Jump to content


Speaking about the T54E1


  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

Poll: T54E1 (37 members have cast votes)

You have to complete 250 battles in order to participate this poll.

What do you think?

  1. I think it should be buffed. (20 votes [54.05%])

    Percentage of vote: 54.05%

  2. I think it shouldn't be buffed, but stay like it is. (14 votes [37.84%])

    Percentage of vote: 37.84%

  3. I think it should be nerfed. (3 votes [8.11%])

    Percentage of vote: 8.11%

Vote Hide poll

xX_HeroWar_Xx #1 Posted 17 September 2017 - 05:37 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 4901 battles
  • 48
  • Member since:
    01-25-2016

I have this tank since a month, and I've just noticed a lot of bad things on it.

So I think to make a poll to see what do you think about it.

Write what do you think!;)


Edited by xX_HeroWar_Xx, 17 September 2017 - 05:38 PM.


RamRaid90 #2 Posted 17 September 2017 - 06:11 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 19655 battles
  • 5,840
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-14-2014

It's better than the T57 heavy IMO.

 

Has a very conservative playstyle and can be devastating when used right.

 

I think its fine as it is. What exactly are your problems with it?



xX_HeroWar_Xx #3 Posted 17 September 2017 - 06:20 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 4901 battles
  • 48
  • Member since:
    01-25-2016

View PostRamRaid90, on 17 September 2017 - 06:11 PM, said:

It's better than the T57 heavy IMO.

 

Has a very conservative playstyle and can be devastating when used right.

 

I think its fine as it is. What exactly are your problems with it?

 

The pen is awful (210 mm pen), and the mobility too (42 km/h maximum speed).

Compared with other tanks with the same tier (also autoloaders, like B-C 25 ap) this tank is not so good.


Edited by xX_HeroWar_Xx, 17 September 2017 - 06:21 PM.


vasilinhorulezz #4 Posted 17 September 2017 - 06:35 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 21061 battles
  • 866
  • Member since:
    09-26-2014

Pen is lowish and speed not that good but it unloads really fast, still most tier 9 meds (except the ones that share the same gun with their tier 10s) have around 220 pen, so not much of a difference there, personally I think it's workable. I kind of like it as it is.


Edited by vasilinhorulezz, 17 September 2017 - 06:35 PM.


Shaade_Silentpaw #5 Posted 17 September 2017 - 06:44 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 21112 battles
  • 330
  • Member since:
    10-12-2015

It needs either a speed buff, a pen buff, or a gun handling buff imo.

 

Make it do 48-50 km/h with better power/terrain resist, *OR* bring it's penetration up to par with the current state of the game (like 220-230) - *OR* Give it good gun handling and accuracy with 10 degrees of depression.

 

 

 



rurkovsky #6 Posted 17 September 2017 - 06:59 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 47037 battles
  • 443
  • Member since:
    09-11-2011

View PostRamRaid90, on 17 September 2017 - 06:11 PM, said:

It's better than the T57 heavy IMO.

 

Has a very conservative playstyle and can be devastating when used right.

 

I think its fine as it is. What exactly are your problems with it?

Maybe switching AP for APCR and add heat as gold ammo but nothing more. Tank is excellent in good hands.



Enforcer1975 #7 Posted 17 September 2017 - 07:19 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 18309 battles
  • 9,832
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014

View PostxX_HeroWar_Xx, on 17 September 2017 - 06:20 PM, said:

 

The pen is awful (210 mm pen), and the mobility too (42 km/h maximum speed).

Compared with other tanks with the same tier (also autoloaders, like B-C 25 ap) this tank is not so good.

 

Pen is actually pretty OKish if you consider the HEAT-54 having 201-219 base pen and no magazine. Don't know anything about mobility though, was planning on getting it when i grind for another tier 9 med.

buttonF1 #8 Posted 17 September 2017 - 07:36 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 23754 battles
  • 60
  • [-HWF-] -HWF-
  • Member since:
    02-14-2012
its bad...  difficult to play like medium

xX_HeroWar_Xx #9 Posted 17 September 2017 - 07:57 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 4901 battles
  • 48
  • Member since:
    01-25-2016

View PostShaade_Silentpaw, on 17 September 2017 - 06:44 PM, said:

It needs either a speed buff, a pen buff, or a gun handling buff imo.

 

Make it do 48-50 km/h with better power/terrain resist, *OR* bring it's penetration up to par with the current state of the game (like 220-230) - *OR* Give it good gun handling and accuracy with 10 degrees of depression.

 

 

 

 

I agree with you.



NiemandXL #10 Posted 17 September 2017 - 11:14 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 37955 battles
  • 2,934
  • Member since:
    01-30-2013

View PostEnforcer1975, on 17 September 2017 - 08:19 PM, said:

 

Pen is actually pretty OKish

 

No, it's not. Because the gun is really really derpy so you can pretty much forget about hitting weakspots. And with the terrible mobility and awful camo values it's not really good at flanking either so you end up having to face tanks frontally for which the AP pen most of the time isn't enough.

Capus #11 Posted 17 September 2017 - 11:53 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 38741 battles
  • 1,767
  • Member since:
    05-13-2012

I don't consider it a medium, but more like a medium heavy, a mevium if you want.

 

Problem with it is that it's utterly useless at long ranges, so it's best used in support of heavies. Of course if the heavies stink, you won't get much done. Personaly in this tank, i either wreck the enemy team, or i just fire of a clip pointlessly, digging 2 holes, scraping off a flock of paint, and shooting a duck out of the air before dying. It's a weird tank, I like it, but it is utterly pointless at range, unless you just sacrificed 2 puppies and a kitten to RNGesus.The reason for it being pointless at range are pretty simple, horrible accuracy with sub-par pen simply doesn't work at range, unless you are shooting at something like a grille. But you can absolutely forget about hitting a LFP at 200 meters, trying that is pretty much a waste of a clip.

 

When brawling though, it's pretty epic.

 

So does it need a buff, i really can't say. I'd say yes, because it's so horrible at range, on the other hand, it's pretty damn awesome at short ranges... so i guess those 2 balance eachother out.


Edited by Capus, 17 September 2017 - 11:57 PM.


suvicze #12 Posted 17 September 2017 - 11:58 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 19297 battles
  • 640
  • [CS-TB] CS-TB
  • Member since:
    08-07-2010

I played it few years ago and even then the tank wasnt anything special. The only thing "good" about it is its amazing ability to drain your credits in no time. This tank pretty much requires you to have full apcr loadout because the standard pen is simply crap and even the APCR isnt enough these days. That tank has bad mobility for medium so you cant flank properly which is a problem when you dont have the pen. T54 might have low standard pen but it has the mobility to flank and if you cant then you have 330 pen heat which can pen any tank in this game while 255 apcr pen for T54e1 isnt enough to deal with some heavies/tds frontally. Guns stats are also trash, acc is bad, aim time is terrible, soft stats mediocre at best so you cant snipe. Intra clip reload isnt anything special and the dpm is pretty bad also. It simply has nothing which would really stand out compared to the rest of the T9 meds.

bc25AP or skoda have better autoloader and overall better gun and also better mobility, the only thing worse is armor.

Rest of the meds either have superior guns, armor or mobility or even all of it.

This tank either needs a massive mobility buff so it can actually move around and flank like skoda, batchat and the like or gun buff + pen buff so you can snipe and pen enemy frontally when needed or bit of both.

In its current form it is pretty much the worst T9 med.



MrClark56 #13 Posted 18 September 2017 - 06:23 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 5693 battles
  • 2,312
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-17-2013
8k to unlock it... hope at least it is better than T69...

Baldrickk #14 Posted 18 September 2017 - 07:37 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 29023 battles
  • 12,786
  • [-TAH-] -TAH-
  • Member since:
    03-03-2013

View PostNiemandXL, on 17 September 2017 - 11:14 PM, said:

 

No, it's not. Because the gun is really really derpy so you can pretty much forget about hitting weakspots. And with the terrible mobility and awful camo values it's not really good at flanking either so you end up having to face tanks frontally for which the AP pen most of the time isn't enough.

To be fair, he was only talking about the penetration. 



Bora_BOOM #15 Posted 18 September 2017 - 07:49 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 20148 battles
  • 2,476
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    08-23-2014
Mobility buff and/or gun handling buff. The rest is more or less workable.

Search_Warrant #16 Posted 18 September 2017 - 08:35 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 25962 battles
  • 5,280
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    02-08-2011
Size of a heavy, armor of a medium, gun of a potato. really dont like playing that tank.

NervosCuNervii #17 Posted 18 September 2017 - 09:09 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 21833 battles
  • 534
  • [D57T] D57T
  • Member since:
    08-31-2013
T54E1 was bad when I played it about an year ago. Things that come to mind are very poor dispersion values, poor aim time, poor pen and bad mobility.
The pen wouldn't be that bad if it was at least point and shoot. But a poor dispersion with poor pen means that you cannot aim for weakspots reliably.

It needs buffs in the gun department, badly.

LebowskiJunior1997 #18 Posted 18 September 2017 - 09:22 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 18915 battles
  • 35
  • Member since:
    02-03-2013
I remember my post about a month or two ago with the same problem. You will have to endure it. But t57 is so worth it, trust me. 

Aikl #19 Posted 18 September 2017 - 10:16 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 25141 battles
  • 3,984
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

View PostMrClark56, on 18 September 2017 - 05:23 AM, said:

8k to unlock it... hope at least it is better than T69...

 

Not really. Clip increases from 4*240=960 to 4*390=1560, but at a tier higher with a slower, larger tank.

 

I did allright in the T69, below average in T54E1 (ongoing grind). T69's main problem is clip size and penetration, with workable-ish speed. T54E1's problem is penetration and lack of speed. There are limits to how bad an autoloader that slams out 1560 damage in 6,66s can be, but the T54E1's sure as hell pushing it. The gun has the nice combo of bad final accuracy, crappy gun handling and mediocre penetration (even with APCR). What you get is a flanking medium that can't flank. Yes, T-54 gets 201-219mm penetration - but that thing actually has speed and armor. T54E1 does not. It's slower than the 50 100 - which still has better clip damage (1800), superior penetration and only marginally worse gun handling (albeit a slower intraclip reload, but it is a tier lower after all).

 

Protip: The last T54E1 engine is not worth grinding. It's a 1,1% increase in raw horsepower for 25k experience.

 

PS: Despite being a 'meh' tank, the really annoying thing is how little you can do on certain maps and situations. Almost feels like I could go AFK for two-three minutes at the start of every match, and alt-tab during reloads.


Edited by Aikl, 18 September 2017 - 10:17 AM.


commer #20 Posted 18 September 2017 - 10:35 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 38080 battles
  • 1,995
  • Member since:
    06-14-2011

View PostxX_HeroWar_Xx, on 17 September 2017 - 06:20 PM, said:

 

The pen is awful (210 mm pen), and the mobility too (42 km/h maximum speed).

Compared with other tanks with the same tier (also autoloaders, like B-C 25 ap) this tank is not so good.

 

This tank doesn't get penned as often. While the armor is unreliable it still bounces shells which means you can live longer. T54e1 also has 300 more dpm thanks to a 10s faster reload time. 

 

It's a good tank. People just don't know how to play it. 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users