Jump to content


Medium Tanks Rebalance: In the Pursuit of Excellence

1.5.1 Rebalance STB-1 Leopard 1 AMX 30 B Object 430 Object 430U

  • Please log in to reply
29 replies to this topic

Chtholly_Seniorious #21 Posted Apr 23 2019 - 17:30

    Captain

  • Players
  • 37371 battles
  • 1,188
  • [OTTER] OTTER
  • Member since:
    04-04-2014
Wow I thought the stb was bad now whew 360 alpha why not just play a prog you get better armour

Canadian_Mano #22 Posted Apr 23 2019 - 17:47

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 35992 battles
  • 513
  • Member since:
    01-29-2012

STB-1, wow. The butchering is real. Coulda fixed it by buffing dispersion softstats, accuracy by a bit, and giving it it's hydropneu suspension. Gonna be garbage if that goes live

Leo 1, buffed top speed, but lowered it's HP/T and traverse? wat? the alpha change is interesting, bad platform is still bad though.

30B, buff pen buff or remove cupola. done. Least it can snipe after those buffs.

430U, switch armour profiles with 113. tank fixed.

 

WG continues to prove they couldn't balance a board on flat terrain.



jsn87xi76slk92mc802d7sk1 #23 Posted Apr 23 2019 - 18:10

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 3929 battles
  • 758
  • Member since:
    11-30-2017

ppl thought it was not possible to nerf the leo 1.. well folks here we have it.

 

they have managed to actually nerf it! this company is [edited]with us at this point.

 

im also beyond words on the stb... there is nothing that anybody with 2 firing brain impulses can even say about that



PanicShots #24 Posted Apr 23 2019 - 18:45

    Private

  • -Players-
  • 42857 battles
  • 9
  • Member since:
    11-29-2012

Wargaming, people have been waiting for buffs on some of these tanks for many years (particularly the STB-1 and the Leopard 1) and this is your answer? The leo buffs do not look bad, but it still won't be able to compete in the current meta. The proposed idea on the STB-1 is atrocious. The STB-1 only needs a better turret and better gun handling. That's it. It is widely considered one of the best looking tanks in the game. Give it some spark.

 

It is smart of you guys to nerf the 430U so I will applaud you on that.


Edited by PanicShots, Apr 23 2019 - 18:47.


jsn87xi76slk92mc802d7sk1 #25 Posted Apr 23 2019 - 20:10

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 3929 battles
  • 758
  • Member since:
    11-30-2017

View PostPanicShots, on Apr 23 2019 - 18:45, said:

Wargaming, people have been waiting for buffs on some of these tanks for many years (particularly the STB-1 and the Leopard 1) and this is your answer? The leo buffs do not look bad, but it still won't be able to compete in the current meta. The proposed idea on the STB-1 is atrocious. The STB-1 only needs a better turret and better gun handling. That's it. It is widely considered one of the best looking tanks in the game. Give it some spark.

 

It is smart of you guys to nerf the 430U so I will applaud you on that.

 

leo 1 is a nerf mate. 

 

a hard [edited]nerf! 



Carde #26 Posted Apr 23 2019 - 20:17

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 60314 battles
  • 265
  • Member since:
    07-12-2013

They are nerfing the Leopard 1 mobility! In lieu of addressing real life upgrades to turret, fire control, vision, side skirts, spaced armor...they simply increase the shell velocity and nerf the reverse speed and general mobility? History does not agree with whoever is making these changes.

Here's a list of hints to fix the Leopard 1 that were in the first generation upgrades to the tank.

  1. Put the proper turret armor on the tank that was ADDED EARLY to the LEOPARD 1. It increased crew protection by FIFTY PERCENT. Leopard 1 had this upgrade...

  2. Also note that Leopard 1 very early adopted a STABILIZED GUN to fire on the move. Add this to the game. Again, Leopard 1A1. Not the 2003 Leopard, the 1969 Leopard had a stabilized, highly accurate when firing on the move gun.

  3. Leopard 1 cross country mobility was UNMATCHED by all other contemporary designs. The reverse nerf is totally inappropriate. Leopard 1 was FAST but had instant linear power from the 10 cylinder diesel power pack. It hit full speed immediately. If any changes to engine should be contemplated by this game, it should be to adjust the burn rate of the exceedingly modern (now industry standard) and exceedingly reliable power pack down. Noting that the speed is buffed to reflect its historical supremacy, tailor the buffs to note that the tank hit top speed fast in forward and reverse, and traversed fast because it had a phenomenal diesel (does not burn!) engine with many horses and lots of torques.

  4. Adding the Lexan shield to the turret would solve so much of the problems and performance of this tank. A1 variant had spaced armor on the front of the turret... Come on Wargaming.

  5. Functional Side skirts. Again, Leopard 1A1.

These are what the tank needs along with the proposed velocity and accuracy improvement. Some of these additionals were bolted on to Leopards before the first iteration could leave the factory.

Leopard 1 was NATO'S MBT, and one of the finest tanks of its era. It should be leaps and bounds better than its current state. It should also be solid enough for any clanwars activity, not some third string junker that we take when all the good players call out sick.

Current proposed buffs to Leopard 1 are, insufficient, inappropriate and inaccurate. Please pay attention, Wargaming!



RickEdwards #27 Posted Apr 23 2019 - 20:30

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 28433 battles
  • 499
  • [NISHI] NISHI
  • Member since:
    07-10-2013

View PostAnublister, on Apr 23 2019 - 15:30, said:

They've been promising to do this for a long time, but I'm not sure they get it.

 

The 430U is played because of it's high dpm and it's excellent armor. I don't see that changing.

 

The Leo 1 is going to be a sniper, so they change it's ammo to regular AP. Did they not get the memo that snipers snipe from long range and adding an ammo type that has reduced penetration over distance might not be something appropriate? It's looking like an oversized lower camo version of a lt tank at tier 10. No bueno.

 

The AMX 30B has a bit fat ZIT on it's head. That's why it isn't played much.

 

Does WG know how the player base play these tanks? It doesn't seem like it.

 

AP actually has less drop over distance than APCR... Also, for both AP and APCR the pen drop over distance for a tier 10 medium is pretty much always essentially non-existent. That with the fact that it will be 278 mm on a gun with .29 base accuracy? If you can't pen with that you need to seriously rethink how you play this game.

jsn87xi76slk92mc802d7sk1 #28 Posted Apr 23 2019 - 20:33

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 3929 battles
  • 758
  • Member since:
    11-30-2017

View PostRickEdwards, on Apr 23 2019 - 20:30, said:

 

AP actually has less drop over distance than APCR... Also, for both AP and APCR the pen drop over distance for a tier 10 medium is pretty much always essentially non-existent. That with the fact that it will be 278 mm on a gun with .29 base accuracy? If you can't pen with that you need to seriously rethink how you play this game.

 

types laugh at you

2684 laugh at u

maushen laugh at u

430u laugh at u

 

need i go on?  as usual the people who dont understand crapabout the game or the tanks in question come here to make blanket statements how xyz number is omegaawesome without actually having a clue what that means in terms of real playability INSIDE the game. hey that sounds exactly like the people who make these changes... hah



grizz2u #29 Posted Apr 23 2019 - 20:47

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 89388 battles
  • 71
  • Member since:
    03-26-2012

Well say goodbye to some of your friends. Every time they "fix" tanks we lose alot of players. You'd think when they saw the interest in classic tanks they'd have figured out people are sick of the rebalancing. A few little kids complain and they [edited]everyone.

 



RickEdwards #30 Posted Apr 23 2019 - 21:14

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 28433 battles
  • 499
  • [NISHI] NISHI
  • Member since:
    07-10-2013

View Postjsn87xi76slk92mc802d7sk1, on Apr 23 2019 - 20:33, said:

 

types laugh at you

2684 laugh at u

maushen laugh at u

430u laugh at u

 

need i go on?  as usual the people who dont understand crapabout the game or the tanks in question come here to make blanket statements how xyz number is omegaawesome without actually having a clue what that means in terms of real playability INSIDE the game. hey that sounds exactly like the people who make these changes... hah

 

No, what I said is completely accurate; that accuracy with that pen is way more than enough. I have about 3 times more battles in tier 10 than your little reroll account there has in general. 278 mm of penetration, moreso because they are AP, is far more than enough to effectively fight any tier 10 at any range. As for the pen drop-off; tier 10 ammo pen drop-off, with the exception of LT guns, loses about 10-15% at 500 m; rng is a much larger factor in your ability to pen a target.

 

And let me guess, you're one of those people who thinks their tank should be able to pen the most heavily armored tanks in the game, consistently, from any range. You know, literally making those tanks useless; you are the one that knows nothing of balance. Not to mention, the Leo will be able to go 70 km/hr, I think you should be able to get to their sides pretty easily if you actually know how to play the game.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users