Jump to content


E-50M buff/replacement

E-50M Buff German mediums

  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

Pewpewpew77 #1 Posted 16 May 2020 - 01:20 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 5730 battles
  • 7
  • Member since:
    06-18-2017

The E-50M is one of the tanks that used to perform quite well but is kind of lacking in the current meta. I have thought of 2 ways to make the E-50M a more competitive tank.

 

Buffing the E-50M

 

So basically the E-50M kind of performs like a weaker Object 430U. I plan to make this tank more viable by giving it thicker armour.

 

Upper glacis

Previous thickness - 150mm 

Effective thickness - 270mm

 

Proposed thickness - 170mm

Effective thickness - 290mm

 

Turret cheeks

Previous thickness - 185mm

Effective thickness - 195mm

 

Proposed thickness - 210mm

Effective thickness - 220mm

 

I expect this would make the E-50M a much more tougher tank. If Wargaming wants the model to look realistic they could add riveted armour plates on the cheeks and upper glacis.

Something like on the Russian KV-1E

 

 

 

Replacement for the E-50M

 

The E-50M is not the most historical tank so I think it would be okay to replace it with a fake vehicle. I took this tank idea/concept/design from Panzer Front. This tank is also called the Panther III so it seemed fitting for the line. this tank would have an auto ricochet or bounce turret. with similar strength to that of an Object 430U. I think the tank would mount a 12,8cm gun so I think a reload of 12 seconds with 100% crew and 460 alpha damage. The tank would have 270mm of effective upper hull armour (somewhat worse than the buffed E-50M for balancing) and 180mm effective lower plate armour. And the turret should have around 300mm but it will ricochet most of the time.

 

Thanks for reading this!

And please write any ideas in the comments.



WindSplitter1 #2 Posted 16 May 2020 - 01:23 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 21332 battles
  • 3,906
  • [WINDY] WINDY
  • Member since:
    02-07-2016

IIRC, WG did want to use something else for the E 50 M but they didn't because of copyrights.

I could be wrong, but there was a vehicle in such position.



Robbie_T #3 Posted 16 May 2020 - 01:32 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 22465 battles
  • 1,416
  • [BBMM] BBMM
  • Member since:
    07-08-2016

Dont need armor buff 90% of the E50M's are camping on paper td spots  the whole game.

 



Hyina #4 Posted 16 May 2020 - 01:48 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 65201 battles
  • 543
  • Member since:
    05-16-2013
Make ze german tank stronker than ruski? Nooooo

shikaka9 #5 Posted 16 May 2020 - 01:57 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 78302 battles
  • 2,385
  • [-SJA-] -SJA-
  • Member since:
    02-27-2013

View PostHyina, on 16 May 2020 - 12:48 PM, said:

Make ze german tank stronker than ruski? Nooooo


well they did it with VK30P , now it is stronger than T34-85 , at least for me


Edited by shikaka9, 16 May 2020 - 01:58 PM.


baratoz1701 #6 Posted 16 May 2020 - 01:59 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 27483 battles
  • 421
  • [DNUTZ] DNUTZ
  • Member since:
    05-31-2012
Not a chance they will make it as tough as 430u

Galan7891 #7 Posted 16 May 2020 - 02:08 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 10133 battles
  • 641
  • Member since:
    02-22-2018

View PostRobbie_T, on 16 May 2020 - 01:32 PM, said:

Dont need armor buff 90% of the E50M's are camping on paper td spots  the whole game.

 


I wonder why.../s



Voldemars_Veiss #8 Posted 16 May 2020 - 02:23 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 33885 battles
  • 2,036
  • Member since:
    10-31-2013
I would downtier e50m to tier 9, thats how strong powercreep has been since i first got it in 2014, i still play it sometimes, just for the ramming memes most of the time. Speaking about 430u, its just not my cup of tea, i rather play with autoloaders or something with gun depression. E50m really didnt make much sense ever, i guess, pretty much the same tank as a tier 9 variant. Only some minor armor differences and tiny touch better mobility, the most stupid th8ng is that dpm doesnt change, i guess back in the old days, low dpm was a balancing factor. Just to have a diffetent gameplay experience, i play my e50 with long 88, insane dpm with ability to permatrack anything, downside is that its more expensive to play that way, but i really dont care, i can always play few battles with prems

iraqxlol #9 Posted 16 May 2020 - 03:10 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 3596 battles
  • 64
  • Member since:
    10-31-2013
Please no more mediums with the armor of a heavy tank while keeping their medium characteristics.

dUG1 #10 Posted 16 May 2020 - 03:26 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35664 battles
  • 1,071
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    05-01-2011

Giving 50M more armor wouldn't change the fact it is terribly out of meta and roflstomped by most of tier 10 MTs spamming HEAT through its front, any part.

Still, I agree that having tier 8 armor value turret on a tier 10 MT based around being armored, is just wrong.

 

3 easy buffs for 50M, that wouldn't break any balance, are:

more DPM (its the worst non-autloader tier X DPM MT)

~225mm turret front

less terrain resistance

 

There, you dont have to thank me, WG.



Balc0ra #11 Posted 16 May 2020 - 03:32 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 77184 battles
  • 23,216
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View PostWindSplitter1, on 16 May 2020 - 01:23 PM, said:

IIRC, WG did want to use something else for the E 50 M but they didn't because of copyrights.

I could be wrong, but there was a vehicle in such position.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong. But did not WG copyright the E50M name to prevent it from appearing in other games?

 

 



WindSplitter1 #12 Posted 16 May 2020 - 04:12 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 21332 battles
  • 3,906
  • [WINDY] WINDY
  • Member since:
    02-07-2016

View PostBalc0ra, on 16 May 2020 - 02:32 PM, said:

Correct me if I'm wrong. But did not WG copyright the E50M name to prevent it from appearing in other games?

That is also true.

But I remember, albeit poorly, that a developer stated there was this vehicle from the E Series they wanted in but likewise could not implement it.

 

It was a fake tank, E 79 I think.



Voldemars_Veiss #13 Posted 16 May 2020 - 05:53 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 33885 battles
  • 2,036
  • Member since:
    10-31-2013

View PostWindSplitter1, on 16 May 2020 - 05:12 PM, said:

That is also true.

But I remember, albeit poorly, that a developer stated there was this vehicle from the E Series they wanted in but likewise could not implement it.

 

It was a fake tank, E 79 I think.

yup, aka Panther 3, a tank from alternative history - what would next generation panther be like, if Germany would win the war. there was some discussion about it in like 2015.]

 

 



ares354 #14 Posted 16 May 2020 - 10:57 PM

    Colonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 78486 battles
  • 3,668
  • Member since:
    12-05-2010

View PostdUG1, on 16 May 2020 - 03:26 PM, said:

Giving 50M more armor wouldn't change the fact it is terribly out of meta and roflstomped by most of tier 10 MTs spamming HEAT through its front, any part.

Still, I agree that having tier 8 armor value turret on a tier 10 MT based around being armored, is just wrong.

 

3 easy buffs for 50M, that wouldn't break any balance, are:

more DPM (its the worst non-autloader tier X DPM MT)

~225mm turret front

less terrain resistance

 

There, you dont have to thank me, WG.

225 turret give him nothing. 

One good buff for E50m turret is MANTLET remodel, to make it bigger, so that would catch most shoots from far. Buffing dpm and mobility, and you have medium for many task, with good gun 



In_Flames90 #15 Posted 16 May 2020 - 11:23 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 13773 battles
  • 91
  • [DECOY] DECOY
  • Member since:
    12-05-2016
Just give it better DPM and it's "fine" for now if they don't want to do too much.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's the only T10 that has the same DPM as the T9 with the same gun.

ares354 #16 Posted 17 May 2020 - 10:46 AM

    Colonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 78486 battles
  • 3,668
  • Member since:
    12-05-2010

View PostIn_Flames90, on 16 May 2020 - 11:23 PM, said:

Just give it better DPM and it's "fine" for now if they don't want to do too much.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's the only T10 that has the same DPM as the T9 with the same gun.

Yea. But alone better dpm wont work. 

Turret need bigger mantlet



murn123 #17 Posted 17 May 2020 - 02:41 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 13480 battles
  • 327
  • Member since:
    07-25-2010

Or maybe nerf 430U. it is not just E50M that 430U makes obsolete. There is also no point in playing 121 and 113. The way to change all of this would be by:

  • giving 430U the soft stats for gun of 121
  • giving 430U the commander hatch weakness of 121
  • buff 121 by giving it the gun soft stats of 430U
  • buff 113 by giving it the commander hatches of 121.
  • buff E50M by giving it a proper turret with nice frontal armor.
  • slight nerf to udes 15/16 dpm ( 121 should have higher dpm)

You cannot just look at one tank and buff it. That is the reason wargaming is in this mess now of constantly buffing tanks, which creates powercreep. That needs to end.

 

The problem is that wargaming just takes way too long to change a tank. It will take them 10 years to change IS-4. That is just crazy by any standard. I don't know how to really get to the development team and ask them why it takes so long to change some numbers. I wish wargaming development team would explain what is it that they are doing that it takes so long to figure this kinda stuff out. It is kinda bizarre how inefficient their game development process is. They are worse than my government. 

 


Edited by murn123, 17 May 2020 - 02:42 PM.


tajj7 #18 Posted 17 May 2020 - 08:34 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 29474 battles
  • 17,750
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

It's not just 430U, it's all the heaviums, they have made the semi-armoured tier 10 meds pointless. Why play an E50M if you go pretty much as fast in a 277, with better armour, better alpha, similar gun handling, heavy tank hit points etc?

 

All the tier 10 heaviums like Chieftain, 277, IS-7, 5A, 430U, 260 need toning down, particularly around mobility, gun handling and in some cases DPM, none of these tanks should go over 40kph, or turn that well, or have such good snap shot ability with 490 alpha guns. 

 

Heavies need to go back to what they used to be, bad at mobility, turning, snapping, DPM, so that medium tanks actually have clear advantages for their lesser armour, HP, alpha etc. 

 

If a heavy has mobility then it needs armour like the T-10, that is the OG heavium and it traded armour for mobility, it's armour is bad, Now heaviums are just too good at everything. 



Pewpewpew77 #19 Posted Yesterday, 05:40 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 5730 battles
  • 7
  • Member since:
    06-18-2017

View PostWindSplitter1, on 16 May 2020 - 04:12 PM, said:

That is also true.

But I remember, albeit poorly, that a developer stated there was this vehicle from the E Series they wanted in but likewise could not implement it.

 

It was a fake tank, E 79 I think.

The E79 was a fake tank made by Panzer Front, there is also a TD version.



Pewpewpew77 #20 Posted Yesterday, 05:51 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 5730 battles
  • 7
  • Member since:
    06-18-2017

View Postmurn123, on 17 May 2020 - 02:41 PM, said:

Or maybe nerf 430U. it is not just E50M that 430U makes obsolete. There is also no point in playing 121 and 113. The way to change all of this would be by:

  • giving 430U the soft stats for gun of 121
  • giving 430U the commander hatch weakness of 121
  • buff 121 by giving it the gun soft stats of 430U
  • buff 113 by giving it the commander hatches of 121.
  • buff E50M by giving it a proper turret with nice frontal armor.
  • slight nerf to udes 15/16 dpm ( 121 should have higher dpm)

You cannot just look at one tank and buff it. That is the reason wargaming is in this mess now of constantly buffing tanks, which creates powercreep. That needs to end.

 

The problem is that wargaming just takes way too long to change a tank. It will take them 10 years to change IS-4. That is just crazy by any standard. I don't know how to really get to the development team and ask them why it takes so long to change some numbers. I wish wargaming development team would explain what is it that they are doing that it takes so long to figure this kinda stuff out. It is kinda bizarre how inefficient their game development process is. They are worse than my government. 

 

Wargaming said they would nerf the 430U but honestly the nerfs are idiotic. They changed the cupolas from 300-290 to 270. No tank that will fight it will pen that or aim at it. Maybe to make it weaker to prammo? They also nerfed the dispersion or something, but that rarely affects the tank anyways.

 

The problem with buffing non-meta tanks is that when those tanks face lower tiers they can absolutely dominate them. It would be much better if Wargaming would actually listen to the community and nerf the overperforming tanks. 

They might not want to nerf premium tanks, but aren't refunds a thing? I could certainly see someone getting their premium nerfed but getting 50 to 70% of the gold they spent on it back. But for tanks like the T95/FV4201 or 279(e) they could perhaps nerf them and give them something special like 100% extra credits instead of the 50% on normal premiums or extra crew training to make them special and not just OP.

 

The meta right now is just so dull because there are tons of tanks that are just forgotten and aren't played.

 

 







Also tagged with E-50M, Buff, German mediums

1 user(s) are reading this topic

1 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


    HeinzvonKrupp