Jump to content


E-75 mud flap weakness


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

dambo150 #81 Posted Aug 12 2011 - 10:02

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 7777 battles
  • 74
  • Member since:
    06-28-2011
Good job WG, now just take the IS-4 weakpoint (driver hatch) out so you confirm that you are nerfing every tank except the russian ones

Belrick #82 Posted Aug 12 2011 - 10:17

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 14380 battles
  • 1,760
  • Member since:
    07-18-2010
Im disliking my E-75 (elite)

I played it in the test 2 patch and loved it.

Now its blah.

I know its early days but this is my comparison to a elite IS-4

-Firepower: slightly worse. Say 95% to 100%
-Speed: noticably slower.
-Mobility: slightly better due to better seeming power to weight ratio.
-Side armour: Significantly worse. Near useless.
-Visibility: Much more visible and a much bigger target.
-Front armour: Complicated. See below.

a.Main glacis plate can either be easier to pen or quite a bit harder than the IS-4 front glacis. This is due to the angle of incidence to the incoming shell wildly effects your armour rating.
b.Weak points, the lower glacis plate is slightly easier to pen than the drivers port on the IS-4 but is a much bigger target. Also the mudflaps are nearly as weak as well as fairly large.

SO in summary. Yeah IS-4 wins, again.

So if the IS-4 is 100% id say the E-75% is 90% as good.

Feels like im driving a T32/KT with a bigger gun but in tier9 battles.

LoooSeR78V #83 Posted Aug 12 2011 - 10:25

    Major

  • Players
  • 21 battles
  • 6,099
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    04-03-2011
E-75 + collision-model.
Spoiler                     
Mudguards just doesn't exist in collision model of E-75.
http://img11.imagesh...4cb69776725.jpg
Posted Image

Problem is here -
Spoiler                     
- projectiles penetrate small part "1":
Posted Image

This place ("1") have 16 or 17mm of armour. And all guns with caliber 3 tmes higher, than 17 can penetrate this part without problems (no ricochet). Also this part have slight slope - so it's not totally horizontal...

Ears have 60mm of "skirt" type armour and optic module under it.

Aesis #84 Posted Aug 12 2011 - 13:56

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 6540 battles
  • 186
  • [PANSY] PANSY
  • Member since:
    05-08-2011
Now I understand why people can do dmg with mudguard shot. That's retarded :(

Carlsberg #85 Posted Aug 12 2011 - 14:00

    Staff sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 8555 battles
  • 310
  • Member since:
    09-21-2010
That post explained everything. so its not mudguards but its the tank design itself. o well got to live with this, and adapt
:Smile_honoring:

KilljoyCutter #86 Posted Aug 12 2011 - 14:50

    Major

  • Players
  • 8469 battles
  • 26,928
  • Member since:
    05-07-2011
Tank needs some weakpoints, if its front glacis can bounce several shots in a row from under 200 meters with pen that exceed the armor thickness by 88mm and are being fired from a higher elevation, thus negating some of the slope.

woodrow_wilson #87 Posted Aug 12 2011 - 16:19

    Sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 9726 battles
  • 161
  • Member since:
    07-25-2010

View PostLoooSeR78V, on Aug 12 2011 - 10:25, said:

E-75 + collision-model.
Spoiler                     
Mudguards just doesn't exist in collision model of E-75.
http://img11.imagesh...4cb69776725.jpg
Posted Image

Problem is here -
Spoiler                     
- projectiles penetrate small part "1":
Posted Image

This place ("1") have 16 or 17mm of armour. And all guns with caliber 3 tmes higher, than 17 can penetrate this part without problems (no ricochet). Also this part have slight slope - so it's not totally horizontal...

Ears have 60mm of "skirt" type armour and optic module under it.

Where'd you locate the model information?  And/or what program are you using to view it?

What is the armor value of the blue side armor?  Might be a place to shoot for if they're angling to get deflections off the upper and lower glacis plates????

BK201 #88 Posted Aug 12 2011 - 17:42

    Sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 22634 battles
  • 219
  • Member since:
    01-01-2011
Was going to get the E75, but with this glaring defect, I've spent money instead on a patton. It's too bad, but they really f*** up the E-series, except the E50.
Oh well, at least I unlocked the VK4502 before the patch, so I don't lose out that much.
I've also started shooting E75 at the mudflap now. More frustrated E75 users = Less E75 users = Stats buff (hopefully)

Kyoji #89 Posted Aug 12 2011 - 17:48

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 6834 battles
  • 532
  • Member since:
    04-18-2011

View PostBK201, on Aug 12 2011 - 17:42, said:

Was going to get the E75, but with this glaring defect, I've spent money instead on a patton. It's too bad, but they really f*** up the E-series, except the E50.
Oh well, at least I unlocked the VK4502 before the patch, so I don't lose out that much.
I've also started shooting E75 at the mudflap now. More frustrated E75 users = Less E75 users = Stats buff (hopefully)
cry more. The E-75 is much better than the Ausf B and the T34 and on par with the IS-4. It's pretty much the best you can hope for in a T9 matchup. The E-100 is also a nice tank as is the E-50.

KilljoyCutter #90 Posted Aug 12 2011 - 19:23

    Major

  • Players
  • 8469 battles
  • 26,928
  • Member since:
    05-07-2011
As I said in the other thread, I'm driving a T34.  Quityerbitchin.   <_<

darkdog9 #91 Posted Aug 12 2011 - 19:29

    Captain

  • Players
  • 6520 battles
  • 1,293
  • Member since:
    07-09-2011
Meh theres a video of a ms-1 penetrating and killing a is-4 all tanks have frontal weakspots get over it

Stevius #92 Posted Aug 12 2011 - 20:52

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 20360 battles
  • 121
  • Member since:
    02-09-2011
My only question is:

If and when the devs admit that there is a problem and fix it in an upcoming patch, will said fix be accompanied by a nerf?

I'm looking at you, King Tiger.

Embiggener #93 Posted Aug 12 2011 - 21:07

    Major

  • Players
  • 14780 battles
  • 4,720
  • [RDSQ] RDSQ
  • Member since:
    05-01-2011
I'm not sure everyone is understanding what is happening here.   The mudguard is a mudguard; it's not supposed to stop shells, and we can have parts of the tank model that take shell hole decals when hit but don't actually damage the tank.  The issue here is how thick the side of the hull is.    Am I missing something?

On a related note, the mudguards and side skirts on the E-100... friends and I found in our own testing just before the patch went live that shots which penetrated the side skirt or mud guards and which obviously should have then hit tracks.......  hit tracks if they penetrated.   No mystery there.

KilljoyCutter #94 Posted Aug 12 2011 - 21:27

    Major

  • Players
  • 8469 battles
  • 26,928
  • Member since:
    05-07-2011

View PostEmbiggener, on Aug 12 2011 - 21:07, said:

I'm not sure everyone is understanding what is happening here.   The mudguard is a mudguard; it's not supposed to stop shells, and we can have parts of the tank model that take shell hole decals when hit but don't actually damage the tank.  The issue here is how thick the side of the hull is.    Am I missing something?

To expand on this, as noted by others earlier, the problem is that the tank as a slight upward angle of the hull where it overlaps the tracks, and there's less than an inch of armor under there.  So, from in front of the E-75, there's path through and then behind the "mudflaps" where rounds that are doing 200-280 pen are hitting an area of the tank with something like 16mm of armor. Overmatch means the angle is pointless, IIRC.  

If you want to blame someone, blame the Germans who designed the thing originally.

Stevius #95 Posted Aug 13 2011 - 00:36

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 20360 battles
  • 121
  • Member since:
    02-09-2011

View PostKilljoyCutter, on Aug 12 2011 - 21:27, said:

To expand on this, as noted by others earlier, the problem is that the tank as a slight upward angle of the hull where it overlaps the tracks, and there's less than an inch of armor under there.  So, from in front of the E-75, there's path through and then behind the "mudflaps" where rounds that are doing 200-280 pen are hitting an area of the tank with something like 16mm of armor. Overmatch means the angle is pointless, IIRC.  

If you want to blame someone, blame the Germans who designed the thing originally.

Dammit, I was all set to flame your ass, but then I looked at the pictures on this site:

E-75 without side skirts.

I see what you mean. The hull of the E-75 rises to clear the drive wheel.

So now my question is:

Why doesn't the King Tiger suffer from the same issue? They are almost identical, and yet it was the Maus, which bears no resemblance to either the KT or E-75 that also suffered the same weakness.

If this truly is the issue, then only low slung TDs (or tanks at a lower elevation) should be able to capitalize on the weakness, as the shell would have to be travelling level, or even upwards to penetrate the E-75 in this manner. If taller tanks are able to punch through the soft underside of the hull by shooting the mudflaps, then that is really kind of proving that the Russians intentionally designed in this particular weakness since their rounds should be hitting nothing but track.

Can someone make a video with a taller tank whose barrel is pointed downward when targeting the mudflaps?

worldeaters #96 Posted Aug 13 2011 - 03:47

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 18767 battles
  • 473
  • [EATER] EATER
  • Member since:
    05-18-2011
I don't get shot there hardly at all. I try to keep the hull moving as much as possible, so they don't have much of a chance to shoot them. :Smile_great:

salihe #97 Posted Aug 13 2011 - 05:17

    Staff sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 1406 battles
  • 424
  • Member since:
    10-02-2010

View PostKyoji, on Aug 12 2011 - 17:48, said:

cry more. The E-75 is much better than the Ausf B and the T34 and on par with the IS-4. It's pretty much the best you can hope for in a T9 matchup. The E-100 is also a nice tank as is the E-50.


Sheeeit, I was taking off 10% per shot with my VK3601, shooting straight at the side of an E-75 earlier. I've never been able to take that much off per hit against the Ausf B before, ever, regardless where I've shot at it. Hell, I've been lucky to pen the Ausf B at all, much less doing that much dmg per shot. When a tier 6 can do that much damage to a tier 9 in battle conditions, i.e. not in a training ground, that tier 9 has some issues.

Death187 #98 Posted Aug 13 2011 - 05:27

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 7221 battles
  • 4,464
  • [LD] LD
  • Member since:
    09-23-2010

View PostAlexby, on Aug 11 2011 - 05:28, said:



Spoiler                     




Wow... that really pisses me off  :facepalmic:

Meoow #99 Posted Aug 13 2011 - 07:31

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 17938 battles
  • 227
  • [MMIMM] MMIMM
  • Member since:
    04-25-2011
It just doesn't make sense since both E-50 and E-75 chassis is almost identical to Tiger II but the Tiger II doesn't suffer mud-guard damage. Please explain, if not then this must be fixed as a bug.
Also the 2 range finders/view ports on both side of the turret, I don't see why it should take damage at all. I mean in real life, the projectile would just go through it and doesn't penetrate into the tank. It makes the game looks stupid (also apply on T29 turret). I got hit in the turret viewport and my gunner got killed, just BS.

Meoow #100 Posted Aug 13 2011 - 08:11

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 17938 battles
  • 227
  • [MMIMM] MMIMM
  • Member since:
    04-25-2011

View PostKyoji, on Aug 11 2011 - 17:29, said:

The IS-4 had the super vulnerable driver hatch that was easy to hit. I guess it's mudflaps for the E-75's. Either way the E-75's are what the IS-4's used to be when they get bumped to T10 which is funny because they got bumped for being OP, but the E-75 is probably on par, better, or a small bit worse than the IS-4. Either way it's close.

You are not taking "weak lower hull" on EVERY German tanks into account, are you?

Let's me ask you, between IS4 driver hatch and German tank lower-hull, Which one is bigger? Which one is more visible and Which one is easier to hit at long range?

Not only that, is there any other weak spots on the IS4 frontal? Yes, the lower hull but it's so small and hard to hit even at close range. It bounces more often as well. That would make 1 and a half weak spots on IS4 frontal. The turret is impenetrable so it's out of the question.

Ok now, E-75 weak spots:

1. Mud Guard (can be pen by even tier 3 tanks as shown on youtube)
2. Lower hull (huge target)
3. Range finders on both side of the turret (can be pen by tier 4 tanks)
4. Commander port

Most of these weak spots can easily hit at medium-long range. I drive E-75 and I know it very well. Even without mud guard bug, E-75 still can be dealt with easily.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users