Jump to content


T-44 is totally meh!


  • Please log in to reply
1023 replies to this topic

StringWitch #1001 Posted 14 April 2015 - 12:18 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 12576 battles
  • 291
  • Member since:
    10-12-2014

Recently got this tank and the first thing I've done is go for the 122mm. I'm finding it perfectly usable. It is a straight worse gun than the LB-1, but I find it really fun for the same reason I enjoy playing the KV-2. As with the KV-2, you'll ideally want to support your frontline heavies in the usual brawling hotspots. Mobility is also great for biting people in the arse with REAL SOVIET DAMAGE and escaping before they react. The DPM is awful but... meh? I personally don't think DPM is a very pertinent stat for most tanks. Compared to the Chinese T-34-2 and T-34-3, assuming all are mounting 122mm guns, the T-44 has a lower rate of fire and worse armour, but a better power-to-weight ratio and superior gun angles (3° of depression is frustrating, 5° I can live with). Honestly, whichever gun one uses, the tank WILL suffer in tier X matches, but such is the plight of every tier VIII medium, so whatever. Something perhaps worthy of note is the surpsise factor a T-44 with the 122mm can have. A lot of people seem somewhat dismissive of me until I blow their fuel tanks and shave off a quarter of their health.


 

Rammer and stabiliser are a must, whichever the user's gun choice. Vents? Wet ammo rack pays off more with this tank — the rack itself isn't especially prone to damage in my experience, the problem is that it's in the front opposite the driver, and getting racked for a 33 second reload is not nice. I know in reality there's also a fuel tank there, but I'm not sure if the same is true in-game.


Edited by StringWitch, 14 April 2015 - 12:30 AM.


nudisti #1002 Posted 14 April 2015 - 08:54 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 39080 battles
  • 74
  • [S3AL] S3AL
  • Member since:
    09-18-2012
You dont really suffer from tier 10 battles with LB :) just become goldnoob and only tanks giving troubles are superheavies and you are not supposed to counter them before end of battle :)

rikkelt #1003 Posted 14 April 2015 - 10:36 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 17506 battles
  • 1,184
  • [ZIU] ZIU
  • Member since:
    03-23-2013

122mm has too many downsides.

-Really bad dpm, don't ever get into a cqc fight with any other MT (tier 7 is enough to fck you over, wtf?)

-Bad accuracy, sniping from more than 200m out of question, snap-shooting strongly discouraged

-Long aim time, huge exposure time just to aim

-worthless prem ammo, 217mm pen is not enough to go through the unangled front plate of a T-54, 235mm is.

 

If you want a mobile tier 8 tank that delivers 400 damge per shot play IS-3, if you want high burst damage play T69 or AMX 50 100.


Edited by rikkelt, 14 April 2015 - 10:37 AM.


nudisti #1004 Posted 14 April 2015 - 11:20 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 39080 battles
  • 74
  • [S3AL] S3AL
  • Member since:
    09-18-2012

Totally agreed with rikkelt first part but i prefer t44 much over t69. Magazine does give nice burst but when you are in t69 and realize that you need gold ammo while ap is loaded in:child:​ and t44 is really good in dogfighting :)

​i should buy my t44 back, i miss her :hiding:



PatroneKonsjele #1005 Posted 17 May 2015 - 10:22 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 35498 battles
  • 156
  • Member since:
    02-23-2014
The ammoracking is a joke: 3x ammoracked and totally blown to pieces today (around 15 battles), I have played 40 battles with it running at 62%. Its a nice tank, but this ammorack crapis WG's way to screw us big I guess... And offcourse the everloosing 2 or 3 crewmembers after getting hit by arti... (besides the ammorack getting hit very frequent).

7th_Brigade #1006 Posted 18 May 2015 - 07:52 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 72837 battles
  • 370
  • Member since:
    02-15-2014
That gun! - omg it's a hateful piece of crap

Fibonachi #1007 Posted 18 May 2015 - 08:09 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 28225 battles
  • 841
  • [FREEP] FREEP
  • Member since:
    01-07-2011
I find it funny with all the T-54 clones on tierVIII that there's even a topic to debate T-44.

Mowglis #1008 Posted 13 September 2015 - 07:59 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 25094 battles
  • 37
  • [RRTB] RRTB
  • Member since:
    03-23-2013
I am tired of buying fireextinguishers for T-43, seems to be a can full of gasoline. It happened even twice in a game to burn like a match. Please tell me that T-44, T-54, etc. have  not the same behaviour.

Mowglis #1009 Posted 06 October 2015 - 08:37 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 25094 battles
  • 37
  • [RRTB] RRTB
  • Member since:
    03-23-2013
I want an opinion from somebody who played T-44 with the third engine (the one that does not carry over T-54), I is worth researching it or just go for T-54 ?

IRSanchez #1010 Posted 06 October 2015 - 09:59 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 55577 battles
  • 1,889
  • [F4W] F4W
  • Member since:
    05-18-2011

View Postmugurelandrei, on 06 October 2015 - 08:37 AM, said:

I want an opinion from somebody who played T-44 with the third engine (the one that does not carry over T-54), I is worth researching it or just go for T-54 ?

 

It's worth it, as it gives almost 10% more power, allowing T-44 to really shift around. Module hitpoints and fire chance are the same as in V-2-54, so you don't trade anything for that power increase.

 

Also, the V-54-6 engine can be used in SU-101, in case you go for Obj-263 some day.

Imho, always unlock all the modules as early (tier-wise) as possible. This gives better results in the long run.

 


Edited by IRSanchez, 06 October 2015 - 10:06 AM.


Mowglis #1011 Posted 07 October 2015 - 11:24 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 25094 battles
  • 37
  • [RRTB] RRTB
  • Member since:
    03-23-2013

View PostIRSanchez, on 06 October 2015 - 10:59 AM, said:

 

It's worth it, as it gives almost 10% more power, allowing T-44 to really shift around. Module hitpoints and fire chance are the same as in V-2-54, so you don't trade anything for that power increase.

 

Also, the V-54-6 engine can be used in SU-101, in case you go for Obj-263 some day.

Imho, always unlock all the modules as early (tier-wise) as possible. This gives better results in the long run.

 

 

Thank you for the advice, i will research it. It's about 150k xp for T-54 so i better be well prepared for the grind.

BelizariusCZ #1012 Posted 23 October 2015 - 04:09 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 135 battles
  • 546
  • Member since:
    09-08-2014

"Meh" is an understatement when describing this tank. It's rather below average in all departments. And the gun handling is just retarded. Gun stats on paper =/= gun stats in battle. The 100mm is one of the most frustrating guns I ever had in this game. Everyone else seems to be able to shoot on the move. But not this turd...shots will fly anywhere else, besides at what you're aiming. BIA + Snap shot + Smooth ride - shooting on the move is a no go.

 

30 k experience until I'll sell it. There's a special place in the kitchen  hell for whoever balanced this joke of a medium...



Pereun90 #1013 Posted 11 December 2015 - 09:02 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 8152 battles
  • 396
  • Member since:
    10-29-2012
I have 3 stars with kv-13 and i cant get 2 stars with this tank, maybe i am doing something wrong, or maybe just higher mm makes me get nuked faster, but i can tell one thing for sure, gun isnt one of its strenghts i miss not alot but enough to get killed in some situations and even i cant penetrate some med from front. Speed is ok, but this tank feel so average and i dont expect anything better from just level up to t-54.

thestaggy #1014 Posted 15 December 2015 - 07:46 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 16764 battles
  • 2,080
  • Member since:
    04-24-2015

Please tell me this tank is better than the T-43 tier-for-tier?

 



Fibonachi #1015 Posted 15 December 2015 - 10:20 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 28225 battles
  • 841
  • [FREEP] FREEP
  • Member since:
    01-07-2011

It really, really isn't. Get used to playing it like a sluggish light tank. You'll have the occasional 3k damage game, but nothing spectacular.



damonstr #1016 Posted 18 December 2015 - 03:24 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 13321 battles
  • 246
  • Member since:
    03-29-2015
Does anyone feel like the pen buff did this tank any good? I don't see much improvement personally; although I AM a total noob.

kramxel #1017 Posted 29 December 2015 - 04:25 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 8219 battles
  • 166
  • Member since:
    06-22-2013

View Postthestaggy, on 15 December 2015 - 07:46 AM, said:

Please tell me this tank is better than the T-43 tier-for-tier?

 

 

T-43 is actually a good tier7 medium.

 

T-44, is a victim of tier 8 power creep, and the advent of good premium mediums.

 



Mr_Burrows #1018 Posted 31 December 2015 - 10:49 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 47166 battles
  • 2,117
  • [D-NUT] D-NUT
  • Member since:
    02-17-2012
My old thread still lives, I see.
All I say is "Pershing", and add "prem shop before midnight".
That is a medium tank that rocks.
Happy new year!  

General_McMuschi #1019 Posted 02 January 2016 - 10:29 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 23782 battles
  • 834
  • Member since:
    06-19-2015

Ok so as far as I noticed, T-44 has very similar 100mm gun as the T-54 first protoype. Prototype has the armor, T-44 has the mobility instead of armor. So which tank is better for my first t8? I am going up Soviet mediums and am currently on T-43 (and kv-13). So should I buy the prototype and play it until I get the T-44 or is it not worth it? I'm not looking for money maker or crew trainer, I'm looking for a tank to drive in higher tiers to learn and get skilled in those t9 and t10 battles.

 

I've read stats, comments, watched reviews and it seems some people consider t-54 first prototype good (Quickybaby), some say it's crap (Foch).

I am aware T-54 proto has poor pen for it's tier, but T-44 has the same pen. And I actually managed to bounce several shots from T-54 proto's gun being hull down in Rudy which made me think this tank really has unimpressive pen. So the guns on both tanks dont seem impressive to me, but is having all the armor on T-54 proto worth it or is it better to have mobility T-44 has?

 

Does any of you have both tanks and can give me opinion which one of the two tanks they find better?

 

Is T-54 proto more like slower version of KV-13 because of the armor? Because KV-13 is a nice little tank and that would be good news.

 

Does these two tanks suffer from module damage as much as T-43? (i'd get ammo racked or hit in fuel tanks or engine in every battle until i mounted wet ammo rack and co2 fuel tank).

 

Which equipment do you use on T-44 and/or T-54 proto: rammer, optics, vents or co2 fuel tank, wet ammo rack and vents?



IRSanchez #1020 Posted 05 January 2016 - 06:48 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 55577 battles
  • 1,889
  • [F4W] F4W
  • Member since:
    05-18-2011

View PostGeneral_McP1cka, on 02 January 2016 - 10:29 AM, said:

Ok so as far as I noticed, T-44 has very similar 100mm gun as the T-54 first protoype. Prototype has the armor, T-44 has the mobility instead of armor. So which tank is better for my first t8? I am going up Soviet mediums and am currently on T-43 (and kv-13). So should I buy the prototype and play it until I get the T-44 or is it not worth it? I'm not looking for money maker or crew trainer, I'm looking for a tank to drive in higher tiers to learn and get skilled in those t9 and t10 battles.

 

I've read stats, comments, watched reviews and it seems some people consider t-54 first prototype good (Quickybaby), some say it's crap (Foch).

I am aware T-54 proto has poor pen for it's tier, but T-44 has the same pen. And I actually managed to bounce several shots from T-54 proto's gun being hull down in Rudy which made me think this tank really has unimpressive pen. So the guns on both tanks dont seem impressive to me, but is having all the armor on T-54 proto worth it or is it better to have mobility T-44 has?

 

Does any of you have both tanks and can give me opinion which one of the two tanks they find better?

 

Is T-54 proto more like slower version of KV-13 because of the armor? Because KV-13 is a nice little tank and that would be good news.

 

Does these two tanks suffer from module damage as much as T-43? (i'd get ammo racked or hit in fuel tanks or engine in every battle until i mounted wet ammo rack and co2 fuel tank).

 

Which equipment do you use on T-44 and/or T-54 proto: rammer, optics, vents or co2 fuel tank, wet ammo rack and vents?

 

 

Just get the normal T-44.

Crew training and credits earning are a vital part of a premium tank, so if you are not after those benefits - there is little to no point getting one.

 

The T-54-proto is good at it, having the same crew setup as T9 and T10s. It just requires liberal use of premium ammo, so that is why QB/Foch opinions differ.

 

For equipement, go with the standard medium setup: vstab, rammer, optics.

 


Edited by IRSanchez, 05 January 2016 - 06:58 PM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users