tier 6 tanks do more DPG than ur m103 "being quite good as well"

 

Hello there Mr Stats guy.

 

Too sad your statistics let you see the DPG of my tanks, but not the date when I last played them. Oh, you didn't think about that... :rolleyes:

 

Not everyone feels your need to reroll just to get nice numbers on their old and sold tanks :D :facepalm:

 

Not to mention that I didn't even unlock the top gun on my M103 before unlocking the E5. Because you think everyone throws money into free xp'ing stuff just so that they can get better stats, because that's the most important thing in the entire world :D

 

And btw Mr Pro, if you take a look here, you'll see that M103 is doing alright when hulldown and max gun depression. Maybe you should look up stuff before bashing players with less WN8 than yourself and making a fool out of yourself?

 

The E5 cupola is weak, that's my opinion. Do you have a problem with that?

 

 

Now instead of wasting more time on a scrub-n00b like me, go and farm more WN8, you're very close to reaching 3000 :ohmy:


Edited by fighting_falcon93, 15 September 2017 - 06:48 PM.


Balc0ra #10 Posted 15 September 2017 - 06:38 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 66296 battles
  • 16,313
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View Postpecopad, on 15 September 2017 - 06:15 PM, said:

It makes no sense to remove this one and leave the other turd....

View PostFolau, on 15 September 2017 - 06:07 PM, said:

Wonder if WG are making good money off people free exping these lines. They are generally poor/unpopular lines but the idea of someone missing out on something...

 

The idea is to make the line consistent. As in making the tier X more equal to the line leading up to it. As now the 183 is as far from what you can expect when grinding the line. It has nothing to do with popularity.  Just like the IS-4 they do consider. IS-4 differ in style etc vs the HT's leading up to it. 

 

View Postpecopad, on 15 September 2017 - 06:15 PM, said:

Don't they analyze the stats of tanks to see what lines people are developing?

 

Why do you think the turreted TD line is getting buffed? It's because people prefer the non turreted line vs the turreted British TD's, and the turreted line is not popular at all. Only one they said was popular on that line was the Charioteer, and where most people do stop.And thus why his buffs was minimal vs the others.

 

 

 

 



Dava_117 #11 Posted 15 September 2017 - 06:41 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 19497 battles
  • 3,305
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014
I can't understand where IS-4 has a different play-style. From tier 5 you have excellent sidescrapers, and all of them works well in this way. In addition to this, both ST-I and IS-4 can play hulldown well. Where is the unconsistency?

fighting_falcon93 #12 Posted 15 September 2017 - 06:45 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 31229 battles
  • 3,911
  • Member since:
    02-05-2013

View PostDava_117, on 15 September 2017 - 06:41 PM, said:

I can't understand where IS-4 has a different play-style. From tier 5 you have excellent sidescrapers, and all of them works well in this way. In addition to this, both ST-I and IS-4 can play hulldown well. Where is the unconsistency?

 

From what I've understood, WG wants to push the IS-4 down to tier 9, not because of consistency, but because they don't want to buff it properly to tier 10 levels. Personally I think they should just remove the turret roof weakspot and maybe give it a bit better gun handling and/or penetration :)

soul3ater #13 Posted 15 September 2017 - 07:00 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 18764 battles
  • 635
  • Member since:
    07-27-2012

meh I will take a free tank.

 

183 was insanely good back in the days now it's just meh tank. you either one shot someone or deal 400-600 dmg with a shell that costs a fortune. 



Dava_117 #14 Posted 15 September 2017 - 07:27 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 19497 battles
  • 3,305
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014

View Postfighting_falcon93, on 15 September 2017 - 06:45 PM, said:

 

From what I've understood, WG wants to push the IS-4 down to tier 9, not because of consistency, but because they don't want to buff it properly to tier 10 levels. Personally I think they should just remove the turret roof weakspot and maybe give it a bit better gun handling and/or penetration :)

 

That is far more reasonable. 

Matcorr #15 Posted 15 September 2017 - 07:36 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 22746 battles
  • 764
  • Member since:
    04-24-2013
I'd rather they change the AT tanks instead, utter shite

anonym_YNch2j0j5oJ9 #16 Posted 15 September 2017 - 08:05 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 689
  • Member since:
    09-24-2018

View Postfighting_falcon93, on 15 September 2017 - 07:35 PM, said:

 

Hello there Mr Stats guy.

 

Too sad your statistics let you see the DPG of my tanks, but not the date when I last played them. Oh, you didn't think about that... :rolleyes:

 

Not everyone feels your need to reroll just to get nice numbers on their old and sold tanks :D :facepalm:

 

Not to mention that I didn't even unlock the top gun on my M103 before unlocking the E5. Because you think everyone throws money into free xp'ing stuff just so that they can get better stats, because that's the most important thing in the entire world :D

 

And btw Mr Pro, if you take a look here, you'll see that M103 is doing alright when hulldown and max gun depression. Maybe you should look up stuff before bashing players with less WN8 than yourself and making a fool out of yourself?

 

The E5 cupola is weak, that's my opinion. Do you have a problem with that?

 

 

 

Now instead of wasting more time on a scrub-n00b like me, go and farm more WN8, you're very close to reaching 3000 :ohmy:

 

It doesnt matter when the last time was that u played m103.. u still dont know how to play it. And u also don't know how to play e5

And i didnt reroll, im just not as dumb as u are... i have many 0 or 400 wn8 tanks so how did i reroll lol?

U dont know how m103 plays because u have never ever played it properly, and same with e5, so u cant state false facts if u dont have any idea what u are talking about



fighting_falcon93 #17 Posted 15 September 2017 - 08:17 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 31229 battles
  • 3,911
  • Member since:
    02-05-2013

View PostPress2ForSkill, on 15 September 2017 - 08:05 PM, said:

It doesnt matter when the last time was that u played m103..

 

Ofc it matters, and anyone with working brain cells wouldn't have a too difficult time figuring out why. All of us improve and get better at the game over time, when a player starts playing he might be terrible, over time he becomes better. If I played my M103 2-3 years ago, it's quite obvius why I didn't do so well in it. On top of that add that I played it stock with the T32 gun before I unlocked the 2nd gun. Ever heard of playing tanks stock? Or maybe you have the luxary to spam gold like crazy when playing stock tanks...

 

Then again, I really couldn't care less if you think I can play it or not. I play my E5 in the same way as I play my T29 and T32. I really don't care if you think that's the right way or not.



Uebergewicht #18 Posted 15 September 2017 - 08:22 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 11702 battles
  • 1,062
  • Member since:
    11-15-2015

View PostDava_117, on 15 September 2017 - 06:41 PM, said:

I can't understand where IS-4 has a different play-style. From tier 5 you have excellent sidescrapers, and all of them works well in this way. In addition to this, both ST-I and IS-4 can play hulldown well. Where is the unconsistency?

 

I don´t want to make a huge deal, but the IS-4 does stick out a bit compared to the others. The T-150, KV-3, KV-4 and ST-1 are all among the biggest, slowest tanks of their class and tier and have some of the best side armor. While the IS-4 shares the side armor trait, regarding overall toughness, it sits right in the middle of tier 10 heavies, under multiple tanks such as the Maus, Type5, E-100 and probably Pz. VIII - and gains "some" mobility instead, for whatever reason. It´s not really a proper hull down tank like the ST-1 due to limited gun depression and a weak roof - the IS-7 is actually the much better hull down tank. It´s not the toughest brawler either due to weak front and the low profile allowing the big heavies to hit its engine deck or even roof. Looking at the IS-4 as an evolution of the ST-1, the only thing it really does unquestionably better is... mobility, of all things. Which is not really the theme of the line prior to this point. So, while yes, the IS-4 is still a reasonably tough heavy with great side armor, it still doesnt feel like a proper evolution especially regarding the ST-1 - its noticeably worse hull down than the ST-1 and much more of an allrounder compared to the heavy slogs that come before it.


Edited by Uebergewicht, 15 September 2017 - 08:24 PM.


laulaur #19 Posted 16 September 2017 - 01:52 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 46687 battles
  • 986
  • [BLAUR] BLAUR
  • Member since:
    08-11-2011

View Postfighting_falcon93, on 15 September 2017 - 05:23 PM, said:

 What about the E5? Last time I checked both the T29 and T32 was kings at hulldown, M103 while a slightly bigger cupola does it quite good aswell, and then BAAAM! E5 with massive cupola that can get penned by every single tier 10. Nice consistency WG...

 

I guess my E5 has a better cupola, even tier 10 with gold does no pen me every time.:sceptic:



fighting_falcon93 #20 Posted 16 September 2017 - 03:05 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 31229 battles
  • 3,911
  • Member since:
    02-05-2013

View Postlaulaur, on 16 September 2017 - 01:52 AM, said:

I guess my E5 has a better cupola, even tier 10 with gold does no pen me every time.:sceptic:

 

That's if they miss the cupola or hit it on extreme angles on the side :P

 

Point is, if you peek over a ridge with T29 or T32, you're (almost) safe from anything that might shoot at you. If you peek over a ridge with your E5, it's just a matter of time until someone slaps you for X damage, because of the cupola on top. I admit that it becomes less of a problem when you can keep your distance, but let's be honest here, how many maps in this game let us effective fight at distances around 300-400 meters? :)






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users