Jump to content


T54 Armour Effectiveness Test


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

NightFalcon #21 Posted 27 December 2010 - 06:53 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 55
  • Member since:
    08-05-2010

View PostSykotic, on 27 December 2010 - 04:02 AM, said:

That is well within the penetration value range of the T-54's armor. With 240mm of effective frontal armor it would have a chance (albeit diminishing with every shot) of bouncing 130mm shells. The penetration range is 195mm to 325mm for the 130mm with the average being 260mm. So, if each shot fell under -10% deviation then it would bounce the shot on frontal armor. It would be and even higher chance of bouncing if you shot the front turret armor.

So, in your Tier 10 Heavy Tank you are upset because you can't just roll over a Tier 9 Medium tank? Would you shoot 4 times at the front of an IS-4 or JagdTiger? Then why are you doing it with a T-54? Why not aim for the left or right tracks? Fail troll is fail. Just because you drive an IS-7 doesn't mean you no longer have to aim.

T9 mediums are not heavy tanks, they suppose to dodge/avoid shells not bounced them. This is the reason for their high mobility. No medium tanks should act as a heavy and charge enemies frontally.


P.S. Stop all that historical crap, its a game(PVP GAME) not even a simulator, so balance comes first.

Warbadger #22 Posted 27 December 2010 - 07:09 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 80
  • Member since:
    07-12-2010

View PostCrazyCrave, on 27 December 2010 - 04:41 AM, said:

I agree with Bulldog as i tired the 122mm on the t54 .. but like any tank such as a is4 the lowest part of the front (belly) has a weak area the HE shells will penetrate and what i plan on useing on all t54's ..

Unfortunately the combination of the low profile and low angle of the hull plate make the lower hull difficult or impossible to hit in most situations.

Malexa #23 Posted 27 December 2010 - 07:44 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 29134 battles
  • 570
  • Member since:
    10-04-2010

View PostSykotic, on 27 December 2010 - 04:02 AM, said:

That is well within the penetration value range of the T-54's armor. With 240mm of effective frontal armor it would have a chance (albeit diminishing with every shot) of bouncing 130mm shells. The penetration range is 195mm to 325mm for the 130mm with the average being 260mm. So, if each shot fell under -10% deviation then it would bounce the shot on frontal armor. It would be and even higher chance of bouncing if you shot the front turret armor.

So, in your Tier 10 Heavy Tank you are upset because you can't just roll over a Tier 9 Medium tank? Would you shoot 4 times at the front of an IS-4 or JagdTiger? Then why are you doing it with a T-54? Why not aim for the left or right tracks? Fail troll is fail. Just because you drive an IS-7 doesn't mean you no longer have to aim.

Why is it ok that he can shoot a panther 2 and pershing anywhere then? They certainly won't bounce anything no matter where he hits, unless he hits the armor at an extreme angle. They have less than 195mm effective armor anywhere by quite a margin.

ripdog #24 Posted 27 December 2010 - 08:33 AM

    Private

  • Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 19
  • Member since:
    08-26-2010
The t-54 is a game breaking tank atm. Its direct competition from the other countries do not even come close to competing with it. Its rediculous that an IS-7 is bouncing shells at point blank off a medium tank. I guess we can chalk up another mark for the crew who claim this game equals russian tanks win. Regardless of "historical" values the game should have balance, not handicap entire tree's while buffing the "favored" one. Its things like this that are starting to make me lose my faith in the devs ability to make this game a success and that makes me sad.

pe2pe #25 Posted 27 December 2010 - 09:11 AM

    Private

  • Beta Tester
  • 7963 battles
  • 33
  • Member since:
    09-05-2010

View PostRipdog, on 27 December 2010 - 08:33 AM, said:

The t-54 is a game breaking tank atm. Its direct competition from the other countries do not even come close to competing with it. Its rediculous that an IS-7 is bouncing shells at point blank off a medium tank. I guess we can chalk up another mark for the crew who claim this game equals russian tanks win. Regardless of "historical" values the game should have balance, not handicap entire tree's while buffing the "favored" one. Its things like this that are starting to make me lose my faith in the devs ability to make this game a success and that makes me sad.


I'm playing t54 and after 50 games I must say that none of the t9-t10 heavy have problem killing me,
Is7 bouncing shots will become an urban legend, like we had with t44, the tank is extremly good if played wise,
but t9-t10 will kill you no problem.

Aslain #26 Posted 27 December 2010 - 09:34 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 14600 battles
  • 12,568
  • Member since:
    07-20-2010
Got elite IS-4 (with IS-7 gun) and got problems with penetrating T-54, that thing is bouncing my 130mm shells like hell.

theta0123 #27 Posted 27 December 2010 - 11:16 AM

    Brigadier

  • Beta Tester
  • 8226 battles
  • 4,456
  • [FHA] FHA
  • Member since:
    07-08-2010
Same here. Luckly the 45KG HE shells of my ML-20 of my ISU arent letting me down



It seems that one source says that the hull armor is 99mm thick, yet another says the hull armor is 90mm thick on one section and 120mm on another section
im getting confused here

murn123 #28 Posted 27 December 2010 - 11:31 AM

    Corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 10890 battles
  • 115
  • Member since:
    07-25-2010
I cant penetrate t-54 with my 105/68 either... good thing is ppl still dont know how effective t-54 frontal armor is    but when they do prepare to see t-54 easly owning a maus or is-4. On the oher hand i have no troubles penetrating panther2 or pershing from the front even with 100mm gun. If you ask me al T9 mediums are OP right now (t-44 has 370 less health then is-3 but t-54 has 90 health less then is-4; panther2 has 100 healht less then mnimaus). And the most OP is t-54... Count that all T9 medium have guns with better dmg + better rof then T8 tank and you see that T9 mediums can easly kill T8 heavies while for example T8 mediums cant easly kill T7 heavys ( they have a lot of trouble). T9 mediums are good for kiling T9 heavys and are somehow even ... but patch made T9 mediums count as T8 heavys so they are OP...

Darro #29 Posted 27 December 2010 - 11:57 AM

    Private

  • Beta Tester
  • 2167 battles
  • 3
  • Member since:
    09-09-2010
t54 is definitely OP

Cygnus_A #30 Posted 27 December 2010 - 11:57 AM

    Private

  • Beta Tester
  • 10097 battles
  • 45
  • Member since:
    10-23-2010
I drive a T-54 (with the upgraded turret) and I almoust never bounce shots from T9 heavies. I always make sure to run the hell away when I see those or make sure they're not aiming at me.

TempSGK #31 Posted 27 December 2010 - 11:59 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 9072 battles
  • 1,035
  • Member since:
    07-09-2010
Panther top end gun can penetrate the front hull of the T54, tested it.  
Also the stock T54 seems to suffer from ammo rack damages a lot.  Its amazing the ammo racks don't explode though.

pe2pe #32 Posted 27 December 2010 - 12:10 PM

    Private

  • Beta Tester
  • 7963 battles
  • 33
  • Member since:
    09-05-2010

View Postmurn123, on 27 December 2010 - 11:31 AM, said:

I cant penetrate t-54 with my 105/68 either... good thing is ppl still dont know how effective t-54 frontal armor is    but when they do prepare to see t-54 easly owning a maus or is-4. On the oher hand i have no troubles penetrating panther2 or pershing from the front even with 100mm gun. If you ask me al T9 mediums are OP right now (t-44 has 370 less health then is-3 but t-54 has 90 health less then is-4; panther2 has 100 healht less then mnimaus). And the most OP is t-54... Count that all T9 medium have guns with better dmg + better rof then T8 tank and you see that T9 mediums can easly kill T8 heavies while for example T8 mediums cant easly kill T7 heavys ( they have a lot of trouble). T9 mediums are good for kiling T9 heavys and are somehow even ... but patch made T9 mediums count as T8 heavys so they are OP...

I'm pretty sure u r not driving t54

Varrakk #33 Posted 27 December 2010 - 12:23 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 99
  • Member since:
    07-13-2010
I have the 105 on my Panther II, and I have very big issues penetrating the front hull.
None of my friends got a T-54 yet to test on in training battles, but from actual combat. I seem to be bouncing 3 of 4 shots with the 220pen gun.

I don't mind  the T-54 having such a powerfull armor, but it should be compensated with a severe drop in HP.
Panther II relies on its 1800hp for survival, T-54 got insane armor values and an abundance of HP to stay alive.

Hornet331 #34 Posted 27 December 2010 - 01:13 PM

    Colonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 16285 battles
  • 3,922
  • Member since:
    07-31-2010
I find this funny, heavies complain they can't penetrate, but when you play a T54 you see that every T8 tank with T9 gun can penetrate you, when they dont shot the turret and its bounces there due to the slope...  :Smile_harp:

Lancer #35 Posted 27 December 2010 - 01:17 PM

    Private

  • Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 6
  • Member since:
    10-17-2010
It can bounce the 12,8cm from VK4502 and Maus off the front hull, and both me and my friend who also has a 12,8cm VK4502 has bounced off of the side armor with little to no angling. It's gotten to the point where we will load APCR without hesitation against a T-54 where we can both penetrate IS-4's and other VK4502's reliably without it. This is clearly not broken in any shape or form no sir.

Pahech #36 Posted 27 December 2010 - 02:57 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 51
  • Member since:
    09-28-2010
You're doing it wrong if you can't penetrate the T-54 with a gun that is above 220 penetration, ie all tier 9 heavy guns.  I consider it lucky if I bounce a tier 8+ heavy tank.  Any exposing the sides will also make the T-54 very vulnerable.  I also can penetrate other T-54s with my top gun with reasonable reliability, and that thing's 219 penetration.

Try the top hatch or the turret ring area for easy penetration, where 175+ penetration will break through with reliability. If not, shooting straight at the turret or the hull plate with a 220+ penetration gun will still have a pretty reasonable chance for it to penetrate.  In an actual fight, I seriously doubt that the T-54 can face all of your team's tanks with the front at all times, so exploit the weak sides and rear.

danger1988 #37 Posted 27 December 2010 - 03:23 PM

    Corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 137
  • Member since:
    07-10-2010
the best solution is giving t-54 the true frontal hull armor (99mm not 120mm) and the true frontal turret armor(180mm not 200mm) like they have in real life .

Hornet331 #38 Posted 27 December 2010 - 03:43 PM

    Colonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 16285 battles
  • 3,922
  • Member since:
    07-31-2010

View Postdanger1988, on 27 December 2010 - 03:23 PM, said:

the best solution is giving t-54 the true frontal hull armor (99mm not 120mm) and the true frontal turret armor(180mm not 200mm) like they have in real life .

They had 120mm fornt armor (T54-1 and T54-2) and thats why you wont see a nerf, because its "historical accurate".  :Smile_harp:

Beginning with the T54-3 in 1951 they switched to 100mm, but it is said that the 100mm form 1951 was more then equal to the 120mm form 1946-47 due to quality improvements.

The Problem is that the T54 in game is using prototyp/early series states, which infact included 200mm turret armor and 120mm glacis plating yet he gets equipmnet form far later years.. like the V-55U engien form the T55 which he resived in 1958 or the D-54 which was introduced in 1954 and was the intended gun for the T62.

Pahech #39 Posted 27 December 2010 - 04:14 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 51
  • Member since:
    09-28-2010
Well, and the Panther II gets non-existent equipment and the Pershing is vastly up-gunned then its supposed weaponry.  It's just not a good argument to use "historic accuracy" and "it's not in the time line" to push for buffs/nerfs.

danger1988 #40 Posted 27 December 2010 - 05:20 PM

    Corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 137
  • Member since:
    07-10-2010

View PostHornet331, on 27 December 2010 - 03:43 PM, said:

They had 120mm fornt armor (T54-1 and T54-2) and thats why you wont see a nerf, because its "historical accurate".  :Smile_harp:

Beginning with the T54-3 in 1951 they switched to 100mm, but it is said that the 100mm form 1951 was more then equal to the 120mm form 1946-47 due to quality improvements.

The Problem is that the T54 in game is using prototyp/early series states, which infact included 200mm turret armor and 120mm glacis plating yet he gets equipmnet form far later years.. like the V-55U engien form the T55 which he resived in 1958 or the D-54 which was introduced in 1954 and was the intended gun for the T62.
_The main problem they decrease the steel thickness was the tank is too heavy to perform as they expected . So if they intended to keep that armor thickness , they must decrease it top speed and traverse speed to match with history.

_ah , if you said about quality of steel , than all german tank will have a lot better armor than their counter part. According to history information (again) , german steel is better than british steel at least 1.3 times except the composite steels that was planned to use on e-100 , it should be better than german normal steel at least 1.7 times.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users