Jump to content


VK 75.01 (K)

Tier 8 Premium Heavy German Gamescom 2019

  • Please log in to reply
124 replies to this topic

Ceeb #81 Posted 23 August 2019 - 01:20 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Beta Tester
  • 34503 battles
  • 6,643
  • [BEXF] BEXF
  • Member since:
    01-14-2011

View PostNoobySkooby, on 23 August 2019 - 12:12 PM, said:

Ok lots of too'ing and throwing arguments here, bit needless in a pixel game really, most know I am a sucker for premiums, I will say this, that maybe it is the player, not the tanks, (certainly true in my case) and I have plenty of the good tech tree tanks also, in fact all the German up to the Maus, unlocked the E 75 yesterday and aiming for that tier X monster looking thing.

 

 

it is all well and good saying this tank don't work, that tank don't work, a quick look on WoT's replays will show you (and make you green with envy) that the tanks actually do work.

 

Good players in bad tanks can make them look good, bad players in OP tanks can increase their WR.

 

Very bad players cant be good in anything.

 

Oh, isnt the E100 after the E75?  Prepare to be disapointed.



Innapropriate_Username #82 Posted 23 August 2019 - 01:36 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 12869 battles
  • 805
  • Member since:
    12-12-2015

View Posttajj7, on 23 August 2019 - 12:53 PM, said:

Other tanks do have holes in their mantlet, for example -

 

Posted Image

 

Serious?

 

That is a hole in gun-mantlet?

View Posttajj7, on 15 February 2019 - 03:28 PM, said:

I mean cos tiny holes in a gun mantlet (that loads of other tanks have btw that are a lot bigger) is so game breaking. :facepalm: Show me a replay of you hitting that hole in the gun mantlet of the Panzer VII 3 times in a row from 100m..... oh wait you won't, cos you simply can't reliably hit a few pictures.

 

E5 has A LOT BIGGER gun mantlet hole?

 

And what are LOADS OF OTHER TANKS that have same holes?

 

the Cent 1 is performing the SAME as the Tiger 2

This sums up the whole thing perfectly.

 

You are arguing SEMANTICS, dancing around long lost argument, trying to bait with pathetic insults, every single thing you write is a Lie or manipulation.

VK75 is garbage, it is only better than "Tiger2" level tanks.

UK tanks got buffed to Defender levels.

 

View PostLong_Range_Sniper, on 23 August 2019 - 01:14 PM, said:

I read, objective statistics taken from a third party source who obtain them directly from game performance.

 

General player statistics do not reflect the performance potential of a tank.

How "Good a Tank is" is not measured by how worst players in the game survive in it, but how much performance the Best players in game can extract from each tank.

 

 



jabster #83 Posted 23 August 2019 - 01:40 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 12813 battles
  • 26,645
  • [WSAT] WSAT
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View PostInnapropriate_Username, on 23 August 2019 - 12:36 PM, said:

 

Serious?

 

That is a hole in gun-mantlet?

 

E5 has A LOT BIGGER gun mantlet hole?

 

And what are LOADS OF OTHER TANKS that have same holes?

 

the Cent 1 is performing the SAME as the Tiger 2

This sums up the whole thing perfectly.

 

You are arguing SEMANTICS, dancing around long lost argument, trying to bait with pathetic insults, every single thing you write is a Lie or manipulation.

VK75 is garbage, it is only better than "Tiger2" level tanks.

UK tanks got buffed to Defender levels.

 

 

General player statistics do not reflect the performance potential of a tank.

How "Good a Tank is" is not measured by how worst players in the game survive in it, but how much performance the Best players in game can extract from each tank.

 

 


Balancing tanks around what a tiny portion of the playerbase can achieve in them wouldn’t seem very wise.



Innapropriate_Username #84 Posted 23 August 2019 - 01:41 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 12869 battles
  • 805
  • Member since:
    12-12-2015

View Postjabster, on 23 August 2019 - 01:40 PM, said:


Balancing tanks around what a tiny portion of the playerbase can achieve in them wouldn’t seem very wise.

 

No, nooo,

 

But you do not say that Tiger2 is as good as Centurion1 because of statistics.

 



jabster #85 Posted 23 August 2019 - 01:42 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 12813 battles
  • 26,645
  • [WSAT] WSAT
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View PostInnapropriate_Username, on 23 August 2019 - 12:41 PM, said:

 

No, nooo,

 

But you do not say that Tiger2 is as good as Centurion1 because of statistics.

 


The point you’re trying to make is?



Long_Range_Sniper #86 Posted 23 August 2019 - 01:43 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 39269 battles
  • 11,131
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    04-04-2011

View PostInnapropriate_Username, on 23 August 2019 - 12:36 PM, said:

General player statistics do not reflect the performance potential of a tank.

How "Good a Tank is" is not measured by how worst players in the game survive in it, but how much performance the Best players in game can extract from each tank.

 

:facepalm:

 

By that logic all tanks are balanced because every tank can be three marked, and even tanks like the IS-4 can get 58% winrates at tier X. 

12:45 Added after 2 minute

View PostInnapropriate_Username, on 23 August 2019 - 12:41 PM, said:

But you do not say that Tiger2 is as good as Centurion1 because of statistics.

 

"Good" - Subjective and highly personal

 

"Performs equally" - Objective and undeniable.

 

If the Tiger 2 performs almost equally across the playerbase to the Centurion 1 then they perform equally. Neither may be "good" in terms of player preferences, and if they reflect the skill of the player in terms of their performance they're balanced.


Edited by Long_Range_Sniper, 23 August 2019 - 01:49 PM.


Innapropriate_Username #87 Posted 23 August 2019 - 01:54 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 12869 battles
  • 805
  • Member since:
    12-12-2015

View PostLong_Range_Sniper, on 23 August 2019 - 01:43 PM, said:

 

:facepalm:

 

By that logic all tanks are balanced because everyone can three mark a tank, and even tanks like the IS-4 can get 58% winrates at tier X. 

12:45 Added after 2 minute

 

"Good" - Subjective and highly personal

 

"Performs equally" - Objective and undeniable.

 

If the Tiger 2 performs almost equally across the playerbase to the Centurion 1 then they perform equally. Neither may be "good" in terms of player preferences, and if they reflect the skill of the player in terms of their performance they're balanced.

 

You are missing the point.

Or do you really think that Tiger2 is as good tank as Centurion1 is?

 

Why are you dragging 3marking into this?

 

For some tanks it is not so clear, but if you want one example Tiger2/Panther2 vs Caern./Centurion is a PERFECT example.

 

They WERE balanced back in 9.17

Centurion got double turret armor, Caern got... from turret to magic "Side 250 bulge"

They all got mobility buffs, soft stats.

Tiger2/Panther2 are the SAME as in 9.17

 

Take Tiger2 as a heavy, let him fight Caern and if they both win/die 50:50 times in hands of similar players - than they are perfectly balanced.

 

If a tank has some special "Feature" (rear turret, etc) it is in separate category, and I am not saying every single tank must be absolutely balanced,

Only that Centurion is closer to Defender level of being "OP", while Tiger2 is on Tog2 Level - and statistics that show players performing similar in Tiger2 vs Centurion is proof you can not use that kind of data for major game balancing.



Long_Range_Sniper #88 Posted 23 August 2019 - 02:10 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 39269 battles
  • 11,131
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    04-04-2011

View PostInnapropriate_Username, on 23 August 2019 - 12:54 PM, said:

You are missing the point.

 

Nope. I pretty well understand that to be successful a games company would probably not be best designing their product for Daki.

 

View PostInnapropriate_Username, on 23 August 2019 - 12:54 PM, said:

Or do you really think that Tiger2 is as good tank as Centurion1 is?

 

Subjective judgement. If I like Centurion because it has a cool name would that be good enough? Show the performance stats across the playerbase and I'll tell you if the tank is designed well for the game.

 

"Good" is just personal choice.

 

View PostInnapropriate_Username, on 23 August 2019 - 12:54 PM, said:

Why are you dragging 3marking into this?

 

You did say tanks should only be designed around the best players. 

 

View PostInnapropriate_Username, on 23 August 2019 - 12:54 PM, said:

For some tanks it is not so clear, but if you want one example Tiger2/Panther2 vs Caern./Centurion is a PERFECT example.

 

They WERE balanced back in 9.17

Centurion got double turret armor, Caern got... from turret to magic "Side 250 bulge"

They all got mobility buffs, soft stats.

Tiger2/Panther2 are the SAME as in 9.17

 

Take Tiger2 as a heavy, let him fight Caern and if they both win/die 50:50 times in hands of similar players - than they are perfectly balanced.

 

If a tank has some special "Feature" (rear turret, etc) it is in separate category, and I am not saying every single tank must be absolutely balanced,

Only that Centurion is closer to Defender level of being "OP", while Tiger2 is on Tog2 Level - and statistics that show players performing similar in Tiger2 vs Centurion is proof you can not use that kind of data for major game balancing.

 

This is mostly irrelevant. They could could have been given pocket rocket launchers and radar.

 

It's how a tank performs against other tanks, the entire playerbase, the teams MM provides and map rotation that's relevant.

 

And that is reflected in the win curve statistics that you class as fantasy data.


Edited by Long_Range_Sniper, 23 August 2019 - 02:11 PM.


Innapropriate_Username #89 Posted 23 August 2019 - 02:28 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 12869 battles
  • 805
  • Member since:
    12-12-2015

View PostLong_Range_Sniper, on 23 August 2019 - 02:10 PM, said:

Nope. I pretty well understand that to be successful a games company would probably not be best designing their product for Daki.

 

Not for Daki,

Only that he is a benchmark how effective a tank can be.

 

View PostLong_Range_Sniper, on 23 August 2019 - 02:10 PM, said:

Subjective judgement. If I like Centurion because it has a cool name would that be good enough? Show the performance stats across the playerbase and I'll tell you if the tank is designed well for the game.

"Good" is just personal choice.

 

Daki in Centurion fights Daki in Panther2 - that will get you what tank is better than the other.

View PostLong_Range_Sniper, on 23 August 2019 - 02:10 PM, said:

You did say tanks should only be designed around the best players. 

 

Not around how best players grind on random players in random tanks.

Tank performance POTENTIAL is manifested only when best players play them.

 

View PostLong_Range_Sniper, on 23 August 2019 - 02:10 PM, said:

This is mostly irrelevant. They could could have been given pocket rocket launchers and radar.

It's how a tank performs against other tanks, the entire playerbase, the teams MM provides and map rotation that's relevant.

And that is reflected in the win curve statistics that you class as fantasy data.

 

If anybody can get your precious "win curves" from when game was in 9.17 or such, I would bet the curves did not deviate much.

 

Centurion1 and Panther2 are extremely similar tanks, or they ware in 9.17,

https://tanks.gg/v09...-i?t=panther-ii

 

Panther2 did get new gun, but even with that, Cent got not only mobility but just double the armor,

Same story with Caern/Tiger2...

 

That is not balance only because same number of players YOLO suicide rushes in them.

 

Same reason tanks like VK100 "overperforms" - how much do they overperform in hands of Daki ?

Daki in VK100 fighting Daki in Centurion5/1 - i bet Centurion5/1 would win most times.

And "General win stats" do not reflect that.

 

 

 

 

 



tajj7 #90 Posted 23 August 2019 - 02:29 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 29072 battles
  • 17,317
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

View PostInnapropriate_Username, on 23 August 2019 - 12:36 PM, said:

 

Serious?

 

That is a hole in gun-mantlet?

 

E5 has A LOT BIGGER gun mantlet hole?

 

And what are LOADS OF OTHER TANKS that have same holes?

 

the Cent 1 is performing the SAME as the Tiger 2

This sums up the whole thing perfectly.

 

You are arguing SEMANTICS, dancing around long lost argument, trying to bait with pathetic insults, every single thing you write is a Lie or manipulation.

VK75 is garbage, it is only better than "Tiger2" level tanks.

UK tanks got buffed to Defender levels.

 

 

General player statistics do not reflect the performance potential of a tank.

How "Good a Tank is" is not measured by how worst players in the game survive in it, but how much performance the Best players in game can extract from each tank.

 

 

 

Interestingly you keep quoting that quote, where btw I have already shown you tanks with holes in the gun mantlet, I mean the holes in the Cent 1 and Cent 7/1 where its just 235m of armour with nothing behind are WAY bigger than the holes in the Panzer VII mantlet,

 

But more importantly did I not say -

 

Block Quote

 Show me a replay of you hitting that hole in the gun mantlet of the Panzer VII 3 times in a row from 100m

 

Where is the replay?  

 

That quote is from February and in over 6 months you have not been able to find anything or produce a replay. 

 

So again where is the replay?

 

Whilst you rant and scream about insignificant pixel weakspots in tanks, that in reality make no impact on their performance, back in REALITY, shall we see how the poor Panzer VII is suffering?

 

Posted Image

 

:D

 

It's suffering so bad that it out performs the Super Conqueror at all skill levels :D

 

It's almost like tiny pixel weakspots in armour, whilst annoying , don't actually impact the tank's performance to any meaningful level. :rolleyes:

 

Block Quote

 

This sums up the whole thing perfectly.

 

You are arguing SEMANTICS, dancing around long lost argument, trying to bait with pathetic insults, every single thing you write is a Lie or manipulation.

 

 

Ironically this quote of your does sum the whole thing up perfectly.

 

I have shown you WT curves that show that the Cent 1 and Tiger 2 are performing similarly, exactly as I said.  That is not arguining 'semantics', that is arguing using objective third party statistics, AKA FACTS.

 

The only one who has 'lost the argument' is you.

 

You are also the one throwing around the insults - 

 

View PostInnapropriate_Username, on 23 August 2019 - 07:00 AM, said:

Only rubbish here is in your head,

 

go have a nice wash and come back with fresh brain.

 

anybody is so Hostile/xenophobic like you.

 

Are you part of some secret QuickyBaby cabal?

 

View PostInnapropriate_Username, on 23 August 2019 - 10:47 AM, said:

Can you get that in through your thick skull?

 

Only thing you have is your booger eating comments, cheap insults and adhomminem provocatins

 

What you have is a lot of played games, wasted time, no life and no brain.

 

 

And as I have shown you are consistently lying as well.

 

So yeh, that sums YOU up nicely. :D

 

Block Quote

 UK tanks got buffed to Defender levels.

 

Can you support this with any evidence? 

 

Because I can show that is rubbish and false -

 

Posted Image

 

Defender is the top green line, notice none of those British tier 8s come close. 

 

Block Quote

 

General player statistics do not reflect the performance potential of a tank.

How "Good a Tank is" is not measured by how worst players in the game survive in it, but how much performance the Best players in game can extract from each tank.

 

Again, I don't know how this needs to be explained to you again, but this is 100% utter rubbish. 

 

The WR curves ARE SKILL ADJUSTED FFS, you can see how well good players can do in the tank by looking at the graphs. 

 



XxKuzkina_MatxX #91 Posted 23 August 2019 - 02:34 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 53231 battles
  • 5,631
  • Member since:
    04-02-2016

I believe that's enough of this tangent and each side already said plenty of arguments. Now if you don't mind get back on topic and leave it at that. Thank you!



Ceeb #92 Posted 23 August 2019 - 02:38 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Beta Tester
  • 34503 battles
  • 6,643
  • [BEXF] BEXF
  • Member since:
    01-14-2011

View PostXxKuzkina_MatxX, on 23 August 2019 - 01:34 PM, said:

I believe that's enough of this tangent and each side already said plenty of arguments. Now if you don't mind get back on topic and leave it at that. Thank you!

 

One side is 100% correct and the other 100% proved wrong... But hell you have to be impressed with Tajj7,  just the speed and quickness he can pull supporting  stats. 

 

I know we have a German guy thats very pished that his tanks seem weak vs the Brits...  Only wish my cents were as good has he trying to prove.



Innapropriate_Username #93 Posted 23 August 2019 - 02:48 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 12869 battles
  • 805
  • Member since:
    12-12-2015

 

View Posttajj7, on 15 February 2019 - 03:28 PM, said:

I mean cos tiny holes in a gun mantlet (that loads of other tanks have btw that are a lot bigger) is so game breaking. :facepalm: Show me a replay of you hitting that hole in the gun mantlet of the Panzer VII 3 times in a row from 100m..... oh wait you won't, cos you simply can't reliably hit a few pictures.

 

View Posttajj7, on 23 August 2019 - 02:29 PM, said:

Interestingly you keep quoting that quote, where btw I have already shown you tanks with holes in the gun mantlet, I mean the holes in the Cent 1 and Cent 7/1 where its just 235m of armour with nothing behind are WAY bigger than the holes in the Panzer VII mantlet,

 

View Posttajj7, on 23 August 2019 - 02:29 PM, said:

        Centurion1 and 7/1 have holes in gun-mantlets, holes that are "WAY bigger" than holes in Pz7 mantlet.

 

                                   *Snap!   (for the cringe collection)

 

They are not bigger, but they are THICKER - and they are on the same general thickness as the Turret itself (235mm mantlet on 254mm turret)

That talk was about Tier10 tanks, with holes in gun-mantlets that are viable targets, are 200mm or LESS, on Turrets that have infinite thickness levels of "bounce".

 

Tnx! :playing:

 

You are Arguing SEMANTICS, dancing around long lost argument, twisting facts, trying to bait with pathetic insults Lies or manipulations, and This discussion is over!



tajj7 #94 Posted 23 August 2019 - 02:51 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 29072 battles
  • 17,317
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

View PostInnapropriate_Username, on 23 August 2019 - 01:48 PM, said:

 

 

 

View Posttajj7, on 23 August 2019 - 02:29 PM, said:

        Centurion1 and 7/1 have holes in gun-mantlets, holes that are "WAY bigger" than holes in Pz7 mantlet.

 

                                   *Snap!   (for the cringe collection)

 

They are not bigger, but they are THICKER - and they are on the same general thickness as the Turret itself (235mm mantlet on 254mm turret)

That talk was about Tier10 tanks, with holes in gun-mantlets that are viable targets, are 200mm or LESS, on Turrets that have infinite thickness levels of "bounce".

 

Tnx! :playing:

 

You are Arguing SEMANTICS, dancing around long lost argument, twisting facts, trying to bait with pathetic insults Lies or manipulations, and This discussion is over!

 

It was over as soon as I first replied to you, cos you know I am right.

 

But no replay then? Shocking. 

 

You do also know what semantics is yeh? Because I get the impression you don't, the Cent 7/1 has a bigger armour hole in it's mantlet, as in more size to actually hit than the Panzer VII does, hence 'bigger', it's an English word, an adjective that indicates something is larger in size, in this case area, then something else. 

 

Because you were wrong, you are now trying to claim that thickness matters, when we were discussing areas that could be reliably hit. :rolleyes:

 

You can punch straight through most British tanks turrets by shooting them around the gun, and you can do it more reliably than hitting those TINY pixel spots on the Panzer VII, hence BIGGER, because there is more chance of hitting them. 

 

200 to 235 is pretty irrelevant, as we are talking about tier 10 guns here with 250-260 penetration, so the only thing that matters is the chance to actually hit them.

 

Which is higher in the Centurion than the Panzer VII

 

Because, wait for it, those spots are BIGGER.

 

Get it now?

 

You were wrong and I was right. 

 

Also I am waiting for your thread on buffing the Super Conqueror, seeing as its performing worse than the so bad Panzer VII and it's poor little pixels, cos you are so fair and balanced yeh. :D


Edited by tajj7, 23 August 2019 - 02:57 PM.


Long_Range_Sniper #95 Posted 23 August 2019 - 03:11 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 39269 battles
  • 11,131
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    04-04-2011

View PostInnapropriate_Username, on 23 August 2019 - 01:28 PM, said:

Not for Daki,

Only that he is a benchmark how effective a tank can be.

 

Lewis Hamilton has the same impact on cars, and funnily enough cars for most people aren't designed for how he can make it work.

 

View PostInnapropriate_Username, on 23 August 2019 - 01:28 PM, said:

If anybody can get your precious "win curves" from when game was in 9.17 or such, I would bet the curves did not deviate much.

 

http://wot-news.com/stat/nstat/eu/en

 

Knock yourself out. Much better to use objective data, than whether you think a tank is "good" or not.



Innapropriate_Username #96 Posted 23 August 2019 - 03:33 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 12869 battles
  • 805
  • Member since:
    12-12-2015

View PostLong_Range_Sniper, on 23 August 2019 - 03:11 PM, said:

 

Lewis Hamilton has the same impact on cars, and funnily enough cars for most people aren't designed for how he can make it work.

 

Aaah you are right, Fiat and Ferrari are the same, because invalid grandma in city obeys speed limits.

...and

You know when designing a new car, (or a plane)... manufacturer takes worst possible drivers to test it in design stage, right?

All those test drivers / pilots, they are the worst, because that is the only way to design "A car for all!"

 

View Posttajj7, on 23 August 2019 - 02:51 PM, said:

 

It was over as soon as I first replied to you, cos you know I am right.

 

But no replay then? Shocking. 

 

You do also know what semantics is yeh? Because I get the impression you don't, the Cent 7/1 has a bigger armour hole in it's mantlet, as in more size to actually hit than the Panzer VII does, hence 'bigger', it's an English word, an adjective that indicates something is larger in size, in this case area, then something else. 

 

Because you were wrong, you are now trying to claim that thickness matters, when we were discussing areas that could be reliably hit. :rolleyes:

 

You can punch straight through most British tanks turrets by shooting them around the gun, and you can do it more reliably than hitting those TINY pixel spots on the Panzer VII, hence BIGGER, because there is more chance of hitting them. 

 

200 to 235 is pretty irrelevant, as we are talking about tier 10 guns here with 250-260 penetration, so the only thing that matters is the chance to actually hit them.

 

Which is higher in the Centurion than the Panzer VII

 

Because, wait for it, those spots are BIGGER.

 

Get it now?

 

You were wrong and I was right.

 

And you forgot some Tier2 tanks, they have bigger holes than whole mantlets...

 

Funny thing about all this gibberish you wrote, how low can you go...

Well if you dig all way down to china, you wont dig yourself out of this one lol

 

View Posttajj7, on 23 August 2019 - 12:53 PM, said:

Other tanks do have holes in their mantlet, for example -

 

Posted Image

 

Serious?

 

That is a hole in gun-mantlet?

View Posttajj7, on 15 February 2019 - 03:28 PM, said:

I mean cos tiny holes in a gun mantlet (that loads of other tanks have btw that are a lot bigger) is so game breaking. :facepalm: Show me a replay of you hitting that hole in the gun mantlet of the Panzer VII 3 times in a row from 100m..... oh wait you won't, cos you simply can't reliably hit a few pictures.

 

 


Edited by Innapropriate_Username, 23 August 2019 - 03:44 PM.


tajj7 #97 Posted 23 August 2019 - 03:44 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 29072 battles
  • 17,317
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

View PostInnapropriate_Username, on 23 August 2019 - 02:33 PM, said:

 

 

 

Ironic that all you have left is a whine about a hole in gun mantlet, desperate much?

 

Still waiting for that replay btw and that thread on the Super Conqueror :D



Innapropriate_Username #98 Posted 23 August 2019 - 03:46 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 12869 battles
  • 805
  • Member since:
    12-12-2015

View Posttajj7, on 23 August 2019 - 03:44 PM, said:

 

 

Wasting time on you is like trying to clog a toilet without using any paper...

 

But a casual driveby sure, just to remind anybody reading this thread of your credibility.



RamRaid90 #99 Posted 23 August 2019 - 03:47 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 26492 battles
  • 7,337
  • [DID0] DID0
  • Member since:
    12-14-2014

Whats hilarious here after skim reading this TL;DR fest, is that the guy arguing with Tajj and L_R_S claims that a tank should be balanced on how good players can perform in it.

 

Then tells players who are far better than him that they're wrong :popcorn::teethhappy:  :facepalm:


Edited by RamRaid90, 23 August 2019 - 03:48 PM.


tajj7 #100 Posted 23 August 2019 - 04:03 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 29072 battles
  • 17,317
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

View PostInnapropriate_Username, on 23 August 2019 - 02:46 PM, said:

 

Wasting time on you is like trying to clog a toilet without using any paper...

 

But a casual driveby sure, just to remind anybody reading this thread of your credibility.

 

So no replay then and no recognition the Panzer VII is out performing the Super Conq. 

 

I also must have missed your thread with the outrage when the Maus got an unhistorical armour buffs.......:D


Edited by tajj7, 23 August 2019 - 04:09 PM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users