Panther too, so Panther to 5.7 then???
AGAIN, this game is more than Germany.
Panther too, so Panther to 5.7 then???
I don’t think you realise how large the drivers port on the T-44 (FM) really is, the entire tank itself is a massive weak spot and most of the silhouette of the Panther is made up of the UFP which is pretty well armoured.
Genuine ragebait coming from you lmao
1 Like
what 5.0 tanks cant pen an 86mm driver port or a cupola with aphe to one shot the crew?
… bro , you are level 48 and have never played the T-44. Why are you even commenting?
1 Like
Bro the 99% of the people is demanding move FM to 6.0 dont even played yet you included…
HAHAHAHAHA. keep crying cuz you new 60% win ratio new toy is no OP enough.
bruh. we aint the same
you still haven’t mentioned the 5.0 tanks that would suffer from not being able to one-shot the T-44 FM through its 86mm flat driver port or cupola,mantlet…etc
2 Likes
What are you talking about? It’s got 1 shot from 4.7 Rus and Swe, not to mention 7.5 and 88, not even need to aim, it’s large for med reload, is bad as hell, reverse not exist, and no armor
The only thing that works for the T-44 FM is the 6.3 BR because I’m almost consistently in 5.3-6.3 matches. I thought its armor was going to be trash, but this thing bounces 88mms like its nobody’s business.
It’s a whole different beast when you play the 6.7 T-44 because you’re always in 6.7-7.3 matches fighting tanks that your 85mm struggles against.
Br-365 penetrates much better than Br-367 due to its MUCH better normalisation. It also has a better damage too. If you have an option of picking it - you should be picking it no question. Arguably the best shell for the medium tank maybe except a Panter round
FIVE seconds?
You think the 85mm gun should have the same reload (or better???) as the US 76mm gun found in the M4A3 (76)?
Panther A with smaller gun is 7.4 seconds.
The T-34-85 (STP) trades significant hull armor for STAB and is same BR.
7.4 seconds for the T-44 seems pretty reasonable. Maybe 7.0 seconds at a stretch.
The M4A3E2 (76) W has advantage of superior armour and the ability to fire on the move when compared to the T-44 (FM). That’s also ignoring the fact that the M4A3E2 (76) W has a faster fire rate and shells which provide similar amounts of penetration.
The only advantage the T-44 (FM) has over the M4A3E2 (76) W is a slightly better shell, that being the BR-367, smaller silhouette, and being faster.
The addition of a faster reload wouldn’t be game breaking, I specifically said six to five seconds as it would of course depend on balancing, the fact you’ve obviously taken the shortest reload as an example would tell me you’re just here to argue.
The Panther A has better survivability, armour, a much better gun (more comparable to the King Tiger), all whilst having the same reloading speed as the T-44 (FM). Stop nit picking, the Panther A has its clear advantages and disadvantages over the T-44 (FM), and I’d also argue it’s a better tank overall, even if close (and especially for BR).
The T-34-85 (STP) gains the advantage of a stabiliser, and the BR-367 shell as well, the vehicle itself could use for a faster reload more comparable to the Shermans, stop using bad examples of overtiered vehicles.
I personally hate to be that guy who looks at other peoples statcard, but you’ve never played the T-44 (FM) before (and no, it’s not comparable to the standard T-44 or T-44-100), once you’ve played it then you’ll understand where I’m coming from.
If 5.7 to 6.7 was to be decompressed, then I’d agree that the T-44 (FM) at its current state is perfectly fine
I was comparing the M4A3 - not the M4A3E2 - because of the gun, which is smaller caliber and so it would not be right to give the 85mm a better reload, regardless of BR.
You want a more comparable medium by BR then looking at the M4/T26. Has a 90mm cannon with 7.5sec reload. So in light of that, dropping the T-44 to 7 seconds would be reasonable. But 5 seconds would be silly.
FYI - WIKI shows both the T-34-85 (STP) and the T-44 (FM) as having access to the BR-367 shell. WIKI is wrong?
Both of them do have the BR-367, not sure where you’ve gotten the idea either one of them doesn’t have it. Wiki is therefor right in this case.
There are multiple variants of the M4 Sherman, you’re not being very concise over here… Regardless, my point still stands.
Comparing apples to pears over here, one functions as a fast light tank in-game unless downtiered whilst the other priorities turret protection and firepower.
I’m assuming you didn’t read what I’ve said in my previous message so I’ll repost it again.
‘The addition of a faster reload wouldn’t be game breaking, I specifically said six to five seconds as it would of course depend on balancing , the fact you’ve obviously taken the shortest reload as an example would tell me you’re just here to argue’
From you.
“The T-34-85 (STP) gains the advantage of a stabiliser, and the BR-367 shell as well”
Your sentence suggests the T-34 STP has 2 advantages over the T-44. 1) STAB and 2) BR-367
In reality the STP trades off significant armor for STAB, which is what I said in my earlier post.
Yes they have diff capabilities. But both are mediums (the T-44 has much better hull armor than the other medium I’m comparing it to) with similar BR and you have not demonstrated why one should have significantly faster reload.
Maybe you should put more thought into the suggested range next time. Not my fault you suggested something that makes no sense. I’m critiquing your suggestion, not arguing. There is a difference.
I was obviously referring to it having that advantage over the standard T-34-85, that was something you’re meant to fill in automatically as the reader, as the T-34-85 (STP) and the T-44 (FM) both have the BR-367 lmao. This was a direct response to your statement of:
‘The T-34-85 (STP) trades significant hull armor for STAB and is same BR’
This is something they teach in Year 4 or less (UK)
It’s all in the original post, use the time you have arguing and read, it shouldn’t take that long - I gave an estimate based on different factors, you’ve taken the fastest one for the sake of arguing.
This topic was posted in MoWD, not the suggestion page, it’s a recommendation not a suggestion, get that right first. Secondly, 69% of people who reacted believe the T-44 (FM) is struggling in one form or another, there is common consensus that the vehicle is struggling.
Read my original post as well before you continue any pointless argument, this topic is beyond dead
I was not referring to the standard T-34-85 so it makes little sense for you to bring that into our conversation.
In no way should your “estimate” of a 5 second reload for the 85mm gun be considered reasonable. I called you out on that.
Well since I used the lower-case “s” in “suggestion” I really can’t understand how you would mistake my word for Suggestion Page. The word suggestion can be synonym for “recommendation”. Now it just seems like you are deflecting.
I get it - most people do not like to have their suggestions (err … RECOMMENDATIONS) critiqued. But there is no reason to become hostile and childish about it.
maybe the fm, but the t44 is fucking insane at 6.7 and can easily carry someone in a 7.7 game, heck the fact the 85 still works against MOST mediums at 7.7 is telling enough its fine at 6.7, the only thing it struggles are heavy tanks from the front, and thats just fine.
also are we still jumping on the tiger 2h bandwagon? thought the nerf was enough for you guys and you just wanna make it worse?
1 Like
It was for additional context, as you appear to be struggling to understand what I’m saying. It’s completely relevant to the discussion.
It was an idea for balancing - a type of recommendation for buffing the vehicle. I don’t ever recall saying that a ‘five second reload would be reasonable’ or anything along those lines; that’s just you manipulating and rewording what I’m saying for the sake of argument. This just feels like you’re either rewording my sentences maliciously, or you lack the reading comprehension to understand what I’m saying - this isn’t me trying to insult you.
Deflecting? Whether lowercase or uppercase, wording is significant here, as it distinguishes a recommendation from a full-fledged suggestion. A vast majority would like to see some form of buff applied to the T-44 (FM), but you - this sounds more like a you issue, possibly just you coping.
Some people also like to engage in arguments just for the sake of arguing; your coping method of rewording what I’m saying and twisting the argument shows the immaturity you have.
Play the T-44 (FM) first, then come back, but the vast majority of people from the eighty one vote poll support some form of buff
I’d agree that the T-44 isn’t terrible at 6.7, especially thanks to its trolly armour, but calling it insane is a bit of a stretch. The T-44-100 and the T-44 are both perfectly fine vehicles, with opinions varying on whether they’re overpowered or slightly bad. However, the T-44 (FM) is definitely lacking.
You took a shot at my education because you don’t understand that recommendation and suggestion can mean the same thing, but I’m the immature one?
Take the criticism like the grown-up you think you are, and just move on.
1 Like