Jump to content


Whatever Happened To The Heavy Rebalance?

E-100 T110E5 IS-4

  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

_Zee__ #1 Posted Oct 01 2019 - 17:46

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 57360 battles
  • 70
  • [IXGD] IXGD
  • Member since:
    04-15-2013
What ever became of Wargaming's promise to rebalance some of the power crept heavy tanks in the game?  They specifically mentioned the IS-4 and E-100. Many at least here on the NA are also hoping for a roll back of the T100E5 nerf. To be most clear, I have 3 tier 10 heavy tanks rotting in my garage, with $200 worth of premium tanks to support their crews. Why would I do something like buy an Alpine Tiger or grind up to the 5A if my experience tells me it will only be a waste of time and money?

_Zee__ #2 Posted Oct 01 2019 - 17:48

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 57360 battles
  • 70
  • [IXGD] IXGD
  • Member since:
    04-15-2013
This thread got double posted. Can an admin remove one?

oldewolfe #3 Posted Oct 01 2019 - 18:12

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 23927 battles
  • 3,583
  • [1STBN] 1STBN
  • Member since:
    11-08-2014

On Hold for the Ammunition Rebalance....

 

They don't want to have Rebalance the Tanks again After that....



SpectreHD #4 Posted Oct 01 2019 - 18:25

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 16907 battles
  • 17,342
  • [TT] TT
  • Member since:
    07-12-2010

View Postoldewolfe, on Oct 02 2019 - 01:12, said:

On Hold for the Ammunition Rebalance....

 

They don't want to have Rebalance the Tanks again After that....

 

And they are suuuure taking their sweet time on that.



Astralite #5 Posted Oct 01 2019 - 18:36

    Captain

  • Players
  • 25999 battles
  • 1,600
  • Member since:
    12-24-2013
Its never going to happen. They'll sell more and more and more premium tanks and then the game will shut down.

T_Bo #6 Posted Oct 01 2019 - 20:14

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 41004 battles
  • 942
  • [REJEX] REJEX
  • Member since:
    02-10-2011
The heavy rebalance that WGing has planned involves selling a bunch of new OPed heavy premiums, your old tech tree heavies will continue to rot

CanadianPuppy #7 Posted Oct 01 2019 - 20:29

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 414 battles
  • 186
  • Member since:
    06-22-2019

Well then, somebody wasted $200 then. That sucks, i guess. Fun while it lasted?

Meanwhile that $200 could have been in an 500 Index Fund


Edited by CanadianPuppy, Oct 01 2019 - 20:29.


Avalon304 #8 Posted Oct 01 2019 - 21:17

    Major

  • Players
  • 23632 battles
  • 10,112
  • [SNPAI] SNPAI
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

View PostSpectreHD, on Oct 01 2019 - 10:25, said:

 

And they are suuuure taking their sweet time on that.

 

I mean... good... this is a large sweeping change to a major system in the game that will have far reaching implications for literally every tank in the game... they should take as much time as they need...

 

EDIT: To the OP the T110E5 was never on the table, nor does it need to be rebalanced. Its already balanced.


Edited by Avalon304, Oct 02 2019 - 06:32.


SpectreHD #9 Posted Oct 02 2019 - 06:15

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 16907 battles
  • 17,342
  • [TT] TT
  • Member since:
    07-12-2010

View PostAvalon304, on Oct 02 2019 - 04:17, said:

 

I mean... good... this is a large sweeping change to a major system in the game that will have far reaching implications for literally every tank in the game... they should take as much time as they need...

 

EDIT:L Tot eh OP the T110E5 was never on the table, nor does it need to be rebalanced. Its already balanced.

 

Yeah sure, by testing out silly solutions like buffing alpha and HP for all vehicles and now for some reason testing HE instead of just outright nerfing or better yet, removing this broken former pay to win mechanic.



Avalon304 #10 Posted Oct 02 2019 - 06:32

    Major

  • Players
  • 23632 battles
  • 10,112
  • [SNPAI] SNPAI
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

View PostSpectreHD, on Oct 01 2019 - 22:15, said:

 

Yeah sure, by testing out silly solutions like buffing alpha and HP for all vehicles and now for some reason testing HE instead of just outright nerfing or better yet, removing this broken former pay to win mechanic.

 

The solution is fine. It will accomplish what it needs to accomplish, and Im better off for it, because the rounds I normally shoot just gain more alpha (standard rounds). I dont think its a bad course of action, because it was never going to go away entirely. (Then again its never actually been a problem in the first place, but like I said, this change just benefits me). I am curious what theyre going to change with HE, since it seems they want to make it more predictable... I am interested to see what the changes are on sandbox.



tanopasman62 #11 Posted Oct 02 2019 - 07:24

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 21375 battles
  • 4,580
  • [_ADP_] _ADP_
  • Member since:
    12-13-2016
On hold until the ammo changes, which will most likely be here by the end of the year, maybe january-march 2020.

_Bagheera_ #12 Posted Oct 02 2019 - 07:44

    Major

  • Players
  • 36887 battles
  • 5,744
  • [SIMP] SIMP
  • Member since:
    12-23-2011

View PostAvalon304, on Oct 01 2019 - 14:17, said:

 

I mean... good... this is a large sweeping change to a major system in the game that will have far reaching implications for literally every tank in the game... they should take as much time as they need...

 

EDIT: To the OP the T110E5 was never on the table, nor does it need to be rebalanced. Its already balanced.

 

E5 is garbage in the face of the wz, super conq, and basically any tier 10 with gun depression and turret armor. 

 

Hell, the tier 9 conqueror is more dangerous than an E5. 



_Bagheera_ #13 Posted Oct 02 2019 - 07:47

    Major

  • Players
  • 36887 battles
  • 5,744
  • [SIMP] SIMP
  • Member since:
    12-23-2011

View PostAvalon304, on Oct 01 2019 - 23:32, said:

 

The solution is fine. It will accomplish what it needs to accomplish, and Im better off for it, because the rounds I normally shoot just gain more alpha (standard rounds). I dont think its a bad course of action, because it was never going to go away entirely. (Then again its never actually been a problem in the first place, but like I said, this change just benefits me). I am curious what theyre going to change with HE, since it seems they want to make it more predictable... I am interested to see what the changes are on sandbox.

He needs to do more to poorly armored tanks, and probably needs to do more damage on an actual penetration. Ive gotten lots of use out of the recently buffed Muts HE shells because they have the same velocity as the AP rounds and have 90mm of penetration. Those things EAT wheeled and light tanks now. 

 

There are quite a few guns, especially the L7 clones that historically fired HEP rounds and should get the same treatment. I also think the large caliber he shells could also get some penetration buffs and alpha/velocity buffs to make them more useful for opportunities where you flank opponents or actually fight poorly armored tanks. Quite a few high tier vehicles have <90 to 100mm of rear or sometimes side armor so...ammo selection could actually matter. 



Avalon304 #14 Posted Oct 02 2019 - 08:15

    Major

  • Players
  • 23632 battles
  • 10,112
  • [SNPAI] SNPAI
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

View Post_Bagheera_, on Oct 01 2019 - 23:44, said:

 

E5 is garbage in the face of the wz, super conq, and basically any tier 10 with gun depression and turret armor. 

 

Hell, the tier 9 conqueror is more dangerous than an E5. 

 

Imagine that... a balanced tank doesnt look good when compared with tanks that are OP. Colour me surprised.

 

View Post_Bagheera_, on Oct 01 2019 - 23:47, said:

He needs to do more to poorly armored tanks, and probably needs to do more damage on an actual penetration. Ive gotten lots of use out of the recently buffed Muts HE shells because they have the same velocity as the AP rounds and have 90mm of penetration. Those things EAT wheeled and light tanks now. 

 

There are quite a few guns, especially the L7 clones that historically fired HEP rounds and should get the same treatment. I also think the large caliber he shells could also get some penetration buffs and alpha/velocity buffs to make them more useful for opportunities where you flank opponents or actually fight poorly armored tanks. Quite a few high tier vehicles have <90 to 100mm of rear or sometimes side armor so...ammo selection could actually matter. 

 

This I fundamentally disagree with... HE is already too much of an easy mode chip damage solution, especially from anything with a caliber larger than 120mm.



SpectreHD #15 Posted Oct 02 2019 - 14:34

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 16907 battles
  • 17,342
  • [TT] TT
  • Member since:
    07-12-2010

View PostAvalon304, on Oct 02 2019 - 13:32, said:

The solution is fine. It will accomplish what it needs to accomplish, and Im better off for it, because the rounds I normally shoot just gain more alpha (standard rounds). I dont think its a bad course of action, because it was never going to go away entirely. (Then again its never actually been a problem in the first place, but like I said, this change just benefits me). I am curious what theyre going to change with HE, since it seems they want to make it more predictable... I am interested to see what the changes are on sandbox.

 

What I do not like about the changes, despite accomplishing the same thing, is that nerfing premium ammo does the same thing as well and does not require change changing tank HP and alpha damage. Just nerfing premium ammo is less work and does not require a sweeping change to two aspects of a game. Basically, there is no reason for a game wide increase to HP and alpha so there is no reason to go this route to address a completely different issue. Also I do not think it is necessary to subject players to having to re-familiarise themselves to the values of this game after all this years. The fact that WG somehow though this was a potential solution instead of addressing the issue directly puzzles me greatly.

 

As for HE, is that what they want to do with it? I actually think it is good now. I wonder if HE damage would decrease the thicker an armour part is up to a certain thickness than it will average around a specific amount. So, if a part is penetrable, it would do the specified damage on penetration, then if the armour is thicker by a 10mm, it would do less, 20mm it will do even lesser damage and so on. So maybe like penetration drop of for AP/APCR at range but on armour it will be a damage drop off depending on the thickness of armour. That is what I am thinking if predictability is something they want.


Edited by SpectreHD, Oct 02 2019 - 14:43.


Mikosah #16 Posted Oct 03 2019 - 05:42

    Major

  • Players
  • 17582 battles
  • 4,479
  • Member since:
    01-24-2013

View Post_Bagheera_, on Oct 02 2019 - 00:47, said:

He needs to do more to poorly armored tanks, and probably needs to do more damage on an actual penetration. Ive gotten lots of use out of the recently buffed Muts HE shells because they have the same velocity as the AP rounds and have 90mm of penetration. Those things EAT wheeled and light tanks now. 

 

There are quite a few guns, especially the L7 clones that historically fired HEP rounds and should get the same treatment. I also think the large caliber he shells could also get some penetration buffs and alpha/velocity buffs to make them more useful for opportunities where you flank opponents or actually fight poorly armored tanks. Quite a few high tier vehicles have <90 to 100mm of rear or sometimes side armor so...ammo selection could actually matter. 

 

The tanks that have higher than normal HE pen can actually use it tactically against soft targets and high-caliber guns can just lob HE at everything, but most normal guns have no use for normal HE. Its inconsistent even against the thinnest armor. And even if it weren't, the time it takes to switch shell types is often just too long to justify a manual swap during actual combat. In situations where HE chip damage against frontal armor is the most viable tactic, that really just means that the corridor/armor saturation has gone several steps too far. Heaven forbid it be practical to aim an AP shell at a weakspot.

 

Situation gets even weirder in those ammo rework sandbox tests they ran several months ago. HP pools and AP damage were scaled up, but HE alpha was not. Without an alpha advantage over AP, the typical gun's low-pen HE becomes even more useless than before. Granted that certain gimmicks like death stars and arta could definitely stand being toned down by the same set of changes, but that's another matter entirely. For typical guns across the board, it would be great if HE did serve its purpose reliably. And as for the whole armor/gold debacle, nobody would even need gold if enemy armor were readily penetrable. So really, we could kill five or six birds with one stone if only the meta shifted away from armor and corridors.



Avalon304 #17 Posted Oct 03 2019 - 06:15

    Major

  • Players
  • 23632 battles
  • 10,112
  • [SNPAI] SNPAI
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

View PostSpectreHD, on Oct 02 2019 - 06:34, said:

 

What I do not like about the changes, despite accomplishing the same thing, is that nerfing premium ammo does the same thing as well and does not require change changing tank HP and alpha damage. Just nerfing premium ammo is less work and does not require a sweeping change to two aspects of a game. Basically, there is no reason for a game wide increase to HP and alpha so there is no reason to go this route to address a completely different issue. Also I do not think it is necessary to subject players to having to re-familiarise themselves to the values of this game after all this years. The fact that WG somehow though this was a potential solution instead of addressing the issue directly puzzles me greatly.

 

As for HE, is that what they want to do with it? I actually think it is good now. I wonder if HE damage would decrease the thicker an armour part is up to a certain thickness than it will average around a specific amount. So, if a part is penetrable, it would do the specified damage on penetration, then if the armour is thicker by a 10mm, it would do less, 20mm it will do even lesser damage and so on. So maybe like penetration drop of for AP/APCR at range but on armour it will be a damage drop off depending on the thickness of armour. That is what I am thinking if predictability is something they want.

 

I mean nerfing premium rounds still requires major sweeping changes to nearly every tank in the game. It would also require a comprehensive armor rework. Either way you slice it, theres a massive amount of work needed to things that arent the ammo. Theyre still addressing the "issue" directly, just not in the way you would prefer.

 

We have no idea what they actually want to do with HE. All they have said is the 4th iteration of Sandbox will be coming this month and that it will deal with HE changes. And how you described HE working is how HE currently works... the thicker the armor you splash the less damage you do.



SpectreHD #18 Posted Oct 03 2019 - 08:20

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 16907 battles
  • 17,342
  • [TT] TT
  • Member since:
    07-12-2010

View PostAvalon304, on Oct 03 2019 - 13:15, said:

 

I mean nerfing premium rounds still requires major sweeping changes to nearly every tank in the game. It would also require a comprehensive armor rework. Either way you slice it, theres a massive amount of work needed to things that arent the ammo. Theyre still addressing the "issue" directly, just not in the way you would prefer.

 

We have no idea what they actually want to do with HE. All they have said is the 4th iteration of Sandbox will be coming this month and that it will deal with HE changes. And how you described HE working is how HE currently works... the thicker the armor you splash the less damage you do.

 

Not to every tank in the game because every tank did not get an armour buff. We only have to look at the tanks they buffed and introduced when they decide to make armour a balanceable stat. Many if not most tanks prior to that tried to be a historically accurate.

 

Just buffing HP and alpha doesn't give a case for reducing overbuffed armour because that is an issue. Armour shouldn't be relegated to be some sort of passive defense that works when RNG decides to low roll the shell hitting it. Armour in general should be thick enough that being lazy allows it to be defeated but also thick enough that it would require more thought to maximise its effectiveness like through angling.

 

Yes, it is not the way I would prefer it because I want to go back to having common sense armour thickness, and promotion of angling and learning weakspots. And that requires changing premium ammo itself.

 

And if HE is already like how it describes, then I have no idea what reason they could do with it. Hope they don't add stun mechanics....


Edited by SpectreHD, Oct 03 2019 - 08:21.


Avalon304 #19 Posted Oct 03 2019 - 09:35

    Major

  • Players
  • 23632 battles
  • 10,112
  • [SNPAI] SNPAI
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

View PostSpectreHD, on Oct 03 2019 - 00:20, said:

 

Not to every tank in the game because every tank did not get an armour buff. We only have to look at the tanks they buffed and introduced when they decide to make armour a balanceable stat. Many if not most tanks prior to that tried to be a historically accurate.

 

Just buffing HP and alpha doesn't give a case for reducing overbuffed armour because that is an issue. Armour shouldn't be relegated to be some sort of passive defense that works when RNG decides to low roll the shell hitting it. Armour in general should be thick enough that being lazy allows it to be defeated but also thick enough that it would require more thought to maximise its effectiveness like through angling.

 

Yes, it is not the way I would prefer it because I want to go back to having common sense armour thickness, and promotion of angling and learning weakspots. And that requires changing premium ammo itself.

 

And if HE is already like how it describes, then I have no idea what reason they could do with it. Hope they don't add stun mechanics....

 

There are several tanks in the game across all tiers that would have to be looked at. There are also a great deal of tanks that are premiums that can not be nerfed, lest the unwashed masses cry that their tank that they paid for is no longer what they paid for. So left with the fact that there are tanks with armor that cant be nerfed we have to go the other way. And thats where we are on sandbox, with standard shells getting more alpha and HP being buffed across the board. Thats where we are, and thats how we got here.

 

Secondly when you say:

 

Block Quote

 Armour in general should be thick enough that being lazy allows it to be defeated but also thick enough that it would require more thought to maximise its effectiveness like through angling.

 

Thats what we had back before they started crazily buffing armor. And yet people constantly cried about gold spam, despite it never being a problem. In fact outside of a few tanks (Type 4 and 5, Obj. 268 v4, Defender, and one or two others) thats still what we have. Because, and heres the kicker, gold ammo penetration really hasnt changed from 3-4 years ago, before the armor ballooned up like it has.

 

Yea, Im not sure what they can do to HE either. Adding stun to all HE would be a garbage change though... that would be bad.



SpectreHD #20 Posted Oct 03 2019 - 11:28

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 16907 battles
  • 17,342
  • [TT] TT
  • Member since:
    07-12-2010

View PostAvalon304, on Oct 03 2019 - 16:35, said:

 

There are several tanks in the game across all tiers that would have to be looked at. There are also a great deal of tanks that are premiums that can not be nerfed, lest the unwashed masses cry that their tank that they paid for is no longer what they paid for. So left with the fact that there are tanks with armor that cant be nerfed we have to go the other way. And thats where we are on sandbox, with standard shells getting more alpha and HP being buffed across the board. Thats where we are, and thats how we got here.

 

Secondly when you say:

 

 

Thats what we had back before they started crazily buffing armor. And yet people constantly cried about gold spam, despite it never being a problem. In fact outside of a few tanks (Type 4 and 5, Obj. 268 v4, Defender, and one or two others) thats still what we have. Because, and heres the kicker, gold ammo penetration really hasnt changed from 3-4 years ago, before the armor ballooned up like it has.

 

Yea, Im not sure what they can do to HE either. Adding stun to all HE would be a garbage change though... that would be bad.

 

Yes, there are several tanks. But I would say they are not a large number. And quite frankly, considering the fact that WG used to nerf premium vehicles, WG should have more integrity and continue that stance and nerf every and ALL vehicles it deems necessary. Whiners be damned. WG can even go as far as allow players to refund them for Gold. WG would benefit more in the long term from better balance and they and the playerbase should recognise that.

 

But a select handful of premium vehicles having armour so strong and WG doesn't want to nerf premium tanks is not a strong enough case to convince me that buffing HP and damage and leaving stupid levels of armour in that can only be defeated by premium rounds. I also do not believe a simple damage nerf or the alternate to that tested in Sandbox is enough to address premium ammo and the issues it caused.

 

Yes, we had that before. Then people spammed premium ammo. Then we got the overbuffing of armour which lead to further balance issues and lead to where we are now. Premium ammo has had always caused issues before armour was overbuffed. The PzIV/M4 derp HEAT spam episode that caused premium HEAT ammo to be nerfed in addition to ROF nerfs to the derps to the M4 and Jumbo when they had no issues prior when just shooting HE, the (HEA)T69 issue which also caused its premium ammo to be nerfed, then the FV-215b 183 prem HESH one shotting Tier 8s and crippling Tier 9s and 10s which also lead to nerfs and the periodical buffs to the Maus prior to its massive buffs are examples of premium ammo causing players to complain and resulted in nerfs that occur fairly quickly.

 

What premium ammo did to what we had back then was made vehicles that would angled their armour useless. So they cannot fight their way out, they cannot run away and they cannot angle to save themselves. The E100 was famous because angling its turret was a technique all E100 drivers had to learn. Now, angled it is still penetrable. Now it is one of the vehicles needing buffs. It didn't get nerfed but now it cannot perform because one of its characteristics to make itself tougher is useless.

 

Will just buffing its HP enough to make up for that? I am not convinced that it will because it will need more buffs since it will still lose HP regardless if it tries to angle its turret. I am not convinced its survivability will be any better than now since players would be more inclined to load premium ammo. So slow armoured tanks will get shot more often with premium ammo so I see little positive improvement to their survivability if at all. I would rather take no damage from some shots, more so when I angle at the cost of being able to do damage, than having my buffed HP being easily chipped away since more would players just switch to special ammo.

 

Also continually buffing vehicles just makes power creep more of an issue and would require urgent look at lower tiers which WG has been straddling their about it.

 

That is why I prefer the nerfing of premium ammo. Their penetration should be 20-40mm more than standard depending on tier. Higher tiers get less of an increase especially for vehicles with good penetration already. Damage would be reduced but not alot. Between 15-20%. Price reduce to be equal to standard. And this will ultimate so that we can nerf overbuffed and excessive armour in the game.


Edited by SpectreHD, Oct 03 2019 - 11:29.






Also tagged with E-100, T110E5, IS-4

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users