Jump to content


T10 Lights WTF?


  • Please log in to reply
46 replies to this topic

commer #1 Posted 28 August 2017 - 08:07 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 38081 battles
  • 1,995
  • Member since:
    06-14-2011

Tier 9 lights are for the most part playable tanks. Some are worse, some are better but tier10 ones are all retarded. Only the sheridan can hit anything but it's the size of a barn so it has no camo. The bigger problem is most other lights have derp gun levels off accuracy. OK I understan WG not wanting to make them OP but there is a huge gap between 0.30 from Leo and 0.42 !!!! on 13 105. This means it's impossible to hit weakspots above 300m and for it you get t8 gun penetration so you cant pen t8 tanks at range. 

 

I know WG is buffing lights but it is buffing them in a completely retarded way. More alpha means nothing when you pen 40% of your shots at best.



SABAOTH #2 Posted 28 August 2017 - 08:13 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 36437 battles
  • 2,914
  • [-133-] -133-
  • Member since:
    08-28-2011

View Postcommer, on 28 August 2017 - 08:07 PM, said:

Tier 9 lights are for the most part playable tanks. Some are worse, some are better but tier10 ones are all retarded. Only the sheridan can hit anything but it's the size of a barn so it has no camo. The bigger problem is most other lights have derp gun levels off accuracy. OK I understan WG not wanting to make them OP but there is a huge gap between 0.30 from Leo and 0.42 !!!! on 13 105. This means it's impossible to hit weakspots above 300m and for it you get t8 gun penetration so you cant pen t8 tanks at range. 

 

I know WG is buffing lights but it is buffing them in a completely retarded way. More alpha means nothing when you pen 40% of your shots at best.

 

Fun fact:

 

they are supposed to be scouts, but a medium scouts as well if not better.:girl:



Cobra6 #3 Posted 28 August 2017 - 08:17 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16332 battles
  • 15,550
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

Wargaming is going through ret@rded levels of reasoning trying (and failing) to justify these potato accuracies.

 

As said, mediums are just as good at scouting as lights but since WG doesn't want to actually touch the viewrange of mediums they have to make lights useless at engaging anything over 200m.

 

Again the classical Wargaming of trying to fix a situation: By treating the symptom rather than the actual disease. See also corridor meta, overbuffing of armour and premium ammo.

 

Cobra 6


Edited by Cobra6, 28 August 2017 - 08:17 PM.


laulaur #4 Posted 28 August 2017 - 08:23 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 46460 battles
  • 986
  • Member since:
    08-11-2011

Yeah, i like how the idea of WG about buffing them means giving them 3-5 shells more...... 

 

 

 

 

 


Enforcer1975 #5 Posted 28 August 2017 - 08:38 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 20725 battles
  • 10,588
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014

The accuracy on the T49 ( 90mm ) and the T-54 ltwt are actually pretty good but i can't get latter to work properly for me unlike the T49 where i switched back to the derpgun and did more or less surprisingly well in it playing with cola for a couple of games now...there are games though where you just can't hit the inside of a barn but the camo is workable, i had a few high assist games just from spotting, one almost 5k and the other almost 6k. It was probably due to my better crew but i could outspot other tier 9 LTs both of us rushing over an open field without being spotted myself. I have been playing almost exclusively tier 9 LTs for the last 250 games.


Edited by Enforcer1975, 28 August 2017 - 08:44 PM.


commer #6 Posted 28 August 2017 - 10:02 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 38081 battles
  • 1,995
  • Member since:
    06-14-2011

View PostSABAOTH, on 28 August 2017 - 08:13 PM, said:

 

Fun fact:

 

they are supposed to be scouts, but a medium scouts as well if not better.:girl:

 

Nah they still scout better. The thing is you still need to be able to fire from time to time, you know in late game situations or on city maps. The problem is their guns aren't worse than medium guns in a few areas but ALL areas. Most meds get 0.30 - 0.35 accuracy not 0.42 accuracy, Most meds get 260+ pen, not 230 pen, most meds get 330 prem round not 260 prem round. Most meds get around 3k dpm not 2k dpm. The gun on the lights is worse at everything by a huge margin. Hell the amx 13 90 has same dpm and a more accurate gun with similar pen to 13 105. The gun on the 13 90 is actually more workable in t10 games than the 13 105 because of how innacurate the 13 105 is.

 

If effect you get a tank that can only scout well but that works only with a full skill crew and it can't shoot because it has the gun suited for a t7 heavy but with no armor and hp

 

FFS. I assumed lights will be worse than meds at range fighting but a bit worse. Not so bad they make me want to play the IS4 with a damaged gun



laulaur #7 Posted 28 August 2017 - 10:16 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 46460 battles
  • 986
  • Member since:
    08-11-2011

This topic made me curious about how bad are T10 lights compared to T9 ones.

I compared AMX13-90 with AMX13-105 and i had a surprise. A bad one, 13-90 is better that 13-105....:amazed:

 

 

I guess WG 'buffing' 13-105 by giving him 3 more shells will balance this situation - you can then miss more shots because you have more ammo.....:sceptic:



brumbarr #8 Posted 28 August 2017 - 10:32 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 38626 battles
  • 6,326
  • Member since:
    07-30-2012

View Postlaulaur, on 28 August 2017 - 10:16 PM, said:

This topic made me curious about how bad are T10 lights compared to T9 ones.

I compared AMX13-90 with AMX13-105 and i had a surprise. A bad one, 13-90 is better that 13-105....:amazed:

 

 

I guess WG 'buffing' 13-105 by giving him 3 more shells will balance this situation - you can then miss more shots because you have more ammo.....:sceptic:

 

How the hell is the 13 90 better???

It clearly  shows here the 105:

-has better gun handling

-has more alpha

-is faster

-better VR.



commer #9 Posted 28 August 2017 - 11:06 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 38081 battles
  • 1,995
  • Member since:
    06-14-2011

View Postbrumbarr, on 28 August 2017 - 10:32 PM, said:

 

How the hell is the 13 90 better???

It clearly  shows here the 105:

-has better gun handling

-has more alpha

-is faster

-better VR.

 

105 actually has worse handling since it has more bloom on the move + is faster so the bloom is even bigger + it has worse final acc. 

 

Play the 13 105. I can deal with bad acc but I did not expect this to be that bad. Imagine trying to heat weakspot when your gun has an accuracy of a derp and t8 heavy pen.

 

Also only +200hp for t10? Really?


Edited by commer, 28 August 2017 - 11:07 PM.


Jumping_Turtle #10 Posted 28 August 2017 - 11:12 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 60466 battles
  • 5,194
  • [CNUT] CNUT
  • Member since:
    10-15-2013

View Postcommer, on 28 August 2017 - 11:06 PM, said:

 

Play the 13 105.
 

 

Brumbarr has 366 games in the 13 90 with 59% WR

Brumbarr has 162 games in the 13 105 with 67% WR



commer #11 Posted 28 August 2017 - 11:14 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 38081 battles
  • 1,995
  • Member since:
    06-14-2011

View PostJumping_Turtle, on 28 August 2017 - 11:12 PM, said:

 

Brumbarr has 366 games in the 13 90 with 59% WR

Brumbarr has 162 games in the 13 105 with 67% WR

 

 

I have to say I am impressed given many 65%+ wr players struggle with the 105. I still hate it. 



laulaur #12 Posted 28 August 2017 - 11:22 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 46460 battles
  • 986
  • Member since:
    08-11-2011

View Postbrumbarr, on 28 August 2017 - 09:32 PM, said:

 

How the hell is the 13 90 better???

It clearly  shows here the 105:

-has better gun handling

-has more alpha

-is faster

-better VR.

 

Actually 105 has worse gun handling.

Also -a slower turning turret:  40 degree/sec compared to 13-90's 48 degree/second

        -a slower intra-clip reload

        -slower shell velocity

        -bigger terrain ressistances

 

Indeed it has 10m more view range, more alpha and is a little faster (4 km/h more) , shorter aimtime and -2 degrees more gun depression.

 

But if you say you like it, this brings me back some hope i will like it too.

I liked 13-90 and i was looking forward to buy 13-105 and T100 when i will have money. But seeing how everyone tells T10 lights are bad and also they even look bad on technical specifications - these things made me kinda unsure if i want to buy them.

I guess i will still buy them but not now, i am gonna prioritize other tanks.

 


Edited by laulaur, 28 August 2017 - 11:28 PM.


commer #13 Posted 28 August 2017 - 11:32 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 38081 battles
  • 1,995
  • Member since:
    06-14-2011

View Postlaulaur, on 28 August 2017 - 11:22 PM, said:

 

Actually 105 has worse gun handling.

Also -a slower turning turret:  40 degree/sec compared to 13-90's 48 degree/second

        -a slower intra-clip reload

        -slower shell velocity

        -bigger terrain ressistances

 

Indeed it has 10m more view range, more alpha and is a little faster (4 km/h more) , shorter aimtime and -2 degrees more gun depression.

 

But if you say you like it, this brings me back some hope i will like it too.

I liked 13-90 and i was looking forward to buy 13-105 and T100 when i will have money. But seeing how everyone tells T10 lights are bad and also they even look bad on technical specifications - these things made me kinda unsure if i want to buy them.

I guess i will still buy them but not now, i am gonna prioritize other tanks.

 

 

So it's a sidegrade not an upgrade but it plays a trier higher.

laulaur #14 Posted 28 August 2017 - 11:38 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 46460 battles
  • 986
  • Member since:
    08-11-2011

View Postcommer, on 28 August 2017 - 10:32 PM, said:

 

So it's a sidegrade not an upgrade but it plays a trier higher.

 

Yeah, i agree on that.

It looks more like a sidegrade, it does some things better and other things worse - and all these things for just 3.000.000 more silver :sceptic:



commer #15 Posted 29 August 2017 - 12:17 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 38081 battles
  • 1,995
  • Member since:
    06-14-2011
@Brumbar - Im still curious how do you maintain such high dpg in the shitwagon. The tank cant hit anything. I will be lucky if I can get 2200dpg in mine

brumbarr #16 Posted 29 August 2017 - 09:15 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 38626 battles
  • 6,326
  • Member since:
    07-30-2012

View Postcommer, on 29 August 2017 - 12:17 AM, said:

@Brumbar - Im still curious how do you maintain such high dpg in the shitwagon. The tank cant hit anything. I will be lucky if I can get 2200dpg in mine

 

Finds opportunities to get in close and empty a clip,  stay alive and do that 3 times a game.

Cant explain much more, but I can show some replays of my last session before finishing 3 marks.

 

http://www.vbaddict....6aa28a71f378270

 



Sharp1903 #17 Posted 29 August 2017 - 09:35 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 37384 battles
  • 1,731
  • Member since:
    01-10-2014
That wn8 thing in light tanks should be changed. Spotting should be much important than damage in light tanks. Especially in tier 10, nobody wants to spot, they just camp behind and try to snipe. 

brumbarr #18 Posted 29 August 2017 - 09:38 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 38626 battles
  • 6,326
  • Member since:
    07-30-2012

View PostSharp1903, on 29 August 2017 - 09:35 AM, said:

That wn8 thing in light tanks should be changed. Spotting should be much important than damage in light tanks. Especially in tier 10, nobody wants to spot, they just camp behind and try to snipe. 

 

If someoen snipes in a tier10 light, they wont get any wn8.

Sharp1903 #19 Posted 29 August 2017 - 09:40 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 37384 battles
  • 1,731
  • Member since:
    01-10-2014

View Postbrumbarr, on 29 August 2017 - 11:38 AM, said:

 

If someoen snipes in a tier10 light, they wont get any wn8.

 

Well, they snipe at mid range mostly, spotting shoud be encouraged  

woolfie #20 Posted 29 August 2017 - 09:47 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 45737 battles
  • 331
  • Member since:
    02-06-2011

View Postlaulaur, on 28 August 2017 - 11:38 PM, said:

 

Yeah, i agree on that.

It looks more like a sidegrade, it does some things better and other things worse - and all these things for just 3.000.000 more silver :sceptic:

 

Along with much higher running/repair costs. There are as many negatives as there are positives.

Edited by woolfie, 29 August 2017 - 09:47 AM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users