Jump to content


T95E6


This topic has been archived.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

Top_Gear_UK #1 Posted Dec 26 2013 - 14:48

    Major

  • Community Contributor
  • 13514 battles
  • 2,668
  • [LORD] LORD
  • Member since:
    09-10-2010

http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/12/26/upcoming-tier-10-medium-t95e6/

 

So it seems we have an incoming addition to the US medium tree. What do you think it will do to the current tree? How will it impact the game and clan battles in general? Discuss...



Darties #2 Posted Dec 26 2013 - 14:55

    Captain

  • Players
  • 7420 battles
  • 1,390
  • Member since:
    08-13-2012
Looks like that will be the new tier ten medium to have when I comes out.

scout_in_da_house #3 Posted Dec 26 2013 - 15:07

    Major

  • Players
  • 26881 battles
  • 2,490
  • [IOC] IOC
  • Member since:
    04-14-2012

- the same gun as T110E5
- 2000 hitpoints
- good maneuverability

 

 

So it's basically another t110e5?

WG is getting really creative these days.

Nice name OP :)



madgiecool #4 Posted Dec 26 2013 - 15:11

    Captain

  • Players
  • 33097 battles
  • 1,751
  • [4NZAB] 4NZAB
  • Member since:
    06-10-2011

+1 for a similar post 10min after that other guy

 

 

http://forum.worldoftanks.com/index.php?/topic/315541-oh-god-the-t95-mt/

 

 

Anyhow, in keeping with the spirit of the post, more tanks = more fun.  (with the exception of autoloaders - they broke the game).



madgiecool #5 Posted Dec 26 2013 - 15:25

    Captain

  • Players
  • 33097 battles
  • 1,751
  • [4NZAB] 4NZAB
  • Member since:
    06-10-2011

View PostDarties, on Dec 27 2013 - 02:55, said:

Looks like that will be the new tier ten medium to have when I comes out.

 

 

Tier 9 possibly? to be on par with the other T95.

 

IMHO if it was going to be a tier 10, WG would have called it a T110____ just so it looks like all the other tier 10's in the US lineup.

 

(you're probably right about it being a tier 10 thou - I'm just picking at WG's naming convention for US tier 10's) 



Windhover118 #6 Posted Dec 26 2013 - 15:30

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 15138 battles
  • 488
  • [IJAG] IJAG
  • Member since:
    05-20-2012

Honestly, I am not that impressed. Based off of what little information was revealed in the article, it looks like it will be a decent medium. It will be able to compete with the M48 but I am not sure if it can surpass it.

 

1. Same Gun as T110E5.

 

That could be a very good thing or a bad thing. The E5 has a good gun but the T110E5 has 10 less penetration than the M48s top gun while doing 10 more damage. The M48 also has a slightly higher rate of fire than the T110E5. If the T95E6 has a heavy tank gun, its rate of fire or accuracy may suffer.

 

2. 2000 Hit points

 

Relatively large pool of hit point's but the same as the Patton.

 

3. Good maneuverability.

 

The M48 also has good maneuverability.

 

4. Armor

 

Article gave no indications for armor. Looks like a decent slope for the upper plate but a relatively large lower plate. The Turret looks like it has a shape similar to the M103 which means it will bounce  a few shots. However, the tumor on top looks like it might be even larger than the ones on the current tier X Americans.

 

Would be nice to have more detailed information about the tank. For all I know the thing has 300mm of frontal armor and can go 90kph and everything I just said is way off base. These are just conclusions that I drew from a picture and a very broad description of the tank itself.

 

 



Legiondude #7 Posted Dec 26 2013 - 15:54

    Major

  • Players
  • 13652 battles
  • 17,221
  • [ELVIS] ELVIS
  • Member since:
    08-22-2011

Hunnicutt's Abrams p298

ARMOR
Type: Turret, cast homogeneous steel; Hull, rolled and cast
homogeneous steel; Welded assembly
Hull Thickness: Actual Angle w/Vertical
Front,

Upper 3.75 inches(95mm) 65 degrees...................................................225 EFFECTIVE
Lower 5.0 to 3.0 inches(127-76mm) 45 degrees.............................................180-107.5 EFFECTIVE

Sides,

Front 4.0 to 2.0 inches(102-51mm) 0 degrees.....................................102-51 EFFECTIVE
Rear 1.25 inches(32mm) 0 degrees...................................................................32 EFFECTIVE

Rear,

Upper 0.75 inches(19mm) 20 degrees...................................................20.2 EFFECTIVE
Lower 1.0 inches(25mm) 0 degrees...................................................................25 EFFECTIVE

Top,

Front 2.0 inches(51mm) 80 degrees..........................................................293.7 EFFECTIVE, AUTOBOUNCE ANGLE
Rear 1.0 inches(25rnm) 90 degrees...................................................................25mm+(Horizontal)


Turret Thickness:
Gun Shield equals 15 inches(381mm) 0 degrees..........................................381 EFFECTIVE
Front equals 7 inches(178mm) 60 degrees.....................................................356 EFFECTIVE
Sides 3.0 inches(76mm) 45 degrees.................................................................107.5 EFFECTIVE
Rear 2.0 inches(51mm) 0 degrees.....................................................................51 EFFECTIVE
Top, Front 2.0 inches(51mm) 80 degrees..........................................................293.7 EFFECTIVE, AUTOBOUNCE ANGLE
Rear 1.5 inches(38mm) 90 degrees....................................................................38mm+(Horizontal)


ARMAMENT
Primary: 120mm Gun T123E6 in combination mount in turret
Traverse: Hydraulic and manual 360 degrees
Traverse Rate: (max) 15 seconds/360 degrees
Elevation:Hydraulic and manual +20 to -9 degrees
Elevation Rate: (max) 4 degrees/second
Firing Rate: (max) one loader w/assist 4 rounds/minute

 

 



Valan #8 Posted Dec 27 2013 - 00:23

    Captain

  • Players
  • 22947 battles
  • 1,508
  • Member since:
    07-13-2012

View PostTop_Gear_UK, on Dec 26 2013 - 14:48, said:

http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/12/26/upcoming-tier-10-medium-t95e6/

 

So it seems we have an incoming addition to the US medium tree. What do you think it will do to the current tree? How will it impact the game and clan battles in general? Discuss...

 

Questions:

Tree Branching

  •  Will this new tank branch off of the T54E1 at tier 9, which leads to the T57 Heavy currently? 
  •  Or might it branch off of the current Sherman Jumbo at tier 6, which leads is in a way a dead-end at present? 

 

Turret module

  •   Is the T95E6's turret related to the T54E1, possibly or not?  (Clueless here, truly am wondering).

 

   Beginning to ponder Wargaming is going to rework the M5 Stuart to Chaffee/T57 Heavy trees in the near future (6 months)?  Why? 

   Two causes:  the 3rd USA Medium tank line (T95E6);  future USA Light tank line spanning to tier 10.

 

    Just seems like the M5 Stuart to Chaffee/T57 Heavy tank trees are quite awkward, and less than ideal. They're a butchered mix of:

 

  •             Light (M5 Stuart)
  •             Light (Chaffee)/Medium (M7)
  •             Light (T21),
  •             Light (T71),
  •             Medium (T69),
  •             Medium (T54E1),
  •             Heavy (T57 Heavy).

 

     Seems like it would be easily to create a 3rd USA medium tank line, starting from the tier 5 M7 tank including the tier 7 T69 & tier 8 T54E1. Then fill in the empty slots with three new USA medium tanks, at tier 6, tier 7, tier 10 (T95E6).

 

     Doing so would allow for near future creation of a full line of USA Light tanks, from tier 1 to tier 10.   Beginning from the M2 Light to the M5 Stuart, then including the Chaffee, T21, T71.  At minimum Wargaming would need 3 new tanks to finish off a full USA light tank. Of course, Wargaming could make one of the light tanks a bridge again, to two or more trees?

 

     If one goes by prior Wargaming French tank tree designs, they designed past trees to be able to be inter-woven with future trees.  I suspect this was the case with the creation of the T57 Heavy line.



Catatonick #9 Posted Dec 27 2013 - 03:15

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 13156 battles
  • 848
  • Member since:
    09-11-2011

Wishful thinking but... 

 

Chaffee Tier 6

Walker Bulldog Tier 7

M551 Sheridan Tier 8

T95E2 Tier 9

T95E6 Tier 10

 

I would be ok with this.



PHOENIX_ONE #10 Posted Dec 27 2013 - 04:48

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 150 battles
  • 439
  • [MIA] MIA
  • Member since:
    03-09-2011

View PostCatatonick, on Dec 26 2013 - 18:15, said:

Wishful thinking but... 

 

Chaffee Tier 6

Walker Bulldog Tier 7

M551 Sheridan Tier 8

T95E2 Tier 9

T95E6 Tier 10

 

I would be ok with this.

 

 

Tier 9 will be T54E2



Top_Gear_UK #11 Posted Dec 27 2013 - 12:16

    Major

  • Community Contributor
  • 13514 battles
  • 2,668
  • [LORD] LORD
  • Member since:
    09-10-2010

View PostValan, on Dec 26 2013 - 18:23, said:

 

Questions:

Tree Branching

  •  Will this new tank branch off of the T54E1 at tier 9, which leads to the T57 Heavy currently? 
  •  Or might it branch off of the current Sherman Jumbo at tier 6, which leads is in a way a dead-end at present? 

 

Turret module

  •   Is the T95E6's turret related to the T54E1, possibly or not?  (Clueless here, truly am wondering).

 

   Beginning to ponder Wargaming is going to rework the M5 Stuart to Chaffee/T57 Heavy trees in the near future (6 months)?  Why? 

   Two causes:  the 3rd USA Medium tank line (T95E6);  future USA Light tank line spanning to tier 10.

 

    Just seems like the M5 Stuart to Chaffee/T57 Heavy tank trees are quite awkward, and less than ideal. They're a butchered mix of:

 

  •             Light (M5 Stuart)
  •             Light (Chaffee)/Medium (M7)
  •             Light (T21),
  •             Light (T71),
  •             Medium (T69),
  •             Medium (T54E1),
  •             Heavy (T57 Heavy).

 

     Seems like it would be easily to create a 3rd USA medium tank line, starting from the tier 5 M7 tank including the tier 7 T69 & tier 8 T54E1. Then fill in the empty slots with three new USA medium tanks, at tier 6, tier 7, tier 10 (T95E6).

 

     Doing so would allow for near future creation of a full line of USA Light tanks, from tier 1 to tier 10.   Beginning from the M2 Light to the M5 Stuart, then including the Chaffee, T21, T71.  At minimum Wargaming would need 3 new tanks to finish off a full USA light tank. Of course, Wargaming could make one of the light tanks a bridge again, to two or more trees?

 

     If one goes by prior Wargaming French tank tree designs, they designed past trees to be able to be inter-woven with future trees.  I suspect this was the case with the creation of the T57 Heavy line.

 

Its one scenario I suppose. Not sure what they plan, why I'm asking myself. I opened my mouth once back in 2011 and said "the M48 is too new for this game with the 105mm the A5 variant had to represent in this game" and ate my words so I don't speculate. At this point I'm surprised they haven't put in the T-64/MBT-70...lol



Theodore #12 Posted Dec 27 2013 - 13:55

    Staff sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 884 battles
  • 498
  • Member since:
    12-05-2010

Just a dream...

 

Quote

According to Storm, however, this tank will NOT be a regular unlockable vehicle, it’s a “special” tank (as in, a reward tank, possibly for CW)

 

http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/12/27/t95e6-more-pictures/

Edited by Theodore, Dec 27 2013 - 13:56.


Top_Gear_UK #13 Posted Dec 27 2013 - 14:49

    Major

  • Community Contributor
  • 13514 battles
  • 2,668
  • [LORD] LORD
  • Member since:
    09-10-2010

 

 

http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/12/27/t95e6-more-pictures/

So it seems that this tank is going to be another reward tank rather than the end of a possible 3rd US tech tree or top of a current tree.



1701E #14 Posted Dec 27 2013 - 14:58

    Corporal

  • Beta Testers
  • 12531 battles
  • 10
  • Member since:
    01-18-2011

This being a reward tank is the most disappointing news I have read in this game.  That only leaves the other T95 medium tanks, all of which have the Patton Turret, making the other tier 10 med in the US line a clone of the current one..... this is terrible.... really really terrible...

 

Like many of us I have waited too long for a competitive US medium tank.... and now it seems the one that could be good is not attainable by the general public.

 

I bet we see another Soviet Med by June 2014 though.....



Legiondude #15 Posted Dec 27 2013 - 15:25

    Major

  • Players
  • 13652 battles
  • 17,221
  • [ELVIS] ELVIS
  • Member since:
    08-22-2011

View Post1701E, on Dec 27 2013 - 07:58, said:

This being a reward tank is the most disappointing news I have read in this game.  That only leaves the other T95 medium tanks, all of which have the Patton Turret

Only T95E2/E8, and E5 have the patton turret



ForcestormX #16 Posted Dec 27 2013 - 15:30

    Major

  • Wiki Staff
  • 10269 battles
  • 10,864
  • Member since:
    06-22-2011
Still extremely angry about the reward tank decision. Reward tanks are unnecessary and counterproductive, and in this case deny us the best-looking medium we've seen in some time.

Theodore #17 Posted Dec 27 2013 - 15:35

    Staff sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 884 battles
  • 498
  • Member since:
    12-05-2010

View PostLegiondude, on Dec 27 2013 - 15:25, said:

Only T95E2/E8, and E5 have the patton turret

 

So we need T95E7.

 

Spoiler


Texshi #18 Posted Dec 27 2013 - 17:30

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 8664 battles
  • 137
  • [FUREX] FUREX
  • Member since:
    08-10-2011
God why a Reward tank I hate this idea so much It's like every tank I wanted the most is only for the best m60 This ffs I wish the idea and the folks who come up with it all rot in lleh

PrototypePegasus #19 Posted Dec 27 2013 - 22:38

    Major

  • Players
  • 10857 battles
  • 4,068
  • [HT] HT
  • Member since:
    02-01-2012

No more freaking reward tanks.

If you insist on making rewards tanks, then you need to make some for the players who do not partake in CW's as well.



Midnitewolf #20 Posted Dec 28 2013 - 05:41

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 7150 battles
  • 2,959
  • Member since:
    09-01-2010
I see a great big weakspot up on that turret.