Jump to content


T-54 First Prototype review vs Type59/T-44

T-54 T54 First Prototype Prot review Type59 T-44 youtube hd

  • Please log in to reply
104 replies to this topic

SirKillsteal #81 Posted 16 April 2016 - 10:18 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 33308 battles
  • 40
  • [SAVVY] SAVVY
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011
This tank is one of the most enjoyable in the game. Type 59 is dull compared to the troll-factor of this thing. It demands an aggressive playstyle. Having tier X matches makes me think "fine, the total HP harvest has better potential". I have a 4 skill obj 140 crew, wet ammorack, rammer and vents. It is what T54 was just after the game released..... a tad too well armoured.

SIRJ4MES #82 Posted 19 April 2016 - 12:54 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 20671 battles
  • 217
  • Member since:
    01-23-2012

 

 

http://wotreplays.com/site/2630686#highway-sirj4mes-t-54_first_prototype


 

Ace Tanker in tier X battle


 

Poor Bat Chat :)



7th_Brigade #83 Posted 20 November 2016 - 12:13 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 75119 battles
  • 390
  • Member since:
    02-15-2014
fu you WG and your OP s prem

Fluffy_The_Destroyer #84 Posted 20 November 2016 - 08:56 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 53 battles
  • 4,402
  • Member since:
    12-07-2014

View Post7th_Brigade, on 20 November 2016 - 12:13 AM, said:

fu you WG and your OP s prem

 

I find this pretty garbage. slow. not enough armor on this to be even worth playing over a Liberte, the gun is BALLS, bad pen bad aimtime bad everything.

kramxel #85 Posted 24 December 2016 - 08:14 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 8219 battles
  • 166
  • Member since:
    06-22-2013

Considering picking this up, as I need a crew trainer...

 

Not really a fan of the 85 for crew grinding, and this looks half-decent, better than the bellow average Joe T-44-100.

 



pudelikael #86 Posted 25 December 2016 - 07:34 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 23552 battles
  • 738
  • Member since:
    05-15-2015
T-54 proto 1 need SMM or pen buff

PaddyOricK #87 Posted 28 December 2016 - 02:32 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 29716 battles
  • 267
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011
Although I am having great games in it my winrate dropped by over 10% from 70% to under 60% now. Tier VIII mediums are pretty much dead and too weak in tier IX and X games.

73north #88 Posted 28 December 2016 - 07:34 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 39784 battles
  • 733
  • Member since:
    10-19-2012

I have this tank , and its a good premium crew trainer , just a bit slow

however the big problem -- !! despite the gun being accurate and fast-firing - is that you get bad penetration to off-set the great armour

Tthe offensive capabilities of this tank are limited; Having only 183mm of penetration on its AP shells makes it almost impossible to penetrate higher tier opponents frontally,

and even sometimes struggling against the side armours of some vehicles.

Thankfully, its Damage Per Minute is slightly above average, and its APCR shell has a decent penetration of 235mm, which can frontally penetrate most weak spots and side armor.

Additionally, its premium vehicle status can help offset the credit cost of premium shells. It should be noted that this tank can only carry a total of 34 shells, so running out of ammunition is a possibility.


 

I find that unless you get to the flank of the enemy , its can be a nightmare to penetrate Heavy Tanks frontally .



Ziurawka #89 Posted 10 January 2017 - 02:22 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 23705 battles
  • 484
  • [NLUFA] NLUFA
  • Member since:
    08-02-2015

There is no way WG is going to buff the load capacity of the proto or the pen as it makes players burn the credit advantage the tank has. I do think it's part of the strategy.

I do think it deserves some love though as it's no longer competitive in comparison to many current tier VIII prems (Patriot :)). Maybe better gun handling ? Or slightly better mobility ? (not suggesting both).



SirDixie #90 Posted 15 January 2017 - 12:23 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 19902 battles
  • 752
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-08-2012

I like it and I'm doing OK with it, I wouldn't say I regret buying it but if I had my time again...

 

 

 

It's early days, but I think I prefer the regular T-44.



anonym_UqKyvbq3j4LM #91 Posted 19 January 2017 - 06:10 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 360
  • Member since:
    11-24-2018
Today, T-54 1 proto pointless s.h.i.t. . 183 pen and 65% games is tier X, pointless.  Weaker premium tanks

Edited by vipueesti, 19 January 2017 - 06:11 PM.


Fluffy_The_Destroyer #92 Posted 25 January 2017 - 11:06 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 53 battles
  • 4,402
  • Member since:
    12-07-2014

View Postvipueesti, on 19 January 2017 - 06:10 PM, said:

Today, T-54 1 proto pointless s.h.i.t. . 183 pen and 65% games is tier X, pointless.  Weaker premium tanks

 

Its true.. i dont see the point of armored meds when same tier heavys can have more armor with preff MM.

Radeon270 #93 Posted 27 January 2017 - 07:45 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 8170 battles
  • 4
  • Member since:
    05-10-2015

This tank is awesome... in its own tier. But this tanks plays a lot of in tier 9-10,and there is underpowered. It needs a better MM ASAP!!!.

 

BTW the armor is still awesome. Today I played on Overlord and I bounced a T110E3's shot 2x and an E-100's shot once with my turret.



Hyina #94 Posted 28 January 2017 - 11:37 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 53974 battles
  • 190
  • Member since:
    05-16-2013
Before the T44-100 came out, this gun had insane fire on the move capability, felt more agile, had more or less 50/50 mm in terms of t8 or t10 games.
 
After those missions, this tank has been mostly unplayable. 8/10 games will be t10 games, fully aimed shots fly wild, never mind autoaim on the move.
 
Well done WG, you killed this tank.


Nexuo #95 Posted 03 February 2017 - 02:05 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 21277 battles
  • 254
  • [DPG2] DPG2
  • Member since:
    09-19-2013
Can the video be updated with the new stats?
Wish WG would give the T-54 prot an engine based on the V-2-54 engine the T-44 gets. Better mobility would make it suck less in tier 10 games..

Noo_Noo #96 Posted 05 June 2017 - 02:03 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 22560 battles
  • 2,966
  • Member since:
    05-05-2013
Personally, having played his a bit now I wouldn't advise anyone to buy it. In he current meta its been power creeped into th as5 of no where. 

It just doesn't work. poor mobility, armour is not all that effective, gun is borderline useless. It has no redeeming features that make it look like a solid purchase. 

General_McMuschi #97 Posted 14 June 2017 - 05:56 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 23950 battles
  • 834
  • Member since:
    06-19-2015
When I first bought it was fun and I could play aggressively with it but now it really doesn't have much going for it. I really think it needs a buff because it is crap now. And doesn't really make money. I think it needs premium mm or pen buff.

Search_Warrant #98 Posted 14 June 2017 - 01:05 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 28313 battles
  • 6,435
  • [FLOOF] FLOOF
  • Member since:
    02-08-2011

View PostGeneral_McMuschi, on 14 June 2017 - 04:56 AM, said:

When I first bought it was fun and I could play aggressively with it but now it really doesn't have much going for it. I really think it needs a buff because it is crap now. And doesn't really make money. I think it needs premium mm or pen buff.

 

Gee, a tank thats got 20mm more hull armor at front and literally Worse than a Type59 in every aspect apart from that, would NOT need preff MM? its just a super crappy wanabe Type59 and an even worse failure of a heavy wanabe..

Noo_Noo #99 Posted 14 June 2017 - 09:37 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 22560 battles
  • 2,966
  • Member since:
    05-05-2013

View PostSearch_Warrant, on 14 June 2017 - 01:05 PM, said:

 

Gee, a tank thats got 20mm more hull armor at front and literally Worse than a Type59 in every aspect apart from that, would NOT need preff MM? its just a super crappy wanabe Type59 and an even worse failure of a heavy wanabe..

 

yeah its not clever. You forgot to mention the poor gun handling. It's supposed to be played at close quarters but really isn't up to the task. Not very good at flanking either (not that you can flank a corridor)

General_McMuschi #100 Posted 16 June 2017 - 08:34 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 23950 battles
  • 834
  • Member since:
    06-19-2015

View PostNoo_Noo, on 14 June 2017 - 09:37 PM, said:

 

yeah its not clever. You forgot to mention the poor gun handling. It's supposed to be played at close quarters but really isn't up to the task. Not very good at flanking either (not that you can flank a corridor)

 

exactly, and having bad view range, bad depression and low ammo count doesn't help. :( such a useless tank




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users