Jump to content


The T-62A fact sheet


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

mamlas #61 Posted 13 June 2012 - 09:54 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 14704 battles
  • 656
  • [-322-] -322-
  • Member since:
    12-22-2010
So, bigger slower less armored T-54, which already is the underdog. If the gun is  not firing APFSDS, i have no idea how it will be of any use:)

Patton and RO 7, here i come !

Legault #62 Posted 13 June 2012 - 10:26 PM

    Captain

  • Beta Tester
  • 14706 battles
  • 2,342
  • Member since:
    10-11-2010

View PostAtomic_Emu, on 13 June 2012 - 08:43 PM, said:

Actually...

T-54 model 1946: length 6270 mm, width 3270 mm, height 2400 mm
T-62A: length 6630 mm, width 3318 mm, height 2352 mm

Note that the T-54 model 1946 is higher, because it had what in the game is its stock turret. T-54's height with "top" turret was ~2350 mm. Length is without gun barrel.
Yeah, and the ingame T54 is as high as the IS tanks, which are generally over 2700 mm. So if they make the T62a size accurate (unlike the T-54), it'll be smaller, as hull size isn't that significant.

BadNews420 #63 Posted 13 June 2012 - 10:57 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 14038 battles
  • 606
  • Member since:
    03-01-2011
So what will change? I guess a bit more HP. Better turret means nothing, since no one is shoting at t-54 turret anyway, will it be faster? or will it just be a bigger credit sink then t-54? any news on the gun? shell cost would be very interesting to see.

gomolj #64 Posted 13 June 2012 - 11:02 PM

    Warrant Officer

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

View Postsutyomatic, on 13 June 2012 - 03:47 PM, said:

Probably the most unimaginative tech tree extension to date.

For 2 reasons:
1. They have to be really careful with balance. Because the current tier 9 meds aren't really to weak. So you don't have your hands untied to bring what ever you want since it has to fit the "little bit better but not too much" philosophy.
2. The tanks have to share similar characteristics with the existing ones. Just be "more of" what the current tier 9s are. So you wouldn't play a nations medium the whole 9 tiers, grinding and grinding, only to find out that the tier 10 you waited so long for is something completely different from what you have been  taught along the way.

The combination of this 2 things pretty much forced WG int introducing these tanks. I don't see any other logical move for them.

Ramjali123 #65 Posted 13 June 2012 - 11:06 PM

    Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 14946 battles
  • 204
  • Member since:
    07-16-2010
Turret armour can't do shite,  due to the bad gun depression which was built for tank trenches

Legault #66 Posted 13 June 2012 - 11:24 PM

    Captain

  • Beta Tester
  • 14706 battles
  • 2,342
  • Member since:
    10-11-2010

View Postgomolj, on 13 June 2012 - 11:02 PM, said:

For 2 reasons:
1. They have to be really careful with balance. Because the current tier 9 meds aren't really to weak. So you don't have your hands untied to bring what ever you want since it has to fit the "little bit better but not too much" philosophy.
2. The tanks have to share similar characteristics with the existing ones. Just be "more of" what the current tier 9s are. So you wouldn't play a nations medium the whole 9 tiers, grinding and grinding, only to find out that the tier 10 you waited so long for is something completely different from what you have been  taught along the way.

The combination of this 2 things pretty much forced WG int introducing these tanks. I don't see any other logical move for them.
"aren't really too weak"


Except there's clan wars, and the t9 mediums/TDs don't really serve much of a purpose outside of the batchat which gets to be a scout. There's the T110 to compete with, and it's got more DPM than most tanks in the game while having good mobility and frontal armor.

Lord_WC #67 Posted 13 June 2012 - 11:30 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 18655 battles
  • 3,277
  • Member since:
    02-21-2011

View PostPlatypusbill, on 13 June 2012 - 04:50 PM, said:

With gold ammo? They have 175, 180, 203 (or at best 232) penetration vs 195mm effective armour.
If a T-54 angles even slightly and doesn´t stay put (to avoid cupola hits), penetrating it is near impossible with lower tier meds other than the Lorraine.

Nope, with normal.
175 pen guns are on type and t-44, both are smaller currently than the t-54, thanks to the 'rebalancing' which gave about 30 cm additional height on the t-54. He can angle his lower glacis as much as he wants it's made out of paper. If he actually angles himself to the point that the lower glacis would bounce, you just shoot his 80mm side. Machine gun ports works as well, they are huge and seems like they draw shells. One thing you forget is that t-54 can't pivot turn only the best players are able to angle themselves constantly if you zoom around them.

180 is pershing. Just circle it to death after a good ramming. Pershing is actually faster than the t-54 if you are not fighting downhill anyway.

203 is p2 by far the easiest. Ram him, and shoot wherever you want to on its hull.

Only actually skillful part is you have to shoot his ammo rack twice. Considering that ammo rack on the hull is readily available from the front and sides, it's not a hard thing to do.

Alternatively you can avoid doing him the favor of fighting in the middle of an airfield and laugh yourself to death when he can't depress his gun on you because there is a 20 cm mound under him:/

(and again, I'm not saying that t-54 is useless, or waste of space or whatever. It's a good tank, and I played hundreds of matches with it because I like it. But compared to the other t9 meds - it's severly handicapped and can't show one thing that compensates for lacking in so many other aspects)

Legault #68 Posted 13 June 2012 - 11:36 PM

    Captain

  • Beta Tester
  • 14706 battles
  • 2,342
  • Member since:
    10-11-2010
Sigh, let's not pretend a T-54 would lose to a tier 8 medium in a 1v1. Just the HP pool and gun make it one sided enough. But yes they can do damage, just like tier 7 and 8 heavies can shoot through the front turret of a maus and bottom plates of many other T10s, and so on.

sutyomatic #69 Posted 13 June 2012 - 11:38 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 50568 battles
  • 626
  • Member since:
    03-07-2011

View Postgomolj, on 13 June 2012 - 11:02 PM, said:

For 2 reasons:
1. They have to be really careful with balance. Because the current tier 9 meds aren't really to weak. So you don't have your hands untied to bring what ever you want since it has to fit the "little bit better but not too much" philosophy.
2. The tanks have to share similar characteristics with the existing ones. Just be "more of" what the current tier 9s are. So you wouldn't play a nations medium the whole 9 tiers, grinding and grinding, only to find out that the tier 10 you waited so long for is something completely different from what you have been  taught along the way.

The combination of this 2 things pretty much forced WG int introducing these tanks. I don't see any other logical move for them.

So a fully fledged T62 with the 115mm gun around 240mm pen and with a ROF around the 7 mark would be all that different from the current T-54?

WG dropped the ball on this and current end tier german and russian medium line players are flabbergasted by the crappy tree extension.

Legault #70 Posted 13 June 2012 - 11:46 PM

    Captain

  • Beta Tester
  • 14706 battles
  • 2,342
  • Member since:
    10-11-2010
Damage: 400/400/515 HP
Penetration: 269/381/60 mm
Rate of Fire: 6.45 r/m
Accuracy: 0.35 m
Aim Time: 2 s
Elevation:  -8°/+15°


That right there is your problem. Try thinking of 3 different tier 10 mediums (leaving batchat out cause it has it's own niche) that somehow compete with a T110. If you don't beat it's damage, penetration or rate of fire, you're going to need significantly more armor or mobility to not be inferior to it. This gun already aims fast while being very accurate. And when I say the mediums would need to beat it in armor or mobility, I don't mean a little. Because heavies have more HP as well, and an extra 10-20mm or 10 km/h isn't going to do **** all.

Edited by ikiralight, 13 June 2012 - 11:51 PM.


H4RT_of_STEAL #71 Posted 14 June 2012 - 02:51 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 43451 battles
  • 1,376
  • [DE-VI] DE-VI
  • Member since:
    03-25-2011

View PostObiWanKenobi, on 11 June 2012 - 06:18 PM, said:

i hate the fact it looks almost the same as T54,same thing with new E50....
well thats because it is basicly a t54 on steroids. stretched hull, different roadwheel placement and different turret, there you go, its a t62(a).

and for all you guys nagging about it should have its smoothbore gun blabla.
i dont know that wg ever said there will never by any mainbattletanks. it would therefor consider it possible that in the future wargaming might realease mbts as part of this game or a as tank in their own "universe"

UGBEAR #72 Posted 14 June 2012 - 03:55 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 16
  • Member since:
    06-11-2012
IMHO, if WG gave us only D-54T then please give us object430 that has 120mm upper hull armor, and the maxium speed is 60km/h,

if WG gave us the T-62, please let us have the 115mm smoothbore gun and we are okey for it's 100mm frontal armor and 50km/h maxium speed........

and what we have now is, no 115mm smoothbore, no 120mm but 100mm frontal armor, and the maxium speed is 50km/h........ I'm sick

klesk #73 Posted 14 June 2012 - 07:58 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 28883 battles
  • 1,747
  • Member since:
    09-09-2010

View Postoldstyleh, on 12 June 2012 - 12:32 PM, said:

Conclusion: everyones cries for getting their own tank nerfed and are happy for the nerfs of the tanks they dont have. Specific tanks have their own specific advantages and disadvantages. Looks like most whiners want their tank to be uber at all areas.

Most of the players, but not everybody ;)

tacomaco #74 Posted 14 June 2012 - 08:48 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 13014 battles
  • 215
  • Member since:
    11-07-2011
Facts? This is world of tanks, facts don't matter here and it won't matter for T-62.

I would say the T-62 effectiveness will increase the same as any new tank increased over the lower tier tank.

Tier 8 T-44 is a big step forward from the T-43. Better armor, speed, and gun. It takes a tier 7 heavy to damage you. Tiger or some other tank with 175+ gun. Tank 160mm already have a hard time at range.

Tier 9 T-54 again is a big step forward from T-44. Again better armor and gun. Speed/agility is about the same.  It takes a tier 8 heavy to damage this with 225mm pen. Tier 7 heavy need some very good rolls to harm you.

Tier 10 T-62 will have to be another step forward from T-54. I would say better armor and better gun and it will need a tier 9 heavy to hit it from the front. Probably a 248mm pen gun.

T-62 will be able to take on E-100/Maus/IS-4 at close range/dog fight.

I would say it will be something like this:

-front hull 140mm with 227mm los. Immune to 225mm guns but it could be pen with +230mm guns or from above with 225mm.
-turret 230-240mm. Hard to pen with 248mm guns at close range. Vulnerable to 260mm pen guns.

T-62 gun with ~240mm pen. Not sure about damage/shot but it might be increased to 400-440

Legault #75 Posted 14 June 2012 - 08:54 AM

    Captain

  • Beta Tester
  • 14706 battles
  • 2,342
  • Member since:
    10-11-2010

View Posttacomaco, on 14 June 2012 - 08:48 AM, said:

Facts? This is world of tanks, facts don't matter here and it won't matter for T-62.

I would say the T-62 effectiveness will increase the same as any new tank increased over the lower tier tank.

Tier 8 T-44 is a big step forward from the T-43. Better armor, speed, and gun. It takes a tier 7 heavy to damage you. Tiger or some other tank with 175+ gun. Tank 160mm already have a hard time at range.

Tier 9 T-54 again is a big step forward from T-44. Again better armor and gun. Speed/agility is about the same.  It takes a tier 8 heavy to damage this with 225mm pen. Tier 7 heavy need some very good rolls to harm you.

Tier 10 T-62 will have to be another step forward from T-54. I would say better armor and better gun and it will need a tier 9 heavy to hit it from the front. Probably a 248mm pen gun.

T-62 will be able to take on E-100/Maus/IS-4 at close range/dog fight.

I would say it will be something like this:

-front hull 140mm with 227mm los. Immune to 225mm guns but it could be pen with +230mm guns or from above with 225mm.
-turret 230-240mm. Hard to pen with 248mm guns at close range. Vulnerable to 260mm pen guns.

T-62 gun with ~240mm pen. Not sure about damage/shot but it might be increased to 400-440
Screw armor and give us some damn mobility... I don't want a 140mm front plate, it's just going to slow down my tank and anything that matters is gonna shoot right through it anyway.

tacomaco #76 Posted 14 June 2012 - 09:28 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 13014 battles
  • 215
  • Member since:
    11-07-2011

View Postikiralight, on 14 June 2012 - 08:54 AM, said:

I don't want a 140mm front plate, it's just going to slow down my tank

You assume this is some kind of simulation where 2 tanks of the same height have the stealth rating or adding more armor increases the weight of the tank. It's all about the internal parameters of the tank not about weight and size.

Here is an example: T-44 top turret has 7500kg. The T-54 stock turret has more armor but still 7500kg. Top turret of T-54 has almost double the armor all over the place, it's bigger and it's only 8500kg.

In fact they can make a T-62 with 400mm armor all over the place and it will still move as fast as a T-44/54

tier 8 and 9 soviet meds have decent armor so T-62 will also have decent armor for a tier 10

Barkmann #77 Posted 14 June 2012 - 10:01 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 14251 battles
  • 185
  • Member since:
    04-14-2011
I also think that T62 on tier 10 medium isnt good idea. They will add crapy tank and because of balance its 100mm armour will bounce T110... dont like that... I would more like object430 because its stats are good and there is no problem with balance here... Its also a progenitor of T64 and looks much batter that T-62...

marcusanton #78 Posted 14 June 2012 - 10:19 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 17186 battles
  • 75
  • Member since:
    10-01-2010
Just for fun and some info on how 'good' the IRL T-62 was.

http://www.youtube.c...4Q&feature=plcp

Lord_WC #79 Posted 14 June 2012 - 10:25 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 18655 battles
  • 3,277
  • Member since:
    02-21-2011

View Postikiralight, on 13 June 2012 - 11:36 PM, said:

Sigh, let's not pretend a T-54 would lose to a tier 8 medium in a 1v1. Just the HP pool and gun make it one sided enough. But yes they can do damage, just like tier 7 and 8 heavies can shoot through the front turret of a maus and bottom plates of many other T10s, and so on.

Pretend? Really, try to do some more battles in meds. You don't know everything about tanks and especially you don't play perfectly to pass judgement on subjective matters. Even more so if the tendency you have with t-54 is the same for all your meds - dealing low damage per battles. A lot of people play more agressively and are able to damage stuff with low pen guns.

There's a huge difference between 'doing damage' and absolutely crippling/killing the tank.
The t-54 has horrible front armor, and any t8 who bothered to learn about aiming will shoot it through. This is not the case with e50, he has awesome armor against trash and no weakspots frontally.
The dpm of t-54 is the lowest of the bunch, so you receive much more damage than you  are supposed to - while patton/batchat will just outdpm anything it encounters.

According to my encounters in t8 meds against t9 meds the skill gap needed to kill the t9 is much-much less in case of t54 than any other. T-54 is a true t9 med. The rest are t9,5. Now when they nerf it even more when introducing the t10 meds and top it off with minor upgrades, the tank will be so much behind its competitors it's not even funny.

But play a few hundred more rounds in the tank and remember those moments when you actually meet people of comparable (or higher) skill level. While you should have the quality advantage you will just take too much damage or yellow modules.

Barkmann #80 Posted 14 June 2012 - 10:46 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 14251 battles
  • 185
  • Member since:
    04-14-2011

View Postmarcusanton, on 14 June 2012 - 10:19 AM, said:

Just for fun and some info on how 'good' the IRL T-62 was.

http://www.youtube.c...4Q&feature=plcp

Soo devs will make great tank for wot from crap tank... nice... Tier 10...




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users