Wargaming.net Mega-thread, part 2 (WoT, WoWP, WoWS)

[Licana]

Thing is that frontal weak spot is relatively small and hard to hit, much harder if the tank is moving around (I've heard some people refer to wiggling your hull on the BP to avoid letting them hit your weak spots, I just move in general). The track weak spots can be reliably hit from long ranges or while the tank is moving since they are almost as tall as the hull and almost as wide as its wide ass tracks.

Truth, but if you want to (effectively) fire on your target, you'll have to stop to aim, even if for just a brief snap shot. This would be the time your enemy hits you back and, as I noted earlier, there's not much of anything you can trade fire with favourably in a Churchill.

Why are you trying to DPM a higher tier tank in a churchill line tank? I am proposing crippling tanks by shooting out its modules and crew. A tank with no commander, no gunner, a constantly broken track, a jammed turret, and a damaged gun is pretty damn useless and an easy kill for your allies. Since you are a low priority target being a slow, small caliber gun, low tier heavy it allows you to more freely engage enemies and cripple them. The enemies would much rather shoot that IS-3 than that Churchill plinking away at them.

Yeah, this isn't a reliable plan of action. Modules are small, their locations generally not well known (I don't even really know most of them, beyond the obvious ones), and highly prone to saving throws. In order to get around those factors, you'd have to have (on top of near-encyclopedic knowledge of the vehicles you can face) the ability to hit those areas multiple times in order to ensure damage done...at which point you're practically engaging in a DPM fight, something that, as I noted, you will not win at.

No one will openly ignore you either, especially if you are managing to penetrate. Since the Churchill is such an easy target, they might even hit you first, simply to take guns off of the field (this is something I do often, especially when alone or at a significant numerical disadvantage).

Not when I get up into your face and shoot you apart point blank where you can only shoot my 152 mm turret because I am so short.

heh, yeah, that's not an issue. I'd still get through with most in-tier tanks. Firing AP.

Better pen than all German guns sans those on TDs

Every german tank in the same tier can mount a gun with more AP pen (practically the same, tbh) and marginally less APCR pen (unless you're the Vk 36.01, at which point your APCR is a fair bit better). So, unless you're firing literally all APCR all the time...

Better armour than any tank in its tier and most tanks in the next tier

In raw data, yes. That being said, abundant flaws make this effectively useless and practically worst in tier.

High rof

for the cost of having close to worst alpha in tier.

Very low profile compared to other heavies in its tier

In this case, not necessarily an advantage.

Honestly its only real downsides are its lack of mobility, its lack of a mantlet, and a few relatively small frontal weak spots. Using that logic the T29 is crap because it has poor hull armour and is slow.

A fair bit of its frontal profile is weaker than advertised, and not all of them are low like they are on the T29. The lack of a mantlet hinders its hull down capability, and it is far worse than T29 in terms of mobility.

By my count that's about a 0/5 in the 'leverageable advantages' column.

[Rich and Corporations]

oh god, giant sperg arguments about tanks. let's be serious, everyone has their own play style. I am a rare player that uses HE once every fifty shots.

[Hurdegaryp]

oh god, giant sperg arguments about tanks. let's be serious, everyone has their own play style. I am a rare player that uses HE once every fifty shots.

WoT is serious business. Also you should always suffer predestined losing streaks with good grace, because there is no escaping them. You can chance tanks, but the fixed MM will just adjust to it. Face it, your winrate is too high anyway. 46% is good enough for the overwhelming majority of WoT players, why do you think you're special?

[Rich and Corporations]

oh god, giant sperg arguments about tanks. let's be serious, everyone has their own play style. I am a rare player that uses HE once every fifty shots.

WoT is serious business. Also you should always suffer predestined losing streaks with good grace, because there is no escaping them. You can chance tanks, but the fixed MM will just adjust to it. Face it, your winrate is too high anyway. 46% is good enough for the overwhelming majority of WoT players, why do you think you're special?

I just mindlessly play world of tanks. There's no reason for me to play well. I have like a 48.5% win rate.


http://i.imgur.com/kUXSU3F.jpg

[Licana]

You know, except for the fact that streaks are a fairly common occurrence in any truly random sequence, and therefore not indicative of any sort of rigging on the part of the system itself.

It's far more likely that any long-term adjustment in performance is the result of the player and their choices.

[Rich and Corporations]

You know, except for the fact that streaks are a fairly common occurrence in any truly random sequence, and therefore not indicative of any sort of rigging on the part of the system itself.

It's far more likely that any long-term adjustment in performance is the result of the player and their choices.

A coin coming up tails five times in a row?

Idk about that.

[The Greater Luthorian Empire]

Truth, but if you want to (effectively) fire on your target, you'll have to stop to aim, even if for just a brief snap shot. This would be the time your enemy hits you back and, as I noted earlier, there's not much of anything you can trade fire with favourably in a Churchill.

If you are at long ranges they are too small to reliably hit, if you are at close range your tank is slow enough that you can still fire somewhat accurately on the move. Hell I gave my BP a rammer, GLD, and vert stabilizer so I could fire on the move almost as accurately as I could stationary. Also what weak spots are you talking about, the ones on the front hull or the zero armour view ports just above it? The former still have like 140 mm of armour and the latter are really fucking small plus I doubt they even have a hitbox behind them.

Yeah, this isn't a reliable plan of action. Modules are small, their locations generally not well known (I don't even really know most of them, beyond the obvious ones), and highly prone to saving throws. In order to get around those factors, you'd have to have (on top of near-encyclopedic knowledge of the vehicles you can face) the ability to hit those areas multiple times in order to ensure damage done...at which point you're practically engaging in a DPM fight, something that, as I noted, you will not win at

.
Honestly it isn't that hard to know or learn where modules are. Even without research the general idea is fairly simply, shoot the hull machine gun to knock out the driver, shoot at the commander's hatch to kill him, engines are fairly large and easy to guess their location, the gunner is somewhere in the turret, frequently the loader is there as well. With German tanks aim for the front hull, always aim for the turret ring if you wanna jam their turret. Beyond that tracking enemies is fairly simple and reliable, plus it nets you a good amount of xp for the damage the vehicle tanks when it is tracked by you. Stick next to some big tank, when an enemy pops around a corner pop their track and let the big guy do most of the killing while you alternate between track and HP damage (track, hull, track, hull, track, hull). Honestly that is how I play my Matilda in tier V and VI matches, simply cripple enemy tanks from long ranges.

No one will openly ignore you either, especially if you are managing to penetrate. Since the Churchill is such an easy target, they might even hit you first, simply to take guns off of the field (this is something I do often, especially when alone or at a significant numerical disadvantage).

The churchill is hardly an easy target considering it has a much lower profile than most other heavies especially tier VII and VIII heavies. It is long but if your enemy is facing your side in a match where you are at the bottom you fucked up already.

heh, yeah, that's not an issue. I'd still get through with most in-tier tanks. Firing AP.

Not with a single German or British gun unless you are a TD. This is flat out ignoring angling too.

In raw data, yes. That being said, abundant flaws make this effectively useless and practically worst in tier.

Its weak spots are better armoured than the strong parts of other tanks in its tier. I don't know what the hell you are talking about? It is slow? So is the T-150 and the German tier VI heavy.

for the cost of having close to worst alpha in tier.

Yes and? If you like alpha you play a different fucking tank it doesn't mean that the tank itself is bad.

In this case, not necessarily an advantage.

Not really, it allows it to facehug more effectively and gives your frontal armour free angling. If they shoot at your roof they are going to be hitting it at an extreme angle meaning that they are unlikely to penetrate from having a height advantage anyway. Plus IIRC it has a pretty good camo rating for a heavy tank of its tier.

A fair bit of its frontal profile is weaker than advertised, and not all of them are low like they are on the T29. The lack of a mantlet hinders its hull down capability, and it is far worse than T29 in terms of mobility.

Even then its "weak spots" are better protected than the strong parts of other heavy tanks. Honestly its weakness is more due to the proliferation of APCR and high pen guns than any inherent weaknesses of the tank itself. Its hull weak spots are like 140 mm, thicker than the thickest parts of the German heavy tank or the T-150.

By my count that's about a 0/5 in the 'leverageable advantages' column.

By my count you simply dislike slow tanks and high RoF/low alpha? What the fuck do you play, only Hellcats? The only real arguments you have are that it is slow, it has some areas of non-uniform thickness (still better protected than most other heavies in its tier from the front even with the weak spots), and you don't like its gun. Considering that I suggested buffing the gun as a way to improve the tank as well that other point is pretty moot. British tanks use low calibre guns, we don't get guns in the 80 mm range until the Germans and Americans are using 105 mm guns. If you dislike low alpha guns use a different line or deal with it until your reach the Conqueror.

[Macedonian Grand Empire]

Churchill best gun: 147 mm penetration with AP
VK 3601 h best gun: 157 mm. That is much better
Churchill best gun APCR: 208
VK 3601h apcr: 221
You were saying better then all German guns?
edit: not to mention better ROF and Better accuracy.

[Licana]

Honestly it isn't that hard to know or learn where modules are. Even without research the general idea is fairly simply, shoot the hull machine gun to knock out the driver, shoot at the commander's hatch to kill him, engines are fairly large and easy to guess their location, the gunner is somewhere in the turret, frequently the loader is there as well. With German tanks aim for the front hull, always aim for the turret ring if you wanna jam their turret. Beyond that tracking enemies is fairly simple and reliable, plus it nets you a good amount of xp for the damage the vehicle tanks when it is tracked by you. Stick next to some big tank, when an enemy pops around a corner pop their track and let the big guy do most of the killing while you alternate between track and HP damage (track, hull, track, hull, track, hull). Honestly that is how I play my Matilda in tier V and VI matches, simply cripple enemy tanks from long ranges.

On most tanks the hull machine gun does not lead to the driver, what you identify to be the commanders hatch may not contain the commander (or be a viable target), 'somewhere' in the turret is a little to vague when dealing with very thin module profiles like the gunner/loader. Turret ring requires you to hit beneath the mantlet and frontal armour, which is no small feat even at close ranges, and the engine is often times not going to be avaliable for you to target (it's not like you're doing any high speed flanking maneuvers in a churchill). Tracking enemies is more viable, but at that point you've p. much come to the conclusion that the only thing that this is good for is keeping enemy tanks in place for your support to pound on them, a far cry from your original claims.

The churchill is hardly an easy target considering it has a much lower profile than most other heavies especially tier VII and VIII heavies. It is long but if your enemy is facing your side in a match where you are at the bottom you fucked up already.

For a tier 8 it sure is, especially since it's profile isn't any lower nor its armour any harder than most T8 or even tier 7 mediums.

Not with a single German or British gun unless you are a TD. This is flat out ignoring angling too.

heh, remember that weakspot I mentioned earlier? The one that most anyone in game wouldn't know?

Here's a hint, your angling doesn't mean anything when I can abuse the overmatch mechanics.

It is slow? So is the T-150 and the German tier VI heavy.

It's even slower than those, speaking from experience, and both of those tanks at least have the option to mount something with non-crap alpha. Though I will admit the VK in its current incarnation isn't much better than the Churchill.

Yes and? If you like alpha you play a different fucking tank it doesn't mean that the tank itself is bad.

It certainly does when the other characteristics of the vehicle prevent you from effectively using the rate of fire. Not to mention that, thanks to the general map design and meta of the current game, alpha > rof in tanks with near equivalent DPM due to less exposure.

Not really, it allows it to facehug more effectively and gives your frontal armour free angling. If they shoot at your roof they are going to be hitting it at an extreme angle meaning that they are unlikely to penetrate from having a height advantage anyway. Plus IIRC it has a pretty good camo rating for a heavy tank of its tier.

This notion of face-hugging people in one of the slowest tanks in tier is kind of amusing. Additionally, that range of engagement effectively removes your frontal armour advantage if your opponent has any idea of what he is doing thanks specifically to their height advantage.

Also good camo for a heavy is still shit and practically useless.

Even then its "weak spots" are better protected than the strong parts of other heavy tanks. Honestly its weakness is more due to the proliferation of APCR and high pen guns than any inherent weaknesses of the tank itself. Its hull weak spots are like 140 mm, thicker than the thickest parts of the German heavy tank or the T-150.

Thicker, unangled, riddled with both well known and little known weakspots, and just generally not as good as advertised.

By my count you simply dislike slow tanks and high RoF/low alpha? What the fuck do you play, only Hellcats? The only real arguments you have are that it is slow, it has some areas of non-uniform thickness (still better protected than most other heavies in its tier from the front even with the weak spots), and you don't like its gun. Considering that I suggested buffing the gun as a way to improve the tank as well that other point is pretty moot. British tanks use low calibre guns, we don't get guns in the 80 mm range until the Germans and Americans are using 105 mm guns. If you dislike low alpha guns use a different line or deal with it until your reach the Conqueror.

Slow and low alpha is a losing combination in this meta, no matter how hard you champion its (flawed) armour.

I doubt they're going to buff the Churchill because it is probably shit by design, like the Chi-Ri or Leo PTA. I'd give up any hope of that happening.

btw, I have a whopping 55 games in the hellcat, out of nearly 8k. Would you care to make another prediction?

[The Greater Luthorian Empire]

You know, except for the fact that streaks are a fairly common occurrence in any truly random sequence, and therefore not indicative of any sort of rigging on the part of the system itself.

It's far more likely that any long-term adjustment in performance is the result of the player and their choices.

A coin coming up tails five times in a row?

Idk about that.

Flip that coin 5,000 times and it will happen flipping a coin and getting heads five times in a row happens 2^5 times on average, so even if it is pure randomness it will happen a lot. Hell the odds of winning 10 games in a row is on 1 to 1024, meaning that with 5,000 games that is still likely to happen.

Edit: As for the Churchill VII believe what you want, at the end of the day I like the churchill line and see the churchill VII as a tank I could potentially enjoy. I find it sad that it has such a crippling weak spot, and if it was fixed and especially if the pen on its gun was buffed I'm sure I would love it. If you think the churchill tanks are inherently crap, whatever, I have a better win rate with my black prince than my IS or KV-1S. I like low profile, well armoured tanks with fast firing high pen guns, speed is nice, but honestly I am probably better off slow as it keeps me from getting to the frontlines first and dying because I am too aggressive. Personally this is how I view the qualities in a tank for me.

HP>Armour>RoF>Pen>front profile>agility (power/weight ratio, ability to traverse soft ground, acceleration)>speed>camo rating
If I can lead the charge and fill the enemy with holes, picking off his crew and modules when I get into a long range sniping duel I am happy.

[Tagmatium]

You know, except for the fact that streaks are a fairly common occurrence in any truly random sequence, and therefore not indicative of any sort of rigging on the part of the system itself.

It's far more likely that any long-term adjustment in performance is the result of the player and their choices.

A coin coming up tails five times in a row?

Idk about that.

Because each coin flip has no influence on the last or the one after it.

Each one is an entirely separate event and it's only the human brain's ability to see patterns that means that you identify patterns.

If the MM's map selector is completely random, there's a good chance that I could play one map over an entire session of possibly several hours, although I'd probably raeg out after ten of the same map and go and do something else.

[Licana]

Leading the charge generally implies a different set of characteristics from the churchill if you want to do so consistently and effectively.

[The Greater Luthorian Empire]

Leading the charge generally implies a different set of characteristics from the churchill if you want to do so consistently and effectively.

Not really, DPM>Alpha as you can't peekaboo, low profile makes it harder for your opponent to hit you while facehugging (many times I've beaten opponents by just going back and forth since they can only hit my turret if I move sporadically I can make them miss the turret and with it my whole tank), high HP means you can tank through damage and draw fire away from any tanks behind you. What traits would you consider good for leading the charge?

[Licana]

ofc you can peak while leading an assault. There is a difference between leading the charge and suiciding, you know?

[Morrdh]

the churchill is a terrible tank even without that track weakspot, because it is a fat, slow tank with paper sides that relies on frontal armour for survival, and its frontal armour is entirely insufficient to protect against in-tier heavies and even some mediums. That's with AP, if your enemy has APCR then damn near anything you can face could potentially pen your front with no problems. Since you're too slow for manuever, your vision/camo is too poor for sniping games, and your alpha is so subpar that you can't even effectively trade with mediums, and its main gimmick doesn't even work, it literally fails across the board at everything.

In short, it's the perfect summary to the majority british tanks as a whole.

Never had much of a problem driving the Churchie 7.

[Licana]

Your one band camp experience completely and entirely refutes my position. I must recant on all arguments.

btw, your overall indicates otherwise.

[Morrdh]

Your one band camp experience completely and entirely refutes my position. I must recant on all arguments.

btw, your overall indicates otherwise.

Personally I feel winrates is just BS, countless games I've stacked up the kills and held flanks only to be let down by the rest of the team.

[Rich and Corporations]

Your one band camp experience completely and entirely refutes my position. I must recant on all arguments.

btw, your overall indicates otherwise.

Personally I feel winrates is just BS, countless games I've stacked up the kills and held flanks only to be let down by the rest of the team.

Whenever you shine the most that's because you're an outlier. In order to be an outlier you need to have a lot of terrible players....

[Licana]

Your one band camp experience completely and entirely refutes my position. I must recant on all arguments.

btw, your overall indicates otherwise.

Personally I feel winrates is just BS, countless games I've stacked up the kills and held flanks only to be let down by the rest of the team.

Confirmation bias, if this were true and you could "stack up the kills and single handedly hold flanks" you'd have had more of an effect on your games. If I had an EU client I could probably explain this further by looking at your more in-depth stats for the tank, but I don't.

I have never, ever, seen anyone with a large sample of games with a low WR and high dpg/kpg, which is what claims like yours would imply.

[The Greater Luthorian Empire]

ofc you can peak while leading an assault. There is a difference between leading the charge and suiciding, you know?

That didn't answer my point. What pray tell is the ideal tank for leading a charge? What traits are ideal for such a task? An ideal sidescraper for example has a rear or central turret, thick side armour and doesn't have a pike nose. Even if you cannot think of an ideal vehicle you should at least be able to think of ideal traits.

[Morrdh]

Personally I feel winrates is just BS, countless games I've stacked up the kills and held flanks only to be let down by the rest of the team.

Confirmation bias, if this were true and you could "stack up the kills and single handedly hold flanks" you'd have had more of an effect on your games. If I had an EU client I could probably explain this further by looking at your more in-depth stats for the tank, but I don't.

I have never, ever, seen anyone with a large sample of games with a low WR and high dpg/kpg, which is what claims like yours would imply.

Most games I get 1 or 2 kills on average, occasionally 3 kills with 5 kills being really good games (one 5 kill game was in the TOG). I never claimed high dpg, especially since I never ever use Premium ammo and never will. But often to win WoT it needs to be a team effort and you know what random battles are like.

[Tagmatium]

Confirmation bias, if this were true and you could "stack up the kills and single handedly hold flanks" you'd have had more of an effect on your games. If I had an EU client I could probably explain this further by looking at your more in-depth stats for the tank, but I don't.

I have never, ever, seen anyone with a large sample of games with a low WR and high dpg/kpg, which is what claims like yours would imply.

Most games I get 1 or 2 kills on average, occasionally 3 kills with 5 kills being really good games (one 5 kill game was in the TOG). I never claimed high dpg, especially since I never ever use Premium ammo and never will. But often to win WoT it needs to be a team effort and you know what random battles are like.

Why don't you use premium ammo?

[The Greater Luthorian Empire]

Most games I get 1 or 2 kills on average, occasionally 3 kills with 5 kills being really good games (one 5 kill game was in the TOG). I never claimed high dpg, especially since I never ever use Premium ammo and never will. But often to win WoT it needs to be a team effort and you know what random battles are like.

Why don't you use premium ammo?

Only scrubs use premium ammo in random matches. Plus it is annoying if you ever run at a loss in a tier VI game because you switched to gold and either had to keep using it or forgot to switch back (once switched to gold to deal with an IS-3 with my BP, forgot to switch back, fired off like 20 gold rounds by the end of it, I was pissed).

[Morrdh]

Most games I get 1 or 2 kills on average, occasionally 3 kills with 5 kills being really good games (one 5 kill game was in the TOG). I never claimed high dpg, especially since I never ever use Premium ammo and never will. But often to win WoT it needs to be a team effort and you know what random battles are like.

Why don't you use premium ammo?

I just don't, hell I don't even have a premium account.

[Hurdegaryp]

You know, except for the fact that streaks are a fairly common occurrence in any truly random sequence, and therefore not indicative of any sort of rigging on the part of the system itself.

It's far more likely that any long-term adjustment in performance is the result of the player and their choices.

A coin coming up tails five times in a row?

Idk about that.

I don't know about it either, but I'm one of those aberrant long-term players who doesn't simply play tier VIII-X vehicles permanently. I'm just not a masochist enough for that, because there are just too may utterly inept chucklefucks in the high tier regions who blundered their way towards their sacred tier X tracked godmachines with licentious abandon. And rest assured that I get thrown into teams with those mouthbreathers whenever I fucking dare to play a tier VIII or higher (if I feel really blasphemous), because you should know your place! WoT: it's all about systematically humiliating those who were stupid enough to actually invest in the game.