Jump to content


AT 2 is useless


  • Please log in to reply
44 replies to this topic

Cremaster #1 Posted 15 January 2018 - 04:40 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 14853 battles
  • 28
  • Member since:
    05-09-2011
Why in the world was AT 2 nerfed so badly? It's totally impossible to do anything on that tank. No armor, no speed.. shouldn't the tank have at least a bit of either?

Dava_117 #2 Posted 15 January 2018 - 04:43 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 18559 battles
  • 2,745
  • [B-BAS] B-BAS
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014

View PostCremaster, on 15 January 2018 - 04:40 PM, said:

Why in the world was AT 2 nerfed so badly? It's totally impossible to do anything on that tank. No armor, no speed.. shouldn't the tank have at least a bit of either?

 

IMO, armour nerf killed this tank. They should have kept the old 203mm frontal armour and weackened the cupola, so tier 4 could pen it.

I don't know why they inverted the formula used on the other tanks of the line...



Strappster #3 Posted 15 January 2018 - 04:45 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 23695 battles
  • 8,926
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    10-20-2015
It's got armour. What it's also got is one of the most widely known weak spots in the game. It was ridiculous before the model was changed, I got an ace in my second battle by simply driving forward to the middle of the map and keeping the front pointed at the enemy while pew-pewing their hp away. Now it sets you up for the rest of that line without being broken when it's top tier.

Balc0ra #4 Posted 15 January 2018 - 04:48 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 64400 battles
  • 15,431
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View PostCremaster, on 15 January 2018 - 04:40 PM, said:

Why in the world was AT 2 nerfed so badly? It's totally impossible to do anything on that tank. No armor, no speed.. shouldn't the tank have at least a bit of either?

 

So are you upset that you can't bounce tier 5 shots. Or tier 7 shots? As the old armor could even bounce most tier 8 guns. No need for that much armor on the hull was it? As tier for tier before, cupola aside. It made most super heavies look bad. At least now you are good as top tier, but like the rest on that line. Needs to tone it down vs +1 or 2 targets.  As it should be.

Edited by Balc0ra, 15 January 2018 - 04:49 PM.


Bad_Mojo_incoming #5 Posted 15 January 2018 - 04:56 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 19606 battles
  • 207
  • [THIK] THIK
  • Member since:
    03-06-2014

View PostDava_117, on 15 January 2018 - 04:43 PM, said:

 

IMO, armour nerf killed this tank. They should have kept the old 203mm frontal armour and weackened the cupola, so tier 4 could pen it.

I don't know why they inverted the formula used on the other tanks of the line...

 

Wow, you ACTUALLY saw tier 4s in it? During the 35 battles I played in it I don't remember seeing tier 4 tanks,...plenty of tier 7 games with 3 arties, though! Hated it immensely.

Dava_117 #6 Posted 15 January 2018 - 04:58 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 18559 battles
  • 2,745
  • [B-BAS] B-BAS
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014

View PostBad_Mojo_incoming, on 15 January 2018 - 04:56 PM, said:

 

Wow, you ACTUALLY saw tier 4s in it? During the 35 battles I played in it I don't remember seeing tier 4 tanks,...plenty of tier 7 games with 3 arties, though! Hated it immensely.

 

View PostBad_Mojo_incoming, on 15 January 2018 - 04:56 PM, said:

 

Wow, you ACTUALLY saw tier 4s in it? During the 35 battles I played in it I don't remember seeing tier 4 tanks,...plenty of tier 7 games with 3 arties, though! Hated it immensely.

 

Well, lets say I've seen many AT2 while grinding tier 4 tanks... :teethhappy:

znapper74 #7 Posted 15 January 2018 - 04:58 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 10681 battles
  • 81
  • Member since:
    02-20-2016

Wasn't that tank even more nerfed with the latest  update?

 

Maybe my notification sent me to the wrong place, but I seem to remember it got another nerf last week.


Edited by znapper74, 15 January 2018 - 05:02 PM.


Dava_117 #8 Posted 15 January 2018 - 05:00 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 18559 battles
  • 2,745
  • [B-BAS] B-BAS
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014
Sorry, double post...

Edited by Dava_117, 15 January 2018 - 05:01 PM.


ZlatanArKung #9 Posted 15 January 2018 - 05:04 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 5,112
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

View PostStrappster, on 15 January 2018 - 04:45 PM, said:

It's got armour. What it's also got is one of the most widely known weak spots in the game. It was ridiculous before the model was changed, I got an ace in my second battle by simply driving forward to the middle of the map and keeping the front pointed at the enemy while pew-pewing their hp away. Now it sets you up for the rest of that line without being broken when it's top tier.

The armour hot slaughtered, instead of having good armour with a weakspot on top. A weakspot that could be made weaker.

 

WG made all from talky armour have same value, but lower. So it easily gets penned by premium rounds (everywhere) while regular rounds bounce (everywhere). Such a good change indeed.



NoPoet406 #10 Posted 15 January 2018 - 05:05 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 2408 battles
  • 494
  • [USAW] USAW
  • Member since:
    07-01-2016
Regardless of what is being said about the AT2, which is a Marmite tank (love it or hate it), the recent nerf has ruined any pretence that it's a good tank. It gets two shotted nearly every battle, seems incapable of blocking most damage, is far too slow to respond to breakthroughs, cannot defend itself due to terrible traverse and is relatively blind. Its gun lacks penetration and does about 75 damage per shot. Literally this tank' s only remaining strength is the ability to fire every 1.9 seconds, which hardly matters when you die in two hits and can barely reach the enemy.

Well done WG, now there are no tanks left in the British tree that are competitive or "must-buys". Instead AT2 joins the Matilda BP, Churchill VII and Churchill GC as novelty tanks which are outclassed in mobility, spotting range and killing power by practically everything else in their tiers.

AlbertL612 #11 Posted 15 January 2018 - 05:12 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 8314 battles
  • 72
  • [ARM] ARM
  • Member since:
    07-14-2012
Best AT 2 is a sold AT 2

ZlatanArKung #12 Posted 15 January 2018 - 05:15 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 5,112
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

View PostNoPoet406, on 15 January 2018 - 05:05 PM, said:

Regardless of what is being said about the AT2, which is a Marmite tank (love it or hate it), the recent nerf has ruined any pretence that it's a good tank. It gets two shotted nearly every battle, seems incapable of blocking most damage, is far too slow to respond to breakthroughs, cannot defend itself due to terrible traverse and is relatively blind. Its gun lacks penetration and does about 75 damage per shot. Literally this tank' s only remaining strength is the ability to fire every 1.9 seconds, which hardly matters when you die in two hits and can barely reach the enemy.

Well done WG, now there are no tanks left in the British tree that are competitive or "must-buys". Instead AT2 joins the Matilda BP, Churchill VII and Churchill GC as novelty tanks which are outclassed in mobility, spotting range and killing power by practically everything else in their tiers.

There are many good British tanks.

 

Cromwell.

Comet.

Caernarvon

Conqueror

S.Conqueror

Badger

Tortoise

AT-8

 

One could argue that the buffed Centurion, Centurion 7/1 and CAX are also all good or decent.

 

Maybe the Charioteer and Challenger can also be seen as decent/good.

 

The bad ones are:

Churchill T5-T7, AT-2, AT-7, AT-15, Churchill GC.

 

And then a bunch of meh tanks.



Xqual #13 Posted 15 January 2018 - 05:23 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 58820 battles
  • 63
  • Member since:
    03-05-2013

View PostNoPoet406, on 15 January 2018 - 05:05 PM, said:

Regardless of what is being said about the AT2, which is a Marmite tank (love it or hate it), the recent nerf has ruined any pretence that it's a good tank. It gets two shotted nearly every battle, seems incapable of blocking most damage, is far too slow to respond to breakthroughs, cannot defend itself due to terrible traverse and is relatively blind. Its gun lacks penetration and does about 75 damage per shot. Literally this tank' s only remaining strength is the ability to fire every 1.9 seconds, which hardly matters when you die in two hits and can barely reach the enemy.

Well done WG, now there are no tanks left in the British tree that are competitive or "must-buys". Instead AT2 joins the Matilda BP, Churchill VII and Churchill GC as novelty tanks which are outclassed in mobility, spotting range and killing power by practically everything else in their tiers.

 

Funny. It is the only tank you actualy managed to perform in.

Besides that, it was so overpowered before it wasent even funny. It has had its time in the sun. And it didnt end soon enough.



NoPoet406 #14 Posted 15 January 2018 - 05:35 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 2408 battles
  • 494
  • [USAW] USAW
  • Member since:
    07-01-2016
Here we go. There may be good British tanks at other tiers/trees, but how do people use them to get to the AT8? Which itself is renowned for being a barely mobile cow pat. No-one seems to have said much about it post-buff.

The AT2 did have troll armour and it needed some toning down - bouncing 1000-2000 damage is insane - but it also needed some balancing aspects, instead of simply killing it off.

Also, I perform in other tanks, but the AT2 playstyle suited me, you just have to be in the right place at the right time. If it was 10kph faster and accelerated at better than walking speed, it would still be worthwhile. Instead, the post-nerf difference isn't just profound, it's shocking.

How many AT2s do you normally see in games? 8? 6? Or 0-1?

dimethylcadmium #15 Posted 15 January 2018 - 08:35 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 5455 battles
  • 770
  • [WGL-A] WGL-A
  • Member since:
    11-24-2017
They should have given it some mobility since it lost a good amount of its armour thickness. 

Edited by dimethylcadmium, 15 January 2018 - 08:35 PM.


BP_OMowe #16 Posted 16 January 2018 - 02:48 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 24764 battles
  • 2,047
  • [-GY-] -GY-
  • Member since:
    01-08-2013

View PostBalc0ra, on 15 January 2018 - 04:48 PM, said:

So are you upset that you can't bounce tier 5 shots. Or tier 7 shots? As the old armor could even bounce most tier 8 guns. No need for that much armor on the hull was it? As tier for tier before, cupola aside. It made most super heavies look bad. At least now you are good as top tier, but like the rest on that line. Needs to tone it down vs +1 or 2 targets.  As it should be.

 

Could, but wouldn't, and definitely isn't as it should be, as it turned from a barely mobile pea-shooting pillbox into a barely mobile shed, still shooting peas.

If you take a tank which was designed to sacrifice almost everything else in order to have superior armour, and then strip away said armour, what you are left with simply isn't good at all, regardless if top-, mid- or bottom tier.

Then again, these heavy-handed "rebalances" isn't something new when it comes to Wg, since the top Foch was too powerful it got hit with the nerf-hammer so hard tier VII became useless.



WilhelmII #17 Posted 16 January 2018 - 12:07 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 33433 battles
  • 192
  • [AT2] AT2
  • Member since:
    06-10-2011

All this nerfing is an old sales ploy used by WOT to frustrate you to the point of getting you to spend some cash by buying Premium accounts as without it now you basically earn nothing as the rewards have been nerfed right down on the standard account that is you want to earn anything then you need to buy it, same with the tanks, out of the 3 WOT WoWP WoWS, WOT is the Flog flog floggit game sell sell sell screw customer satisfaction, as now they have invested they will stay they will never leave as we have them on our hook and they are right, have they fix the MM? NO ! will they NO, why because that would reduce the sales figures.

 

As for Credits and XP earned missions and prizes all I will say is WOT needs to take a leaf out of WoWP book as they really do give big payouts and rewards and do not ask stupid amount to research modules, don't believe me, look for yourself it is there daily  



fwhaatpiraat #18 Posted 16 January 2018 - 06:22 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 45660 battles
  • 532
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    05-04-2013
Only thing i remember from playing the at-2 is a battle on Lakeville (edit: abbey) ±4 years ago. After the battle started I headed to the 8-line, pressed 'r' twice and alt-tabbed, since the vehicle isn't that fast. Somehow forgot that I was in a battle and came back after 5 minutes, with the at-2 at the bottom of the river/lake.

Playing the AT-2 was great fun. :)

Edited by fwhaatpiraat, 16 January 2018 - 06:25 PM.


Balc0ra #19 Posted 16 January 2018 - 06:30 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 64400 battles
  • 15,431
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View Postdimethylcadmium, on 15 January 2018 - 08:35 PM, said:

They should have given it some mobility since it lost a good amount of its armour thickness. 

 

Not gonna argue there tbh. But I'm still waiting for some to give a solid reason why they need 252 mm of armor on tier 5 vs 110 mm pen guns. Or why the ELC still needs 252 gold pen at tier 5 with +2 MM as most still say.

Jumping_Turtle #20 Posted 16 January 2018 - 06:32 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 60397 battles
  • 5,183
  • [CNUT] CNUT
  • Member since:
    10-15-2013

Just did this ...

 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users