Jump to content


Make the E5 Great Again


  • Please log in to reply
49 replies to this topic

EmperorJuliusCaesar #41 Posted Nov 10 2018 - 02:41

    Major

  • Players
  • 30451 battles
  • 4,727
  • [EOR] EOR
  • Member since:
    03-16-2014

View PostNorse_Knight, on Nov 09 2018 - 18:16, said:

View PostEmperorJuliusCaesar, on Nov 09 2018 - 05:38, said:

 

The last time it's stats were posted, it was right in the middle of the pack.  That is competitive, not obsolete.  It's just no longer the mindless clubber tank that it used to be, not should it be.

 

 

Well it shows the tank being played as it should be, with a brain, and shows that it can reliably bounce many shots while doing so.   It's no longer the brainless clubber tank that it was and nor should it be.  Again, he last time it's stats were posted, it was right in the middle of the pack.  That is competitive.

 

Go look at the current winrate on vbaddict. 3rd to last, right above the leopard 1. If that's what you call competitive then sure. Things have changed and power creep has taken its toll. For those of you who wont go look its winrate is 45%

 

When people REFUSE to adapt to the new playstyle, not everyone is going to do well in it.  As you can see from the video, it bounces shots easily and reliably when you actually play TO the style of the tank.



EmperorJuliusCaesar #42 Posted Nov 10 2018 - 02:47

    Major

  • Players
  • 30451 battles
  • 4,727
  • [EOR] EOR
  • Member since:
    03-16-2014

View Postcommander42, on Nov 10 2018 - 03:40, said:

View PostEmperorJuliusCaesar, on Nov 08 2018 - 23:38, said:

 

The last time it's stats were posted, it was right in the middle of the pack.  That is competitive, not obsolete.  It's just no longer the mindless clubber tank that it used to be, not should it be.

 

 

Well it shows the tank being played as it should be, with a brain, and shows that it can reliably bounce many shots while doing so.   It's no longer the brainless clubber tank that it was and nor should it be.  Again, he last time it's stats were posted, it was right in the middle of the pack.  That is competitive.

 

reliably bounce shots unless of course the enemy has a brain and shoots the gigantic weakpoint that you cant hide.  No tank should be played like that.  Its stats are near the bottom, especially for heavies, that is not competitive.

 

Maybe watch the video, it shows how to easily hide it and then the tank bounces shots like a boss.  It's not the mindless wonder anymore, it has a playstyle that limits it from being a mindless wonder and that's good.  As you said, we need less troll armor.



EmperorJuliusCaesar #43 Posted Nov 10 2018 - 02:58

    Major

  • Players
  • 30451 battles
  • 4,727
  • [EOR] EOR
  • Member since:
    03-16-2014

View PostBEASTY_BUCKEYE, on Nov 10 2018 - 05:29, said:

View PostEmperorJuliusCaesar, on Nov 09 2018 - 04:38, said:

 

The last time it's stats were posted, it was right in the middle of the pack.  That is competitive, not obsolete.  It's just no longer the mindless clubber tank that it used to be, not should it be.

 

 

Well it shows the tank being played as it should be, with a brain, and shows that it can reliably bounce many shots while doing so.   It's no longer the brainless clubber tank that it was and nor should it be.  Again, he last time it's stats were posted, it was right in the middle of the pack.  That is competitive.

 

I'm not even sure why you are even here posting your opinion. When you have never even played a single battle in a T110E5. You have no clue what you are even talking about. You are basing your opinion off a WG video, really dude.  And just for your info it was never a mindless clubber tank like you state.  How ever it is a 45% obsolete tank. That ether needs some love or retired and replaced with something more in line with today's meta.  That is if, this is the direction that WG is going to go with there game. Small weak spots and high alpha guns.  WG can live in there make believe world of thinking, that America would bring a 45% heavy tank to the battle field all they want. But we all know that that would never happen in real life. 

 

Could you be anymore triggered?  Look at the tone of your post....lol. Have some self control.  Basing my opinion off a video?  Come on now, I've got 10s of thousands of games under my belt, and most are at high tier.  You don't have to have a tank to know and understand it.  There's a reason that during that year that it was Over-Performing....OP....that it was one of the most played tanks.  Everyone that plays this game knows that when a tank is OP and isn't fixed quickly, it quickly becomes the most played tank for it's reign.  Just like the VK 45.02B, just like the Obj. 268 v4.  This tank was OP and it eventually finally got fixed.  It was a mindless performing tank as everyone, including bads were over performing in it, it's stats revealed that and WG fixed it.  Playing against the tank then was like playing a super heavy, which it is not.  Now it's still a good tank, I see people doing well in them.  If it's someone that doesn't understand how to hide the cupola, or refuse to do it, yes, they're not going to do well.  But for those that have the discipline to play to it's style, it's still a great tank.  Just as hull down tanks have a specialty and get penned very easily if you don't stick to it, the T110e5 has a specialty, but if you stick to it, it's great.  It's just laziness, people refuse to adapt and want their OP tank back.  Doubtful that will happen, and hopefully not.  It's a fast heavy, it shouldn't have troll armor.



Hurk #44 Posted Nov 10 2018 - 05:18

    Major

  • Players
  • 52075 battles
  • 17,325
  • [KGR] KGR
  • Member since:
    09-30-2012

Green is current

black line is all time pre-nerf, etc. 

 

the tank is now trash. needs serious buffs to fix the current deficits. and all of this is due to the stupid hat. 

 

rebuff the hat, turn it back into a beak, then weaken the tanks gun control to stop the high end players from abusing it.



Avalon304 #45 Posted Nov 10 2018 - 07:01

    Major

  • Players
  • 19876 battles
  • 8,566
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

View Postspud_tuber, on Nov 09 2018 - 17:13, said:

Pretty much everything that competes in the fat medium category is better than the E5, or at least as good.  113, WZ-5A, 430U, probable post buff IS-7 and 260, maybe Patton.  You could throw the 50B in here and well.

 

While I'm in full agreement that power creep has hurt the E5 more than the nerf, I think the E5 also is hurting from a lack of identity.   On the one hand it tries to be a fat medium, but ends up slow for that,  and on the other,  a support heavy,  but lacks anything that makes it good in that roll( 57's dpm and burst, s conq's dpm, gun handling, and turret armor, E4's alpha, 50Bs burst and mobility, kran's burst and turret armor).

 

*shrug* appropriate buffs and nerfs to give it more of an identity might help it as well.

 

 

I mean... the 430U is a horribly broken tank and the 5A isnt exactly the most balanced thing either, so.... The 113 is a low slung tank with worse depression (and uneven depression as well) and less flexibility on any sort of hilly terrain because of its turret location in relation to its lengthy hull. The 50B isnt a fat medium, its more of a 2nd or 3rd line support. It doesnt have the armor to bully mediums with any sort of reliablity

 

I dont know that I'd classifiy the IS-7 as a fat medium either, as it doesnt really have the gun for it. Its more suited to holding a hull down position against other heavy tanks. I cant speak to the 260, but Id imagine after the buff it will be more like the IS-7.

 

The E5 is very much a fat medium. It has just enough speed to be with them and just enough armor to make enemy mediums have to actively try to aim for the cupola. Thats its identity. Support mediums, throw your weight and HP with them to help bully other mediums.

 

Buffing a tank that is already well balanced when the problem is other tanks, is not the solution. The solution is to balance the other tanks. Then, reassess and see if the original tank needs something. You dont just buff the original tank. That leads to power creep. (Which I can never tell if players want or dont want, given how many people ask for tanks to be buffed willy nilly and then complain when tanks are buffed willy nilly). Lets fix the actual problem tanks first. Lets nef the 430U, because it clearly needs it. Lets nerf the Super Conqueror, because it clearly needs it (particualrly its gun depression, which is actively physically impossible with its turret shape). Lets address the fact that the 5A is super powerful. Lets bring other tanks into line first. Then if we need to (and I doubt we will), we can address the E5 and any other tanks. Lets start from a reasonably balanced start point, rather than the cluster we currently have with regards to tier 10 heavy tanks.

 

View PostHurk, on Nov 09 2018 - 21:18, said:

the tank is now trash. needs serious buffs to fix the current deficits. and all of this is due to the stupid hat. 

 

rebuff the hat, turn it back into a beak, then weaken the tanks gun control to stop the high end players from abusing it.

 

Wow... you mean people dont know how to play a tank that has an actual weakspot? Its almost like players dont like tanks that arent invulnerable to standard rounds. The E5 is fine, it just requires the player to have a brain to play it well.

 

And lol on that gun handling nerf suggestion... thats an actively terrible idea, even coupled with an associated buff.



spud_tuber #46 Posted Nov 10 2018 - 07:28

    Major

  • Players
  • 52474 battles
  • 6,651
  • Member since:
    08-26-2013

View PostAvalon304, on Nov 10 2018 - 00:01, said:

 

I mean... the 430U is a horribly broken tank and the 5A isnt exactly the most balanced thing either, so.... The 113 is a low slung tank with worse depression (and uneven depression as well) and less flexibility on any sort of hilly terrain because of its turret location in relation to its lengthy hull. The 50B isnt a fat medium, its more of a 2nd or 3rd line support. It doesnt have the armor to bully mediums with any sort of reliablity

 

I dont know that I'd classifiy the IS-7 as a fat medium either, as it doesnt really have the gun for it. Its more suited to holding a hull down position against other heavy tanks. I cant speak to the 260, but Id imagine after the buff it will be more like the IS-7.

 

The E5 is very much a fat medium. It has just enough speed to be with them and just enough armor to make enemy mediums have to actively try to aim for the cupola. Thats its identity. Support mediums, throw your weight and HP with them to help bully other mediums.

 

Buffing a tank that is already well balanced when the problem is other tanks, is not the solution. The solution is to balance the other tanks. Then, reassess and see if the original tank needs something. You dont just buff the original tank. That leads to power creep. (Which I can never tell if players want or dont want, given how many people ask for tanks to be buffed willy nilly and then complain when tanks are buffed willy nilly). Lets fix the actual problem tanks first. Lets nef the 430U, because it clearly needs it. Lets nerf the Super Conqueror, because it clearly needs it (particualrly its gun depression, which is actively physically impossible with its turret shape). Lets address the fact that the 5A is super powerful. Lets bring other tanks into line first. Then if we need to (and I doubt we will), we can address the E5 and any other tanks. Lets start from a reasonably balanced start point, rather than the cluster we currently have with regards to tier 10 heavy tanks.

 

 

Wow... you mean people dont know how to play a tank that has an actual weakspot? Its almost like players dont like tanks that arent invulnerable to standard rounds. The E5 is fine, it just requires the player to have a brain to play it well.

 

And lol on that gun handling nerf suggestion... thats an actively terrible idea, even coupled with an associated buff.

I agree,  if WG is willing, nerf major over performers first.  Of course, WG may not be willing, but it would be the better solution.   It would also help T8 tanks out quite a bit, and would be worthwhile for that reason alone.

 

However, unless you're talking major nerfs to most T10s, based on what Hurk posted and pretty much ever other available performance stat set, the E5 will likely end up needing a buff even after the overperforming tanks are nerfed.  After all, that graph says even players with a brain underperform in the E5.

 

To my rather great surprise, it looks like 113 and s conq many neither one be in that major overperforming category based on what performance stats I could find.  To my minor surprise, there may be a heavy or 2 at T10 that's worse than the E5, based again on what I could find.  That the IS-4 is one of the candidates for that position isn't a surprise, however.

 

 

 



NERORATH #47 Posted Nov 10 2018 - 10:19

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 27543 battles
  • 740
  • Member since:
    08-08-2013

View PostAvalon304, on Nov 09 2018 - 22:01, said:

Wow... you mean people dont know how to play a tank that has an actual weakspot? Its almost like players dont like tanks that arent invulnerable to standard rounds. The E5 is fine, it just requires the player to have a brain to play it well.

 

And lol on that gun handling nerf suggestion... thats an actively terrible idea, even coupled with an associated buff.

 

I just 3 marked the E5 a couple days back. As someone that knows how to play the tank and has been playing it well over the last couple weeks, it is absolutely awful. There is a reason the E5 is rocking a 45% win rate on NA right now and is by far the worst performing tier 10 HT on NA according to vbaddict. Its only strength is being able to hit over 275+ view range when rocking food on it. The gun is ok but not good enough to make up for everything else wrong with the tank. A weak spot on the turret that tier 8s can punch through and a lower plate that can be easily penned by every tank. All this on top of having an extremely weak ammo rack. If you are penned frontally there is a very good chance your rack gets busted even from a low caliber shell.

 

The E5 could be classified as a tier 9 with no changes to the tank and a majority of tier 9 HTs would out perform it in head to head matchups. 



Avalon304 #48 Posted Nov 10 2018 - 11:32

    Major

  • Players
  • 19876 battles
  • 8,566
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

View Postspud_tuber, on Nov 09 2018 - 23:28, said:

I agree,  if WG is willing, nerf major over performers first.  Of course, WG may not be willing, but it would be the better solution.   It would also help T8 tanks out quite a bit, and would be worthwhile for that reason alone.

 

However, unless you're talking major nerfs to most T10s, based on what Hurk posted and pretty much ever other available performance stat set, the E5 will likely end up needing a buff even after the overperforming tanks are nerfed.  After all, that graph says even players with a brain underperform in the E5.

 

To my rather great surprise, it looks like 113 and s conq many neither one be in that major overperforming category based on what performance stats I could find.  To my minor surprise, there may be a heavy or 2 at T10 that's worse than the E5, based again on what I could find.  That the IS-4 is one of the candidates for that position isn't a surprise, however.

 

 

 

 

Most tier 10s? There are like 3 that really need a nerf: 430U, WZ 5A and Super Conqueror.

 

The 430U is just all around better than most mediums and most heavies. It needs either an armor nerf to make it more of a medium or a mobility nerf and gun handling nerf to make it more like a heavy.

 

The 5A pretty much supplanted the 113 and IS-7 when it came out and its still the most meta friendly tank in the game due to its excellant combination of speed, gun depression and workable armor, not to mention its alpha. Id probably give it the same depression as the 111 1-4, and probably call it good. Maybe drop the DPM a bit too to match the 277.

 

The Super Conqueror has the  gun depression advantage (which is actually physically impossible for it to have with its current turret geometry), DPM and gun handling along with fantastic armor. Just nerfing the gun depression back to -7 and/or nerf either the gun handling or DPM. The Super Conqueror really pays nothing for all the good things it has about it. (The tier 9 Conqueror should also go back to -7 as well, as an aside).

 

 

View PostNERORATH, on Nov 10 2018 - 02:19, said:

 A weak spot on the turret that tier 8s can punch through and a lower plate that can be easily penned by every tank. All this on top of having an extremely weak ammo rack. If you are penned frontally there is a very good chance your rack gets busted even from a low caliber shell.

 

A weakspot like that is a GOOD thing. More tanks should have them. A weak lower plate is ok too (as it should be hidden whereever possible).

 

As for the ammo rack, the only tanks with better ammo racks are the 3 German super heavies and the Type 5. The E5 has what could be termed as an average ammo rack with an ammo rack health of 260, the same as the Super Conqueror, M4 54 and T57 Heavy. Comparatively tanks like the 5A and 113 have ammo racks with 240 health and tanks like the 705A, 60TP and IS-7 each have an ammo rack with 210 health.

 

Yes, lower tiers should be able to pen tanks without resorting to premium ammo. Yes, this means weakspots should be preserved (and even added back to many tanks) and that a weak lower plate is not a bad thing.

 

That other tanks perfom better because they have either been buffed in ways that they didnt need to be, or were just desgined with power creep in mind (see also 5A, SConq and 430U) does not mean the E5 needs to be buffed, it means those tanks need to be nerfed first. Buffing the well balanced tank is not the answer.



spud_tuber #49 Posted Nov 10 2018 - 16:24

    Major

  • Players
  • 52474 battles
  • 6,651
  • Member since:
    08-26-2013

View PostAvalon304, on Nov 10 2018 - 04:32, said:

 

Most tier 10s? There are like 3 that really need a nerf: 430U, WZ 5A and Super Conqueror.

 

The 430U is just all around better than most mediums and most heavies. It needs either an armor nerf to make it more of a medium or a mobility nerf and gun handling nerf to make it more like a heavy.

 

The 5A pretty much supplanted the 113 and IS-7 when it came out and its still the most meta friendly tank in the game due to its excellant combination of speed, gun depression and workable armor, not to mention its alpha. Id probably give it the same depression as the 111 1-4, and probably call it good. Maybe drop the DPM a bit too to match the 277.

 

The Super Conqueror has the  gun depression advantage (which is actually physically impossible for it to have with its current turret geometry), DPM and gun handling along with fantastic armor. Just nerfing the gun depression back to -7 and/or nerf either the gun handling or DPM. The Super Conqueror really pays nothing for all the good things it has about it. (The tier 9 Conqueror should also go back to -7 as well, as an aside).

 

 

 

A weakspot like that is a GOOD thing. More tanks should have them. A weak lower plate is ok too (as it should be hidden whereever possible).

 

As for the ammo rack, the only tanks with better ammo racks are the 3 German super heavies and the Type 5. The E5 has what could be termed as an average ammo rack with an ammo rack health of 260, the same as the Super Conqueror, M4 54 and T57 Heavy. Comparatively tanks like the 5A and 113 have ammo racks with 240 health and tanks like the 705A, 60TP and IS-7 each have an ammo rack with 210 health.

 

Yes, lower tiers should be able to pen tanks without resorting to premium ammo. Yes, this means weakspots should be preserved (and even added back to many tanks) and that a weak lower plate is not a bad thing.

 

That other tanks perfom better because they have either been buffed in ways that they didnt need to be, or were just desgined with power creep in mind (see also 5A, SConq and 430U) does not mean the E5 needs to be buffed, it means those tanks need to be nerfed first. Buffing the well balanced tank is not the answer.

Yes,  most T10s, based on actual performance data,  not someone's "feels" about which tanks are OP, UP, and balanced.  I realize sometimes WG nerfs or buffs for money, or due to how many are playing a tank rather than its actual performance, or even to satisfy people's "feels", but that's how we get where we are now, rather than with a balanced game.  I also realize that sometimes people who are good at the game think their "feels" are more accurate than actual data, but if they're going to dismiss one kind of stats, they've given up any legitimacy their own stats provide because those stats can just as easily be dismissed in favor of "feels".



Trauglodyte #50 Posted Nov 10 2018 - 18:43

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 16092 battles
  • 2,561
  • [GSH] GSH
  • Member since:
    06-04-2016

View PostAvalon304, on Nov 10 2018 - 00:05, said:

 

The T110E5 has always been a fat medium, not a hull down heavy tank (its never been a hull down heavy tank). Its a tank that can bully mediums with a decent gun that handles very well for a tank of its class. You shouldnt be sitting still when you arent shooting the gun, you should be making the cupola as hard to his as possible.

 

We can speak about other tanks not heaving weakpoints, and thats its own problem. One that isnt fixed by buffing another weakpoint off of a tank.

 

The E5s problem isnt that its weak, its that other tanks like the Super Conqueror are too good. The way to fix this is not to buff the E5... its to fix the other tanks.

 

I don't have the E5 or anything on the US tech tree above tier 5 so that is why I was asking.  Perspective and context are really important.

 

View Postspud_tuber, on Nov 10 2018 - 01:13, said:

Pretty much everything that competes in the fat medium category is better than the E5, or at least as good.  113, WZ-5A, 430U, probable post buff IS-7 and 260, maybe Patton.  You could throw the 50B in here and well.

 

While I'm in full agreement that power creep has hurt the E5 more than the nerf, I think the E5 also is hurting from a lack of identity.   On the one hand it tries to be a fat medium, but ends up slow for that,  and on the other,  a support heavy,  but lacks anything that makes it good in that roll( 57's dpm and burst, s conq's dpm, gun handling, and turret armor, E4's alpha, 50Bs burst and mobility, kran's burst and turret armor).

 

*shrug* appropriate buffs and nerfs to give it more of an identity might help it as well.

 

 

This is true but power creep has made that what it is.

 

View PostAvalon304, on Nov 10 2018 - 11:32, said:

 

Most tier 10s? There are like 3 that really need a nerf: 430U, WZ 5A and Super Conqueror.

 

The 430U is just all around better than most mediums and most heavies. It needs either an armor nerf to make it more of a medium or a mobility nerf and gun handling nerf to make it more like a heavy.

 

The 5A pretty much supplanted the 113 and IS-7 when it came out and its still the most meta friendly tank in the game due to its excellant combination of speed, gun depression and workable armor, not to mention its alpha. Id probably give it the same depression as the 111 1-4, and probably call it good. Maybe drop the DPM a bit too to match the 277.

 

The Super Conqueror has the  gun depression advantage (which is actually physically impossible for it to have with its current turret geometry), DPM and gun handling along with fantastic armor. Just nerfing the gun depression back to -7 and/or nerf either the gun handling or DPM. The Super Conqueror really pays nothing for all the good things it has about it. (The tier 9 Conqueror should also go back to -7 as well, as an aside).

 

 

 

A weakspot like that is a GOOD thing. More tanks should have them. A weak lower plate is ok too (as it should be hidden whereever possible).

 

As for the ammo rack, the only tanks with better ammo racks are the 3 German super heavies and the Type 5. The E5 has what could be termed as an average ammo rack with an ammo rack health of 260, the same as the Super Conqueror, M4 54 and T57 Heavy. Comparatively tanks like the 5A and 113 have ammo racks with 240 health and tanks like the 705A, 60TP and IS-7 each have an ammo rack with 210 health.

 

Yes, lower tiers should be able to pen tanks without resorting to premium ammo. Yes, this means weakspots should be preserved (and even added back to many tanks) and that a weak lower plate is not a bad thing.

 

That other tanks perfom better because they have either been buffed in ways that they didnt need to be, or were just desgined with power creep in mind (see also 5A, SConq and 430U) does not mean the E5 needs to be buffed, it means those tanks need to be nerfed first. Buffing the well balanced tank is not the answer.

 

If you nerf the 5A, you'd need to nerf the 277 and the T-10 as well, since they're essentially the same thing as the 5A and the 111-1whatever.

 

I'm in complete agreement that the outliers need to be whacked, because there is too much disparity between tanks when it needs to be like 1-2% difference in stats and then the rest being game play differences.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users