Jump to content


[CT] 9.20.1 Common Test Feedback


  • Please log in to reply
100 replies to this topic

CabbageMechanic #1 Posted Sep 21 2017 - 00:48

    Senior Community Manager

  • Administrator
  • 9068 battles
  • 8,388,607
  • [WGA] WGA
  • Member since:
    09-19-2010
Hey Tankers,

Please let us know what you think of the 9.20.1 Common Test build.  Information on changes available below:

Vehicle Rebalances
Bonds and Medals
 

Edited by CabbageMechanic, Sep 21 2017 - 22:49.


zanzan #2 Posted Sep 22 2017 - 00:02

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 25892 battles
  • 105
  • Member since:
    01-30-2011
What is the release date of the 9.20.1 update?

Edited by zanzan, Sep 22 2017 - 00:03.


boxters #3 Posted Sep 22 2017 - 00:06

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 24085 battles
  • 25
  • [200IQ] 200IQ
  • Member since:
    07-21-2012

the buff for the british was needed but as usual you forget the Cheiftain/T95 that really need a buff more than any other british med and what is your probleme you replace my beloved FV215B for the super conqueror ok at least i keep it but why does the super conqueror have less HP than the FV215B had less DPM and have a longer aiming time ....  if you want to replace something don't make it worst gun wise ! and after trying it for at least 30 battle my conclusion are simple.

1. lack of DPM , you replace an awesome tank with a tank with less dpm and less hit point to trade with the enemy if needed. without forgetting a bit worst gun handling.

2. That atrocity on the top of the turret need to be buff or like the chrysler K there but not modeled as part of weak spot or didnt inflict damage when hit cause when i saw that i was like weird i clicked on super conq not on foch 155 or foch B !

3.  Why would i play the tier 9 but a tier 10 with just minor difference in armor and gun?  Make no sense ! you are replacing something but for now replacing it by something that need as much buff as the FV215B need so why dont you just buff the FV and don't put the Super Conqueror ?

4. you are always telling that when you are replacing a tank you go with the perfect tank to suit this line and the most logical ..... well if we take a look at british tank history you should replace the tier 9 conqueror by the super Conqueror and put the chieftain MK6 as the tier 10 so you would fallow your logic and be more accurate for once in term of history ! and for once you fisrt choice for replacing the FV215B was the best one ( chieftain mk6) and when you planned to replace it by the chieftain MK6 all the stat where better : the gun ,the armor, the speed even the gun depression wich was logical for a replacement for the FV215B no like that tier9 Super Conqueror you are trying to make us believe have his place as a tier 10


 

So basicly you should just do my point number 4 and more people will play heavy british tank and you will make happy the current owner so IMO it's win-win scenario.


Edited by boxters, Sep 23 2017 - 18:58.


Sic_Transit_Gloria #4 Posted Sep 22 2017 - 00:19

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 15583 battles
  • 193
  • Member since:
    11-18-2014

The bonds rewarded seems really low. Just look at the battle results in the 9.20.1 video.

 

"Congratulations! you killed over six tanks, including three artillery, stood alone against at least five enemies and won, and did the most damage in the battle. Your reward is 22 bonds. Only another 4978 bonds to go before you can get something actually useful!"

 

If you can earn 10 bonds from epic achievements per battle, it'll only be 500 battles before you can do something with them.

 

The rare medals ought to have a far higher reward. Maybe 50 or 100 bonds for a Kolobanovs.



Jaspo #5 Posted Sep 22 2017 - 01:18

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 30393 battles
  • 462
  • Member since:
    03-12-2015

hahahaha hahahaha

 

That's a good one, 1 bond for a top gun.

 

hahahaha

 

Funniest joke this year, wg

 

Ok, so just how ridiculous is this? Lets do the math.

 

Improved gun laying drive is 5000 bonds. Improved. Standard gun laying drive for a tier 10 is 500000 credits. So 1 bond is worth less than 100 credits. So you're awarding us the equivalent of  less than 100 additional credits for a top gun. And with a straight face too. Shameful.

 

Multiply these numbers by 10 and it might make it worth the effort you spent to implement it. Multiply them by 100 and it might actually feel like an award.

 

Along the same lines, bond payout for tier 10 battles is also, if not quite equally, pitiful. In no way does it make up for the net credit loss at this point.

 

And lastly, ditch the improved equipment and directives. Instead make bonds the currency (or at least an alternate currency) for converting free experience and demounting complex equipment and changing usernames and starting clans and such. All those maintenance tasks that are using gold but shouldn't be.


Edited by Jaspo, Sep 22 2017 - 05:06.


Avalon304 #6 Posted Sep 22 2017 - 01:20

    Major

  • Players
  • 21925 battles
  • 9,312
  • [BRVE] BRVE
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

Super Conqueror still garbage. Slow. Armor is meh. Gun is meh.

 

Centurion turret buffs still terrible. Doesnt actually help against anyone willing to press 2.

 

Conway and FV4005 will probably become OP, because someone thought average MT mobility and great gun depression were good things to give tanks capable of dumping 770+ or 1150+ damage regularly.



Zolann #7 Posted Sep 22 2017 - 01:28

    Private

  • Players
  • 16258 battles
  • 4
  • [W0LF-] W0LF-
  • Member since:
    08-11-2013
nice going on missing 6 British tanks that need buffs really bad lets name them shall we the Churchill 1 is too slow no armor and the gun is crap and it stand no chance against tier 6 tanks let alone tier 7 tanks next is the Churchill 7 same thing as the Churchill 1 little better turret armor slightly slower fire rate weaker hull armor and it sees tier 8s so much worse than the churchill1 next is the black prince its the exact same tank and the Churchill 7 slightly higher pen with a stupid long reload slightly better turret armor but nowhere near enough and its tier 7 so it sees tier 9s and stupid low alpha for a tier 7 so called heavy tank the massive problems with all three of these is the have to face tier 7-9 super heavies that they cant do a damn thing to while the roof on the hull in front of the turret gets over matched like nothing making all three of these so called heavies pointless massive cash grabs then we have the at-8 and at-7 stupid slow tds that are just giant weak spots with terrible gun placements with 202 mm same as the at-2 with slightly better guns and the armor is only on a few parts of the front hull but it doesn't matter since the face a ton of tanks the have 210+ pen which is more than enough to pen any part of your armor and they are so easy to out flank since there guns are in such terrible spots then we move on to the at-15 225mm armor for tier 8 and that's just around the gun its got a better position for the gun and the gun is good but the rest of the tank is horrifyingly terrible theses three tds are also massive cash grabs and the tortoises armor has massive wholes in the front armor but its still a good tank cause of its amazing gun and dpm now you keep buffing tier mediums yet you keep forgetting the horrible perishing it has terrible armor the so called upgraded turret is worse than the stock cause it has no gun mantel just a stupid bag the gun is horrible in every way its mobility is lacking hard in every way and now to the m48 Patton it needs its gun depression buffed to -10degrees now to the t110e5 it needs to be un nerfed and that's including its cupola and don't say it doesn't cause you have over powered cupolas on teir 8 and 9 tanks the bounce gold round with 297+ pen like it was nothing and it needs its side armor buffed from 76 to at least 100m so it can actually side scrape now to the t28 prototype it needs its hp buffed to the same at the t28 1500 then it needs its hull armor rounded again or in crease its hull armor and its turret needs to have a slight armor buff to at least 215mm to give it a better chance to bounce shots at range and now to every 120mm gun on a heavy at tier and 10 needs their alpha damage increased to 440 just like the 122mms at tier and 10 to be more competitive with the super heavies that have 128mm+ guns and with the 122mm+ heavies

CloneSociety #8 Posted Sep 22 2017 - 01:33

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 19936 battles
  • 165
  • [DYNO] DYNO
  • Member since:
    07-29-2013

Directives are just worthless in my opinion and I simply ignore them.  There's no reason to use them outside of competitive play. The bond rewards for medals are so small they can't even cover the cost of some directives.

I'm not a fan of the refusal to make bond rewards for medals retroactive. Just out of curiosity I figured out I would have between 1,363-3,188 bonds if the system was retroactive.
 

Upgraded equipment costs 3K, 4K, or 5K.  I, at best, would be able to afford an upgraded repair kit.  It's the only equipment valued at 3k.

I understand there are accounts out there that would get stupid amounts of bonds, but equipment is expensive enough that I think it would be rare for people to be able to get anything more than a couple pieces of equipment at these values.  I don't think the argument stands that it would mess with the economy at the current values given that players have been able to get far more bonds from the Rank Battle tests.  I could see an issue if the values for medals were upped, but, personally, I would push for retroactive.



3025_griffin #9 Posted Sep 22 2017 - 03:36

    Private

  • -Players-
  • 47880 battles
  • 7
  • [ZSF] ZSF
  • Member since:
    01-29-2016

well i gotta say i like most of it so far,

  But, the bonds issue needs to be increased.i mean to get any of the new improved equipment u need to fight like a ton of games to get a few smidgeons of them. either increase the bond payout or decrease the special improved equipment cost.

 

another thing, the tier 10 german light still has horrible accuracy. and its ability to spot for its tier is pathetic.                                                                                                                                                                                                                            



Masauwu #10 Posted Sep 22 2017 - 03:36

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 641 battles
  • 17
  • Member since:
    05-02-2013
  • (edited - i see now that you can unlock by completing perfect set with honors) Personal campaign camouflage sets: limiting them to the reward tank only makes their usefulness almost non-existent. Given how long and difficult it is to obtain them please extend their availability to either all tanks of the same nation or all tanks of the same type (TD, MT etc.); or alternatively you can make them as unlocks for any tank that players can apply with gold, making them bring some extra revenue for you. 
  • TD-15 personal mission for Obj.260: was already the most difficult mission to complete and this patch plans to make it even harder if not impossible for many by upping the secondary conditions, please revisit this change or at least decrease the 8000 damage requirement so you get more chances at coupling the main + secondary objectives.
  • Super Conqueror: was disappointing for me, in its current state i see no reason to play this tank over its tier 10 alternatives, low mobility + ineffective armor = very frustrating combination. It gets ammo rack damage a lot from shots in the frontal hull which is a very bad thing for a heavy tank. Big cupola weakspot on top of the turret, which is very easy to hit because the roof angles forward; and 17mm thick engine deck that makes it a prime victim for artillery. 
  • Small new bug in general chat window in garage, everytime you open it now starts from the beginning of the chat and quickly scrolls down to the current position, instead of opening directly to the current position.

Edited by Masauwu, Sep 22 2017 - 10:10.


3025_griffin #11 Posted Sep 22 2017 - 03:42

    Private

  • -Players-
  • 47880 battles
  • 7
  • [ZSF] ZSF
  • Member since:
    01-29-2016
i have a good question. why was the SPIC auto-loader removed, and its speed nerfed? i mean it wasnt OP by any means.

Avalon304 #12 Posted Sep 22 2017 - 05:24

    Major

  • Players
  • 21925 battles
  • 9,312
  • [BRVE] BRVE
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

View PostMasauwu, on Sep 21 2017 - 19:36, said:

  • Personal campaign camouflage sets: limiting them to the reward tank only makes their usefulness almost non-existent. Given how long and difficult it is to obtain them please extend their availability to either all tanks of the same nation or all tanks of the same type (TD, MT etc.); or alternatively you can make them as unlocks for any tank that players can apply with gold, making them bring some extra revenue for you. 

 

To unlock the PM camos for the nations you have to complete all missions with honors in each operation. (So completing all 75 missions for the T28 HTC with honors will unlock the camos for the USA, ditto StuG and T-55A for Germany and Obj. 260 for Russia). Just unlocking the camos for the reward tanks only requires completing all 75 missions for that tank... which is not hard (literally unlocking a tank by completing all missions gets you the camos for that tank).



CloneSociety #13 Posted Sep 22 2017 - 05:25

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 19936 battles
  • 165
  • [DYNO] DYNO
  • Member since:
    07-29-2013

View PostMasauwu, on Sep 21 2017 - 18:36, said:

  • Personal campaign camouflage sets: limiting them to the reward tank only makes their usefulness almost non-existent. Given how long and difficult it is to obtain them please extend their availability to either all tanks of the same nation or all tanks of the same type (TD, MT etc.); or alternatively you can make them as unlocks for any tank that players can apply with gold, making them bring some extra revenue for you. 
  • TD-15 personal mission for Obj.260: was already the most difficult mission to complete and this patch plans to make it even harder if not impossible for many by upping the secondary conditions, please revisit this change or at least decrease the 8000 damage requirement so you get more chances at coupling the main + secondary objectives.
  • Super Conqueror: was disappointing for me, in its current state i see no reason to play this tank over its tier 10 alternatives, low mobility + ineffective armor = very frustrating combination. It gets ammo rack damage a lot from shots in the frontal hull which is a very bad thing for a heavy tank. Big cupola weakspot on top of the turret, which is very easy to hit because the roof angles forward; and 17mm thick engine deck that makes it a prime victim for artillery. 
  • Small new bug in general chat window in garage, everytime you open it now starts from the beginning of the chat and quickly scrolls down to the current position, instead of opening directly to the current position.

 

If you complete all the missions for a vehicle with honors the camos are supposed to be made available to any tank of the same nation. IE completing all the T28 HTC missions with honors should make the camos available to US tanks. Not sure if it's one use or multiple uses.



Cpt_Schummdaddy #14 Posted Sep 22 2017 - 07:02

    Private

  • Players
  • 13903 battles
  • 2
  • [5GTD] 5GTD
  • Member since:
    04-04-2014

PREM rounds need to cost more. Just to teach people not to spam it. Other wise the test was good.

 



POLIZEI110 #15 Posted Sep 22 2017 - 07:25

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 55867 battles
  • 335
  • Member since:
    03-16-2012

As for the Type 59 buffs, they are a joke and does nothing for it, so the gun handling improves, but is pointless since it will still only have a 181mm pen gun, I have tier 6 and 7's that have better pen.

Without that single most important need, I have no choice to continue to use it for rush scouting only.

Btw, I don't use gold, so spare me the gold bla bla bla.



_Pitohui_ #16 Posted Sep 22 2017 - 11:07

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 19542 battles
  • 18
  • Member since:
    06-13-2013

HD STB-1

What The F..K man ? what is wrong with developers ?

Can't believe they made STB-1 extreme prototype

Real prototype never looks like that

That leather face turret was the 1st testing turret "IN THE FACTORY" it never attach to "that" hull

and devs put them together....

Why RU WG devs hate Japanese medium tank so much ? Just because those tanks were built to counter Soviet tanks ?

WG devs made their fantasy vehicle really good but made actual exist vehicle bad

Here is the link "History of Type 74"

http://tankguy.goosi...e74History.html

 



peraltaluis #17 Posted Sep 22 2017 - 12:09

    Private

  • -Players-
  • 14302 battles
  • 1
  • [SHEEN] SHEEN
  • Member since:
    01-21-2013
PLS BUFF THE t-54 FIRST PROTOTYPE IT HAS A TIER 7 GUN AND IS A TIER 8 !!!!! GOIN AGAINST TIER 10S

_Pitohui_ #18 Posted Sep 22 2017 - 13:15

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 19542 battles
  • 18
  • Member since:
    06-13-2013

View Postperaltaluis, on Sep 22 2017 - 21:09, said:

PLS BUFF THE t-54 FIRST PROTOTYPE IT HAS A TIER 7 GUN AND IS A TIER 8 !!!!! GOIN AGAINST TIER 10S

 

Same on M46 KR bro it's tier 8 and has tier 7 gun

_Pitohui_ #19 Posted Sep 22 2017 - 13:30

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 19542 battles
  • 18
  • Member since:
    06-13-2013

Since WG says Type 59 is out dated, have they ever think about STB-1 ?

Current days ANY Tier 10 medium tank can out run a STB-1 without any trouble

STB-1 use to have highest dpm in 105 gun but after AMX 30 B gets buff it does not.

Current STB-1 no longer has ANY advantage ( not even the looking after 9.20.1 )

M48 Patton had buff

Leopard 1 had buff (long time ago)

Soviet 3 brothers always get buffs

Centurion AX had buff

AMX 30B had buff

BC 25t had buff

121 had buff

TVP 50/51 needs buff

STB-1 the only tier 10 med that never gets any buff (except 9.20.1 with useless frontal turret armor increase from 132 to 192 [it still gets penetrated easily] )

yet, it's out dated and RU WG devs don't give a sh*t



_Hatsune__Miku_ #20 Posted Sep 22 2017 - 13:57

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 33769 battles
  • 965
  • Member since:
    05-23-2011

Super Conqueror was a complete disappointment....

Slow, barn size weak spot on front, huge weak spot on turret & laughable hull armor.

worst gun than current FV (aim time and dpm)

overall I am glad we can keep the FV, the S.Conq. on this state is not worth it






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users