Jump to content


Solution to the T-54 problem


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

MARMIST #21 Posted 28 January 2011 - 12:45 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 10646 battles
  • 811
  • Member since:
    08-24-2010

View Posttrackpin, on 22 January 2011 - 09:34 PM, said:

I want an OP dev-54! No, but seriously. I read in the forums so many people complaining about the Soviet tanks being so much better than their peers.

Is it really that bad? Or are people exaggerating?

Should I stop playing the German tanks and reroll Soviet?

Yes.

Only tanks you need to play this game are IS7 and T54. And you as a good player.

Forget the Germans. I have all of them and stopped playing them as soon as I got the Russians. The T54 is ridiculously overkill. I have 75% winning ratio with it. I consider myself a good player too.

Right now Overlord started a thread inviting everyone to point out German problems. I hope he really means it, otherwise there's no reason in going German.

If anybody replies to this, he mus be someone who, like me, has BOTH RUSSIANS AND GERMANS HEAVIES, all of them. All others will be ignored.

Stavinsky #22 Posted 28 January 2011 - 05:41 AM

    Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 12813 battles
  • 277
  • Member since:
    07-23-2010
Actualy i must say that as i like the challenge i play in the 3 tank lines.
Up to T30 in the US, IS-4 opened (and is-7 unlocked since before the 5x time)
and got as far as Ausf B for the German heavies with full equipement.

I'm playing often with a friend who own a maus and see how it perform
and i have battled a good number of is-7 and other tanks over the time.

Since the last addition, i must say that the panther 2 or the pershing
even in good numbers are not any troubles for me, as they are challenging but
not unstoppables.

And another good reason is perhaps you rarely see more than 3-4 Panther 2 or Pershing in one game
where i have had game with up to 11 T-54 (8 in my side, 3 to the other, the game was
ended before 10:00 with only the other team Maus still barely alive but 2 of the
T-54 driver were wanting to capture)


And there is a reason  why we don't see the Panther 2 and Pershing in huge numbers.
Overlord stated before the 5x exp and credits that there were a number X of perhsing
a number egal to 2 x X of Panther, and a number of 4 x X of T-54 already.

The 5x exp and credit only showed what a soft wipe would have provided
"World of T-54" instead of World of Tanks.

When it come to the game, i don't have any issue with any of the other
tanks, even artilleries with their monster damage. I just know how to
avoid them most of the time, and having a team play mind i know that
if an artillery is trying to kill me and i'm among the 'middle' tank, that
artillery is not bothering our most heavier assets. So i don't mind and
try my best to survive if i can. And if it try to kill me and i'm the top tank
i know i have moved to the wrong place, or the arty player played smartly
to have an angle where i am.

In whatever tank i am (from tiers 5 and up) i don't mind to cross the path
of a panther 2 or pershing as i know that even if i die, i will die
doing some damage to him, doing part of my job and softening
that target for other in the team to kill it.

But that is very often not true when i get against a T-54.
I almost never use auto aim (only use of it is when scouting
to keep a slow target in sight when i concentrate on my driving)
and again it's more to 'try to do damage' as an addition to my scouting.

To come back to the T-54, the trouble is that it sometimes bounce like hell
even when using some of the heavier tanks and taking carefull aim to the supposed
weakness.

I have seen so many of my 105mm shells from my Tiger II, Ferdi, Jagdpanther, or T-29/T-32/T-34
shells bounce from that frontal armor, or the turret, or just because it could turn on itself
to face me in less time that my 100% crew with aiming equipement take to have a good shooting
solution on the target...

But even then, most recently i had 2 shoots in a row bounced from a tracked T-54 with my 155mm
gun from my T30, to the very side of that stopped T-54, at an Right angle, no deflection, nothing.

Same happening with some of my Ferdinand or Ausf B last guns.
And even had my  ISU-152 152mm BL-10 bounce from the back armor of another tracked T-54.

So in my opinion the problem is that the tank got more bounces that i ever saw on the leopard
at a time (something that the dev corrected), and even more than the US tanks with their 20% more hull
where having (and that too they corrected) when using guns that are supposed to make damage to it.

What is realy problematic, is that with such a tank performing good in most of the tasks
(even the ones it's not supposed to do), and Astoundingly good in it's supposed tasks
you end up with more and more people wanting to play it. Ending with a reduced field of tanks
played in the game, and killing most of the fun you should have from a game that should have
much more highly mixed sets of tanks in each game.

Add to the equation the fact that this tank can litteraly 'dance' around heavies, and kill them without a fuss in 1vs1
as they have to catch him doing an error and be lucky they monster gun shells don't bounce, were he can actualy even 'stop to aim'
before the heavy turret even manage to catch with it, and you have a game killer instead of a 'nice addition'.

I guess what is the more frustrating for players is to see a tank getting hit again and again and again
without any damage done to it, or tracking it just to see it retrack in less time it need to say "yea got him"
and reaccelerate to full speed in no time to escape the death that would have awaited all the other tanks of the game
in such exact same situations.

Even if i killed a fair number of T-54, when i see how much concentrated firepower
you need to kill one, compared to any other tank (Maus excepted perhaps), i think
that medium tank should be revised.

Proposed solution :

I guess that just taking the 100mm armor instead of the 120mm should make a lot to ease the
problem. And have the traverse speed reduced to 40 (the same as the Pershing)
would make it more acceptable, as the Pershing to compare rarely bounce any of my shells
of gun tiers 7 and upper and reach 48km/h compared to the 56km/h of the T-54.

The last move would be to correct the match maker balance to split those T-54 evenly in both team
when the worst happen and that you have up to 5-10+ T-54 in the same game.


Those are my impressions and my 2 cents.

HighFlyer15 #23 Posted 28 January 2011 - 09:23 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 20356 battles
  • 1,163
  • [INC] INC
  • Member since:
    09-09-2010

View PostTagori, on 25 January 2011 - 07:46 AM, said:

t54 has enough weakspots if you know where they are you can easily kill them, nothing else to say to this matter anymore .... stop the whine guys and get on with it
You're adding nothing constructive to this thread, so please leave.. The tank ruins the game and nothing else to say to this matter anymore..
Everybody knows it, only drivers of the tank do not want it nerfed and the people who own one, who say they aren't OP, are the people who think they're indestructable in it and just go out and take shells to the face.

Speed reduced or repairspeed reduced.. I've tracked several T-54s and they repair within 1-2 seconds and then they're at topspeed and out of harms way again.. It's ridiculous!

Donoda #24 Posted 28 January 2011 - 09:37 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 12061 battles
  • 54
  • [GGD] GGD
  • Member since:
    07-22-2010

View PostHighFlyer15, on 28 January 2011 - 09:23 AM, said:

Speed reduced or repairspeed reduced.. I've tracked several T-54s and they repair within 1-2 seconds and then they're at topspeed and out of harms way again.. It's ridiculous!

Absolutely - their repair speed is faster than a F1 pitch stop - they can cross a whole desert village, destroying houses and trees like in a god-mode without reducing speed

enu_ #25 Posted 28 January 2011 - 05:41 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 22823 battles
  • 3,202
  • [-322-] -322-
  • Member since:
    08-18-2010

View PostStavinsky, on 28 January 2011 - 05:41 AM, said:

Proposed solution :

And have the traverse speed reduced to 40 (the same as the Pershing)
would make it more acceptable, as the Pershing to compare rarely bounce any of my shells
of gun tiers 7 and upper and reach 48km/h compared to the 56km/h of the T-54.
if they do that then T-54 will be worse than T-44. and T-44 is one tier down.
so what then?

Stavinsky #26 Posted 28 January 2011 - 11:00 PM

    Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 12813 battles
  • 277
  • Member since:
    07-23-2010

View Postillidan, on 28 January 2011 - 05:41 PM, said:

if they do that then T-54 will be worse than T-44. and T-44 is one tier down.
so what then?

It will not be worse as i still will be faster than the T-44, have more armor than the t-44,
a stronger turret and better guns than the T-44, with a better view range (last turret wise)
than the T-44. So tell me where it could be worse than a T-44 ?

Just the added speed and stronger armor could easily explain the little loss of agility.

And if you want to compare 'historicaly' you have to think about
the fact that the first series of T-54 were hull of T-44 with a new
turret and that the design was refined by more than 1400 modification
during the production of the first series.

So if they wanted to stay true to the first design you should have
a T-44 hull with just more armor and new turret, and not a
"smaller, shorter shaped tank". When you take the size
of the T-54 compared to a T-44, the T-54 is longer (40cm more) and wider (12cm more)
and the same height (5cm smaller) and it's not what we see in the game actualy.

So if they had wanted to stay true to the first series of T-54
you should have a tank that would be like the T-29 / T-32 / T-34 / T-30 series we have in game,
shortly said a little more armor with the same hull shape and size
with "just" more hp and better guns and the new turret.

I don't propose to get that far. Just to have a balance set
around that would definitively make this tank more in line
with other Tiers 9 medium, and less of a game killer.

And don't worry, even with those 'lessening' you would still
win a lot of battles but you will have to do it with skill
and not because you have an game killer balanced tank
that is actualy
- more agile than a A-20 with less speed loss
- bouncing shells better than a Leopard in the early beta
- faster than most scout tank
- retracking faster than F1 pit crew could swap tires
- with a better Damage Per Minute ratio than Tiers 9 and Tiers 10 heavies.


Now that is said, i guess my proposal is still a valable one and
could be tried. As the russian servers are actualy showing
that the supposed 'nerf' proposed that is up there since
the 15.01.2011 is not enough to stop the transformation
of WoT to WoT-54.

My 2 cents.

enu_ #27 Posted 29 January 2011 - 02:17 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 22823 battles
  • 3,202
  • [-322-] -322-
  • Member since:
    08-18-2010
well speed T-44 51km/h > T-54 48km/h
traverse T-44 i think 48 > T-54 40
track repair will be the same on T-54 and T-44 with this new patch that coming
also T-54 will be 15cm higher so it will be high as T-44, also longer than T-44 and wider than T-44, so bigger target than T-44
we also want to nerf it front hull armor for at least 20mm right?
what left then? nerf T9 gun? weakest from all Tier 9 mediums. lower it HP also? also weakest by HP from all Tier 9 mediums.

today u can kill T-54 but u must try it really hard, not so easy, no AA fire at it, but u can kill it. u can wait for them and ambush, get them in crossfire, one tank hit tracks one shoot in turret at gun, one from behind and he is dead.

same thing happens again, like when they killed T-44, after that they killed arty (Hummel was hard core killer, faster than T-44, they can kill it even more, because it way to OPed even now like S-51), now they going to kill T-54. i personally would love to see that, huge T-54 nerf so that people stop whining and start playing.

Stavinsky #28 Posted 29 January 2011 - 03:03 AM

    Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 12813 battles
  • 277
  • Member since:
    07-23-2010

View Postillidan, on 29 January 2011 - 02:17 AM, said:

well speed T-44 51km/h > T-54 48km/h
traverse T-44 i think 48 > T-54 40

track repair will be the same on T-54 and T-44 with this new patch that coming
also T-54 will be 15cm higher so it will be high as T-44, also longer than T-44 and wider than T-44, so bigger target than T-44
we also want to nerf it front hull armor for at least 20mm right?
what left then? nerf T9 gun? weakest from all Tier 9 mediums. lower it HP also? also weakest by HP from all Tier 9 mediums.

today u can kill T-54 but u must try it really hard, not so easy, no AA fire at it, but u can kill it. u can wait for them and ambush, get them in crossfire, one tank hit tracks one shoot in turret at gun, one from behind and he is dead.

same thing happens again, like when they killed T-44, after that they killed arty (Hummel was hard core killer, faster than T-44, they can kill it even more, because it way to OPed even now like S-51), now they going to kill T-54. i personally would love to see that, huge T-54 nerf so that people stop whining and start playing.



Ok let's take it one by one

T-44 with full equipement :

Traverse speed : 45 deg/sec
Max speed : 51 km/h
Hull Armor : 90 / 75 / 45
Turret Armor : 120 / 100 / 100

*******************************

T-54 with full equipement now :

Traverse speed : 48 deg/sec
Max speed : 56 km/h
Hull Armor : 120 / 80 / 45
Turret Armor : 200 / 160 / 65

*******************************

T-54 with proposed change :

Traverse speed : 40 deg/sec (potentialy 45)
Max speed : 55 km/h  (even if it's the speed of the T-55 and not t-54 no change)
Hull Armor : 100 / 80 / 45  (historical front armor)
Turret Armor : 200 / 160 / 65


********************************

And just to compare, here are some of the real values about the tank
as they claim to use those for historical accuracy AND then balance
them in the game.

Hull front, upper: 3.82 in (97 mm)  (not 120mm that was the very first prototype and was built only once)
Hull front, lower: 3.9 in (99 mm)
Hull sides, upper: 3.11 in (79 mm)
Hull sides, lower: 0.79 in (20 mm)
Hull rear: 1.81 in (46 mm)
Hull floor: 0.79 in (20 mm)
Hull top: 1.3 in (33 mm)

Turret front: 8 in (203 mm)
Turret sides: 5.9 in (150 mm)
Turret rear: 2.52 in (64 mm)
Turret top: 1.54 in (39 mm)

Road Speed
T-54: 30 mph (48 km/h)
T-55: 34 mph (55 km/h)


Here again we see they used the speed of a T-55 and not T-54.
Do i realy need to point other things ?

Now to come back to the game, the proposal that is done is only
about the agility and front armor. The retrack speed is clearly too fast
compared to most of the tanks but i could live with that if the
bugs with the over bouncing situations are corrected and if
that beast once tracked has a chance to be damaged like
almost every other tank in the game.

Even with it's higher Damage per minute than most Tiers 10 heavy,
the gun is perfectly fine and i personaly don't ask for any change about it.
I could even live with a little buff to it to compensate for the agility and armor loss.


Actualy i would just point one of your own declaration

"today u can kill T-54 but u must try it really hard,..."


That's the exact problem, the Pershing and the Panther 2 are both good and manage themselves
pretty fair in a fight. But when outnumbered they don't have the opportunity to
just 'bounce shells away like mad' and 'accelerate to full top speed in no time'
and 'leave the dangerous area'.

It's definitively not normal for a lonely tank to be able to escape 5-6 tanks
who all touched him, destroyed both it's tracks, but bounced every other shells
(from side, back and all, and no i was not auto aiming) and then just 'dash' through
the enemy base, killing 2 arty in the process and saying good bye because there was
no tank fast enough in the other team to simply stop it.

I had such situation, and i'm not the only one, much too often with T-54, and those
realy don't happen with panthers 2 and pershing, when you corner a Pershing and a panther 2
with 2 is-4 and 1 is-7, the lone one is dead, end of story. With a T-54, the driver can have
a good chance to simply drive away waving good bye with bouncing shoots.

And when you say "take them in crossfire", do you think it's normal to need 4-6 tanks have the garanty to kill
only ONE MEDIUM ? If it was the case for the Pershing and the Panther 2, then ok it could be normal
but in the actual situation it is not, the T-54 is the ONLY medium who require the kind of team play
needed to down a maus or an is-7.... So sorry, i can hardly consider it balanced, and even less when
you have up to 8-10  T-54 in one game , as it's a third of the mix, where you should find something like
2-4 maximum (like almost every other tanks, you rarely see other tiers 9 in such numbers as T-54).


Actualy it's not whinning, actualy we are in beta testing, and we are supposed to point out what is not working
and what look like potential problems that could ruin the game when it get released.
And as with all the MMO, are they MMORPG, or other PVP - Team play game , when you have ONE class who do the job
of all the other classes sometimes even better than the other classes, then yes you have something wrong somewhere.
And if that 'wrong' stay until you reach the release, you gonna have a lot of angry customers, and angry customers
usualy don't pay to play.

As i said, my 2 cents.

Hornet331 #29 Posted 29 January 2011 - 12:17 PM

    Colonel

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

View PostMARMIST, on 28 January 2011 - 12:45 AM, said:

Yes.

Only tanks you need to play this game are IS7 and T54. And you as a good player.

Forget the Germans. I have all of them and stopped playing them as soon as I got the Russians. The T54 is ridiculously overkill. I have 75% winning ratio with it. I consider myself a good player too.

Right now Overlord started a thread inviting everyone to point out German problems. I hope he really means it, otherwise there's no reason in going German.

If anybody replies to this, he mus be someone who, like me, has BOTH RUSSIANS AND GERMANS HEAVIES, all of them. All others will be ignored.

Well when even the russian devs say "Do not play on the German tanks"...  and admit that they only balance to achive a ~50% win/lose rate for the tanks and not/only partially considereing the driver skill.

http://forum.worldof...&pid=386868  <- the above links summerized by the original author in english.

You can call the t54 a highend noob tank (the devs actually do), in which even young and unskilled players can do good... now imagin what happens if you put a good (german) driver in a T54... 70%+ winrate just like so many of u have shown. And its even more obvious in clan battels where it is mandatory to have highend russian tanks...

WOTAN #30 Posted 29 January 2011 - 01:32 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 25 battles
  • 72
  • Member since:
    07-13-2010
As I wrote in the other T54 thread, T54 is very good to dominate in standard battles - there you can overwhelm opponents with simple tactics because the average level of teamplay is very low. Speed and decent protection+firepower are deadly vs slow acting and uncoordinated opponents. Therefore, broad masses of players in public battles will aspire to own the T54 and have to spend money to get it/maintain it.
I personally haven't had a big problem with this yet, as I always try to instruct my team what to do when we meet masses of mediums... and in a coordinated way, T54 is easier to kill than a T9 heavy. With my own T54, I'm a bit bored and usually rush into death, which explains my low T54 victory rate. But I start to see, that this business model/development starts to represent a problem, especially in regard to the performance of the other tier9 meds.

In clanwars and companies it's a completely different story, at least in terms of the T54. There its benefits are much lower.

Hornet331 #31 Posted 29 January 2011 - 01:53 PM

    Colonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 16285 battles
  • 3,922
  • Member since:
    07-31-2010
Na just read the russian forum, there are even now clans where its mandadtory to have highend russian tanks, else you can't join or they strongly recommend you to level russian skill tree.
The problem is how they ballance this game... with the current system your slopy playstyl leads to a stronger tank, while mine leads to a weaker tank.

Read this post: http://forum.worldof...post&pid=386868 and you'll see how they balance system works...

but in a short summery -> to worse you play a tank, the stronger it gets, cause you deviate from the 50% target winrate. On the russian server the ussr is most played faction by far, which means it got the worse, or better the most "avarage skill", of all factions, other factions are more likly to be driven by the "pro" players. And that is compensated with better tactical/technical tank stats.

This works if you only look at the avarage, but when you consider clan/world map etc. battles it just gets out of hand... if you put a avarage skilled player in a good tank, you can pit him against a good skilled player in a avarage tank, it works most of the time. But now put a equal skilled player in both tanks... ups, I see what they did there.  :Smile_harp:

Alteisen #32 Posted 29 January 2011 - 03:26 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 16739 battles
  • 1,292
  • Member since:
    10-04-2010

View PostHornet331, on 29 January 2011 - 01:53 PM, said:

This works if you only look at the avarage, but when you consider clan/world map etc. battles it just gets out of hand... if you put a avarage skilled player in a good tank, you can pit him against a good skilled player in a avarage tank, it works most of the time. But now put a equal skilled player in both tanks... ups, I see what they did there.
They can always introduce a skill rating system and make the stats of the tanks whatever they want (with appropriate weight of course). A highly skilled player in a powerful tank (compared to other same tier tank) would have to face more difficult opponents. Of course, the matchmaking system would need to be updated accordingly but it might result in more balanced and enjoyable matches.

Rumshot #33 Posted 29 January 2011 - 08:24 PM

    Private

  • Beta Tester
  • 4559 battles
  • 32
  • [THEC] THEC
  • Member since:
    01-11-2011

View PostTagori, on 25 January 2011 - 07:46 AM, said:

t54 has enough weakspots if you know where they are you can easily kill them, nothing else to say to this matter anymore .... stop the whine guys and get on with it


ooh yes?

         Battles Wins
T-54 306 190

i can se ur enjoying ur t54

Legault #34 Posted 29 January 2011 - 11:42 PM

    Captain

  • Beta Tester
  • 14706 battles
  • 2,342
  • Member since:
    10-11-2010
The T54 isn't as hard to kill as everyone makes it out to be, lol. I don't fear is that much in my King Tiger. T-54s usually win, but as far as I'm concerned they should, as they're the last medium tanks down the line and they often get put with tier 10s.


I'll give a hint; there's one weak spot on the front of T54s. Back is obviously an easy target, certain parts on the sides though hard to hit if not stationary, and the side/back of the turret are horrid.

Stavinsky #35 Posted 30 January 2011 - 11:21 AM

    Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 12813 battles
  • 277
  • Member since:
    07-23-2010

View Postikiralight, on 29 January 2011 - 11:42 PM, said:

The T54 isn't as hard to kill as everyone makes it out to be, lol. I don't fear is that much in my King Tiger. T-54s usually win, but as far as I'm concerned they should, as they're the last medium tanks down the line and they often get put with tier 10s.


I'll give a hint; there's one weak spot on the front of T54s. Back is obviously an easy target, certain parts on the sides though hard to hit if not stationary, and the side/back of the turret are horrid.


I guess you are also fully "neutral" in your declaration about T-54 ? Mmmh let see,

ikiralight stats :
Tanks Battle Victory
T-54 116 71

61% ratio wining. I guess i don't have to point further away... Nothing personal, just
another fact pointed out.


What your very own situation show is that a good driver using a T-54
will achieve very high win ratio because HE/SHE will be a decisive factor
in the winning. And when you come to the play, 1 or 2 tanks should not be WHAT
make a team win. It should be the action of the WHOLE team.

And that's where the T-54 "well doing everywhere" with no real
weakness in matter of fighting is unbalanced compared to every other
tank of the game, whatever it's tier.
But even more when compared to the other Tiers 9 Medium.

And as we are in BETA test, we are not here to "destroy and enjoy being the most powerfull players in game"
we are here supposedly to point out what's wrong in the balance, in the game mechanics,
or other bugs, so the dev team can correct those and when the game is released
it's a succes, and not a catastrophe.

If you want to take a look to a very recent "catastrophic" release, you should take
a look at the last Final Fantasy, and see how in huge troubles they are from
a lack of good beta testing and not realy taking their beta testers
informations into account.

As a player who waited very long for a good game of tank, i just realy hope
to help as much as i can to have a nicely balanced game that is very enjoyable
and profitable to the dev making it, so they could have it running for as
long as possible.

But to do that, they will have to take into account that most players
of others countries would love to play the tanks of their countries
and have their chance in game, and not being forced to play
tanks they don't like just because they are the winning factors
EVERY time they are in a game.

I have been through enough MMORPG and other MMO over the last 10+ years
to know how a game succes can suffer from a bad balance. And how fast
such errors can kill the game. So i realy hope they will
make something to have their whole tech trees worth grinding
them, and all the tank to be at least fun in some ways to play
or it will not stay up long.

My 2 cents, and my hope.

PS : Sorry for my long posts, but when i speak
from passions AND experiences, i tend to let myself go
and not count the lines lol.

ev0lutionX #36 Posted 30 January 2011 - 12:22 PM

    Private

  • Beta Tester
  • 12863 battles
  • 11
  • [0CARE] 0CARE
  • Member since:
    09-10-2010
Yes I play the T-54. I do not know my stats in one. I hope they are good. I prefer rushing it is fun, I usually die a lot. (In all tanks). Now before y'all scream NERF ! because your unupgraded, 60% crew, auto-aiming King Tigers can't easily kill one please do remember the following:

1. The matchmaking system likes to group them up - so occasionally there are 6 T-54s in one team. This is too much, as T9 med > T8 heavy. The value of the t9 mediums should be increased. For the other mediums it's probably still fine though. (Cause they are not v. good).

2. The camping mentality, the no support mentality and the no teamplay mentality that dominates WoT is also to blame. We run platoons of T9 mediums, not always just 3 T-54s mind you but also Pershings and P2. When the other team has 5+ T-54s we determine their likely area of attack and go meet them head on. We usually win, this is due to 1) Focus fire, and 2) Taking shots for eachother. Clearly any lone King Tiger hanging around in the bushes because bushes makes you invisible is gonna die once a few T-54s circle him, but he's gonna die to any T9 medium circling him. Teamplay is essential to handle large groups of 54's and other T9 mediums. One to track, the others place their shots carefully. They die in no time.

3. The reason why I love the T9 mediums in platoon is the awesome mobility. Say we just ganked most of the medium enemy tanks over in the east, we can now either push for enemy base (And run into bush campers and TD's), which would be the natural axis of attack for heavies/tds or we can go west to support our heavies currently slugging it out with the other teams heavies. Now if we help the other tanks of our teams we can assault the base with more tanks. Clearly, thats the better idea. I wouldn't do it in a heavy, but since the meds are so fast it's no problem. So we go help m out and the other team dies easily and that is why sometimes you get 15-5 and worse results.

I don't care if they for some reason listen to the DOOMsayers on the forums and nerf 54 to 44 level or buff P2 to godmode level or make the KT the best tank in the game by far, cause come release I'll play all heavy and medium lines anyway. What's annoying is the constant whining from heavy tank players. You rendered my favourite tank the T-44 useless by far. It's just a slightly better T-34-85 now postwarp-fix. Now sure you ain't got it easy cause every autoaiming idiot easily penetrates the turret of your tigers and Is-3s and I understand that frustration, but this isn't World of Heavy Tanks, World of King Tigers, World of Whining Tank Players or World of Tanks Camping in the bushes making me INVINCIBLE.

It is a teamplaying game, so start to play like a team. The reason why the T-54 is so god damn popular isn't just because it's awesome (It is kinda awesome - perhaps a nerf to armor would be justified - but it does need a bit of survivability) - it also encourages teamplay. The tank is good solo, but no real threat alone. If however you face a group of this tank, or the other T9 meds by yourself, you might as well save them the trouble and just exit battle. For the first time, we have a group of tanks who's usefullness is exponentially related to the number of them in the platoon, and the teamwork skills of the players in the platoon. In numbers, lets say a platoon of 3xT9 mediums is ten times as awesome as a single T9 medium, while a platoon of 3xT9 heavy tanks is just 3 times as awesome as a T9 heavy tank.

Can't play as a team ? Constantly hanging around in bushes ? Go find yourself a single player game. German tanks needs something - and the T-54 may need a slight nerf, but not because you dislike the way some of us prefer to play this game - fast paced, tactically and team oriented as opposed to slow paced, bush camping, invisible forest hugging solo oriented.

Stavinsky #37 Posted 30 January 2011 - 04:04 PM

    Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 12813 battles
  • 277
  • Member since:
    07-23-2010

View Postev0lutionX, on 30 January 2011 - 12:22 PM, said:

Can't play as a team ? Constantly hanging around in bushes ? Go find yourself a single player game. German tanks needs something - and the T-54 may need a slight nerf, but not because you dislike the way some of us prefer to play this game - fast paced, tactically and team oriented as opposed to slow paced, bush camping, invisible forest hugging solo oriented.


i will pick only this, as i never said i don't play as a team, i try as much as i can.

The trouble is that in such a team play as World of Tank we are supposed to have tanks
doing their jobs, and not have some tanks able to do ALL the jobs, like the T-54 is doing right now.

If it was not as troublesome and easy to use, there would not be any troubles as we would not
see up to 8 or 10 of them in the same games.

What we have right now with the T-54 is a tank that is good at everything, and excell in his
fast moving job.
Yes it can be fun, but no it's not "balanced", you don't just add a new "class" in a game
that rape all the jobs of other classes who were created before.

And no i don't ask for any buff on the Panther 2 or the Pershing, just that the
T-54 would be what a T-54 should be (they have realy over reached
it's values in the game compared to the real values, just the 100m armor
the real max speed and others details, like the 15cm height missing actualy....)

A medium heavy should be able to flank, and cause trouble, and they should be
seen in equal and reasonable numbers. And no i'm sorry, 3 tanks
working together should not be responsible for the kill of 10-12 tanks
in a random battle, you can't say that with equaly skilled people
playing that random game, supporting each other, you should be able
to simply 'roll over a flank' and kill everything like the T-54 are doing
right now because they are fast as hell, nimble as hell, and bouncing as hell.

If you say that it is normal that we need up to 5-6 tanks shooting at 1 medium
tank just to have a chance to kill it, then no that's not something balanced.
Not when you compare to some Heavies that are supposed to be able to
bear the brunt of the attacks where the medium are supposed to be damage dealer
with speed to get in position.

But of course, i guess that when we see that on every forums in every language the players
are saying this tank cause trouble, and that most of the peoples in game are reaching a point
that seeing no t-54 in a high tier game they react by saying things like
"Yes a game without T-54", like so many were doing with arty, then i think
we have to admit that there is something wrong with the tank as much as with the match making
that group them.

Now again we are in a beta test, and we have to point out what is working, what is not, and
hope the dev find ways to balance all those details in a game that will be fun to play
at every level and every line of tanks.

enu_ #38 Posted 30 January 2011 - 05:09 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 22823 battles
  • 3,202
  • [-322-] -322-
  • Member since:
    08-18-2010

View PostRumshot, on 29 January 2011 - 08:24 PM, said:

ooh yes?

         Battles Wins
T-54 306 190

i can se ur enjoying ur t54
i don't get it? what's with the stats?
r u don't enjoying driving your tanks?

i do, i enjoyed in T-44, i enjoyed in IS-3 i enjoy now in T-54 and i enjoy now in IS-4. i don't even look at stats. and if u look at stats every few minutes than u don't enjoy u play for better stats. and that is not joy

ev0lutionX #39 Posted 30 January 2011 - 05:49 PM

    Private

  • Beta Tester
  • 12863 battles
  • 11
  • [0CARE] 0CARE
  • Member since:
    09-10-2010

View PostStavinsky, on 30 January 2011 - 04:04 PM, said:

Text.

I understand your concerns regarding this tank, but the reason to why the T9 mediums are the flavor of the month these days are not simply because they can roll over anyone else easily because the tanks themselves are THAT good. The problem is much more complex than that. The main two problems as I stated over is lack of teamplay and the matchmaking tendency to group T9 meds up.

Please don't mistake me, I have nothing against the ones that try to factually question the balance of the T-54 and the other mediums - it's the ones that demand that their Tier8/7 guns should be able to do serious damage to the T9 meds I have a distaste for. Fortunately there are not many, but a lot of them are active on the forums. In comparison with the other T9 meds the T-54 is the best one. P2 needs the little buff it's getting, and Pershing could generally bounce a little more. Either that or they need to dearmor the T-54 a bit. The P2 buff sounds like the devs are trying to buff the others instead of nerfing the 54, which means they are ok with the way they perform in the public battles. However - T9 mediums are T9 tanks and should perform like a T9 tank should. If it is one thing I hate with the T8/T7 mediums it is that they perform like tier 7.5 and 6.5. Would you be happy if we gave the T9 meds the armor and hitpoints of the T9 heavy tanks with more speed and less DPS ?

Say you are free to nerf the T9 meds as you wish, at what point will you stop ? When their top guns are removed and their top speed nerfed ? Who will play them then ? And we are back to world of heavy tanks, invisible tank destroyers and SPGs with laser guided bombs. How much fun is that ?

I agree with the fact that the match weight of the tanks needs to be higher to avoid 5 or more T9 meds in the same team in a match. That is my point. They get exponentially better the more they are. 3 or 4 is a nice number - just like SPG's. They should be equal or atleast close to a Tier9 heavy in public matches. They ain't. That is why T9 med dominated teams easily wins, and why everyone plays them.

However in companies - there are nowhere as many T9 meds - which is why this is a matchmaking issue and not the tanks themselves.

Stavinsky #40 Posted 30 January 2011 - 06:13 PM

    Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 12813 battles
  • 277
  • Member since:
    07-23-2010
As i said my own proposal are not about touching the T-54 guns and damage.
Just to have it to it's true frontal armor of 100mm and that they review it's agility
to be more on part with the Pershing.

In the actual situation the T-54 has almost the same number of HP than an IS-4
once upgraded, and bounce a lot of shells from it's front.
What is causing the most troubles is the insta turning rate they have, managing
to keep that frontal armor most of the time to their targets, especialy long loading ones.
Or just dance around some obstacle, using their smaller frame
to keep firing on targets and escaping the shoots or boucing them.

With a little less agility, and a more realist front armor, those tanks would still be
able to perform well, but would have to be played like Medium, and not like heavies
like a lot of players are using them actualy AND winning with that strategy.
That's what is wrong finaly with that tank. As it outperform heavies, highjacking
their job, and rendering them useless in some situation.

I don't think people who grinded countless hours to try and have heavies, that
are supposed to be able to hold themselves in battle would be happy after the release
to discover that a medium is able to outperform them at every angle, and add
the huge mobility as a bonus. If the whole sets are not balanced you will end up with battle
consisting mostly of T-54 and nothing else, and that will ruin the game interest
fully. As this game interest is the possibilities to have so many tanks
and so many possibilities to play.
If you end up beaten all the time what ever the tank and skill you have
by some 1 or 2 type of tanks, you can bet that the player wanting to win
are going to get those, and others are going to simply leave the game out
from being bored.

As i said, i have been through a lot of mmorpg and mmo over the last 10+ years
and lots of beta, and when you don't make good balance among class / tanks / (whatever could be used)
you end up with one sided battles who loose all interest.
And a game without interest is a dead game. Could be good to avoid it to be dead
even before released, no ?

My 2 cents.


PS : EvolutionX i don't ask that my tiers 7 guns or others do damage from the front constantly
but that some tiers 8-9-10 gun could at least do some damage and not being constantly bounced.
When i see that both the BL-10 on my isu-152 or the 155mm of my T30 keep bouncing on some
T-54 turret or hull even when carefully aiming for supposed weakness, and i'm not the only one
who notice it, then i guess there is something wrong with the amount of bounce.
It would not be the first time, as the dev did the exact same bug with the
Leopard earlier in the beta as it was bouncing shells like hell when those shells
should have just riped it in 2. I don't think it is fair that they corrected
in a hurry the problem caused by the over bouncing hulls of the US heavies
or the leo, and not taking a look in what looks like exact same kind of bugs.

The other problems is that the dev instaured some performance to the T-54
that are not from the T-54, definitively not from the T-54 mark 1 or Mark 2.
And i must say i'm not realy interested to see the performance of a T-54 being
the one of a T-55 or some 1990 version of that same T-55. And i'm not the
only "would be paying player" who hope that we are not going to end up with a game
that would turn us from "would be paying customer" to "not interested anymore" players.

I have seen to much game i was having hope for over the last years being simply dying
because of such kind of stupid errors, that i realy hope WoT is not going to join that
list.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users