Jump to content


the STB-1 "buff" Feedback


  • Please log in to reply
58 replies to this topic

Asassian7 #1 Posted May 18 2019 - 02:46

    Major

  • Players
  • 25494 battles
  • 12,136
  • [PETCO] PETCO
  • Member since:
    12-26-2011

so, this is happening. I guess it is technically a "buff" to the tank, but I need to give some major feedback as to why it should not happen, at least with the current changes, in a vein hope that WG will actually listen to a non RU player (and if not I hope the RU players are saying the same thing)

 

The hydualic suspension. Its... okay. There is a slight delay when switching from regular gun dep to the suspension. It makes snap shots especially when over ridges a bit clunky. it is otherwise fairly seamless. I am so far 50/50 on my opinion on it.

 

The turret buff is very nice - its something the tank sorely needed. that can be kept.

 

But heres the problem - It now has -6 only over the sides, you only get that -13 or even the -10 it used to have over the front. this is BAD. BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD! It makes the entire suspension buff completely irrelevant. It should be staying at -10 over the side. heck, it should stay at -10 over the front and just have the suspension take it up to -13. At the very least it should have -8 over the sides after this change. as it is now the tank is actually less effective in ridge fighting that it was before, needing to be completely front on to the enemy to get gun dep, which limits angles you can use when poking ridges.

 

Second, the gun changes. The reload is great, my STB now reloads faster than my 140. HOWEVER. I don't think it needs these changes. Ignoring the gun handling, I think I'd rather have the RoF/alpha left as it is. the reason being is they are making everything too complicated. The tank is now too "busy" with the suspension, the mismatched depression, the fact you now need to be sitting in front of enemies constantly to get damage out. There is too much going on with it. Too much different things to concentrate on to get the most out of the tank, even if you can potentially get a lot out of it.

 

the tank in general, even though its supposed to be a buff, doesn't feel any more capable than it did before. even with the major RoF buff and even with the gun handling buff.

 

So, heres my suggestion to what it should actually be:

 

-Keep turret buff. that is really good.

-Gun dep, -10 all around as it is currently. Suspension can take it up to -13 over the front like it currently does on CT.

-ignore the RoF buffs, just leave it as it is. don't change the alpha, leave it at 390. If you have to then maybe a 0.2 second buff would be good. 

-Gun handling buff, I don't actually think it needs it, but I don't think keeping it would make it overperforming or anything.

 

These are what it actually needs. not a complete redesign of how the tank plays which is what WG is currently going for. the current changes are technically a buff, but they don't really work. 



2MOEJOE #2 Posted May 18 2019 - 03:01

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 4340 battles
  • 686
  • Member since:
    11-28-2017
I can't remember the last time I've seen a Japanese medium  in  pubs much less an STB1.

tanopasman62 #3 Posted May 18 2019 - 03:06

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 21367 battles
  • 4,580
  • [_ADP_] _ADP_
  • Member since:
    12-13-2016
Pretty much this, the overcomplicated gun depression makes all the DPM buffs pointless.

F1O1 #4 Posted May 18 2019 - 03:22

    Captain

  • Players
  • 60 battles
  • 1,583
  • [SAMUS] SAMUS
  • Member since:
    01-11-2012

F1O1, on Apr 23 2019 - 18:13, said:

Generally speaking, when improving something......you don't buff half the attributes and nerf the other half. That is not how improvement works. People aren't so keen to look into any of these buffs, because they are caught up on agonizing over the nerfs,  nerfs towards a tank not good to begin with. Which makes me wonder, what do they have planned for E100 and lS4. My goodness.

 

STB1 has a bad reputation for accuracy and dispersion. Bad reputation for easily over-matched armour spots and lots of wholes in the turret, with a trouble some cupola. lt has a bad reputation, on terrible soft stats in comparison to other tier ten medium tanks. This is what WG should concentrate on. Righting some of the wrongs tonnes of people complain over. Like what they did with M48, and shrinking the cupola. They righting a major wrong. They need to do that with STB1, not this elaborate trading of buffing and nerfing, which may very well make the vehicle even worse than before. Like what they did with the AMX30B fiasco.....and they are doing it again a year later.

 

Let me do WG job.  lt is simple.  What STB1 really needs, and won't toss WOT community into a card trading uproar. 

 

Posted Image

 

 

My take on the STB1. Upper hull needs some help, +20mm makes it like T62A, which is not much to ask for. 50mm upper porition beneath turret would be alot like progetto, so that is not an issue either. Side armour increase so no more 122 - 130mm over matches. Cupola armour increase, to remove HE pens. Although, a smaller M48A patton cupola buff would be great

Turret front, problem is their listed 222.....ln reality most is actually 160-205mm. l wish they would just put that entire orange turret front 222mm, as listed. 390 alpha will be missed.....

 

.............................................................................................................................................................................................

lf you do not mind, while also talking about tier 10 balancing, l would also like to split your thread to talk about AMXmle54.

 

Everyone complained about Type 5 side armour, and front shoulders, at 105/140mm and 210mm, being too weak. So WG increased it, to 140/160 and 270mm.

Type 140mm gun, just received buffs on the low penetrations, from 249/282 to 257/290. Because people complained about the ridiculous 150mm gun. 

 

Well, why exactly is WG ignoring AMX54? Not a particularly popular tier 10, many say the tier 9 is a tonne better. Let us see the problems:

 

- Terrible side armour, not even matching 90mm like Somua it should get. Terrible front shoulders, 150mm exposed when side scraping   cough...cough....cough....Type 5.

- Terrible gun penetration. 250/280mm. Like the type 5 gun right, pre-buff. cough....cough....cough....cough  Lets buff Type 5 though, to get 257/290. 

- Anemic DPM with the small 120mm, if you want to use the DPM, penetration, accuracy option. No 325 APCR like AMX50B either for some reason.

 

AMX54 needs some loving. At the very least, to correct the same problems Type 5 has got corrected. 

lncrease side armour to 90mm, increase front shoulders to 200mm, increase 130mm premium AP pen to 295mm, increase 120mm fire rate to 5.88 and 325mm APCR

 

 



F1O1 #5 Posted May 18 2019 - 03:26

    Captain

  • Players
  • 60 battles
  • 1,583
  • [SAMUS] SAMUS
  • Member since:
    01-11-2012

l find it extremely unfair, uncharacteristic, that when WG buffed lS7 year and a half ago....They buffed the tank.

They did not nerf half the aspects, and buff other half. They flat out buffed it with only improvements.

Why can't they seem to do the same, with Leopard, AMX30, STB1? 

 

With 140, did they buff half of it, and nerf the other half? No. Just buffs. [(why buff 140 in the first place?)]



Konigwolfen #6 Posted May 18 2019 - 04:00

    Captain

  • Players
  • 25105 battles
  • 1,291
  • [BFPA] BFPA
  • Member since:
    08-23-2011
This goes right back to the main issue with WG's buffing logic in the past year. Rather than simply buff what isn't adequate on a tank they instead try to make it unique even if the design and purpose of the tank was meant to follow a similar vehicle. This is why we ended up with a derpy DPM brawler with the AMX 30B even though it and the Leopard are fairly identical in design and purpose. They've gone from starting from a historical point stat-wise, to just making things up as they go along, and it has only caused more harm than good.

venom286 #7 Posted May 18 2019 - 05:12

    Captain

  • Players
  • 43458 battles
  • 1,311
  • Member since:
    11-08-2012
you are a og of wot so ill go with what you say i have not even tested it i never do unless its something i really want to try this is not one of them still working on getting this tank so if they mess it up i want be that disappointed 

Avalon304 #8 Posted May 18 2019 - 05:37

    Major

  • Players
  • 23618 battles
  • 10,112
  • [SNPAI] SNPAI
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

View PostAsassian7, on May 17 2019 - 18:46, said:

So, heres my suggestion to what it should actually be:

 

-Keep turret buff. that is really good.

-Gun dep, -10 all around as it is currently. Suspension can take it up to -13 over the front like it currently does on CT.

-ignore the RoF buffs, just leave it as it is. don't change the alpha, leave it at 390. If you have to then maybe a 0.2 second buff would be good. 

-Gun handling buff, I don't actually think it needs it, but I don't think keeping it would make it overperforming or anything.

 

These are what it actually needs. not a complete redesign of how the tank plays which is what WG is currently going for. the current changes are technically a buff, but they don't really work. 

 

 

Really all they need to do is properly implement the full suspension. The STB-1 could also use is suspension to tile left and right. They do that, everything else is ok.



thegreat101 #9 Posted May 18 2019 - 05:58

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 30686 battles
  • 222
  • [MAD-] MAD-
  • Member since:
    08-05-2012
I feel if WG wants to make the the tank a Frontline Brawler, they need to do 1 of two things to it. Ether Buff the Armor of the turret more to like 260mm or 270mm, 222MM is nice, but its terrable VS gold, and its just not enough. it fires so fast, that you need to stay exposed to do the DPM. so the armor just does not hold up for what i feel they want the tank to be. Second choice is the HULL IS EXTREAMLY WEAK. so if they dont want to buff the turret more, at least buff the Hull so arty cant 1 shot you. its Terrable that a "frontline" MED cant hold up as well vs arty like a 140 or 430U can. and look at the armor of the 140 and 430U. Strong Turret and hull!!. just give the STB a stong Turret WEAK HULL, but GD

Edited by thegreat101, May 18 2019 - 06:01.


Asassian7 #10 Posted May 18 2019 - 06:16

    Major

  • Players
  • 25494 battles
  • 12,136
  • [PETCO] PETCO
  • Member since:
    12-26-2011

View PostKonigwolfen, on May 18 2019 - 15:00, said:

This goes right back to the main issue with WG's buffing logic in the past year. Rather than simply buff what isn't adequate on a tank they instead try to make it unique even if the design and purpose of the tank was meant to follow a similar vehicle. This is why we ended up with a derpy DPM brawler with the AMX 30B even though it and the Leopard are fairly identical in design and purpose. They've gone from starting from a historical point stat-wise, to just making things up as they go along, and it has only caused more harm than good.

yup, I completely agree. why do they have to make it all different? just... buff it. don't change it all around so its a completely different tank ffs. make what it currently does better. 

View Postvenom286, on May 18 2019 - 16:12, said:

you are a og of wot so ill go with what you say i have not even tested it i never do unless its something i really want to try this is not one of them still working on getting this tank so if they mess it up i want be that disappointed 

Its also the fact the STB-1 is my all time favourite tank, with 2500+ games in it. I honestly would much rather they left it alone even if its currently under performing than changing it around so much. 

View PostAvalon304, on May 18 2019 - 16:37, said:

 

 

Really all they need to do is properly implement the full suspension. The STB-1 could also use is suspension to tile left and right. They do that, everything else is ok.

oh if they did that it'd be absolutely fine. but as far as I have played it it only has the suspension work over the front. no side depression. 



Mikosah #11 Posted May 18 2019 - 07:00

    Major

  • Players
  • 17582 battles
  • 4,478
  • Member since:
    01-24-2013
They made these changes way more complicated and counterproductive than they needed to. They could have just buffed the turret armor and used the hydro suspension to add a few degrees of extra gun depression and called it a day. And though the STB does gain a good deal from the improvements to gun handling, why did they start playing with the alpha, pen, velocity, and shell types out of the blue? What on earth was that supposed to accomplish?

_Direwolf #12 Posted May 18 2019 - 07:48

    Major

  • Players
  • 12646 battles
  • 7,200
  • [SUX] SUX
  • Member since:
    09-19-2012
The STB isn't what it used to be Assassin! :(

thandiflight #13 Posted May 18 2019 - 10:11

    Major

  • Players
  • 87129 battles
  • 4,417
  • [SIMP] SIMP
  • Member since:
    07-10-2011
Good points - I agree - except it is vain hope not vein hope (not unless your hope is de-oxygenated)

Avalon304 #14 Posted May 18 2019 - 11:43

    Major

  • Players
  • 23618 battles
  • 10,112
  • [SNPAI] SNPAI
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

View PostAsassian7, on May 17 2019 - 22:16, said:

oh if they did that it'd be absolutely fine. but as far as I have played it it only has the suspension work over the front. no side depression. 

 

I and one or two others brought it to the attention of KrzyBoop... whether or not that suggestion and the video evidence of the tank doing it made its way to the developers is unknown, but it was done at such a time that it would have been too late for inclusion in this current test server.



GeisterKatze #15 Posted May 18 2019 - 12:58

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 24236 battles
  • 3,365
  • [7CR] 7CR
  • Member since:
    07-28-2011

It seems to me that WG is trying to make tanks individually different, so that play-style can be more diverse.  At the same time WG is NOT giving any one tank the ability to "do everything". 

 

I see that as a plus. 

 

In the past 35+ years of computer gaming and almost 20 years of online gaming I've seen title after title become "homogeneous" in order to placate players.  A perfect example of that is Blizzard's "World of Warcraft".  In Vanilla WoW every race had special abilities, and every class did also.  In fact, some classes had different abilities within themselves depending on the race chosen(only a Dwarven Priest could "dispel fear", etc).  But as updates came out classes and races became less unique, instead becoming just a different 'skin' you wrapped around your tank/dpm/healer/AOE spambot.

 

WG on the other hand have done pretty well to keep introducing unique traits to specific types or nations of tanks.  Does this give some tanks an advantage over others?  Yes, but diversity keeps the game interesting for me.  Take FrontLine for example.  I enjoy dusting off my KV-5, T-44(with the 122mm), Centurion I(with the COOL MK I turret), and M45(historically-correct M26 Pershing with the 105mm howitzer) and playing them competitively.  FrontLine allows me to play more diverse tanks, because it makes those tanks capable again.  And yes, the M45 can do well.  Last night I survived an entire battle, fired 65 shots, and hit 60 times.  

 

I get worried when I see players advocating 1)making the game more homogenous and/or 2)giving any particular vehicle/class/nation within the game all-encompassing abilities.  I like the idea of the STB-1 having to be face-on to an enemy in order to take advantage of the articulated suspension.  Besides, watch ANY real Godzilla movie and you'll see they always face Big-G directly!

 


Edited by GeisterKatze, May 18 2019 - 12:59.


Kaneloon #16 Posted May 18 2019 - 13:11

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 7 battles
  • 14
  • Member since:
    03-07-2014

View PostGeisterKatze, on May 18 2019 - 11:58, said:

In the past 35+ years of computer gaming and almost 20 years of online gaming I've seen title after title become "homogeneous" in order to placate players.  A perfect example of that is Blizzard's "World of Warcraft".  In Vanilla WoW every race had special abilities, and every class did also.  In fact, some classes had different abilities within themselves depending on the race chosen(only a Dwarven Priest could "dispel fear", etc).  But as updates came out classes and races became less unique, instead becoming just a different 'skin' you wrapped around your tank/dpm/healer/AOE spambot.

 

Same with hunter pets, which had their own skills. I am really looking forward wow classic ...

 

About the Stb1 I really don't know. Its "carrion" gameplay was so difficult. To me the main problem was the armor : you always are the #1 target of everybody. Plus it felt clumsy and like driving a minivan. Not fun at all.

 

But here you have the feeling the balancing department needed to justify their salary, changes are over complicated and the gun is hard to manage at low speed.



Trauglodyte #17 Posted May 18 2019 - 16:15

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 23747 battles
  • 3,786
  • [GSH] GSH
  • Member since:
    06-04-2016

The "suspension delay" has been a thing, since the Swedium common test.  I imagine that it is still in the game, on live.  But, it is a weird delay, since the icon shows that you're in Siege Mode but you aren't actually in it, yet.  Really annoying and it took a little to get used to, given the delay.

 

As to the side gun depression issue, I imagine that is simply a coding error.  That wasn't a "feature", for the Swediums.  So, given the attention that it SHOULD get, I expect that to get buffed.  I personally like the rate of fire increase.  Granted, I haven't played it on live but it feels like a freaking machine gun.

 

On the flip side, the changes to the Leopard 1 are super boring.  70 kph doesn't mean anything when you don't have the power-to-weight to get there and maps are both too short or have too many inclines/bad terrain resistance areas to allow it.  Plus, while I like the increase in alpha, none of that matters when maps aren't designed for ghetto "alpha" Light tank snipers, which is exactly what the Leopard 1 is.  They should have left well enough alone and just turned the Leo 1 into the Leopard 1A1A8, which would have added spaced armor side skirts and spaced armor to the turret.  The alpha is a nice thing to have but the turret still rotates like crap and the tank is still super sluggish - straight line NEVER means anything on maps that are the size of shoe boxes.  I swear, it is like the devs don't understand the limitations of their overall map designs.  Plus, do I need to point out the irony that the Leopard 1 is a "sniper" tank yet it still has less view range than the M48 Patton, which was designed and produced way earlier than the Leo 1 and is NOT a sniper tank?


Edited by Trauglodyte, May 18 2019 - 17:41.


General_FireBall #18 Posted May 18 2019 - 23:43

    Private

  • Players
  • 32116 battles
  • 6
  • [S--A] S--A
  • Member since:
    01-15-2012

View PostAsassian7, on May 17 2019 - 20:46, said:

so, this is happening. I guess it is technically a "buff" to the tank, but I need to give some major feedback as to why it should not happen, at least with the current changes, in a vein hope that WG will actually listen to a non RU player (and if not I hope the RU players are saying the same thing)

 

The hydualic suspension. Its... okay. There is a slight delay when switching from regular gun dep to the suspension. It makes snap shots especially when over ridges a bit clunky. it is otherwise fairly seamless. I am so far 50/50 on my opinion on it.

 

The turret buff is very nice - its something the tank sorely needed. that can be kept.

 

But heres the problem - It now has -6 only over the sides, you only get that -13 or even the -10 it used to have over the front. this is BAD. BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD! It makes the entire suspension buff completely irrelevant. It should be staying at -10 over the side. heck, it should stay at -10 over the front and just have the suspension take it up to -13. At the very least it should have -8 over the sides after this change. as it is now the tank is actually less effective in ridge fighting that it was before, needing to be completely front on to the enemy to get gun dep, which limits angles you can use when poking ridges.

 

Second, the gun changes. The reload is great, my STB now reloads faster than my 140. HOWEVER. I don't think it needs these changes. Ignoring the gun handling, I think I'd rather have the RoF/alpha left as it is. the reason being is they are making everything too complicated. The tank is now too "busy" with the suspension, the mismatched depression, the fact you now need to be sitting in front of enemies constantly to get damage out. There is too much going on with it. Too much different things to concentrate on to get the most out of the tank, even if you can potentially get a lot out of it.

 

the tank in general, even though its supposed to be a buff, doesn't feel any more capable than it did before. even with the major RoF buff and even with the gun handling buff.

 

So, heres my suggestion to what it should actually be:

 

-Keep turret buff. that is really good.

-Gun dep, -10 all around as it is currently. Suspension can take it up to -13 over the front like it currently does on CT.

-ignore the RoF buffs, just leave it as it is. don't change the alpha, leave it at 390. If you have to then maybe a 0.2 second buff would be good. 

-Gun handling buff, I don't actually think it needs it, but I don't think keeping it would make it overperforming or anything.

 

These are what it actually needs. not a complete redesign of how the tank plays which is what WG is currently going for. the current changes are technically a buff, but they don't really work. 

 

Took the words right from me. Everything here I agree with. My opinion on the Gun Handling is a bit differen't, I feel the STB-1 needs a Gun Handling buff as it lacks in that the most from every other Tier 10 Medium Tank. The turret armor buff is nice, though hard to test on the CT due to the constant  premium ammo spam, but hey, that CT for you. The switch from APCR to AP wasn't really needed. But I do like the changes overall, just needs a few minor tweaks to make effectively perfect the STB-1.

Asassian7 #19 Posted May 19 2019 - 01:34

    Major

  • Players
  • 25494 battles
  • 12,136
  • [PETCO] PETCO
  • Member since:
    12-26-2011

View PostGeisterKatze, on May 18 2019 - 23:58, said:

It seems to me that WG is trying to make tanks individually different, so that play-style can be more diverse.  At the same time WG is NOT giving any one tank the ability to "do everything". 

 

I see that as a plus. 

 

In the past 35+ years of computer gaming and almost 20 years of online gaming I've seen title after title become "homogeneous" in order to placate players.  A perfect example of that is Blizzard's "World of Warcraft".  In Vanilla WoW every race had special abilities, and every class did also.  In fact, some classes had different abilities within themselves depending on the race chosen(only a Dwarven Priest could "dispel fear", etc).  But as updates came out classes and races became less unique, instead becoming just a different 'skin' you wrapped around your tank/dpm/healer/AOE spambot.

 

WG on the other hand have done pretty well to keep introducing unique traits to specific types or nations of tanks.  Does this give some tanks an advantage over others?  Yes, but diversity keeps the game interesting for me.  Take FrontLine for example.  I enjoy dusting off my KV-5, T-44(with the 122mm), Centurion I(with the COOL MK I turret), and M45(historically-correct M26 Pershing with the 105mm howitzer) and playing them competitively.  FrontLine allows me to play more diverse tanks, because it makes those tanks capable again.  And yes, the M45 can do well.  Last night I survived an entire battle, fired 65 shots, and hit 60 times.  

 

I get worried when I see players advocating 1)making the game more homogenous and/or 2)giving any particular vehicle/class/nation within the game all-encompassing abilities.  I like the idea of the STB-1 having to be face-on to an enemy in order to take advantage of the articulated suspension.  Besides, watch ANY real Godzilla movie and you'll see they always face Big-G directly!

 

 

except, the STB did not do even close to everything before. and this change won't make it do everything. And its not actually making its playstyle more diverse, its limiting it. It will do much better in the limited style that WG have chosen for it, but it will not be able to work around that limitation as well. 

 

In this game, limiting tanks to specific roles is always a guaranteed way to make them worse. The Leo itself is a great example for this. it can do one thing - snipe. It can do that very well. it cannot do anything else, which in the current game meta makes it absolutely terrible, even with the buffs it is getting next patch. 



Avalon304 #20 Posted May 19 2019 - 03:35

    Major

  • Players
  • 23618 battles
  • 10,112
  • [SNPAI] SNPAI
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

View PostAsassian7, on May 18 2019 - 17:34, said:

In this game, limiting tanks to specific roles is always a guaranteed way to make them worse. The Leo itself is a great example for this. it can do one thing - snipe. It can do that very well. it cannot do anything else, which in the current game meta makes it absolutely terrible, even with the buffs it is getting next patch. 

 

I feel the need to point out that the meta of this game has only developed as it has because every tank is capable of doing everything at least semi-well. Giving tanks diverse roles, and unique roles is the way the meta starts to shift.

 

These werent just "buffs" to the STB (or the Leopard), these were complete reworks. Diversifying the roles of tanks, while making them worse in the short term (as far as the games current meta is concerned) will be better in the long term because it will provide a more dynamic and unqie meta to emerge over time. This needs to be supported by other things, but it does have to start somewhere.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users