Jump to content


Chinese 113 ! bad tank !


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

MesoTroniK #21 Posted Jan 26 2013 - 03:00

    Captain

  • Players
  • 27839 battles
  • 1,888
  • Member since:
    04-10-2011
You clearly are incapable of holding an intelligent dialog about this, good luck on your journey and I leave this as a parting gift to you.

Spoiler                     


JDCollie #22 Posted Jan 26 2013 - 03:21

    Major

  • Players
  • 10347 battles
  • 3,287
  • Member since:
    05-20-2011
Admittedly, the 113 does suffer from lack of gun depression, but that doesn't mean that it's terrible.

XxFinal_RestxX #23 Posted Jan 27 2013 - 02:50

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 15111 battles
  • 35
  • Member since:
    08-11-2012
i dint even go to that gun part yet lol so Meso as u said this 113 seem to be a good tank ? do me a favor and ask in game to see wat peoples say about this tank . i bring this up because it seem unfair to chinese line that the heavy tier 10 front amor can be pen by a tier 7 ? lets talk about british why does tier 10 heavy tank has faster loading time and aiming time than this one ? and i bet u cant pen that tier 10 heavy british tank with a tier 7 ! because even the medium chinese seem way better than this 113 . if u take away the amor from the 113 atleast give it a gun like the british tank or a better amor than that

partigirl #24 Posted Jan 27 2013 - 07:25

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 13229 battles
  • 247
  • Member since:
    04-11-2011
113 has the speed in compensation, second among all T10 heavies just below 50b. No much need for a great gun.

XxFinal_RestxX #25 Posted Jan 27 2013 - 21:18

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 15111 battles
  • 35
  • Member since:
    08-11-2012
what about it always on fired when get shot at front amor? forgot to mention this and always get ammo rack by getting shot at front amor

PandaMarine #26 Posted Jan 28 2013 - 02:25

    Sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 8455 battles
  • 125
  • Member since:
    10-09-2010
I'm sure a lot of 50B players would trade armor and tank size/shape with you.

XxFinal_RestxX #27 Posted Jan 28 2013 - 04:55

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 15111 battles
  • 35
  • Member since:
    08-11-2012
u cant compare 50b with this 113 50b has autoloader and it faster and it able to aim lower than this 113 ......o_O

KnightOfZero #28 Posted Jan 28 2013 - 20:00

    Sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 20307 battles
  • 124
  • Member since:
    09-15-2010
Ok, first I have to wonder of you even know what punctuation is. It hurts my head to read giant run on sentences of fail. Second, how do you play 370 battles on a tank and not figure it out? Also looking at your stats, you have only played tanks with higher bounce rates than others. SP and Maus of course bounce or soak 0 damage a lot. If anything, play the 113 like a Super Pershing than can actually move. Keep that front to the enemy, don't be right at the front unless needed, then use mobility to get around other problems.

XxFinal_RestxX #29 Posted Jan 28 2013 - 21:55

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 15111 battles
  • 35
  • Member since:
    08-11-2012
like i said from the get go the only thing about this 113 is mobility ........ what else can it does ? if u said i`m failing do me a favor and ask peoples u play with in random battle what they think about the 113 ... do u even has a 113? " play 113 like a SP "

XxFinal_RestxX #30 Posted Jan 29 2013 - 01:51

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 15111 battles
  • 35
  • Member since:
    08-11-2012
and actually the mobility u so call is because the tank is lighter its not because its has more horsepower ! 113 is not so call a heavy ... because nothing worst than get ammo rack or light on fired by front armor with first hit . cant say nothing about the side armor because if u angle the tank just a lil u`ll get pen by side armor right away . it just like how they say about the 113 in random battle " it made in china "

OmniJackal #31 Posted Jan 29 2013 - 15:05

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 9180 battles
  • 461
  • Member since:
    05-30-2011
this worse! topic i am ever read! i am much more dumber! for have reading it!

KnightOfZero #32 Posted Jan 29 2013 - 18:56

    Sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 20307 battles
  • 124
  • Member since:
    09-15-2010
anhtheky, I did not say you fail at playing your tank. I did not criticize your play style. I do not have a 113, but I was trying to offer advice as someone who has played the game for a long time and can judge a tank fairly well by watching others play it. What I did accuse you of, and am accusing you of again, is having absolutely no grasp of the English language. People who come on these forums from non-English speaking countries and begin their post with "English is not my first language" use it with more fluency than you. That, coupled with your inability to read the English language makes you completely of unworthy of receiving anyone else's advice on these forums. Good day.

Eriance #33 Posted Jan 30 2013 - 21:30

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 15140 battles
  • 245
  • Member since:
    06-02-2011
I wondering why they switched the WZ-111 with the 113 for the Tier X spot. 113 looks like an oversized medium, which seems would work better for a T9?

Edited by Eriance, Jan 30 2013 - 21:31.


XxFinal_RestxX #34 Posted Jan 31 2013 - 02:33

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 15111 battles
  • 35
  • Member since:
    08-11-2012
thank you Eriance about time someone think 113 is an oversized medium , but it is really an oversized medium as good as a tier 9

XxFinal_RestxX #35 Posted Jan 31 2013 - 02:40

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 15111 battles
  • 35
  • Member since:
    08-11-2012
Knightofzero u have ur way to "jack at things" i mean judge I HAVE MINES just because u played this game so long doesnt mean ur advice always right ! because u sound like this 113 is the beast ! tell me good things about this tank except for " run almost like a med " ?

MLIOOBE #36 Posted Jan 31 2013 - 04:56

    Corporal

  • Beta Testers
  • 20655 battles
  • 10
  • Member since:
    07-14-2010
I really wish they would switch back the 113 and WZ-111. WZ is just more distinct looking for the tree, and is an actual heavy tank, as opposed to the 113. Which is objectively worse than the tier x medium in every way (which is worse than the T-62A).

Midnitewolf #37 Posted Jan 31 2013 - 22:10

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 7172 battles
  • 2,972
  • Member since:
    09-01-2010
I think people should start looking at playstyle not at Tiers.  Let me explain, the game as it stands now is getting bloated buy too many tanks performing just like other tanks.  I mean seriously, what is the point of having another Tier 10 tank that performs just exactly like the IS-7?  None really since we already have the IS-7.

Instead, WG is starting to try to offer us variety in the playstyle of tanks.  We had the Brits which don't play like any other tank currently in the game, not really, now we have the Chinese which at the higher tiers operate in the same fashion.

What the 113 offers is a playstyle option.  Basically you have a tank the is highly mobile for a Tier 10 heavy but gives up a bit of protection.  While many people won't like this, there will be others that will be able to take advantage of this tanks characteristics to do amazing things with it. They may even find the 113 to have a much more enjoyable playstyle to having to plod along like other Heavies.

The point is that the 113 offers another playstyle option that some people will find appealing.  If you don't like the playstyle, your not forced to grind the line and play the tank.  Personally I think it is good to have variety.

XxFinal_RestxX #38 Posted Feb 02 2013 - 02:58

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 15111 battles
  • 35
  • Member since:
    08-11-2012
tier 7 can pen front armor ... ammo rack or fired by front armor too ...... thats a bit alright :)

morgotz #39 Posted Feb 07 2013 - 06:24

    Private

  • Beta Testers
  • 0 battles
  • 9
  • Member since:
    08-09-2010
I grinded this tank, while 110 and WZ-111 model 1-4 were quite enjoyable to play, this tank is a mess. The turret is weak (german 12,8 is enough to pen it) and the hull is even weaker. Weve tested it and the LFP will be penetrated by a 7.5 cm L70 and even guns with 128mm penetration are able to put a hole in that. The UFP seemed strong in the test until I used it in combat situations. When the enemy is closer than 100m the armor becomes weaker and weaker to the point where even some T8s can punch through there.
It gest worse when someone is shooting from above, being 500m will not change a thing in the weak armor.
Being above an enemy would help, but because of the bad gun depression you can hardly do that.
And lets not forget the gun. Many many bounces and a really bad aiming time doesnt really fit on such a tank. I really hope WG will buff it ...

BiBiLoo #40 Posted Feb 20 2013 - 15:28

    Private

  • Players
  • 23377 battles
  • 7
  • Member since:
    10-30-2012
I played 113 on test server, when it had 2500 HP and 2300 HP, and I currently own a 113.
I honestly say that 113's armour is way too weak, considering a TierX heavy inevitability encounter TierX at close range. And mobile TDs make 113's life even more miserable.
While the 220 frontal plate is bouncy at far at times, the lower plate and turrent hatches are very easy for opponents to aim for.
The generally bumpy terrians and the depressing gun depression are often larger threats than enemy shells.
After all, the magnificant mobility is just not good enough to compensate its paper thin defending system.
I hope wargaming will seriously evaluate 113's battle performance in this regard.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users