Jump to content


Upcoming New Vehicle - Obj. 257 Stats (T-10 Replacement)

obj. 257 t-10 replacement

  • Please log in to reply
36 replies to this topic

sahmlockhart #21 Posted Nov 02 2017 - 14:27

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 41786 battles
  • 951
  • Member since:
    06-09-2013

View Post_Brew_, on Nov 02 2017 - 07:21, said:

Someone was saying that there is a possibility of moving the T-10 to a mini branch off the IS-3 moving toward a new Tier X called the Obj. 777. 

 

Got any info on that Sahm?

 

Not that I know of. I just going off of the RU forums. The devs haven't mentioned the Obj.777 v.2.

sparango #22 Posted Nov 02 2017 - 14:40

    Captain

  • Players
  • 48057 battles
  • 1,293
  • [PZB] PZB
  • Member since:
    07-13-2013

View PostSpectreHD, on Nov 01 2017 - 17:32, said:

And the US tree continues on without the rightful M60A1, a heavy tank shoehorned into a TD (T30 Heavy), and wrongfully labelled T110 tank proposals as TDs (T110E3/E4).

 

To make it worse, the T95/T96 tanks that could be a second or even third medium line are having variants made in CW reward vehicles and friend referral vehicle.

People who think the t30 is a td, frustrate me.



sergeantmine09 #23 Posted Nov 02 2017 - 14:58

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 13688 battles
  • 1,003
  • [D-DAY] D-DAY
  • Member since:
    08-21-2014

View Postleadtag101, on Nov 02 2017 - 01:48, said:

Its funny how everyone says how Russian Tanks get all the preferences ,then how come nearly everyone claims the OBJ 268 TD sucks?? just an honest question. Thanks 

 

The Obj. 268 is just a overused Derper that people just get tired of. What people enjoy is the Obj. 263(heavy breathing) because it has great sloped armor and an amazing DPM gun. Sadly enough the 263 is getting nerfed and booted down to Tier 9 so Wargaming can try to revive the Obj. 268 by making a second version of it, replacing the Obj. 263 at tier 10. Because all the tier 10 TD's need to be 750 alpha derpers. *Looks over at Sweeden* Trust me, youre next

 



spud_tuber #24 Posted Nov 02 2017 - 15:24

    Major

  • Players
  • 56797 battles
  • 7,721
  • Member since:
    08-26-2013

View Postsparango, on Nov 02 2017 - 07:40, said:

People who think the t30 is a td, frustrate me.

Or the T28 proto, or the E4. I know sometimes their lower HP and/or armor compared to same tier heavies means they can't always front line, but that doesn't mean they need to be draw circle sniping unless there's no other place to get shots off from.

 

I can almost understand the confusion with the E3, T95, and T28, so it doesn't frustrate me quite as much.



Hurk #25 Posted Nov 02 2017 - 15:29

    Major

  • Players
  • 55234 battles
  • 17,374
  • [KGR] KGR
  • Member since:
    09-30-2012

View PostSpectreHD, on Nov 01 2017 - 18:32, said:

And the US tree continues on without the rightful M60A1, a heavy tank shoehorned into a TD (T30 Heavy), and wrongfully labelled T110 tank proposals as TDs (T110E3/E4).

 

To make it worse, the T95/T96 tanks that could be a second or even third medium line are having variants made in CW reward vehicles and friend referral vehicle.

most of that is due to the fact that the US stopped development of all TDs after the hellcat.

 

what they really need to do is stop worrying about tank "lines" and just place tanks where they make sense and stop with the paper projects. im perfectly happy with the american TD line not having a tier 7-8 or 10. tank. the T95 assault gun was not a TD, but at least it makes sense.



Verblonde #26 Posted Nov 02 2017 - 15:40

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 17996 battles
  • 2,978
  • [FUNTB] FUNTB
  • Member since:
    02-08-2015
It would be a great shame if the T10 were to depart the game: I'm old-fashioned and prefer my tanks to be 'real', as far as that's possible - the T10 actually saw service (and, it seems, featured in the Six-Day War)...

SideshowBob_ #27 Posted Nov 02 2017 - 15:48

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 2338 battles
  • 235
  • [JERM] JERM
  • Member since:
    08-13-2017
Another FREE tank   :honoring:

leadtag101 #28 Posted Nov 02 2017 - 15:51

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 15937 battles
  • 433
  • Member since:
    10-28-2012

View Postcloudwalkr, on Nov 02 2017 - 01:58, said:

 

You're really going to try and debunk russian bias over 1 TD (which is still a good td in the right hands) when they have all those other amazing tanks?  GTFO...

 

Edit:  I'm with xrays.  Stop giving WG money and they will start doing things differently.

 

Anyway  just an honest question don't get your panties in a wad I don't play this as a lifetime job it is only for fun.

I have enough drama with my teenagers don't need any here.


Edited by leadtag101, Nov 02 2017 - 15:53.


SOB_Tenato #29 Posted Nov 02 2017 - 17:28

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 22808 battles
  • 536
  • Member since:
    07-28-2014

View PostDrone157, on Nov 02 2017 - 01:32, said:

This looks much more useful then the fairly mediocre T-10.

 

Are you high? T-10 has speed, great mobility an accurate and powerful gun, great RoF for a heavy, great view and radio range... man T-10 is a beast and I will pick mine over my IS7 anytime. I hope we get to keep T-10 or I will be very very disappointed.



_Smoken_ #30 Posted Nov 02 2017 - 17:49

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 40407 battles
  • 927
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012
there is nothing wrong with the t10, leave it alone.

Mikosah #31 Posted Nov 02 2017 - 18:04

    Major

  • Players
  • 17582 battles
  • 4,388
  • Member since:
    01-24-2013
Oh goody, another Defender. That's exactly what the game needed. But tovarish, how will players adapt from IS-3 to T-10? How we will achieve consistency in tank line? Consistency is a counterproductive 'solution' to a nonexistent problem. WG gains absolutely nothing of value from making the lines consistent, and making these tech tree changes comes with massive drawbacks. To think that WG spent valuable time and resources on this of all things...

Hans_Mo1eman #32 Posted Nov 02 2017 - 18:27

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 14039 battles
  • 230
  • [PRGY] PRGY
  • Member since:
    12-16-2015

View PostMikosah, on Nov 02 2017 - 10:04, said:

But tovarish, how will players adapt from IS-3 to T-10? How we will achieve consistency in tank line? Consistency is a counterproductive 'solution' to a nonexistent problem. WG gains absolutely nothing of value from making the lines consistent.

 

Well put. I'm not much a fan either of the recent changes to try and make every tank in a line exactly the same. Makes the game more boring and redundant for one thing and eliminates some unique or creative playstyle too.



SpectreHD #33 Posted Nov 03 2017 - 04:20

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 16763 battles
  • 17,082
  • [TT] TT
  • Member since:
    07-12-2010

View PostHurk, on Nov 02 2017 - 22:29, said:

most of that is due to the fact that the US stopped development of all TDs after the hellcat.

 

what they really need to do is stop worrying about tank "lines" and just place tanks where they make sense and stop with the paper projects. im perfectly happy with the american TD line not having a tier 7-8 or 10. tank. the T95 assault gun was not a TD, but at least it makes sense.

 

Agreed! Not all lines need to end with a Tier X. And it is this silly requirement that actually holds some vehicles back from being implemented. If anything, if a line of vehicle ends before Tier X, just have it join to another line.

 

View Postsparango, on Nov 02 2017 - 21:40, said:

People who think the t30 is a td, frustrate me.

 

Well, only because it was shoehorned rebalanced into a TD with barge like hull and turret traverse and dispersion of a drunk. Back, when it was a Tier X heavy, players were very aggressive with it.

 

I still long for the day for the T30 to return to being a heavy. Give it the penetration of the E100, don't even need 750 alpha (except maybe for its HE round) as the 155mm gun on it was actually inferiour to the 120mm. Then let it have a choice of mounting the 120mm which was historically a far superiour gun with good DPM. Then it can have its former Tier X heavy dispersion and mobility.

 

Bam! A balanced T30 Tier X heavy.

 



ToxicPubbieBot #34 Posted Nov 03 2017 - 07:44

    Major

  • Players
  • 35017 battles
  • 5,124
  • [ITDED] ITDED
  • Member since:
    06-19-2013

View Postrich73, on Nov 02 2017 - 00:32, said:

 

So they buffed the T10 so they could remove it???I knew thinking was a waste of time for W G personnel.Maybe I give them too much credit with the thinking part.

 

they didnt buff it. t10 is actually a shadow of the original is8. 

Deathstar_Commander #35 Posted Nov 03 2017 - 09:44

    Major

  • Players
  • 51291 battles
  • 2,527
  • [YODA] YODA
  • Member since:
    05-16-2011
For all you fans of the T-10 don't worry, since there is a large hole in tier 8 russian premium heavies they'll only have it removed for a little bit before they resell it as a tier 8 premium so you can have your t-10's back... but for 50 bucks.

KaSt_Patton #36 Posted Nov 03 2017 - 15:37

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 25275 battles
  • 785
  • Member since:
    05-28-2011
I love the IS-8 and I am excited for the 257.

spud_tuber #37 Posted Nov 03 2017 - 15:56

    Major

  • Players
  • 56797 battles
  • 7,721
  • Member since:
    08-26-2013

View PostViserion_Dies, on Nov 03 2017 - 00:44, said:

 

they didnt buff it. t10 is actually a shadow of the original is8. 

In what ways is the T-10 less than the IS-8?  It got armor buffs when it went HD, and gun handling buffs around the same time.  I can't remember it getting any nerfs.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users