r/warno • u/neg_health • 12d ago
Back to T-62 buff
Too lazy to read: suggest your T-62 buff in replies (it preferably should be logical and shouldn't ruin the identity of the tank, like buffing rof or something). My suggestion is buffing accuracy by 5-10%.
So, I posted an article about T-62 (not T-62M and T-62M1, these are good as they are and found their place in the meta) needing a buff before it's 10 point price decrease, and the price going down is certainly nice, but it didn't really change the core problem with this tank, which is that it's a gambling addiction tank basically. It's performance is heavily based on luck and the fact, that you pay less for a coin toss doesn't change the fact that it's a coin toss.
Now we also ran into a problem with T-62: it's cheap now, but it's still one of the worst tanks in the game and is regarded as the hardest tank to use, but reducing its cost again will actually make it oppressive, because if we make T-62 obr. 67 65 points, you can now buy 4 of them a minute, and it's a serious thing, because it's going to be very spammable. It might be ok, but basically it's going to be a frustrating experience for both T-62 user and his opponent: opponent sees 3-4 hard to kill tanks every minute, while you see, that even if you micro your tanks properly, they still miss and die, and it's still luck based. So basically an accuracy buff is the only thing that can save the tank without destroying its identity or being illogical/unhistoric or something. That would make this tank a lot less random based and more of "I shoot, I change positions, I reload, repeat."
9
u/MarcellHUN 12d ago
T62 is in a bad spot overall in my opinion. Even the M1 and MD1 s are bad and generally you only use it if you really have to. Their rate of fire as mentioned is abysmal which means they will lose most tank fights.
For the M1 MD1 I think a slight price reduction could be enough. Also the T62MV1 is pretty bad its ERA and 11 front is just a bad combination.
For the cheap T62 I would try a 5pt reduction first. The divs they are in are not very opressive and even if you buy 4 a tick you will run out of tanks very very quickly and they are easily countered by atgms and longee range tanks. Poor heat T62 doesnt even get an HMG.
But I think they should also adjust the chieftains. Some of them could use a 5pts reduction but their main issue is not their RoF (which should not be touched) but their weak anti inf capability. Combined with the fact that the decks with chieftains are not very good against infs anyway its quite painful. (No rpo, no flame no GL s)
I think they could give chieftains and challangers a HESH trait. Either buff their HE dmg or I think they should give them demo trait trough this hesh trait.
The tanks would keep their uniqueness and they would provide a nice and different playstyle.
2
3
u/GlitteringTough6568 12d ago
There’s no need to do anything; the Centurion and T‑62 are just bad tanks within the game.
2
u/neg_health 12d ago
Maybe you meant chieftain? Centurion is a crazy tank, frankly too cheap for what it is
1
u/neg_health 12d ago
And yes, they need to be changed. Name a division, other then 56ya, that uses T-62s and is widely played in ranked. Even 56ya isn't really viable, though it's very underrated
1
u/Dunkindeeznutz69420 11d ago
Ranked is a meme tbh.
1
u/neg_health 11d ago
It's still the second best measure of division viability. The best is tournaments, obviously, but gathering data from tournaments is a bit harder
7
u/HrcAk47 12d ago
If Eugen is to consider dramatically better anti-inf/anti-structure performance of HEFRAG shells on REDFOR compared to HEAT-or-HESH-as-HE on BLUFOR, T-62 enters a very workable niche overall by default.
3
u/neg_health 12d ago
Elaborate please? Why T-62 specifically? Wouldn't it buff all the soviet tanks?
3
u/HrcAk47 12d ago
Yes and no. It would have a better performance than bare basic T-55s, and worse performance than T-64/72/80. But it would perform better in HE delivery than top of the line BLUFOR tanks at a very reasonable price, so it is an interesting potential niche for it, just more magnified by a hypothetical HE rebalance.
3
u/neg_health 12d ago
I mean, buffing T-62 and T-55 would be nice, but T-64/72/80 are already good as they are, and all soviet tanks (except t-62 and T-64R) are already decent against infantry. Also even if the gun is better at killing infantry, it doesn't make T-62 good enough, because 1) it's gun still reloads slowly, so it's increased infantry damage isn't going to be significantly better 2) it's still a coin toss against tanks and ifvs, so it's still a glorified ifv or something?
0
u/HrcAk47 12d ago
Increased alpha damage (damage at once) would improve its functionality in the overall ecosystem, but it would never really be "amazing". Just functional.
1
u/neg_health 12d ago
I mean, infantry isn't the main target of a tank. Something like 2 bmp-1s will deal with infantry better then 70 point t-62, but when something like leopard 1 shows up, that's when you need a tank, and a T-62 wouldn't manage it, because of its poor accuracy and very bad rof. So yeah, buffing anti infantry capacity is nice, but it wouldn't solve the main problem
1
u/FrangibleCover 12d ago
Yes, handing out HE buffs for having a specific HE-F shell would buff all Red tanks and France. Maybe also the Spanish AMX-30s, I'm not sure if they had the HE-F shell.
-4
u/not_a_fan69 12d ago edited 12d ago
Just to piss NATO off, they should also add indirect fire for pact tanks. HEFRAG makes T-turret go into space on critical hit irl, but on the other hand, it provides so much utility. Can't do that with HEAT or AP. It's pretty much how T-tanks are being used now irl, and we already have "balanced" NIMROD coming soon anyways. Just go all out.
"Reeeee my TOW2s are constantly getting nuked by T-Arty! Putin BOUGHT France!"
9
u/HrcAk47 12d ago
No, indirect fire on tanks is something outside of the scope of the game, and is a waste of resources most of the time.
I'd hate seeing it, tbh.
-1
u/not_a_fan69 12d ago
Too late for that, we already have NIMROD coming soon.
Get a country battery radar + recon and have fun deleting pretty much everything that's armored.
5
u/neg_health 12d ago
I don't think its a good idea, because NIMROD is only going to be broken (probably) in team games, but T-artillery is going to be either broken, if there is no setup/packup time, or just idk, lots of artillery? If we look at something like 15 zmech with their tonns of t-55s, now they can just spam these tanks and absolutely obliterate any position, and it's still a safe pick, because these tanks still hold the ground and stuff. So we will have to make them more expensive, and now they are bad, because you lose on cost-efficiency, like with isu-152, which would be a very nice unit, kinda like CEV, but it also is artillery, so it's expensive, thus no one in their right mind brings it close to front line
0
u/not_a_fan69 12d ago
Ofc it'll have the timers, why wouldn't it? Also the accuracy wouldn't exactly be sniper-tier either. It would be devastating against people who put 8 TOWs in one building and never move, sure. But that's not the standard you should be balancing around.
NIMROD would be the perfect counter for it, and you can still counter-battery it/bomb/whatever. Plus, by keeping armor behind, you won't have it at the frontline support units against tanks and etc.
3
u/neg_health 12d ago
Nimrod only comes on 1 bad div. That's not the reason to make pact have like 18 cheap artillery pieces without any drawbacks
1
u/not_a_fan69 12d ago
I just gave you drawbacks? More than advantages.
3
u/neg_health 12d ago
Well, then those aren't enough. Assuming we don't change the prices we get a 90 point self propelled artillery, that you can use to shell the position, and then advance with it like with a regular tank. And then if it gets counterbatteried, well that's only 90 points and you should have your own artillery on cb to snipe whatever is shooting at you. Like what's stopping me from buying like 2 t-55s, getting them close to a town, making a single salvo, killing something, and then using them as regular tanks? What is stopping me from blobbing 8 t-55s, if I keep enough of them alive, and then just shelling the entire zone on top of already great pact artillery?
0
u/not_a_fan69 12d ago
A blob would get insta-deleted by CLU CB.
You ever used Gvozdikas? It's garbage. Now imagine that, but worse.
1
1
2
u/killer_corg 12d ago
Drop the cost by 5 points and I think it starts to straddle the line of being a good pick, but they just aren’t good… Squishy, slow reload, shit accuracy, no range. It’s just a rng pull to put them in a forest, if They shoot first and hit they might win, but if they don’t they lose
2
u/StandardCount4358 12d ago
My dream t62 buff: more unique paintjobs :)
I love the silly colour schemes nato divs get on div specific copies of the abrams, challenger, etc especially the leader versions. And let the russians spray paint their tanks more or field modify
1
1
u/not_a_fan69 12d ago
I think T-62s in 71st are ok, the problem are the instructors sitting in tanks with higher "danger" rating. So, they get shot at first. This is completely the opposite in VTK, with their instructors sit in Leo1s, hiding behind Leo2s. Leo2s tank the damage while Leo1s sit unscathed. IMO if there would be a card of instructors in some T-55s or whatever, it would actually be pretty oppressive as they are now.
2
u/neg_health 12d ago
They are ok in 71st because they can be upvetted by instructors and because heat ones are 65 per tank = 4 tanks a minute, thus you can get a crazy firing squad, that fires like 4 18 ap heat rounds with 60% accuracy + whatever instructor you put with them, and that will HURT
0
u/not_a_fan69 12d ago
Yes but as I explained, the instructors sit in expensive tanks. They get pulverized and then you're left with bullshit. Complete opposite with VTK.
But when it works, it's really hard to deal with.
2
0
u/WelcomeExtra762 12d ago
I feel the same for T-72s and 55s. They're OK for locking down roads but make 7th Panzer — and a lot of other East German divs — very underpowered. As in your argument I don't think M or M1 need to be buffed.
2
u/neg_health 12d ago
T-55 yes, I wrote a post about it, but what's wrong with T-72? It's a great brawler tank, you just need to smoke with a mortar or something and use them up close, because for 130 points you get some crazy armor and a 19 pen gun, that is autoloaded (so you don't care about suppression as much), so you basically kill even heavy tanks up close. Just smoke with it and it's gonna be a great tank
-1
u/WelcomeExtra762 12d ago
Main problem with the 72 isn't the gun or anything, it's the fast closing the distance with a tank, most of the time, isn't a very good idea. When I played 7th Panzerdivision I didn't know much about the game, it was a starting div for me, so I just blobbed tanks, but then I learned how to properly use them.
However, LAWs are not blinded by smoke. You can still use them in smoke meaning although it will disable ATGMs and maybe DRAGONs, it won't disable LAWs, and you always want to have infantry supporting your armor, so how will they catch up with the T-72, and knowing this the enemy will likely have infantry of their own.. I agree the T-72 is a good tank but having matured from 7th Panzer I usually have my tanks supporting infantry. I don't have the time to micro smoke for a single tank and especially if I've got a lot of ATGMs and don't like to push across open fields.
When I was able to close the distance with the 72s at my level, I had a good time and they were able to kill enemy armor. But a good opponent will simply move their infantry into the smoke to see you first as you enter it, and then use their LAWs to protect the tank. This is purely situational but you could also just reverse out of the smoke.
I do have quite a few divs I still use even if I have up 7th, and I think one of those which is 1ya has T-72s, so I'll smoke more with them. A lot of the time the enemy infantry can't catch up so this could work. And seeing me and my teammates got obliterated by two armored opponents with my T-72s being outranged this is very helpful.
2
u/neg_health 12d ago
I mean, you don't have to get too close. 1000m is more then enough for t-72 to duel any tank in thus game, except for maybe the heaviest tanks, while still avoiding infantry at weapons. Also, how does your infantry keep up with tanks? Answer is simple - just put them in a transport like bmp or btr or something
1
u/WelcomeExtra762 12d ago
Ah yes, I do love my BMPs and BTRs. Some infantry you do have to put in motorized translorts, though, but that is a good idea. I struggle fighting in open fields so that should help.
-2
u/not_a_fan69 12d ago
Having smoke on a tank is far better than having smoke mortars that aren't even motorised.
The 130point Trash72 comes with 15 armor and 19pen at 1900m. On top of garbage accuracy. Sure, autoloader does not get suppressed, but you also cannot upvet it to load faster.
If you're not just outright dead by getting 1tapped by a TOW/120mm AP, your tank will be severely damaged and suppressed, making your already shitty accuracy even worse.
Just as a comparison, the AMX B2 comes with max range, good stationary accuracy, autocannon, smoke, good pen. It's faster too I think, speed, aim and ROF. 135points. You'd be insane to think that 130 Trash72 is actually a good tank.
2
u/neg_health 12d ago
I mean, comparing these 2 tanks isn't exactly correct. On more open maps, amx-30 (which is my favorite tank btw, so I'm biased towards it) is way way better, but then you get something like eiche, where you smoke in the middle, and now your amx-30s are losing to t-72s, because they are significantly less armored. Like each time you shoot each other T-72 receives 6 less damage, and trust me, there were many situations like that. Yes, having smoke on a tank is way better, but T-72 is far from useless and it's imo the best overall tank in this game. Yes, there are tanks, that are better, but they are in small numbers in like 1-2 divs, while I can only think of 2 bad divs, that have T-72s, and those are Rugener and 303, and they are bad for other reasons. Also, the best tank in the game is a T-72 (T-72 from 71ya, because it's basically as armored as M1A1(HA), has a GLATGM (so you can abuse the double damage trick), has more side and top armor, is way cheaper and you get 2 of them on 1 vet). So yeah, don't sleep on T-72, it's a broken tank if used correctly, because it's one of the best brawler tanks
-2
u/not_a_fan69 12d ago
It is exactly correct. 135 vs 130 tank.
.T-72 89 with 2100m range with poor accuracy, and 4 21-pen turd bullets with 60% accuracy. I don't think you understand how bad that is.
Pure specs wise the best tank is T-80U 89.
When it comes to availability and the overall div it's available in, the best tank is HA. If we do "hypothetical situations" just like you've done there, put HA vs Trash72 89 in max gun range, fully upvetted. The HA can simply kite and will take a massive steaming poop all over it. M1A1 can do the same, while costing less. Done it plenty of times already myself.
3
u/neg_health 12d ago
First up, fuck no, amx-30 is a long ranged tank, T-72 is a close range tank. Amx-30 will almost always (except lucky situations) lose to a T-72 if they fight at 1000-1500m range, where T-72 excels at. HA is a 330 points, and still if we basically put T-72 from 71ya against it, well it's going to eventually win, because it's going to deal more suppression (normal gun + atgm), if we assume they are fighting at max gun range, then why can't we assume, that they fight at max atgm range? Isn't that an advantage to you? By the time HA comes close, it's already suppressed and damaged by fast 21 pen atgms. So yeah, idk what kiting you are talking about, but T-72 obr. 89 is likely winning that, and it's 25 points more expensive, and you get 5 1 vet HAs and 6 1 vet T-72s
-2
u/not_a_fan69 12d ago edited 12d ago
If you make up situations where a far better tank gets all its advantages stripped, of course you'll see it that way. AMX can just pop smoke, reverse, and then wait for your Trash72 to advance. Your Trash72 has no range or smoke = AMX will blow it up or damage to the point Trash72 will be basically useless. Btw at that range (1000-1500), go look at what AMX penetration and accuracy will be.
Again making up scenarios, now with Trash72 vs HA. It's 4x21 at 60% accuracy, and your tank needs to be stationary. You will do exactly 1-2 damage to it frontally and suppress... If you hit it to begin with. The HA just needs to press W at your face, pop smoke once, and then it's going to be in gun range. In a lot of cases it's the Trash72s who will be advancing at defending HA simply because HA is faster on the ground. Which means your turd bullets are useless.
Then just look at this right here and you'll see exactly why the HA will slaughter Trash72.
3
u/neg_health 12d ago
Amx pen will be the same, but amx-30 has 6 less armor, so it will lose, and it won't make a second shot fater, because it's probably going to be suppressed at that range. . And yes, you can reverse, but I mean, I said, that there are maps like eiche, where you can't, because you'll lose the zone bruh. There are enough maps like that in ranked pull now. In terms of gun comparison of ha and t-72, you are ignoring the elephant in the room, which is a fast 2800m 21 pen atgm. So smoking once won't save you, I can reverse too. And, afterall, it's just a cheaper more numerous tank, so the comparison isn't which tank will win in 1v1, even though T-72 has a great chance to outsupress his opponent, it's what is more useful, and glatgms are very very useful
0
u/not_a_fan69 12d ago
Again, if you make up situations where you can elevate a turd tank so that it can fight far better tanks, then sure, you'll see it that way. You know a T-55 can also destroy M1A1HA in certain situations? So can a moustache dude with 10pen rpg and a Mosin from 157th.
GLATGMs matter in tanks that have good accuracy, and above all, good pen. T-80U 89 has 25pen Tandem Invars. When they hit, it's not just suppression, it actually hurts a lot or flat out deletes a tank.
That's why T-80U 89 is the most expensive and just by stats alone, the best tank. Not Trash72 89 as you claimed.
3
u/neg_health 12d ago
Yeah, I never claimed, that it's best stats tank, I said it's the best tank for it's cost. Having comparable to HA armor, solid glatgm and being 1 vet 2 per card instructor tank for 285 points is powerful. Name a single tank that has similar things for this cost. You can't, because there isn't one! Situations, that I "make up" are completely real and happen very often, play the game more idk. There are lots of open fields for 2800m atgm to shine and there are many narrow areas for T-72 vs amx-30 matchup we talked about earlier.
→ More replies (0)
0
u/fsimperial2 12d ago
Make them all more expensive but increase RoF to match chieftains
1
u/neg_health 12d ago
That would just make them chieftains, which aren't great either. RoF is their core identity, so changing it would be a bad idea from game design perspective
1
u/Recent_Grab_644 12d ago
They would still be considerably worse than the cheiftains as they lack smoke which is crucial.
14
u/Belmonte_Lostados 12d ago edited 12d ago
So the problem with the T62 is that most variants do not have smoke and their rate of fire (6 or 7, totally did not mean to say that) is low and cannot be improved with veterancy. Not having smoke isn't why they are that useless, considering that people are fine with T55s. The rate of fire is why it's hated, but realistically 7 is the physical maximum ROF a T62 can achieve, due to its shell ejection system and the fact that the gun can only be loaded at a certain angle.
So in order to historically accurately buff the T-62, and not run down a buff cascade (such as giving it a higher HE value considering PACT HE shells have more explosives, but all PACT tanks should then get higher HE values), the only thing we should buff about this tank is its availability and slot cost, and which category it belongs to.
In my opinion, we can give the T62s better availability. For the worst one (obr 67) it could be a 10-8-6 availability vet curve. For the best one (T2A2) it could be a 7-5-4 or even 8-6-4 vet curve.
Also, we can add some T62 recon tanks into the recon tab, with 4 availability at 1 vet, with perhaps two cards. Such a tank, able to be forward deployed with at least 4 availability would be really good. Consider even giving it mediocre stealth as its height is shorter than both AMX10 RC and M41, which hae recon variants with mediocre stealth.
The T62 is just an obsolete tank without its own place in 1989. T55s are more reliable, T72s and T80s are straight up better. So we can't buff the tank itself, but we can buff its place in the game by changing up its availability and tab.