Jump to content


E50 and E50M needs tweaking... A fair bit, but with an explanation!

Turret E50 Gun Mantlet Buff Consistency E50M E50M Skin

  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

Rukier #1 Posted Jun 26 2019 - 07:21

    Private

  • Players
  • 7660 battles
  • 7
  • Member since:
    05-27-2011

As much of a grind Panther and eventually Panther ll will be, I am looking forward to trying out the E50 series of tanks. That said, however, I have noticed alot of calls for inflating armor thickness of the turret front, buffing its DPM (again, for some reason), buffing its mobility, or something else entirely. Some of this I agree with, others I do not. Looking over the information from Tanks.gg, Panzerworld.com 's Relative Armor Calculator, the Wargaming Wiki, and Wikipedia article of the Entwicklung Series (E-series). I came up with a few suggestions on how to Buff the tank without artificial inflation necessary- though, it may be some work on your part Wargaming!

 

Turret: The single biggest gripe I hear is how bad the turret is which nowadays can be a big issue. Not only are their more armor on lighter turrets, but ridiculous weight values to boot. Now while I have no doubt casting turrets save both material waste as well as more weight than welding. I am doubting wholeheartedly that IS-m with it's IS-BM turret, the IS-7 with it's IS-7 turret, the 113 with it's 113 turret, and even the 60TP with its 60TP lewandowskiego turret- just to name a few and to put into perspective that they are all cast and all HEAVY tanks.... Have turrets that are all LIGHTER than what's on the E50m's E50 Ausf M. turret. And let's not forget that the Ausf. M turret is the exact same as the Ausf. B turret, armor wise, yet weighs in 3,600 KG more. With historical accuracy and gameplay being at the forefront, maybe, just maybe tone the weight down a tad.

 

Back to the armor profile, the main gripe is that the frontal plate is rather weak. being flat, at 21 degrees, and a thickness 185mm makes this a rather factual complaint with Tanks.gg 's 3D modeling and Panzerworld.com 's calculator both showing a relative armor thickness of 195-198mm. At rank 8, let alone 9 or 10 unless you have an autoloader, automatic reloading system, or an excellent mix of mobility, gun depression, gun handling, and a quick firing gun. Quite frankly the E50 and E50M has none of that other than acceleration in a straight line. So we can fix this in a number of ways. Easy way to do it is simply inflate the armor thickness numbers to something meaty like 220-260mm frontally with 90-100/90-100mm thick sides and rear to compensate for both weight and usefulness of the turret. Another option would be a fair bit of work to make it work. Remodeling the turrets to have more of a 45-50 degree angle at the cosine(vertical angle of the armor. On panzerworld.com's calculator, that, combined with the 185mm thickness would give you a roughly 261.63 - 287.81 relative armor thickness. Why is this an option? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entwicklung_series in the depictions of the vehicles on the right it shows a rather acute angle going from the front of the turret, in. Doubt the accuracy of it due to schmalturm's recovered from world war 2, but who knows these days.

 

My more preferred option for adjusting the turret to be better is to 'technically' change the gun. I am talking about the gun mantlet as it seems to be directly connected and change upon the gun you install on the tank. Reason being that the gun mantlet on them currently being shared with the Panther ll... Which only has 75mm and 88mm cannons, which to me seems a little weird to me considering that the top gun on the E50 and E50M are 105mm cannons- which should be thicker and larger than those previous calibers. Now, the first iteration of the E50 and E50M both had bolted, conical gun mantlets just like the Tiger 2, E75, VK45.02A, and VK45.02B. But these were quickly removed so I won't be suggesting these, plus the current model of the turret has a bulge out the front of the turret behind the gun mantlet, again, much like the Panther ll. So instead I went into the specifics of their 105mm guns, being Kw.K models L/52's, with the mounting brackets of the gun being, more than likely, being within that bulge. For this I can't look through the German heavies, as again, their gun mantlets are conical like what was removed. Instead, the search brought me to the Tank Destroyers funnily enough. Jagdpanther, Jagdpanther ll specifically and the Jagdtiger, and Ferdinand to a lesser degree.

 

Excluding the Ferdinand, the Jagd series of Tank Destroyers all share the same vulnerable bulge for extending the gun brackets forward for more room and better angles within the casemates. Not only that but the Jagdpanther l and ll both share a Kw.K L/52 gun. While the Ferdinand and Jagdtiger have 128mm cannons, I feel like with the larger calibers of 105 and up these gun mantlets could still apply to the E50 and E50M. Not the sheer thickness of them but the general style and shape of the mantlets of these German guns can give these mediums greater appeal and better frontal protection WHILE being historically accurate- as accurate as drawing board/ blueprint tanks can be.

 

If we still used the same thickness as what's on the gun mantlets now, that would be about 120mm of spaced armor, 5-15mm of air, and 185mm of frontal turret armor to go through. Air doesn't apply to World of Tanks but still, that would be the rough equivalent of 305mm of armor one has to penetrate to do damage through the mantlet. However, like more German flat faced turrets, the mantlet doesn't protect everything. While guarding 80% of the face(rough estimate) this will still allow people to pinpoint and still shoot it in the cheeks of the frontal plate, allowing it to have some frontal weak spot still.

 

References; https://tanks.gg/tank/jpanther/model   https://tanks.gg/tank/jpanther-ii/model?l=101123   https://tanks.gg/tank/ferdinand/model   https://tanks.gg/tank/jagdtiger/model   https://panzerworld.com/relative-armor-calculator

 

  And I do see the flaw that they ARE enclosed, casemate TDs but it is a similarity- a historical similarity at that and could be applied to these tanks.

 

Mobility: This one probably won't surprise some, or surprise a lot but despite these tanks having essentially identical the same hull, turret, even gun. They have heavily differing amounts of mobility. All around the E50M's mobility is better than the E50 due to the redesign of it, but its ground resistances are horrendous. Comparatively speaking despite having a beefy hp/t and 45.29 tank traverse speed, it has roughly 30% worse overall terrain resistance than the E50. Not saying it's bad or anything, balance for a tank like this and all. Just put the values more in line with one another, please and thank you Wargaming!

 

References; https://tanks.gg/tank/e-50/stats    https://tanks.gg/tank/e-50-m/stats

 

Track link additions:  Like the E75, like the T-34-85's, the PZ.KPFW. Vll, like the Tiger ll should have on its model. Track links place under the ports on the side of the turret, on the back half of the side. If you're feeling generous even place a small belt of tracks right there on the lower glacis. 20mm thick track link spots aren't really going to help the sides of the turret all too much with anything else other than lower-tier lights (if even then), only real boost the links would give is making the middle section of the lower glacis just a little better with still soft  sides where you put them, assuming, hydraulic track tension at. Only other reason I would say put these on the tank is, well... It's to streamline, pleasing as it is to look at, it's dull and needs flare! (I DEMAND A SKIN FOR IT NEXT CHRISTMAS!!  )

 

References; https://tanks.gg/tank/e-75/model    https://tanks.gg/tank/t-34-85/model

 

And More: Just off the wall ones like giving the E50M the option to put on a Heavy Spall Liner, considering it IS technically a heavy by most other nation's standard. Model in an MG42 of some such atop of that where that mounting port is. Little tidbits like that.

 

Possible nerfs to substitute:  0.30 accuracy to 0.31-0.32.  Reducing the traverse to 40-42 on the hull. Add yet another 3,600kg of weight into the turret for god knows why.

 

All in all, hope this gets noticed by some of the staff and taken into consideration. And, hope a good few of you guys agree with me on this. Still hope to get this tank soon enough, and I'll be seeing you on the battlefield soon enough with a gun mantlet worthwhile!



Laser_Beam #2 Posted Jun 26 2019 - 07:45

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 5723 battles
  • 50
  • [4NZAB] 4NZAB
  • Member since:
    05-13-2017

So you want to buff a tank you have never played?

 

 

:amazed:



Rukier #3 Posted Jun 26 2019 - 08:06

    Private

  • Players
  • 7660 battles
  • 7
  • Member since:
    05-27-2011

View PostLaser_Beam, on Jun 26 2019 - 01:45, said:

So you want to buff a tank you have never played?

 

 

:amazed:

 

 

 

If that's all you took out of it, sure.

 

Buffing a tank that I have repeatedly penetrated the hell out of it's turret with the fv4202, Caernarvon, conqueror, fv215b in the past. And could do the same with a progetto 46, centurion 5/1, mutz, my vk45.02A, 53tp, 50tp, 50tp prototyp, super conqueror, and 60 tp if they were around and about still. I'd rather buff a tank that isn't really used anymore and try to bring it up to par at least to where it's capable to more than the 'skilled' the video Wargaming posted about it than to watch the feed and see.... Maybe a single E50 in the 300+ games I played since I gotten back into the mix? Figured it's more reasonable to want that and you know, make a more clear 'repost' of everyone's ache for the tank to be buffed with solutions than just 'Make the turret 260/120/120 so it's good' or 'mobility sucks, please give it X amount of terrain resistance' or 'bump up the DPM, give it X.XX reload'.

 

Hell, even gave you reference links to what I was talking about. But instead of prattling more lets put it simply as.... Yes, I want to see a tank that isn't played nearly enough get better, for the better and stated my observations between the game, the websites I linked, and giving a 'buff'/ solutions to help remedy complaints over the main Issue: the turret while not affecting the gameplay of the tank other than giving it a worthwhile gun mantlet instead of the reskin of the gun mantlet of the Panther ll.



Laser_Beam #4 Posted Jun 26 2019 - 09:00

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 5723 battles
  • 50
  • [4NZAB] 4NZAB
  • Member since:
    05-13-2017

View PostRukier, on Jun 26 2019 - 08:06, said:

 

Buffing a tank that I have repeatedly penetrated the hell out of 

 

M3 Lee

CHCH Gun Carrier

Toaster

SU 85

View PostRukier, on Jun 26 2019 - 08:06, said:

 

I'd rather buff a tank that isn't really used anymore and try to bring it up to par 

M3 Lee

CHCH Gun Carrier

Toaster

SU 85

 



madgiecool #5 Posted Jun 26 2019 - 11:11

    Major

  • Players
  • 52982 battles
  • 4,696
  • [4NZAB] 4NZAB
  • Member since:
    06-10-2011

View PostLaser_Beam, on Jun 26 2019 - 20:00, said:

 

M3 Lee

CHCH Gun Carrier

Toaster

SU 85

M3 Lee

CHCH Gun Carrier

Toaster

SU 85

 

 

How about the S51 

Long reload, poo aim......

Everything can pen that!



BlackAngelCom #6 Posted Jun 26 2019 - 15:05

    Captain

  • Players
  • 9540 battles
  • 1,572
  • Member since:
    05-25-2011

The E50 doesn't need buffs. Don't play it as a hull down tank when it is built to either snipe from long, long range where someone can't even isolate the turret face - or ram/brawl. 

 

E50M however...that's one big "why."  Why choose to play your E50 a tier higher?



WaywardChild #7 Posted Jun 26 2019 - 15:10

    Captain

  • Players
  • 38906 battles
  • 1,316
  • [_RUF_] _RUF_
  • Member since:
    11-27-2013
That's a lot of work you put in there OP for something you never tried. You have a bright future in Politics.....

Rukier #8 Posted Jun 27 2019 - 08:27

    Private

  • Players
  • 7660 battles
  • 7
  • Member since:
    05-27-2011

Alright, back from work. Now let's see...

 

 

View PostLaser_Beam, on Jun 26 2019 - 03:00, said:

 

M3 Lee

CHCH Gun Carrier

Toaster

SU 85

M3 Lee

CHCH Gun Carrier

Toaster

SU 85

 

 

While I intended the post to be about the E50 and E50M, lets square you away.

 

M3 Lee: Not quite sure what you are wanting here... If you go off of information of it, the vehicle was a hastily built vehicle with a medium velocity 75mm cannon meant to combat the German PZ lll and PZ lV. From the resources given the armor modeling of the tank is correct. 51mm on the hull front, turret front/side/rear is 51mm as well with 38mm on the hull side/rear. Penetration is on the low side but as 75mm's in the beginning goes it's not half bad. Given it's accuracy, aim time, rate of fire, and general dispersion values when handling its gun compared to the m4 above it... It isn't something to take lightly. To be considered a Tank destroyer by gun placement's standards, but you'll get dual turret/ dual gun usage out of it before long (with any luck).

References; https://tanks.gg/tank/m3-lee   https://tanks.gg/tank/m4?l=212115  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M3_Lee   

 

Churchill Gun Carrier: You can blame the modeling department on Wargaming's part for this as this is a Vehicle that based off of the Churchill l tank.  While it isn't favorable but there isn't much else one can do for the armoring of this vehicle as it was intended to be AS armored as the regular heavy tank. being given a 32 pounder to compensate for being a block on tracks is about the best you can hope for honestly like it, in itself was made novelty and obsolete the moment it went into production and in-game, unfortunately. Too few bushes, too few pieces of cover big enough to make it worthwhile without giving it something novel like a 'perma-installed' camo net like that want the repair kit for the AE phase 1 to have.

References; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Churchill_tank#Churchill_Gun_Carrier     https://tanks.gg/tank/churchill-gc/model      https://tanks.gg/tank/churchill-i/model

 

Toaster, AKA Pz Skl. lVc: Nothing much can be done about it armor wise, nor gun wise as it is based on a Pz lV... Possibly one of the ones before the D model in the game. What could possibly done is something similar to that of the STRV's in the Swedish tech tree, allowing it to go into a mode that slows it down, but allows it's sides to unfurl and for the gun to traverse a MUCH  larger range at the sacrifice of being immobile/slower than a crawl to move.

References; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grille_10    https://tanks.gg/tank/pzsfl-ivc/model   https://tanks.gg/tank/pz-iv-d/model

 

SU-85: Only thing I see wrong with this is view range... Boosting it to 300-310, the minimum the other tank destroyers of the tier share. Other than that... Shares the same hull base as the T-34, the high-velocity 85mm is accurate with only moving the actual tank about knocking your dispersion past .33 accuracy and penetration being par for the team.

References; https://tanks.gg/tank/su-85    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SU-85

 

 

View PostBlackAngelCom, on Jun 26 2019 - 09:05, said:

The E50 doesn't need buffs. Don't play it as a hull down tank when it is built to either snipe from long, long range where someone can't even isolate the turret face - or ram/brawl. 

 

E50M however...that's one big "why."  Why choose to play your E50 a tier higher?

 

I'll agree with you on the E50 and essential cloning of it into a speedier E50, such as the E50M. The fact that their guns have identical characteristics other than penetration and velocity is fairly annoying. Though I would suggest nerfing the rate of fire and accuracy to be more comparable to the more heavily armored mediums. Possibly to a full 10 seconds or comparable with .33-.34 accuracy. While we're on the topic I would mind the tactic of sniping at long, long range if there weren't others already better at it Like the Centurion 7/1 or THE sniper Leopard Prototype A as they both have similar accuracy, far more penetration, and same alpha damage. This goes for their tier 10 variants as well. As for ram/brawl, I wouldn't mind it if it wasn't a suicide mission. Unsurprisingly going into that means facing off against heavies more often than not who end up hugging you so all you can shoot is the turret and cupola, while they have free range on your turret face. On mediums, it'll be more effective, definitely more than with heavies but faced with a similar issue as before if it isn't isolated or somewhere you can recover from as mediums, in general, are never really alone. Whether it's another medium or tank destroyers in the back. and while your lower glacis is protected by a tank carcass... That bare turret is still a prime target.

 

E50M, really is a big 'why?' as well for me as you said, it's just an up tiered E50. It's sort of why I was suggesting to give it a gun mantlet worthwhile rather that oddball... Gun sleeve I nicknamed that piece of metal that was still using from the panther ll model for the E50's 105mm. Giving it something more squared and encasing like what you find on the Jagd series of tank destroyers since they weren't exactly happy with giving it a conical mantlet like it started out with. Giving it better frontal protection of the turret and giving a bit of value to that 'M' for modification other than moving the transmission into the rear of the tank. The track links were more of a novelty Idea like you would find on the E75 or Tiger ll. Giving the sides of the turret a little more protection in spots, and if they even bothered, in the middle of the lower glacis for who knows why. I'd like to see something like that or more modifications of the E50M tank to earn that Ausf. M status. That and moving it more away from the sniper status with nothing really going for it to the pseudo-heavy status it has as within the information about the Entwicklung series. Saying that it was meant to replace both Panther and Tiger l tanks. Obviously, that means sacrificing the .3 accuracy for something more along the lines of .33-.34, the 19.26 HP/T for 17-18 HP/T, maybe even penetration from 270 to 260-265. Just to make it more capable of ramming, brawling... A more aggressive and capable German tank than the super heavies.

 

I'd much rather have a gun mantlet and a hybridization of medium and heavy tanks over the artificial inflation of its turret armor to the amount others were suggesting for it (some odd 220-260/120/120mm some were suggesting on other topics about the E50M) just to have essentially a medium version copy of the Tiger ll, out at long distances trying to snipe or going into a brawl or ram where I'm going to be penetrated by every round anyway.

 

 

View PostWaywardChild, on Jun 26 2019 - 09:10, said:

That's a lot of work you put in there OP for something you never tried. You have a bright future in Politics.....

 

Funny, with how dismissive you are about it. If you have constructive criticism about what I said, say it as this is supposed to be a post suggesting tweaks, buffs, and even nerfs to make the E50 and E50M into something people want to play. As for being a Politician, it'll never be in my future as I'll watch it to try and figure out what's going on in the world but don't indulge or feverishly stimulate myself over the idea of doing what's only best for 'me' as most do. As for OP... Over Powered, I could be going through an entire slew of vehicles for that one. Type 5, object 268 V4, Object 705A, Udes 15/16, T-100 LT, Object 430 U, and the like... But no, I'll stick with its contemporaries, other tier 10 Medium tanks.

 

Closest Relation for size and stats is for an E50M would be, the Centurion Action X. Accurate gun, good dispersion, no gun mantlet, good mobility for its size and weight. But... It's fairly better. You have greater depression of the barrel, a faster rate of fire (.7 round faster RoF than the E50M) A turret face of 254mm with an effective ranging from 321.3-479.8mm when using said gun depression. Far better traverse allowing it to move from cover to cover, pop out and back in to different spots relatively close to one another as well as if you do manage to track the tank to get around to more vulnerable sections. its turret is fast enough to follow even light tanks around its body with ease.

 

Amx 30B. the brawling french man. Gun has a high RoF, 1.5 rounds faster than the E50M, Russian dispersion values- unmoving and on the move values(More or less excellent). Turret and gun mantlet, fast traverse that won't catch the fastest lights if tracked but good enough to give them a run for their money. The effective thickness of the mantlet and turret front is 308.1-400~mm. Along with a low profile with an auto ricochet section of the upper glacis, 70km/h, 20hp/t, 50-degree traverse and even if it's a little- better view range. It can keep the E50M guessing on most maps.

 

T-62A, Obj 430U, Obj 140, Obj 907. Shouldn't have to say this but The are the rule makers of the battlefield nine times outta ten.  tit for tat the DPM, armor of the turret and hull, dispersion values, and ground resistances can all be considered better than the E50M by a long shot. Their accuracy is good enough to snipe from afar with with the velocity and dispersion for it. having between 9-10 rounds a minute ensures the damage build-up is consistent and despite the weak spots of cupolas they are difficult to damage without firing premium rounds or risking 50/50 chances of the round going off to the side or ricocheting. Would argue ramming is a valid tactic here for them, but... with that RoF, their sheer height. and their mobility in both hull and turret would ensure that if you don't kill them with it.... you will have a very minimal window to kill them with an E50M before they tear you apart.

 

STB-1. Again an excellent brawling, dig in medium tank similar to the Amx 30B. Maneuverable, durable gun mantlet and turret shape with depression to boot now that it has hydraulic suspension. High RoF, good 2.3 rounds more a minute. While yes penetration is more heavy tank status and the damage is only 360 a shell, can still lay down the pain where ever and whenever it pleases turret and tank traverse, like the Amx 30B, allows it to dip in and out, speed off to the next location or outflank the enemy.

 

The M48A5 Patton would be the only actual close contender with the E50M if it came down to it. Patton has a weak hull to the E50M's weak turret. E50M has better values for its gun (Though the Patton has essentially 1 more round a minute) while the Patton has superior view range. Patton has the better general maneuverability while E50M has better top speed. It's neck and neck on who gets the last shot in first until you consider that the Patton's dispersion values on it are gun and slower top speed allowing it to wiggle back and forth behind cover with minimal bloom. While the E50M can do the same with slightly more bloom or even side scrape to counter the wiggle... Doesn't change the fact that your turret face of only 185mm thick armor fas to be exposed to take an shot at the sloped and casted turret of the M48A5. Could mention the gun mantlet again but you already know where that was going.

 

Not going to talk about Leopard 1 and K-91 because they are THE sniper tanks of the game. Nor the autoloaders and auto-reloaders as they are going to have slightly worse DPM and armor because of historical construction, design, and the sheer burst of damage they can inflict to the one shot (if it even hits) they take in turn for the 3-4 shells they plant in.

 

Not going to give references to all I talked about- half out of exhaustion from work and getting this amount of text out, but also as a player with over 36,785 battles under their belt... You should know damn well what I am talking about. That, and I would have expected constructive suggestions, criticism, or some, you know... OTHER than a passive-aggressive insult over a topic.



ShmeeCow #9 Posted Jun 28 2019 - 09:32

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 29175 battles
  • 831
  • [TAW] TAW
  • Member since:
    01-04-2011
I wouldn't mind a DPM buff on the  E50M

Spammy #10 Posted Aug 22 2019 - 01:26

    Staff sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 67287 battles
  • 466
  • [4HIM] 4HIM
  • Member since:
    08-01-2010
E50m needs a slight DPM buff and an decent turret  buff... . It's both clear by the armor values and the global win % that there's a problem....it's not russian though so.... not gonna happen




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users