Man takes what is one of the most overtiered tanks in the game and uses it to complain about a completely mid tank. Lmao.
I personally wouldn’t mind seeing the Valentines being turned into heavy tanks, because that’s the closest approximation to their Infantry Tank role. Why is every other Infantry Tank a heavy tank except for the Valentine? Though, in saying that, I will only agree to it if the Valentine Mk I goes back to 2.3.
Also, I’ve the M15 is terrible and barely an improvement over the M14/41. It could easily go down to 2.3 or even 2.0.
1 Like
Why is every other Infantry Tank a heavy tank except for the Valentine?
Because its armor isn’t that good. It’s the same reason why the P 26/40 is a medium tank. It can be easily penetrated by the 5 cm Kw. K. 39 and fairly easily dealt with by the Kw. K. 38. It’s not like it needs to be nerfed, which turning it into a heavy tank would just be an outright nerf by both removing its artillery and increasing its spawn cost. The armor is good, but it can still be easily penetrated and the mobility is absolutely horrid. All three of them are also restricted to solid shot exclusively, albeit the Mark XI, along with the rest of the British O.Q.F. 75-mm tanks, should have access to regular M62 APC-T.
It could easily go down to 2.3 or even 2.0.
The entire M 13/40 and the M 14/41 series should also go down. I have no idea how they even got that high in the first place, the only thing they had going for them is their armor but by 1.7 it’s just utterly average.
It’s not that much worse armoured than the Matilda. 65mm turret compared to 75mm. 60mm hull front compared to 78mm. Depending on the BR, a far better gun too.
Another buff is that Gaijin gave the Mk IX the wrong 6-Pdr. It should have the longer Mk V so that adds a little bit more penetration and velocity. I bug reported it ages ago.
1 Like
Its side armor is 43 mm thick and the 60 mm front is completely flat. While its turret face is trolly, it’s not as trolly or thick as the turret face of the Matilda II. The front armor on the Matilda II is thicker and has more angles to troll, the sides are thicker and feature another trolly double or triple layer of armor adding up to either 53 mm to 78 mm of thickness, not including angles, depending on where it’s struck.
It is worse armored enough that it can’t be trusted as a heavy tank and has to be used more-so as a slow medium that can sometimes bounce shots. It certainly shouldn’t be made a heavy tank and lose out on the benefits of a medium tank.
Changing it from a medium to a heavy won’t change how it plays though. The only difference is it goes up 10 SP and loses artillery. If that’s what it takes to stop Gaijin from uptiering them again, that’s fine to me. I still hate the Valentine Mk I uptier to 2.7, it’s completely redundant compared to the Mk XI.
1 Like
But that wouldn’t stop them from uptiering it again if it trips whatever algorithm is behind the BR changes. This entire thread is because a dude looked at it with an overtiered tank that has a gun which shouldn’t leave 1.0, when the Valentine’s armor is easily penetrated by literally everything else at 2.0-3.0.
It has better armor though and 60/60mm was crazy effective at 2.3.
It basically played exactly like a heavy.
Now at 2.7 it’s made somewhat redundant by the Matilda being even more armored, with the only saving grace that it’s a medium and thus is cheaper to spawn and gets arty.
The Mk IX and XI are basically just improvements in the same sense as the KV-1S.
The KV-1S is a late KV-1 but is actually less armored than previous models, improving mobility and reliability.
While the Mk IX and XI add a stronger gun and also sacrifice some armor.
Even the Churchill Mk I is basically somewhat better armored than the up gunned Mk III.
But nothing changed about their designation or purpose.
1 Like
They aren’t - the Matilda 1 could never be classed as a Heavy tank - so only 2 out of the 4 British ones are “heavy”.
Also the 3 French ones are all light tanks, as are the T-26 and T50.
Matilda 1 could never be classed as a Heavy tank
Tbh I don’t see a scenario of it being added where it wouldn’t be one. Sure, the gun would be utterly terrible since the Vickers .50 is the best it can have, but it would still have 60 mm of all-around armor and at the BR it would be added due to its completely ineffectual armament and its slow speed, that would be very good.
2 Likes
We have WW1 tanks, and another tank with a .50 browning as it’s main gun that I think is still a TT vehicle with no restrictions…, so I’ll put up $1 that is will be in the game at some point in my lifetime! :)
It would definitely work at 1.0 right now, but bear in mind that the Vickers .50 is probably the worst cal. .50 to have been made, or to have at least hit mass production. It’s already in-game in the form of some ship anti-aircraft mounts and its armor-piercing performance is abysmal. It can only penetrate 24 mm of armor with its armor-piercing projectile.
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
Give the Valentine XI the M61 APHE and its missing ESS system and it could be 3.0 no problem. I do think the reload could be nerfed to 6 seconds however, as its got a relatively tight 2-man turret, and M61 APHE is one of the best rounds at this BR range, so it makes sense from a logic and balance perspective.
2 Likes