Griphos

Verified Tanker [NA]
  • Content count

    593
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Griphos

  • Rank
    No Fochs Left To Give

Profile Information

  • Server
    NA

Recent Profile Visitors

1,357 profile views
  1. Actually, in proper German, Untermenschen. You think you're being cute? Much of my extended family died because of that exact word and the "casual racism" it employs. Fox advises we focus on the "actual issue." What is the actual issue? A new premium tank with good frontal armor? Sir Foch being treated unfairly by WG? WG being a business and trying to make money? You guys getting your panties in a twist because there's a new premium you can't afford to buy or don't want in a game, or someone was mean to your favorite streamer? Sorry, those aren't real issues. Fuck the Chrysler K, and fuck Sir Foch. And, most particularly, fuck "casual racists." "Hard" enough for you, Fox? I'm sorry if you guys feel I've "derailed" this oh so important topic to call attention to something actually worth addressing. The ironic thing is that this thread would have stayed on topic (to the extent there actually was one) if some of you guys hadn't spent so much of it defending the "casual racism" and telling the rest of us to get over it in terms that perpetuated it or made it worse
  2. ..."undesirables"...???
  3. Tell that to the Nazis. Your comment was an anti-Semitic slur of the sort that has long been used against Jews, frequently to justify violent action, and that references Jews as an ethnic, and not religious, identity. You weren't suggesting that WG celebrates the Sabbath on Friday night.
  4. It's not closer to a slur....it's all the way there.
  5. Good luck with that...
  6. He may have been lucky, but he was shooting AP. And I was just going by what Fox said, "177.8mm angled at 40 degrees." I thought that he meant effective, not nominal. I know how armor angling works.
  7. Yeah, and the AP round on the Chrysler is 198. So.....
  8. That's what I'm disagreeing with you about. I don't think graphs showing some tanks performing somewhat better than overall average is the issue you seem to think it is. What is the issue exactly? It's certainly not evidence that these tanks are "insta win." And that they aren't that hard to fight does, I think, mean it's not a problem. What is the problem exactly? Maybe you and I get into very different kinds of battles, but mine aren't decided by which team has more Defenders or superheavies. They are decided by which team's players play better. Tempest in a teacup.
  9. I was just watching replays of the tank, to learn a bit about it, and in one, two Chryslers were facing off. One of them kept penning the cupola of the other with AP. The other kept bouncing off the LFP of the first one. Guess who won that battle. Maybe he was lucky, but it didn't seem that hard to do.
  10. Because people are grinding credits to buy their T9 and T10 tanks, not because they're OP.
  11. And yet the Defender is the only one people keep mentioning. What are the other premiums that are so OP? That they are releasing premiums with lower skill floors, I grant you. But after a little bit, people learn how to counter them and those that buy them don't do much better in them. I think the reason we don't see battles with just one tank is because although some tanks are better than others (no argument from me or anyone about that, I suspect), none of the better ones are so much better. I seriously doubt wanting to play multiple classes or get to T10 would dissuade the vast unwashed not to play a tank in which they really could win a lot more. And I'm not sure I see a problem with bads being a bit more effective in a premium than in a tech tree tank. They're still not that effective. And one premium like the Defender isn't destroying the game. As I said to start with, I don't find them hard to fight, and I suspect you guys don't either. I think the Defender stands out as a premium that is ridiculously easy for bads to play better in. I think it's kind of alone in that respect. Does MOVE even do CW? In the CW I've done since the Defender came out, there have been a lot of them, but the IS-3 is just as effective, if not more so for some strats/maps. So, you're not out anything. And we're just talking about T8 CW anyway. The change in lights did more to mess up the T8 CW than all of the premiums combined.
  12. But the cupola is pennable.
  13. I get that armor increases survivability, and so is less skill sensitive, but it doesn't guarantee survival. I see plenty of people playing well armored tanks badly and dying early in the battle. I'm sure you do too. What I'm finding hard to swallow is the idea that any tanks offer a "win button." I'd sure buy one if I could find one! I'm not seeing the "vastly supersedes".... The graphs above are interesting. That's the kind of data I was asking for. However, what those show is that bads are still pretty bad even in these "OP" premiums. You have to win more than half your games (which, as we all know, most people don't) before playing one of these tanks helps you out that much. If you win 47% of your battles overall, you might win just over 50% in a Defender. But I'm betting that's the case for a number of tanks. Is the suggestion that WG should make premiums that don't allow anyone to win more than their average? The IS-3 is an interesting case, since many people call it OP. And the graph suggests that the very best players do very well in it indeed, but the rest of us do about average in it. I suspect most of the rest of us think of it as OP because the really good players talk about how much they like it and think it is OP. I would agree the Defender is more forgiving than the IS-3. Another point is that the overall WR for all of those players ranges across the percentages in divergent ways. For each of them, that win 55%, say, that average includes tanks where they win 70% of the time across 100 or more battles, and tanks where they win 45% of the time. The ones they do well in are just the ones they do well in, not necessarily OP. Take some of my stats for instance. I have 170 battles in the T-44, almost all of them much earlier in my WoT experience (haven't had that tank for quite a while) and I've won just under 61% of the time in it, 5% more than my average WR. Is that tank OP?! I have 124 battles in my SuperP (I clearly grind too much and never play any single tank for many battles...so these are some of my higher battle count tanks), and I have a 62% WR in that. Nobody will say it's OP with a straight face. I like it. It's fun. But you see my point, I hope. I'm not even sure I fully understand what would count as OP. Some tanks are better than others. Some premiums are better than others. I just don't see any of them "vastly superseding" other tanks. If some tank really did, then wouldn't that be the only tank we see on the battlefield?
  14. Actually, that's what I'm rejecting, as I said, "speculations" about how some tanks increase WR in the absence of actual data (and I mean meaningful data, gathered over a significant range for a sufficient number of players to actually be representative and predictive). If the evidence is that the Defender has a very high win rate on Vbaddict, then that makes the WZ-132 OP as well, which is just silly.
  15. The people complaining about OP tanks seem to be complaining only about armor. I don't hear anyone talking about any other feature that makes them OP, or fussing about tanks having too much pen (we praise tanks with high pen) or about tanks being too mobile (again, we like those). I just hear fussing about armor. And the Defender is the one usually mentioned. I'm sorry, but I don't find it any harder to fight Defenders than I do other heavy tanks (and certainly not as hard as the high tier Japanese heavies). They have weakspots. Aim! They're not some magical tank that wins games just by showing up. And armor is one of the variables in the game. Game "balance" (whatever that is supposed to mean) includes having some more heavily armored tanks with compensating weaknesses, like, for instance, being slow. The pen on the Chrysler, for instance, is low for a T8 heavy to compensate for its increased armor (in front). The reload on the Defender is slower even than the IS-3. Seriously, some of you are talking like some of these tanks are invulnerable. Like armor is some over-riding advantage. Or like you want all tanks to be as easily penned as lights. Armor makes it easier for people to play badly a bit longer, yes. But it doesn't make people playing badly that much more of a factor in the battles I play at least. And I'm not interested in speculations about how much % WR increases for baddies as some kind of evidence of OP status. The VK100.01P has a higher win rate and good armor. Why aren't people using those in CW for instant wins? Because it has compensating weaknesses, perhaps? In fact, the WZ-132 has almost as high a WR, according to Vbaddict. How is it OP? And bullshit predictions about how soon WG will die are bullshit.