Also a much more fair comparison will be like a Maus vs IS-4M. The way how you comapre it is like Maus vs IS-2 How is that even fair?
Add on: I checked your stat your literally a very very good player why are you so afraid of it? You should not have problem killing it.
If you would take 5 seconds to actually look, you would see that I do actually play all the vehicles throught the ranks of all nations in game, and spade a large percent of them.
You made both comments here, both solutions to the nonexistent problem based on the idea that:
When you fundamentally misunderstand how balancing works in the game, there is no point or need to address the changes you wish to be made, because they are already based on the flawed logic you started with, they defeat themselves.
No, it should be an Infantry tank, this is again something that you do not understand. Doctrinally, the British army defined its tanks as “Infantry” and “Cruiser” types instead of the “Heavy”, “Medium” and “Light” you generally see early tanks portrayed as today. In game, Gaijin has not added these names, and uses the more general terms. It would be correct to say that the Infantry tanks generally had the most overlap with heavy tanks in terms of their intended use, but they do not always possess the same qualities as heavies in game and the classification in game is respective more of the vehicle in the context of the tanks around it, as opposed to real life, where the definitions of what a Heavy tank is and should be doing differed from nation to nation. This is also why for example, the Crusader and Cromwell, both Cruiser type tanks, are classified differently.
What if he is actually an new player and playing on someone’s account?
Nah he’s just a single nation main, probably from that country and had his pride wounded so came to complain. Usual forum stuff
Is he even reading what we are saying, or is he just ignoring it? Not easy to convince someone who always thinks he’s right…
^^
You kept stating this.
The British used it in the same role as Cruiser tanks in Africa and in other armoured divisions generally - it was better armoured and faster than the “Heavy” Cruiser Mk II (A10)!
It was mostly replaced by Churchill - which definitely met the “heavy tank” side of Infantry tanks - but that just goes to show how muddled the Infantry tank concept was!!
My God 🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️ it was a rhetorical question… My fault, I should have written it in parentheses so you would have understood.
Dude, I’m an Italian main player, I know perfectly well how to flank an enemy, come up with another excuse… Your attempts to discredit me on the subject of ability just make me laugh…
But that’s not the issue, and you’re clearly straying from the topic of discussion in order to win a conversation you’ve lost… The point is that it behaves like a heavy tank, so we might as well classify it as a heavy tank and remove its artillery.
I never said it was OP, don’t put words in my mouth. If you don’t believe me, reread all my posts… What seems strange to me is that it behaves like a heavy tank despite Gaijin mistakenly classifying it as a medium tank… Apparently the English built it to be a heavy tank,so we could also classify it as such by keeping it at BR 2.7. So we have a game that better reflects historical reality.
I recommend that you reread the messages.
If you think that way, you’re wrong… Oh my God, why do you always think the worst when someone proves that it was actually designed as a heavy tank?
Read the entire speech from beginning to end and you will understand… But if you want a summary, it seems that the British created the Valentine Xi with the aim of it being a heavy tank:
Especially when it seems I’m right… And you’ve written nonsense again… I think you should repeat your own words while looking at yourself in the mirror… Or better yet, reread comments::
Cool. Still not what you are saying.
There is a difference between “irl this was considered a heavy so it should labeled as one” and “i think this should be a heavy because it doesnt fit my definition of a medium”.
At least start using the first argument instead of repeating the second one.
I am still gonna try my best to answer every question you asked. Not like you.
So you got no problem killing any tank with the worst tank possible then you have no problem killing the valentine XI. Case solved…
Ok so because the VK 3002M behaves like an heavy tank in the frontal armour, and you use the worst possible tank within it BR range and find out it totally impossible to penetrate it from the front. So it will either lose its artillery strike and get classified as an heavy tank? That how I am seeing you treating a Valentine XI.
The Valentine XI is an infantry tank that is basically a front-link tank. Of course it needs heavy armour on the front because it is trying to break through heavy enemy fire openly. But a Heavy tank? 2 x the armour thickness of the Valentine and protected from almost every angle. If you can make the valentine like that, then sure.
Not OP, right? then it fine. I need evidence I need the sources. I don’t want sources made up by people in the forums or wikipedia. I want proper sources and better from the officials. If you can’t provide it then we can’t make it as a heavy tank; the best we can do is make an infantry tank.
@TIGER_TANK_1 I found your soul mate. (Not being rude)
Are you serious? That’s the most pathetic attempt at gaslighting I’ve ever read, especially when others have said the same thing. You should have reread the messages as I advised you to.
I have kindly reread my own words, and it shows that you have decided to use a source that was made up by someone and still refuses to give me a proper source and evidence to proof that the velentine is an heavy tank. As I can’t find it yet.
Not to be mean or rude, but I think he’s right…
That is someone else. Here is what you keep saying yourself.
Every one of these is “This tank performs like My definition of a heavy tank therefore it should be a heavy.”
This is why i will keep asking you if the m6 should be changed to a medium tank. The m6 behaves like a medium so it should be changed to a medium, right?
If you want to use what the other dude said for an argument, then use that. Stop with the “behaves like” and “similar to” stuff.
In reality,I also answered the questions you asked me, showing you that it wasn’t what you thought… I’m sorry you took it the wrong way…
But wouldn’t you like to see it for what it is historically? (Putting it as a heavy tank would reflect the purpose for which the British built it.) I’ve always pushed for a game as historically realistic as possible rather than a game of total fantasy.
When the VK 3002 was produced, its manufacturers (Maschinenfabrik Augsburg-Nürnberg) classified it as a medium tank, not a heavy tank. We follow what the tank manufacturer says, not what you like to hear.
Yes, I understand that you will not accept anything that is not in line with what you say.
The irony of how this was your entire argument.
Luckily the other dude came in.
