While I do see your point and do agree that ‘Conqueror-syndrome’ as you call it is often a thing, I don’t agree that the Conqueror, IKV-103 and PVKV-IV are examples of ‘trash vehicles’.
Perhaps better examples would be things such as the HSTV-L, Archer and Maus.
I don’t really get these arguments.
Sure, the damage on the Tiger tanks is more, but the 17pdr definitely isn’t so weak as you call it.
It generally overpens anything it shoots quite a bit and thus creates quite some spall, which means that you often times will be able to kill multiple crew each shot. Shooting multiple times isn’t such an issue either since you can tank many hits while also having a decent reload.
Regarding the weakspots, they really aren’t pronounced, volumetric very much works in favour of this tank quite a lot.
Not quite sure what the ready rack issue is either… 15 shells is a decent amount and enough most of the time. It’s not so exposed or vulnerable nor does the reload take a massive hit after running out of ammo for the ready rack. I can assure you that most of your deaths wouldn’t be from ammo cookoff.
And oh no no no, the gun is most definitely not bad at 5.0+, it is in fact a punchy and good penning cannon that doesn’t suffer from the platforms it is put on.
Hell, I still have a blast using it on the Centurion Mk.2 at 6.7!
Wouldn’t say it’s a personal thing, Tigers armor is more trolly with all the different values and volumetric benefitting it, whereas the Black Prince has a more universal profile.
I do not wish this to sound arrogant or offensive by any means, but I think this is a lack of experience on your behalf with this vehicle that makes you think it’s bad. I checked out your profile and you seem to not own it at all.
It definitely doesn’t look appropriate stat-wise, but it plays way better than you’d expect. Often times it can be the most unassuming tanks that really surprise you once played, such as the M36 or the P26/40.
Well i had those except the Pvkv, and the Conqueror is in competition for the title of “worst tank in the game” along with the Churchill 7.
I even have a thread with the Conq, exlaining why is it an utter trash.
I haven’t played the HSTVL, but the archer was suprizingly funny in the 2-3 games i played with it. Yeah, it is a bad tank, but not very bad.
About the Maus, i don’t have it either, but i get what you say. I like killing that tank. Tho it is good for a meme, but also some people still like it.
I don’t really think it is weak, but it’s damage is bad. It is not the gun’s fault, but Gaijin’s. If they have more realistic spall than it would be a much better gun.
My issue is that many times it just does not spall at all. Again, Gaijin’s incompetence.
The issue is the size. 15 shots with low calibre solidshot, or even more useless APDS is just not enough. When i was playing the 17 pdr cruisers, i ususlly used up 20-30 rounds, without having enough time to replenish the (thankfully non existant) ready rack. And keep in mind that at that BR it is much easier to both pen, and deal damage with the gun.
Well, 76mm Shermans with less pen, less mobility, worse/same reload time, equally zero armor are still better.
Why? because those cruisers are big, sluggish metal boxes with absolutely no armor (I was 1shotten in my Avenger by both a Chi-Ri’s 37mm gun and the M6’s 37mm SAP once from the front), while they have slower reverse speed than the speed of a bloody continent.
Also, if they are on a slight incline, they turn like a pregnant whale in a pool of superglue.
Again, the pen is good on the gun, but nothing else.
This is also similar to the T-34-57. I have both versions, and i absolutely HATE them. The only thing they gained from the 76mm is flat pen, and it means NOTHING.
Yeeeah, you can pen a Tiger frontally… And maybe turn the driver yellow. And on top of that, the 75mm is awfully inaccurate, and has trash angle pen. I literally perform better with the 76mm version at 5.0 (with nothing but full uptier to 6.0 with my 5.0 lineup), than the 57mm one at 4.7.
Sorry for this tangent btw.
But again, high pen means absolutely nothing.
Yeah, as i said, you are built differently xd.
Agreed.
Tho it has the same (or at least extremely similar) armor profile to the Churchill 7, and that has no armor at all… And it is just at 4.7. Thos even if it were to be at 1.7 it would still suck.
The only thingi think the BP has better is that the turret is welded, so you can angle it a bit (without having a ~90mm thickness rounded corner like on the Ch 7).
I did not took as that, don’t worry.
Yes, i thankfully don’t have it, tho i have played it for a few games on a laptop of a friend of mine back in high school.
It was not as horrible as the Ch 7 (that tank made me almost cry several times, and around half of my kills were open tops with HE), but not a very good either.
Also i am not going to lie, there is a bit of personal bias in me, i just don’t like tanks with unreliable guns.
This is also the reason i like the Tiger over the Panthers (the other reason is reverse speed, and maybe turret armor), that if a Tiger pens, the tank is no more.
It is also not just the damage.
Just look at my stat with the Cent mk 3, Caernarvon, and FV4202. And then compare it to the Cent mk 10 and Vickers Mk1…
I used them at the same BR (when the mk 10 was still 7.7), and i struggled to get a positive K/D on the 83mm gun tanks, and absolutely hated them, while i had a chilling 4-4.3 K/D with the Mk 10 (that was before Gaijin fucked all up, and i constantly saw 5 Object 279s (that i can’t do anything against realistically)in the enemy team each game…)
The only thing that changed was the gun. From a piece of garbage to a decent one.
Same (or even worse) trash armor, same bad mobility (in forwards, the reverse speed felt like light speed after the previous cruisers), yet the gun changed, and the tank is just awesome.
I’d have to strongly disagree with that, but perhaps that is more an arcade than a realistic thing.
Judging from your profile you seem to be much more of an arcade enjoyer rather than a realistic player, which I think is quite chad.
I can assure you that both the Conqueror and Churchill VII are very good tanks in realistic battles, but perhaps they suffer more in arcade battles due to speed modifiers, penetration calculators ect.
I guess that must be a difference in experience then, I really quite enjoy solid shot as it is.
Perhaps this is a difference between the arcade and realistic modes too, where arcade is much faster paced than realistic is.
Gonna pull out the old reliable arcade and realistic differences here. Really seems to be the root to the differences in viewpoints.
Perhaps Cruisers feel sluggish in arcade since all other tanks also have boosted mobility, but in realistic battles they are generally quite a bit more speedy than other medium tanks, even keeping up with light tanks depending on the model.
The T-34-57 also has significantly faster muzzle velocity and a much faster reload, it’s not just the pen.
Years upon years ago I had actually bought the premium variant of the T-34-57 because I loved the tree version so much I wanted another one.
The Black Prince has an additional 50mm plate covering the bottom of the turret frontally, which is a great boon for it’s protection.
That’s very fair.
Playstyles and preferences differ, which makes the diversity of this game such a great boon.
As I mentioned quite a lot in this response, I think it’s the fundamental differences in gamemodes that we play that causes us to perceive things differently.
CAS in air battles isn’t the same as CAS is in ground battles, just as arcade ground differs quite a bit from realistic ground despite the overlap.
I’m quite glad we managed to keep this civil, I really like your way of speech!
I’ve never really had troubles with the 17pdr AP. It still creates pretty good spalling. Very often it’s OHK, too. Ofc it’s post-pen dmg is not as good as of APHE, yet it’s decent enough IMHO. On the other hand, what good is it to have great post-pen dmg if you can’t pen at all? Personally I prefer being able to knock-out with 2-3 shots rather than knock-knock and never hear “Who’s there?”. And the BP, thanks to it’s armour, can afford it. Oh, and it’s not the Conqueror-syndrome, thanks. I’m the guy who knows that flat pen isn’t everything and also the guy who’s using different ammo for different targets (you know, so that I don’t need to cry on forums how AP and APHE do nothing to light armoured vehicles, because I’m well aware of the existence of HE shells)… :)
APDS, well, that’s a bit different story. Used to OHK Panthers frontally through the hull, now I need 2 shots most of the time. Gaijin hit them quite hard thanks to russian mains’ tears…
However, I can only speak of my own experience. When plying BP I’m not really afraid of Tigers, but vice versa I’m very cautious and try to avoid direct (read frontal) confrontation…
You know that with APHE you can aim at things, like cupolas, and still damage the enemy?
And if it has more than 200g of TNT in it, it will OP the crew. This works with any weak spot.
No. Conqueror-syndrome is not just that. It is looking at a single thing (or a few things sometimes, but usually it is just 1) on a tank and then concluding that it must be OP.
I hope you realise that it hit really hard on soviet tanks with APDS too…
Basically the 105mm L7 and 120mm L11 are the only guns with good APDS, so soviet APDS is now useless.
Please don’t start this “russian bias” bullshit. There is no such bias.
I was in favour of this, before the recent BR changes. Now, I think it can stay, especially if what’s up also gets decompressed eventually (here’s hoping). Most of the old 5.7 is now 6.0 anyway.
it has higher pen, faster velocity so can be used more easily over distances and requires less effort to aim and faster reload. you can say the 88 does more damage which it does but 17pdr will one shot most tanks it faces bar the king tiger mostly.
I actually think the Maus is a great tank tbh. Just a bit complicated to get into in terms of mindset. Even compared to other heavy/slow vehicles, there are fewer transferable skills, is how I would describe my experience with it.
Guilty as charged.
It’s possible. My favourite vehicle in game is the Jagdtiger, I like slower gameplay, so this discussion resonates with me.
And of course, nothing is more “slow, deliberate patience” than playing the Maus in SB.
Fair, perhaps there’s still some other better suited vehicles for the stated Conqueror-syndrome as it was called, but the Maus was an easy one to come up with for me.
The M-51? That’s another tank that draws people in with the big headline number (400mm of pen!) which obscures all its actual flaws, and make people decide it’s OP.
The Maus to me actually suffers from the reverse syndrome. Everyone says it’s useless, but then when you take the time to study it a bit and use it right, it’s deceptively competent. The 75mm coax is its biggest strength to me, and yet I rarely, if ever see fellow Maus players bother to use it. I have a custom sight specifically for that coax because it’s the magic ingredient that makes the rest of the tank “work”.
+1 i support this it should be 5.7
i bought years ago and never used it very painful to play and with APDS nerf not worth playing at all
and you can’t run away or go back from cas players at all very very slow and armor does not work all of the time.
i wish if they replace it with another tank like the did for the Swedish premium.
I can agree to that too to some extent.
With the Ch7 i’d like to tell some of my experiences with it’s “armor”. The issue is, that it has some kind of weak spot everywhere.
Now, you mentioned the arcade pen calculator. I am going to tell you that it just lies 60% (or even more) of the times.
US 75mm vs IS-2 angled lower plate? It shows green…
Or things, like Tiger 1/Panther vs AMX M4 or ARL-44 upper plate is green…
And many more. I just almost never rely on it for pen calculating.
Now the issue with the Ch7 is, that there are just so many of these weak spots, that the enemy just going to hit one by chance, even if they just blindly shoot at you (like an average german main xd).
I had many examples, when someone was trying to find a weak spot on my tank with the indicator (seeing them moving their gun all around to find a green spot), and finding none, then just shooting my track, which is one of the weak spots. Or that they miss the track, and it bounces up into the turret corncer (where the turret’s frontal and side plate meet with a rounded cast shape), and it just pens…
And the worst one was when i met a 105mm Sherman. It is almost 2 BR lower, yet it is a better heavy tank in every way.
The guy angled the tank, so the only part i could pen was the MG port. And it could only kill the MG operator. The guy didn’t even care about me (i was tracked+engine out). When he killed my teammate next to me, aimed at me, and 1shotted me, because the Ch 7 has also no roof armor at all.
I literally could do nothing to that tank.
Now on the other hand, any other heavy at that BR (any KV-1 or ARL-44 ACL-1) would just absolutely destroy that M4, while also surviving that shot. And those heavies are much fater, have much better guns, and the armor is more reliable if you can use it correctly.
You get into a sidescrape with a KV-1, you can literally hold an entire flank, while also getting tons of kills, even in a full uptier.
Or even just stand in the open, and still get a few kills before someone kills you.
You can’t really do tha with the Ch7 (or can, but you wont get many kills).
Okay, on good hands, the armor can work, and you can get kills too, but why bother playing that thing, when literally any other option ib better in every meaningful way?
Agreed.
Mobility buff isn’t actually that “noticable”. i dont have the words to fully describe it.
The more noticable thing is turret traverse for me.
My point there would be the “why bother” again. Why would you play those, when you can just use a Hellcat, taht is faster, has a better gun (pen does not matter when you flank, tho it can still frontally pen almost anything even with it’s BR rise), better survivability (like APHE not fusing a lot of times), scouting, AND a .50cal?
I also played the Concept 3 in a weird mash of both medium and light stiles, and it worked much better than the cruisers. I could use that as a better medium, and a as a better light/flanker.
It does not mean i liked the Concept 3 (if i remember correctly i had worse stats with it than with the Challenger, but better than the Avenger/Comet), but it was way better experience than those.
This comes down to playstyle. As i said, i like more reliable guns. I rather aim at a weak spot, and deal more damage, than use soemthing with higer pen, but dealing less damage.
Example 1:
Facing a Tiger with the 57mm: I usually shoot the Tiger with APHE in the middle of the upper plate.
Any APHE will just 1shot it (or leave the commander dark red), but not this gun. It is a miracle if it takes out both driver and MG operator, but nothing more.
The best bet is to shoot thext to the driver, and hope for an ammo rack.
If the Tiger is in hulldown, then it is even worse. Cupola shots will only take out the commander, and damage the gunner.
With the 76mm, i just shoot the cupola, and the whole turret crew is gone.
Example 2:
I really like the Ho-I, and the StuH 42. They both have low pen APHE with over 200g, so if it pens, it 1shots (even a 2c Bis most of the times). I only use HEAT when there is just no other option, unlike most people who spams HEAT.
But again, it is just a difference in playstyle.
Yes.
Agreed.
Well skycancer is skycancer regardless of the mode.
Because you dont try to misrepresent/strawmen my arguments, and don’t go with the usual “YoU pLaY aRcAdE” BS like most of the “people” on the forum.
You use logical arguments, and realise that we just have different styles.
MOST users will not be silly enough to use heavies (as a heavy) outside their own BR (or maybe 6.3 too).
This is why the BP is good where it is, especially as it stayed put recently.
It is best not to compare with certain other heavies where you see arguments for them being just as valid in the full uptier (in terms of survivability) as their own BR. And of course popularity of said vehicles can completely skew their “performance”.
Some nations get to hold onto their poor use to scream all is not fair, others just use their brains and do not expect hand holding.
Also I feel there is an issue depending on how AP is performing this week. Otherwise I have done ok in it personally but I don’t use it in first spawn in 6.7/7.0s like some players do with their heavies… sad to see Tigers in full uptiers when the Panther gun will be sooo much more effective but you get the “wanna play what I wanna play” or “haven’t unlocked that line yet”…
I’ve been saying it should go down for years. People always mention the armour, but the armour basis is exactly the same as the Churchill VII. The gun is the same 17-Pdr seen as early as the Archer at 2.7 just now with APDS seen at 5.3 on the A30 Challenger. Then it’s even slower than the Churchill VII. If you follow the same logic as the Jumbo’s, same platform but better gun = +1.0 BR increase then it should be 5.7.
However, in saying that, I haven’t had the chance to try it after the recent BR changes. A lot of things went up, so it could be good now. So I may change my mind.
It was fine before and therefore bound to be still if played at the correct BR as most heavies should. Same with the VII.
It is just some other nations push the idea every vehicle has to be top dog at every BR position in a match. And I feel that damages the experience of everyone else.
ooh boy…not a mention on the movement of it? how its going almost at 5 KM/H on any terrain? and -2 in reverse? yee i think its cannon and armor is the least of its problems…
