If I where you, I would break them down by class - and rate them that way.
Most players have preferred play styles that allow them to do better in one class over another.
1
The ULTIMATE Tier X Tier List
Started by TheFluffiestSeal, Mar 06 2018 12:21 AM
Tier X Meta TierListSeal
43 replies to this topic
#41 Posted 06 March 2018 - 04:02 PM
-
- Players
- 59774 battles
-
11,651
- [-C6-]
-
Member since:
12-08-2014
Annoying Mod
Tank Hoarder: 384 tanks in Garage: 376/386 aced (Mk1 Heavy and T49A repo), wallet warrior. Loyal Original M60 owner
Sorry I haven’t aced the Smasher yet - So I’m still ruining tier 6-8
#42 Posted 14 April 2018 - 04:10 PM
-
- Players
- 21319 battles
-
1,253
-
Member since:
08-23-2014
DRINK!
The real question is Wargaming's doctrine on autoloaders; they will not let an autloader's total damage based off of alpha damage exceed the tank with the highest single shot damage in the tier (which is usually held by tank destroyers)
In the case of the T57 Heavy and AMX 50 B, they are restricted by the 183. But this poses an interesting question; for tier X autoloaders, does the 183 have to be the deciding factor every time?
For the Foch 155, if they gave it a Defender-style autoloader, it could be possible:
155mm Gun
2 shells
5.2 second inter-clip reload
22 second full reload
4.1 second aim time
0.352 dispersion
640/545/800 (AP/HEAT/HE) <------------------ |
280/370/75 (AP pen/HEAT pen/HE pen) <----- You can't have two 960 damage HE shells that can pen 90mm of armor
#4 in the LeKpz 41 (with TwisterCup camo), #6 in the M41 Walker-Bulldog, and #8 in the T37
This is what BlitzStars is reporting, so I might be reading something incorrectly...
Certified Anti-FV215b 183 Extremist
#43 Posted 14 April 2018 - 04:19 PM
-
- Players
- 17117 battles
-
1,237
- [III-P]
-
Member since:
07-06-2014
First Sergeant
theFANTASTICfox, on 14 April 2018 - 11:10 AM, said:
The real question is Wargaming's doctrine on autoloaders; they will not let an autloader's total damage based off of alpha damage exceed the tank with the highest single shot damage in the tier (which is usually held by tank destroyers)
In the case of the T57 Heavy and AMX 50 B, they are restricted by the 183. But this poses an interesting question; for tier X autoloaders, does the 183 have to be the deciding factor every time?
For the Foch 155, if they gave it a Defender-style autoloader, it could be possible:
155mm Gun
2 shells
5.2 second inter-clip reload
22 second full reload
4.1 second aim time
0.352 dispersion
640/545/800 (AP/HEAT/HE) <------------------ |
280/370/75 (AP pen/HEAT pen/HE pen) <----- You can't have two 960 damage HE shells that can pen 90mm of armor
NO! Don’t you touch the Foch! I love it the way it is. If WG gave it an auto loader they would nerf the living hell out of it in some other, horribly ill thought out, way. For God’s sake man, if it ain’t broke don’t “fix” it. And the Foch 155 works quite well as it sits.
The point of the game is to win. The purpose of the game is to have fun. They are not mutually exclusive.
#44 Posted 14 April 2018 - 05:44 PM
-
- Players
- 7953 battles
-
363
- [22ND]
-
Member since:
12-24-2016
Sergeant
theFANTASTICfox, on 14 April 2018 - 04:10 PM, said:
The real question is Wargaming's doctrine on autoloaders; they will not let an autloader's total damage based off of alpha damage exceed the tank with the highest single shot damage in the tier (which is usually held by tank destroyers)
In the case of the T57 Heavy and AMX 50 B, they are restricted by the 183. But this poses an interesting question; for tier X autoloaders, does the 183 have to be the deciding factor every time?
For the Foch 155, if they gave it a Defender-style autoloader, it could be possible:
155mm Gun
2 shells
5.2 second inter-clip reload
22 second full reload
4.1 second aim time
0.352 dispersion
640/545/800 (AP/HEAT/HE) <------------------ |
280/370/75 (AP pen/HEAT pen/HE pen) <----- You can't have two 960 damage HE shells that can pen 90mm of armor
Wait a second- doesn't the defender have 1200 clip potential. That breaks the rule, right?
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
