The Greater Luthorian Empire wrote:Licana wrote: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.
You somehow assume that I can't because I decided to put forth the idea that your ideal characteristics were based on what appeared to be flawed assumptions instead of presenting my own personal tactics? That's amusing.
First off, there isn't a clear-cut, definitively optimal set of traits, there is some dependence on playstyle and user skill. Not to imply that this somehow makes fat, slow, low alpha heavies relevant at anything in this meta. If I'm looking for an aggressive vehicle, I prioritize high alpha/burst to reduce exposure, decent enough frontal/side protection to be workable in head-on engagements, mobility to maintain momentum and flex. DPM isn't terribly important as long as it isn't crippling (most high alpha tanks have competitive DPM anyway). Everything else isn't hugely important. P. much the IS series are the perfect aggressive heavies, with the american heavies running close second (their armour lets them down, though their great fire control can mitigate that).
The take-away from this is that this requires more of a generalist. As you never know what map you're going to end up on or what your team is going to do, you have to be ready to do anything if you want to consistently do successful aggressive action. One-trick ponies don't work, and no-trick ponies like the churchill in this meta definitely don't work.
Morrdh wrote: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.
First off, if what you said was true, you'd probably have close to a 2 kill/game. You don't. You have a 0.7. That means, on average, you don't get 1 or two kills per game; it's more like one or two kills every two games.
Secondly, it's p. easy to get high DPG values w/o using premium. Most tanks don't need premium spam in the first place, and increases in skill and general game knowledge just make this more true. That being said, I will never advise someone to carry no premium. It's a useful tool, especially for when you end up at the bottom of the team on the MM charts.
Thirdly, WoT may be a team game, but this does not mean that a core 1-3 players can't make a big difference in the games that they play. The only constant variable in every game is you and your actions. This reflects in all of the tracked statistics. Yes, there are some games in which no amount of personal effort will pull out the victory. Everyone gets those. The clincher is how many games you can personally swing from the middle. It may be hard to remember that the best of the best of any server generally hovers in the 70% WR range, which means they still lose three out of every ten games they play on average. Even the most skilled players still lose quite a bit, in the grand scheme of things.
