Jump to content


british td line


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

sgtYester #1 Posted 14 November 2017 - 07:45 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 49228 battles
  • 1,247
  • [RANGX] RANGX
  • Member since:
    04-10-2011

good, finaly some love for the at line, they are indeed in need of more armor...

 

but what the f#$@#$#  are u nerfing the at-2 for???  this is the only td in that line that actually has working armor!!!

 

keep ur paws of the at-2 !!  

 

this td does not need any nerfs!!  its guns are meh at best and it needs it armor to work properly



Bucifel #2 Posted 14 November 2017 - 07:49 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 24634 battles
  • 1,157
  • [3NRGY] 3NRGY
  • Member since:
    03-18-2013

stupid nerfs for AT2, and idiotic buffs for AT8 and 7...typical WG drunk balance...just swap a mistake from a tank to another like E5 - Type5 case...

 

and fv183 still same...i mean still same loadout...i mean 12 shells for 30 enemys in Grand battles...:facepalm:


Edited by Bucifel, 14 November 2017 - 07:51 PM.


Balc0ra #3 Posted 14 November 2017 - 07:59 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 58168 battles
  • 11,532
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

Tier for tier most of them face guns that can pen them as top tier if they still aim right even after the buffs. Right now on the AT-2 not many can even pen the cupola when it's top tier. And did it really need 201 mm armor when 110mm pen is the most common he faces when top tier? Heck even most tier 4's have zero chance on the side or rear even. In my 102 gold pen Matilda VI, I would rather go for the O-I, then the AT-2 head on. 

 

Then again.. it's slow as all heck. But still. It's armor works. But yet you have complained about tier X armor and gold spam. And tier for tier IMO, this is above even VK 100.01 or defender vs the pen they usually face.


Edited by Balc0ra, 14 November 2017 - 08:00 PM.


Noo_Noo #4 Posted 14 November 2017 - 08:15 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 20413 battles
  • 1,253
  • Member since:
    05-05-2013

View PostsgtYester, on 14 November 2017 - 07:45 PM, said:

good, finaly some love for the at line, they are indeed in need of more armor...

 

but what the f#$@#$#  are u nerfing the at-2 for???  this is the only td in that line that actually has working armor!!!

 

keep ur paws of the at-2 !!  

 

this td does not need any nerfs!!  its guns are meh at best and it needs it armor to work properly

 

Because people use premium ammo against it and apparently that's not fair............

oh weren't you one of those people moaning about premium ammo?

sgtYester #5 Posted 14 November 2017 - 09:23 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 49228 battles
  • 1,247
  • [RANGX] RANGX
  • Member since:
    04-10-2011

View PostBalc0ra, on 14 November 2017 - 07:59 PM, said:

Tier for tier most of them face guns that can pen them as top tier if they still aim right even after the buffs. Right now on the AT-2 not many can even pen the cupola when it's top tier. And did it really need 201 mm armor when 110mm pen is the most common he faces when top tier? Heck even most tier 4's have zero chance on the side or rear even. In my 102 gold pen Matilda VI, I would rather go for the O-I, then the AT-2 head on. 

 

Then again.. it's slow as all heck. But still. It's armor works. But yet you have complained about tier X armor and gold spam. And tier for tier IMO, this is above even VK 100.01 or defender vs the pen they usually face.

 

hell no!  its slow and easy to flank.  u can go around it so easily when ur close and can pen it in side and rear with regular ammo.  

 

and no i like armor on heavy tanks that SHOULD!  have workable armor to be able to breaktrough and not get penned by meds from the front that are to lazy/stupid to flank  (or just famr theit precious wn8)



THE_JACK_OF_HEARTS #6 Posted 14 November 2017 - 09:31 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 7898 battles
  • 665
  • Member since:
    02-04-2015
ahhh its sgt teamkiller Yester, a forum fool who teamkills,.....

vasilinhorulezz #7 Posted 14 November 2017 - 10:54 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 15802 battles
  • 220
  • Member since:
    09-26-2014
Removing frontal weakspots is never a good idea WG, didn't you learn nothing from the recent balance changes WG :sceptic:?




7 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 7 guests, 0 anonymous users