On Land and at Sea
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

medal medal medal medal

Community Reputation

2,663 Outstanding

1 Follower

About Eden_Earhart

  • Rank
    Faster in the corners
  • Birthday 10/15/1996

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

3,749 profile views
  1. I haven't noticed a flip, but I have seen a Maus at a 45 degree angle What a game.
  2. So you're gonna complain about WW2 prototypes as well, when Germany has a couple of tanks that are complete fantasy? Moving the goalposts if ever I saw it. And it's not 10 Shermans vs 1 Tiger It's more like 20 Shermans, 10 of which are 76mm Shermans, vs 1 Tiger. Or if it's a historical British armoured brigade, it's 1 or 2 Tigers, up against 26 Cromwells, and 15 Comets/Challengers/Fireflies Guess who wins those. If you want something fully realistic, you only have to look at the actual war and see who won...
  3. That not really the point. The point is that all these German players complaining about fighting post-war tanks, and demanding a WW2 only mode have no clue of what they are asking for. Their "Never penetrated during the war" Tiger 2s would get steamrolled by WW2 tanks from other nations, and then they'd start complaining that they need post-war tanks to compete, the the circle would be complete.
  4. Seems like it's more games than it isn't that I'm literally pushing around an enemy tank with my own, because the maps are just so small it's unavoidable. Peek around a corner, and you're face to face (Or hull to hull) with a Tiger 2 or something, and immediately the battles becomes less about which tank is better, but who can mash the other into a position where the physics freak out and spin someone's tank 90 degrees like it weighs nothing. I wonder if it even entered the mind of a single engineer that the tanks could possibly be used for anything like this, let alone thought of as common practice. Very "realistic" indeed. Though at the same time the ramps from the water are a welcome change. Finally don't have to spend 20 minutes of swimming if you accidentally fall in a river with walled sides in my PT-76
  5. Ya, my first game in the T34 was against a 3 person squad of Maus' Didn't end too well. The problem with that is there was no APHE type round developed for it. It would be best just to give all solid shot shells a similar buff, because IRL, solid shot was pretty much just as effective.
  6. The firepower isn't the problem. In fact, because the APCR is so good, it kinda forces itself into a position where, to balance the gun, you have to put it at a BR where heavy tanks are pretty weak. I mean, the M103 might be good, but the T34 is less mobile and less armoured. Putting it against speedy tanks that make it's armour useless would kill it. Moving the BR limit to 10.0 would allow tanks like the IS-4M and IS-3 to be viable again, rather than just RP pinatas, and you can create a range where powerful heavy tanks are useful again. Here the T34 could be great with it's full performance, rather than just being a one trick pony. It's a custom test area. They added a new shell type exclusive to US 120mm guns. It's "Large_Calibre_AP" or something along those lines. Haven't checked out the files myself yet. But basically it's the same as normal AP, but they just increased the spalling amount by heaps.
  7. If they correct the APCR performance, it could quite easily sit at 7.3, though with the current compression, it is quite annoying to balance. If you move it to 7.3, and at the same time the IS-6 is (probably going to be) moved to 7.3, then you have them both facing ATGM tanks that make these things useless. Unless we get a 10.0 BR, heavy tanks at high tier are going to be super problematic.
  8. Well, America did, they just didn't have the need for it. Though in 1945 they had the T34, which could put an APCR round through the front plate of the IS-6 at 2km. Though of course in game russian dokuments say....
  9. You know, I kinda like it.
  10. As an IS-6 driver, I wouldn't mind if it got bumped up to 7.3 I put it in my line up and use it after my IS-4M It's much faster than originally expected (Kinda makes me wonder if they modelled it using the best parts of Object 252 and 253...), and RU 251 drivers were much worse than expected.
  11. There is no reason for it, other than cus gaijin said so. Damn the IRL performance. And in a tier where everyone fires HEAT, what advantages does the T-62 hold over the Leopard?
  12. To show how badly modelled it is T34 has two huge holes in it's armour, for no reason. The optic port has no armour at all, somehow, and there is a gap around the gun that allows the breach to be killed with .30 cals I'd also like to point out the recently added IS-6, which has two large optic ports, which are somehow both covered with 300mm of steel.
  13. Why would you be so complacent about such an obviously broken model? It would take less than an hour to fix, and was found almost immediately, and yet they did nothing.
  14. Pardon me?
  15. The damage model is the exact same for AB You even get the marker that tells you the exact spot your shell will hit. It is miles easier to get ammo rack and crew kills in AB.
  16. And yet up until a few patches ago, Russia was the only nation that could fight against everyone else at once. They did fine then, and they do fine now, even though they are forced to use a line up of entirely 6.3 tanks, baring the T-34-100, where as Germany can make a full 5 tank line up out of 6.7 tanks. German teams used to win more, because there was no competition to the King Tiger Only now that the T29 has come around do German tankers actually have to use their brains. Russia regularly fights against US and British teams, and sometimes it's purely Russia vs Germany Most of the games I've played since the patch have had Germany and Russia on a team against the US.
  17. That's why they added the RU 251 to the game. You can't say German teams don't have support when they have a King tiger, and then two back ups of it, the best light tank in the game, multiple tank destroyers, and a whole line of panther tanks. IS-6 players are getting good results, because German teams suck. Every RU 251 I've run into so far has been used as a heavy tank, trying to play peak-a-boo with my IS-6, and quite predictably, losing. It's not the line up that is the problem for Germany, because if the line up was the problem, how could Russian be doing so well with only a single 6.7 tank?
  18. Fixed.
  19. The Tiger 2 is the most played tank in the game. Compared to Russia and Japan, who only have two (Rarely played) tanks at 6.7 between them. German players complained and complained about the IS-2 having the D shell and now that it's gone, and Russia has a single 6.7 tank, Germany still cannot compete?
  20. So they should work on more tanks for Japan and Russia then. Sounds good to me.
  21. It is as reliable as you make it. If you know what you're doing, it reliably does the job. If you don't, then it won't. Centurion Mk3 in a test drive. First shot fired kills the Panther at 600m range. And before you say "Oh, that's test drive, you already know the ranges so it's easy" I reloaded, drove up to the top of the hill, so I didn't know the range, and the tank was at an angle. First shot killed it yet again. Three things to also note here. Both these shots killed all the crew in the turret, so even if I had missed the ammo it is still a crippling shot, and would be a killing shot against russian tanks, or tanks with 4 crew members, which are most high tier tanks. Secondly, the gun on the RU 251 has 200m/s better muzzle velocity than this gun, so if you're missing shots, it's not the gun's fault. And thirdly, HEAT does way more damage than APDS does, because you have explosive damage to go along with it. So there isn't really much of an excuse as to why you would be taking 3-5 shots to kill an enemy.
  22. That's what I'm saying. Out of all the nations, Germany would be the least likely to actually succeed against the odds. They have everything tipped in their favour in this game, and still stuff it up.
  23. No you don't. From playing British tanks a lot, and not having APHE for the entire line, you get used to having to actually aim for crew or ammo, instead of mindlessly blasting into the middle of a tank. Given a sideshot, you can one hit kill any tank quite easily if you know where these things are. If you can't hit them on the move easily, aim for the driver first, or the engine. Your reload will easily beat out the turret rotation of almost anything. On top of this, the RU has HESH, which does a huge amount of damage on side shots. It could not be made easier to kill tanks in this thing. So no, it's not useless. Players just need to actually think about what they're doing, and it will easily stomp. Sheridan is also an 8.0 tank. Not a very good one either. Object 906 is also a higher BR tank. The ability to float on water is the biggest gimmick. Helps the tank in no practical way. It's also slower, worse HEAT, no HESH, has a worse transmission, less crew, and is somehow a higher BR than the RU 251? Yeah, "just speed" It's "only" the fastest tank in the game. It's "only" got the best HEAT round at it's BR It's "only" the best light tank in the game
  24. Yes comrade, german teams very good)))) Can win out against the superior enemy tenks ))))
  25. Alright then. Let's list the top tier tanks then. Allies get: IS-3s, IS-6s, T29s, T34s, T32s, Centurion Mk.1s, M26s, T95s, T30s, T-44-100s, and tortoises Axis get: Tiger 2, Jagdtiger, and a Maus with no gun Sound good? If not, stop using this stupid argument.
  26. The M18 was moved up 0.6 BR since it's release.
  27. Win rate is not a great indicator this early on. You take a new tank and throw it against people who have no idea how to fight it, and it'll stomp, even if it's borderline garbage. The IS-6 isn't though, I find it to be really great. I've started putting it in my Russian 7.7 line up as my second tank to bring out. The mobility is much higher than expected. Feels like I'm using arcade physics when I'm playing realistic. Doesn't this also offset the armour advantage of American and Russian tanks? Kinda make that moot if all armour is irrelevant. And now that Germany has the best HEAT equipped tank at 6.7, I would say other nations armour matters even less. Quite often you get Germany and Russia vs America Or Germany and Russia vs America and Britain sometimes.
  28. I've played against it though. It seems to be a great tank. Against germany at this BR, they are always capping points first, and the HEAT is deadly Apart from this though, everytime I've run into one, they are being used as a frontline brawler, simply driving around in front of our teams tanks being used like a heavy tank. I would say the error is the players, not the tank.
  29. That's really a problem with the bushes, and not the tank. You can do the same thing with any other tank in the game.
  30. You can do it almost instantly if you're that close. Nevermind that someone could just spam an MG at you from any range and kill your breach. It is the modellers fault. Here is the hole.
  31. And then there is also the issue of the hole in the armour about 10cm wide that let's you see into the turret. It's a joke honestly. They aren't even looking at these models before they rush them out the door.
  32. Turretless, open top tank destroyer that is slower, and doesn't have HESH. Turretless tank destroyer that is MUCH slower, Russian transmission, has a longer reload time, lower HEAT penetration, and no HESH Slower, 120mm lower HEAT penetration, no HESH Slower, MUCH worse gun handling, lower HEAT penetration, no HESH, Russian transmission Anyone not playing German and those that like a balanced game. This whole argument is such BS "Oh, other nations have tanks with HEAT at the same BR, but never mind that they are all worse that the RU 251 by a large margin" Because the balance isn't perfect, that's not an excuse to set the german dogs lose and ruin the game completely. Edit: I also noticed you forget to mention the Object 906, a comparable vehicle (But still worse in gun handling, speed, HEAT penetration, HESH, and transmission) that sits at a higher BR. Odd.
  33. "Mildly easier" It's a big red sign above your tank that might as well say "Please drop bombs here cus you will get a guaranteed kill" for 20 seconds to 2 minutes depending on the game mode. If you're capping a zone, you can also be firing against enemy tanks, the same as if you weren't in the cap. Is your advice for this to never shoot because you'll give your position away and be bombed? Seems awfully unfair that firing, capping, and moving are all things you shouldn't do if you don't wanna be instakilled with a bomb. This is not correct. Put a tank in a forest, not moving, and then put one driving out of the forest over open ground. Then get in a plane and see which one is easier to spot and kill. Alright, but he's not out of the game. A single kill with a bomber is enough to get back into a tank. So a bad player is rewarded by instantly killing this player that has one upped them, and can now respawn in a tank. Nevermind that you could have been playing the objective or gotten yourself into a flanking position or a hull down position. Instantly killed, and forced to either start driving from spawn again in a weaker tank, or into a plane, which, if I wanted to fly a plane, I'd play air battles instead. How is any of this a "reward" when I would prefer, in all situations, to stay alive and keep my advantages that I've worked for in that position? It's not favouring batter players, it's giving bad players an opportunity to get easy revenge kills on players, who have no way to fight back, and are forced to be killed. Not to mention the fact that that same pilot can easily just bomb you again right in your own spawn as soon as you start moving. Spawn camping even if you're decisively winning the game. Very fair and balanced ))))))
  34. Mini necro. Planes should be removed honestly. Their whole design is so counter-intuitive to everything in the game. They discourage objective play, because if you sit in the cap point, you're an easy target for some "ace" with a 1,000lb bomb to just drop on you, with no possible defence, unless gaijin has found it in their heart, in their random doling out of pintle-MGs, to give you some tiny defence. They encourage camping, because you can't drive over open ground, even in your own spawn, because you'll be spotted and space-barred with no way to stop it. The only way to avoid them is to sit under trees and not move. Great gameplay there. They punish good players for getting kills. Everyone has experienced this. You are playing well, gotten a few kills, and then one of the guys you killed can just come back with an instant death weapon you have no defence against. How is that fair to the player that is doing well, when bad players are rewarded with this power?
  35. The D-30T gun has a rammer so the loader can just place the shell on the rack and it will automatically push the shell into the breach so the loader can be busy with getting another round, and it has a bore evacuator so the you don't have to wait so long before opening the breach after firing. They still use the basic D-25T Though all D-25T guns should probably have slightly higher reloads.
  36. BR-350A has 1.4MJ of force, while the BR-361 has 2.1MJ of force. It's got 50% more energy behind it than the BR350A, so while I don't have the actual historical numbers on hand, it's certainly possible that it has that much more pen.
  37. The APDS round was made 20 years after the IS-6 project was cancelled. I don't really see any finagling you could do to get that to fly.
  38. I've had King Tigers shoot through the hatch over the breach before. Sometimes the weird angles of it can lead to interesting deaths. But it's not a bad tank really. If you get into an 8.0 battle, you are of limited use, but it's still pretty nice if you catch out a leopard or an M60 or something like that, cus the 122mm does wonders on them. In games where you are top tier, it's great, as you're almost immune to most guns you'll face, baring British guns, meaning you can rack up a lot of points simply for bouncing 88mm shells. Just keep working at it and you'll work it out.
  39. 7,500GE Which is about $40
  40. The Panther 2 can go back to 6.7, but the RU 251 should be no lower than 7.3
  41. And again, you have the same K/D in the King Tiger King Tiger H has a 55% win rate in arcade, SLA.16 has a 60% win rate in arcade. Found them. Perhaps this fits the German playstyle of "Drive at the enemy and attempt to kill everything in a slugging match and hope it works out" because all the tanks have big red "shoot me" markers on them so even a german player couldn't miss them. A big slow heavy tank, vs the fastest tank in the game with a round that ignores armour. Hmm, I wonder who will win in this situation.
  42. It's not in the game anymore. You can quite clearly see the whole map if you are high enough somewhere. And not all maps are cities. Some of them are, some of them are not. Any open map though, and the KT will destroy anything it faces without worry. Smaller maps, and the KT is still competitive. Which mediums can even slow down a KT? M46? Only with HEAT on the turret, while the KT can hit it anywhere and one shot kill UK only has the Charioteer, which is again made of paper while being a very limited threat to a KT Russia has the T-44 (lol) and the T-34-100, which is finally a proper threat. Not even mentioning the Panthers that German has that can rush forward, because germany is not totally devoid of medium tanks like you seem to think. Oh, alright then. 4 KTs turn up to a point contested by a Super Pershing, Caernarvon, and two walker bulldogs. Guess who wins. 7.3-6.3 line up is great for Germany. 3 KTs, Jagdtiger, KT 10,5cm, kannonenjagdpanzer, Panther F, Panther 2, Ferdinand, 2 Jagdpanthers, Sturer Emil.
  43. You can see my ground forces tester badge. I know what it was like. Removing the haze was a buff to Germany much more than Russia. Smaller maps doesn't change much of the overall balance. The KT can brawl pretty well. Alright, and when the KTs arrive at a cap point, what's going to stop them? American heavies? Well they only have the T29 to match up to the KT, and the KTs are faster, so it'll be there before the T29s can back up their bulldogs. British heavies? Caernarvon isn't going to be any help. They can both pen each other's turrets, and the KT uses APHE, so whoever gets the first shot gets the advantage. But if the KT gets the first shot, the Caer is dead, and if the Caer gets the first shot, the KT backs up and repairs for round 2. Soviet heavies? What 6.7 heavy? I have played germany 6.7 I bought the SLA.16, played a handful of games, clubbed the hell out of soviets for 6-7 matches, and then took it off my line up because what I was doing with it was not fun.
  44. The PT-76 is a crappy tank, and the M56 is an open top, turretless tank destroyer, which is still slower than this thing. It's your choice to only take 1 King Tiger, but you could take 3 if you wanted to.
  45. "Current map design" has never changed. It's always been about getting to the cap points first. The KTs are also some of the most mobile heavy tanks in the game, so there is not really a problem there. I don't really see how a 3 v 1 changes anything. A King tiger will still destroy a Super Pershing, even if it's sitting next to a Centurion. Having different nations doesn't change anything.
  46. "Only competitive tank" As if 3 King Tigers weren't enough? Also, these allied tanks that fire HEAT are all at 7.3 And even these are still not as good as this thing is going to be. But sure, have your month of clubbing with it if germany really needs something so grossly overpowered to compete.
  47. It's not even really a crappier leopard though. The only downgrade from the leo is the HEAT penetration is lower by 80mm But 320mm is still enough for almost anything is faces. Apart from that, it's faster and has a better reload than the leopard, and you don't have people firing APDS to save money. Also the T29 is about the same price, and still one of the most played tanks in the game currently. The combination of the best heavy tank in the game, and the best light tank in the game, in the same line up, is gonna cause some issues I suspect. Especially for nations that rely on armour *cough*Russians*cough* which is now useless, and nations that rely on high pen, low damage *cough*Britain*cough* which now matters very little. US stands the best chance against the coming hordes, but I don't think it'll end well for even them.
  48. This just in! Heavy tank with big gun has lots of armour and makes big boom!
  49. Yeah, but much faster and with 320mm HEAT.
  50. Ah, I must have misremembered the reload rate for it then. My mistake. The lack of rear gun depression isn't that big of a deal. How many times are you forced to shoot over the back of a light tank, unable to turn your hull? It's very rare. Tanks that are test driven on the dev server are stock. Of course off road speed isn't going to be 80kph with a stock tank. But on roads and on just slight hills, this thing will fly. Plus, its turning sets this thing apart from the Type 62. I'm not saying that popularity influences BR, I'm just saying that even if the Type 62 was the most OP thing in the game, it wouldn't be that much of a problem, due to the limited numbers of them not having that great of an overall effect. On the other hand, this thing will be incredibly OP, and because it's widely available, it will have a huge effect on the game.
  51. You brought it up. It's not that close. The RU 251 can go 80kph in both directions, where as the Type 62 gets 70kph, but loses it all in the turns and can't neutral steer. What does the Panther have to do with this? The RU 251 has better reload, turret traverse, and gun depression. 105mm HESH is enough to go through almost all medium tanks it faces plus the damage is being buffed. Popularity matters, because a tank you see maybe once ever 20 6.7 matches isn't going to ruin the game, where as a widely available and overpowered tank will.
  52. It can pen everything on the Maus apart from the UFP Probably should be equal though, considering that's the point of it. It does not have the speed of the RU 251 Or the gun handling Or the HESH round Or the popularity I will quit the game if this thing isn't moved to a rank 5 BR after 2 months.
  53. Yeah put it at 1.0 since it has only 30mm of armour But hey, you can kill it so what's the problem?
  54. What I have said, is the complete opposite of your inane ideas.
  55. If you're trying to get into slugging matches with this thing, they you have completely missed the point. It's speed is not a disadvantage. It's an incredible advantage. You can get to cover on mid points in the map and completely destroy the enemy team as they are still driving in the open, with almost no way to hit you back.
  56. Cus it's totally not gonna just rush to good spots on the map and snipe out every tank is faces from the front with no problems.
  57. No at all. One of the people you quoted even said the T29 was better than the KT I own the T29, and I think it should be at 7.0 same as the KT It means nothing You can go back to the first page of this topic and read my posts there if you like.
  58. Numerous times I have said that the T29 is equal to the KT But showing that people play a certain tank proves nothing. You have a huge amount of games in the KT, and yet you want it moved up. So what about owning the T29 invalidates the comments of those other people?
  59. Your own stats show a 3:1 K/d on both the Tiger 2 and the T29 I think your stats tell a different story than your words.
  60. Oh look, it's exactly the same case for you. Now can you make an actual argument now that we have shown this goes nowhere?
  61. Plus the 95mm howitzer that was put on Churchills, Cromwells, and Centaurs.
  62. But historically, it was a factor. And I'm not saying that welds should be a factor in game. There is no real way to get data on the welds of every tank and create a scale to measure them on, apart from "This weld was good, this weld was not good" I'm purely talking about historical performance here.
  63. British reports of the time show that the variation in hardness was considerable. The report above this post shows that entire batches of Tigers and Panzer 4 were built with weld defects, because of the time of year they were built at. Hardly seems like these are isolated cases, but rather an appreciable drop in production quality late war.
  64. At the very least, it is obvious that some tanks were good quality, and others not so much. Showing here that Panzer 4 and Tiger 1 tanks had cracking problems with their welds if they were made during the winter, and less problems if they were made in the summer.
  65. The previous report I posted showed that even after they had stopped face hardening, the weld quality was still an issue because they favoured production over quality. Both Germany and Russia had crappy welds, that much is obvious, I'm simply responding to bellezza's claim that weld quality was of a high grade.
  66. I never said that Panthers were built with good quality, just that they got the better quality steel, because the Tiger 2 would be less effected by crappy steel, with it's 150mm plate, than the 80mm plates on Panthers. Also, report of welds on a Tiger being broken up with a hammer without even seeing combat. British report showing that the armour was too soft on thicker plates to gain the maximum protection.
  67. Allied reports say that no Panthers they captured had brittle armour, but that the hardness of the steel varied wildly on each tank. Only a single Russian Panther was found to have brittle armour. Every report on German welding has show that late war, they were rushing tanks out the door to meet demand.
  68. The thing is there shouldn't be a modifier on armour that thick. Past a certain thickness, cast armour is just as effective as rolled armour, but this isn't modelled in game. The IS-4 should have it's full armour with no modifier. Also, why should they not model in the Tiger 2's poorer armour? It used a different armour type than all other German tanks. Why should cast armour be nerfed, leading to unhistorical nerfs to cast armoured tanks, but not model the Tiger 2s weaker chrome-molybdenum alloy armour, thus leading to it being stronger than IRL? Also, very weird that German tankers never talkabout how they are the only nation in the game to have tanks with "High Hardness Rolled Steel" a 1.25x modifier.... It's a known fact that Tiger 2s used a different steel alloy, because the higher quality steel was used for Panthers, while the lower quality chrome-molybdenum alloy was used on Tiger 2s because their thicker armour made up for it more than it would on the panther.
  69. And which WW2 plane sits at 9.0? Germans also play on the same team as Russians most of the time. So these "ww2 planes" are also affecting the Russians almost as much
  70. Because it's a hold over from when it used to fight mainly T-44s and IS-1s when the game was first made, and the IS-2 was expected to fight them without the D shell You mean like how 122mm guns should get about 4-6 rounds per minute? No, but I'd love to see some evidence for this actually happening, let alone being common. I've never seen it or had it happen to me even once. The fact that it is APHE at all puts it in the top 50% of shell damage. Hard to have sympathy for the poor panther when US and Britain rely mainly on solid shot, as APHE is buffed in every patch. I have not heard anything about the Tiger 2 having different components to other tanks. I'm gonna say that's just not true. I would suggest not carrying a full ammo load if you are having this problem.
  71. German and Russian MiG-15bis has an 8 point difference in winrate, despite being the exact same aircraft. But maybe you're right, german teams are the best playerbase ))))))