Jump to content


Why is the Churchill family so bad in-game when the Churchill was historically such a successful des...

Churchill I Churchill III Churchill VII Churchill GC Black Prince

  • Please log in to reply
37 replies to this topic

Poll: The Churchill line, one of WoT's problem children (67 members have cast votes)

Are any of the Churchill tanks actually playable?

  1. Churchill I (22 votes [20.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 20.00%

  2. Churchill III (37 votes [33.64%])

    Percentage of vote: 33.64%

  3. Curchill VII (10 votes [9.09%])

    Percentage of vote: 9.09%

  4. Churchill GC (5 votes [4.55%])

    Percentage of vote: 4.55%

  5. Black Prince (18 votes [16.36%])

    Percentage of vote: 16.36%

  6. Absolutely not. (18 votes [16.36%])

    Percentage of vote: 16.36%

Vote Guests cannot vote Hide poll

StuG_Life_Ausf_G #1 Posted Nov 10 2018 - 16:19

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 904 battles
  • 25
  • [B_T_T] B_T_T
  • Member since:
    01-26-2018
As the title says. Historically the Churchill was considered one of the better heavy tanks, but in-game they are just short of unplayable for the most part, and the Churchill I in particular is basically a handicap for your entire team even when fully upgraded. What gives, and what can one do to at least somehow make them work?

zippychippy #2 Posted Nov 10 2018 - 16:26

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 19007 battles
  • 267
  • [-NHL-] -NHL-
  • Member since:
    12-26-2016
I think the Churchhill gets put into games with other tanks that came out much later like the Tiger gets put into games with post wwii tanks. 

Edited by zippychippy, Nov 10 2018 - 16:27.


diego999 #3 Posted Nov 10 2018 - 16:45

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 35613 battles
  • 5,203
  • [ACA-T] ACA-T
  • Member since:
    11-22-2010
The premium Churchill is amazing. The others I've played some time ago and they were workable. Not amazing but not bad either.

CynicalDutchie #4 Posted Nov 10 2018 - 16:52

    Major

  • Players
  • 43001 battles
  • 4,336
  • [CYNIC] CYNIC
  • Member since:
    05-18-2011

View Postzippychippy, on Nov 10 2018 - 16:26, said:

I think the Churchhill gets put into games with other tanks that came out much later like the Tiger gets put into games with post wwii tanks. 

 

The Tiger is a good tank though, the Churchills are not.

spinax22 #5 Posted Nov 10 2018 - 17:00

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 20351 battles
  • 123
  • Member since:
    10-08-2011
Churchill 1 is fantastic, turret armor aside. Churchill 3, same thing. Churchill 7 is a pain, and nobody likes the gun carrier. 

The Black Prince however, is complicated. it's crazy good if you spam gold or are top/mid tier, and you don't mind low alpha guns.

NutrientibusMeaGallus #6 Posted Nov 10 2018 - 17:23

    Major

  • Players
  • 22674 battles
  • 5,663
  • [FILOX] FILOX
  • Member since:
    10-26-2012
 Churchill isn't bad... Any of them, not horrible. Gotta keep in mind it was good for it's time, and you're put against newer and better tanks, as well as power creep over time etc....

oldewolfe #7 Posted Nov 10 2018 - 17:40

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 22712 battles
  • 3,426
  • [1STBN] 1STBN
  • Member since:
    11-08-2014

WWII didn't have Premium Spam....      lol

 

I have the Church III now and while it's not Bad, most everything around it is Better seems to be the Issue....        Even swapping in my T-10 Crew is only Marginal Help thanks to the Radio Man none of my other Tanks has anymore....     Makes the BiA all but Useless until he get's Caught Up.....

 

I'll be keeping it busy though, IS7 Crew us New and needs Fast Traing....     257 Crew is New, same as the IS7.....        Good thing WR doesn't mean as much as a Good Game does, now I just some of those.....       lol



gpc_4 #8 Posted Nov 10 2018 - 17:46

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 43032 battles
  • 4,726
  • [DHO-X] DHO-X
  • Member since:
    07-06-2014
The game is tanks fighting tanks. Churchills excelled at infantry support, which is not part of the game.

Sam_Sanister #9 Posted Nov 10 2018 - 18:11

    Captain

  • Players
  • 27563 battles
  • 1,820
  • [K0HAI] K0HAI
  • Member since:
    10-11-2013
The Churchills are not terrible vehicles, but they could use some slight QoL buffs. 
These aren't meant to be balance-breaking, but make the vehicles a bit less terrible to play.

Churchill I; Slightly buff dispersion while moving+traversing the turret, increase frontal turret armor to 101 mm, increase turret roof armor to 25 mm, increase base DPM on its 75 mm Vickers HV from 1,760 to 1,850.
Churchill VII; Slightly buff dispersion while moving+traversing the turret, increase turret roof armor to 30 mm, increase base DPM from 2,037 to 2,050.
Black Prince; Top speed increase to 25 km/ph, increase base DPM on its 17-pounder from 1,878 to 1,925.
Churchill GC; Buff superstructure armor to 101 mm; increase base DPM on its 94 mm from 1,844 to 1900.

tod914 #10 Posted Nov 10 2018 - 18:31

    Major

  • Players
  • 64246 battles
  • 6,295
  • Member since:
    12-23-2013

They nerfed the Black Prince a while back too.  It was reasonably balanced before that.  Also, that nerf was prior to new OP Premiums. 

 

The GC needs a major view range buff, along with the same armor ratings as its Churchill counterpart.



Chaplain_5 #11 Posted Nov 10 2018 - 18:45

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 2405 battles
  • 48
  • Member since:
    03-29-2018

Right, excellent question!

 

Simple answer off the top of my head, without gathering my resources: The Churchill in-game is used in a way that it should not have been - going toe-to-toe with other tanks, heavys and mediums. The Churchill was an infantry tank, a tank designed for the role of crawling along with the infantry and performed general fire support duties. Taking out enemy infantry and artillery. Bunker-busting. Providing a long, large cover thingy for the infantry to hide behind. And that sort of thing. Yes it had at least a modicum of anti-tank capability, depending on the model, but this was not ideal. A Churchill would be a far more effective tool in an RTS game where it would face multiple kinds of enemies, for example, than in WoT, where it has to do nothing but the job that it's not really ideal for.

 

I do not mean that the Churchill shouldn't be in game. It's a recognized and (sometimes) beloved tank series. But we have to recognize that certain in-game vehicles were not at all intended for these tank-on-tank battles.



mworthy #12 Posted Nov 17 2018 - 02:55

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 11380 battles
  • 915
  • [941ST] 941ST
  • Member since:
    05-14-2011
church 1 and III are very good for their tiers, BP is iffy in a good position it can be a [edited]to kill, once help a side on arctic region by the giant mountain next to the water getting 3 kills while doing so with over 2k blocked

FrozenKemp #13 Posted Nov 18 2018 - 17:32

    Major

  • Players
  • 52476 battles
  • 9,578
  • Member since:
    04-24-2011

Fundamentally I think the problem is the tiering system.  The Churchill VII is not so much better than the Churchill I that it should be an entire tier higher.  And both the I and the VII have been given beefed up guns to try to fit them into their tiers.  I don't think any Churchill tank had a better gun than the 75mm with 91mm of penetration.  (They also had the 6 pounder before that was phased out in favour of the 75 which had better HE capabilities.)

 

Imagine this:

 

Churchill I, tier 4, stock turret only, 2 pounder or 3" howitzer

Churchill VII, tier 5, 75mm M3 or 6 pounder, or maybe even the 75mm HV

Black Prince, tier 6, 17-pounder.

 

The armour would be SO much more effective. 


Edited by FrozenKemp, Nov 18 2018 - 17:32.


mworthy #14 Posted Nov 21 2018 - 19:42

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 11380 battles
  • 915
  • [941ST] 941ST
  • Member since:
    05-14-2011

View PostFrozenKemp, on Nov 18 2018 - 11:32, said:

Fundamentally I think the problem is the tiering system.  The Churchill VII is not so much better than the Churchill I that it should be an entire tier higher.  And both the I and the VII have been given beefed up guns to try to fit them into their tiers.  I don't think any Churchill tank had a better gun than the 75mm with 91mm of penetration.  (They also had the 6 pounder before that was phased out in favour of the 75 which had better HE capabilities.)

 

Imagine this:

 

Churchill I, tier 4, stock turret only, 2 pounder or 3" howitzer

Churchill VII, tier 5, 75mm M3 or 6 pounder, or maybe even the 75mm HV

Black Prince, tier 6, 17-pounder.

 

The armour would be SO much more effective. 

 

But what would the tier 7 heavy for the brits be if this were to occur, as much as i hate to see my BP move down a tier, personally it needs a pen buff considering its tier and it has similar pen to the IS

FrozenKemp #15 Posted Nov 24 2018 - 03:49

    Major

  • Players
  • 52476 battles
  • 9,578
  • Member since:
    04-24-2011

View Postmworthy, on Nov 21 2018 - 13:42, said:

But what would the tier 7 heavy for the brits be if this were to occur

 

Yep, that's the big problem.  If they hadn't made the A45 a premium, it'd work I think.  Oh well. 

 

As you say... the BP gun would be much better at tier 6 :) 



1SLUGGO1 #16 Posted Nov 30 2018 - 03:20

    Major

  • Players
  • 24723 battles
  • 10,198
  • Member since:
    02-23-2012
The British are all over tiered.  It’s a little laughable that mediums outgun the Black Prince....and those mediums are tier 6.

I_QQ_4_U #17 Posted Dec 01 2018 - 16:59

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 22174 battles
  • 6,477
  • Member since:
    10-17-2016
Because this is a video game and not reality.

Trakks #18 Posted Dec 03 2018 - 00:38

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 3789 battles
  • 598
  • Member since:
    11-24-2011
If you want to play heavies, just avoid the British line. Play the Russian line instead. The Churchill's are a joke compared to the KV and IS lines. 

Chaplain_5 #19 Posted Dec 03 2018 - 00:40

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 2405 battles
  • 48
  • Member since:
    03-29-2018
Japanese heavies are fun too and statistically are real winners. ;)

mworthy #20 Posted Dec 03 2018 - 19:48

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 11380 battles
  • 915
  • [941ST] 941ST
  • Member since:
    05-14-2011

View PostTrakks, on Dec 02 2018 - 18:38, said:

If you want to play heavies, just avoid the British line. Play the Russian line instead. The Churchill's are a joke compared to the KV and IS lines. 

 

funny thing is i find the churchill tanks with the exception of the church VII as better than the russian heavies




3 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 3 guests, 0 anonymous users