Jump to content


T110, T30, M103, and Hellcat nerfs are in


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

Jacob0423 #221 Posted Jun 07 2012 - 23:46

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 3614 battles
  • 10
  • Member since:
    02-27-2012
Why should the Hellcats supencion be nerfed, IRL it was a very fast and manuverable armoured vehical. (armoured is a lightly used term for this TD) I think the M18 and the M36 where pretty balenced out.

KilljoyCutter #222 Posted Jun 08 2012 - 01:48

    Major

  • Players
  • 8469 battles
  • 26,214
  • Member since:
    05-07-2011
They're nerfing it because they fundamentally fail to understand what US TDs were like, what the doctrine was, and how they were used.

SpectreHD #223 Posted Jun 08 2012 - 03:15

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 16835 battles
  • 17,115
  • [TT] TT
  • Member since:
    07-12-2010

View PostHaides, on Jun 07 2012 - 23:36, said:

Let's just get off the whole autoaim argument since that was silly when that guy started it. I don't use it and honestly, no one should ever be using it.

I'm not saying aim for the upper glacis. I'm just saying that autoaim in the T110's front is fairly futile as it'll probably hit the harder bits and bounce as well.

You do realize that it's the same for the IS-8, right? Even tier 6 heavies can go through the front easily, not something that can be said of the M103.

Sorry, Tier 6s can go through the front of the M103. The only difference is they have to aim. The same for the IS-8.

Drive_Me_Closer #224 Posted Jun 08 2012 - 03:23

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 7300 battles
  • 639
  • Member since:
    04-09-2011

View PostHaides, on Jun 07 2012 - 23:36, said:

Let's just get off the whole autoaim argument since that was silly when that guy started it. I don't use it and honestly, no one should ever be using it.

I'm not saying aim for the upper glacis. I'm just saying that autoaim in the T110's front is fairly futile as it'll probably hit the harder bits and bounce as well.

You do realize that it's the same for the IS-8, right? Even tier 6 heavies can go through the front easily, not something that can be said of the M103.

The M103 has a good angle on its front if it is directly facing you.  Otherwise 160 mm pen is more then sufficient.  The IS8's sloped 200 mm front will bounce more then the M103s 127.  Plus the M103's angles are not properly modeled, so you can pen the cheeks next to the mantlet easily rather then bouncing like you should.  

The IS8's hull is basically the same as the IS3, so it fares about the same as the M103 against T8s.

Haides #225 Posted Jun 08 2012 - 03:26

    Major

  • Players
  • 9246 battles
  • 2,166
  • [IOC] IOC
  • Member since:
    08-14-2011

View PostDrive_Me_Closer, on Jun 08 2012 - 03:23, said:

The M103 has a good angle on its front if it is directly facing you.  Otherwise 160 mm pen is more then sufficient.  The IS8's sloped 200 mm front will bounce more then the M103s 127.  Plus the M103's angles are not properly modeled, so you can pen the cheeks next to the mantlet easily rather then bouncing like you should.  

The IS8's hull is basically the same as the IS3, so it fares about the same as the M103 against T8s.
The IS-8's front is not 200 mm thick, nor is it even 200 mm effective. The lower plate is only about 130 mm effective and the upper plates 180 mm effective (with angling taken in, as well)

Engine_of_War #226 Posted Jun 08 2012 - 03:31

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 11367 battles
  • 840
  • [TAEON] TAEON
  • Member since:
    11-19-2010
If nerfs  continue Ill see you all in Planetside 2.


Point blank.
American tanks and Germans do NOT need nerfs of anykind. They need buffs more. including but not limited too. shrinking some tanks in size. or increase armor values through armor composition and density. better guns and so on.

Russians. don't need anything thing more.

Frenchys. remove that heavy handed reload nerf on the heavys. you can extend the reload just reduce the nerf. i dunno. it take my AMX 100 40+ second to fully reload (100% crew). how about 30 seconds more or less instead?

KnightFandragon #227 Posted Jun 08 2012 - 05:16

    Major

  • Players
  • 4617 battles
  • 6,732
  • Member since:
    05-06-2011

View PostDrive_Me_Closer, on Jun 08 2012 - 03:23, said:

The M103 has a good angle on its front if it is directly facing you.  Otherwise 160 mm pen is more then sufficient.  The IS8's sloped 200 mm front will bounce more then the M103s 127.  Plus the M103's angles are not properly modeled, so you can pen the cheeks next to the mantlet easily rather then bouncing like you should.  

The IS8's hull is basically the same as the IS3, so it fares about the same as the M103 against T8s.

Well my uncle and I tried the straight on shots, the E75 penned every dead on shot, only shells that flew wide and ricorshitted off the roof or some odd angle off the gun mantle bounced....That is not good armor...IS8 armor...idk, it does seem about as useless, but the IS8 has massive speed bonuses...ive seen it rush off hills and perform the medium role perfectly fine as it...IT does even bounce M58 rounds off its turret and hull....I did it a number of times in like 3 firing tests against my uncle.  The IS8 penned on every dead on shot, the T62 has poor dispersion at range...but up close, yeah, it works.  Lowe? It ate my tank for dinner as well....no real issue.  In actual game play, everything from pershings to E75s, to T29s eat the frontal armor for dinner...there is no angling to save it, reversing, jinking..yeah, that angle means nothing...

Edited by KnightFandragon, Jun 08 2012 - 05:17.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users