Jump to content


Centurions are the new Leo PTA?


  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

PoIestar #1 Posted 20 July 2018 - 09:25 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 31707 battles
  • 4,078
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    05-02-2013

So the story of the Leo PTA was that when you get penned in the side, it wasn't the question of whether your ammorack was damaged because it always did. 

 

I currently own two Centurions, the 5/1 and the 7/1. And they both have the exact same problem, but different: get penned anywhere with every shot and your ammorack damages. 

Now that's okay, I carry a repair kit. But the fun part is that the next shot just guaranteed blows you up. I've had a dozen of recent games where I got shot at for the first time, didn't repair my ammorack, because I got detracked and thought I could wait until the consumables refresh.

 

Wrong: get ammoracked in the Centurion and the next shot is a guaranteed blow-up. And yes, I'm running safe stowage.

 

Is this something known? I've been driving Centurions for over 3 years now and I never noticed this. I mean, the ammoracks where a bit weak but safe stowage fixes that easily. Now it's become a giant 2-shot lottery. It's quite annoying, I'm even considering running 2 repair kits. Although that's a questionable decision too, considering the fire hazard from a Centurion.


Edited by PoIestar, 20 July 2018 - 09:27 AM.


signal11th #2 Posted 20 July 2018 - 09:30 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 37042 battles
  • 5,695
  • [S3AL] S3AL
  • Member since:
    07-14-2011
Dunno mate, pretty much I've always felt any british tank has a very dodgy ammo rack, I've just taken it as the norm. 

pathed91 #3 Posted 20 July 2018 - 09:38 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 17990 battles
  • 229
  • Member since:
    03-09-2014

Didn't Jingles a long time ago say that he considered that the ammo rack was so bad on the centurions that WAR was a viable equipment choice?

 

I have only played the cent 1 and from what i remember the ammo rack was in the front and got damaged all the time, so it's nothing new.  



tank276 #4 Posted 20 July 2018 - 09:55 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 50083 battles
  • 561
  • [KEKE] KEKE
  • Member since:
    08-30-2012

I had noticed that problem when I was grinding through Leo PTA some years ago, I used wet ammo rack to compensate. Dont know its current state.

Havent noticed anything out of the ordinary (have 5/1, 7/1 and AX Centurions) but if you see it as a problem , mount wet ammo rack on them (instead of vertical stabs or something).



GB3000 #5 Posted 20 July 2018 - 10:09 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 17504 battles
  • 54
  • [CH3SS] CH3SS
  • Member since:
    05-13-2015

komrade ...its not a problem ... its a new feature.

 



Dr_ownape #6 Posted 20 July 2018 - 10:15 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 43338 battles
  • 5,480
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    03-27-2013
yes known problem..think the message was "don't get hit on the left side"

Edited by Dr_ownape, 20 July 2018 - 10:17 AM.


Sfinski #7 Posted 20 July 2018 - 10:23 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 31689 battles
  • 2,610
  • [-PJ-] -PJ-
  • Member since:
    09-26-2013

View Postpathed91, on 20 July 2018 - 10:38 AM, said:

Didn't Jingles a long time ago say that he considered that the ammo rack was so bad on the centurions that WAR was a viable equipment choice?

 

I have only played the cent 1 and from what i remember the ammo rack was in the front and got damaged all the time, so it's nothing new.  

 

Shouldn't listen Jingles, he is not good enough to give advices....

Xandania #8 Posted 20 July 2018 - 10:29 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 36347 battles
  • 1,063
  • [-DGN-] -DGN-
  • Member since:
    05-16-2013

View Postsignal11th, on 20 July 2018 - 08:30 AM, said:

Dunno mate, pretty much I've always felt any british tank has a very dodgy ammo rack, I've just taken it as the norm. 

 

I think for the Brits the tea kettle, the biscuit box and the stove count as ammo rack as well ;P

Simeon85 #9 Posted 20 July 2018 - 10:54 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 1097 battles
  • 2,997
  • Member since:
    04-19-2013

Never really noticed it being any worse than most other meds and weak hulled heavies. 

 

I think it is more to do with the position of the ammo rack more than anything, most British and US tanks seem to have it near the drive wheels so people trying to track you often ammo rack you as well.

 

Just run large repair kit, then no choice is needed between repairing tracks and repair the rack.

 

Also safe stowage.

 

Russian tanks IIRC have worse ammo racks, at least in module HP terms and they tend to be just as badly placed, IS7 and T-10 have racks in the pike, so shoot them side on in there when they peak and it's pretty easy to rack them. 



vasilinhorulezz #10 Posted 20 July 2018 - 11:01 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 22813 battles
  • 1,109
  • Member since:
    09-26-2014

Having ammoracks next to the driver is probably what someone would call a design flaw :sceptic::hiding:.

 

 

On a serius note, Cents are known for weak ammoracks, and there are a lot of cases

where I've been penned in the front track wheel and got ammoracked at the same time.

There is an ammorack in the front and can be damaged from shots like that. 

 



shane73tank #11 Posted 20 July 2018 - 11:11 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 28146 battles
  • 2,018
  • [USAGI] USAGI
  • Member since:
    03-01-2014

View PostDr_ownape, on 20 July 2018 - 09:15 AM, said:

yes known problem..think the message was "don't get hit on the left side"

Really ? Gonna take getting used to as in Russian meds you have to hide the right side of your turret - game diversity :-)



Dr_ownape #12 Posted 20 July 2018 - 11:46 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 43338 battles
  • 5,480
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    03-27-2013

View PostXandania, on 20 July 2018 - 09:29 AM, said:

 

I think for the Brits the tea kettle, the biscuit box and the stove count as ammo rack as well ;P

 

TBH if you lose the kettle you might as well give up. no point living without a good cuppa

pathed91 #13 Posted 20 July 2018 - 02:04 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 17990 battles
  • 229
  • Member since:
    03-09-2014

View PostSfinski, on 20 July 2018 - 10:23 AM, said:

 

Shouldn't listen Jingles, he is not good enough to give advices....

 

I know Jingles is clueless when it comes to giving advice on the game, my point was that centurions have always had weak ammo racks and that the problem is so severe that some players might get fooled into using WAR instead of useful equipment. 

StinkyStonky #14 Posted 20 July 2018 - 02:17 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 28309 battles
  • 2,143
  • [-SJA-] -SJA-
  • Member since:
    11-02-2015

It's a known manufacturing defect.

 

They ran out of side armour panels and so used ammo racks instead :trollface:



Simeon85 #15 Posted 20 July 2018 - 02:24 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 1097 battles
  • 2,997
  • Member since:
    04-19-2013

View Postpathed91, on 20 July 2018 - 02:04 PM, said:

 

my point was that centurions have always had weak ammo racks

 

They don't have weak ammo racks. 

 

The Cent 7/1 for example has 240 HP on it's ammo rack, tanks like the Obj. 257, T-10, T-54, IS7, Obj. 430U etc. have 200 - 210 ammo rack HP. 

 

People just let them get shot often and there is no real armour there because it's pretty much behind the lower plate and in the front of the hull. 

 

Russian tanks have the weakest ammo racks. 



pathed91 #16 Posted 20 July 2018 - 03:05 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 17990 battles
  • 229
  • Member since:
    03-09-2014

View PostSimeon85, on 20 July 2018 - 02:24 PM, said:

 

They don't have weak ammo racks. 

 

The Cent 7/1 for example has 240 HP on it's ammo rack, tanks like the Obj. 257, T-10, T-54, IS7, Obj. 430U etc. have 200 - 210 ammo rack HP. 

 

People just let them get shot often and there is no real armour there because it's pretty much behind the lower plate and in the front of the hull. 

 

Russian tanks have the weakest ammo racks. 

 

Then the amount of hp of the ammo rack is not that important i guess? You might not get one-shotted by high alpha guns if you have more module hp but having the ammo rack in the front still cause getting it damaged.

kaneloon #17 Posted 20 July 2018 - 03:12 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 28098 battles
  • 1,609
  • [OBLIC] OBLIC
  • Member since:
    11-18-2011
I confirm what is said about the T-10 : every game I am ammorack. Can't remember a blow-up though.

Search_Warrant #18 Posted 20 July 2018 - 04:11 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 27190 battles
  • 6,141
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    02-08-2011
Lower Front Plate has the dam ammorack in.funny coz people whined about 112 gas tank frontal but they moved that gas tank to somewhere else, sadly cant do that to Cents coz they are british.

Baldrickk #19 Posted 20 July 2018 - 05:37 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 30109 battles
  • 14,287
  • [-TAH-] -TAH-
  • Member since:
    03-03-2013

View PostSimeon85, on 20 July 2018 - 02:24 PM, said:

 

They don't have weak ammo racks. 

 

The Cent 7/1 for example has 240 HP on it's ammo rack, tanks like the Obj. 257, T-10, T-54, IS7, Obj. 430U etc. have 200 - 210 ammo rack HP. 

 

People just let them get shot often and there is no real armour there because it's pretty much behind the lower plate and in the front of the hull. 

 

Russian tanks have the weakest ammo racks. 

But the Leo has the reputation for a wreak ammo rack despite the most AR HP of all tanks on the tier. 

 

It's because it is big,  easy to hit and easy to pen. Not because the HP is low. 

Same with the Cent



FatigueGalaxy #20 Posted 20 July 2018 - 07:03 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 19273 battles
  • 2,115
  • [SPIKE] SPIKE
  • Member since:
    02-09-2011
IIIRC ammo rack is next to the driver so take that into consideration when you are trying to angle/sidescrape and try to never expose that front wheel. Sometimes it's better to not angle trying to bounce a shot than take a hit, get tracked and ammo-racked.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users