|
The T-44 is basically Jesus with a gun. And four men stuffed into his bottom.
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 00:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 18:44 |
|
|
LostCosmonaut posted:
 AND MY AXE!
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 00:29
|
|
|
The Southern Dandy posted:Where'd you scurry off to these days? The last applicant G took was, well, I won't post it. I'm still in g but I play like 2 games per week
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 00:31
|
|
|
BadLlama posted:So my friend just got the T-44 and is awful at it so I was going to go to vbaddict and show that the tank is good but holy gently caress literally everyone that drives the T-44 has to be an aborted fetus. It only feels like a good tank because it comes after the T-43. It is aggressively mediocre.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 00:42
|
|
|
WayAbvPar posted:It only feels like a good tank because it comes after the T-43. It is aggressively mediocre. I think years ago that was true but not any more. VV It's the most popular tier 8 medium just that it's usage stats are awful because everyone that plays it is apparently a dead child. BadLlama fucked around with this message at 00:54 on May 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 00:50
|
|
|
BadLlama posted:So my friend just got the T-44 and is awful at it so I was going to go to vbaddict and show that the tank is good but holy gently caress literally everyone that drives the T-44 has to be an aborted fetus. It's one of my best mediums despite being my second T8 ever - one of my best winrate tanks at higher tiers. It's much like the T-34-85 in that it's a really balanced and flexible medium. No idea why it's unpopular. e: he's not using the 122mm is he? TheFluff fucked around with this message at 00:54 on May 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 00:51
|
|
|
WayAbvPar posted:It only feels like a good tank because it comes after the T-43. It is aggressively mediocre. There's nowt wrong with t'T-43, our chuck.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 00:58
|
|
|
The T-44 has a really awful stock grind. You have the T-34-85's gun and a very underpowered engine, so you're too slow to flank and can't pen anything frontally for poo poo. It doesn't get good until you've got both the top gun and engine, which requires new tracks, turret, another (pretty awful) gun, and a mediocre mid-grind engine. Even topped out it's not fun to play, with an ammo rack that goes boom a lot, a gun that pens less than you expect, and turret armor that never seems to stop anything. One of the T-44's few virtues is that the T-54 is next in line, so you can look forward to a massive upgrade fairly soon after you unlock all the top modules.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 01:17
|
|
|
Terrorist Fistbump posted:Even topped out it's not fun to play, with an ammo rack that goes boom a lot, a gun that pens less than you expect, and turret armor that never seems to stop anything. Topped out it's a blast to play. Low pen on tiny, highly maneuverable tanks with great camo shouldn't be a major downside. Sometimes you get hosed by WG's years of lovely map design but not most the time anymore. Maybe I am different but I some how have done far better in my T-44 than I am currently doing in my T-54.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 01:26
|
|
|
DonkeyHotay posted:I'm still in g but I play like 2 games per week You're diamonds in my little book of good WoT friends.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 01:35
|
|
|
BadLlama posted:So my friend just got the T-44 and is awful at it so I was going to go to vbaddict and show that the tank is good but holy gently caress literally everyone that drives the T-44 has to be an aborted fetus. The problem is that a lot of players go through it to get to the T-54 which they want because it's a Really Good Tank and they don't take time to play it properly. The T-44 is very good at getting around the map, has good camouflage and view range and is a decent medium range sniper. It is NOT good at getting into head-on confrontations with heavy tanks at pretty much any range nor is it good at slugging it out with other tanks. The armor just isn't there and there are plenty of ways to take critical damage in it. The stock gun is bad, the D-10T which you can now only get from the IS (a heavy tank) is better and the LB-1 is quite good except for a lack of penetration which becomes painfully apparent when fighting same-tier heavies and pretty much any higher tier tank (which happens a lot on the U.S. servers because the player population is small and likes to play Tier X tanks). As someone else said it's kind of sluggish with the stock engine and tracks which makes flanking more painful. Once you get the tracks and the second engine it's decent and the third (optional) engine gives it excellent acceleration and reduces speed bleed while turning. It doesn't add anything to the top speed though. The progression is either tracks -> turret -> D-10T gun -> 1st engine -> LB-1 gun -> T-54 (and 2nd engine if you plan to keep playing it) OR throw a suspension upgrade on it and get the turret/gun first and then go back for the tracks and engine. I recommend the latter route because even with straight APCR the D5T-85BM just doesn't have the penetration or punch to cut it in a tier eight vehicle. I've owned one continuously since back in Beta and it's a solid performer and one of my favorite tanks, but it requires a degree of finesse that many people don't have or care to learn.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 01:40
|
|
|
Re: has WT gotten better since months ago chat; this beauty landed in the patch today. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zbtGV8vO_U Not my video, and you'll have to forgive this poor soul for playing in the worst game mode (Arcade) but whatever.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 02:14
|
|
|
Look, WGA finally killed a nazi clan http://na.wargaming.net/clans/1000016521/
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 02:24
|
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:Look, WGA finally killed a nazi clan http://na.wargaming.net/clans/1000016521/ Well, that is some of the most garbled mess of german I've ever seen. If they are already roleplaying as loving Nazis, then maybe they should atleast make an effort to get the language right.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 02:41
|
|
|
WebDO posted:Re: has WT gotten better since months ago chat; this beauty landed in the patch today. Has it?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 03:16
|
|
|
Tanks of 9.7 FCM 36 By the 1930s, the Renault FT 17 was completely obsolete. A request for tender was sent out for a new infantry support tank, which was won by the Forges et Chantiers de la Méditerranée company (FCM). The prototype began trials in April of 1935, and was accepted into production in 1936, after design improvements and increase in armour thickness from 30 to 40 mm. The vehicle was indexed FCM 36. This tank was truly innovative. It had thick shellproof angled armour, which provided excellent protection from AT guns of the time. The diesel engine provided it with great range on one tank of fuel. The completely welded hull was also a novelty at the time. The FCM 36 met all military requirements, but it had two drawbacks. It was heavy for tanks of its class (12.35 tons) and was very expensive. In total, only 100 tanks of this type were built. Renault R35/R40 This tank was developed in 1934 as an infantry support tank. It was not as innovative as the FCM 36, as it used a cast hull with riveted elements, with nearly vertical armour. On the other hand, more traditional assembly methods lowered the vehicle's cost. The R35 weighed 10.6 tons and used a short 37 mm gun as well as a rifle caliber machinegun. The maximum thickness of the armour was 44 mm. The crew consisted of two men. In 1938, the tank was equipped with a longer 37 mm gun and an improved suspension. The weight of the tank grew to 12.5 tons. This modification was indexed R40. 120 such tanks were made. The Renault R35 was France's most numerous light tank during WWII. 1500 vehicles of this type were built, over 550 of which were exported. The French army used these tanks in all theaters: Europe, Syria, Tunis, Algiers. SOMUA S35 This medium tank was meant for cavalry units. It was developed in 1935, and until 1940 was considered a very good tank, used only by domestic forces. The tank hull was cast, and assembled with rivets. The turret was also cast, and only fit one crewman. The armour was up to 40 mm thick, and its armament consisted of a 47 mm cannon and a 7.5 mm machinegun. The crew consisted of three men. About 500 units were made. During WWII, these tanks were used in France and Tunis. 300 S35s were captured and used by Germans, including action against the USSR. Some of these tanks were converted into tractors. In 1944, after France returned to Europe as an independent state, the army captured a number of SOMUA tanks back from the Germans. S40/SARL 42 In the spring of 1942, technical requirements for a modernization of the SOMUA S35 were composed. The hull and suspension were to be redesigned, but the first prototype of this series also received a turret upgrade. The S40 was supposed to begin production in July of 1940, but the war interfered. In 1942, on occupied territory, in deep secrecy, a group of engineers led by Maurice Lavirotte started working on a project to modernize the S40. The main idea was to improve the tank's characteristics with minimal changes the engine or suspension. A new turret was designed by the ARL company for this tank, so it would be indexed SARL 42. The new hull had sloped armour, a simplified shape, and a new turret ring. The ARL turret had a very low silhouette and was completely welded, which was odd for French tanks. Work on the SARL 42 ended in the fall of 1942, when Germany completely occupied France. Renault G1R Requirements for a new medium infantry support tank were formulated in the mid 1930s. After revisions to the requirements (60 mm of armour, a gun capable of knocking out enemy armour, etc), the project was undertaken by seven companies, including Renault. Their entry was named G1R. Initially, the designers planned an unmanned turret with an autoloader mechanism, one of the first ideas of its kind. Unfortunately, it was too difficult to produce at the time. The G1R consisted of a cast hull with sloped armour. The hemispherical turret was shifted towards the rear of the hull. It had a 47 mm gun, but an upgrade to a 75 mm gun was also in the works. One prototype was built, but work was not finished before the German invasion in 1940. AMX 30 1st prototype After a long hiatus from tank design caused by the war, France restored its school of design relatively quickly. In 1956, a joint Franco-German program was launched to develop a new battle tank. The French doctrine was, at first glance, contestable. Their designers sacrificed thick armour for mobility and a small size. In reality, HEAT shells became so advanced that thick armour was no longer impressive, but a small and fast tank would be hard to hit for the enemy. The first prototype of this vehicle, indexed AMX 30, was built in 1961. This was the lightest NATO tank of the first generation. It could accelerate to a speed of 65 kph on a highway and had a 105 mm gun. After trials and improvements that lasted until 1965, the AMX 30 was approved for use by the French army. AMX 30B This modification of the vehicle was developed in 1966 and entered production in 1967. The hull was composed of welded cast and rolled elements, the turret was completely cast. The new tank had a commander's cupola with a panoramic sight and a multi-fuel diesel engine. The 105 mm gun could be controlled by either the gunner or the commander. The barrel was equipped with a thermal casing to improve precision. The tank had an additional 20 mm autocannon or 12.7 mm machinegun, as well as a 7.62 mm machinegun, controlled remotely. The French still placed their bet on mobility. The mass of the AMX 30B increased from 30 tons to 36, but the speed did not decrease due to an improved engine. The AMX 30 and its modifications served in the French army until 1997.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 03:21
|
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:Look, WGA finally killed a nazi clan http://na.wargaming.net/clans/1000016521/  Never actually seen this before. This might just be the best way to end a night of tanks.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 03:24
|
|
|
Valle posted:
And my bow!  Wait, are those "buffs" just them switching the front transmission to the rear, stopping fires when shot in the front? That'd make sense. Welp while I was typing this the patchnotes got posted: quote:VK 30.02 (d) I probably should rebuy that tank. BadLlama posted:So my friend just got the T-44 and is awful at it so I was going to go to vbaddict and show that the tank is good but holy gently caress literally everyone that drives the T-44 has to be an aborted fetus.  For more than half of that, I had more average damage in the T-43 than the T-44. It's possible I just got a ton of wins where I couldn't actually damage anything, hence the incredibly high winrate paired with the incredibly poor average damage. Or maybe I'm just the bad. e: it isn't like the T30 was bad beforehand T30 - Suspension T80E3A: Shot dispersion factor 0.24 / 0.24 ( 0.26 / 0.26 ) - Suspension T84E38: Shot dispersion factor 0.22 / 0.22 ( 0.24 / 0.24 ) - Turret T30D1: Gun 155 mm AT Gun T7 accuracy 0.37 ( 0.39 ) Hellsau fucked around with this message at 05:03 on May 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 04:58
|
|
|
Uranium 235 posted:I think that might be expected damage, not experience. I have a slightly different mod that shows expected damage and WN8 in real time. What is this mod? Also: What's the news site that replaced FTR? I'd like to look at the patch notes and leaks and stuff.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 05:53
|
|
|
The 50 100 is loving retarded jesus gently caress why did I not get this sooner.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 06:00
|
|
|
Hellsau posted:e: it isn't like the T30 was bad beforehand Buffing the T30 is pretty crazy. It is already a great tank. I need to rebuy that one, cause it was great fun. Also, they are buffing the Churchill Gun Carrier so now it might be worth playing. I couldn't write that without laughing
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 06:13
|
|
|
Atomizer posted:The Birch Gun is similar to the SU-26 in that they both have turrets but are tragically made useless by undersized guns. RanKizama posted:The M3 Lee is a solid Tier IV tank but suffers from a high learning curve that newer players have trouble adjusting to early on in the game. Hence its terrible reputation. New low-tier players see "Medium Tank" and expect to have a Tier IV Sherman. The M3 Lee is very unforgiving for improper deployment but rewarding when played conservatively. Most experienced players tend to look at the Lee with a higher regard once they've learned the mechanics of the game and come back to it to grind the M4 Sherman or T1 Heavy. Content: the S35 is cool and I think I like it.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 06:13
|
|
|
I don't see any notes about how they buff the Church GC. Do they give it more than a, what was it, 5 degree firing arc?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 06:35
|
|
|
Cardiac posted:Buffing the T30 is pretty crazy. It is already a great tank. I need to rebuy that one, cause it was great fun. Any advice for making the leadup to the T30 less awful? Everything I hear is that the T25/2 and T28P are both aggressively terrible
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 07:03
|
|
|
Magres posted:Any advice for making the leadup to the T30 less awful? Everything I hear is that the T25/2 and T28P are both aggressively terrible The T25/2 is the best tier 7 medium, even better than the Comet since it has a useful mantlet and great gold pen. The T28P can be free XPed through.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 07:06
|
|
|
There's a month long mission where if you get 500 kills you get a free Tog. That's a bit over 16 kills a day. Will any goons go for it?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 07:10
|
|
|
RandomPauI posted:There's a month long mission where if you get 500 kills you get a free Tog. That's a bit over 16 kills a day. Will any goons go for it? Can you complete it with tier 5 limited mm tanks?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 07:15
|
|
|
Is there any word on when the Rudy etc will be available?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 07:19
|
|
|
RandomPauI posted:There's a month long mission where if you get 500 kills you get a free Tog. That's a bit over 16 kills a day. Will any goons go for it? That's like 5 games a day if you play the right tanks. I already have a TOG, so I'll welcome 3500 free gold.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 07:34
|
|
|
BadLlama posted:Can you complete it with tier 5 limited mm tanks? Yes, it's tier 4 and up.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 07:36
|
|
|
RandomPauI posted:Yes, it's tier 4 and up. Excelsior with 100% gold then.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 07:40
|
|
|
Why the gently caress did this thread blow up again in only like 2 days?!? Oh I see, Panfilo.  I like how in that Sela video, one of the furfags is impressed at his winrate and he goes, "Oh is that good?"  Oh Sela.  If he only has one arm then why doesn't he just play arty?!?  Also you made fun of an elderly amputee war vet.  Dude's gotta be pushing 70.  Rorac posted:How it works is that at 100% skill, your crew is performing at what the tank's listed stats claim. At 0% skill (IE, knocked out) they perform at 50% of the tank's listed values. Each 1% increase in crew skill is worth roughly .5% to the functional skill. A 121% crew (100% + BIA and vents, with the 11% from the commander) actually performs at about 110% in real terms. It's not *exactly* that due to how the math works, but it's close enough. With all that and consumables, somewhere around 115-116% in real performance. Basically, effective skill is the average of crew skill and 100%. So a 100% crewmember functions at nominal level, 50% is effectively 75%, and 110% is 105%. Chaosprime posted:I can get view cap in both my 13 90 and my WZ-132 using coated optics. Should I use Coated Optics over Binos? Extra view range (in this case from binocs) would help you negate camo. However, as Slim already mentioned, you need to be stationary for binocs and the camo net to work. Optics are good for very mobile tanks like the lights you mentioned. Agrajag posted:Holy poo poo someone in your clan is paying 800 dollars for an account? What is he looking for in an account? For 800 dollars I'm willing to sell my account right away. They'll pay that much for a Type 59. Blindeye posted:So, a bit of advice needed. Seeing as I oddly can tear poo poo up in my Lee and plan to get both the T-1 and M4 (because why not?), I'm in need of advice about my other tanks... The T-50 is mediocre considering it's a worse version of the T-80 but with scout MM. It's playable, but not great anymore after the scout rebalance. The T-28 as others mentioned is a fast sniper. You shouldn't be close enough to be spotted and shot at so your camo and armor (or lack thereof) are meaningless. Missing Name posted:bwahahaha Unfortunately, Wargaming's definition of "permanent" does not coincide with that of the rest of the world. The Commander will be unbanned when he fixes the clan content. frood posted:What is this mod? http://ritastatusreport.blogspot.nl/ KurdtLives posted:I enjoy the rapid fire of the Birch tho. Rapid fire is one thing. Rapid fire for little to no damage is another. 
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 08:57
|
|
|
Wait people seriously pay that much money for Types? Holy poo poo how do I cash out
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 09:17
|
|
|
Bit of an odd question, but is there a general rule on how long it takes for a new premium tank to appear on the in-game shop for gold? I am planning to buy the T-54 Prototype, but it occurs to me that for the same money I could grab the 13 57 and combine that with gold I already have, and the gold from this month-long mission, and then buy the Prototype for gold. If it's going to appear on the in-game shop within a reasonable period, and assuming a price equivalent to other tier VIII premiums.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 09:48
|
|
|
Magres posted:Any advice for making the leadup to the T30 less awful? Everything I hear is that the T25/2 and T28P are both aggressively terrible As Chillsau said, the T25/2 is actually pretty good. It lacks the top gun that the T25AT gets, but stick some gold shells in there and you shouldn't have any issues. And the mantlet is ridiculous, and will bounce a lot of poo poo you never thought it would. T28 Proto is...not horrible I guess. It gets a decent gun, and more or less a turret, but its speed makes you want to stab yourself. Best suffered through in a platoon, so you can share the misery. In other news, I just checked out Ranzar for the first time in several months. I was not disappointed: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRPbttT4SI8 It's really good to see that pubbies are the same everywhere!
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 09:49
|
|
|
Gapey Joe Stalin posted:Bit of an odd question, but is there a general rule on how long it takes for a new premium tank to appear on the in-game shop for gold? I am planning to buy the T-54 Prototype, but it occurs to me that for the same money I could grab the 13 57 and combine that with gold I already have, and the gold from this month-long mission, and then buy the Prototype for gold. If it's going to appear on the in-game shop within a reasonable period, and assuming a price equivalent to other tier VIII premiums. Speaking of which, is the 13-57 any good at all? I do like rapid fire BAPBABAP guns...
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 09:53
|
|
|
Gapey Joe Stalin posted:Bit of an odd question, but is there a general rule on how long it takes for a new premium tank to appear on the in-game shop for gold? I am planning to buy the T-54 Prototype, but it occurs to me that for the same money I could grab the 13 57 and combine that with gold I already have, and the gold from this month-long mission, and then buy the Prototype for gold. If it's going to appear on the in-game shop within a reasonable period, and assuming a price equivalent to other tier VIII premiums. Generally tanks that are debuted in the cash store are added to the in-game gold store in the *following* patch. So figure on 9.9.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 09:59
|
|
|
Gapey Joe Stalin posted:Bit of an odd question, but is there a general rule on how long it takes for a new premium tank to appear on the in-game shop for gold? I am planning to buy the T-54 Prototype, but it occurs to me that for the same money I could grab the 13 57 and combine that with gold I already have, and the gold from this month-long mission, and then buy the Prototype for gold. If it's going to appear on the in-game shop within a reasonable period, and assuming a price equivalent to other tier VIII premiums. When the 112 and T-34-3 were released they kept them out of the in game store to  prevent another Type 59 situation, which was complete bullshit with how hard they nerfed them after the test version. They even said this was a special case and they'd not make a habit of it.Since then, to no one's surprise, every single premium has been available for real money for a full patch before it's available for funny money. I'm a bit tempted on the T-54 proto but I'd be more tempted if it had preferential MM. The thought of a medium with a poor gun that relies on armour without preferential MM makes me apprehensive, though at least it's not just a lesser version of a regular tank like the Panther 8.8 or the STA-2. Hellsau posted:Speaking of which, is the 13-57 any good at all? I do like rapid fire BAPBABAP guns... The 13 57 is fun but it really shouldn't be seeing t10s, and it really shouldn't have a terrible WG advertisement on it. The gun is surprisingly decent but I lost my second game in it because I ran out of ammo. That was mostly my fault for firing at long range too quickly; I'm considering just running all APCR (currently a 1:2 AP:APCR ratio) in it, though the AP is quite adequate most of the time, just because you do run low on ammo often enough. I'd rather just play my 131, but the 13 57 at least sits above the 13 75 and the awful panther. Desuwa fucked around with this message at 11:07 on May 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 10:49
|
|
|
RandomPauI posted:I don't see any notes about how they buff the Church GC. Do they give it more than a, what was it, 5 degree firing arc? Better traverse. The POS still have worse camo than the AT-8, worse armour and slow as poo poo. The only sensible way to buff the CGC would be to keep the stats and drop it down to tier 5.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 10:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 18:44 |
|
|
Desuwa posted:The 13 57 is fun but it really shouldn't be seeing t10s, It has the same matchmaking as the Bulldog? Hahahah gently caress that. Also I can't bring myself to play tanks where I'm liable to run out of ammo before killing every enemy. Those losses are just too depressing.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 11:03
|
|