|
WitchFetish posted:Btw, did you guys know that winrate is not an accurate way of calculating a player's skill, but hitrate is? At least that is better logic than some 47% that argued with me that he is a far more skilled player because after 50K battles played he has 23 tier ten vehicles or something so obviously he is more skilled.
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 18:26 |
|
|
# ? May 18, 2024 03:55 |
|
So I'm reading the internal Swedish evaluation of the British (BAOR) 1973 evaluation report on the S-tank, and it's a loving riot. The Swedish observers have a lot to say about the British army's poo poo. Archive documents are usually drier than Sahara, but this is genuinely entertaining reading. On gunnery skills: quote:The gunnery practice was finished by two tests with a gun camera, one against a fixed target and one against a moving one, as per usual Swedish standard. The results were bad. The first time the results may possibly be explained by the gunners not taking the trial seriously, but even after they had evaluated their own results and re-did the test the results were very bad. It is possible that more training could have improved the results somewhat, but the more likely explanation is that a large portion of the British gunners simply aren't suited for their job as gunners. In some cases, problems with bad eyesight were apparent. It should be noted that British tank personnel is not tested in the same way as Swedish personnel before being assigned as tank gunners. quote:Both the methods the tank crews used for engaging targets and their laying skills were unacceptable and clearly worse than that of the average Swedish crew. On command style and discipline: quote:Exercise of command was relatively tame and commanders rarely supervised anything. The subordinates were left with a lot of freedom to solve rather ill-defined problems on their own. When it came to looking after their equipment, the personnel was rather sloppy and nonchalant. quote:The readiness (in a broad sense of the word) at the BAOR appears to be rather low. quote:Radio traffic was very lively, but rarely contained orders. On observation and crew resource management: quote:The number of targets detected was on par with the performance of Swedish crews. However, the time to open fire was in most cases far longer than can reasonably be expected. In part, this is due to lack of training on the tank, but more importantly it's also due to the way the British crews work together. The tank commander always have to give orders about everything and the gunner is forbidden from opening fire on his own initiative when he spots a target, unlike in Swedish regulations for tank crews. Just like in the 1968 trials, it has been impossible to convince the Brits to try the Swedish method, which is also employed by the Germans for example. The reason cited by the Brits is that tanks carry so few rounds that the commander cannot risk the gunner opening fire on a non-essential target and that the gunners in general aren't all that good at neither judging the importance of a target nor at adjusting their fire. (...) This severely limited the advantages of the S-tank's duplicated controls. On tactics: quote:(in a discussion on delaying fights) The target marker equipment made this exercise an excellent and very illustrative example of how not to fight this type of action (in both Chieftain and the S-tank). quote:Coordination between infantry, artillery and tanks is nonexistent. On civilian relations: quote:Very little attention is paid to the fact that the unit is exercising on private property. Careless driving on public roads and the maneuver area isn't delimited. Damage to planted fields is frequent despite good opportunities to choose routes over fields where the harvest has already been taken in. Apparently the property damage costs for a similar exercise in the same area last year were on the order of 10 million SEK (about 62 million SEK today, ~6 million EUR). These damages are paid for by the German authorities. There's a lot more of this. Should I keep on translating? Maybe it's a better fit for the milhist thread in A/T.
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 18:32 |
|
LostCosmonaut posted:Challenger is ahistorically buffed, it doesn't explode after 73 seconds. I remember that day well...I was in high school. Yes, I am old. Stay the gently caress off my lawn. In WoT news- is everyone's noobmeter stuck from like 10 days ago or is it just me? My last update was on 21-March. How can I watch my stats creep slowly toward competence??
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 18:34 |
|
notwithoutmyanus posted:Use gold whenever feels right, all the time is an option of course. I'm not denying good ACPR on the 1390. Something is wrong if you can't make 170 pen work against anything other than tanks with >170mm sides, though. Those are when gold is a must. You have a genuine playstyle problem if you can't figure out how to aim for weak spots or position to shoot the side of tanks. Most other LTs I'll play with only 20% or less gold loadout, and I use it sparingly when it's absolutely necessary to pen or when I need to put my carry shoes on (unless it's a T71/Bulldog in which case gently caress HEAT except in very special circumstances). My wn8 in all my lights is about 2350, with about 2600 total battles. Does the 13 90 do fine without APCR? Sure, I played at least 200 battles without APCR and it was already statistically one of my best tanks. I just think APCR is worth the extra cost in the 13 90. 170->248 is a hell of an improvement. Uranium 235 fucked around with this message at 18:41 on Apr 1, 2015 |
# ? Apr 1, 2015 18:38 |
|
TheFluff posted:These damages are paid for by the German authorities. hahaha get owned Yes post more, these are great.
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 18:49 |
|
" New British tanks Chieftain and Centurion Action X will not come anytime soon, the modelling has not even started yet because of the delay with obtaining the data from the museums;" Nooooo
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 18:53 |
|
TheFluff posted:So I'm reading the internal Swedish evaluation of the British (BAOR) 1973 evaluation report on the S-tank, and it's a loving riot. The Swedish observers have a lot to say about the British army's poo poo. Archive documents are usually drier than Sahara, but this is genuinely entertaining reading. This is great, keep going. Can I post these on my blog like last time? As for dryness, criticism is always a good read, even in archives. I have a telegram where an officer instructs his subordinate to go talk to another officer and "swear at him with much profanity" on his behalf
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 18:55 |
|
Uranium 235 posted:Well, my wn8 average in the 13 90 is ~2700 and I have 270 battles with it, so I think my playstyle is just fine. I only recently switched to an all APCR loadout and in my opinion it makes a big difference in what you can do with the tank. Take that for what it's worth. I usually run half gold half regular. If I know the first thing I am going to see is little shits, I use silver rounds. When it comes to the higher tier more heavily armored tanks I load gold. If it is a mostly T9/T10 game I will just load gold. Also with the KT talk, I've being doing quite well in it. Surprisingly even. By the way people talk of it, I thought it was going to be the Garbage Carrier heavy tank. Granted, I don't have a ton of games in it. But still, check it out:
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 18:57 |
|
Ensign Expendable posted:This is great, keep going. Can I post these on my blog like last time? Go ahead! I'll probably post the entire report (mostly in Swedish, but anyway) on tanks.mod16.org sooner or later but feel free to crosspost whatever you like.
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 18:58 |
|
Whats this fun little picture from? Is it a mod or website? VV Thank you, I've been having troubles getting off without seeing my stats. BadLlama fucked around with this message at 19:09 on Apr 1, 2015 |
# ? Apr 1, 2015 19:02 |
|
BadLlama posted:Whats this fun little picture from? Is it a mod or website? Thanks to noobmeter dying like a piece of poo poo, I discovered this website: http://www.wotstats.org/ So wotlabs and this are now my way of knowing how giant my epeen is.
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 19:04 |
|
TheFluff posted:So I'm reading the internal Swedish evaluation of the British (BAOR) 1973 evaluation report on the S-tank, and it's a loving riot. The Swedish observers have a lot to say about the British army's poo poo. Archive documents are usually drier than Sahara, but this is genuinely entertaining reading. So what I am reading here is squaddies being squaddies. When the poo poo hasn't hit the fan they really just don't try too much. Plus the army in the 70's was very much like the rest of the country with the Rupert's being self absorbed better than you attitude and the squaddies treating it like they are owed a living. Things are much different now (on the hole much more professional even if they still don't give a poo poo if its not a war zone)
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 19:08 |
|
I like that site, I know my winrate has been going down over the past few weeks and its probably attributable to the fact I have been playing most lights and I apparently have an awful winrate in lights.
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 19:12 |
|
BadLlama posted:I like that site, I know my winrate has been going down over the past few weeks and its probably attributable to the fact I have been playing most lights and I apparently have an awful winrate in lights. My WN8 takes a beating every time I run my lights the past couple of weeks since I am trying to complete the 2nd LT-15, and spotting damage doesn't get figured in WN8. I usually end up saying gently caress it and shooting red tanks eventually, but I try to spot first.
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 19:24 |
|
WayAbvPar posted:My WN8 takes a beating every time I run my lights the past couple of weeks since I am trying to complete the 2nd LT-15, and spotting damage doesn't get figured in WN8. I usually end up saying gently caress it and shooting red tanks eventually, but I try to spot first. Arty is the reason my stats are lower than what they should be. Minus the M40/43 and 261. I gotta say, this website is pretty great. Average WN8 for each tank is a real nice feature. Edit: It is also nice to see what your weaknesses are, could be a good metric to determining what kind of tanks a player is most comfortable playing. Mesadoram fucked around with this message at 20:03 on Apr 1, 2015 |
# ? Apr 1, 2015 19:58 |
|
SPGs are my second highest (after heavies). Lights are definitely my worst, and mediums are disturbingly low. I need to L2P.
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 20:25 |
|
I don't know why but okay on this one: Fire nothing but APCR out of the 105mm
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 20:27 |
|
SPGs and lights kill me
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 20:31 |
|
Funny thing- SPGs are my 2nd highest WN8 but my lowest win rate. Can't carry in arty, but I can rack up some ridiculous WN8 scores when my team doesn't poo poo its pants in the first 2 minutes.
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 20:37 |
|
primelaw posted:SPGs and lights kill me To be fair, they are the hardest to carry in, and with out us carrying... WayAbvPar posted:Can't carry in arty Yup.
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 20:41 |
|
Light tanks are actually my highest win rate class... I hate playing TDs.
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 20:46 |
|
Byez is loving terribad at tonks, news at 11 over 8000ish battles. I need to drive my stats all red. Guess I better start cliffdiving every match.
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 20:50 |
|
Just start running a bot program. You'll get your red stats and you'll (slowly) progress without having to play the game!
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 20:52 |
|
Uranium 235 posted:I hate playing TDs. Some of my best memories of this game was in the 704. But nice work in light tanks, you are doing something quite right with them (TELL US YOUR SECRETS)! I should buy back my KV-13...
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 20:52 |
|
Okay, it's quite small sample size, but anyway:
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 20:54 |
|
Gervasius posted:Okay, it's quite small sample size, but anyway: I enjoyed that tank quite a bit. It has bullshitium armor. But ya, the bottom of the barrel bringing up our WN8's
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 21:01 |
|
Check my winrate on this tank:
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 21:19 |
|
^^ Basically proof that spotting for pubbies is pointless. I didn't like the Churchill VII much, every other brit heavy owns bones though.
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 21:19 |
|
I never looked at a breakdown of my WN8 per tank before...this is interesting. I always felt like my WR in my E-75 was lower than it felt like it should be... WN8 1452.74, WR 48.25%. I guess I just suck at carrying in it, but not in damage farming? I feel like it suffers horrifically from being in way too many tier 10 matches where its primary strength (armor) is trivial. I play primarily on USW, so maybe the smaller population drives me into my 10s? T110E5 looks similar- 1307.16 WN8, 46.67
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 21:21 |
|
You can still use the E75s armour effectively in tier 10, just gotta be careful with TDs, but so long as you can hide your lower while at the same time not sitting still and staring at 260+ pen guns you're in good shape.
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 21:26 |
|
srb posted:Check my winrate on this tank: That... that is just brutal. BadLlama posted:I didn't like the Churchill VII much, every other brit heavy owns bones though. I don't know what people do in the Conq, but it is seriously amazing. The gun just decimates tanks. It kind of caught me by surprise how high my WN8 is in it: After grinding the British Heavies super hard, it took a bit of time to get used to other countries accuracies and aim time again. British tanks spoil you.
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 21:32 |
|
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 21:34 |
|
If/when I ever get around to obtaining a copy of Vegas to edit my poo poo I'm going to set a montage of slow motion platoon turbocarries to this song I think.
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 21:34 |
|
Mesadoram posted:British tanks spoil you. I agree. I love the conq too my wn8 on it is one of my highest but my winrate on it is a lovely 52% and I don't know why. VV Yeah... my third most played heavy tank is the Vk 3601 back when I had bad pubbie mentality at launch, 205 battles with a solid 46% winrate in it. BadLlama fucked around with this message at 21:44 on Apr 1, 2015 |
# ? Apr 1, 2015 21:38 |
|
BadLlama posted:I agree. I love the conq too my wn8 on it is one of my highest but my winrate on it is a lovely 52% and I don't know why. Can't carry them all. Pubbies don't want to win, we must drag them to victory. Looking at some of these stats made me realize that I played like real poo poo with great tanks back in the day. T29 and E8 come to mind...
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 21:40 |
|
I assume the giant rainbow shower doesn't actually hurt/do anything, other than piss pubs off? If so, it is the best item ever.
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 21:51 |
|
Sperglord Firecock posted:I assume the giant rainbow shower doesn't actually hurt/do anything, other than piss pubs off? Courtesy of Reddit: https://gfycat.com/DeadlyMaleAmmonite http://www.reddit.com/r/WorldofTanks/comments/312urx/sending_a_lorraine_on_a_magical_journey_to_the/
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 21:52 |
|
Sperglord Firecock posted:I assume the giant rainbow shower doesn't actually hurt/do anything, other than piss pubs off? http://worldoftanks.eu/en/news/pc-browser/46/event-sky-traffic/ code:
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 22:00 |
|
Computer viking posted:Huh, on EU we got this one. this was believable till the end...making working models is pretty extensive for a prank. it'd make sense if they wanna retain players when armored warfare comes out.
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 23:37 |
|
|
# ? May 18, 2024 03:55 |
|
Until the start of WWII, the United States Army did not have the budget for improving its armoured forces, but the defeat of France in 1940 was a wakeup call for American generals. Debates raged on the topic of whether money should be spent on a medium tank that can fight enemy tanks or if cheaper field guns should be dealing with this problem. General Leslie McNair, the commander of the American land forces, proposed another idea. He envisioned a maneuverable tank destroyer designed to attack enemy tank formations from the flanks. When his work was done, the army did not even await the end of trials and ordered 1000 new TDs. The vehicle was adopted under the index M18 in early 1944 (the prototype was called T70). The vehicle immediately received an unofficial nickname, "Hellcat", due to the logo that the Buick company painted on its product: a huge panther with burning eyes gnawing on tank tracks. The motto on the logo was "Seek, Strike, Destroy". Hellcats in Europe The Hellcat's debut was during the Battle of Anzio, in the first half of 1944. 5 TDs were transferred to Italy. The vehicles reached their units in early May, and entered battle on May 23rd during the general Allied offensive. Naturally, a few vehicles could not impact the course of the battle, but they impressed their commanders with their speed. Their maneuverability kept them from being easy prey. However, the crews complained: there was little room inside the vehicle to work. There were also problems with ammunition storage. Nevertheless, the Hellcats showed themselves well. On September 18th, 1944, in Nancy, Lieutenant Edwin Leiper, a platoon commander in the 704th battalion, headed his unit on the march to Montcourt. Suddenly, he spotted a German tank in the mist. He ordered his platoon to take up positions and open fire. The Hellcats only needed five minutes to destroy all five German tanks. In return, the Americans lost one Hellcat. Later, another Hellcat platoon commander, Henty Hartman, knocked out 6 tanks, most of them Panthers. M18s played an important role in the Ardennes operation, also known as the Battle of the Bulge. One of the most critical points of the operation was the attempted capture of Allied fuel warehouses in Noville, without which the offensive would have stalled. A battalion of Hellcats was sent to counterattack a group of German tanks that was suddenly discovered. During this hurried march, the Hellcats demonstrated their maximum speed: 89 kph. The counterattack was a success: 24 German tanks, including several Tigers, were destroyed. The enemy lost nearly 500 soldiers and officers. This greatly upset the German plans. The Hellcats' "shoot and scoot" tactics showed themselves well. German Headache The Hellcat's 76 mm gun could penetrate only 88 mm at long ranges. This was more than enough for PzIV tanks, but not enough for new Tigers and Panthers. The Hellcats could not penetrate the front of these tanks at a range of just under a kilometer, and attempting to get closer was suicidal. On the other hand, the Hellcat could easily penetrate these tanks from the side or rear. Their large dimensions made aiming easy. The odds of destroying a Panther or Tiger completely were high due to the ammunition stored on the sides of the fighting compartment. The Hellcats' maneuverability showed itself yet again. American designers reasoned that high caliber German guns would be able to penetrate the armour of most Allied tanks anyway but the speedy Hellcat could return fire effectively, and had superior mobility. One American officer wrote: "The Hellcat is the most effective vehicle that I have ever seen in the fight against Germany." During WWII, M18 Hellcats were also shipped to China, supporting the fight against Japan. After the war, Hellcats were used by Yugoslavia, South Korea, and Venezuela. In some armies, Hellcats served until the end of the 2000s. As the saying goes, cats have nine lives, and the Hellcat definitely confirms that with its good design and characteristics.
|
# ? Apr 1, 2015 23:41 |