German tanks RB once again

[MagicalMethod 1,768]

1 hour ago, warrior412 said:

The main reason German win rates are lower (on average--stuff like the Panzer IVs have higher than average win rates) is because of the objectives. Capping zones is how you win games.

 

German tanks usually kill plenty, frequently in excess of their peers. However, kills =/= wins.

This is something we agree on. However given the fact that the position of CPs doesnt make any sense. Or the fact that generally german tanks are not made for brawling.

There has been several threads regarding the issue of german heavy armor not doing germany much favors. We have asked several times for more speedy vehicles or more "brawly" vehicles.. .All ideas of vehicles that would make germany more potent at knife fighting in a city we're shot down. Especially by you because "Tiger Syndrome" and you wave around with this "Syndrome" every time you're given the chance.

1 hour ago, warrior412 said:

Unlike other nations' mediums at that rank, the Panzer IVs can OHK enemy heavies a BR higher like the Churchill and Jumbo frontally. simply by aiming at weakpoints. That capability has value to it. 

Pretty much all nations have this option. Some have to resort to using APCR (which is shifty but it can do the job) however those that have to resort to APCR. Which i believe are only 75mm shermans get a stabilizer to help them at it. I play all nations (but Japanese which i havent touched and Italians which im slowly starting to grind) and i have very rarely had problem destroying a tank because of lackluster gun. Especially short 75 shermans are joy to play against germans. And now US 4.7-6.7 lineups are powerfull like they were never before.

1 hour ago, warrior412 said:

The "usually" qualifier comes in here because with the Jumbo precise shooting is necessary to harm it. Many people flub their shots and so the Jumbo gets a shot into them. As the German tanks aren't quite so resilient, taking that fire hurts.

 

That is why the Jumbos succeed--they often get a chance at returning fire.

Yes... Because the only weakspot on those things is a machine gun port that bounces like crazy. (Be mindfull i have no issue with Jumbos facing Panthers and tigers.. I have issue with Jumbo facing Panzer IVs and 76mm T34s) There are very few vehicles that could be considered unpennable or extremely hard to pen frontally. US have most of these.

1 hour ago, warrior412 said:

The Jumbo players are not succeeding so much as their opposition is failing.

 

By your own words:

Yea... remember when IS-6's or Panther's II oponents we're failing ? Guess what happened. They got uptiered. It's about time 75mm jumbo went to 5.0-5.3

1 hour ago, warrior412 said:

It is well documented that teams around 5.7 have inordinately high numbers of highly inexperienced players--sometimes in excess of 25%.

Unless you show us some solid proof i call this BS.

And i remember seeing several threads which we're about adding new german vehicles between 4.7-5.7. I remember seeing you there as well... Whole heartedly dissagreeing with absolutely everything. Even tho we wanted those added so that people would gain more experience before jumping to Tigers and Panthers. But you didnt care. You saw that german players want new tanks. And you couldnt help but disagree with everything that was said there.

[aBrumz_suFFers 3,895]

7 hours ago, warrior412 said:

You claimed I did not own vehicles above 6.3. I own more than a dozen. The issue here is indeed simple--your assumption was wrong, just accept it.

Please show me the quote where I say that you don't have 6.3 vehicles. I have always stated you have 6.3 vehicles (I also showed how 1% of your battles are with 6.3 vehicles) and that you have 0 battles with anything higher than 6.3. You are simply denying the truth with lies and making up quotes and statements which I never said (just like the Tigers being impossible to play since 1.71. But don't even start this argument again).

 

7 hours ago, warrior412 said:

It is doubtful you've spaded as many tanks as I have. So no, you haven't done the same as I have.

 

It would maybe take me one day to spade all the vehicles I don't have spaded (which are mainly low BR's). Plus I have basically every 5.7-7.0 in game spaded with Italy, FR, US, UK and Ger which require a lot more time compared to low BR's.

 

7 hours ago, warrior412 said:

The guy was murdered by AP wielding enemies--he undoubtedly got SP from the hits that he took as he was being killed.

 

So one spawns 3 top BR HT's in a row just by getting shot at? Hard to believe.

 

7 hours ago, warrior412 said:

You're not aware of the gravitational pull premiums have on people trying to get way too far way too fast?

The Tiger II Sla has 1.5 K/D with 49% WR. That's why I was asking.

 

7 hours ago, warrior412 said:

I have already explained this many times. However, I will do it yet again:

Excuses, excuses. Just say it, after the 1.71 magic ended winning with Germans wasn't as easy.

 

7 hours ago, warrior412 said:

American players regularly capture points--which is how you win matches.

Nah. it's because they can do everything the Germans can and do it better. Before the Italians were introduced capping zones before Germany was an easy task for the Allied teams.

 

 Funny you say this when just yesterday I lost a Battle map with the US where the German/IT team captures the zone and keeps it until the end meanwhile half of my team was either on the other side or camping near it not doing anything.

 

7 hours ago, warrior412 said:

The Americans will certainly have to pioneer ways to work without armor now that the Jumbos and T20 are being uptiered.

 

I don't think it's that much of an issue, and I say it again, the changes aren't definite yet.

 

7 hours ago, warrior412 said:

Though you're denying the advantage that many fallback vehicles present for Germany

If you know how the spawn costs work you can easily see how limited that advantage is.

[Darkrocket14 758]

Anybody want to have a replay of my 6.0 line-up being absolutely annihilated in a full uptier by T32s, a T92 with heat-fs and the fastest spawncamp I have ever seen?

If yes, do not forget to bring popcorn and a drink with you 

 

I just read that the T32E1 will go up to 7.3

The first jumbo to 5.0 

The second Jumbo to 6.0

And the Tiger II 105 down to 6.7 

And some other changes but I do not know for sure

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 22, 2019 by Darkrocket14

[MagicalMethod 1,768]

4 minutes ago, Darkrocket14 said:

Anybody want to have a replay of my 6.0 line-up being absolutely annihilated in a full uptier by T32s, a T92 with heat-fs and the fastest spawncamp I have ever seen?

If yes, do not forget to bring popcorn and a drink with you 

 

 

 

 

Drop it in

 

[Darkrocket14 758]

Here you go:

 

https://warthunder.com/en/tournament/replay/430397633351167001

 

Also, I just achieved my fourth defeat in a row . 

 

 

7 minutes ago, Darkrocket14 said:

I just read that the T32E1 will go up to 7.3

The first jumbo to 5.0 

The second Jumbo to 6.0

And the Tiger II 105 down to 6.7 

And some other changes but I do not know for sure

I still do not know why they would not move up the T29 and T34 to 7.0 like they want to do in AB

[MagicalMethod 1,768]

6 minutes ago, Darkrocket14 said:

Here you go:

 

https://warthunder.com/en/tournament/replay/430397633351167001

 

Also, I just achieved my fourth defeat in a row . 

 

 

I still do not know why they would not move up the T29 and T34 to 7.0 like they want to do in AB 

Definitely move it up.

 

Btw yea this is just about typical game for germans.

[xF4LC0NxPUNCHx 3,603]

4 minutes ago, MagicalMethod said:

Definitely move it up.

 

Btw yea this is just about typical game for germans.

 

Is it really, though? I've just started playing German 5.7 (literally 4-5 matches) and so far it has been very friendly to me with my Tiger H1 having 75% WR and 5:1 k/d.

[Sidiros 4,914]

Just now, xF4LC0NxPUNCHx said:

 

Is it really, though? I've just started playing German 5.7 (literally 4-5 matches) and so far it has been very friendly to me with my Tiger H1 having 75% WR and 5:1 k/d.

 

My win rate has been in the gutter with my 5.7 German lineup; although, I haven't been playing much.     Too much projects going on at home that's been keeping me busy.

 

As a poster above mentioned I really do think it's the objectives that account for the win rate issue and I actually changed the OSS app recently to start capturing and uploading the game type based on how many capture points there are.     My hunch is Germans win more Battle than they do with Dom or Conquest.

[xF4LC0NxPUNCHx 3,603]

5 minutes ago, Sidiros said:

My hunch is Germans win more Battle than they do with Dom or Conquest.

 

You're probably right, though seeing as how the Germans are paired with the Italians most of the time this really shouldn't be happening.

[waldopb 310]

I see the Germans as having 4 problems at tier 3 and lower.

 

1. Lack of good light tanks, USA get Stuart's, Chaffee and bulldog, Russia has T50, BT-7 and others, UK has armoured cars and fast cruiser tanks, Italy gets fast armoured cars. I have lost count of the number of times I have died to sneaky BT-7s hiding on flank.

 

2. Weak armour. PzIV and PzIII are glass cannons, good guns but flat thin armour. Any hit seems to take out half my crew or kills me even from front.

 

3. Inconsistent shells. I have OHK a KV-1 and in the same game put 4 shells into a T34 and not killed it. I have hit a t34 in the front plate from 20m and had a non pen hit with my pzIVF2 panzergranate 40, they also have poor fragmentation so even a penetrating hit often leaves crew alive.

 

4.poor turret rotation and mobility. Goes with point 1, if you encounter a light tank and don't kill them straight away you can find them getting around you sides and in to your thin side armour.

[DaGreenBolt 1,403]

Btw I should metion that there are more inexperienced players in America and Russia compared to Germany from 5.7 to 7.7 br, but according to @warrior412, less experienced players would mean poor teams. If that were the case, I would see US from 5.7 to 7.7 at 40% win rates, but they are not.

 

Which means there are five problems, First problem are how the gamemode is: Conquest already puts Tiger 1s, Tiger 2s, Maus, Panthers, and Tank Destroyers in a bad position as they lack mobility, and weren't made to be offensive, they were made to be defensive.

 

Problem 2 would be undertiered allied vehicles, its painfully clear that tanks like the t29, t34, jumbo, super perishing, t32, and t28 are undetiered, the recent buffs in armor and guns really made them strong and able to hold on and defeat a king tiger easily.

 

Problem 3 is overteired German vehicles, tanks like the Tiger 105, jadgtiger, jpz4-5, Maus, and to some degree the Tiger h1, tiger 2p and 2h.

 

Problem 4 is the nerf to german guns, So far over the year, german guns were nerfed in 60 degree pen for the long and short 88, long 75, the 105mm and the 128mm. Which made enemies these guns face harder to pen, but it was still doable. But now thxs to new pen values, german guns just got nerfed in pen, which they still keep their old brs, but they also again nerf 60 degree pen in the long 88 making it basically have a low chance to pen the ufp of a cent mk 3.

 

Problem five is lack of decent cas, again only a select handful of planes can do cas compared to the American, british, and Russian tech tree. And most good german cas is in bombers which are expensive to spawn and because a free kill for spaas, fighters, attackers, and even tanks. Heavy fighters don't have the maneuverability and don't say people under estimate them, only time these heavy fighters have okay maneuverability is when they are at high speeds, but that is also when they have poor elevators where they can't even pull up unless from 1000m alt. 

[SlayerMkX 9,961]

 

1 hour ago, waldopb said:

1. Lack of good light tanks, USA get Stuart's, Chaffee and bulldog, Russia has T50, BT-7 and others, UK has armoured cars and fast cruiser tanks, Italy gets fast armoured cars. I have lost count of the number of times I have died to sneaky BT-7s hiding on flank.

Puma don't real and the Italians are always teamed with the Germans.

 

All the US tanks you listed have peashooters for their BRs, the Russian light tanks have very weak guns and the UK armored cars and cruiser tanks don't have usable reverse speeds.

 

 

1 hour ago, waldopb said:

2. Weak armour. PzIV and PzIII are glass cannons, good guns but flat thin armour. Any hit seems to take out half my crew or kills me even from front.

 

The Panzer IVs are both with a good mobility and have by far the strongest gun for their BRs, something the US, UK and USSR don't get in a medium tank up until BR 4.3 for the Russians with the T-34-57, 4.7 for the US with the M4A1 76mm and the British at 4.7 with the Firefly. 

 

Meanwhile the Germans get the fairly mobile F2 and G at 3.3 and 4.0 respectively. 

 

Also medium tanks at those tiers don't rely on armor regardless of them being American, British and arguably the Russians against Germans.

 

1 hour ago, waldopb said:

3. Inconsistent shells. I have OHK a KV-1 and in the same game put 4 shells into a T34 and not killed it. I have hit a t34 in the front plate from 20m and had a non pen hit with my pzIVF2 panzergranate 40, they also have poor fragmentation so even a penetrating hit often leaves crew alive.

 

 

If you are using the PzGr 40 APCR instead of the PzGr 39 APHE then the problem lies between keyboard and chair.

 

Stop looking at sheer flat penetration and look at the angled penetration and if the shell has the unrealistic ball of doom for having explosive filler in the shells, which do fit the game meta better than solid shot and APCR.

 

1 hour ago, waldopb said:

4.poor turret rotation and mobility. Goes with point 1, if you encounter a light tank and don't kill them straight away you can find them getting around you sides and in to your thin side armour.

 

WATCH. YOUR. FLANK.

 

German medium tanks don't have poor mobility and the hull pivot or neutral steering turning more than makes up for it. If they are getting to your side armor is because you are letting them to, specially when light tanks have to flank if they want to kill anything without being blown away first.

 

3.3 and 4.0 Germany still reign supreme, specially with the Italians filling all the gaps in the German teams. 

 

 

 

[warrior412 14,723]

6 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

Please show me the quote where I say that you don't have 6.3 vehicles.

On 18/02/2019 at 08:37, LandKreuzer_89 said:

Your highest BR vehicle is 6.3.

On 19/02/2019 at 16:22, LandKreuzer_89 said:

you have 0 vehicles with a BR higher than 6.3.

6 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

You are simply denying the truth with lies and making up quotes and statements which I never said (just like the Tigers being impossible to play since 1.71. But don't even start this argument again). 

 

No, I am merely pointing out that you write things that are wrong and then never fess up to being wrong. You said I don't have any vehicles above 6.3--I do--but you won't admit you were wrong.

 

And yes, you did say the Tigers were "impossible" to play around the same time I was playing them.

 

6 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

It would maybe take me one day to spade all the vehicles I don't have spaded (which are mainly low BR's). Plus I have basically every 5.7-7.0 in game spaded with Italy, FR, US, UK and Ger which require a lot more time compared to low BR's.

 

Sure.

 

6 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

So one spawns 3 top BR HT's in a row just by getting shot at? Hard to believe.

 

With no kills, caps or assists, where else was SP going to come from?

 

7 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

The Tiger II Sla has 1.5 K/D with 49% WR. That's why I was asking.

 

The K/D is lower than the regular Tiger II H while the WR is barely higher despite much fewer battles played (less weight on the statistics). That indicates the SLA does not do as well.

 

7 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

Excuses, excuses. Just say it, after the 1.71 magic ended winning with Germans wasn't as easy.

 

Amusingly, you still keep circling back to the silly fiction of me playing Tigers in 1.71--I didn't. It was only weeks after 1.71 was gone that I started played the Tigers.

 

I played them in very late 1.73 in the Winter events and then in 1.75 in random battles--you know, during the time when they were "unplayable."

7 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

Nah. it's because they can do everything the Germans can and do it better. Before the Italians were introduced capping zones before Germany was an easy task for the Allied teams.

 

American guns at 5.7 are not the equal of the Germans'. The 76mm is still nowhere close to the performance of the Panther's 75mm, even after the buff. The vehicles, like the M4A3, do not have comparable armor either.

Despite all the chatter about Germany mobility, the Panthers' speed is nearly on par with things like the T-34-85. "Slow German tanks" is, in large part, a baseless meme.

 

7 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

 Funny you say this when just yesterday I lost a Battle map with the US where the German/IT team captures the zone and keeps it until the end meanwhile half of my team was either on the other side or camping near it not doing anything.

 

I was referring to capturing on Domination. Capturing on Battle is a fool's errand--especially for the unarmored vehicles the US has to use.

 

7 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

I don't think it's that much of an issue, and I say it again, the changes aren't definite yet.

 

If the Jumbos are uptiered, their armor will become a joke and the tanks will be perpetually uptiered. The 75mm is mediocre at best even at 4.7 and counters to the armor already exist at 4.3--it doesn't take much to see at 7.0 the Jumbo will be target practice.

 

Uptiering the Jumbo will have a wide range of effects--and none of them good for anyone really.

 

7 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

If you know how the spawn costs work you can easily see how limited that advantage is.

 

With SP costs for tanks lowered, the Germans actually stand to benefit greatly from the numerical advantage. (This was seen quite quickly when the changes were made.)

 

After all, US tankers could potentially take more aircraft to compensate for their fewer tanks...but since aircraft costs were actually hiked by the SP cost changes, the US players would pay more SP out to access those vehicles.

 

 

 

28 minutes ago, DaGreenBolt said:

I should metion that there are more inexperienced players in America and Russia compared to Germany from 5.7 to 7.7 br, but according to @warrior412, less experienced players would mean poor teams.

 

Hmm?

 

29 minutes ago, DaGreenBolt said:

most good german cas is in bombers which are expensive to spawn and because a free kill for spaas, fighters, attackers, and even tanks.

 

The best German CAS is not bombers, it's attackers.

 

Things like the Hs 129B-2 with MK 103, Bf 110G with BK 3,7, He 219 and Me 410B-6/R3 are absolute killers. The Do 217s can be alright, but they're not like these attackers because the 217s rely on bombs.

 

30 minutes ago, DaGreenBolt said:

Heavy fighters don't have the maneuverability and don't say people under estimate them, only time these heavy fighters have okay maneuverability is when they are at high speeds, but that is also when they have poor elevators where they can't even pull up unless from 1000m alt.  

 

I have used the Me 410s extensively--they are far more agile than you portray them to be. They don't have issues with the elevators really either.

[waldopb 310]

6 hours ago, Slayer3XD said:

 

Puma don't real and the Italians are always teamed with the Germans.

Puma is only one for Germany, has great gun and I use mine all the time but it is big compared to most light tanks. Italians have only just been added.

Quote

 

All the US tanks you listed have peashooters for their BRs, the Russian light tanks have very weak guns and the UK armored cars and cruiser tanks don't have usable reverse speeds.

Did you read my comment? A 37mm peashooter still goes through me like hot knife through butter in the side. You don't need reverse when you are zooming about like a race car.

Quote

 

 

 

The Panzer IVs are both with a good mobility and have by far the strongest gun for their BRs, something the US, UK and USSR don't get in a medium tank up until BR 4.3 for the Russians with the T-34-57, 4.7 for the US with the M4A1 76mm and the British at 4.7 with the Firefly. 

 

Meanwhile the Germans get the fairly mobile F2 and G at 3.3 and 4.0 respectively. 

 

Also medium tanks at those tiers don't rely on armor regardless of them being American, British and arguably the Russians against Germans.

The PzIV F2, G and H are great tanks but like I say have really weak armour, I just find M4s and t34s have better survivability.

Quote

 

 

If you are using the PzGr 40 APCR instead of the PzGr 39 APHE then the problem lies between keyboard and chair.

I haven't played tanks in over a year until recently and it is not obvious the stock pzgr 39 would be best, but I have learnt that lesson, however I do find it gives strange results like not penning the t34. Also the pzIII PZGr 39 won't pen a lot of the time the front of an m4 so you have to rely on the APCR. No need to be insulting.

Quote

 

Stop looking at sheer flat penetration and look at the angled penetration and if the shell has the unrealistic ball of doom for having explosive filler in the shells, which do fit the game meta better than solid shot and APCR.

 

 

WATCH. YOUR. FLANK.

 

German medium tanks don't have poor mobility and the hull pivot or neutral steering turning more than makes up for it. If they are getting to your side armor is because you are letting them to, specially when light tanks have to flank if they want to kill anything without being blown away first.

I find this mostly happens on built up maps like Stalingrad or when trying to recover a cap point for my useless team, because I mostly spend my time on the flanks, who covers my flank? I find that in games I do poorly in my team ignores the flank and I am left by myself.

Quote

 

3.3 and 4.0 Germany still reign supreme, specially with the Italians filling all the gaps in the German teams. 

 

 

 

My win rate would disagree with this statement, but then maybe I am dragging my team down.

[aBrumz_suFFers 3,895]

15 hours ago, warrior412 said:

No, I am merely pointing out that you write things that are wrong and then never fess up to being wrong. You said I don't have any vehicles above 6.3--I do--but you won't admit you were wrong

A) You were accusing me of saying you had no 6.3's which is wrong as I never said that and you just proved it with those quotes B) I am right when I say you have 0 battles played in any vehicle above 6.3 and both TS and your stat card show that. Just stop with the useless lies and enough of this, it has gone far enough.

 

15 hours ago, warrior412 said:

With no kills, caps or assists, where else was SP going to come from?

 

Your imagination?

 

15 hours ago, warrior412 said:

The K/D is lower than the regular Tiger II H while the WR is barely higher

s). That indicates the SLA does not do as well.

It has 1.5 vs 1.4 on the normal (H). 

 

15 hours ago, warrior412 said:

much fewer battles played (less weight on the statistics)

You see what you did here? 76 battles on your Tiger?

 

15 hours ago, warrior412 said:

you still keep circling back to the silly fiction of me playing Tigers in 1.71--I didn't. It was only weeks after 1.71 was gone that I started played the Tigers.

That period lasted for over 3 months, it only started with 1.71.

 

15 hours ago, warrior412 said:

played them in very late 1.73 in the Winter events and then in 1.75 in random battles--you know, during the time when they were "unplayable."

That's what I've been saying this whole time. 1.71/73/75 all came in quick succession you know. And I laugh again on the last part, the trolling is evident. 

 

15 hours ago, Slayer3XD said:

3.3 and 4.0 Germany still reign supreme, specially with the Italians filling all the gaps in the German teams. 

 

Italian vehicles up to 4.7 are ridiculously bad (for the exception of the M43 and some of the wheeled TD/LT which can still be useful). I never had a harder time playing any nation in game like I had with the low BR Italians. What are you going on about?

Edited February 23, 2019 by LandKreuzer_89

[MH4UAstragon 9,581]

Regarding German tanks and brawling ability, the only thing they have that can sometimes be decent at the task is the Tiger E, since it handles very much like you’d expect a Pershing to do. But without support that one tank is simply overrun too easily.

 

Japan didn’t provide the answer Germany needed.

 

France didn’t provide the answer Germany needed.

 

Italy isn’t providing the answer Germany needs.

 

The real issue is that Germany is always fighting America when America keeps getting buff after buff after buff after buff. 

- addition of T29 & T34

- solid shot buff

- the first rise and eventual fall of rocket CAS

- the gradual un-nerfing of rockets and bombs since then, presumably so both actually do something to ships, has considerably buffed US CAS again, with little chance of it going away this time.

- support by stabilizers from Britain and even more crazy-strong solid shot

- the ammo restructuring did Germany no favors (other than the KT105’s formerly upgraded shell now being stock), while the 76, 105, and first 120 got buffed all to hell.

- and despite countless people saying its time for the T29 and T34 to get bumped to 7.0+ now, they’re only getting a bump IN ARCADE. Which means 6.7 Germany still has to face stuff that’s just simply better 24/7 even in a full downtier.

[warrior412 14,723]

4 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

A) You were accusing me of saying you had no 6.3's which is wrong as I never said that and you just proved it with those quotes

 

You said I "don't have" 6.3s--meaning that I don't own them. I do, which proves you wrong.

 

4 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

I am right when I say you have 0 battles played in any vehicle above 6.3 and both TS and your stat card show that. Just stop with the useless lies and enough of this, it has gone far enough. 

 

No, no lying from me--I've just told the facts. You said I didn't have 6.3s and that the Tiger was unplayable, you were wrong on both counts and you will not admit even having said these things (despite evidence proving it). All you've done is destroyed your credibility--no one can trust what you say as you don't stand behind it.

 

4 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

Your imagination?

 

Nah, it came from bounces. If you don't know how SP generation works, that's one of the ways someone who is otherwise doing nothing can get SP.

 

The guy managed to get slaughtered slow enough to get slaughtered again twice over. Not a big accomplishment, but just what he did.

 

4 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

It has 1.5 vs 1.4 on the normal (H). 

 

Those numbers don't even reflect what TS says.

 

4 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

You see what you did here? 76 battles on your Tiger?

 

Lol, you don't get that you're arguing from the wrong direction. 150 battles means the player faces relatively heavy weight on the statistics to sustain them. To sustain such numbers as a 60+% and 3:1 K/D after ~150 battles is proof that the results are quite consistently so positive as that.

 

4 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

That period lasted for over 3 months, it only started with 1.71.

 

No, as the person who actually knows when I played the Tigers, I can tell you it was 1.73 (in events no counted by the records) and 1.75 (random battles).

 

I did not play the Tiger Is during 1.71, despite your mistaken claims otherwise. Instead, I played it during 1.75--a time at which you said it was "unplayable."

 

4 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

That's what I've been saying this whole time. 1.71/73/75 all came in quick succession you know. And I laugh again on the last part, the trolling is evident. 

 

No trolling at all--I am simply using your words. (Or is that what you meant? that you were trolling? ) 1.71 was mid-September 2017. 1.73 was early November 2017. 1.75 was early Jan. 2018. The 3 patches were separated pretty clearly--I'm not sure how you can confuse 1.75 with 1.71 so often.

 

Your quote was that the Tiger I was unplayable right around the time I was using it (1.75); we can bring that quote up again if you'd like, but it's readily visible as it is so I see little point.

 

4 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

Italian vehicles up to 4.7 are ridiculously bad (for the exception of the M43 and some of the wheeled TD/LT which can still be useful). I never had a harder time playing any nation in game like I had with the low BR Italians. What are you going on about?

 

He was talking about German vehicles and how the Italians rounded them out.

 

Considering that Panzer IVs have never shed their far above balanced WR and with the Jumbo going to 5.0 (and, thus, 5.7/6.0 battles as a rule), it is safe to predict the Panzer IVs are going to resume brutally clubbing from 3.3 onwards. The Italians will enjoy their status with the Germans then, regardless of whether they're the powerhouses or not.

 

 

@*coder-2010 I played my GER 6.0 lineup once last night--Battle on Berlin. The match went to the timer and we won by 200 tickets after a pretty even match. I spent a good portion of it proving German CAS is good after getting two kills with my Panther G.

 

That takes my WR tally since you asked for the information to 4 wins in 6 battles.

Edited February 23, 2019 by warrior412

[MH4UAstragon 9,581]

Also from seeing how they perform, Italy isn’t actually that bad. Only the following are actually straight-up bad:

- AB41: decent platform, bad acceleration, absolutely pathetic postpen even with HVAP belt.

- L6/40: laughably bad platform that cannot turn or accelerate worth a damn, pathetic postpen damage even with HVAP belt

- AS42: cross between the above two that can be killed with rifle caliber guns, it was actually one of the only player kills I made while spading the hideously bad Mk VIA AA.

- 47/32 L/40: same awful chassis as L6/40, it has a reserve level cannon, why is it at 1.7 when its not actually any more well armored or significantly lower profile?

- M11/39: labelled a medium tank yet its somehow got a worse gun than the reserves and is more like the SAu 40 than an actual medium tank.

- and the 75/34 M43 just is too high of a BR with a crappy gun, even 3.7 like the BR changes are putting it at isn’t really enough. 

 

Everything else seems mostly okay.

 

Though people are going WAY overboard about the R3 T20 FA-HS. Like the other 20mm armed vehicles its postpen damage is about null. It’s just a fast meme and nothing else.

Edited February 24, 2019 by MH4UAstragon

[NoodleCup31 8,824]

Do you want to know something? They want to raise the Leopard 2A4 repair cost. It is going to be the most expensive MBT in the game besides the Chally mk 3. Even the M1IP will be 2k cheaper

[aBrumz_suFFers 3,895]

21 hours ago, warrior412 said:

You said I "don't have" 6.3s--meaning that I don't own them. I do, which proves you wrong.

 

I asked you to bring up quotes where I said this, where are they?

 

21 hours ago, warrior412 said:

If you don't know how SP generation works, that's one of the ways someone who is otherwise doing nothing can get SP.

 

You're making things up for sure. Someone that spawns a top BR HT 3 times in a row getting SP just by bouncing shots sounds like sci-fi.

 

21 hours ago, warrior412 said:

Those numbers don't even reflect what TS says.

 

What are you even looking at?

 

21 hours ago, warrior412 said:

to sustain such numbers as a 60+% and 3:1 K/D after ~150 battles is proof that the results are quite consistently so positive as that.

Your results with Tigers are counted separately and not together, you have 77 battles with the Tiger H1 and 75 with Tiger E and not 150 as they are two distinct vehicles. Taking both tanks together you get an average result which has nothing to do with what I was saying. In conclusion this is what you said "much fewer battles played (less weight on the statistics)" and it still stands true as your 77 battles remain a small number of battles.

 

21 hours ago, warrior412 said:

I did not play the Tiger Is during 1.71, despite your mistaken claims otherwise. Instead, I played it during 1.75--a time at which you said it was "unplayable."

1.71 released in September 2017, 1.73 released in November 2017 and 1.75 released in December 2017. You get what I'm saying now? When I say "during" 1.71 I'm referring to the major change it brought to rockets and CAS which benefits lasted through all the successive patches (especially the ones when you played it which came out in quick succession like I showed you).

 

21 hours ago, warrior412 said:

Your quote was that the Tiger I was unplayable right around the time I was using it (1.75); we can bring that quote up again if you'd like, but it's readily visible as it is so I see little point.

False. I always referred to Tigers and Germans being unplayable during the patches that came before 1.71. That quote only proves your lack of basic English, nothing else and there are dozens of other quotes where you claim Germans were clubbing during the time you were playing them, those are also visible to all and clearly point out your contradictions.  

 

21 hours ago, warrior412 said:

He was talking about German vehicles and how the Italians rounded them out.

 

Well they don't and they are totally dependent on German vehicles to win battles.

[warrior412 14,723]

12 minutes ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

I asked you to bring up quotes where I said this, where are they?

 

I cited them already, right in this reply:

 

 

How’d you miss these? Don’t you read posts before replying to them? 

 

14 minutes ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

You're making things up for sure. Someone that spawns a top BR HT 3 times in a row getting SP just by bouncing shots sounds like sci-fi.

 

No, I suppose you just don’t understand how SP generation works.

 

15 minutes ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

What are you even looking at?

 

TS, just like I said. Your numbers don’t mesh.

 

16 minutes ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

Your results with Tigers are counted separately and not together, you have 77 battles with the Tiger H1 and 75 with Tiger E and not 150 as they are two distinct vehicles. Taking both tanks together you get an average result which has nothing to do with what I was saying. In conclusion this is what you said "much fewer battles played (less weight on the statistics)" and it still stands true as your 77 battles remain a small number of battles.

 

Fewer battles mean heavier weight on the statistics. The lower the number of battles, the harder it is to sustain results.

 

While 75 battles is quite a lot, its lower than others’ count and so there is more weight tied to individual battles with my count. On average, that means I have to (and usually have) done better to do better.

 

The only thing you’re highlighting is that my Tigers have done well.

 

20 minutes ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

1.71 released in September 2017, 1.73 released in November 2017 and 1.75 released in December 2017. You get what I'm saying now? When I say "during" 1.71 I'm referring to the major change it brought to rockets and CAS which benefits lasted through all the successive patches (especially the ones when you played it which came out in quick succession like I showed you).

 

1.71 =/= 1.73 or 1.75. If you meant during the post-1.69 era as you say, you need to say that.

 

Saying “during 1.71” means during 1.71, not other patches. To claim that it’s okay to be vague and change meanings

after the facts is just moving the goalposts.

 

24 minutes ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

False. I always referred to Tigers and Germans being unplayable during the patches that came before 1.71. That quote only proves your lack of basic English, nothing else and there are dozens of other quotes where you claim Germans were clubbing during the time you were playing them, those are also visible to all and clearly point out your contradictions.  

 

Not true. My English is just fine and everyone sees that.

 

They can also see your quote, cited in the linked post above, dating back to 1.75 with you claiming the Tigers unplayable.

 

You claimed the Tiger was “impossible” to play and have a good showing with, I proved that was false.

 

(As an aside, statistics have continually proven what I’ve said about German clubbing (with the Panzer IVs) too. It’s silly to try debating that, as the numbers have confirmed they’re clubbers for years. 60+% WR for over two years straight...  )

 

29 minutes ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

Well they don't and they are totally dependent on German vehicles to win battles.

 

Doubtful.

 

I suspect you’re just underestimating them. 

[coder-2010@psn 1,537]

I played 14 battles yesterday as Germany from BR 8.7 down to 4.7. 3 wins and 11 loses. something needs to be done.

 

The 15th battle was a mixed one, all nations vs all nations and I mean ALL. I have never run into that at BR 4.7 before. Did the MM feel sorry for me and tried to give me balance? 

[aBrumz_suFFers 3,895]

1 hour ago, warrior412 said:

How’d you miss these? Don’t you read posts before replying to them? 

 

I clearly state that you have 6.3 vehicles in those, that's why I asked for quotes where I say you have no 6.3's. Don't you understand what I write?

 

1 hour ago, warrior412 said:

No, I suppose you just don’t understand how SP generation works.

 

It's really hard to believe, but obviously you don't have video proof right?

 

1 hour ago, warrior412 said:

TS, just like I said. Your numbers don’t mesh.

 

TS is messed up right now but I can assure you the numbers I posted are correct.

 

1 hour ago, warrior412 said:

Fewer battles mean heavier weight on the statistics. The lower the number of battles, the harder it is to sustain results.

 

That's exactly why the results of 77 battles are easy to manipulate, especially when they are played during the best moment for Germans by someone like you who only used them to get good results and use the stats on every argument about German vehicles here on forums. Just sad.

 

1 hour ago, warrior412 said:

1.71 =/= 1.73 or 1.75. If you meant during the post-1.69 era as you say, you need to say that.

It should have been obvious. 1.71 was the patch that changed things for Germans and we all know that.

 

1 hour ago, warrior412 said:

They can also see your quote, cited in the linked post above, dating back to 1.75 with you claiming the Tigers unplayable.

Enough.

 

1 hour ago, warrior412 said:

I suspect you’re just underestimating them. 

Then play them and see for yourself.

 

[coder-2010@psn 1,537]

I just checked my battle history, Germany 4.7 to 8.7. 33 battles with 8 wins. That's a 24% win rate

 

[warrior412 14,723]

13 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

I clearly state that you have 6.3 vehicles in those, that's why I asked for quotes where I say you have no 6.3's. Don't you understand what I write?

 

Ask and ye shall receive (I already posted these, but whatever):

On 18/02/2019 at 08:37, LandKreuzer_89 said:

Your highest BR vehicle is 6.3.

On 19/02/2019 at 16:22, LandKreuzer_89 said:

you have 0 vehicles with a BR higher than 6.3

You literally said I have no 6.3s in a public quote. It's ridiculous that you're trying to backtrack now.

 

13 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

It's really hard to believe, but obviously you don't have video proof right?

 

If you don't understand that bouncing or absorbing and surviving (or at least not dying immediately) hits gets you SP, a video will not help you. It is something you learn having played heavies in RB GFs.

 

13 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

TS is messed up right now but I can assure you the numbers I posted are correct.

 

Ah yes, I am sure of that.

 

13 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

That's exactly why the results of 77 battles are easy to manipulate

 

77 battles is a modest number of plays--one match is more than 1% of the total, making the statistics easy. As it is more difficult to sustain good performance than not, it's easy for statistics to get bogged down in such a state.

 

Far from being easy to manipulate, a number like that makes success very difficult to keep up because everything is worth so much. You have to consistently succeed to get results on par with the ones achieved.

 

13 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

especially when they are played during the best moment for Germans by someone like you who only used them to get good results and use the stats on every argument about German vehicles here on forums. Just sad. 

 

Despite this very fanciful conspiracy theory, there is no actual truth to it. According to you, I played the Tigers during a time when they were "impossible" to do well with (again, your description). Because I did well and because positive results like my own defy the German inferiority complex, you've recanted and have frantically trampled over your own words backtracking to claim that what you said wasn't actually what you said.

 

I did not use my Tiger to get good statistics, I used my Tiger to play it and spade it. The fact that I did well with the Tiger just proves what a great vehicle it is. Again, second random match I ever played with the Tiger H1 had me go to 6.7 and end it 8:0. So much for "impossible" to succeed with.

 

13 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

It should have been obvious. 1.71 was the patch that changed things for Germans and we all know that.

 

Lmao, no. When people say "1.71" reasonable people presume they mean 1.71--that is the thing they were talking about.

 

You don't see me saying "kitty tank" to reference the Leopard, Tiger or Panther now do you?

 

13 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

Enough.

 

Yes, people can see the quote for themselves. I'm sure they've seen enough.

 

13 hours ago, LandKreuzer_89 said:

Then play them and see for yourself.

 

At some point. I already have a 1.0 lineup set up, I've just never used it.

 

My time is finite and I've been more in the mood for 6.X work with my US/GER/USSR lineups.