Verified Tanker [SEA]
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About lavawing

  • Rank
    No Fochs Left To Give

Profile Information

  • Server

Recent Profile Visitors

1,463 profile views
  1. Worth noting that the STB gets a turret buff next patch
  2. The E 100 is not an IS-7, so do not expect it to do what you would not expect of an IS-7. The theme of the entire line is pretty much about alpha and sidescraping. It can push, but that is very far from its forte. Now, the quintessential assault tank has troll frontal armour - not necessarily reliable - it may not even reward meaningful angling. An IS-7 is a good example, the E3, and then the 4502B, or the Chinese TDs, or even the E5. Basically, for a heavy tank to be good at aggressive plays, you want armour that will work even when you cannot control the engagement, and in that respect the E 100 is merely mediocre.
  3. Still better than the M103, however.
  4. The giant rangefinder is autobounce on flat ground
  5. I would love to grind out the 215b, but the Caernarvon is just so prohibitively shit, not to mention the stock Conq.
  6. British ammoracks like the E5s coincide perfectly with weakspots. On Soviet pike-nosed tanks the situation is similar, except you now have troll side armour and weird angles to throw off shots. The T-10 bounces a stupid amount of shot even when unangled; the Conqueror virtually never. I would argue the T-10 is better against meds thanks to speed and side armour and a smaller profile; and better against superheavies on account of a better gold round. The T-10 is also not artybait being Soviet as shit. The Conqueror is undoubtedly an excellent gun tank; and the T-10 a merely decent one, but the T-10 is also a medium and a heavy, and the Conq is none of those things.
  7. 704 can rrr Tier 10s though
  8. Wasn't the 44-100, not the Mod 1, released as a marathon tank? No idea about NA however
  9. The -7 is only at the front btw. It's like the M4 45 in that respect. I would rather play the 44-100 as @CarbonWard pointed out, which is more flexible in every possible way. Prior to Tier 8 MM getting fucked over the T54 mod 1's hull armour had a point. Now it doesn't.
  10. Better armour for bullying, better armour for getting trollbounces, is more than 50% faster both forward and in reverse. Gun is objectively worse but the platform is so much better. Besides 340 pen HEAT makes the T-10 better suited for the meta. Also doesn't get deleted by arty, and has an ammo rack as opposed to the loader piling 120mm shells on his lap.
  11. True. But the E100 was never about being 100% impenetrable. It's armour is a tool to make them aim long enough so you can dunk sizzling 750 alfa shells into whatever flat surface you can find. This makes the tank strong against superheavies and immeasurably shit against things like competent 113s or 5A which rely on angles and have high gold pen.
  12. Lowe can bully Tier6s and anchor against most 10s.
  13. Less DPM than the IS-3, ewwwww IMO this tank sacrifices too much for the 122mm. The T-44 has about 400 more DPM and the 416 has almost 1k more, although the STG does have better flat accuracy than both. Moreover, the armour is unreliable and lacks bully potential. The rear turret placement is awkward, and it cannot sidescrape reliably due to the hull cheeks. All this makes it a dedicated support tank - but even in that role it is merely decent due to the DPM.
  14. Until recently I thought DiagonalSushitSensei and @Chi Ri were the same person. Apparently not.
  15. The tank got a 50% increase in gun depression in 9.20, and though I didn't suspect it, it became vastly better. Firepower has never been the 50 100's problem, it was comfort. Giving it American levels of gundep makes it so much easier to unload and use terrain. Now the only thing that holds it back is its outsize clip - which for better or for worse defines the tank.