Jump to content


So... you buffed the armour on the AT15 huh?


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

mak_90 #1 Posted 14 December 2017 - 08:23 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 8581 battles
  • 1
  • [D076] D076
  • Member since:
    04-20-2011
So how is it that i seem to get penned even more now?

You know what? I get that the British line has to be the one garbage line but FFS if you are going to do nothing but put my AT15 in with tier tens at least give me a gun and armour that can handle that. Out of 20 games I have played i have gotten 19 bottom tier games and one in  whitsh i was the only tier 8 in a tier 9 game and guess what? everyone and their grandmother can put holed in the front of my tank, not the cupola the bloody front. 

https://www.youtube....h?v=yGimi5t3S8U

"the gunmantlet area became stronger" Your words are not backed up by actual facts..

Sfinski #2 Posted 14 December 2017 - 08:32 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 29763 battles
  • 2,013
  • [-PJ-] -PJ-
  • Member since:
    09-26-2013
Gun mantlet is 260 - 400 effective... I'd call that a quite a buff.

Balc0ra #3 Posted 14 December 2017 - 08:38 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 62839 battles
  • 14,439
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View Postmak_90, on 14 December 2017 - 08:23 PM, said:

"the gunmantlet area became stronger" Your words are not backed up by actual facts..

 

Common misconception. The mantle it self is the same as before. It's the opening the gun sticks out of that was buffed with over 2x more armor.

 

View PostSfinski, on 14 December 2017 - 08:32 PM, said:

Gun mantlet is 260 - 400 effective... I'd call that a quite a buff.

 

It always was that effective. Even last patch. As 152mm with 101mm spaced armor over it, going from 24 to 68 degrees slope. It's the narrow opening the gun stuck out of that was buffed. It was 127mm last patch. Now it's 279mm.

 

The MG port or the roof is still 127mm tho. So don't expect wonders.


Edited by Balc0ra, 14 December 2017 - 08:38 PM.


brumbarr #4 Posted 14 December 2017 - 08:43 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 38626 battles
  • 6,293
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    07-30-2012

yeah, the armor got buffed, but its still crap.

I played it before and after the pathc, and while its definitly much better its still a horrible tank, the alpha is just too low and the armor isnt good enough to compensate.



Balc0ra #5 Posted 14 December 2017 - 08:45 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 62839 battles
  • 14,439
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View Postbrumbarr, on 14 December 2017 - 08:43 PM, said:

 I played it before and after the pathc, and while its definitly much better its still a horrible tank, the alpha is just too low and the armor isnt good enough to compensate.

 

alpha is "meh". But it's the only 20 prd on tier 8 with good dpm.

a_noob_in_his_ #6 Posted 15 December 2017 - 01:44 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 45952 battles
  • 309
  • Member since:
    09-29-2013

i get the feeling that WG doesn't really like the British

 

they removed the only strength the AT2 had, the armour

they rearranged the only tier 5 light tank we had from a mediocre light and made it into a piss-poor medium

they replaced the FV215b and FV215b(183) because reasons

and most of the mid-tier tanks have the most frustrating gun in the game, the 17pdr

 

maybe it's just my perception because i mainly play the Brits, being mildly patriotic

 

peace



Sfinski #7 Posted 15 December 2017 - 06:45 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 29763 battles
  • 2,013
  • [-PJ-] -PJ-
  • Member since:
    09-26-2013

View Posta_noob_in_his_, on 15 December 2017 - 02:44 AM, said:

they removed the only strength the AT2 had, the armour (Still has best armour at its tier)

they replaced the FV215b and FV215b(183) because reasons(Replaced them with much better tanks)

 



Excavatus #8 Posted 15 December 2017 - 10:32 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 18865 battles
  • 1,653
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    07-28-2013

being the ONLY tier 8 tank, in a tier 9 battle?

really?

can you share even a screenshot for that?

 

If thats real you need to contact with WG because that is clearly a bug and needs to be solved immediately.

Becasue what I've read about the new MM since the spring, it will not allow this kind of matchmaking..

 

But I really think that was not the thing you believe you saw..



eldrak #9 Posted 15 December 2017 - 11:46 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 45844 battles
  • 975
  • [NE-VO] NE-VO
  • Member since:
    01-27-2011
With all of the recent changes to the British tree I think it's one of the strongest trees in the game overall so I don't think that complaint is valid anymore.

Palora #10 Posted 15 December 2017 - 02:44 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 23433 battles
  • 415
  • [ROCOM] ROCOM
  • Member since:
    03-17-2010
 the commander cupola also got a slight armor buff, it's not all one giant hitbox with identical armor, it has a bit more at the sides facing forward. So yeah, technically a buff, but it's alright, you have the OP Badger to look forward to. 

magkiln #11 Posted 15 December 2017 - 03:19 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 21948 battles
  • 712
  • [EKKE] EKKE
  • Member since:
    09-21-2015

View Posta_noob_in_his_, on 15 December 2017 - 01:44 AM, said:

i get the feeling that WG doesn't really like the British

 

they removed the only strength the AT2 had, the armour

they rearranged the only tier 5 light tank we had from a mediocre light and made it into a piss-poor medium

they replaced the FV215b and FV215b(183) because reasons

and most of the mid-tier tanks have the most frustrating gun in the game, the 17pdr

 

maybe it's just my perception because i mainly play the Brits, being mildly patriotic

 

peace

 

  • Just put a second mark on the AT-2, even though I hadn't played it in more than six months, so I'm not complaining. The armour is still strong, but at least now it can actually be penned by tier IVs if they know what they're doing. Before it was completely insane.
  • So? The crusader always played like a second-rate medium. It had shitty view-range, mediocre mobility, and  didn't get scout matchmaking. They just made official what we already knew. For that matter, that's how it was used in real life, so what does it matter?
  • Batcher isn't bad and I get to to keep my Deathstar (which now gets 20 rounds of ammo instead of 12). So, again not complaining. And let's be honest, both tanks are completely made-up.
  • I think the French guns are more frustrating because of the way they troll you with accuracy, but, yes, the 17 pounder has issues. Then again, at least they've given the Tier 8s a decent gun instead of the 20 pounder, so I guess there has been some progress.

 



CaptainThunderWalker #12 Posted 15 December 2017 - 03:20 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 18937 battles
  • 1,297
  • Member since:
    09-25-2015

View PostSfinski, on 15 December 2017 - 06:45 AM, said:

...

 

You know that the AT2's armor will be utterly useless when it's not top tier right?

 

In the past, at least its frontal armor was the same for everybody. Whether you were Tier IV or Tier VII, you couldn't penetrate its frontal hull, and Tier IVs that weren't TDs couldn't penetrate its cupola.

Currently, Tier IV and V still can't penetrate its frontal hull, Tier IV still can't penetrate the cupola, Tier V still can, and a lot of Tier VIs can now autoaim at its hull. Tier VII just autoaims at its hull.

 

Side/Rear armor changes I can agree with, but if anything Wargaming should have nerfed the cupola a bit more while having left the old armor intact (though I don't mind the current nerf on the sides and rear of the tank either, especially the engine compartment (though I think the side/rear casemate nerf was unneeded).

 

Because then: Tier IV, V, VI and VII could all easily penetrate its cupola.

Tier VI, V, VI and VII could not penetrate its hull armor with only some premium rounds and higher-tier TDs being the exception.

I think that's fair in regards to balance, at least much more than the status quo.


Edited by CaptainThunderWalker, 15 December 2017 - 03:24 PM.


Balc0ra #13 Posted 15 December 2017 - 03:30 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 62839 battles
  • 14,439
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View Posta_noob_in_his_, on 15 December 2017 - 01:44 AM, said:

they removed the only strength the AT2 had, the armour

 

Tier for tier, that thing had more armor then it ever needed. Unless you feel it was balanced when even the T29 can bounce head on it. No one could pen that thing head on when it was top tier on the hull. Still can't. Cupola on that thing is even strong for it's tier vs the other TD's, and it was the only spot even tier 7's had to go for head on. It should have been nerfed years ago.

 

View Posta_noob_in_his_, on 15 December 2017 - 01:44 AM, said:

they rearranged the only tier 5 light tank we had from a mediocre light and made it into a piss-poor medium

 

If it was mediocre as a light, is that why you have over 1K games in it? It's still a good bully tank even as a medium. Always was. I still enjoy mine.

 

View Posta_noob_in_his_, on 15 December 2017 - 01:44 AM, said:

they replaced the FV215b and FV215b(183) because reasons

 

Line consistency is the reason here. As the tier X's play style is not even close to the line going up to it. Yet you have both of them. So why care?

 

View Posta_noob_in_his_, on 15 December 2017 - 01:44 AM, said:

and most of the mid-tier tanks have the most frustrating gun in the game, the 17pdr

 

17 pdr on the Archer at tier 5 is fantastic. Great DPM, great pen for it's tier. Works fine on tier 6. Still a great gun on the AC4 as it is on the Achilles. Tier 7... not really. It's not the main gun on the Challenger anymore. But it still is on the two tier 7 British HT's. That I can agree on. Those two are the only tanks the gun is not working on anymore.

Edited by Balc0ra, 15 December 2017 - 03:32 PM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users