Jump to content


So when is T92 getting buffed?


  • Please log in to reply
33 replies to this topic

Search_Warrant #1 Posted 15 December 2017 - 01:18 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 27192 battles
  • 6,158
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    02-08-2011

Its a bad tier 7 in tier 8. T71 DA can slap this turd around left and right. its 400 viewrange is nothing special as mediums have that already at tier 8 (and heavy tanks, hi there VK100P). the mobility is actually one of the worst at tier 8 with a crappy 60 top speed and it actually turns worse than a beached whale on rough ground.

 

1k HP is on the super low end of TD's hitpoint pool and all TD's have to to is fap in a bush at the red line, but this "light tank" is forced to do dangerous stuff like "passive/active spot" and "be annoying on the flanks" but it simply cannot do that. its out the match in 2-3 shots and other light tanks like WZ-132 can ruin you for 330 hitpoints with there HE!.

 

And then we get to the worst part, the GUN! the guns shockingly bad, like tier 6 tanks get better guns than this! T-34-85M gun takes a fat dump all over this thing in everything but gun handling! the 85M has slightly better ACCURACY and 5 more gun elevation. 85M wins in Alpha, DPM,  Module Damage, Potential Damage. AND THE SHELL COST IS CHEAPER!.

 

Again another terrible thing the T92 gun has, stupidly expensive gold rounds that are garbage 210 HEAT that cost 5600 credits a shell! WHY?! the standard pen is 175! the alpha is a pathetic 150! what universe do you get that kind of stupid number for a shell? you been around the british 20 pounder too long and its effecting your brain or something.

 

Please buff this Turd WG. you sold a bad tier 7 and shoved it to teir 8 for no reason and without any form of compensated buffs.



Strappster #2 Posted 15 December 2017 - 01:22 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 24045 battles
  • 9,019
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    10-20-2015

View PostSearch_Warrant, on 15 December 2017 - 12:18 AM, said:

... this "light tank" is forced to do dangerous stuff like "passive/active spot" and "be annoying on the flanks" ...

 

It's almost as though light tanks aren't supposed to trade and brawl with enemy mediums and heavies. Huh, weird. Such a shame that absolutely no one mentioned this before the tank was sold so that you could have been prepared for its shortcomings.



Search_Warrant #3 Posted 15 December 2017 - 01:35 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 27192 battles
  • 6,158
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    02-08-2011

View PostStrappster, on 15 December 2017 - 12:22 AM, said:

 

It's almost as though light tanks aren't supposed to trade and brawl with enemy mediums and heavies. Huh, weird. Such a shame that absolutely no one mentioned this before the tank was sold so that you could have been prepared for its shortcomings.

 

Its not just about T92. its all LT's at tier 8 that face tier 10 with abysmal guns and no hitpoints to do anything with. mediums took there jobs and WG said after the changes LT's would get there "jobs back" and clearly lied.

Strappster #4 Posted 15 December 2017 - 01:42 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 24045 battles
  • 9,019
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    10-20-2015

View PostSearch_Warrant, on 15 December 2017 - 12:35 AM, said:

... clearly ...

 

 

I don't think the role's changed much at all but then I've always put scouting above dealing damage in my lights. But the point is that there was plenty of information available ahead of the release of the T92 and now you appear to be complaining that it's not as over-powered as you'd hoped it would be.



Search_Warrant #5 Posted 15 December 2017 - 02:39 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 27192 battles
  • 6,158
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    02-08-2011

View PostStrappster, on 15 December 2017 - 12:42 AM, said:

 

 

I don't think the role's changed much at all but then I've always put scouting above dealing damage in my lights. But the point is that there was plenty of information available ahead of the release of the T92 and now you appear to be complaining that it's not as over-powered as you'd hoped it would be.

 

You know what WG are like.. "if we dont see the numbers we cant touch it coz no numbers to work off"

Strappster #6 Posted 15 December 2017 - 02:53 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 24045 battles
  • 9,019
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    10-20-2015

View PostSearch_Warrant, on 15 December 2017 - 01:39 AM, said:

You know what WG are like.. "if we dont see the numbers we cant touch it coz no numbers to work off"

 

Ok, numbers - M41 Bulldog, tier 8 US light tank, standard pen (APCR) with top gun is 175, with premium (HEAT) it's 210, both give 170 alpha. The T92 has lower alpha but higher RoF and considerably better gun handling. The DPM is comparable with the T92 getting a base 2,085.71 vs. the Bulldog's 2,127.43.

 

The T71 CMCD gets lower pen (145 on standard APCR) for the same alpha as the T92. It might be nice to give the T92 the same alpha as the Bulldog but then you'd have to give it similar gun handling to remain consistent and avoid the T92 being OP compared to the regular tank.

 

The Bulldog might not be a particularly strong tier 8 light (I've no idea, I haven't played it) but going by the numbers it would seem the T92 is in the right place.



Strange_Neighbour #7 Posted 15 December 2017 - 03:05 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 2617 battles
  • 2,585
  • Member since:
    03-25-2015
lmao it's your fault for buying it, it was abundantly clear that it was going to be a bad tank just by looking at the stats. 

Search_Warrant #8 Posted 15 December 2017 - 04:41 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 27192 battles
  • 6,158
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    02-08-2011

View PostStrange_Neighbour, on 15 December 2017 - 02:05 AM, said:

lmao it's your fault for buying it, it was abundantly clear that it was going to be a bad tank just by looking at the stats. 

 

Was gifted it actually. randomly... but a turd is a turd.

 

Also the old bulldog was godlike compared to its destroyed state you see now. if T92 was anything like its counterpart in the old days it would be amazing. but no... base it off a none autoloader because everyone loves tier 8 tanks with crap guns with no punch right? people complain about tier 8 mediums and "oh look another 90mm medium tank! booring!" but its somehow fine to give a LT a gimped worthless gun with PREFF MM levels of pen and terrible 150 alpha not even teir 7 are scared of?

 

I miss the old bulldog... only LT that people dident fight 1v1 coz it actually had something a LT never had. fear factor.



Spurtung #9 Posted 15 December 2017 - 04:45 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 63763 battles
  • 5,900
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013
Wasn't it buffed already? I seem to recall the engine had 300 h.p. when I got it.

Strappster #10 Posted 15 December 2017 - 04:52 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 24045 battles
  • 9,019
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    10-20-2015

View PostSearch_Warrant, on 15 December 2017 - 03:41 AM, said:

if T92 was anything like its counterpart in the old days it would be amazing.

 

Right, so you'd prefer a tier 8 light that's balanced for tier 9. Wouldn't we all.



Search_Warrant #11 Posted 15 December 2017 - 07:11 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 27192 battles
  • 6,158
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    02-08-2011

View PostStrappster, on 15 December 2017 - 03:52 AM, said:

 

Right, so you'd prefer a tier 8 light that's balanced for tier 9. Wouldn't we all.

 

But it never was. none of them was (besides bulldog). why you think they changed the LT's to have +2mm in the end? even then they really messed up putting underpowered tier 7 lights in tier 8 when they was clearly poor performing even at tier 7.

Edited by Search_Warrant, 15 December 2017 - 07:11 AM.


Hiisi #12 Posted 15 December 2017 - 07:14 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 14978 battles
  • 266
  • [-PJ-] -PJ-
  • Member since:
    03-21-2011
T92 is quite fine. Only thing that is lagging is its agility. Agility should be buffed.

Pen is in the low end and alfa too, but exelent gunhandling, really good gundepression and ok dpm balances it out.  





Strappster #13 Posted 15 December 2017 - 07:17 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 24045 battles
  • 9,019
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    10-20-2015

View PostSearch_Warrant, on 15 December 2017 - 06:11 AM, said:

why you think they changed the LT's to have +2mm in the end?

 

Why do you think they nerfed every light at the same time?



Mosjmosh #14 Posted 15 December 2017 - 07:24 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 38457 battles
  • 274
  • Member since:
    11-23-2013
T92's heat pen is far too low and way too costly for what it is.

leggasiini #15 Posted 15 December 2017 - 09:58 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 14273 battles
  • 6,194
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012
If you buff it, it might have a small chance of doing tickle damage to Murazor's precious Maus. So don't expect it to be buffed. Ever.

mortalsatsuma #16 Posted 15 December 2017 - 10:19 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 13211 battles
  • 1,638
  • Member since:
    06-13-2014

I encountered one in my AMX 13-57GF, rammed it head on and completely flipped in onto its roof. After battle results showed as a result of the flip I damaged its engine and I believe its gun. Didn't even shoot it and it took module damage in two separate areas. 

 

It does seems like a turd though. I mean I know the 13-57 is godlike, and I suck in LTs, but the fact that I was able to ram a tank a tier higher than me to death in a LT, even if the other vehicle was also a LT, and not only that but completely flip him & damage his engine is just hilarious. I'll try to dig out the replay when I get home as it was just so much fun that game overall 



Kurat666 #17 Posted 15 December 2017 - 10:29 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 29534 battles
  • 285
  • [WEBAN] WEBAN
  • Member since:
    12-27-2011

View PostSearch_Warrant, on 15 December 2017 - 02:35 AM, said:

 

Its not just about T92. its all LT's at tier 8 that face tier 10 with abysmal guns and no hitpoints to do anything with. mediums took there jobs and WG said after the changes LT's would get there "jobs back" and clearly lied.

 

 I prefer tier VIII and IX  lights over top tiers anytime against tier X tanks...  

Edited by Kurat666, 15 December 2017 - 10:30 AM.


Search_Warrant #18 Posted 15 December 2017 - 11:13 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 27192 battles
  • 6,158
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    02-08-2011

View PostKurat666, on 15 December 2017 - 09:29 AM, said:

 

 I prefer tier VIII and IX  lights over top tiers anytime against tier X tanks...  

 

You prefer 175pen 150 alpha guns that meet tier 10?

eldrak #19 Posted 15 December 2017 - 11:36 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 47507 battles
  • 1,040
  • [NE-VO] NE-VO
  • Member since:
    01-27-2011

View Postmortalsatsuma, on 15 December 2017 - 09:19 AM, said:

I encountered one in my AMX 13-57GF, rammed it head on and completely flipped in onto its roof. After battle results showed as a result of the flip I damaged its engine and I believe its gun. Didn't even shoot it and it took module damage in two separate areas. 

 

It does seems like a turd though. I mean I know the 13-57 is godlike, and I suck in LTs, but the fact that I was able to ram a tank a tier higher than me to death in a LT, even if the other vehicle was also a LT, and not only that but completely flip him & damage his engine is just hilarious. I'll try to dig out the replay when I get home as it was just so much fun that game overall 

 

This doesn't make sense, it doesn't tell at all if the T92 is good or not.

Ramming damage is not tied to tier, it depends on speed, weight and armor thickness.

Flipping is usually due to luck.



Aikl #20 Posted 15 December 2017 - 11:42 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25552 battles
  • 4,349
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011
Here's to hoping someone will gift you a box with a Type 59 in. For the good of all of us - and well-deserved knowing your T-34-3 history. ;)




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users