Jump to content


Thoughts on WZ-111 5A

WZ-111 5A 9.19.1

  • Please log in to reply
39 replies to this topic

Dr_Oolen #21 Posted 13 July 2017 - 11:44 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 22924 battles
  • 1,748
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    03-13-2012

View PostMoppedhupe, on 13 July 2017 - 11:33 AM, said:

Do you guys prefer the new WZ over the 113?

 

Well.

 

- Gun wise wz is slightly better than 113 since it has the same dpm with better alpha and the gun handling is the same on both tanks, + better gun depression to the front will make it better at getting some shots off.

- 113 is definitely faster, but the difference isnt that big.

- armor wise 113 is better versus high tiers since it can be used better (sidescraping/angling when hiding lfp) and the cupolas are harder to hit while wz has the better armor vs lower tiers since it has 215+ everywhere unangled. But the armor itself cant be really put to as much use vs t10s.

 

Overall - id say its basically the same and just about personal preference. But id give wz slight edge over 113 in randoms while 113 i can see still being better in cw.



1ncompetenc3 #22 Posted 13 July 2017 - 11:45 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 37326 battles
  • 11,492
  • Member since:
    03-18-2013
Considering the mobility, gun, elevation angles and turret armour I'd say having poor hull armour is fair. It's a heavium, not a proper heavy, and just going from its stats it appears to be damn good in that role.

RamRaid90 #23 Posted 13 July 2017 - 11:48 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 23075 battles
  • 6,826
  • [LQL] LQL
  • Member since:
    12-14-2014

View Postbrumbarr, on 13 July 2017 - 10:42 AM, said:

You mean the 113 is much better armoured all around? 

 

Wz has the gun advantage and 113 the armor advantage.

 

113 has much more useful armour, since it doesn't have shoulders which can be a nightmare when trying to angle your hull.

 

But as stated, it's not a front line heavy. At best it's a Heavium or second line support.

 

And as incompetence said, looks a damn good one at that.



Moppedhupe #24 Posted 13 July 2017 - 11:55 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 32776 battles
  • 1,717
  • [DUCKZ] DUCKZ
  • Member since:
    03-20-2013

View PostDr_Oolen, on 13 July 2017 - 11:44 AM, said:

 

Well.

 

- Gun wise wz is slightly better than 113 since it has the same dpm with better alpha and the gun handling is the same on both tanks, + better gun depression to the front will make it better at getting some shots off.

- 113 is definitely faster, but the difference isnt that big.

- armor wise 113 is better versus high tiers since it can be used better (sidescraping/angling when hiding lfp) and the cupolas are harder to hit while wz has the better armor vs lower tiers since it has 215+ everywhere unangled. But the armor itself cant be really put to as much use vs t10s.

 

Overall - id say its basically the same and just about personal preference. But id give wz slight edge over 113 in randoms while 113 i can see still being better in cw.

 

Thanks man. That's moreless the same what i thought about that tank.

 

Still not sure if I'm going to rebuy the 113 (when i bought that tank ages ago, I used it as a propper heavy... that didn't quite hit the mark :D) or maybe go back to the 111 1-4, grinding the new WZ as well and take a look which of those tanks i'll get when i'm done.



Kozzy #25 Posted 13 July 2017 - 01:22 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 39569 battles
  • 2,706
  • [RINSE] RINSE
  • Member since:
    06-29-2011

View Postshishx_the_animal, on 13 July 2017 - 09:03 AM, said:

Have you considered that the MM is rigged against this new vehicle? :thinking:

 

View PostWunderWurst, on 13 July 2017 - 09:19 AM, said:

 

ALso never forget that countless people have proven that there is that "rigged" RNG as well. Maybe buy a Fort Knox package to update your RNG again?

 

 

Guys, please don't encourage the nabsacks.  You know they just need to read the word 'rigged' and they get a semi while all frothy at the mouth...

qpranger #26 Posted 13 July 2017 - 01:25 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 34892 battles
  • 5,516
  • [HAMMY] HAMMY
  • Member since:
    12-25-2013
Well, I got the IS7 (still) and as people are openly comparing this new tank to IS7, I definitely won't bother getting it :)

Long_Range_Sniper #27 Posted 13 July 2017 - 01:38 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 34363 battles
  • 9,451
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-04-2011

Do people not play these on the test server first? I did and without even looking at the stats thought "mmm, plays a lot like my T-10".

 

So when I looked at the stats afterwards and saw that it's similar to the T-10 in many aspects, and whilst it's better on some stats the T-10 gets IX matchmaking which at the moment is sweeter I thought it wasn't worth the grind.

 

Good tank though and if you've got the crews and like the playstyle it's a good one.



kripton69 #28 Posted 13 July 2017 - 02:26 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 1208 battles
  • 392
  • [-UM] -UM
  • Member since:
    06-23-2016

Oh so they added the tank. I just inspected it in tanks.gg and compared it to 113 so is it just me or was 113 buffed as well? It appears to have -7 gun depression... I am pretty sure it had -5. Then when I check 113 directly instead of seeing it through the comparison to the new 111, it says -5. Then the game says -7 again. Tbh I'm starting to be a bit confused but the last thing I feel like doing is playing a random battle so I just ask someone to tell me how it is.

 

 

I have to ask though. Why would anyone play this over 113 if the gun dep of 113 is also -7? All it gets is 50 alpha more, a little bit better aiming time and worse mobility and base accuracy. Other than that it has worse armor layout? I mean the lower plate appears better but 225 EA still isn't great at tier 10 and the pike nose is a much bigger downside as far as I'm concerned.


Edited by kripton69, 13 July 2017 - 02:35 PM.


TrelomamiasThess #29 Posted 13 July 2017 - 02:51 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 21468 battles
  • 21
  • Member since:
    05-16-2014

View Postkripton69, on 13 July 2017 - 01:26 PM, said:

Oh so they added the tank. I just inspected it in tanks.gg and compared it to 113 so is it just me or was 113 buffed as well? It appears to have -7 gun depression... I am pretty sure it had -5. Then when I check 113 directly instead of seeing it through the comparison to the new 111, it says -5. Then the game says -7 again. Tbh I'm starting to be a bit confused but the last thing I feel like doing is playing a random battle so I just ask someone to tell me how it is.

 

 

I have to ask though. Why would anyone play this over 113 if the gun dep of 113 is also -7? All it gets is 50 alpha more, a little bit better aiming time and worse mobility and base accuracy. Other than that it has worse armor layout? I mean the lower plate appears better but 225 EA still isn't great at tier 10 and the pike nose is a much bigger downside as far as I'm concerned.

 

It's -7 on the sides. Still -5 front.

kripton69 #30 Posted 13 July 2017 - 04:13 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 1208 battles
  • 392
  • [-UM] -UM
  • Member since:
    06-23-2016

View PostTrelomamiasThess, on 13 July 2017 - 03:51 PM, said:

 

It's -7 on the sides. Still -5 front.

 

Understood. Thanks.

TheDrownedApe #31 Posted 13 July 2017 - 04:34 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 46209 battles
  • 5,837
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    03-27-2013

I'm now F2P and i can't see a reason to spend silver to rebuy the 111-4 and grind another 200k for this over the 113. Yes i have lots of free exp but as i have very limited gold now (just what i earn from playing) i can't justify spending it either.

 

Is it THAT better than the 113 or just "horses for courses"?

 

Edit: just seen Oolen's post at the top


Edited by Drownape, 13 July 2017 - 04:38 PM.


tajj7 #32 Posted 13 July 2017 - 05:01 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 26487 battles
  • 14,213
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

One of the best things IMO is they didn't try to fleece people out of too much XP for it, sub 200k is not much for a tier 10 these days, when the lights were like 40-50k more and they knew a few people would already have the tier 9.

 

I'm grinding it, about halfway, what appeals over the 113 to me is -7 gun depression to the front, the better gun handling and 490 alpha with the same DPM. Armour wise they are probably the same, yes the 113 turret probably has a slight edge and it can angle the UFP, it however has a complete cheese LFP, whereas you need over 230 pen to reliably go through the front of the WZ which allows it to bully lower tiers much easier. Even when angled you only need like 200 to go through the LFP of the 113 so it'll lose a lot of HP where the WZ won't. 



RamRaid90 #33 Posted 13 July 2017 - 06:25 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 23075 battles
  • 6,826
  • [LQL] LQL
  • Member since:
    12-14-2014

View Postkripton69, on 13 July 2017 - 03:13 PM, said:

 

Understood. Thanks.

 

121 also now has -5 all round instead of -3.5...

brumbarr #34 Posted 13 July 2017 - 09:19 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 38626 battles
  • 6,326
  • Member since:
    07-30-2012
Got 200k xp ready for when i get home from holidays, I hope it isnt as hard as the wz1114 to 3 mark, that thing was a pain in the [edited]

Edited by brumbarr, 13 July 2017 - 09:20 PM.


Zodiac1960s #35 Posted 14 July 2017 - 01:51 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 39799 battles
  • 944
  • Member since:
    03-27-2011

View PostDrownape, on 13 July 2017 - 03:34 PM, said:

I'm now F2P and i can't see a reason to spend silver to rebuy the 111-4 and grind another 200k for this over the 113. Yes i have lots of free exp but as i have very limited gold now (just what i earn from playing) i can't justify spending it either.

 

Is it THAT better than the 113 or just "horses for courses"?

 

Edit: just seen Oolen's post at the top

Why not get a premium account? 30 days, It's like two beers out. A trip to the cinema cost more than that. 


Edited by Blind_Hate, 14 July 2017 - 01:52 AM.


HunterXHunter8 #36 Posted 14 July 2017 - 02:09 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 33733 battles
  • 964
  • Member since:
    04-27-2013

good tank but another tank wg wants you to spam gold in.

 

premium shells have 90mm more pen then regular ap. pure incompetance of wg's part imo 



kripton69 #37 Posted 14 July 2017 - 02:23 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 1208 battles
  • 392
  • [-UM] -UM
  • Member since:
    06-23-2016

View Posttajj7, on 13 July 2017 - 06:01 PM, said:

One of the best things IMO is they didn't try to fleece people out of too much XP for it, sub 200k is not much for a tier 10 these days, when the lights were like 40-50k more and they knew a few people would already have the tier 9.

 

I'm grinding it, about halfway, what appeals over the 113 to me is -7 gun depression to the front, the better gun handling and 490 alpha with the same DPM. Armour wise they are probably the same, yes the 113 turret probably has a slight edge and it can angle the UFP, it however has a complete cheese LFP, whereas you need over 230 pen to reliably go through the front of the WZ which allows it to bully lower tiers much easier. Even when angled you only need like 200 to go through the LFP of the 113 so it'll lose a lot of HP where the WZ won't. 

 

Yep, real turret armor and gun depression is always a very attractive combination. I just fail to understand why Wargaming keeps pushing it and making it more common all the time, it just kills off mediums when their hunting grounds are now swarming of heavies that do the job around those areas better. Kind of sad to be honest. I think in terms of absolute power level the new WZ will be very close to what E5 was during its prime, except it could actually be even better(absolutely speaking) with the higher alpha without the gold pennable, fairly large cupola. The gun handling is somewhat worse and there's one less degree of gun depression but with almost 20% more alpha and some 230 more DPM it's not a bad trade-off and we can expect a quite similar tank.

 

On the other hand the overbuffed E5 would be like TVP now, an unbalanced and previously OP tank that nobody bothers to complain about anymore because there are even more broken tanks now and the whole metagame(all the new maps, the reduced chance of non-standard game modes, the new matchmaking) has shifted to favor Maus and Type 5 so much.


I'd probably grind it if I could be arsed to play but we'll see. Dingers TBs > randoms.


Edited by kripton69, 14 July 2017 - 02:24 AM.


TheDrownedApe #38 Posted 14 July 2017 - 08:23 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 46209 battles
  • 5,837
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    03-27-2013

View PostBlind_Hate, on 14 July 2017 - 12:51 AM, said:

Why not get a premium account? 30 days, It's like two beers out. A trip to the cinema cost more than that. 

 

Because i'm not giving anymore money to these leeches at WG. I hate their new direction (premium tank factory) and I'm doing the only thing i can; become a burden (or at least no longer funding them).

250swb #39 Posted 14 July 2017 - 08:35 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 23165 battles
  • 5,401
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-23-2015
For anybody interested QB features on YouTube a player who got 11,000 damage, and he didn't play like a unicum. He did start to struggle when his HEAT ran dry, lol :teethhappy:

Edited by 250swb, 14 July 2017 - 08:36 AM.


Ville67 #40 Posted 14 July 2017 - 03:28 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 22001 battles
  • 226
  • Member since:
    08-05-2013
WZ-111 5A is superior to IS-7 in every way, except for the armor, but it doesn't matter, since neither can withstand 340+mm HEAT





Also tagged with WZ-111 5A, 9.19.1

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users