German tanks RB once again

[warrior412 14,723]

15 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

Of course, at 6.7 you are lucky if you get a top BR match once every 5 and the time you get a top BR game you decide not to spawn your 6.7. Absolutely illogical.

 

Not illogical at all--quite the contrary, I understand that some people choose vehicles based on the situation at hand, not just their BRs. If I am in a 5.7 match but want something quick, I'm not going to select the Waffentrager just because it's a 5.7.

 

There is an excellent chance that people had top tier vehicles but chose not to use them on their first spawn, just as I stated.

 

15 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

Or maybe it's you that doesn't understand its importance, maybe you are too used to low BR's.

 

No, I am well accustomed to all war time BRs and I simply understand that mobility is overrated. Its importance has been highly exaggerated because people do not fully understand what it does for vehicles (the fast ones and those facing them).

 

In some modes (especially Battle), mobility can be more of a hindrance than help. In Battle mode, mobility based BRs hurt vehicles because those fast (but usually small and lightly armored) have to face heavy opponents who can approach at their leisure--massed and grouped as they wish to prevent flankers from getting around them. As the capture points do not do anything for either team unless fully captured by the enemy, there is no immediate need for speed. A few moments' difference in travel time will not have a huge effect.

 

15 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

Maybe I was referring to things like the T92? Doesn't take a genius to understand it. 

It doesn't take a genius to understand that I was referring to the Jumbo 76--I said I was talking about the Jumbo 76.

 

15 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

You're again denying the truth aren't you? The only time those things were unplayable was before the rocket spam (there is an entire thread and previous discussion on this where I clearly proved this taking back older quotes where I was referring to pre-1.71 and not after that like you claim. Stop embarrassing yourself with such lies).

 

I am simply stating the truth and correcting the record. I began working with the Tigers at a time when you said the Tigers were unplayable.

 

Here's your quote:

On 28/01/2018 at 11:38, LandKreuzer_89 said:

You can't really blame them for wanting to play the most powerful and feared tank of WW2 like it was in RL, the fact that in game it's absolutely impossible is something every Tiger player starts to realize very early on.

 

 

That is from late Jan. 2018, Patch 1.75. These are your words--it's laughable to claim "lies" when everyone can see the truth.

 

You did indeed say it was "impossible" to play the Tiger, but my results have proven that to be utterly false. The Tiger is a highly capable tank that has unfortunately been derided unfairly.

 

15 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

Plus the results you have on every other 5.7 vehicle is nowhere close to the ones you got on the Tigers, this is the real proof and I don't need anything else. 

 

As shown, my other vehicles have results very similar to the Tigers. Only the Waffentrager lags behind markedly, for reasons already explained.

 

15 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

Which is far from 63% on the Tigers, it's over 10% difference. 

 

Getting into the 60% range is pushing it quite honestly--it's a lofty mark that'd be hard to match even for the strongest but balanced tanks; that's at a point where if it were the general result a BR increase would be in order.

 

That I have many BR 5.X German vehicles that boast WRs at/above 50% shows the vehicles are quite capable of winning. I don't have to say much more about them, as the results speak for themselves.

 

15 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

The only vehicle above 5.0 you played which has that KD is the H1 (77 battles), what a coincidence. All your other German 5.7s barely reach 2. 

 

As I have already said, it is not my fault that my averages are worsened by bad teams.

 

If not for terrible teams leaving me outnumbered as often as they do, I probably would have 3:1 exchange rates (or better) in most of my vehicles. I very often kill 3 or more enemies before dying in these vehicles.

 

15 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

So all the terrible Tiger II players are on your teams apparently? Looking at the TS stats their K/D are rather on par with other HT's of the same BR's yet they win less. Just for example the T29 (mainly used by US pros) has a K/D of 1.6 while the Sla has1.5, the T-34 has 1.2 while the (H) has 1.4, the T26-E1 has 1.5 and the Tiger II (P) has 1.4. This is an obvious meme.

 

No, it's not a meme. I wish it were a meme that I get saddled with poor Tiger II teammates, but it's not. I am indeed burdened very often with useless Tiger II players. Some of these players are not exactly like the guy I mentioned (3 Tiger IIs lost by 1 guy for 0 kills )...some players are killers, but not winners.

 

In that match on Eastern Europe with @Darkrocket14 that he cited, there was a Tiger II (P) player who did indeed contribute to the match. That Tiger II killed 5 players without being killed; the match was a loss. That Tiger II did aid his team, but the team was already fatally weakened and doomed so it lost the match. Those kinds of guys are how you get the decent K/D, subpar WR you see on TS.

[warrior412 14,723]

16 hours ago, *coder-2010 said:

I will admit that players are probably part of the issue but not the biggest one.

 

Yesterday I was playing my IS-2 and I saw one of the less impressive sights of the night:

 

I was on Poland and was flanking around the side that A sits on. Out in front of me, two Panthers were trying to get to the side I was on via the open field between the windmill, A and the Allied spawnpoint. The Panthers were side on as they traveled perpendicularly. Both were cut down long before they could make it to the flank; I did not kill either as I flubbed my shots (playing the M41 one game to the IS-2 the next does not help you with aiming precision) but I did get assists for having hit them with MGs.

 

Had the Panthers made it to the flank, they would have been an impediment to the Allies. However, their failure made things much more comfortable. Smoke or a smarter avenue could have probably delivered success to them.

 

16 hours ago, *coder-2010 said:

Maybe I just play at a bad time of day, 10 battles and 10 loses is not a great outcome. I did ok in most of those battles. I find 6.3 a nice BR, The Jagdpather fits my play style and the Panther A is a great respawn.

 

Reviewing last night's games, 3 of the 5 matches I played with my German 6.0 lineup were victories.

 

16 hours ago, *coder-2010 said:

I agree that the vehicles are not bad, just so many other factors that add up to tip the scales. Yes the Italy map is a horrible spawn rush map.

 

I would say one of the biggest issues people have is psyching themselves out. People see a full uptier and think "I'm useless" when it's really just a chance to try for the Balancer award.

 

16 hours ago, *coder-2010 said:

I think everyone has great and horrible matches, just the way it goes. Still if one or two players have a bad match it should not always affect the win rates.

 

Over many months time, what I have seen is that a greater than average burden of most matches' action is on the shoulders of the top 4 players--usually the bottom 75% does significantly less outright but is still important to the team at large.

 

That is why it hurts when that 75% is outright useless. It becomes extremely difficult to weather that storm.

Edited February 18, 2019 by warrior412

[Dalriaden 45]

Ironically when it comes to CAS Germany probably has better with the DO and its hvap rounds that shred engine decks all day and get far more runs than a p47 dropping bombs once.

[warrior412 14,723]

Just now, Dalriaden said:

Ironically when it comes to CAS Germany probably has better with the DO and its hvap rounds that shred engine decks all day and get far more runs than a p47 dropping bombs once.

 

When I played 5.3 GER, the Me 410B-6/R3 was one of my aircraft (the other being an air superiority fighter like the Bf 109 or Fw 190).

 

It was a specific strategy of mine to wound many tanks with the MK 103 fire, rather than try explicitly killing any one. The goal was to deal damage to as much of the enemy team as possible, rather than simply killing a couple of their number. A whole bunch of terribly wounded and immobilized T-34s and Shermans would not be much trouble for Panthers and Tigers to finish off.

[coder-2010@psn 1,537]

3 hours ago, warrior412 said:

Yesterday I was playing my IS-2 and I saw one of the less impressive sights of the night:

 

I was on Poland and was flanking around the side that A sits on. Out in front of me, two Panthers were trying to get to the side I was on via the open field between the windmill, A and the Allied spawnpoint. The Panthers were side on as they traveled perpendicularly. Both were cut down long before they could make it to the flank; I did not kill either as I flubbed my shots (playing the M41 one game to the IS-2 the next does not help you with aiming precision) but I did get assists for having hit them with MGs.

 

Had the Panthers made it to the flank, they would have been an impediment to the Allies. However, their failure made things much more comfortable. Smoke or a smarter avenue could have probably delivered success to them.

 

That is a bad route to go, most players should know that by now, you can do it if you are the first to battle and have a quick enough tank.

 

3 hours ago, warrior412 said:

Reviewing last night's games, 3 of the 5 matches I played with my German 6.0 lineup were victories.

 

Mine usual averages 1 or 2 out of 5. The other day with 10 loses in a row was horrible.

 

3 hours ago, warrior412 said:

I would say one of the biggest issues people have is psyching themselves out. People see a full uptier and think "I'm useless" when it's really just a chance to try for the Balancer award.

 

Well I have felt this too after a few stompings, you get discouraged.

 

3 hours ago, warrior412 said:

Over many months time, what I have seen is that a greater than average burden of most matches' action is on the shoulders of the top 4 players--usually the bottom 75% does significantly less outright but is still important to the team at large.

 

That is why it hurts when that 75% is outright useless. It becomes extremely difficult to weather that storm.

 

Ok so lets say for a moment that bad players are a big part of issue, what can be done about it? You can't exactly "make" players play well lol.

 

3 hours ago, warrior412 said:

It was a specific strategy of mine to wound many tanks with the MK 103 fire, rather than try explicitly killing any one. The goal was to deal damage to as much of the enemy team as possible, rather than simply killing a couple of their number. A whole bunch of terribly wounded and immobilized T-34s and Shermans would not be much trouble for Panthers and Tigers to finish off.

 

Not to mention spotting, Germany is really lacks spotting tanks.

 

[MH4UAstragon 9,581]

42 minutes ago, *coder-2010 said:

Ok so lets say for a moment that bad players are a big part of issue, what can be done about it? You can't exactly "make" players play well lol.

First, start closing Tiger Syndrome. 

- Bump up all long 75mm Panzer IVs except the J/Bfw.IV to 4.3+. Russia and Japan don’t get long barrel guns on actual tanks til 4.3, US, UK, FR, & IT don’t get that privelege til 4.7, why should Germany get such vehicles all the way down to 3.3? The Kwk40 L/43-48 is in between the 57mm ZiS-4 & 76mm M1 in effectiveness. The StuG III F should be 4.3, as should the Hetzer, since they’d all then be on a smooth gradient between mobility and armor with similar firepower.

- Then meanwhile we need an APCR postpen buff to spread out the long barrel Pz. IIIs at 3.3-4.0. 

- Then at 4.3 we need to add the VK65.01(H), which would have 80mm armor on all sides of the hull, a turret similar to other Panzer IVs, and a unique 75mm Kwk40 L/34.5 with performance similar to the US 75mm. This would be a German heavy tank for early-midtier.

- then downtier the Tiger H1 and Panther D to 5.3 as improved versions sitting at 5.7 have rendered both obselete backups.

- then add the prototype Panther model with a 60mm UFP at 5.0.

- there isn’t much main tree stuff between 4.3 and 5.3 for Germany but that’s a better gap than 3.3 to 5.7. To encourage sales of premiums I’d drop the KV-1B 756(r) to 4.7 and give it the same 600hp engine as the rest of the KV-1s. The Brummbar is also a good option these days.

 

Then with the long gun spam moved up, we can see similar moving up of 75mm Shermans, 76mm T-34s, Cromwells, and so forth to not just baton pass the clubbing flag to them. 

 

With all of those vehicles moved up we can start decompressing 1.0-2.3 stuff more significantly, though APCR & HEAT postpen buffs will be needed to allow the offending German things in that range to take proper BRs.

[coder-2010@psn 1,537]

28 minutes ago, MH4UAstragon said:

First, start closing Tiger Syndrome. 

- Bump up all long 75mm Panzer IVs except the J/Bfw.IV to 4.3+. Russia and Japan don’t get long barrel guns on actual tanks til 4.3, US, UK, FR, & IT don’t get that privelege til 4.7, why should Germany get such vehicles all the way down to 3.3? The Kwk40 L/43-48 is in between the 57mm ZiS-4 & 76mm M1 in effectiveness. The StuG III F should be 4.3, as should the Hetzer, since they’d all then be on a smooth gradient between mobility and armor with similar firepower.

- Then meanwhile we need an APCR postpen buff to spread out the long barrel Pz. IIIs at 3.3-4.0. 

- Then at 4.3 we need to add the VK65.01(H), which would have 80mm armor on all sides of the hull, a turret similar to other Panzer IVs, and a unique 75mm Kwk40 L/34.5 with performance similar to the US 75mm. This would be a German heavy tank for early-midtier.

- then downtier the Tiger H1 and Panther D to 5.3 as improved versions sitting at 5.7 have rendered both obselete backups.

- then add the prototype Panther model with a 60mm UFP at 5.0.

- there isn’t much main tree stuff between 4.3 and 5.3 for Germany but that’s a better gap than 3.3 to 5.7. To encourage sales of premiums I’d drop the KV-1B 756(r) to 4.7 and give it the same 600hp engine as the rest of the KV-1s. The Brummbar is also a good option these days.

 

Then with the long gun spam moved up, we can see similar moving up of 75mm Shermans, 76mm T-34s, Cromwells, and so forth to not just baton pass the clubbing flag to them. 

 

With all of those vehicles moved up we can start decompressing 1.0-2.3 stuff more significantly, though APCR & HEAT postpen buffs will be needed to allow the offending German things in that range to take proper BRs.

 

Some interesting changes. I just don't see how players can make it all the way up to the Tiger 1's and not understand the game. And even if they don't fully understand it, a few deaths in the Tiger 1's by Russian 85 mm guns and they will soon understand that the mighty Tiger is just a normal tank in WT and has to be treated as such. You know there was a time when the 85 mm could not pen the front of a Tiger, ah the good old days lol.

 

[aBrumz_suFFers 3,895]

9 hours ago, Loongsheep said:

I am generally immune to 76mm guns in my angled Tiger I.

Funny. The only way you will be near immune (only referring to hull) is if someone (with a 76mm) is attempting to snipe at long distances. Generally the 76mm will still penetrate the Tiger frontally between 500-800m even if angled (and as I mentioned it has other weakspots too).

 

6 hours ago, warrior412 said:

If I am in a 5.7 match but want something quick, I'm not going to select the Waffentrager just because it's a 5.7.

It makes no sense and you are simply assuming things to be that way. If I'm grinding the WT why would i waste the chance of a top BR battle and spawn something different? If I want something "quick" then I wouldn't play the WT ion the first place. 

 

6 hours ago, warrior412 said:

No, I am well accustomed to all war time BRs and I simply understand that mobility is overrated

Your highest BR vehicle is 6.3. I doubt you fully understand.

 

6 hours ago, warrior412 said:

It doesn't take a genius to understand that I was referring to the Jumbo 76--I said I was talking about the Jumbo 76.

The thing that confuses me is how did you even get to the Jumbo when I clearly stated 6.7's firing HEAT-FS? 

 

6 hours ago, warrior412 said:

I began working with the Tigers at a time when you said the Tigers were unplayable

No, you started playing the after 1.71 when things were easy and you have admitted it many times Germans were clubbing in those 2-4 months like you do here:

Spoiler

 

Of course, we'll hear all about how the sudden spike in German win rates is "skill" and all that".(20/09/2017)

"Other nations' trees will probably go less played as it becomes more well known that Germany is the clubber nation of 1.71" (20/02/2017)

 

referred to 5.7-6.3: "Okay, so half of German teams dying scoreless in 1.69 meant enemy aircraft were OP, but in 1.71 Germans clubbing means good teams and bad Allied players". (20/09/2017)

 

Your words not mine.

 

 

6 hours ago, warrior412 said:

You did indeed say it was "impossible" to play the Tiger

As usual you are misunderstanding and taking the meaning of a post way out of context. In that sentence it's rather clear I am referring to how the in-game Tiger is different from the RL one and there is no reference to how good or bad it is in-game. The two things are very different as in RL it fought vs way eaier enemies and it could withstand plenty of hits something that isn't possible in WT, hence the word IMPOSSIBLE. What is pathetic is that you keep pushing this argument when I have disproved it many times (even in those posts the answers I give to your continuous spamming were identical to the explanations I gave here).

 

6 hours ago, warrior412 said:

Getting into the 60% range is pushing it quite honestly

We all know why you have 60% on those vehicles and I have explained it quite thoroughly many times, plus no one really cares about your cherry-picked 70 battles sample.

 

6 hours ago, warrior412 said:

As I have already said, it is not my fault that my averages are worsened by bad teams.

 

What? If you don't get kills it's the other players fault? Don't be ridiculous. 

 

6 hours ago, warrior412 said:

I probably would have 3:1 exchange rates (or better) in most of my vehicles

The fact is that above 4.7 you DON'T have a 3 KD on ANY vehicle from ANY nation except the H1. That's a bit strange.

 

6 hours ago, warrior412 said:

No, it's not a meme. I wish it were a meme that I get saddled with poor Tiger II teammates

Again - Looking at the TS stats their K/D are rather on par with other HT's of the same BR's yet they win less. Just for example the T29 (mainly used by US pros) has a K/D of 1.6 while the Sla has 1.5, the T-34 has 1.2 while the (H) has 1.4, the T26-E1 has 1.5 and the Tiger II (P) has 1.4, Caernarvon has 1.4 and the 1944 IS-2 has 1.2. This is an obvious meme.

 

Numbers clearly debunk your claims. 

 

Edited February 18, 2019 by LandKreuzer_89

[Darkrocket14 758]

9 hours ago, warrior412 said:

Not illogical at all--quite the contrary, I understand that some people choose vehicles based on the situation at hand, not just their BRs. If I am in a 5.7 match but want something quick, I'm not going to select the Waffentrager just because it's a 5.7.

 

There is an excellent chance that people had top tier vehicles but chose not to use them on their first spawn, just as I stated.

 

And why would the players of teams that you always call inexperienced and useless use such advanced tactics while the allies do not? 

What is there to choose from? If you look at the German tanks from 5.7 to 6.7 it is like only being allowed to use sniper rifles while all the other players (nations) can use PDW´s, shotguns, assault rifles, sniper rifles and grenades. Germany does not have any light and fast flanking vehicles, they do not have tanks good at brawling and even at sniping some nations outperform them. 

 

 

 

Edited February 18, 2019 by Darkrocket14

[coder-2010@psn 1,537]

Many helpless cats died in the making of this video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCv_q6HU7l8

 

This biggest issue is the US is now the most powerful Nation in WT GF and Germany is no longer Ever allowed to join with them. And to top it off Germany has to fight the US pretty much every battle.

[Darkrocket14 758]

9 hours ago, warrior412 said:

In some modes (especially Battle), mobility can be more of a hindrance than help.

There basically are only two modes (Domination and Battle). The second mode is really rare these days and most games (90%) are domination.

 

9 hours ago, warrior412 said:

A few moments' difference in travel time will not have a huge effect.

A few? That's probably why I never see Panthers spawn camping 3 minutes after the match has started, unlike the M18s.

 

9 hours ago, warrior412 said:

Had the Panthers made it to the flank, they would have been an impediment to the Allies.

Until they get spotted and blown into the next dimension by an 84mm apds, 90mm, 105mm, 120mm, 122mm, 155mm or even an ATGM right through the UFP from 2km or more away. Since they cannot retreat into cover after firing, the few allied tanks that do not have stabilizers will have plenty of time to aim and shot.

 

9 hours ago, warrior412 said:

Reviewing last night's games, 3 of the 5 matches I played with my German 6.0 lineup were victories.

Not surprising for someone with thousands of battles of experience. You could have easily won 9 out of 10 battles with an American 6.7 line-up, especially when downtiered. If you were in a squad probably even 10 out of 10 matches. Still, the average experienced German player, I would include myself here, loses most of the battles. 

 

 

[warrior412 14,723]

4 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

It makes no sense and you are simply assuming things to be that way. If I'm grinding the WT why would i waste the chance of a top BR battle and spawn something different? If I want something "quick" then I wouldn't play the WT ion the first place. 

 

You’re simply being willfully ignorant of a very realistic, very reasonable estimate of the situation.

 

Not everyone takes their highest vehicle out first right away.

 

4 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

Your highest BR vehicle is 6.3. I doubt you fully understand.

 

Not true, lol. I have 7.7s (9.0s if you want to count aircraft) and have been in 7.3 battles regularly.

 

I understand the situation perfectly well.

 

4 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

The thing that confuses me is how did you even get to the Jumbo when I clearly stated 6.7's firing HEAT-FS? 

 

I pointed out Tigers not angling properly and you decided to talk about T92s with HEAT-FS.

 

As I was talking about Jumbo 76s with mere APHE, I chuckled at your T92 talk. It was not relevant.

 

4 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

No, you started playing the after 1.71 when things were easy and you have admitted it many times Germans were clubbing in those 2-4 months like you do here

 

False, on both counts:

 

-I started playing the Tigers long after 1.71; my first random battle with H1 would have been no earlier than mid-January 2018 (within weeks of your cited post claiming the Tigers “impossible” to play); the Tiger E would be even later

 

I must admit, it does amuse me that you apparently think you know what I’ve played and when better than I do. One of these days I’ll have to get a crystal ball too.

 

4 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

Of course, we'll hear all about how the sudden spike in German win rates is "skill" and all that".(20/09/2017)

 

Considering that German 5.7s like the Tiger did see substantial deviations In 1.71/1.73 in WR (reaching over 55% as I recall) with people crediting the WR change to German skill, that quote was vindicated.

 

What had actually happened was the Allied nations had effectively been uptiered with the neutering of CAS. Across the board BR reductions to compensate for the deprivation of capability were in order but not implemented. Thus, the effectively downtiered Germans faced far weaker opposition and did far better.

 

4 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

Other nations' trees will probably go less played as it becomes more well known that Germany is the clubber nation of 1.71" (20/02/2017)

 

I’ll bet a look at Thunderskill with Wayback Machine would vindicate this too.

 

British play rates dropped meaningfully once their 6.3s were uptiered to oblivion.

 

4 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

referred to 5.7-6.3: "Okay, so half of German teams dying scoreless in 1.69 meant enemy aircraft were OP, but in 1.71 Germans clubbing means good teams and bad Allied players". (20/09/2017)

 

Yeah, because in the days after the introduction of patch 1.71, there was definitely a massive influx of better German players.  

 

The better German results then could not have possibly been related to the Allies’ dramatically reduced capabilities with the patch. Oh wait... 

 

Vindicated again.

 

4 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

As usual you are misunderstanding and taking the meaning of a post way out of context. In that sentence it's rather clear I am referring to how the in-game Tiger is different from the RL one and there is no reference to how good or bad it is in-game. The two things are very different as in RL it fought vs way eaier enemies and it could withstand plenty of hits something that isn't possible in WT, hence the word IMPOSSIBLE.

 

Obviously it’s not impossible to be a fearsome tank with a high exchange ratio—that’s what my results have proven. It can do that.

 

4 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

What is pathetic is that you keep pushing this argument when I have disproved it many times (even in those posts the answers I give to your continuous spamming were identical to the explanations I gave here).

 

Disproven? Lol...I have disproven the ridiculous derision of the Tiger.

 

The Tigers are great tanks and it is shameful they are defamed.

 

4 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

We all know why you have 60% on those vehicles and I have explained it quite thoroughly many times

 

Because I had some good German teams some of time and other times a small group us that carried.

 

That’s why.

 

4 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

no one really cares about your cherry-picked 70 battles sample.

 

Lmao, 70 battles (140+ when you count both) is cherrypicking. That’s golden.

 

My results are not cherrypicked, they’re simply a testament to how capable the Tigers are. These inferiority claims are mere nonsense.

 

4 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

What? If you don't get kills it's the other players fault? Don't be ridiculous. 

 

If I am outnumbered and being overwhelmed because my team failed, I may not be able to get my usual average or win.

 

4 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

The fact is that above 4.7 you DON'T have a 3 KD on ANY vehicle from ANY nation except the H1. That's a bit strange.

 

Considering the average kill rates on many vehicles are not even 1:1, it’s amusing to hear this.

 

Not perpetually getting 3:1 on average is normal.

 

4 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

Again - Looking at the TS stats their K/D are rather on par with other HT's of the same BR's yet they win less. Just for example the T29 (mainly used by US pros) has a K/D of 1.6 while the Sla has 1.5, the T-34 has 1.2 while the (H) has 1.4, the T26-E1 has 1.5 and the Tiger II (P) has 1.4, Caernarvon has 1.4 and the 1944 IS-2 has 1.2. This is an obvious meme.

 

Numbers clearly debunk your claims. 

 

Obviously you failed to read what was said:

 

11 hours ago, warrior412 said:

In that match on Eastern Europe with @Darkrocket14 that he cited, there was a Tiger II (P) player who did indeed contribute to the match. That Tiger II killed 5 players without being killed; the match was a loss. That Tiger II did aid his team, but the team was already fatally weakened and doomed so it lost the match. Those kinds of guys are how you get the decent K/D, subpar WR you see on TS.

 

I fully explained why higher K/D does not necessarily make for a higher WR.

[ImPeRaToR 47]

A player, who for example sits on a hill near his spawn might get 5 kills, picking off enemies rushing to their spawn, but if he cannot actually engage enemies capturing or interdict their reinforcements, only killing enemies that have overextended while the actual enemy defending force remains untouched and in force, preventing his team from capping or even killing his team mates on the way to the capture point is in fact not contributing at all to his team, especially so, if he is in a top tier or close to top tier tank (i.e. one BR step lower, like the Tiger II (P).

I did not watch the reply so I can't say, how he got his kills and how relevant they were, I am just saying this to underline that K/D does not automatically mean anything. Killing enemies that have no impact on the game or killing them too late because you were too defensive and did not go into a key position, you are weighting your team down, not helping it.

[aBrumz_suFFers 3,895]

23 minutes ago, warrior412 said:

Not everyone takes their highest vehicle out first right away.

 

"Not everyone", who are these people? Maybe someone that brings a higher BR plane, caps a zone with a low fast tank and J's out. Other than that I really don't see any reason to waste a top BR battle and spawn in a lower BR vehicle, at least I've never done it. It's like playing the Tiger II with 10 uptieres to 7.7 in a row and when you finally get a 6.7 battle you spawn a Tiger E because reasons. Makes no sense.

 

23 minutes ago, warrior412 said:

Not true, lol. I have 7.7s

Tanks? How many battles have you played with any ground vehicle higher than 6.3?

 

23 minutes ago, warrior412 said:

I pointed out Tigers not angling properly and you decided to talk about T92s with HEAT-FS.

 

You are saying a Tiger should angle in a 6.7 BR game and I simply pointed out what you said was pure comedy e as it's completely useless even at 5.7. In that battle there were 3 vehicles with an M1 76mm.

 

26 minutes ago, warrior412 said:

I started playing the Tigers long after 1.71; my first random battle with H1 would have been no earlier than mid-January 2018

You are just proving what I'm saying. The period which I have referred as being "easy" for the Germans is from the release of 1.71 (19 Sep 2017) all the way to Feb 2018 (if you note that quote which I wrote as 20/02/2017 is actually from 2018).

 

37 minutes ago, warrior412 said:

Considering that German 5.7s like the Tiger did see substantial deviations In 1.71/1.73 in WR (reaching over 55% as I recall)

Perfectly in line with my claims. You played 77 battles when things were favorable for Germans, case closed as you have admitted it yourself. 

 

38 minutes ago, warrior412 said:

British play rates dropped meaningfully once their 6.3s were uptiered to oblivion.

 

But they had enjoyed clubbing with them for quite a long time.

 

39 minutes ago, warrior412 said:

with people crediting the WR change to German skill,

This has no relevance. The fact is that when rockets were rightfully nerfed yes, the Allies lost a powerful weapon but during that period they were still getting used to it and was a transition period for them. You simply took advantage of the situation (knowing Ger was being played a lot at those BR's and they were winning a lot more).

 

43 minutes ago, warrior412 said:

that’s what my results have proven

Why don't you play 20-30 battles now with your Tiger and show us your results? Let's see how strong and fearsome it really is.

 

46 minutes ago, warrior412 said:

The Tigers are great tanks and it is shameful they are defamed.

 

No one ever said they were bad.

 

47 minutes ago, warrior412 said:

Because I had some good German teams

Funny how only 2 out of all your Ger vehicles at 5.7-6.0 reach a 60% WR, an incredible coincidence, all the good Ger players were put in your teams whenever you played one of the two Tigers and vanished with all your other vehicles where they barely go over 52%. Amazing. 

 

49 minutes ago, warrior412 said:

My results are not cherrypicked, they’re simply a testament to how capable the Tigers are

Me (and other players) had seen plenty of your replays where you simply never showed up in full uptier battles (happened quite often). But you deny hat too. Plus 77 battle and 75 are nothing, play 10 battles unlucky and they could change very quickly.

 

51 minutes ago, warrior412 said:

If I am outnumbered and being overwhelmed because my team failed, I may not be able to get my usual average or win.

But it also means you are incapable of getting kills.

 

54 minutes ago, warrior412 said:

Not perpetually getting 3:1 on average is normal.

 

But this doesn't change the fact your only vehicle that has a higher K/D than 2.9 is the Tiger H1 when your average with 5.3-56.3 vehicles is around 2.

 

1 hour ago, warrior412 said:

I fully explained why higher K/D does not necessarily make for a higher WR.

Yes, but we are comparing the K/D of the 6.7 HT's not individual players. Tiger II's have a a lower WR because MM and team unbalances are still a thing in WT, it's rather obvious.

 

[coder-2010@psn 1,537]

1 hour ago, ImPeRaToR said:

A player, who for example sits on a hill near his spawn might get 5 kills, picking off enemies rushing to their spawn, but if he cannot actually engage enemies capturing or interdict their reinforcements, only killing enemies that have overextended while the actual enemy defending force remains untouched and in force, preventing his team from capping or even killing his team mates on the way to the capture point is in fact not contributing at all to his team, especially so, if he is in a top tier or close to top tier tank (i.e. one BR step lower, like the Tiger II (P).

I did not watch the reply so I can't say, how he got his kills and how relevant they were, I am just saying this to underline that K/D does not automatically mean anything. Killing enemies that have no impact on the game or killing them too late because you were too defensive and did not go into a key position, you are weighting your team down, not helping it.

 

That is true, but playing heavy slow TD's you don't have a lot of choice. If you do happen to move up too far you get hit in the side are are taken out without doing anything at all. Now what happens if half your team decided to play TD's, there is no balance at all on tank types so in that case your probably going to lose no matter how good you or you teammates do. You just won't have enough time to try and get to the caps. And later in the battle the air is full of bombs so capping becomes just a suicide run. Those kinds of battles are kind of lost from the start just because there was not enough balance on your team by tank/plane types.

 

[MH4UAstragon 9,581]

And now the US heavies can lolpen the Ferdinand, Jagdtiger, Maus, and E-100 using either T13 APHE or T32 solid shot. Armor was all those four tanks were really good for at all, and if that doesn’t work, they’re totally useless. The Caernarvon could already lolpen all four, the buff simply made the stock grind less hair-pulling.

[warrior412 14,723]

16 minutes ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

"Not everyone", who are these people? Maybe someone that brings a higher BR plane, caps a zone with a low fast tank and J's out. Other than that I really don't see any reason to waste a top BR battle and spawn in a lower BR vehicle, at least I've never done it. It's like playing the Tiger II with 10 uptieres to 7.7 in a row and when you finally get a 6.7 battle you spawn a Tiger E because reasons. Makes no sense.

 

In an uptier, it is very common to not take your top tier vehicle because people would rather not lose it if they can try to work around it and preserve it for later in the game (when others might be using their second line (read: level tier) vehicles).

 

I have never said that people automatically neglect to take their top tier vehicles, I just said that some don't--which is entirely reasonable and common.

 

18 minutes ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

Tanks? How many battles have you played with any ground vehicle higher than 6.3?

 

Vehicle BRs do not stop people from seeing higher BRs via uptiers. I have used 6.3s and seen 7.3 as a result.

 

You're just trying to make an issue where there isn't one.

 

20 minutes ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

You are saying a Tiger should angle in a 6.7 BR game and I simply pointed out what you said was pure comedy e as it's completely useless even at 5.7. In that battle there were 3 vehicles with an M1 76mm.

 

It's not useless to angle--it's how to live. A Tiger facing off against a Jumbo should angle. If the Tiger doesn't, he's just doing his best to die.

 

21 minutes ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

You are just proving what I'm saying. The period which I have referred as being "easy" for the Germans is from the release of 1.71 (19 Sep 2017) all the way to Feb 2018 (if you note that quote which I wrote as 20/02/2017 is actually from 2018).

 

No, I have completely debunked what you have said.

 

Your claims of when I played the Tiger have fallen apart (you were months off) and your claims of when I played the Tiger (in terms of its viability) were also off. I played the Tiger during a time (mid-Jan. 2018 onward) at which you said it was "impossible" to play it and yield good results; as shown, that is not the case. Also as shown, the quote was from 2018, not 2017. People can see the citation you know.
 

24 minutes ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

Perfectly in line with my claims. You played 77 battles when things were favorable for Germans, case closed as you have admitted it yourself. 

 

Lmao, "case closed." Your own quote shows you claiming the Tigers "impossible" to use in Jan. 2018--about when I began using them. Yet now somehow things were "favorable" into February...

 

I have pointed out the inconsistencies in your standing. You said at the time the Tiger was impossible to use, now you say it was easy to use then. Which is it? Which story are we supposed to believe?

 

28 minutes ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

But they had enjoyed clubbing with them for quite a long time.

 

They were uptiered unnecessarily and suffered with poor performing ammunition too. They were doubled nerfed and they were played less as a result. They suffered wrongfully.

 

31 minutes ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

This has no relevance. The fact is that when rockets were rightfully nerfed yes, the Allies lost a powerful weapon but during that period they were still getting used to it and was a transition period for them. You simply took advantage of the situation (knowing Ger was being played a lot at those BR's and they were winning a lot more).

 

Lmao, it has central relevance. The modelling change to rockets was a joke--one that ruined balance. Depriving nations of weaponry with no compensation to them is massive nerf. The Allies should have seen across the board BR reductions in light of their massively reduced influence. But that never happened. After 1.71, the Germans had the best SPAA and best CAS to accompany their excellent tanks.

 

As for "taking advantage of the situation" lol...no. I played during that time, but I was still playing all nations quite widely. As I recall, the Russians were where I spent a fair portion of my time in late 2017. Despite your claims, there was no vast conspiracy going on then.

 

36 minutes ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

Why don't you play 20-30 battles now with your Tiger and show us your results? Let's see how strong and fearsome it really is.

 

My time is finite and my Tigers are spaded. I'm playing tanks I need to spade now and will continue to do that.

 

Besides, even if I did play 20 or 30 more battles with them, you'd just scream "cherrypicking" like you have with the 140 I have already played if they didn't play into the German inferiority claims.

 

38 minutes ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

No one ever said they were bad.

 

You said they were "impossible" to play. That portrayal sounds pretty bad to me.

 

38 minutes ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

Funny how only 2 out of all your Ger vehicles at 5.7-6.0 reach a 60% WR, an incredible coincidence, all the good Ger players were put in your teams whenever you played one of the two Tigers and vanished with all your other vehicles where they barely go over 52%. Amazing. 

 

Many of my other vehicles were played more or less than the Tigers. The Panther D, for instance, has 105 plays and the Panther A has 34. What that means is that the number of matches that must be won to move the WR is quite different. The influence a single match's win or loss has varies.

 

The reality here is that the 60% WRs of the Tigers are not extraordinary, though they are above average. If not for the teams I am often put with, my other vehicles would probably have 60% WRs too. (As a matter of fact, the Jagdpanzer IV/70 already sits on a 61% WR.)

 

4 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

Me (and other players) had seen plenty of your replays where you simply never showed up in full uptier battles (happened quite often). But you deny hat too. Plus 77 battle and 75 are nothing, play 10 battles unlucky and they could change very quickly.

 

Lmao, no, that's not true. If I leave battles it's because of maps, not because of tiering.

 

If I was put on Italy, I can tell you that you will probably see me leaving. Stalingrad? Ditto. But that's why I leave, not because of tiering. I left a couple top tier games on each of those maps earlier today and yesterday--the maps are terrible no matter what tier I am playing.

 

4 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

But it also means you are incapable of getting kills.

 

I am perfectly capable of getting kills, but I am not a miracle worker. I cannot always carry the team and win when facing 3 versus 1 odds.

 

4 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

But this doesn't change the fact your only vehicle that has a higher K/D than 2.9 is the Tiger H1 when your average with 5.3-56.3 vehicles is around 2.

 

2.9:1 is far in excess of the average--nearly thrice in fact.

 

It's a bit funny that you're talking as though that's a small feat, but I suppose it's what you have to do to deride the Tigers...

 

4 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

Yes, but we are comparing the K/D of the 6.7 HT's not individual players. Tiger II's have a a lower WR because MM and team unbalances are still a thing in WT, it's rather obvious.

 

I am explaining why the comparison comes out to the results that it does. Others have also pointed the reasons out too, as shown here:

 

4 hours ago, ImPeRaToR said:

A player, who for example sits on a hill near his spawn might get 5 kills, picking off enemies rushing to their spawn, but if he cannot actually engage enemies capturing or interdict their reinforcements, only killing enemies that have overextended while the actual enemy defending force remains untouched and in force, preventing his team from capping or even killing his team mates on the way to the capture point is in fact not contributing at all to his team, especially so, if he is in a top tier or close to top tier tank (i.e. one BR step lower, like the Tiger II (P).

I did not watch the reply so I can't say, how he got his kills and how relevant they were, I am just saying this to underline that K/D does not automatically mean anything. Killing enemies that have no impact on the game or killing them too late because you were too defensive and did not go into a key position, you are weighting your team down, not helping it.

 

As @ImPeRaToR explains, K/D is deceptive because you can do great...at the expense of winning.

 

German K/Ds are commonly higher because camp and snipe is a standard practice. Such is the case of the Tiger IIs.

[DaGreenBolt 1,403]

16 minutes ago, warrior412 said:

Vehicle BRs do not stop people from seeing higher BRs via uptiers. I have used 6.3s and seen 7.3 as a result.

 

You're just trying to make an issue where there isn't one

Being uptiered to face a tank that you think is better and op, is not the same as playing that tank, this is what is happening to the maus or any heavily armored vehicle people don't have but they say its fine cause it can bounce their shells when it angled against them, but in reality they may be weaker than their competition but people don't realize it cause u have veterans playing them.

Edited February 19, 2019 by DaGreenBolt

[MH4UAstragon 9,581]

40 minutes ago, DaGreenBolt said:

Being uptiered to face a tank that you think is better and op, is not the same as playing that tank, this is what is happening to the maus or any heavily armored vehicle people don't have but they say its fine cause it can bounce their shells when it angled against them, but in reality they may be weaker than their competition but people don't realize it cause u have veterans playing them.

Pretty much this. The only reason I have good stats in my Maus are the following:

 

1) I used GE during the last big sale to skip most of the stock grind on the thing. Just shy of 1500GE well spent I’d say.

2) I don’t play it like it has any armor, instead I just act sorta like a medium wearing heavily weighted clothing 24/7. And because of so many people spamming grinder lineups brainlessly there are plenty of kills to be had, but most die before even seeing me. 

3) I rangefind for basically every shot to not miss given its xxxx optics. 

4) I douse whole swathes of map in smoke to make enemies as blind as I am.

 

The amount of effort needed to get a single kill in the thing is easily 3-4x more than what any other tank at its BR requires, and its just exhausting to play for more than the occasional game. To be even remotely fun you need a full downtier and a predictable enough map that you can take advantage of enemy stupidity with. Then season it with a decent amount of luck hoping you don’t run into some potato running around at Mach 20 spamming HEATFS or ATGMs, or a camper sitting in some obscure area seemingly waiting for you and you alone, or a plane just happening to bomb you because you’re there whether you’ve done anything or not, or if you kill something he doesn’t come back in a revenge (suicide) plane.

 

That is not how one of the penultimate heavy tanks should be tiered. The IS-3 and IS-4M don’t suffer anywhere near that bad as they have decent to good mobility and better turret traverse. America and Britain never built proper heavy tank equivalents but the T95 and a properly modelled Tortoise would be the same role for them.

[xF4LC0NxPUNCHx 3,603]

I'm now 4 matches deep into playing the Tiger H1, seems like a pretty darned good tank to me so far.

[MH4UAstragon 9,581]

9 hours ago, xF4LC0NxPUNCHx said:

I'm now 4 matches deep into playing the Tiger H1, seems like a pretty darned good tank to me so far.

Oh yes, the tank itself is actually great, though the E is significantly better in mobility, maneuverability, and turret traverse. 

 

Tiger 1s are basically Pershings and should be used the exact same way.

 

The issue is ceaseless uptiers and teams falling apart around you more often than not. 

 

One good player like you or me cannot hope to carry a game if over half of your team is made of Tiger Syndrome Lemmings, which most of them are. 

[aBrumz_suFFers 3,895]

14 hours ago, warrior412 said:

which is entirely reasonable and common.

maybe it's common for you to do it but this doesn't mean other use your same strategy. Me for example have never even thought of something so dumb wasting the opportunity of a top BR game where I can be decisive. 

 

14 hours ago, warrior412 said:

like you have with the 140 I have already played if they didn't play into the German inferiority claims.

152 divided by two that is. Average is 76 battles played with each Tiger tank, that's really not a lot.

 

14 hours ago, warrior412 said:

You're just trying to make an issue where there isn't one.

 

You are just avoiding the truth and turning around the problem. The fact your percentage of battles with vehicles higher than 5.3 is extremely limited (around 5-6%). Anything higher than 6.0 is basically non-existent

(around 1%) and 0% higher than 6.3.

 

14 hours ago, warrior412 said:

Your own quote shows you claiming the Tigers "impossible" to use in Jan. 2018

If you fail to comprehend basic English (even after it's been explained to you) then it's not my fault. You're free to think what you want and I won't carry on discussing this matter with a troll like you.  

 

14 hours ago, warrior412 said:

Also as shown, the quote was from 2018, not 2017. People can see the citation you know.
 

The comprehension issues continue. 

This is what I wrote:

"(if you note that quote which I wrote as 20/02/2017 is actually from 2018)". 

It clearly means I am right as you were still playing and considering Germans to be clubbers in late Feb 2018 like I have been saying for so long. It just proves that the reason you played those vehicles in that period is because you perfectly knew they were winning, I've said it countless times and now your own quotes prove it. I would feel incredibly embarrassed if I were you.

  

19 hours ago, warrior412 said:

you know what I’ve played and when better than I do.

That's because we have been having this discussion for ages and you are still in absolute denial. I remember the times before 1.71 where you had zero battles in any 5.7 vehicle with Ger, those were the times they were impossible to play and you simply knew nothing about it.

 

14 hours ago, warrior412 said:

 

The reality here is that the 60% WRs of the Tigers are not extraordinary, though they are above average.

That's like your highest K/D vehicle with the highest WR. It is an extraordinary result (funny that not even your Tiger E was able to replicate those results).

 

14 hours ago, warrior412 said:

2.9:1 is far in excess of the average--nearly thrice in fact.

 

That's not the point. The point is that it's rather strange that your only vehicle with a 3 K/D is the Tiger H1.

 

3 hours ago, MH4UAstragon said:

over half of your team is made of Tiger Syndrome Lemmings, which most of them are. 

And who's fault is that? Instead of putting so much effort for new vehicles which weren't needed or changing the entire values of penetration with a broken calculator they could have invested time in giving Ger some good vehicles to fill those gaps, but no, let's ignore the existing issues and let's break the game even more (making Axis teams suffer even more in the meantime).

Edited February 19, 2019 by LandKreuzer_89

[aBrumz_suFFers 3,895]

3 hours ago, MH4UAstragon said:

Tiger 1s are basically Pershings and should be used the exact same way.

 

Not really. Pershing has more armor and is way more versatile than a Tiger thanks to better turret rotation, better mobility, better reverse and even has a stronger gun. Pershing can easily be a close brawler taking cover/shooting over hills and quickly reversing into cover, the Tigers are best at medium/long range as support vehicles and occasionally can move forward and take some shots it you get a top BR battle vs 4.7's. M26 is just overall a much better fitted vehicle for WT.

Edited February 19, 2019 by LandKreuzer_89

[warrior412 14,723]

2 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

maybe it's common for you to do it but this doesn't mean other use your same strategy. Me for example have never even thought of something so dumb wasting the opportunity of a top BR game where I can be decisive. 

 

It’s very smart to ration your strong vehicles* to allow for their usage later whilst using another early on and inflicting damage with it at a lower cost.

 

That you think a wise strategy like that is “dumb” evidences exactly the kind of lack of foresight that destroys so many German teams.

 

2 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

152 divided by two that is. Average is 76 battles played with each Tiger tank, that's really not a lot.

 

If I had 77 battles in each of the Tigers, you’d say I was clubbing with them. There’s no satisfying you.

 

2 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

You are just avoiding the truth and turning around the problem. The fact your percentage of battles with vehicles higher than 5.3 is extremely limited (around 5-6%). Anything higher than 6.0 is basically non-existent

(around 1%) and 0% higher than 6.3.

 

No, that’s a load of bologna. I’ve played 6.3s quite regularly now (spaded the T-44, nearly so with two other tanks now too) and have thus seen 7.3 as well.

 

I have far more experience than one would need to have to comment on 5.3+—many, many hundreds (thousands probably now actually) of battles’ worth of experience.

 

You simply don’t want to hear it though because I point out the failings of buffons like that 0-3 Tiger II player...

 

2 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

If you fail to comprehend basic English (even after it's been explained to you) then it's not my fault. You're free to think what you want and I won't carry on discussing this matter with a troll like you.  

 

No comprehension problems nor trolling here.

 

I understand fully well that your Jan. 2018 position was that the Tiger was “impossible” to play. Now called out on that versus your claims now, you cannot reconcile the changes in your story.

 

2 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

The comprehension issues continue. 

This is what I wrote:

 "(if you note that quote which I wrote as 20/02/2017 is actually from 2018)". 

 

The quote was from Jan. 2018; you said the Tigers were impossible to play then; I showed that to be false.

 

2 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

It clearly means I am right as you were still playing and considering Germans to be clubbers in late Feb 2018 like I have been saying for so long. It just proves that the reason you played those vehicles in that period is because you perfectly knew they were winning, I've said it countless times and now your own quotes prove it. I would feel incredibly embarrassed if I were you.

 

-You claim the Tigers are “impossible” to use to good effect

 

-I use them and get ~3:1 K/D with ~60% WR

 

-That somehow proves I was playing the vehicles...because “they were winning”

 

———

 

Sorry to burst your bubble, but I was winning in those tanks because I was playing them—not the other way around.

 

What is proven by the quotes and data is that the “impossible” claim was always a meme—baseless and wrong.

 

The Tiger was (is) a good tank and I did not said otherwise.

 

2 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

That's because we have been having this discussion for ages and you are still in absolute denial. I remember the times before 1.71 where you had zero battles in any 5.7 vehicle with Ger, those were the times they were impossible to play and you simply knew nothing about it.

 

I am not denying things, I am stating what actually happened. Even before 1.71, Germans were far from being “impossible to play.” I played 5.7 matches routinely in uptiers with my Jagdpanzer IV/70 and others (thus at an added disadvantage), yet I still have very nice results in them.

 

So much for “impossible.”  (Considering how your claim with that has collapsed with the Tigers, it’s probably best to back away from that term.)

 

2 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

That's like your highest K/D vehicle with the highest WR. It is an extraordinary result (funny that not even your Tiger E was able to replicate those results).

 

Again, around thrice the average.

 

My results with the Tigers are very good and I have the tanks, my decent teams and myself to thank for them.

 

2 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

That's not the point. The point is that it's rather strange that your only vehicle with a 3 K/D is the Tiger H1.

 

It’s strange to you that a noted deviation from the norm is a deviation?

 

2 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

And who's fault is that? Instead of putting so much effort for new vehicles which weren't needed or changing the entire values of penetration with a broken calculator they could have invested time in giving Ger some good vehicles to fill those gaps, but no, let's ignore the existing issues and let's break the game even more (making Axis teams suffer even more in the meantime).

 

Germany has quite possibly the best 5.7 lineup to work with, so the whole “suffering” bit does come off as a joke.

Edited February 19, 2019 by warrior412

[JohanssenJr 441]

43 minutes ago, warrior412 said:

 

Germany has quite possibly the best 5.7 lineup to work with, so he whole “suffering” bit does come off as a joke.

 

The only thing Germany has in the 5.3-5.7 range that suffers are the FW190Ds with their dumpster fires called "rudders." Otherwise best 5.3-5.7 lineup in the game.