Jump to content


* * - - - 3 votes

[ST] A43 BP Prototype & T54E2

supertest

  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

DomoSapien #1 Posted Jun 14 2019 - 16:59

    Community Coordinator

  • Administrator
  • 14694 battles
  • 1,055
  • [WGA] WGA
  • Member since:
    12-28-2012

Tankers, we've got two new tanks hitting Supertest today: The A43 BP Prototype, and the T54E2.

 

The A 43 BP Prototype is a British Heavy, and it's essentially the Churchill's big brother.

 

The prototype of the Black Prince is sort of a line extension to the Churchill. It has more armor (150 mm at the front of both its turret and hull) and a gun of a larger caliber. The British 17-pounder is capable of firing rapidly (11 shots per minute) and has an excellent penetration of 171 mm with a basic round. To crack the armor of an especially tough opponent, you may employ an APCR able to pierce 239 mm of steel.

 

Everything goes with a price, and in the case of the Black Prince it’s dynamics. This Brit is slow and cumbersome, with a top speed of just 20 km/h. The hull traverse of 20 degrees per second lets any fast tank drive circles around it, which will take a bit of getting-used-to.

 

The A43 BP prototype was made to slowly (but stylishly) push through enemy defensive lines. Its armor allows it to mitigate punches laid by vehicles of the same tier, and its armament is enough to damage any foe. The only thing keeping the Black Prince from totally dominating every battlefield is its sluggishness.

 

 

______________________________________

 

 

We've got an American Heavy Boi joining Supertest as well, although it's more of a Heavium than the A43 BP; The T54E2.

 

 

If it had a name, that would be “Mr. Versatility” as this Yank’s weak sides are balanced by the strong ones. For example, its gun has a dispersion of 0.4 which is far from ideal. But with an armor penetration of 226 mm (with a basic shell) the operator of the T54E2 won’t have to thoroughly aim at the weakest points of enemy vehicles. Penetrating opponents of the same tier won’t be a problem at all. Sure, the combination of an alpha strike of 390 points and 14-second reload time isn’t outstanding. But the sheer ability to dish out stable amounts of damage with basic rounds is worth much.

 

As for the survivability, the average hull protection of the T54E2 (150 mm at the front) is compensated for by its thick (up to 240 mm) turret armor. Even though the turret still has a weak spot (the commander’s cupola), the gun depression of -10 degrees allows for more ways of hiding it.

 

T54E2 is reasonably fast, with a top speed of 45 km/h and a specific power of more than 16 hp per ton of weight. This lets it take key positions and benefit from its armor penetration and gun depression angle. This tank is a well-rounded fighter, being a jack of all trades but a master of none. It may assist attacking allies or bolster its side’s defenses, being sheer Versatility on tracks.

 

 

 



YANKEE137 #2 Posted Jun 14 2019 - 17:06

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 13609 battles
  • 6,205
  • [6-ACR] 6-ACR
  • Member since:
    08-17-2015

OK, the Brit looks like typical Brit formula- slow, thick armor, pew pew gun.  

 

The US tank is good but that cupola weak spot has been done to death. The boys in Minsk never get tired of it though. I mean can't we eliminate the MG turret and make the turret ring a weak spot just for variety ? 

 

Just another Headshot Harry.


Edited by YANKEE137, Jun 14 2019 - 17:17.


enjineer #3 Posted Jun 14 2019 - 17:14

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 46130 battles
  • 2,824
  • [-CMF-] -CMF-
  • Member since:
    12-07-2010
That T54E2 will be a complete pile of rubbish.

Mikosah #4 Posted Jun 14 2019 - 17:30

    Major

  • Players
  • 17582 battles
  • 4,421
  • Member since:
    01-24-2013
Are these meant to be tech tree tanks or premiums?

Goat_Rodeo #5 Posted Jun 14 2019 - 17:37

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 15281 battles
  • 1,570
  • [DHO4] DHO4
  • Member since:
    06-26-2014

View Postenjineer, on Jun 14 2019 - 16:14, said:

That T54E2 will be a complete pile of rubbish.


C’mon, with .4 dispersion and a massive turgid cupola, what’s not in the win win category here?


Edited by Goat_Rodeo, Jun 14 2019 - 23:10.


Gothraul #6 Posted Jun 14 2019 - 17:54

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 2361 battles
  • 5,525
  • Member since:
    11-17-2014
Be happy to have them given there was a chance without needing to spend real money especially for the a43-bp though the tier 8 is already better than some current tanks people won't be happy with the pagoda cupola.

CynicalDutchie #7 Posted Jun 14 2019 - 18:09

    Major

  • Players
  • 42561 battles
  • 4,252
  • [CYNIC] CYNIC
  • Member since:
    05-18-2011

As I said in my thread about this:

 

View PostCynicalDutchie, on Jun 14 2019 - 16:19, said:

They could have easily putten this or the T54 as a T10 MT as well by simply buffing the gun stats instead of making it a T8 heavy (why make it a heavy?) with terrible gun stats. They could have easily given us 2 T10 meds as well. Have the T54 split of from the T54E1 and the T54E2 from the M46 (it has an M48 hull so it would even make sense historical sense for however much that is worth for WG nowadays).

 

This way the US tech tree would have 3 T10 meds researchable:

  • The current M48 patton
  • The T54 from the T54E1 giving the US an autoloading MT at T10
  • The T54E2 from the M46. Sure, the T54E2 might be a bit similar to the M48 gameplay wise but it wouldn't be anything like the Russian T-62A/140 combo. 

 

Even the French tree has more T10s at this point! Come on WG! Not saying it's bad for the French tree to have this much content but the USA one is one of the OG 3 and severely neglected content wise



Tjtod #8 Posted Jun 14 2019 - 20:02

    Captain

  • Players
  • 6540 battles
  • 1,947
  • Member since:
    04-01-2013
It would be more interesting to have the T77 follow the T54E1 than the T54

Avalon304 #9 Posted Jun 14 2019 - 20:27

    Major

  • Players
  • 22100 battles
  • 9,481
  • [SNPAI] SNPAI
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

So... not sure why we are making the T54E2 a heavy tank.... part of me doesnt really care as its another US tank to through one of my heavy crews in... but on the other hand it would have been so bloody easy to give a a mini branch of American mediums with this. From my post here:

 

Block Quote

 

US Protoype Medium Mini branch:

This rework opens the door for a quick minibranch of US prototype mediums. Starting at tier 8, this line would culminate in a 120mm armed US medium.


Tier 8: T42 Medium

This is, essentially, a prototype of the M47 Patton (and indeed the turret later went on to become the M47 Pattons turret). At tier 8 it branches off from the M26 and has the same gun as the M46 Patton KR (the 90mm M3A1) along with an upgrade in the form of the 90mm T119. Along with an appropriate engine upgrade if needed. A simple tank, that lets us move on to the two really interesting tanks.


Tier 9: T54E2 Medium

One of two new tanks in this mini-branch. The T54E2 is a 105mm armed medium with a conventional turret (unlike its brother the T54E1). This tank is already mostly in game in various piece scattered about (the gun and hull from the T54E1 and the turret from a tier 10 thats been sitting in the client for ages). So lets cobble them together and use them. While the T54E1 suffers from bad gun handling and low penetration due to its autoloading 105mm gun, this tank ideally would not, being a more conventional tank.

This lets us move on to the final tank:


Tier 10: T54E2 (120)

Now, before anyone goes nuts, Im aware the T54E2 (120) was never a designation used by any tank the US Army designed (at least that Im aware). But... Im not averse to using a little creative liberty to make things work.

Back before the M60 was the M60 the US army put forth a proposal to arm it with a 120mm gun. The gun used with the 120mm T123E6. In order to test if this was even feasible, the army took the turret of a T54E2 and mated it to the hull of an M48A2 and gave it the 120mm T123E6. So the T54E2's turret was clearly capable of mounting the 120mm gun. In fact this very tank exists in the client right now as the M48A2/T54E2/T123E6, which is a mouth full. And is why Im calling it the T54E2 (120), as thats essentially, what the assembled tank was (as the T54 US Medium series use M48 Patton hulls anyway). So lets make use of a tank thats been sitting in the client files for ages twice (once to cobble together a tier 9, and again as a full tier 10.

 

I dont see this tank needing many changes from its current iteration. Infact we could add the 105mm from the tier 9 if we wanted as having a 2nd viable gun option on the tier 10 isnt a bad thing and adds a slight variety to the tank that it otherwise wouldnt have.

 

 



SpectreHD #10 Posted Jun 14 2019 - 21:15

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 16843 battles
  • 17,120
  • [TT] TT
  • Member since:
    07-12-2010

THE T54E2 IS A FREAKING MEDIUM AND COULD BE A PART OF ANOTHER MEDIUM LINE!


Edited by SpectreHD, Jun 14 2019 - 21:15.


ThatTrafficCone #11 Posted Jun 14 2019 - 21:17

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 42089 battles
  • 139
  • [200IQ] 200IQ
  • Member since:
    06-11-2011

Why on Earth is the T54E2 a heavy tank when it's literally just the T54E1 with a different turret?

 

:izmena:



SpectreHD #12 Posted Jun 14 2019 - 21:48

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 16843 battles
  • 17,120
  • [TT] TT
  • Member since:
    07-12-2010

View PostThatTrafficCone, on Jun 15 2019 - 04:17, said:

Why on Earth is the T54E2 a heavy tank when it's literally just the T54E1 with a different turret?

 

:izmena:

 

Because whoever in charge is a smart and innovative person. /s

 

WG, if you butcher the history of vehicles, you butcher whatever soul/character this game has. Might as well be Fortnite with tanks if WG continues down this path.


Edited by SpectreHD, Jun 14 2019 - 21:49.


Dragon_Witch #13 Posted Jun 14 2019 - 23:08

    Major

  • Players
  • 12392 battles
  • 13,611
  • Member since:
    03-27-2011

I hope you know fluent Russian, because the only chance you have to get Wargaming to actually listen is to ignore this thread and go complain on the .ru server. They won't even listen to The_Chieftain, so what makes you think they'll listen to some filthy, worthless Americans complaining?

 

And even if you complain, who are we kidding?  The people who actually care are a small and not very vocal minority here.  I'm sure IF, and that's a big IF the devs ever decide to give the American line even a quarter of the lines they've given the Russians, they'll just make some crap up and invent the tanks out of whole cloth.  It worked for the Italians, the Polish, and the Japanese, so why not the Americans?  No one will care anyways.


Edited by Dragon_Witch, Jun 14 2019 - 23:54.


ArcticTankHunter #14 Posted Jun 17 2019 - 01:08

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 16170 battles
  • 647
  • [OSU-V] OSU-V
  • Member since:
    05-22-2014

They forgot the T22E1 autoloader tank which could be tier 6-7 tank leading to T69. WG is putting a tier 9 tank as tier 8 premium again just like Defender.

 

Also tier 6 Black prince, this should've been tier 7 with premium MM, told you WG you will never get rid of premium MM tanks because too many tanks need it based on real life. Still waiting for premium MM, Tog 1. None of the Tier 4s are going to pen it. Sherman tanks can't do jack against it. Buff original BP RoF already.

 

I find it OP with 152 frontal armour with no frontal weak spot. 95 mm armour is unstoppable for side scrapping at that tier, this thing can face tier 8s no problem like the original BP apart from the 152 turret armour.

 

What WG should do is, put Fv201 as tier 8 premium MM(like Is6/110), buffing turret armour, accuracy of the gun and slight RoF(make the tank fire APCR only). Move this tier 6 BP to tier 7 with premium MM, on par with original BP gun stats.


Edited by ArcticTankHunter, Jun 17 2019 - 05:32.


Dragon_Witch #15 Posted Jun 21 2019 - 14:40

    Major

  • Players
  • 12392 battles
  • 13,611
  • Member since:
    03-27-2011
See?  No one cares that Wargaming is butchering the chance of making a second American medium line in favor of making a quick buck.  A grand total of 4 people actually pointed out that the T54E2 is a medium and deserves to be on the tech tree.  4 people.  Out of an average server population of 12-15,000 people.  There's no way that they'll change their mind.  So what was the point in even complaining?

ArcticTankHunter #16 Posted Jun 21 2019 - 18:03

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 16170 battles
  • 647
  • [OSU-V] OSU-V
  • Member since:
    05-22-2014

View PostAvalon304, on Jun 14 2019 - 20:27, said:

So... not sure why we are making the T54E2 a heavy tank.... part of me doesnt really care as its another US tank to through one of my heavy crews in... but on the other hand it would have been so bloody easy to give a a mini branch of American mediums with this. From my post here:

 

 

 

 

How about, T22E1(tier7) -> T69 -> T54E1 -> T57

                                                                    -> T58(in between both)

                                        -> T42 -> T54E2 -> T77


Edited by ArcticTankHunter, Jun 21 2019 - 18:07.


Avalon304 #17 Posted Jun 22 2019 - 23:16

    Major

  • Players
  • 22100 battles
  • 9,481
  • [SNPAI] SNPAI
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

View PostArcticTankHunter, on Jun 21 2019 - 10:03, said:

 

How about, T22E1(tier7) -> T69 -> T54E1 -> T57

                                                                    -> T58(in between both)

                                        -> T42 -> T54E2 -> T77

 

No. The T58 is a bad idea and a balancing nightmare... and the T77 is an autoloading heavy that would come directly after two non-autoloading mediums, it might make a good tier 9 or 10 reward heavy tank (for either a personal mission campaign or an upcoming event) given its just a lighter armed T57 Heavy Tank. But as a tier 10 tech tree tank theres just no reason to have it there.. And the T22E1 would be terrible at tier 7, as it would either have a terrible 90mm autoloader (which would be a bad idea for tier 7) or it would have a 75mm autoloader, which would just make it a bad tank in general. That line up is a terrible idea for a whole host of reasons..

 

The line I made was made to keep relative consistency across the tier 8, 9 and 10 vehicles (both in the form of them being prototype mediums and in the form of them being single shot tanks) and was made to use one tank that already exists in the games files, as a way to entice Wargaming by giving them as little work as possible for some good PR. All 3 of the tanks are mostly ingame, in one form or another: The T54E2 has the hull and top gun of the T54E1 (though its single shot, not autoloading) and the turret from the tier 10. The tier 8 T42 woudl have the top turret from the M46 Patton and guns from the M46 Patton, and the hull of the T69.

 

 







Also tagged with supertest

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users