Looks like the mother of all TT gaps. The Panther II at 6.7 is badly needed. Especially since the Leopard I got nerfed to 8.0 and now has trouble facing stabilized tanks with thermals.
5 Likes
Yes, we need all original 3 more than ever.
2 Likes
Let’s not exaggerate, other trees have it way worse, and we have no shortage of tanks to bring… although 7.3 is a little empty after the (much needed) decompression.
Leo1 should imho always have been 7.7. It was ridiculous at 7.3, I say it as a German main. It contributed to the above average uptiering rates of 6.7 too because everyone was at that lineup.
Since 8.0 is basically the old 7.7, its BR is fine, and will get even better once the next set of BRs are decompressed.
Why did puma ifv gets a nerf this update? They added ammo filler…
2 Likes
Leo 1 is fine at 8.0, compare it to the T-54 1951. Issue is the lack of tanks either side.
Leo protos would be good for below 8.0 and the 1A1 would be nice for 8.3, as it’s stabilised.
2 Likes
Absolutely. Should have been 7.7 ages ago, and 8.0 is basically the new 7.7 after the decompression. It was laughable at 7.3.
Yes. That’s sort of what I was getting at. Not all countries, not even major countries, have an uninterrupted production of AFVs, and obviously Germany has a big gap in between the end of the war, and the Leopard. Even its prototypes.
This is obviously true of other tech trees as well. Building tanks wasn’t exactly Italy’s priority in the late 1940s.
I don’t know enough about the prototypes that competed for the final design selection. I know a lot more about German WW2 AFVs than I do postwar. But would they really be suitable at lower BRs? Because just going by what I expect the development process could have been like, I suspect that they would share the same overall traits as the final design, no? Emphasis on mobility, virtually zero armour, low reload times, lolpen ability. If you have a “worse Leopard” it could maybe go to 7.7, but really, that doesn’t sound like the sort of vehicle that should routinely meet end WW2 stuff to me. It inevitably powercreeps them.
The real design gap is between 1945 and 1955. Soviet, American (and to a degree Swedish, see the Krankvagn) tanks were still being designed with WW2 lessons in mind. T-400-100, the early T-54, all the late American heavies etc. I’d like to see a couple equivalents for Germany (and a few other tech trees), even if they are speculative (Ho Ri is a good example).
Like I said, I realise this isn’t a priority whatsoever, I realise it’s subjective, I realise many players are against the idea. It’s just my personal preference. :)
1 Like
“once” like they plan on doing it
1 Like
I think they will tbh. As more vehicles are introduced and they are less paranoid about queue times being affected by it. It’ll be too slow and inconsistently implemented, but I think it will come.
Queue times have never been a legitimate argument by them though, it’s always been their way of distracting the community. They don’t want to decompress for other reasons.
1 Like
Yes because there are 2 leo prototypes (4 in total) with only 90mm cannons. They would be similar to the ru251 and probably would be 7.3 aswell.
Absolutely. Should have been 7.7 ages ago, and 8.0 is basically the new 7.7 after the decompression. It was laughable at 7.3.
But the leo 1 should get the same moment of inertia of the other leo1s. It has a much higher moment of inertia and looses much more speed if you turn.
This was datamined that they nerfed the leo 1 this way
Is it possible to vote for a referendum? This will happen again if no actual actions are taken
3 Likes
One that includes return of the original 3 German Tanks preferably.
2 Likes
And why was my favourite German TD ruined The Jagdpanther but not the G1 the G2 l think it was , it had late model panther exhausts and the zoom on the sights was 9.3 x , Ive barely used it since they changed it. At the same time the panzer iv 70/v sights with a from the late model panther sights which have a good zoom rate (9.3x ?) to something similar to stug iiig sight zoom (5X)
Shit l hope that is possible , even better just put the good versions in the game
I would prefer both original and new variants together side by Side. Of course just my opinion.
A referendum for what, exactly.
Fairness for Germany in WT, you russki.
You assume Russia being my main tree, despite it being one of my lowest. You have an incredible amount of implicit bias.
If we’re really going to argue about fairness, Germany is very low on that list. This willingly ignores glaring flaws, holes, and incompleteness of other tress. Namely France, Japan, Italy (less so now), and to some extent Britain. Germany needs… what? A couple of top MBTs (not including squadron) and a top IFV with ATGMs. Not the least of which Germany is stated by Gaijin to receive a couple of such MBTs this year. To pretend that this nation in particular is purposely undermined by Gaijin when other nations require more urgent attention is ridiculous.
4 Likes
No other Nation in WT had to suffer from a direct Russian hostile Action, like Germany in 2019.
German ground is somewhere in the middle - needs more and proper support vehicles (incl; wheeled IFVs, fixes to the Puma, and an anti-tank vehicle [like Boxer 120mm - tracked or wheeled], fixes to their MBTs, and more MBTs that are actually an upgrade and not a downgrade (PSO…). It’s in the same boat as France actually in what it needs, Japan is quite stacked with capable MBTs and support vehicles, but lacks capable SPAA on the other hand (Type 93 vs Ka-52, best joke of the decade).
German air however is high on the list, it severly lacks CAS options between 8.7 and 11.3, and whatever CAS it has is of really low quality, with few options for stand-off weaponary, even their 11.3+ fixed wing CAS capabilites are mid and there should be at least an alternative to the Tornado ASSTA. Ironically, 2 of the 3 nations you mentioned have better CAS (with France boasting arguably the best fixed wing CAS at top tier, bar maybe the F-16C, and UK getting the same airframe but with potent F&F stand-off bombs, plus GR.7 is arguably speaking superior to both the GR.1 and ASSTA).
5 Likes