Tips

Please take your time and read the blog rules

Jun 2, 2013

Superpershing nerf won't happen

Source: http://world-of-tanks.livejournal.com/4888198.html

Just a quick update on the Superpershing frontal armor nerf.

Storm personally confirmed it was a mistake and that the armor will stay, as it is:


36 comments:

  1. uff, SP already is one of the most unreliable tanks i have ever played, if anything it needs a buff!

    ReplyDelete
  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. i've mailed you about this storm's comment few seconds before you posted this information )

      Delete
  3. f this shit. It needs nerf to front armor.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Uninstall. Now.

      Delete
    2. Make that 3.

      Delete
    3. Make that 5, scrub

      -Exigency (NA)

      Delete
    4. How about a 6 for an additional vote?

      Delete
  4. His elaboration, WHY.

    http://world-of-ru.livejournal.com/2029779.html?thread=137835987#t137835987

    That's a long-winded elaboration, but it will be better, if you translated it. I cant correctly write some sentences on english.

    - lonefur

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, that would be awesome if someone could translate that for us English speakers.

      BTW, it's "in English".

      Delete
    2. Apparently it started as a problem between artists and programmers. Storm says they fixed this already a few patches ago but decided not to implement it. It was included into the new patch by mistake, but will be left out for the future. The SP will continue to have the "wrong" nose shape because that's how it was sold.

      Delete
  5. Hahaha how the fuck can you model the tank by mistake? it's the same situation as the E-50 gun depression/headlight.

    They saw the rage, and they changed it. WG : we dont take into account community rage, when we buff/nerf tanks.

    Yea right xD

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "They saw the rage, and they changed it. WG : we dont take into account community rage, when we buff/nerf tanks.

      Yea right xD"
      Of course they do, but what do u think would happen if they say so? 100kk Threads of the kind "I want it , i want i want i want"

      Delete
  6. Super Pershing owners got their jimmies rustled for nothing lol

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Please don't use le epic reddit maymays outside of le reddit.

      Delete
    2. "Rustled jimmies" is not a leddit meme.

      Delete
    3. Got proof, tough guy?

      Delete
    4. Hah, someone can't differentiate reddit and 4chan.

      Delete
    5. Don't you know everything meme came from reddit?

      *roll eyes*

      Delete
  7. wtf?!?!? argh! shell eater 9000 remains as normal then...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The weak points are easy enough to hit once you close within 250~300m

      Delete
  8. Great! I am so glad they changed their mind, because I did test of SP new armour on test server and it was a disaster!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Major asses these WG "producers" & "developers",

    Their I.Q was nerfed, due to historical reasons...

    ReplyDelete
  10. Now they can buff the gun the gun to historical specs.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It has 10 less pen and .1 less accuracy than the Pershing's top gun and that's it. I bet when it's OP you'd bitch about it like everyone bitches about the 59. :/

      Delete
    2. I'd just like to say that 10 penetration can make far more difference than you might believe.

      The T25/2 upgrades into a "better" version of the Hellcat's gun that has an increase of 10 penetration (for 170). It's still a piece of crap gun for a tier 7 tank destroyer to be carting around, but it's surprising how much that 10 penetration makes it go through rather than dinging off uselessly.

      Can't say the result would be the exact same on the Super P, but it's not as if a small buff to its gun penetration is going to make it massively overpowered. Still a fairly slow tank with big ol' weakspots and a low-alpha gun.

      Delete
  11. I almost wish they would have kept the spaced armor plate at the same angle but restricted the actual hull back to its historical shape. The actual hull shape looks SU-100Y style unfinished.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Someone wanted to nerf it? WTH I don't even know one and if anything it needs a buff.

    ReplyDelete
  13. What I don't understand is, how the hell did they model it "unhistorically" in the first place? And if they did, why does it matter now?

    Dev1: Hey, let's create a T26E4!
    Dev2: Okay, here it is! But I couldn't shape the front of the armor in the right angle, because I was drunk all week and a gorilla raped my arse when I was sleeping!
    Dev1: Oh, don't worry, it's totally cool.
    *1 year later*
    Dev1: You know, Dev2, it's not cool at all. We need to be historically 300% correct when it comes to useless things, so align that armor properly! And no gorillas this time, please!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dev2 describes the entire wg staff.

      Delete
  14. if the T26E4 gets to keep the T29 angled armor hull, then give that same hull to the M26.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.