Jump to content


Buff T44 122mm!


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
16 replies to this topic

AragornSkywalker #1 Posted Sep 19 2011 - 02:27

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 0 battles
  • 925
  • Member since:
    12-27-2010
With the 59 having superior armor, turret, and D10T to the T44, I'm starting to think that a T44 buff for the 122 would make a lot more sense than bringing the mod1945. Even though I personally would use the mod1945 more because I dont have premium and cant afford 1000 credit rounds, the fact is that the superior hull of the T59 simply makes it a better D10T platform regardless of gun quality. The advantages that remain on the T44: the acceleration and manueverability, really doesnt lend itself to the D10T any more than the slightly slower T59, which can sit back and lob shells with its super turret armor. It would however make a very interesting hit and run play style with the 122, if the only the 122 didn't suck balls.

The problem with the 122 - and there are MANY - is that it fires abysmally slow, is terribly inaccurate, does not penetrate any better than the D10T, and is much more expensive to run. For the cost of 1 shell that does 390dmg avg, you can fire 4 100mm shells that can potentially do an average of 920dmg. This is typical trade-off for high alpha dmg, but it doesnt help if that initial shell misses or bounces. A pin-point gun with so-so penetration can be useful in the hands of a skilled player, who can reliably hit weak spots. A sloppy gun with high penetration is obviously useful as long as it hits the target. A sloppy gun with sub-par penetration is just aggravating. 175mm is not woefully inadequate, but it is the lowest of the 3 T8 mediums (bar 59), and it suffers the most from shell normalization because the T44 is a low tank hitting a hull at a steeper angle.

So in my opinion, of the 3 most crippling problems: ROF, Penetration, Accuracy, at least 2 must be addressed heavily.

ROF: 3.57 is ungodly slow. This stacked on top of the fragile ammo rack on the T44 is just murder. Even with WAR, getting a damaged rack or loader is not uncommon, in which case you might as well grab a book between reloads. This should be raised to 4rpm at least, which would put the average dpm below the D10T at 1560:1955, but not so much that its un-usable. A reduction in DPM is a fair trade off for high alpha, but not to the extent it currently is, which is a good 30% lower.

Accuracy: The overall accuracy on this gun is acceptable since a T44 shouldnt be sniping stuff with 122mm rounds at 400m, the moving accuracy must be greatly improved to fit a hit-and-run playstyle. An increase of FotM accuracy of 20-25% would not be unfair, since I've had rounds miss at 50, which is usually a death sentence in a brawl.

Penetration: Since nobody can expect to target a weak-spot with this gun, nor hold still for the wopping 3s aim time, the overall penetration much be greatly improved. 200 would be ideal, but nothing less than 190 would be really acceptable.  

Hopefully with these changes, the 122mm would allow the T44 to differentiate itself from the new T59, as well as offer a high-skill, high-reward play-style that would let good drivers bring it on par with the pershing and P2, and not be embarrassingly overshadowed by a premium tank.

GeneralDynamics #2 Posted Sep 19 2011 - 02:32

    Staff sergeant

  • Wiki Staff
  • 0 battles
  • 356
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011
I think the t44 is on par with the p2 and pershing. I dont know what game your playing because the panther 2 catches fire and ammo racked all the time. I really dont know that much about the pershing, but I feel the t44 is fine right how it is now.

AragornSkywalker #3 Posted Sep 19 2011 - 02:37

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 0 battles
  • 925
  • Member since:
    12-27-2010
Do you know of any other tank that has a mandatory equipment like the T44 (WAR)? And WAR doesnt even solve all the ammo rack problems, it just prevents you from getting 1-shotted. Ammo rack damages still happen alot.

The Panther 2 is a very mobile sniper. It has a far superior gun, decent frontal hull armor, and better ROF. A Panther 2 should beat a T44 at range, but the sad fact is that a T44 can even lose in a brawl now. The Panther 2 has better DPM, more health, and will always penetrate. A T44 will occasionally bounce on the front.

-Edit: nvm on accel, forgot they removed top engine.

120mm_he #4 Posted Sep 19 2011 - 02:53

    Major

  • Players
  • 0 battles
  • 10,896
  • Member since:
    02-17-2011
Blah blah give it 200mm+ pen and everyone is happy.

ruslanbear14 #5 Posted Sep 19 2011 - 03:05

    Corporal

  • Beta Testers
  • 0 battles
  • 85
  • Member since:
    11-07-2010
when i played the 122mm it was fine on T-44, just have to b more careful with the shots and get the hell out of there when u shoot

Chiyeko #6 Posted Sep 19 2011 - 11:53

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 0 battles
  • 645
  • Member since:
    04-11-2011
Buff the DT10 on the T-44 instead that would make me a whole lot happier, 122 remains a peek a boo gun at best even if buffed.

Altruismo #7 Posted Sep 20 2011 - 02:30

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 0 battles
  • 676
  • Member since:
    09-01-2010

View Postnick9645, on Sep 19 2011 - 02:32, said:

Are you really saying the t44 isnt on par with the p2 or pershing. I dont know what game your playing because the panther 2 catches fire and ammo racked all the time. I really dont know that much about the pershing, but I feel the t44 is fine right how it is now.

Heh, did you really just come into a T-44 thread and complain about the ammo rack on a panther 2?

View PostChiyeko, on Sep 19 2011 - 11:53, said:

Buff the DT10 on the T-44 instead that would make me a whole lot happier, 122 remains a peek a boo gun at best even if buffed.

The 122 is a terrible peek-a-boo gun, low accuracy + long aim time = peek.... sit, sit, sit, get hit, sit, get hit again, sit.... a-boo.
The T-44 does not have the armour to be a suitable platform to peek-a-boo with a D25 series gun.

Gyarados #8 Posted Sep 20 2011 - 02:56

    Major

  • Council of Armored Forces
  • 0 battles
  • 9,910
  • Member since:
    07-09-2010
The ammo rack on the Panther II isn't even that bad dude.

Lapland #9 Posted Sep 20 2011 - 03:06

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 0 battles
  • 972
  • Member since:
    08-08-2010
No, just give the T-44 buffed 100mm Mod. 1945 gun already.

fastdude #10 Posted Sep 21 2011 - 21:36

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 0 battles
  • 153
  • Member since:
    06-26-2011

View PostAragornSkywalker, on Sep 19 2011 - 02:27, said:

With the 59 having superior armor, turret, and D10T to the T44, I'm starting to think that a T44 buff for the 122 would make a lot more sense than bringing the mod1945. Even though I personally would use the mod1945 more because I dont have premium and cant afford 1000 credit rounds, the fact is that the superior hull of the T59 simply makes it a better D10T platform regardless of gun quality. The advantages that remain on the T44: the acceleration and manueverability, really doesnt lend itself to the D10T any more than the slightly slower T59, which can sit back and lob shells with its super turret armor. It would however make a very interesting hit and run play style with the 122, if the only the 122 didn't suck balls.

The problem with the 122 - and there are MANY - is that it fires abysmally slow, is terribly inaccurate, does not penetrate any better than the D10T, and is much more expensive to run. For the cost of 1 shell that does 390dmg avg, you can fire 4 100mm shells that can potentially do an average of 920dmg. This is typical trade-off for high alpha dmg, but it doesnt help if that initial shell misses or bounces. A pin-point gun with so-so penetration can be useful in the hands of a skilled player, who can reliably hit weak spots. A sloppy gun with high penetration is obviously useful as long as it hits the target. A sloppy gun with sub-par penetration is just aggravating. 175mm is not woefully inadequate, but it is the lowest of the 3 T8 mediums (bar 59), and it suffers the most from shell normalization because the T44 is a low tank hitting a hull at a steeper angle.

So in my opinion, of the 3 most crippling problems: ROF, Penetration, Accuracy, at least 2 must be addressed heavily.

ROF: 3.57 is ungodly slow. This stacked on top of the fragile ammo rack on the T44 is just murder. Even with WAR, getting a damaged rack or loader is not uncommon, in which case you might as well grab a book between reloads. This should be raised to 4rpm at least, which would put the average dpm below the D10T at 1560:1955, but not so much that its un-usable. A reduction in DPM is a fair trade off for high alpha, but not to the extent it currently is, which is a good 30% lower.

Accuracy: The overall accuracy on this gun is acceptable since a T44 shouldnt be sniping stuff with 122mm rounds at 400m, the moving accuracy must be greatly improved to fit a hit-and-run playstyle. An increase of FotM accuracy of 20-25% would not be unfair, since I've had rounds miss at 50, which is usually a death sentence in a brawl.

Penetration: Since nobody can expect to target a weak-spot with this gun, nor hold still for the wopping 3s aim time, the overall penetration much be greatly improved. 200 would be ideal, but nothing less than 190 would be really acceptable.  

Hopefully with these changes, the 122mm would allow the T44 to differentiate itself from the new T59, as well as offer a high-skill, high-reward play-style that would let good drivers bring it on par with the pershing and P2, and not be embarrassingly overshadowed by a premium tank.

Amen +1

AragornSkywalker #11 Posted Sep 22 2011 - 05:55

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 0 battles
  • 925
  • Member since:
    12-27-2010

View PostLapland, on Sep 20 2011 - 03:06, said:

No, just give the T-44 buffed 100mm Mod. 1945 gun already.

Or do both? Why not? The D10T is kinda subpar anyways, and the 122 could use some love. Be nice to have the option of having 2 very different playstyles.

Azyur #12 Posted Sep 26 2011 - 02:44

    Staff sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 0 battles
  • 440
  • Member since:
    01-25-2011

View PostAragornSkywalker, on Sep 19 2011 - 02:27, said:

With the 59 having superior armor, turret, and D10T to the T44, I'm starting to think that a T44 buff for the 122 would make a lot more sense....

Hopefully with these changes, the 122mm would allow the T44 to differentiate itself from the new T59, as well as offer a high-skill, high-reward play-style that would let good drivers bring it on par with the pershing and P2, and not be embarrassingly overshadowed by a premium tank.

You're assuming that the people who could make life bearable for T-44 operators actually care to do so. The T-44 is such a compromised tank that it has become infamous within the WoT community. Yet, has it been buffed? Have better gun offereings been made, or hinted? Yes, the 122mm D-25-44 is a piece of junk. Not only compared to other tier 8 medium guns, butalso in comparison to the common D-2-5T and D-25T series. There is simply no way that was an oversight. Clearly, as with all the gimped nuances of the T-44, it's operating as intended. The only relief in sight for frustrated T-44 operators is to sell the tank and buy a premium Type 59 (what the T-44 would be without the nerfs), or just grind through it to the T-54. That's my two-cents worth and i'm sticking by it.

Prav #13 Posted Sep 26 2011 - 03:13

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 0 battles
  • 476
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011
Add a T-44 exclusive piece of equipment (to match the WAR): the Beta-class warping device.

soloman02 #14 Posted Sep 26 2011 - 03:34

    Corporal

  • Beta Testers
  • 0 battles
  • 89
  • Member since:
    07-31-2010

View PostPrav, on Sep 26 2011 - 03:13, said:

Add a T-44 exclusive piece of equipment (to match the WAR): the Beta-class warping device.


I had my T44 during the beta when warping existed and before they nerfed its speed/accel. It was a most awesome tank then. People complained about the T44 then like they do now with the type 59 (only more because the warping bug made it a super tank).

Sparky630 #15 Posted Sep 26 2011 - 03:43

    Staff sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 0 battles
  • 304
  • Member since:
    07-18-2010
i agree, the 122 needs some buff, in rof, penn, and accuracy.... either one, or more than one and we will see it being used more often  :Smile-izmena:

Kaminaa #16 Posted Sep 26 2011 - 07:01

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 0 battles
  • 31
  • Member since:
    03-30-2011
I'd rather have the upgraded 100mm, although I have not used the 122mm before. The 122mm doesn't suit a medium, it promotes a peekaboo style of play which the T-44 shouldn't do when it has a speed advantage over anything else.

I absolutely hated the 122mm D-25 when I played my IS, the accuracy and shell cost were horrendous that I believe I ended up using the D10T to finish my grind.

AragornSkywalker #17 Posted Sep 26 2011 - 13:13

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 0 battles
  • 925
  • Member since:
    12-27-2010
122 on a T44 would not just be for peek-a-boo, but hit and run, a tactic that no other tank currently fulfills very well.