Jump to content


59-Patton


  • Please log in to reply
42 replies to this topic

DragonH19 #1 Posted 21 March 2018 - 05:30 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 18613 battles
  • 862
  • [FE_PT] FE_PT
  • Member since:
    06-05-2012

Can you guys, who know this tank better, or even have it on the garage tell me if this tank is is good enough on the current mm or it is rather mediocre?

 

I know that there are better tanks and stuff but im starting a medium tank chinese line and inwas wonderinf about buying it for the discount price....i saw videos already but was from verg old updates so atm the tank mas have been either buffed or nerfed.

 

Can yoy guys tell me how good/bad this tank is?

 

Thanks



Search_Warrant #2 Posted 21 March 2018 - 05:35 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 27192 battles
  • 6,159
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    02-08-2011
Imagine a high viewrange Type59.. buff the gun handling a bit and add a bit of pen. then make the turret TRASH and add a cupola the size of a tier 1 tank. tadaaa, 59-Patton.

Balc0ra #3 Posted 21 March 2018 - 05:35 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 66296 battles
  • 16,313
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012
How many have you seen the past few months playing with it? And there is your answer.

Panikovski #4 Posted 21 March 2018 - 05:36 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 11242 battles
  • 19
  • [-EXC-] -EXC-
  • Member since:
    07-19-2017
I have both the 59 Patton and the T34-3, I can tell you hands down the latter is better in pretty much every single scenario you can imagine. 59 Patton has two things going for it, View Range and Gun Handling, it's pretty nasty in every other aspect. I'd pick the T25 Pilot over it any day (more or less the same play style).

RamRaid90 #5 Posted 21 March 2018 - 06:08 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 21507 battles
  • 6,487
  • [D0NG] D0NG
  • Member since:
    12-14-2014

It's trash now, just as it was trash when it was released.

 

It was nothing more than a pacifier for those who whinge about type 59s.



somegras #6 Posted 21 March 2018 - 06:39 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 49062 battles
  • 8,707
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    09-04-2013
If it didnt have that huge cupolar it would be alright. But in its current state it's pretty bad.

SABAOTH #7 Posted 21 March 2018 - 06:50 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 36793 battles
  • 2,914
  • [-133-] -133-
  • Member since:
    08-28-2011

View PostSearch_Warrant, on 21 March 2018 - 05:35 PM, said:

Imagine a high viewrange Type59.. buff the gun handling a bit and add a bit of pen. then make the turret TRASH and add a cupola the size of a tier 1 tank. tadaaa, 59-Patton.

 

Sounds like garbage. I will keep my Type 59 then

DragonH19 #8 Posted 23 March 2018 - 02:36 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 18613 battles
  • 862
  • [FE_PT] FE_PT
  • Member since:
    06-05-2012
Between 59 patton and FV4202, wich one is the strongest then?

DuncaN_101 #9 Posted 23 March 2018 - 02:38 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 53226 battles
  • 1,897
  • [-B-C-] -B-C-
  • Member since:
    07-29-2011
Neither... Save your money in these cases

doriansky1 #10 Posted 23 March 2018 - 02:44 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 29143 battles
  • 229
  • [SKIL1] SKIL1
  • Member since:
    12-14-2015
That huge cupola makes your camo similar with that of a Maus. It denies the good turret armor , gun depression and view range. It's simply impossible to not be spotted because of that ...let's call it neoplasm.

DragonH19 #11 Posted 23 March 2018 - 02:48 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 18613 battles
  • 862
  • [FE_PT] FE_PT
  • Member since:
    06-05-2012

View PostDuncaN_101, on 23 March 2018 - 12:38 PM, said:

Neither... Save your money in these cases

 

But i tought FV got buffed.....i just wanted to buy in discount one of those....

Bitter_Kipper #12 Posted 23 March 2018 - 02:49 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 23747 battles
  • 393
  • Member since:
    07-10-2014

Tumor defeats the ridge line fighter as enemy can shoot before you can see over ridge. I have seen a couple wrecked trying to shot tanks over ridges and getting baited into over exposure.

I have not seen a single one in over a year. Talking of not seen tanks people still drive FCM 50ts?



Panikovski #13 Posted 23 March 2018 - 02:56 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 11242 battles
  • 19
  • [-EXC-] -EXC-
  • Member since:
    07-19-2017

View PostDragonH19, on 23 March 2018 - 02:36 PM, said:

Between 59 patton and FV4202, wich one is the strongest then?

 

Easily the FV. But you're better off with a T-44-100 or  Lorr, both are much more fun, as far as medium tanks go..

Search_Warrant #14 Posted 23 March 2018 - 03:02 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 27192 battles
  • 6,159
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    02-08-2011

View PostDragonH19, on 23 March 2018 - 01:48 PM, said:

 

But i tought FV got buffed....

 

Thats what they WANT you to think.


Edited by Search_Warrant, 23 March 2018 - 03:02 PM.


DuncaN_101 #15 Posted 23 March 2018 - 04:52 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 53226 battles
  • 1,897
  • [-B-C-] -B-C-
  • Member since:
    07-29-2011

View PostDragonH19, on 23 March 2018 - 02:48 PM, said:

 

But i tought FV got buffed.....i just wanted to buy in discount one of those....

And both are not great prem tanks and if I would have to choose I wouldn't get either 

 

The fv is still in the bottom of the list of premium Meds even after the few buffs it had



Browarszky #16 Posted 23 March 2018 - 05:01 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 16096 battles
  • 3,737
  • [I-S-L] I-S-L
  • Member since:
    12-03-2013

 

Tank encyclopedia also provides information on FAKE tanks:

 

"From the Wargaming design bureau...Video games and historical accuracy are rarely used together in the same sentence. World of Tanks is perhaps one of the worst offenders, giving rise to some interesting, yet laughable fake tanks...."

 

http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/59_Patton_Fake_Tanks



VarzA #17 Posted 23 March 2018 - 05:05 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 20561 battles
  • 1,384
  • [USAGI] USAGI
  • Member since:
    06-17-2011

View PostDragonH19, on 23 March 2018 - 02:36 PM, said:

Between 59 patton and FV4202, wich one is the strongest then?

 

Revalorise ..... really.

In the 7k gold area, the only silver printer that matters/has value is the Revalorise (1.0 might change this a little, but i doubt it).

 

Above it (in gold price), T-54 mod 1, Skorpion G, Strv S1 (might be better now with flattened maps), Lowe; T-44-100 is good too, but it is actually quite a lot more expensive, i think it is close to 9k gold, or equivalent when it goes on sale.

If you want something for less gold, t7's suck at making gold (close in price to t7 meds, repair costs around the same value, less creds making), with the exception of E25 ... but that is usually behind a paywall.

At t6, pretty much Skoda T40 (if you can make it work) and T-34-85M, Type 64 too.

At t5, Pz. T25 (can make stupid creds) and Churchill III probably.

 

PS: Some ppl mention it's vision in comparison with the T25 Pilot 1.

The t25 was my first t8 premium, got it in the marathon ....  i don't have the 59-patton, but i wouldn't get it because :

- you almost always have to flank with it because of the damn cupola, it's too easy to hit it; t25 pilot can rely on bouncing off the uppet mantlet and it has somewhat small cupolas

- if you're going to flank (which the T25 pilot is forced to do because of the low pen and low shell velocity), 192 pen is just as good as 212 pen

- i don't know how accurate the 59-patton is, but it's shell velocity is not much better than the t25 pilot's (and that one sucks)

- t25 pilot has 390m base view range, 400 on 59-patton .... and t25 pilot still will get better vision; that is because the radioman is separate on the t25 pilot, which allows you to research it earlier. If the radioman is the loader on the 59-patton, then it's still ok-ish, but it's probably the commander which means he is overworked, and it is very difficult to get both Recon, BIA and Situational Awareness on him; the difference in view range skills is compensated for by the +10 to view range the turret gets, but is it really worth it to buy a 240 alpha medium tank for this ?

 

So in all, if you want a tank to train a chinese medium crew, it will work well .... though the chinese medium line absolutely blows.

If you want a tank that will make creds, it won't make good creds until you have 3 skill crew in it, and even then it will at most make as much as the T25 pilot .... which is essentially a marathon tank.

At least the T25 pilot can make some creds before it gets vision because it has no such huge cupola .... this thing, it just plain sucks.

The hull armor and turret armor are better overall than the Pilot, but it won't help you much unless you face tons of t6's.

On the bright side, it has better reload on it's gun, 6.33s instead of 6.58s on Pilot .... but is that really that much of a difference when aimtime is far worse and it doesn't get the Pilot's great gun handling ?


Edited by VarzA, 23 March 2018 - 05:22 PM.


FluffyRedFox #18 Posted 23 March 2018 - 05:13 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 22971 battles
  • 8,394
  • Member since:
    12-05-2012

View PostDragonH19, on 23 March 2018 - 02:36 PM, said:

Between 59 patton and FV4202, wich one is the strongest then?

4202 is significantly better than the 59-patton in all aspects except for alpha and hull armour 

 

 

 



RamRaid90 #19 Posted 23 March 2018 - 05:47 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 21507 battles
  • 6,487
  • [D0NG] D0NG
  • Member since:
    12-14-2014

View PostDuncaN_101, on 23 March 2018 - 03:52 PM, said:

And both are not great prem tanks and if I would have to choose I wouldn't get either 

 

The fv is still in the bottom of the list of premium Meds even after the few buffs it had

 

FV is far and away not the worst. I would consider it one of the better tier VIII premiums. Turret armour is useable even as bottom tier and it has great pen for a medium tank.

Aikl #20 Posted 23 March 2018 - 05:52 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25554 battles
  • 4,349
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

View PostBrowarszky, on 23 March 2018 - 04:01 PM, said:

 

Tank encyclopedia also provides information on FAKE tanks:

 

"From the Wargaming design bureau...Video games and historical accuracy are rarely used together in the same sentence. World of Tanks is perhaps one of the worst offenders, giving rise to some interesting, yet laughable fake tanks...."

 

http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/59_Patton_Fake_Tanks

 

Nonsense! As the Creative Director of WoT has stated (this is almost verbatim):

"We're not really being super historically accurate game per say, we're trying, but not to the dot, to the millimeter, we're not a simulator anyway. (...) We're not gonna give the KV-5 a gun that was never ever even considered installed on it. (...) Some things that hypotethically could happen might happen in a wargame. Some things that were crazy when this thing was real, and this is a real tank, it was built in 'Nevel', we're trying not to do (anything like this)." 

01:57:08 here: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/234403166

 

I'm suure they care about historical accuracy enough to not implement something that is impossible as a functional design, completely illogical and has no actual roots in tank design. :)

 

(I don't really care much about historical accuracy 'per se', but more that Wargaming uses it whenever they find it practical.)






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users