Jump to content


Isn't time to make more prem TDs? Very lacking


  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

Dirizon #1 Posted Sep 14 2017 - 03:46

    Major

  • Players
  • 25998 battles
  • 3,531
  • Member since:
    06-05-2011

I by no means like arty. I actually hate it. I think it is lazy and detracts from tanks ability to play as tanks. But this isn't about my opinions, but rather a topic at hand which WG could definitely add to and improve.

WoT has 2 prem SPGs, all low tier. Also they aren't part of the big 3 nations either, that typical players would have most games in. Think of all the missed out crew training, free EXP, and credits for arty players. This is incredibly lacking, considering the tonne of prem LTs, Meds, HVYs, TDs

Can we have some T 6-7 prem SPGs, maybe an 8? For Germany , USA, USSR especially. 

M7 4.5''  an M7 priest with the US 114mm

T117 an improved tracked carriage mounting BR-2, like S51 with stock gun

Self propelled Marder variant, mounting Bisons SiG33 15cm

just some examples. Sadly, can't use SU122l or Brummbar, because they would be put in as TDs.

BR-21 triplex would be a suitable tier 8, mounting a bored out BR-2 to 18cm instead of 15.2

 



Augustus_GoldNoob_Sohn #2 Posted Sep 14 2017 - 03:49

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 1305 battles
  • 315
  • [WCTNT] WCTNT
  • Member since:
    06-27-2014
Slightly misleading title. 

Dirizon #3 Posted Sep 14 2017 - 03:51

    Major

  • Players
  • 25998 battles
  • 3,531
  • Member since:
    06-05-2011

View PostAugustus_GoldNoob_Sohn, on Sep 13 2017 - 22:19, said:

Slightly misleading title. 

 

Tongue tied. I meant SPGs, thanks for pointing that out good sir  +1 is an order

for everyone else, l meant SPGs, excuse the 'me being a useless boob' and putting TD



Sam_Sanister #4 Posted Sep 14 2017 - 04:08

    Captain

  • Players
  • 24346 battles
  • 1,611
  • [N1NJA] N1NJA
  • Member since:
    10-11-2013
I don't think people would be too happy with new SPGs in general, let alone prem SPGs.
That being said, tier 6 or 7 would be appropriate tiers for prem SPGs.
Good enough firepower without being RNG reliant.

Dirizon #5 Posted Sep 14 2017 - 04:15

    Major

  • Players
  • 25998 battles
  • 3,531
  • Member since:
    06-05-2011

View PostSam_Sanister, on Sep 13 2017 - 22:38, said:

I don't think people would be too happy with new SPGs in general, let alone prem SPGs.
That being said, tier 6 or 7 would be appropriate tiers for prem SPGs.
Good enough firepower without being RNG reliant.

 

this isn't about gameplay opinions on classes. And their performance, or what to or not to like.

 

It it is about class fairness in training, EXP, creds. All classes should have the option. And this is a class that is overlooked in prem market. A market l am sure WG can capitalize on big, and make extra cash. Especially since they are coming out with loads of prem tanks



SilverEaglewing #6 Posted Sep 14 2017 - 04:54

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 29780 battles
  • 694
  • [NICO] NICO
  • Member since:
    09-17-2013

Cause what we really need are more wankers in the back, but now you can make more credits and train ur spg crews to be even more camcer. GREAT IDEA

 



SilverEaglewing #7 Posted Sep 14 2017 - 04:57

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 29780 battles
  • 694
  • [NICO] NICO
  • Member since:
    09-17-2013
Put the sy122I as a TD along with the bummbar. If those arties are to be added then make them as standard tanks. 

Isola_di_Fano #8 Posted Sep 14 2017 - 05:29

    Major

  • Players
  • 19009 battles
  • 2,559
  • Member since:
    11-05-2012

Prem arties ?

 

As in  we see MORE arties ... ????

 

No, honestly, no thanks.



Augustus_GoldNoob_Sohn #9 Posted Sep 14 2017 - 05:36

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 1305 battles
  • 315
  • [WCTNT] WCTNT
  • Member since:
    06-27-2014

View PostDirizon, on Sep 13 2017 - 18:51, said:

 

Tongue tied. I meant SPGs, thanks for pointing that out good sir  +1 is an order

for everyone else, l meant SPGs, excuse the 'me being a useless boob' and putting TD

 

I hipenit didn't come across snooty, as it wasn't meant to be so. I do stuff like that all the time. 

Dirizon #10 Posted Sep 14 2017 - 05:48

    Major

  • Players
  • 25998 battles
  • 3,531
  • Member since:
    06-05-2011

View PostSilverEaglewing, on Sep 13 2017 - 23:27, said:

Put the sy122I as a TD along with the bummbar. If those arties are to be added then make them as standard tanks. 

 

WoT implements assault guns as TDs, so as l said in 0P, brummbar and SU122l or even Semovente D 75 and 1O5 would be classed TDs. 

Standard tanks, lol.

View PostSilverEaglewing, on Sep 13 2017 - 23:24, said:

Cause what we really need are more wankers in the back, but now you can make more credits and train ur spg crews to be even more camcer. GREAT IDEA

 

 

l agree. Unfortunately our opinions and dislike, don't constitute fairness. There are people that play lots of arty, and it is a WoT class, so they deserve tools as well, to help them out. That is a fair concept. Be constructive, accommodating and accepting, rather than judgemental and discriminatory. 

Zennosha #11 Posted Sep 14 2017 - 06:16

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 9686 battles
  • 211
  • [NAISU] NAISU
  • Member since:
    06-26-2014

View PostDirizon, on Sep 13 2017 - 21:48, said:

 

WoT implements assault guns as TDs, so as l said in 0P, brummbar and SU122l or even Semovente D 75 and 1O5 would be classed TDs. 

Standard tanks, lol.

 

l agree. Unfortunately our opinions and dislike, don't constitute fairness. There are people that play lots of arty, and it is a WoT class, so they deserve tools as well, to help them out. That is a fair concept. Be constructive, accommodating and accepting, rather than judgemental and discriminatory. 

 

accomodating and being accepting of arty is like accepting that non-binary genderfluid rainbowkin attack helicopter is a real thing.

The_Chieftain #12 Posted Oct 10 2017 - 22:09

    Military Specialist

  • Administrator
  • 10013 battles
  • 9,551
  • [WGA-A] WGA-A
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011
We're pushing for new US TDs, but I'm not sure how the OP is relevant given those seem to be artillery pieces.

pickpocket293 #13 Posted Oct 10 2017 - 23:44

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 21480 battles
  • 412
  • Member since:
    05-14-2015

View PostThe_Chieftain, on Oct 10 2017 - 13:09, said:

We're pushing for new US TDs, but I'm not sure how the OP is relevant given those seem to be artillery pieces.

 

Are you allowed to comment on this further, in an "unofficial" manner? I'm honestly just curious as to your personal thoughts about what there are for options and what you think could possibly be implemented into the game. I'd love to have a crew trainer for my abysmal T110E4 crew and the T28HTC and I do not get along. M56 Scorpion demands a good crew to play well and no other high-tier US TDs play similarly, so the crew skills don't usually match up... So the options for crew training in general are pretty slim.



Omega_Weapon #14 Posted Oct 11 2017 - 02:17

    Captain

  • Players
  • 41178 battles
  • 1,329
  • [GRIEF] GRIEF
  • Member since:
    11-15-2011

View Postpickpocket293, on Oct 10 2017 - 17:44, said:

 

Are you allowed to comment on this further, in an "unofficial" manner? I'm honestly just curious as to your personal thoughts about what there are for options and what you think could possibly be implemented into the game. I'd love to have a crew trainer for my abysmal T110E4 crew and the T28HTC and I do not get along. M56 Scorpion demands a good crew to play well and no other high-tier US TDs play similarly, so the crew skills don't usually match up... So the options for crew training in general are pretty slim.

 

​I think the M36B1 is a prime candidate. Jackson turret mounted on a Sherman hull. Reduced mobility but slightly improved armour. That would make for an excellent mid tier Premium TD.

Ivan_Moscavich #15 Posted Oct 11 2017 - 03:25

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 14399 battles
  • 962
  • Member since:
    02-08-2011

Definitely need premium tier 5,6, or 8 arty for the major nations, and tier 8 premium lights as well. Crew training with some nations low tier lights is just, not worth it and in some cases you can't even match crew layouts anyways.

 

I would totally buy a 18cm Russian premium spg... and I don't even play Russian arty.



hazmatman #16 Posted Oct 11 2017 - 03:48

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 10978 battles
  • 587
  • Member since:
    04-19-2015

View PostOmega_Weapon, on Oct 11 2017 - 02:17, said:

 

​I think the M36B1 is a prime candidate. Jackson turret mounted on a Sherman hull. Reduced mobility but slightly improved armour. That would make for an excellent mid tier Premium TD.

 

That's probably the best option since WoT does not allow for wheeled or half track vehicles, and recoilless rifles are out.

 

So unless they go with another wartime adhoc solution, like the T53 GMC (just a fatter bigger slower version of the current M56 Scorpion albeit with much more gun traverse), they either go with the M36B1 or a totally paper tank. Granted the M36B1 on its face does not appear unique - an M4 hull with a Jackson turret, or have characteristics that would lend themselves to unique gameplay, if placed at Tier 6 it would provide a good crew trainer for American TD crews, esp since it could accommodate a RO which will serve you up to the T30. The M56 does not train Radio Operators.

 

And while a Tier 8 Premium TD would be nicer (something that would be a real earner), I can't see putting a Sherman, with a paper thin turret and Tier 7 90mm gun at Tier 8. The French Ravioli works at Tier 8 because of that gun, the rest of it is a squishy Tier 5...but at least it has that big alpha gun with those wicked fast APCR shells. Unless they mount a non-historic gun, I cannot see how the M36B1 can live at Tier 8.


Edited by hazmatman, Oct 11 2017 - 03:49.


The_Chieftain #17 Posted Oct 11 2017 - 03:51

    Military Specialist

  • Administrator
  • 10013 battles
  • 9,551
  • [WGA-A] WGA-A
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011

View PostOmega_Weapon, on Oct 11 2017 - 01:17, said:

 

​I think the M36B1 is a prime candidate. Jackson turret mounted on a Sherman hull. Reduced mobility but slightly improved armour. That would make for an excellent mid tier Premium TD.

 

I think they still want to keep that reserved in case 'alternate hulls' become enabled, which they've been talking about for years.

 

My guess is there is more chance of seeing T53. It is worth noting that a T24 3D model used to exist, though it would be more a Tier IV or so. I haven't seen that model in a very long time, though, it's been pulled from the development server chute. There are other TDs which can be thrown in, such as M78 or T72. Problem is most are not above Tier VI.



hazmatman #18 Posted Oct 11 2017 - 03:59

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 10978 battles
  • 587
  • Member since:
    04-19-2015

View PostThe_Chieftain, on Oct 11 2017 - 03:51, said:

 

I think they still want to keep that reserved in case 'alternate hulls' become enabled, which they've been talking about for years.

 

My guess is there is more chance of seeing T53. It is worth noting that a T24 3D model used to exist, though it would be more a Tier IV or so. I haven't seen that model in a very long time, though, it's been pulled from the development server chute. There are other TDs which can be thrown in, such as M78 or T72. Problem is most are not above Tier VI.

 

That is a problem from a player perspective when some other lines are flush with T6, 7, and 8 Premium examples. Such is life in a computer game. Would we call that a 1st Virtual World problem? US doctrine and wartime pressures were just not the same as Germany and the USSR, so the US just didn't seem all that interested in, nor forced to develop as many solutions to the problem of "how do I kill the maximum number of OPFOR tanks on the cheap".

 

So when do we get Italian tanks & TDs? LOL


Edited by hazmatman, Oct 11 2017 - 03:59.


The_Chieftain #19 Posted Oct 11 2017 - 04:47

    Military Specialist

  • Administrator
  • 10013 battles
  • 9,551
  • [WGA-A] WGA-A
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011

View Posthazmatman, on Oct 11 2017 - 02:59, said:

 

So when do we get Italian tanks & TDs? LOL

 

If I were a betting man, I'd go with seeing an M13/40 in WoT at some point in 2018 (It's another vehicle we used to have a 3D model of, together with the L6). I have not seen anything to indicate that it has been approved, however, let alone more tanks in the line.



Dirizon #20 Posted Oct 11 2017 - 07:03

    Major

  • Players
  • 25998 battles
  • 3,531
  • Member since:
    06-05-2011

View PostDirizon, on Sep 13 2017 - 22:21, said:

 

Tongue tied. I meant SPGs, thanks for pointing that out good sir  +1 is an order

for everyone else, l meant SPGs, excuse the 'me being a useless boob' and putting TD

 

View PostThe_Chieftain, on Oct 10 2017 - 16:39, said:

We're pushing for new US TDs, but I'm not sure how the OP is relevant given those seem to be artillery pieces.

 

l stated it earlier, l meant this. I haven't corrected the title.

 

View PostThe_Chieftain, on Oct 10 2017 - 23:17, said:

 

If I were a betting man, I'd go with seeing an M13/40 in WoT at some point in 2018

 

Chi Nu Kai, Turan lll, Cz T4O are examples of nationality and class starters, introduced before a line, to start a line. Well, not really Turan l guess, more of Pz P T25. Regardless, these tanks are at least on par with tech tree equivalent, and given M13/4O would probably be very mediocre or even subpar, l'd hope we instead get something like 26/4O, which would be at lot like a M4 lmproved or T14 or Excelsior. And later on if need be, an actual non prototype P4O can be introduced into actual tech tree. 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users