Jump to content


* * * - - 2 votes

[9.20.1] Super Conqueror and Vehicle Balance Changes

9.20.1

  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

CabbageMechanic #1 Posted Oct 18 2017 - 20:04

    Community Coordinator

  • Administrator
  • 7280 battles
  • 195
  • [WGA-A] WGA-A
  • Member since:
    09-19-2010

Hey Tankers,

Let us know what you think of the new Tier X British Heavy and the 9.20.1 vehicle change here.  Notes available at the bottom of this post.

 

 



Eleven_Hotel #2 Posted Oct 18 2017 - 20:30

    Captain

  • Players
  • 79314 battles
  • 1,105
  • [VETS1] VETS1
  • Member since:
    02-03-2012
I did okay in my first battle. Battle would have been worse if I was in the FV 215B because lack of gun depression.

ChokeMe_WhipMe_Maika #3 Posted Oct 18 2017 - 20:40

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 10392 battles
  • 242
  • [NAISU] NAISU
  • Member since:
    06-26-2014
You guys will hit it hard with the nerf bat within an update or two. 

FrozenKemp #4 Posted Oct 18 2017 - 20:52

    Major

  • Players
  • 42662 battles
  • 4,673
  • Member since:
    04-24-2011
I think the Super Conq is everything I could want in a tier X British heavy.  Which means yeah, I expect you guys are going to nerf it.  Why did it get delivered with the same DPM as the FV215b?

Nudnick #5 Posted Oct 18 2017 - 21:38

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 21052 battles
  • 2,337
  • Member since:
    01-06-2013
Well, the Brit tanks have somewhat decent frontal armor now. I just bounced 11 shots off a Super Conqueror in my FV 4202, and bounced 6 of his. Now they just need to fix the gun handling.

CabbageMechanic #6 Posted Oct 19 2017 - 00:47

    Community Coordinator

  • Administrator
  • 7280 battles
  • 195
  • [WGA-A] WGA-A
  • Member since:
    09-19-2010

View PostZennosha, on Oct 18 2017 - 11:40, said:

You guys will hit it hard with the nerf bat within an update or two. 

 

What about the tank do you believe is overpowered?  What situations does it overperform in?

Edited by CabbageMechanic, Oct 19 2017 - 00:47.


Scorpiany #7 Posted Oct 19 2017 - 02:28

    Major

  • Community Contributor
  • 30221 battles
  • 11,050
  • [N1NJA] N1NJA
  • Member since:
    06-27-2013

View PostCabbageMechanic, on Oct 18 2017 - 16:47, said:

 

What about the tank do you believe is overpowered?  What situations does it overperform in?

 

It's a better T110E5. The only area in which the E5 performs better is mobility, and even there the differences are marginal at best, with the exception of acceleration.

 

The hull is only really worse on the lower plate, and the Super Conqueror's turret completely makes up for this (Especially with the gun depression & small cupola are factored in).

 

 

 

 

This isn't a new tactic. Tier 10 tank is overbuffed, despite statistics clearly showing that it's unreasonable, and it remains that way for several patches despite WG "knowing" about the issue.

 

The T110E5 buff wasn't an "accidental" bug. If that were the case, it would have been fixed sooner than a year. Maus and Type 5 Heavy were buffed to ridiculous levels despite massive criticisms; only to be nerfed later (Those nerfs never addressed the core issue of the tank either).

 

Grille 15 was introduced at a higher level than all Tier 10 TD's... Several patches later, conveniently nerfed. How unforeseeable. T-22 medium was literally marketed as a tank better in every way to Tier 10 mediums... Only to be nerfed into oblivion after the Rampage game mode died its painful death.

 

Frankly, it's tiring seeing this.


 

Here are the 3 biggest issues with the Super Conqueror, that are a symptom of many, many other tanks in the game at this point.

 

1) It's a god at hull-down. It's practically impenetrable, with great gun depression. Far too many tanks have been having their turrets buffed to practically impenetrable levels for same-Tier tanks...

 

2) Unless you shoot Gold shells. Many tanks in the game have Pay2Win weakspots. If you're shooting standard AP shells, good luck ever getting through the Super Conqueror's cupola... But as soon as you shoot HEAT, you can butter straight through it. T110E5 "weakpoint" on the cupola can be buttered only with Premium shells. The M48 Patton's, Centurion AX's turrets? Just load the Gold, you'll penetrate every time! Type 4 / Type 5 Heavy "nerfs" were really a laugh in the face of the community. They weren't an attempt at balancing the tanks, they were just a spiteful change to show how little WG actually cares. Those "weakpoints" are at absolute best a 50/50 to penetrate, assuming you're at point blank shooting straight at the tanks... An impractical scenario in most battles. To penetrate the "weakpoints", you have to shoot Premium ammo! Wow, what a surprise!

 

3) The over-saturation of gun depression. Not every tank needs to have 10 degrees or more of gun depression. Part of the premises of game balance used to be that some vehicles had inflexible gun characteristics, and had to be creatively positioned on the maps to be used well. Now on the other hand, 10 degrees is almost reaching the point of being "average". 8 degrees used to be a good gun depression value, 10 degrees was spectacular. Now it's just... Nothing special. All the British TD's had their gun depression doubled for some reason, the British heavies had a 45% increase in depression, Japanese heavies have 10, Swedish vehicles have more than 10. Even the Chinese tanks, notoriously known for having "bad" gun depression, now have 7 degrees on the WZ-111-5A and 113. This only furthers the issue of everything being great at hull-down - Now that seemingly every tank has great gun depression, weak hulls don't have to be exposed; only revealing practically impenetrable (Unless you shoot Premium) turrets!


 

Overall, if I could give WG's balancing department a -1, I would. But we can't even do that anymore, can we?


Edited by Scorpiany, Oct 19 2017 - 02:29.


TwinTanker #8 Posted Oct 19 2017 - 02:45

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 13610 battles
  • 667
  • [N1NJA] N1NJA
  • Member since:
    10-06-2013

View PostScorpiany, on Oct 18 2017 - 17:28, said:

 

It's a better T110E5. The only area in which the E5 performs better is mobility, and even there the differences are marginal at best, with the exception of acceleration.

 

The hull is only really worse on the lower plate, and the Super Conqueror's turret completely makes up for this (Especially with the gun depression & small cupola are factored in).

 

 

 

 

This isn't a new tactic. Tier 10 tank is overbuffed, despite statistics clearly showing that it's unreasonable, and it remains that way for several patches despite WG "knowing" about the issue.

 

The T110E5 buff wasn't an "accidental" bug. If that were the case, it would have been fixed sooner than a year. Maus and Type 5 Heavy were buffed to ridiculous levels despite massive criticisms; only to be nerfed later (Those nerfs never addressed the core issue of the tank either).

 

Grille 15 was introduced at a higher level than all Tier 10 TD's... Several patches later, conveniently nerfed. How unforeseeable. T-22 medium was literally marketed as a tank better in every way to Tier 10 mediums... Only to be nerfed into oblivion after the Rampage game mode died its painful death.

 

Frankly, it's tiring seeing this.


 

Here are the 3 biggest issues with the Super Conqueror, that are a symptom of many, many other tanks in the game at this point.

 

1) It's a god at hull-down. It's practically impenetrable, with great gun depression. Far too many tanks have been having their turrets buffed to practically impenetrable levels for same-Tier tanks...

 

2) Unless you shoot Gold shells. Many tanks in the game have Pay2Win weakspots. If you're shooting standard AP shells, good luck ever getting through the Super Conqueror's cupola... But as soon as you shoot HEAT, you can butter straight through it. T110E5 "weakpoint" on the cupola can be buttered only with Premium shells. The M48 Patton's, Centurion AX's turrets? Just load the Gold, you'll penetrate every time! Type 4 / Type 5 Heavy "nerfs" were really a laugh in the face of the community. They weren't an attempt at balancing the tanks, they were just a spiteful change to show how little WG actually cares. Those "weakpoints" are at absolute best a 50/50 to penetrate, assuming you're at point blank shooting straight at the tanks... An impractical scenario in most battles. To penetrate the "weakpoints", you have to shoot Premium ammo! Wow, what a surprise!

 

3) The over-saturation of gun depression. Not every tank needs to have 10 degrees or more of gun depression. Part of the premises of game balance used to be that some vehicles had inflexible gun characteristics, and had to be creatively positioned on the maps to be used well. Now on the other hand, 10 degrees is almost reaching the point of being "average". 8 degrees used to be a good gun depression value, 10 degrees was spectacular. Now it's just... Nothing special. All the British TD's had their gun depression doubled for some reason, the British heavies had a 45% increase in depression, Japanese heavies have 10, Swedish vehicles have more than 10. Even the Chinese tanks, notoriously known for having "bad" gun depression, now have 7 degrees on the WZ-111-5A and 113. This only furthers the issue of everything being great at hull-down - Now that seemingly every tank has great gun depression, weak hulls don't have to be exposed; only revealing practically impenetrable (Unless you shoot Premium) turrets!


 

Overall, if I could give WG's balancing department a -1, I would. But we can't even do that anymore, can we?

 

Bravo, +1. You covered almost everything.

 

To add to his third point, I think this is an issue, sure. But the bigger issue is that these new tanks, with ridiculous depression and turret armor, are completely outclassing current vehicles. Take, for example, the Leopard 1. This tank was solid, not broken, on release. It has -10 depression (yet still poor armor everywhere) and almost best in class speed and maneuverability. What else does it have? A solid gun if accuracy even mattered. Why play the Leopard 1, when every other damn tank can do a part of its job better, or the entire job better?



BananaCannon #9 Posted Oct 19 2017 - 02:55

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 22129 battles
  • 129
  • [MAHOU] MAHOU
  • Member since:
    10-28-2013

In the first iteration of the test server the super conqueror was balanced but kind of underwhelming and a complete departure from the rest of the line (gun was inaccurate, gun handling was bad).... making it more like the 215b was a positive change, but because armor of the Super Conqueror above the lower plate is so good, it can hulldown and demolish a flank with its 10 degrees of gun depression and upper/plate and turret which are a challenge to penetrate even with gold rounds.

 

It makes sense that the S. Conq. needs to be similar to the 215b.... but it cannot just be an armored 215b because it's overwhelming. It can face hug tanks and aim down into their upper plates. It can do the is-7 hulldown role. It has the dpm and accuracy to do support roles. It both can brawl and snipe with high dpm.

It seems clear that the armor is a unique attribute of the model of the tank, but nerfing the thickness of turret ring and fighting compartment would make it more balanced... much like the super pershing at tier 8 where you can aim for the gaps in the armor. The the vehicle can sidescrape without weakspots, even though most british vehicles should have weaker side armor. Having weak side armor and a protruding fighting compartment on the hull under the turret was a balancing feature of the 215b before it. It simply needs to have weakspots when its hull down. Currently its biggest weakspots are a thin turret ring which is 300+ and a mantlet which is 270mm and is hard to hit unless it turns its turret. If the areas that were not spaced armor were thinner I don't think it would be so overpowering.

I think nerfing the gaps in the armor is enough, but reducing its dpm so that it can't just press W and trade to win is probably a good idea considering how well armored it is. The gun handling and pen that make the tank comfortable can remain the same this way.



indoctrinated #10 Posted Oct 19 2017 - 03:12

    Major

  • Players
  • 20171 battles
  • 2,138
  • Member since:
    05-22-2012
Why did you give this tank 10 degrees of gun depression instead of the normal 7?

The_World_Needs_A_Hero #11 Posted Oct 19 2017 - 03:35

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 7053 battles
  • 1,176
  • Member since:
    07-27-2013

The tank is fine. Just like any other perceived strong tank, you'll have the initial panic of the player base that cannot figure out how to destroy it. We saw this with the Patriot and other tanks when they were introduced. The overall sluggishness of the tank offsets its great gun, depression, and turret armor. The area on top of the hull under the gun can be overmatched by 155mm guns. If you can't overmatch it, shoot HE below the gun and it will splash down and do a great deal of damage. I shot another S Conq. with my S Conq  below the gun and did 560 dmg with HE. So, that is an area that is going to be learned very quickly by opponents.  

 

Honestly, I think the tank is right where it needs to be. 



Avalon304 #12 Posted Oct 19 2017 - 05:05

    Major

  • Players
  • 16826 battles
  • 6,469
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

View PostCabbageMechanic, on Oct 18 2017 - 16:47, said:

 

What about the tank do you believe is overpowered?  What situations does it overperform in?

 

The combination of gun depression, dpm, gun handling and armor that requires gold to pen is the major issue.

 

Had it only 2 of the 4 it wouldnt be an issue.

 

~~~

 

The over saturation of good gun depression + plus turrets that now require gold and continued homogenization of tanks in this patch is also bad.

 

Not every tank needs to have a good turret. Not every tank needs -10 gun depression. Not even tank needs that exact combination of things either. The balance team is continually dropping the ball on tank balance. They did it with the Pattons last patch, and again with the Centurions this patch. The British TDs also dont deserve -10 depression as part of what balanced them was the fact that you had to actually think about your position. We need to revert a lot of the tank balance changes, going all the way back to the Maus changes because theyve all been terrible for the actual balance of this game.


Edited by Avalon304, Oct 19 2017 - 05:11.


Redwave11 #13 Posted Oct 19 2017 - 11:31

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 16707 battles
  • 494
  • [RIP-U] RIP-U
  • Member since:
    07-01-2015
I'm not sure how or why but i just can't get this tank to work for me. Played 5 battles and i have half the avg damage of my tier 9 conqueror. Hopefully its just RNG and i can get it to start behaving.

Hans_Mo1eman #14 Posted Oct 19 2017 - 15:24

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 7098 battles
  • 170
  • [GUNS2] GUNS2
  • Member since:
    12-16-2015

View PostAvalon304, on Oct 18 2017 - 21:05, said:

continued homogenization of tanks in this patch is also bad.

 

This. As others have mentioned too. Why remove a tank with a unique play style and replace it with something that copies the E5 (Patton and Cent too) but does it better because of smaller weakspots. Anyone else notice at the start of each teir 10 match 3 or 4 tanks on each side all clustering around the same few "hull down, gun depression" firing positions and pushing each other to get shots in. Karelia anyone? El hauf? Ponk? Airfield?

 

Also does anyone actually have a problem with thanks of the same line having a different playstyle or unique experience. WG keeps using the explanation that they want to "have the tank perdorm with the playstyle of other tanks in the line". Why is this important? To me it just makes the game more repetitive and boring as you grind up to teir 10.



Mikosah #15 Posted Oct 19 2017 - 17:51

    Major

  • Players
  • 17520 battles
  • 3,161
  • Member since:
    01-24-2013

View PostScorpiany, on Oct 18 2017 - 19:28, said:

3) The over-saturation of gun depression. Not every tank needs to have 10 degrees or more of gun depression. Part of the premises of game balance used to be that some vehicles had inflexible gun characteristics, and had to be creatively positioned on the maps to be used well. Now on the other hand, 10 degrees is almost reaching the point of being "average". 8 degrees used to be a good gun depression value, 10 degrees was spectacular. Now it's just... Nothing special. All the British TD's had their gun depression doubled for some reason, the British heavies had a 45% increase in depression, Japanese heavies have 10, Swedish vehicles have more than 10. Even the Chinese tanks, notoriously known for having "bad" gun depression, now have 7 degrees on the WZ-111-5A and 113. This only furthers the issue of everything being great at hull-down - Now that seemingly every tank has great gun depression, weak hulls don't have to be exposed; only revealing practically impenetrable (Unless you shoot Premium) turrets!

 

This is the one point I'll disagree with. Of all the possible buffs to make a tank more playable, depression is one of the few that does make a tank much more comfortable without directly impacting its nominal output. Positioning yourself so that a hull-down gives you a tactical advantage is a respectable skill that should be encouraged. 

 

As of the Super Conqueror itself, the problem isn't that its just too safe in hull-down, rather that its just too well armored in any case. If it were only the turret that was so durable that would be one thing, but that the hull also strong is where the line is crossed. Same could be said for the tier 9 Conqueror, the old version made much more balancing sense. 

 

Which leads me to the much more overarching point that armor itself is a major liability in terms of game balance. Whenever a tank depends on armor, one of two things will inevitably happen. One is that the armor does its job, but in doing so a great deal of frustration is caused by the stalemate of endless ricochets. Particularly in +/-2 scenarios where bottom tiers struggle even harder. The other is that the armor doesn't do its job, vis-a-vis code 22 or otherwise. In which case there's an entirely new frustration that having it was pointless to begin with. RNG's attempt to create a gray area in between is ultimately counterproductive. From the player's perspective, the sample size is always one shot. If that one shot does something it wasn't supposed to, then the reaction is invariably: "broken mechanic, dumb devs".

 

And that's not to even mention the issues with premium ammo or the game economy. Eventually something will have to be done about the code 22 status quo, and if so then the Super Conqueror balancing situation wouldn't likely be an issue in the first place. Same goes for the overall armor mechanics. Though mind you in the short-term they could just nerf the cupola and call it a day at that. 



Avalon304 #16 Posted Oct 19 2017 - 20:09

    Major

  • Players
  • 16826 battles
  • 6,469
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

View PostMikosah, on Oct 19 2017 - 09:51, said:

 

This is the one point I'll disagree with. Of all the possible buffs to make a tank more playable, depression is one of the few that does make a tank much more comfortable without directly impacting its nominal output. Positioning yourself so that a hull-down gives you a tactical advantage is a respectable skill that should be encouraged. 

 

 

Are you kidding? Gun depression is one of the best ways to increase a tanks "nominal output" without changing any other stats. Because gun depression opens up tons of positions on every map in the game that those tanks wouldnt otherwise be able to use effectively.

 

Could you imagine what would happen if the T-62A or Obj. 140 got -10 gun depression (with no other stat changes) and were able to using positions a CAX or Super Conqueror can use? Do you know how broken that would be? (BTW, Wargaming dont do this... it would be bad).

 

The Super Conqueror itself is actually the one of the best examples of this... -7 made the tank hard to use and hard to deal damage in unless you actually thought about where you put your tank. With -10 it can pretty much go ANYWHERE and deal out damage super effectively.

 

The Charioteer is another perfect example: Before, with -5 depression  a player had to carefully consider where to position to effectively deal damage. Now it can just be played like a medium tank and go to positions every other medium with -10 depression can use. Its broken. Even further, Conway and FV4005 are ALSO good examples of this. They both became so much easier to deal damage in now that they can aim down and poke a ridgeline without exposing nearly as much as they did before.

 

Getting hull down isnt really a skill anymore when you have -10 or more depression because you can do it pretty much anywhere.



Mikosah #17 Posted Oct 19 2017 - 22:56

    Major

  • Players
  • 17520 battles
  • 3,161
  • Member since:
    01-24-2013

View PostAvalon304, on Oct 19 2017 - 13:09, said:

 

 

Are you kidding? Gun depression is one of the best ways to increase a tanks "nominal output" without changing any other stats. Because gun depression opens up tons of positions on every map in the game that those tanks wouldnt otherwise be able to use effectively.

 

Could you imagine what would happen if the T-62A or Obj. 140 got -10 gun depression (with no other stat changes) and were able to using positions a CAX or Super Conqueror can use? Do you know how broken that would be? (BTW, Wargaming dont do this... it would be bad).

 

The Super Conqueror itself is actually the one of the best examples of this... -7 made the tank hard to use and hard to deal damage in unless you actually thought about where you put your tank. With -10 it can pretty much go ANYWHERE and deal out damage super effectively.

 

The Charioteer is another perfect example: Before, with -5 depression  a player had to carefully consider where to position to effectively deal damage. Now it can just be played like a medium tank and go to positions every other medium with -10 depression can use. Its broken. Even further, Conway and FV4005 are ALSO good examples of this. They both became so much easier to deal damage in now that they can aim down and poke a ridgeline without exposing nearly as much as they did before.

 

Getting hull down isnt really a skill anymore when you have -10 or more depression because you can do it pretty much anywhere.

 

Generally speaking, the idea that less of the map is unusable actually makes for a net improvement to gameplay. I stand by what I said before, that should a tank need a buff, depression is a clever way to do so indirectly as depression is only as powerful as the position it lets you abuse. Examples like the Charioteer, Super Conqueror, and hovermeds are more a case study of tanks that have no business being buffed in the first place. Had they been given the more typical buffs instead- alpha, DPM, penetration, armor, view range, mobility, et cetera, that would be just as broken in the end scheme of things. 

 

As for whether or not more depression makes positioning too easy, I'd say you're severely overestimating just how many players know anything at all about the map meta or even the most basic tenets of positioning. 



indoctrinated #18 Posted Oct 19 2017 - 23:02

    Major

  • Players
  • 20171 battles
  • 2,138
  • Member since:
    05-22-2012

View PostMikosah, on Oct 19 2017 - 12:51, said:

 

This is the one point I'll disagree with. Of all the possible buffs to make a tank more playable, depression is one of the few that does make a tank much more comfortable without directly impacting its nominal output. Positioning yourself so that a hull-down gives you a tactical advantage is a respectable skill that should be encouraged. 

 

As of the Super Conqueror itself, the problem isn't that its just too safe in hull-down, rather that its just too well armored in any case. If it were only the turret that was so durable that would be one thing, but that the hull also strong is where the line is crossed. Same could be said for the tier 9 Conqueror, the old version made much more balancing sense. 

 

Which leads me to the much more overarching point that armor itself is a major liability in terms of game balance. Whenever a tank depends on armor, one of two things will inevitably happen. One is that the armor does its job, but in doing so a great deal of frustration is caused by the stalemate of endless ricochets. Particularly in +/-2 scenarios where bottom tiers struggle even harder. The other is that the armor doesn't do its job, vis-a-vis code 22 or otherwise. In which case there's an entirely new frustration that having it was pointless to begin with. RNG's attempt to create a gray area in between is ultimately counterproductive. From the player's perspective, the sample size is always one shot. If that one shot does something it wasn't supposed to, then the reaction is invariably: "broken mechanic, dumb devs".

 

And that's not to even mention the issues with premium ammo or the game economy. Eventually something will have to be done about the code 22 status quo, and if so then the Super Conqueror balancing situation wouldn't likely be an issue in the first place. Same goes for the overall armor mechanics. Though mind you in the short-term they could just nerf the cupola and call it a day at that. 

The tank was already good enough- why give it close to 50% more gun depression when 7 was perfectly fine?
This tank actually now has better frontal armor (from the upper glacis upwards) than the Type 5 Heavy which is hilarious. 152@60 upper glacis plus the 20@60 space armor sheets are far superior to the Type 5 Heavy's frontal hull armor. Turret is also considerably better.



Avalon304 #19 Posted Oct 20 2017 - 00:22

    Major

  • Players
  • 16826 battles
  • 6,469
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

View PostMikosah, on Oct 19 2017 - 14:56, said:

 

Generally speaking, the idea that less of the map is unusable actually makes for a net improvement to gameplay. I stand by what I said before, that should a tank need a buff, depression is a clever way to do so indirectly as depression is only as powerful as the position it lets you abuse. Examples like the Charioteer, Super Conqueror, and hovermeds are more a case study of tanks that have no business being buffed in the first place. Had they been given the more typical buffs instead- alpha, DPM, penetration, armor, view range, mobility, et cetera, that would be just as broken in the end scheme of things. 

 

As for whether or not more depression makes positioning too easy, I'd say you're severely overestimating just how many players know anything at all about the map meta or even the most basic tenets of positioning. 

 

You can stand by what you said, but you are wrong. Depression is the easiest way to improve a tanks output without actually buffing any other stats. Its why WG buffed the depression of the Brit TDs and of both Conqueror and Super Conqueror. Heres another example: the 121. Before 9.19.1 it had 3.5 degrees of depression. In 9.19.1 it was given 5. Thats a minor buff of 1.5 degrees and yet, its now a better 113 than the 113 is. They changed literally nothing about the 121 other than the depression. The 113 vs the WZ 5A is another good comparison. The 5A has -7 all around the sides and front, and its is better than the 113, which only has -5 over the front.

 

You can say that "less of the map being unusuable makes for a net improvement in gameplay" but youre also wrong there too, because it allows tanks to use positions that they have no business using. A Charioteer shouldnt be able to poke a ridgeline like a medium tank. Nor should a Conway or FV4005. Variety makes for better gameplay. Removing variety, whether that be by allowing all tanks to use the same positions through depression buffs or making all tanks have impenetrable turrets or any other myriad of ways is incredibly bad for the game.

 

Im really not overestimating anything. Especially in the case of hull down. Even bad players understand how to get hull down, and with -10 depression you can, quite literally, do it just about anywhere. If we were talking about a players macropositioning (that is their choices of deployment to a flank) yea sure. If we were talking about side scraping or reverse side scraping then sure. But hull down is so brain dead easy that people think its the only way to play tanks with good gun depression (see also T29 drivers that think they cant brawl in a city because theyre a "hull down tank" or players who snipe hull down with a T30 despite the fact that the T30s gun is super bad for sniping).



Dands #20 Posted Oct 20 2017 - 02:26

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 10044 battles
  • 736
  • Member since:
    08-03-2010

View PostZennosha, on Oct 19 2017 - 05:40, said:

You guys will hit it hard with the nerf bat within an update or two. 

 

The old bait and switch WG tactic once again. Put an OP tank in the line. Let everyone chase it and then nerf it, sorry rebalance it into mediocrity.





Also tagged with 9.20.1

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users