Liz_F_Beurling

Member
  • Content count

    2,153
  • Joined

  • Last visited

medal medal medal

Community Reputation

1,000 Outstanding

About Liz_F_Beurling

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    World End
  • Interests
    War Thunder, Silent Hunter, Navy Field, FFXIV, Anime, Dessert

Recent Profile Visitors

4,079 profile views
  1. if it is not at ridiculous angle, even the upper glacis can be penetrate by Panther 75mm gun i mean, i could kill multiple T29 with my Panther F in Kursk, so could Panther D not the best way for panther to counter T29, but "dorable"
  2. Most British tanks and some US tank would love this fix asap
  3. Panther gun is enough to kill a T29 frontally with upper glacis shot, side shot should not be a problem unless either you shoot the angle turret or u hit the track
  4. it is somehow fix with the overmatch patch large cal will just go through it like butter, no more deflection downward, at least no more on 88mm+ calibre
  5. because Tortoise and super pershing sitting at 6.7 if 105 at 6.7, these two must be move to 6.3, and it will be nightmare for 5.3 to fight so i propose give Tiger II H proper turret armor value, stay at 6.7 with T29 i dont own T34 so i have no idea it is 6.7 or 7.0 material then figure out what to do with 105 next
  6. Tiger is doing great at 5.7, it have no place lower it is not fun for my M4A1 76 constantly seeing Tiger H I and Panther too it is BR spread that need fix, or BR cap need to expand
  7. Avenger is little bit difference situation, due to the mobility and gun, it is slightly less affected by uptiering it is a bit like Nashorn or Dicker Max, with a turret and without the target effect it is more comparable to Panther A/G/F, so i think 6.0 is about right too
  8. I have experience something similar with 17pdr APDS, direct hit to ammo rack and turn it yellow but i dont have much issue killing Tiger II crew, usually a round through turret will result gunner and commander kill for me
  9. i still think a 5minute queue time with lower BR spread would be more enjoyable than constantly uptiering all they need is just a test for like a week, and see how it go
  10. i think we all hope for the latter one come soonTM it is affecting every nations and every BRs
  11. the optic on Tortoise
  12. Tiger II H slightly worse than T29/T34 but on par if not better than Caernarvon and Tortoise for sure
  13. crew skill matter i guess my Cent Mk.1 on a zero invested crew, have a poor accuracy, the spread can reach 4m at 1.0km while my fully invest (targeting) gunner, it have pin point accuracy even at 1.6km
  14. like other explain it is a weakspot shouldnt be able to be penetrate in real life but it does it game due to poorly model and it happen to many other vehicle, the vehicles i listed is just a part of it
  15. Tiger II H should have their proper turret armor thickness then it will be perfectly balance at 6.7
  16. it does make a difference, I have both Tiger II H and Tiger II 105 the play style does not change, but for II H some time I need 2 shots to finish opponent, the 105 just 1 hit wonder here is why i say it should be remove, T29 make a new 6.7 performance cap and i it is already at 6.7 borderline, 105 just break the upper cap, then those at lower 6.7 cap have to be lower down to 6.3 and it just make lower BR even more compress but if we took 105 at 7.0, it just work poorly at 7.0, since it got up tier to 7.3 sometime even 8.0 99% of time the HE filling actually make quite a difference, once the sphere of doom get fix, it might be on same level of T29 the gun mantle is larger, the weakspot is actually slightly smaller than Tiger II H not too much difference in close range, but it does help when i engage over 1.2km
  17. this kind of failure mechanic is not German exclusive it happen on T-44 driver periscope, Caernarvon driver Periscope and Black prince periscope it is because the shell, all the shell are needle size, no matter it is a 122mm or 20mm
  18. KillaKiwi have explain it
  19. I have play it myself, and i can say it is great, probably one of the best 5.7 vehicle when used right
  20. i would just remove KT105 from game completely, and refund the RP/SL if KT015 is moving to 6.7, then i might have to suggest moving Tortoise and may be Caernarvon to 6.3, it will just break the 6.3 balance more, yet, they both are no where near on par with KT105 so as Tiger II H, who would still driver a II H when 105 on same BR with a smaller weakspot, slightly better mobility and way better gun
  21. when you queue 4.7
  22. APBC is still a solid AP, just with ballistic cap without any HE filling i am saying the KT105 HE filling giving it nuking target effect and yea, T29 is already at borderline of upper 6.7 cap, lowering KT105 is breaking this mess further but on the other hand I do agree both KT105 and T32 just couldn't keep up with higher tier, this is why we need to expand the BR cap to 9.0 or even 10.0 making more room for higher tier as for IS-6, theoretically it might be able to fire BR-471D shell, give it to IS-6 and bump it to BR 7.3 should be a temporary measure to resolve the issue for now
  23. according to WT WIKI the ZiS-5 cannon have 105mm penetration @90degree @10m with APBC round
  24. my 190F8 remain my favourite ground attack plane, i could net out more ground kill than my Typhoon 1B due to the ammo count but like you said once the opponent have some fighter i lose more air to air combat ability than Typhoon carrying rocket
  25. All plane capable of ground attacking i.e. Large bomb, AP cannon, rocket should have their spawn cost increase now 99% of game you will see M18/RU-251 rush to cap and die, come back with a ground attack plane
  26. Tiger II breech can easily absorb fragment of APDS or solid AP too no doubt T29 is slightly bette than Tiger II H, since hull is easier to hide than angling the turret T29 upper glacis is a weakspot too, even my Panther G could take out T29 with upper glacis shot IS-6 is a seriously undertier tank, it should be push up give Tiger II a proper armour value and remove KT105 completely, refund the RP and SL
  27. T-34/85 is equal to Panther D Panther D have way stronger hull armour, better gun depression and better gun penetration in exchange for poor turret traverse T-34/85 have better target effect and turret side armour, by giving up gun depression and penetration, and smaller fighting compartment T-34/85 and Panther D mobility is quite similar Panther D have way way way stronger frontal fight ability compare to T-34/85 and M18 City CQC map favor T-34/85 like Long range map favor Panther D but it is not the vehicle fault when player choose to fight in City when there are position for range engagement like Tunisia
  28. one of the difference irl and in game is the magic repair and crew replacement let say you have some very brave crew would not bail out as first penetration, but a shot to any vital modules the tank is disable lose a radio in a war, the tank is blinded, lose the transmission/engine in frontline, better bail out, jam the turret etc even it doesnt hit any important modules, the hot fragment spraying onto a crew, say gunner, the crew just can not magically remove the dead body and sit at the gunner seat with 30s
  29. no, it is not that simple, and it is not a linear relation the failure mechanism of armour have a huge role in spallation, i.e. armour undergo 95% brittle failure vs armour undergo 50%/50% ducticle/brittle failure will have different spallation phenomenon and plugging phenomenon Sato done a research in 2015 show that the influence of strain rate on fracture strain have a not influence region, and this region is material strength and strain rate dependant
  30. driving band reduce rifling, but sabot on APFSDS also wear barrel, and the barrel life usually end way before the driving band kill it and British love their gun able to anti armour as well as able to anti structure or lightly armour object when needed
  31. T-34/85 with BR 5.7 are equal to Panther D although they are both medium, they do not play the same T-34/85 D-5T is weaker than Panther D
  32. i have both Tiger II H and Tiger II 105 (not spade) and i hate the 105 due to the BR T29 and Tiger II H is a good balance, i would not disagree T29 at a slightly advantageous position as the turret armour is stronger, but as i say, give Tiger II H a proper turret armour value, the balance will be great, and when i angle my Tiger II turret slightly to the left, my weakspot become hard to hit and Tiger II 105 the gun alone just out perform T29/T34, the slightly longer reload is not a big issue as it shoot nuke and have a good penetration
  33. best thing to do is completely remove KT105, refund the RP and SL, leave a gap on there it just no way to put at 6.7 without compressing more lower BR, and it just not good enough to be 7.0
  34. except KT105 have a gun fill with nuke with very little penetration lose compare to T29 solid AP and this gun have no issue penetrating T29 gun mantle and hull, while T29 have a weaker gun and unable to penetrate Tiger II hull until very close range not only T29 are more closely balance with Tiger II H, with slightly advantageous on T29 KT105 at 6.7 meaning some of the 6.7 tank have to go down to 6.3 and start clubbing lower BR tank just give Tiger II H proper turret armour thickness, problem solved
  35. same can say Tiger H I and Panther breaking 4.7 game, we don't have to go down this road expand BR cap and reduce spread is what the cure and i still think when dev put KT105 in game, it is a very poor choice
  36. with the 1.0 BR spread, we will keep seeing this kind of awkward BR it club hard when fighting 4.7 below, and it still very strong if the driver have little brain at 5.7 game but when it was back in 5.0, it get clubbed hard by 6.0
  37. got kill in a E2 by a 37mm SPAA, who keep shooting my gun mantle and the fragment go through the hull roof fragment penetration just out of hand
  38. player is the one who responsible for learning a tank, not the tank leaning toward to hand hold the player tank performance is not gun and armour only, which alot of players have miss out when discuss about BR adjustment tank performance is a max of a lot of stats, armour, gun, target effect, mobility, gun depression, module lay out, armour layout, ROF, traverse rate, no. of crews etc
  39. negative T29 T13 round have 219, 217, 207, 193, 181, 171 penetration @90degree only the T32 round have better penetration than KT105, but it is a solid AP round and even T13 round have much less explosive filling compare to HT105 gun and we all know how bad APCR perform in WT KT105 is at a very awkward position, it will break lower 6.7 balance if put at 6.7, but it just not 7.0 material
  40. Player skill is irrelevant to how a vehicle performance
  41. Panther D is equal if not better than Tiger H I Russian Panther should go to 6.0
  42. IS-1 have less crew, no gun depression, can not angle, not 200mm gun mantle, lower penetration but i do agree IS-1 could be at 5.7 and IS-2 back to 6.0 in RB i dont care what br they go in AB, but Tiger H I have no business lower than 5.7 in RB and SB
  43. Tiger II H trade penetrating power for explosive filling T29 use Solid AP for more penetrating power or less penetrating power for target effect 105 pack both, and 105 have smaller weakspot, not alot smaller, but still smaller then i say T29 is already at borderline of 6.7, 105 out perform it in alot aspect should not go into 6.7 if 105 drop to 6.7, we have to consider dropping Tiger II H and Caernarvon drop to 6.3, then those 6.3 tank have to drop 0.3 BR, 6.0 tank again need to drop 0.3, vice versa, the compression mess began If I am developer, I would just simply remove Tiger 105 leave it a gap, fill it with other 7.0 or 7.3 tank like you describe land lease or licensed version, or even fantasy like E series, I mean we already have Ho-229/R2Y2, i think it is reasonable to have a paper just for gap filling purpose as long as the stats make sense
  44. Tiger E arent so much better than H1 that worth a 0.3 different Tiger H I have better gun and better armour than IS-1, Tiger H I is a very mobile Heavy so as IS-1 German need something to fill up 4.7-5.3, but Tiger H I is way too good to be there
  45. 17 pdr APDS have 207 at 500m, it is the driver fault if he fight the opponent at such short range, and it is definitely the driver fault not hiding his hull or slight angling IS-6 is a undertier tank, it should not be compare with, it should be compare with current 6.7, when T29 already at borderline of 6.7, the better gun 105 can not go down to 6.7 with current APHE effect
  46. no it doesn't or it is RNG, i trade fire with Cent Mk3 in my Ferdi and Tiger II H the best it does is kill my gunner and my commander, gun breech damage if he is lucky the gun breech will absorb all the fragment and shielding my loader (and on a side note, when i say poor, i mean weaker than APHE, sorry of my english if it is hard to understand, it is never my first language) edit: on a second thought, what distant you fighting with that APDS vehicle, i still suspect, distant is affecting the fragments and its damage on solid perforation, I am fighting them over 1.2km and it is what i observed
  47. Only the 20 pdr APDS at 6.3 are danger to Ferdinand, but their poor post pen effect couple with 6 crews and roomy fighting compartment, it is a very good TD and the long 88 have no issue 1 hitting those 6.3 20 pdr I have even hold my ground a lot of times fighting T-54 back when my Ferdinand are 6.7 imo, KT105 should never add, i just don't feel it is a 7.0 material, but the gun itself is too good for 6.7 either, I rather they leave a gap or go for something completely paper like Lowe or E series
  48. and i must say Ferdinand cant go any lower it is already quite good back in 6.7, now at 6.3 it is one of the best TD at this BR armour is exceptionally good, weakspot are easy to hide, and a great gun, large and roomy only draw back is the poor mobility it is like opposite of JagdPanther
  49. only that a bomb, usually do not have a casing so thick like a tank shell the thick shell casing will more likely to create larger fragment which will carry more inertia and fly further, but also mean smaller area of coverage and hand grenade shape into an egg or cylindrical shape so when it go off, it cover as much area as possible while a shell will flying after perforation, and explosive do not go off simultaneously, it go from one end to another, the fragment will have to over come the inertia of shell thus, the APHE shell will not act like a grenade
  50. For example HESH use a graze fuse for triggering the delay time mechanism, it should be a inertia mechanism, but now we have something like 0.X mm a HESH shell can go through layers and layers of leaf without slowing it down enough to arm the delay fuse, but now in WT, it treat soft object such as bush as armour and allow bushes or leafs to arm the fuse
  51. I can compromise with they fixing post pen and fuse one by one, don't have to be fixed at the same time as long as they aware it is a issue waiting to be fix
  52. I could confirm it is quite difficult to penetrate it with 122 from flank, some slight angle and you can't do much about, it really shouldn't fight 6.3
  53. Nah, I was hoping they are actually testing proper fuse mechanic, but seem I am hoping too much
  54. It would be a great 5.0 or even 5.3 filler depend on the mobility
  55. So we back to APHE meta again
  56. I support, stock grind in challenger and Cent Mk.1 is painful, it doesn't get much better until mk.8 shell unlock
  57. It is a very good tank good rof, smaller turret weakspot decent gun, it is my favourite panther along all variants
  58. i have try to analyse why are german doing so badly at 6.7 and come up with few possible factors 1. RU-251, it is some thing never found in German tree, it is a very powerful tank in a good hand to support slow moving, long range favoriting German tank, but most of them do poorly in this 2. US tank design seem to be favoring in more med to close range combat, with the introduction of T29/T34, Tiger II is no longer the best tank in 6.7, Tiger II now require to aim the hull of US tank or load APCR for the gun mantle, which I found many of German player do not carry any APCR, even with the experience encountering Sherman E2 3. US at 6.7 have T29/T34 for drawing fire and taking hit, while they are support by fast light tank for flanking like T92 and M56, German require competent RU-251 driver and ST-A from Japan 4. Cap circle are magical, they attract player drive into it like fly event it is a death trap, I have see Tiger II H driver, Ferd driver getting into the city side of cap, when there are more obvious choice of route, they pick the one that not suitable for their tank, other Nations would do the same, but Russian tank hold more advantageous in CQC fight, fighting them in City with German tank is using own weakness to fight opponent strength
  59. there was a game i am using my 5.7 British, seeing 2 RU-251 driving from cap C to B in the middle of plain open field like are racing in a F1 i agree German player have to avoid 6.7 currently, not until the RU-251 syndrome gone
  60. so far, i can confirm my Tiger H short 88, Ferdi long 88, Panther F long 75 and Sturer Emil 128 is fine at given range only observe this so call RNG, when i try shooting a KV-2 in the 88 flak truck over 1.2km another test done on 17pdr, when i shoot the same target in the same range, standard AP (lowest muzzle velocity one) have more chance of RNG than APDS so i safely assume it is the penetration energy "bug" hit again, which I have seem it not long after US tank first introduce
  61. wouldnt higher hardness have more issue with shattering due to brittle property?
  62. it is possible they mess up the coding used for test server and put on one of the client stability patch
  63. just tested both solid AP and APHE now i found out there is a pattern of the so call RNG when shooting thinner armour, APHE work like before fragments start to get less and dmg starting to get lower when firing thicker/harder armour, same rule apply to solid AP i guess if it is intended, then gaijin is trying to work toward a more accurate perforation model and fusing system like partial penetration and pre-mature detonation if this is true, i really looking forward to see such mechanics, but no doubt that the residue energy after perforation and fragmentation do need some adjustment
  64. player skill should never take into account when measuring vehicle effectiveness a more suitable way would be compare to similar type vehicle at same, +/-0.3 BR
  65. it would be a good gap filler to ease all the uptiering then
  66. W/R is highly depend on player skill, teammate and opponent skill all those factor should isolate from measuring how good a tank is
  67. W/R is one of the worst tool to measure how good a vehicle is using W/R RU-251 W/R 41%, it must be very bad 6.7 tank, this just an example how wrongly W/R coudl reflect a tank performance W/R is why Japanese plane got absurdly high BR W/R is why P-47 once got so low BR a tank effectiveness should never be measure by how well the driver use it
  68. T29/T34/T32 are not real issue they are good, but just slightly better than German counter part the really thread is IS-6 and uptiering IS-6 should received BR adjustment soon, along side RU-251, thank god there will be less RU-251 rush to die take over important tank slot uptiering is some deep issue we have no idea when will it get fix, it is not only happening at 6.7 for German, but any BR for any nations but i have to agree with warrior412 the 50mm Me410 is a very good ground attacker, yes it does not have such great air to air combat ability compare to US or UK, but they also have less ground killing ability compare to the Me410, and the Ho229 is amazing in both ground attack and air to air combat but i do feel ground attacker spawn cost is way to low, rush to cap in M18 or RU-251 then die and spawn in ground attacker is not a very good game play spawn cost for any ground attack capable plane should be increase to discourage cap rush
  69. yes IS-6 have to go at least 7.0 or 7.3
  70. adding more 4.7-5.3 tank will also resolve 4.7 tank constantly being drag up to 5.7 too
  71. i do agree Maus is suffering in 7.7, but 6.3 tank should not be fighting it either either expand the BR cap and adjust higher Tier, or we have to reduce BR spread below 0.7 so we always have tank like this too weak to be at higher br and too good to be at lower one
  72. i dont know much about US tank, but T-44/85, IS-2 1944, they need to be very close, and almost 90degree entry angle, if T-54 at 7.3 is a problem then rise T-54 1947 BR, we need no more compression, expand to 9.0 or 10.0 and move up higher Tier BR
  73. 6.3 tank will fight it and it will be difficult even from flank BR do not need more compression, but expand the cap on top BR and move up some of the 7.3, 7.7 and 8.0 tank sorry Maus is no room at 7.3 as long as the 1.0 BR spread remain, and to resolve MM/BR issue, it is always better for better tank go up than tank go down, when 5.7 already start having compression issue we have 9.0 for plane, we should do the same for tank, or even 10.0 as cap BR
  74. rather than dropping Maus to 7.3 and create more issue in lower BR it should remain 7.7 and expand BR cap and i though the MAN version VK3002 is just panther prototype, what's the different?
  75. this is freaking mess up then i usually do not carry too much APDS round, as the stand AP have enough penetrating power APDS isnt cheap to spam, and with the increase repair price it is time for me to join the dark-side and spam Russian APHE with minimum repair bill
  76. 17 pdr is affect by recent bug too, unless you shooting APDS, which I have not test the standard solid AP on 17 pdr, US 76mm/75mm suffer the same as APHE bug, basically all the RNG bug hit all Nations i will grind my Cent Mk.1 APDS and see how it go
  77. i am not here to join the shattering fight but i have to point out capped help reduce shattering, no matter it is RHA or FHA shattering happen due to the initial impact shock creating an reflection shock wave driving backward and reflect forward, when those shock meet, it create a compression shock zone and causing shattering failure it is more common to be found on FHA and APCR/APDS, due to the shock wave is highly depended on the impact force i.e. impact velocity and material hardness therefore, if the RHA is thick enough and the impact velocity is high enough, projectile size is large enough, it will shatter theoretically , but usually RHA do not have the strength to withstand such high penetrating power and the projectile will simply overcome the armour strength and enter hydrodynamic penetration, thus, what the very fight generation long rod penetrator and HEAT does
  78. using penetration depth as fusing is very wrong to begin with they should completely remodel their base fuse mechanism
  79. i doubt they are adjusting it because all shell are being affect by this, Solid AP, APHE, HEAT etc i guess this is a bug more than their intended adjustment
  80. KT105 have smaller weakspot and better gun KT105 is better than T29/T34 T29/T34 have very weak hull, it is easy to hide, but they also trade off their gun, their APHE round is not as good as Tiger II H the solid AP is never as good as APHE in game and turret is strong but not completely immune, APCR good through it with ease T29 is slightly better than Tiger II H, but definitely not 0.3 BR better the same can argue Tiger II H compare to Caernarvon and IS-2 1944 (yes, IIS-2 1944 should really stay at 6.7, it is weaker than T29, Tiger II H, but not 0.3 BR weaker)
  81. i kill quite a lot of T29 in my Panther through low glacis if anyone have issue with long 88, it is the player is T29 better than Tiger II H, yeah, i would say hull is easier to hide, but it is not a 0.3 BR better
  82. I think the problem are mainly those plane with ground killing capabilities require Spawn cost increase, which include rocket, bomb, and cannon do it like the old days plane choosing ground attack armaments have a higher spawn cost than standard air to air armaments we also need a way to encourage people to drive SPAA, increase reward for shooting down plane might do the trick
  83. i dont know, i have more kill with MK103, 50mm, bomb than rocket but generally, i really think plane spawn cost have to increase, not only SPAA take up spawn cost and if the opponent do not have any air, you are crippling yourself it also promote rush cap tactic, it is bad for GF, i dont want to see a M18 rush to cap and die, so as RU-251
  84. spawn in RU-251, go cap, die and come back with 500kg bomb or MK 103 Spawn T-50, go cap, die and come back with attacker see, it is not rocket alone out of hand it is all attacker have way too low spawn cost
  85. the fragmentation pattern must be change but i doubt this is a intention nerf or bug because it is not hitting only APHE but also solid AP shell, and this kind of RNG happen before, way before British was added
  86. higher chance of setting fire slightly higher chance of crew damage British do have APHE, they call it SAP, but only use in Naval gun APHE does do more dmg than solid AP, but not like a nuke Recovering a vehicle from fire damage is so much harder than just penetration on it, and when a solid projectile perforate an armour, the red hot fragment flying all around in the fighting compartment is not present, not to mention the projectile could have bounce inside, most of the crew would just abandon the tank at that case so back to the topic, APHE really have a higher chance of casualty than solid AP, but it trade off the chance of fuse malfunction, muzzle velocity, shell structure integrity for slightly increase in damage chance in WT we does not have fuse failure, shell shattering, and we could repair modules in a blink of eye so I see Gaijin balance it with ROF, it isn't really the best way to do it, but as long as APHE working like they should (doing more damage but not nuke) i think it is something we have to compromise in balance of game play and reality and pretty much the pure impact shock from a projectile is enough to cause the primary explosive to trigger the explosive train in the propellant, having HE filling or not
  87. I love this tank generally, but the stock grind is pathetic the stock AP round have very poor dmg (occasionally direct hit to ammo rack just turn it orange), and once I have to land 4 shot on a Tiger H, even the Tiger H is not angle and all penetrate not to mention the poor penetration on slope with stock AP but once the APDS is unlock, it is a much better tank, while it is stock, it is even worse than my Comet, but the armour is great in hull down position and require APDS to shine
  88. they also should implement no magic repair of module, and no removing the unconscious crew with 20s, and a proper fusing system too many thing are broken in GF
  89. APHE is not a grenade APHE is not a grenade APHE is not a grenade it is very important, that's why have to repeat 3 times some/most of the grenade have preform fragmentation pattern grenade have much thinner casing tank shell have retain some inertia even after perforation of tank armour, this will result the fragments having similar inertia, thus, the pattern will mostly end up like a cone
  90. unfortunately, APHE is still doing that in game
  91. after playing with my Ferd in SB event APHE still acting with sphere of death
  92. let me just add another one, fighting a Tiger I H, 1 shot center mass, hull, disable turret ring only 2 shot center mass, turret gunner side, kill the gunner only 3 shot lower hull center, damage the gear box only 4 shot left side turret, loader dead only then the Tiger I H 1 shot me
  93. avoid 4.7, with the new BR of T-34-85 and IS-2 it is almost 90% fighting Tiger H/E +Panther or T-34-85 + IS-2
  94. i just come from a game, RB, 7.0 or 7.3 max, i can be sure, Berlin, a RU-251 have 7 kills and 0 Dead when I die
  95. One major advantageous of Japan is their variety they have fast, high climb plane like N1K, Ki-84 and J2M pushing player down, while those slower but more agile in horizontal plane like Zero swarm the player that got push down, everytime when I fly A6M5, the match are decided on our N1K, J2M and Ki-84
  96. Expand BR cap, and reduce MM BR spread adjust BR according to vehicle performance not W/R or K/D. Rework Ground Force Reward system.
  97. A tank performance shall never judge by player competency a tank can be strong but hard to master, an equally strong tank can be much easier to play with
  98. it wont be so simple, for APHE, legality, exploding pattern of fragments variety by size and momentum, which depend on the thickness of the shell, the energy of the HE filling, and the residue velocity after perforation while for solid AP the same issue apply, we also have to apply the hardness and thickness of the armour instead of HE filling then for APDS it is even worse due to hyper-velocity penetration resulting in hydrodynamic penetration then we have fuse, which the arming mechanism should be based on inertia rather than thickness of armour i doubt Gaijin have the ability to do such complicate modelling of all those physic, and some of the constant in those formula arent even accessible by civilian
  99. APHE is no grenade during WWII some grenade already have preform fragmentation pattern, and it explode in a 360 sphere with consistent size of fragmentation with most of them using purely time fuse with manual arming mechanism while APHE is a projectile flying over at least twice the speed of sound, even penetration an armour would not suddenly slow down to a stop, the fragmentation should never be a sphere not even half sphere, and not to mention the broken fusing in WT
  100. what do you mean by GOSTH CANNON? binocular aiming? shot coming out from the view point instead of gun barrel? for the latter one, i think in SB now shell start at muzzle position, if it is not in RB, then yes, i think it should be in
  101. i just come back from a wonderful game, fighting against an IS-2 in my Avenger the shell go through my very top side turret front, hit the module in the middle of the turret then ricochet into the lower fighting compartment, and explode like a grenade WT is a magical place
  102. i got lots of game for 5.7 (RB), including US/UK got uptier to fight 5.7, since T-34-85 and IS-2 drop to this BR, combine with German Tiger H/E and Panther D
  103. i just quit the game and let it crew lock, swap to another nations, everytime i got uptier more than 0.7, except 6.7, i quit when i got uptier more than 0.3
  104. Stick to 6.3 for the moment, more down-tiers and the Ferdinand, Jagdpanther and King Tiger Porsche are good tanks. Pray your teammate who drive the Ferdinand, Tiger II P/H does not rush to city cap if 6.7 vehicle do not get uptier, German are very competitive, so as other Nations it is just the BR and MM kick in, and no way to avoid it, 4.7 get to fight 5.7, 6.3 get to fight 7.3, 6.7 get to fight 7.7 etc
  105. T29 have a weak hull, i kill alot of them in my Panther F which is sitting at 6.0 it is about the same as Tiger II H, might be slightly better due to weakspot on hull, but if it hull down, the player is playing the tank right IS-6 given what they have, 7.0 is about right, of cause we could give it the 230 shell and boost it 7.3, if the IS-6 did use it irl the issue is IS-6 fight tank below 7.0 and no they are not equal to RU-251, as least they do not have 320mm pen over 2km, if you got spot in the fast -9 degree gun depression RU-251, either you opponent out smart you, or you playing it wrong
  106. and I m quite sure when it come to composite material, their mechanical response with stress and shock loading is more than just comparing penetrator number and armour thickness number
  107. And this will crumble like a falling bridge, when teammate fail one by one, eventually the remaining player will be swarm by the opponents let say skill level of all nations are close to normally distribute, which lead to even lower skilled player could be carried by another skilled player in a plane that fit the meta and you are welcome to start you own thread regarding JS/MA, this is not the thread about JS/MA
  108. aircraft/loadouts

    hum is a hard decision for me.... I do not like German tree to fill with copy and paste like MiG and Sabre, and I want more distinct jet for German but on the other hand, not even a trial prototype was build, which mean all flight characteristic will have to be a estimation, and seeing how it usually end (Ho-229) I think I have to say No this time but I really appreciate your passion and hard work
  109. about 10-20% big in my 4.7, 10% big in my 6.3 and 90% of time is Abandoned Factory from 4.0 all the way up to 6.7
  110. luckily i still see Sinai in my 4.7 line up but I have not see Kursk for almost a month now
  111. You could easily lose silver even you have premium account mainly due to the repair cost i pay almost 5k SL repair even I got up Tier to fight 7.7 in my 6.7 tank, and I barely could do any damage to those 7.7
  112. may be due to the time i play my firefly see 5.3+ quite alot, and sometime 5.7 but when i get into a 4.7 game, my 4.7 tank is pretty competitive I still couldn't figure the best way to use Charioteer in RB, due to the lack of gun depression, small map and slow reverse and for Caernarvon I am still doing more Assist than kill, especially when facing Tiger II or Ferd
  113. same argument can be said we got a mode of SB which enforce everything you want then you can either keep asking the developer for a RB+ that suit what you want or you just have to deal with it I want a RB with no icon/ enforce cockpit view too, i make my voice in suggestion, if the developer choose not to listen, I can either keep fighting for one in suggestion or deal with it the majority is enjoying what WT offer, I can not always force what I want on the majority if this game do not fulfill what you need, why still play this game instead of fighting in suggesting, you chose to post in a irrelevant thread, this is not fighting for the thing you want, this is trolling
  114. Don't feed the troll he just trolling because he couldn't turn RB into the game mode he want i understand some JS user want a slightly more arcadish game mode than SB but instead of asking for a new game mode, he chose to troll any thread MA related
  115. May be I should try that prime time 2300-0000 usually end up with a small team game, around 10 players per team only
  116. what time you guys usually playing? 2300 and 0000 BST usually will end up in 5.7 or 5.3
  117. I actually prefer Avenger over firefly when got up Tier in 5.7, both do not have enough armour to take punishment, but average offer extra gun depression Tiger H is a less leathal opponent since the 17 pdr can go through the hull having a high chance killing the gunner and driver in 1 shot, panther is my worse enemy, if I shoot the lower glacis the transmission will absorb most the fragments, if I shoot the turret usually just kill 2 of the crew IS-2 though is matter of who saw who first
  118. I can confirm I do better with German plane than US as a below average player mainly due to the fire power and climb rates
  119. It happen long before Easter holidays kick in, German player was never better than other Nations, with the new T28, T34 introduced, and more CQC map, German tank are no longer top dog, of cause they are going downhill faster than rollercoaster And to make matters worse, I have no idea why could a Tiger II rush to cap even the ticket bleed is so slow and we already have a few RU-251 in team
  120. for some reason, i fight Tiger/ Panther 90% of time, if not them, then it will be IS-2....
  121. in AB i would pick big armour, since you will easily be spot no matter how careful you are if it is RB so SB, i would pick big gun over big armour
  122. it might be a good gap between Crusader MK II and MK I, but I dont feel it would be able to replace MK I, since they are still 20mm only
  123. Just one issue I always want to express about CAS, not HO-229/Rocket related currently I do feel the spawn cost of CAS is too low it is encouraging people to spawn in fast tank, rush to cap, die and respawn in a CAS plane plane especially with good payload or ground attacking ability e.g. AP/HVAP cannon should be a reward for good player to earn it, it should need more spawn point than just rush cap
  124. isnt there a Crusader AA with triple Oerlikon variant?
  125. Which one do u have issue handling? T29, i kill alot of them in my Panther F Tiger 2 sla, just same as Tiger II H T-34-100, all it got just a 100 gun, the hull is till a T-34, it is a Russian Super hellcat minus gun depression RU-251, paper thin armour, might be little bit too low at 6.7, but it is hard tank to master IS-6, 7.0 is about right for what it have now, only issue is, it fight tank below 7.0 T95, i kill quite alot in my Panther Strv, still a Cent Mk.3
  126. which hour do you play on which server? currently I am usually playing around 00:00 GMT on all server, for about 1 hour it usually result in US+British vs Russian 5.3, sometime 5.7 or US+British+Russian vs German + Japan at 5.7 i do get British+US vs German only at 4.3 but only like 1 out of 20 game
  127. Seriously? the long 88 is one of the best Tier IV cannon if i see only Panther/Tiger Turret, i can 9/10 kill the gunner and commander too if i see only Centurion Mk1 Turret, I can 9/10 kill all the crews and you compare a 5.7 Tiger/Panther to a 6.3 medium? Again? T29 might be slightly better than Tiger II H in terms of defence, due to the weakspot is on the hull, but Tiger II have a better gun than T29 and Caernarvon armour is not even close to Tiger II level