Jump to content


Rebalancing KV-5 and other preferential matchmaking tanks.


  • Please log in to reply
82 replies to this topic

Jotneblod #1 Posted 23 May 2018 - 09:12 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 849 battles
  • 180
  • Member since:
    01-01-2015

So it's official - preferential matchmaking will be removed.

Source: https://worldoftanks...ums-perfection/

 

"Perfecting" preferential matchmaking.

 

For those who haven't read the article above the summary would be that Wargaming are taking away our preferential matchmaking tanks that we bought... hm, could be because of their preferential matchmaking(!) and turning them into more tier 10 fodder. Is there anyone who doesn't have enough of that in their garage? I for one bought my preferential matchmaking tanks because being bottom tier is not fun. I have all too many normal matchmaking tier 8 tanks in my garage that I haven't played in ages because they've become increasingly frustrating to play. The last thing I want is more of them.

 

The comical/sad part in the article is that Wargaming are basically putting a ton of blame on the preferential matchmaking tanks. They are trying to sell it to us that PMM tanks are ruining the matchmaking and causing all the constant bottom tier games for other tanks. In case anyone is buying these blatant lies here's the correction - in 9.18 the template system was added to the game and there were lots of +1/-1 games but because Wargaming didn't like the balanced gameplay they changed things in 9.19 so the matchmaker is now prioritizing the 3-5-7 template which means that the game creates +2/-2 battles much more often. Removing the preferential matchmaking from the PMM tanks is going to have practically zero impact on this matter. 

 

I might also add that as we speak tanks like IS-6, SuperPershing, 112, AT-15A and Panther M10 are still being sold at the very moment. I'd imagine that game breaking problem tanks would've removed from sale now before their existence finally explodes the whole game. It also just happens to be that they put Type 59 into the Christmas loot boxes and sold tons of the boxes with the Type being the main attraction. They also sold E-25 at the same time. At that time it didn't seem all too troublesome for the game health to try to sell tons of preferential matchmaking tanks. But hey, this is probably just me being cynical right?

 

Anyone who can read between the lines can conclude that Wargaming acknowledge that +2/-2 is a rotten format and that being bottom tier is not fun for anyone(barring the 47% baddies who think it's epicz challengez to be in a useless tank who don't even try to contribute) and they are trying to sell it to us that they are "saving" the matchmaker here and addressing a critical problem in it. This is all just lies and propaganda. I can offer a very simple solution - give every tank +1/-1 matchmaking and buff the PMM tanks. Done. Problems solved. No more constant bottom tier misery for anyone. Or alternatively make the matchmaker prioritize +1/-1 games? No no no, this would directly address the problem and would reduce the mandatory gold spam and the frustration factor which causes people to spend gold on skipping grinds. How bad would things be if people actually had fun?

 

Fear not, the comedy doesn't end here - Wargaming's "solution" to the problem of constant bottom tier games isn't making the matchmaker prefer +1/-1 format and simply kill off the 3-5-7 template they knowingly created and prioritized, but to spread that very disease to the tanks that don't have it yet. You know, the tanks people are playing because they are sick of being useless bottom tier cannon fodder game in and game out. Now they won't have a choice. What a brilliant fix. I am sure this is going to fix all the problems of the matchmaker.

 

Wargaming have intentionally let PMM tanks become unprofitable as they require a healthy amount of premium shells to function in the World of Armor Power Creep. This has naturally decreased their popularity because people primarily play premium tanks to make credits. Now Wargaming are coating themselves as "merciful" and "allowing" us to lose our tanks so they can be "rebalanced for tier 10 games". They could easily have fixed KV-5 and others by just bringing them up to date in penetration values - give KV-5 the planned penetration changes of 218/243. Some of the easiest and most straightforward balancing ever and the profitability problems are fixed without the tanks being overpowered. This is how they are trying to frame the issue - PMM tanks are so hard to balance and the only way is to destroy them.

 

And to add the insult to the injury, if you don't like the changes to your PMM tank you can always pay Wargaming extra to swap your tank into something else and receive... what exactly? One thing for sure is that it is going to be more snack for Object 268 v4s and Type 5 Heavies. Playing as bottom tier 60-70% of the time with a Patriot or Liberte gets old pretty quickly even if the tanks are good on paper. You know the game is broken when armored heavy tanks are forced to play as passive support tanks in most battles. But hey! PMM tanks are to blame, not the fact that Wargaming have engineered their matchmaker to prioritize these awfully imbalanced 3-5-7 farmfests over everything else.

 

Wargaming's suggested changes for KV-5

 

The suggested changes on the KV-5 are laughable. With KV-5 being my most played tank with 3 marks and 66% win rate I know a thing or two about it. They are removing all the unique features including the obvious weak spots and super strong side/arse that have always defined the tank and made it different from everything else. First off you do not actually want the 330 alpha damage buff because currently the reload is in a very harmonic sweetspot where you have a fairly hard hitting 300 damage gun with medium-like reload, mine being 6.67sec with food. Basically you have significantly better than same tier mediums but you can still permatrack anything and often set up 2-for-1 trades against heavies with much longer reloads. The alpha damage should not be touched.

 

Now the penetration... the suggested changes are 218 AP as standard and 243(I guess APCR) premium penetration. These values would be a fantastic change if the tank kept its preferential matchmaking. I would probably even come back to play the game on my all time favorite tank sometimes if these changes took place. Basically it could penetrate most tanks it faces with AP shell but it would still be in a horrible shape against a Type 4 Heavy, E75 or T95 even with premium rounds. But Wargaming are talking about 10 battles here... Just wow. Are you serious? The required gold spam which is the #1 problem of KV-5 would not go anywhere. The only difference would be that you couldn't play your tank proactively anymore and you'd just be spamming the gold at tier 9-10 tanks instead of tier 8-9.

 

KV-5s armor will not be able to withstand any fire in tier 10 battles even with the removal of the weak spots. Thanks to the 3-5-7 system that will make it bottom tier most of time time, it will be pure cannon fodder in roughly 60-70% of the battles. On the other hand in the "lucky" games when you spawn as top tier your tank would be more or less invulnerable against the lower tiers. This is just very classic +2/-2 "balancing", the lucky top tiers [edited] on everyone without any skill needed and the low tier tanks can't consistently impact the game even if they play well.


How to balance KV-5 balanced for tier 10 games

 

With my faith on Wargaming's balancing department being what it is(or rather it isn't), I decided to extend my hand and offer some aid with the hopes that something could be properly balanced for once. I allow WG to copy my ideas and put them into practice, no need to thank me.

 

With the +2/-2 matchmaking and the 3-5-7 template are you forced into tier 10 battles all the time so being a "competitive" tank means being good at fighting them because they are the decisive vehicles. Since Wargaming are promising us "competitive" tanks that means we need machines that can put up real fights against them.

 

Alpha damage: 440
DPM: 2600
Penetration: 249 AP/305 APCR/65 HE

Hull armor: 240/150/100; R2D2 armor buffed to 250.

Turret armor: 280/240/100

 

I won't even go into soft stats or deeper details. I think you guys get the point. Since we're talking about a super heavy tank here it needs to be able to bounce tier 10 AP shells to be able to pull off its role. It will still be fairly easy to penetrate with 330 HEAT shells. It also needs a gun that's capable of hurting tier 10 enemies in terms of penetration. Of course this is going to add more misery to tier 6-7 tanks but that's just fun diversity right? They can always flank you and aim for the weak spots it's all good. :)

 

I think by now everyone has figured out the KV-5 would be ridiculous with my suggested changes. But this is what it takes to have a tank that's competitive in tier 10 games nowadays. And honestly the tank would also be ridiculous(in a bad way) with Wargaming's suggested changes and absolutely useless in the tier 10 battles they are trying to shove it into. My point is that you cannot balance a tank for +2/-2 matchmaking because it's fundamentally impossible to make a tank that's competitive against tier 10 tanks but that isn't overpowered against tier 6 tanks. How do you make armor? How do you make a gun that penetrates and significantly hurts tier 10 tanks but that doesn't lolpen and 2-shot tier 6s? It's impossible. It's like demanding a pocket sized phone with a 60inches HD screen so you can also use it as a big TV. It's just not possible.

 

Anyone who thinks their KV-5 is being "buffed" with these changes where it loses its PMM status and gets 218 penetration is being delusional, all that's happening is that your unique tank that could easily be fixed is being turned into a scapegoat and transformed into more tier 10 fodder. With so many +2/-2 premiums available for those usually bad players who "enjoy the challenge" of being a useless bottom tier tank all the time, just buy yourself an STA-2. Leave the PMM tanks be. There's a reason why people bought them and it's to avoid the horrible +2/-2 matchmaker.

 

Further concerns

 

When I see players and youtubers complain about the changes, they're making the classic mistake. Basically they are letting Wargaming "frame the issue" with that 2k gold and the lack of refund option. In the end Wargaming "will listen" and allow the exchange for Patriot or Liberte without any extra gold or even gold refunds with full knowledge that gold is of limited value nowadays and players are basically forced into "buying gold for the price of the PMM tank" that they would've never bought otherwise. As someone who has 20k gold on his account without any meaningful use I can say that gold refund will effectively just remove some of my favorite tanks from my garage without giving anything back. I am definitely not going to accept that, but with because these players and youtubers were too busy complaining about the minor points the big picture is being forgotten which is exactly Wargaming's plan here. Nobody is even talking of real money refund or the fact that they are trying to change the product you bought into something completely different. Something that is even technically very far away from what you bought. You bought your preferential matchmaking tank because you didn't want bottom tier games. Now Wargaming are "allowing you" to change it into something that sees bottom tier games all the time, because they want everyone to suffer without a choice from their +2/-2 matchmaking and the bottom tier rally that they artificially brought upon us. They literally have programmed it into their matchmaker that it seeks to create unbalanced 3-5-7 battles as priority which makes you bottom tier much more often than top or mid. You shouldn't accept that because that was precisely what you were looking to avoid when you bought your PMM tank.

 

The least we should get is to keep our tanks in their current state or receive a moneyback. Gold is useless for many people by now because it can't buy you most of the interesting content and you're effectively forced into buying bland tech tree premiums, burning it on free XP or buying premium time that you already have a year's worth of.

 

If you at Wargaming are really forcing through this PMM farce you can say goodbye to your "we can't nerf/rework/significantly change premiums" mantra and I am sure most people are looking forward to you nerfing the Defender and a few other broken tanks. Are you going to rework the Defender? You know, the tank that actually hurts the game balance and has at least partly destroyed entire game modes? Or are the PMM tanks just a good scapegoat and does it end here?

 

At the very least if these changes go through everyone needs to keep in mind that buying well performing or unique premiums is no longer going to "safe". Up until now when you've bought a premium you've had this guarantee that Wargaming aren't going to change it for the worse. This will fly out of the window and it's going to at least cut some sales, most notably from the people who have either purchased PMM tanks or who bought your lootboxes during the Christmas.

 

Thanks for the read,

T

 

EDIT: IN CASE IT ISN'T OBVIOUS, THE SUGGESTED CHANGES ARE A JOKE. LOL HAHAHAHA JOKE. The point is still that a tank can't be balanced for +2/-2 because making it competitive against tanks two tiers higher would make it absolutely super broken against lower tier tanks.


Edited by Jotneblod, 24 May 2018 - 04:50 AM.


Nazgarth #2 Posted 23 May 2018 - 09:16 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 28472 battles
  • 1,115
  • [-TWO-] -TWO-
  • Member since:
    05-07-2011
You have to be joking with those suggested stats for KV5, its a tier 8 which sees tanks with sub 175mm pen, not a tier 10. The stats you have there would be more OP than a Defender ffs.

Edited by Nazgarth, 23 May 2018 - 09:16 AM.


Jotneblod #3 Posted 23 May 2018 - 09:18 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 849 battles
  • 180
  • Member since:
    01-01-2015

View PostNazgarth, on 23 May 2018 - 09:16 AM, said:

You have to be joking with those suggested stats for KV5, its a tier 8 which sees tanks with sub 175mm pen, not a tier 10. The stats you have there would be more OP than a Defender ffs.

 

Yes, it was mentioned a few lines after the stats that it's obviously a joke. The point is that it is impossible to "balance" a tier 8 tank for tier 10 games and that 218/243 penetration is going to be a joke in such games.

Edited by Jotneblod, 23 May 2018 - 09:19 AM.


Nazgarth #4 Posted 23 May 2018 - 09:19 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 28472 battles
  • 1,115
  • [-TWO-] -TWO-
  • Member since:
    05-07-2011

View PostJotneblod, on 23 May 2018 - 09:18 AM, said:

 

Yes, it was mentioned a few lines after the stats that it's obviously a joke. The point is that it is impossible to "balance" a tier 8 tank for tier 10 games.

 

Well its not impossible, you can balance a tier 8 tank for tier 10 games, it doesn't mean the tank will be as good as the tier 10s, that's the whole point of tiers.

Jotneblod #5 Posted 23 May 2018 - 09:21 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 849 battles
  • 180
  • Member since:
    01-01-2015

View PostNazgarth, on 23 May 2018 - 09:19 AM, said:

 

Well its not impossible, you can balance a tier 8 tank for tier 10 games, it doesn't mean the tank will be as good as the tier 10s, that's the whole point of tiers.

 

So it isn't going to be competitive against the tier 10 tanks that it faces in most battles. This is the problem, it will be yet another passive [edited] support tank just like all the other tier 8s and can't do its heavy tank duty in most games. Do you want more of that?

 

With +2/-2 there's no such thing as balance. If it's competitive against higher tiers, it's absolutely broken and far too good against lower tiers. If you make it "balanced" against lower tiers it will be worthless against higher tiers. It's zero sum game, whichever side you lean towards you break the other side. A tank that is facing both tier 6 tanks and tier 10 tanks is never going to be possible to balance. 


Edited by Jotneblod, 23 May 2018 - 09:25 AM.


Nazgarth #6 Posted 23 May 2018 - 09:25 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 28472 battles
  • 1,115
  • [-TWO-] -TWO-
  • Member since:
    05-07-2011

View PostJotneblod, on 23 May 2018 - 09:21 AM, said:

 

So it isn't going to be competitive against the tier 10 tanks that it faces in most battles. This is the problem, it will be yet another passive [edited] support tank just like all the other tier 8s and can't do its heavy tank duty in most games. Do you want more of that?

 

Are you expecting a tier 8 tank to be as powerful as a tier 10? Its going to be competitive when compared with other tier 8s, yes, if they buff it right that is. BTW I don't agree with WG plans to do with PMM tanks as in many cases its the entire reason why people bought them,

firelars4 #7 Posted 23 May 2018 - 09:25 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 41479 battles
  • 107
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    02-04-2013
You're completely overbuffing it with those changes. WG's new changes with maybe a little DPM increase and viewrange up to 380-390 meters is enough. 

Jotneblod #8 Posted 23 May 2018 - 09:27 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 849 battles
  • 180
  • Member since:
    01-01-2015

View Postfirelars4, on 23 May 2018 - 09:25 AM, said:

You're completely overbuffing it with those changes. WG's new changes with maybe a little DPM increase and viewrange up to 380-390 meters is enough. 

 

You might want to read the whole post before you comment on it. And if the 2 minutes it takes to read is too long there's no point in commenting. 

firelars4 #9 Posted 23 May 2018 - 09:28 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 41479 battles
  • 107
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    02-04-2013

View PostJotneblod, on 23 May 2018 - 09:27 AM, said:

 

You might want to read the whole post before you comment on it. And if the 2 minutes it takes to read is too long there's no point in commenting. 

 

I get the sarcasm, but I'd still like to add some reasonable changes ^

Element6_TheSprout #10 Posted 23 May 2018 - 09:29 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 28638 battles
  • 10,044
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    01-06-2013

View PostJotneblod, on 23 May 2018 - 09:18 AM, said:

 

Yes, it was mentioned a few lines after the stats that it's obviously a joke. The point is that it is impossible to "balance" a tier 8 tank for tier 10 games and that 218/243 penetration is going to be a joke in such games.

Those games will have you see a maximum of 3 Tier 10 tanks. You have a team, you are not a one man army.



Jotneblod #11 Posted 23 May 2018 - 09:34 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 849 battles
  • 180
  • Member since:
    01-01-2015

View PostElement6_TheSprout, on 23 May 2018 - 09:29 AM, said:

Those games will have you see a maximum of 3 Tier 10 tanks. You have a team, you are not a one man army.

 

Yes, the classic "it's a team game" argument where broken things are defended with "someone else has to do it". I don't think I've ever seen a game with less teamwork and much more often than not when you expect a teammate to do the heavy lifting for you he will fail. That is just not a practical approach and it results in lots and lots of frustration.

 

The whole point of preferential matchmaking is that you've been able to do the heavy lifting duty yourself even if your tank is a bit underpowered compared to its peers. With a bit of skill you can usually put up a fight against same tier tanks but most importantly you've been able to play proactively every game. If teammates want to support you, that's great but you're not overly reliant on them doing the right plays that they most likely fail to do. 

 

Removing preferential matchmaking just turns more and more heavy tanks into narrow, useless support tanks that the game is already has far too many of.

 

And just to clear it up, facing 1-2 tier 10 tanks on your flank often turns it unplayable for your tier 8. You also face those tier 9s that still have noticeably better tanks than you. You could possibly be able to fight the tier 9s but the combination of 8 copies of tier 9-10 tanks is just too much and the reality is that your tank is just insignificant in such a battle.


Edited by Jotneblod, 23 May 2018 - 09:38 AM.


Element6_TheSprout #12 Posted 23 May 2018 - 09:46 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 28638 battles
  • 10,044
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    01-06-2013

View PostJotneblod, on 23 May 2018 - 09:34 AM, said:

 

Yes, the classic "it's a team game" argument where broken things are defended with "someone else has to do it". I don't think I've ever seen a game with less teamwork and much more often than not when you expect a teammate to do the heavy lifting for you he will fail. That is just not a practical approach and it results in lots and lots of frustration.

 

The whole point of preferential matchmaking is that you've been able to do the heavy lifting duty yourself even if your tank is a bit underpowered compared to its peers. With a bit of skill you can usually put up a fight against same tier tanks but most importantly you've been able to play proactively every game. If teammates want to support you, that's great but you're not overly reliant on them doing the right plays that they most likely fail to do. 

 

Removing preferential matchmaking just turns more and more heavy tanks into narrow, useless support tanks that the game is already has far too many of.

 

And just to clear it up, facing 1-2 tier 10 tanks on your flank often turns it unplayable for your tier 8. You also face those tier 9s that still have noticeably better tanks than you. You could possibly be able to fight the tier 9s but the combination of 8 copies of tier 9-10 tanks is just too much and the reality is that your tank is just insignificant in such a battle.

Which team games do you know of where one player is supposed to do the heavy lifting, AKA being a one man army? Doesn't that defeat the purpose of a team game? This is a team game, that is why it is a "classic".

 

Maybe there is a reason they want to remove the point of being able to do heavy lifting as a single player?

 

WR cruves will probably tell the story some time after these changes have been made.



clixor #13 Posted 23 May 2018 - 09:46 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 49954 battles
  • 2,980
  • Member since:
    08-07-2011

View PostJotneblod, on 23 May 2018 - 09:34 AM, said:

Yes, the classic "it's a team game" argument where broken things are defended with "someone else has to do it". I don't think I've ever seen a game with less teamwork and much more often than not when you expect a teammate to do the heavy lifting for you he will fail. That is just not a practical approach and it results in lots and lots of frustration.

 

The whole point of preferential matchmaking is that you've been able to do the heavy lifting duty yourself even if your tank is a bit underpowered compared to its peers. With a bit of skill you can usually put up a fight against same tier tanks but most importantly you've been able to play proactively every game. If teammates want to support you, that's great but you're not overly reliant on them doing the right plays that they most likely fail to do. 

 

Removing preferential matchmaking just turns more and more heavy tanks into narrow, useless support tanks that the game is already has far too many of.

 

And just to clear it up, facing 1-2 tier 10 tanks on your flank often turns it unplayable for your tier 8. You also face those tier 9s that still have noticeably better tanks than you. You could possibly be able to fight the tier 9s but the combination of 8 copies of tier 9-10 tanks is just too much and the reality is that your tank is just insignificant in such a battle.

 

Do you even own a KV-5??? Currently it sees 5 tier9s each and every game you play in it. And as you more often than not don't have much choice to go to a heavy spot that means you will be fighting tier9 heavies which, in the current state, the kv-5 has no chance of dealing with whatsoever.

 

So with the pen buff at least you can deal with tier9s. In a 3/5/7 tier10 mm you'll still see 5 tier9s same as now and it's not your job as a tier8 to be dealing with the enemies tier10s (not alone anyway).

 

 

 



Lentomies1 #14 Posted 23 May 2018 - 09:49 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 28498 battles
  • 320
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    12-05-2012
The best way to buff the KV-5 is to give it the top gun of the KV-4, and do the armour changes WG suggested (apart from side armor nerfs).

firelars4 #15 Posted 23 May 2018 - 09:53 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 41479 battles
  • 107
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    02-04-2013

View PostLentomies1, on 23 May 2018 - 09:49 AM, said:

The best way to buff the KV-5 is to give it the top gun of the KV-4, and do the armour changes WG suggested (apart from side armor nerfs).

 

At the moment it has 350m viewrange, I'd buff that aswell to acceptable levels of 380-390m. 

Balc0ra #16 Posted 23 May 2018 - 10:03 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 63409 battles
  • 14,819
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View PostJotneblod, on 23 May 2018 - 09:18 AM, said:

 

Yes, it was mentioned a few lines after the stats that it's obviously a joke. The point is that it is impossible to "balance" a tier 8 tank for tier 10 games and that 218/243 penetration is going to be a joke in such games.

 

KV-5 is a ramming tool anyway. It weighs 30 to 50% more then most tier X HT's. Putt a spall liner on it, and you don't even need speed to screw it up for most of them. And as with most of my tier 8 prem +2 MM tanks atm. I don't seek out the tier X armor first. And if my tier X HT won't go the HT line. Neither will I. As my Lowe is not soloing a Type 5. It helps my tier X HT's deal with it. Not the other way around.

 

Sure the pen is not ideal. But it's either that or sub 170 pen vs 200+ mm effective armor now in pure tier 8 games. As lets be honest. The current Meta with the Type 4, Defender or even Patriot to name a few gives you more of a tough time now, then most normal tier X targets will do after the buffs. As even there, the new meta has run from a few of them.



Dava_117 #17 Posted 23 May 2018 - 10:11 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 17855 battles
  • 2,463
  • [B-BAS] B-BAS
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014

View PostLentomies1, on 23 May 2018 - 09:49 AM, said:

The best way to buff the KV-5 is to give it the top gun of the KV-4, and do the armour changes WG suggested (apart from side armor nerfs).

 

KV-5 getting the top gun from KV-4 can be a good idea, but then no armour buff would be needed. That's just overbuffing a tank again.

 

View Postfirelars4, on 23 May 2018 - 09:53 AM, said:

 

At the moment it has 350m viewrange, I'd buff that aswell to acceptable levels of 380-390m. 

 

380-390 m VR is LT or MT level for soviet tier 8 veicles, so no thanks.

Edited by Dava_117, 23 May 2018 - 10:28 AM.


Lentomies1 #18 Posted 23 May 2018 - 10:14 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 28498 battles
  • 320
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    12-05-2012

View PostDava_117, on 23 May 2018 - 11:11 AM, said:

 

KV-5 gettong the top gin from KV-4 can be a good idea, but then no armour buff eould be needed. That's just overbuffing a tank again.

 

 

380-390 m VR is LT or MT level for soviet tier 8 veicles, so no thanks.

 



Dava_117 #19 Posted 23 May 2018 - 10:27 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 17855 battles
  • 2,463
  • [B-BAS] B-BAS
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014

View PostLentomies1, on 23 May 2018 - 10:14 AM, said:

 

 

You don't know how may typos I correct every day. Hate those small keys on the phone... :D

Igor_BL #20 Posted 23 May 2018 - 10:29 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35774 battles
  • 1,152
  • Member since:
    06-10-2015
indeed.... typing from phone is like i have dyslexia. even in my native language... i have huge hands, every letter is a lottery.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users