Jump to content


* * * * * 1 votes

[ S T ] Medium Tank rebalances!

KRZY Rebalance changes buffs all around

  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

ArcticTankHunter #21 Posted Aug 12 2020 - 02:13

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 18990 battles
  • 767
  • [OSU-V] OSU-V
  • Member since:
    05-22-2014

View PostKRZYBooP, on Aug 07 2020 - 14:47, said:

Howdy Boom Jockeys!

 

We are continuing our rebalancing of high-tier vehicles. Next in line are branches of German and Chinese medium tanks, as well as the Soviet Object 140.

Of the two German Tier X MTs, the E-50M is the more protected and durable one. Due to its frontal armor, the vehicle is somewhat like a heavy tank. Nevertheless, the thickness of the turret's frontal armor plate is insufficient to repel shots from high-tier opponents. We plan on improving the protection of this area by increasing the thickness of the turret's effective armor from 197 to 266 mm.

Other vehicles of the branch will be improved as well:

Spoiler

 

E50M:

  • Increased the effective armor of the turret's frontal armor plate from 197 to 266 mm
  • 10,5 cm Kw.K. L/52 Ausf. gun
    •  Increased the penetration value of a standard shell from 220 to 230 mm
  • 8,8 cm Kw.K. L/100 gun
    • Increased the damage value from 240 to 280 HP

Panther II:

  • 8,8 cm Kw.K. L/100 gun
    • Increased the damage value from 240 to 280 HP

Panther 8.8:

  • Increased the damage value from 240 to 280 HP

The Chinese medium tank branch will receive a wide array of improvements to a number of technical characteristics affecting both survivability and firepower. These changes should make these vehicles more competitive compared to other, newer tanks.

 

Spoiler

 

121:

  • Increased the effective armor of the upper glacis plate from 240 to 270 mm  
  • Increased the penetration value of a standard shell from 258 to 262 mm
  • Increased vehicle durability from 1,950 to 2,050 HP
  • Increased engine power from 580 to 650 h.p.
  • Changed shell velocity from 1,000/1,000/1,000 to 1,115/907/907 mps

WZ-120:

  • Increased vehicle durability from 1,650 to 1,750 HP
  • Changed the dispersion on turret traverse from 0.16 to 0.14
  • Changed the top speed from 56 to 60 km/h
  • 122 mm 60-122T gun
    • Changed the reload time from 12 to 11 s
    • Changed shell velocity from 950/950/950 to 800/640/800 mps

 

Spoiler

 

Т-34-2:

  • Increased the effective armor of the upper glacis plate from 140 to 200 mm
  • Changed vehicle durability from 1,300  to 1,400 HP
  • 122 mm 37-122JT gun 
    • Changed damage from 390 to 360 HP
    • Changed the reload time from 15 to 12 s
    • Changed accuracy from 0.48 to 0.44
    • Changed the aiming time from 3.1 to 2.9 s
  • 100 mm 44-100JT gun
    • Changed accuracy from 0.42 to 0.4
    • Changed the reload time from 9.1 to 8.1 s
    • Changed the aiming time from 2.9 to 2.7 s

 Т-34-1:

  • 100 mm 44-100JT gun
    • Changed accuracy from 0.42 to 0.4
    • Changed the reload time from 9.3 to 8.3 s
    • Changed the aiming time from 2.9 to 2.7 s
  • Changed the dispersion on turret traverse from 0.16 to 0.14
  • Increased vehicle durability from 1,050 to 1,150 HP

The Object 140 is essentially a well-balanced vehicle, but it will also benefit from slight improvements in firing comfort and survivability. Its gun depression angles will be increased from -6 to -7 degrees, and the armor thickness of the frontal glacis plate will be increased to 260 mm instead of 237 mm. Thanks to these tweaks, the Object 140 will  more confidently withstand attacks from other tier X vehicles and will perform more aggressively on the battlefield.

 

Spoiler

 

Note that these technical characteristics are not final and can be changed.

 

Holy cow 88mm gun does more damage than 90mm of Pershing tank now. Centurion 20pdr is behind the new tanks when it comes to DPM and accuracy.

 

Pershing needs damage increase from 240 damage to 280 damage.

 

122 mm 37-122JT gun 

  • Changed damage from 390 to 360 HP

 

I do not agree on this. We have 100mm cannons do the same damage. Its a 122mm gun. It should do more damage per shot and makes the tank different compare to Russian mediums like the Obj416 and T-44.

 

 

 

 



ArcticTankHunter #22 Posted Aug 12 2020 - 02:18

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 18990 battles
  • 767
  • [OSU-V] OSU-V
  • Member since:
    05-22-2014

View PostSlyGambit, on Aug 07 2020 - 15:25, said:

Makes sense if you read it in Cyrillic.  Can't wait to see how they buff the 260 and IS-7 next.

 

With all the armour buff going on. The have to reverse the Tortoise 268mm of pen. This will also give Conway 268mm pen making it an actual 1 tier higher TD than Charioteer which has the same 268mm pen values. I'm all for reversing the penetration nerf of British TD's. I rather play the Charioteer than Conway because the stock pen is just down right better and makes no sense. Conway is fun for peeking over buildings.

 

WG needs to make up its mind of armour values because in tier X MM everyone shoots gold. The armour changes make no difference other than making it hard for F2P players to even get to tier X from 8 & 9.

 

http://forum.worldof...-foch-pen-nerf/

 

WG should make it that if you face hug a slow heavy Assault Tank, you should die by a thousand cuts. Not make the tank impenetrable to Assault TDs. Just ruin the entire game for Assault TD lines. This was already an issue with the Object 430U before they nerf that command hatch. Mediums are suppose to circle them to death. Not face hug and bounce rounds.

 

Assault TD are heavy tanks in real life and already classed as Heavy tanks in the MM.


Edited by ArcticTankHunter, Aug 12 2020 - 02:30.


Mikosah #23 Posted Aug 13 2020 - 19:13

    Major

  • Players
  • 17582 battles
  • 4,719
  • Member since:
    01-24-2013

I'll repeat my usual mantra- that though we are now accustomed to just throwing armor everywhere to bring powercrept tanks back up to par, this has a massively detrimental side effect of contributing to the corridor meta and to the gold shell problem. More armor means that in practice, players will be punished for using their standard shells and gold shells will become an even greater necessity than before. As a generality, we need less armor and more penetration on the board so that's what I'll suggest. 

 

And in particular I'll point out just how strange it is that the 140 is being buffed again. When its turret was buffed a while back, it basically became the better T-62a. Now they want to buff the hull armor as well? Surely this is some major typo and they actually meant to buff the T-62a instead?



SpectreHD #24 Posted Aug 14 2020 - 11:36

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 17150 battles
  • 17,736
  • [TT] TT
  • Member since:
    07-12-2010

View PostMikosah, on Aug 14 2020 - 02:13, said:

I'll repeat my usual mantra- that though we are now accustomed to just throwing armor everywhere to bring powercrept tanks back up to par, this has a massively detrimental side effect of contributing to the corridor meta and to the gold shell problem. More armor means that in practice, players will be punished for using their standard shells and gold shells will become an even greater necessity than before. As a generality, we need less armor and more penetration on the board so that's what I'll suggest. 

 

And in particular I'll point out just how strange it is that the 140 is being buffed again. When its turret was buffed a while back, it basically became the better T-62a. Now they want to buff the hull armor as well? Surely this is some major typo and they actually meant to buff the T-62a instead?

 

Not only that, inter-tier balanced is negatively affected as it will make it harder tanks that are lower tier to do more.

 

WG should make as historical as possible armour that is still usable and when higher skill knowledge like angling is used, tough. That means nerfing premium ammo and nerfing fantasy armour. Having a fixed stat (historical armour) to start balancing from would make overall balancing easier as a fixed stat to start from would make a solid base to build up from.

 

This was how the game was balanced and the sudden change those years back has resulted in tanks with fantasy armour playing with tanks with historical armour. That is rubbish balancing.

 

I don't know how WG can be so blind to see this. Whoever is working on balancing now has no clue or never experience this game in the first 5 years of its life and when it probably had the most depth and was when this game attracted historians and freelance researchers to go through archives and documents to give WG new and unique tanks to add to the game. Balance now is just a huge farce.



Mikosah #25 Posted Aug 16 2020 - 16:11

    Major

  • Players
  • 17582 battles
  • 4,719
  • Member since:
    01-24-2013
And incidentally, I saw a different set of patchnotes that say that when the Panther 88 gets its alpha buffed from 240 to 280, they're also going to increase the standard shell cost from 252 to 676 credits a pop. Naturally, this should be taken with a grain of skepticism. Still, if it turns out to be true then that would be a very significant disincentive against using the P88. Keep the cost proportional, suddenly multiplying it by 3 is obnoxious. Rather than thinking: "280 damage for only 252 credits? Can't let them have that!" the correct approach would be more like: "Maybe 1200 credits for a 320-alpha standard shell is too much."

SpectreHD #26 Posted Sep 01 2020 - 12:51

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 17150 battles
  • 17,736
  • [TT] TT
  • Member since:
    07-12-2010
Also, can we return E-50's original top engine. Heck, return the top engines from the German tanks that were removed for NO reason.

Fourche7 #27 Posted Sep 03 2020 - 14:02

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 13217 battles
  • 48
  • Member since:
    03-15-2013
^ I'd trade the E 75s recent amour buffs for this.




4 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 4 guests, 0 anonymous users