Jump to content


Worst heavy tanks in the game...my list.


  • Please log in to reply
91 replies to this topic

earthman34 #81 Posted Jul 12 2018 - 22:41

    Major

  • Players
  • 47182 battles
  • 3,145
  • Member since:
    07-17-2013

View Post_Juris, on Jul 12 2018 - 10:18, said:

 

This post is one sixth correct, one third defensible, and one half a canonical example of why downvotes should be a thing.  In order:

 

Tier 5:  No.  The pre-nerf O-I Exp was ridiculous, now it's just not ridiculous.  it still has the insane derp gun that can one-shot some same-tier tanks and most lower-tier tanks.  That alone means it's not going to be the worst.  Let's consider the Churchill 1.  Yes, it has nice penetration.  No, that mostly doesn't matter.  Its alpha is well below-average, and has abominable elevation and depression, which combined with the enormous body makes it very awkward to actually aim at things.  The turret placement makes using your reasonable amounts of armor quite difficult, and that, combined with the enormous size and terrible power to weight ratio, makes it very difficult to force engagements to be on your terms.  It might not be the worst tier 5 heavy if it only had to face other tier 5 heavies, but it's the biggest XP pinata when facing anything above it.  I could entertain an argument for the VK, but it at least has mostly better gun characteristics and doesn't have the awkward turret arrangement.  Verdict:  downvote worthy.

 

Tier 6:  See tier 5 discussion - all the same arguments apply, and now include literally worst-in-tier alpha along with all the rest, except this time you made those arguments properly.  Verdict:  correct.

 

Tier 7:  Black Prince definitely isn't great, and you're not wrong about its downsides.  The improvement in penetration still leaves it lacking compared to its peers, and its alpha is weak.  However, it now has a reasonably reliable turret, enough gun depression to make it work, and enough gun handling to leverage the above-average DPM.  I would not call it the worst in tier, but it's definitely weak.  I think I would class the IS-2 as the worst, since it combines awful gun handling, poor depression, and no particularly workable/abusable armor.  Verdict:  defensible.

 

Tier 8:  AMX 65t is pretty bad, I agree.  It has a workable turret, good alpha, and reasonable penetration, but poor handling, bad DPM, and no hull armor.  So far you're in defensible territory, although I would say either the KV-4 (slow, low alpha, low DPM, armor only works as top tier) or the Tiger II (low alpha, low DPM, armor only works as top tier) could be worse.  Saying the Emil 1 is bad is... maybe defensible?  It's not great, but almost any autoloader is never going to be super bad because the clip potential makes it dangerous.  However, this veers pretty close to downvote territory because you call the Caernaervon bad.  It used to be, but with the addition of the 32-pounder and the DPM buff, it is now one of the better tier 8 heavies, since it has a turret strong enough to actually make use of the DPM.  Verdict:  defensible, only just.

 

Tiers 9 and 10:  If you think the Conqueror and Super Conqueror are bad, you are literally proving that you can't play tier 9 or tier 10 tanks.  Both have strong, reliable turrets, good gun depression, and awesome gun handling, and all the rest of their characteristics are perfectly adequate.  400 alpha is on the lower side, but both tanks have turrets easily strong enough to make near-full use of the DPM, and if you want to spam APCR there's basically nothing outside of superheavies or very heavily armored casemate TDs that you can't just right-click/left-click.  At tier 9, you could probably make arguments for the M103 or the 50-120, which have pretty glaring downsides, and at tier 10, probably the IS-4 (or maybe the E5, outside of the hands of very skilled players) are the worst.  Whichever way you go, it's definitely NOT the Conq/Super Conq.  Verdict:  downvote worthy.

I consider things situationally. Too many vehicles in this game are utterly situational...I assume that's by design. Take the O-I Exp. for example. Yes, it used to be "ridiculous"....as in able to hold it's own. Now it really can't, especially playing down-tier. It is not a tank I "fear", so to speak. It's a juicy artillery target, and easily dealt with by most TDs. Like many heavy tanks, it's too slow and clumsy to be much of a threat by itself.

To be honest, I've not played  the Conqueror or Caernarvon since they were buffed, my opinions could be out of date.

My point about the Super Conqueror is better expressed this way, it's also too situational. It's alpha is too low to intimidate anything. Vehicles like the JPZ 100 or FV 183 will simply shoot you right through your "reliable" armor (which has major weak spots), then retreat to reload, while you hit them for 350-400, maybe twice if they're stupid. Vehicles like the Maus will laugh at you as you bounce shot after shot while they whittle you down with HE or HEAT. Bottom line is, I'm underwhelmed.



_Juris #82 Posted Jul 13 2018 - 01:46

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 17976 battles
  • 571
  • [VILIN] VILIN
  • Member since:
    10-03-2013

View Postearthman34, on Jul 12 2018 - 16:41, said:

I consider things situationally. Too many vehicles in this game are utterly situational...I assume that's by design. Take the O-I Exp. for example. Yes, it used to be "ridiculous"....as in able to hold it's own. Now it really can't, especially playing down-tier. It is not a tank I "fear", so to speak. It's a juicy artillery target, and easily dealt with by most TDs. Like many heavy tanks, it's too slow and clumsy to be much of a threat by itself.

To be honest, I've not played  the Conqueror or Caernarvon since they were buffed, my opinions could be out of date.

My point about the Super Conqueror is better expressed this way, it's also too situational. It's alpha is too low to intimidate anything. Vehicles like the JPZ 100 or FV 183 will simply shoot you right through your "reliable" armor (which has major weak spots), then retreat to reload, while you hit them for 350-400, maybe twice if they're stupid. Vehicles like the Maus will laugh at you as you bounce shot after shot while they whittle you down with HE or HEAT. Bottom line is, I'm underwhelmed.

 

Yes, so do I.  Under nearly all situations at the battle tiers they see, neither the OI Exp or the Super Conqueror is anything like the weakest tank on the field.  The Churchill 1 has to try to plink things to death while being slow and un-armored - at least the OI can poke, fire and erase 33-100% of a tank's health, then retreat and reload.  And for the Super Conqueror, literally the ONLY thing it can't do is drive straight at a superheavy or assault gun TD.  If you're driving straight at a JPZ E100 or an FV 215 183, with respect, you're doing something you shouldn't be doing in ANY tank, and there is no such thing as reliable armor that will bounce JPZ HEAT.  You have to play a tank according to its strengths, so yes, if you were doing these things in a Super Conqueror, I can understand why you think it's bad.  However, that's literally the worst thing to do with it, and also completely unnecessary ~90% of the time.

spud_tuber #83 Posted Jul 13 2018 - 01:56

    Major

  • Players
  • 51792 battles
  • 6,433
  • Member since:
    08-26-2013
@_Juris.  Are you referring to the 140pen HEAT 12cm gun on the OI exp? I must admit I didn't even know it has that gun.  Comparable to the RU 122mm derp on the KV-1 and -1s it looks like.

_Juris #84 Posted Jul 13 2018 - 02:09

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 17976 battles
  • 571
  • [VILIN] VILIN
  • Member since:
    10-03-2013

View Postspud_tuber, on Jul 12 2018 - 19:56, said:

@_Juris. Are you referring to the 140pen HEAT 12cm gun on the OI exp? I must admit I didn't even know it has that gun. Comparable to the RU 122mm derp on the KV-1 and -1s it looks like.

 

Yes, that one.  It seems more sensible at those tiers, and for most stuff it's probably not worth bothering with HEAT.  Just play it like a mini-KV-2.  Either way, there's literally no way it's worse than the Churchill 1.

HENRYOFORANGE #85 Posted Jul 13 2018 - 03:00

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 10685 battles
  • 354
  • [DEVON] DEVON
  • Member since:
    08-14-2011

tier 5- vk 30, its not really a heavy at all, should be a med

tier 6- I don't really see any bad ones

tier 7- tiger p, its slow, has worse dpm than the tiger, and the armor is able to be penned by most tier 8s and has too many weak spots.

tier 8- amx 65 t hands down, I haven't played but by just looking at it its BAD

tier 9- most heavy's are good at this tier, but from engagements with them its the m103 and wz 111 1-4. both have bad armor for its tier and the m103 front is made of mostly weak spots. wz only has good turret armor

tier 10- t110e5, the tank has nothing, the super conq is just better.



HENRYOFORANGE #86 Posted Jul 13 2018 - 03:38

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 10685 battles
  • 354
  • [DEVON] DEVON
  • Member since:
    08-14-2011

View Postearthman34, on Jul 08 2018 - 22:15, said:

 

Yup.

I'll tell you why I hate the Super Conqueror. 

1. Auto penned by whatever shoots at it, even tier 8's.

2. Loses a crew member on most hits, sometimes two.

3. Loses either the gun or ammo rack on most hits.

4. Is tracked on literally any hit to the lower half of the tank, any artillery hit, and being touched by any other tank.

5. Doesn't have enough DPM to scare anything. Most shots roll ~380, which isn't going to make any tier 10 turn and run.

These are almost exactly the same reasons I hate the T110 E5...Wargaming's intense contempt for British and American vehicles that slaughtered Russian vehicles on every battlefield of the world.

 

1. do you know why your auto penned? the lower plate is [edited], hide it

2. I cant explain that

3. I cant help you on that

4. don't poke out with your tracks, they are thing and your side armor is thin

5. doesn't have dpm? are you kidding? its like a tortoise, you track them and show them the power of the British empire!



jairogut #87 Posted Jul 13 2018 - 21:00

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 27151 battles
  • 166
  • [GSH] GSH
  • Member since:
    09-12-2014

View PostHENRYOFORANGE, on Jul 13 2018 - 03:38, said:

 

1. do you know why your auto penned? the lower plate is [edited], hide it

2. I cant explain that

3. I cant help you on that

4. don't poke out with your tracks, they are thing and your side armor is thin

5. doesn't have dpm? are you kidding? its like a tortoise, you track them and show them the power of the British empire!

 

This guy does have any clue what he is talking about..... Does not have enough DPM!!! LOL....... and I was saying the [edited]had to be nerfed!!! 

earthman34 #88 Posted Jul 14 2018 - 00:56

    Major

  • Players
  • 47182 battles
  • 3,145
  • Member since:
    07-17-2013

View Postjairogut, on Jul 13 2018 - 14:00, said:

 

This guy does have any clue what he is talking about..... Does not have enough DPM!!! LOL....... and I was saying the [edited]had to be nerfed!!! 

 

DPM is surprisingly irrelevant if you can't use it. If you're desperately trying to hide behind a rock while a Jpz 100 is drawing down on you and three SPGs are dropping shells on your turret every 15 seconds, DPM is really not going to save you. If two autoloaders are circling you shooting your tracks off, dpm is not going to help you. If your team runs off to hide on the other side of the map, DPM is not going to save you. Purely situational.

Zwinmar #89 Posted Jul 14 2018 - 02:40

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 15761 battles
  • 29
  • [80PRF] 80PRF
  • Member since:
    07-29-2011
Any heavy that can't heavy. If it has to sit midline or in the back then it isn't really a heavy now is it.

w1ckymagee #90 Posted Jul 14 2018 - 05:04

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 21470 battles
  • 111
  • Member since:
    09-10-2011

View Postearthman34, on Jul 14 2018 - 00:56, said:

 

DPM is surprisingly irrelevant if you can't use it. If you're desperately trying to hide behind a rock while a Jpz 100 is drawing down on you and three SPGs are dropping shells on your turret every 15 seconds, DPM is really not going to save you. If two autoloaders are circling you shooting your tracks off, dpm is not going to help you. If your team runs off to hide on the other side of the map, DPM is not going to save you. Purely situational.

This applies to every tank. If its surrounded and out gunned its gonna lose. This argument isn't valid.



jairogut #91 Posted Jul 15 2018 - 00:08

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 27151 battles
  • 166
  • [GSH] GSH
  • Member since:
    09-12-2014

View Postearthman34, on Jul 14 2018 - 00:56, said:

 

DPM is surprisingly irrelevant if you can't use it. If you're desperately trying to hide behind a rock while a Jpz 100 is drawing down on you and three SPGs are dropping shells on your turret every 15 seconds, DPM is really not going to save you. If two autoloaders are circling you shooting your tracks off, dpm is not going to help you. If your team runs off to hide on the other side of the map, DPM is not going to save you. Purely situational.

 

You can say whatever you want.... But you SAID the DPM was bad.... accept your mistake..... DPM is a numerical value... not a bunch of "player points of view".... 

SwedishBob_ #92 Posted Jul 15 2018 - 02:24

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 2838 battles
  • 195
  • [MOVE] MOVE
  • Member since:
    05-20-2017
It's not the Tank .. but you know who   :P




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users