Jump to content


Tier 10 Medium Hopes


This topic has been archived.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

Garbad #1 Posted Jun 13 2012 - 19:03

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 24194 battles
  • 14,206
  • [-G-] -G-
  • Member since:
    10-02-2010
I hope WG takes the opportunity to fix some of the balance issues we see in tier 9 meds. I'd like to see:

T-62:
We know it will have mediocre firepower and armor. That's fine -- make it the best scout. Inflate its speed, agility, and camo so its the best scout -- better than the batchat.

E-50 Ausf:
I'd like to see improved turning, and better frontal armor.

M48:
Practically identical to the patton now, although if it gets a mantlet and/or frontal armor I will love WG forever.

Batchat:
See T-62. Its firepower is great, but it shouldn't be the best scout and the best firepower med,

And in general, I hope we see:

- high agility, as high or higher than t9s
- high dps/pen
- relatively weak armor/hp compared to 10s, or even tier 9 heavies

Lert #2 Posted Jun 13 2012 - 19:07

    Major

  • Community Contributor
  • 36710 battles
  • 23,978
  • [IOC] IOC
  • Member since:
    09-02-2010
This is one of those times where I fully and completely agree with Garbad. +1

cracker25 #3 Posted Jun 13 2012 - 19:09

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 8014 battles
  • 152
  • Member since:
    10-02-2011
http://www.mwradio.i...0/02/banzai.jpg
Place bets for if the new tier 10s will be good!

Minds_Eye #4 Posted Jun 13 2012 - 19:10

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 15313 battles
  • 1,579
  • Member since:
    10-10-2010
I don't think WG will give the M48 enough armor to matter, but with the sloping on the turret + hull down a bit more armor there would come a long way. The hull will probably be cheese. My best hope is for excellent aim time and end accuracy, like the T110, with the speed of the Patton. A higher top speed wouldn't hurt either.

_cthulhu_ #5 Posted Jun 13 2012 - 19:19

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 35048 battles
  • 541
  • [REL_2] REL_2
  • Member since:
    02-21-2011

Quote

E-50 Ausf:
I'd like to see improved turning, and better frontal armor.

You are kidding right? The Leopard 1 is what this should be not a 1945 upgrade...
The T62 and Leopard 1 were both made in the same timeframe.

ChickenBucket #6 Posted Jun 13 2012 - 19:20

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 9766 battles
  • 437
  • [DSTS] DSTS
  • Member since:
    05-08-2011
I expect to see the only buff on the new E-50 being the rear placed transmission. I expect to see the T-62 being totally obsolete to the bat. I expect see the M48 as a health buff from the patton, not much else added. and I expect to the bat chat rule the world with the only tank standing a chance against it being the T2 light because it can run away long enough for the match to be a draw.

VirgilHilts #7 Posted Jun 13 2012 - 19:23

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 14799 battles
  • 3,416
  • Member since:
    07-31-2010

View PostGuanamarioch, on Jun 13 2012 - 19:19, said:

You are kidding right? The Leopard 1 is what this should be not a 1945 upgrade...
The T62 and Leopard 1 were both made in the same timeframe.

They're going to give you the Leopard, at the end of a second medium line.

I don't think you're going to like it much though, it has a little more armor than a tier VI U.S. turreted TD.

That minimal armor might be fine for the real world, where any tank of that era would almost certainly suffer a penetration if hit, and one penetrating hit normally put a tank out of action. I doubt most players will like it in this game.

ColdBackHAND #8 Posted Jun 13 2012 - 19:28

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 8397 battles
  • 202
  • Member since:
    06-24-2011
What we'll get is a repackaged tank with very little attribute changes.  That is what I believe for the most part.

VirgilHilts #9 Posted Jun 13 2012 - 19:29

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 14799 battles
  • 3,416
  • Member since:
    07-31-2010

View PostDinnerBucket, on Jun 13 2012 - 19:20, said:

I expect to see the only buff on the new E-50 being the rear placed transmission. I expect to see the T-62 being totally obsolete to the bat. I expect see the M48 as a health buff from the patton, not much else added. and I expect to the bat chat rule the world with the only tank standing a chance against it being the T2 light because it can run away long enough for the match to be a draw.

The M48 has slightly better armor protection. If they give it the diesel powertrain, it will not lose much mobility, it may even get better. The M68 105MM, if they get even close to historically correct stats, will be a serious improvement over the make believe T5E1M2 105MM on the M46. It should have considerably more accuracy, significantly more penetration, as well as a much higher rate of fire, but it may have even less alpha. The M68 was good enough that it was installed on the first run of M1 Abrams tanks.

Elepole #10 Posted Jun 13 2012 - 19:32

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 9408 battles
  • 9,264
  • [KISS] KISS
  • Member since:
    10-26-2010

View PostGarbad, on Jun 13 2012 - 19:03, said:

I hope WG takes the opportunity to fix some of the balance issues we see in tier 9 meds. I'd like to see:

T-62:
We know it will have mediocre firepower and armor. That's fine -- make it the best scout. Inflate its speed, agility, and camo so its the best scout -- better than the batchat.

E-50 Ausf:
I'd like to see improved turning, and better frontal armor.

M48:
Practically identical to the patton now, although if it gets a mantlet and/or frontal armor I will love WG forever.

Batchat:
See T-62. Its firepower is great, but it shouldn't be the best scout and the best firepower med,

And in general, I hope we see:

- high agility, as high or higher than t9s
- high dps/pen
- relatively weak armor/hp compared to 10s, or even tier 9 heavies

Well, concerning T-62A and Batchat, it would be interesting to see them to have almost the same speed/mobility, but the batchat to stay with his burst damage, and the T-62A to have great dpm, enough to counter a batchat. But i don't think the the T-62A wil have as weak armor as the batchat, specially on the turret. Don't forget that.

Also, weak HP compared to T9 heavy ? The WHOLE purpose of the T10 medium is to bring them inline with T10 heavy HP wise. If they stay with weak HP compared to T9 heavy you might as well just stay with T9 medium. Weak HP is the principal reason why they are not use in CW for other purpose than scoot. If they don't have comparable HP to at least a T9 heavy this whole T10 medium stuff would be useless.

Buff_Rumblecrunch #11 Posted Jun 13 2012 - 19:37

    Major

  • Players
  • 17983 battles
  • 4,731
  • [VILIN] VILIN
  • Member since:
    07-22-2011

View PostGarbad, on Jun 13 2012 - 19:03, said:

T-62:
We know it will have mediocre firepower and armor. That's fine -- make it the best scout. Inflate its speed, agility, and camo so its the best scout -- better than the batchat.
Considering I've already been seeing and hearing complaints about it's armor and firepower making it "inferior" to is predecessor, I'm in complete agreement, this is what I hope and completely expect to be done to it.

The Bat is a great "surprise, you're dead" flanker and that's how it should specialize.

Air_0374 #12 Posted Jun 13 2012 - 20:38

    Staff sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 26604 battles
  • 257
  • [HAM] HAM
  • Member since:
    01-21-2011

View PostGuanamarioch, on Jun 13 2012 - 19:19, said:

You are kidding right? The Leopard 1 is what this should be not a 1945 upgrade...
The T62 and Leopard 1 were both made in the same timeframe.

As SerB said, your cardboard dreamtank is coming. One day you will enjoy having less armor with the batchat with none of the advantages, hopefully realizing that dates are meaningless in this game...

...but I doubt it...

View PostElepole, on Jun 13 2012 - 19:32, said:

Also, weak HP compared to T9 heavy ? The WHOLE purpose of the T10 medium is to bring them inline with T10 heavy HP wise. If they stay with weak HP compared to T9 heavy you might as well just stay with T9 medium. Weak HP is the principal reason why they are not use in CW for other purpose than scoot. If they don't have comparable HP to at least a T9 heavy this whole T10 medium stuff would be useless.

I think he means relative to the tier. They will get more hp no doubt, but most likely not as much as the heavies like in every other tier.

Edited by Air_0374, Jun 13 2012 - 20:42.


Garand #13 Posted Jun 13 2012 - 21:10

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 22777 battles
  • 1,233
  • Member since:
    10-30-2010

View PostGarbad, on Jun 13 2012 - 19:03, said:

T-62:
We know it will have mediocre firepower and armor. That's fine -- make it the best scout. Inflate its speed, agility, and camo so its the best scout -- better than the batchat.


Many years ago during one of my NTC rotations.. there was a little museum near the dust bowl with a number of static displays.  One of the tanks in display was a T62.  Giving my wargaming background in high school.. I was very interested in the data plates.  The comment on the T62s plate had stuck out.. .it read (paraphrasing) that the "T62s turret traverse was so slow it was ineffective at engaging moving targets".

Now this was back in the mid 90s.. so I don't know if this was pro-western propaganda or not but I thought it was interesting.  If true.. the turret traverse on the T62 should be similar to the U.S. turreted TDs.. lol

Before posting this reply I decided to check to see if I could find the turret traverse documented anywhere.. found this little gem on wiki...

Quote

Each time the gun is fired, the tube must go into détente for cartridge ejection; the power traverse of the turret is inoperable during ejection and reloading operations. Since manual elevation and traverse are rather slow and not effective for tracking a moving target, rapid fire and second-hit capabilities are limited. The turret cannot be traversed with the driver's hatch open. Although the tank commander may override the gunner and traverse the turret, he cannot fire the main gun from his position. He is unable to override the gunner in elevation of the main gun, causing target acquisition problems.[5]

I think the T62 is going to need some artistic license ;)

Edited by Garand, Jun 13 2012 - 21:13.


_Hawkeye_ #14 Posted Jun 13 2012 - 22:07

    Captain

  • Players
  • 18722 battles
  • 1,293
  • Member since:
    09-24-2011
Well I am hoping for more firepower in t62 but I'd be happy if garbads wish came true

Redwing6 #15 Posted Jun 13 2012 - 22:12

    Major

  • Players
  • 23352 battles
  • 3,677
  • [CONZ] CONZ
  • Member since:
    03-26-2011

View PostLert, on Jun 13 2012 - 19:07, said:

This is one of those times where I fully and completely agree with Garbad. +1
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


THIS!

Garnett101st #16 Posted Jun 13 2012 - 22:28

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 17623 battles
  • 2,192
  • Member since:
    08-05-2010

View PostGuanamarioch, on Jun 13 2012 - 19:19, said:

You are kidding right? The Leopard 1 is what this should be not a 1945 upgrade...
The T62 and Leopard 1 were both made in the same timeframe.

You really want a tank with 60mm armor huh.... If they did that, the forums would be raged that Leopard 1 is being destroyed so easily, after all its a "main battle tank"... E50m has more armor, and good guns for being tier 10.

Fazar #17 Posted Jun 13 2012 - 22:31

    Major

  • Players
  • 12781 battles
  • 3,733
  • [-FU-] -FU-
  • Member since:
    04-28-2011
I think they are going to end up "Tier 10 Heavy-Like"  Not saying I want it like that but I think HP will be similar, or very close to the Heavies (IS-7/T110), Better speed, maneuverability, and the Patton at least will have a killer gun.

I just have a sinking suspicion they'll be like smaller, more agile, less damaging 50-Bs.

Legiondude #18 Posted Jun 13 2012 - 22:33

    Major

  • Players
  • 13695 battles
  • 17,284
  • [ELVIS] ELVIS
  • Member since:
    08-22-2011

View PostGarand, on Jun 13 2012 - 21:10, said:

Many years ago during one of my NTC rotations.. there was a little museum near the dust bowl with a number of static displays.  One of the tanks in display was a T62.  Giving my wargaming background in high school.. I was very interested in the data plates.  The comment on the T62s plate had stuck out.. .it read (paraphrasing) that the "T62s turret traverse was so slow it was ineffective at engaging moving targets".

Now this was back in the mid 90s.. so I don't know if this was pro-western propaganda or not but I thought it was interesting.  If true.. the turret traverse on the T62 should be similar to the U.S. turreted TDs.. lol

Before posting this reply I decided to check to see if I could find the turret traverse documented anywhere.. found this little gem on wiki...



I think the T62 is going to need some artistic license ;)
That's the T-62's feature, not the T-62A

JohnGaltCobraCommander #19 Posted Jun 13 2012 - 22:33

    Major

  • Players
  • 16752 battles
  • 5,564
  • [PLSGO] PLSGO
  • Member since:
    08-26-2011
T30 turret on Patton plox

Garand #20 Posted Jun 13 2012 - 23:21

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 22777 battles
  • 1,233
  • Member since:
    10-30-2010

View PostLegiondude, on Jun 13 2012 - 22:33, said:

That's the T-62's feature, not the T-62A

I understand that the game is going with the earlier T62A.

Do you have a source of information saying otherwise for the T62A?  My understanding is that the turret design and automatic ejector are similar despite the different guns.

Edited by Garand, Jun 13 2012 - 23:21.