Jump to content


WG Why do you hate T-54 so much?


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

Homer_J #21 Posted 13 July 2012 - 09:52 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 30786 battles
  • 33,211
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

View PostAnthoniusii, on 13 July 2012 - 09:13 PM, said:

I agree,,,cheaper ammo...From what LB-1 that can not penetrate E-50's rear armor unless it has less than 10% life points?

Because armour gets thinner as you lose health points. Riiiiiight.

Quote

Plus E-50 can aim and hit a T-54 at maximum ranger while T-54 must reach at few meters and staaaayyy ,aiiimmmm and then shot E-50 after a century!

I'm beginning to wonder if you've actually played the T-54 at all.

i486DX #22 Posted 13 July 2012 - 10:00 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 9 battles
  • 1,422
  • Member since:
    05-29-2012
Comparing it to the E-50 is wrong, because in close combat the T-54 rapes it.

maeh_schaf #23 Posted 13 July 2012 - 10:02 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 19005 battles
  • 271
  • Member since:
    12-30-2011
just test it on the testserver and you ll get a idea of what the t-62 will be?

that's just a tip, i dont claim to know the problems of t-54, i m just on my way to it.

Edward_Teague #24 Posted 13 July 2012 - 10:22 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 32642 battles
  • 1,056
  • Member since:
    02-07-2011
The close combat ? where I ram t-54 to death in my 60t 1200bhp tank?
That kind of close combat?

Stieger11 #25 Posted 13 July 2012 - 10:43 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 28157 battles
  • 1,154
  • Member since:
    12-18-2010
You have ~890 avg dmg so far, after ~270 battles on your T54, it's a Tier9 medium tank! What kind of buff do you want? Maybe robotpilot and autoaim for weakspots?
And who the hell forced you to use your bank card to unlock tanks?


Edward_Teague:
your relentless neg rep farming gets really annoying... :Smile_sceptic:

i486DX #26 Posted 13 July 2012 - 11:03 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 9 battles
  • 1,422
  • Member since:
    05-29-2012

View PostEdward_Teague, on 13 July 2012 - 10:22 PM, said:

The close combat ? where I ram t-54 to death in my 60t 1200bhp tank?
That kind of close combat?

Malinovka middle of the field, E-50 vs T-54. If you win with the E-50 then I will agree.

tomatojim #27 Posted 14 July 2012 - 12:35 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 20273 battles
  • 486
  • Member since:
    05-13-2011
mother of god!
Anthoniusii would you plz stop your endless whinings and your bad maths (E-50 kills T54 in 2 shots, AMX 13 75 kills T54 in seconds)? you just cant play the tank after 275 battles. sell it and and don't scare off other players who might still enjoy a good (close to other t9s at least) t9 medium.

Legault #28 Posted 14 July 2012 - 12:41 AM

    Captain

  • Beta Tester
  • 14706 battles
  • 2,342
  • Member since:
    10-11-2010
Oh good lord, he's making threads now...


The T-54 is perfectly fine. Playing it on live, played it on the 7.5 test, no noticable difference. Get over it.

Anthoniusii #29 Posted 15 July 2012 - 06:07 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 23972 battles
  • 1,312
  • Member since:
    03-25-2011
Who said that Chat Bat can not kill a T-54 with 3 shots?
I just got kiled by a Chat Bat with 3 ONLY shots!!!That is for those that "worship" everything WG does and find NO mistake!

CmdrMonk #30 Posted 16 July 2012 - 08:20 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 56953 battles
  • 57
  • Member since:
    02-26-2011

View PostKnobster, on 13 July 2012 - 08:40 PM, said:

All tier 9 mediums get nerfed because tier 10 mediums are introduced, except for t54 that gets almost only buffs, yeah WG really hates the t54...

Yea and brilliant improvements they are too!!

filefool #31 Posted 17 July 2012 - 01:01 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 20058 battles
  • 275
  • [NGZ] NGZ
  • Member since:
    01-27-2011
You are serious OP aren't you?

All of the TIX meds get rebalanced for 7.5 and while ALL other meds get nerfs, the T-54 actually gets more buffs than nerfs. And you are complaining that WG hates the T-54? I'm baffled!

Since the T-54 is the only Tier IX med you played, i suggest you try the other ones out, before whining about something you have no clue of.
If you never took a 90 degree spin in your E-50, exposing your sides because every shot breaks your tracks, or see that every enemy targets you in your paper armour M46, although there are 10 other targets available, i consider this one of so many "Nerf everything that isn't in my garage" topics.

Edited by filefool, 17 July 2012 - 01:05 AM.


Basardius #32 Posted 17 July 2012 - 01:53 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 9082 battles
  • 796
  • Member since:
    03-15-2011
T-54 is the weakest Tier 9 heavy Fact. The latest stats snib shown only strenghtens this aswell as the poll on the USSR medium forum.

Basardius #33 Posted 17 July 2012 - 02:06 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 9082 battles
  • 796
  • Member since:
    03-15-2011

View Postfilefool, on 17 July 2012 - 01:01 AM, said:

You are serious OP aren't you?

All of the TIX meds get rebalanced for 7.5 and while ALL other meds get nerfs, the T-54 actually gets more buffs than nerfs. And you are complaining that WG hates the T-54? I'm baffled!

Since the T-54 is the only Tier IX med you played, i suggest you try the other ones out, before whining about something you have no clue of.
If you never took a 90 degree spin in your E-50, exposing your sides because every shot breaks your tracks, or see that every enemy targets you in your paper armour M46, although there are 10 other targets available, i consider this one of so many "Nerf everything that isn't in my garage" topics.

I agree on some points but the fact the E-50 has the 3 key points, Speed, Armour and fire Power. It has more in each category to that of the T-54.
Patton has more firepower and better gun depression to that of the T-54 and better accuracy over all the patton is regarded as a much better tank to that of the T-54.
As for the bat chat its taken away the only thing that made the T-54 stand out. and that was its aggresive nature in which the batchat is far superior.

Also what key trait makes the T-54 stand out over the other mediums? I will tell you, the ammo resupply costs.
Apart from that the T-54 is a jack of "some" trades and a clear master of none.

Edited by J_Pershing, 17 July 2012 - 02:06 AM.


Jukelo #34 Posted 17 July 2012 - 02:08 AM

    Colonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 26535 battles
  • 3,608
  • Member since:
    08-13-2010

Quote

WG Why do you hate T-54 so much?


Obvious russian bias.

filefool #35 Posted 17 July 2012 - 10:34 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 20058 battles
  • 275
  • [NGZ] NGZ
  • Member since:
    01-27-2011

View PostJ_Pershing, on 17 July 2012 - 02:06 AM, said:

I agree on some points but the fact the E-50 has the 3 key points, Speed, Armour and fire Power. It has more in each category to that of the T-54.
Patton has more firepower and better gun depression to that of the T-54 and better accuracy over all the patton is regarded as a much better tank to that of the T-54.
As for the bat chat its taken away the only thing that made the T-54 stand out. and that was its aggresive nature in which the batchat is far superior.

Also what key trait makes the T-54 stand out over the other mediums? I will tell you, the ammo resupply costs.
Apart from that the T-54 is a jack of "some" trades and a clear master of none.

I slightly disagree. It's actually mobility, armour and firepower that counts. While the E-50 sure is fast, it's nowhere near as mobile as the other mediums. The T54 may lack the raw firepower of the others but it can outmaneuver other tanks quite easily. Ever tried to chase down one around some corners? That's very frustrating, especially when sitting in a german tank.

I agree that the T-54 isn't the best of the bunch. But it's a solid tank, that can really shine in the right hands. And to complain about WG although i's the least nerfed tank in 7.5 is ridiculous.

captainInsano #36 Posted 17 July 2012 - 11:00 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 64175 battles
  • 516
  • [EFE-S] EFE-S
  • Member since:
    02-26-2011
I really disagree. Have you even tried any of the other tier 9 mediums?

Played all tier 9s except BatChat. Imho the E-50 is the worst medium. Mainly because it is big and has low dpm. Sure you can snipe with it, but it is also costly. Low penetration towards high-tiers and poor damage. Yes, it's fairly fast (downhill) but it is also like an E-75 = large and easy to hit.

Patton is imho the best overall tank. It has much of everything the others lack, a mix of german- and russian tank.

T-54 is great fun. Easy to play even when stock (with LB-1 from T-44). Yes, 175 penetration in tier 9 might sound hard but it isn't. The T-54 is incredibly agile even when stock (and now it gets even better, do the math). It is so easy to always flank heavier tanks to make use of even stock guns. It isn't supposed to sit still in = waste of a great tank. It is also a small target, and much harder to hit than ie. E-50. Only real downside i noticed is the very frequent ammo-rack hits to the side, it is so easily destroyed = has to be careful not to expose sides (well, like almost all tanks but the T-54 ammo-rack is very, very fragile).

Finally, i don't get the T-54 rant...at all...it's a good tank that will get even better in next patch (at least stock). Then again, what was that about "expensive ammo"? Are you aware of that the E-50 top-gun is more expensive (1245 vs. 1230 for the T-54) than the T-54s? Sure, you can use the cheaper "Pinocchio" (88/L100) gun but then you lack severely in alpha-damage.

mondog #37 Posted 17 July 2012 - 11:13 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 14599 battles
  • 1,931
  • Member since:
    03-17-2011
I had and sold the t54 after 50 matches. It is expensive to run I'll give you that but its inherent lack of gun depression is what killed it for me.

On paper the t54 is quite a cool little tank but when you read about its down sides, the real t54, count yourselves lucky. It could be allot worse. It should have a 15 second reload time.

Lord_WC #38 Posted 17 July 2012 - 11:46 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

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

View PostcaptainInsano, on 17 July 2012 - 11:00 AM, said:

Finally, i don't get the T-54 rant...at all...it's a good tank that will get even better in next patch (at least stock). Then again, what was that about "expensive ammo"? Are you aware of that the E-50 top-gun is more expensive (1245 vs. 1230 for the T-54) than the T-54s?

Again, just for reference - you get credits depending the amount of damage you dealt. More damage = more creds.
Now you pay 1245 for 390 damage (and let's not even go into the accuracy question, because that matters a lot again), or you pay 3,19 credits for each hp damage.

On the other hand you pay 1230 for 320 damage in a t-54, or 3,84 credits for each hp damage.

All else equal that means for the exact same amount of damage a t-54 pays 20% more ammo cost. As the profitability of t9 meds are really low this means that you certanly can expect a loss in long term on a t-54. That, by itself wouldn't be the problem. The problem is that other t9s doesn't suffer from the same. This would only be fair if, and only if the t-54 has superior stats (the income expectancy is higher for it). Well, this may have been the case in the beta, however now it's clearly the weakest t9. It's not a bad tank, no. It's playable, all right. But having the worst t9 med AND losing creds in the process is terribly annoying.

View Postmondog, on 17 July 2012 - 11:13 AM, said:

On paper the t54 is quite a cool little tank but when you read about its down sides, the real t54, count yourselves lucky. It could be allot worse. It should have a 15 second reload time.

Yes, and e-100s would run around with a wooden turret, t95s would cruise around 5km/h, and instead of e50s you would have 2 sleepy eyed designers... We are not talking about reaility, this is a game, with its own balance.


Regarding the original post: I don't think WG hates the t-54. This rebalance is certanly a step in the right direction. After the nerfs the t-54 should have been reevaluated, this happens now. If these buffs are enough, or too much/little we will see in a few weeks.

Edited by Lord_WC, 17 July 2012 - 11:52 AM.


Snib #39 Posted 17 July 2012 - 11:54 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 18888 battles
  • 3,307
  • Member since:
    07-16-2010

View PostcaptainInsano, on 17 July 2012 - 11:00 AM, said:

Then again, what was that about "expensive ammo"? Are you aware of that the E-50 top-gun is more expensive (1245 vs. 1230 for the T-54) than the T-54s? Sure, you can use the cheaper "Pinocchio" (88/L100) gun but then you lack severely in alpha-damage.

T-54 pays 3.85 credits per HP avg. damage.
E-50 pays 3.19 credits per HP avg. damage.

That's what it's about. Patton is the most profitable tier 9 medium at the moment, but they're not only nerfing its hidden income multiplier in 0.7.5 but also the tank itself, whereas T-54 won't get an income nerf and actually a buff to the tank itself, so the situation might well be the inverse in 0.7.5.

Anthoniusii #40 Posted 17 July 2012 - 12:11 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 23972 battles
  • 1,312
  • Member since:
    03-25-2011
Someone said..You get more money depending on the damage to cause...
Today fight.
I was the only med in a battle facing IS-4.
Some will say "don't face it ahead" ...right so i runed at its sides and start shoting with this WONDERFULL D-54
that failed to penetrate IS-4's sides!!!!!!!!!!
Of course IS-4 killed me with two shots!
So what profit will i get?
If i have a tier 9 tank that HAS NOT gun that can help me survive (i am not talking about the tank's armor etc)
then what is the point of having that tank? Simply because it looks nice???
Why WG han not published a video about the proper use of tier 9 meds like it did for the french tds?
Maybe becuase it can not make such a guide because in the same time players would understand that everything is a lie?




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users