Shots through the side when I make the mistake of sticking my gun around a corner are not my point of offense.
Shots frontally to the barrel tip by the guy I am aiming at are what I take massive offense to.
And shouldn’t long reloads already balance out most large-caliber guns? The only cases of large calibers with fast reloads are glass cannons (SAV 20.12.48 and Bkan 1C) or are at BRs where most opponents have rounds able to frontally pen regardless (AMX-50 Surbaisse/Surblinde, IS-7, Object 279) and thus don’t need to specifically aim at the barrel.
It’s the machines which are weighed down by lots of armor still being able to be frontally crippled by literally anything which I have a problem with. It means you can only ever hump a corner/hill passively and almost never use your heavy in any sort of aggressive manner, despite CQC city maps clearly being designed to allow aggressive use of heavies.
A Maus throws away everything for its armor - the barrel being able to be frontally disabled means it has thrown away all its mobility for almost nothing except delaying the inevitable.
Same story for a T95, T32, Tortoise, IS-4M, or several other examples.
If I stick my gun barrel around a corner and someone shoots through the side of it, that’s my own damn fault.
But how can I not present the gun barrel tip as a target when I need to aim at the guy I am looking at frontally to kill him? Barrel wiggling doesn’t work so long as the opponent isn’t stupid enough to try shooting. And that’s IF your tank even has sufficient gun traverse to enable wiggling in a meaningful way in the first place.
And why is that? Its exactly the same thing. You are aiming for him and he is aiming for you.
I have a great question for you. Which tank in your list has an armored barrel? Give me one example of a tank in this game that uses ARMOR for their gun barrel instead of regular steel. No tank has ever (to my knowledge, please prove me wrong) used armor on/for its barrel. They all have UNPROTECTED steel as a barrel. So in theory, it should actually be weaker than RHA. As much as you don’t like the barrels being damage frontally, it has the potential to be done, and thus it can happen in game. It only makes sense.
No, it is not. I can move my turret to where my barrel tip isn’t sticking around the corner and thus not present it as a target.
There is no way to engage someone who knows I am there without presenting the barrel tip as a target. And whatever piece of late game heavy armor I am using is already penalized by a lengthy reload, low mobility, and in many cases either slow turret traverse or no turret at all. With all those penalties, that is why I see the ability to frontally cripple the barrel as “an insult to injury for heavy armor.”
It is unnecessary. Every machine should not be able to frontally cripple every other machine it could ever face. That isn’t “balance” - that is utter stupidity which encourages mindless spam of only a select handful of machines instead of using the correct tool for the job.
If you’re uptiered in say a 6.3 Jumbo 76, you should not spawn the Jumbo 76 early on, and instead use the M36B2, M41A1, or M109A1 as a first spawn. You should not be rewarded for picking the wrong machine for a situation by being given a “get out of jail free card,” when the heavy you cripple the barrel tip of has no other card to play BUT its “armor.”
Barrel damage is the same as random transmission failures - technically realistic but terrible for gameplay.
To my knowledge, it happened ONCE in WW2 when a Pershing sent a round down a Tiger 1E’s barrel by pure stroke of luck, splitting the muzzle brake in half.
If a machine throws away all its mobility for frontal protection, but then still doesn’t have actually practical frontal protection, all you get is a mostly useless tank save for killing unaware idiots.
Again its the same. If you can hit him or his barrel he can hit you back. You cannot shoot around corner without your gun visually clearing corner. And when you do that you become target too.
1 Like
Nope, because one machine has far slower reload and turret traverse than the other, thereby biasing things in favor of the guy with the weaker, fast-reloading gun. It is not “counterplay,” it is stupidity.
So don’t play vechicles that are known to get their barrels destroyed as they don’t suit Your playstyle.
Another question, which you seem like you’ll just ignore. What is armor for? Why does the Maus have such heavy armor? Is it to protect the CREW and internal modules. It has nothing to do with the gun, otherwise it would also be armored.
Two different things. One is a mechanical failure, the other is damage. If I took a 75mm gun and shot the barrel of a 128mm and it hit it, it would ALWAYS damage it and warrant replacement of the gun.
I already played most of such things, and fully spaded them, no less. I want to be able to enjoy them in their intended role, like I can most other machines.
Right now there are too many things stacked against such vehicles for no good reason - it is overdue to remove some of those mechanics unfairly stacked against them.
Barrel damage made sense before HEATFS was added to the game. Now, it no longer does, when every single nation has HEAT dispensers below the BR of the heaviest armor they could meet, and also more recently have access to artillery that don’t even need to aim.
A machine which throws away all its mobility for armor should not still have a frontal cripple point that removes all ability for it to shoot back. Period.
Why? All vehicles have this weakpoint… Should they remove the machine gun ports and cupolas like World Of Tanks did?
Why wont you answer my questions? Do you have to deflect back to the same “it’s not fair because armor makes you slow and dumb” argument in order to have any semblance of making sense?
How is it not counterplay? Everything in WT is counterplay you just need to learn how to defend against it.
Here is simpler analogy. You want for WT to be boxing match where there are certain rules yet WT is MMA fight where everything is allowed.
You can enjoy them if You use them in proper way.
It is unfairly stacked in the favor of the guy with the weaker gun and faster reload and better mobility. That is why. It adds insult to injury to machines which are already slow, have slow turrets or no turrets at all, and long reloads.
And honestly, yes, I do think removing cupola and MG port weakspots would be a very positive change for the game at large. Either you can pen the actual armor layout of the opponent, or you can’t and must instead go around.
It’s not counterplay in any sense of the word when things are so slighted towards the guy with better mobility and faster-reloading guns.
Heavies already have to deal with long reloads, low or no mobility, slow or in some cases no turrets at all, and with all those penalties you seriously think that after paying those prices such machines should still be able to be frontally crippled by literally anything they come across?
I do not know what to tell you, man.
And all a guy has to do to counter turret wiggling is wait for the wiggler to get impatient and stop wiggling. There is literally nothing a heavy can do if the guy isn’t dumb enough to shoot you while you wiggle.
If You allow enemy to cripple You while having a chance to do the same to him, that is a skill issue, nothing more.
1 Like
If You allow Yourself to be in that situation it is Your fault from the start