Jump to content

Hîr-am-Helcaraxë

Verified Tanker [EU]
  • Content Count

    61
  • Joined

  • Last visited


Reputation Activity

  1. Upvote
    Hîr-am-Helcaraxë reacted to Tupinambis in Sandbox: Ammo and Health Changes   
    It’s a pretty clever way to “not nerf gold rounds” and then actually nerf gold rounds. I wonder if they can “not nerf” shit like the defender and Chrysler by not giving them a HP and alpha damage buff too
  2. Upvote
    Hîr-am-Helcaraxë reacted to Haswell in LIttle Free Premium Polish Tankette isn't bad.   
    It's tier 2. That automatically makes it bad.
  3. Upvote
    Hîr-am-Helcaraxë reacted to nabucodonsor in P.44 Pantera....tier 8 MM   
    The pantera should have been the premium tank while the progetto 46 should have been the tech tree tank. The progetto is more similar to the tiers 9 and 10.
     Anyway just dont care about WR. It is a much better game if you focus on having fun or simply doing dmg.
  4. Upvote
    Hîr-am-Helcaraxë reacted to Crossfader in Careful it might be learning - WG goes back on pref tanks changes   
    WoT aint fun no more but watching WG flop around like a fish out of water sure is entertaining
  5. Upvote
    Hîr-am-Helcaraxë got a reaction from ZXrage in Obj 277 - Just a worse 5A?   
    I don't seem to be able to find a 277 topic and this fact per se should be indicative of its mediocrity and mehity in general but I thought I could start one with the most obvious -and problably only needed- question: is this really just a worse 5A?

    The nerf bat hit hard just before the releas of this tank, it was in a borderline OP state imo but maybe that was too hard. To be fair it has something going for it to distinguish itself from the 5A but I really can't feel if that's enough to be even able to be something fresh and different. As alway I'm not looking for a better version of the already available tanks but rather for something new and to be fair to WG I really feel like this was the original intent however timidly expressed. Sadly they have no balls whatsoever, they didn't want to risk a new v4 and the morons at the head of the balance department are too powerful and scary so that any good idea is quashed before maturing.

    Let's go back to topic to see the diffrences between this two tanks and maybe the IS-7 just for reference.

    Obj. 277 pluses are:
    + 265 silver pen against 250, not bad at all (jic someone didn't noticed they lowered gold pen to the normal 340 with 1k m/s speed just before release)
    + .38 accuracy against .39 (5A) and .40 (IS-7) with better dispersion than the 5A. I feel this is marginal.
    + better p/w ratio but compensated by worse ground resistances and 5 more kph top speed

    5A has for it:
    + better dpm, 5.36 base rof against 4.8 (277) and 4.38 (IS-7). I'm not a dpm fanboy as the theoretic dpm is seldom used in "real life", reloading in 1.3 second less than a 277 and in 2.5 seconds less than an IS-7 is huge though. The IS-7 can use a bit more effective dpm by being able to expose more thanks to better armour but again the flexibility of the 5A allows it to use more positions and not be fucked by wierd angles
    + 2.50 aim time against 2.70 (277) and 2.90 (IS-7) although with the dispersion they have, good crews and equip you basically have NO aimtime so this is almost irrelevant
    + 7° of gun depression against 5.5° (277) and 6° (IS-), this is quite a bit, you are viable in so many more locations.
    + better ground resistances and 36°/s traverse vs 32°/s (277) and 28°/s (IS-7) render this a bit more faster to react a flex, the worse p/w ration limits this a bit.

    Just to give a more complete picture the IS-7 has:
    + armour
    --- 303 gold pen lol

    Ok so it seems we have silver penetration (277) VS dpm and flexibility (5A) VS armour (IS-7). I can't really feel which one is better as mobility goes, can someone please share their experience on this? It feels like the IS-7 better mobility is just a hoax, it has basically the same p/w as the 277 (a bit more even), the same groud res and 5 kph better top speed but the 277 feel a LOT faster. How is that? It never reaches its top speed (a part downhill of course) by a lot, I'm not saying it has poor mobility, just worse than the other two.
    Also the armour: 5A vs 277, are they basically the same? I can't get the feel. How's the IS-7 armour nowdays? Is it worth to have this better armour paying the gun stat price if everyone shoots gold at you? I mean if the 277 and 5A armour if used correcly is good enough to bounce silver why not get something esle instead of more armour? Or is IS-7 armour still reliable against gold?

    What about the 430U? That feels basically the same class (heavium) but I didn't remember it but I'm lazy so I'm not rewriting all just to insert this. It has way better groud res and amazing traverse but worse p/w and top speed. How's the armor? How's the gun hanling?

    In the end, is 5A still meta? I feel like the 277 problem in its current stat is the 5A: you buff the 277 you get an OP tank, you nerf it and you get a useless tank. I tried and suggest this during the test but oddly enough they didn't listen to thoughful feedback but just to the whining feedback:
    That was imo a decent solution for having 2 different tanks and not just one being a better version than the other, of a bit diffrent but still one clearly better and one clearly worse.
    Or am I biased by the dpm and gun depression of the 5A? Of course being "a bit worse than the 5A" doesn't mean being a bad tank by any stretch of the imagination.

    Some end attached questions:
    - What would you suggest to a player that already has a 5A, to still get the 277 or the IS-7 for a change?
    - What would you suggest to a new (but decent) player as his FIRST tier 10 between the 277 and the IS-7? Is the IS-7 still comfortable for new players in 2018 or the power creep is too hard?

    Please share your thoughts.
  6. Upvote
    Hîr-am-Helcaraxë reacted to MagicalFlyingFox in Obj 277 - Just a worse 5A?   
    An ASIA server unicum write up
     
     
    Defiant_Duck, on 12 July 2018 - 09:54 AM, said:
    The Object 277 vs the Wz-111-5A. Here we go!

    FIrepower:
    The 5A is the winner of this category. The 277 is noticeably more accurate, it doesn't donk as many of its shots. The 277 has better moving dispersion but the 5A has a slightly better aim time. The biggest difference between the two tanks would be their DPM. The 5A has a 1 second faster reload giving it over 300+ DPM than the 277. The 5A also has much better gun depression (-7 degrees) than the 277 (5.5 degrees) giving it more flexibility when working rigdes.

    Armour:
    The 277 wins in this category. The 277 has very good armour better designed for bouncing incoming rounds than the 5A. Both turrets are strong but the 5A has two large and annoying cupolas whilst the 277 only has a small flat one. The 277's hull shape is very similar to that on the 907. Its got a well sloped curved front and side armour that is sloped inwards giving it a "v" shaped hull. The advantage of the 277's 907-like hull compared to the 5A's pike nose is that the armour thickness is much more consistent and more troll as well. Regardless of what angle the 277's hull is angled at, some parts of the hull will always be at an auto ricochet angle. I've had HEAT spamming E-100s and T30's drive out and try to put off shots without fully aiming (clearly underestimating the capability the hull armour) and bouncing right off. The 5A's hull on the other hand is alright but is much easier to pen because its more rigid and it losses effectiveness when angled. Both tanks have spaced side armour which help absorb HEAT rounds and reduce damage done by HE, I won't go into detail but they both do their job.

    Mobility:
    The winner of this category is the 277 hands down. The 5A has considerably good mobility. 50km top speed with decent ground resistances, good traverse speed, and a respectable power to weight ratio of about 15. The 277 just throws all that crap out the window because its just proven to me it runs on magic. I'm going to digress a bit here but I think its going to help emphasis what I'm about say about the 277's mobility. The 277 and the IS-7 both have IDENTICAL ground resistances. However, the IS-7 has a higher top speed and a slightly better power to weight ratio. But for some reason the 277 runs faster in a straight line than an IS-7 (huh how does that work???). The 277 is ludicrously fast for a HT. It has great acceleration and a high top speed of 55km allowing it to out run a lot of mediums and relocate from one side of the map to another with ease. 


    Overall Opinion:
    Imo both tanks powerful and formidable machines on the battlefield. However the 277 would be the better than in pub matches as it is slightly more adaptable than the 5A and I highly recommend new players to try grind for it as it more noob-friendly and helps teach and get new players into playing the role of a frontline heavy. But the 5A would be the better choice for more experienced players because it offers more of a challenge. When it comes to clan wars, the 277 has not replaced the 5A (5A is still meta yay!). The 277 (from personal experience) is used to take and hold positions during clan wars. For example, 277's were used (by a clan I won't mention) to storm up the hill on malinovka and hold the top. Because they got to the top before the 5As did meant that they had the battle in their favour. On the other hand, a battle I had on Ensk (which is a very flat map). The 5A's easily out brawled the 277s thanks to its better DPM. So both tanks have their strengths and weakness and I guess its up to you guys to decided on which one you think is better. Hope you guys found this useful. 
    Pardon the formatting.
     
    1 - Really doesn't matter, the 277 is more closer to the 5A though if they want something closer to a 5A. 
    2- IS-7 is more idiotproof and I don't think anyone is at a skill level where they will do better in the 277 as their first tier 10. IS-7 is still extremely competitive, it hasn't really been powercrept to oblivion because its armour is mainly in the turret thickness and sloping. Corridors have helped it more than anything and APCR goes through almost everything anyway. 
     
  7. Upvote
    Hîr-am-Helcaraxë got a reaction from SmyleeRage in Obj 277 - Just a worse 5A?   
    I don't seem to be able to find a 277 topic and this fact per se should be indicative of its mediocrity and mehity in general but I thought I could start one with the most obvious -and problably only needed- question: is this really just a worse 5A?

    The nerf bat hit hard just before the releas of this tank, it was in a borderline OP state imo but maybe that was too hard. To be fair it has something going for it to distinguish itself from the 5A but I really can't feel if that's enough to be even able to be something fresh and different. As alway I'm not looking for a better version of the already available tanks but rather for something new and to be fair to WG I really feel like this was the original intent however timidly expressed. Sadly they have no balls whatsoever, they didn't want to risk a new v4 and the morons at the head of the balance department are too powerful and scary so that any good idea is quashed before maturing.

    Let's go back to topic to see the diffrences between this two tanks and maybe the IS-7 just for reference.

    Obj. 277 pluses are:
    + 265 silver pen against 250, not bad at all (jic someone didn't noticed they lowered gold pen to the normal 340 with 1k m/s speed just before release)
    + .38 accuracy against .39 (5A) and .40 (IS-7) with better dispersion than the 5A. I feel this is marginal.
    + better p/w ratio but compensated by worse ground resistances and 5 more kph top speed

    5A has for it:
    + better dpm, 5.36 base rof against 4.8 (277) and 4.38 (IS-7). I'm not a dpm fanboy as the theoretic dpm is seldom used in "real life", reloading in 1.3 second less than a 277 and in 2.5 seconds less than an IS-7 is huge though. The IS-7 can use a bit more effective dpm by being able to expose more thanks to better armour but again the flexibility of the 5A allows it to use more positions and not be fucked by wierd angles
    + 2.50 aim time against 2.70 (277) and 2.90 (IS-7) although with the dispersion they have, good crews and equip you basically have NO aimtime so this is almost irrelevant
    + 7° of gun depression against 5.5° (277) and 6° (IS-), this is quite a bit, you are viable in so many more locations.
    + better ground resistances and 36°/s traverse vs 32°/s (277) and 28°/s (IS-7) render this a bit more faster to react a flex, the worse p/w ration limits this a bit.

    Just to give a more complete picture the IS-7 has:
    + armour
    --- 303 gold pen lol

    Ok so it seems we have silver penetration (277) VS dpm and flexibility (5A) VS armour (IS-7). I can't really feel which one is better as mobility goes, can someone please share their experience on this? It feels like the IS-7 better mobility is just a hoax, it has basically the same p/w as the 277 (a bit more even), the same groud res and 5 kph better top speed but the 277 feel a LOT faster. How is that? It never reaches its top speed (a part downhill of course) by a lot, I'm not saying it has poor mobility, just worse than the other two.
    Also the armour: 5A vs 277, are they basically the same? I can't get the feel. How's the IS-7 armour nowdays? Is it worth to have this better armour paying the gun stat price if everyone shoots gold at you? I mean if the 277 and 5A armour if used correcly is good enough to bounce silver why not get something esle instead of more armour? Or is IS-7 armour still reliable against gold?

    What about the 430U? That feels basically the same class (heavium) but I didn't remember it but I'm lazy so I'm not rewriting all just to insert this. It has way better groud res and amazing traverse but worse p/w and top speed. How's the armor? How's the gun hanling?

    In the end, is 5A still meta? I feel like the 277 problem in its current stat is the 5A: you buff the 277 you get an OP tank, you nerf it and you get a useless tank. I tried and suggest this during the test but oddly enough they didn't listen to thoughful feedback but just to the whining feedback:
    That was imo a decent solution for having 2 different tanks and not just one being a better version than the other, of a bit diffrent but still one clearly better and one clearly worse.
    Or am I biased by the dpm and gun depression of the 5A? Of course being "a bit worse than the 5A" doesn't mean being a bad tank by any stretch of the imagination.

    Some end attached questions:
    - What would you suggest to a player that already has a 5A, to still get the 277 or the IS-7 for a change?
    - What would you suggest to a new (but decent) player as his FIRST tier 10 between the 277 and the IS-7? Is the IS-7 still comfortable for new players in 2018 or the power creep is too hard?

    Please share your thoughts.
  8. Upvote
    Hîr-am-Helcaraxë reacted to Katoleras in SU-101 Wow!   
    Less armored than tier 7, no gun depression, cant snipe, cant brawl, turns like a boat, no view range. Pure Cancer.
  9. Upvote
    Hîr-am-Helcaraxë reacted to Fulcrous in The Batchat 25t.   
    It is too easy for pubbies to counter mines. They only have to stare at you all game.
  10. Upvote
    Hîr-am-Helcaraxë reacted to Nkrlz in E-50/E-50 M Fan Club   
    The E50 is still a good tank (far from it's glory days, but decent), i never liked the M and nowadays it's pointless to play it. Go with the Maus line tier 8 upwards it's retard proof, you just can't flex but with the current meta it's not important really (and i'm telling you this even though the 50 is, by far, my most played tank 400 extra battles over the 2nd one).
  11. Upvote
    Hîr-am-Helcaraxë got a reaction from mort_CZ in T32 Equipment 3rd Slot Trilemma: The Trilemma-ing   
    I'd go for vents. With optics the vr is really sweet but you need it very rarely these days and it gives you no advantages whatsoever in any other engagements that is not a mid/long range. Since there's no real need for anything a bonus to everything, for minuscule it is, comes at no real cost because not having to renounce something really useful.
  12. Upvote
    Hîr-am-Helcaraxë reacted to Britzz in How do I B1 Centauro?   
    It's an italian tank, right? Have you tried driving it in reverse or switching sides at the right moment? 
  13. Upvote
    Hîr-am-Helcaraxë got a reaction from Britzz in Retrofits stacking - Reload time or alpha increase? How it affects your DPM   
    Just my two cents, I downloaded the game 3 days ago so I'm just still testing varius things and getting the hang of it. Mostly played MBTs. Not sure if it's for the game being played on larger maps (longer distances) than wot or for the considerably minor rng when fully aimed compared to when not (at least I found it so) but I feel that aim time is crucial in this game: less exposing time and being able to quickly snapping peaking targets. However, regarding alpha damage vs sustained damage/dpm I think alpha is the obvious choice on MBTs since they clearly concentrate on that and have generally bad sustained damage to begin with, also dpm here is a lot less important than wot in my opinion (or at least at the low tiers when I am atm). Not sure about AFVs that relies on dpm, just played till tier 2, they don't peekaboo of course and they have really good sustained from what I saw so I guess they probably just shred the opponet with the insane dpm and maybe any % increase on dpm is magnified by the big numbers, have to test better on this.
    In the end, yes I think that having 8,5% more alpha and 15,4% more sustained is better than having 5% more alpha and 16,3% more sustained (TS+EP+CLB vs TS+EP+B). Btw Britzz, I would've done an "alpha % increase" column too.
    As I said aim time is important in my opinion, not sure if more than alpha (for the moment I this yes) and how much, having a game that let you play more like the tank needs as aw seems to be (aka not glass cannon sniping in Himmelsdorf) maybe will give us more options to fit the tank and situation. What I mean is that if the game developes correctly we'll be able to maximise (or rather minimise) aim time for snipey tanks and alpha for brawlers (or short range engagers as brawling in no near as common as in wot) and really make use of such improvements. But this thread is about alpha vs sustained so no point of discussing this further.
     
     +1 on this but the "area del tracciato" thing is really making me unconfortable...
  14. Upvote
    Hîr-am-Helcaraxë reacted to Intumesce in Crew Skills, Retrofits, And How To Best Use Them   
    Since I've already done a thread about commanders and how to make the most of them, I figured I'd make a thread for crew skills and retrofits. I'll go in detail and provide what retrofits and skills are the best.
    Crew skills
    Note: these are different from the commander's skills. You cannot transfer non-commander crew members between vehicles.
    Each crew member can only have 2 skills at most and some vehicles have more than 1 of each crew member while some have less.
    The more crew members you have, the slower your skills level up, but you get to pick more skills since you have more crew members. Choose skills wisely.
    Driver Skills:
    Smooth Ride - 20% better dispersion while turning or moving the hull of your tank
    Battering Ram - 30% increase in ramming damage to enemy vehicles
    Off-Road Driving - 10% better traction on off-road terrain
    Spin To Win - 10% increased hull traverse speed
    Gunner Skills:
    Marksman - 20% better maximum accuracy (maximum accuracy is your raw accuracy stat; fully aimed shots are affected by this skill.
    Do The Twist - 10% faster turret traverse speed
    Quick Draw - 10% faster aim time
    Shoot From The Hip - 20% better minimum accuracy (minimum accuracy is the worst possible bloom you can have; unaimed, moving reticule size is affected by this skill.
    Loader Skills:
    Rapid Fire - 5% faster reload speed
    Preparation - 20% faster ammo swap speed
    Explosive Shells - 20% increased module damage against enemy vehicles
    Secured Ammunition - 40% increase in ammo rack module HP

    That's all the crew skills in the game at the moment. So let's rank them by their usefulness, separated by each member category.
    First off, the driver:
    1. The best skill is arguably off-road driving. This is the go-to first skill for pretty much every vehicle.
    2. Smooth ride is a good alternative however since it helps your dispersion. It's especially useful on MBTs, less so on AFVs due to their already low bloom, but nearly useless on light tanks since they have no bloom while stationary or at low speeds, but at high speeds the skill has some use on them if you move around a lot with your light tanks.
    3. Spin to win is a decent choice if you have late-tier Russian MBTs to improve their turning even further, or to help mitigate the slow turn speed of some AFVs. Generally however, you'll see much more benefit from off-road driving.
    4. Battering ram is the worst skill by far for obvious reasons. Ramming damage is pretty difficult to get in this game (except against teammates) and with a limited amount of skills you should pick any of the above skills before ever getting this one.
    Gunner:
    1. In general, quick draw is the best skill. It helps the aim time for tanks that need it the most, namely SPGs, MBTs, and AFVs. LTs do not get as much of a buff from it for the same reasons as smooth ride isn't that good for them; their class-native skill gives them no bloom when stationary and on the move your aim time will not settle at all, meaning it's only useful after you turn or move. AFVs benefit a lot from this skill since it quickly resets their bloom after firing, and since autocannons fire so fast you'll want to maximize aim time as much as possible.
    2. Marksman is best used on vehicles with bad or already good accuracy. Generally, go for Quick Draw first and Marksman second if you can. This works best for AFVs and MBTs, with TDs not seeing much of a boost due to their meh/bad accuracy. LTs, however, benefit from it pretty well if their gun is accurate. The ET is a good example.
    3. Shoot From The Hip is a pretty meh skill. It can be combined with smooth ride to allow relatively accurate firing on the move, but due to the nature of this game not many vehicles benefit from on-the-move firing. This skill works best on SPGs and some fast light tanks, but even then I would still prioritize the aforementioned skills.
    4. Turret traverse is pretty much useless. Most non-MBTs turn their turrets more than fast enough for reliable target acquisition, and only a handful of MBTs are actually so slow that with the combined effort of turret and hull traverse, they still can't catch up. Unless you happen to be playing one of these VERY slow turning tanks, you should probably overlook this skill as a whole because it's not very useful. And before you say "what about AFVs?" the problem with circling MBTs generally comes from not being fast/not turning fast enough, the turrets on AFVs are usually way ahead of the hull in terms of turning.
    Loader:
    1. Rapid Fire is the obvious choice. 5% faster reload, why not? HOWEVER, this is a very big "if," which is why there are 2 number 1 picks here.
    1. If you have a commander that increases module damage dealt against enemy vehicles, explosive shells should almost always be your number 1 pick. Be it driving arty, an MBT, or an AFV, you should maximize module damage if you have a commander that already has a skill that boosts it. Even more so if you end up shooting HE a lot. You can damage 5+ modules with a single HE shell at times with both of these skills combined.
    3. Preparation is a pretty alright skill, but since ammo swapping happens a bit more in this game than in WoT, it is a decent choice for vehicles such as AFVs and LTs. Some AFVs have the ability to swap between 4 different rounds (Auto-AP, Auto-HE, HE, ATGM) and LTs almost always get 3+ different shell types. Unless you're the type that only shoots one type of shell most of the match, it will come in handy pretty often.
    4. Despite the fact that in WoT, I'd always recommend Safe Stowage as at least a second skill for the loader, AND the fact that it's 40% in this game rather than 12.5%, you just never really see ammo rack damage in this game. There's even a retrofit that increases ammo rack HP if you don't want to give up a loader skill. So generally, same as with turret traverse for the gunner, you should just overlook this skill.

    Retrofits
    So now that you know what crew skills do, I should cover retrofits and what tanks best to use them on.
    I will list options for both Mk. 1 of each retrofit and Mk. 3. However it should be pretty obvious that you should always mount the highest mark available, but in the case that some dual-stat retrofits provide a worse single-stat bonus than another retrofit, it's up to you to figure out whether you want to use (for example) Mk. 2 Experimental Propellant or a Mk. 1 Magnetic Actuator. Also, if you do not have one of the retrofits listed, go for the next best alternative.
    I will not go in detail on these retrofits' stats or how to unlock them since that can be seen in game. I don't want to make an already very long post even longer.
    These are ranked by their usefulness in general, so your mileage on what is the most useful will vary. I'll explain all of these rankings a bit later down.
    I should also note that you should ALWAYS (unless you're poor) put a retrofit on no matter how useless it is. Universal slots are rare, so fill those up with the best you can mount, but don't ignore a mobility slot on an MBT just because they generally suck.
    Armor retrofits:
    Internal Hull Reinforcement - Okay, let's be brief here. This is pretty much the only armor retrofit worth using. All the others give a smaller HP bonus, even at Mk. 3 compared to the Mk. 1 of this one. The only reason to use another one is if you're stacking HP, in which case it doesn't matter which one to use, just use the one with the highest available mark.
    Ammo Rack Reinforcement - No comment.
    Improved Spall Liner - No comment.
    Reinforced Engine Housing - No comment.
    Firepower retrofits:
    Chrome Barrel Lining - This one is good for anything really. Only AFVs do not get a large boost from this since they deal low-single-shot damage anyway and won't rely on their accuracy much. ESPECIALLY good for tanks like artillery and TDs.
    Magnetic Actuator - Best for MBTs and arty obviously. Has priority over E.P. if you have bad aim time. Also useful on AFVs to boost their aim time, but Gyroscopic Stabilizers has priority over this one for AFVs.
    Experimental Propellant - Probably the single best piece for MBTs and arty. If you don't have bad aim time, even Mk. 1 of this has priority over all other retrofits unless they are Mk. 3 of something like M.A. or G.S. for example.
    Advanced MRS - Really not sure how useful this piece is, and it's not very well explained by the devs. Better safe than sorry, so let's assume it's not that good. You'll usually be shooting weak spots anyway so normalization won't matter much. Best on TDs and MBTs with bad accuracy. Does not work for non-AP shells from what I've heard, so your tank must fire AP or else it's useless.
    Enhanced Shell Materials - A really good retrofit for tanks that have to deal with bloom. Best on artillery (relocation) and LTs that move around a lot. AFVs do not benefit that much since shooting on the move isn't exactly a common practice, but even at Mk. 2 it's better than the A.T.S.
    Gyroscopic Stabilizers - A good combination of aim time and reload, best for TDs and AFVs unless you use ATGMs for your main source of damage.
    Advanced Thermal Sleeve - Since this has no Mk. 3 (yet) it really shouldn't be picked above any of the other dual-stat reload retrofits. If you do have the Mk. 2 however, it MIGHT be better on some vehicles like TDs and tier 6+ LTs.
    Augmented Breech Lock - Since there is only a Mk. 3 for this one, it's unlikely you'll get to use it over another retrofit. However, if you do have it, it's amazing for TDs and tier 6+ LTs.

    Mobility retrofits:
    Air Induction Precleaner - Alright, same deal as armor retrofits; there really isn't much diversity between mobility retrofits and they don't matter much to begin with. That said, the A.I.P. is probably the best one of them all. This takes priority over all other mobility retrofits. 
    Advanced Supercharger - This one, however, is also pretty good. This should really just be used on AFVs and LTs; LTs to boost their max speed for the ECU, AFVs for obvious reasons and to slightly extend their camo breakoff point. The hull traverse itself is also really good on some tanks like SPGs and certain scouty AFVs, or just to compensate for slow-turning AFVs/MBTs.
    Enhanced Drivetrain - No comment.
    Improved Filter Systems - An okay-ish alternative for LTs if they don't have the A.I.P or the A.S. to improve their ECU top speed. Not really useful on anything else except for AFVs if you also don't have the A.I.P. or the A.S.
    Enhanced Oil Cooling - No comment.
    Upgraded Transmission - No comment.
    Technology retrofits:
    Braided Kevlar Wiring - Welp, technology slots aren't exactly stellar either. But let's go over this. AFAIK, "penalty reduction" means you suffer a smaller penalty when one of your modules is damaged/destroyed. Module damage is pretty rare, so there's very little reason to mount a retrofit with this as a dual-stat for that alone. That said, if your MBT has a technology slot and you only have Mk. 1 optics AND your view range isn't already decent/good, you might as well mount this for the slightly better crew skills.
    Security Control Package - This is probably the most useless technology retrofit. Sometimes it can save your ass in a close match, but most of the time it sits there doing nothing (like most technology retrofits.) If you want to do some triple-platoon trollcapping, it's best to maximize it by playing a trooper-carrying AFV and have Sabrina maxed out. Otherwise, you should really never touch this thing.
    Augmented Optics - The best all-around technology retrofit. Best on AFVs for obvious reasons, but it should probably also be slapped on anything with decent view range.
    Enhanced Sight Interface - Trash on its own as it provides a worse VR bonus than A.O. However, if you get 2 technology slots or want to maximize view range, it's worth putting on.
    Intercom Systems - Currently this is bugged, but once it is fixed it will probably be the single best retrofit piece due to how crew skills work. To sum it up: it's supposed to increase all of your crew abilities by a flat percentage, for example the Mk. 1 of this piece will give your loader a 5% faster reload for a combined total of 10% when he is at level 5. The more crew members you have, the more use you see out of this skill. 

    So, let's narrow this down to just which stats you should boost for each vehicle class. Starting with AFVs:
    With few exceptions, generally your goal should be to maximize your view range then your firepower. A lot of them get mobility slots, but you should not waste universal slots on that. Use them for view range and firepower.
    Some vehicles like the Ramka, Terminator, Swingfire, and BMD-1/BMP-1 are strange outliers and have a weird platform or don't have an autocannon at all, and should follow the retrofit upgrade line of thought for the closest class equivalent. ATGM reliant AFVs should maximize damage and reload, since aim time, accuracy, and bloom are all non-factors. Single-shot ones (or ones with a single-shot option, a la BMD-4/BMP-3/BMP-3M) should prioritize damage and aim time like MBTs.
    Generally, for AFVs, the firepower upgrade list goes like this:
    Aim time > reload = accuracy > dispersion > damage.
    Since autocannons fire in bursts and (hopefully) hit armor that's already paper anyway, the goal is to make sure you can land as many shots as accurately as possible. Since each shot slightly sets off the aim time, boosting aim time as much as possible is best for long-range shots, which is what you should be doing. However, if you deal most of your damage via flanking, reload is #1. Damage is obviously at the bottom since you only add a single-digit amount of damage.
    TDs:
    TDs are a tricky one since they vary from pretty damn good at low tiers to total garbage at high tiers, so I'll look at them separately.
    For low tiers, TDs are all about their camouflage, rate of fire, and view range. If you have technology slots, you should put on augmented optics. However their firepower is still their priority. At low tiers, MBTs are much more paper and also dumber and slower. You won't need single-shot alpha as much as you do at high tiers, but you'll want to make sure every hit connects. So for low tiers:
    Reload > accuracy = damage > aim time > dispersion.
    The faster you reload the better, and the more you hit the better as well. Their aim time and dispersion aren't particularly good or bad, so they take the back seat to every other stat.
    High tiers, however, are a totally different subject...
    TDs no longer have a huge VR advantage and their camouflage vanes with the tiers really, really quickly. You'll end up getting spotted more often than not and since you are so huge you are going to get hit. There's no way around this.
    MBTs also get much more armor starting at tier 5 and 6. You can no longer trust your DPM to carry you. As with most other vehicles, prioritize firepower, but armor secondarily. If you have an armor slot, you better damn fill it up with the best armor retrofit you have.
    Accuracy = damage > aim time > reload > dispersion.
    TDs at high tiers, with the sole exception of the Stryker, have pretty shit accuracy considering how far their engagement ranges are. They will also need to build up their alpha as much as possible, since if they do connect a hit and penetrate, they usually don't get a chance at a second shot. Their aim time and dispersion get a bit worse at higher tiers, but you're gonna be camping one spot anyway so what does it matter. Mind the gun depression!
    LTs:
    Since LTs have some pretty awesome class bonuses, it's pretty much a question of what you happen to like the most. Like TDs, I'll have to split this up in 2 seconds since tier 3-5 LTs have pretty much nothing in common with tier 6+ ones.
    As with the others, firepower is the priority here. But depending on the vehicle, either mobility or armor are number 2. Also, if you experience frequent engine damage (I have) then you could always put on the engine HP retrofit.
    The Scorpion relies on HE damage, the Sheridan relies on HEAT and ATGMs, and the Bagelpanzer relies on HEAT and ATGMs as well. Not much can be said about these tanks, just maximize damage and aim time, or reload if otherwise possible. As for mobility slots, ALWAYS go for something that increases track traverse or at least top speed.
    Damage > accuracy > reload > dispersion > aim time.
    You'll be using peekaboo tactics a lot and your guns have pretty heavy reload times. Because you don't get AP, you should maximize damage for the few targets you can reliably penetrate. They also don't have stellar accuracy, so boost that if possible.
    Tier 6+ light tanks are much more consistent thought the tiers however. They get reliable single-shot guns with HE, HEAT, and AP. Sadly they lose their ATGMs however. Most of the combat you'll be doing involves hill sniping and sometimes flanking.
    Reload > damage > accuracy > aim time = dispersion.
    Because of their dispersion ability, if you play LTs like snipers you won't have to worry much about managing your aim time. Even then, it's not much worse than TDs, so aim time and dispersion really are not much of a concern unless you play LTs VERY actively. If you do, then use retrofits that boost dispersion rather than aim time.
    MBTs:
    And lastly we have the big guys. Generally, MBT gameplay comes down to which of you can pen the other's weak spot more reliably between reloads. So naturally this results in a lot of peekaboo gameplay, which means you should maximize your damage and aim time to get the biggest shot off before the enemy does.
    If you get technology retrofits, put on crew skill enhancing slots if you don't care about view range. If you have decent or good view range, put on optics so you might counter spot whatever might be shooting at you. Keep in mind firing pretty much turns your camouflage negative in this game, so every meter of view range you have means much more than in WoT.
    Damage = aim time > dispersion > accuracy = reload.
    Simple. Get the biggest boom out of your buck and stack as many aim time/damage increasing retrofits as possible.
  15. Upvote
    Hîr-am-Helcaraxë reacted to Intumesce in Commanders ranked by their usefulness and best suited class [REVISED]   
    This is as an informative guide to help you learn which commanders are best suited for your tank and to avoid using a bad commander for longer than necessary.
    All my information comes from this thread. How you unlock certain commanders and what their skills do are listed there.
    General usefulness
    First the easy part. I'll just list off commanders by how good their skills are and how well they'd perform in any tank regardless of type. The lower a commander is, the worse they are in general.
    1A. Fyodor Sokolov/Maximillian Koenig
    2A. Viktor Kirsanov 
    1B. Juan Carlos Miramon
    2B. Freja Hojbjerg
    3. Anthony Diaz
    4. Sabrina Washington
    5. Rashid Al-Atassi
    6. Philipp Holzklau
    7. Ioannis Sanna
    So why are these commanders good? Well that's the fun part of this guide.
    Right off the bat, the more "if X happens, you get Y for Z seconds" a commander has, the worse they are. You want concrete skills that are always active and don't require a trigger to function. There are exceptions to this, like Juan's terrain resistance skill after firing, but that is an extreme case since firing is what you'll be doing a lot of. Viktor, Ioannis, Anthony, and Philipp all have a lot of situational skills that are at best on par with always-on skills, and at worst they're horrible alternatives to a solid stat increase.
    Secondly, the most desirable commander stats are crew skill increases, aim time boosts, and reload boosts. The more and the better of these 3 skills a commander has, the more relevant they are. Freja and Juan have two of these skills, while Viktor and Philipp also get them but with a condition requirement attached to them, making them slightly better than one without them but much worse than one which is always active. However, only 3 commanders have the 10% crew skill increase: Fyodor/Maximillian, Viktor, and Anthony. This boost is extremely important and I'll cover it below.
    Thirdly, several commanders come with unique skills of varying usefulness. Ioannis for example has a bunch of them but they are almost all useless. Meanwhile, Anthony and Sabrina both have unique abilities in the form of instant crew member revival and camouflage/cap rate boosts, respectively. If your tank is specialized, it may be better to get a commander with a unique ability over a generally good one like Freja or Juan.
    So from this ranking, we can tell the following:
    Fyodor/Maximillian, Viktor, and Anthony recently rose above their peers as it was discovered one of their skills is in fact extremely useful. They have a 10% crew skill increasing perk which is a lot more useful than it sounds, but also depends on your tank's crew of all things. They improve the characteristics of all your crew members by an additional 10%, meaning for example the loader loads 10% faster and the gunner aims 10% faster, and so on for all crew members you have. This basically means the more crew members you have, the better.
    Freja and Juan are good for tanks with few crew members, especially those without a loader. They are essentially gimped versions of the 3 crew skill increasing commanders for tanks that don't have enough crew members to benefit from such a boost. Their module damage boost is a decent reason to use them, however. Juan is generally better than Freja unless you like the increased rate of fire (not reload speed) perk.
    Sabrina and Rashid are either specialized commanders with efficiency only seen on certain tank types, and don't have the greatest skills, but their strength lies in the fact that no other commander offers similar abilities to theirs. For example, no other commander gives any camouflage boosts, and few give any view range bonuses.
    Philipp and Ioannis are complete shitlord commanders because they rely on dice roll skills with a catch that ultimately are either not that much better than an always active ability or just suck dick in comparison. Never ever touch these commanders. You ALWAYS have a better alternative.
     
    What commander on what tank?
    Now that we have their usefulness out of the way and you know which to avoid, I'll list off what commanders you should put on a tank. I can't cover every example, but this is so you get the general idea of where to put them.
    Vehicles reliant on camouflage
    AFVs: Sabrina for vehicles such as the recon line and some early BMP/BMD line vehicles.
    TDs: Sabrina again. However Juan is also a good combat alternative if you don't need the camouflage/VR that badly.
    LTs: Sabrina if your vehicle has a good camouflage rating, Freja if not. 

    Vehicles with mediocre camouflage but poor armor
    AFVs: Juan for the terrain resistance after firing. If you have ATGMs and use them frequently and/or like moving around a lot, Rashid is a good alternative for the turret/hull traverse boosts. His skill also decreases ATGM reloads by 10%.
    Note that FS/MK are a good alternative for camouflage-reliant AFVs since the skill for being spotted activates as soon as you're spotted, so you don't have to wait 1.5s for it to go active. They also come with a view range skill.
    TDs: Freja. No point using Sabrina if you don't have good camouflage.
    LTs: Rashid for the Sheridan and the Bagelpanzer. Juan/Freja for all others.

    Vehicles with good/very good armor
    MBTs: Maximillian/Fyodor for the crew skill increase and 10% extra view range if you find that desirable, otherwise Viktor because of his various armor-related bonuses.
    AFVs (aka just the Terminator and Ramka): Rashid. His skills slightly help with the horrible turning speeds while making your ATGMs more viable, plus a potential reload bonus if you hang out with MBTs.
    LTs: Sabrina if you have the camouflage for it, Juan or Freja if you don't. Rashid is not worth it if you don't have ATGMs (which LTs with armor do not.)
    Vehicles with poor armor and poor camouflage
    Anything but SPGs: Freja. If your camouflage sucks and your armor sucks, pray to god your gun is good.
    SPGs: One of the three crew skill increasing commanders, as arty almost always has 2 loaders, thus resulting in a 20% faster reload time.
  16. Upvote
    Hîr-am-Helcaraxë reacted to Britzz in Retrofits stacking - Reload time or alpha increase? How it affects your DPM   
    Following up on the topic by @_WL:

    I wanted to try out a few numbers, trying to better understand how the retrofits stacking works and how it can affect your DPM.

    In this post I will try to analyze the DPM, alpha and reload time. I will not talk about the aimtime/accuracy/gunnery increases that your firepower retrofits can give as those are heavily tank dependant and which one you stack will be your own choice, depending on what you want to increase on your tank's performance. The alpha increase and reload time decrease are equal for all those "mixed" retrofits, so I will consider the chrome lining barrel and the augmented breech to represent the DPM effect for both classes of "mixed" retrofits. The analysis is done considering single shot cannons only, as the autoloaders/machineguns area bit more complicated and I need to fully understand the effects of the retrofits yet.
    Here is a link to the google docs table I compiled: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1buUTQ53DbBbxhmzSr62Jk9tfZZQEpV7AJ2iyAEMOmYQ/edit?usp=sharing
    The first table is just a plain analysis of how the Mk.1-3 advanced thermal sleeve and experimental propellant affect your DPM.
    This is done considering the same DPM of 500 (placeholder value) and different alpha dmg and reload times to get a combined stock DPM of 500.
    It proves that both the retrofits act as an increase in DPM even with different alphas and reload times. Data can be found in the link above. The calculations for the DMP are made according to the topic by _WL: the reload time is decreased and the alpha is increased as he describes it in his topic.
    The important result here is the DMP increase that the different retrofits give:
    Experimental propellant DPM   Advanced thermal sleeve DPM Mk.1 Mk.2 Mk.3   Mk.1 Mk.2 Mk.3 525,00 531,25 537,50   531,91 540,54 549,45 % over thermal sleeve   % over experimental propellant 98,7 98,28125 97,825   101,3171226 101,7488076 102,223358 We can see how the difference in DPM given by the thermal sleeve is definetly minor!
    The Mk.3 thermal sleeve gives a 2.2% increase in overall DPM compared to the Mk.3 experimental propellant! This is of course done WITHOUT improving the alpha dmg. In my opinion the DMP increse with the thermal sleeve is not as important as the added raw damage increase you get with the experimental propellant. Bear in mind that these calculations are done with the same stock DPM of 500. We all know by now that alpha is somehow the king, since the times you will be able to fully use your DPM will be less than the ones ou will get a single shot and then retreat/break line of fire. In this matter I can affirm that the experimental propellant is better than the thermal sleeve.
    Let's consider stacking:
    Analyzing the mk.1 retrofits % buff What it affects Denomination Thermal sleeve 0,94 Reload speed TS Breech 0,9604 Reload speed B Experimental propellant 1,05 DMG EP Chrome lining barrel 1,033 DMG CLB  
    Combination DPM Alpha RPM Reload Time DPM% increase Stock 500,00 250,0 2,00 30,00 100,00 TS+EP 558,51 262,5 2,13 28,20 111,70 TS+B 553,85 250,0 2,22 27,08 110,77 EP+CLB 542,33 271,2 2,00 30,00 108,47 EP+B 546,65 262,5 2,08 28,81 109,33 TS+CLB 549,47 258,3 2,13 28,20 109,89 B+CLB 537,80 258,3 2,08 28,81 107,56 TS+B+EP 581,54 262,5 2,22 27,08 116,31 TS+EP+CLB 576,94 271,16 2,13 28,2 115,39 The table gives a good overlook at the situation but a graph will be a bit more exhaustive:

    OP italian ovelay on the scrrenie of the graph.  
    What we gather is that the DPM increase given by "reload retrofits" is greater than the one given by "alpha retrofits". The % change is not that big though, 2.3% roughly if we compare the conditions with pure reload buffs and pure alpha buffs. Again the alpha buffs will increase your single shot capabilities, which makes them a tiny bit better IMHO.
    When we get to the point of combining reload retrofits and alpha retrofits we get a negligible difference between the 2 situations (0.5%). If you choose to stack the retrofits this way you can then select what best suits your case for secondary buff and give the primary buff the best buff for your case (arguiably it will still be the alpha dmg buff for theprimary buff).
    The triple stacking is rare, but I think it can be done, againg the results are simillar but here you can "play" a bit more and tune your tank a bit better.
    So what we gather from this is that given a DPM (so given a tank!) you will have a very small difference in final DPM increase wether you choose the reload time route or alpha dmg route. This will give IMO a better choice in the DMG retrofits compared to the reload retrofits, considering the fact you will have better single shot capabilities and you will not be "forced" to use the raw RPMs of your gun to get better damage.
    Further calculations and considerations can be done according to different reload times and alpha combinations, considering the "time window" you have to fire your gun. This means a reload buff can be better when you have a Xs timeframe to unload your gun: it will give you a better chance to put 2 shots out in that time frame, whereas a damage buff will give you a better damage in the shot you can fire. The discussion can be complicated if you start considering this as well, but I think that my analysis can be a good starting point for further discussions in alpha vs reload buffs
    I hope you enjoyed the read and that it wasn't too complicated.
    PS: yes I'm bored.
     
  17. Upvote
    Hîr-am-Helcaraxë reacted to cheesecake16 in Chaffee with 90mm   
    Hi all
    Well I was looking around on the interweb and stumbled across this little gem the NM-116 light tank.

    Its a chaffee with the sp 1c's stock gun. It had 4 crewmen. And my proposal is to have this tank as a premium t7 or t8 light tank to train your T37, M41, and T49 crew members sense no other prem American light tank can. I dont know how to add a poll on mobile but if you like or dislike the idea then put a yes or a no in the comments and why or why not.
     
  18. Upvote
    Hîr-am-Helcaraxë reacted to Gharirey in m4 improved   
    The times when you could buy solid premiums are long gone. These days 90% of the new prems are utter turds. Don't waste your money!
     
    If I had to grade prems (excluding reward tanks), the list would look like this (* = tank has to be removed from the shop/was only available during special offers):
    1. tier: excellent carry-potential/borderline OP:
    tier VIII: Type 59* and IS-6 - both have limited MM and good armor for their tier tier VII: SU-122-44 - a beast; one of the best tier VII TDs in the game. tier VI: Cromwell B* - p2w! tier V: KV-220* - needs more armor ;), some more p2w tier III: Pz IIJ* - p2w pushed to a ridiculous degree! 2. tier: good carry-potential/solid tanks
    tier VIII: FCM, M6A2E1* - again, special MM is what makes a good tier VIII premium! The FCM is also an excellent credit-grinder since it rarely needs gold ammo. tier VII: E 25*, IS-2* tier VI: Rudy*, Type 64, Skoda T 40 tier V: leFH18B2* - best tier V arty in the game; escaped the 8.6 arty nerfs! tier IV: B2* - always top tier! tier III: BT-SV*, T-15, S35, FCM 36 Pak 40*, T-127 Everything else is not worth buying in my humble opinion. Granted the CDC and Super Pershing are decent and I have seen people perform in the Chinese 122mm tier VIII premiums. Post buffs the JT 8.8. should be a lot better as well. But I still wouldn't recommend buying these vehicles.
    The amount of tanks in this list, that have been removed from the store, should give you a pretty good pciture how WG's premium policy has changed during the last year. I feel sorry for those who haven't been around in the old days when you could get strong premiums.
    Hint: if you want to buy a new premium, the SU-122-44 is hands down the best currently available for money!
  19. Upvote
    Hîr-am-Helcaraxë got a reaction from Casas5591 in T32 Equipment 3rd Slot Trilemma: The Trilemma-ing   
    I'd go for vents. With optics the vr is really sweet but you need it very rarely these days and it gives you no advantages whatsoever in any other engagements that is not a mid/long range. Since there's no real need for anything a bonus to everything, for minuscule it is, comes at no real cost because not having to renounce something really useful.
  20. Upvote
    Hîr-am-Helcaraxë reacted to X3N4 in Ensk Troubles   
    Played Ensk today in batchat and remembered this thread. It's no 8k dmg ace tanker but a pretty decent gaming showcasing what I generally do. Pick favourable angles and trade well (kinda easy with an autoloader). I take this entrance over the other because the enemy doesn't have hulldown there and the building in front protects my retreat. Peek as aggressive as the situation allows (in this replay very aggressive because we have a guy rushing the buildings). After the first couple of shots when most things are spotted you gotta decide if you keep fighting it out there or if you have to run (when your team sucks and camps uselessly in the back or the enemy rushes the field). From this place it's easy to flex because you can disengage very quickly. Similar principles apply with Ru meds. You don't have an autoloader in a 62A but you're still a big threat because of your ability to permatrack. Ru meds can sidescrape which makes things a lot easier because you're not solely dependant on trading/using meatshields.
    https://www.dropbox.com/s/z7gk6y8fopj4zec/ensk_city_south.wotreplay?dl=0
  21. Upvote
    Hîr-am-Helcaraxë reacted to Fabunil in Bonuses for emblems and inscriptions   
    What? 
    You don´t want to boost your commander to improve your vehicles viewrange while you are proxyspotting 2 enemy tanks?
  22. Upvote
    Hîr-am-Helcaraxë got a reaction from Flaksmith in Tier 8 to 9 "alpha jump" - Is it an issue?   
    Hello guys! In the last week I've unlocked 5 tier 8 tanks and having only another t8 and one t9 I'm not very experienced of high tiers so I was looking into some statistics to start scratching the veil of mist that still darken my path in some occasions.
    I tier 7 I really don't find problems in t8 games, I can manage enemy t8 tanks with not too much problems, they're better of course but the situation is manageable. Tier 9 tanks, on the other hand, usually wreck me. I'm not saying they shouldn't, they're two tier above after all, and I'm far from being unicum but my fear is that there's a gap between t8 and t9 of "more than 1 tier" meaning that t9s are more superior (is it english?) to t8s that t8s are to t7s. The tier 8 tanks seems in many cases improvement of t7 tanks while t9 often seems mini-t10. So I'm a bit worried that facing many more t9 could be a not very pleasant experience.
    My (lttle) experience is ok though: my first t8 was the T32, good tank and being in t9 or 10 doesen't differ that much as the turret works almost the same. The oher t8 I already have is the IS-3 which is of course very very good. Having to buy other 5 (+1 that I already bought for discount but didn't play yet due to crew not ready) t8 tanks is another story.
    Many t9s mount almost the same modules (guns mostly) as t10 but with worst stat/performance. Is this enough? Or are the t8s that are a bit underwhelming? Do you guys think that there is a real gap or is just my wrong mindset?
    I know alpha is not everything but the average increase of it from t8 to t9 is really high with the average alpha of t9 mediums that almost ridicules t8 heavies alpha. It seems that t9s are t10s with worst soft stats and the t8s are a bit under the trend. Here is a chart with average damage of mediums and heavies from tier 6:

    I did not count premiums, only regular tanks. I did not put in it tank destroyers, the "jump" for them is between t7 and 8 and at t10 (with avg dmg that goes from 557 to 829) but is a more complex question.
    The "alpha jump" is real but I'm not saying this is wrong or an issue: I'm asking you! Is it ok or is it a problem? How is this balanced or works? How to work with t8 tanks when mid tier without feeling bottom tier or overwhelmed by t9s? Why is the firepower of t9s so similar to t10s?
    Here are an average dpm and an average penetration charts to be more complete. The first in particular is wierd as hell. The average dpm on tier 8 mediums is abysmal, so below the trend line. Like heavies generally need alpha and get really bad one at t8 so mediums that generally need (or can use) good dpm get a really bad one at t8:


    Is it tier 8 the worst tier (not counting low tiers)? What am I missing?
  23. Upvote
    Hîr-am-Helcaraxë got a reaction from Sabrechien in Tier 8 to 9 "alpha jump" - Is it an issue?   
    Hello guys! In the last week I've unlocked 5 tier 8 tanks and having only another t8 and one t9 I'm not very experienced of high tiers so I was looking into some statistics to start scratching the veil of mist that still darken my path in some occasions.
    I tier 7 I really don't find problems in t8 games, I can manage enemy t8 tanks with not too much problems, they're better of course but the situation is manageable. Tier 9 tanks, on the other hand, usually wreck me. I'm not saying they shouldn't, they're two tier above after all, and I'm far from being unicum but my fear is that there's a gap between t8 and t9 of "more than 1 tier" meaning that t9s are more superior (is it english?) to t8s that t8s are to t7s. The tier 8 tanks seems in many cases improvement of t7 tanks while t9 often seems mini-t10. So I'm a bit worried that facing many more t9 could be a not very pleasant experience.
    My (lttle) experience is ok though: my first t8 was the T32, good tank and being in t9 or 10 doesen't differ that much as the turret works almost the same. The oher t8 I already have is the IS-3 which is of course very very good. Having to buy other 5 (+1 that I already bought for discount but didn't play yet due to crew not ready) t8 tanks is another story.
    Many t9s mount almost the same modules (guns mostly) as t10 but with worst stat/performance. Is this enough? Or are the t8s that are a bit underwhelming? Do you guys think that there is a real gap or is just my wrong mindset?
    I know alpha is not everything but the average increase of it from t8 to t9 is really high with the average alpha of t9 mediums that almost ridicules t8 heavies alpha. It seems that t9s are t10s with worst soft stats and the t8s are a bit under the trend. Here is a chart with average damage of mediums and heavies from tier 6:

    I did not count premiums, only regular tanks. I did not put in it tank destroyers, the "jump" for them is between t7 and 8 and at t10 (with avg dmg that goes from 557 to 829) but is a more complex question.
    The "alpha jump" is real but I'm not saying this is wrong or an issue: I'm asking you! Is it ok or is it a problem? How is this balanced or works? How to work with t8 tanks when mid tier without feeling bottom tier or overwhelmed by t9s? Why is the firepower of t9s so similar to t10s?
    Here are an average dpm and an average penetration charts to be more complete. The first in particular is wierd as hell. The average dpm on tier 8 mediums is abysmal, so below the trend line. Like heavies generally need alpha and get really bad one at t8 so mediums that generally need (or can use) good dpm get a really bad one at t8:


    Is it tier 8 the worst tier (not counting low tiers)? What am I missing?
  24. Upvote
    Hîr-am-Helcaraxë got a reaction from lazydot in Tier 8 to 9 "alpha jump" - Is it an issue?   
    Hello guys! In the last week I've unlocked 5 tier 8 tanks and having only another t8 and one t9 I'm not very experienced of high tiers so I was looking into some statistics to start scratching the veil of mist that still darken my path in some occasions.
    I tier 7 I really don't find problems in t8 games, I can manage enemy t8 tanks with not too much problems, they're better of course but the situation is manageable. Tier 9 tanks, on the other hand, usually wreck me. I'm not saying they shouldn't, they're two tier above after all, and I'm far from being unicum but my fear is that there's a gap between t8 and t9 of "more than 1 tier" meaning that t9s are more superior (is it english?) to t8s that t8s are to t7s. The tier 8 tanks seems in many cases improvement of t7 tanks while t9 often seems mini-t10. So I'm a bit worried that facing many more t9 could be a not very pleasant experience.
    My (lttle) experience is ok though: my first t8 was the T32, good tank and being in t9 or 10 doesen't differ that much as the turret works almost the same. The oher t8 I already have is the IS-3 which is of course very very good. Having to buy other 5 (+1 that I already bought for discount but didn't play yet due to crew not ready) t8 tanks is another story.
    Many t9s mount almost the same modules (guns mostly) as t10 but with worst stat/performance. Is this enough? Or are the t8s that are a bit underwhelming? Do you guys think that there is a real gap or is just my wrong mindset?
    I know alpha is not everything but the average increase of it from t8 to t9 is really high with the average alpha of t9 mediums that almost ridicules t8 heavies alpha. It seems that t9s are t10s with worst soft stats and the t8s are a bit under the trend. Here is a chart with average damage of mediums and heavies from tier 6:

    I did not count premiums, only regular tanks. I did not put in it tank destroyers, the "jump" for them is between t7 and 8 and at t10 (with avg dmg that goes from 557 to 829) but is a more complex question.
    The "alpha jump" is real but I'm not saying this is wrong or an issue: I'm asking you! Is it ok or is it a problem? How is this balanced or works? How to work with t8 tanks when mid tier without feeling bottom tier or overwhelmed by t9s? Why is the firepower of t9s so similar to t10s?
    Here are an average dpm and an average penetration charts to be more complete. The first in particular is wierd as hell. The average dpm on tier 8 mediums is abysmal, so below the trend line. Like heavies generally need alpha and get really bad one at t8 so mediums that generally need (or can use) good dpm get a really bad one at t8:


    Is it tier 8 the worst tier (not counting low tiers)? What am I missing?
  25. Upvote
    Hîr-am-Helcaraxë reacted to Razavn in Bonuses for emblems and inscriptions   
    If they are going to make emblems and inscriptions give a bonus I'm not sure why they made it so that different emblems get different bonuses. After all, some people have emblems they like looking at but provides a bonus they don't desire.
    In my opinion, what they should have done, is made it so that you can put any emblem/inscription on and then CHOOSE what bonus you want to receive from each emblem.
×
×
  • Create New...