Jump to content


E 75

E-75 FAQ Tips Tactics Review Weak spots Discussion E 75

  • Please log in to reply
1381 replies to this topic

Poll: Allowing the community to decide. (1323 members have cast votes)

You have to complete 250 battle in order to participate this poll.

What equipment do you use on the E-75?

  1. Enhanced Gun Laying Driver (451 votes [11.74%])

    Percentage of vote: 11.74%

  2. Vertical Stabilizer Mk 2 (690 votes [17.96%])

    Percentage of vote: 17.96%

  3. Coated Optics (116 votes [3.02%])

    Percentage of vote: 3.02%

  4. Fill Tanks with CO2 (9 votes [0.23%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.23%

  5. Large Caliber Tank Gun Rammer (1180 votes [30.71%])

    Percentage of vote: 30.71%

  6. "Wet" Ammo Rack Class 2 (18 votes [0.47%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.47%

  7. Improved Ventilation Class 3 (891 votes [23.19%])

    Percentage of vote: 23.19%

  8. Large Spall Liner (155 votes [4.03%])

    Percentage of vote: 4.03%

  9. Enhanced Torsion Bars 5+ t Class (17 votes [0.44%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.44%

  10. Toolbox (115 votes [2.99%])

    Percentage of vote: 2.99%

  11. Binocular Telescope (102 votes [2.65%])

    Percentage of vote: 2.65%

  12. Camouflage Net (72 votes [1.87%])

    Percentage of vote: 1.87%

  13. None (26 votes [0.68%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.68%

What Consumables do you use on the E-75?

  1. Chocolate (27 votes [0.69%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.69%

  2. 105-Octane Gasoline (15 votes [0.38%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.38%

  3. Automatic Fire Extinguishers (271 votes [6.95%])

    Percentage of vote: 6.95%

  4. Large First Aid Kit (98 votes [2.51%])

    Percentage of vote: 2.51%

  5. Large Repair Kit (119 votes [3.05%])

    Percentage of vote: 3.05%

  6. 100-Octane Gasoline (30 votes [0.77%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.77%

  7. Small First Aid Kit (1177 votes [30.16%])

    Percentage of vote: 30.16%

  8. Small Repair Kit (1201 votes [30.78%])

    Percentage of vote: 30.78%

  9. Manual Fire Extinguishers (964 votes [24.71%])

    Percentage of vote: 24.71%

Vote Hide poll

perfection58 #601 Posted 25 March 2013 - 03:41 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 20370 battles
  • 4
  • Member since:
    08-30-2012
Hi guys,Maybe not the best in game but when this happens, checkout the number of hits received, even though you lose makes you think it an't that bad..!         

Attached Files

  • Attached File   59 hits.jpg   30.7K


Kartoffelmos #602 Posted 29 March 2013 - 01:33 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 20801 battles
  • 580
  • Member since:
    05-22-2011
EDIT: I stand corrected, see my next post.

As for the ongoing Vertical Stabilizer vs Gun Laying Drive discussion, here's a nice picture to illustrate the difference:
Spoiler                     

Now, due to E-75's mediocre accuracy and penetration (not to mention the occasional randomness), you pretty much have to stop before shooting in any case, so we can negate that aspect. However, after stopping, the Gun Laying Drive will reach maximum accuracy a tad faster, whilst the Vertical Stabilizer will start at a somewhat better accuracy. In other words, the Stabilizer will only be an improvement when you are rather close to the enemy (thus being able to shoot before maximum accuracy is reached) or when turning your turret to deal with those pesky mediums.

Now, in both of those situations, wouldn't the shorter aim time be just as useful? Granted, the Stabilizer will help you more when fighting mediums, but the Gun Laying Drive will provide faster aim at all distances.Yes, the Stabilizer may allow you to pump out a shell faster in extremely close ranges, but you will then be susceptible to random deviations that may (or may not) cost you the victory.

In my opinion, the Gun Laying Drive is the better choice, but I can understand why someone would chose the Stabilizer.

Edited by Kartoffelmos, 03 April 2013 - 01:38 AM.


WinG_HU #603 Posted 29 March 2013 - 03:50 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 6596 battles
  • 379
  • Member since:
    11-20-2010

View PostKartoffelmos, on 29 March 2013 - 01:33 AM, said:

As for the ongoing Vertical Stabilizer vs Gun Laying Drive discussion, here's a nice picture to illustrate the difference yadda

Excellent diagram, +1. Although I prefer to use them both. It really matters on heavies with low rate of fire.

Kartoffelmos #604 Posted 29 March 2013 - 04:37 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 20801 battles
  • 580
  • Member since:
    05-22-2011

View PostWinG_HU, on 29 March 2013 - 03:50 PM, said:

Excellent diagram, +1. Although I prefer to use them both. It really matters on heavies with low rate of fire.

Don't you yadda me!!1!one

Never tried to use them both, as I go with Ventilation and Rammer most of the time. I do use the Stabilizer on vehicles with fast aiming speed, like the awesome King Tiger, or on mediums/hybrids.

WinG_HU #605 Posted 29 March 2013 - 08:15 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 6596 battles
  • 379
  • Member since:
    11-20-2010

View PostKartoffelmos, on 29 March 2013 - 04:37 PM, said:

Don't you yadda me!!1!one

Never tried to use them both, as I go with yadda yadda yadda

I apologize for yadding you, good sir!

Anyway I'm an idiot as I have rammer, venti and vstab on my E-75. Maybe it would be worth a shot trying out the gun laying drive, however I'm broken in WoT constantly, currently havin like ~20k credits. With premium.

Arafel #606 Posted 02 April 2013 - 08:20 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 47981 battles
  • 596
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    07-31-2011

View PostKartoffelmos, on 29 March 2013 - 01:33 AM, said:

As for the ongoing Vertical Stabilizer vs Gun Laying Drive discussion, here's a nice picture to illustrate the difference:
Posted Image
Now, due to E-75's mediocre accuracy and penetration (not to mention the occasional randomness), you pretty much have to stop before shooting in any case, so we can negate that aspect. However, after stopping, the Gun Laying Drive will reach maximum accuracy a tad faster, whilst the Vertical Stabilizer will start at a somewhat better accuracy. In other words, the Stabilizer will only be an improvement when you are rather close to the enemy (thus being able to shoot before maximum accuracy is reached) or when turning your turret to deal with those pesky mediums.

Now, in both of those situations, wouldn't the shorter aim time be just as useful? Granted, the Stabilizer will help you more when fighting mediums, but the Gun Laying Drive will provide faster aim at all distances.Yes, the Stabilizer may allow you to pump out a shell faster in extremely close ranges, but you will then be susceptible to random deviations that may (or may not) cost you the victory.

In my opinion, the Gun Laying Drive is the better choice, but I can understand why someone would chose the Stabilizer.

How did you make this graph, it doesn't look completely correct to me, or I'm missing something?
Why does the line for the vertical stabilizer go all the way to 100% aim time? Aim time is not the time it takes to go to full aim, it shows the time it takes for the circle to reach a third of its size, so it is only an indication of the rate with which the aiming circle shrinks. If you start out smaller the aiming circle needs to shrink less, so you don't need to wait as long as without a vertical stabilizer (your graph seems to suggest you need to wait as long with vert. stabilizer as without to reach maximum accuracy).

*EDIT*
To clarify I tried to make a similar graph:
        

Do note that after 1 aim time (100%) the aiming circle typically is not at full accuracy, it takes a while longer, so the GLD will get even closer to the Vert Stab situation. However, only after 2 times the aiming time the GLD will catch up with the Vert Stab (and be better on even longer aiming times). I don't know how long full aim really takes (depends a bit on the situation I think), but in almost all cases you will achieve full aim faster with Vert Stabs than with GLD, but only by a small margin. If you have to take a quick shot than Vert Stab is of course much better. Therefore, I think the general advise of always taking Vert Stab over GLD if you have the choice (many low tier tanks can only have GLD not Vert Stab) is still valid.

*EDIT2*
For some reason it shows the graph really small, but clicking on it shows it in a normal size.

Attached Files

  • Attached File   GLD VSTAB.jpg   52.13K

Edited by Arafel, 02 April 2013 - 12:48 PM.


Kartoffelmos #607 Posted 03 April 2013 - 01:34 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 20801 battles
  • 580
  • Member since:
    05-22-2011

View PostArafel, on 02 April 2013 - 08:20 AM, said:

How did you make this graph, it doesn't look completely correct to me, or I'm missing something?
Why does the line for the vertical stabilizer go all the way to 100% aim time? Aim time is not the time it takes to go to full aim, it shows the time it takes for the circle to reach a third of its size, so it is only an indication of the rate with which the aiming circle shrinks. If you start out smaller the aiming circle needs to shrink less, so you don't need to wait as long as without a vertical stabilizer (your graph seems to suggest you need to wait as long with vert. stabilizer as without to reach maximum accuracy).

Do note that after 1 aim time (100%) the aiming circle typically is not at full accuracy, it takes a while longer, so the GLD will get even closer to the Vert Stab situation. However, only after 2 times the aiming time the GLD will catch up with the Vert Stab (and be better on even longer aiming times). I don't know how long full aim really takes (depends a bit on the situation I think), but in almost all cases you will achieve full aim faster with Vert Stabs than with GLD, but only by a small margin. If you have to take a quick shot than Vert Stab is of course much better. Therefore, I think the general advise of always taking Vert Stab over GLD if you have the choice (many low tier tanks can only have GLD not Vert Stab) is still valid.

You are indeed correct in the fact that my graph don't look right. I forgot about that pesky one-third-rule, which leads the graph to be a more tricky one, that is, a non-linear one (for every aiming time, the aiming circle will be reduced by two-thirds). I came up with the following graph:
Posted Image

It is based on one full aiming time from 100% size to 33,33% size. The peculiar form is due to the area being that of a circle, thus being a quadratic function itself (A = PI*r^2). I couldn't be bothered to change the result to showing that of the radius, as that would be even less informative (and would require more thinking on my part. It's late, and I want to sleep!  :angry: ) .

Now, my new improved graph (order one now, and get a second one, absolutely FREE! Only 10 gold, special offer today!) is hardly correct, as only WG knows the exact formula, but I do believe that it shows the difference between the two equipment types well enough. The only issue I have is that I don't know if WG use the starting value as an absolute basis (my graph depicts this), or if it's basis is incremental (the size will be adjusted based on the real-time size, as opposed to the initial size).

Now, you might be wondering why the Stabilizer doesn't finish faster than the Gun Laying Drive (GLD); the answer is quite simple. As we know, the circle will shrink two thirds for every aim time, but with the GLD installed, it will shrink two thirds for every 90% aim time. The Stabilizer will start have a more favourable initial value, yes, but it will use the standard aim time as the exponent, thus resulting in a performance drop in the long run.
Well, that is the theory (or rather, my theory, until I get some support/evidence to back it up) in any case and to get a definitive answer, testing will be required.

Edited by Kartoffelmos, 03 April 2013 - 01:36 AM.


Arafel #608 Posted 03 April 2013 - 08:50 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 47981 battles
  • 596
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    07-31-2011

View PostKartoffelmos, on 03 April 2013 - 01:34 AM, said:

You are indeed correct in the fact that my graph don't look right. I forgot about that pesky one-third-rule, which leads the graph to be a more tricky one, that is, a non-linear one (for every aiming time, the aiming circle will be reduced by two-thirds). I came up with the following graph:
Posted Image

It is based on one full aiming time from 100% size to 33,33% size. The peculiar form is due to the area being that of a circle, thus being a quadratic function itself (A = PI*r^2). I couldn't be bothered to change the result to showing that of the radius, as that would be even less informative (and would require more thinking on my part. It's late, and I want to sleep!  :angry: ) .

Now, my new improved graph (order one now, and get a second one, absolutely FREE! Only 10 gold, special offer today!) is hardly correct, as only WG knows the exact formula, but I do believe that it shows the difference between the two equipment types well enough. The only issue I have is that I don't know if WG use the starting value as an absolute basis (my graph depicts this), or if it's basis is incremental (the size will be adjusted based on the real-time size, as opposed to the initial size).

Now, you might be wondering why the Stabilizer doesn't finish faster than the Gun Laying Drive (GLD); the answer is quite simple. As we know, the circle will shrink two thirds for every aim time, but with the GLD installed, it will shrink two thirds for every 90% aim time. The Stabilizer will start have a more favourable initial value, yes, but it will use the standard aim time as the exponent, thus resulting in a performance drop in the long run.
Well, that is the theory (or rather, my theory, until I get some support/evidence to back it up) in any case and to get a definitive answer, testing will be required.

Indeed we don't know exactly how aiming works in relation with aiming time. On the wiki it is stated that aiming time is the time it takes the circle to shrink to 1/3 of its size. However, it does not say that 2 aiming times makes it shrink to 1/3 of 1/3 of its original size, if this is the case this would mean you would never reach full aim, and waiting for infinity will keep making your aim better (although by very little after a few aiming times). Also in your graph it appears that the Vert Stab line will cross the no equipment line at some time. This would suggest you would actually get a penalty in aiming time when using a Vert Stab, which I highly doubt is the case.
In the game I have never observed this, in all cases the aiming circle seems to reach a minimum size within a not too long time (but longer than one aiming time) and the radius of the aiming circle keeps decreasing in a more or less linear fashion. Based on these observations I think the aiming time given is just an indication of the speed with which the aiming circle shrinks, and that the this speed is constant (i.e. a linear decrease in the radius of the aiming circle).
The reason why WG gives such a vague description of aiming time is that you cannot give a time for when you reach full aim. The reason is that the aiming circle size depends on numerous factors, did you move your tank or not (and how fast), did you rotate turret or not, and did you fire your gun or not. So they can only give an indication of the speed with which the aiming circle shrinks, but this speed is (in my observation) linear, not decreasing exponentially like you suggested.

So which is better, GLD or Vert Stab? Well this one is still hard to say, Vert Stab surely has a better initial bonus that is for sure. GLD will catch up with Vert Stab in time, but when is this? Based on a forum topic quite some time ago (where people tested the differences in equipment in game and concluded Vert Stab is slightly better) and the quick graph I made I would say Vert Stab is better in nearly all cases. Only when you manage to get the maximum aiming circle size you will benefit slightly more from GLD, but for this you would probably have to come crashing down a hill while turning your turret and shooting your gun.

Edited by Arafel, 03 April 2013 - 08:52 AM.


Kartoffelmos #609 Posted 03 April 2013 - 02:25 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 20801 battles
  • 580
  • Member since:
    05-22-2011

View PostArafel, on 03 April 2013 - 08:50 AM, said:

Indeed we don't know exactly how aiming works in relation with aiming time. On the wiki it is stated that aiming time is the time it takes the circle to shrink to 1/3 of its size. However, it does not say that 2 aiming times makes it shrink to 1/3 of 1/3 of its original size, if this is the case this would mean you would never reach full aim, and waiting for infinity will keep making your aim better (although by very little after a few aiming times).

And that's why we don't have zero-accuracy guns, but a final value (0,34, etc.).

Quote

Also in your graph it appears that the Vert Stab line will cross the no equipment line at some time. This would suggest you would actually get a penalty in aiming time when using a Vert Stab, which I highly doubt is the case.

Well, this is just for one aiming period and my function is undoubtedly more simple than the official one. In case you wondered, here's the incremental graph as I mentioned earlier, but couldn't be bothered to finish yesterday:
Posted Image

As you see, this support your theory that the Stabilizer is better when you don't have that big of an increase in the aiming circle. I agree with that point of view (this was also apparent in the last graph, but then the Stabilizer lost its advantage quite early).

Quote

In the game I have never observed this, in all cases the aiming circle seems to reach a minimum size within a not too long time (but longer than one aiming time) and the radius of the aiming circle keeps decreasing in a more or less linear fashion. Based on these observations I think the aiming time given is just an indication of the speed with which the aiming circle shrinks, and that the this speed is constant (i.e. a linear decrease in the radius of the aiming circle).

As I wrote earlier, my graphs depicts the area of the circle, not the radius. The radius will have a more linear reduction due to it being raised to the second power when calculating the area.

Quote

The reason why WG gives such a vague description of aiming time is that you cannot give a time for when you reach full aim. The reason is that the aiming circle size depends on numerous factors, did you move your tank or not (and how fast), did you rotate turret or not, and did you fire your gun or not.

Agreed, which is also why my graphs are rather inaccurate.

Quote

So which is better, GLD or Vert Stab? Well this one is still hard to say, Vert Stab surely has a better initial bonus that is for sure. GLD will catch up with Vert Stab in time, but when is this? Based on a forum topic quite some time ago (where people tested the differences in equipment in game and concluded Vert Stab is slightly better) and the quick graph I made I would say Vert Stab is better in nearly all cases. Only when you manage to get the maximum aiming circle size you will benefit slightly more from GLD, but for this you would probably have to come crashing down a hill while turning your turret and shooting your gun.

I agree with most points (do you still have a link to that discussion? :3), but I felt that I did aim faster when I swapped my Stabilizer with a Gun Laying Drive on my E-75. Probably placebo, but still.
I may do some tests when I have the time, but the equipment is so damn expensive. Fortunately, a friend of mine have just researched the King Tiger, so I may persuade him into installing a Gun Laying Drive and some ventilation, so we'll see then. If that fails, there's always the test servers, but then I have to wait until the next public testing.

EDIT: So as to not go completely off topic ( :teethhappy: ), I think we all can agree that the E-75 is an awesome tank though it does have its issues in tier 10 battles (mostly due to the combination of "low" penetration and average accuracy).

Edited by Kartoffelmos, 03 April 2013 - 02:44 PM.


Arafel #610 Posted 03 April 2013 - 03:58 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 47981 battles
  • 596
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    07-31-2011

View PostKartoffelmos, on 03 April 2013 - 02:25 PM, said:

And that's why we don't have zero-accuracy guns, but a final value (0,34, etc.).
That is true, I just put the asymptotic value to the point of full aim (e.g. 0,34 in this case) but your case is indeed more likely, that you will just cross the full aim line on your way to zero dispersion (which is indeed not achievable). But I still think this implies a non-linear decrease in radius of the aiming circle, which I'm not observing.

Quote

Well, this is just for one aiming period and my function is undoubtedly more simple than the official one. In case you wondered, here's the incremental graph as I mentioned earlier, but couldn't be bothered to finish yesterday:
Still I expect the Vertical stabilizer line to run parallel to the normal no equipment line, i.e. they should have the same aiming speed and only a different starting point.

Quote

As I wrote earlier, my graphs depicts the area of the circle, not the radius. The radius will have a more linear reduction due to it being raised to the second power when calculating the area.
My bad, I was indeed thinking of the radius/diameter. Still it might be useful to plot that, since the accuracy/dispersion stat is also given in meters (thus showing the radius or diameter of the aiming circle).

Quote

I agree with most points (do you still have a link to that discussion? :3), but I felt that I did aim faster when I swapped my Stabilizer with a Gun Laying Drive on my E-75. Probably placebo, but still.
I may do some tests when I have the time, but the equipment is so damn expensive. Fortunately, a friend of mine have just researched the King Tiger, so I may persuade him into installing a Gun Laying Drive and some ventilation, so we'll see then. If that fails, there's always the test servers, but then I have to wait until the next public testing.
Unfortunately I don't have the link to the original forum thread, it may well be over a year old. I did find the following topic:
http://forum.worldof...er#entry3990137
At the bottom of the first page there is a link to youtube, which I think shows the testing of the the different equipment used for the old forum thread.
With GLD your aiming circle is shrinking faster, so you may have seen that  :smile: . Comparing the two pieces of equipment is difficult since it is hard to achieve equal penalties for your aiming circle, the only reliable test is to shoot without turning the turret, nor moving the tank, which will never give you the maximum aiming circle size, so in that case Vert Stab will very likely come out on top.

Quote

EDIT: So as to not go completely off topic ( :teethhappy: ), I think we all can agree that the E-75 is an awesome tank though it does have its issues in tier 10 battles (mostly due to the combination of "low" penetration and average accuracy).
We are still (slightly  :hiding: ) on topic, we are trying to figure out which is the best choice for the third piece of equipment for an E-75, next to the vents and rammer  :smile:

SoToS22 #611 Posted 03 April 2013 - 09:08 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 22475 battles
  • 235
  • Member since:
    07-21-2012
In my opinion you forgot to mention the modules that increase view range. I really bellieve the coated optics is a fine 3rd module for this tank. Not only you can shoot having more time to aim, but you can spot them for arty and\or teammates

Arafel #612 Posted 04 April 2013 - 08:05 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 47981 battles
  • 596
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    07-31-2011

View PostSoToS22, on 03 April 2013 - 09:08 PM, said:

In my opinion you forgot to mention the modules that increase view range. I really bellieve the coated optics is a fine 3rd module for this tank. Not only you can shoot having more time to aim, but you can spot them for arty and\or teammates

Since the E-75 has quite some armour and hitpoints, but a gun with only medium accuracy and penetration, your role should be that of a medium to close distance heavy. The 400+ meter viewrange you already have with the E-75 is more than sufficient for this role, therefore in my opinion the best equipment setup is vents, rammer, vert stab.

GehakteMolen #613 Posted 05 April 2013 - 09:03 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 51973 battles
  • 3,134
  • [322] 322
  • Member since:
    10-08-2010
about GLD vs V-stab, V-stab starts with a 20% smaller crosshair, but needs same amount of time to shrink as normal, so better when shooting while moving, or close range (where u wont zoom completly) GLD is better for long range combat, coz u can first 10% faster...

Arafel #614 Posted 07 April 2013 - 11:11 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 47981 battles
  • 596
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    07-31-2011

View PostGehakteMolen, on 05 April 2013 - 09:03 PM, said:

about GLD vs V-stab, V-stab starts with a 20% smaller crosshair, but needs same amount of time to shrink as normal, so better when shooting while moving, or close range (where u wont zoom completly) GLD is better for long range combat, coz u can first 10% faster...

The aim time remains the same for the V-stab, but the aim time is NOT the time it takes to reach full aim, that typically takes more time (see wot wiki for the definition of aim time). If you are suggesting it takes the same time to reach full aim with V-stab as without any equipment it would mean you actually get a penalty to the speed with which the aiming circle shrinks. This seems not to be the case, if you watch the test at http://www.youtube.c...h?v=Ei16-rnMMLE you can see the speed with which the aiming circle shrinks is the same for V-stab as without equipment, so no penalty. Therefore, V-stab is in most cases the best option to reach full aim fastest, although the difference with GLD is not very big.

Sw0pDiller #615 Posted 07 April 2013 - 08:51 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 19330 battles
  • 11
  • Member since:
    12-29-2011
i am loving my e75 but i hate the last hun the loadingtime and aimtime are just horrible compared to the 10.5 46L68 is have the BIA on it and i am reloading in 7,5 sec. the alpha damage and pen on the 128mm gun is not enough to even out the aim time, accuracy and reload. anybody else is playing this beast on a tier 9 gun?

Remix13 #616 Posted 11 April 2013 - 08:59 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 34996 battles
  • 369
  • Member since:
    04-28-2011

View PostSw0pDiller, on 07 April 2013 - 08:51 PM, said:

i am loving my e75 but i hate the last hun the loadingtime and aimtime are just horrible compared to the 10.5 46L68 is have the BIA on it and i am reloading in 7,5 sec. the alpha damage and pen on the 128mm gun is not enough to even out the aim time, accuracy and reload. anybody else is playing this beast on a tier 9 gun?

I do... stock tank  :sad:

But indeed gun is not my main pain compared to stock turret and engine  :arta:

I feel so sorry for my teams...

ComandoreBombardiero #617 Posted 11 April 2013 - 04:40 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 5944 battles
  • 51
  • Member since:
    04-15-2012
What is extremely irritating on german HT is the ugliness of the summer camo... I mean come on, the winter and desert ones are awesome but this tank plays mostly on the summer maps... And You don't grind up to tier 9 to look like someone had vomited on your tank... ( WTF http://img05.allegro...5/86/3035158600 )

Sorry for the offtop, but maybe we could vote for a change of camo for this tank or sth? After all this is an action game not an actual simulator so historical value should be of no concern when it comes to sth so unimportant as camouflage... It's really spoiling the fun for me.

Have fun and good luck on the battlefields
CB.

Edited by ComandoreBombardiero, 11 April 2013 - 04:40 PM.


Kartoffelmos #618 Posted 12 April 2013 - 12:59 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 20801 battles
  • 580
  • Member since:
    05-22-2011

View PostArafel, on 03 April 2013 - 03:58 PM, said:

Still it might be useful to plot that, since the accuracy/dispersion stat is also given in meters (thus showing the radius or diameter of the aiming circle).

Well, I tried to get a decent result out of that, but without a solid reference point, the graphs really didn't display any useful information. I did however run some tests at the test server, where I recorded a 180 degree turn of the turret at the very start of the match, as well as driving some distance whilst moving the turret. When the barrel reached the end point, I stopped the vehicle. I did this with both the Gun Laying Drive and the Vertical Stabilizer (as well as Rammer and Ventilation, but only Ventilation has a small impact on the result). Then, I displayed the videos in a video editing software (Sony Vegas, if you want to know. As a scientist, I have to be very specific! :izmena:) and wrote down the initial time values and the final values for each case. The results were quite staggering:

Gun Laying Drive - turret rotation: 3,066 seconds
Gun Laying Drive - turret rotation and tank movement: 4,700 seconds

Vertical Stabilizer - turret rotation: 2,800 seconds
Vertical Stabilizer - turret rotation and tank movement: 4,634 seconds (was on rough terrain, so the aim bobbed up and down in the beginning. The exact value may be a tad better)

For the E-75, the Vertical Stabilizer seems to be the best choice, but for other vehicles with higher dispersion (higher top speed, better turret traverse, longer aim time and worse accuracy), I guess that the Gun Laying Drive may be a better choice. Who would have thought that the slow traverse would actually be good for something?  :teethhappy:

Edited by Kartoffelmos, 12 April 2013 - 01:01 PM.


Arafel #619 Posted 12 April 2013 - 01:13 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 47981 battles
  • 596
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    07-31-2011

View PostKartoffelmos, on 12 April 2013 - 12:59 PM, said:

For the E-75, the Vertical Stabilizer seems to be the best choice, but for other vehicles with higher dispersion (higher top speed, better turret traverse, longer aim time and worse accuracy), I guess that the Gun Laying Drive may be a better choice. Who would have thought that the slow traverse would actually be good for something?  :teethhappy:

Nice job on the testing!
The dispersion is tricky, as far as I can tell it is a hidden vehicle parameter with no clear relation to known vehicle stats. Compare for example a pershing to the E-75, the pershing has a higher top speed, faster hull traverse, much faster turret traverse and worse accuracy, yet its dispersion is smaller than that of the E-75. In general american tanks have a pretty good dispersion (so aim circle keeps relatively small during moving), while russian tanks are typically quite bad, although there are of course quite a few exceptions to this rule.

Kartoffelmos #620 Posted 12 April 2013 - 01:19 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 20801 battles
  • 580
  • Member since:
    05-22-2011
Yeah, I was thinking about the IS-series (though there are probably more tanks that benefits more from the Gun Laying Drive than the Stabilizer). Now I'll need to buy and replace some equipment! D:<
Luckily, it's on sale this weekend so I won't waste that much silver.




3 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 3 guests, 0 anonymous users