Jump to content


Obj 268 needs to be replaced with obj 268v4 not with 263


  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

hasnainrakha57 #1 Posted 05 November 2017 - 09:53 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 13844 battles
  • 584
  • [WFTTE] WFTTE
  • Member since:
    08-01-2013
Obj 268 has always been worst tier 10 it got ok aimtime and accuracy but not good its armor sucks even.Thats why u dont see obj 268s player a lot.In my opinion the 263 performs a lot well then 268 gd armor, gd accuracy, gd aim time,gd rof.What are the obj 268 positive point none? And wg say obj263 needs to be replaced lol.Obj 263 line only needs changes to tier 7,8 and 9.But obj 268 must be replaced rather then 263.

tankzman #2 Posted 05 November 2017 - 09:56 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 64294 battles
  • 403
  • Member since:
    06-27-2013
nope, move on

Igor_BL #3 Posted 05 November 2017 - 09:59 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 39598 battles
  • 1,345
  • [GX] GX
  • Member since:
    06-10-2015
268 is crap even after last buff

leggasiini #4 Posted 05 November 2017 - 10:13 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 14187 battles
  • 6,194
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012
Or just buff it instead of replacing it with entirely other tank...

hasnainrakha57 #5 Posted 05 November 2017 - 10:23 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 13844 battles
  • 584
  • [WFTTE] WFTTE
  • Member since:
    08-01-2013

View Postleggasiini, on 05 November 2017 - 09:13 PM, said:

Or just buff it instead of replacing it with entirely other tank...

But wg got obj 268v4 that deals 750dmg why not replace 268 with it rather then replacing with 263 :-



leggasiini #6 Posted 05 November 2017 - 10:35 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 14187 battles
  • 6,194
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012

View Posthasnainrakha57, on 05 November 2017 - 11:23 PM, said:

But wg got obj 268v4 that deals 750dmg why not replace 268 with it rather then replacing with 263 :-

 

Might as well put it as an alternate tier 10 the 2nd TD line instead. Want more armor, more alpha but otherwise a much worse gun? Pick 268 V4. Want more DPM and accuracy, so it can kinda snipe while be an assault tank? Pick the 263.

 

I would think that giving the current Object 268 the old 850 again would be logical buff considering the style of the line, but I don’t think that bringing more mega alpha guns is very good idea tbh. I think 268 should get major improvements to aim time, bloom, maybe -6 depression and bit more HP.



hasnainrakha57 #7 Posted 05 November 2017 - 11:29 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 13844 battles
  • 584
  • [WFTTE] WFTTE
  • Member since:
    08-01-2013

View Postleggasiini, on 05 November 2017 - 09:35 PM, said:

 

Might as well put it as an alternate tier 10 the 2nd TD line instead. Want more armor, more alpha but otherwise a much worse gun? Pick 268 V4. Want more DPM and accuracy, so it can kinda snipe while be an assault tank? Pick the 263.

 

I would think that giving the current Object 268 the old 850 again would be logical buff considering the style of the line, but I don’t think that bringing more mega alpha guns is very good idea tbh. I think 268 should get major improvements to aim time, bloom, maybe -6 depression and bit more HP.

Or maybe u can research 268v4 or 268 after 704 :)

 



leggasiini #8 Posted 05 November 2017 - 11:32 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 14187 battles
  • 6,194
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012

View Posthasnainrakha57, on 06 November 2017 - 12:29 AM, said:

Or maybe u can research 268v4 or 268 after 704 :)

 

 

Maybe. I just think the V4 (despite it being a 268 variant) makes more sense from that line cus rear casemate and otherwise being more like the tanks in 263, just the gun is kinda different.

Derethim #9 Posted 06 November 2017 - 12:33 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 17518 battles
  • 1,888
  • Member since:
    04-03-2012

I'd wish they do something, that wasn't done yet.

Like a tier X accessible only from another tier X. I would like that.

Put it between 268 and 263 :)



callum347 #10 Posted 06 November 2017 - 12:43 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 44885 battles
  • 397
  • [WAAT] WAAT
  • Member since:
    05-05-2013
The problem with this. WG are removing tanks and making all tanks that share a line have similar play style, like they "removed" the Foch 155, FV215b and now FV215b 183, so putting a tank with a rear mounted super structure on a line with tanks with super structures at the very front won't work, this is why WG were changing those tanks that I just mentioned. 

hasnainrakha57 #11 Posted 06 November 2017 - 10:27 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 13844 battles
  • 584
  • [WFTTE] WFTTE
  • Member since:
    08-01-2013

View Postcallum347, on 05 November 2017 - 11:43 PM, said:

The problem with this. WG are removing tanks and making all tanks that share a line have similar play style, like they "removed" the Foch 155, FV215b and now FV215b 183, so putting a tank with a rear mounted super structure on a line with tanks with super structures at the very front won't work, this is why WG were changing those tanks that I just mentioned. 

Well then explain why tier 9 su 122 54 a front superstructure and is place in line with rear superstucture and also explain t57 being heavy should have tier 7,8 and 9 heavy also but they are scouts or med. The point is if they add v4 in obj 268 line make sense as wg ruined other lines as i mentioned i hope i explained u well.

Spoiler

 


Edited by hasnainrakha57, 06 November 2017 - 10:28 AM.


STLR #12 Posted 07 November 2017 - 03:04 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 30840 battles
  • 736
  • [MIND] MIND
  • Member since:
    06-07-2013
I agree.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users