Jump to content


VK4502P Ausf. B


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
14 replies to this topic

firepool #1 Posted Jun 12 2012 - 15:08

    Sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 9348 battles
  • 132
  • Member since:
    01-14-2011
Here's my suggestion for a way to make the Ausf B competitive with other tier 9s while still not changing the role of the tank.

Increase side hull armor to 150mm and rear hull to 130mm.  Leave everything else the same.

The Ausf B is worse than the E75 in EVERY way except turret and gun, where it is equal.  E75 front, side and rear hull is more effective, it has much better mobility and of course better turret positioning.

Now I'm not suggesting we make the Ausf B the same tank as the E75 - I think tactically it will always be a less useful tank anyway.  But here are the following two points of the Ausf B which should, in my opinion, define it:
  • Strong armor and accurate gun allowing for decent mid-long range combat
  • Rear mounted turret and poor mobility which prepares the player to play the Maus
The second point is the most important.  Look at the other tech trees:  The M103 plays very much like the T110E5, the ST-I to IS-4, the IS-8 to IS-7, the E-75 to E-100.  The problem with the Ausf B is that it cannot play like the maus because its armor is not even close to the tier 9 equivalent of the Maus.  The problem is the side armor NOT the front, which while riddled with weak spots and weaker than the E75 or M103 is still sufficient if used well.  One vital tactic of the Maus is angling and using the reliable side armor at angles of 30 degrees or even more to deflect as many shells as possible.  The Ausf. B can only afford an angle of 10-15 degrees because its side armor is so thin, meaning it is very hard to bounce shells with your lower hull against tier 9 or 10 guns.

A side armor increase would also improve the Ausf Bs survivability against lower tier tanks.  Compared to the other bunker-like tanks in game (ST-I, IS-4, Maus) which with any sort of angle can be very tough for tanks two or more tiers below to penetrate anywhere, the Ausf B is incredible vulnerable as even tier 6 tanks can easily penetrate its side and rear hull unless significantly angled.

So to recap, increasing side hull armor to 150mm (approx) and rear hull to 130mm (approx) would make the ausf B able to fulfil the role I think Wargaming wants it to have.  The tank would still be unique and have character, but would be able to fight well if used correctly.

I actually think any other sort of buff to this tank would be a shame and damage its uniqueness and its role, but it IS in sore need of a boost, so please consider the above.

bobobobobiy #2 Posted Jun 12 2012 - 15:13

    Captain

  • Players
  • 9329 battles
  • 1,506
  • Member since:
    04-16-2011
Increasing side armor would make it invincible with the "ferdi" tactic, of peeking out out building by going backwards while angled a tiny bit to the opposite of the way you want to go. It's hard to explain, so search it up a little. However, when done right, it only reveals VERY slanted side armor and the front of your turret.

___________
------------------l
------------------l
------------------l _
___________l l l
,,,,,,,,,,,,,, \\\\\\\\\l l
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, \\\\\\\\l\l
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, \\\\ /llll\
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, \\ lllllllll
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, \ llllllllll


I tried drawing it lol.

Edited by bobobobobiy, Jun 12 2012 - 15:29.


zephoid #3 Posted Jun 12 2012 - 15:20

    Captain

  • Players
  • 19413 battles
  • 1,222
  • [FEL0N] FEL0N
  • Member since:
    03-13-2011
thats kind of the point.... You cant use peeking on many maps because you just get flanked. Right now the AusB is the least used teir 9 by orders of magnitude. It has been the worst teir 9 heavy since beta and has just gotten worse as time has gone on. Both other teir 9s from beta have been replaced or buffed up. About time for this one.

PanzerRaider #4 Posted Jun 12 2012 - 15:20

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 8407 battles
  • 394
  • Member since:
    03-10-2012
I think bobobobobiy is refering to the side scrapper technique, which is effective in alot of different tanks.

sxegregor #5 Posted Jun 12 2012 - 15:24

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 8131 battles
  • 847
  • Member since:
    03-06-2011
I had that tank and had zero problems with it even before the top gun. I managed to take out many tier 10s and others. I don't know where you've gone wrong.

Just don't get thrown off by the turret in the back ALWAYS keep you front in front it's bouncy enough to withstand tier 10 shots in most situations

I never had a match where i left angry that tank.

bobobobobiy #6 Posted Jun 12 2012 - 15:30

    Captain

  • Players
  • 9329 battles
  • 1,506
  • Member since:
    04-16-2011
Thanks for the -1, people.

EDIT: Thanks to the person who zero'ed it.

Edited by bobobobobiy, Jun 12 2012 - 15:40.


zephoid #7 Posted Jun 12 2012 - 15:48

    Captain

  • Players
  • 19413 battles
  • 1,222
  • [FEL0N] FEL0N
  • Member since:
    03-13-2011
@sxegregor, you have a 44% win ratio with that tank. You obviously weren't pulling your own weight no matter how much you believe you were.


I am aware of the tactic of peeking, where you stick your rear (or front here) into a building and and rotate the side out slightly to expose only highly angled side armor. However, meds can easily flank you from that position and deny you that ability. Arty can still hit you, tanks can still rush you, and some tanks can just go and pen your turret. Its not an invulnerable tactic or one that can be used on most maps. Himms, ruinberg, and Sigfried line are probably the only 3 its common on, though south coast has some places

Buffing the side armor might make more sense if they gave it skirts (even better, add the skirts with the 2nd tracks and add the weight there). Its the kind of tank that could utilize them with the large side armor providing many mounting points. Would also make it look better IMO. Rear armor.... eh im not so sure. It would be nice, but hard to justify. Id rather see a 20mm lower plate buff since these new guns can just pen that all day long.

ANGARON #8 Posted Jun 12 2012 - 16:03

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 16474 battles
  • 139
  • [CHAOS] CHAOS
  • Member since:
    02-27-2011
Me ether i love the tank i have it with the brothers perk maxed.

DannyT251 #9 Posted Jun 12 2012 - 17:02

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 19501 battles
  • 974
  • Member since:
    04-30-2011
Yes, yes and once again yes!

sxegregor #10 Posted Jun 12 2012 - 17:22

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 8131 battles
  • 847
  • Member since:
    03-06-2011

View Postzephoid, on Jun 12 2012 - 15:48, said:

@sxegregor, you have a 44% win ratio with that tank. You obviously weren't pulling your own weight no matter how much you believe you were.


I am aware of the tactic of peeking, where you stick your rear (or front here) into a building and and rotate the side out slightly to expose only highly angled side armor. However, meds can easily flank you from that position and deny you that ability. Arty can still hit you, tanks can still rush you, and some tanks can just go and pen your turret. Its not an invulnerable tactic or one that can be used on most maps. Himms, ruinberg, and Sigfried line are probably the only 3 its common on, though south coast has some places

Buffing the side armor might make more sense if they gave it skirts (even better, add the skirts with the 2nd tracks and add the weight there). Its the kind of tank that could utilize them with the large side armor providing many mounting points. Would also make it look better IMO. Rear armor.... eh im not so sure. It would be nice, but hard to justify. Id rather see a 20mm lower plate buff since these new guns can just pen that all day long.

Well win ratio doesn't mean much...the way I played myself was good. Plus I'm not saying how amazing I was in that tank I'm just saying its good in the right hands.I'd appreciate it if you didn't put people down like that too. Completely unnecessary

hailene2092 #11 Posted Jun 12 2012 - 17:49

    Major

  • Players
  • 13062 battles
  • 2,469
  • Member since:
    05-29-2011

View Postsxegregor, on Jun 12 2012 - 17:22, said:

Well win ratio doesn't mean much...the way I played myself was good. Plus I'm not saying how amazing I was in that tank I'm just saying its good in the right hands.I'd appreciate it if you didn't put people down like that too. Completely unnecessary

If the 45% win percentage wasn't enough, how about the 1020 average damage (my bloody tier 6 Arl has higher average damage), .65 kills per a game, and 546 average experience?

Where's your excuse now?  Your performance is definitely substandard for a tier 9.  Heck, it's probably substandard for a VK 4502 B.

Anyway, back on topic.  The VK has some serious issues.  Having played every tier 9, I must say it's the weakest of the bunch.  It's pretty slow, has thin armor (even in the front), and the damned rear mounted turret has some issues.  As the OP pointed out, the E-75 does anything the VK can do, and better.

Honestly, increasing the side and rear armor wouldn't do too much. It's unangled and so easy to penetrate. I guess you could begin angling your front like crazy, though.

I can't think of a better suggestion (besides giving it a more accurate, faster firing gun and a bit of speed).

MaxL_1023 #12 Posted Jun 12 2012 - 19:26

    Major

  • Players
  • 30342 battles
  • 2,477
  • Member since:
    07-15-2011
I averaged 2500+ dpg in mine, and would probably break 2750 if I played it now. All the tank really needs is the side and rear buffed to the same 120mm as the E-75 - 150/130 would be overkill. The front armor is still quite strong, but an additional 5mm on the upper plate may be needed to allow the upper glacis to remain resistant to the 260-270 penetration guns. Right now anything that can depress into it will penetrate if it has 248+ penetration.

Edited by MaxL_1023, Jun 12 2012 - 19:27.


RuthlessBastard #13 Posted Jun 12 2012 - 19:36

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 13032 battles
  • 297
  • [TRBC] TRBC
  • Member since:
    03-10-2012
I can kill ausf b in my kv5 one on one. Soo it needs a buff the same way a kv5 needs to have the r2d2 made into spaced armor with damage going trough only if the angle of penetration doesn't send It clear trough the r2d2 .please + 1 me I'm at -57 for no reason as I only state my opinions and do not insult or make fun of. Well... Maybe sometimes.

DV_Currie_VC #14 Posted Jun 12 2012 - 19:54

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 26268 battles
  • 1,549
  • [ACES] ACES
  • Member since:
    08-04-2010
I like the tank. Don't use it very much anymore, as I grind the crew in my Lowe. I use my E75 more. Still, I have over 200 battles in it, 56% wins, 874 avg XP, and 1910 efficiency. It needs to be run carefully.

Darkflame #15 Posted Jun 12 2012 - 21:33

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 14692 battles
  • 761
  • Member since:
    04-14-2011
Come on, only the IS7 needs a boost !!!