Jump to content


T34/T30 to M103/T110 Info from russian forums


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
83 replies to this topic

CryoVolt #41 Posted Feb 09 2012 - 20:35

    Major

  • Players
  • 28920 battles
  • 2,388
  • Member since:
    04-29-2011
I think you have to have them trained as T34 to get new M103 crew.

DekklinOfDeath #42 Posted Feb 09 2012 - 21:33

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 22174 battles
  • 2,572
  • Member since:
    09-04-2010

View PostSpectreHD, on Feb 09 2012 - 18:38, said:

If we have to grind for the 155mm, I sure hope it has better dispersion that it has now and 1900HP, the same as a Tier 9 T34.


The latest Wargaming TV episode said that it will have increased accuracy. Mobility got nerfed to hell, but we expected that. HP should be around 1800 I think.

TELEFORCE #43 Posted Feb 09 2012 - 22:21

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 13961 battles
  • 904
  • Member since:
    04-21-2011
More info from WGTV?  Anything else we should know?  I hope the mobility nerf doesn't make it as bad as the Lowe!

Aesir #44 Posted Feb 09 2012 - 23:27

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 9414 battles
  • 961
  • Member since:
    12-03-2010

View PostHindric, on Feb 09 2012 - 12:36, said:

Thanks for the overall better translation Aesir, I've replaced the two quotes with yours since it was more simple and easier to read.
No problem. I kind of figured that I wasn't the only one having a problem with some of the weird grammar and verbiage.

One thing, however: does anybody know what this line really means? My re-write uses my best guess for what it's trying to get at.

Spoiler                     

View PostCadyshack, on Feb 09 2012 - 18:14, said:

I've got my crew in the T34 still trained for the T32, but still sitting in the tank. Would they be retrained, or would I have to get them T34 trained?

I also guess that just having the T34 is fine and one wouldn't have to have played in it. I want to grind in the 103, not the 34.
I think that it is kind of implied that the crew has to be specifically trained for the T34. It's better to spend 120,000cR to get them retrained in the T34 and guaranteed to be trained for the premium version, rather than to just leave them open to the possibility of being excluded from re-training.

Lysandis #45 Posted Feb 10 2012 - 02:21

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 10808 battles
  • 247
  • Member since:
    08-10-2011
I took that to mean any modules from the t34 that can be used on another tank (the 105 for example) will be demounted and put in the depot.   As opposed to the t34 only stuff that will be dismounted and sold.

View PostAesir, on Feb 09 2012 - 23:27, said:


One thing, however: does anybody know what this line really means? My re-write uses my best guess for what it's trying to get at.







SpectreHD #46 Posted Feb 10 2012 - 03:09

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 16835 battles
  • 17,116
  • [TT] TT
  • Member since:
    07-12-2010

View PostDekklinOfDeath, on Feb 09 2012 - 21:33, said:

The latest Wargaming TV episode said that it will have increased accuracy. Mobility got nerfed to hell, but we expected that. HP should be around 1800 I think.

Wow...mobility nerfed to hell. Somehow, I feel it should still have its mobility considering how ill protected this tank is unless you can hull down.

Drive_Me_Closer #47 Posted Feb 10 2012 - 03:54

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 7300 battles
  • 639
  • Member since:
    04-09-2011

View PostSpectreHD, on Feb 10 2012 - 03:09, said:

Wow...mobility nerfed to hell. Somehow, I feel it should still have its mobility considering how ill protected this tank is unless you can hull down.

You will note that neither the Slugger or the Wolverene have their historical agility.  For tanks weighing slightly less then a Sherman with a 51 kmh top speed, they sure don't play that way in game. The Dev's tried to shoe horn them into traditional TD roles by nerfing all their soft stats.  I suspect they will do the same to the T30 to avoid it being another T9 heavy in TDs clothing.

Gyarados #48 Posted Feb 10 2012 - 11:44

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 14368 battles
  • 11,504
  • Member since:
    07-09-2010

View PostSpectreHD, on Feb 10 2012 - 03:09, said:

Wow...mobility nerfed to hell. Somehow, I feel it should still have its mobility considering how ill protected this tank is unless you can hull down.
What's even worse is that they've already done things to the mobility and dispersion in preparation for it becoming a tank destroyer...months before it did.

dudeguy13 #49 Posted Feb 10 2012 - 12:46

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 6875 battles
  • 162
  • Member since:
    04-21-2011

View PostPolitical_Malcontent, on Feb 09 2012 - 05:22, said:

Ah these kids after 7.2.(leans back in rocking chair) I remember those dark days, before the great change…
Thats great XD

dudeguy13 #50 Posted Feb 10 2012 - 12:48

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 6875 battles
  • 162
  • Member since:
    04-21-2011
Thanks for ths great post its nice to know this and clarify some things :Smile_honoring:

SpectreHD #51 Posted Feb 10 2012 - 13:57

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 16835 battles
  • 17,116
  • [TT] TT
  • Member since:
    07-12-2010

View PostGyarados, on Feb 10 2012 - 11:44, said:

What's even worse is that they've already done things to the mobility and dispersion in preparation for it becoming a tank destroyer...months before it did.

Doubt it. They nerfed the dispersion because players can use it to great effect in Clan Wars. I think WG.net fail to realise in their use of stats from the general public that Tier 10 heavies have a majority of their games/stats from Clan Wars.

Really, from some post somewhere about a Q&A about the T30 pretty much states it had a mobility nerf, top speed nerf, turret traverse nerf, little to no camo rating increase and of course, a HP nerf all for a more accurate gun(probably just returning the dispersion before the uncalled for nerf). Freaking hell, WG, the T30 barely performs as a Tier 10 heavy and could only excel in Clan Wars because it is very coordinated game mode. Now just because it is called a "TD" now and a Tier lower, WG.net thinks it is balanced for the T30 to pretty much be butchered like the M36. How in the world is the T30, nearly the size of the Maus suppose to function?

I hope they quickly bring our the 7.2 test server so we can see how bad the T30 is.

GoldMountain #52 Posted Feb 10 2012 - 14:19

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 41 battles
  • 7,795
  • Member since:
    01-06-2011

View PostSpectreHD, on Feb 10 2012 - 13:57, said:

Doubt it. They nerfed the dispersion because players can use it to great effect in Clan Wars. I think WG.net fail to realise in their use of stats from the general public that Tier 10 heavies have a majority of their games/stats from Clan Wars.

Really, from some post somewhere about a Q&A about the T30 pretty much states it had a mobility nerf, top speed nerf, turret traverse nerf, little to no camo rating increase and of course, a HP nerf all for a more accurate gun(probably just returning the dispersion before the uncalled for nerf). Freaking hell, WG, the T30 barely performs as a Tier 10 heavy and could only excel in Clan Wars because it is very coordinated game mode. Now just because it is called a "TD" now and a Tier lower, WG.net thinks it is balanced for the T30 to pretty much be butchered like the M36. How in the world is the T30, nearly the size of the Maus suppose to function?

I hope they quickly bring our the 7.2 test server so we can see how bad the T30 is.

Every Q&A i have seen does not give specific or even vague changes the T30 will get, other than it will get a HP nerf.
They all say the changes the T30 will receive are still being decided/finalized for testing, and even at that point they are still subject to change.

SpectreHD #53 Posted Feb 10 2012 - 14:28

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 16835 battles
  • 17,116
  • [TT] TT
  • Member since:
    07-12-2010

View PostGoldMountain, on Feb 10 2012 - 14:19, said:

Every Q&A i have seen does not give specific or even vague changes the T30 will get, other than it will get a HP nerf.
They all say the changes the T30 will receive are still being decided/finalized for testing, and even at that point they are still subject to change.

Fair enough. In my opinion, all it needs it is its dispersion un-nerfed and maybe turret traverse nerf and HP reduced to 1900hp. The same as the T34 is now. I don't see how just because it is called a "TD" now, doesn't mean it should have the least HP of all the Tier 9 TDs nor behave like it has no turret. At the least, 1800hp like the JagdTiger only because it will have less armour than the JT even with the big gun and turret.

_Jayzilla #54 Posted Feb 10 2012 - 14:56

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 33214 battles
  • 1,277
  • Member since:
    09-05-2010

View PostSpectreHD, on Feb 10 2012 - 14:28, said:

Fair enough. In my opinion, all it needs it is its dispersion un-nerfed and maybe turret traverse nerf and HP reduced to 1900hp. The same as the T34 is now. I don't see how just because it is called a "TD" now, doesn't mean it should have the least HP of all the Tier 9 TDs nor behave like it has no turret. At the least, 1800hp like the JagdTiger only because it will have less armour than the JT even with the big gun and turret.


Remember what they did to the Tier 9 Pershing to Patton swap? They screwed up the accuracy claiming the Patton was balanced enough as is only to return to "Tier 9 Pershing Accuracy" a month or so later. Furthermore, the current Tier 8 Pershing is just too sluggish compared to the once great ride known as the T23 (rest its poor soul).

WG.net simply does not want to give a US tank a competitive edge. US having abundant mantlet armor while turret having visible weak spots (Yes I am talking about the T29,T34,T30 turrets) that are much larger (i.e. the commander's hatch) than their counterparts just seems absurd.

I know you remember when they took away the gun depression on US tanks, and after much plea from the community, finally returned to the way it was months later. My only beef is now who's bright idea was it to give that same gun depression to the IS4? Like it needed a buff, lol. I do not recall it always having it, I may have been absent minded the entire time I fought against them.

Yes this was a rant. But that being said, I expect a good month or so after WG.net actually begins listening to what I am sure of, the new pleas from the new T110E5 and M103. I seldom see any bright lights at the end of it all, just delights of an attainable tangible fantasy.

CCC_Dober #55 Posted Feb 10 2012 - 15:56

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 0 battles
  • 1,476
  • Member since:
    10-19-2010
The camo values I've seen on turreted TDs so far are a joke. If WG is so adamant to move a more or less solid T10 heavy to the TD department, then they better give it and the other turreted TDs an advantage that will offset the low armor levels. And no, the turret is not an advantage when it is used to decrease camo levels in the first place and degrade the tanks to laughing stock by adding a number of ridiculous nerfs to mobility, gun depression and traverse rates. In fact, said turreted TDs would be much better off in a proper tank line without the unjustified nerfs they are flooded with. There, I said it. Currently turreted TDs are better off as tanks than TDs. It's about time WG gives the players a real choice instead of forcing them to play stuff they didn't want to play.

Take me as example for many others: I chose the american heavy line because I wanted to play heavies. If I wanted to play TDs, I would be sitting in a T95 somewhere on the other end on the map. But no, I'd rather be all over the face of my opponents and smash their toothy grins in with a 155mm Boomstick. That was and is my choice. Now WG, you take it away from me by nerfing the T30 and moving it to the TD tree. For that you will not have my support at all. I will be forced to play a tank that can not fulfill this role effectively and is in effect the complete opposite of what made the T30 successful. This is not adapting to new realities, this is gun envy. The T30 has a place in Clan Wars and if you take it out without offering a better alternative, there will be drop in sales numbers. That is my prediction for things to come. Don't expect US heavy fans to drop money on your game if you kick their faces in like that!

GoldMountain #56 Posted Feb 10 2012 - 16:07

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 41 battles
  • 7,795
  • Member since:
    01-06-2011

View PostJayzilla, on Feb 10 2012 - 14:56, said:

Remember what they did to the Tier 9 Pershing to Patton swap? They screwed up the accuracy claiming the Patton was balanced enough as is only to return to "Tier 9 Pershing Accuracy" a month or so later. Furthermore, the current Tier 8 Pershing is just too sluggish compared to the once great ride known as the T23 (rest its poor soul).

WG.net simply does not want to give a US tank a competitive edge. US having abundant mantlet armor while turret having visible weak spots (Yes I am talking about the T29,T34,T30 turrets) that are much larger (i.e. the commander's hatch) than their counterparts just seems absurd.

I know you remember when they took away the gun depression on US tanks, and after much plea from the community, finally returned to the way it was months later. My only beef is now who's bright idea was it to give that same gun depression to the IS4? Like it needed a buff, lol. I do not recall it always having it, I may have been absent minded the entire time I fought against them.

Yes this was a rant. But that being said, I expect a good month or so after WG.net actually begins listening to what I am sure of, the new pleas from the new T110E5 and M103. I seldom see any bright lights at the end of it all, just delights of an attainable tangible fantasy.
I would take the M26 over the T23 any day, yea the T23 was fast and fun but it was totally inadequate at taking on same tier tanks let alone stand any chance against a tier 9...

EmGee42 #57 Posted Feb 10 2012 - 18:37

    Staff sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 8807 battles
  • 400
  • Member since:
    07-17-2010
T30's could still remain effective in CWs games if the gun itself remains the same or better. I don't think a slower speed or slower turret traverse would hurt it in clan play as they are a fairly static piece. Any buffs to the gun might actually make it a better. Certainly no current TD can replace it. The 704 and JT are mostly not used in clan wars and the T95 is slow and good only facing in one direction. If it doesn't work out after the changes, then it will be replaced by more E-100's.

In pubbie games it would suffer tremendously at the hands of any med or light tank. It's rate of fire, speed, slow turret, reduced HP, and soft armour will just make it fodder and it's stats should suffer. If WG does pay attention to stats then they will see the T30 underperforming and should buff it. Yeah, right:(

Honestly though, I could care less about the T30 and worry more about the M103/M110 tanks performance. They are gonna be the deal breaker. If they suck then I think WG will have a lot of angry players after waiting for so long.

SFC_Storm #58 Posted Feb 10 2012 - 18:56

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 15366 battles
  • 3,855
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View PostGoldMountain, on Feb 10 2012 - 16:07, said:

I would take the M26 over the T23 any day, yea the T23 was fast and fun but it was totally inadequate at taking on same tier tanks let alone stand any chance against a tier 9...

If the T23 had the M26 gun it would have raped it up from down.

I used to kill Pershings in it, I would track them 2 times run off at T50 speeds and they would start to engage elsewhere then I would pop right back around and ass shoot em to death.

The T23 was the best Buswacker in game, it was also the best Med scout ever made when played right.

If the idiots at WG would have just dropped it to T7and replaced the T20 of which there was made what 3 vs the 300 T20e3`s

aryelco #59 Posted Feb 10 2012 - 19:02

    Corporal

  • Beta Testers
  • 3573 battles
  • 46
  • [TPA] TPA
  • Member since:
    12-10-2010

Quote

for example, if the tank has T34 gun 105mm_Gun_T5E1 installed, it will be replaced with a tank gun 120mm_Gun_T122 M103;

This is too good to be true....

CCC_Dober #60 Posted Feb 10 2012 - 19:15

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 0 battles
  • 1,476
  • Member since:
    10-19-2010

View PostEmGee42, on Feb 10 2012 - 18:37, said:

Honestly though, I could care less about the T30 and worry more about the M103/M110 tanks performance. They are gonna be the deal breaker. If they suck then I think WG will have a lot of angry players after waiting for so long.

That's the problem mate, you know it'll be gone and you are stuck with whatever you get fed instead. Might be good, might be bad. It is clear however that T30 will not survive the projected changes (mobility, HP, loss of vert stab) in a competitive environment. Camo isn't something you can count on either as the devs have not given turreted TDs any to speak of so far. Agreed on the last part, but one could say we've had enough reasons already to be angry. I see something else up ahead ... a shit-storm of epic proportions that is gonna cause fallout (read: bans) left and right and then some.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users