Jump to content


* - - - - 3 votes

[ S T ] Heavy tank rebalances!

KRZY Rebalance Changes tanks heavy tanks

  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

KRZYBooP #1 Posted Mar 25 2020 - 16:36

    Community Coordinator

  • Administrator
  • 4508 battles
  • 560
  • [WGA] WGA
  • Member since:
    08-10-2015

Howdy Boom Jockeys! 

 

Here is a bunch of text:

Spoiler

Summary

We promised to review certain vehicles quite a while ago, but we needed time to check the hypotheses related to the balance rework. So, we had to postpone testing the changes to individual vehicles.

We do understand that the community as a whole has issues with a larger number of tanks than mentioned above but for now, we’re going to concentrate on making these concrete vehicles more fun to play. We intend to deal with the rest in the future and will inform you when the time comes for that.

We would like to express our gratitude to the players who have been pointing out the problems with these (and some other) vehicles to us. We appreciate your involvement, passion, and concern very much.

Please take note that the changes we’ve talked about aren’t final (as is always goes with proposed adjustments to the vehicles). We can’t wait to hear your opinion on this batch.

Check out some pictures!

Spoiler

 


Edited by KRZYBooP, Mar 25 2020 - 16:48.


Zanarkand_C #2 Posted Mar 25 2020 - 16:50

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 38690 battles
  • 993
  • [RELIC] RELIC
  • Member since:
    12-06-2014
The IS4 sounds like it's going to be a beast again. The E5 on the other hand sounds like it'll still be lack luster, it's really just the cupola that ruins the tanks game play. All in all I like these changes, only thing missing imo is I wish the 113 was tweaked a bit before sending it to the collectors lot.

Cowcat137 #3 Posted Mar 25 2020 - 17:00

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 15707 battles
  • 7,583
  • [HHOUR] HHOUR
  • Member since:
    08-17-2015
300% turret weak spot buff to Russian. E5's tumor is … ignored. 

Oberjager_Jeremy_Torres #4 Posted Mar 25 2020 - 17:32

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 18655 battles
  • 176
  • [CR506] CR506
  • Member since:
    08-13-2013

View PostCowcat137, on Mar 25 2020 - 16:00, said:

300% turret weak spot buff to Russian. E5's tumor is … ignored. 

Its a russian game so...



madogthefirst #5 Posted Mar 25 2020 - 17:36

    Major

  • Players
  • 25732 battles
  • 9,570
  • [GFLC] GFLC
  • Member since:
    12-28-2011
  • Hmm Tiger II armor buff, go on. 
  • Turret buff to M103 by all means go on, we'll probably still have a easy to over match turret roof.
  • Tiger 1 probably does need a buff at all it is fine the way it is. 
  • I honestly feel the bar on the E100 should stay the way it currently.
  • T32 is going to need more pen buff still 200ish pen is pretty anemic for a tier 8 heavy.

 



KRZYBooP #6 Posted Mar 25 2020 - 17:49

    Community Coordinator

  • Administrator
  • 4508 battles
  • 560
  • [WGA] WGA
  • Member since:
    08-10-2015

View PostCowcat137, on Mar 25 2020 - 10:00, said:

300% turret weak spot buff to Russian. E5's tumor is … ignored. 

 

being able to fire faster with less of a penalty to moving seems like a pretty big advantage.



ThatTrafficCone #7 Posted Mar 25 2020 - 17:52

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 43571 battles
  • 144
  • [Y0L0] Y0L0
  • Member since:
    06-11-2011

I do not like these changes to the German branch. I would have much rather preferred removing the top guns from these tanks and down-tiering them instead. Wargaming has already admitted in the past that were they to start the game over, they would likely put the entire E-100 branch down a tier. So what's stopping them from doing so now? I mean, come on! We've already got a premium Tiger I at Tier VI, a Tiger II at Tier VII, and even a E 75 at Tier VIII! Rather than buffing these regular tanks to be equivalent to their same-tier premium counterparts, why not just drop them a tier and make them more similar to the premiums?

 

Regarding a Tier X replacement, there is the E 100 Project B Antrieb: 

 

 

This vehicle is an interpretation of a real design by Skorpion_G_Twitch. Basically, Ardelt wanted to fit the E-100 with the 1200 HP Maybach engine the in-game tank uses. To do so, however, would have necessitated swapping the engine compartment and the fighting compartment around, pushing the turret to the rear and allowing for a longer (higher penetration) gun due to the improved center of gravity. The engine could also push the tank to 40 km/h. This tank could very easily accept the incoming E-100 buffs because not much is known about it, allowing Wargaming some more leniency with respect to historical accuracy.

 

An "E-100 PBA" would very similar to the premium VK 72.01 K. The E-100 at Tier IX could also receive the Tiger-Maus turret as a stock option. The entire branch itself would better fit the mold of being less armored than the Maus branch, but being a bit more mobile and having bigger guns. Hell, this would even give Wargaming the opportunity to make premium tanks out of the Tiger with the 8,8 L/71 and the Tiger II with the 10,5 L/68.

 

I think it's nonsense to buff this line of tanks when down-tiering them (along with some minor rebalances to ensure they fit the new tiers better) would accomplish the same effect, and better respect the actual tanks. I think after these changes I will finally have to go out back behind the shed with my internal historian.


Edited by ThatTrafficCone, Mar 25 2020 - 18:16.


PAP0 #8 Posted Mar 25 2020 - 17:59

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 18721 battles
  • 294
  • Member since:
    11-25-2013

View PostKRZYBooP, on Mar 25 2020 - 08:49, said:

 

being able to fire faster with less of a penalty to moving seems like a pretty big advantage.


Or just get a S conq...

Although, the E100 and IS4 buffs are neato:medal:



ShmeeCow #9 Posted Mar 25 2020 - 18:00

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 29929 battles
  • 832
  • [CLASS] CLASS
  • Member since:
    01-04-2011

I like the look of that E100 B. Very sexy. 

 

As for current buffs, I feel that similar 128mm guns used on other German HTs should use the same shell and receive the same buff. This would be Maus, Mauschen (top gun) and VK4502p B. Also, what about the Panzer VII? IMO it could use APCR buff and a fix of weakpoints that prevent it from side scraping more effectively. 



Gothraul #10 Posted Mar 25 2020 - 18:08

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 2682 battles
  • 6,152
  • Member since:
    11-17-2014

Really unimpressed with the accuracy and reload nerfs some guns are getting coupled with a few other things like not buffing the ST-1's aim time. WG you guys can do better than this and why nerf the E75's traverse as that doesn't make any sense at all when that aspect has never been complained about. The tumor on the E5 has to be improved otherwise we'll be here complaining of it for years to come.



Nutzo #11 Posted Mar 25 2020 - 18:45

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 51052 battles
  • 87
  • [K-BBQ] K-BBQ
  • Member since:
    03-01-2011
Both EU and NA forums have conflicting information about the E75 traverse changes, and the E75 already has 30 degrees of hull traverse currently for top configuration, were the numbers reversed by accident?

iiNSaNiiTY #12 Posted Mar 25 2020 - 19:06

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 20536 battles
  • 1,612
  • [----E] ----E
  • Member since:
    02-17-2014
E100 buff armor is rubbish, if they do not buff the 150mm sides it will not do any good, they will continue to golden spam her face.

Cowcat137 #13 Posted Mar 25 2020 - 20:04

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 15707 battles
  • 7,583
  • [HHOUR] HHOUR
  • Member since:
    08-17-2015

The E5 problem is that the tumor is a hat that is always exposed to enemy fire, absorbing endless punishment yet can never be destroyed. If it were treated like a  module that once broken, couldn't be damaged again - that might work. As is,  it's a gigantic OFF button, can be hit from any direction even when you are hull down. If you are climbing a hill the enemy can start smashing you before you can get your gun on them. 

Is it realistic ?  Historically yes! The US designed them like that, but if you're gonna say it has to be realistic, there's a slew of Russians with impossible features- lightweight armor, supercharged engines and flat turrets that had -3 degrees gun depression.  The Russians intentionally optimized their designs to dominate the flat north German plain, and when  they invaded  Hungary, Czechoslovakia and Afghanistan they suffered for it because their enemies figured out they could use hills and buildings to attack and fire down on them.


Edited by Cowcat137, Mar 25 2020 - 20:05.


Fadedspirit #14 Posted Mar 25 2020 - 20:48

    Sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 10989 battles
  • 146
  • [REL_3] REL_3
  • Member since:
    07-17-2010

I'll say this, the reason why my E100 was sold years ago and never bought back was the atrocious pen on the main gun. Having such a garbage gun is why it's lackluster. Just buff the pen up to about 256, remove the bar as a weakpoint, and buff the cheeks by another 40 or 50mm. Done . 

 

I haven't noticed much weakness with the is4 other than the top of the turret. Also, the the lower plate is normally the weakest part of the IS4's hull for me. I guess these changes are ok?

 

As for the E5, why did you even bother changing anything about it?? What you posted are not buffs, and will not make people want to play it more. You know what would? Remove the massive capola on top, buffing its capola armor, or reducing the size of the capola.  

 

Literally the only reason no one plays the E5 is because it is riddled with weakpoints, and the capola on the turret being the #1 issue. Please actually take this feedback seriously. Go look at content creators talking about these changes, and the comments are riddled with thousands of people repeating the same things I've posted here. Actually listen please!



LtKelly #15 Posted Mar 25 2020 - 21:10

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 18658 battles
  • 135
  • [BITSA] BITSA
  • Member since:
    07-04-2012

The changes to the American lines are kind of lackluster. Originally the turret armor on the T32 gave it a big advantage, thus you balanced it with a mediocre gun, now, not so much so. It is still required to fight tier 10s as a heavy, and will see the tier 9 and 10 super heavies, and a 10 mill increase to 208mm is kind of mehh. So as not to mess with the T29 which has the same gun why don't you just make the top gun on the T32 the tier 9 T5E1M2 from the 46 Patton with 218 pen. This would also help the entry level M103 which starts with a sub-par tier 8 gun. With regards to the M103 and the E5, I've played them both, gun stats were never an issue, what ruins them is the fragile commanders hatches. On the M103 and the E5 the other team sees it (the commanders hatch), gets their shot off into it, usually penning it, and gets themselves concealed again, all in the time it takes to get the gun on the M103 and E5 into a firing position. I would rather see an armor buff to the commanders hatches, like the British Conquerors got, than a gun buff.

 

As for the buffs to the D-25T for the ST-1 and the IS-4 its simple survey how many people use the tier8 gun as the main weapon, probably none, remove it. Make the BL9 the starting point on the ST-1 and make the M62T2 gun the standard gun on the ST4, you have to research it on the ST-1 to get to the IS-4 anyways. Personally when you spend 6.1 million on a tier 10 it ought to be fully decked out as a tier 10, having to spend an additional 335,000 credits to buff a tank to tier 10 is just stupid. In the case of the E100 you have the choice between two different tier 10 guns so that is different.

 

The biggest issue Tanks the game has, with regards to the guns, is that they must be able to deal with tanks 2 levels higher than the tank they are mounted on, problem is they then overpower tanks 2 levels lower than said tank. Stupid question, have they ever considered going to a new 1 up 1 down format vs the current 2 up 2 down format. This would make gun, and tank, balances a bit easier.



Tupinambis #16 Posted Mar 25 2020 - 21:12

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 38264 battles
  • 15,574
  • Member since:
    12-22-2010
If you buff the E5's turret armor to be really strong it and the Super Conq just end up both trying to be the same tank. By prioritizing the E5's gun over the armor, at least the two tanks will be going for slightly different roles. This game has too many tanks that are constantly trying to be the exact same thing. 

Tupinambis #17 Posted Mar 25 2020 - 21:22

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 38264 battles
  • 15,574
  • Member since:
    12-22-2010
Also Hooray! The KV-3 will not longer be "An IS-2 but the same or worse in literally every single way". I mean, its not much of a difference, but at least its SOMETHING

Scorpiany #18 Posted Mar 25 2020 - 21:24

    Major

  • Game Knowledge Expert
  • 37986 battles
  • 13,122
  • [N1NJA] N1NJA
  • Member since:
    06-27-2013

View PostKRZYBooP, on Mar 25 2020 - 10:49, said:

 

being able to fire faster with less of a penalty to moving seems like a pretty big advantage.


Have you seen the Super Conqueror? It has very similar gun handling, while still maintaining better DPM, better shell velocity, better gun depression and much better armor on the turret and side; only suffering with the lower plate.

 

The gun handling / DPM buff is nice, but it will still just be a worse version of the Super Conqueror, which means once again the T110E5 will still be completely irrelevant in the game's meta. And considering that the Cheiftain is essentially a more armored, more mobile version of the Super Conqueror... Even the Super Conqueror isn't even all that meta outside of Random Battles... So how will the E5 fare?

 

The Super Conqueror needs a nerf for the T110E5 to ever be relevant again. And something needs to be done about the Chieftain / Obj. 907, because they're just better versions of normal tech-tree tanks.

 

Block Quote

  VK 36.01 (H)—from 1,000 to 1,100;

•           Pz.Kpfw. VI H Ausf. H2—from 1,060 to 1,200;

 

Also, what does any of this mean? The VK's stock turret has 850 health, not 1,000... And the upgraded turret has 950 health, not 1,060... Is it actually getting buffed up to 1,200? Because that would mean an already great heavy tank is going to have significantly more HP than any other tank at the Tier other than the Tog II, and would only be 200 HP behind the Tog.

 

That doesn't seem right at all...

 


Edited by Scorpiany, Mar 25 2020 - 21:46.


RoIito #19 Posted Mar 25 2020 - 21:52

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 19571 battles
  • 922
  • Member since:
    12-23-2016

View PostScorpiany, on Mar 25 2020 - 15:24, said:

 

Also, what does any of this mean? The VK's stock turret has 850 health, not 1,000... And the upgraded turret has 950 health, not 1,060... Is it actually getting buffed up to 1,200? Because that would mean an already great heavy tank is going to have significantly more HP than any other tank at the Tier other than the Tog II, and would only be 200 HP behind the Tog.

 

That doesn't seem right at all...

 

 

Remember all lower tier tanks are getting their HP buffed, as the HP buff part actually made it into the next tests from the sandbox.



Avalon304 #20 Posted Mar 25 2020 - 23:11

    Major

  • Players
  • 24905 battles
  • 10,639
  • [SNPAI] SNPAI
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

View PostRoIito, on Mar 25 2020 - 13:52, said:

 

Remember all lower tier tanks are getting their HP buffed, as the HP buff part actually made it into the next tests from the sandbox.

 

Only the low tier HP changes have been kept.

 

~~~

 

Its still amazing to me that people keep comparing a hull down heavy tank (the Super Conqueror) to a fat medium (the T110E5). They arent meant to do the same things. The E5 is more mobile and will now have better ability at gaining positional advantages on the map and its gun will be better in motion (which you should always be in, even if youre forced to brawl other heavies, since thats how you make the cupola hard to hit). It really doesnt matter that the E5 is a worse Super Conqueror (or a worse Chieftain) given that their roles are completely different. (And this ignores the fact that of those two tanks, both of them are either broken or OP so... its not even a good comparison in the first place).







Also tagged with KRZY, Rebalance, Changes, tanks, heavy tanks

2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users