Jump to content


T-43 underpowerd?

T-43 gameplay

  • Please log in to reply
200 replies to this topic

tomogaso #21 Posted 09 February 2013 - 11:14 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 20038 battles
  • 2,503
  • Member since:
    03-13-2011
For me the T43 isn't that bad, it has very nice agility and an awesome RoF for tier 7. Yes, the alpha is lacking, but the DPM is still good.

The problem is you can only flank, you can't go hull down like the T20, and can't snipe like the flanker. I guess you could say the panther couldn't do the other roles either, but the T20 sure can. I guess it's the case of US tanks being the most versatile again...

Carantanien #22 Posted 10 February 2013 - 12:55 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 16942 battles
  • 1,521
  • Member since:
    01-06-2011

View PostFoxfort, on 08 February 2013 - 04:53 PM, said:

My advice is for the best WoT experience just play with Heavy Tanks from beginning.

Someone here has really really high opinion of his game skill & knowlege to give such confidente advice.
Living in clouds ?   :tongue:
And T43 isnt so bad either as you say :)

Foxfort #23 Posted 10 February 2013 - 01:11 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 3601 battles
  • 61
  • Member since:
    03-07-2011

View PostCarantanien, on 10 February 2013 - 12:55 PM, said:

Someone here has really really high opinion of his game skill & knowlege to give such confidente advice.
Living in clouds ?   :tongue:
And T43 isnt so bad either as you say :)

Well I don't have lot's of battles, but I've been observing WoT gamplay style for lot of time and Yes Heavy Tanks are better in WoT.  

T-43 is bad, It's not bad when your opponets are same or lower class. But around 7 of 10 battles WoT makes you play against VII+ class tanks. You can't make any good in those battles.

Edited by Foxfort, 10 February 2013 - 01:13 PM.


custardSPARTA #24 Posted 10 February 2013 - 01:57 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 39003 battles
  • 954
  • [SPRT] SPRT
  • Member since:
    09-14-2011
UP my buttocks

It's a great tank kept mine

wims80 #25 Posted 10 February 2013 - 06:08 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 10801 battles
  • 4,611
  • Member since:
    07-18-2012

View PostFoxfort, on 10 February 2013 - 01:11 PM, said:



Well I don't have lot's of battles, but I've been observing WoT gamplay style for lot of time and Yes Heavy Tanks are better in WoT.  

T-43 is bad, It's not bad when your opponets are same or lower class. But around 7 of 10 battles WoT makes you play against VII+ class tanks. You can't make any good in those battles.
Completely false. The T-43 is an awesome tank (when fully upgraded).

rodier #26 Posted 16 February 2013 - 08:52 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Banned
  • 8636 battles
  • 631
  • Member since:
    01-28-2011
I must  correct my previous post.. with 89% crew Im loading under 5 second, so gun is incredible fast and with aggressive style of play its easy to kill lazy tigers and Is :_D
my stats
33 battles, 31 kills
78% hit ratio
55% victories, 21% survived.

Mr_Chunky_VS_The_Creator #27 Posted 18 February 2013 - 02:01 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 16878 battles
  • 1,190
  • Member since:
    04-28-2011
The T-43 is a very good vehicle, believe me.
A very fast gun, nice mobility and a not-bad turret.

Just go to my channel, there are a lot of good games with T-43 :)
mwreplays.com/TwelveHundred

Edited by TwelveHundred, 18 February 2013 - 02:02 PM.


Likvor #28 Posted 19 February 2013 - 06:30 AM

    Corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16496 battles
  • 131
  • Member since:
    12-16-2010
T-43 is like T-34-85 in hardcore mode.
Has less mobility, less pen and damage for his MM.
But I liked my T-34-85(never to be sold), and I like(sort of, but can't wait to get rid of it) T-43 but in truth it should be buffed a little.
But the problem is - where?
He never mounted 100mm cannon(although this is not a game for historical accuracies), he was slower, less hp/ton, heavier than T-34.
So to buff T-43, there has to be imaginary upgrades, like stronger motor, stronger cannon etc....

One possible buff could be that he could never meet T9 in battle, just up to T8. That would be beautiful buff but probably unbalanced.

Overall 4/10 because it's not that bad, but it is damaged in underpowered sort of way. Specialized tank for specialized players.

Edited by Likvor, 19 February 2013 - 06:30 AM.


Thlurp #29 Posted 19 February 2013 - 05:09 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 11413 battles
  • 605
  • Member since:
    08-15-2012
the t-43 is fine as it is, the only thing you wish for is a little bit more pen on your gun, i actually like the t-43 way more than the t-44

sgtdoom112 #30 Posted 19 February 2013 - 08:31 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 10031 battles
  • 2
  • Member since:
    06-15-2011
I think that it needs the 100mm D10T since the Chinese tier 7 t-34-1 has the 100mm 44-100JT (I know that it is not a copy of this tank) and WZ-131 Light tank has the 100mm 59-100T. Other wise this tank is basically the t-34-85 just a tier higher.

just down the rate of fire to around 6.5 and this will bring it to similar performance of the 100mm 44-100JT on the T-34-1.

Edited by sgtdoom112, 19 February 2013 - 08:43 PM.


Carantanien #31 Posted 20 February 2013 - 06:58 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 16942 battles
  • 1,521
  • Member since:
    01-06-2011
Havent played this tank with iD10T gun, but as i read its not called iD10T gun for nothing.
85BM gun with 4sec reload dishing 180 dmg isnt bad at all.

wims80 #32 Posted 20 February 2013 - 08:03 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 10801 battles
  • 4,611
  • Member since:
    07-18-2012
The DPM is OK, the problem is the 144mm penetration. It's quite lacking, but OK, it's not like I'm trying to face heavies from the front with my T-43

Redbubble481 #33 Posted 20 February 2013 - 08:21 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 12411 battles
  • 24
  • Member since:
    11-30-2012
I am playing the T-43 atm the 85mm D5T-85BM was fine on the T-34-85, but is underpowered on the T-43. Since the T-43 was unused in the war even though it passed its trials. It could be argued that the T-43 would have had a better gun fitted later. If the Russians could have afforded it.
I find this tank is a poke the enemy in the side or rear when they are not looking, then hide. I don't expect many kills, but maybe I can weaken the enemy enough to help an ally.

Foxfort #34 Posted 20 February 2013 - 09:52 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 3601 battles
  • 61
  • Member since:
    03-07-2011
T-43 is just as you said, better version of T-34/85, but in wrong tier.
I don't know what to say to people who haven't play against T8 and T9 with this tank. T-43 is good tank against <T7 but against super heavy tanks is very weak.
Better gun would fix it.

Foxfort #35 Posted 09 May 2013 - 02:24 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 3601 battles
  • 61
  • Member since:
    03-07-2011
New update has been released and still no improvements to T-43 :(

ArnieDude #36 Posted 13 May 2013 - 09:57 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 24040 battles
  • 834
  • Member since:
    11-18-2011
The T-43 is a different beast from the other mediums in its line. Use its gun depression, which is actually quite decent. And while doing that you will find that the turret is quite bouncy. I've had great fun with this tank and it racks up XP like no other since its a medium tank.
Never engage anything head on, but try to flank and you will find that the gun actually pumps out damage really quick.

One of the better tier VII mediums for me.  :playing:

taattis #37 Posted 16 May 2013 - 01:09 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 23202 battles
  • 1,499
  • [OLENI] OLENI
  • Member since:
    03-16-2012
I like it somewhat, sure pen sucks but nothing that loading 50/50 wont fix though I assume it would suck if you do not have a premium account.

Trt_Smrt #38 Posted 17 May 2013 - 11:54 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 17462 battles
  • 358
  • [MORA] MORA
  • Member since:
    11-09-2012
Acutally, the pen is not that bad at all. Just don't face heavies frontally. If one gets to Tier 7, it should be rather obvious what are the main heavy routes and where are possible flanking spots on all of the maps. Use this to your advantage and get to positions early, keep your head low, if possible without taking damage/being spotted, keep the enemy heavies lit (you'll pack the binos so you should see them before they see you), and wait for your heavies to engage. Then, and only then, go flank and put a round every 4.9 sec in their side weakspot, or even back.
Don't underestimate that fast reload and if you manage to consitently pen (and this can be easily done), you can get even IS3 from the side very easily, and reduce his HP pool considerably, creating aditional problems for him as he must look at the both sides. You'll will be in cover, preferably hull-down, and annoying the hell out of their heavies, making critical hits, or even putting them on fire.

I have no problems making 2.5K dmg per battle, due to high DPM of the last gun, even without using (too much) prem rounds. Loading gold is only necessary when the situation arise that you MUST pen or die, but don't get in those situations in the first place. You'll be facing a lot of good mediums here... Type 59 being the highest threat as you CAN'T pen him from the front and he has better agility and could kill you easily.

So, T43 is definitely a different beast, not that much of a bralwer, but a nice combination of a frontline scout/sniper/support, acting just behind or beside the heavies, taking an opportunity to annoy, cause general disturbance and provide close cover for your heavies in case they are being flanked by enemy mediums or even zerged by heavies. As I've said, those 160-200 dmg every 5 seconds start to hurt after a bit and combined with amounts of critical hits you make, could overturn the battle.

Yesterday, i've managed to kill a Tiger, VK3001P and almost kill a VK3601 on the hill in mines, as they tried to overrun me (alone) on the hill, near the enterance to the mine itself. Good angling and hiding behind the hills made possible to pen every time the Tiger's LFP, putting him on fire, VK also, while they have bounced 4-5 shots in the process. Yeah, I died in the end, but i've made so much damage, that the rest of the team (hiding behind the cover), could've made it through easily and cap the flag.

In short - Don't stick your head longer than needed, count the enemy reload time and try to support the general push. Only, and only when there are more than 3 meds making a wolfpack, go join them and hunt for those lone heavies. You can cause much pain even with sub-par penetration as you will be in the better position. If not - don't engage and try to find some other place to fight.

Every hit kills some of your crew, damages at least one module, so use your medkits/repairs wisely.

Hope it helps. I kinda love this tank, but it will pass another few hundred battles untill i get it right.. mostly due to lack of general communication on pubs. If you suck, try to platoon with two heavies or a heavy and the med.. it works like charm. :)

Cheers!

taattis #39 Posted 17 May 2013 - 04:54 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 23202 battles
  • 1,499
  • [OLENI] OLENI
  • Member since:
    03-16-2012
I really dont know why are people exaggerating or just outright making things up when everyone can just check their stats. If you reliably did 2.5k per battle you would average close to 2k not 1k.

Trt_Smrt #40 Posted 18 May 2013 - 04:56 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 17462 battles
  • 358
  • [MORA] MORA
  • Member since:
    11-09-2012
Because you just can't make it every time. I'm not counting battles when my team gets Zerged in the first 30 seconds due to lemmingtrain, or get hit by an arty and killed right on the start of the battle. That also counts as average damage...

The gmd i've been saying is only for the illustrative purpose (or i should put a disclaimers every time I say a stat?), for those who say that the penetration is horrible - not for advertising my battle valor and skills, which are obviously not that great, or at least to say there are others, much better players than me.




2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users