Jump to content


The Object 252U Defender's Cashgrab,, until being nerfed in a month


  • Please log in to reply
170 replies to this topic

WhatsThisBoxFor #41 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 06:37

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 9 battles
  • 944
  • Member since:
    09-20-2015

View PostDallen9, on Feb 27 2017 - 05:28, said:

 

 

 

 

Worst tanks per DPM? of all tier 8 heavies it places at 25/37, ahead of tanks like the lowe, t34 and AMX M4 MLE.

It has the same DPM as the IS-3 which is considered one of the strongest tier 8 tanks. PLUS it has 440 alpha, compared to the IS-3's 390.

 

god awful handling? It has 6% better aim time than the IS-3, and 10% worse accuracy (5% better than the is-6). This is pretty much the only place it falls below the IS-3, but for tier 10 armor, i'd gladly have 30% worse accuracy.

 

 

The lower plate of the defender when angled is stronger than the strongest point of the is-3 and is-6 when angled hull armors. The LFP "weakness" on this tank is stronger then the strongest point on the other tanks. Look at my initial post to see for yourself.

 

 At tier 8 the defender's turret is extremely strong, requiring enemies to be up close and have accurate guns. The turret is actually one of the few balanced things about the tank, having a weak-point pretty much the same as the IS-6's cupolas and the IS-3's over matched turret roof/

 

 

 

Anyways, If you reply to this, I would prefer if you actually include facts instead of phrases like "god awful handling and accuracy" and "similar to some of the worst tanks for DPM in the tier".

 

Also try posting on your account with more than 8 games played.

 

This tank is overpowered.

 

 

 

25/37 on DPM. Well into the bottom half. And some of those tanks are A) Not in the game yet, B) Clones with different skins, I.e M4 49 + Liberte, T26E5 + Patriot, and C) Autoloaders, which aren't comparable in any way in terms of DPM. Factoring out tanks that are not in the game yet, are reskin clones, and autoloaders, it is 16/23. Meaning it is only 30th percentile for DPM, which is terrible. 

 

Apparently you are so daft you don't know what handling is. Yes it does have slightly better aim time, but worse accuracy. That's not what handling is. Gun handling is the dispersion values, which both the IS-3 and IS-6 beat the 252. The IS3 gets 0.21/0.21/0.08 and the IS-6 gets 0.23/0.23/0.12 to the 252s 0.24/0.24/0.12. So the IS-3 beats it significantly, and the IS-6 beats it marginally. I would hope a tank with sheltered matchmaking wouldn't absolutely thrash the 252, it's purposefully gimped with that trash gun, and the IS-6s gun STILL handles better than the 252. 

 

The lower plate is huge and easily penetrable with same tier prem ammo even when angled optimally, and somewhat reliably penned with standard T8 heavy ammo when head on.

 

The turret is strong yes. I suggest you stop firing at the thickest parts of it. The cupolas are prominent targets, and even with its trash tier handling I've repeatedly penned other 252s with my Defender whilst at 100m and they are juking. It doesn't require a very accurate gun at all, it just requires you to know how to aim and be sure to have 100% crews so you don't miss often. Really if you are fighting a 252 at a range where his gun is a threat in any reasonable amount of time, the cupolas are very easy to hit. If you are at a range they aren't easy to hit, then the 252 is going to have a laughable time trying to get his gun to settle in to hit you at all reliably. 

 

This account is an NA account created for reasons I don't care to repeat another time. I play on EU. If I try to login in to the NA forums with my EU account it won't let me.

 

This tank is not overpowered, you are just too ignorant to figure out how to beat it. I guarantee you if you buy it you will change your opinion, and probably complain that you want your money back because it came nowhere close to your expectation. There is an old addage, what was it? Ah yes, pebkac.


Edited by WhatsThisBoxFor, Feb 27 2017 - 06:38.


johnmadara #42 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 07:40

    Major

  • Players
  • 29661 battles
  • 4,930
  • Member since:
    10-09-2011

View PostJTM78, on Feb 27 2017 - 03:12, said:

The 252U will not be nerfed. This is the way the new premiums will be. The reason all the new premiums are so stronger is because they don't have preferred MM. Since they don't have preferred MM they must be stronger. If you want a preferred MM tank you better buy it before WoT quits selling them for good.

 

premium tanks were never suppose to be amaizing tanks, you used to buy them simply cause they made alot of credits...

_Bagheera_ #43 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 09:36

    Major

  • Players
  • 29517 battles
  • 4,447
  • [Y0L0] Y0L0
  • Member since:
    12-23-2011

View PostIcedBroom, on Feb 26 2017 - 21:19, said:

Clearly you forgot WG policy. They don't nerf premiums anymore. Not since the type 59.....Or was it the SP either way they don't nerf premiums period. The SP nerf was like 2 or 3 years ago. Take the kv-5 for example. They buff the crap out of it and now they can't nerf it since it is now over preforming.....Well that was until these new tanks came along and change all that.

 

The KV5 is over performing?

 

Whut?



TanksR_Epic2 #44 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 11:18

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 6504 battles
  • 1,865
  • [FRAG_] FRAG_
  • Member since:
    12-06-2014
It's not OP shoot the giant lower plate or other weakspots. Also nerfing the 252 would be a bad idea since people wouldn't buy premiums anymore if they knew they would be nerfed.

VooDooKobra #45 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 12:34

    Captain

  • Players
  • 6360 battles
  • 1,981
  • [1-185] 1-185
  • Member since:
    04-23-2011

View Postjohnmadara, on Feb 26 2017 - 23:40, said:

 

premium tanks were never suppose to be amaizing tanks, you used to buy them simply cause they made alot of credits...

 

​that was when they had pref matchmaking, you could put out substandard tanks since they did not meet top of their tier range ever.  then when pref MM went away you still had the same crappy tank but it was now seeing the top of their tier range and people were complaining.  how many times did you see posts "not buying, pos tank, no pref matchmaking".  by getting rid of pref matchmaking they had to make the tanks more competitive or else we just see more of the same old POS tank posts.

KnightOfEris #46 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 13:49

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 5688 battles
  • 269
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014
There would be legit legal issues with nerfing a paid for item, be it a tank or otherwise, so I don't think WG would go down that road. Much easier to keep up the armsrace and release ever more powerful premiums, and keeping the cash flowing.

Verblonde #47 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 15:28

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 15427 battles
  • 1,702
  • [FUNTB] FUNTB
  • Member since:
    02-08-2015

My feeling is that the 252 is a touch OP, but not much; the lack of speed and appalling gun handling prevent it from being the all-conquering monster that people feared pre-release.

 

Based on my experiences over the weekend playing it, plenty of people know how to kill them; the first few games on Friday (while people were working it out), I notched up some ridiculous damage blocked numbers, but by the end of yesterday it played and won/lost pretty much like a typical good Tier VIII heavy.

 

I'm actually having more trouble with defeating the new Tier VIII Pre-Maus than with the Defender/252...



WhatsThisBoxFor #48 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 15:44

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 9 battles
  • 944
  • Member since:
    09-20-2015

View PostKnightOfEris, on Feb 27 2017 - 13:49, said:

There would be legit legal issues with nerfing a paid for item, be it a tank or otherwise, so I don't think WG would go down that road. Much easier to keep up the armsrace and release ever more powerful premiums, and keeping the cash flowing.

Ignorance is a powerful force. There are no legal issues with nerfing prems. You give them that right when you accept the EULA.



The_World_Needs_A_Hero #49 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 15:48

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 5179 battles
  • 625
  • Member since:
    07-27-2013

View PostWhatsThisBoxFor, on Feb 27 2017 - 15:44, said:

Ignorance is a powerful force. There are no legal issues with nerfing prems. You give them that right when you accept the EULA.

 

And you are ignorant to the fact that the EULA is trumped by whatever consumer protection laws govern the purchasers country/state/region. The last thing WG wants is some genius lawyer to round up a bunch of irate gamers in a class action suit. 

 

You see contracts invalidated all the time in the court system for one illegal provision or another. 


Edited by Drewthesteelman, Feb 27 2017 - 15:49.


TodSoldat #50 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 15:52

    Major

  • Players
  • 30522 battles
  • 4,384
  • [BTB] BTB
  • Member since:
    10-04-2011

View PostDallen9, on Feb 26 2017 - 22:06, said:

 

Haha seems balanced to me !

 

Seriously, Do we blame employee stupidity that tanks this unbalanced are added or is wargaming that desperate to increase profit/rip off customers prior to the nerf?

 

This should be labeled "How to screw over your customer base 101"

 

What kind of moron compares a medium to a heavy to try to prove a point?

Verblonde #51 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 16:02

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 15427 battles
  • 1,702
  • [FUNTB] FUNTB
  • Member since:
    02-08-2015

View PostTodSoldat, on Feb 27 2017 - 09:52, said:

 

What kind of moron compares a medium to a heavy to try to prove a point?

 

I may be spectacularly wrong, but I read that as comparing several heavies when being shot at by a Panther II; aren't the second and third 'heat maps' the IS3 and IS6...? I agree that it isn't terribly well expressed regardless.

Not that I agree with the blighter either...

Edited by Verblonde, Feb 27 2017 - 16:04.


commander42 #52 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 16:08

    Major

  • Players
  • 19421 battles
  • 3,521
  • [T-R-P] T-R-P
  • Member since:
    07-08-2013

View PostKnightOfEris, on Feb 27 2017 - 07:49, said:

There would be legit legal issues with nerfing a paid for item, be it a tank or otherwise, so I don't think WG would go down that road. Much easier to keep up the armsrace and release ever more powerful premiums, and keeping the cash flowing.

 

there would be no legal issues but it wouldn't be good for them in terms of future premium tank sales, that's why they don't do it, and the reason they release better and better premiums is so that people keep on buying them, I guess they think that if they release a balanced tank people won't see a point in buying it

WhatsThisBoxFor #53 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 16:09

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 9 battles
  • 944
  • Member since:
    09-20-2015

View PostDrewthesteelman, on Feb 27 2017 - 15:48, said:

 

And you are ignorant to the fact that the EULA is trumped by whatever consumer protection laws govern the purchasers country/state/region. The last thing WG wants is some genius lawyer to round up a bunch of irate gamers in a class action suit. 

 

You see contracts invalidated all the time in the court system for one illegal provision or another. 

It is not illegal for WG to nerf premiums and they have done it before. It's not a smart business practice to release premiums in need of nerfs because some day they may be forced to nerf it to end player dissatisfaction with it being OP to fight against, but that creates more dissatisfaction from owners of the prem. Dissatisfied customers = less profit.

 

WG reserves the right to do whatever they want with their game, and you agreed to this. You might want to give the EULA a quick once over. When you agree to the EULA you also agree to the TOS. 

 

This is one of the terms:

 

(f)      we may change, replace, remove access to or update the Content at any time in our sole discretion. 



_Bagheera_ #54 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 16:16

    Major

  • Players
  • 29517 battles
  • 4,447
  • [Y0L0] Y0L0
  • Member since:
    12-23-2011

View PostVooDooKobra, on Feb 27 2017 - 05:34, said:

 

​that was when they had pref matchmaking, you could put out substandard tanks since they did not meet top of their tier range ever.  then when pref MM went away you still had the same crappy tank but it was now seeing the top of their tier range and people were complaining.  how many times did you see posts "not buying, pos tank, no pref matchmaking".  by getting rid of pref matchmaking they had to make the tanks more competitive or else we just see more of the same old POS tank posts.

 

Exactly I posted elsewhere that the tanks before the patriot and liberte where all mostly abysmal failures till they got buffed, or they are still not selling well.

 

You would be absolutely stupid to buy something like the 59-Patton ETC.

 

The M4 Ravioli only became a contender after gigabuffs to the gun. I still feel its penetration is anemic for tier 10 games especially in th eface of these super armored heavies now. Wargaming likes to make money you know, and they aren't going to make money selling crap premiums that nobody with a brain is going to buy.

 

Then came the mutz. Wargaming saw that thing sell like hotcakes... BECAUSE IT WAS GOOD....great actually.

 

 

 

 


Edited by _Bagheera_, Feb 27 2017 - 16:19.


TodSoldat #55 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 16:24

    Major

  • Players
  • 30522 battles
  • 4,384
  • [BTB] BTB
  • Member since:
    10-04-2011

View PostVerblonde, on Feb 27 2017 - 10:02, said:

 

I may be spectacularly wrong, but I read that as comparing several heavies when being shot at by a Panther II; aren't the second and third 'heat maps' the IS3 and IS6...? I agree that it isn't terribly well expressed regardless.

Not that I agree with the blighter either...

 

Between me having not smoked my meds yet and his extrapolation choices may have led to my confusion

SMScannonfodder #56 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 16:29

    Major

  • Players
  • 24017 battles
  • 2,703
  • [CFS] CFS
  • Member since:
    04-29-2011

View PostIcedBroom, on Feb 26 2017 - 21:19, said:

Clearly you forgot WG policy. They don't nerf premiums anymore. Not since the type 59.....Or was it the SP either way they don't nerf premiums period. The SP nerf was like 2 or 3 years ago. Take the kv-5 for example. They buff the crap out of it and now they can't nerf it since it is now over preforming.....Well that was until these new tanks came along and change all that.

 

They Nerf them by no longer selling the OP premiums.

NiteDog #57 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 16:38

    Major

  • Players
  • 25242 battles
  • 4,947
  • [CRTL2] CRTL2
  • Member since:
    08-09-2011

View Postjohnmadara, on Feb 26 2017 - 22:40, said:

 

premium tanks were never suppose to be amaizing tanks, you used to buy them simply cause they made alot of credits...

 

Somehow, over time, this has been neglected by the player community.

WhatsThisBoxFor #58 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 16:40

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 9 battles
  • 944
  • Member since:
    09-20-2015

View Post_Bagheera_, on Feb 27 2017 - 16:16, said:

 

Exactly I posted elsewhere that the tanks before the patriot and liberte where all mostly abysmal failures till they got buffed, or they are still not selling well.

 

You would be absolutely stupid to buy something like the 59-Patton ETC.

 

The M4 Ravioli only became a contender after gigabuffs to the gun. I still feel its penetration is anemic for tier 10 games especially in th eface of these super armored heavies now. Wargaming likes to make money you know, and they aren't going to make money selling crap premiums that nobody with a brain is going to buy.

 

Then came the mutz. Wargaming saw that thing sell like hotcakes... BECAUSE IT WAS GOOD....great actually.

 

 

 

 

Imo the Mutz and KR are the perfect sweet spots for premiums. Quite good and competitive, but also not at all overpowered.



_Bagheera_ #59 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 18:17

    Major

  • Players
  • 29517 battles
  • 4,447
  • [Y0L0] Y0L0
  • Member since:
    12-23-2011

View PostBavor, on Feb 26 2017 - 22:17, said:

 

Wow!  You think its OP?  Really?  Have you tried aiming when shooting it?  It has 5 or 6 frontal weak spots that you need 150mm-250mm of pen to go through it.  And the sides aren't that strong.  I killed on in a brawl with my IS-6 today.  And everyone was saying the 252 makes the IS-6 obsolete.

 

Instead of calling the tank OP, how about you learn about its weak spots and weaknesses?

 

It kinda does unless you are fighting someone brain dead.

_Bagheera_ #60 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 18:20

    Major

  • Players
  • 29517 battles
  • 4,447
  • [Y0L0] Y0L0
  • Member since:
    12-23-2011

View PostWhatsThisBoxFor, on Feb 27 2017 - 09:40, said:

Imo the Mutz and KR are the perfect sweet spots for premiums. Quite good and competitive, but also not at all overpowered.

 

The mutz and KR where the first they made that DIDN'T suck, and honestly the KR was not selling TOO well until they buffed its mantlet finally. now its basically a premium pershing. Wargaming is a business and I'm sure they noticed how well those tanks sold and saw that

 

"Hey guys, they pay good money for premium tanks that dont SUCK"

 

Why do you think there have been so many buffs to older premiums? Besides the fact they got power creeped to hell they honestly sucked. Now the Lowe is a BEAST of a heavy tank with good armor a good turret better mobility, depression and a great gun. Just lacks dpm.

 

Im not going to say the T34's buffs made it phenomenal but I definitly notice a difference in gun handling and it sticks its shots much more often.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users