Jump to content


T-54 needs hull nerfing.


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

Search_Warrant #1 Posted 03 August 2014 - 09:39 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 28065 battles
  • 6,435
  • [FLOOF] FLOOF
  • Member since:
    02-08-2011

That medium tank hull armor is bouncing my 189 pen WZ-132 shots point blank dead on no angle. im sorry but i have seen heavy tanks with worse armor layouts than that. add to the fact it has retardedly fast speed (he was going backwards and i was going downwards a hill) he was keeping up with my speeds. i couldent get around him..it was break neck speed for both of us..he was going BACKWARDS!

 

What the hell made you think giving a medium tank 189 effective frontal armor was balanced WG? it seems you still have not balanced that all around jack-of-every-tank-in-game. all its missing is arty satalite view with orbital cannon. it can scout/take far too many bounce shots/flank/lead a freaking charge with that troll armor.



M1tchy #2 Posted 03 August 2014 - 09:42 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 34364 battles
  • 2,743
  • Member since:
    04-19-2012
Edited.

Edited by M1tchy, 03 August 2014 - 09:42 PM.


Valvalecia #3 Posted 03 August 2014 - 09:48 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 11686 battles
  • 1,405
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012
quoting from one of my favorite game's community: git gud

Darkblood96 #4 Posted 03 August 2014 - 09:53 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 27691 battles
  • 1,273
  • [TAF-G] TAF-G
  • Member since:
    04-18-2013
Make a russian tank practically immune to the lower tier tanks and noone bats an eye.
Make a german tank's turret bouncy and everyone loses their minds

War_of_Genius #5 Posted 03 August 2014 - 09:53 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 28989 battles
  • 2,509
  • Member since:
    05-02-2011
Try shooting e-50s upper frontal plate with your tier 8 scout. Then come back whining again.

joyuesp #6 Posted 03 August 2014 - 09:55 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 53397 battles
  • 7,700
  • [KAZNA] KAZNA
  • Member since:
    01-22-2012
in a terrible scale of one to 10 how terrible it its?

Darkblood96 #7 Posted 03 August 2014 - 09:56 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 27691 battles
  • 1,273
  • [TAF-G] TAF-G
  • Member since:
    04-18-2013

View PostGeneral_Jack_D_Ripper, on 03 August 2014 - 09:53 PM, said:

Try shooting e-50s upper frontal plate with your tier 8 scout. Then come back whining again.


E50 has 150 upper and 80 lower. 

T54 has 120 upper and 120 lower, both at really really great angle and very bouncy. 

I'ld say T54 has better overall frontal armor combined with 240mm turret



Ohaithar #8 Posted 03 August 2014 - 09:57 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 407 battles
  • 1,918
  • Member since:
    01-15-2014

The front hull is supposed to be 200mm effective actually. Cannot be changed.

 

However, if you're wondering about where the 700 hp engine comes from...

 

Block Quote

 In the beginning of the 1960s, the OKB-29 design bureau in Omsk was working on adapting the tank to use a GTD-3T gas turbine engine developing 700 hp (522 kW). One T-55 tank fitted with this gas turbine engine passed trials but was deemed unsatisfactory and the design did not go into production.

 

Yep, the T-54 we have is running around with a turbine engine that was rejected by the USSR probably due to fuel consumption. Normally the T-55 (not a typo) had a 565 hp engine. Historically, the T-54 had about the same power/weight as the Type 59 in-game.

 

However, do remember that the E series use turbine engines too. And the Obj 140 and T-62A (T-62A used a 585 hp engine). Don't know how they got here, but WG should at least consider adding the T-54's actual engine as a stock engine. Come on, it's saddening.



Search_Warrant #9 Posted 03 August 2014 - 09:57 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 28065 battles
  • 6,435
  • [FLOOF] FLOOF
  • Member since:
    02-08-2011

View PostGeneral_Jack_D_Ripper, on 03 August 2014 - 09:53 PM, said:

Try shooting e-50s upper frontal plate with your tier 8 scout. Then come back whining again.

T-54 dont even have a LFP! thats why im pissed off! i have no weak spot to aim for! the hull is a medium hull not a heavys!


Edited by Search_Warrant, 03 August 2014 - 09:57 PM.


Darkblood96 #10 Posted 03 August 2014 - 10:02 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 27691 battles
  • 1,273
  • [TAF-G] TAF-G
  • Member since:
    04-18-2013

View PostSearch_Warrant, on 03 August 2014 - 09:57 PM, said:

T-54 dont even have a LFP! thats why im pissed off! i have no weak spot to aim for! the hull is a medium hull not a heavys!



Agreed. T54 can angle and dodge ( Angling and dodging are different things if you dont know ) shells fairly better than any other medium because low silhouette and fast traverse. 

T54 is better at brawling than any other medium on t9, and all heavies except E75, and fairly better, or at least equal to the tier 10 meds. 

And everyone knows T54 is OP as f***.


Edited by Darkblood96, 03 August 2014 - 10:06 PM.


wims80 #11 Posted 03 August 2014 - 10:02 PM

    Brigadier

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

You're not supposed to engage him from the front. Unless you shoot gold. I had a blue T-54 complaining about me penning him with gold from my KV-5 today, like I was just going to roll over and take it in the [edited]. The KV-5 only has 167mm pen with std ammo, so gold is the only option against a T-54 frontally

 

View PostDarkblood96, on 03 August 2014 - 11:02 PM, said:



Agreed. T54 can angle and dodge ( Angling and dodging are different things if you dont know ) shells fairly better than any other medium because low silhouette and fast traverse. 

T54 is better than any other medium on t9, and all heavies except E75, and fairly better, or at least equal to the tier 10 meds. 

And everyone knows T54 is OP as f***.


Actually, it's a bit under average if you're only firing standard ammo.


Edited by wims80, 03 August 2014 - 10:03 PM.


Search_Warrant #12 Posted 03 August 2014 - 10:08 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 28065 battles
  • 6,435
  • [FLOOF] FLOOF
  • Member since:
    02-08-2011
I make 170 pen on my amx13 90 work just fine. never fire gold. low pen is not a reason to complain about on a medium that can do almost anything another tank can do on the same tier.

Darkblood96 #13 Posted 03 August 2014 - 10:09 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 27691 battles
  • 1,273
  • [TAF-G] TAF-G
  • Member since:
    04-18-2013

View Postwims80, on 03 August 2014 - 10:02 PM, said:

You're not supposed to engage him from the front. Unless you shoot gold. I had a blue T-54 complaining about me penning him with gold from my KV-5 today, like I was just going to roll over and take it in the [edited]. The KV-5 only has 167mm pen with std ammo, so gold is the only option against a T-54 frontally

 


Actually, it's a bit under average if you're only firing standard ammo.

 

Every medium has medicore pen. E50 has 220 so what. I dont see much of a difference between 218 and 220. And T54 has epic gold pen. 


Edited by Darkblood96, 03 August 2014 - 10:11 PM.


wims80 #14 Posted 03 August 2014 - 10:14 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 10801 battles
  • 4,611
  • Member since:
    07-18-2012
The T-54 has 201mm pen. It's easily the worst pen of all the tier 9 tanks in the game. The other tier 9 tanks have between 10% and 30% more penetration

War_of_Genius #15 Posted 03 August 2014 - 10:14 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 28989 battles
  • 2,509
  • Member since:
    05-02-2011

View PostDarkblood96, on 03 August 2014 - 09:56 PM, said:


E50 has 150 upper and 80 lower. 

T54 has 120 upper and 120 lower, both at really really great angle and very bouncy. 

I'ld say T54 has better overall frontal armor combined with 240mm turret

 

:eyesup:

 

E-50 has way better angled armor, which leads to the same result (100mm lfp btw).

LFP has about 200mm effective armor, go check it in tank inspector or calculate it yourself.


Edited by General_Jack_D_Ripper, 03 August 2014 - 10:15 PM.


hedi2222 #16 Posted 03 August 2014 - 10:15 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 31880 battles
  • 7,836
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    08-12-2013
Excuse me but the First sentence made me stop reading .

WZ 132 vs t-54 frontly . Why ?

Dont expect it to pen anyhow , so dont bother . You can basically pen T-54's sides at any angle with 175+ pen guns . SO stop being an idiot . Stop whining . and learn aim .

Darkblood96 #17 Posted 03 August 2014 - 10:15 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 27691 battles
  • 1,273
  • [TAF-G] TAF-G
  • Member since:
    04-18-2013

[Edited] 

 


Edited by FireflyDivision, 03 August 2014 - 10:24 PM.
This post has been edited by a member of the Moderation Team, due to inappropriate content. An official notification has also been sent. -FireflyDivision


Darkblood96 #18 Posted 03 August 2014 - 10:17 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 27691 battles
  • 1,273
  • [TAF-G] TAF-G
  • Member since:
    04-18-2013
The E50 LFP is barely 180mm effective and the angle is even more negated because the tank is as tall as a [Edited] E75. 

[Edited]

Edited by FireflyDivision, 03 August 2014 - 10:26 PM.
Moderated


hedi2222 #19 Posted 03 August 2014 - 10:19 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 31880 battles
  • 7,836
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    08-12-2013

View PostDarkblood96, on 03 August 2014 - 09:15 PM, said:


[Edited]

Lfp is weaker  , same angle though , thus why the noobs have time penning it . tank is tricky to kill , but easy to he who knows the numbers .


Edited by FireflyDivision, 03 August 2014 - 10:26 PM.
Quote moderated


wims80 #20 Posted 03 August 2014 - 10:20 PM

    Brigadier

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

View PostDarkblood96, on 03 August 2014 - 11:17 PM, said:

The E50 LFP is barely 180mm effective and the angle is even more negated because the tank is as tall as a [Edited] E75. 

[Edited]

Quoted for truth for the moderator


Edited by FireflyDivision, 03 August 2014 - 10:27 PM.
Quote moderated





2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users