Jump to content

Tupinambis

Verified Tanker [NA]
  • Content Count

    670
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by Tupinambis

  1. Rhetorical question, which tank does a better job making the TVP VTU look like a complete bitch? This or the Lansen C?
  2. More complete stats CS-63. Initial Parameters: (Fast mode)* Tier: MT-10, Polska, standard HP: 2 000 Engine: 740 hp (1 150 hp)* Mass: 40,85 t Maximum load: 42,50 t Power-to-weight: 18,12 hp / t Max speed / Reverse speed: 55 (70)* / -15 km / h Hull turning speed: 48,0 °/s Turret turning speed: 52,10 °/s Terrain resistance values: 0,575 / 0,671 / 1,534 View range: 400 m Radio range: 730 m Hull armor: 80 / 50 / 40 mm Turret armor: 260 / 60 / 40 mm Gun: 105 mm armata wz. 64 Alpha Damage: 390 / 390 / 510 Penetration: 258 / 315 / 53 mm Rate of fire: 7,361 rounds/minute Damage per minute: 2 870,90 Reload time: 8,151 s Accuracy at 100 m: 0,345 Aiming time: 2,21 s (3,5 s)* Depression/Elevation: -8 ° / + 20 ° Time needed to change from standard to fast mode: 2,0 s Rounds in magazine: 50 Shell speed: 1 241 m/s Crew – 4 members: Commander, Driver, Gunner, Loader. Aim spread: after firing: 2.877 (4.0) *; during turret rotation: 0.058 (0.3) *; during vehicle movement: 0.115 (0.45) *; during vehicle rotation: 0.115 (0.45) *; during turret rotation at maximum speed: 2.88; at the maximum vehicle speed: 6.33; at the maximum vehicle rotation speed: 5.52. Camouflage Values: fixed tank camouflage: 28.0%; tank camouflage in motion: 21.0%; fixed tank camouflage while shooting: 5.85%; tank camouflage while shooting on the move: 4.39%. Seems fine. Getting to good positions fast seems like a neat gimmick, otherwise the tank just seems "fine", like the tier 8 premium.
  3. lol all the 240 alpha non-auto loader meds are gonna need a major rework soon. as for this tank it seems... fine? Like a clumsier Lansen C with a little bit of armor
  4. I like what this is going for. The actual execution we will have to see, but adjusting equipment cost for individual tiers is absolutely a good thing. Equipment was horrifically overpriced for low tier vehicles. Also I do like how at least *some* of the equipment options seem extremely valuable. Additional Grousers went from being a completely pointless shit equipment to something actually very valuable. Also a combo of improved tank helmets, module protection and superheavy spall liners might be an amazing combo for fat, slow tanks that get arty focused a lot, like the T95 or Maus.
  5. I'm strongly in the camp of "not every new line needs a gimmick", they just have to not be broken and stupid. With that said, this tank looks.... fine? The "go fast sometimes" looks neat, but yeah I'd rather them just have unusually good alpha and that pretty much be it.
  6. Isn't the SU-101 just the WZ-120G FT, but worse?
  7. This isn't the first time WG has done the "make a tank terrible on purpose" stress test in supertest. ....though I'm honestly not sure *WHY* they bother doing this, like what useful data are they supposed to get from this? All the same, its not the first time. I'd be kinda surprised if these end up being the stats that these vehicles go in with to the live server.
  8. I think we need to take a moment to appreciate the absolutely radical, extreme reverse-powercreep that we are witnessing with the KV-1S. First it was hiding in the shadow of its absolutely terrifying, crushing, monstrously powerful counterpart; the tier 6 KV-3 Then the KV-3 got moved up a tier, and the KV-1S stood shoulder to shoulder with the M18 Hellcat as being one of the most overpowered tanks in the entire game, a tier 7.5 medium masquerading as a tier 6 heavy. Then it was booted down to tier 5 where it has been resting as a completely solid, competent but balanced tier 5 heavy. Now its getting booted back up to being a tier 6 heavy and its absolutely horrendous. Easily the worst tier 6 heavy in the game. All the Wehraboos are whining about how bad the VK. 30.01P is going to be rebranded as a tier 6 heavy; its still going to be way better than this. Its like if you took an M6 heavy and.... made practically everything worse. Its armor only works against tier 4 mediums and the gun would be unimpressive even on a tier 5 heavy. Its so bad its actually funny.
  9. ??? the LFP and police bar on the E-100 are still pretty bad.This isn't anything like the Chrysler, Type 5 or Defender. Likewise, the IS-4 still has a pretty bad LFP and the shoulders aren't good if you're angling. Still not like the 279e either. I think its a good thing that the T110E5 isn't getting a turret armor buff.... only because doing that would just again result in it and the Superconq both trying to be the exact same tank. That's boring; this game has enough of that already. WG should buff the gun even more. If the E5 prioritizes firepower over armor it will at least be DIFFERENT from the superconq. Maybe not actually, like, GOOD, but at least different.
  10. Is it just me or does this tank not actually look that good? Kinda bad hull armor, meh turret armor, meh gun, kinda bad reload, meh mobility.... ...is there something I'm missing?
  11. From what I can tell; compare to battle passes in other games, the free one here is actually pretty good, but the paid one is overpriced
  12. You don't think that actually rewarding players for knowing when to, and not to use different ammo types isn't a redeeming quality? Is this somehow a downgrade compared to the current "Fire premium APCR and never shoot anything else because there's literally no reason to" meta? Releasing foxes to take care of your feral rabbit problem. You're not wrong, but I just can't get behind the "solve a problem with a stupider problem" logic. Being bottom tier sucks, that shouldn't justify keeping gold ammo as a terrible game mechanic. These are separate problems that need to be addressed separately. Will the gold ammo nerf also result in things like the Object 279e overperforming even more? Yeah probably, but WG should nerf that thing anyway; that still doesn't justify leaving gold ammo as is. Gold ammo itself lead directly to most of these other problems; it was the direct cause of the closed maps with minimal flanking opportunities and tanks with idiotic armor schemes and no functional weakspots, which in turn are the main reason why bottom tier MM is so miserable. Also its absolutely a good thing that standard ammo penetration becomes a meaningful game balance statistic again. Anyone here remember when the Panther and the AMX AC Mle 1946 were, like, actually considered good? Some tanks are specifically balanced around high standard pen and give up quite a bit to have it. Other tanks are specifically balanced around low standard pen and, likewise, get a lot in compensation for it.
  13. I think its fair to assume that the point of this patch wasn't to directly buff or nerf any specific vehicles, so a lot of tanks that were OP or UP before are still going to be that way in the sandbox. It has produced a lot of weird anomalies though of tanks moving tiers and then being absolute garbage. The KV-1S at tier 6 looks HORRENDOUS.
  14. T67 isn't gong away, but I bet they become a lot less popular when all the targets they have to shoot at are now completely bloated with hitpoints for them to try and carve through. Of course, their own durability will go up too, but they'll lose the ability to take away half of an enemy's hitpoints before they can even duck back into cover.
  15. Kind of ambivalent on this one. The KV-2 really, let’s be honest here, has nothing else going for it. It’s huge, slow, the armor kinda sucks for its tier, etc. if the HE shells sucked then the tank would be borderline unplayable unless WG decided to give it like weirdly good ROF, gun handling and accuracy.
  16. Gonna be honest, not seeing the problem here beyond cases of "I wanted the 113/T62A/AMX30B/etc but can't get it anymore" for the high tier stuff. Pruning down low tiers is good. It reduces the odds of a new player accidentally stumbling into a truly horrific tank and then quitting the game because of how bad it is [the only really bad low tiers left are the AMX 38 and AMX 40], and it makes backtracking into a new line less irritating. If I started the Swedish medium line for example, and then I want to go back and do the TD's, I don't have to cut through or waste free XP on a bunch of dumb low tier garbage anymore. It is kind of weird that some rather iconic tanks are being taken out, but at least for the low tiers WG is still keeping them accessible for all players. I was afraid they were going to be some dumb reward crap that's completely inaccessible for most players, like what the M60 used to be, but no. Specifically for the AMX 30, Im willing to bet that the AMX 30 re-incarnates later on as part of a continuous line connecting the Somua S35 at tier 3 all the way to the 30B at tier 10. WG went all crazy for "line consistency" between tiers 8 and 10; this is why the Badger got introduced, the Soviet medium and heavy lines got all sorts of messed with, and now all the French TD's at those tiers have autoloaders. Going from the BatChat 12T to the AMX 30 was always super weird and made no sense. Its likely that WG is trying to build a line that bridges the Renault G1R all the way to the AMX 30.
  17. I wouldn't be surprised if the 100mm of the Object 703 shows up. Also either the KV-4 Krev or that weird KV-4 TD. WG said that at least some of this stuff is going to be weird and things that have never really appeared before.
  18. I wouldn't be surprised if this thing has a lot of historical data backing it up. USA tanks are generally pretty good about this stuff.
  19. hmm... another tier 9 "special" vehicle. Suspicious.
  20. I'm not sure, the turret cupolas are REALLY wide and if the tank is rocking back and forth on just a horizontal axis, I still feel like these are going to be pretty easy to hit [also the green zones near the cupolas are 35mm thick, so they can be overmatched by a KV-5]. Rocking might work a lot better if you're on a hill, but then you're having to deal with the really bad bloom values and aim time.
  21. This tank made it in the 1.7.1 common test files. Hull armor looks completely idiotic - there are small strips of the front plate that look pennable with standard ammo but they're going to be very easy to miss. LFP is a weakspot but it too is very easy to miss. Boat shaped hull is almost completely idiot proof; the only flat surfaces are at the back roadwheels or hidden behind the suspension. The turret, however, has two cupolas that are REALLY big by Soviet standards, and are like 180mm thick. They're also completely unobstructed and will probably be very easy to hit outside of extremely long ranges. If you're shooting at it at the side; either aim for the rear portion, or aim for where the suspension is directly under the turret There's like a weird bulge that comes out of the hotbox that really isn't well angled. EDIT: Worth noting that the gun bloom values are pretty ugly movement0.26 rotation0.24 Turret dispersion is pretty good though 0.11
  22. Heads up: Gamemodels3d has the test version of 1.7.1 up. I don't know if anyting significant is in there, but I'm happy to see that the stock IS-2-II ISN'T stuck with absolutely miserable 85mm guns with like 160 pen or whatever it had it supertest. They're still 85mm guns, but they're magical and have like 212 stock pen. Also the shell cost for the 100mm version of the Object 703 II got adjusted, so they're probably planning on releasing that at some point. Honestly it looks better than the 122mm version.
  23. I'd rather them change all this stuff at once rather than trying to do one thing at a time, each consecutive change breaking the things that came before it.
  24. Oh, see, the bloom thing is another thing with the 703 II that makes it OP but isn't the double barrels. Imagine how amazing the 112 would be if it had those bloom values and the pen, even without the double barrels? Its really fun watching someone getting blapped for 800 damage, but the windup and winddown time for the double shot makes it really awkward and situational; the whole system amounts to a really clumsy quasi-autoreloader system. I guess I'll put it this way: would the IS-5 actually be any good if WG threw double barrels and made no other changes?
×
×
  • Create New...