Jump to content


tank destroyers should lose camo coverage due to them shooting and not being seen anymore


  • Please log in to reply
8 replies to this topic

reight #1 Posted 10 June 2018 - 10:39 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 30110 battles
  • 23
  • Member since:
    12-02-2011
due to recent updates in the game the camo effect on tank destroyers should be nerfed , the hidden bushes effect  where they hide behind 2 bushes and fire but they are not seen shooting due to the already high camo they have should not be allowed , or they should lose 50% of there gun power like arty did , this effect that they have now in the game is just total crap by war gaming , and its 3 times as bad on Russian tank destroyers time to change this part of the game or give every tank its true value of firepower and armour instead of nerfing like you have done , its time to  have the game on a fair and even keel instaed of the crap of today 

Homer_J #2 Posted 10 June 2018 - 10:54 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 29160 battles
  • 30,606
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

Patch 0.9.1 want's it's idea back.

 

Quote

  • Post-fire visibility factor for all tank destroyers (except Premium vehicles) brought in line (mainly increased) with the factors for the same guns on other types of vehicles

Edited by Homer_J, 10 June 2018 - 11:02 PM.


Jigabachi #3 Posted 10 June 2018 - 11:46 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 17946 battles
  • 19,337
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011

That already happened. You just want the game to get dumbed down some more so that you can just roll around in your heavy tanks.

 

Bonus:

1. No space in front of commas.

2. "Look, there are the Robinsons. And they brought their dog!"

3. Use more points and paragraphs.


Edited by Jigabachi, 10 June 2018 - 11:47 PM.


Balc0ra #4 Posted 11 June 2018 - 02:06 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 66609 battles
  • 16,623
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012
Been there done that. But if they did it again... I suspect premiums would remain. As the D-Max still has an insane camo and view range for a TD.. Or even the Pak40 with a 400m base view range at tier 3. As any premium pre 0.9.1 patch has. 

250swb #5 Posted 11 June 2018 - 06:56 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 22964 battles
  • 5,147
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-23-2015

View Postreight, on 10 June 2018 - 09:39 PM, said:

due to recent updates in the game the camo effect on tank destroyers should be nerfed , the hidden bushes effect  where they hide behind 2 bushes and fire but they are not seen shooting due to the already high camo they have should not be allowed , 

 

Except you can have great camo values on light and medium tanks as well, so you want to nerf those as well? Consider as one  example the Obj.416 medium tank, better camo values than many tank destroyers, so why shouldn't a player take advantage of that? A TD doesn't have some god given camo value, it only has an advantage, it still needs the player to decide how they want to set the tank up and invest their efforts by grinding crew skills. So quit this 'I want the game dumbed down' rant, adapt or fail, like everybody else it's up to you.



Dead_in_30_seconds #6 Posted 12 June 2018 - 07:06 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 2693 battles
  • 598
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    11-07-2017

View Postreight, on 10 June 2018 - 09:39 PM, said:

due to recent updates in the game the camo effect on tank destroyers should be nerfed , the hidden bushes effect  where they hide behind 2 bushes and fire but they are not seen shooting due to the already high camo they have should not be allowed , or they should lose 50% of there gun power like arty did , this effect that they have now in the game is just total crap by war gaming , and its 3 times as bad on Russian tank destroyers time to change this part of the game or give every tank its true value of firepower and armour instead of nerfing like you have done , its time to  have the game on a fair and even keel instaed of the crap of today 

 

View PostBalc0ra, on 11 June 2018 - 01:06 AM, said:

Been there done that. But if they did it again... I suspect premiums would remain. As the D-Max still has an insane camo and view range for a TD.. Or even the Pak40 with a 400m base view range at tier 3. As any premium pre 0.9.1 patch has. 

 

View Post250swb, on 11 June 2018 - 05:56 PM, said:

 

Except you can have great camo values on light and medium tanks as well, so you want to nerf those as well? Consider as one  example the Obj.416 medium tank, better camo values than many tank destroyers, so why shouldn't a player take advantage of that? A TD doesn't have some god given camo value, it only has an advantage, it still needs the player to decide how they want to set the tank up and invest their efforts by grinding crew skills. So quit this 'I want the game dumbed down' rant, adapt or fail, like everybody else it's up to you.

 

Off-Topic how exactly?

SiliconSidewinder #7 Posted 12 June 2018 - 09:36 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 27738 battles
  • 4,629
  • Member since:
    09-16-2012

View PostDead_in_30_seconds, on 12 June 2018 - 07:06 PM, said:

 

 

 

Off-Topic how exactly?

 

 

could be a secret request to derail the thread?

 



Dead_in_30_seconds #8 Posted 12 June 2018 - 11:54 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 2693 battles
  • 598
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    11-07-2017

View PostSiliconSidewinder, on 12 June 2018 - 08:36 PM, said:

 

 

could be a secret request to derail the thread?

 

 

Apologies to you my friend

I meant no harm or spite

I merely thought another thread

might offer more insight.

 

Forgive me then, for my error

I see now, was my bad

Last thing that I wanted here

was sounding like your Dad.

 

:facepalm:



Graeme0 #9 Posted 14 June 2018 - 11:54 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 25164 battles
  • 508
  • [M-O-M] M-O-M
  • Member since:
    02-15-2015
Reight. Learn to play the game and stop whining about simple game mechanics with 27k games under your belt.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users