World of Tanks - Free to play Panzer MMO

[Husar]

Not that I know, maybe some people do that, but I always upgrade my tier 9s, sometimes I even want to keep them and never get the 10s (e.g. M103, Centurion 7/1, lkatter may change when the tier 10 becomes a centurion as well)
Possible that some people try to skip the engines or radios, but I wouldn't count on too many people skipping the gun or turret if possible.

[Slyspy]

I have two tier nines, the M46 Patton and the E75. Both are worth keeping.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Tier seems to be huge at 7 and above. I have faced 9s now with my t25/2 and have been annoyed by some of the brutal simplicity of it. The...

My medium is a tier 9 so my armor is better, I am faster, I hit just as hard and so I will blaze up to you take your shot, ram into you, shoot you for the kill and laugh in your face.

....approach taken by some seems gloriously inelegant to me. Works, mind you, and efficacy is its own reward in some ways. I guess I just do not possess the brawler mentality -- I have a gun that will accurately shoot to 5 kilometers so NOW I can REALLY kick tush at 15m. Huzzah!

And why is it that little pump fakes based on relative acceleration curves of the respective vehicles -- eliciting a miss and thereby putting you ahead on the "slugging" exchange -- is counted as "skill" while accurately hitting a moving target at 400m is considered "noobish" or even labeled as "OP?"

[Husar]

Maybe it's slang or there is a comma missing, but the part about relative acceleration curves and fake pumps escapes me.

I also wouldn't give too much about what others call noobish, it can be hard to decide between joining a rushing team or camping, although I would usually join the rushing team for two reasons:

1. Teams are more likely to win than small groups of loners, staying back alone often means the enemies beat the rest of the team easier and you end up facing their surviving horde (almost) alone. Local superiority and all that.
2. The rest of the team can serve as a distraction or bullet sponges, allowing your weakly armored tank to take shots while the enemies reload or even to flank them sometimes.

And unless the battle has a whole lot of tier 9s, you can usually be useful in a tier 7 either by supporting the big ones or by picking enemies of your size, it's not easy of course.

[Slyspy]

Maybe it's slang or there is a comma missing, but the part about relative acceleration curves and fake pumps escapes me.

I can confirm that Seamus's post was the least intelligible thing he has ever written here!

The gap between tier seven and nine is rather significant. The increase in armour and alpha at higher tiers mean that if you lack these then people will YOLO you on a regular basis. Even at tier eight people showed my Pershing no respect. Then again if you are bottom tier at any level then this is a risk.

The point, of course, is not to be alone. Try and make sure that either your target is focused on someone else or, if he rushes you, then make sure that he is driving into a world of hurt.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Re-reading that last paragraph I can see where the problem occurred. Had I been SPEAKING to either of you, my non-verbals would have bridged the missing info and made my point clear. BAD writing tactic that.

Take two:

Reading the forums and in-game chat comments I have gathered the sense that a good majority of players only label as "skilled" a fellow player who is good at close-in brawling tactics. These include little rocking motions with your tank (currently positioned behind hard cover) trying to draw an overly fast reaction shot that then ricochets or otherwise misses thus allowing the player using the "pump fake" rocking motion -- sorry, that is an American Football term -- to bounce out and get a "free" shot thus putting them ahead in the tank-on-tank attrition battle.

By contrast, the player sniping from beyond draw range is usually labeled as unskilled no matter how well cover and concealment are being used or how the tank is repositioned to minimize spotting or counterfire; the light tank driver who goes to the flank of the two brawling heavies to shoot the opposing team heavy from the side is "only lucky that I was fighting the KV" as I read once; and many assert that all artillery tanks should be banned as no real skill is required but those tanks can kill "actual" (again quoting) tanks.

Please note that this is NOT to decry the value of good "fake out" skills in close-in fighting. It is a lament for the apparent denigration of all of the other skill sets.

I was also whining, briefly, about the tendency for a tier 8 light tank to roll up to a tier 6 TD and simply shrug off the damage and smash it flat in the same manner that a middling Heavyweight boxer can walk into the ring with the Welterweight champion and beat him flat. That "win," however effective, betokens no skill whatsoever.

I concur with slypsy that the 6-8 and 7-9 tier gaps represent bigger qualitative differences than do the gaps from 3-5, 4-6, or 5-7. Though the tier increments are same, the qualitative differences between vehicles is striking for tier 8 and higher.

Of COURSE I agree with both of you that coordinated play trumps solo -- that was never in dispute. 3 Coordinated tankers will generally wipe the floor with any 3 opponents operating mostly as solos and often with 4 or even more opponents who are "lone ranger"-ing it.

[Slyspy]

Brawling is just another skill set. It is different to the support or sniping skill sets, but still essential. Note that even in your commentary you are hinting at the opinon that the former has less value than the latter. We all have our strengths. I suck at brawling. I lack the patience for sniping. I prefer a support style. But is that more skilled than the other two?

The game needs brawlers. The maps are small, the ranges often short. Even where they are not you need the brawlers and blockers in order for the support and snipers to be effective. As for which is more skilled I cannot say. Further, is it more important to winning than the other two? Most WoT players have very little idea of what they are doing but have very firm ideas about what everyone else should be doing. Most WoT players should be ignored when spouting their opinion about skill.

Remember that these are people who will do anything to put down a player who is better then them (or at least gets better results than them). A skilled player sits at the back. A skilled player spams gold. A skilled player doesn't help the team. A skilled player only plays for personal stats (meaning third party stats. Strangely, though, a decent win rate usually follows). A skilled player gets better teams or better RNG. A skilled player pays money to get an advantage. A skilled player abuses game mechanics.

All bullshit. In short, most players are best ignored because they have no idea.

That said, in general, controlled aggression wins games. This is my opinion of course (see above!).

[InsaneApache]

That said, in general, controlled aggression wins games.

FTW

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I am learning heavies -- no surprise as I won a T-14 and had to justify spending the time to acquire it. I have also since acquired a KV-1. I like gaming in both, and the brawling/aggressive style (while not my native approach) suits the qualities those tanks bring to it (albeit the t-14 pretty well has to start as a supporter of other heavies until the herd is thinned a bit).

I would gleefully agree that all of the major roles: scout, brawler, flanker & supporter, arty , & sniper have a role to play and I have seen tanks in each of these roles prove crucial to victory in a match. I have PLAYED tanks crucial to victory in a match in all but one of those roles [I have never arty'd other than Karl]. It should be noted that I have had very few successful games as a scout, but I have had a couple and have seen really good scouts stymie entire platoons of enemies while their own people grab key positions.

The drum beat to remove arty from the game may not be waxing, but it is a continuous theme. Read a post or two about snipers no longer having any cover to work from and you almost always have a majority of posters saying that the map in question is now better because of it. Severogorsk is getting the axe....but it is (soon will be was) a lovely map for a sniper. At least for the NA crowd it is Brawlers #1, Scouts and Flankers #2 and the rest a distant third.


Yes, any number of the in game comments are both silly and inaccurate. Just yesterday I was tapped for being "KV-1 near base no help at all" by an the M41 driver near base at Severogorsk after he was gunned down by someone who had almost, but not quite broken through on the two line from the North.

Real translation, "I died and that heavy wasn't at the point so it is his fault."

I KNOW he was incorrect about my play because I went hull down behind a rock to block the exit of the 8 line axis which, for some lemming reason, NONE of my teammates had gone to defend. Unsurprisingly, a heavy and two mediums rolled through to flank and break us except I was there to play Horatius. Killed one medium, spotted another for its destruction by -- irony of ironies, the same M41 driver who complained about me and who scored his only direct hit and kill with my spotting -- and then played silly buggers on opposite sides of the rock from the heavy -- pinning and spotting him -- until a teammate heavy ammo-racked him from behind. My "nothing for the team" put me 3rd on the damage done list and 1st in experience courtesy of my spotter chevron ribbon.

SO yeah, I know to take those kinda in-game comments -- at least anecdotally -- with a grain of salt. While I included some of the choicer quotations to salt my earlier post, my assessments are drawn from a broader sampling of the NA forum etc.

[Slyspy]

One thing to note is that in it's current version Severowhatsit is not a sniping map by any stretch of the imagination. But then this is, of course, my opinion and I am a WoT player!

[Seamus Fermanagh]

One thing to note is that in it's current version Severowhatsit is not a sniping map by any stretch of the imagination. But then this is, of course, my opinion and I am a WoT player!

Really? I think the latest changes took sniping away from Murovanka more than from Severogorsk. True, the North spawn no longer has that almost unassailable sniping hill in back as it did in older days, but you still have useful sniping locations even for glass cannons -- with some interesting crossfire possibilities if you think of covering both a flank exit and the trench. Murovanka was made extremely dangerous for glass cannons since there is little well position hard cover for them at either end. All too often you get off a great shot and get blown away even before you can scoot. Depression trumps cover use of any other kind on the new Murovanka.

[Slyspy]

Really? I think the latest changes took sniping away from Murovanka more than from Severogorsk. True, the North spawn no longer has that almost unassailable sniping hill in back as it did in older days, but you still have useful sniping locations even for glass cannons -- with some interesting crossfire possibilities if you think of covering both a flank exit and the trench. Murovanka was made extremely dangerous for glass cannons since there is little well position hard cover for them at either end. All too often you get off a great shot and get blown away even before you can scoot. Depression trumps cover use of any other kind on the new Murovanka.

Point is that by the time those sniping positions come into play the chances are that the game is already decided. I don't fear any TD on that map unless it is either right in my face or still hidden while we are mopping up.

[InsaneApache]

I just unlocked the Leopard I.

Deep joy indeed;

[InsaneApache]

Just a note to my mates on my buddy list. My old account InsaneApache is no longer defunct. I gave it to my grandson for Christmas. He's only 8 so you play with him at your peril. I should know.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Advice on T-25/2 please.

Hellcat scales up to fighting 8s way better than the 25/2 scales up to nines. Barely holding 50/50 record despite my usual performance being 53.5

[Sigurd]

Advice on T-25/2 please.

Hellcat scales up to fighting 8s way better than the 25/2 scales up to nines. Barely holding 50/50 record despite my usual performance being 53.5

I remember the tank being quite annoying until the last gun. It can take a beating on the front "glacis" compared to the Hellcat, meaning, where the Hellcat just let shells through, you'll experience a few bounces with the 25/2.
The longer 90mm is a better sniper gun compared to the the Hellcat... I guess there has been made changes since I played these tanks, so take all this with a grain of salt.
All this is vague.. the only strong memory is the transition from 25/2 to t28 prot... now that was something.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I remember the tank being quite annoying until the last gun. It can take a beating on the front "glacis" compared to the Hellcat, meaning, where the Hellcat just let shells through, you'll experience a few bounces with the 25/2.
The longer 90mm is a better sniper gun compared to the the Hellcat... I guess there has been made changes since I played these tanks, so take all this with a grain of salt.
All this is vague.. the only strong memory is the transition from 25/2 to t28 prot... now that was something.

The "improved" 90 at the top of the 25/2 gun list adds 10 pen, zero damage increase, zero accuracy, zero reload diff, zero aiming time diff. The 10 added pen does not change the metric on fighting tier8 much and is virtually irrelevant in making the 90 more effective against tier 9.

The armor is better than the Hellcat, but only really shows itself as better against equal tier opponents. It isn't as well sloped as the cat or the Jackson and it loses that speed edge/nimbleness that is the cat's best defense. The Jackson even has more hull armor, though only on the lower glacis. The turret cover does help a bit against near misses by arty.

This is NOT a bad TD, but seems to be outperformed, slightly, by both of the Tier 6 TDs, I kept the Hellcat cause I like it for skirmish mode games, but the 25/2 just doesn't quite get it done.

[Slyspy]

Sorry I can't help. I haven't played past the Hellcat because whenever I see a T25/2 I think "victim" rather than "threat". But then perhaps that tells you something!

[InsaneApache]

Yeah I'm the same, whenever I meet that tank on the battlefield I think "result". You often get shite tanks after a good one and vice-versa.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I am not THAT negative about it....but it really feels exactly like driving an engine-damaged hellcat against tier 9s.

[Sigurd]

It didn't use to be... I remember the T25/2 was a threat to be reckoned with. I have a 60% win-rate with it and a master badge, which means I must have done pretty well in the tank.

[Husar]

I didn't like the T-43 a whole lot but my win rate and some other stats in it were quite decent/good.
I haven't really touched the turreted TDs and haven't played the game in a while.
(That also means, if anyone absolutely must have that reward tank for inviting inactive players, is willing to platoon with me when I find it convenient again and has a lot of patience to get the tank in maybe 10-20 years, they can try to send me an invitation*. *No guarantees whatsoever)

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I am still grinding it, but win loss is always teetering at or near 50/50. I have the same skills that I have in the Hellcat *53%" and the M8a1 "54%." The decrease in speed without a significant increase in either pen or damage seems to create a sense that this td lags behind a bit. Perhaps it was different some versions ago. For now, I don't see me keeping it for lone once the proto is unlocked.

[Husar]

Maybe play it like a medium, I consider most tier 7 mediums a bit undergunned. Most of them keep the tier 6 gun or get an improvement that is not very great. In terms of penetration that is.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Maybe play it like a medium, I consider most tier 7 mediums a bit undergunned. Most of them keep the tier 6 gun or get an improvement that is not very great. In terms of penetration that is.

Interesting. 25/2 is a little slow for that role but I like the principle (sneak and flank). At least that is putting this tier 6.2 gun in the right place....penning things frontally is either a complete waste of time or involves getting way to close for 76mm of frontal armor.

I shall give that a try -- won't keep me from being one shotted by the 9s, but I might get more licks in first.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

So far, I have taken to using the 25/2 like an assault gun. Move up behind the heavies by about 100m and shoot over their shoulders. Damage per match up a good notch.

Makes no sense as 76mm of armor with so-so slope stops virtually nothing at tiers 7 and 8, but at least I am scoring more. I am playing it closer to a JPz IV. Also doing the same with the Nashorn since long-range sniping is minimal on most maps.

[Husar]

There are actually not that many tanks in my garage which have really good armor. Yesterday some tier7 and 8 tanks (KT, Panther and AMX M4 45) tore apart my KV-4 from the front. They probably aimed mostly for the weakspots since ~200mm penetration shouldn't reliably penetrate a KV-4 everywhere, so I'm looking forward to the overall accuracy nerf that will come in 0.9.6.
The accuracy increase back then was also the reason I sold my SuperPershing. It was an amazing tank before that but when everybody started to hit only the weakspots, it felt like it had become really weak.
With the Leopard 1 for example, you really cannot rely on your armor either though, and I still like it quite a lot. Supporting heavies that actually engage the enemy can be very rewarding, the only downside is that it won't work if the heavies are not willing to expose themselves and won't fulfill their function/retreat behind you and expose you...

[Seamus Fermanagh]

There are actually not that many tanks in my garage which have really good armor. Yesterday some tier7 and 8 tanks (KT, Panther and AMX M4 45) tore apart my KV-4 from the front. They probably aimed mostly for the weakspots since ~200mm penetration shouldn't reliably penetrate a KV-4 everywhere, so I'm looking forward to the overall accuracy nerf that will come in 0.9.6.
The accuracy increase back then was also the reason I sold my SuperPershing. It was an amazing tank before that but when everybody started to hit only the weakspots, it felt like it had become really weak.
With the Leopard 1 for example, you really cannot rely on your armor either though, and I still like it quite a lot. Supporting heavies that actually engage the enemy can be very rewarding, the only downside is that it won't work if the heavies are not willing to expose themselves and won't fulfill their function/retreat behind you and expose you...

Learned that one, hence the 100m back positioning. There's a segment of heavy drivers who prefer a fellow tanker for armor whenever possible -- and yes they will trade your tank's gun for 3 fewer hits on their hull.

SuperPershing is still a beast to face for me. Have not been able to reliably take shots above mantlet at turret front. When I get to their sides they go boom easily enough but those front plates....

[Husar]

If you're not at really long range, the top of the turret is relatively easy to hit. If it's not facing you, the turret below the addon armor on the side or the rear of the turret can usually be hit. It's not exactly easy, but the Sushi driver himselv has the problem of not having a spectacular gun himself and not being able to maneuver a lot due to a lack of speed. The armor is almost the only actual selling point of the tank, the other aspects are average or below average. The problem with the armor is that when everybody has almost pinpoint accuracy, all those tier 9 TDs you face will rather reliably hit your weak or weaker spots whereas previously even they would bounce around 50% of the time. And you don't quite have the speed to rush around them or the gun to do serious damage to them. Heavies are similarly problematic while other mediums can flank you if you're alone or hit your weakspots reliably if you're not.

I also remember facing an IS-3 in a city head on in my SU-101, he thought he could rush me but I penetrated his thin turret roof three or four times in a row and killed him before he could reach me. To pentrate such a small weakspot so often and with such reliability made me laugh, but is also quite sad given that the IS-3 is supposed to be well-armored. The realistic aspect may be worth mentioning as well, since WW2 was not the era of laser guns and tankers would usually aim center mass if possible and be happy to land the shell on that other tank instead of specifically aim for weakspots.

As much as many lament that this will hurt e-sports etc., I don't mind when the game forces some of that inaccuracy on people, especially if it means that I will less often see my heavies with an almost perfect front but 8 perfectly placed holes in a cupola. 4 holes in thew cupola, two bounce marks below and two misses into the air sounds a lot better to me but still won't make anyone invincible.

It worked before the accuracy buff and the nerf will not return quite as many misses as we had back then anyway if I'm not mistaken. The accuracy buff also hurt fast tanks because they can now be hit far more reliably whereas before the accuracy buff, speed could actually be used as protection, maybe some of this will return as well.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I've read much the same. Targeting tended to be turret or hull when being picky....none of this 'just hit the driver's view slit 3 times..."