Jump to content


AMX M4 54, Mediocre at best? Here are some reasons on why it should be buffed.

Buff AMX M4 Balance Tier 10 Heavy tank 54 AMX M4 51 Super Conqueror T110E5 Comparison

  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

The_Suicidal_Maus #1 Posted Feb 05 2018 - 02:27

    Private

  • Players
  • 10868 battles
  • 7
  • [G-M-U] G-M-U
  • Member since:
    02-09-2012

Hello everyone.

Forgive me as this is my first or second post ever.

I have come to the analysis that the AMX M4 54 is severely... Lacking compared to its competitors and its predecessor, the AMX M4 51.
The tanks I will be comparing the "54" to will be the S. Conqueror and T110E5.

First off, I would like to state that, I will be comparing this tank and the "51" when it is using the 120mm, NOT the 127mm or 130mm as they are "different" and will be covered in a different topic later on.

1. DPM: This is one is the major weakness of the "54". Unlike its predecessor the "51", which has a competitive #2 overall best DPM in all of the heavy tanks,
the "54" is in the #5 from the bottom of the list in terms of DPM. Only beating the IS4 (which needs a buff too), IS-7, Type 5, and the Pz-7.
This would not be a disparaging issue if it has a large alpha (130mm). But in this comparison and argument for a buff, the "54" is using the 400 alpha gun.

Of the Most comparable tier 10 heavy tanks, the S. Conqueror and the T110E5, which have a (imho) overpowered and respectable DPM of 2,876.85 and 2,502.86, the "54" only has a 2,201.84 DPM.
This is one of the joint lowest DPM in all of tier 10 all around, especially the fact that it only has a 400 alpha damage (I'm excluding light tanks as they are not relevant in this comparison).

I believe the solution to this issue is to raise the DPM for the 120mm from 5.7 RPM to a respectable 6.1 RPM. 
This change will not make this tank overpowered and still having less DPM than the T110E5 (6.26 RPM).

In addition, regarding the 130mm, I believe that it is a very good gun, however less so than the DPM is its penetration power. 250mm penetration is fair,
however the 280mm penetration on the premium shell is quite abysmal. When dealing with things like the E3 and a well positioned Badger, all I can do is load HE and hope for the best.
I suggest that its premium penetration should be increased to 300mm-310mm at least. 
For comparison, the 120mm has 325mm penetration, which is overall decent for a 120mm shell.
Though it would be nice to have the DPM also increased a little bit from 3.9 RPM to around 4.2. 

2. Armor: The armor of the "54" while not bad has a lot left to be desired. 
- The cupolas
The amount of frustration and anger I have accumulated from these god-forsaken cupolas are immeasurable. Not only are they 100mm thick, but they are prominent and there are T W O of them.
Surely for a tier higher I was hoping for it to be much more armored or at least have one removed, but those were false beliefs.
In comparison, the E5 has a cupola that is 210mm thick and well angled even if it were prominent. 
The S. Conqueror has a cupola that, while not as much armor as 100mm, (at 70mm) is practically at an autobounce angle. (Unless you are in a very tall tank at close range)
My complaints would have been non existent if it were more armored or gotten rid of altogether. In addition to the fact that the armor of the turret does not change from tier 9 to tier 10.
As a heavy tank that is reliant solely on its frontal armor, I believe that at least one cupola should be gotten rid of and the other should get an armor buff.
 

- The shoulders.
My god these shoulders have given me such a hard time peeking corners and etc... While these shoulder plates are very well angled, that's all they have, 150mm thickness at tier 10 is an absolute joke. Actually 150mm of armor is a joke at tier 6-7 these days anyways. While remodeling the entire hull armor model would be optimal (it would be very lovely if they could make it like the E75), the solution in my opinion is to increase the armor to 170mm. This is because the tier 9 and tier 10 have nearly the exactly same hull armor and the tier 10 is not much of an upgrade other than the UFP.
Perhaps even just 10mm extra armor to the whole sides, so that it cannot be overmatched by the 183. (60mm of armor is really despicable to be honest)

- The gun mantlet.
I was sure that the Gun mantlet would have acted as spaced armor until I actually played the "51" and the "54". Before I played any of these vehicles, when I looked on the tanks.gg website,
I was absolutely sure that these tanks had Impenetrable Gun mantlets as they were 300mm +40mm (spaced) or 300mm + 300mm (actual turret face).

B O Y was I wrong.

Turns out the face is 260mm-300mm max at the Gun mantlet. Which is an absolute G O L D  M A G N E T

Surely for a tank, a heavy tank that relies solely on its frontal armor, it would be much better but, alas.... 

Don't get me wrong, I am all for weakspots and such for this game, H O W E V E R this tank is dependent on its front armor and front armor only. I am not asking for a major armor buff or anything of the sort, but at least bring the armor up to the S. Conqueror or E5's standards. This is also the reason why I am not complaining about its LFP.

3. Soft stats.
My last argument for a buff is the fact that moving from tier 9 to 10 has nearly no changes. the gun stats become marginally better but nothing else.
257 to 264 penetration? big whoop.
Marginal gun handling enhancements? O.K should be natural progression, though it could be better.
1100 HP engine to 1200 HP? Well, you accumulate 7 more tons of weight so you technically go down in HP/Weight ratio. (73 tons to 80)
NO terrain resistance change, as a matter of fact it kinda gets worse imho. (effective terrain resistance on hard-medium-soft terrain becomes 15-25% worse. Data from Tanks.gg)
A meager 300 hit points difference.
and not even a 400m view range like the S. Conqueror or the E5.

Here are some solutions to the soft stats issue.
Give it marginally better ground resistance.
400m view range? like all the competitors at the tier? Feels like a must.
health buff from 2200 to a very nice 2500. This should make it feel like a Heavy tank. (Reminder the S. Conqueror has 2400 and still weighs less than the "54" )
1200 Horses to 1300 Horses to compensate for the weight increase

Conclusion:

The AMX M4 54 is a diamond in the rough, I think it just needs a little more to be more popular and an actually competitive tank.
But it has to be constantly reminded that it is EXTREMELY dependent on its frontal armor.

Overall, the changes I would make to this tank are:
1. Minor adjustments to the DPM
2. Minor increase to the armor (front and sides)
3. Removal or buff to the cupolas
4. Health to 2500 from 2200
5. Minor terrain resistance buffs
6. Minor Effective terrain resistance buffs to at least bring it on par with its predecessor, the AMX M4 51

Reminder once again that this tank is EXTREMELY DEPENDENT on its frontal armor and frontal armor only.
Side scraping? good luck with 60mm on all of the sides and the fact that the shoulders exist.


I understand that there are other tanks that need balancing, we all do, but take this one with a pinch or a large grain of salt please.
And if you so do wish, please refute me on why this tank is OP or balanced enough. 

Thank you all for reading.

-Maus


 


Edited by The_Suicidal_Maus, Feb 05 2018 - 03:46.


C_Menz #2 Posted Feb 05 2018 - 05:18

    Major

  • Community Contributor
  • 26066 battles
  • 2,882
  • [VAN] VAN
  • Member since:
    07-09-2011
Honestly the issue isn't with the AMX M4 54.  The problem is the tier 9 51 is a tad bit too good for its tier. And also tanks like the badger, super Conqueror, and other new buffed/introduced t10s need to be nerfed.

WG needs to rollback power creep at high tiers. Continually buffing stuff a few tanks at a time never will solve the problem.

The_Suicidal_Maus #3 Posted Feb 05 2018 - 05:20

    Private

  • Players
  • 10868 battles
  • 7
  • [G-M-U] G-M-U
  • Member since:
    02-09-2012

View PostC_Menz, on Feb 05 2018 - 04:18, said:

Honestly the issue isn't with the AMX M4 54. The problem is the tier 9 51 is a tad bit too good for its tier. And also tanks like the badger, super Conqueror, and other new buffed/introduced t10s need to be nerfed.

WG needs to rollback power creep at high tiers. Continually buffing stuff a few tanks at a time never will solve the problem.

 


Don't you think at least the DPM and the Armor profile should be looked at at least?

B1zness #4 Posted Feb 05 2018 - 08:00

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 30561 battles
  • 26
  • Member since:
    12-16-2014

View PostC_Menz, on Feb 05 2018 - 05:18, said:

Honestly the issue isn't with the AMX M4 54. The problem is the tier 9 51 is a tad bit too good for its tier. And also tanks like the badger, super Conqueror, and other new buffed/introduced t10s need to be nerfed.

WG needs to rollback power creep at high tiers. Continually buffing stuff a few tanks at a time never will solve the problem.

Buffing a few at a time feels more like a marketing strategy for WG, causing people to rush those lines spending gold and free exp. I enjoy playing unpopular tanks but they are getting left so far behind they just sit in my garage



Hurk #5 Posted Feb 05 2018 - 18:45

    Major

  • Players
  • 52995 battles
  • 17,373
  • [KGR] KGR
  • Member since:
    09-30-2012
the numbers for the 51 so that its OP for its tier, significantly in most cases. it needs a nerf. the 54 however, is fairly well balanced. only minor modifications are needed. and no, it does not need a competitive 120mm gun. its got tradeoffs and other choices. the dedicated 120mm platforms do not. 

Edited by Hurk, Feb 05 2018 - 18:45.


Bubba187 #6 Posted Feb 05 2018 - 18:58

    Captain

  • Players
  • 45137 battles
  • 1,926
  • [DHO-X] DHO-X
  • Member since:
    03-06-2013

When I get asked about how I like the 54 I simply reply its ok.  It is a decent all around tank but doesn't shine in any one area.  I have had some pretty good games playing both the 120mm and the 130mm.  The alpha of the 130 was fun, but the pen is mediocre.  The pen of the 120 is pretty nice, but the alpha is mediocre.  I think its merely OK mobility wise.  It seems to get up to speed as I would expect a heavy should, and FAR better than it's tier 8 predecessor.  That thing is a slug.  The things the OP mentions would definitely make the tank better and more competitive, but I think they did a decent job of not making it too good.  Just don't expect to see many around for this reason.


 

I asked a unicum this weekend how he liked his.  Nothing favorable came from his mouth.  Hard to entice people to go down the line when there's nothing spectacular waiting for them.  It's just another tank to collect really.



KaSt_Patton #7 Posted Feb 05 2018 - 19:30

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 25002 battles
  • 776
  • Member since:
    05-28-2011
if its not a super conq its not worth playing

The_Suicidal_Maus #8 Posted Feb 05 2018 - 19:38

    Private

  • Players
  • 10868 battles
  • 7
  • [G-M-U] G-M-U
  • Member since:
    02-09-2012

View PostHurk, on Feb 05 2018 - 17:45, said:

the numbers for the 51 so that its OP for its tier, significantly in most cases. it needs a nerf. the 54 however, is fairly well balanced. only minor modifications are needed. and no, it does not need a competitive 120mm gun. its got tradeoffs and other choices. the dedicated 120mm platforms do not. 

 

What do you think should be changed? If you don't mind me asking? 



BlackFive #9 Posted Feb 06 2018 - 00:30

    Major

  • Players
  • 30982 battles
  • 3,683
  • [_E_] _E_
  • Member since:
    09-09-2013

View PostThe_Suicidal_Maus, on Feb 05 2018 - 19:38, said:

 

What do you think should be changed? If you don't mind me asking? 

 

Let's not mess with the 51.  It's the only Tier IX heavy that is fun to play.  It only looks OP at the moment because good people are playing it.

 

Outside of finding a good hull down position it is highly vulnerable.  Nerf the tank at all and it won't be playable. 



DonkRanger #10 Posted Jul 29 2018 - 06:18

    Private

  • Players
  • 35491 battles
  • 6
  • [SOYUZ] SOYUZ
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011
I think the idea of it is for it to be extremely hard to penetrate it frontally. This is sometimes the case until the second the enemy uses gold. Then it becomes fairly easy to penetrate.

Fight_Panda #11 Posted Aug 25 2018 - 22:14

    Private

  • -Players-
  • 2566 battles
  • 1
  • Member since:
    07-30-2015
The side armour needs to get a buff to at least 140-150. I could handle it then if it was more than 100 instead of 60mm. 60 mm is a joke for a t3.

_Gungrave_ #12 Posted Aug 25 2018 - 22:24

    Major

  • Players
  • 42942 battles
  • 16,299
  • [X-OUT] X-OUT
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011

View PostC_Menz, on Feb 05 2018 - 05:18, said:

Honestly the issue isn't with the AMX M4 54. The problem is the tier 9 51 is a tad bit too good for its tier. And also tanks like the badger, super Conqueror, and other new buffed/introduced t10s need to be nerfed.

WG needs to rollback power creep at high tiers. Continually buffing stuff a few tanks at a time never will solve the problem.

 

Well you can't blanket nerf or buff an entire tier of tanks because that would present more problems than it would fix.

The_Suicidal_Maus #13 Posted Aug 25 2018 - 22:43

    Private

  • Players
  • 10868 battles
  • 7
  • [G-M-U] G-M-U
  • Member since:
    02-09-2012

At this point,

 

i honestly doubt the devs actually play their games.

 

the imbalance at tier 10 with the introduction of the new tanks,

 

the 268-4, obj 430u, now the polish e-100.

 

im tired, and sick of this game's inability to progress

 

268-4? Even with the nerfs still a massive power creep to most tank destroyers

430u? Let's just make the 121 even more obsolete

60tp? Smaller better armored, more mobile, better gun handling than the E-100.

 

the devs don't want to fix anything nor listen,

 

all the Q&A's I've read all avoided the glaring issues of the game with mm and Arty and balancing.

 

Im really tired.

 

this game has only gone down hill for me with every passing day.

 

at least in the past this game was fun and (more) balanced.

 



The_Suicidal_Maus #14 Posted Aug 25 2018 - 22:51

    Private

  • Players
  • 10868 battles
  • 7
  • [G-M-U] G-M-U
  • Member since:
    02-09-2012

I believe I can say that I have felt true "balance" and frustration,

 

when i play all the right moves, all the right position and get "balanced" 

straight through the strongest part of the turret face with a gold shell

while I can't do anything with a 280mm gold shell back to a obj430u.

 

its those moments where I just shut down my computer and say

 

"screw this" 



_Gungrave_ #15 Posted Aug 25 2018 - 23:03

    Major

  • Players
  • 42942 battles
  • 16,299
  • [X-OUT] X-OUT
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011

View PostThe_Suicidal_Maus, on Aug 25 2018 - 22:43, said:

At this point,

 

i honestly doubt the devs actually play their games.

 

the imbalance at tier 10 with the introduction of the new tanks,

 

the 268-4, obj 430u, now the polish e-100.

 

im tired, and sick of this game's inability to progress

 

268-4? Even with the nerfs still a massive power creep to most tank destroyers

430u? Let's just make the 121 even more obsolete

60tp? Smaller better armored, more mobile, better gun handling than the E-100.

 

the devs don't want to fix anything nor listen,

 

all the Q&A's I've read all avoided the glaring issues of the game with mm and Arty and balancing.

 

Im really tired.

 

this game has only gone down hill for me with every passing day.

 

at least in the past this game was fun and (more) balanced.

 

 

Well they are a business and totally balanced tanks doesn't equate to good profits.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users