Jump to content


Leopard PTA soft stats


  • Please log in to reply
43 replies to this topic

tumppi776 #1 Posted 09 October 2017 - 11:33 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 41285 battles
  • 2,266
  • [GG_EZ] GG_EZ
  • Member since:
    01-27-2014

Looking at tanks.gg Leopard PTA has 0.29 accuracy for the 105mm with my equipment setup and crew.

 

Still I feel and stats confirm the realized accuracy is bad. Does the worst in class moving and turning dispersion explain the discrepancy?



Cobra6 #2 Posted 09 October 2017 - 11:47 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16332 battles
  • 15,513
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

Wargaming forgot that paper tanks need great gun(handling) to make up for the fact they have no armour to make sure they have time to aim. No armour tanks need to be able to snapshot instantly.

 

CDC has the same issue, gun handling is terrible for a tank without armour.

 

Cobra 6


Edited by Cobra6, 09 October 2017 - 11:47 AM.


Poerhis #3 Posted 09 October 2017 - 12:02 PM

    Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 16939 battles
  • 212
  • [SIKA] SIKA
  • Member since:
    01-14-2011
PTA is god. PTA is awesome. 

tumppi776 #4 Posted 09 October 2017 - 12:04 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 41285 battles
  • 2,266
  • [GG_EZ] GG_EZ
  • Member since:
    01-27-2014

View PostPoerhis, on 09 October 2017 - 11:02 AM, said:

PTA is god. PTA is awesome. 

 

Jokes aside its literally the worst:

 

http://www.vbaddict....t_ratio&server=



Poerhis #5 Posted 09 October 2017 - 12:12 PM

    Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 16939 battles
  • 212
  • [SIKA] SIKA
  • Member since:
    01-14-2011

...yeah, it's not pretty. The tank has a huge skill ceiling and even if a good player uses the PTA, he will most likely do better in another tier 9 medium tank.

 

Hopefully both of the Leopards will get some love when their turn in the balance bingo comes. As long as the buff is not turret armour and -10 degrees of gun depression, as that seems to be the flavor of the year.



brumbarr #6 Posted 09 October 2017 - 12:14 PM

    Lieutenant General

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

View PostPoerhis, on 09 October 2017 - 12:12 PM, said:

...yeah, it's not pretty. The tank has a huge skill ceiling and even if a good player uses the PTA, he will most likely do better in another tier 9 medium tank.

 

Hopefully both of the Leopards will get some love when their turn in the balance bingo comes. As long as the buff is not turret armour and -10 degrees of gun depression, as that seems to be the flavor of the year.

What? The pta is awesome, its pretty much a better old amx30 prot, and that thing was the best tier9 med.



Poerhis #7 Posted 09 October 2017 - 12:17 PM

    Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 16939 battles
  • 212
  • [SIKA] SIKA
  • Member since:
    01-14-2011
Don't get me wrong, I really do love the PTA and do quite OK in it. It's just that, is there any tier 9 tank that you fear less when facing it?

Thrael7 #8 Posted 09 October 2017 - 12:21 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 22983 battles
  • 1,911
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    11-17-2012

The PTA is easy to love due to its great mobility. It's also easy to hate if you play it in WG's masterpiece that is WoT2017™.

What will happen to it eventually? It will get a ~230mm effective turret front at some point... 'cause that's the WG way.



The_Georgian_One #9 Posted 09 October 2017 - 12:23 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35180 battles
  • 1,561
  • [KOFN] KOFN
  • Member since:
    01-05-2015

View Posttumppi776, on 09 October 2017 - 12:04 PM, said:

 

Jokes aside its literally the worst:

 

http://www.vbaddict....t_ratio&server=

 

I don't get it. I guess pre-buff results impacted the data. I picked up the tank after all recent buffs and I find it very capable. Sure, you have to aim your shots, but when they hit, they leave a mark. Also, this tank doesn't bounce, which is a deadly mixture with the long exposure required to actually hit something. It simply means the tanker needs to know what their doing, but I'm very far from calling it bad.

Edited by The_Georgian_One, 09 October 2017 - 12:24 PM.


tumppi776 #10 Posted 09 October 2017 - 12:23 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 41285 battles
  • 2,266
  • [GG_EZ] GG_EZ
  • Member since:
    01-27-2014

View Postbrumbarr, on 09 October 2017 - 11:14 AM, said:

What? The pta is awesome, its pretty much a better old amx30 prot, and that thing was the best tier9 med.

 

What BS youre spewing - these are your stats dude:

 

AMX 30 IX 140 4722,85 65,00%
Leopard PT A IX 192 2236,58 54,69%

 



Thrael7 #11 Posted 09 October 2017 - 12:24 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 22983 battles
  • 1,911
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    11-17-2012

View PostThe_Georgian_One, on 09 October 2017 - 01:23 PM, said:

 

I don't get it. I guess pre-buff results impacted the data. I picked up the tank after all recent buffs and I find it very capable. Sure, you have to aim your shots, but when they hit, they leave a mark. Also, this tank doesn't bounce, which is a deadly mixture with the long exposure required to actually hit something. The package requires tanker to know what their doing, but I'm very far from calling it bad.

 

It's not bad but it is challenging. The TVPs pop out, hit all shots and disappear. The LEOs will hit if at full stop. I don't understand what keeps WG from rebalancing such paper tanks. Is there a slight possibility they would ever become OP for the masses? Not a fkn chance. After all, WG is all about BUFF-BUFF-BUFF...

Edited by Thrael7, 09 October 2017 - 12:28 PM.


tumppi776 #12 Posted 09 October 2017 - 12:25 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 41285 battles
  • 2,266
  • [GG_EZ] GG_EZ
  • Member since:
    01-27-2014

View PostThe_Georgian_One, on 09 October 2017 - 11:23 AM, said:

 

... but I'm very far from calling it bad.

 

On semantics: Literally worst <> bad

The_Georgian_One #13 Posted 09 October 2017 - 12:26 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35180 battles
  • 1,561
  • [KOFN] KOFN
  • Member since:
    01-05-2015

View Posttumppi776, on 09 October 2017 - 12:23 PM, said:

 

What BS youre spewing - these are your stats dude:

 

AMX 30 IX 140 4722,85 65,00%
Leopard PT A IX 192 2236,58 54,69%

 

 

Question is WHEN the data comes from. I'd agree the pre-change AMX and post-buff Leo were similar tanks.

brumbarr #14 Posted 09 October 2017 - 12:31 PM

    Lieutenant General

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

View Posttumppi776, on 09 October 2017 - 12:23 PM, said:

 

What BS youre spewing - these are your stats dude:

 

AMX 30 IX 140 4722,85 65,00%
Leopard PT A IX 192 2236,58 54,69%

 

Maybe because 

1) i got the amx this year and pta a year ago and i became a better player

2) i played the pre buff pta

3) i stock grinded the leo and free xped the amx modules



brumbarr #15 Posted 09 October 2017 - 12:33 PM

    Lieutenant General

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

View PostPoerhis, on 09 October 2017 - 12:17 PM, said:

Don't get me wrong, I really do love the PTA and do quite OK in it. It's just that, is there any tier 9 tank that you fear less when facing it?

Pretty much all tier9 tanks that dont have autoloaders, dont hit for 750 or arent superheavys.



Poerhis #16 Posted 09 October 2017 - 12:56 PM

    Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 16939 battles
  • 212
  • [SIKA] SIKA
  • Member since:
    01-14-2011

View Postbrumbarr, on 09 October 2017 - 02:33 PM, said:

Pretty much all tier9 tanks that dont have autoloaders, dont hit for 750 or arent superheavys.

 

Mate that is baloney. You fear the PTA more than say an E75? I mean, the average PTA driver almost detonates his own ammo rack and has no camo skill...

Edited by Poerhis, 09 October 2017 - 12:58 PM.


brumbarr #17 Posted 09 October 2017 - 01:06 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 38626 battles
  • 6,326
  • Member since:
    07-30-2012
I dont fear any tank that isnt one of the ones i mentioned.

Poerhis #18 Posted 09 October 2017 - 01:12 PM

    Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 16939 battles
  • 212
  • [SIKA] SIKA
  • Member since:
    01-14-2011
Yeah but let's compare this to having your butt probed. Although you can deal probably with it in any case, I think everyone has a preference over what thickness they want the probing tube to be. I like mine as thin as possible, preferably with an anesthetic.

The_Georgian_One #19 Posted 09 October 2017 - 01:27 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35180 battles
  • 1,561
  • [KOFN] KOFN
  • Member since:
    01-05-2015

View PostPoerhis, on 09 October 2017 - 01:12 PM, said:

Yeah but let's compare this to having your butt probed. Although you can deal probably with it in any case, I think everyone has a preference over what thickness they want the probing tube to be. I like mine as thin as possible, preferably with an anesthetic.

 

That's an interesting experience, never tried it.

 

Coming back to PTA - I'd rather be in this tank vs any other in tier 9 (bar AMX30 maybe) in any matchmaking. Whereas E75 may shine when top tier, Leo doesn't care if it has to crap (nomen, omen, using your comparison), on tier 7s or tier 10s.

 

I have 2300 AVG damage/game and 61% WR in mine, though the sample is small, only 85 battles.


Edited by The_Georgian_One, 09 October 2017 - 01:27 PM.


tumppi776 #20 Posted 09 October 2017 - 01:31 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 41285 battles
  • 2,266
  • [GG_EZ] GG_EZ
  • Member since:
    01-27-2014

View Postbrumbarr, on 09 October 2017 - 11:31 AM, said:

Maybe because 

1) i got the amx this year and pta a year ago and i became a better player

2) i played the pre buff pta

3) i stock grinded the leo and free xped the amx modules

 

View Postbrumbarr, on 09 October 2017 - 11:31 AM, said:

Maybe because 

1) i got the amx this year and pta a year ago and i became a better player

2) i played the pre buff pta

3) i stock grinded the leo and free xped the amx modules

Main thing propably is that you played it yourself and had awesome results then? bcs the claimed awesomeness is not showing






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users