Jump to content


The T-62A fact sheet


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
206 replies to this topic

gomolj #201 Posted 07 July 2012 - 01:19 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 25178 battles
  • 579
  • Member since:
    08-15-2011

View Postgomolj, on 06 July 2012 - 07:12 PM, said:

If we keep in mind that:
  • the ingame tanks are balanced by a variety of parameters other then thickens of armor
  • all game tanks have to have their strong/weak points compared to their peers
  • the sum of all the parameters that make up the in game tank  or the "whole package", if you will, is more important than any singled out parameter.
If we keep all those things in mid..

It makes no sense what so ever cherry pick parameters in order to present a false image about in game tanks. True or false?

Just for you..

View PostRedneck, on 17 June 2012 - 12:30 PM, said:

Dude no need to get personnel, nowhere i stated the patton beeing worse as the t-54, this only came to ur mind cause u are utterly pissed at something so u have to vent ur anger. Server stats in my opinion mean squad! To many factors that are not considered influence em, analysing stats is a very delicate and complicate science. U can come up with any numbers and display em what is relevant to, is that u need to give the backround how these numbers got produced. Means envirronement, homogenity of the samples population quality and the population number........

Back to what i said:
- Many seem to whime about t-62a looking worse than t-54 (aka franken54).
- franken54 uses the 120mm front hull from the preproduction t-54 series that caused a number of problems bigger then the advantage it created,hence the reason it got dropped and the t-62a only has 100mm on front.
- the franken54 is a better t-55 then in real life cause of that frontplate, the turret from 55 and the latest engine update from the 55 line. (all this done from memory so might not be 100% accurate)
- the m46 hull is worse in protection than m47 hull
-m47 turret has worse protection than m26 top turret (see mantlet covering full turret front on m26 and the tiny mantlet on m46 top turret) thei m26 when it was tier 9 actuelly was n m46 already
-m46 we got ingame at tier9 fielding m47 turret is 1 ever made prototype for turret testing purpouse.
These things are no story but facts. So shove ur angry post uo where sun dont shine.
- m46 gun has 0,42 acxuracy same as object 261
-object 261 is an arty
- armor on patton(m46) is worse then franken54 on hull and turret

These are the things i said nothing more nothing less. Needless to say both tanks are different and play different!

This means that the Us tier10 tank can only be (if u like it or not) an upgrade in armor compared to tier 9 we have atm cause the tier9 is the weakest combination of both components right now. Even if we wouldnt get the m48, the 47 would be an upgrade to.

U want to vent ur anger on something, then not on me but on WG that spoiled u with the best combination of hull and turret on the current tier9 (basically they wasted potential by not moving it up a tier and buffing it) or the soviet tank design that decided not to stick to the 120mm front plate in the later designs.

Facts are not stories sorry to burst ur bubble of all american tank players beeing Whiners.

Edited by gomolj, 07 July 2012 - 01:19 PM.


CuddlyPanda #202 Posted 07 July 2012 - 01:54 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 21298 battles
  • 1,635
  • Member since:
    07-06-2011

View PostJohnTravolta, on 06 July 2012 - 11:51 PM, said:

@theta0123: sure :Smile_honoring:
@CroCitizen2407: IIRC this specific picture is from here: http://208.84.116.22...showtopic=14200
here you can find full version: http://btvt.narod.ru...ry/_45_2006.htm

Ty man, +1 :Smile_Default:

Redneck #203 Posted 07 July 2012 - 07:17 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 20110 battles
  • 974
  • Member since:
    08-17-2010
@ gomolj
Wow i am impressed, u can quote and rearrange bits of a discussion in non chronological way.

gomolj #204 Posted 08 July 2012 - 11:46 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 25178 battles
  • 579
  • Member since:
    08-15-2011
Non chronological, but still perfectly representative of your cheery picking of stats and whining that got you bashed in this tread in the first place. Now run along, discussing with you doesn't make any sense. Farewell.

Redneck #205 Posted 08 July 2012 - 01:27 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 20110 battles
  • 974
  • Member since:
    08-17-2010
No it doesnt make any sense discussing because even tho we are saying the same things, meaning tanks get balanced by beein different, if not they would be clones one of each other with different skins. U are just so focused on debunking a whine where is none.

Even in my post u quoted, i state: both tanks are different and play different.  Ok i do not write that using words like : no tank is overpowered or undepowered.... Ithat was implying, i was discussing with a person from its posts i considered smart enough to understand the concept of balancing by diversity.

The only one of us bringing up the Tank A is better than Tank B was u by saying the patton outperforms the T-54 on server WR ratio.

And please do not shaft me into the: you Us tank player. Categori, because In my garage there aint us tanks only.

michnixten #206 Posted 09 July 2012 - 07:05 PM

    Private

  • Beta Tester
  • 5514 battles
  • 4
  • [WPZ] WPZ
  • Member since:
    01-16-2011
http://worldoftanks....second_episode/
Gun
100mm
Rate of fire 9,09 pocisków/min
Damage 320/320/420
Penetration 264/380/100mm
Amount of ammo 47

Turret
Turret armor
front 240mm
side 161mm
back 65mm
Turret Traverse Speed 48 degrees/sec
View Range about 400m

Enige
power 1050 k.m.
Chance of fire 10%

Supersession
Traverse Speed 56 stopni/sec
Load Limit 39,8t

Radio
Signal Range 850m

Love those stats!

Edited by michnixten, 11 July 2012 - 12:29 PM.


RussianBias #207 Posted 18 July 2012 - 05:06 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 148
  • Member since:
    11-20-2011

View PostRedneck, on 06 July 2012 - 02:24 PM, said:

Just because i came here to to get info about a tank ingame (t-62a) and post my opinion i invade a threat? Ok then i am an invader because i use freedom of speech to disagree with some people.
Where i am from that is a fundamental right, u dont like that well then go to, wait what was it called again? Ohh yeahh china!(sarcasm alarm) so i invaded this topic? Why do u invade a whole forum for trolling?
- 1. previously you said that im invaded thread, i just returned that statement back to you. 2. i never trolled anyone anuwhere, in fact its me who end up always trolled by some euronazies, rednecks and russophobes. 3. its actually funny how you brought up freedom of speech here but before tried to shut me up because you dont like what i say.

View PostRedneck, on 06 July 2012 - 02:24 PM, said:

Yes i blamed some people here because most whine about something about a tank where only little info is known and they decide it to be crap instead of adding info about named tank.  Getting info about that tank was why i came here.
- im too. And i joined that special olympics started by you. Do you remember how you whined about so called russian bias and nerfed us tanks? If yes, ask yourself why you insult and denying others right to whine about "nerfed" t-62a? Freedom of speech in its finest biased western way...

View PostRedneck, on 06 July 2012 - 02:24 PM, said:

Yes of course the ammo protection is better because of the more secure location of said ammo. Why did they remove the ammo from the sherman sponson to under the turret basket?  Which actually helped more than those water jackets.
Lower profile vs higher one is a doctrine decision on which everyone has advantages and disadvantages,
- lol please check where ammorack of contemporary to t-54 western tanks where placed, than check they armour thickness and after that think what of these tanks is easier to hit with contemporary guns/optics/etc.

View PostRedneck, on 06 July 2012 - 02:24 PM, said:

Circling, sure is a nice asset. But here the t-54 has the stronger turret which eill help it deflect shots while the m46 will take the hit. There is rng ingame which will make u miss the spot u aim at. But again how big is the amount of circling compared to peek a boo ingame?) u will circle lone tanks in ur patton the other amount of time u will support other allues and hide. Because the patton does not have the armor to go expose himslef and bounce shells.  Hill fight, no argument on that the m46 is better. Now u talk about finishing off damaged tanks, with faster reload. Well the t-54 reloads faster than patton.
So rof is variable and theoretic, it is no strong number because there are factors involved. (u would need to be exposed, aimed fully as soon u reloaded which works in theory but aint practice)
- 1. who cares about its turret? Do you really want to say you shoot at turret front of t-54? :Smile_confused: 2. peak a boo on medium? WTF is wrong with this server? And BTW due to stronger alpha m46 is immensely better than a t-54 in peak a boin'g. 3. well t-54 have a far less impressive alpha. So rof is definitely strong tank stat ingame and if you say otherwise you basically proving that patton is better because of having a stronger alpha.


View PostRedneck, on 06 July 2012 - 02:24 PM, said:

Even if u mean by mm thikness, the armor was not better, because modern shells would not bounce it anyway.
Fact is no us m47 ever carried that gun, and as u stated ur self, ingame it aint even an m47 because we dont get the better hull from m47.
From ur statement of best possible marriage between turret and hull i assume u have neither an m26 nor an m46. The m26 can effectively hull down and bounce reliably even high tier guns while the m46 cant.(xcept u hit at a very odd angle or that tiny mantlet, rng........)
- what modern shells? I lost you here... :Smile_confused: Technologically speaking ingame m46 is a marrige of best parts available to patton 1 + a fantasy gun, just like t-54 with change of fantasy gun to a fantasy engine. M47 turret generates weird bounces and that a fact i know.

View PostRedneck, on 06 July 2012 - 02:24 PM, said:

Even tho i got it was a joke (even a bad one) it could be used  as example to increase ur knowledge on the subject.
- but it was good you just mean spirited person who dont want to get it :Smile_smile:

View PostRedneck, on 06 July 2012 - 02:24 PM, said:

No problems with wg keeping some game mechanics under cover but values on tanks, that are assets they have, should be listed so the player can use the machine to its best instead of making crap topics about invisible hackers. (i know spotting system aint working at 100% but it fot much better) cammo value is a main game feature, not beein detected means not getting hit, correct? (well xclude the raee cases of blind shoting and aiming at a tank, missing that one and destroging the undetected tank behind)
- and again as i said previously majority of game developers hide true stats/formulas behind their programs. Here where already plethora of FAQa about how visibility system work ingame.


View PostRedneck, on 06 July 2012 - 02:24 PM, said:

Well u may have thaught that speed is tied to a vehicle rather than engine HP but over 3 posts u wrote something very different.
- l2read pretty much nay? I explained what i meant by my statement about horsepower and engines ok?

View PostRedneck, on 06 July 2012 - 02:24 PM, said:

This might be another case of ill communication. The t-54 ingame has the best (armor mm wise) hull ever made for a t-54, we agree on that? So it is the king of any t-54 ever ever made. At least ingame where the drawbacks of the 20mm surplus armor are insignificant. So best T-54 ever made, correct? So people see 120mm at tier9 and now cry that the tier 10 is gonna lose those 20mm, correct?
- im sorry but it looks more like - "i dont want to listen anyone who think not like me". In case of t-54 we have - hull from early model( about a thousand tanks produced), turret from 1949 model (not the best available to t-54 tank and was installed later in purpose to upgrade existing t-54's with 120mm front), d54 gun that was tested in the middle of 50's on t-55(which is just same old t-54 model 1949 with NBC protection and quite few internal enhancements) and finally prototype v-14 engine from another soviet prototype med.tank. In case of m46 we have - hull from m46 (which is 1948 tank), turret from t42 experimental tank (1950), fantasy 105mm gun, stabilizer which was never fitted in it. Seems pretty much best m46 built no? :Smile_veryhappy:

View PostRedneck, on 06 July 2012 - 02:24 PM, said:

Thats why i said we should have gotten 100mm t-54 as tier 9 and make the the t-54/55 as a tier 10 with the better protected hull. This is no atrocity it would have the better hull at tier 10 and hence less whining. Because an improvement of hull mm in tier, which is actually what players seem to expect.
- no this is far more atrocious than what WG deed, because you suggesting to make t-55 with hull it never had irl.

View PostRedneck, on 06 July 2012 - 02:24 PM, said:

The transmission and gearing discussion was no brag and wasnt pointed at u in the first place, as said before it was there for people to have the ability to increase their knowledge on the subject and to explain that speed is not related to HP but to gearing (supposed u have an engine capabel of running em)
- that why you and french missile guy wrote that i failed yes?




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users