Jump to content


Your worst win rate tanks


  • Please log in to reply
95 replies to this topic

_Kalbo_ #1 Posted 27 June 2019 - 05:58 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 44653 battles
  • 135
  • [BRT_6] BRT_6
  • Member since:
    11-24-2012

I have recently finished the grind for the UDES 15/16, having enjoyed playing through the tier 8 & 9 respectively.

 

I like the tier 10 but wow, just 5 wins from 26 games. I am not the best player but some tanks I just can’t play. This is now the poorest win rate tank I have (with an amount of games played) but I will progress on to 100 games and see if I can improve.

 

what are your tanks you just can’t win in?



Jauhesammutin #2 Posted 27 June 2019 - 06:59 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 23502 battles
  • 691
  • [KANKI] KANKI
  • Member since:
    11-05-2013

View Post_Kalbo_, on 27 June 2019 - 04:58 AM, said:

I have recently finished the grind for the UDES 15/16, having enjoyed playing through the tier 8 & 9 respectively.

 

I like the tier 10 but wow, just 5 wins from 26 games. I am not the best player but some tanks I just can’t play. This is now the poorest win rate tank I have (with an amount of games played) but I will progress on to 100 games and see if I can improve.

 

what are your tanks you just can’t win in?

 

That's still pretty low sample size. Even if you AFK'd you should get ~40% winrate. 

 

A recent tank which I couldn't win with was the Comet (54%). Horrible tank in my hands.


Edited by Jauhesammutin, 27 June 2019 - 07:15 AM.


Balc0ra #3 Posted 27 June 2019 - 07:07 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 70974 battles
  • 19,625
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

I mean, I have tanks with 3 games and zero wins. But if I put a battle limit on it higher then 26 and eliminate grinds from my early "newb" days and do later stuff only? Then def the KV-3. It's also the 1st tank I've ever used free xp to rage skip. As I had 35% on it. I only aced it on losses. Gun never wanted to work with me, and I skipped it.

 

IS-M. My most recent failure, that I refused to waste free XP on. That was more me than the tank and a curse. I just could not get it to work early on. At the worst I had a 30% WR after over 50 games. But I did manage to turn it around once I got used to it more, and got it to 46% when I elited it.

 

Panther M10. Tho most of these battles are pre buff, as I bought it when it was first removed. 42 battles, 42% WR. Not played many after the buffs. I did better in it, and it's a great tank now. But still can't win in it.

 

Then the odd one out. As it was under special circumstances. And I've not played it since that event. Cent AX. It did keep the old FV stats before it. That was around 20 battles and it had a 60% WR or something. Then the Cent AX came and ofc there was a marathon for the FV as a tier 8. But you needed to do a daily win in the AX every day for 10 days IIRC. The issue was that every one of those daily wins was more or less a 15 vs 15 Cent AX battle. And it took me 3-4 battles a day to get that daily win. Usually when I got a rare game with only 2-3 AX on the map. 62 games, 43% WR.

 

But 26 games is not much to go on. I've had plenty of tanks and early grinds with sub 40% WR like the T54E1 when I got close to 50 battles. But still did manage to get past 50% later or when I elited it. It's like the IS-M for me. At times you just gotta get used to it before it works.

 

 

 


Edited by Balc0ra, 27 June 2019 - 07:09 AM.


PowJay #4 Posted 27 June 2019 - 07:10 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 38949 battles
  • 5,091
  • Member since:
    09-07-2012

It's far easier to get lousy win rates in tier X vehicles as you are ALWAYS top tier or equal tier. You can never afford to sit back as bottom tier in support of more dangerous allies, and doing your own HP in damage is simply not enough. 

 

I've seen many terrible players with as low as 35% WR with tier X vehicles. I've seen players with respectable average damage who are struggling to get a positive WR in tier X.

 

My current worst offender is the Skorpion G. 10 games won from 43 battles, and I can neither blame lack of upgrades or the crew (3-4 skill all-female crew)

 

 



undutchable80 #5 Posted 27 June 2019 - 07:25 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 10833 battles
  • 3,319
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    10-30-2014

Conqueror: 31 games, 32.3% WR, 1,867 WN8. I struggle with T9 gameplay in general. All my T9 tanks have less than 50% WR except for the M46 Patton in which I am rocking a 60% WR for some reason. 

Caernarvon AX: 35 games, 37.1% WR, 2,232 WN8. This one surprises me since my regular Caernarvon has a 54,9% WR and 2,011 WN8 after 51 games. I blame crap teams. :hiding:

   

100+ games:

T-34-3: 163 games, 41,1% WR, 613 WN8. Not surprising since it was one of my first T8 premium tanks when I was still on T6 in the regular tech tree. Traded it in for the WZ-120-1G-FT. 



Cobra6 #6 Posted 27 June 2019 - 07:30 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16505 battles
  • 17,107
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

View Post_Kalbo_, on 27 June 2019 - 04:58 AM, said:

what are your tanks you just can’t win in?

 

Any tank that WG, due to their bad balancing, has made uncompetitive. Basically.

 

Cobra 6



Captain_Kremen0 #7 Posted 27 June 2019 - 07:43 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 38711 battles
  • 2,181
  • [TFMB] TFMB
  • Member since:
    06-04-2011

somewhere between "quite a few" and "more than I'd care to mention". I will mention the T34-100 as I have played a few games with it elited waiting to take the plunge on the TVP. Win Rate on this is 43% against my aberage of 49-52 (as avarage as it gets).

I don't dislike the tank. It is a capable tank in the right hands and I have had some really good games in for MT missions. But mostly it's a turd.A turd of curry night inconsistency.



Spartan_93 #8 Posted 27 June 2019 - 08:32 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 24461 battles
  • 811
  • [-IDC-] -IDC-
  • Member since:
    10-11-2012
Cromwell B: 16 battles and 5 victories (31,25%), but I think that is still more bad luck than my failure (dmg/b: 828; k/d: 1,73)

WhoCares01 #9 Posted 27 June 2019 - 08:39 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 17992 battles
  • 535
  • Member since:
    04-21-2015

StuG IV at 40% after 40 battles, closely followed by STRV 103-B at 41.41% after 198 battles. And that while I have a reasonable 50.70% on STRV103-0 after 286 battles...



spamhamstar #10 Posted 27 June 2019 - 08:40 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 64313 battles
  • 2,269
  • [LLAY] LLAY
  • Member since:
    12-02-2012
Heh heh, VK 30.02 (d) 193 battles with 37.82% win rate.  TBF I don't even remember playing that tank.

Kozzy #11 Posted 27 June 2019 - 08:44 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 41550 battles
  • 3,104
  • [RINSE] RINSE
  • Member since:
    06-29-2011
Since sample sizes don't seem to count for anything I think I can win this with my Tog II - 0% WR.  Where's my prize?

DuncaN_101 #12 Posted 27 June 2019 - 08:46 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 55236 battles
  • 2,869
  • [TEC] TEC
  • Member since:
    07-29-2011
30b... Dunno how bad but its bad...

Lagalaza #13 Posted 27 June 2019 - 08:50 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 7088 battles
  • 220
  • [D-ANG] D-ANG
  • Member since:
    08-11-2018

For me it would be way too many to list them all....

 

I'll set the bench at 50 battles and above and start with the Defender (:facepalm:)... I know, it's OP, noob friendly and deadly in the right hands. It's just that mine are not the right hands. You do not want me in your team in this tank. 36.7% WR, 765 average DMG and 456 WN8. I am better in it now. The problem was, I got it in a loot box when I was 1000 battles in to the game, having started playing in November 2018. Saw all the hype and thought it was going to be easy!! Tier 8 is not a place for a noob in a Defender.

 

JagdPanther... nearly 200 battles as I really like it but only 40.5% WR, 670 DMG and 655 WN8!! I'm ok (well average) in the JagdPanzer IV but can't get the JagdPanther to work.

 

There are more.......

 

 

 

 

 

 



iztok #14 Posted 27 June 2019 - 09:48 AM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 35215 battles
  • 2,642
  • Member since:
    10-28-2010

Hi!

I mostly struggle with high tiers. A perfect example would be my T-54. When I first played it some 6 years ago I had after 250 battles a whopping 40% WR. :amazed:

When "gold" ammo became available for credits, I gave it another try, and in additional 400 battles managed to "push" it up to nearly 49%. :sceptic:

 

With my SkorpG I gave high tiers another try, and after a long period of really weak performance managed to get it to 52% (1400 battles). I seriously devoted quite some time to learn what I've been doing wrong. At the end I deduced that high tiers aren't a stuff for me. The gameplay changes so much it's no more enjoyable to me. :(

 

BR,  Iztok


Edited by iztok, 27 June 2019 - 06:18 PM.


tajj7 #15 Posted 27 June 2019 - 09:52 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 27578 battles
  • 15,292
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

Super Conqueror for me, has the worst win rate of any tier 10 I have played over 100 battles in. 

 

And the tier 10 lights, pretty much all of them I struggle to win in. 



Kozzy #16 Posted 27 June 2019 - 09:59 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 41550 battles
  • 3,104
  • [RINSE] RINSE
  • Member since:
    06-29-2011

View Posttajj7, on 27 June 2019 - 08:52 AM, said:

Super Conqueror for me, has the worst win rate of any tier 10 I have played over 100 battles in. 

 

And the tier 10 lights, pretty much all of them I struggle to win in. 

 

Yeah, what is it with the OP Super Conq?  I have 46% in 80 battles.  I really don't seem to get on with it at all, seems quite a situational tank to me (but apparently not others).

Jauhesammutin #17 Posted 27 June 2019 - 10:03 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 23502 battles
  • 691
  • [KANKI] KANKI
  • Member since:
    11-05-2013

View PostKozzy, on 27 June 2019 - 08:59 AM, said:

 

Yeah, what is it with the OP Super Conq?  I have 46% in 80 battles.  I really don't seem to get on with it at all, seems quite a situational tank to me (but apparently not others).

 

I've played S.Conq and Conq both exactly 105 battles. 60% and 70% winrates. Tier 9 is just easier.

tajj7 #18 Posted 27 June 2019 - 10:08 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 27578 battles
  • 15,292
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

View PostKozzy, on 27 June 2019 - 08:59 AM, said:

 

Yeah, what is it with the OP Super Conq?  I have 46% in 80 battles.  I really don't seem to get on with it at all, seems quite a situational tank to me (but apparently not others).

 

It is IMO no way as strong as people make it out to be.

 

I'd agree its situational, it works hull down, with people willing to attack you hull down and with 1 or no arty. In the current meta that doesn't happen very often, most of the time there is 2-3 arty, often lots of the enemies camp unwilling to push, and if you find a good hull down spot you either have people who don't fight you or are facing other equally as strong hull down tanks you can't pen.

 

And as I noticed in ranked, against relentless premium spam, the turret doesn't hold up that will, the cupola is penned with HEAT, the mantlet gets penned, the turret cheek gets penned etc. Whereas good luck finding a way past a 430U turret, T95/FV4201 turret, 279e turret, etc. 

 

Outside of that you have a slow tank, with low alpha, and weak hull armour that tier 8s can usually pen from most angles. Compared to the all round Russian tanks that can pretty much do anything with their speed, strong turrets, alpha, lower profile, troll hull armour, I don't think it matches up very well. 

 

it's funny because it was a power creep tank itself but I think it has been power crept. 


Edited by tajj7, 27 June 2019 - 10:10 AM.


Lomion_EU #19 Posted 27 June 2019 - 10:12 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 38782 battles
  • 621
  • [CSW] CSW
  • Member since:
    08-30-2012

View PostKozzy, on 27 June 2019 - 08:59 AM, said:

 

Yeah, what is it with the OP Super Conq?  I have 46% in 80 battles.  I really don't seem to get on with it at all, seems quite a situational tank to me (but apparently not others).

 

Glad I'm not the only one that's struggling with the SConq, Nearly 200 games and wr at 44.67% with an excellent crew.  That's almost 10% below the average global w/r from Noobmeter and 8% lower than my own overall w/r.  It's only ever been played with a highly skilled crew.  Average damage is only just over 1800 per game.  Now pretty much run special ammo only (which as a tight arsed Scot is unusual) to at least boost the damage, if not the win rate.

Kozzy #20 Posted 27 June 2019 - 10:33 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 41550 battles
  • 3,104
  • [RINSE] RINSE
  • Member since:
    06-29-2011

View Posttajj7, on 27 June 2019 - 09:08 AM, said:

 

It is IMO no way as strong as people make it out to be.

 

I'd agree its situational, it works hull down, with people willing to attack you hull down and with 1 or no arty. In the current meta that doesn't happen very often, most of the time there is 2-3 arty, often lots of the enemies camp unwilling to push, and if you find a good hull down spot you either have people who don't fight you or are facing other equally as strong hull down tanks you can't pen.

 

And as I noticed in ranked, against relentless premium spam, the turret doesn't hold up that will, the cupola is penned with HEAT, the mantlet gets penned, the turret cheek gets penned etc. Whereas good luck finding a way past a 430U turret, T95/FV4201 turret, 279e turret, etc. 

 

Outside of that you have a slow tank, with low alpha, and weak hull armour that tier 8s can usually pen from most angles. Compared to the all round Russian tanks that can pretty much do anything with their speed, strong turrets, alpha, lower profile, troll hull armour, I don't think it matches up very well. 

 

it's funny because it was a power creep tank itself but I think it has been power crept. 

 

Summed up pretty nicely.  I find they aren't a terrifying opponent and have no problems just tapping 2 and shooting to the left or right of the mantlet for fairly easy pens.  The hull is weak and full of modules and crew just queuing up to be knocked out.  Would much rather see an S Conq on the enemy team than a 277 or 430u etc.

 

All this power creep cannot be maintained before a major revamp, surely?






2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users