Jump to content


9.20 Supertest of Rebalanced Vehicles: Japanese tanks


  • Please log in to reply
87 replies to this topic

baconFIRE #41 Posted Jun 20 2017 - 23:00

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 13021 battles
  • 111
  • [LOAD] LOAD
  • Member since:
    12-05-2014
I think the Maus needs a nerf first, except maybe rebalancing the idiotic guns on the Type 5 and 4.

Edited by baconFIRE, Jun 20 2017 - 23:00.


dexatrin82 #42 Posted Jun 21 2017 - 00:14

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 16643 battles
  • 198
  • [AR-PA] AR-PA
  • Member since:
    10-02-2011
Maybe fix contact lists instead of working on this?

Sturm_Teufel #43 Posted Jun 21 2017 - 00:19

    Major

  • Players
  • 39621 battles
  • 3,556
  • Member since:
    07-22-2011
Hey dance, are they ever going to undo the nerfs they did to the light tanks? ELC sucks donkey butthole now, VK2801 misses it's derp.:(

KingofDragons #44 Posted Jun 21 2017 - 00:40

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 15611 battles
  • 200
  • Member since:
    05-14-2011

Wont be long before the american and french light tank owners start crying they cant pen Type 5 with stock ammo.. Where does it stop ?  You people must be forgetting about the all the tanks that can easily pen with stock ammo..

 

Pretty well every tank can pen sides and rear so don't give me that i cant pen a Type 5 with stock ammo b.s .. You have one of the slowest and biggest tank around whose main defence is its armor , which hardly ricochets and has to absorb , and now millimeter by millimeter your turning this box tank into something it use to be and something people played less and less .. Great move as usual  W.oT .. 

 

 



Nixeldon #45 Posted Jun 21 2017 - 01:41

    Captain

  • Players
  • 52298 battles
  • 1,197
  • [CLAWS] CLAWS
  • Member since:
    10-30-2011
The most significant change the Type 4/5 require is removal of the 15cm.  

_Schneller_Heinz_ #46 Posted Jun 21 2017 - 02:12

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 1927 battles
  • 629
  • [TIER6] TIER6
  • Member since:
    02-05-2015

View Postdance210, on Jun 20 2017 - 17:57, said:

Not so long ago we’ve shared the plans about the rebalancing of some vehicles branches. And today we’re ready to share the first details about the upcoming changes: to the ST go the Japanese tanks. We plan to test a complex change of vehicles of medium and top tiers. The purpose of rebalancing Japanese heavies is to improve the branch balance, to save battle effectiveness and applicability of Japanese heavies, and at the same time to create equal conditions in battle for the vehicles of other nations.


We plan to test the following vehicles:

  • Tanks of Tier IX and X will have revised armor: We added some parts to the front armor with thickness of 240-260 mm for Tier X and 220-240 mm for Tier IX. Their maneuverability and speed will be adjusted so they are a bit better than what the Maus has. The frontal armor of these vehicles, unlike Germans of the same class, didn’t have any vulnerabilities and could only be penetrated with premium ammo. We have added the changes to some parts of frontal armor to make it possible for their opponents to fight them on equal terms. 

      

  • The tank of Tier VIII O-HO will get premium ammo with an armor penetration value around  250-260 mm for the gun 10 cm Experimental Tank Gun Kai. Previously, this gun didn’t have AP shells with enough penetration for damaging, due to which players didn’t have opportunity to choose game style – the tank was playable only as a derp.
  • The tank O-I will have a bit weaker rear armor, in order to decrease tank’s domination in a battle, especially towards the tanks of lower tiers.  Previously, low-tier vehicles could not damage the O-I even if they managed to flank it. After the changes flanking will work. 

  • Tank O-I Exp V of Tier V will get improved front armor in order to more effectively stand against high-tier vehicles and to perform the role of breakthrough tank. Moreover, 105-mm gun will be removed from this vehicle, which was disproportionately effective on Tier V. The mobility of the tank will be decreased.

 

Hey dance. How about wargaming fixes first the utter broken contact list and game chat???

Because as it is, pretty much nobody on the NA server can platoon with friends and it takes a lot of fun out of the game.

 

PS. How is it, that there are no communication issues on the EU or RU server?



AlienfromUranus #47 Posted Jun 21 2017 - 02:30

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 34782 battles
  • 76
  • [-DRB-] -DRB-
  • Member since:
    11-07-2013
So yet another nerf of the O-I! You already nerfed the reload ( added 5 seconds) you nerfed the speed and you removed hitpoints, considering that it sees tier 8 on a constant basis and a lot of times it is the top heavy tank when this happens you need to stop messing with the tanks and maybe do the things we keep asking you, 1 MAPS when are you going to give us new maps? 2 MAPS bring back some of the removed ones, 3 Fix the match maker since you won't use win8 why not player ratings as a standard,4 CHAT it's been broken for a month with no way to platoon this is a problem.

ScrubIord #48 Posted Jun 21 2017 - 04:32

    Captain

  • Players
  • 27945 battles
  • 1,081
  • [-G-] -G-
  • Member since:
    03-31-2012

WG needs to kick out its supertesting team and get a new one

Can someone explain to me how this is possible?



tod914 #49 Posted Jun 21 2017 - 06:12

    Captain

  • Players
  • 48598 battles
  • 1,486
  • [RDNKS] RDNKS
  • Member since:
    12-23-2013

View Postsaru_richard, on Jun 20 2017 - 13:13, said:

while were at it lets make the Cupolas a weak spot as well

 

I would like to see the cupolas have their own hit point allowance.  Once that is reached, that's it.  You can't continue to do damage.  Maybe crew performance and view range suffers due to it, but the entire tank should not be able to be taken out.

Avalon304 #50 Posted Jun 21 2017 - 08:55

    Major

  • Players
  • 15729 battles
  • 5,746
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

View PostScrubIord, on Jun 20 2017 - 20:32, said:

WG needs to kick out its supertesting team and get a new one

 

 

They really do... the super test team (and the entirety of the balance department) have been dropping the ball. I'll gladly help super test if it means returning some form of balance to this game.

Scorpiany #51 Posted Jun 21 2017 - 10:58

    Major

  • Community Contributor
  • 29482 battles
  • 10,683
  • [N1NJA] N1NJA
  • Member since:
    06-27-2013

Alright, so here are my thoughts on this:

 

Type 5 Heavy: Bad changes.

Explanation: You guys seem to have missed the point with adding in weakpoints for the Type 5 Heavy. A 260-270mm zone isn't a "weakpoint" to most tanks unless they're Tank Destroyers. Any heavy tank or medium tank fighting against the Type 5 Heavy will still have to require Premium ammunition to be able to penetrate it reliably. A very high penetration gun on a Russian medium tank will only have a 50/50 chance to penetrate those zones, if it manages to get them completely flat at close range. If the Type 5 angles it even slightly, even Russian meds will struggle from close range. Anything else, such as Tier 10 heavy tanks, still don't stand a chance without HEAT / APCR.

 

Proposed Fix: 

  • Make the highlighted zones between 240mm-250mm thick.
  • Make the lower plate 260mm thick.
  • Make the cupola 175mm thick.

 

The highlighted zones already have a slight angle to them, so their effective armor is approximately 10mm greater than the raw nominal thickness. Making them 240mm thick will make them about 250mm effective; giving same Tier heavies at least a 50/50 to penetrate in optimal circumstances. Making the lower plate 260mm gives lower penetration TD's and high pen meds a closer to 50/50 chance to penetrate as well. The cupola is well angled, so 175mm thick would still be 220-230mm thick; especially since some tanks have to shoot up at it. This gives Tier 8's and 9's a chance to penetrate the tank with higher pen guns, and lower pen guns can go through with Premium if they aim well.

 


 

Type 4 Heavy: So-So Changes.

 

Explanation: As with the Type 5 Heavy, the purpose of lowering the armor thickness in the highlighted areas, is to give tanks a reasonable chance to penetrate if they aim well in ideal circumstances. The Type 4 Heavy, being a Tier lower, needs to have some sort of armor chance to give Tier 7's and even Tier 8's some kind of remote chance of fighting against it. Whilst the change does make it reasonable against Tier 10 tanks now, lower Tier vehicles still don't stand a chance.

 

Proposed Fix:

  • Make one of the highlighted zones down to 225mm-230mm thick
  • Make the cupola 160mm thick (220ish effective)

 

The Type 4 Heavy breaks game balance for lower Tier and even same Tiered vehicles by presenting armor which simply cannot be penetrated even with careful aim. For some tanks, premium ammunition isn't even enough. If you make one of the highlighted zones about 230mm effective, that presents a viable weakpoints for most Tier 9-10 tanks, and even a few Tier 8 tanks. Then, by making the cupola 220mm effective, you give another opportunity to contest its armor, in case the Type 4 Heavy is well angled (in which case the 230mm highlighted zone becomes too thick to penetrate).

 


 

O-Ho: Good Changes.

 

Explanation: It was always strange that the O-Ho didn't have any Premium shell. Whilst 230mm of AP pen at Tier 8 is pretty good, most Tier 8's need at least some amount of Premium ammo to be able to fight against higher Tier tanks; especially with how many recent armor buffs there have been. Giving it a 265mm Premium shell would make the 10cm gun a viable choice.

 

Proposed Fix: Make the Premium ammo on the 10cm up to 265mm of penetration. 250-260mm won't quite be enough; especially considering that the O-Ho will primarily be fighting other slower, heavily armored vehicles.

 


 

O-I: Good Changes

 

Explanation: The rear armor of the O-I left new players baffled when they couldn't penetrate what the game's tutorial calls "the weakest point of the armor". Giving it numerous weaker zones is definitely a step in the right direction.

 

Proposed Fix: I would suggest adding in some kind of weakpoint, albeit relatively small, at the front of the tank as well; with about 110mm of effective armor. In its current state, some tanks are still required to resort to firing Premium ammunition at the O-I; especially if the matchup puts them in a tight city brawl with the only real chance of victory being to take out the enemy's O-I.

 


 

O-I Experimental: Very Good Changes

 

Explanation: The O-I Experimental in its current state simply does not reflect how the rest of the tank line plays out, and is a combination of excessively strong vehicle characteristics. Removing the 105mm (Called 10cm in-game) gun is definitely a correct decision, as it was undoubtedly far too much alpha damage for a Tier 5 tank with so much mobility and armor. Reducing the mobility and increasing the armor effectiveness, will make it a more "proper" Tier 5 heavy tank, and better fit the playstyle of a heavy tank as well as fit the playstyle of the rest of the Japanese heavy tank line.

 

Proposed Fix: Make the mini-turrets on the front of the tank approximately 90mm effective armor, so that KV-2's and O-I's won't be penetrating the front of it with HE shells. They'll still be a sufficient weakpoint for most tanks, but also will stop the tank from constantly being one-shot (Which is going to be more of a problem when the tank doesn't have the mobility to get into cover).



Scorpiany #52 Posted Jun 21 2017 - 11:04

    Major

  • Community Contributor
  • 29482 battles
  • 10,683
  • [N1NJA] N1NJA
  • Member since:
    06-27-2013

View PostScrubIord, on Jun 20 2017 - 20:32, said:

WG needs to kick out its supertesting team and get a new one

Can someone explain to me how this is possible?

Spoiler

 

 

You're comparing it to an HE shell, and pointing it at a spot where the shell goes through spaced armor, and proceeds a significant distance to the armor behind it. Spaced armor is HE's worst nightmare.

 

That being said, the spaced armor on these tanks can get quite silly. If their specialty is that they can't be tracked and damaged with the same shot, make the rest of the side penetrable behind the spaced armor. Alternatively, leave the rest of the spaced armor as strong as it is now, but remove it from the area nearby the track wheels; to allow damaging tracking shots. One or the other; not both.



KingofDragons #53 Posted Jun 21 2017 - 18:33

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 15611 battles
  • 200
  • Member since:
    05-14-2011
Keep nerfing till people don't play them anymore.. Than players will be posting about not seeing this tank or that tank anymore and wondering why .. 

Avalon304 #54 Posted Jun 21 2017 - 18:41

    Major

  • Players
  • 15729 battles
  • 5,746
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

View PostKingofDragons, on Jun 21 2017 - 10:33, said:

Keep nerfing till people don't play them anymore.. Than players will be posting about not seeing this tank or that tank anymore and wondering why .. 

 

Im sorry that balancing the game means your broken tanks wont be as broken as they currently are. I dont expect you to understand... but the current state of the Type 4 and 5 is BAD for game balance. If you cant see that, there is no helping you.

Vampiresbane #55 Posted Jun 21 2017 - 18:59

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 22668 battles
  • 906
  • [MEDIC] MEDIC
  • Member since:
    06-27-2011

Those aren't "weak" spots Dance.  Those are changes that will it easier to pen with gold ammo.

 

260 base armor (without angling) is such a high armor value the following tier X tanks can't pen it with regular ammo:

 

Light tanks (none can pen 260 as a "weak spot):

  • AMX 13 105 - 234 base pen
  • Rheinmetall Panzerwagen -242
  • 100 LT - 230
  • wz-132-1 - 246
  • M551 Sheridan - 236

Medium tanks (only including non reward tanks):

  • 121 -258
  • Amx 30B - 260* (Technically this could pen it 50% of the time, but that's if the tank is not angled AT ALL)
  • Bat Chat - 259
  • Centurion Action X - 268 
  • E50M - 270
  • Leo - 268
  • M48A1 Patton - 268 
  • Obj 140 -264
  • Stb1 - 258
  • T-62a - 264
  • TVP 50/51 - 248

 

Heavy Tanks (No heavy can pen armor value of 260 reliably (ie >50%) with regular ammo)
 

  • 113 - 249
  • AMX 50 B - 257
  • E100 - 246
  • FV215B - 259
  • IS-4 - 258
  • IS-7 - 250
  • Kranvagn - 252
  • Maus - 246
  • Pz.Kpfw. VII - 258
  • T110E5 - 258
  • T57 Heavy Tank - 258
  • Type 5 - 249 (lel, can't pen itself from the front even with "weak spots" )

Tank Destroyers:  (All X Tds can pen 260 armor if not angled.)

  • AMX 50 Foch (155) - 293
  • FV215b (183) - 310
  • FV4005 Stage II - 310
  • Grille 15 - 279
  • Jagdpanzer E 100 - 299
  • Object 263 - 290
  • Object 268 - 303
  • Strv 103B - 308
  • T110E3 - 295
  • T110E4 - 295

 

 

And mind you, this isn't including a weak spot that's weak enough for tier 8 and 9's to pen if aiming correctly, this is thinking ONLY about tier X's.  So that's 16/38 or 42% of tier X tanks that can pen 260 armor while it's flat.  Conclusion: 260 armor is not a weak spot.  Not for Tier X's.  Not for Tier IX's.  Not for Tier VIII's.


 

Did your balancing team actually look at these values or just decide to throw a teeny, tiny armor nerf at us to placate us and call it "balance"?  This is silly.



ScrubIord #56 Posted Jun 21 2017 - 22:49

    Captain

  • Players
  • 27945 battles
  • 1,081
  • [-G-] -G-
  • Member since:
    03-31-2012

View PostScorpiany, on Jun 21 2017 - 05:04, said:

 

You're comparing it to an HE shell, and pointing it at a spot where the shell goes through spaced armor, and proceeds a significant distance to the armor behind it. Spaced armor is HE's worst nightmare.

 

That being said, the spaced armor on these tanks can get quite silly. If their specialty is that they can't be tracked and damaged with the same shot, make the rest of the side penetrable behind the spaced armor. Alternatively, leave the rest of the spaced armor as strong as it is now, but remove it from the area nearby the track wheels; to allow damaging tracking shots. One or the other; not both.

Effective armor has nothing to do with shell type, go pick a 183, 4005 or Maus and run the HE shell in tanks.gg. None of the tanks have an effective armor of 1000+mm at a single spot. The japanese tanks have broken armor.



Scorpiany #57 Posted Jun 21 2017 - 23:02

    Major

  • Community Contributor
  • 29482 battles
  • 10,683
  • [N1NJA] N1NJA
  • Member since:
    06-27-2013

View PostScrubIord, on Jun 21 2017 - 14:49, said:

Effective armor has nothing to do with shell type, go pick a 183, 4005 or Maus and run the HE shell in tanks.gg. None of the tanks have an effective armor of 1000+mm at a single spot. The japanese tanks have broken armor.

 

Yes it does. HE / HESH and HEAT shells passing through spaced armor lose substantial penetration when passing through such a sheet. This results in substantially more effective armor. A lack of any normalization or possibility of overmatching the outer layer of armor, further increases its effectiveness.

 

Go to that same spot with any other gun on tanks.gg. I did yesterday - Nothing came close to 1,000mm except for HE.



ScrubIord #58 Posted Jun 21 2017 - 23:13

    Captain

  • Players
  • 27945 battles
  • 1,081
  • [-G-] -G-
  • Member since:
    03-31-2012

View PostScorpiany, on Jun 21 2017 - 17:02, said:

 

Yes it does. HE / HESH and HEAT shells passing through spaced armor lose substantial penetration when passing through such a sheet. This results in substantially more effective armor. A lack of any normalization or possibility of overmatching the outer layer of armor, further increases its effectiveness.

 

Go to that same spot with any other gun on tanks.gg. I did yesterday - Nothing came close to 1,000mm except for HE.

 

I would highly recommend you to go read about effective armor because you are still wrong, It has nothing to do with Shell type. Effective armor means how strong the armor is at the angle at which you are looking at it

Couple of definitions for it:  The value a shell will need to penetrate after the armor’s thickness, vertical angle, and horizontal angle are factored in.

The equivalent amount of flat armor required to match the amount of penetration your armor will shield against. e.g. 120mm at a 30 degree angle from the horizontal has an effective armor value of 240mm against HEAT rounds. The HE round does not change the angle of the armor meaning it does not change the effective armor.

and here i proved you wrong again.

with AP round



Scorpiany #59 Posted Jun 21 2017 - 23:24

    Major

  • Community Contributor
  • 29482 battles
  • 10,683
  • [N1NJA] N1NJA
  • Member since:
    06-27-2013

View PostScrubIord, on Jun 21 2017 - 15:13, said:

 

I would highly recommend you to go read about effective armor because you are still wrong, It has nothing to do with Shell type. Effective armor means how strong the armor is at the angle at which you are looking at it

Couple of definitions for it:  The value a shell will need to penetrate after the armor’s thickness, vertical angle, and horizontal angle are factored in.

The equivalent amount of flat armor required to match the amount of penetration your armor will shield against. e.g. 120mm at a 30 degree angle from the horizontal has an effective armor value of 240mm against HEAT rounds. The HE round does not change the angle of the armor meaning it does not change the effective armor.

and here i proved you wrong again.

Spoiler

with AP round

 

You didn't prove me wrong. The icons on the bottom do nothing to actually affect shell type. It's still calculating it as though it's HE.

 

How about you use the "Compare" tab, instead of trying to farce HE to fit your narrative? I agree that the balancing team makes questionable decisions, but come on man. At least try to use factual data to represent your arguement.

 

And if you do read up on penetrate mechanics, as I've actually done, you'll see that spaced armor substantially affects shell penetration per millimeter of armor passed through. This effect is greater for HEAT / HE / HESH, than it is for AP.


Edited by Scorpiany, Jun 22 2017 - 00:01.


ScrubIord #60 Posted Jun 21 2017 - 23:41

    Captain

  • Players
  • 27945 battles
  • 1,081
  • [-G-] -G-
  • Member since:
    03-31-2012

View PostScorpiany, on Jun 21 2017 - 17:24, said:

 

You didn't prove me wrong. The icons on the bottom do nothing to actually affect shell type. It's still calculating it as though it's HE.

 

How about you use the "Compare" tab, instead of trying to farce HE to fit your narrative? I agree that the balancing team makes questionable decisions, but come on man. At least try to use factual data to represent your arguement.

 

And if you do read up on penetrate mechanics, as I've actually done, you'll see that spaced armor substantially affects shell penetrate per millimeter of armor passed through. This effect is greater for HEAT / HE / HESH, than it is for AP.

 

I know spaced armor will increase effectiveness, I assumed you said shell type increased effectiveness.

Still tracks or not 550mm+ effectiveness against 215b apcr is stupid






8 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 8 guests, 0 anonymous users