Jump to content


T-54 needs hull nerfing.


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

Dragos_CS #181 Posted 05 August 2014 - 07:05 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 22829 battles
  • 2,081
  • [LGEND] LGEND
  • Member since:
    04-14-2011

View PostSearch_Warrant, on 05 August 2014 - 07:52 PM, said:

i killed a tiger 2 from angled side and shot a conqueror threw the turret face 2 times and kill them both. heavy tanks! then suddently T-54..1 whole tier lower shows up and suddenly he gets granted immunity to my gun? **** you WG. since when should mediums be given better armor layouts and 190+pen immunity hulls and turrets than HEAVY TANKS! balance at its finest.

They were exposing soft armor or were noobs. Maybe the T54 wasnt. Or maybe you got lucky RNG.

Sooooo light tank penetrates same tier and higher tier heavies with no problem, therefore the light tank is OP and ilunbalanced and i want it to be nerfed.



xCaptainObviousx #182 Posted 05 August 2014 - 07:11 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 23222 battles
  • 2,219
  • [4077] 4077
  • Member since:
    05-30-2011
You know, I'm fine with the T-54's hull armor... as long as they add the extra 2 tons that's currently missing and lower the top speed to 48 km/h like the 120 mm frontal armor version had

Search_Warrant #183 Posted 05 August 2014 - 07:11 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 28596 battles
  • 6,435
  • [FLOOF] FLOOF
  • Member since:
    02-08-2011
No. OP-54 bounces shots that it shouldent. heavys get penned by my crappy 170pen shells.  ether heavys are underpowered or T-54 is OP. take your pick.

Edited by Search_Warrant, 05 August 2014 - 07:11 PM.


cherry2blost #184 Posted 05 August 2014 - 07:12 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 19301 battles
  • 946
  • [BAD-A] BAD-A
  • Member since:
    12-19-2010

View PostDragos_CS, on 05 August 2014 - 05:38 PM, said:

Not knowing patch notes or weakspots = sucking hard at the game (btw did you bounce on VK45B lower plate recently?) . I cant comprehend enjoying something you are bad at. And yes, i was a potato at 800wn8, but at least i had the guts to recognize that i suck and improve, unlike you.

Why are you a loser? Because you are a noob and dont want to improve. I wont call a willing person a loser. Why is cherry2blost a loser? Because he thinks anyone with better stats is a statpadder or a re-roll.

 

Sorry buddy... but if you read back a few pages YOU were the first one to bring up stats... saying I was a terrible player for only having 1.7k avg dmg in my Cent 7... so when your intended target fights back with stat questions... all of a sudden they are the stat whore. ... man you need to get the surgery done... coz yo mouth ain't sposed to be in your behind....


Edited by cherry2blost, 05 August 2014 - 07:13 PM.


Ohaithar #185 Posted 05 August 2014 - 07:17 PM

    Lieutenant

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

View PostSearch_Warrant, on 05 August 2014 - 08:11 PM, said:

No. OP-54 bounces shots that it shouldent. heavys get penned by my crappy 170pen shells.  ether heavys are underpowered or T-54 is OP. take your pick.

 

The heavies you were shooting at don't actually have armor. The KT has mediocre armor, the Conqueror doesn't have armor either and its weakspots are the turret cheeks and LFP. At a certain angle, the right cheek is only 150mm effective. And of course the T-54 bounces anything that's under 190-200mm.

 

Please don't try using pretty badly armored heavies and compare them to one of the better armored tier 9 mediums. Doesn't work out, and with that logic I might as well complain about the E-50 having too much armor since it has more armor than the Conqueror.



7049 #186 Posted 05 August 2014 - 07:31 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 155 battles
  • 1,495
  • Member since:
    12-11-2012
The E-50 is easy to penetrate. The turret does not have much armour. The sides of the E-50 are not angled at all unlike the T-54.

Ohaithar #187 Posted 05 August 2014 - 07:54 PM

    Lieutenant

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

View Post7049, on 05 August 2014 - 08:31 PM, said:

The sides of the E-50 are not angled at all unlike the T-54.

 

The T-54 doesn't have angled sides either, even if the IS series are quite notorious for their sloped side armor.



Dragos_CS #188 Posted 05 August 2014 - 09:41 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 22829 battles
  • 2,081
  • [LGEND] LGEND
  • Member since:
    04-14-2011

View Postcherry2blost, on 05 August 2014 - 08:12 PM, said:

 

Sorry buddy... but if you read back a few pages YOU were the first one to bring up stats... saying I was a terrible player for only having 1.7k avg dmg in my Cent 7... so when your intended target fights back with stat questions... all of a sudden they are the stat whore. ... man you need to get the surgery done... coz yo mouth ain't sposed to be in your behind....

No. I said more than 1,7k wn8 is achievable even solopubbing. Never said you are terrible.



taattis #189 Posted 05 August 2014 - 11:07 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 23202 battles
  • 1,499
  • [OLENI] OLENI
  • Member since:
    03-16-2012
Only thing that T-54 needs is a gold ammo nerf but WG trolol not balanced by premium ammo.

Dragos_CS #190 Posted 05 August 2014 - 11:17 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 22829 battles
  • 2,081
  • [LGEND] LGEND
  • Member since:
    04-14-2011

View Posttaattis, on 06 August 2014 - 12:07 AM, said:

Only thing that T-54 needs is a gold ammo nerf but WG trolol not balanced by premium ammo.

Let me at least finish grinding it. Pretty please? You can molest it afterwards. :>



7049 #191 Posted 06 August 2014 - 06:40 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 155 battles
  • 1,495
  • Member since:
    12-11-2012

View PostOhaithar, on 05 August 2014 - 07:54 PM, said:

 

The T-54 doesn't have angled sides either, even if the IS series are quite notorious for their sloped side armor.

 

Now which of these two tanks is harder to penetrate front the side?

 

Edit:

You have entered a link to a website that the administrator does not allow links to

 

look at wot-shot.com

 

 

 

 

 


Edited by 7049, 06 August 2014 - 06:43 AM.


hgjwz #192 Posted 06 August 2014 - 06:51 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 13313 battles
  • 2,263
  • Member since:
    02-10-2013

View Postcherry2blost, on 05 August 2014 - 08:12 PM, said:

 

Sorry buddy... but if you read back a few pages YOU were the first one to bring up stats... saying I was a terrible player for only having 1.7k avg dmg in my Cent 7... so when your intended target fights back with stat questions... all of a sudden they are the stat whore. ... man you need to get the surgery done... coz yo mouth ain't sposed to be in your behind....

 

Hah we never told you that you are bad/newb whatever because you do 1.7k avg, what we did have issue however is when you claimed that its hard/impossible to do more when clearly ppl are doing it. (solo)


Edited by hgjwz, 06 August 2014 - 06:51 AM.


RogDodgeUK #193 Posted 10 August 2014 - 02:58 PM

    Player

  • Player
  • 10875 battles
  • 1,629
  • Member since:
    01-19-2013
moved to soviet medium tank section as this is primarily a discussion about such a tank.

christos_swc #194 Posted 11 August 2014 - 12:52 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 9259 battles
  • 1,249
  • [KOULA] KOULA
  • Member since:
    02-04-2013

View Posttaattis, on 06 August 2014 - 01:07 AM, said:

Only thing that T-54 needs is a gold ammo nerf but WG trolol not balanced by premium ammo.

This basically.

I don't know how to scream loud enough to get it through, balancing a tier 9 med that has all the tallents in the world with a low pen gun and then giving it 330 pen with premium ammo is damn as ****.

But we know they are not damn and it's intentional.

That's no more flattering.



Gruminmor #195 Posted 30 August 2014 - 02:05 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 14749 battles
  • 1,389
  • [KITTY] KITTY
  • Member since:
    12-25-2012

View PostSearch_Warrant, on 03 August 2014 - 11:56 PM, said:


Dont read my post then. i clearly stated its about the 189pen vs a mediums front armor. clearly all you care about is "hurrdurr u bed pleyer  u face wrong tenk in scout" just gtfo.

 

@Alice

no one forcing you to read my topics. dont like them? GTFO U SCRUB. im rather tierd of you douchebags coming into MY topics whining about MY posts when you are the ones coming in here reading them. no one forcing you to do it. but you find it your sworn duty to [edited]and moan about people bitching and moaning. just leave you ******

 

just wow. 


Edited by Gruminmor, 30 August 2014 - 06:35 PM.


Userext #196 Posted 01 September 2014 - 10:34 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 16259 battles
  • 897
  • Member since:
    06-12-2011

well what do we have here

 

T-54 isnt OP you crazy?

 

premium ammo might be OP a bit but when you think about the tanks you face with...

 

T-54 isnt a good medium tank(you will suffer when you start to use it)

T-54 has bad side armour try to catch it from side

it has down armour plate fire through there

if you have a gun that pens over 200mm you can pen in front of T-54,

 

but dont think that your aimless gun with rotating turret and hull will make it easier

T-54 is crapagainst any tier 9 heavy

tier 8 heavies? if they arent dumb T-54's frontal armour isnt effective

 

"but i couldnt pen frontal armour of it nerf nerf nerf wha wha wha" 13 90 using tier 7 gun tier 8 light tank and you expect to penetrate upper armour? you new?



rikkelt #197 Posted 01 September 2014 - 11:27 PM

    Second Lieutenant

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

You couldn't successfully troll the other thread so now you're trying your luck here? REALLY DUDE?

 



Legault #198 Posted 02 September 2014 - 12:28 AM

    Captain

  • Beta Tester
  • 14706 battles
  • 2,342
  • Member since:
    10-11-2010

View PostDragos_CS, on 05 August 2014 - 10:41 PM, said:

No. I said more than 1,7k wn8 is achievable even solopubbing. Never said you are terrible.

 

He is, though.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users