|
Feindfeuer posted:and I doubt he doesn't know that the german armored vehicle with he most impressive Kill/Loss ratio almost exclusivy fought from ambush, cause that's what the StuG III did best. I think you mean the armored vehicle responsible for destroying the largest number of enemy vehicles; the Tiger certainly had a more impressive ratio than the StuG even after dispelling decades worth of myth and propaganda. This should hardly be surprising since the StuG was a mediocre stop-gap vehicle, a fact was emphasized whenever it did not fight from ambush, which was common during the second half of the war. For example, it was the sole armored vehicle available to the Germans during their counter-attacks around Aachen and was very ineffective in that role, taking severe losses trying to advance against Shermans and M10s. In a nutshell, StuG is cool acronym, but not an excellent tactical weapon; the Tiger is overhyped, but in no imaginable way worse than the StuG at tactical fighting.
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 13:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 11:34 |
|
|
philosoraptor posted:I think you mean the armored vehicle responsible for destroying the largest number of enemy vehicles; the Tiger certainly had a more impressive ratio than the StuG even after dispelling decades worth of myth and propaganda. This should hardly be surprising since the StuG was a mediocre stop-gap vehicle, a fact was emphasized whenever it did not fight from ambush, which was common during the second half of the war. For example, it was the sole armored vehicle available to the Germans during their counter-attacks around Aachen and was very ineffective in that role, taking severe losses trying to advance against Shermans and M10s. In a nutshell, StuG is cool acronym, but not an excellent tactical weapon; the Tiger is overhyped, but in no imaginable way worse than the StuG at tactical fighting. I feel like I have read this word for word somewhere else already.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 15:30
|
|
|
FaustianQ posted:P-38G has to be, what, the third best twin engine fighter? F7F and Ki-96 being #1 and #2 respectively? Besides twin engines usually being pretty bad, I really want the P-38J and L, be really good companions for the P-51Ds. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=grmw3lXiwgo
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 15:52
|
|
|
The F-82 is now kind of capable of loving with the enemy but totally dumb. Handles weird, locks up hard, view is awful if rolling at all. Climbs pretty well now and goes fast. But that first time you unleash 14 M3Ps against a 190 from over a km out it is kinda cool.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 16:09
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:The F-82 is now kind of capable of loving with the enemy but totally dumb. Handles weird, locks up hard, view is awful if rolling at all. Climbs pretty well now and goes fast. It used to be a real dog, but now is at least useful in arcade where it's one of the better heavy fighters considering it has no problem charging straight up to bomber altitude carrying 14 M3s 
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 16:11
|
|
|
Xerxes17 posted:I feel like I have read this word for word somewhere else already. Well I didn't copy it if that is what you mean, but it's not surprising that some people focus on demythologizing a "special" tank like the Tiger and overcompensate by elevating the workmanlike into the excellent. It's actually an interesting reaction because instead of looking for the boring truth it just re-polarizes the issue by putting the "invisible, toiling laborer" in the top position vacated by the "undeserving elite."
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 16:27
|
|
|
I just got my first talisman! Yay! gently caress you game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 16:49
|
|
|
http://warthunder.com/en/devblog/current/803 British tank preview yay Apparently arriving this year sometime?
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 17:14
|
|
|
Oh god I hope soon. Interesting, the Centurion is going to be tier IV; facing panthers and T-44s. That suggests they're going later for their tier V tanks...
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 17:35
|
|
|
FaustianQ posted:I just got my first talisman! Yay! Least you don't get back up vehicles three times in a row.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 17:35
|
|
|
spectralent posted:Oh god I hope soon. Centurion Mk5, Mk5/2, Mk7, Mk7/2, Mk10, Mk10/2. Lots of post war Centurion iterations to make use of. Chieftain would be a better cap to the heavy line, could do Mk1, Mk2 and Mk3.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 17:43
|
|
|
FaustianQ posted:Centurion Mk5, Mk5/2, Mk7, Mk7/2, Mk10, Mk10/2. Lots of post war Centurion iterations to make use of. Chieftain would be a better cap to the heavy line, could do Mk1, Mk2 and Mk3. Chieftain was confirmed as likely months ago, this confirms it. Guess Mk10 Centurion will be only one at Tier 5 in the MBT/Cruiser line, rest of the Tier 5 in that line will be the early Chieftains. Given this, Brit line will definitely be top dog - until they introduce the T64 that is.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 18:09
|
|
|
ukle posted:Chieftain was confirmed as likely months ago, this confirms it. Guess Mk10 Centurion will be only one at Tier 5 in the MBT/Cruiser line, rest of the Tier 5 in that line will be the early Chieftains. Given this, Brit line will definitely be top dog - until they introduce the T64 that is. If they've got the T-10 and M103, they'll have the Conqueror too.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 18:16
|
|
|
Thief posted:Twin engine fighters require a sort of patience/discipline to play well though the Japanese ones kind of let you do whatever at high speeds and Tigercats can just run away forever and bounce back because wtf. They aren't exactly fun to play if you like to improvise which is something a plane more like the Hien rules at. I think this is probably why my wingman who loves the P47 and stuff loves the P38 so and I don't do so well in it (I am not the most patient pilot). I imagine it'd fly well paired with an F6F or Kingcobra, though. Something to keep the enemy busy so the P38 can pounce on them. Might try flying that with his 38 in the future.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 18:18
|
|
|
Madurai posted:If they've got the T-10 and M103, they'll have the Conqueror too. As I said that's just the MBT / cruiser line. Heavies will be the Conqueror while TD's for Tier 5 will probably be that weird abomination that was built and used that had a 180mm Naval gun on top of a Centurion chassis - seriously gently caress knows what they were thinking when the built that one as if a normal tank cannon is not enough firepower. AA could be anything, from Chieftain or Centurion dual AA gun platforms to the weird as hell no armour 100mm Sabot AA firing at 3 rounds a second thing they also built. Britain really did go completely nuts with designs at the end of the war / post war and some were actually fielded, although not the 100mm AA gun - seriously what planes are you trying to shoot down that needs 100mm Sabot rounds! Here is the nuts AA gun for the curious - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Mace ukle fucked around with this message at 18:28 on Jul 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 18:22
|
|
|
Calling it now, the Comet is going to be a BR5.7 mini Leopard I. Good penetration against even Tiger IIs in the right places, (especially if they don't model any of the inaccuracy of the APDS), yet with the Centurion sitting at the IV slot as stated, or the 6.7-7.0 space, this thing is going to rule at that lower bracket.
Mazz fucked around with this message at 18:35 on Jul 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 18:28
|
|
|
I still want to know if they will include the concrete bunker on a truck chassis or the 1939 mg tank* with armour proof against pretty much everything until 1941/1942. *Matilda?
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 18:35
|
|
|
Mazz posted:Calling it now, the Comet is going to be a BR5.7 mini Leopard I. Good penetration against even Tiger IIs in the right places, (especially if they don't model any of the inaccuracy of the APDS), yet with the Centurion sitting at the IV slot as stated, or the 6.7-7.0 space, this thing is going to rule at that lower bracket. Expect a Panzer IV, T-34/85 hybrid for this games purposes. I don't know if you played the Comet in WoT, if you did I don't think the experience will be transferable.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
Matilda will def be in, but prob the Matilda 2, which had an actual (lovely) AT gun
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 18:39
|
|
|
I cannot wait for the Tommytanks. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 18:57
|
|
|
FaustianQ posted:Expect a Panzer IV, T-34/85 hybrid for this games purposes. I don't know if you played the Comet in WoT, if you did I don't think the experience will be transferable. I left WoT a little after the Brits were in (I joined -G- for the first CW campaigns, got that Georgia peach medal, and burned the gently caress out like 2 weeks after), but I don't consider them comparable either way. The key here is the 77mm has an added 20-50mm of penetration for standard ammo vs those tanks you just mentioned, depending on if they use the 77mm or the full 17. That's clean through the turret face of a Panther at medium ranges , and clean through the Tiger I basically anywhere you feel like hitting. It's also clean through the Tiger IIP on a decently aimed turret shot. If APDS shows up performing even remotely as well as it possibly could, you have like 88mm L/71 penetration for tough shots on Tiger IIs. Attach this to a tank that sits low, can presumably hit 35 on level terrain, and has decent gun handling/depression in comparison to the other tanks in its projected class. That makes a for a very good tank in decent hands, even with sub par after-armor effects compared to the 85mm/90mm. I personally don't give a poo poo about a tank's ability to take hits, because the best way to play the game is to focus everything on making sure you're shooting first. Mobility and effective firepower trump armor about 80% of the time for me and how I like to play. Mazz fucked around with this message at 19:14 on Jul 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 19:02
|
|
|
Mazz posted:I left WoT a little after the Brits were in (I joined -G- for the first CW campaigns and burned the gently caress out like 2 weeks after), but I don't consider them comparable either way. The key here is the 17 pounder has an added 30-50mm of penetration for standard ammos vs those tanks you just mentioned. That's clean through the turret face of a Panther at on any map but Kursk max distance, and clean through the Tiger I basically anywhere you feel like hitting. It's also clean through the Tiger IIP on a decently aimed turret shot. If APDS preforms even remotely as well as it possibly could, you have like 88mm KwK43 penetration for tough shots on Tiger II turret faces. Eh, the Comet doesn't have a 17pdr and whoever wrote the article is a loving idiot. It's got the 77mm HV, which should be pretty comparable to the US 76mm and Russian 85mm (785m/s, 7.7kg), so don't expect spectacular performance. I agree, armor should be a secondary concern, as the optimal strategy is to never be shot at in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 19:14
|
|
|
FaustianQ posted:Eh, the Comet doesn't have a 17pdr and whoever wrote the article is a loving idiot. It's got the 77mm HV, which should be pretty comparable to the US 76mm and Russian 85mm (785m/s, 7.7kg), so don't expect spectacular performance. Yeah, I had to double check the pens as I remembered that fact soon after the post, and made some edits to reflect it (which you beat me to posting). I assume Gaijin will get it right, or get yelled at and fix it in testing, but its still in the 140-150mm range using the tables that they've stated they're using (WWII Ordinance), and they might be forced into an APDS round that performs better then it should given a lack of concrete data. Either way, if it's sitting below 6.3 for whatever reason, it's certainly in a position to do well. Maybe not M18 first week of release well, but it's going to be a lot of fun to drive once you get a rhythm for it, because at first glance theres not a lot you can find wrong with it for the style of game CARB is. It's basically above average to good in all important metal-box-that-shoots categories. Mazz fucked around with this message at 19:21 on Jul 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 19:19
|
|
|
Looking at it, US tanks were added 16th dec, and began previewing 29th october. That's about a month and a half.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 19:26
|
|
|
ukle posted:As I said that's just the MBT / cruiser line. Heavies will be the Conqueror while TD's for Tier 5 will probably be that weird abomination that was built and used that had a 180mm Naval gun on top of a Centurion chassis - seriously gently caress knows what they were thinking when the built that one as if a normal tank cannon is not enough firepower. They were anticipating a postwar heavy tank arms race that was short-circuited by advanced shaped charges and ATGMs, which led the "armor is futile" school to bring us things like the Leopard 1 and AMX-30. If those active defense systems for tanks wind up working as advertised, the pendulum could swing back and we could see another creep towards land dreadnoughts in the future.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 19:41
|
|
|
Protip: Always make sure the enemy tank is dead before you place yourself into a compromising position. http://gfycat.com/UntimelyScientificAllensbigearedbat Also give me the Churchill AVRE or give me death.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 19:58
|
|
|
I just want the Italian tree 
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 20:02
|
|
|
Ludicro posted:Protip: Always make sure the enemy tank is dead before you place yourself into a compromising position. I wonder if you'll have to have a 10 second crew-replacement timer every time you reload to simulate the guy getting out and dropping the petard back in.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 20:12
|
|
|
I researched and switched to Fw190 A-5 from the A-4. The amount of sparks I got was staggering and I thought, what the gently caress is going on. Man, the german 20mm default belts are complete rear end. MG151/20 has 50% Incendiary Tracers?? No wonder going back from 5/7 minengeschoss belts feels like being kicked in the balls.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 20:20
|
|
|
Azran posted:I just want the Italian tree We both know the MC-205 will get tiered at like 4.7 or something.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 20:45
|
|
|
Skoll posted:We both know the MC-205 will get tiered at like 4.7 or something. Considering how awesome the MC202 is, an MC202 But With Cannons And Other Improvements could fight almost anything below superprops.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 20:46
|
|
|
That was pretty awesome. The Twinstang seems to be built to do head-ons, which you basically have to get pubbies to do if you want to kill them, and going in straight lines. So it's basically a 190. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MmPGAwgiQg
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 21:03
|
|
|
Not a bad day, wake up to Brit tanks news. I am happy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 21:18
|
|
|
Wales Grey posted:The second wildcat has six. It also sucks balls because it has no more ammo than the four gun version, but less ammo per gun, so you run out faster. It also climbs way worse because of the extra weight from the guns and the folding wings.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 22:14
|
|
|
Looking it up I'm not sure what the AVRE would get balled at; 290mm HE would gently caress over anything but it's a churchill that needs to be within 100m to hit anything, with churchill movement speeds and a cumbersome reload.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 22:18
|
|
|
Seems to be lots of retards around lately who don't understand the concept of battle ratings. About 2/3 matches tonight half the team will be comprised of T34-85s with the odd KV2 but will be facing Panther IIs, Tiger IIs, M26s and even T32s. Might be just me but lately Russian ground teams seem to have become really loving bad.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 22:48
|
|
|
YarPirate posted:http://warthunder.com/en/devblog/current/803 I just want them to start talking about the naval stuff. e: Some of the Russian tank teams seem to do quite well at around the 5.0-5.3 area, but from my recent experience when they lose they lose hard. jaffyjaffy fucked around with this message at 23:29 on Jul 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 23:26
|
|
|
jaffyjaffy posted:I just want them to start talking about the naval stuff. Isn't the KV-2 5.0 or thereabouts? I could see Russian teams doing good or bad entirely on how well their death-cannons did.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 00:17
|
|
|
spectralent posted:Looking it up I'm not sure what the AVRE would get balled at; 290mm HE would gently caress over anything but it's a churchill that needs to be within 100m to hit anything, with churchill movement speeds and a cumbersome reload. Prime candidate for Premium maybe?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 00:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 11:34 |
|
|
Alkydere posted:Isn't the KV-2 5.0 or thereabouts? I could see Russian teams doing good or bad entirely on how well their death-cannons did. It's like 4.3 in RB. Arcsquad12 posted:It also sucks balls because it has no more ammo than the four gun version, but less ammo per gun, so you run out faster. It also climbs way worse because of the extra weight from the guns and the folding wings. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 00:24
|
|