Jump to content


HELLCAT 7.4 NERF totally uncalled for


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
155 replies to this topic

Poll: What would you call the Hellcat (337 members have cast votes)

Overpowered, Perfectly Fair, Underpowered

  1. OP (37 votes [10.54%])

    Percentage of vote: 10.54%

  2. Perfectly Fair (209 votes [59.54%])

    Percentage of vote: 59.54%

  3. UP (105 votes [29.91%])

    Percentage of vote: 29.91%

Vote Hide poll

VirgilHilts #101 Posted Jun 29 2012 - 22:49

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 16650 battles
  • 3,417
  • Member since:
    07-31-2010

View PostMyshella, on Jun 29 2012 - 16:36, said:

How did the nerf make it more difficult to track moving targets? The nerf was to track transverse not turret and the dispersion nerf is for when the tracks are moving.

I said it pre-patch and I'm saying it post-patch. The nerfs are barely noticeable and It hasn't impacted the Hellcats still stunning performance. If your being killed because you cannot transverse fast enough then you're engaging at too closer range, you need to adjust your strategy.


Because the turret traverse is so artificially (read:nerfed)slow that you often need to traverse the hull.

You cannot always be where you do not need hull traverse and low dispersion. It just does not work that way. Sometimes you are the only one capable of relocating to rescue a falling flank.

Sure, maybe you can "always" have a strategy that prevents you from needing rapid traverse to track a target. It just might also prevent you from having a chance to win. That's not really a great strategy.

It's a bogus, unnecessary nerf on a vehicle that was already artificially handicapped due to their insistence it be forced into a role it was not designed for. Mobility and agility is the only reason a Hellcat exists.

Nerfing the mobility and agility of the Hellcat is the same as continually nerfing the dispersion on the T30 and removing the vertical stabilizer it actually came with. It is done for two reasons.

A. Because people refuse to learn how to fight against them.
B. Because they try to force them into roles they were not designed for, due to their inability to grasp basic armored warfare.

Myshella #102 Posted Jun 30 2012 - 03:32

    Staff sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 8559 battles
  • 419
  • Member since:
    12-13-2010

View PostMajor_DeFeet, on Jun 29 2012 - 16:57, said:

I think there's more to the nerfs than hull rotation and gun dispersion. I am missing more carefully aimed, stationary shots, getting more bounces and experiencing more no-damage penetrations than ever. Here's my evidence. Before the nerf and with a less-trained crew, I won 56% of the 50 battles I played over a five-day period. Seventy percent of those battles were either tier 8 or tier 9.

After the 7.4 patch, I repeated the experiment. I won 54% of the games, even though 58% of my battles were tier 6 or tier 7 battles. The slower hull rotation didn't really bother me and neither did the gun dispersion, probably because my driver has 100% clutch braking skill, my gunner has 100% snapshot skill and I rarely fire on the move. Given the more favorable tiering the second time around, I'd think that perhaps I could at least come close to matching the result of my first 50 games, but that wasn't the case.

Looking back at some of my replays -- even in games I won -- there seems to be something else going on. The Hellcat doesn't appear to be as good at hitting targets and dealing damage as it used to be. And for a vehicle as fragile as the Hellcat, every time you miss or don't do damage, it means your opponents are in a better position to hurt you. And, as I've previously stated, many players have gotten a lot better at taking advantage of the Hellcat's glaring weaknesses, which is another reason I think the nerf was unnecessary.

I will add that a player much better than me who I greatly respect said he believes that since the 7.4 patch, misses and no-damage pens have increased across the board in WoT. That might be the case, but if true, I believe such changes have greater impact on lightly armored vehicles with low HP such as the Hellcat.

I like that your approaching it in a more constructive manner but 50 battles is just too smaller sample size to draw any real conclusions. Anyone could have repeated the same experiment and had different results. My own win rate has been steadily increasing not decreasing. people are catching on to the Hellcats weaknesses slightly but most are still ignorant, especially arty.

As for stealth nerfs, I haven't noticed any nerfs to the gun. Almost every patch people claim there has been some major stealth nerf to gun accuracy or pen. Not that I would put it past WG but I've just seen no evidence of this.


View PostVirgilHilts, on Jun 29 2012 - 22:49, said:

Because the turret traverse is so artificially (read:nerfed)slow that you often need to traverse the hull.

You cannot always be where you do not need hull traverse and low dispersion. It just does not work that way. Sometimes you are the only one capable of relocating to rescue a falling flank.

Sure, maybe you can "always" have a strategy that prevents you from needing rapid traverse to track a target. It just might also prevent you from having a chance to win. That's not really a great strategy.

It's a bogus, unnecessary nerf on a vehicle that was already artificially handicapped due to their insistence it be forced into a role it was not designed for. Mobility and agility is the only reason a Hellcat exists.

Like I said before. If your always having to transverse to follow your targets, your too close. I understand that sometimes you have to engage at close range but you should try to avoid it where possible. Even at close range the effect of the transverse and dispersion is hardly noticeable and I don't even have clutch braking or smooth ride. It leads me to believe there's something wrong with your strategy that's making you feel the effects of the nerf far more than others.

I see you play a few of the US mediums. Perhaps your experience with their close range mobility is impairing your ability to use the Hellcat to its full potential.

GoodGuy2U #103 Posted Jun 30 2012 - 03:57

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 4391 battles
  • 125
  • Member since:
    08-06-2011
I laugh at the irony. WG decided to add american turreted TDs. So obviously you'd expect they'll have good traverse. BUT, they pretty nerfed it that an a regular TD without a turret and a better gun to rotate faster than the turreted TDs, making then pretty much the same and ignoring everything IRL. I'm guessing WG is afraid that the turreted TDs would be too hard to balance so they went diecided to stick with the tried-and-true slow-rotating TD.
.

OseanTanker #104 Posted Jul 02 2012 - 02:45

    Captain

  • Players
  • 16472 battles
  • 1,118
  • Member since:
    09-29-2011
i can notice the nerf and it bugs me

Drive_Me_Closer #105 Posted Jul 02 2012 - 03:38

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 7300 battles
  • 639
  • Member since:
    04-09-2011

View PostGoodGuy2U, on Jun 30 2012 - 03:57, said:

I laugh at the irony. WG decided to add american turreted TDs. So obviously you'd expect they'll have good traverse. BUT, they pretty nerfed it that an a regular TD without a turret and a better gun to rotate faster than the turreted TDs, making then pretty much the same and ignoring everything IRL. I'm guessing WG is afraid that the turreted TDs would be too hard to balance so they went diecided to stick with the tried-and-true slow-rotating TD.
.

Yes, when the dispersion when moving tracks and turret is twice what a nonturreted TD has, then you know it is a failed game mechanic.

Skyfaller #106 Posted Jul 02 2012 - 10:46

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 5804 battles
  • 537
  • Member since:
    05-04-2011

View PostXxdoorcountyxX, on Jun 03 2012 - 01:16, said:

Thoughts?

Concerns?

Rages?

all  are welcome

The Hellcat needs to have its acceleration massively increased in both forward and reverse and its top speed increased to the max 70kph or so the engine allows. If the T50 series light tank can go that fast so should the hellcat. As far as gun... I honestly think the Hellcat should be given three 76mm versions (no 90mm). The two existing ones and the higher penetration one (same as found in the T32 US heavy tank). The Hellcat historically used the 76mm in combat not the 90mm and it was damn good with it. In this game the 76mm does wonders thanks to the Hellcat's mobility. And it will do even better if said mobility is increased to match or closely match historical speeds.

Imprint_ThreeStones #107 Posted Jul 02 2012 - 21:03

    Major

  • Players
  • 19666 battles
  • 5,517
  • [-MOE-] -MOE-
  • Member since:
    02-07-2011

View PostDrive_Me_Closer, on Jul 02 2012 - 03:38, said:

Yes, when the dispersion when moving tracks and turret is twice what a nonturreted TD has, then you know it is a failed game mechanic.
Yet Hellcat is still winning more than any other tier 6 TD, must be the players playing being uber pro right?

guywitn0life #108 Posted Jul 03 2012 - 05:40

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 7477 battles
  • 1,236
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    07-07-2010
I've noticed Hellcat gets significantly better matchmaking then the M36 did. Toward the end of my career in the M36 I was almost constantly in tier 9 games.

I've got more then twice as many games in the M36 then the M18, but the M18 still feels like it gets tier 6 and 7 games more often then not, with the occasional tier 8 and the very uncommon tier 9.

That could explain why it's winning so often. Against tier 6s, it's a monster. But then again, so are the M36 and the VK3601.

VirgilHilts #109 Posted Jul 03 2012 - 07:49

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 16650 battles
  • 3,417
  • Member since:
    07-31-2010
As far as tier VI goes, the M18 is the lowest performing tier VI I own, behind the M6, the M4A3E8, and the VK3601H. I can maintain 53-55% wins in any of those three, with ease, where as I have to work my ass off to hold 50% in the M18.

guywitn0life #110 Posted Jul 03 2012 - 08:56

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 7477 battles
  • 1,236
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    07-07-2010
I've got a 57% win rate in it playing 100% solo. But like I said either I'm ridiculously lucky with matchmaking (in that vehicle only) or it gets good matchmaking. I've always adored the 90mm M3 AT variant too. Even on the M36. A hell of a gun.

The M36 and M18 could both use more track traverse, they could both use more turret traverse, and M36 could sure as hell use it's historical engine, but I doubt we'll ever see it and I'd hate to see what they take away to give it to them.

Overlord promised us the M36 would be getting the Ford GAA over a year ago. Hasn't happened yet.

Major_DeFeet #111 Posted Jul 03 2012 - 13:54

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 27255 battles
  • 404
  • Member since:
    05-19-2011

View PostCarbonWard, on Jul 02 2012 - 21:03, said:

Yet Hellcat is still winning more than any other tier 6 TD, must be the players playing being uber pro right?
But its win rate is falling, if you haven't noticed.

Imprint_ThreeStones #112 Posted Jul 03 2012 - 14:36

    Major

  • Players
  • 19666 battles
  • 5,517
  • [-MOE-] -MOE-
  • Member since:
    02-07-2011

View PostMajor_DeFeet, on Jul 03 2012 - 13:54, said:

But its win rate is falling, if you haven't noticed.
In the past 2 weeks, which is since 7.4 was introduced, it still holds the highest WR by a wide margin.

Horrorsh0w #113 Posted Jul 03 2012 - 15:07

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 6435 battles
  • 388
  • Member since:
    03-05-2011
I barely noticed a difference before and after patch.  Still the most fun tank in the game and still feels almost unsportsmanlike in tier 6 matches.

Drive_Me_Closer #114 Posted Jul 03 2012 - 19:15

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 7300 battles
  • 639
  • Member since:
    04-09-2011

View PostCarbonWard, on Jul 02 2012 - 21:03, said:

Yet Hellcat is still winning more than any other tier 6 TD, must be the players playing being uber pro right?

Considering it and the french T6 td are running 51% on the RU server, and the SU100 is 48%, add the 3.5% for population normailzation, and yes, the TDs are all running dead even in the last two weeks.  Yet, if you filter the stats by top player, the Hellkat jumps to 68% and none of the rest breach 60%.  So Yes, good players in hellkats do better then good players in other tanks.

Major_DeFeet #115 Posted Jul 03 2012 - 19:25

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 27255 battles
  • 404
  • Member since:
    05-19-2011

View PostCarbonWard, on Jul 03 2012 - 14:36, said:

In the past 2 weeks, which is since 7.4 was introduced, it still holds the highest WR by a wide margin.
Wide margin? Rounded, the M18 and the SU-100 each have a 51% win rate on the NA server. The Hellcat currently has a .32% advantage, but we don't know if its win rate will continue to fall. It's also impossible to say how much of the the reduction has been because of the nerf and how much is because more players are learning how to exploit the Hellcat's weaknesses. I think it's a combination of both.

Edited by Major_DeFeet, Jul 03 2012 - 19:27.


Major_DeFeet #116 Posted Jul 03 2012 - 19:41

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 27255 battles
  • 404
  • Member since:
    05-19-2011

View PostHorrorsh0w, on Jul 03 2012 - 15:07, said:

I barely noticed a difference before and after patch.  Still the most fun tank in the game and still feels almost unsportsmanlike in tier 6 matches.
In the 100 games in which I tracked the Hellcat's tiering, 12% of battles were at T6, 32% at T7, 45% at T8 and 11% at T9. So your chances of getting into a T6 battle are about the same as getting into a T9 battle. While the M18 might seem OP in T6, 88% of the time, you probably won't be playing at that level.

Drive_Me_Closer #117 Posted Jul 03 2012 - 19:50

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 7300 battles
  • 639
  • Member since:
    04-09-2011

View PostMajor_DeFeet, on Jul 03 2012 - 19:41, said:

In the 100 games in which I tracked the Hellcat's tiering, 12% of battles were at T6, 32% at T7, 45% at T8 and 11% at T9. So your chances of getting into a T6 battle are about the same as getting into a T9 battle. While the M18 might seem OP in T6, 88% of the time, you probably won't be playing at that level.

Actually, I think that favors the hellkat.  High tiers are going to ignore even the toughest armor on a T6 tank.  So speed and the gun are going to become larger factors.  Both the Hellkat and ARL V39 have faster aiming, more accurate guns, so they can fire and get back under cover quickly.  The Su 100 doesn't have that luxury, and the Jpaner doesn't have the pen to handle T7 and above.  

Also, speed and fast aim reward skilled players more then new players, so the effect should be more pronounced on the Hellkat and ARL.

KnightFandragon #118 Posted Jul 03 2012 - 20:42

    Major

  • Players
  • 4617 battles
  • 6,715
  • Member since:
    05-06-2011
M18 got its traverse nerfed by 2?  I watch my dad play his M18...and yeah, that hull traverse seems pretty damn slow now.....the m18s only strength is speed and they took that from the thing....2 degrees doesnt seem like much...but really..it is..I dont thin the M18 needed its nerf...of course, WG and their limited buff/nerf basis of GWR alone is why it was.....and why WG needs to widen thier views on what reasons to nerf/buff a tank..

As for the Poll, I think the M18 was JUST perfect in its old state....its almost invisible..which is another feature it relies on to survive..speed, RoF and camo...should it ever be seen, it dies in seconds....its armor is 0, it needs its speed and camo to live...it is a perfectly fine tank as it was...can it have its 2 degrees back!?

Edited by KnightFandragon, Jul 03 2012 - 20:43.


Panzerstecher #119 Posted Jul 03 2012 - 20:54

    Captain

  • Players
  • 19887 battles
  • 1,032
  • [MARVN] MARVN
  • Member since:
    10-03-2011
I voted UP, but only for the reason that the turret traverse speed is rediculous.  The Hellcat had a power traverse that was so fast that the gunners very commonly used it to slew the turret to the target, then used manual controls to aim.  I am not saying that the turret speed needs to be buffed to historical accuracy, but it does need to be faster then it is now.

IronHenry #120 Posted Jul 04 2012 - 01:49

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 28673 battles
  • 796
  • [MANTS] MANTS
  • Member since:
    01-03-2012

View Postkongman, on Jun 03 2012 - 01:28, said:

None of the tanks are accurate to what they where .......when will ppl realise this
Yeah, yer right, the russian tanks are all hilariously over gunned to what they really were.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users