Jump to content


Too much penetration/too much armor problem.

128L55 Foch T10 TD balance WGfail

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
104 replies to this topic

Loofah #1 Posted 04 August 2012 - 12:04 PM

    General

  • Clan Diplomat
  • 22733 battles
  • 8,726
  • Member since:
    08-06-2011

*
POPULAR

I think after the latest 0.7.5 patch, this is the perfect moment to write something about this problem, 2 problems, actually.

TLDR version: (pink because I hate this color)
Too much armor on some vehicles coupled with tiny or very strong "weakspots" (Foch, post-buff Maus, T110E3) makes reducing avg penetration of T10 guns impossible without making some of these vehicles quite damn OP, and since nobody likes to bounce - every gun WG introduces must have over 260mm penetration. With nearly all guns being 260+ pene, armor has to be stronger to actually work, so WG has to introduce stronger or smaller weakspots, which further hurts all lower-pene guns and results in power creep while making all lower-pene tanks obsolete. F.e. T9 meds used to be  TD killers. They could hurt all T9 TDs but T95 which on the other hand was easily outmaneuverd thanks to its 0 mobility. Then Foch came with its 240+mm armor all over the place coupled with crazy mobility and mopped the floor with all T9 meds - it was too fast to get outmaneuvered and it had way too thick armor to be hurt from the front and the weakspots were way too small to be hit from any reasonable distance.

Too much armor on some vehicles leads to a need for more penetration ("you can penetrate any T9 TD, unless it's Foch, then you're dead" - it doesn't sound too fun for a med driver, does it?) because T10 meds can't have enough pene for anything but 3-4 vehicles (they are T10 tanks, right?), we have to make them effective vs ANYTHING in game. Since armor values went way up since 0.7, to be succesfull vs everything, you need over 255+ penetration nowadays. Oh and T10 TDs have way too much penetration, and it is absolutely unnecessary.

1. Too much penetration.
Recently we have received new T10 meds and T10 tank destroyers. All of them have 259+ penetration. A value so high, that every one of these tanks can reliably penetrate angled E100's hull, IS7 front, IS4 front, angled E75 etc. etc. Basically all tanks that used to be "well armored" are easily penetrable by meds too.

IS7 used to bounce shells mostly from German 128L55 and 150L38 guns (same goes for IS7).All new meds have WAY more penetration than these guns. E100 used to bounce 128L55 and 150L38 from shorter range - and the same problem appears  everyone can easily penetrate it. Also, such "tough targets" as IS7's UFP can be no longer relied on. 268 penetration and even 5-6 degrees angle make it penetrable pretty damn often.

Since T10 TDs joined the party, armor has to deal with around 300 penetration 850+ alpha guns of TDs. They can penetrate IS7 turret front, hull of IS4 or IS7 is as good as paper. Vs these guns armor only works when the penetration roll is way below average. So not even smart positioning will save E75/IS4/IS7 or E100 from getting a gigantic hole in the hull of turret. Only fully angled E100/Maus with hidden LFP can expect to bounce these guns, too bad this means they can't move while doing such maneuvers attack vs these TDs is very often suicide.
New 155mm Foch which can 3-shot all T10 heavies but Maus (I mean, technically, it can also 3-shot Maus, just needs some lucky rolls to do this) with 293 penetration and around 3s reload in-between shots doesn't make things any better. Heavy tank caught in the open for a few seconds is as good as dead. Even catching "only" 2 shells will reduce anyone's HP way below 50% (and usually to around 25-30%). 293 penetration is 7 more than BL10. And BL10 was way more than enough to puncture any in-game tank. French gun is more accurate too.


Too much penetration leads to demise of armor-based vehicles and without armor we may all drive meds as well. We need heavies that are able to bounce a lot of shots because... armor is fun and it allows to break through the defence - we need vehicles that are able to "push" through the defence - with all these new high penetration high DPM guns it's not possible. And tanks are about armor. 303 penetration brings us to a "autoaim at anything" realm and makes armor-angling-wiggling based survival in many "steel walls" of old impossible.

2. Too much armor.
Some of you may find it counter-intuitive to complain about too much armor just after complaining about too much penetration. But both phenomenons are closely connected.
Lets take a look:
Maus: 240mm turret front, angled hull has around 255mm+ effective all-around even when the LFP is visible. 128L55 won't go through any part of the front , unless turret front is hit absolutely perfectly and a good pen-roll happens. Otherwise - bounce after bounce. 267+ penetration grants as good chances of penetration of the turret as 128L55 used to have (and it bounced on 220mm turret front quite often, too bad M68 didn't)
T9/10 Foch: over 240mm all over the front, and it has some of the tiniest weakspots in the business, impossible to hit from over 100m, especially with long-aiming, inaccurate German guns.
90% of the shots will hit the UFP or ground/air if you will try to aim at those weakspots from some distance. Remember - this tank is small to begin with. LFP is one of the smallest in game - not a viable target at distance. 232mm immunity means that 232mm penetration simply doesn't go through. Effective armor is over 240mm according to review. A bit of wiggling and 128L55 won't go through more than 3/7 and 150L38... 1/7?

T110E3 - only tiny lower part of the LFP is reliably penetrated with 246 penetration, upper has around 235mm armor.
Which means... that with some minimum angling/wiggling 128L55 will bounce on the most of this LFP more often than not, and even lower part, which is around 220mm effective WILL bounce shots fairly often (especially when wiggling). WHole LFP is small, lower part of it is simply tiny. GL hitting those. 128L55 will probably bounce more than 50% of the time vs smartly used T110E3, 150L38 will simply bounce all day long.  You have to remember that obj 704 with armor only on mantlet can bounce incredible amount of shots. T110E3 has 10 times as much armor and way better gun. It simply can not be balanced vs 240-250 penetration, unless gigantic nerfs happen, but then it won't be balanced properly vs high-penetration guns.

IS7 - in theory 225 pene goes through the LFP with 50% reliability. In practice - to go through with  reliability you need 246 penetration, and true reliability starts with 260 - vs 260 penetration it's an easy target.
IS4 - angled properly, it gets 240+mm armor all around. 128L55 doesn't go through reliably, 150L38 can be laughed at. Yes, they go through sometimes, but before E100 manages to put 3 penetrating hits through IS4, it will shoot it back 9 times, simply because E100 needs MANy shots to penetrate IS4 3 times unless the distance is really close. However, vs 260+ penetration IS4 is an easy target, which bounces rarely (so it's quite OP vs up to 250mm penetration, it's actually slightly UP vs most T10 guns).



3. Conclusion.
As you can see, the number of vehicles that require over 260 penetration to reliably penetrate at 100-150m is increasing fast. This is IMO the main reason why WG gave T10 meds 259+ penetration - because otherwise they would had no/limited chances vs T9/10 Foch, T110E3 and angled IS4 armor.
The attempts of balancing this game and new vehicles are made only with 260+ penetration guns and arty in mind. WG doesn't care if certain tank will bounce 50-60-70% of German shots while getting penetrated by everyone else - what counts is its WR. If it rapes German heavies and all T9 meds it's fine as long as higher penetration guns or arty can kill it - WR is around 50%? It's fine, even if it is absolutely overpowered vs certain nations' vehicles. Foch pre 0.7.4 was absolutely OP vs anything with less than 250 pene - German/American T8 TDs, T9 meds (because of Foch's mobility mostly), German T9/10 heavies, all T8 heavies etc. But it was an easy kill for arty and Soviet/French/US vehicles could deal with it frontally, so according to WG it was just fine.
The whole problem can only be solved by drastically reducing penetration of nearly all guns in game. Bringing meds to 242-250 penetration range would be the 1st good move. Reducing armor on certain vehicles so, just like in the old days, everything but T95 and properly angled Maus is reliably penetrated at 100-150m given careful aiming with 240+ pene would be the 2nd good move. Tiny weakspots around 240+mm armor plate on a fast TD like Foch shouldn't be an option. Tiny weakspots on a vehicle with god-killer gun like T110E3 shouldn't be an option. T10 TDs don't need 300 penetration. 286mm penetration of BL10 should be the upper limit. More accuracy - yes. Better aimtime - yes. A bit better DPM than obj. 704 - why not. But f.e. T110E3: 295mm penetration, way better aimtime, better ROF and 850 alpha + shitton of armor? Now this is simply crazy.

IMO a tank like obj 704 with 400 more HP, slightly buffed side/upper armor (vs arty) and a bit better aimtime/accuracy would be a perfect T10 TD. But instead of a slight upgrade, we got some absolutely crazy vehicles that are simply annoying to deal with and they don't even have to use camo - when there is no arty around, they can just happily pump shell after shell in that IS7's front, while IS7 will bounce on T110E4/T110E3/JPE100/Foch and sometimes even Obj 268 pretty damn often.
I have always kept saying  how E50 with 248 penetration and 2k HP would be a perfect T10 med. What did we get? 270 penetration. Why? What is the point of this? Same goes for M48A1/T62A, which would be absolutely perfect with around 244. But they got 268/264 instead. And both are a downgrade when it comes to mobility, which is quite ridiculous. Meds should be fast, 44km/h is not fast. 50km/h is not fast either. Instead of increasing flanking potential, WG reduced it, and added so much DPM, accuracy, penetration and aimtime that it actually makes no sense to flank - which further breaks the game.


Does anyone remember times, when 1 out of 4 T9 heavies had over 250 penetration. Does anyone remember times when 2 out of 4 T10 heavies had over 250 penetration, however, 1 of them had quite weak armor all around and the other had NO armor on the hull and was very often forced to take 2x128/130mm shells for one of his 155mm shots. So every one of these tanks penetrated the others without much issues, of course assuming careful aiming. Their balance wasn't perfect, but at that time 246mm penetration was perfectly enough for any in-game target. So German T10 heavies were NOT handicapped by their inability to reliably penetrate, because they have mostly used the same weakspots as their enemies and had almost as high chance of success thanks to BETTER accuracy and better aimtime (something which is long long forgotten).
Nowadays, on 1 hand too much penetration makes armor less and less useful. On the other hand, we can't reduce penetration without turning some recently-introduced tanks into Steel-wall machines. That's why we have to reduce both or at least rebalance some of the high-armor vehicles to make them killable again with lower penetration.


EDIT: IMO this game should be balanced in 2 way simultanously (following may sound obvious, but judging by how some tanks are getting taken care of f.e. T110E5 and holes in frontal armor, WG doesn't agree with me):
1) tank vs tank to ensure proper balance in no-arty encounters (tank on tank doesn't mean 1 on 1, it's just about balancing a tank towards fighting other tanks),
2) tank vs arty - to ensure that every tank is at least semi-useful on the more open maps.
The random nature of this game which results in drastically different arty threat from 1 map to another is a huge problem. Maybe WG should think about rebalancing/redesigning the artillery itself?

Edited by Loofah, 05 August 2012 - 10:44 PM.


CarroStimpak #2 Posted 04 August 2012 - 12:11 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 5974 battles
  • 879
  • Member since:
    04-17-2011
Maybe you shouldn't shoot the Maus angled turret but the hull weakspot? :Smile_sceptic:

Loofah #3 Posted 04 August 2012 - 12:12 PM

    General

  • Clan Diplomat
  • 22733 battles
  • 8,726
  • Member since:
    08-06-2011

View PostCarroStimpak, on 04 August 2012 - 12:11 PM, said:

Maybe you shouldn't shoot the Maus angled turret but the hull weakspot? :Smile_sceptic:

Maybe you should read the fricking OP before posting a dumb reply?
Also it seems your doubtful intelligence didn't notice that I'm actually doing way better than you in this game, so if I'm playing like an idiot, then guess what it tells us about you.

Edited by Loofah, 04 August 2012 - 12:15 PM.


KAFKAS_KARTALI #4 Posted 04 August 2012 - 12:14 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 19532 battles
  • 52
  • Member since:
    04-26-2011
I swear my two bl10 shots bounced direct hit from T1103 LOWER HULL. It is 286 ap i was like wtf.

Loofah #5 Posted 04 August 2012 - 12:17 PM

    General

  • Clan Diplomat
  • 22733 battles
  • 8,726
  • Member since:
    08-06-2011

View Postdostunuz, on 04 August 2012 - 12:14 PM, said:

I swear my two bl10 shots bounced direct hit from T1103 LOWER HULL. It is 286 ap i was like wtf.

While this is an extreme example, it shows how more armor "forces" WG to introduce more penetration. Even a couple of too-much-armor tanks is enough, because game has to be always balanced, and not only when certain X/Y/Z tank is not present.

Woel #6 Posted 04 August 2012 - 12:22 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 24260 battles
  • 1,355
  • Member since:
    01-27-2012
I agree, though this was expected. Whenever WG is adding something new, it "has to be" superior to most of things from before, most of people want to see bigger numbers on their guns and WG is providing that, without thinking of consequences. Personally I was always for the lower penetration values, that makes aiming and knowledge of weakspots actually an advantage.
By the way, what's the clip reload time of Foch155?

Loofah #7 Posted 04 August 2012 - 12:24 PM

    General

  • Clan Diplomat
  • 22733 battles
  • 8,726
  • Member since:
    08-06-2011

View PostWoel, on 04 August 2012 - 12:22 PM, said:

I agree, though this was expected. Whenever WG is adding something new, it "has to be" superior to most of things from before, most of people want to see bigger numbers on their guns and WG is providing that, without thinking of consequences. Personally I was always for the lower penetration values, that makes aiming and knowledge of weakspots actually an advantage.
By the way, what's the clip reload time of Foch155?

Probably around 44s. The problem is - it has enough mobility to run away during reload (20,7 hp/ton). Also - yeah, when it reloads you can kill it, but who wants to get killed in 9s in T10 heavy first? :)

Edited by Loofah, 04 August 2012 - 12:28 PM.


h4ctor #8 Posted 04 August 2012 - 12:26 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 16457 battles
  • 1,821
  • Member since:
    03-25-2012
power creeping everywhere,new better tanks forcing players to grind them and spend money...awesome business plan if you think about it

hopeasusi #9 Posted 04 August 2012 - 12:27 PM

    Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 13029 battles
  • 218
  • Member since:
    11-24-2010
Maus too much armor, really mate?

Its massive, slow as hell and has a crappy gun, so It needs to be unpenebrable from the front to be anything else than a roadblock. Plus it still has far less armor in the LFP than in real life where it was 200mm thick. Plus by all logic the slowwes and the biggest tier 10 heavy should have the best armor as it's the whole point of the maus. If you ask me it should get it's historical armor all around. so extra 10mm to the sides and 20mm to the UFP, then it would truly be a moving bunger as it should be. Anything can circle it except other armor behemoths so it would be fair.

Too much penetration with new tanks, yes this is something I totally agree. 250 should be cap for all but TD and those should be BL-10 level or less, then armor would actually have importance, now it just slows you down agains similar tier tanks.

Killatomate #10 Posted 04 August 2012 - 12:28 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 19200 battles
  • 1,691
  • Member since:
    05-13-2011
+1
for everyone who complains about power creep

Latorque #11 Posted 04 August 2012 - 12:28 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 8177 battles
  • 493
  • Member since:
    05-23-2012
Good post; i've generally stopped seriously grinding beyond Tier VIII until there is a silver lining of hope in the current Tier IX / X situation - looking at the stats it's plain abvious this can't work in any way that's remotely fun; since any kind of "rock-paper-scissors" mechanic has been completely dropped.

Maybe this will be fixed when 1.0 comes around, maybe not. I'll just keep to lower tiers until then.

Loofah #12 Posted 04 August 2012 - 12:31 PM

    General

  • Clan Diplomat
  • 22733 battles
  • 8,726
  • Member since:
    08-06-2011

View Posthopeasusi, on 04 August 2012 - 12:27 PM, said:

Maus too much armor, really mate?

Its massive, slow as hell and has a crappy gun, so It needs to be unpenebrable from the front to be anything else than a roadblock. Plus it still has far less armor in the LFP than in real life where it was 200mm thick. Plus by all logic the slowwes and the biggest tier 10 heavy should have the best armor as it's the whole point of the maus. If you ask me it should get it's historical armor all around. so extra 10mm to the sides and 20mm to the UFP, then it would truly be a moving bunger as it should be. Anything can circle it except other armor behemoths so it would be fair.

Too much penetration with new tanks, yes this is something I totally agree. 250 should be cap for all but TD and those should be BL-10 level or less, then armor would actually have importance, now it just slows you down agains similar tier tanks.

Maus has 200mm LFP. EDIT: not 100% sure about that, we'll have to wait for wotarmory review :)
And the problem isn't Maus itself, but Maus's armor.
You may think that it's not a problem, because it's not. Unless you're driving German T9/10 heavy, then you are shafted. If T10 meds had 245 penetration, Maus would be the only frontally impenetrable T10 heavy, and guess what, Maus actually is NOT easy to flank if its team has any idea what they're doing. I'm opposed to "balancing by arty" so arty vulnerability is not a good argument either.


EDIT: BTW in the times of 220mm Maus turret front it also used to have 3200HP. So while turret was penetrated, Maus had enough HP to survive the beating and strike back - and since angling the turret worked wonders, by going shot for shot with Maus other tanks simply died even if they penetrated every one of their shots :)

In short words: Maus is "fine" vs 270 pene. Maus is not fine vs 235 and 246. Why do you think that it's OK when only 1 nation can't hurt Maus frontally while all other nations can? This is ridiculous and has nothing to do with proper balancing.

And Maus turret wasn't that bad, when it was shot by 128L55. It actually bounced pretty damn often. It felt like paper, because IS8, St-1, M103, 50-120 etc. could all penetrate it with not-so-perfect hits - and this has happened because tons of new powerfull and accurate guns were added. Back in the age of T10 T30 and weaker IS7 this wasn't the case - even 220mm armor was "a lot" and T30 was supposed to penetrate reliably anyway.

Edited by Loofah, 04 August 2012 - 12:54 PM.


Trakais #13 Posted 04 August 2012 - 12:33 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 34129 battles
  • 1,035
  • Member since:
    03-17-2011
This may sound cruel but... WG wants you to buy gold shells so that you can "reliably" penetrate, WG wants you to grind for those new tanks, WG wants money. And money is the only factor which determines how tanks are balanced in this game. They may say that it is done according to global WR, I say - that is bullshit. Every tier 10 tank was made and balanced with one aim - give money to WG.

Obirzoe #14 Posted 04 August 2012 - 12:39 PM

    Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 16221 battles
  • 233
  • Member since:
    09-28-2010
+1 to that

I Used to play since open beta and i remember those times, the t10 Heavies where balanced in a good way.

->T30 was a damage dealer which was very fragile due to its paper chassis
->E-100 was still a damage dealer but with potential to bounce shots and then brawl and fight the enemy in close combat
->Maus was simply a tank, a driving bunker nearly impenetrable from the front even the weakspots if angled could bounce quiet some shots
->IS-7 fast and well sloped armor nice cannon, all in all an all rounder between tank and damage dealer it didnt came to perfection on both like the Maus in taking/avoiding damage or the t30 in dealing damage

Same goes for TDs but they balanced amor/speed/Damage&Penetration


These new guns are ridiculous E-100 in my opinion is a tank that do suffer a lot since it never had much armor and even with the buffs it wont have much more and thanks to his "poor" gun it cant do much cause close combat and flanking an enemy to put the shells through his armor means dead for sure.
The Maus can still withstand soem hits but on the other hand it can die in only !!!3!!! shots from an jgdpzE100. To remain a useful tank and fulfill its tasks its needs a massive buff to the whole front. (just messing around with some numbers Weak spot 250+angle, UFL 300+angle, turret 280+angle)

But as you mention this is going insane and the heavys are following in my opinion the way of history and will disappear in favor of MBTs which the T10 meds are.

Merquise #15 Posted 04 August 2012 - 12:40 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 27130 battles
  • 4,582
  • Member since:
    08-25-2011
If it were up to me, there would be a lot more armor and all penetrations would be halved, but in the mean time RNG would be lilited to +/-5% instead of +/-25%

Right now i have the feeling it's just a matter of who has the most hitpoints.
Everything pens everything, just shoot a lot and voila thats it.
It's like to see at least the front of most tanks to be impenetrable.
TD's but also heavies. Much more frontarmor pls.

Maybe then WoT wouldn't be so much of a slugfest and people who know how to drive and flank get an advantage.
A few days ago an M18 was behind ahouse, me in Jgdtiger88 on the other side of house. That guy flanked right, drove back, flanked left, drove back.. I tried to counter him, tried to manouvre but he did a perfect job. Even though I lost it was the most fun I had in weeks.
I want more of those battles where manouvering is more important than a big gun.
So either reduce penetration or give more front armor.

remuneratio #16 Posted 04 August 2012 - 12:43 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 19460 battles
  • 752
  • Member since:
    03-04-2011
+1 from me
1st: since the patch i dont touch my t-54 anymore because tier 10 battles are just ridiculous
2nd: i WONT upgrade my t-54 to whatever-his-name-is for less medium playstyle and more heavy playstyle
furthermore 3rd: i wont go anywhere beyond tier 7/8 until the content is rebalanced in a manner OP stated...

oh, and 4th:

View PostMerquise, on 04 August 2012 - 12:40 PM, said:

I want more of those battles where manouvering is more important than a big gun.
So either reduce penetration or give more front armor.

Edited by remuneratio, 04 August 2012 - 12:48 PM.


Loofah #17 Posted 04 August 2012 - 12:47 PM

    General

  • Clan Diplomat
  • 22733 battles
  • 8,726
  • Member since:
    08-06-2011

View PostMerquise, on 04 August 2012 - 12:40 PM, said:

If it were up to me, there would be a lot more armor and all penetrations would be halved, but in the mean time RNG would be lilited to +/-5% instead of +/-25%

Right now i have the feeling it's just a matter of who has the most hitpoints.
Everything pens everything, just shoot a lot and voila thats it.
It's like to see at least the front of most tanks to be impenetrable.
TD's but also heavies. Much more frontarmor pls.

Maybe then WoT wouldn't be so much of a slugfest and people who know how to drive and flank get an advantage.
A few days ago an M18 was behind ahouse, me in Jgdtiger88 on the other side of house. That guy flanked right, drove back, flanked left, drove back.. I tried to counter him, tried to manouvre but he did a perfect job. Even though I lost it was the most fun I had in weeks.
I want more of those battles where manouvering is more important than a big gun.
So either reduce penetration or give more front armor.

Well, reducing the random spread to +/-15% would be a good start (I think 5% is a bit too little).
Front armor is fun, I fully agree. But only if it requires some intelligence to use :) E75 used to be so fun because it had this front armor but it was like a tool - it could create a huge number of bounces if used by a skilled driver, but it was useless when the driver sucked.

BTW M8A1 is epic fun :) T4 is much more fun than T10, and there is no arty focusing you and killing with splash from 5m away. Direct hit = death, but they almost never hit directly.

Edited by Loofah, 04 August 2012 - 12:49 PM.


Psycho_Baby_ #18 Posted 04 August 2012 - 12:48 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 61209 battles
  • 2,089
  • [AHAZ] AHAZ
  • Member since:
    05-23-2011
Loofah, can I use this up later? Maus-testing are in the last stages.

Seems we are on one mind.

Loofah #19 Posted 04 August 2012 - 12:50 PM

    General

  • Clan Diplomat
  • 22733 battles
  • 8,726
  • Member since:
    08-06-2011

View PostSinenfutorepatolvaj, on 04 August 2012 - 12:48 PM, said:

Loofah, can I use this up later? Maus-testing are in the last stages.

Can't wait for Maus armor review, although I think I know what to expect - mostly bad news for German heavy tank drivers (even if they have a Maus themselves, nobody likes never-ending shell spamming :) ).
Use whatever you want, I have created this topic out of pure boredom.

Edited by Loofah, 04 August 2012 - 12:51 PM.


japtank #20 Posted 04 August 2012 - 12:53 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 28766 battles
  • 1,056
  • Member since:
    04-20-2012
Lower tiers is where the fun is.

But to each his own, I guess :)





Also tagged with 128L55, Foch, T10, TD, balance, WGfail

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users