Jump to content


E50 - Simply the Boss


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

RenHoek #61 Posted Aug 14 2011 - 14:37

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 26530 battles
  • 47
  • Member since:
    03-29-2011
if I'm not mistaken, the 60km is the maximum speed limit for the vehicle, which as far as I know does not change on any tank ever regardless of upgrades to the tank. The upgrades govern said vehicle's ability to reach that speed in level ground, which from the Test 3 experience, I can assure you the E-50 will never reach 60 with the stock engines unless you're downhill. It can only reliably reach 55+ on level ground with the top engine.

Besides, its an game which only pays spurious lip-service to realism.

Foksuh #62 Posted Aug 14 2011 - 14:39

    Staff sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 7638 battles
  • 469
  • Member since:
    09-23-2010
Well it is happening. Speeds would have to change on every tank depending on engine but I think that'd make things bit too complicated for the game.. and its not like you'll be reaching top speeds easily with stock engine on any tank.

rshoaf883 #63 Posted Aug 14 2011 - 14:54

    Corporal

  • Beta Testers
  • 33069 battles
  • 73
  • [MTLHD] MTLHD
  • Member since:
    07-09-2010

View PostKillingMeSoftly, on Aug 14 2011 - 14:35, said:

So?  There's no tank in this game that doesn't have a fantasy configuration as its top loadout.  Also I don't think you're going to hit 60 km/h with the stock engine unless you're going down hill.  It takes long enough to reach top speed with the 1200hp engine, let alone 750hp.

Most tanks in this game go faster than their typical realistic combat speeds.

This is true, BUT, this is more even more fantasy than reality than just about anything in the game.  The fact that it takes so long to reach 60kph in the E50 with it's top engine, should tell you that it's practically impossible with it's base engine.

Vandelay #64 Posted Aug 14 2011 - 15:02

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 11324 battles
  • 756
  • Member since:
    05-08-2011

View Postrshoaf883, on Aug 14 2011 - 14:54, said:

This is true, BUT, this is more even more fantasy than reality than just about anything in the game.  The fact that it takes so long to reach 60kph in the E50 with it's top engine, should tell you that it's practically impossible with it's base engine.

What is your point?

rshoaf883 #65 Posted Aug 14 2011 - 15:12

    Corporal

  • Beta Testers
  • 33069 battles
  • 73
  • [MTLHD] MTLHD
  • Member since:
    07-09-2010

View PostVandelay, on Aug 14 2011 - 15:02, said:

What is your point?

My point is that the speed needs to be nerfed to something more realistic.  In contrast, the T54, with it's 700 HP engine and weighing in at 34 tons, can only manage 56 km/h.. and that's better than 20 hp/ton.  50 - 55 km/h would be much more realistic for the E50.

PROACEX1 #66 Posted Aug 14 2011 - 17:43

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 12663 battles
  • 205
  • [TL-DR] TL-DR
  • Member since:
    05-12-2011
If I could marry my E-50 and have sex with it, ya know what? I'd do that and even buy it a diamond ring the size of it's view port.
Respectfully,
PROACEX1

Peppr_Onei #67 Posted Aug 14 2011 - 17:44

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 31642 battles
  • 930
  • Member since:
    05-16-2011

View Postrshoaf883, on Aug 14 2011 - 15:12, said:

My point is that the speed needs to be nerfed to something more realistic.  In contrast, the T54, with it's 700 HP engine and weighing in at 34 tons, can only manage 56 km/h.. and that's better than 20 hp/ton.  50 - 55 km/h would be much more realistic for the E50.

53 is mainly where the tank runs.  It can go 60 down a grade, but conversely up a grade it lags a long way behind the T54.

RenHoek #68 Posted Aug 14 2011 - 17:50

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 26530 battles
  • 47
  • Member since:
    03-29-2011

View Postrshoaf883, on Aug 14 2011 - 15:12, said:

My point is that the speed needs to be nerfed to something more realistic.  In contrast, the T54, with it's 700 HP engine and weighing in at 34 tons, can only manage 56 km/h.. and that's better than 20 hp/ton.  50 - 55 km/h would be much more realistic for the E50.

So you want a nerf... just to make it more realistic? Yeah sure. Either you're a really particular nitpicker or you're just afraid for your Russian tanks.

Doctuer #69 Posted Aug 14 2011 - 18:12

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 24518 battles
  • 746
  • Member since:
    07-19-2010
no game developer with any experience and half a brain would change their game design based on forum whining

every gamer in the world (bar the smart ones) thinks the opposite, of course ;)

ie: game developers have to find the source of the whining and examine that logically, or they will end up serving two masters and that never works

rshoaf883 #70 Posted Aug 14 2011 - 20:22

    Corporal

  • Beta Testers
  • 33069 battles
  • 73
  • [MTLHD] MTLHD
  • Member since:
    07-09-2010

View PostDoctuer, on Aug 14 2011 - 18:12, said:

no game developer with any experience and half a brain would change their game design based on forum whining

every gamer in the world (bar the smart ones) thinks the opposite, of course ;)

ie: game developers have to find the source of the whining and examine that logically, or they will end up serving two masters and that never works


Isn't that where most nerfing comes from?  From people talking about how OP one vehicle in a game is over the rest of the like tiered vehicles?  Practice will show (and has already showed) that the E50 outclasses its Russian and US counterparts.  It has more hit points than the US and Russian counterparts.. thicker armor over all than them, it's faster, more accurate, faster aiming, more penetration, more damaging per hit.  Just look at the previous posts in this thread alone.. people are extolling it's virtues over it's counterparts.. and I'm not talking about novices.. I'm talking about seriously experienced WoT players.. talking about how much better the E50 is over its counterparts.  It's not whining when its fact.. it's simply stating the obvious.

RPND #71 Posted Aug 14 2011 - 22:00

    Corporal

  • Beta Testers
  • 5888 battles
  • 59
  • Member since:
    12-22-2010

View Postrshoaf883, on Aug 14 2011 - 13:21, said:

E50 is in serious need of nerfing.. Simply put, it's top speed is not realistic.  60 KPH from a 750 HP engine?  Not gonna happen with a vehicle weighing in at 60 tons.  Even a tank with a more advanced suspension.. the British Chieftain Tank (55 tons), could only manage 48 KPH with it's 750 HP engine.. 30 KPH off road.  Weighing in at only 47.5 tons, the Russian T90A tank.. with it's 840 HP engine can only manage 60KPH.  The power to weight ratio simply does not support 60KPH on the E50.

Here's a list of current MBT tanks with their power to weight ratios and their top speeds:

Russian T90 - 23.7 hp/ton - 60–65 km/h
Israel Merkava - 23 hp/ton - 64 km/h
Republic of Korea K2 Black Panther - 27.2 hp/ton - 70 km/h
USA M1A2 - 24.5 hp/ton - 72 km/h (governed)
England Challenger 2 - 19.2 hp/ton - 56 km/h

Germany E50 - 12.5 hp/ton 60 km/h..  not gonna happen

You know, hp/ton means more to acceleration than to top speed.

Foksuh #72 Posted Aug 14 2011 - 22:00

    Staff sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 7638 battles
  • 469
  • Member since:
    09-23-2010
The thing is, E-50 goes pretty fast if you drive a straight line.
Start going up hills and turning around and all and it'll lose  to T-54. Its not about just the max speed, T-54 might not have a better top speed but it'll keep its speed better.
And as usual its just a game, and we're dealing  with a lot of prototype vehicles here, some of which never even materialized..

As for nerfing and buffing, Im sure the forums play some part in it, a small part, most of it relies on the statistics they are getting from the game.

I understand what youre after here, maybe things will change, maybe not, but atleast the germans finally have something that can go up against high tiers just like Patton and T-54.

As for facts..

E-50 has the slowest gun. E-50 has a far bigger profile than Patton or T-54 and its not as agile the other two.
The pen values on all three guns are about the same.
Damage is the same for Patton and E-50.. T-54 has lower but it has a better rate of fire?

rshoaf883 #73 Posted Aug 14 2011 - 22:41

    Corporal

  • Beta Testers
  • 33069 battles
  • 73
  • [MTLHD] MTLHD
  • Member since:
    07-09-2010

View PostRPND, on Aug 14 2011 - 22:00, said:

You know, hp/ton means more to acceleration than to top speed.


It means both.  You're not gonna get to 200+ mph in your Ferrari 458 in 6th gear with beat up old 89 Ford Escort engine, no matter how long a stretch you have to do it in.  It takes the 570 HP V8, pushing out 398 lb·ft of torque at 6000 RPM.  

BTW, it's torque that accelerates you, not HP.. It's HP that gets your top speed due to gearing. HP/weight of the vehicle to be precise.

Azrou #74 Posted Aug 14 2011 - 23:30

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 15482 battles
  • 179
  • Member since:
    05-22-2011

View Postrshoaf883, on Aug 14 2011 - 22:41, said:

It means both.  You're not gonna get to 200+ mph in your Ferrari 458 in 6th gear with beat up old 89 Ford Escort engine, no matter how long a stretch you have to do it in.  It takes the 570 HP V8, pushing out 398 lb·ft of torque at 6000 RPM.  

BTW, it's torque that accelerates you, not HP.. It's HP that gets your top speed due to gearing. HP/weight of the vehicle to be precise.
Actually you would.  All you need is a steep enough grade.

Apparently you don't understand how the game mechanics work.  Engine/horsepower have nothing to do with top speed.  I reiterate: NOTHING.  What the engine does affect is traverse, turret traverse, and most noticeably, acceleration.  The top speed listed in a tank's stats is determined by one thing and one thing only: suspension.

Is this realistic?  Of course not, but you can blame that on the game developers.  You know, the same people that let the T-54 have the best mobility of any tank in the game while giving it the experimental 120mm frontal armor rather than the 99mm that was actually found on production models.  And the same people who think that a shot to the transmission would somehow cause the engine to explode.  But these are the things we live with, since it's their game.

Btw, don't believe me on the suspension/transmission?  Look at the Hummel and Leopard.  They have an identical top engine and are very similar in weight.  Yet the Leopard's top speed is 68 km/h but the Hummel can only go 40 km/h.  The Hummel has 25 hp/ton, better than all the modern tanks except the Black Panther yet it has a much slower top speed.  I assume you would support buffing the Hummel up to 65-70 km/h as well?

RPND #75 Posted Aug 14 2011 - 23:37

    Corporal

  • Beta Testers
  • 5888 battles
  • 59
  • Member since:
    12-22-2010

View Postrshoaf883, on Aug 14 2011 - 22:41, said:

It means both. You're not gonna get to 200+ mph in your Ferrari 458 in 6th gear with beat up old 89 Ford Escort engine, no matter how long a stretch you have to do it in. It takes the 570 HP V8, pushing out 398 lb·ft of torque at 6000 RPM.

It might, in a vaccum (might cause, losses other than drag != 0).

View Postrshoaf883, on Aug 14 2011 - 22:41, said:

BTW, it's torque that accelerates you, not HP.. It's HP that gets your top speed due to gearing. HP/weight of the vehicle to be precise.

You know, power affects the rate at which you can increment your kinetic energy (you need to compensate for losses). Yes, torque is there, but saying that "HP is not what accelerates you" is just plain wrong (or reeeeeeaaaally short sighted).

Lets not jump into undergrad physics and assumptions, I've had enough of that with pseudo-ballistic-engineers in airsoft forums. My point being: Why is a 12.something hp/ton ratio incapable of reaching 60km/h? I mean, other than "HEY THAT OTHER TANK HAS LIEK 50% MORE HP/TON AND HAS THE SAME TOP SPEED, HENCE E-50 IS WRONG!"?

Peppr_Onei #76 Posted Aug 15 2011 - 00:46

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 31642 battles
  • 930
  • Member since:
    05-16-2011

View Postrshoaf883, on Aug 14 2011 - 22:41, said:

It means both.  You're not gonna get to 200+ mph in your Ferrari 458 in 6th gear with beat up old 89 Ford Escort engine, no matter how long a stretch you have to do it in.  It takes the 570 HP V8, pushing out 398 lb·ft of torque at 6000 RPM.  

BTW, it's torque that accelerates you, not HP.. It's HP that gets your top speed due to gearing. HP/weight of the vehicle to be precise.

HP is just Torque/RPM

hiroshi_tea #77 Posted Aug 15 2011 - 00:57

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 15796 battles
  • 3,458
  • [SPIDY] SPIDY
  • Member since:
    09-21-2010
Another outstanding game with the E-50 88L100
Posted Image

Battle story, yay!  I love story time.

Match started out as the usual.  A panther II got run into by another tank and got turned blue because of it.  Told the team to ignore him since he wasn't shooting at anyone, but they killed him anyways.  Enemy arty also killed another tank right off the bat.  It was a phenomenal start.

I took hill with the help of the remaining Panther II.  Just us two and the arty watching over us.  Hill was already occupied by a T-44, a T-54, a Patton and a DB.  The ally panther II took the brunt of the hits while I worked on killing the Patton and the T-44.  T_44 dies to me easily and I almost kill the Patton too.  Not sure who killed the DB though.  Seeing that his buddies got decimated, the T-54 runs away like a coward giving me and panther II have full control of hill.  Arty kills the T-54 on retreat, LOL.
An enemy IS-3 decided to attack hill and and kills the poor panther II.  I get a few shots on the IS-3 before he face hugs me.  I kill him by myself with over half health left.  By now, my platoon mates are having trouble against an IS-4 at the base of the hill so i move over to the edge and finish off the IS-4 for them.  I go scouting for the arty and kill first arty that I run into.   They happened to be the hummers which I easily dealt with, but end up dying to the Objeckt 212 before I could reload and kill him for a top gun.

All in all, very good match.  the 88L100 is a decent gun.  Lacks the alpha of the 105mm, but in prolonged firefights like the ones on hill and when I was trying to kill 3 arty at one time that I was involved in, the extra rate of fire really helped.  The gun might not be the best, but it can really bully the lower tier tanks quite easily

rshoaf883 #78 Posted Aug 15 2011 - 04:09

    Corporal

  • Beta Testers
  • 33069 battles
  • 73
  • [MTLHD] MTLHD
  • Member since:
    07-09-2010

View PostAzrou, on Aug 14 2011 - 23:30, said:

Actually you would.  All you need is a steep enough grade.

Apparently you don't understand how the game mechanics work.  Engine/horsepower have nothing to do with top speed.  I reiterate: NOTHING.  What the engine does affect is traverse, turret traverse, and most noticeably, acceleration.  The top speed listed in a tank's stats is determined by one thing and one thing only: suspension.

Is this realistic?  Of course not, but you can blame that on the game developers.  You know, the same people that let the T-54 have the best mobility of any tank in the game while giving it the experimental 120mm frontal armor rather than the 99mm that was actually found on production models.  And the same people who think that a shot to the transmission would somehow cause the engine to explode.  But these are the things we live with, since it's their game.

Btw, don't believe me on the suspension/transmission?  Look at the Hummel and Leopard.  They have an identical top engine and are very similar in weight.  Yet the Leopard's top speed is 68 km/h but the Hummel can only go 40 km/h.  The Hummel has 25 hp/ton, better than all the modern tanks except the Black Panther yet it has a much slower top speed.  I assume you would support buffing the Hummel up to 65-70 km/h as well?

Actually, top speed on the T54 with the experimental 120mm frontal armor is VERY close to what it achieved in real life.. 56 kph in game verses 53 kph in real life.  No, I don't support buffing the Hummel up to 65 kph, as final speed is also effected by final drive ratio as well as suspension type, and I'm pretty sure that the Hummel, being based on the PzIV suspension (which was less advanced than the PzIII suspension), more than likely had the PzIVs tranny which would have been built for power, not speed.  

Ask a modern tank designer, and I'd be willing to bet that given the type of suspension that the E50 employs as well as it's power to weight ratio, and he would tell you that 60 kph is unrealistic.  That being said, speed is only a part of the issue.  The tank and it's components are at or near the top in every category in the game.  It's only failing over the T54 and M46 is RoF.. and the fact that it's only 14% slower RoF than the fastest, while being 22% harder hitting... AND being about 20% more accurate, WITH a faster aiming time.. and the tank has thicker armor overall with more hitpoints????  Really??  This from a tank that was designed in WW2, while both the M46 and T54 were designed after WW2.   Believe me, I've been thinking the German medium line needed fixing up too.. but build a super tank.. no.    You may say it's whining.. but look at the thread!  E50 owners are loving it.. not because they finally have an equal.. but because they have something far superior.

PROACEX1 #79 Posted Aug 15 2011 - 04:40

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 12663 battles
  • 205
  • [TL-DR] TL-DR
  • Member since:
    05-12-2011

View Postrshoaf883, on Aug 15 2011 - 04:09, said:

Actually, top speed on the T54 with the experimental 120mm frontal armor is VERY close to what it achieved in real life.. 56 kph in game verses 53 kph in real life.  No, I don't support buffing the Hummel up to 65 kph, as final speed is also effected by final drive ratio as well as suspension type, and I'm pretty sure that the Hummel, being based on the PzIV suspension (which was less advanced than the PzIII suspension), more than likely had the PzIVs tranny which would have been built for power, not speed.  

Ask a modern tank designer, and I'd be willing to bet that given the type of suspension that the E50 employs as well as it's power to weight ratio, and he would tell you that 60 kph is unrealistic.  That being said, speed is only a part of the issue.  The tank and it's components are at or near the top in every category in the game.  It's only failing over the T54 and M46 is RoF.. and the fact that it's only 14% slower RoF than the fastest, while being 22% harder hitting... AND being about 20% more accurate, WITH a faster aiming time.. and the tank has thicker armor overall with more hitpoints????  Really??  This from a tank that was designed in WW2, while both the M46 and T54 were designed after WW2.   Believe me, I've been thinking the German medium line needed fixing up too.. but build a super tank.. no.    You may say it's whining.. but look at the thread!  E50 owners are loving it.. not because they finally have an equal.. but because they have something far superior.
The IS-4 still exists at T9.5, so I don't mind the E-50 being awesome. Lol.
Respectfully,
PROACEX1

Dresden #80 Posted Aug 15 2011 - 04:51

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 4012 battles
  • 11
  • Member since:
    05-12-2011

View Postrshoaf883, on Aug 15 2011 - 04:09, said:

Actually, top speed on the T54 with the experimental 120mm frontal armor is VERY close to what it achieved in real life.. 56 kph in game verses 53 kph in real life.  No, I don't support buffing the Hummel up to 65 kph, as final speed is also effected by final drive ratio as well as suspension type, and I'm pretty sure that the Hummel, being based on the PzIV suspension (which was less advanced than the PzIII suspension), more than likely had the PzIVs tranny which would have been built for power, not speed.  

Ask a modern tank designer, and I'd be willing to bet that given the type of suspension that the E50 employs as well as it's power to weight ratio, and he would tell you that 60 kph is unrealistic.  That being said, speed is only a part of the issue.  The tank and it's components are at or near the top in every category in the game.  It's only failing over the T54 and M46 is RoF.. and the fact that it's only 14% slower RoF than the fastest, while being 22% harder hitting... AND being about 20% more accurate, WITH a faster aiming time.. and the tank has thicker armor overall with more hitpoints????  Really??  This from a tank that was designed in WW2, while both the M46 and T54 were designed after WW2.   Believe me, I've been thinking the German medium line needed fixing up too.. but build a super tank.. no.    You may say it's whining.. but look at the thread!  E50 owners are loving it.. not because they finally have an equal.. but because they have something far superior.

Check your facts. Development of the first T-54 prototype (based on the T-44) started in October 1944 at the OKB-520 design bureau, at the Stalin Ural Tank Factory No. 183 (Uralvagonzavod), in Nizhny Tagil. The initial design was completed in December, with a prototype completed in February 1945. It was commissioned for service in April '45, with serial production starting in '47.

Work on the Patton began in '48.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users