Jump to content


New tank: Super Conqueror

9.20.1 Public Test

  • Please log in to reply
74 replies to this topic

Ph3lan #1 Posted 18 September 2017 - 05:26 PM

    Senior Community Manager

  • WG Staff
  • 18303 battles
  • 583
  • [WG] WG
  • Member since:
    11-17-2010
Please leave any feedback on the new Super Conqueror here. 

nuke97 #2 Posted 21 September 2017 - 07:12 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 26402 battles
  • 299
  • [BULB4] BULB4
  • Member since:
    04-05-2011

Those spaced armors not seems to work at all, got penned by AP rounds in front of my turret where the spaced armors are.

Also the gun handling seems a bit off , the T9 conqueror has better handling.



NIborGER #3 Posted 21 September 2017 - 07:30 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 28556 battles
  • 13
  • Member since:
    10-16-2013

@nuke97: AP shells dont really care about spaced armor. Due to 3x calibre rule they really just add 20mm of armor. For heat however, they are a considerable obstacle

 

I agree on the gunhandling stuff. The bloom from driving and turning the tank is ok BUT once you turn that turret, the aim circle opens up massively. This kinda odd, since british heavys used to have really nice gunhandling, allowing for snapshots. However, i dont really feel the snapping capeability with the SC, which is really sad.



Thuis001 #4 Posted 21 September 2017 - 08:43 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 5923 battles
  • 463
  • [-SBN-] -SBN-
  • Member since:
    05-29-2015

First off, this is the first CT that I can actually join the server on release day, so that's an improvement. But SC.

This tank can be very fun to play but has some strong points and some weakpoints. 

Strong points:

-Good gun, this gun can work wonders, and with the 120mm pen on the HESH shells, you can really suprise tanks, the gunhandeling is fine, but your RoF and DPM aren’t that great, especially for a British vehicle with DPM beind just over 3200 when fully maxed out

-Decent armor, for a heavy tank you have a nice bit of armor (altough CT means Prem ammo spam, so that doesn't really help testing it) and you can really bounce a lot.The spaced turret armor helps against HEAT rounds and the fact that the turret gets it's usefulness from it's shape means that both AP and APCR have a fair chance of bouncing aswell. The UFP is fairly resistant against shots as long as you keep it well angled.

-HESH-ammo, Like the Conq on tier IX this thing gets HESH that is very usefull against lights and thinly armored TD's. (got a lot of damage by shooting FV4005's in the turret)

-viewrange, this thing has a high base viewrange so getting a lot of assistance  damage is possible

 

weakpoints:

-speed, this thing is not that fast nor agile, but it is a heavy tank so, yeah. 

-Arty magnet, sjeez, this thing attracts more arty shells then a Cent AX, getting arty focused is common in this tank. This might even go to an extend that playing this thing means being stunned most of the time. (without stun, this might even be a bit better, yet still removing arty as a class would be best)

-Gundepression, -7 degrees for a british tank????? I think that of the weakpoints this thing is the most notable. You can't really go hulldown behind a ridge, and I think that -8 degrees or more might be a way to buff this tank.

 

Since I have only played a few games in this tank I can't really give any final opinion. But for now I would say, it is a fun tank to play on the Common test server, and I will certainly play it again in later versions of the game. But for now, I won't grind towards it, mainly because HT's in general are kinda worthless thanks to gold spam and arty. Also the mweh gundepression and arty focus makes that I will probably get the Cent. AX first. And while it is a fun tank, I don't think it is worth the grind through the Churchill I, VII and BP which means, getting 200k xp in slow, and generally bad tanks. So no, I will pass for now. Perhaps in the future when those tanks get buffed/changed I will go up this line and be able to play the SQ


Edited by Thuis001, 22 September 2017 - 07:20 AM.


Dr_Oolen #5 Posted 21 September 2017 - 09:17 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 20602 battles
  • 1,556
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    03-13-2012

Its pretty damn bad. Gun handling worse than t9 conqueror while being slower and much less maneuvrable with armor that tier for tier is barely better. 

 

All it needs to be ok is +4° hull traverse and gun dispersions same as on conqueror or slightly better.



Bucifel #6 Posted 21 September 2017 - 09:20 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 29630 battles
  • 1,373
  • [JDUN] JDUN
  • Member since:
    03-18-2013
its not bad...but i really expected some better on armor...

tajj7 #7 Posted 21 September 2017 - 10:36 PM

    Field Marshal

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

View PostDr_Oolen, on 21 September 2017 - 08:17 PM, said:

Its pretty damn bad. Gun handling worse than t9 conqueror while being slower and much less maneuvrable with armor that tier for tier is barely better. 

 

All it needs to be ok is +4° hull traverse and gun dispersions same as on conqueror or slightly better.

 

This basically. 

 

Needs to be closer to the 215b in gun handling, DPM and agility. 



Bucifel #8 Posted 21 September 2017 - 11:49 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 29630 battles
  • 1,373
  • [JDUN] JDUN
  • Member since:
    03-18-2013

View Posttajj7, on 21 September 2017 - 10:36 PM, said:

 

This basically. 

 

Needs to be closer to the 215b in gun handling, DPM and agility. 

 

not agility because its suposed to be better in armor...thats what they said

i cant see 3d model yet...but sides looks very weak anyway...

 

they wanted to make this line like a true heavy line...FV is a hybrid between veavy and medium....so agility is not a priority for a heavy line.


Edited by Bucifel, 21 September 2017 - 11:50 PM.


KosmetskiTigar #9 Posted 22 September 2017 - 01:26 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 46842 battles
  • 42
  • Member since:
    12-19-2012

We need that damn DPM. Come on, guys.

 



Exozen #10 Posted 22 September 2017 - 03:34 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 31008 battles
  • 1,068
  • Member since:
    08-16-2011
From the few games i did in it , it feels straight up like a downgrade to current FV.

ogremage #11 Posted 22 September 2017 - 04:52 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 32929 battles
  • 1,406
  • [KAZNA] KAZNA
  • Member since:
    06-26-2011
Under-powered tank. Needs more DPM (at the very least).

Lentomies1 #12 Posted 22 September 2017 - 05:58 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 28620 battles
  • 321
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    12-05-2012

I played it few times, and so far my impressions are;

 

Mobility: ​Way too slow. It turns very slowly and is overall very sluggish. Buff the terrain resistances, 

 

Gun: ​Doesen't feel like british 120mm gun. Aim time is longer and dispersion values when moving/turning the hull/turrer are too high. Buff them to something like this: 0.11/0.11/0.08. Also increase the gun depression from -7 to -8. Also the DPM might need some improvement.

 

​Armor: ​Really not that impressive. The cupola is actually very weak. It's not angled enough to bounce anything. Old FV215B has a cupola which can actually bounce something.

 

 

So... so far S. Conqueror feels like a worse T110E5.


Edited by Lentomies1, 22 September 2017 - 05:59 AM.


kenderalovag #13 Posted 22 September 2017 - 08:53 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 8980 battles
  • 6
  • [V4D] V4D
  • Member since:
    01-25-2016
The super conqueror needs some refinement. The dome is too easy to get this we did not use on the FV215b this is much shorter. At least be that. The sideways make it harder for the overly thinned sidewall, and in addition, the tower is so harder. Heavy tank is still thin enough for the front armor. The rotation limit of the targeting time is disturbing but also the margin of DPM is poor enough compared to the FV215b. Compared to the heavy tank the side became thinner, its front nearly the same in return, the cannon became lighter and the dome was too easy to get. This is a huge deterioration and this is not so good.

Edited by kenderalovag, 22 September 2017 - 08:57 AM.


Sharp1903 #14 Posted 22 September 2017 - 01:17 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 37379 battles
  • 1,731
  • Member since:
    01-10-2014

* Its so slow for a heavy tank, its not a super heavy but as slow as them.

* Its gun depression is not adequate, should be 8 degree like E5, we can't use turret armor properly cuz of it. 

* Its top hull armor is also not good enough, It should be bouncy like E5, for ex, I feel much comfortable when I play WZ111 5A cuz of bouncy hull armor. 

 

If you fix FV215b fire thing, I would prefer FV215b instead of Super Conq. in this case. 


Edited by Sharp1903, 23 September 2017 - 02:03 PM.


Duvelske #15 Posted 22 September 2017 - 01:50 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 17129 battles
  • 162
  • Member since:
    01-25-2016

I wanted the fv215b the moment I start playing this game. Now it gets removed and I'm lucky I was close to get it. So at least thnx for the knowledge some weeks priorly it gets removed.

 

After saying that I tested the super conqueror on the testserver and I liked it. Ok it has its weaknesses, but that's a part of the game. I have to agree that the gun depression seem to be giving many times problems. So you cannot really play that turret that well, 1 degree more would be preferable. But still all in all.. its not bad, but some improvements to fit the current meta more would be nice.


Edited by Duvelske, 22 September 2017 - 02:27 PM.


DangerMouse #16 Posted 22 September 2017 - 02:05 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 24779 battles
  • 599
  • [FLOG] FLOG
  • Member since:
    10-28-2010

If its to have any chance of being competitive in the current meta with the likes of the Type 5, buffed IS-7 etc then it needs the 215B's gun handling as well as these new turret buffs.

 

DM



Ajrobs1 #17 Posted 22 September 2017 - 04:56 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 42943 battles
  • 108
  • [KTTP] KTTP
  • Member since:
    06-18-2013
so lazy WG, you give us a T9 with a bit of spaced armour, please just put the chieftan in at T10 and balance it to fit

TheArk_2014 #18 Posted 22 September 2017 - 05:04 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 58973 battles
  • 625
  • [AETOS] AETOS
  • Member since:
    01-03-2014

Here we have three videos with gameplay with the Super Conqueror.

 

 

 


Edited by TheArk_2014, 23 September 2017 - 05:16 AM.


RiflemanThick #19 Posted 22 September 2017 - 05:43 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 12784 battles
  • 208
  • [EGYPT] EGYPT
  • Member since:
    10-25-2012
Super Conqueror pros and cons: Not bad Turret, worst hull among ALL tier 10 heavy tanks(tier 7+ can pen it),Good gun, bad depression for such weak hull, bad mobility and Speed. Tell us WG why is the hell we supposed to grind to that tank instead of T110E5????

Edited by RiflemanThick, 22 September 2017 - 05:55 PM.


ogremage #20 Posted 23 September 2017 - 04:56 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 32929 battles
  • 1,406
  • [KAZNA] KAZNA
  • Member since:
    06-26-2011
Do we get any free 100% crew from this swap or not?




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users