Jump to content


A Proposal for US Tier 10 Medium

Cats Hookers Blow Twerking You say hes just a friend The groove is in the heart

  • Please log in to reply
41 replies to this topic

Nocturnal814 #21 Posted 01 February 2015 - 03:09 AM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 16690 battles
  • 9,952
  • Member since:
    08-09-2013

Or, you could cut the t20, move the Pershing to tier vii, the m46 to tier viii, the m48 to tier ix, and have the m60 be at tier x. The m60 had more improvements than just the gun including an upgraded engine, radio, etc.

cutting the t20 wouldn't even be essential because, as the Russians have proven, you can have multiple tanks of the same type at the same tier.



something, something, something, dark side...

Vicaring45LC #22 Posted 01 February 2015 - 03:09 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 6332 battles
  • 518
  • Member since:
    02-12-2014

Not really. The average damage for the 6-lber at tier 5 is 75. It takes 8 or 9 average penetrating shots to kill a same-tier heavy.

 

The hit points for the IS-7 is 2150. The hit points for the T110e5 is 2200. It would take 9 average penetrating shots to kill the IS-7 and 10 for the IS-4.

 

Make the alpha 250 if you must, whatever. The point is, it could work.

 

I am making a proposal to put both the M48 and the M60 Pattons in the game, and have them be and play as different tanks (not clones of each other, in other words). Pray tell why that is a bad idea? Perhaps WG should implement more fantasy tanks that never even existed in blueprints (WT E-100 I'm looking at you) because OMFG big guns!

 

EDIT:

Block Quote

 

Or, you could cut the t20, move the Pershing to tier vii, the m46 to tier viii, the m48 to tier ix, and have the m60 be at tier x. The m60 had more improvements than just the gun including an upgraded engine, radio, etc. 
 

 

Yeah, I've thought of this too, and it could work. Have to change the hit points of course, and probably remove the 105mm from the M46, but it could certainly work.


Edited by Matthew Vicar, 01 February 2015 - 03:11 AM.


Turboclicker #23 Posted 01 February 2015 - 03:11 AM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 22110 battles
  • 34,740
  • Member since:
    08-20-2013
They are already dumping all fake tanks.

Your idea doesn't work.

You can't compare the guns at tier V to the guns at tier X. Two whole different games going on there.


Nocturnal814 #24 Posted 01 February 2015 - 03:15 AM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 16690 battles
  • 9,952
  • Member since:
    08-09-2013

View PostNocturnal814, on 01 February 2015 - 03:09 AM, said:

Or, you could cut the t20, move the Pershing to tier vii, the m46 to tier viii, the m48 to tier ix, and have the m60 be at tier x. The m60 had more improvements than just the gun including an upgraded engine, radio, etc.

cutting the t20 wouldn't even be essential because, as the Russians have proven, you can have multiple tanks of the same type at the same tier.

 

View PostIcesev, on 01 February 2015 - 03:11 AM, said:

They are already dumping all fake tanks.

Your idea doesn't work.

You can't compare the guns at tier V to the guns at tier X. Two whole different games going on there.

This would allow them to dump another prototype tank, while moving a few tanks closer to where they historically should be (Pershing designed to counter tigers, m60 matching with other Cold War tanks)



something, something, something, dark side...

Turboclicker #25 Posted 01 February 2015 - 03:21 AM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 22110 battles
  • 34,740
  • Member since:
    08-20-2013
Prototype tanks are just as real as fielded ones.

Nocturnal814 #26 Posted 01 February 2015 - 03:26 AM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 16690 battles
  • 9,952
  • Member since:
    08-09-2013

View PostIcesev, on 01 February 2015 - 03:21 AM, said:

Prototype tanks are just as real as fielded ones.

 

true, in some cases. T71 comes to mind, does a wooden mock up make a tank real? Either way, moving a few tanks down a tier to include the m60 is actually reasonable. Would need to redo their stats and available guns, but that shouldn't be too bad. 

something, something, something, dark side...

Rorschach911 #27 Posted 01 February 2015 - 03:41 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 8375 battles
  • 901
  • Member since:
    01-05-2014
Cant we leave this sort of thing to jocco
Tanku no sekai wa kawaīdesu ❤

AJR568 #28 Posted 01 February 2015 - 03:43 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 18321 battles
  • 15,887
  • Member since:
    02-06-2014
M60 is already a tank in WoT. just isn't available to the 360 community yet.

Compliments and Credit to STLxSTANG for the sig.

The 8.11 TD rebalances need to be implemented.

T20 is love, T20 is life. And if you disagree I'll cut you!


AJR568 #29 Posted 01 February 2015 - 03:43 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 18321 battles
  • 15,887
  • Member since:
    02-06-2014

View PostRorschach911, on 31 January 2015 - 09:41 PM, said:

Cant we leave this sort of thing to jocco

 

Agreed.

Compliments and Credit to STLxSTANG for the sig.

The 8.11 TD rebalances need to be implemented.

T20 is love, T20 is life. And if you disagree I'll cut you!


Turboclicker #30 Posted 01 February 2015 - 03:45 AM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 22110 battles
  • 34,740
  • Member since:
    08-20-2013
So does the T20 become a premium?

Nocturnal814 #31 Posted 01 February 2015 - 04:02 AM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 16690 battles
  • 9,952
  • Member since:
    08-09-2013

View PostIcesev, on 01 February 2015 - 03:45 AM, said:

So does the T20 become a premium?

 

either that or have multiple tier vii mediums for the Americans. Why not? The Russians get 2

something, something, something, dark side...

Turboclicker #32 Posted 01 February 2015 - 04:06 AM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 22110 battles
  • 34,740
  • Member since:
    08-20-2013
The T20 would be a bit sub par in comparison if they gave the Pershing a weaker 90mm than it currently has but with the same armor it currently has.

Joco3000 #33 Posted 01 February 2015 - 04:10 AM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 27034 battles
  • 28,721
  • [JOCO]
  • Member since:
    08-22-2013

View PostRorschach911, on 01 February 2015 - 03:41 AM, said:

Cant we leave this sort of thing to jocco

K.

 

M46 and Pershing get combined into one tank (all the M46 Patton is is a new engine, gun and a few minor things). Add the M47 Patton at tier IX, and keep the completely accurate (not sarcastic) M48A1 at tier X. M60 could be added as an alternative tier X, but not until the T58 and T77 are introduced, and preferably after the T95E7.


You can PM with with questions, if you wish. I don't bite.

Compilation thread of my ideas


Nocturnal814 #34 Posted 01 February 2015 - 04:12 AM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 16690 battles
  • 9,952
  • Member since:
    08-09-2013

View PostIcesev, on 01 February 2015 - 04:06 AM, said:

The T20 would be a bit sub par in comparison if they gave the Pershing a weaker 90mm than it currently has but with the same armor it currently has.

 

maybe a speed buff for the t20 to compensate while giving the Pershing the 90mm m3 that the t20 has. Or eliminate the t20 altogether, buff the pershings speed while reducing its gun to the historical m3 it got. Just think, this would make the grind for the tier viii far less painful as I am pretty sure the m46 never had a 76. 

something, something, something, dark side...

Nocturnal814 #35 Posted 01 February 2015 - 04:14 AM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 16690 battles
  • 9,952
  • Member since:
    08-09-2013

View PostJoco3000, on 01 February 2015 - 04:10 AM, said:

K.

 

M46 and Pershing get combined into one tank (all the M46 Patton is is a new engine, gun and a few minor things). Add the M47 Patton at tier IX, and keep the completely accurate (not sarcastic) M48A1 at tier X. M60 could be added as an alternative tier X, but not until the T58 and T77 are introduced, and preferably after the T95E7.

The difference between the Pershing and m46 isn't very different from the difference between the m48 and m60... Why not combine the m48 and m60 at tier x using packages, if you want to go this way? (Not that I would want to)



something, something, something, dark side...

Joco3000 #36 Posted 01 February 2015 - 04:15 AM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 27034 battles
  • 28,721
  • [JOCO]
  • Member since:
    08-22-2013

View PostIcesev, on 01 February 2015 - 04:06 AM, said:

The T20 would be a bit sub par in comparison if they gave the Pershing a weaker 90mm than it currently has but with the same armor it currently has.

Historical T20 gun was the 76mm. I'd also change the hull to the E3 variant, and change the name to M27B1. It would be an amazing tier VI premium.


You can PM with with questions, if you wish. I don't bite.

Compilation thread of my ideas


Vicaring45LC #37 Posted 01 February 2015 - 04:15 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 6332 battles
  • 518
  • Member since:
    02-12-2014

View PostJoco3000, on 31 January 2015 - 10:10 PM, said:

M60 could be added as an alternative tier X, but not until the T58 and T77 are introduced, and preferably after the T95E7.

 

What do the 155mm autoloading T58 and the 120mm autoloading T77 have to do with the M60, and why would the introduction be after those were introduced?

Joco3000 #38 Posted 01 February 2015 - 04:17 AM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 27034 battles
  • 28,721
  • [JOCO]
  • Member since:
    08-22-2013

View PostNocturnal814, on 01 February 2015 - 04:14 AM, said:

The difference between the Pershing and m46 isn't very different from the difference between the m48 and m60... Why not combine the m48 and m60 at tier x using packages, if you want to go this way? (Not that I would want to)

The M60 and M48 share the same turret (and gun in the M48A5 version). The hulls are different, and the M60A1 has a different turret (similar to the T110E5 and I think it originates from the T95 project).


You can PM with with questions, if you wish. I don't bite.

Compilation thread of my ideas


Joco3000 #39 Posted 01 February 2015 - 04:20 AM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 27034 battles
  • 28,721
  • [JOCO]
  • Member since:
    08-22-2013

View PostMatthew Vicar, on 01 February 2015 - 04:15 AM, said:

 

What do the 155mm autoloading T58 and the 120mm autoloading T77 have to do with the M60, and why would the introduction be after those were introduced?

Nothing. The T58 should be a replacement for the completely fake T110E4 (properly balanced, of course), and the T77 would provide a medium for the US autoloader line. M60 wouldn't be too different from the M48 (I suppose the T77 will be similar to the T57 as well).


You can PM with with questions, if you wish. I don't bite.

Compilation thread of my ideas


ObituaryHippo36 #40 Posted 01 February 2015 - 04:28 AM

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 9276 battles
  • 39
  • Member since:
    04-22-2014
:BI like this idea.  The m48 and m60 have long and successful battle histories.   The game should reflect that,  
:)




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users