Jump to content


268 V 4 has not changed.


  • Please log in to reply
32 replies to this topic

Dirizon #1 Posted Jun 15 2018 - 04:05

    Major

  • Players
  • 27352 battles
  • 4,925
  • Member since:
    06-05-2011

In regards to:

https://worldoftanks...-1-0-2-is-here/

https://www.youtube....h?v=yhRKxax7WhU

 

WG would everyone to believe it has changed. Certainly, theoretically, it was changed. But in practicality in terms of MM we face, not much changed at all. All that was really altered, was the firepower, which was not the strong suit of the tank to begin with. In fact, bobject firepower has never really been talked about at all, because compared to other T X  TDs the firepower sucks. Firepower has nothing to do with the tanks disgusting nature. Is 252Y hated and disgustingly claimed ridiculous, because of outrageous DPM, aim-time, accuracy, gun soft stats? No. It is because the tank fails to take damage. It is a tank with some weird Kryptonian shield that only Russian tanks get this game. It forces enemies to sling gold ammunition at it, and it even bounces and repels those too. Not much has changed.

 

Armour

Although WG may have you believe, with their intricate and detailed slides, that the armour has changed, in practicality it has not. Lowering a commanders eye piece police bar to a staggering two-thrity  mm,  from a colossal two-fifty, is not an armour decrease. What lower tier, they state in these same armour slides, except TDs, reliably penetrate two-thirty armour levels. The commanders cupola does not mean squat, as it is literally the size and thickness of a plastic Frisbee, impossible to hit. The gun case front, the lower hull 1ft slab of armour, were not changed. The immuno side armour spaced armour panel, the side upper hull extreme slope and thickness, were not changed. These are the huge problems. The miniature lower hull rectangle beneath the slab is still relatively tough, very hard to hit, and close range where you can aim ti hot it, adds ridiculous downward angle to it toughening it more. It did not lose thickness either. The 55mm roof and engine plating was not reduced, meaning true weak spots cannot be hit. It is still just how it was, ridiculous. Losing one hundred HP was a start though, give WG some credit. 

 

Mobility

The tank is still too quick, for being able to deliver that alpha and have that toughness and staying power. Turning into a slower medium, from being an avg medium, is not the nerf required. Reduce the horsepower 2/3rds, 33%.... to 1K  HP.  Not ten %

Grille lost reverse speed, got terrain resist penalties, because it was turreted, too fast, and delivered too much alpha. 

Fochs 15.5 lost two hundred HP, terrain resist nerfs, just about 17%, for being too fast.  Not a mere ten %

 

The tank is still too strong. Removing what it did not really have in the first place, the gunnery, means very little. Like nerfing Type 4 and 5, by reducing viewports and bow machine gun plates ten mm  each part. Nice nerf. So Three-Thirty or Fourty  mm HEAT is no longer required, you can get away with using Three-Ten.  Sweet, huge change.

 

Clan wars will still be full of these. 

 



tod914 #2 Posted Jun 15 2018 - 04:09

    Major

  • Players
  • 58655 battles
  • 4,194
  • Member since:
    12-23-2013
It has a soft underbelly now.

Dirizon #3 Posted Jun 15 2018 - 04:22

    Major

  • Players
  • 27352 battles
  • 4,925
  • Member since:
    06-05-2011

View Posttod914, on Jun 14 2018 - 22:39, said:

It has a soft underbelly now.

 

No, it does not. That is what they want you to think. 

 

 



Kamahl1234 #4 Posted Jun 15 2018 - 04:22

    Major

  • Players
  • 18393 battles
  • 10,078
  • Member since:
    04-06-2012

The thing about armor, especially making weak-spots in an armored tank, is that making it too weak simply kills off the tank. We have had a number of  "useless" armored tanks before, almost all because of weak-spots that bottom tier tanks could penetrate with fair ease.

 

Armor is simply binary, there is no in-between. 



Dirizon #5 Posted Jun 15 2018 - 04:36

    Major

  • Players
  • 27352 battles
  • 4,925
  • Member since:
    06-05-2011

View PostKamahl1234, on Jun 14 2018 - 22:52, said:

 

Armor is simply binary, there is no in-between. 

 

Simply false.  I could not have said it any simpler.

 



Kamahl1234 #6 Posted Jun 15 2018 - 04:41

    Major

  • Players
  • 18393 battles
  • 10,078
  • Member since:
    04-06-2012

View PostDirizon, on Jun 15 2018 - 03:36, said:

 

Simply false.  I could not have said it any simpler.

 

 

Uhh, what?

 

If you have weak-spots that bottom tier tanks can easily pen you frontally, simply everyone shoots you there and your armor is meaningless. It's what happened to a number of tanks that had armor over-buffs, like the Type 5, which had hull shoulders that were super easy to pen, so everyone did. The armor was worthless, and it neither had the gun nor mobility to at all warrant having armor which tier 8 tanks could AP through frontally. 

 

Armor literally works or it doesn't. That's the definition of a binary case. 



Dirizon #7 Posted Jun 15 2018 - 05:02

    Major

  • Players
  • 27352 battles
  • 4,925
  • Member since:
    06-05-2011

View PostKamahl1234, on Jun 14 2018 - 23:11, said:

 

Uhh, what?

 

If you have weak-spots that bottom tier tanks can easily pen you frontally, simply everyone shoots you there and your armor is meaningless. It's what happened to a number of tanks that had armor over-buffs, like the Type 5, which had hull shoulders that were super easy to pen, so everyone did. The armor was worthless, and it neither had the gun nor mobility to at all warrant having armor which tier 8 tanks could AP through frontally. 

 

Armor literally works or it doesn't. That's the definition of a binary case. 

 

Let us take IS6 for example. A cromwell, has great gold ammunition for a tier 6. Most non heavy and non TD vehicles do not have something over two hundred pen, stuck on numbers like 194mm or even lower. Yet, 2O2mm has difficulty going through an IS6, right out of the barrel at one hundred  mm, with the upper hull (besides the cupola hatches) being the most susceptible at fifty percent probability. Basically, that fifty percent becomes less, with combat conditions and angles.  Is lS6 outstandingly armoured? Most certainly not a 252Y or Chrysler. Is an IS6 '''''armour works or it does not'''''  Again, certainly not. 

 

Then there is the argument of an extremely unreliable accuracy system, which is incredibly random and turns out shots aimed at weak points into hitting tough thick points instead. Even with something actually accurate, like an UDES, STRV, or E-Fifty. 

 

The premise about armour, like something along the lines of Lowe or King Tiger. They have strong upper hulls. But shooting their lower underneath frontal hull, makes them an easy pen. With even a entry level one-sixty  mm  pen 9cm gun. Yet you simply cannot auto aim these tanks, for fear of hitting their upper hull and wasting a shot. Then you have tanks a stage over that too, like one-ten / lS3 / Emil ...that have semi-hardened lower hulls. Not quite weak to T 6-7, but T8 AP reliably put holes through them. This is how tanks should be.  Shoot the upper plate, bounce. Shoot the lower plate, pen. Shoot the lower plate improperly, bounce. The problem is obj252Y and Chrysler, or even 112 are heavy tank all over. They have extreme armour for their class and tier, that necessitate gold rounds. 252Y being the most stinking offender, as it bounces off gold rounds anyway, and has the bottom hull of the so called Tiger ll strong upper hull. As a weak spot.  Your statement is entirely false. As tanks like 112 or Chrysler or 252Y, are not like Maus or Type 5. They are not one hundred tonne slab side houses moving around, but tanks that actually travel thirty km around the battlefield. Tanks like Maus, or Type, can be handled even though they have thick armour, as they are literally battlefield magnets, and targets for everyone. And they do not speed off. A tank like obj268 V4 should not have that benefit

 



Maxx_Rage #8 Posted Jun 15 2018 - 05:18

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 25194 battles
  • 362
  • [Y0L0] Y0L0
  • Member since:
    09-17-2013
It sounds like someone needs to go into a training room and learn how to pen said tanks, no?

KingofDragons #9 Posted Jun 15 2018 - 05:20

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 21154 battles
  • 586
  • Member since:
    05-14-2011

Let’s not forget what the 268 replaced.. the 263 had speed a high rpm gun .. strong upper haul..can’t expect Tier 6s to pen the front.. if they did what chance would it have against Tier 10s..

 

this is is an example of why +2/-2 is impossible to balance..


Edited by KingofDragons, Jun 15 2018 - 05:22.


Dirizon #10 Posted Jun 15 2018 - 05:33

    Major

  • Players
  • 27352 battles
  • 4,925
  • Member since:
    06-05-2011

I mean, if they wanted to hurt its already poorer TD firepower, they could have hurt the things that actually mattered. 

-- lowering the gun sweep of fire. -4GD,  -7/=7 or -8/+8 like old obj 263. Not an extremely wide and generous -5GD and -12/+12

-- Giving it 317HEAT like obj 75 Hvy tank, since they basically share gun stats

 



Dirizon #11 Posted Jun 15 2018 - 05:55

    Major

  • Players
  • 27352 battles
  • 4,925
  • Member since:
    06-05-2011

View PostMaxx_Rage, on Jun 14 2018 - 23:48, said:

It sounds like someone needs to go into a training room and learn how to pen said tanks, no?

 

Well I do have a superior hit% and armour-use efficiency. 

Generally, someone would say It sounds like you are wrong.

 



Avalon304 #12 Posted Jun 15 2018 - 06:33

    Major

  • Players
  • 19506 battles
  • 8,448
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

View PostDirizon, on Jun 14 2018 - 21:55, said:

 

Well I do have a superior hit% and armour-use efficiency. 

Generally, someone would say It sounds like you are wrong.

 

 

Not really. It really does sound like you need to take a trip into a training room and learn how to pen the tank now... you might even need to take it into a training room and play it to see how it performs now.


Edited by Avalon304, Jun 15 2018 - 06:33.


RC_1140 #13 Posted Jun 15 2018 - 06:46

    Major

  • Players
  • 58864 battles
  • 2,011
  • [-NHL-] -NHL-
  • Member since:
    06-13-2013

View PostDirizon, on Jun 14 2018 - 20:33, said:

I mean, if they wanted to hurt its already poorer TD firepower, they could have hurt the things that actually mattered. 

-- lowering the gun sweep of fire. -4GD,  -7/=7 or -8/+8 like old obj 263. Not an extremely wide and generous -5GD and -12/+12

-- Giving it 317HEAT like obj 75 Hvy tank, since they basically share gun stats

 

I like these suggestions. 



Dirizon #14 Posted Jun 16 2018 - 02:24

    Major

  • Players
  • 27352 battles
  • 4,925
  • Member since:
    06-05-2011

View PostAvalon304, on Jun 15 2018 - 01:03, said:

 

Not really. It really does sound like you need to take a trip into a training room and learn how to pen the tank now... you might even need to take it into a training room and play it to see how it performs now.

 

You are entitled to your opinions. Everyone is. I leave it up to users to decide and sift through which are useful

I, however, do not listen or value the opinions of someone who is satisfied with 2.2K damage on the majority of his Xs. 

But I do value and investigate the opinions of a far more skilled you-tuber

 

 

 



Frostblitz20 #15 Posted Jun 16 2018 - 10:59

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 3288 battles
  • 554
  • [VAHLA] VAHLA
  • Member since:
    03-21-2015
You do know this tank has the worst gun stats out of every t10 td in the game it’s aim is so bad every shot far off is more of a risk then anything else as you waste ammo and prob won’t even hit close to the spot you was wanting...


So removing the armor with the horrible gun stats will make this tank no more useful then a tank drowning in the ocean.......

Firemoth #16 Posted Jun 16 2018 - 11:48

    Major

  • Players
  • 37007 battles
  • 3,933
  • Member since:
    05-21-2011

im triggered by why dirzon is switching randomly between numbers and words

 

250mm/230mm as two fifty mm and two thirty mm

110 (the chinese heavy) as the one ten

ten %

E fifty

 

why, who even does this.



Dirizon #17 Posted Jun 17 2018 - 02:36

    Major

  • Players
  • 27352 battles
  • 4,925
  • Member since:
    06-05-2011

View PostFrostblitz20, on Jun 16 2018 - 05:29, said:

You do know this tank has the worst gun stats out of every t10 td in the game it’s aim is so bad every shot far off is more of a risk then anything else as you waste ammo and prob won’t even hit close to the spot you was wanting...

So removing the armor with the horrible gun stats will make this tank no more useful then a tank drowning in the ocean.......

 

this guy thinks the vehicles armour was removed.  lol.  laughable.

When type 5 got drivers port and bow gun nerf on thickness, you must think that was a huge nerf too

 



Frostblitz20 #18 Posted Jun 18 2018 - 18:54

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 3288 battles
  • 554
  • [VAHLA] VAHLA
  • Member since:
    03-21-2015

View PostDirizon, on Jun 17 2018 - 02:36, said:

 

this guy thinks the vehicles armour was removed.  lol.  laughable.

When type 5 got drivers port and bow gun nerf on thickness, you must think that was a huge nerf too

 

This guy is funny to think I said they removed every mm of armor.... never did I say that if you could read I said so by removing the armor which everyone knows I mean the thick hull armor because it’s the main issue everyone has it would make the assult td aspect pointless with the crap gun it has. Which we all know wg will never make the armor value 0 or 1 so dropping it down to like 100-220mm or effective armor when angled. 

 

 sad how now days we have to explain in details everything or else things like people eating tide pods will happen because they look like candy.... 


Edited by Frostblitz20, Jun 18 2018 - 19:02.


Dirizon #19 Posted Jun 19 2018 - 02:10

    Major

  • Players
  • 27352 battles
  • 4,925
  • Member since:
    06-05-2011

View PostFrostblitz20, on Jun 16 2018 - 05:29, said:

You do know this tank has the worst gun stats out of every t10 td in the game it’s aim is so bad every shot far off is more of a risk then anything else as you waste ammo and prob won’t even hit close to the spot you was wanting...


So removing the armor with the horrible gun stats will make this tank no more useful then a tank drowning in the ocean.......

 

You have openly said they have remove the armour. And they have not.  They made a tiny strip available, lower bottom hull, that is very small, and when you can aim at it - it is extremely low and adds atrocious angle. The commanders aim bar, is still a hardened target, tougher than Type 5 cupola, a ridiculous idea, way thicker than something like jag panzer E cupola.  Argue all you want. Top youtubers, way more skilled than you, if what you have counts as skill at all, say the same. The tank is still a HEAT magnet, because HEAT is basically required, and micro aiming to hit the lower lower lower lower hull has you hit the dirt instead, or that monstrous three hundred  mm  plate. Because accuracy is way so RNG reliable. They nerfed the speed, yes, so now it is no longer a soviet med in speed, but instead now a chinese med, still way too ridiculous. Faster than a great deal of T X  TDs. This thing is still a tough gold ammo target, is fast and has camo like a go-kart, and even with nerfs has high HP for TDs which usually stick around 1.8-1.9K

 

Nothing has changed. Believe whatever you want. Probably still why you play the way you do. You don't know any better

 

 

 

 



Panman69 #20 Posted Jun 19 2018 - 02:45

    Captain

  • Players
  • 34620 battles
  • 1,405
  • Member since:
    05-30-2012
Dang it! I didn’t go up that line for the simple fact that WG was nerfing the reason to grind the line. Now you tell me that it wasn’t nerfed. All those wasted hours on BS tanks that I could have been grinding for an OP tank. Guess I’ll have to dip into my FreeXP to get it.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users