North Korea had T-34s not T-54’s they only start ordering those in 1967.
Not relate to your message however I would recommend updating the title and putting a - between cause you are kinda started confusing people.
T-54->Russian or T54E1->US.
There’s a reason why the Slash is important. It’s to differentiate between the vehicles.
Other you start confusion. Cause sometimes numbers are used for other vehicles in another country. Ex:
Japanese Type-95 Ha-Go and the Chinese Type-95 SPAAG
has pretty similar guns and armour to the vehicles at it’s br. The uptiering in 7.7-8.0 russia is unbearable because of 8.7 players. Its just a problem with the matchmaker.
I’m pretty sure the gun depression, the 5.9 deg/s horizontal traverse and the long reload has been mentioned multiple times in the thread. I myself have at least said it twice.
So am I supposed to believe that you actually read what people have said, and aren’t just a drone coming to give your uneducated opinion?
Pretty ignorant take considering the statements made through this entire thread.
I mean, it has the best gun at the BR, and it basically has the best armor of an MBT at the br (not that the armor even does anything for MBTs at this br). Its also a bad thing to bring up a problem but to not provide a solution.
1 Like
It also has GLACIAL turret rotation and no gun depression. So that gun is rather difficult to get on target. And at the SAME BR you have the Type 69 with both better turret rotation and a stab. APFSDS is similar to the T54’s apds and the 400 pen HEAT is the same.
You admit its armor is largely irrelevant as almost all 7.7+ tanks are looking at 300mm+ pen then hold that up as a draw point to the tank… interesting.
The solution is to downteir the tank to 7.7. How is that not obvious? Again, none of the regularly played 6.7s are going to have difficulty when the T54 cupola is that weak. ALL of your talking points have been gone over and over and over but you apparently can’t read them.
1 Like
I’m not sure about this one, but yes, the gun is difficult to get on target, or I would assume so.
I see you haven’t used either.
APFSDS are near universally better postpen than APDS due to rod length. Type 69 is far, far more lethal than the T54. Angled performance is FAR better for apfsds and is reflected in the numbers you gave. Flat pen is nearly irrelevant at 8.0 as nearly no tank uses flat armor in areas you should be shooting. I’ll take postpen over flat pen numbers. Try playing a conq with its 480 pen than regularly fails to one-shot UFPs and you get the idea pretty quick.
Agree, T-69 and T-59 are way better than T54’s.
Every stat apart from velocity of the t-54 round is better than the apfsds round.
Type 71 APDS is an absolute abomination and if you’re actually using it you have to be some kind of a masochist. Also you should take a better look at the picture, it literally shows that russian APDS has better angled penetration than the chinese APFSDS (it’s also much better than the APDS that type 59 has)
I guess I am an masochist, I main that shell in the T-69
No? The 8.0 Magach 6A not only has superior armor, but it fires M728 - which is a very potent APDS, modeled with late modifiers, that doesn’t shatter. It’s basically APFSDS, and you see the same thing on the Chieftains. A far superior shell than anything the T-54 fires.
And the 6A also has 10 times better gun handling… With -10 degrees of gun depression. And a 3 times faster turret traverse…
This is all at the same BR, by the way.
I also mained that shell.
I didn’t have a bad time in either the Type 59 or the Type 69 once I got used to them (I played until I spaded them, and it took a long time as I didn’t have a premium account back then).
But you can tell that I had a slightly lower K/D and winrate in the Type 69 even though the Type 69 has a far better turret traverse (biggest flaw of the Type 59) and more horsepower. And that was definitely because of that shell.
The shell on the Type 69 is really bad. It’s not modeled like M728 and it has a horrendous dropoff.
(penetration is only 170mm at 1km). It was quite the pain to use, and a lot less fun than the APHE of the Type 59.
Keep in mind that I played these vehicles a long time ago - when the PUMA released at ~8.3 or something, along with the still very undertiered Turm III. And before a lot of vehicles around 7.0-9.0 went up, so I had FAR worse matchmaking than these tanks do today. Today, they must be a lot better.
You should give China 8.0 a shot, still a solid line up to play.
I agreed considering most 8.0 are just 7.3 figting 8.3 and 8.7 now. But for some reason i do better at 8.0 while still using the aphe ( haven’t unlocked the apds yet) lol, probly cuz there are more lightly armored tank, i also brought the t-44-100 and did suprisingly well too. I do play it like a slower light tank so maybe that helps as well.
Well, I already spaded them all and had a decent time.
Now my favorite BR is China 10.0.
cool, getting there.
You really aren’t very good with numbers are you?
From 30 degrees to 60 degrees the APDS round drops ~65% of its pen. the APFSDS drops 35%. Meaning past 60 degrees that APDS shell is going to lose pen to the point that it is bouncing off even MBT UFPs, LFSs, or roofs. The APFSDS is going to be >100 pen even at 70 degrees. With the leo being the benchmark 8.0 tank and the many ifvs around the BR, i’ll take the round that reliably pens angles and has better postpen.
Turns out, reading the stat card of a round is more than just reading ‘hur… this number bigger’.
2 Likes