StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I've never played one, but I find them most annoying and difficult to kill when they're being used as sniper-tanks from long range. The tank's frontal armor is much harder to penetrate than its side armor (as usual), and it's got one of the patented "our brawler guns are more precise than your sniper guns" German cannons. Plus, the turret just under the mantlet" is a poorly armored shot trap by all accounts.

So being too far away for the enemy to put rounds into that weak spot, while still exploiting your frontal armor and accurate long-range gunnery, will probably make the tank a lot harder to kill than it would be otherwise.

Yeah. Loewe's are basically a bread and butter german (super)heavy. Keep the hull slightly angled and you're golden. The gun is amusingly accurate; IIRC, it's only beaten by the Panther's 75/L100 and the tank itself is a reasonably armoured wall of hitpoints.

It's not really ideal as a front line tank, but it's excellent in support. Still, if you're the biggest thing on the battlefield, go nuts. It's a Loewe. Win or lose, you're in the money.

The thing's dead nasty at long range especially when it can cover its hull.

Oh, off Overlord's blog:

Also at this stage a lot of work is being done on the following stuff:

multiple UI improvements, especially the design of tank trees
new camo patterns
new game modes - Assault and Counter battles, both entered the final production stage
new sound effects
improvements to the current team damage reimbursement mechanics

I am the happy that I might start playing this game outside clan wars again.

Lowe has a solid gun. Just remember that you are weak on the flanks, lower glacis, and the turret ring. That's where they'll aim to try and nail you. If you can go hull down, you'll be hard to deal with in front.

Have they by chance announced any plans for a bunch of WW1 tanks to enhance levels of silly? The 100cal 75mm being allowed is already silly so no reason not to go further. I know they have some other games coming out too that are no doubt eating time, I much await world of battleships, but they really need vehicles that can have upgrades like 'one man transmission'

That would be hilarious, although making them properly controllable by one person may be overly difficult. I think that'd have to be an alternate game mode at the very least.

Also, there looks to be a huge sale coming tomorrow.

They already have the FT-17 and the Soviet T-18 tank; I suspect that when they put up the British tree the first tank will be the Whippet. By and large, WWI-era tanks would not play well with the game engine, until they figure out how to implement things like sponson guns and multiple guns.

Plus it's pure tank vs. tank combat, so there's really no use for that boatload of machine guns most of the heavy WWI tanks have.

Isn't the whippet just a british FT-17?
That said, IIRC, last I saw, the Brit tier I was going to be "Little Willie if they actually got the turret on it" Not entirely sure why they went for that one though.

No, the Whippet was a different design- functionally similar, but not a copy of the FT-17.

I haven't actually played yet (not for lack of trying mind you) but from what I've read in this thread, WW1 tanks just wouldn't work. If I've read this right, speed and maneuverability are the most important things, unless you have a tank with a big enough gun and enough armor to snipe people. A WW1 tank has neither, considering even the Whippet and FT-17 aren't particularly fast. If they stick WW1 tanks in at all, they should stay in Tier 1, or else be a separate thing entirely (separate from the main game Tiers rather)

(Though I will admit that if I ever get around to playing this game (hopefully soon) I wouldn't mind cruising around in an FT. Now a Tsar tank though...that would be FUN )

The FT-17, Soviet T-18 and (hypothetically) Whippet would be Tier 1 tanks; they're matched up against tanks roughly equivalent to the Panzer I, so they work. Larger World War I tanks do indeed run into that problem.

The whole "speed and maneuverability versus big gun and armor" thing scales with level- you can have situations where the same tank gets played as a lumbering kill-behemoth against some vehicles, while being zippy and sneaky compared to something else.

What's really problematic in WWI tanks other than the 'generic Tier 1 lights' is that they're all big multi-weapon vehicles with limited fields of fire. They'd play something like the M3 Lee, only with smaller fields of fire and less armor.

Well, like I said, all my information comes from reading this thread. So I have no experience in how to play a big tank as a speedy tank (though I could see a Panther (for example) being used as a lumbering kill tank against Lees and Stuarts, while being a speedy sneaker compared to Maus and King Tigers).

Of course, the problem with larger WW1 tanks, is that they lack speed, armor, and firepower. Thus, if I were actually playing, I would advocate a different Tier System for the WW1 tanks.

And it would be fun to play with the sponsons on a Mark I-IV tank. Though the only equivalent tank (that would fight a Mark 1-IV) was the A7V...and that was only armed with one 57mm gun, and a whole lot of MGs. Which would make that a Tier 1 despite the size...right? Or would the size of the gun make it a Tier 2 or 3? I can see how this would start to get confusing to implement now...

Panthers are amusingly fast kill tanks vs. Lees and Stuarts. They eat them.

I very much doubt that the Whippet would be a british T1, owing to its total lack of a turret. The only WWI UK tank *with* a turret, IIRC was the Little Willie.

Well, I more meant in a speed comparison. Not how fast it could kill them. But again, haven't actually played the game, so I have to go by actual history, where a Stuart could run circles around a Panther (in theory).

EDIT: I'm well aware how fast a Panther could kill my example tanks. After all, it does have a much bigger gun, plus decent speed.

Oops. I could have sworn that a Whippet had a turret. In that case, the British are more likely to make their Tier I tank one of their 1920s light tank/tankette designs, like the Lloyd-something...


The A7V- The 57mm cannon is too heavy for Tier 1 and quite remarkable for Tier 2; the only Tier 2 vehicle I've played with a 50mm-plus gun was a tank destroyer. I'd rate it as a Tier II gun, assuming relatively slow rate of fire and penetration for its caliber, which is fair.

The real problem would be that the tank is sluggish and has negligible armor- you could probably penetrate it with a .50 caliber machine gun fairly reliably, and it's a big enough target that you'd hit. Also the limited firing arc on the main gun is a problem, since the beast has neither the maneuverability to turn and engage a fast-moving opponent, nor a turret traverse to shoot things that have gotten around behind it. All the disadvantages of a tank destroyer and not many of the advantages.

Might make an interesting Tier I/II Heavy, anyhow... Matchmaking would probably leave it mixed in exclusively with the Tier I and II tanks, if it was sane, which means the programmers would probably throw Tier III and IV vehicle at it periodically. Do you know what armor thickness the thing had? It would be a serious problem if high explosive 37mm rounds could penetrate it reliably.


And the same goes for the British 'heavy' models- better firing arc, Tier II or so gun, but now with an added objection. While Wargaming has code for multiple meaningful-caliber guns on the same vehicle, they haven't implemented it yet- so you'd have to pick one sponson to work on a Mark IV.

The A7V's armor thickness was 20mm on the side and 30mm on the front. Of course, this was lower-quality steel than the armor a 37mm (on a WW2 tank) would have to go through. Thus, it is fairly safe to say an A7V would get horribly owned by anything bigger than a 20mm on a Panzer II (and maybe even then). Of course, its own gun could be fairly dangerous, assuming it was matched with weaker tanks.

And all of that was assuming it was an actual question on armor thickness and not a rhetorical one. And honestly, it probably would fit best as a Tier I/II heavy like you said.

And how exactly could they implement the two sponsons on a British heavy? I mean, that would be a little interesting if the guns had decent power (for their Tiers). Unless you just went with one sponson. It would also make using a speedy flanking attack more interesting since you have a cannon (or MG) on either side.

Well, the sponsons don't have overlapping arcs. You'd have to end up having one gun covering front right and swap to the other gun for front left.

As for the previous comment: Yes, the Stuarts can outrun the Panther. But not by much. Certainly not enough to really rely on it. The Lees are actually slower than the Panther.

Finally: Whippets had a quartet of machineguns in a pill-boxy structure on the roof. It *looks* like a turret but isn't anything of the sort.

Type 59 is in the gift shop if anyone's interested and there's a huge sale on on all sorts of stuff.

Also, patch coming tomorrow, so if you have any of the tanks getting replacements unlocked but not bought, do it now.

Also, bonus code: ENDWARNA. 1 day premium and 5 of each of the gold crew consumables.

7.3 hit, got my 2 free tanks. sold KV-1, re bought M4. sold T-150, re bought B1 planning on working up to ARL for medium company games.

Kicked nine kinds of ass in the T29

Victory!
Battle: Westfield Tuesday, May 08, 2012 8:52:17 PM
Vehicle: T29
Experience received: 9,710 (x5 for the first victory each day)
Credits received: 53,670
Battle Achievements: Mastery Badge: Ace Tanker


solo'd 5 tanks did 80% damage to a KV-3 and Tiger H. it came down to the wire though. their last tank (a SU-5) uncloaked, killed me while i capped the base. which left it up to our last tank (a derp KV-2 at 40% health) to lob a shell what must have been 500-600m and nail him.

a T29 in a tier 7 game really is a god of war

I'm going to ask about advice for the T29 heavy and the Pershing... obviously separate tanks, but the Pershing is really giving me trouble. I'm not that good at this, but I'm doing even worse than usual in it.

Victory!
Battle: Steppes Tuesday, May 08, 2012 9:53:18 PM
Vehicle: IS-8
Experience received: 7,860 (x5 for the first victory each day)
Credits received: 43,015
Battle Achievements: Mastery Badge: II Class, Top Gun

I like this tank. Coffee and I got back to back top guns in the thing. It's like a tier nine 4502 A, which is my favorite tank yet. I'm just having a hard time caring about tanks much anymore, warplanes is scratching the world of itch great and I'm really good at it.

Also, if you want Pershing advice, I'd be happy to give some, what exactly are you looking for help with?

I just... can't seem to stop fucking up with it. Chronically. If I hang back and snipe I predictably get potted by artillery. If I zip in and brawl I find the Pershing lacks the maneuverability to do that.

It may just be shitty luck so far- I've played about sixty games in it. But it really doesn't feel like I'm getting the hang of it, even now that I have the upgraded 90mm and all.

So... doctrinally, what is the Pershing for, so to speak? What kind of places do you send it on a map where it's strong? On other maps, what do you do instead, what's your backup plan?

Does that make sense?

has warplanes gotten any better optimized yet? i haven't messed with it in a few weeks to to poor performance on my PC (duel core 1.8GHz with 3 gigs DDR2 ram)

Simon_Jester wrote:I just... can't seem to stop fucking up with it. Chronically. If I hang back and snipe I predictably get potted by artillery. If I zip in and brawl I find the Pershing lacks the maneuverability to do that.

It may just be shitty luck so far- I've played about sixty games in it. But it really doesn't feel like I'm getting the hang of it, even now that I have the upgraded 90mm and all.

So... doctrinally, what is the Pershing for, so to speak? What kind of places do you send it on a map where it's strong? On other maps, what do you do instead, what's your backup plan?

Does that make sense?

The Pershing works really well in hills in my experience, where it can use its stupid gun depression and low speed agility to get endless shots on enemies without taking return fire. It also does really well as flank support for heavies if you can get into position where you can pop into the flanks of enemy heavies and tear into them a bit while they're engaged. It's a bit hard to run, but with some experience you can get used to what it can do and what it can't. One key thing is that with its really good moving dispersion and fast aim time you can peek and shoot faster than most anything, so if an enemy's looking away that can be all the opening you need.

Marko Dash wrote:has warplanes gotten any better optimized yet? i haven't messed with it in a few weeks to to poor performance on my PC (duel core 1.8GHz with 3 gigs DDR2 ram)

I'd seriously recommend trying it again. I believe it's performing a good bit better and there's some neat stuff you probably wouldn't have seen. Waiting a few days might be a good idea though if you aren't going to play a lot.