Jump to content


Should pref MM tier 8s get some sort of a buff?

China Russia Germany France Heavy 112 Wz111 IS6

  • Please log in to reply
34 replies to this topic

Poll: What buffs should pref MM tanks get if any? (56 members have cast votes)

You have to complete 100 battles in order to participate this poll.

Should tanks like the T-34-3, 112, IS-6 and the WZ-111 get buffs to compensate for the new meta?

  1. Aim time Decrease (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  2. Dispersion Decrease (1 vote [1.79%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 1.79%

  3. Slight Pen Buff (32 votes [57.14%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 57.14%

  4. Reload Decrease (2 votes [3.57%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 3.57%

  5. No buff they're fine stop crying! (21 votes [37.50%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 37.50%

Vote Hide poll

misterwit #21 Posted Aug 23 2017 - 03:04

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 12756 battles
  • 703
  • [NOKAP] NOKAP
  • Member since:
    06-15-2011

View PostMountainLion1, on Aug 23 2017 - 01:26, said:

All the Tier VIII premium heavy tanks with 175 or less pen needs a penetration buff. The super pershing is a medium and it has 192, the heavies should have at least this much penetration.

 

Why? The super pershing is basically a heavy and probably the worst tank to make the "mediums have it better argument". It's accuracy is horrid and it's armor is gimmicky. Not to mention 90mm at tier 8 is pretty lame for a tank that moves like a T95.

Firemoth #22 Posted Aug 23 2017 - 10:29

    Major

  • Players
  • 35545 battles
  • 3,445
  • Member since:
    05-21-2011
KV-5 would be ok if its tumors were removed.

OldFrog75 #23 Posted Aug 23 2017 - 12:02

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 7249 battles
  • 1,584
  • [WCTNT] WCTNT
  • Member since:
    02-23-2017
If you buff the VIII's then they will be OP when they MM against VI's and VII's.  Better to leave it as it is - challenging against IX's but not excessively OP against lower tiers.

Blackstone #24 Posted Aug 23 2017 - 12:42

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 8432 battles
  • 551
  • [-AK-] -AK-
  • Member since:
    04-19-2011

View PostCapPhrases, on Aug 22 2017 - 11:36, said:

recent interview they mentioned looking at removing the pref mm and buffing them but they're still considering options

 

Yep, I read that too. If they go with removing preferred MM, then one of two things will happen:

1. slight buffs to make them competative

2. do nothing

 

 

From what I've seen of WG, it'll probably be #2. So the Super Pershing, for example, will be more worthless than ever.



OldFrog75 #25 Posted Aug 23 2017 - 12:56

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 7249 battles
  • 1,584
  • [WCTNT] WCTNT
  • Member since:
    02-23-2017

View PostCapPhrases, on Aug 22 2017 - 17:36, said:

recent interview they mentioned looking at removing the pref mm and buffing them but they're still considering options

 

Would that be for all Pref MM or just the Tier VIII's?  Seems like that would upset all the players who bought Premium tanks specifically for the Pref MM status - which is probably just about everybody.  :popcorn:

Edited by OldFrog75, Aug 23 2017 - 12:58.


SturmButcher #26 Posted Aug 23 2017 - 14:15

    Captain

  • Players
  • 37688 battles
  • 1,615
  • [11A_D] 11A_D
  • Member since:
    02-05-2011
I said go to hell, you only want to have premiums buffed but not nerfed, so no, keep it in that way, its better for us that WG nerf some OP premiums re-balancing other tanks. Defender is OP for example and how WG nerf it? buffing other and leaving that crap in the dust, you wanted this way crying for premium nerfs. Wg will not touch the stats you bought and you complain instead they are going to buff what they can buff to nerf it indirectly.

Komitadjie #27 Posted Aug 23 2017 - 14:28

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 1030 battles
  • 832
  • [HHOUR] HHOUR
  • Member since:
    11-10-2011
Would sure like to see my Super Pershing get some love. The buff on the gun pen was nice, but still feels really weak against 9s, maybe could use some accuracy, so it can hit weak spots reliably to compensate for the low alpha and pen for tier? And the frontal armor has been crept a bit and is kinda gimmicky.  EVERYONE knows *exactly* where the turret roof and the humongous MG port are.

I'd honestly rather see it buffed up to have usable pen on the gun, the frontal armor restored to being tough as hell, and the pref MM removed.  I can live with the super slow speed, but I need something to go with it. The frontal armor's near invulnerability was supposed to be that "something", but...

FelixTactx #28 Posted Aug 23 2017 - 14:37

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 7447 battles
  • 63
  • [STL_T] STL_T
  • Member since:
    02-28-2014
Let's be honest, removing the premium MM from these tanks would cause a lot of backfire on WG. They could give us an option to trade these old tanks for a newer premium tank similar to it. I'm not saying lets trade IS-6s and KV-5s for defenders, but trade them for an equal value tank or tanks.

teamoldmill #29 Posted Aug 23 2017 - 14:41

    Major

  • Players
  • 14284 battles
  • 11,117
  • Member since:
    03-19-2011

View PostKomitadjie, on Aug 23 2017 - 13:28, said:

Would sure like to see my Super Pershing get some love. The buff on the gun pen was nice, but still feels really weak against 9s, maybe could use some accuracy, so it can hit weak spots reliably to compensate for the low alpha and pen for tier? And the frontal armor has been crept a bit and is kinda gimmicky. EVERYONE knows *exactly* where the turret roof and the humongous MG port are.

I'd honestly rather see it buffed up to have usable pen on the gun, the frontal armor restored to being tough as hell, and the pref MM removed. I can live with the super slow speed, but I need something to go with it. The frontal armor's near invulnerability was supposed to be that "something", but...

 

It bounces 40% of shots that hit it. 16 T8 heavy tanks, Lowe and Tiger II included, bounce less. How tough do you want it to be?

Komitadjie #30 Posted Aug 23 2017 - 14:57

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 1030 battles
  • 832
  • [HHOUR] HHOUR
  • Member since:
    11-10-2011

View Postteamoldmill, on Aug 23 2017 - 14:41, said:

 

It bounces 40% of shots that hit it. 16 T8 heavy tanks, Lowe and Tiger II included, bounce less. How tough do you want it to be?

 

Given that both the Lowe (which I have and love) and the Tiger 2 both have decent guns to go along with the armor, they're not one-trick ponies.  They're also both MORE mobile than the SP, as HEAVY tanks.

 

I'd like either a frontal protection that's on par for tier with a super-heavy (albeit with medium flank and rear armor), or a gun that's on par with another heavy, since that's how the tank plays.  It feels badly miss-cast as a medium, I'm literally out-run by heavies.  I'd also be happy if they'd just remove the enormous MG port weakspot.  It's slow enough that if you try to actually hold a corner and USE the frontal armor, you take one through the port almost immediately, while your little popgun bounces rounds off of their frontal plates.  This tank feels like it's SUPPOSED to be a frontal blocker, something to hold a corridor against a few tanks, and is supposed to be killed from the flanks.  But the low gun pen and armor weakspots kinda keep it from excelling at that roll. It's too slow to be a flanker, and too inaccurate and low pen to be a sniper...  What the heck IS it?

 

One other thing to think about? Most of those heavies don't have pref MM, so they see tier 10 guns with a ton more pen, so I'd expect less bounces overall.  Ironically, my survival rate and damage per battle are a TON better in the Lowe than in the SP, even without the pref MM.


Edited by Komitadjie, Aug 23 2017 - 15:06.


flowerpower210 #31 Posted Aug 23 2017 - 17:47

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 19196 battles
  • 388
  • [TUF] TUF
  • Member since:
    02-25-2011
How about we give the IS-6 the defender's gun?

Yankee #32 Posted Aug 23 2017 - 17:54

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 33644 battles
  • 9,814
  • [-G-] -G-
  • Member since:
    08-02-2010
Then how would they sell defenders?

jajanaboczku #33 Posted Aug 23 2017 - 18:05

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 49678 battles
  • 458
  • [PL1AD] PL1AD
  • Member since:
    06-17-2011
Not a matter of should they.
All this tanks will need a whole range of buffs in some cases to make them competitive at tier 10.

_Juris #34 Posted Aug 23 2017 - 18:11

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 15333 battles
  • 485
  • [VILIN] VILIN
  • Member since:
    10-03-2013

View PostYankee, on Aug 23 2017 - 11:54, said:

Then how would they sell defenders?

 

By buffing the Defender's armor and gun, obviously.  Kappa.

Faster_Blaster #35 Posted Aug 23 2017 - 18:15

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 23042 battles
  • 268
  • [ROGER] ROGER
  • Member since:
    04-20-2015
Accuracy buff is enough for soviet-Chinese tanks. I do well in my T-34-3 and never shot a HEAT shell. 112 on the other hand, compared to T-34-3, needs "something" to stay on par.





Also tagged with China, Russia, Germany, France, Heavy, 112, Wz111, IS6

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users