Jump to content


B-C 25 t and the forgotten 100mm gun proposal...a suggestion:

B-C 25 t

  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

PervyPastryPuffer #1 Posted 14 April 2019 - 10:12 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 32704 battles
  • 3,204
  • [VRTC] VRTC
  • Member since:
    09-13-2013

I've got a bit of an idea which I've been thinking about lately... Making the 100mm gun a viable option on the BatChat.

 

I sometimes feel like the 105mm gun is a "commit or fail" type of deal, mostly because of its 2.73 sec intra-clip reload. The AMX 13 90 for example, has a much faster intra-clip reload of 2.21 sec, and when I play it, it feels like i can get that one more shot off before the enemy runs back behind cover after they've repaired their tracks, and actually keep them tracked and keep pumping shots into them.

 

The 1390 also has a shorter clip reload, allowing it to deal the intended damage swiftly, pull back, flank around, and immediately empty another clip into the unfortunate enemy. This keeps it in the battle almost permanently, constantly moving and planning the next assault. I like this style of gameplay, it feels engaging, exciting, all that...

 

Now, for the BatChat's 100m gun, currently with 6 shells, an intra-clip reload the same as the 105mm gun, and 36 seconds base clip reload time, I'd like to propose the following:

 

Clip reload: 25s (-11)

Clip size: 4 (-2)

Intra-clip reload: 2.21s (-0.52)

Penetration: 263 (+31) (replace AP with APCR)

 

This would give it a much more "active" gun option, one I'd really like to try out. If it's so fun on the 1390, why wouldn't it be just as fun on the BatChat?

 

Tips and thoughts appreciated. :honoring: Also, try to keep it classy... :sceptic:



shane73tank #2 Posted 14 April 2019 - 10:46 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 30830 battles
  • 2,092
  • [BC-X] BC-X
  • Member since:
    03-01-2014
I love it  - let’s make it a different credentials playstyle so there are two genuine options rather than a straight upgrade

XxKuzkina_MatxX #3 Posted 15 April 2019 - 06:38 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 53200 battles
  • 3,318
  • [SPIKE] SPIKE
  • Member since:
    04-02-2016

Come on now, don't be shy about it. The 105mm on the BC is the problem. It's an obsolete, powercrept and archaic piece of crap that belongs to WOT 2015!

 

That horrible gun handling and intra-clip reload needs to go for the tank to be remotely viable. Here's an alternative...

 

  • Intra-clip reload: 2.73s (2.3s)
  • Aim time: 2.59s (2.2s)
  • Dispersion: 0.36 (0.34)
  • moving: 0.16 (0.14)
  • tank traverse: 0.16 (0.14)
  • turret traverse: 0.15 (0.12)
  • after firing: 3.84 (2.88)

 

The tank will still have 2.3k DPM as a trade off for the clip potential but at least it'll be able to hit more shells from that clip!


Edited by XxKuzkina_MatxX, 15 April 2019 - 06:39 AM.


arthurwellsley #4 Posted 15 April 2019 - 08:37 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 53128 battles
  • 3,652
  • [-B-C-] -B-C-
  • Member since:
    05-11-2011

Bat chat back in 2015 and 2016 was the unicum padding tank of choice. The skill ceiling on it is very high. If you were an exceptionally good player you could consistently get amazing games in the bat chat, whereas if you were an average or below player it would likely punish you hard.

 

Nothing has changed on the bat chat since then.

 

The things that have changed are (a) introduction of tier X light tanks, (b) CZ and Italian autoloaders introduced, (c.) template 9.18.1 MM, and (d) more city style maps.

All of those things have contributed to the bat chat being harder to excell in.

 

WoTreplays still has plenty of recent bat chat games that show it's potential;

 

http://wotreplays.eu...-ch_tillon_25_t

http://wotreplays.eu...-ch_tillon_25_t

http://wotreplays.eu...-ch_tillon_25_t

http://wotreplays.eu...-ch_tillon_25_t

http://wotreplays.eu...-ch_tillon_25_t

 

So I guess back at WG HQ the stats they keep on the bat chat will still show on the one hand extreme games with top players doing very well, and all the rest getting punished in it.

 

So what the bat chat needs is not a buff, but the player to =  "git gooderest top five percent of all players"


Edited by arthurwellsley, 15 April 2019 - 08:38 AM.


fwhaatpiraat #5 Posted 15 April 2019 - 09:02 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 53077 battles
  • 1,136
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    05-04-2013
I recently played a good bunch of battles in the batchat, I really like that thing.

xx984 #6 Posted 15 April 2019 - 09:04 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 59644 battles
  • 2,838
  • [SHEKL] SHEKL
  • Member since:
    08-11-2013

BC is fine with 105 atm, but another gun with a different play style, that isn't flat out better will be welcomed.

 

A gun to bridge the gap between the two play styles of the TVP and 105 gun would be great, more bursty but not as bursty as the tvp



TungstenHitman #7 Posted 15 April 2019 - 09:11 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 26363 battles
  • 4,923
  • [POOLS] POOLS
  • Member since:
    08-28-2016
Won't happen. With that change there'd simply be no reason to play AMX 13 90. You'd be giving the B-C all the advantages of the AMX along with keeping all the advantages of playing a medium tank. What advantages? Well, a medium tank does not get light tank MM(I think for this B-C), it's not added to the battle as a light tank and what that means is that while the B-C very much can be a scout and has many similar light tank attributes such as speed and camo etc, it's not obliged to have to play the light tank role same as a light tank does on open maps whereas the B-C gets to pick an chose a lot more what it wants to do during a battle. Maybe you fancy scouting, maybe you don't but because it's medium tank you're not backed into a corner to perform that duty same way as a light tank often is on an open map. You also get more hp pool to play with as med so you can tank maybe one more shot, depending on what you're fighting obviously, which might be vs a AMX 13 90 for example. So, if you're giving the B-C the same 4 shell mag and inter clip reload as the AMX it would just make the AMX redundant imo not to mention the fact that this new improved B-C gun, in your offering, would also give it far superior pen than the AMX along with I assume a bit more alpha per shell? There's just no reason to play the AMX after that and with that recent AMX vs B-C poll thread I created recently since I'm grinding them, it was clear that the T9 AMX was the better at T9 and B-C was the better T10 so if that's the case and you change makes the T9 B-C also better than the T-9 AMX.... again, what's the point of the AMX line?

DSsacul_666 #8 Posted 15 April 2019 - 09:14 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 43473 battles
  • 134
  • [DRNKS] DRNKS
  • Member since:
    12-06-2012

Very good suggestions. :)


 

But it's not very likely that WG will read this post or respond to it. They are too busy introducing new tanks and selling more premium tanks.



tajj7 #9 Posted 15 April 2019 - 09:33 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 27067 battles
  • 14,656
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

I like tanks having two viable gun options, very few do, so its a good idea.

 

But really the 105 should have its gun handling buffed a little I reckon. 



Cobra6 #10 Posted 15 April 2019 - 09:41 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16463 battles
  • 16,703
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

Bc25T needs better gun handling and aimtime, nothing more. 

It's balanced for when it was first introduced but that version of WoT no longer exists.

 

Cobra 6


Edited by Cobra6, 15 April 2019 - 09:41 AM.


lnfernaI #11 Posted 15 April 2019 - 11:50 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 30866 battles
  • 3,998
  • Member since:
    09-15-2012
I just wish it had 7 clips, instead of 6. Do not care about anything else.

TankkiPoju #12 Posted 15 April 2019 - 01:04 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 22095 battles
  • 6,827
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    05-20-2011
Why would you buff the already best tier 10 light tank even more.

lnfernaI #13 Posted 15 April 2019 - 04:54 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 30866 battles
  • 3,998
  • Member since:
    09-15-2012

View PostTankkiPoju, on 15 April 2019 - 02:04 PM, said:

Why would you buff the already best tier 10 light tank even more.

 

Why would you oppose buffing non-Russian tanks?

PervyPastryPuffer #14 Posted 15 April 2019 - 06:17 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 32704 battles
  • 3,204
  • [VRTC] VRTC
  • Member since:
    09-13-2013

View PostTungstenHitman, on 15 April 2019 - 09:11 AM, said:

[Wall of Wrongness]

 

I'm talking about the tier 10 B-C. The tier 9 doesn't have a 105mm gun, it has a 100mm gun with a ridiculously long reload time. By giving the tier 10 a more "active" 100mm gun as an alternative to the sledgehammer 105mm, it would change the playstyle of the tank completely, as an option.

 

The transition from tier 9 to 10...it's simple. The T9's 100mm gun has the clip damage potential and reload time of the 105mm gun on the T10. An adjusted 100mm gun on the T10 would only provide an extra option to change your playstyle. Nobody uses the 100mm on the T10 B-C anyway, because the 105mm is just flat-out better...right? Well, why not make it an option then? :amazed:



AliceUnchained #15 Posted 15 April 2019 - 07:06 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 38974 battles
  • 9,483
  • [322] 322
  • Member since:
    10-18-2011
Sounds good to me. Really wish Wargaming would focus on different gun options, and even other modules/equipment options so that players can tune their favorite vehicles more to their own playstyle without gimping them in the process. Within vehicle class limits of course. 

kubawt112 #16 Posted 15 April 2019 - 07:25 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 3378 battles
  • 533
  • [-UM] -UM
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012
Sounds good, unlikely to become an issue, would be an interesting alternative where you cannot tell for sure what sort of 'Bat' you're dealing with - and hence it won't happen. :)

vasilinhorulezz #17 Posted 15 April 2019 - 07:34 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 23236 battles
  • 1,398
  • Member since:
    09-26-2014

The only reason the BC has a fear factor is the 1900 damage potential of the 105mm gun, without the gun it will yolo-rushed on sight.

Also the tier X medium with a smaller gun than the same tier light doesn't even make sense.



AliceUnchained #18 Posted 15 April 2019 - 07:40 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 38974 battles
  • 9,483
  • [322] 322
  • Member since:
    10-18-2011

View Postvasilinhorulezz, on 15 April 2019 - 07:34 PM, said:

Also the tier X medium with a smaller gun than the same tier light doesn't even make sense.

 

When it comes to gun performance (damage, penetration), overmatch and normalization mechanics, A LOT already makes no sense in WoT. Plus, not all nations classified their tanks by gun caliber during WW II



vasilinhorulezz #19 Posted 15 April 2019 - 07:46 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 23236 battles
  • 1,398
  • Member since:
    09-26-2014

View PostAliceUnchained, on 15 April 2019 - 07:40 PM, said:

 

When it comes to gun performance (damage, penetration), overmatch and normalization mechanics, A LOT already makes no sense in WoT. Plus, not all nations classified their tanks by gun caliber during WW II

 

Also tank on tank combat was not really a thing, battles were tanks plus infantry plus artillery plus air support vs tanks plus infantry plus artillery plus air support, what is your point?

AliceUnchained #20 Posted 15 April 2019 - 08:36 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 38974 battles
  • 9,483
  • [322] 322
  • Member since:
    10-18-2011

View Postvasilinhorulezz, on 15 April 2019 - 07:46 PM, said:

 

Also tank on tank combat was not really a thing, battles were tanks plus infantry plus artillery plus air support vs tanks plus infantry plus artillery plus air support, what is your point?

 

That your point about it not making sense makes no sense?





Also tagged with B-C 25 t

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users