Jump to content


TS-5 vs T110e3

Alternative Design

This topic has been archived.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

Poll: TS-5 vs T110e3 (126 members have cast votes)

Which one?

  1. T110e3 (13 votes [10.32%])

    Percentage of vote: 10.32%

  2. TS-5 (55 votes [43.65%])

    Percentage of vote: 43.65%

  3. Fantasy T95 upgrade (40 votes [31.75%])

    Percentage of vote: 31.75%

  4. Cheesedogs (18 votes [14.29%])

    Percentage of vote: 14.29%

Vote Hide poll

Priory_of_Sion #1 Posted Jun 12 2012 - 20:12

    Major

  • Players
  • 10324 battles
  • 5,915
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    11-08-2011
Right now the T110e3 will become the new tier X TD after the T95. I do not like this arrangement at all. The T110e3 will have less frontal armor and the same 155mm gun. It just doesn't make any sense for the T110e3 to be researched from the T95.

However there was a design from 1954 for a vehicle based off the T95/T28 project. That vehicle was the TS-5. The TS-5 was to mount the M58 120mm gun and could upgrade to the T7 155mm. The TS-5 would have the around the same armor values(slope is much better) of the T95 and would still be slightly smaller and would have a top speed of 16-21km/h.
http://sa100.ru/armo...es/ts_5_124.jpg
vs.
Posted Image



The TS-5 also looks better.
The T110e3 is just ugly.

IotaOmicron #2 Posted Jun 12 2012 - 20:15

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 6790 battles
  • 729
  • [23RDB] 23RDB
  • Member since:
    01-30-2011
are u saying that if i get my t110 soon i will be stuck with a stupid TD on my hands?   :Smile_sad:

DFM #3 Posted Jun 12 2012 - 20:25

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 21834 battles
  • 255
  • [RAGE] RAGE
  • Member since:
    08-11-2011
no thanks. You see that Tumor on the black and white? Much worse than the E3 screen.

who gives a crap about how much frontal armor you have if everything on the planet just aims for the commanders turret and rips it to shreds from 300m away.

Priory_of_Sion #4 Posted Jun 12 2012 - 20:33

    Major

  • Players
  • 10324 battles
  • 5,915
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    11-08-2011

View PostDFM, on Jun 12 2012 - 20:25, said:

no thanks. You see that Tumor on the black and white? Much worse than the E3 screen.

who gives a crap about how much frontal armor you have if everything on the planet just aims for the commanders turret and rips it to shreds from 300m away.
Well in the actual T110 designs the cupola was ALOT bigger. The T110e3's cupola has been shrunk. They can easily shrink the TS-5's cupola and make the front part of the cupola heavily armored as well.

T110e3 design with larger cupola.
Posted Image

blackwidowP61 #5 Posted Jun 12 2012 - 20:53

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 12952 battles
  • 267
  • Member since:
    02-01-2011

View PostIotaOmicron, on Jun 12 2012 - 20:15, said:

are u saying that if i get my t110 soon i will be stuck with a stupid TD on my hands?   :Smile_sad:
Not at all. The T110 in game is the T110E5 which is the heavy tank everyone knows and loves/hates.
WoT is going to add another 2 T110's to the game to the US TD trees.
T110E3 is the T95 upgrade (pictured above) and T110E4 is the T30 upgrade (pictured in the tier 10 announcement topic)
So in short all high tier US tank matches will be T110's in one form or another.

INKRO #6 Posted Jun 13 2012 - 01:50

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 9781 battles
  • 1,051
  • [RD] RD
  • Member since:
    07-27-2010
I'd like the TS-5 better, but WG is clearly trying to recycle as many art assets as they can in order to get these things out in time.

Drive_Me_Closer #7 Posted Jun 13 2012 - 03:06

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 7300 battles
  • 639
  • Member since:
    04-09-2011
There was a 62 ton design that mounted a 175 mm T145 cannon and glacias with 5 inches (127 mm) at 60 degrees.  Gigantic turret for superior comfort.

lostwingman #8 Posted Jun 13 2012 - 03:14

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 20334 battles
  • 20,284
  • [PBKAC] PBKAC
  • Member since:
    01-11-2011
Howabout both?
Plus, unless they lolmoararmoar the T110E3 I don't see how it is going to be much of an upgrade over the T95...

Priory_of_Sion #9 Posted Jun 13 2012 - 03:31

    Major

  • Players
  • 10324 battles
  • 5,915
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    11-08-2011

View Postlostwingman, on Jun 13 2012 - 03:14, said:

Howabout both?
Plus, unless they lolmoararmoar the T110E3 I don't see how it is going to be much of an upgrade over the T95...
Need 3rd TD line, but that is the idea. The TS-5 makes more sense than the T110e3 as being researched from the T95. The T110e3 needs to be researched from something else (TS-31 and TL-6 designs)

View PostDrive_Me_Closer, on Jun 13 2012 - 03:06, said:

There was a 62 ton design that mounted a 175 mm T145 cannon and glacias with 5 inches (127 mm) at 60 degrees.  Gigantic turret for superior comfort.
That is the H3. It also had an autoloader and much thicker armor than 127. AFAIK only the H1 and H2 had 127mm thick armor. The H3 looks like it is more around 200+mm of armor with a 175mm autolader.

The H1 would be a better replacement for the T110e4 (half-turret T110 design which actually didn't have a half-turret but just a regular casemate) The H1 would perform like a T30/T110e5 hybrid. The h1 would have the M58 or the T7(H2 design was the same as the H1 but with the 155mm T7).

http://armor.kiev.ua...y/PartII/h1.gif
Shows make up of the H1/H2, H3, TS-5, and other postwar concepts.


The next picture show the T110 designs from e1 -> e5

http://armor.kiev.ua...y/PartII/h3.gif
This picture proves the T110e4 doesn't have anything like a turret.
The T110e4 shows the superstructure going into the engine deck. The line going down the center of the T110e4 might be seen as a turret but the location of the cupola debunks it.


My idea

T34 -> T30 -> H1/H2

T28 -> T95 -> TS-5

TS-31 -> T110e3 -> T110e4 (actual T110e3 and T110e4 designs)

Edited by Priory_of_Sion, Jun 13 2012 - 03:50.


lostwingman #10 Posted Jun 13 2012 - 03:41

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 20334 battles
  • 20,284
  • [PBKAC] PBKAC
  • Member since:
    01-11-2011
I like how the driver disappears in the E2 and E4.
Also it could be construed that the E4 has the lower part of the rear turret removed which would allow it to pass over a raised engine deck with the commander in the rear.

Priory_of_Sion #11 Posted Jun 13 2012 - 03:49

    Major

  • Players
  • 10324 battles
  • 5,915
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    11-08-2011

View Postlostwingman, on Jun 13 2012 - 03:41, said:

I like how the driver disappears in the E2 and E4.
Also it could be construed that the E4 has the lower part of the rear turret removed which would allow it to pass over a raised engine deck with the commander in the rear.
The T110e1's driver's head is sliced in half. So much for comfort.

The T110e4 wouldn't have its historical design if the lower rear part of the superstructure was removed. We haven't seen the T110e4 from different angles so it might be a little to early to tell.

Killertomato #12 Posted Jun 13 2012 - 04:07

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 4500 battles
  • 773
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View PostPriory_of_Sion, on Jun 12 2012 - 20:33, said:

Well in the actual T110 designs the cupola was ALOT bigger. The T110e3's cupola has been shrunk. They can easily shrink the TS-5's cupola and make the front part of the cupola heavily armored as well.

T110e3 design with larger cupola.
Posted Image

Wait a second, this monstrosity is real? WTFWTFWTFWTF

Priory_of_Sion #13 Posted Jun 13 2012 - 04:24

    Major

  • Players
  • 10324 battles
  • 5,915
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    11-08-2011

View PostKillertomato, on Jun 13 2012 - 04:07, said:

Wait a second, this monstrosity is real? WTFWTFWTFWTF
Was it a real design and designation?-Yes
Is WG following that exact design?-Not Exactly

mastergenera1 #14 Posted Jun 14 2012 - 16:46

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 19109 battles
  • 851
  • [70] 70
  • Member since:
    09-16-2010

View PostKillertomato, on Jun 13 2012 - 04:07, said:

Wait a second, this monstrosity is real? WTFWTFWTFWTF
yea ive said this in another thread but the chieftain pointed out to the community that all the T110 variants(1-5) were all designs by chrysler(the guy)crazy kook he was.

thundersaver #15 Posted Jun 14 2012 - 17:02

    Major

  • Players
  • 3647 battles
  • 2,904
  • Member since:
    08-01-2011

View PostPriory_of_Sion, on Jun 12 2012 - 20:33, said:

Well in the actual T110 designs the cupola was ALOT bigger. The T110e3's cupola has been shrunk. They can easily shrink the TS-5's cupola and make the front part of the cupola heavily armored as well.

T110e3 design with larger cupola.
Posted Image

Wait the T110E3 has only a crew of THREE?!, slower reload and crews dieing would be one heck of a mess to the new tank, this really sucks

paradat #16 Posted Jun 14 2012 - 17:12

    Major

  • Players
  • 29233 battles
  • 7,625
  • [TBW] TBW
  • Member since:
    03-24-2011

View PostIotaOmicron, on Jun 12 2012 - 20:15, said:

are u saying that if i get my t110 soon i will be stuck with a stupid TD on my hands?   :Smile_sad:

NO

Drakkun #17 Posted Jun 14 2012 - 17:25

    Corporal

  • Beta Testers
  • 4993 battles
  • 41
  • Member since:
    01-14-2011
If the t110e3 has less armor make that the t-9....bump t-95 to the x slot..

Priory_of_Sion #18 Posted Jun 14 2012 - 20:07

    Major

  • Players
  • 10324 battles
  • 5,915
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    11-08-2011
reasons why the TS-5 should be tier X TD instead of the T110e3 or T95.
  • It has around the same armor as the T95 and has much more than the T110e3.
  • It has increased speed and agility over the T95 which makes it more adaptable in a battle.
  • It has at least the M58 and T7 guns with a possibility of a 175mm gun. This gives it the same/better firepower than the T110e3 or T95
  • It is the historical decendent of the T95.
  • The TS-5 is smaller than the T95 which means it is harder to hit.
  • The TS-5's cupola will be strengthened to avoid an obvious weakpoint.
  • A fantasy T95 upgrade is a fantasy. (hint: the word fantasy)
  • The T110e3 would work better in a 3rd TD line instead of a heavily armored one.
  • The TS-5 has similar gameplay to the T95.
  • the TS-5 looks badass.


Daeson #19 Posted Jun 14 2012 - 21:11

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 9009 battles
  • 140
  • [CRUX] CRUX
  • Member since:
    05-01-2011
Seeing whats going down on the EU and RU forums as well, alot of people are pissed at the perposed design, and want either the T95 uptiered and upgraded, or a  T95-B ,fantasy upgrade. Which is what we should get.

Whyan #20 Posted Jun 15 2012 - 02:37

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 5995 battles
  • 1,872
  • Member since:
    01-26-2011

View PostPriory_of_Sion, on Jun 14 2012 - 20:07, said:

reasons why the TS-5 should be tier X TD instead of the T110e3 or T95.
  • It has around the same armor as the T95 and has much more than the T110e3.
  • It has increased speed and agility over the T95 which makes it more adaptable in a battle.
  • It has at least the M58 and T7 guns with a possibility of a 175mm gun. This gives it the same/better firepower than the T110e3 or T95
  • It is the historical decendent of the T95.
  • The TS-5 is smaller than the T95 which means it is harder to hit.
  • The TS-5's cupola will be strengthened to avoid an obvious weakpoint.
  • A fantasy T95 upgrade is a fantasy. (hint: the word fantasy)
  • The T110e3 would work better in a 3rd TD line instead of a heavily armored one.
  • The TS-5 has similar gameplay to the T95.
  • the TS-5 looks badass.
The problem with the TS-5 is that it lacks the side/track armour of the T95, which allows it to soak up shots and completely absorb/bounce shells from various guns.

Edited by Whyan, Jun 15 2012 - 02:39.