Jump to content

Lower/mid tier match making post 1.95 patch


10 hours ago, warrior412 said:

I have a few vehicles whose results contest that...

 

Everybody here knows you had 0 battles with Ger 5.7 before 1.71 hit, for that matter the T-34-85 and T-44 were the only 2 vehicles above 5.3 which you had played up to then. You have no idea what it was like to play Ger 5.7 and higher in those days.

 

10 hours ago, warrior412 said:

Ah yes...it’s great to face 7.0s with a tank cobbled together with parts from 3.X and 5.X—not to worry, the “7.0s are very few!” 

 

Unfortuantely that's not how it works in WT. The 3.x and 5.x vehicles in question have reasons for being lower, if for example the M10 was based only on gun performance then it would be at least 5.0, the 75 Jumbo based only only its armor would be at least 5.7. You see where I'm going with this?

 

10 hours ago, warrior412 said:

The saddest part about this is that I’m pretty sure even you admitted the Jumbo 76 was fine at 5.7—but now you’re backtracking.

 

It doesn't matter, the fact remains that even at 6.0 the 76 Jumbo is perfectly balanced. 

 

10 hours ago, warrior412 said:

The M18 has a gun from 3.7 on a vehicle that can be murdered by just about everything and mobility that’s mirrored by the R3’s (which also pops up at 3.7.) What makes 5.7 so critical?

 

The combination of firepower, speed and mobility has few rivals in WT,. 

 

11 hours ago, warrior412 said:

. I suppose you think it was great to turn US 4.X into one of the barest wastelands in all WT?

The game doesn't rotate around US, 4.7-5.3 was a wasteland for other nations thanks to US clubbers, now they are simply more spread out.

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, aBrumz_suFFers said:

Everybody here knows you had 0 battles with Ger 5.7 before 1.71 hit

 

The bigger question is why you think patches from many years ago matter at all. (Also, I commonly found myself into 5.7 the moment I got to/above 4.7.)

 

2 hours ago, aBrumz_suFFers said:

for that matter the T-34-85 and T-44 were the only 2 vehicles above 5.3 which you had played up to then. You have no idea what it was like to play Ger 5.7 and higher in those days.

 

Lmao, wrong again:

 

-I played many vehicles that put me into 5.7 matches then; Germany did alright when they didn’t fumble the match so badly that an uptiered Hetzer/Jagdpanzer IV had to lead

 

-I only played the rather mediocre T-44 substantially later—your recollections of my record are simply wrong

 

-The real issue was performance since 1.71 and I’ve shown fine results with them

 

2 hours ago, aBrumz_suFFers said:

Unfortuantely that's not how it works in WT. The 3.x and 5.x vehicles in question have reasons for being lower, if for example the M10 was based only on gun performance then it would be at least 5.0, the 75 Jumbo based only only its armor would be at least 5.7. You see where I'm going with this?

 

Ah yes...the Jumbo would be 5.7 if its BR was centered on the armor that gets countered by 5.0.

 

2 hours ago, aBrumz_suFFers said:

It doesn't matter, the fact remains that even at 6.0 the 76 Jumbo is perfectly balanced. 

 

Lmao

 

2 hours ago, aBrumz_suFFers said:

The game doesn't rotate around US, 4.7-5.3 was a wasteland for other nations thanks to US clubbers, now they are simply more spread out.

 

Ah yes, because the Americans were competitive it was a wasteland.

 

Suurrre.

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, aBrumz_suFFers said:

Competitive? They were borderline clubbers.

 

Lmao, no, they weren't clubbing. Let's not get into revisionist history here.

 

WRs were high for the Americans, but this was because Allied teams play the objectives with much more zeal than their foes--not that the Allies clubbed. As far as exchange rates went, the Americans' were unremarkable.

 

What was done to them for just playing the game well was disgraceful--it's left the US tree at mid-tier badly barren.

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 4
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, warrior412 said:

Lmao, no, they weren't clubbing. Let's not get into revisionist history here.

 

So saying that the PzIV's are clubbing can also be labeled as "revisionist history", good to know. 

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Rainbowprincess said:

mUhH superior objective play:crazy:


It's simply the truth. The Allies did (and do) pursue the objectives with more zeal and so they won more.

 

They shouldn't be punished for winning when their enemies were (almost literally) not trying to win.

 

3 minutes ago, aBrumz_suFFers said:

So saying that the PzIV's are clubbing can also be labeled as "revisionist history", good to know. 

 

Nope (though you've already denied the Panzer IVs' years of clubbing anyway).

 

The Panzer IVs slaughtered and won. The Allies just played the objectives. There's a difference there.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 2
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yesterday I played soviet 10.3 on ash river with a single cap in the riverbed. I went there with my t-80b and another team mate. I haven't seen a single Abrams down there for the entire match. They all went on the plateau and died.

 

mUhH superior objective play.

 

and yes, I don't discuss this topic seriously with you anymore.

  • Confused 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Rainbowprincess said:

mUhH superior objective play:crazy:

Panzer 4G the secret hellcat.

Tiger 1H the best brawler and counter flanker in WT.

Jumbo 76 super overtired tank need 5.3.

Stabilizer dont give any real adventage.

Old rocket damage model was fair and balanced.

People is hyped by movility but RU is OP and German 41 is undertired.

Meta ingame is the german heavy armor

etc...

:lol2::lol2::lol2::lol2::lol2:

 

 

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 2
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Rainbowprincess said:

and yes, I don't discuss this topic seriously with you anymore.

 

There isn't really anything to discuss.

 

German teams didn't play the objectives but deny it while Allied teams did play the objectives (and got punished with it). Everyone can see what's gone on for themselves.

 

3 minutes ago, Flak_Dancer said:

Panzer 4G the secret hellcat.

 

The Panzer IV G is indeed more similar to the M18 than it is different. Alas, since it's German it must be derided (and by Germans no less).

 

4 minutes ago, Flak_Dancer said:

Tiger 1H the best brawler and counter flanker in WT.

 

Fake claim--I never said the Tiger Is are the best brawlers/anti-flankers around, but it is true they do well at these things.

 

5 minutes ago, Flak_Dancer said:

Jumbo 76 super overtired tank need 5.3.

 

Considering it has a 5.0 hull and a 3.7 gun, giving it a 6.0 BR is a bit of a joke.

 

As for saying I said it needed 5.3, I've said that realistically that'd be alright but that 5.7 would suffice. Again, this is simply you making a fake claim.

 

7 minutes ago, Flak_Dancer said:

Stabilizer dont give any real adventage.

 

Stabilizers are hyped; APHE is commonly more valuable.

 

7 minutes ago, Flak_Dancer said:

Old rocket damage model was fair and balanced.

 

Despite all the hype, rockets still accounted for a paltry percentage of kills. The rocket hype was a hoax and it was proven as such.

 

8 minutes ago, Flak_Dancer said:

People is hyped by movility but RU is OP and German 41 is undertired.

 

The Ru 251's mobility is not what makes it undertiered, it's simply better than its peers. The German M41 is also extremely well equipped and yet it sits only +0.3 over its less sophisticated basis.

 

As I've not said what you claim, your quote here is just another fake claim.

 

28 minutes ago, Flak_Dancer said:

Meta ingame is the german heavy armor

 

Armor is valuable, despite the derision people give it.

 

Somehow the Germans' armor is bad but the Jumbo is OP, right? :016:

 

 

 

If you'd just stop trying to see Germany as inferior all the time, you'd be a lot better off.

  • Like 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Flak_Dancer said:

image.thumb.png.dd01d0a2920b5251b15ca459

:lol2:

you-have-no-power-here-meme-feat-good-1-

 

 

People ignore what they cannot argue with.

 

To ignore someone is to simply concede you cannot argue with what they've said--effectively all you've said is "you're right." ;)

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, warrior412 said:

The Panzer IVs slaughtered and won. The Allies just played the objectives. There's a difference there.

Not true. Allied tanks had high K/D meaning they also slaughtered oposition and won. It the same as PzIVs.

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, KH_Alan said:

Not true. Allied tanks had high K/D meaning they also slaughtered oposition and won. It the same as PzIVs.

 

Yet it is still observable that Axis generally start to make objectives less of a priority at certain BRs, for x y and z reasons.

 

This isn't the only place this item is discussed, and noted.

 

So why is there such a passion for others to deny it?

 

And so since games are won by many different routes (steam rolls, ticket bleed from caps, one team burning through SP, too many people jumping in planes and leaving the ground to be overrun), I agree that Allied teams in these BRs don't just win by objectives. But that doesn't really counter the idea that at 5.3 upwards there is a noticeable pattern in some games where German lead Axis teams stumble due to lack of trying to control caps. But still since there is quite the denial going on regarding this with just childish responses I doubt there is much sensible discussion to be had.

 

And so this is about low and mid tiers right? Not about someone's experience at 10.3 being used to attempt to derail the thread and make it personal... again... So obvious it must be quite embarrassing for them.

  • Like 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, LahvanCz said:

They were not and my results prove it. (yes, I took that argument from you... thanks)

 

Eh, no. The global statistics of the relevant US vehicles were by no means extraordinary--they did not necessitate the forced exodus that's occurred.

 

Also, please spare me--you're claiming I made and argument that I didn't.

 

1 hour ago, Deranger79 said:

But still since there is quite the denial going on regarding this with just childish responses I doubt there is much sensible discussion to be had.

 

Right now there's little room to talk about Germany seriously because serious discussion of Germany's issues simply isn't tolerated by the players who are hurt by these problems. Whatever it is--pride, an unwillingness to be introspective, whatever--talk on this matter is essentially forbidden by the people who would benefit the most from finding solutions. Instead, we get this denialism. Denialism prevents progress, the problem persists (and worsens) and here we are today until tomorrow comes.

 

As a German main myself, helping Germany is a major issue for me and I'd like to see it pan out--I want to see Germany do better. That's why I've started this thread to try cutting through the nonsense so that these problems can be alleviated. Perhaps my try will work, idk:

 

 

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Deranger79 said:

 

Yet it is still observable that Axis generally start to make objectives less of a priority at certain BRs, for x y and z reasons.

 

This isn't the only place this item is discussed, and noted.

 

So why is there such a passion for others to deny it?

 

And so since games are won by many different routes (steam rolls, ticket bleed from caps, one team burning through SP, too many people jumping in planes and leaving the ground to be overrun), I agree that Allied teams in these BRs don't just win by objectives. But that doesn't really counter the idea that at 5.3 upwards there is a noticeable pattern in some games where German lead Axis teams stumble due to lack of trying to control caps. But still since there is quite the denial going on regarding this with just childish responses I doubt there is much sensible discussion to be had.

 

And so this is about low and mid tiers right? Not about someone's experience at 10.3 being used to attempt to derail the thread and make it personal... again... So obvious it must be quite embarrassing for them.

Because my answer was directly tided to PzIVs and them being OP while Allied tanks supposedly were not.

 

Statistical numbers are facts and those were showing the same result for PzIVs and 76 mm Shermans. If by those numbers PzIVs were slaughtering opposition to win exactly the same goes for 76 mm Shermans. Any explanation without proof is only an opinion and not a fact. This is what may answer was.

 

Since we are at observations considering for lower to mid BRs (I played with 4.7 lineup) since 76 mm Sherman BR raise Germans mostly go for objectives and be first to cap (even on full uptier to 5.7). So how come players suddenly changed their mentality?

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Deranger79 said:

So why is there such a passion for others to deny it?

Maybe because many others don’t share the same observations? I can’t see any difference in general behavior of all teams. Talking about Germany I see them go to the caps first in most games. At some BRs they simply can’t be first because of lacking mobility, but very often „Axis“ teams hold the caps for several minutes until the get thrown out because of being scouted constantly,  bombed or bypassed by much more agile counters.

The same can be seen at other BRs for other nations. Stating a thesis and trying to explain it with own observations will always bring up biased opinions.

 

19 minutes ago, warrior412 said:

Perhaps my try will work, idk:

I followed that thread from the start, but never had hope of a real discussion. I am sorry, but that’s your own fault, you asked a question and gave in your opinion the absolute answer in the same post. Why should anybody try to argue with you? 

 

19 minutes ago, warrior412 said:

As a German main myself, helping Germany is a major issue for me and I'd like to see it pan out--I want to see Germany do better.

„Ceterum censeo Cartaginem esse delendam!“

Edited by tranquillium
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, tranquillium said:

I followed that thread from the start, but never had hope of a real discussion. I am sorry, but that’s your own fault, you asked a question and gave in your opinion the absolute answer in the same post. Why should anybody try to argue with you? 

 

I pointed out the faults with the various claims as I see them--and considering that I am an experienced player, my comments are definitely reasonably based. I did not say they were absolute answers, I said quite clearly that they were my reactions to the claims.

 

36 minutes ago, tranquillium said:

„Ceterum censeo Cartaginem esse delendam!“

 

I want to see Germany do better. Screaming "Germany suffers!" will not make Germany better.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, KH_Alan said:

 

Since we are at observations considering for lower to mid BRs (I played with 4.7 lineup) since 76 mm Sherman BR raise Germans mostly go for objectives and be first to cap (even on full uptier to 5.7). So how come players suddenly changed their mentality

 

Sorry, the main part was more to the thread than your comment. But still you personally deny there is a point in the BRs where not going for objectives can be noted as an issue (not every game of course, just noticeable trends).

 

The 10.3 comment was directed elsewhere. Because that BS has support... Which sort of sums up level of discussion certain people bring this down to when people don't agree with them.

 

I'm not sure what observations you are talking about regarding Germany so I can't answer that. What teams are you in, what are you against, what composition are both teams BR wise and therefore vehicle wise, what results are you referring to, is this just the couple of weeks since BR changes or including legacy matches? I don't need all of that to consider your question but without more I am not completely sure what you mean.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, tranquillium said:

Maybe because many others don’t share the same observations? I can’t see any difference in general behavior of all teams. Talking about Germany I see them go to the caps first in most games. At some BRs they simply can’t be first because of lacking mobility, but very often „Axis“ teams hold the caps for several minutes until the get thrown out because of being scouted constantly,  bombed or bypassed by much more agile counters.

The same can be seen at other BRs for other nations. Stating a thesis and trying to e

 

Maybe. You personally might come from that but for others this counter opinion is not considered.

 

Ask Miragen, as a player who does have quite a focus on Germany he explained a situation around vehicles at these mid BRs, resulting in a tend he at least understood as a possibility.

 

If Germany/Axis do always heavily go for caps then fair enough, but I will say that more often than not I notice a lack of ever moving forward (not every match, and not always a loss of the map allows for the enemy impaling themselves on well positioned Axis until numbers are depleted enough to push the caps back).

 

But hey, if you really have never seen it low to mid then fair enough. It is a matter of trust (or not) to consider that these observations are more than just one offs but do follow trends, trends that seemed to show issues of win rate at these BRs.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Deranger79 said:

Sorry, the main part was more to the thread than your comment. But still you personally deny there is a point in the BRs where not going for objectives can be noted as an issue (not every game of course, just noticeable trends).

Simply because I don't see Germany not going for objectives. Germany not reaching objectives because Allies get there first and dig in yes but that doesn't mean they didn't go for objectives. So I am not denying it I just don't see those games which proves the point that observations are not objective but subjective view.

Edited by KH_Alan
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, warrior412 said:

 

I want to see Germany do better. Screaming "Germany suffers!" will not make Germany better.

 

But since from many threads you aren't allowed to go there we shall just sit back and hope changes become justified and we can all be happy when you come across that "don't want to improve ever" team. At least that sickness is very much player specific and nothing to do with nations played.

 

I mean, pointing out ideas that some can benefit from (using tanks in non standard ways) is a bad thing here because rather than considering it it's an immediate tirade of un-constructive babble from the usuals, taking understandings of the comments to an extreme. But then you play a match and your Allied team get stomped because people are using vehicles as described! Anecdotal, but it does make me consider more how teams win (what they do) rather than lose (just focusing on the enemy).

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, KH_Alan said:

Simply because I don't see Germany not going for objectives. Germany not reaching objectives because Allies get there first and dig in yes but that doesn't mean they didn't go for objectives. So I am not denying it I just don't see those games which proves the point that observations are not objective but subjective view.

 

Understood. But myself and many others I have seen in other parts of the forum suggest not going for caps and whole teams hanging back. And from playing alot of RU and Japan before I quit I came across this A LOT.

 

Again, ask Miragen, in these situations I describe he had a good reflection on it (people not willing to push with certain vehicles because of what "keeps happening").

 

Unfortunately because it is an important point and some have observed it as the norm around mid BRs it will always be a sore point.

 

The direction I come from is noticing that I DO see it and think people breaking from it would improve matches (because they are losses). But if you don't see it then it all goes back to just "Allies always OP", which in many cases is just lame... And now we have a 4.0-5.0 black hole to contend with.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...