Jump to content


Make the E5 Great Again


  • Please log in to reply
50 replies to this topic

Rottax #1 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 17:53

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 35983 battles
  • 134
  • [AMOX] AMOX
  • Member since:
    11-18-2013
They need to fix power creep and buff/level the playing field for all tank lines that got left behind. The E5 could use 50 more damage per shot with maybe 10 sec reload. Move engine hp from 875 to 950. Give it 10 more pen to AP and 5 more pen to HEAT. Give 10 mm armor back to weak spots. These changes might not make it great but it would be enough for me to want it.

Edited by Rottax, Nov 08 2018 - 22:13.


Devil__Anse #2 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 17:55

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 1806 battles
  • 229
  • [HSOLO] HSOLO
  • Member since:
    05-05-2013

the commander's hatch doesn't need to go back to pre-nerf levels but it sure as hell needs a buff



TheGame_ #3 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 18:02

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 35764 battles
  • 796
  • [MAHOU] MAHOU
  • Member since:
    12-24-2011
it doesn't shoot apcr...

Norse_Knight #4 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 18:05

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 19756 battles
  • 287
  • [HROW] HROW
  • Member since:
    03-25-2014
Question on the E5...why does the M48 patton have a 105mm that does 390 damage, shell velocity is 1478, ROF is 7.49 and pen is 268 while the the T110E5s 120mm does only 10 more damage at 400 but the velocity drops to 1000, ROF drops to 6.26 and the pen drops to 258? The 120 is worse in almost every single way, a straight down grade from the mediums gun.

Edited by Norse_Knight, Nov 08 2018 - 18:05.


GothicNightmare #5 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 18:13

    Private

  • -Players-
  • 9227 battles
  • 6
  • [LOPG] LOPG
  • Member since:
    04-02-2015

View PostNorse_Knight, on Nov 08 2018 - 18:05, said:

Question on the E5...why does the M48 patton have a 105mm that does 390 damage, shell velocity is 1478, ROF is 7.49 and pen is 268 while the the T110E5s 120mm does only 10 more damage at 400 but the velocity drops to 1000, ROF drops to 6.26 and the pen drops to 258? The 120 is worse in almost every single way, a straight down grade from the mediums gun.

 

unfortunately you can say that about every medium line with a 105 and above and a heavy tank with a 120 I feel like that mediums need a dmg nerf perhaps to 320 instead of 390 that heavies can have an advantage in dmg but mediums will still have dpm 

spud_tuber #6 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 18:19

    Major

  • Players
  • 52539 battles
  • 6,661
  • Member since:
    08-26-2013

View PostNorse_Knight, on Nov 08 2018 - 11:05, said:

Question on the E5...why does the M48 patton have a 105mm that does 390 damage, shell velocity is 1478, ROF is 7.49 and pen is 268 while the the T110E5s 120mm does only 10 more damage at 400 but the velocity drops to 1000, ROF drops to 6.26 and the pen drops to 258? The 120 is worse in almost every single way, a straight down grade from the mediums gun.

I can't give you a balance reason, but historically the 105 had significant advantages over the 120 because it was a newer gun using more modern technologies. The M60 with the new 105 basically replaced both the M48 with the 90mm and the M103 with the 120mm.  

 

For gameplay, WG probably should buff the gun.   Would help the M103 as well, which needs it bad.  Many later 122mm guns are pumping 440 alpha, so maybe the alpha on later 120s should be bumped up some as well.



moogleslam #7 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 18:20

    Major

  • Players
  • 39702 battles
  • 4,215
  • Member since:
    12-20-2013

View PostDevil__Anse, on Nov 08 2018 - 12:55, said:

the commander's hatch doesn't need to go back to pre-nerf levels but it sure as hell needs a buff

 

I'd say that's exactly what needs to happen.  Remove the entire nerf from that patch, and it would be competitive again.  Power creep would have made that version of it balanced in today's game.

Norse_Knight #8 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 18:39

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 19756 battles
  • 287
  • [HROW] HROW
  • Member since:
    03-25-2014

View Postspud_tuber, on Nov 08 2018 - 18:19, said:

I can't give you a balance reason, but historically the 105 had significant advantages over the 120 because it was a newer gun using more modern technologies. The M60 with the new 105 basically replaced both the M48 with the 90mm and the M103 with the 120mm.  

 

For gameplay, WG probably should buff the gun.   Would help the M103 as well, which needs it bad.  Many later 122mm guns are pumping 440 alpha, so maybe the alpha on later 120s should be bumped up some as well.

 

Right the Russian 122mm does 440...105=390, 120=400, 122=440. That 2mm gap equals 40 extra damage lol Give the 120mm 420 alpha.

Edited by Norse_Knight, Nov 08 2018 - 18:40.


spud_tuber #9 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 18:43

    Major

  • Players
  • 52539 battles
  • 6,661
  • Member since:
    08-26-2013

View PostNorse_Knight, on Nov 08 2018 - 11:39, said:

 

Right the Russian 122mm does 440...105=390, 120=400, 122=440. That 2mm gap equals 40 extra damage lol Give the 120mm 420 alpha.

To be fair, early 122s do 390, but early 120s do 400 just like later 120s.



Norse_Knight #10 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 18:47

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 19756 battles
  • 287
  • [HROW] HROW
  • Member since:
    03-25-2014

View Postspud_tuber, on Nov 08 2018 - 18:43, said:

To be fair, early 122s do 390, but early 120s do 400 just like later 120s.

 

I would assume this is supposed to show advancements in ammunition types so it would be logical to say that by tier 10 the 120 would of also advanced into the higher damage range. The early 105 on the T29 only does 320 alpha so its shows a change in later tiers.

Edited by Norse_Knight, Nov 08 2018 - 18:48.


Hurk #11 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 19:07

    Major

  • Players
  • 52113 battles
  • 17,345
  • [KGR] KGR
  • Member since:
    09-30-2012

View PostNorse_Knight, on Nov 08 2018 - 10:05, said:

Question on the E5...why does the M48 patton have a 105mm that does 390 damage, shell velocity is 1478, ROF is 7.49 and pen is 268 while the the T110E5s 120mm does only 10 more damage at 400 but the velocity drops to 1000, ROF drops to 6.26 and the pen drops to 258? The 120 is worse in almost every single way, a straight down grade from the mediums gun.

because mediums are the meta. all medium tanks in game are massively OP compared to where they should be vs heavies. 

one of the sandbox tests changed all the 120s to be 440 damage along with the 122s. but that change never went live. 

View Postspud_tuber, on Nov 08 2018 - 10:43, said:

To be fair, early 122s do 390, but early 120s do 400 just like later 120s.

however early 105s do 300 and 320, but end up at 390. 

the 120s/122s do not scale well. 

 


Edited by Hurk, Nov 08 2018 - 19:10.


Devildog8 #12 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 20:16

    Major

  • Players
  • 10361 battles
  • 6,288
  • [RSHRK] RSHRK
  • Member since:
    12-26-2011

FREE THE E5!!!!!!

#FREETHEE5



Dain_Ironfoot_ #13 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 20:24

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 22476 battles
  • 2,091
  • [4HIM] 4HIM
  • Member since:
    05-14-2014
Yes, please unbreak the E5.

Trauglodyte #14 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 20:27

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 16092 battles
  • 2,568
  • [GSH] GSH
  • Member since:
    06-04-2016

View PostNorse_Knight, on Nov 08 2018 - 18:05, said:

Question on the E5...why does the M48 patton have a 105mm that does 390 damage, shell velocity is 1478, ROF is 7.49 and pen is 268 while the the T110E5s 120mm does only 10 more damage at 400 but the velocity drops to 1000, ROF drops to 6.26 and the pen drops to 258? The 120 is worse in almost every single way, a straight down grade from the mediums gun.

 

I would hazard a guess that they don't want heavy tanks to be the meta because of a feared combination of alpha, dpm, armor, and health.  Plus, they view the medium tank to be a brittle heavy with speed to compensate for armor/health.  This is one of the reasons why tanks that are really fast (hello Leo 1) have such crappy stats and/or alpha/dpm.  WG sees speed and agility, in many cases, as being equal to armor.  Look at the disparity between Lights and Mediums.  The Rheinmetal Panzerwagon has a 105, just like the E50M and the Leo 1.  Yet, the Rh. Pz deals less damage, has less armor, and is only slightly faster than the Leo 1.  The E50 has a 105, same as the Tiger II, yet the E50 does 40 more damage per trigger pull of the same caliber gun and the Rh. Pz. does 30 more damage with the same caliber gun.

 

If you think on things in this game long enough, blood vessels might pop.


Edited by Trauglodyte, Nov 08 2018 - 20:30.


That1Villain #15 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 20:36

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 22368 battles
  • 752
  • Member since:
    01-15-2015
honestly a bit more engine power and a slight dpm buff would put the e5 in a very nice spot, it wouldn't be completely outclassed by the S.Conq, just mostly outclassed

spud_tuber #16 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 20:38

    Major

  • Players
  • 52539 battles
  • 6,661
  • Member since:
    08-26-2013

View PostThat1Villain, on Nov 08 2018 - 13:36, said:

honestly a bit more engine power and a slight dpm buff would put the e5 in a very nice spot, it wouldn't be completely outclassed by the S.Conq, just mostly outclassed

Swapping the gun depression and maybe DPM on the E5 and S conq would go a little ways to fixing both their imbalances imo.



Norse_Knight #17 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 20:39

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 19756 battles
  • 287
  • [HROW] HROW
  • Member since:
    03-25-2014

View PostTrauglodyte, on Nov 08 2018 - 20:27, said:

 

I would hazard a guess that they don't want heavy tanks to be the meta because of a feared combination of alpha, dpm, armor, and health.  Plus, they view the medium tank to be a brittle heavy with speed to compensate for armor/health.  This is one of the reasons why tanks that are really fast (hello Leo 1) have such crappy stats and/or alpha/dpm.  WG sees speed and agility, in many cases, as being equal to armor.  Look at the disparity between Lights and Mediums.  The Rheinmetal Panzerwagon has a 105, just like the E50M and the Leo 1.  Yet, the Rh. Pz deals less damage, has less armor, and is only slightly faster than the Leo 1.  The E50 has a 105, same as the Tiger II, yet the E50 does 40 more damage per trigger pull of the same caliber gun and the Rh. Pz. does 30 more damage with the same caliber gun.

 

If you think on things in this game long enough, blood vessels might pop.

 

Ahh but there's the problem; the T110E5 has none of the trade offs you mentioned. It is so vastly underpowered compared to the super conquerer I don't even see why anyone would play it. It has no great redeeming features that would warrant such a low alpha and DPM trade off. I have shreaded several E5s in my M48 patton simply by hitting the cupola and if he shows his hull its even easier. He has almost no chance at a return shot to reliably pen and I'm certain it would be the same situation if it was fighting a super conq.

Edited by Norse_Knight, Nov 08 2018 - 20:40.


Norse_Knight #18 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 20:41

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 19756 battles
  • 287
  • [HROW] HROW
  • Member since:
    03-25-2014

View Postspud_tuber, on Nov 08 2018 - 20:38, said:

Swapping the gun depression and maybe DPM on the E5 and S conq would go a little ways to fixing both their imbalances imo.

 

I like this idea but I think giving it gun depression and alpha would be better 

Trauglodyte #19 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 20:48

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 16092 battles
  • 2,568
  • [GSH] GSH
  • Member since:
    06-04-2016

View PostNorse_Knight, on Nov 08 2018 - 20:39, said:

 

Ahh but there's the problem; the T110E5 has none of the trade offs you mentioned. It is so vastly underpowered compared to the super conquerer I don't even see why anyone would play it. It has no great redeeming features that would warrant such a low alpha and DPM trade off. I have shreaded several E5s in my M48 patton simply by hitting the cupola and if he shows his hull its even easier. He has almost no chance at a return shot to reliably pen and I'm certain it would be the same situation if it was fighting a super conq.

 

I get what you're saying.  But, sadly, you're talking about a new tank compared to an old tank that was nerfed.  Look at the 430 vs. 430U or the T-10 vs. Object 277.  The 430 was a balanced tank at tier 10 and is even somewhat balanced at tier 9 while the 430 U is freaking broken at tier 10.  The T-10 was a balanced tier 10 that got moved to tier 9 with little changes which is why the Object 277 was so "meh" upon release - they couldn't make it so much better or it would have blown everything else out of the game.

 

The Super Conqueror is a broken tank that desperately needs to have the power creep dialed back.  The E5, on the other hand, was considered "then" to be what the S. Conq is now which is why it was nerfed and is now, not only weak versus its old peers, but stupidly weak versus the power creeped new tanks.  Look at the entirety of the German tech tree.  When was the last time that anyone said <insert German tank> was broken?  If you remember, it was back when the Maus got the health and DPM buff.  If you took THAT (pre-nerf) tank and put it into today's game, it wouldn't be a problem because tanks like the 5A and S Conq are that great.

 

Edit:  The really hard part about all of this is how do you balance a weak spot in a game where gold spam is so common?  Say that they added +50 more armor to the cupola or even +100.  What difference does it make when tier 10 medium tank premium ammo can just burn through the turret cheeks?  We're playing a game asking for tanks to be buffed, because they absolutely need to be buffed, that will result in empty buffs because of the ability to dab the #2 key while OP tanks still exist that won't ever see the nerf bat.


Edited by Trauglodyte, Nov 08 2018 - 20:53.


Norse_Knight #20 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 20:55

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 19756 battles
  • 287
  • [HROW] HROW
  • Member since:
    03-25-2014

View PostTrauglodyte, on Nov 08 2018 - 20:48, said:

 

I get what you're saying.  But, sadly, you're talking about a new tank compared to an old tank that was nerfed.  Look at the 430 vs. 430U or the T-10 vs. Object 277.  The 430 was a balanced tank at tier 10 and is even somewhat balanced at tier 9 while the 430 U is freaking broken at tier 10.  The T-10 was a balanced tier 10 that got moved to tier 9 with little changes which is why the Object 277 was so "meh" upon release - they couldn't make it so much better or it would have blown everything else out of the game.

 

The Super Conqueror is a broken tank that desperately needs to have the power creep dialed back.  The E5, on the other hand, was considered "then" to be what the S. Conq is now which is why it was nerfed and is now, not only weak versus its old peers, but stupidly weak versus the power creeped new tanks.  Look at the entirety of the German tech tree.  When was the last time that anyone said <insert German tank> was broken?  If you remember, it was back when the Maus got the health and DPM buff.  If you took THAT (pre-nerf) tank and put it into today's game, it wouldn't be a problem because tanks like the 5A and S Conq are that great.

 

Very true. They have purposefully thrown balance off and simply passed the mantle of OP tank to the next. More than likely this is just to get people to grind a new line thus buy gold/premium time. They have access to all the stats like we do on vbaddict and the T110E5 is right next to the Leopard 1 in winrate. Look at the Object 268 V4. They knowingly released an obvious OP tank on a line that had little attention before. Its all intended. 

Edited by Norse_Knight, Nov 08 2018 - 20:55.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users