Jump to content


British Heavy Updates (SUPER CONQUEROR AHOY)

Super Test

  • Please log in to reply
57 replies to this topic

Gothraul #21 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 00:15

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 1526 battles
  • 2,668
  • Member since:
    11-17-2014
Well this makes up for not getting the T-29 tier 3 gift tank but looking down the pipeline I am wondering if such a change is going to happen to the IS4 as it differs from the previous two tanks in play style.

Jarms48 #22 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 00:23

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 117 battles
  • 1,173
  • Member since:
    06-21-2015

No buffs to the powercreeped Churchill VII and Black Prince? The Churchill Mk. I could use a little love too, to a lesser extent of the former. 


Edited by Jarms48, Aug 12 2017 - 00:34.


_Schneller_Heinz_ #23 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 00:23

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 1931 battles
  • 631
  • Member since:
    02-05-2015

View PostCabbageMechanic, on Aug 11 2017 - 21:00, said:

 

As stated in the recent 9.20 changes video, there is an ongoing design effort to ensure that tier 8-10 tanks of the same tree share playstyle traits - that's why the Conq is also being changed.

 

I think you're dismissing the Super Conq pretty early, I think it looks fine and if it underperforms in testing it will likely receive buffs. 

 

Sure wargaming you gonna tailor the Tier VIII tanks to fit in the play style with tier 10's.

Because with the new horse manure match maker wargaming implemented Tier VIII is designated 80% being bottom tier for Tier IX/X target practice.

 


Edited by _Schneller_Heinz_, Aug 12 2017 - 00:24.


Avalon304 #24 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 00:29

    Major

  • Players
  • 15743 battles
  • 5,752
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

View PostJarms48, on Aug 11 2017 - 16:23, said:

So, why doesn't the "Super" Conqueror have the 20mm of applique and 14mm burster plates on the upper front glacis as well? 

 

 

Also, no buffs to the powercreeped Churchill VII and Black Prince? The Churchill Mk. I could use a little love too, to a lesser extent of the former. 

 

Because thats a picture of the tier 9. You can fine WiP tier 10 shots here:

 

https://thedailyboun...ish-heavy-tank/



Jarms48 #25 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 00:31

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 117 battles
  • 1,173
  • Member since:
    06-21-2015

View PostAvalon304, on Aug 12 2017 - 09:29, said:

Because thats a picture of the tier 9. You can fine WiP tier 10 shots here:

 

https://thedailyboun...ish-heavy-tank/

 

Oh nice. I withdraw my prior comment. Still would have liked to see the Improved Ballistic Shaped Turret that Listy found as the tier X, we can dream. 


Edited by Jarms48, Aug 12 2017 - 00:56.


indoctrinated #26 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 02:28

    Captain

  • Players
  • 19855 battles
  • 1,837
  • Member since:
    05-22-2012

View PostCynicalDutchie, on Aug 11 2017 - 21:06, said:

 

I find it funny how they decided to buff the conqueror's armor which makes it more like the super conqueror and then proceed to add the super conqueror as the new T10 leaving us with the exact same tank, twice in a row.

 

So I say again: Give us the chieftain already!

The Chieftain has a pathetic upper glacis and a merely above average turret. Grossly overhyped tank. I will take this new Conqueror easily.

Good changes IMO. Caern especially needed some love.
 

View PostCenotaph, on Aug 11 2017 - 22:43, said:

 

I don't question his sanity... only his prejudice and intelligence.

 

Don't forget he's also responsible for the Defender, the T26E5 and Jesus Chrysler... also, he's the reason the anniversary tank was "too OP to be given away" this year.

 

WG were warned about him before they even hired him... but as usual they completely ignored the opinions of the CC's that they flew to their office to "discuss the future of the game".

 

The guy is a complete muppet, and a perfect representation of WG's inept hiring policies and obvious refusal to remove problem employees... like Ph3lan, for example.

The Defender, T26E5 and Chrysler K are grossly overhyped tanks, above average at best. SirFoch really pulled the wool over this game community with his immature, vitriolic rants against WG (while using THEIR FREE CONTENT to make money on WG's back).



killertank_962 #27 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 03:06

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 10235 battles
  • 27
  • [AR-PA] AR-PA
  • Member since:
    10-18-2012

1. Caernavon Is finally gonna be competitive, now dont go nerfing it.

2. Conqueror needs no changes, but if the Caernavon is getting good DPM this does too, so maybe Nerf its speed by 5kmph for the DPM buff.

3. Buff the FV215B (remove side armour weak spot, make it have more hull armour) make it the first line and give us the super conqueror as the 2nd to branch off from the conqueror and also put the chieftain as the 3rd tier 10 to branch of to from the conqueror.

4. Buff the Black prince by giving it the old Caernavon 20pdr, and buff speed by 5kmph

5. Buff the Churchill Vll's speed by 5kmph, also give it the black princes 17pdr

6. Buff the Churchill l's speed by 5kmph

 

Done


Edited by killertank_962, Aug 15 2017 - 06:15.


Ken_McGuire #28 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 03:10

    Captain

  • Players
  • 25552 battles
  • 1,263
  • [O-VER] O-VER
  • Member since:
    12-21-2012

View PostCabbageMechanic, on Aug 11 2017 - 15:00, said:

 

As stated in the recent 9.20 changes video, there is an ongoing design effort to ensure that tier 8-10 tanks of the same tree share playstyle traits - that's why the Conq is also being changed.

 

In the Czech line, how do the tier 9 and 10 autoloaders really play like the tier 8? Or the other way around for the AMX 30 - especially after the proposed changes?

 

And while they do have a bit more similarity, the T32 has a more solid turret than any of the tanks following it, giving it a significantly different play style.

 

What about the Obj 416 > Obj 430? Way different play styles....

 

 


Edited by Ken_McGuire, Aug 12 2017 - 03:18.


Avalon304 #29 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 03:55

    Major

  • Players
  • 15743 battles
  • 5,752
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

View Postindoctrinated, on Aug 11 2017 - 18:28, said:

The Chieftain has a pathetic upper glacis and a merely above average turret. Grossly overhyped tank. I will take this new Conqueror easily.

 

The Defender, T26E5 and Chrysler K are grossly overhyped tanks, above average at best. SirFoch really pulled the wool over this game community with his immature, vitriolic rants against WG (while using THEIR FREE CONTENT to make money on WG's back).

 

A. Weve gone over the Chieftains turret. (BTW tier 10 TDs are gonna ruin this things turret too, since that is your benchmark for if a turret is mediocre or not). The Chieftains turret is very strong against anything that isnt an E3 or JPE. Saying its turret is mediocre is objectively incorrect. Saying the Super Conqueror's turret is better is ALSO objectively incorrect. (Oh BTW... -7 depression is TRASH for a heavy tank limiting the positions in which you can actually use the turret).

 

B. Those tanks are all in various states of both brokenness and overpoweredness. Thinking they arent is foolish on your part.

 

View Postkillertank_962, on Aug 11 2017 - 19:06, said:

(Before you read my PERSONAL OPINION summary and thoughts on these tanks please take a deep breath and not attack me, remember its my opinion <3)

 

(Also there may be some slightly bad language so you have been warned)

 

First of all, i have been praying to WG for years for buffs to these British heavy's, they are the only line that I've got to tier 10 in so far and from what i can see the Super(S**t) Conqueror is worse in every way compared to the fv215b (Less health-must be a medium tank then, Less DPM-must be a light tank then, Less mobility-Lets make it a Maus with no armour, Less gun handling-this was the only saving grace for this tank (besides health but tank fires are aids for it) and you decide to take the tank to the bathroom and cr*p all over it. So i propose a new and better system for balancing tanks now instead of using a lottery machine for it. Allow the community to tell what really needs changing. 

 

For example-The Caernavon needs a more punchy gun (more alpha little bit less ROF maybe) and some more turret cheek armour and you dont need to Nerf the mobility cause its already slower and got less armour then an is-3. Now this is where it really shows the IQ of a "Balance" team (no offence but its a personal opinion), Why have you even pulled the Conqueror's files from you storage in the first place!!, The tank is a balanced excellent DPM monster with a decent turret (which has weak spots unlike Maus and type 5) it is a completely balanced tank and its gun is the reason for that, but hold your horses WG says this "I have a brilliant idea guys... ready... we could take the Conqueror and Nerf its gun... wouldn't that erupt the Community". Please dont touch it, you already Nerfed its gun depression from 8 to 7 and its a front mounted turret!!! the FV215B has the same gun depression with a rear mounted turret!! This tank should stay the same if not get better ammo rack health and a little more upper plate armour (you decide for this tank, community that is, i personally love it but i hate the upper plate <3). Now for what we have all been waiting for....(drum role please)... the Tier 10 tank that should be at tier -69, What was your thought process of this tank from day one, It was probably one of the lowest performers in the game due some reason but you still decided on nerfing its DPM in some patch. It was already under powered(Personal Opinion, i do drive the tank) and then you went "nahhhhhhhhhhh lets slowly make it bad so the community doesn't notice. well well well we did realise.

 

And i think i can safely assume that The community (Opinion guys!) and I all think that these tanks should get these changes applied.

1. The Caernavon - it needs for alpha for a small ROF decrease and more armour :) enough said.

2. The Conqueror - the Gem of tier 9 I strongly think this tank should be left alone, but we know that probably wont happen so i propose a better hull and nothing else, if you lay a finger on that gun i might cry :(.

3. The FV215B probably one of the most unwanted tanks for a player in this game at tier 10, Please please please remove its hull weak spot when side scraping, i dont see one on the Maus or Type 5 (anymore that it) and both these tanks beat it in nearly every way (i know they may play differently but let me have my 10 minutes), also for the FV215B make it have a stronger fuel tank and then make it a reward tank. Now guys i have a new crazy idea........ why dont we introduce the Chieftain!!!!! who would have thought, this tank is perfect for the tier 10 position in the line, where did you pull the super conqueror idea from, cause all i can smell is a*s fumes all around it. WG we know your trying, it may not be 100% but the community wants the Chieftain, why dont you just copy and paste it from the Chinese server and buff the current 8,9 and 10 and call it a day. 

 

Well agree or disagree i dont care, this is in the best favour of the community and even if some may hate it, the effects would drastically increase the sanity of players in this game, and keep all the British heavy drivers happy.

 

of poop i nearly forgot, Remember the tier 5, 6 and 7 British heavy's, throw some love at them, (preferably the Black Prince and Churchill Vll).

 

You have the answer, but you have the power "JUST DO IT".

 

1. is literally happening.

 

2. I agree with it being left alone and otherwise not touched.

 

3. The 215b is also becoming a reward tank. And as much as I think the Super Conqueror is a big pile of dung it is based in reality. And yes, we all want the Chieftain. (Its already in the files).



indoctrinated #30 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 04:15

    Captain

  • Players
  • 19855 battles
  • 1,837
  • Member since:
    05-22-2012

View PostAvalon304, on Aug 12 2017 - 03:55, said:

 

A. Weve gone over the Chieftains turret. (BTW tier 10 TDs are gonna ruin this things turret too, since that is your benchmark for if a turret is mediocre or not). The Chieftains turret is very strong against anything that isnt an E3 or JPE. Saying its turret is mediocre is objectively incorrect. Saying the Super Conqueror's turret is better is ALSO objectively incorrect. (Oh BTW... -7 depression is TRASH for a heavy tank limiting the positions in which you can actually use the turret).

 

B. Those tanks are all in various states of both brokenness and overpoweredness. Thinking they arent is foolish on your part.

 

 

Why Tier X TD gold? On the West server I see a LOT of people playing E4s, E3s, etc and they aren't shy about using gold ammo. I did label it as merely "above average" but it doesn't change that the hull is horrible. I am not sure how strong this turret is against AP/APCR as these pictures are not enough:

7 depression ain't great but from playing the Conqueror on the test server I thought it wasn't an impediment to playing the tank. Upper glacis isn't great vs gold AP/APCR but it'll be deliciously troll against 330 HEAT pen. Turret spaced armor might even let this absorb Jpz E-100 HEAT (lol) but I am not sure how it fares against Jagdtiger and E4 APCR.
I don't get the hype train about these tanks-
T26E5- Worse standard ammo (230 APCR is worse than 225 AP), medicore hull (200 effective upper glacis, frontal hull is actually similar to a Tiger II's in strength), bad weapons handling, only has a good turret.
Chrysler K- Awkward rear turret layout, bad weapons handling, mediocre AP shell
Obj. 252- Atrocious aiming stats (very dangerous in high tier games), lower glacis is worth about 200 to AP. All that for a very strong upper glacis and 40 more damage than a T34?



Avalon304 #31 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 04:24

    Major

  • Players
  • 15743 battles
  • 5,752
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

View Postindoctrinated, on Aug 11 2017 - 20:15, said:

Why Tier X TD gold? On the West server I see a LOT of people playing E4s, E3s, etc and they aren't shy about using gold ammo. I did label it as merely "above average" but it doesn't change that the hull is horrible. I am not sure how strong this turret is against AP/APCR as these pictures are not enough:

7 depression ain't great but from playing the Conqueror on the test server I thought it wasn't an impediment to playing the tank. Upper glacis isn't great vs gold AP/APCR but it'll be deliciously troll against 330 HEAT pen. Turret spaced armor might even let this absorb Jpz E-100 HEAT (lol) but I am not sure how it fares against Jagdtiger and E4 APCR.
I don't get the hype train about these tanks-
T26E5- Worse standard ammo (230 APCR is worse than 225 AP), medicore hull (200 effective upper glacis, frontal hull is actually similar to a Tiger II's in strength), bad weapons handling, only has a good turret.
Chrysler K- Awkward rear turret layout, bad weapons handling, mediocre AP shell
Obj. 252- Atrocious aiming stats (very dangerous in high tier games), lower glacis is worth about 200 to AP. All that for a very strong upper glacis and 40 more damage than a T34?

 

The point is NOTHING is good against tier 10 TD gold. Not this tank. Not the Chieftain. Not anything. (Except maybe the E3. Maybe). Using it as a barometer is setting any tank up to fail. But you cant magically say one is bad, and then say another isnt, as you are attempting to suggest here. And I mean those images are telling you the armor thickness of the sections. And you know the avg pen of tier 10 TDs firing gold... so figure it out.

 

The T26E5 is a better T32. Period. Its OP as balls.

 

The K can side scrape very effectively and has a turret capable of withstanding a lot of punishment. This one is more broken than OP but it does over perform slightly.

 

The 252 is broken (but not OP), in that it has armor that is too good for its tier, but is otherwise a terrible tank. 

 

And then theres the Skorpion which is OP as balls.

 

The fact is Murazor is, objectively, very bad at his job. These upcoming changes are further proof of that.



Admiral_Duncan #32 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 04:40

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 17923 battles
  • 64
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011
After nearly a year and a half of taking a brake from this game due to repetitive promises being broken, I happen upon an article that seems to imply top tier British tanks are being change after so many long years. Immediately i get that old feeling of excitement i used to feel all those years ago when the game was new and exciting, just thinking after all this time we finally get the chieftain (havoc will surely follow) my life could finally be complete. I then proceed to actually read the article only to find out north Korea isn't the only country with a massive nuclear arsenal in the hands of a madman as wargamming has yet again given me the largest nuclear middle finger man kinda hasn't seen since the czar bomba. Thanks wargaming for yet again driving me back out into society and making me live a normal life. Now all the hundreds of dollars you would have seen go towards xp for the chieftain will now be spent on something worthless like a house or a car. I hope your proud of yourself.

indoctrinated #33 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 05:00

    Captain

  • Players
  • 19855 battles
  • 1,837
  • Member since:
    05-22-2012

View PostAvalon304, on Aug 12 2017 - 04:24, said:

 

The point is NOTHING is good against tier 10 TD gold. Not this tank. Not the Chieftain. Not anything. (Except maybe the E3. Maybe). Using it as a barometer is setting any tank up to fail. But you cant magically say one is bad, and then say another isnt, as you are attempting to suggest here. And I mean those images are telling you the armor thickness of the sections. And you know the avg pen of tier 10 TDs firing gold... so figure it out.

 

The T26E5 is a better T32. Period. Its OP as balls.

 

The K can side scrape very effectively and has a turret capable of withstanding a lot of punishment. This one is more broken than OP but it does over perform slightly.

 

The 252 is broken (but not OP), in that it has armor that is too good for its tier, but is otherwise a terrible tank. 

 

And then theres the Skorpion which is OP as balls.

 

The fact is Murazor is, objectively, very bad at his job. These upcoming changes are further proof of that.

Turret geometry is still important and its kinda obscured by the spaced armor sheets. Raw thickness isn't the full picture. Turret is fully proof to plebian HEAT/APCR but it remains to be seen how much of the turret front can resist the strongest of gold shells in the game.
Being better than a T32 isn't setting a high standard. It's a one-trick pony tank with a diamond strong turret but poor/average everything else.
Does the 252's armor really matter when most tanks are just gonna cut the lower glacis to pieces while it struggles to even squeeze in one shot? 
Skorpion G does pretty well but it looks to have razor thin margins of error. Giant bloated tank with atrocious aiming stats definitely isn't a good start.
I don't like that most people seem to focus in on best case scenarios for a tank while ignoring other situations it'll be encountering. Chrysler K can side-scrape sure but what else is it good at?



Avalon304 #34 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 05:11

    Major

  • Players
  • 15743 battles
  • 5,752
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

View Postindoctrinated, on Aug 11 2017 - 21:00, said:

Turret geometry is still important and its kinda obscured by the spaced armor sheets. Raw thickness isn't the full picture. Turret is fully proof to plebian HEAT/APCR but it remains to be seen how much of the turret front can resist the strongest of gold shells in the game.
Being better than a T32 isn't setting a high standard. It's a one-trick pony tank with a diamond strong turret but poor/average everything else.
Does the 252's armor really matter when most tanks are just gonna cut the lower glacis to pieces while it struggles to even squeeze in one shot? 
Skorpion G does pretty well but it looks to have razor thin margins of error. Giant bloated tank with atrocious aiming stats definitely isn't a good start.

 

If those are raw thicknesses, true. But coming from tank inspector, though could easily be effective thicknesses... and as effective thicknesses, thats not good.

 

I mean youre wrong about every one of those tier 8s... but ok.

 

The T32 is strong at what it does. The T26E5 is better.

 

The 252 can hide that lower plate. And given that the tank seems to regualrly allow anyone to do well in it, I would say yes, it matters.

 

It really doesnt. You can be half asleep and squeeze out high damage games in the Skorpion.



Silamon #35 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 05:13

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 7842 battles
  • 117
  • [SAVE] SAVE
  • Member since:
    05-01-2011

Now yall got me worrying they might nerf the conqueror's gun after they buff the armor.

 

 

Wargaming, PLEASE don't nerf the gun on conqueror, I would rather the tank stay as is than get armor but lose the amazing gun stats  :(


Edited by Silamon, Aug 12 2017 - 05:14.


Avalon304 #36 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 05:29

    Major

  • Players
  • 15743 battles
  • 5,752
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

View PostSilamon, on Aug 11 2017 - 21:13, said:

Now yall got me worrying they might nerf the conqueror's gun after they buff the armor.

 

 

Wargaming, PLEASE don't nerf the gun on conqueror, I would rather the tank stay as is than get armor but lose the amazing gun stats  :(

 

Its losing DPM. http://rykoszet.info...rytania-cz-iii/

indoctrinated #37 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 05:48

    Captain

  • Players
  • 19855 battles
  • 1,837
  • Member since:
    05-22-2012

View PostAvalon304, on Aug 12 2017 - 05:11, said:

 

If those are raw thicknesses, true. But coming from tank inspector, though could easily be effective thicknesses... and as effective thicknesses, thats not good.

 

I mean youre wrong about every one of those tier 8s... but ok.

 

The T32 is strong at what it does. The T26E5 is better.

 

The 252 can hide that lower plate. And given that the tank seems to regualrly allow anyone to do well in it, I would say yes, it matters.

 

It really doesnt. You can be half asleep and squeeze out high damage games in the Skorpion.

T32- what is so good about it besides turret armor? Upper glacis is about as strong as a Tiger II's, lower glacis is only good for resisting 170 pen guns which isn't all that relevant nowadays. Sub 200 AP pen blows- the T26E5 fixes that but that's about all it has over the T32. Soft stats (movement) are bad on both, okay turret bloom on both. And really, are people that incapable of reading a minimap that the difference between a 35 and 40 km/h speed limit is a deal breaker? I've played a TON of slow tanks like the Japanese Super Heavies, the British AT line to have minimap awareness ingrained into my mind (decent winrates on my Japanese heavies and they go 25 km/h).
From seeing the 252U in the wild, it's not really any more dangerous than any other T8 Heavy. The lower glacis is quite prominent and its a 6 depression tank.
Tanks need to be evaluated across varying circumstances, not ideal cherry picked ones. This is why I laugh at arguements like the JP2 being a "good" tank when it's decent in a hull down position, but that hardly ever happens with the HUGE hull. It's not always going to happen, and in that case how does the tank perform?

View PostSilamon, on Aug 12 2017 - 05:13, said:

Now yall got me worrying they might nerf the conqueror's gun after they buff the armor.

 

 

Wargaming, PLEASE don't nerf the gun on conqueror, I would rather the tank stay as is than get armor but lose the amazing gun stats  :(

If anything I don't see why Tier IX/X DPM shouldn't be toned down. There's already a huge power gap between those tiers at Tier 8. Tier 8s are already a feast for those tanks to devour.


Edited by indoctrinated, Aug 12 2017 - 05:49.


Avalon304 #38 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 06:05

    Major

  • Players
  • 15743 battles
  • 5,752
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

View Postindoctrinated, on Aug 11 2017 - 21:48, said:

T32- what is so good about it besides turret armor? Upper glacis is about as strong as a Tiger II's, lower glacis is only good for resisting 170 pen guns which isn't all that relevant nowadays. Sub 200 AP pen blows- the T26E5 fixes that but that's about all it has over the T32. Soft stats (movement) are bad on both, okay turret bloom on both. And really, are people that incapable of reading a minimap that the difference between a 35 and 40 km/h speed limit is a deal breaker? I've played a TON of slow tanks like the Japanese Super Heavies, the British AT line to have minimap awareness ingrained into my mind (decent winrates on my Japanese heavies and they go 25 km/h).
From seeing the 252U in the wild, it's not really any more dangerous than any other T8 Heavy. The lower glacis is quite prominent and its a 6 depression tank.
Tanks need to be evaluated across varying circumstances, not ideal cherry picked ones. This is why I laugh at arguements like the JP2 being a "good" tank when it's decent in a hull down position, but that hardly ever happens with the HUGE hull. It's not always going to happen, and in that case how does the tank perform?

If anything I don't see why Tier IX/X DPM shouldn't be toned down. There's already a huge power gap between those tiers at Tier 8. Tier 8s are already a feast for those tanks to devour.

 

 

RE: The bolded. YES! Have you ever played this game? People are incapable of reading the map 99% of the time.

 

Youre wrong about the tier 8s, those premiums are either OP or broken as balls. (And the JPII is a good tank. Its both mobile enough to move around and good in defensive positions).

 

"Tanks need to be evaluated across varying circumstances, not ideal cherry picked ones".

 

Thats hilarious considering you cherry pick tier 10 TD gold rounds to evaluate armor. But even then, by that logic the tier 8 premiums in question are all either OP or broken.

 

 



Cenotaph #39 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 10:02

    Captain

  • Players
  • 9305 battles
  • 1,326
  • Member since:
    01-31-2011

View PostGothraul, on Aug 11 2017 - 15:15, said:

Well this makes up for not getting the T-29 tier 3 gift tank but looking down the pipeline I am wondering if such a change is going to happen to the IS4 as it differs from the previous two tanks in play style.

 

They plan to make the IS-4 a tier 9, and turn the ST-I into the ST-II at tier 10, with a twin cannon setup...  :facepalm:



B00BLEMAX #40 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 10:20

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 14557 battles
  • 391
  • [QSF] QSF
  • Member since:
    08-03-2012

1) We want the chieftain. 

 

2) We want the chieftain now

 

3) Conqueror doesn't need any buffs. If anything you should be focusing on the tiers 5,6 & 7 which are the low points of the whole branch. Canarven doesn't really need any big buff. 

 

4) Go to Minsk and tell them we want our chieftain. 

 

 







Also tagged with Super Test

4 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 4 guests, 0 anonymous users