Jump to content


T54E1 change to HT


  • Please log in to reply
50 replies to this topic

ZlatanArKung #21 Posted 27 March 2020 - 04:11 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1537 battles
  • 5,770
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

View PostNikka_Katajainen, on 27 March 2020 - 02:45 PM, said:

 

Care to explain what do you think should be done then?

 

If they want to make it a heavy, which isn't really neccessary, but whatever.

 

Then they should make it so the tank have some role to play, and isn't entirely outshined by AMX 50 120.

Which is what WG changes will do.

 

So if they want to make it a heavy, give it 2s between shots, or max 2.1.

Improve the drum reload by 5 seconds (maybe more).

Give it like ~260 std pen, and then you can make those nerfs to mobility.

 

But better would be to just keep it as a slow medium, maybe increase mobility slightly (like 1 hp/t buff). Give it 230 standard shell pen and then you are done. 

 

The main issue with the tank is the low Penetration on standard ammo.

15:12 Added after 1 minute

View PostElement6, on 27 March 2020 - 02:54 PM, said:

Not really, they are out of ouch with what some players think the game should be like...because they have a different idea of what the game should be like.

They took a tank that was already in a bad state and in need of a buff to be viable and decided to nerf it some more.

 

I fail to see how that is a good way to balancing a tank or make the tank viable at all.



Flicka #22 Posted 27 March 2020 - 04:26 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 23730 battles
  • 515
  • [CELL] CELL
  • Member since:
    10-25-2011

"The main issue with the tank is the low Penetration on standard ammo."

 

They buffed that, fixed the main issue, let's now see how it feels. Before they make some changes nobody wants to see.

 

What the hell is going on lately, I know people would like to see some of their tanks buffed because they either are bad or are played bad.

But if we/they just keep buffing tanks this game is going down much faster then it should.

 

I really hope they buff grille 15, maybe give it just 299 pen on standard rounds and just 200 more dmg per shell, and just a fully rotatable turret, and just camo of EBR, and and and….



_SpartanWarrior_ #23 Posted 27 March 2020 - 04:42 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 39673 battles
  • 908
  • [BLOJ] BLOJ
  • Member since:
    01-09-2013

T57 HT has enough armor and accuracy,also has OK mobility.

T54E1 is WORST T9 TANK EVER in this situation

What does penetration mean when;

No armor for HT

No mobility

Mediocre gun handling

Only good is damage per shot.

I saw someone mentioning "Quicky has good games with it" What does that mean??????? If Quicky plays good,then the tank is good? Get brain,no insult.



Celution #24 Posted 27 March 2020 - 05:14 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 28574 battles
  • 1,718
  • Member since:
    09-26-2010

View Post_SpartanWarrior_, on 27 March 2020 - 04:42 PM, said:

T57 HT has enough armor and accuracy,also has OK mobility.

T54E1 is WORST T9 TANK EVER in this situation

What does penetration mean when;

No armor for HT

No mobility

Mediocre gun handling

Only good is damage per shot.

I saw someone mentioning "Quicky has good games with it" What does that mean??????? If Quicky plays good,then the tank is good? Get brain,no insult.

 

Don't compare it to a traditional heavy tank, because it's not. The armor is good enough to hold up against most tier 7 targets, and will be trollish against the lower spectrum of tier 8, let alone it is safe against HE penetrations. The AMX 50 120 doesn't have any of that luxury, whilst being the size of a barn. Furthermore, the magazine unload time is significantly faster at 2.22 s interval as opposed to the 3.33 s on the AMX 50 120. This means that your TTK (time-to-kill) is vastly shorter and thus effectively lowers the time you're at risk.

 

Even with a nerfed top speed, the tank will still be vastly more agile than the T57 overall, and it being a whole tier lower means that the opposition you're facing is generally a lot more forgiving anyway. The gun handling is actually better than either of the mentioned tanks, with the exception being the base accuracy.

 

All-in-all, as someone previously mentioned, the main weakness of the T54E1 was not its mobility or armor, it was the mediocre penetration. This because even as a medium tank it was forced to take a lot of frontal engagements due to the nature of the platform being sluggish. The vastly increased penetration on both the AP and APCR will make it excel a lot better in this regard and actually be a formidable opponent in head-on fights now that it can penetrate plenty of the stronger armor zones with great efficiency.

 

That said, the only thing that should be improved at this point is the abysmal 0.4 base accuracy, to something in the league of ~0.36, and perhaps the DPM could be somewhere around ~2300 base, but lower than that of the Emil II for sure.



Warzey #25 Posted 27 March 2020 - 05:22 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 61562 battles
  • 1,415
  • [GO0FY] GO0FY
  • Member since:
    04-29-2011

View Post_SpartanWarrior_, on 27 March 2020 - 03:42 PM, said:

T57 HT has enough armor and accuracy,also has OK mobility.

T54E1 is WORST T9 TANK EVER in this situation

What does penetration mean when;

No armor for HT

No mobility

Mediocre gun handling

Only good is damage per shot.

I saw someone mentioning "Quicky has good games with it" What does that mean??????? If Quicky plays good,then the tank is good? Get brain,no insult.

 

You'd really call T54E1 the worst T9 tank when likes of Obj 430 version 2, M103 and WZ-120 exist? 

 

When I look at the stats I'd say that T54E1 will be able to fill more or less the same role as T57 heavy. T54E1 has the best gun handling and fastest inter clip reload among autoloading heavies, also armor is still trollish especially against lower tier tanks. T54E1 heavy will be just fine, not stupidly powerful and definitely not among the worst T9 tanks.


Edited by Warzey, 27 March 2020 - 05:23 PM.


_SpartanWarrior_ #26 Posted 27 March 2020 - 05:23 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 39673 battles
  • 908
  • [BLOJ] BLOJ
  • Member since:
    01-09-2013

View PostCelution, on 27 March 2020 - 10:14 AM, said:

 

Don't compare it to a traditional heavy tank, because it's not. The armor is good enough to hold up against most tier 7 targets, and will be trollish against the lower spectrum of tier 8, let alone it is safe against HE penetrations. The AMX 50 120 doesn't have any of that luxury, whilst being the size of a barn. Furthermore, the magazine unload time is significantly faster at 2.22 s interval as opposed to the 3.33 s on the AMX 50 120. This means that your TTK (time-to-kill) is vastly shorter and thus effectively lowers the time you're at risk.

 

Even with a nerfed top speed, the tank will still be vastly more agile than the T57 overall, and it being a whole tier lower means that the opposition you're facing is generally a lot more forgiving anyway. The gun handling is actually better than either of the mentioned tanks, with the exception being the base accuracy.

 

All-in-all, as someone previously mentioned, the main weakness of the T54E1 was not its mobility or armor, it was the mediocre penetration. This because even as a medium tank it was forced to take a lot of frontal engagements due to the nature of the platform being sluggish. The vastly increased penetration on both the AP and APCR will make it excel a lot better in this regard and actually be a formidable opponent in head-on fights now that it can penetrate plenty of the stronger armor zones with great efficiency.

 

That said, the only thing that should be improved at this point is the abysmal 0.4 base accuracy, to something in the league of ~0.36, and perhaps the DPM could be somewhere around ~2300 base, but lower than that of the Emil II for sure.

We cant all agree,but this tank does not fit as a HT

EDIT: 430 v2 has good mobility and very good accuracy.

M103 has got fine turret armor,good Damage per shot and fine accuracy.

WZ120, EVERYONE complains,but its perfectly balanced.

T54E1 has bad mobility,not-so-good armor (Not paper but its not better than T57) and mediocre accuracy.

EDIT: 120mm-140mm armor around its turret. Even T4 can penetrate if the player aims.

Hull sure has fine armor,but turret is just a no.

Mobility nerf

Bad gun handling (0.38 at 100m)

Nearly no turret armor

We will see how will it fit. I don't think it will fit well.

Of course as i said,we cant all agree,but when you figure out it does not fit well,dont cry.


Edited by _SpartanWarrior_, 27 March 2020 - 05:32 PM.


Element6 #27 Posted 27 March 2020 - 05:55 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 33475 battles
  • 12,035
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    01-06-2013

View PostZlatanArKung, on 27 March 2020 - 04:11 PM, said:

They took a tank that was already in a bad state and in need of a buff to be viable and decided to nerf it some more.

 

I fail to see how that is a good way to balancing a tank or make the tank viable at all.

Thank you for confirming what I just wrote.

 

They nerfed the traverse and speed, so clearly they were not trying to buff traverse or speed = their goal/opinion is not the same as that of some players. You'd have to be pretty mindbogglingly dense if you think that WG are so stupid that they reduce traverse and speed while trying to make the tank move nimble. So that is clearly not their goal with those changes.

 

They clearly want it do deal damage more reliably without the need to spam premium ammo, which this tank is known for, hence they buffed the penetration. 

 

Since it is going to be less mobile, in part due to being reclassed as a HT, they want to give it more HP. Again, WGs goals/opinions are not the same as that of some players, hence you do not see the point of all this, whici is what my comment was about.

 

The change is in line with other tech treee changes, the line makes more sense as it now ends with two HTs instead of being an MT line that ends with a T10 HT. Similar to changes made to RU meds.

 

 



ZlatanArKung #28 Posted 27 March 2020 - 07:40 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1537 battles
  • 5,770
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

View PostElement6, on 27 March 2020 - 05:55 PM, said:

Thank you for confirming what I just wrote.

 

They nerfed the traverse and speed, so clearly they were not trying to buff traverse or speed = their goal/opinion is not the same as that of some players. You'd have to be pretty mindbogglingly dense if you think that WG are so stupid that they reduce traverse and speed while trying to make the tank move nimble. So that is clearly not their goal with those changes.

 

They clearly want it do deal damage more reliably without the need to spam premium ammo, which this tank is known for, hence they buffed the penetration. 

 

Since it is going to be less mobile, in part due to being reclassed as a HT, they want to give it more HP. Again, WGs goals/opinions are not the same as that of some players, hence you do not see the point of all this, whici is what my comment was about.

 

The change is in line with other tech treee changes, the line makes more sense as it now ends with two HTs instead of being an MT line that ends with a T10 HT. Similar to changes made to RU meds.

 

 

They nerfed mobility whole not giving it anything of value in return.

 

If they had given it significant buffs in other areas I wouldn't mind, but this change is just a plain nerf to mobility and that's pretty much it. 

 

Yes, they also brought AP pen up to acceptable levels for a T9 tank. But that should have been done any way. And 100hp extra is insignificant.

 

 

Another thing I dislike with the change is that they make the tank less unique and more generic. They should work with what makes the tank different.

 

 

Same critique exists towards ELC nerf, VK1602 nerf, 59-16 change, M41 bulldog change etc.


Edited by ZlatanArKung, 27 March 2020 - 08:02 PM.


Element6 #29 Posted 27 March 2020 - 09:22 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 33475 battles
  • 12,035
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    01-06-2013

View PostZlatanArKung, on 27 March 2020 - 07:40 PM, said:

They nerfed mobility whole not giving it anything of value in return.

 

If they had given it significant buffs in other areas I wouldn't mind, but this change is just a plain nerf to mobility and that's pretty much it. 

 

Yes, they also brought AP pen up to acceptable levels for a T9 tank. But that should have been done any way. And 100hp extra is insignificant.

 

 

Another thing I dislike with the change is that they make the tank less unique and more generic. They should work with what makes the tank different.

 

 

Same critique exists towards ELC nerf, VK1602 nerf, 59-16 change, M41 bulldog change etc.

Well, I can understand that WG is ignoring certain parts of the feedback when they give a tank a 30% improvement in dispersion on turret rotation, 16% and 18% penetration increase, 6% reduction in repair cost, 7% inrease in profitability and +100 HP, and people see that as nothing of value.

 

 



undutchable80 #30 Posted 27 March 2020 - 09:33 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 14872 battles
  • 4,955
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    10-30-2014
Looking forward to the changes

Edited by undutchable80, 27 March 2020 - 09:35 PM.


ExclamationMark #31 Posted 27 March 2020 - 09:42 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 16788 battles
  • 4,521
  • [IDEAD] IDEAD
  • Member since:
    04-12-2013
Still gonna be trash TBH.

ares354 #32 Posted 27 March 2020 - 11:18 PM

    Colonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 78495 battles
  • 3,705
  • Member since:
    12-05-2010
For me, 248 AP pen changes a lot. Unlike Emil 2, who have 252 APCR, and AMX 120 which is huge, and have very long out burst, T54E1 unload crazy fast. Mobility nerf is pointless imho, he was never fast. They should keep old moblity, that wont make him OP at all. 

Rattogigi #33 Posted 27 March 2020 - 11:51 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 63784 battles
  • 130
  • Member since:
    01-27-2011
https://tanks.gg/v10900ct/tank/t54e1 For the new stats and amour.

MeNoobTank #34 Posted 27 March 2020 - 11:53 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 19351 battles
  • 1,241
  • [GT_WC] GT_WC
  • Member since:
    02-16-2017
So it is the same but they nerfed mobility and buffed penetration.

Edited by MeNoobTank, 27 March 2020 - 11:58 PM.


ZlatanArKung #35 Posted 28 March 2020 - 07:31 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1537 battles
  • 5,770
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

View PostElement6, on 27 March 2020 - 09:22 PM, said:

Well, I can understand that WG is ignoring certain parts of the feedback when they give a tank a 30% improvement in dispersion on turret rotation, 16% and 18% penetration increase, 6% reduction in repair cost, 7% inrease in profitability and +100 HP, and people see that as nothing of value.

 

 

Because those values are pretty much irrelevant. 

 

100hp is insignificant. 

Pen increase while good, doesn't change how tank is played or what makes it different from other T9 tanks. 

Cost and profitability change doesn't effect gameplay, and also happen to every tank, so should obviously be ignored when talking about balance and gameplay. 

The dispersion buff by 30% is kind of nice, but just turns the tank into a worse AMX 50 120 it Emil II.

 

The general direction of the change/nerf is to take a tank, remove the more unique and different aspects of the tank, buff and other aspects so it becomes more alike other tanks in game.

 

I would love, if WG instead of making more tanks similar, tried to make tanks different and unique in more then their model.

 

I think they did a good job with the Bourrasque in this aspect, and the new Ranked tank reward tank.

But for so many other tanks, they just make them more and more alike. 

 

T6 lights being most obvious.

But also the general trend of 10 degrees of gun depression coupled with a strong turret on similar mobility medium tank changes some time back.

 

This T54E1 is already different, work with what makes it different and don't turn it into a lesser Emil II or AMX 50 120. Work with what makes it different and accentuate those aspects.


Edited by ZlatanArKung, 28 March 2020 - 08:08 AM.


TankkiPoju #36 Posted 28 March 2020 - 10:14 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 25871 battles
  • 7,981
  • Member since:
    05-20-2011

View PostExclamationMark, on 27 March 2020 - 09:42 PM, said:

Still gonna be trash TBH.

 

Agreed.

 

Who would anyone want to play tier 9 autoloader tanks like T54E1 when game has tanks like Standard B that are flat out superior.



MrClark56 #37 Posted 28 March 2020 - 10:56 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 8196 battles
  • 2,602
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-17-2013

View PostTankkiPoju, on 28 March 2020 - 10:14 AM, said:

 

Agreed.

 

Who would anyone want to play tier 9 autoloader tanks like T54E1 when game has tanks like Standard B that are flat out superior.

Well for starters.. we have to grind the standard B.

 

I rarely play my t54e1 these days. Even moved its crew to my m48 patton. 

Regarding the changes.. they could have kept its mobility, turret and tank traverse because they werent medium like in any case. 

The real let down is gun accuracy.. improving gun dispersion wont help it hit where required because everyone knows you never shoot while moving tank or turret in this tank. Those who play it know you have to stay still when shooting. 

So buff the acc. 

 

 


Edited by MrClark56, 28 March 2020 - 10:56 AM.


Ragoutrabbit #38 Posted 28 March 2020 - 08:11 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 11650 battles
  • 1,164
  • Member since:
    11-08-2012
At least it now has workable pen, before this tank was just utter trash.

DeanWong #39 Posted 29 March 2020 - 08:45 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 15016 battles
  • 247
  • [WHEN] WHEN
  • Member since:
    07-09-2012

I think the changes are fine. I will play it like the SOMUA. Find a nice russian or german buddy and stick with him. With your buddy's 490 alpha and your 1600 clip, most tier 9 and some tier 10 can be obliterated, I can finally look forward to grinding this line again, having abandon at T69.

 

Like most autoloader, if you're alone, you are doing it wrong and having mobility or not will change nothing.

However, better gun stats and penatration is going to change the potency of this tank.



Mr_Burrows #40 Posted 30 March 2020 - 07:46 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 52205 battles
  • 2,630
  • [D-NUT] D-NUT
  • Member since:
    02-17-2012

Tier X Kranvagn has 252 and 300 pen. T54 E1 at tier 9 will get 248 and 310.

So a tank one tier lower will have 4 mm less pen on standard ammo, but 10 mm better pen with premiums.

 

Makes sense? :confused:

 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users