Jump to content


new E50m gun suggestion- 88 L100 with apcr-standard


  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

oliver101 #1 Posted 11 May 2018 - 06:15 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 32239 battles
  • 11
  • [SOS_] SOS_
  • Member since:
    06-15-2013

hi everyone, it's been quite a while now since they introduced the 8.8 L100 on the panther 2 as well as buffing it on E50, but recently i took a look at the dpm stats of the gun and it is quite good, 3k dpm in top config with no dpm boosters...

 

this got me thinking of a new 8.8cm L100 on the E50M which would then sport similair pen to the 10.5cm so somewhere around 270 maybe more, maybe less but in reality i think that the biggest factor is the dpm, because since it's creation it has always had weak dpm and by the way the meta is moving into more and more dpm(and [edited]level) i think it would be about time to give it an optional/better gun.

 

futhermore maybe slightly shorter reload/(higher alpha ca. 260) than t9 E50 because i would find it natural to have a step up in powerlevel as you advance a tier...

 

so what i am thinking

ca. 3200 dpm

240-260 alpha

average 260-280 pen standard and 300-340 gold

ca. 12.52 rounds a minute(more if less dmg per shot, otherwise the same)

1.7 sec aim time

0.28 dispersion

0.13 moving

0.13 tank traverse

0.08 when turning turret

 

125 dmg vs modules

1600m/s shell velocity

78 shell capacity with 240 alpha and 72 shell capacity with 260 alpha(same as 105mm potential dmg)(18720)

 

shell cost aprox. 700-800

 

https://tanks.gg/tank/e-50?l=71112l

 

https://tanks.gg/tank/e-50-m

 

https://tanks.gg/tan...1112l&cs=e-50-m

 

looking forward to hearing from ya all:D

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



AllTheChildren #2 Posted 11 May 2018 - 07:12 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 32732 battles
  • 157
  • [E-BAY] E-BAY
  • Member since:
    07-09-2014


xx984 #3 Posted 11 May 2018 - 07:20 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 50828 battles
  • 2,065
  • [GO-IN] GO-IN
  • Member since:
    08-11-2013
dont see why not, Option would be nice, Although id still use the 105. 

Warzey #4 Posted 11 May 2018 - 07:23 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 56215 battles
  • 792
  • [XEQTE] XEQTE
  • Member since:
    04-29-2011
I would definitely like to see this option. If nothing else it would make E-50M interesting to play.

tank276 #5 Posted 11 May 2018 - 07:31 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 47766 battles
  • 252
  • [KEKE] KEKE
  • Member since:
    08-30-2012

Sure , why not?

But isnt 3,2 k DPM a bit too much?



Balc0ra #6 Posted 11 May 2018 - 07:49 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 62749 battles
  • 14,369
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

280 pen and 3K dpm on the armor, mobility and ramming combo it already has? On the tier X.. sure if you tone down on the pen a few notches, as the DPM advantage should come at a cost vs the 270 pen gun the tier X already has.

 

On the tier 9... that's a bit to insane. As it's not a 2nd line med tbh, unlike the high pen dpm paper tier 9 meds as is. L100 already has more pen then the top gun. But a DPM increase on it to match the T-54's two gun options etc and the path they had there to around 2500 ish. Why not? They could balance one for DPM and brawling with worse dispersion etc. And one for those that like to keep their distance with more pen and less DPM. As I wish more meds on high tier had that option as the T-54 did.

 


Edited by Balc0ra, 11 May 2018 - 07:49 PM.


Strizi #7 Posted 12 May 2018 - 12:06 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 33401 battles
  • 550
  • Member since:
    06-16-2011
I dont want a litte pewpew gun i want them to buff the dpm of the 10,5 gun.

pathed91 #8 Posted 12 May 2018 - 11:11 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 17424 battles
  • 133
  • Member since:
    03-09-2014

View Posttank276, on 11 May 2018 - 07:31 PM, said:

Sure , why not?

But isnt 3,2 k DPM a bit too much?

 

I would say not enough, considering that E50 gets around 2.9 k dpm. You would rarely get the chance to use that raw dpm.

AliceUnchained #9 Posted 12 May 2018 - 11:55 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 37820 battles
  • 8,520
  • [322] 322
  • Member since:
    10-18-2011

Better suggestion, remove both ridiculous clown L/100 guns from the game...

 

And to provide some reasonable alternative; the 8.8 cm KwK 43 L/71 should get 285 mm with APCR already (and 220 - 225 mm base penetration with standard AP). Which would be the correct performance for this gun using WoT penetration criteria (if we can even call it that). There really is no need for the L/100 to exist, at all.


Edited by AliceUnchained, 12 May 2018 - 09:00 PM.


oliver101 #10 Posted 12 May 2018 - 05:08 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 32239 battles
  • 11
  • [SOS_] SOS_
  • Member since:
    06-15-2013

View Posttank276, on 11 May 2018 - 06:31 PM, said:

Sure , why not?

But isnt 3,2 k DPM a bit too much?

 

3K on tier 9 so a small increase seems reasonable

ares354 #11 Posted 12 May 2018 - 08:30 PM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 72387 battles
  • 2,565
  • Member since:
    12-05-2010

View PostAliceUnchained, on 12 May 2018 - 11:55 AM, said:

Better suggestion, remove both ridiculous clown L/100 guns from the game...

 

And to provide some reasonable alternative; the 8.8 cm KwK 43 L/71 should get 285 mm with APCR already (and 220 - 225 mm base penetration with standard AP). Which wuld be the correct performance for this gun using WoT penetration criteria (if we can even call it that). There really is no need for the L/100 to exist, at all.

 

Germans hardly get pen on gun to 90 degree plate. Funny that 76 mm gun on tier 5 Sherman had 98 mm of pen on 100 meters, in game 128. 

75 L75 have 150, over 21 less then 17 pounder. 

L100 is in game coz WG use for Germans 30 degree angle pen tables. 88 L71 now suffer a lot, from powercreep. For Tiger its ok pen, for Panther 88 its not, not anymore. 

Edited by ares354, 13 May 2018 - 01:19 AM.


Cobra6 #12 Posted 12 May 2018 - 09:02 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16295 battles
  • 14,999
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

The supposed armour it has does not function properly anymore nowadays so the balancing factor for the dreadful DPM is gone, this means it can get a competitive DPM level on the 105. Still the 88 would be an interesting option regardless.

I mean the RU meds get more effective turret armour, more DPM, more mobility and people still insist the E-50M has armour.....only against players that don't have a clue.

 

And ramming potential, it should not matter in the balancing itself since you can only use this very occasionally anyway :)

 

Cobra 6


Edited by Cobra6, 12 May 2018 - 09:10 PM.


AliceUnchained #13 Posted 12 May 2018 - 09:09 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 37820 battles
  • 8,520
  • [322] 322
  • Member since:
    10-18-2011

View Postares354, on 12 May 2018 - 08:30 PM, said:

Germans hardly get pen of gun to 90 degree plate. Funny that 76 mm gun on tier 5 Sherman had 98 mm of pen on 100 meters, in game 128. 


75 L75 have 150, over 21 less then 17 pounder. 

L100 is in game coz WG use for Germans 30 degree angle pen tables. 88 L71 now suffer a lot, from powercreep. For Tiger its ok pen, for Panther 88 its not, not anymore. 

 

Overlord tried to justify this nonsense some years ago by stating that after conversion from German 30º from the vertical to 90º, and then converting to Soviet penetration criteria would keep the performance more or less the same as the 30º performance at German criteria. Which is complete and utter nonsense, obvious to anyone with even some basic knowledge on the subject.

 

And before anyone starts blabbering about 50% criteria used by the German again; it's false, nonsense, wrong. The Germans used the following; 5 consecutive (as in, 5 in a row) successful penetrations for larger caliber guns (7.5 cm, 8.8 cm, 12.8 cm) and 3 consecutive for lower caliber, where success meant having a projectile behind the test plate in a condition fit to burst. In other words, basically fully intact (as German APHE had burster in the base of the projectile). Soviets had Initial Penetration (IP) and Certified Penetration (CP), where the former meant 80% of the projectile behind the test plate 25% of the time, and the later 80% behind the plate 75% of the time. Unfortunately, penetration tables almost never indicate whether it's IP, CP, or an average (50% success). Furthermore, some is actually extrapolated using Demarre calculation. That's why Soviet data varies so much from one source to another. It's not necessarily wrong, just a different criteria used.



ares354 #14 Posted 13 May 2018 - 01:30 AM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 72387 battles
  • 2,565
  • Member since:
    12-05-2010

View PostAliceUnchained, on 12 May 2018 - 09:09 PM, said:

 

Overlord tried to justify this nonsense some years ago by stating that after conversion from German 30º from the vertical to 90º, and then converting to Soviet penetration criteria would keep the performance more or less the same as the 30º performance at German criteria. Which is complete and utter nonsense, obvious to anyone with even some basic knowledge on the subject.

 

And before anyone starts blabbering about 50% criteria used by the German again; it's false, nonsense, wrong. The Germans used the following; 5 consecutive (as in, 5 in a row) successful penetrations for larger caliber guns (7.5 cm, 8.8 cm, 12.8 cm) and 3 consecutive for lower caliber, where success meant having a projectile behind the test plate in a condition fit to burst. In other words, basically fully intact (as German APHE had burster in the base of the projectile). Soviets had Initial Penetration (IP) and Certified Penetration (CP), where the former meant 80% of the projectile behind the test plate 25% of the time, and the later 80% behind the plate 75% of the time. Unfortunately, penetration tables almost never indicate whether it's IP, CP, or an average (50% success). Furthermore, some is actually extrapolated using Demarre calculation. That's why Soviet data varies so much from one source to another. It's not necessarily wrong, just a different criteria used.

 

Its good you expalained that to this degree. I only follow simple logic, if all guns have one criteria, then we use it for all Nations. I see no reason to buff Allies pen over Axis and vice versa. No matter how low pen chance was, in this game, that dont really matter coz we have rng factor. 

With 90 degree angle, pen of 75 L\70 gun was 185 for vertical plate. Its more then enough for Panther to work with( no comedy gun is needed). Gold can be around 245-250. Coz this tank is sniper. Source are US. For 88 L71 is 232, so both KT and Panther 88 can work with it. KT as alternative dpm gun. 

Germans did have in mind 88 L100 http://tankarchives....m-l100-pak.html so maybe even 75 L100 was consider at some point. 

Edited by ares354, 13 May 2018 - 01:30 AM.


hopeasusi #15 Posted 13 May 2018 - 08:55 AM

    Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 13002 battles
  • 218
  • Member since:
    11-24-2010

View Postares354, on 13 May 2018 - 02:30 AM, said:

 

Its good you expalained that to this degree. I only follow simple logic, if all guns have one criteria, then we use it for all Nations. I see no reason to buff Allies pen over Axis and vice versa. No matter how low pen chance was, in this game, that dont really matter coz we have rng factor. 

With 90 degree angle, pen of 75 L\70 gun was 185 for vertical plate. Its more then enough for Panther to work with( no comedy gun is needed). Gold can be around 245-250. Coz this tank is sniper. Source are US. For 88 L71 is 232, so both KT and Panther 88 can work with it. KT as alternative dpm gun. 

Germans did have in mind 88 L100 http://tankarchives....m-l100-pak.html so maybe even 75 L100 was consider at some point. 

 

Da comrade, but Germans can't have nice things. Unless of course armor on a super heavy, cause those need to be good for all the Steve's around XD

 

E50M became obsolete thanks to the russian wunderwaffe Obj. 430U. That does everything better than E50M, except snipe. 

 

 



AliceUnchained #16 Posted 13 May 2018 - 08:57 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 37820 battles
  • 8,520
  • [322] 322
  • Member since:
    10-18-2011

View Postares354, on 13 May 2018 - 01:30 AM, said:

Germans did have in mind 88 L100 http://tankarchives....m-l100-pak.html so maybe even 75 L100 was consider at some point. 

 

True, but it was a PaK. Not KwK. I honestly doubt it would work on a tank, the length and weight of the barrel would cause it to deform almost surely. Especially during motion.



Simeon85 #17 Posted 13 May 2018 - 10:40 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 1097 battles
  • 1,373
  • Member since:
    04-19-2013

View PostBalc0ra, on 11 May 2018 - 07:49 PM, said:

as the DPM advantage should come at a cost vs the 270 pen gun the tier X already has.

 

 

 

 

It already does, alpha, that is a huge disadvantage and loads of 390 alpha tanks on tier 10 have 3k DPM as it is.

 

Small guns = more DPM IMO, so the 3.2 - 3.3k base DPM the OP suggested for that gun would be the minimum IMO, you should be able to get it down to like a sub 3s reload.

 

270 pen would be fine, with another say 320 pen APCR round would be alright. 

 

I like this idea, adds something different to tier 10 and the E50M but WG would have to do it justice so it's actually a viable gun, the DPM needs to be the highest on a medium tank IMO. 



HundeWurst #18 Posted 13 May 2018 - 10:56 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 67549 battles
  • 4,169
  • [FAME] FAME
  • Member since:
    02-06-2012
With that kind of potato alpha you need at least 4k base dpm to make that work. more like 4.5k base dpm....

Zhongze_Li #19 Posted 13 May 2018 - 11:48 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 8454 battles
  • 201
  • [HAV0C] HAV0C
  • Member since:
    10-29-2015
I mount L100 on my e50 (because that makes the tank unique instead of a worse e50m), but IMO that DPM level is still not enough to rival the competitiveness level of the e50 using 105mm. So yeah like HundeWurst said, you need even higher dpm to make this work.

Edited by Zhongze_Li, 13 May 2018 - 11:49 AM.


ares354 #20 Posted 13 May 2018 - 04:54 PM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 72387 battles
  • 2,565
  • Member since:
    12-05-2010

View PostAliceUnchained, on 13 May 2018 - 08:57 AM, said:

 

True, but it was a PaK. Not KwK. I honestly doubt it would work on a tank, the length and weight of the barrel would cause it to deform almost surely. Especially during motion.

 

Mobility or gun dep of game Fv 4005 was impossible in real life, yet WG buff it and dont care. Some tank have guns is game they wouldn't fit into turret. Its game. 

As for new 88 L71 have 240 dmg, add L100 260 dmg, with based dpm 3,5 k, high pen and acc. 

Edited by ares354, 13 May 2018 - 04:54 PM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users