Jump to content


Buffs for T110 and M103 for 2nd Test Server Update


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
471 replies to this topic

KnightFandragon #381 Posted Mar 16 2012 - 19:49

    Major

  • Players
  • 4618 battles
  • 6,719
  • Member since:
    05-06-2011

View Postrazielkaine, on Mar 16 2012 - 19:42, said:

Mm needs to recognise  support heaviest as they currently are and pair them off with one true heavy in team.Tier

Yeah, GL with that one.  IT would have to start with a renaming of the tech trees and a serious MM reweight for the support heavies.  The US heavies should be renamed "Heavy Gun Tanks" According to what WG is calling the new tanks and the French should prolly be called the same thing.  Thn reduce the MM weight of them to just above a same tier medium and a T10 HGT, give it T9 med MM weight.  Even in their own current system there are changes that could be made to make it not so retarded...

Doctuer #382 Posted Mar 16 2012 - 19:54

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 24518 battles
  • 745
  • Member since:
    07-19-2010
Don't be too black and white on the issue just to make your point seem stronger. As an example, me and my platoon mate won 85% of our games over a 3 hour period last night as the top teired heavy tanks in our games, driving AMX50's. We didn't have any problem with "support leading support" as many seem to be claiming is a fact, when in fact, it is only an opinion.

The T110E is going to be similar to the French AMX50's ... as a "heavy" tank it will do very well or extremely badly almost entirely on the player driving them, and the teamwork of course. There will be no middle ground.

Jensen_Blayloc #383 Posted Mar 16 2012 - 20:14

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 12339 battles
  • 598
  • [GANG] GANG
  • Member since:
    08-07-2010
The AMX 50B especially if run in pairs is redculous. The 110 is not going to produce the damage output of the 50B, not even close. Trading 1.5 shots to 1 is not the same as trading 4 shots to 1.

Whiskey_dod #384 Posted Mar 16 2012 - 20:16

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 25763 battles
  • 1,092
  • Member since:
    10-07-2010

View PostKnightFandragon, on Mar 16 2012 - 19:18, said:

Take that "Support" tank BS and GTFO......I would be willing to say were support tanks if the damn MM wasnt such BS and actually put US Tanks in a support role of a Frontline heavy.  However, nooooo, the MM Simply goes by TIER and so that leaves us "SUPPORT" tanks In a "LEAD" role!!  Top of the friggin Rung trying to take our Bullshit in a Box up against Real tanks sooo damn often.  Sooo, no, give us a goddamn T9 and T10 LEAD heavy just like the rest of the nations...cuz guess WHAT!?  THE MEDIUMS ARE SUPPORT!!!! ARTY isSUPPORT!!!  A LIGHT is support, TDs are SUPPORT!! HEAVY is a LEADER!!! you get out there, you stick your gun barrel down the enemies throat, have them stick theirs down yours and repeat the process until the battle is decided....

You sound angry...

And what's the big deal with certain heavies not being front-line heavies? Sure, in a perfect world all heavies would be pushers, but life isn't perfect. If you go around expecting everything to be perfect, you will be... well... angry.

KnightFandragon #385 Posted Mar 16 2012 - 20:27

    Major

  • Players
  • 4618 battles
  • 6,719
  • Member since:
    05-06-2011

View PostWhiskey_dod, on Mar 16 2012 - 20:16, said:

You sound angry...

And what's the big deal with certain heavies not being front-line heavies? Sure, in a perfect world all heavies would be pushers, but life isn't perfect. If you go around expecting everything to be perfect, you will be... well... angry.

No, I do not expect every tank to be a line pusher..but if your going to pigeonhole a tank into a certain role, well...stick it in that role and DO NOT put it in a position to where it has the potential to have to fill a role which it is NOT supposed to fill. In this case, saying the US Line is support, but then constantly putting them in the top 2 or 3 tanks in the lead role...thats the top spots where everyone expects you to push and quite frankly...that is the job of those top tanks..to pus the line, breakthrough, have your other lighter stuff come in behind and support you.  The US Tanks cannot do that job well.  If you sit back and do the job of the mediums as the lead tanks, well, tht just makes for a big camping team and camper teams taht do not move t all are just as successful as Support tanks pushing with support tanks against lead tanks....  Would you want to be a Nascar racer who is forced to use a friggin Chevy astro fan?  Its the same difference with the MM and the way the devs design and call the US Tanks Support tanks but then will gladly put them in a position which they simply do not belong....  Or In Mechwarrior...you dont take your Cougar Light up against Loki's, Thor's and Warhawk Heavy and Assault mechs, and actually be expected to do well....sure, maybe you might have a freak of nature occurance but as a general rule...I will take my own Warhawk up against those thank you very much.  Sooo, I say, either change the MM to put tanks more so into their own roles or change the tanks so they can better fulfill the role which they are going to be forced to fulfil.  Am I angry?  Only in game.....just me raging on the forums about how retarded WG is with the way they call tanks one thing, design tanks a certain way they when it comes time to play them in their role you find out oh, wow....im now the lead role, cant do that very well at all......

KnightFandragon #386 Posted Mar 16 2012 - 20:32

    Major

  • Players
  • 4618 battles
  • 6,719
  • Member since:
    05-06-2011

View Postloregothe, on Mar 16 2012 - 20:14, said:

The AMX 50B especially if run in pairs is redculous. The 110 is not going to produce the damage output of the 50B, not even close. Trading 1.5 shots to 1 is not the same as trading 4 shots to 1.

Yeah, the French tanks can take down 1 tank between 2 of them, 1 drum of 4 simpyl doesnt kill a full tank.  Then what does that leave for 30 sseconds?  You either sit there in your french tank to make the enemy think you are loaded or you retreat and the enemy whips your teams ass for 30 seconds...you then hope there is still a team or frontline left when you return.  French tanks are the absolute epitome of a Support tank..fast, quick, deadly burst damage...they NEED their team....solo they really arent worth their weight in furballs....All that talk about people saying French are OP...naw, I cant say they are OP, just very effective when used properly, junk when not....Just like an IS4 or E75...very effective at the job they are set to fulfill and to boot, very able to fulfill their set job...the US tanks not so much...They commonly have to spend half the round finding a place to setup so they can begin to pretend to fulfill their role...and even then you better bring an umberella cuz its raining arty rounds.

Whiskey_dod #387 Posted Mar 16 2012 - 20:33

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 25763 battles
  • 1,092
  • Member since:
    10-07-2010
That is a MM issue, not a tank issue. Just because a tank is difficult to play in a pub, doesn't make it a bad tank...

KnightFandragon #388 Posted Mar 16 2012 - 20:41

    Major

  • Players
  • 4618 battles
  • 6,719
  • Member since:
    05-06-2011

View PostWhiskey_dod, on Mar 16 2012 - 20:33, said:

That is a MM issue, not a tank issue. Just because a tank is difficult to play in a pub, doesn't make it a bad tank...

W/E the issue, it should be fixed and it never will be.  Knowing the fix is right there staring us all in the face and the devs wont take time to fix it....Instead they want to sit and relase half baked content 4 months after they say it will be released.....Then during testing phase, which I thought was the time to give suggestions and get stuff fixed, the Devs are just like.....more vodka please, lets get this thing going...ok, change that to that *We have pleyrs who think we should do *This* to this tank*...*Naw, lets keep it how we want it, just tell them we cant do anything about it*....So we end up with half baked BS...

Cobra39 #389 Posted Mar 16 2012 - 20:50

    Captain

  • Players
  • 33014 battles
  • 1,342
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

View PostWhiskey_dod, on Mar 16 2012 - 15:17, said:

Posted Image

Just sayin...

The American heavy line has almost always been more of a supporting line. Sure, the T110 isn't as strong in the turret as the T30 was, but anyone who knew what they were doing could pen the t30 when it's hull-down anyways. I am just as unhappy as the rest of you about the hatch, but it's weakness can be minimized similarly to how we compensated for the t30's weaknesses, if not better. Keep good range on the enemy and pound them to the ground with the gun. American heavies have never been front line tanks, why would you expect any different now?
Please tell me why American heavy drivers always have to be "more of a supporting line"?  The devs had basically a clean sheet of paper to give us a new tier 10 that would be competitive with the Russians and Germans and they gave us another "support" vehicle. It's infuriating and, yes, biased. Oh, I forgot, the tank actually is very "comfortable", I will give it that.

Whiskey_dod #390 Posted Mar 16 2012 - 21:08

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 25763 battles
  • 1,092
  • Member since:
    10-07-2010

View Postcobra39, on Mar 16 2012 - 20:50, said:

Please tell me why American heavy drivers always have to be "more of a supporting line"?  The devs had basically a clean sheet of paper to give us a new tier 10 that would be competitive with the Russians and Germans and they gave us another "support" vehicle. It's infuriating and, yes, biased. Oh, I forgot, the tank actually is very "comfortable", I will give it that.

...

If you didn't want a 'support' vehicle to begin with, why would you even grind the American heavies? Because they're American? And how are support tanks NOT competitive? Because they can't be on the front line? So what! If you don't like a tank line... then don't grind it. That's like buying an SUV then complaining that it uses up too much gas...

I understand that you all wanted another IS-7, but why would someone even want something like an IS-7 when they could just have... an IS-7.

9mmCapsule #391 Posted Mar 16 2012 - 21:24

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 8393 battles
  • 886
  • Member since:
    01-14-2012

View PostWhiskey_dod, on Mar 16 2012 - 21:08, said:

...

If you didn't want a 'support' vehicle to begin with, why would you even grind the American heavies? Because they're American? And how are support tanks NOT competitive? Because they can't be on the front line? So what! If you don't like a tank line... then don't grind it. That's like buying an SUV then complaining that it uses up too much gas...

I understand that you all wanted another IS-7, but why would someone even want something like an IS-7 when they could just have... an IS-7.
Firstly, I didn't design this game, I'm a player, we all start somewhere, somewhere we don't know anything about this game except it looks cool and it's about tanks
Secondly, I love Sherman and Pershing tanks, they are my favorite tanks during the WWII, and the game CoH, I want to play them in this game
Thirdly, neither Sherman nor Pershing tank was solely used as support tank during the war, not to mention Sherman Firefly and super Pershing (which is the Pershing in game), they are quite capable to take out German tanks like Tiger and Panther on their own, this game only kept historical accuracy for certain US tanks to make sure they can fit a support role better, nonsense.
Finally, we don't want another IS7 that's cherry picked and only workable in dev's head, what we want is another ADEQUATE tier 10 that don't have a weak spot as large as Titanic and punches enemy like a tier 10, not tier 8

aquabat #392 Posted Mar 16 2012 - 22:01

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 10378 battles
  • 620
  • Member since:
    01-19-2011

View PostFaustianQ, on Mar 16 2012 - 17:41, said:

Of course, my beef is that simply it's such a drastic change up form what you have been taught since day 1 with American heavies. Eliminate the "tumor", and it'd play exactly like every other American heavy and be able to participate on the front lines. It's maddening that developer dogma is what keeping that from happening, and all I'd ask for is the hatch to be a critical hitzone (but not the whole thing), hell since there are hydraulic fuel lines in it, throw a "transmission" hitbox in it, just make it stop taking damage.

From my experience with this tank (using all sorts of different skills setup and gold/non gold loadouts) I'd say the only thing this guy can't do that the T30 can is being hull down.

Yeah, the tumor makes your life harder, but from my experience people tend to miss it more than hit when you are on the move. It's fast and agile enough moving forward to keep up with mediums/is7s. It reloads very fast (IIRC, it's 7.8s with rammer and vent), so you're able to put out 3 shots for the first 2 shots of a T30, meaning you're just going to be 350dmg short. All in all, it's an ok tank. I liked my T30 better, but only because of the alpha.

Now I would love to see the tumor removed, but it doesn't make the tank unplayable. Just like the lack of armor (except for the mantlet) didn't make the T30 unplayable. What, in my opinion, would be the best avenue to improve this guy is giving it 10° depression and increasing it's reverse speed, but from what I've seen, this guy does just as well as the T30 in pugs.

As for CW, all I've been was a grunt in such battles but I think this guy might be a perfect counter for french tanks. That being said, I must defer to Mow_Mow's opinion that it will only be taken by clans that can't field tier 9s, though. ;)

CodyMenz #393 Posted Mar 16 2012 - 22:17

    Major

  • Community Contributor
  • 35509 battles
  • 2,891
  • [VAN] VAN
  • Member since:
    07-09-2011
Check out my Youtube Channel.  Have a few of the T110/M103 from Test #1 and uploading Test #2 videos as I type this.

http://www.youtube.c...dymenz04/videos




Cobra39 #394 Posted Mar 16 2012 - 23:05

    Captain

  • Players
  • 33014 battles
  • 1,342
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

View PostWhiskey_dod, on Mar 16 2012 - 21:08, said:

...

If you didn't want a 'support' vehicle to begin with, why would you even grind the American heavies? Because they're American? And how are support tanks NOT competitive? Because they can't be on the front line? So what! If you don't like a tank line... then don't grind it. That's like buying an SUV then complaining that it uses up too much gas...

I understand that you all wanted another IS-7, but why would someone even want something like an IS-7 when they could just have... an IS-7.
Stop trolling. I ground the Russian heavy line first, then the German. I saved the American line for last (there was no French line). I have four tier 10 heavies and can have the AMX 50B if I wanted it right now. The American line is by far the weakest. Considering liberties have been taken with so many tanks that never existed, then why could the devs not come up with an American heavy that could go toe-to-toe with an IS-7 or any other of the tier 9's and 10's?  It's either incompetence, laziness or bias. Take your pick.

The Americans designed an oscillating turret heavy tank that mounted the 155mm of the T30 and had an autoloader. Why do you think that tank wasn't chosen for development in the game? You already know the answer to that one.

Here is the tier 10 we should have had, the T58:

http://www.tankinfo..../images/T58.png

http://media.desura...._1244719990.jpg

ice101v #395 Posted Mar 16 2012 - 23:16

    Major

  • Players
  • 10361 battles
  • 2,858
  • Member since:
    03-27-2011

View Postcobra39, on Mar 16 2012 - 23:05, said:


The Americans designed an oscillating turret heavy tank that mounted the 155mm of the T30 and had an autoloader. Why do you think that tank wasn't chosen for development in the game? You already know the answer to that one.


Cause a tank with the 155 on an auto loader would rape anything in existence with half a drum?

Tupinambis #396 Posted Mar 16 2012 - 23:22

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 39258 battles
  • 15,753
  • Member since:
    12-22-2010

View PostFaustianQ, on Mar 16 2012 - 19:14, said:

As far as the current metagame is concerned, if a tank is not capable of offensive action, it's not worth a slot. The basic question comes down to - can a T110E5 fight other T10 heavies on it's own? Can it defeat an IS-7, or E-100, without being those tanks, and without requiring a higher skill level.

If yes, then the T110E5 will find a place in UC, since it has a purpose and is different enough that teams will find a way to use it.
If no, then the T110E5 will be relegated to obscurity or as the last chosen for a team.

Yes, depending on the combat situation. Long ranges? Yes. close range 1v1 slugfest? Yes [since it can just out DPM them].
Urban peek-a-boo? No.

Tupinambis #397 Posted Mar 16 2012 - 23:23

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 39258 battles
  • 15,753
  • Member since:
    12-22-2010

View Postcobra39, on Mar 16 2012 - 23:05, said:


The Americans designed an oscillating turret heavy tank that mounted the 155mm of the T30 and had an autoloader. Why do you think that tank wasn't chosen for development in the game? You already know the answer to that one.


Logic says because that would be obscenely unbalanced. I don't think that was the answer you were looking for though.

BeingBadNotBeingGood #398 Posted Mar 16 2012 - 23:26

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 9808 battles
  • 5,662
  • Member since:
    10-15-2010

View Postcobra39, on Mar 16 2012 - 23:05, said:

Stop trolling. I ground the Russian heavy line first, then the German. I saved the American line for last (there was no French line). I have four tier 10 heavies and can have the AMX 50B if I wanted it right now. The American line is by far the weakest. Considering liberties have been taken with so many tanks that never existed, then why could the devs not come up with an American heavy that could go toe-to-toe with an IS-7 or any other of the tier 9's and 10's?  It's either incompetence, laziness or bias. Take your pick.

The Americans designed an oscillating turret heavy tank that mounted the 155mm of the T30 and had an autoloader. Why do you think that tank wasn't chosen for development in the game? You already know the answer to that one.

Here is the tier 10 we should have had, the T58
The T58 is OP, you just can't balance it into the game. The T57 on the other hand might work. 8 round 120mm drum while having about half the speed and slightly more armor than 50B might work. Works better as a tier 10 TD though...

Cobra39 #399 Posted Mar 16 2012 - 23:28

    Captain

  • Players
  • 33014 battles
  • 1,342
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

View Postice101v, on Mar 16 2012 - 23:16, said:

Cause a tank with the 155 on an auto loader would rape anything in existence with half a drum?
They also designed a 120 mm gun version of it.

CCC_Dober #400 Posted Mar 16 2012 - 23:40

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 0 battles
  • 1,476
  • Member since:
    10-19-2010
balance tip: reduced drum capacity, increased time between shots

Can't be balanced is a lame excuse, especially with the devs unerring ability to nerf even the most underpowered tanks to hell and back (take current T34 as example, it's even worse than before). They can be very creative, given enough incentive.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users