Jump to content


M46 Fatton Giggles


  • Please log in to reply
50 replies to this topic

Erwin_Von_Braun #1 Posted 06 September 2018 - 07:19 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 38623 battles
  • 5,069
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    01-25-2014

Ploughing through this as we speak - got bored with the standard stock guns, still need the top engine at 31000xp and the top gun is 68000xp, so it's going to be a monster of a grind.

How to make it more entertaining methinks?:unsure:

Slapped on the Tier V Derp - cue much mirth :D

This may actually be a fun grind:popcorn:



Dava_117 #2 Posted 06 September 2018 - 07:29 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 19870 battles
  • 3,475
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014

View PostErwin_Von_Braun, on 06 September 2018 - 07:19 PM, said:

Ploughing through this as we speak - got bored with the standard stock guns, still need the top engine at 31000xp and the top gun is 68000xp, so it's going to be a monster of a grind.

How to make it more entertaining methinks?:unsure:

Slapped on the Tier V Derp - cue much mirth :D

This may actually be a fun grind:popcorn:

 

Agree. Derp them hard! And remember to HEAT their back when you can.

XxKuzkina_MatxX #3 Posted 06 September 2018 - 07:31 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 50848 battles
  • 1,855
  • Member since:
    04-02-2016
I saw this abomination once in all my 48k battles. It was Stalingrad and he was actually a good player, finished 2nd by damage if i remember correctly! :) 

Erwin_Von_Braun #4 Posted 06 September 2018 - 07:39 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 38623 battles
  • 5,069
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    01-25-2014

View PostDava_117, on 06 September 2018 - 06:29 PM, said:

 

Agree. Derp them hard! And remember to HEAT their back when you can.

 

A damn fine idea sir - full HEAT it is :honoring:

 

View PostXxKuzkina_MatxX, on 06 September 2018 - 06:31 PM, said:

I saw this abomination once in all my 48k battles. It was Stalingrad and he was actually a good player, finished 2nd by damage if i remember correctly! :)

 

I doubt that I will make the top ten, but will give it my best:izmena:

BR33K1_PAWAH #5 Posted 06 September 2018 - 08:02 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 3597 battles
  • 547
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    04-11-2018

 

 :B



Enforcer1975 #6 Posted 06 September 2018 - 08:58 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 20760 battles
  • 10,887
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014
I actually tried the derp on the Pershit and it was more fun than expected.

PoIestar #7 Posted 06 September 2018 - 09:35 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 31917 battles
  • 4,120
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    05-02-2013
I must do this someday, I just bought the M46 Patton as I finally got all the parts for it and my God, it's amazing. Call me a statswhore but it currently tops my list on WN8 (3462 in 20 games), finally dismissing the T71 CMCD which I hated and doesn't deserve to be there.

Erwin_Von_Braun #8 Posted 06 September 2018 - 09:42 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 38623 battles
  • 5,069
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    01-25-2014

View PostPoIestar, on 06 September 2018 - 08:35 PM, said:

I must do this someday, I just bought the M46 Patton as I finally got all the parts for it and my God, it's amazing. Call me a statswhore but it currently tops my list on WN8 (3462 in 20 games), finally dismissing the T71 CMCD which I hated and doesn't deserve to be there.

 

I was going to 'like' this...

Then I read the part about the T71...:hiding:



PoIestar #9 Posted 06 September 2018 - 09:50 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 31917 battles
  • 4,120
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    05-02-2013

View PostErwin_Von_Braun, on 06 September 2018 - 09:42 PM, said:

 

I was going to 'like' this...

Then I read the part about the T71...:hiding:

 

My agression for WG concerning the T71 is deep since the absolute T71 messup. In its old state it was a Dinky Toy tank, adorable with its way too big wheels, the oscillating turret which made it quite futuristic. And best of all? It was AMAZING to play. God, I loved that thing to bits.

 

The Detroit hull has ruined everything. It's so ugly that every time I play it, I want to stick a fork in my eyeballs to end it. And I just can't look through it, knowing that it used to be such a cool looking tank.

 

I hoped that with the CMCD, the magic could return. The old hull returned which made the tank look funky again. And the gun is like the same, but without autoloader.

 

But I can't like it. I just can't. A T71 needs to look like the CMCD with the DA turret and needs an autoloader. The annoying thing is that it used to be in that state but WG likes to change winning teams to something stupid.

 

If you ask me, the T71 CMCD needs to be reverted back to the autoloader branch combining the DA turret with the CMCD hull to create the awesome T71. Then nerf everything in the Bulldog line and downtier it all, like that used to be too. Then the XM551 at tier 9 and the proper 551 Sheridan at tier 10. 

 


Edited by PoIestar, 06 September 2018 - 09:50 PM.


Erwin_Von_Braun #10 Posted 06 September 2018 - 10:10 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 38623 battles
  • 5,069
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    01-25-2014

View PostPoIestar, on 06 September 2018 - 08:50 PM, said:

 

My agression for WG concerning the T71 is deep since the absolute T71 messup. In its old state it was a Dinky Toy tank, adorable with its way too big wheels, the oscillating turret which made it quite futuristic. And best of all? It was AMAZING to play. God, I loved that thing to bits.

 

The Detroit hull has ruined everything. It's so ugly that every time I play it, I want to stick a fork in my eyeballs to end it. And I just can't look through it, knowing that it used to be such a cool looking tank.

 

I hoped that with the CMCD, the magic could return. The old hull returned which made the tank look funky again. And the gun is like the same, but without autoloader.

 

But I can't like it. I just can't. A T71 needs to look like the CMCD with the DA turret and needs an autoloader. The annoying thing is that it used to be in that state but WG likes to change winning teams to something stupid.

 

If you ask me, the T71 CMCD needs to be reverted back to the autoloader branch combining the DA turret with the CMCD hull to create the awesome T71. Then nerf everything in the Bulldog line and downtier it all, like that used to be too. Then the XM551 at tier 9 and the proper 551 Sheridan at tier 10.

 

 

CMCD is one of my favourite LT's - I guess we shall have to agree to disagree on that one:)

mortalsatsuma #11 Posted 07 September 2018 - 08:41 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 13286 battles
  • 1,644
  • Member since:
    06-13-2014
The M48 is the 'Fatton' not the M46. 

Simeon85 #12 Posted 07 September 2018 - 09:07 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 1097 battles
  • 3,323
  • Member since:
    04-19-2013
307 average damage in a tier 9 med, I am sure your team mates are having great 'fun' with that sort of 'contribution'. 

Long_Range_Sniper #13 Posted 07 September 2018 - 09:27 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 32993 battles
  • 9,044
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-04-2011

View Postmortalsatsuma, on 07 September 2018 - 07:41 AM, said:

The M48 is the 'Fatton' not the M46. 

 

View PostSimeon85, on 07 September 2018 - 08:07 AM, said:

307 average damage in a tier 9 med, I am sure your team mates are having great 'fun' with that sort of 'contribution'. 

 

This monstrosity has been seen a few times on the battlefield where it's known as the M46 PRATTON for obvious reasons.



Ph3lan #14 Posted 07 September 2018 - 11:02 AM

    Community Operations Lead WoT EU

  • WG Staff
  • 18581 battles
  • 662
  • [WG] WG
  • Member since:
    11-17-2010

View PostBR33K1_PAWAH, on 06 September 2018 - 08:02 PM, said:

 

 :B

 

Oh God, what have you done to my favorite stat padder in game :ohmy: In almost 20k games I have never seen an M46 use that abomination. I think I'll have to have a serious talk with some of our devs about this gun at some point :P 

seppc76 #15 Posted 07 September 2018 - 11:07 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 33758 battles
  • 4,917
  • [TRYIT] TRYIT
  • Member since:
    08-10-2013

View PostPh3lan, on 07 September 2018 - 11:02 AM, said:

 

Oh God, what have you done to my favorite stat padder in game :ohmy: In almost 20k games I have never seen an M46 use that abomination. I think I'll have to have a serious talk with some of our devs about this gun at some point :P 

 

You REALLY missed this Circon Highlight?

 



BR33K1_PAWAH #16 Posted 07 September 2018 - 11:11 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 3597 battles
  • 547
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    04-11-2018

View PostPh3lan, on 07 September 2018 - 01:02 PM, said:

 

Oh God, what have you done to my favorite stat padder in game :ohmy: In almost 20k games I have never seen an M46 use that abomination. I think I'll have to have a serious talk with some of our devs about this gun at some point :P 

 

But you missed the point. What's realy great about that cannon on M46 is that you have to install top turret before you can even use it.

 

Thats just gold game design, right there :trollface:



Ph3lan #17 Posted 07 September 2018 - 11:20 AM

    Community Operations Lead WoT EU

  • WG Staff
  • 18581 battles
  • 662
  • [WG] WG
  • Member since:
    11-17-2010

View PostBR33K1_PAWAH, on 07 September 2018 - 11:11 AM, said:

 

But you missed the point. What's realy great about that cannon on M46 is that you have to install top turret before you can even use it.

 

Thats just gold game design, right there :trollface:

 

Agreed, that is probably not the best thought out element of our research trees :D I know for a fact that it is something that our devs are aware of. There are other examples of this not too friendly research choices in the tech tree and some of our guys are looking into ways to make them friendlier. This is part of a larger design question though, so I definitely can't share any concrete details or timelines at this point. 

speedphlux #18 Posted 07 September 2018 - 11:21 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 44197 battles
  • 1,808
  • [TZAR] TZAR
  • Member since:
    01-28-2011
I tried it for one game in that config - didn't liked it. But that's all down to personal preferences I guess. I'm not much of a fan of derp guns. The tank performed well thou - did 2,8k dmg and over 3k assistance. Most of the assist was due to all the tracks I took out with the derp gun.

Whatever floats your boat I guess. If it makes you happy - go for it.

adameitas #19 Posted 07 September 2018 - 11:26 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 63888 battles
  • 860
  • Member since:
    07-29-2011
back to old days there was a clan where players liked to do 3x m46 platoons with derps. Lol what a days:)

Erwin_Von_Braun #20 Posted 07 September 2018 - 11:50 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 38623 battles
  • 5,069
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    01-25-2014

View Postmortalsatsuma, on 07 September 2018 - 07:41 AM, said:

The M48 is the 'Fatton' not the M46.

 

I think sir will find it was General Fatton that was the real Fatton :)
10:51 Added after 0 minutes

View PostSimeon85, on 07 September 2018 - 08:07 AM, said:

307 average damage in a tier 9 med, I am sure your team mates are having great 'fun' with that sort of 'contribution'.

 

Like I care what they think.
10:52 Added after 1 minute

View Postspeedphlux, on 07 September 2018 - 10:21 AM, said:

I tried it for one game in that config - didn't liked it. But that's all down to personal preferences I guess. I'm not much of a fan of derp guns. The tank performed well thou - did 2,8k dmg and over 3k assistance. Most of the assist was due to all the tracks I took out with the derp gun.

Whatever floats your boat I guess. If it makes you happy - go for it.

 

This^

See Tajj, it's not all about DPM

View PostSimeon85, on 07 September 2018 - 08:07 AM, said:

307 average damage in a tier 9 med, I am sure your team mates are having great 'fun' with that sort of 'contribution'.

 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users