Jump to content


Remove Conquer GC - replace with 2 options


  • Please log in to reply
31 replies to this topic

saxsan4 #1 Posted 16 June 2020 - 05:33 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25823 battles
  • 4,630
  • [-WR--] -WR--
  • Member since:
    11-08-2011

Hello,

 

I get sad when I see fake tanks in the game and I have two alternatives for this Conquer GC arty

 

First one is the FV433 Abbott 

 

Designed to replace the ww2 era tanks the sextons, 

 

234 were built and developed in the 1950s, this has a fully rotating turret and 105mm gun

6 man crew

top speed 47 kilometres per hour

armour 12-10 mm thick

 

Small, low caliber gun, rapid fire, low stun, basically more similar to the Bert arty

 

Spoiler

 

Or the

 

RO2001 

 

 

Developed in 1986 one was produced featuring 122mm gun 

 

a bit late but could easily fir into WOT as tier 10 arty, again Is a real tank over the fake Conq GC

 

5 crew 

 

55 kilometres per hour speed

 

traverse is 30 to left 30 to right

 

 

 

Spoiler

 

 

which one do you guys prefer or do you think WG should keep the fake tank conquer GC?

 

this is what the world of tanks wiki says about the conq gc

 

 

In-game description is false. The Conqueror Gun Carriage never existed, not even in blueprints. There were no plans to mount the BL 9.2 inch Mark II gun on a Conqueror chassis. Nor was there any plan to make a self-propelled version of the BL 9.2 inch siege howitzer at all, it being an outdated weapon that was built in 1916 and retired even from the coastal battery artillery role before the end of World War II on account of its ponderous size and nearly all of the ammunition having already been expended. The BL 9.2 inch Mark II howitzer also had a much higher muzzle velocity than the in-game version at 490m/s; the in-game 360m/s velocity is based on the even older BL 9.2 inch Mark I that was introduced in 1914 and retired in the 1920s.


Edited by saxsan4, 16 June 2020 - 05:36 AM.


Gruff_ #2 Posted 16 June 2020 - 06:27 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 26116 battles
  • 2,626
  • [W0WW] W0WW
  • Member since:
    09-22-2011

You can take away my tier 8 UK arty the FV207, it started off so well but haven't been able to pump dmg or stuns out recently hoping the tier 9 picks things up again.

 

Both of those tanks look good, it would be nice to have more mobile arty for other nations not jsut the French



Spurtung #3 Posted 16 June 2020 - 06:39 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 82405 battles
  • 8,453
  • [USSRX] USSRX
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

View Postsaxsan4, on 16 June 2020 - 04:33 AM, said:

Small, low caliber gun, rapid fire, low stun, basically more similar to the Bert arty

 

Newsflash: Bert is not similar to Bert itself.



Kartoshkaya #4 Posted 16 June 2020 - 08:45 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 30050 battles
  • 1,035
  • [S4BRE] S4BRE
  • Member since:
    01-01-2015

Why do you want to replace all tanks in the game ? It's an arcade game, with arcade game mechanics and arcade tanks. If you want real tanks with real game mechanics you should search for a solid tank simulator instead.

 

Don't get me wrong, i'm not against new tanks, but removing/replacing them makes no sense to me. (rebalancing is another thing however)


Edited by Kartoshkaya, 16 June 2020 - 08:47 AM.


saxsan4 #5 Posted 16 June 2020 - 10:02 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25823 battles
  • 4,630
  • [-WR--] -WR--
  • Member since:
    11-08-2011

View PostKartoshkaya, on 16 June 2020 - 07:45 AM, said:

Why do you want to replace all tanks in the game ? It's an arcade game, with arcade game mechanics and arcade tanks. If you want real tanks with real game mechanics you should search for a solid tank simulator instead.

 

Don't get me wrong, i'm not against new tanks, but removing/replacing them makes no sense to me. (rebalancing is another thing however)


It a fake tank when we have real tanks to put in - why do u want to pla

View Postiraqxlol, on 16 June 2020 - 07:53 AM, said:

I want to punch you so hard right now.


why

y fakes?



Frostilicus #6 Posted 16 June 2020 - 10:05 AM

    Colonel

  • Clan Diplomat
  • 24199 battles
  • 3,779
  • [-ZNO-] -ZNO-
  • Member since:
    07-12-2011

You know, posting suggestions for a tech tree that's already been developed is a lot more stupid than making suggestions for a tree that may come in the future....

 

tldr: cut the shitpoasting


Edited by Frostilicus, 16 June 2020 - 10:06 AM.


saxsan4 #7 Posted 16 June 2020 - 10:08 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25823 battles
  • 4,630
  • [-WR--] -WR--
  • Member since:
    11-08-2011

View PostFrostilicus, on 16 June 2020 - 09:05 AM, said:

You know, posting suggestions for a tech tree that's already been developed is a lot more stupid than making suggestions for a tree that may come in the future....

 

tldr: cut the shitpoasting


no, FV215b was tier 10 British heavy and replaced due to it being fake, I have been up all night readying about British tanks ready for my big thread of a complete redesign of the British tech tree, very good things planned, this is taster of whats to come, last time I do this HUGE interest. Fv4202 the same, wut aux e-100 the same, so there is ALREADY precedent 

 

 

what does 'tldr' mean? 

 

 


Edited by saxsan4, 16 June 2020 - 10:09 AM.


DaniulSims #8 Posted 16 June 2020 - 10:16 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 11477 battles
  • 1,085
  • [ELC3K] ELC3K
  • Member since:
    03-29-2014
The FV4202 was removed because it was one of the worst tier X mediums at the time, the FV215b was removed because it was not played at all, the WTF E100 was just broken, and the FV215 183 was removed because a 183mm glass cannon had no place in a line made out of slow, well armoured, high RoF TDs.


WG doesn't have a tendency to remove tanks due to historical inaccuracies, and no amount of threads will change that, especially not when they patented a tank to put it in the TT (E-50M).

saxsan4 #9 Posted 16 June 2020 - 10:20 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25823 battles
  • 4,630
  • [-WR--] -WR--
  • Member since:
    11-08-2011

View PostDaniulSims, on 16 June 2020 - 09:16 AM, said:

The FV4202 was removed because it was one of the worst tier X mediums at the time, the FV215b was removed because it was not played at all, the WTF E100 was just broken, and the FV215 183 was removed because a 183mm glass cannon had no place in a line made out of slow, well armoured, high RoF TDs.


WG doesn't have a tendency to remove tanks due to historical inaccuracies, and no amount of threads will change that, especially not when they patented a tank to put it in the TT (E-50M).


THe FV4202 was removed because it was very unhistorical and they found a replacement, the reason e50m hasnt been removed is because no replacement exists 

The reason fv215b was removed was because they didn't have any heavies at the time (they admitted this themselves) so they invented one, as shows, they have precedent to removing fake tanks when real alternatives show up. 

 

same reason T28 had its model changed to be more real, now no arty has been changed in a while so this would be the perfect way to fix many fake tanks in the game

 

 

 



24doom24 #10 Posted 16 June 2020 - 10:44 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 9571 battles
  • 1,948
  • [WW3] WW3
  • Member since:
    10-20-2012
Ah yes a lefh at tier 10. 

Richthoffen #11 Posted 16 June 2020 - 10:46 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 33054 battles
  • 2,868
  • [MS-] MS-
  • Member since:
    12-23-2011
you missed the thirth option.. just remove it, no need to replace

Geno1isme #12 Posted 16 June 2020 - 11:14 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 50004 battles
  • 11,395
  • [TRYIT] TRYIT
  • Member since:
    09-03-2013
Tier 10 arty with a sub-150mm caliber gun isn't going to work in any way, unless you massively change the HE mechanics. And replacing a tank for no real reason isn't very popular with the general WoT population, unless the replacement is massively better than the original.

Edited by Geno1isme, 16 June 2020 - 11:18 AM.


Gruff_ #13 Posted 16 June 2020 - 05:15 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 26116 battles
  • 2,626
  • [W0WW] W0WW
  • Member since:
    09-22-2011

View Postsaxsan4, on 16 June 2020 - 10:08 AM, said:

what does 'tldr' mean? 

 

 

Too long didn't read.



Balc0ra #14 Posted 16 June 2020 - 05:32 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 77836 battles
  • 23,619
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012
For the first one, he had a 105mm gun. Keep in mind that the only gun with less than 150mm that has stun. So I don't see how a 410 alpha gun, with sub 40 pen will make an impact on tier X when the enemy has a T92 smacking your Maus for 500, and yours hardly does 50 on a failed pen. The French 155mm with 48 pen can even do zero damage head-on vs the Maus if he hits wrong due to the low pen and low alpha on a failed pen. Thus the nullifier vs armor comes faster. It will be worse with a 105.

 

The 2nd one is from the late '80s. An era WOT doesn't dip their toes into. So that's already out.



NekoPuffer_PPP #15 Posted 16 June 2020 - 05:38 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 37087 battles
  • 5,434
  • [VRTC] VRTC
  • Member since:
    09-13-2013

View Postsaxsan4, on 16 June 2020 - 05:33 AM, said:

Small, low caliber gun, rapid fire, low stun, basically more similar to the Bert arty

 

Right.

 

Anyone who DOESN'T want that in tier 10, raise your hand.



splash_time #16 Posted 16 June 2020 - 06:26 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 17063 battles
  • 2,235
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    02-20-2018

I would say, remove CGC and all artys for more healthy gameplay without clicking from corners! :great:

Even the campaign would be easier and a more enjoyable to play, instead of rolling on pure RNG. 



Erwin_Von_Braun #17 Posted 16 June 2020 - 06:29 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 46661 battles
  • 7,519
  • Member since:
    01-25-2014

View Postsaxsan4, on 16 June 2020 - 04:33 AM, said:

Hello,

 

I get sad when I see fake tanks in the game and I have two alternatives for this Conquer GC arty

 

First one is the FV433 Abbott 

 

Designed to replace the ww2 era tanks the sextons, 

 

234 were built and developed in the 1950s, this has a fully rotating turret and 105mm gun

6 man crew

top speed 47 kilometres per hour

armour 12-10 mm thick

 

Small, low caliber gun, rapid fire, low stun, basically more similar to the Bert arty

 

Spoiler

 

Or the

 

RO2001 

 

 

Developed in 1986 one was produced featuring 122mm gun 

 

a bit late but could easily fir into WOT as tier 10 arty, again Is a real tank over the fake Conq GC

 

5 crew 

 

55 kilometres per hour speed

 

traverse is 30 to left 30 to right

 

 

 

Spoiler

 

 

which one do you guys prefer or do you think WG should keep the fake tank conquer GC?

 

this is what the world of tanks wiki says about the conq gc

 

 

In-game description is false. The Conqueror Gun Carriage never existed, not even in blueprints. There were no plans to mount the BL 9.2 inch Mark II gun on a Conqueror chassis. Nor was there any plan to make a self-propelled version of the BL 9.2 inch siege howitzer at all, it being an outdated weapon that was built in 1916 and retired even from the coastal battery artillery role before the end of World War II on account of its ponderous size and nearly all of the ammunition having already been expended. The BL 9.2 inch Mark II howitzer also had a much higher muzzle velocity than the in-game version at 490m/s; the in-game 360m/s velocity is based on the even older BL 9.2 inch Mark I that was introduced in 1914 and retired in the 1920s.


How about no?

 



saxsan4 #18 Posted 16 June 2020 - 06:51 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25823 battles
  • 4,630
  • [-WR--] -WR--
  • Member since:
    11-08-2011

View PostErwin_Von_Braun, on 16 June 2020 - 05:29 PM, said:


How about no?

 


so you want to play fake tanks?



WindSplitter1 #19 Posted 16 June 2020 - 06:58 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 21765 battles
  • 4,148
  • [WINDY] WINDY
  • Member since:
    02-07-2016

View PostKartoshkaya, on 16 June 2020 - 07:45 AM, said:

Why do you want to replace all tanks in the game ? It's an arcade game, with arcade game mechanics and arcade tanks. If you want real tanks with real game mechanics you should search for a solid tank simulator instead.

 

Don't get me wrong, i'm not against new tanks, but removing/replacing them makes no sense to me. (rebalancing is another thing however)

 

View Postiraqxlol, on 16 June 2020 - 07:53 AM, said:

I want to punch you so hard right now.

 

View PostFrostilicus, on 16 June 2020 - 09:05 AM, said:

You know, posting suggestions for a tech tree that's already been developed is a lot more stupid than making suggestions for a tree that may come in the future....

 

tldr: cut the shitpoasting

 

Did the OP warrant such vitriolic responses from your behalf? Or is it because the post is related to the "A" word?

Christ...

 

 

@Ontopic. CGC and the Black Dragon, especially the latter, could use being replaced. T92 doesn't fit the line. You move from a line that gets progressively better and generous, culminating in the best SPG of the game, M55, to then suffer the downgrading of a slow, long-loading gun, mounted on a platform that is utterly useless.

 

My suggestion would be to replace it with the M109 (1960). Gun caliber decreases but the vehicle would be a much better fit.

 

I have no knowledge of the British design.

 



Erwin_Von_Braun #20 Posted 16 June 2020 - 07:00 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 46661 battles
  • 7,519
  • Member since:
    01-25-2014

View Postsaxsan4, on 16 June 2020 - 05:51 PM, said:


so you want to play fake tanks?


I have some news for you buddy - pretty much anything you play here is 'fake' in some way or another.

 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users