Jump to content


T55A


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

Destroy0 #1 Posted 11 July 2018 - 09:37 PM

    Currently Unavailable

  • Players
  • 19062 battles
  • 2,087
  • [FRS17]
  • Member since:
    03-19-2016

Saw the thing in battle and decided to compare it to it's closest competitors.

 

Immediately, we see that it's superior to the t54 in firepower on both guns. It combines the dpm and accuracy of the D10 with the penetration of the D54. It also has a 50 hitpoint advantage and exactly the same mobility.

 

However, it loses 20mm of armor on the the front hull and turret.

 

But there is something completely unexpected to this tank, it actually has more armor on the sides of the turret. It has 200mm of side turret armor and 165mm of back turret armor. 

 

I would really appreciate it if someone checked it out on armor inspector to see if there's any unseen angling factors, cause this thing looks like it has a really powerful all-round turret that'll give any gun issues from any angle if you're unware about its unique quirk.

 

Posted Image

 

Posted Image

 

Posted Image


Edited by Destroy0, 11 July 2018 - 09:39 PM.


Jonny_applesauce #2 Posted 11 July 2018 - 09:38 PM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 6932 battles
  • 785
  • [CLEAR]
  • Member since:
    08-29-2017

"Any gun issues"

 

*Bl10*

 

"Most guns issues"


WoT blitz is better than WoT PC imho because no arty and +/- 1 mm.

 

Jonny Applesauce


RommelTanker #3 Posted 11 July 2018 - 09:50 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 1922 battles
  • 2,089
  • [_DX2_]
  • Member since:
    09-03-2017

After having a thorough discussion regarding the statistics of the T-55A vs. the T-54 (Technically the T-55...), me and a group of people from TRPD came to two conclusions:

The first is this:
This is a straight upgrade over the standard T-54/55. There's no sugar coating it, no saying "Oh but it trades away 20mm off the front", no. It's a direct and literal upgrade to the T-54/55. Statistically, as we can see, the gun is the best of both the T-54/55's guns; the superb accuracy and DPM of the 100mm D-10T2C, with the better penetration and shell velocity of the 100mm D-54. It has identical gun handling, the same aim time, gun depression, and elevation. Its HEAT shells are from the 100mm D-10T2C. This means it loses... wait for it: a grand 5m/s off of the shell velocity compared to the D-54. It has identical penetration and alpha as well.

 

The frontal armor, while 20mm thinner, is still arguably just as strong against most Tier VIIIs. The side and rear turret are significantly thicker than the side and rear of the T-54/55.

 

The second is this:
It's not OP; just superior to the T-54/55. The tank is still susceptible to Tier IX AP to the front hull, and most HEAT will cut clean through the front. The turret's front is actually mildly easier to pen than the T-54/55's and the gun depression makes hull down widely nonviable.



trogvision #4 Posted 11 July 2018 - 09:51 PM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 14203 battles
  • 696
  • [ATO]
  • Member since:
    05-24-2013
Here come the stupidly broken and op tanks... 
Nobody likes AFK'ers.

BrickSniper33A #5 Posted 11 July 2018 - 10:02 PM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 65 battles
  • 612
  • Member since:
    01-14-2018
https://blitzhangar.com/en/tank/t-55a According to BlitzHanger, the only parts of the entire turret that are 200mm thick are the small shields surrounding the gun itself. Everything else on the sides are 140-160mm thick, just like a normal T-54. So in essence, it is a T-54 which trades armor for firepower.  

In civilized countries saying Star Wars is better than Dr. Who and Star Trek should be punishable by death.

                                                    Official Cybermen obsessed Dr. Who nerd and omnisexual pervert of Blitz https://www.blitzsta...m/BrickSniper33


reluctanttheist #6 Posted 11 July 2018 - 11:03 PM

    Canuck Didactics

  • Players
  • 23138 battles
  • 6,042
  • [III-H]
  • Member since:
    01-12-2015

What Bricky said.  The cupola on the turret is more prominent and more easily penned.  The turret has less armor near the gun as well.

 

The whole top of the T-55A turret is 30mm of armor.  Shoot HE at the top of a T-55A and get big DMG numbers...

 

The T-55A will do worse than the T-54 IMO.


Tanks:  _X: T110E5, T110E3, FV215b(183), IS-7, Obj.140  _IX: M103, T-54  _VIII: IS-6, T34, Lowe, T-44, IS-6, IS-3D  _VII: T-43, Comet, E25, AT-15A, SU-122-44
Usually on in the evenings Pacific time.  Intake Contact for Triarii Clan (PM for details)
Be a better player  |  Click here if you have lag  |  Graphics Settings for iOS  |  Check your ping with Pingplotter  |  Get good: watch Bushka!  |  Check out tanks on Tank Compare  and  BlitzHangar


BrickSniper33A #7 Posted 11 July 2018 - 11:35 PM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 65 battles
  • 612
  • Member since:
    01-14-2018
I have seen several excellent players in the tank, and they (from what I've seen, which admittedly isn't a huge number of people) seem to preform below average in the tank compared to their T-54 stats.

In civilized countries saying Star Wars is better than Dr. Who and Star Trek should be punishable by death.

                                                    Official Cybermen obsessed Dr. Who nerd and omnisexual pervert of Blitz https://www.blitzsta...m/BrickSniper33


Destroy0 #8 Posted 11 July 2018 - 11:36 PM

    Currently Unavailable

  • Players
  • 19062 battles
  • 2,087
  • [FRS17]
  • Member since:
    03-19-2016

View Postreluctanttheist, on 11 July 2018 - 06:03 PM, said:

What Bricky said.  The cupola on the turret is more prominent and more easily penned.  The turret has less armor near the gun as well.

 

The whole top of the T-55A turret is 30mm of armor.  Shoot HE at the top of a T-55A and get big DMG numbers...

 

The T-55A will do worse than the T-54 IMO.

Ah, so it's going to be one of those tanks that they heavily advertise how good its paper stats are, but never actually tell you what the profile looks like.



BrickSniper33A #9 Posted 11 July 2018 - 11:41 PM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 65 battles
  • 612
  • Member since:
    01-14-2018

View PostDestroy0, on 11 July 2018 - 11:36 PM, said:

Ah, so it's going to be one of those tanks that they heavily advertise how good its paper stats are, but never actually tell you what the profile looks like.

 

"The VK 45.03 has the armor of a Tiger II, but at tier 7!"

 

WG doesn't even need to advertise truthfully about the paper stats. They can come out saying that the winning features of the T-34-3 are good accuracy+gun handling and amazing armor and the idiots that buy 100 crates would be none the wiser.


In civilized countries saying Star Wars is better than Dr. Who and Star Trek should be punishable by death.

                                                    Official Cybermen obsessed Dr. Who nerd and omnisexual pervert of Blitz https://www.blitzsta...m/BrickSniper33


Destroy0 #10 Posted 12 July 2018 - 12:32 AM

    Currently Unavailable

  • Players
  • 19062 battles
  • 2,087
  • [FRS17]
  • Member since:
    03-19-2016

View PostBrickSniper33A, on 11 July 2018 - 06:41 PM, said:

 

"The VK 45.03 has the armor of a Tiger II, but at tier 7!"

 

WG doesn't even need to advertise truthfully about the paper stats. They can come out saying that the winning features of the T-34-3 are good accuracy+gun handling and amazing armor and the idiots that buy 100 crates would be none the wiser.

Here's the thing, if the tank isn't in crates, I'd seriously consider buying it since I loved the t54 and would really like a premium varient no matter how watered down it is.

 



Charfyee #11 Posted 12 July 2018 - 12:33 AM

    Junior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 6086 battles
  • 152
  • [22ND2]
  • Member since:
    04-27-2016

View PostBrickSniper33A, on 11 July 2018 - 11:41 PM, said:

 

"The VK 45.03 has the armor of a Tiger II, but at tier 7!"

 

WG doesn't even need to advertise truthfully about the paper stats. They can come out saying that the winning features of the T-34-3 are good accuracy+gun handling and amazing armor and the idiots that buy 100 crates would be none the wiser.

Hey babe (; (! (): (':



Wombeer #12 Posted 12 July 2018 - 03:21 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 24485 battles
  • 1,523
  • [DRSI4]
  • Member since:
    11-12-2015

View PostBrickSniper33A, on 11 July 2018 - 11:41 PM, said:

 

"The VK 45.03 has the armor of a Tiger II, but at tier 7!"

 

WG doesn't even need to advertise truthfully about the paper stats. They can come out saying that the winning features of the T-34-3 are good accuracy+gun handling and amazing armor and the idiots that buy 100 crates would be none the wiser.

 

I mean, the T-34-3 DOES have one of the best gun handling stats at tier because of that amazingly good aim time. That’s the foremost feature that makes it fun to play. After the buff to its turret armor in 5.1, it’s already decent armor will be even better as well. If you were to try to sell it based on its “damage potential” or “big gun in mobile package” on the other hand, those would be pretty egregious lies since its major weaknesses are atrocious dpm and mediocre mobility. But in general I agree that WG’s descriptions are entirely misleading. Witness the 59 Patton and T95E2; two almost identical tanks competing for the crown of mediocrity among tier 8 premiums.:D


Tech Tree: 100% researched

 Current Goals: Tier 2-6 Ace and regrind, Tier X grind for credits (11 tier Xs left) 


someguyfromPitt #13 Posted 12 July 2018 - 04:15 AM

    Jeez Louise that one bounced

  • Players
  • 46312 battles
  • 4,266
  • [III-C]
  • Member since:
    07-12-2014

Here here, who didn’t grind the T-54 for two tier X tanks?

 

 Then let’s create up a premium tank and sell it to them. 


Tier 10's: FV 183, T110E3, T110E4, T110E5, T57, M48, IS-4, IS-7, T-62a, Obj 140, Grille, BätChät 

 

There is only one TD and 183 is her name. 

I drive Joseph Stallon (IS) tanks for the win.


Nuclear_Nachos_21 #14 Posted 11 September 2018 - 12:46 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Players
  • 7816 battles
  • 46
  • [BWING]
  • Member since:
    04-13-2016
Not worth the $75 price tag IMO. Love my T-54 better because it was free!:D
  




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users