Jump to content


Purple Poaster
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by StranaMechty

  1. The armor is deceptive, it has the same issue of the Tiger P with lightly-armored shoulders, but due to the stepped nature of the glacis plate it has twice as many of them.

  2. There is no good reason I can think of for you to be playing 40 different tanks in a given month on a regular basis.  The solution for you is simple: cycle your tanks and play fewer each month, or pick a couple handfuls each week and only buy 7-day inscriptions for them.

    How about "This is a game and people like to play the vehicles they've bought"? Between September 5th and October 2nd I drove 55 tanks. Why? Because I fucking wanted to. Your solution is stupid. "Just play less of the game, guys. It's not a big deal. Just force yourself to use this vehicle again and again instead of the one you want to."

  3. I would call that a bit of a strong statement for what this change would be. Many on this forum run food items on their favorite tanks at 20,000 credits a match in order to gain an edge and don't bat an eye. The costs involved in this are far lower. Additionally, no one runs all of the tanks in their garages. I have just over 90 right now and maybe 40 get run in any given month. No one would be forced to immediately slap inscriptions and emblems on every tank they own or take an immediate 10% recent WR hit. I would bet that outfitting 10 tanks in any given garage would cover the bases for all stronghold and CW necessities as well as pub favorites.

    Most of us buy 3 seasons of camo for every tank we value. We enjoy a small bonus from that purchase to the tank so equipped. The sky has not fallen. Many of us have purchased inscriptions and emblems for our favorite tanks and done so for no bonus whatsoever. Now that they are considering a small bonus for those purchases as well, one would think the sky is indeed falling. The effects of this are to simply add another small dimension to the min/maxing portion of the game. I welcome it and am happy that those purchases I have already made will now have some small utility, and that future purchases will have some small utility as well.

    Food is not a comparison. Food is a tradeoff with another consumable, it has opportunity cost. It isn't the standard. These emblems, which have no opportunity cost, simply raise the cost of standard performance by that much. It's the case of camo, which is now an accepted requirement because it has no downsides or tradeoffs, which I already disliked, just writ larger.

    This is much akin to adding a fourth module slot which can only have vents in it. You'd be silly not to use it. The problem is this isn't a one-time purchase (unless you use gold, which the vast majority must spend money on), it's a constant drain on finances. Even I look at those credit costs and find them too high, and I don't even have any tank lines or tier 10s left to save up for.

  4. Goddamnit, the test server is up and my chosen snake emblems provide 2% to the radioman.

    Inscriptions (the words) provide 1% to crew skills each, so tanks that can only have one will be at the tiniest of disadvantages (yes, I checked, they don't count for double). Emblems (flags, army symbols, etc) provide either 1% to the entire crew or 1-2% to a specific member. There is, for instance, no reason save cosmetic to pick the puma emblem, as it provides only 1% to the driver alone instead of the 1% to the entire crew of a different set.

  5. Damn and blast. Have Incinerator 4 active, Himmelsdorf, in the T-34-1. Right at the start of the game I spot a full health IS-6 trundling across an opening, snapshot... lit him on fire. Okay, well, that's a good start.

    I put four more shots into the rear end of that damn IS-6 (and several into the rear of a T34) and nothing doing.


    Sounds par for the course. One time in the Type 59 I lit a fire on my first shot, then proceeded to kill two JT 88s from full health by shooting the after segment, damaging and then destroying both engines. No fire.

  6. I never bothered to grind them cause I'm afraid of the RU copy and the even worse gun depression. Following this topic since I'm interested in further opinions :)

    Ignoring the IS-2, the 110 and WZ-111 1-4 are easy to compare with their Soviet counterparts but they have enough differences that calling them clones doesn't do them justice. They start out as Soviet tanks, but there's enough of a twist on them to be worth looking at.

    The 110 is a great pub tank, having additional depression and markedly better view range than the IS-3. It's not as good a vehicle for competitive formats, but I like it more anyway. It's not quite as clumsy as the IS-3 is, and the improved sustained DPM makes it faster to chew through masses of enemy hitpoints to carry the day.

    The WZ-111 1-4 is what the IS-8 wants to be. Faster, better armored, and better armed. It takes a 130mm and moves it around the field much faster than the IS-7 (faster than an M48, for that matter), and while the armoring is not as reliable as the IS-7's, it's good enough to make a difference in a number of situations. It's an excellent "heavium" and one of the best tier 9 heavies. Also, the cannon is crazy long and the tank looks awesome.


    Even in the unlikely situation where the O-Ho never gets a chance to pen with HE or the chance to switch to AP & your DPM gets cut in half, your damage output is still comparable to some other T8 heavies (think Lowe, T34).

    I doubt it could be comparable to the T34 or Lowe (both of which are unimpressive vehicles to begin with). Non-penetrating HE loses half damage, so the absolute max you'd get out of that is 455 damage against 0mm of armor, but you wouldn't not penetrate against 0mm of armor. Even a direct impact on a 100mm plate leaves you with only 345 damage every 17 seconds (instead of 400 every 15 on the T34 (using base reloads since I don't have equipped values on hand)). Also, the difference between 0.54 and 0.35 accuracy, the pedestrian muzzle velocity of only 500-540 m/s, etc.

    The O-Ho is garbage because it has all those structural issues and a weak gun selection. Derp guns are fun and all but at tier 8 a tier 6 one doesn't offer enough when it's tied to a platform as deficient as the O-Ho.

    Edit: Forgot to mention something. Run into an E-100, Maus, IS-7, etc. What do you do other than derp them for 200 damage every 17 seconds? I'm not saying a lot of other tier 8s are in a great position, the disparity between damage output and HP is too great, but at least they don't lose 80% of their damage to passive defenses.

  8. I just took a look at average damage values and discovered that the Type 4 has yielded lower average values than the M103. Now, that alone isn't terribly notable, however there's two things to consider there.

    1) I jumped into the Type 4 fully kitted out. No stock grind.

    2) Those aren't actually my M103 stats. I barely played the M103. Those are my "hard-grind the tier 9 T34 from stock" stats. If that doesn't trigger PTSD flashbacks in you, let me explain by referencing a response I once wrote to "What was your worst grind in this game?"

    Kids these days don't know how lucky they are.

    Tier 9 T34. Welcome to a tank with 170mm or 180mm penetration stock. You could get the 105mm from the T29/T32 (after ~25k spent on suspension), then you could have 198mm penetration, at tier 9 (at a time when the IS-4 was also tier 9 and was armed with the 130mm S-70) for the next ~85,000 XP. No meaningful hull armor, you're not that mobile until getting the engine and suspension...ugh. This is all in an era before premium for credits was available. My M103 stats are still burdened by that horror.

    There aren't actually any adjectives I can use in condemnation of the Type 4 that wouldn't be superfluous in light of that particular bit of information. 

  • Create New...