t54-1947 LOL

[My longest ree ever]

LOL 8/10 Deaths are from shot trap AND NOW IT IS UPRANKED TO 7.7? Gimme a break...

[Rumpelcrutchskin]

引用自 Mindstream：

Funny thing is that that's not even the case. The thing is frontally nearly immune to WW2 shells.

Only if you dont know what you are doing, right cupola on top almost always bounces the shot in, turret cheek next to gun barrel goes through and shooting directly below gun barrel to bounce it inside works too. And that's just from front.
Most people think that all T-54s are the same but later models have completely different turret that is much better at bouncing long 88.

[Putin The Gun To Ukraine]

The only reason it has such a high winrate is because it's supported by tanks like the IS-6

[Obamenau]

引用自 UKoctane：

You can conclude that I actually know what im doing when I shoot at tanks. its a flat 200mm ffs and you have a ridiculously powerful gun. Unless its 500m+ (where the T54 will have trouble hitting your weakspots too tbh) it will cut through it like a knife through butter.

Also on this whole subject... Jagdtiger... case closed. Impenetrable to T54 but absolutely craps on the T54 in return for the same BR.

T54 1947 is not a 7.7 tank. Get over it.

Its is not a flat 200. Its everywhere at least 220mm effective, with only a small space with a weak angle .

You think the JT is a counter? lol its the other way around. I have plenty of experience shooting the 128mm at T54s: your only options are the tiny cupola and turret cheek weakspots, and alternatively unreliable trapshotting. Meanwhile the T54 just has to hit its transmission and the JT is done.

Telling me to get over it while youre struggling in a T54-47
lmao

引用自 Rumpelcrutchskin：

Only if you dont know what you are doing, right cupola on top almost always bounces the shot in, turret cheek next to gun barrel goes through and shooting directly below gun barrel to bounce it inside works too. And that's just from front.
Most people think that all T-54s are the same but later models have completely different turret that is much better at bouncing long 88.

All of these weakspots are absolutely tiny, and unreliable in most cases. You do remember that this is a MEDIUM tank right? There are litteraly no other mediums in the game that are so well protected they force most tanks it faces to shoot at a few cubic centimeters wide weakspots.

The T54-1949+ better armored? what? Do you even face those things? The turret is actually easier to pen than the first model since the cheeks are much much flatter and it even has bigger cupolas. Not to mention the sh*tty hull amor that can be penned by 128mm APHE.

Its getting pretty obvious that you guys are the ones playing the T54-47, not the ones fighting it.

[Spaddobird]

引用自 Kozarsson：

引用自 Spaddobird：

There isn't really any reason it shouldn't be the same BR as the other T-54s. The turret design is not so inferior and it has a thicker frontal plate. At 7.7 it doesn't really matter anyway because people are still gonna pen you anywhere with HEATFS or rockets.

Are you mental sick? The stock round is trash and even the 240mm pen round is bad at 7.3, the turret is trash and penned all the time and the 20mm less armor doesn't matter, you still won't pen that hull with any APHE/ you will always pen that hull with HEAT-FS.
IMO the T-54 and the T-44-100 should switch placed as I get more penned in my T-54 than I do in my T-44.

Are you trying to tell me that the Russians actually use the HEAT-FS on the T-54? Clearly you haven't actually played with or against late T-54s for more than a few minutes if you think this is the case. The only thing that ever comes out the barrel of a T-54 is a kinetic penetrator. The 240mm round is entirely fine at any battle rating, especially tier 5 where the majority of other nations are sacrificing armour for mobility.

Other than the shot trap (which is tiny anyway), the 1947's turret is actually better than the later T-54 turrets in most situations, it isn't as if that actually matters anyway though because you're gonna get HEAT-FSd by other nations. How can you possibly think that it is a good idea to switch the T-54 1947 and the -44-100? The -44 actually does have an inferior turret. Who is the mentally sick one here?

[I II II I_]

引用自 Mindstream：

引用自 UKoctane：

The entire turret is pretty much a free 1 shot for the long 88.

So i can conclude youre just trolling?

It kind of is. Unless you hit the edges or the upper part of it, it is an easy pen unless you are at long range. It also has the shottrap which is easy to exploit.

[I II II I_]

I can kind of see where they are coming from by doing this, because this tank sucks ass to fight at 6.7. However it doesnt make sense that this tank will be forced to go up against MBT-70s, which are superior to it in every single way.

[Katokevin]

引用自 W A K E M E U P I N S I D E：

I can kind of see where they are coming from by doing this, because this tank sucks ass to fight at 6.7. However it doesnt make sense that this tank will be forced to go up against MBT-70s, which are superior to it in every single way.

MBT/KPz-70, T-64A, and the Chieftain Mk.10 are going up to the new max, 9.0 so the T-54 1947 won't see them at all.

[I II II I_]

引用自 Katokevin：

引用自 W A K E M E U P I N S I D E：

I can kind of see where they are coming from by doing this, because this tank sucks ass to fight at 6.7. However it doesnt make sense that this tank will be forced to go up against MBT-70s, which are superior to it in every single way.

MBT/KPz-70, T-64A, and the Chieftain Mk.10 are going up to the new max, 9.0 so the T-54 1947 won't see them at all.

Ohhhhhh, I forgot about that. Disregard my post.

[Kozi]

引用自 Spaddobird：

引用自 Kozarsson：

Are you mental sick? The stock round is trash and even the 240mm pen round is bad at 7.3, the turret is trash and penned all the time and the 20mm less armor doesn't matter, you still won't pen that hull with any APHE/ you will always pen that hull with HEAT-FS.
IMO the T-54 and the T-44-100 should switch placed as I get more penned in my T-54 than I do in my T-44.

Are you trying to tell me that the Russians actually use the HEAT-FS on the T-54? Clearly you haven't actually played with or against late T-54s for more than a few minutes if you think this is the case. The only thing that ever comes out the barrel of a T-54 is a kinetic penetrator. The 240mm round is entirely fine at any battle rating, especially tier 5 where the majority of other nations are sacrificing armour for mobility.

Other than the shot trap (which is tiny anyway), the 1947's turret is actually better than the later T-54 turrets in most situations, it isn't as if that actually matters anyway though because you're gonna get HEAT-FSd by other nations. How can you possibly think that it is a good idea to switch the T-54 1947 and the -44-100? The -44 actually does have an inferior turret. Who is the mentally sick one here?

The T-44-100 is superior lmao, the turret actually takes skill to penetrate and it is about twice as fast and maneuver. The only reason I use the T-54 is because it is rank V, so more RP for my T-64A.

[Vriz]

引用自 Kozarsson：

引用自 Spaddobird：

Are you trying to tell me that the Russians actually use the HEAT-FS on the T-54? Clearly you haven't actually played with or against late T-54s for more than a few minutes if you think this is the case. The only thing that ever comes out the barrel of a T-54 is a kinetic penetrator. The 240mm round is entirely fine at any battle rating, especially tier 5 where the majority of other nations are sacrificing armour for mobility.

Other than the shot trap (which is tiny anyway), the 1947's turret is actually better than the later T-54 turrets in most situations, it isn't as if that actually matters anyway though because you're gonna get HEAT-FSd by other nations. How can you possibly think that it is a good idea to switch the T-54 1947 and the -44-100? The -44 actually does have an inferior turret. Who is the mentally sick one here?

The T-44-100 is superior lmao, the turret actually takes skill to penetrate and it is about twice as fast and maneuver. The only reason I use the T-54 is because it is rank V, so more RP for my T-64A.

I have both, only thing T-44-100 has going for it is it's faster turret traverse and side skirts.

Unless you want to throw stats around?

[My longest ree ever]

引用自 Vriz：

引用自 Kozarsson：

The T-44-100 is superior lmao, the turret actually takes skill to penetrate and it is about twice as fast and maneuver. The only reason I use the T-54 is because it is rank V, so more RP for my T-64A.

I have both, only thing T-44-100 has going for it is it's faster turret traverse and side skirts.

Unless you want to throw stats around?

i have both as well (neither maxed) and i prefer t44-100 becuse i get killed from legit penetrations and not shottrap

[My longest ree ever]

引用自 Mirage：

T-54 1947
Winrate 65%
K/d ratio of 2.0

T-54 1949
Winrate 49%
K/d ratio of 1.1

T-54 1951
Winrate 48%
K/d ratio of 1

How many games and kills? percentages is not saying that mutch to the rest of us

[Rumpelcrutchskin]

引用自 Kozarsson：

The T-44-100 is superior lmao, the turret actually takes skill to penetrate and it is about twice as fast and maneuver. The only reason I use the T-54 is because it is rank V, so more RP for my T-64A.

Yes I like T-44-100 lot better then T-54 1947 and I use it in same 7.3 lineup. It's much more maneuverable and has actually more chance to bounce long 88 then T-54 1947 altough you would not think it at first.

[Vriz]

引用自 My longest ree ever：

引用自 Mirage：

T-54 1947
Winrate 65%
K/d ratio of 2.0

T-54 1949
Winrate 49%
K/d ratio of 1.1

T-54 1951
Winrate 48%
K/d ratio of 1

How many games and kills? percentages is not saying that mutch to the rest of us

http://thunderskill.com/en/vehicle/ussr_t_54_1947
Arcade Battles

Battles 9657
Win rate 56.66%
Air frags per battle 0.1
Air frags per death 0.1
Ground frags per battle 2
Ground frags per death 2.4

Realistic Battles

Battles 16175
Win rate 65.02%
Air frags per battle N/A
Air frags per death N/A
Ground frags per battle 1.5
Ground frags per death 2




http://thunderskill.com/en/vehicle/ussr_t_44_100
Arcade Battles

Battles 7798
Win rate 51.33%
Air frags per battle 0.1
Air frags per death 0.1
Ground frags per battle 1.2
Ground frags per death 1.5

Realistic Battles

Battles 14418
Win rate 63.17%
Air frags per battle N/A
Air frags per death N/A
Ground frags per battle 1.1
Ground frags per death 1.5

引用自 My longest ree ever：

引用自 Vriz：

I have both, only thing T-44-100 has going for it is it's faster turret traverse and side skirts.

Unless you want to throw stats around?

i have both as well (neither maxed) and i prefer t44-100 becuse i get killed from legit penetrations and not shottrap :angry_creep:

If you're only getting killed by getting cheesed through shottraps, thats the whole reason why it's OP and getting uptiered because its rather difficult to pen it in the first place.

Doesn't mean you can't do it, I know how to cheese 1947s through cupola shots (same thing like IS-6) but it's just not ****balanced**** since the 1947 doesn't need to aim at your cupola in the first place; unless you're fighting the same tank in AB but its AB and green tells you where to pen in the first place so moot point.


Hell, in 6.7 downtiers in my 7.7 IS-4m, the ONLY way to kill me frontally is through my angled driver's hatch or shottrapping me as my cupolas are non-existent.

That's OP as ♥♥♥♥, that's not balanced and why it's sitting at 7.7 so it faces tanks that CAN get through it's armor in the first place with APDS / HEATFS frontally

[[SPM]*Nadir]

The t

引用自 My longest ree ever：

LOL 8/10 Deaths are from shot trap AND NOW IT IS UPRANKED TO 7.7? Gimme a break...

The T54 1947 is a 7.3.... scroll in your research table. the 1949 and 1951 are 7.7.