Jump to content


How Would YOU Define an "OP" Tank?

OP Over-Powered OverPowered OP Tanks Poll Bias Biases Biased Tanks General Discussion What Do You Think?

  • Please log in to reply
87 replies to this topic

Poll: How Would You Describe An "OP" Tank? (154 members have cast votes)

You have to complete 250 battle in order to participate this poll.

How Would YOU Describe The Term "OP" In Reference To Tanks?

  1. The tank itself is completely overpowered. It takes next-to-no brainpower to play the tank and is in urgent need of a "nerf". (88 votes [57.14%])

    Percentage of vote: 57.14%

  2. The tank is good, though the driver has some sense of how to play it. In this tank, I could probably do well, though to play it really well, it would take some skill on my part. (30 votes [19.48%])

    Percentage of vote: 19.48%

  3. Both the power of the tank and player skill are equal in playing it. The tank is okay, though having skill will take it a long way. (11 votes [7.14%])

    Percentage of vote: 7.14%

  4. The power of the tank has nothing to do with whether a tank is classed as being "OP". It is solely down to the player. A tank is only ever good if the player driving the thing is good; the term "OP" is irrelevant. (5 votes [3.25%])

    Percentage of vote: 3.25%

  5. I honestly couldn't care less, (^^). (10 votes [6.49%])

    Percentage of vote: 6.49%

  6. Other, (if so, please specify in a post of your own). (10 votes [6.49%])

    Percentage of vote: 6.49%

If You Answered With Either Options 1 or 2, What Tanks Would You Say Were Currently Over-Powered?

  1. I don't really know. (73 votes [47.40%])

    Percentage of vote: 47.40%

  2. Here's my suggestion(s), (if so, please specify your selected tank in a post). (81 votes [52.60%])

    Percentage of vote: 52.60%

Thank You For Taking The Time To Vote, I Really Appreciate It!

  1. No problem! (73 votes [48.99%])

    Percentage of vote: 48.99%

  2. Meh, it was alright, I guess. (31 votes [20.81%])

    Percentage of vote: 20.81%

  3. Hmff! (45 votes [30.20%])

    Percentage of vote: 30.20%

Vote Hide poll

Slyspy #21 Posted 01 January 2015 - 05:05 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 15292 battles
  • 17,937
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011
Voted "couldn't care less" and then couldn't vote in the second question.

Elhazzared #22 Posted 01 January 2015 - 05:06 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 22236 battles
  • 830
  • [GUP] GUP
  • Member since:
    03-23-2011

Going through a list of overpowered tanks would be futile as there is many but simple examples are the IS7 and how much it bouces. It takes no brain power to play it because with the exception of tier 10 TDs, nothing penetrates it from the front (well ocasionally you get one but it mostly bounces everything straight out, even APCR and HEAT). It can even take shots with the side flat and still bounce many. Just drive straight to the enemy and shot. No brain is required. That said someone with a brain will always do better, that is normal, but it requires no brain to play at all.

 

Similarly there are other tanks that just nearly play by themselves. they may be no IS7 but they have characteristics that make doing bad in them a challenge. The Isu-152 is yet another simple example. You need only to fire the gun twice to be doing well with it. It is just that simple. Obviously a player with a brain will many times get 3K to 5K damage in a battle, but even a zombie will somewhat easily do 1.5K damage which is 2 shots and do more damage than the tank has in HP.



SastusBulbas #23 Posted 01 January 2015 - 05:35 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 36722 battles
  • 3,114
  • Member since:
    11-24-2010
Panzer 1C is a bit of a game breaker in low tiers, just flies around tearing soft skinned slow lights a new A-hole.

GTRaPToR #24 Posted 01 January 2015 - 05:39 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 23817 battles
  • 2,400
  • [ANIML] ANIML
  • Member since:
    03-03-2012

View PostElhazzared, on 01 January 2015 - 06:06 PM, said:

Going through a list of overpowered tanks would be futile as there is many but simple examples are the IS7 and how much it bouces. It takes no brain power to play it because with the exception of tier 10 TDs, nothing penetrates it from the front (well ocasionally you get one but it mostly bounces everything straight out, even APCR and HEAT). It can even take shots with the side flat and still bounce many. Just drive straight to the enemy and shot. No brain is required. That said someone with a brain will always do better, that is normal, but it requires no brain to play at all.

 

Similarly there are other tanks that just nearly play by themselves. they may be no IS7 but they have characteristics that make doing bad in them a challenge. The Isu-152 is yet another simple example. You need only to fire the gun twice to be doing well with it. It is just that simple. Obviously a player with a brain will many times get 3K to 5K damage in a battle, but even a zombie will somewhat easily do 1.5K damage which is 2 shots and do more damage than the tank has in HP.

It's funny how bad players talk about tanks which they don't even have. You obviously have no idea how IS7 works.



mortalsatsuma #25 Posted 01 January 2015 - 06:20 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 15034 battles
  • 1,776
  • Member since:
    06-13-2014
you lost me when you tried to make out that the IS-3 has awful side armour. :teethhappy:

p6mmpea #26 Posted 02 January 2015 - 11:45 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 9561 battles
  • 17
  • [HUNDU] HUNDU
  • Member since:
    06-08-2012
All the common tanks used by sealclubbers, clans, stronghold battles etc. are more or less OP (read: better overall stats than same vehicle classes of the same tier). However as for me, grinding stock crap-tanks has improved my skill a lot more than just enjoying the game in my fully developed favourite tanks.

Soppatykki #27 Posted 02 January 2015 - 03:10 PM

    Private

  • Beta Tester
  • 29258 battles
  • 46
  • Member since:
    11-29-2010

OP, means that the tanks in question is better then its peers. It does`t need to be better in every situation, but better on average. OP tanks is one where you could defeat yourself driving its peers. OP tanks give you better results then you would otherwise have.

 

For example, if I could play T-29 against me playing any other tier VII tank, I would win far more matches in the T-29, at times RNG and maps would allow the other tank to win, but on average, the T-29 would win. OP means capacity to defeat equally skilled player driving, that OP tanks peers.

 

Examples of OP tanks are KV-1, T37, T-29 and Bulldog, tier VIII quite balanced, T-54 and finally Batchat, T-62, Obj-140.



Aim_Away_From_Face #28 Posted 02 January 2015 - 03:33 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 77 battles
  • 709
  • Member since:
    09-10-2011

I think there are elements of tanks which are OP which subsequently make the whole tank seem OP. Guns are the usual culprite, WT auf E100,T57 and various other autoloaders are clear examples of this, in my opinion no tank should be able to destroy another of equal tier and type with a single clip (or single shot for large caliber signle shot guns) apart from ammo racks/firs etc. No matter how bad the player might be these tanks can kill you with literally no skill involved. WT again as an example need its reload between shots to be at least 5 seconds and for such a large gun the aim time needs to be double and even then it would still be the most powerful offense at tier 10.

 

Other things like armour and view range are obviously OP, Matilda as mentioned before it massively OP in armour AND gun, T40/T67 both have insane view range advantages over anything else at their tier but WG, being what they are, nerfed other tanks like M5 Stuart in the view range department taking away the single positive it had. Yeah gj.

 

 



Swoopie #29 Posted 02 January 2015 - 03:59 PM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 29330 battles
  • 2,558
  • [RSOP] RSOP
  • Member since:
    01-15-2011

View PostEscapeArtist, on 01 January 2015 - 05:59 PM, said:

Only epicly OP things were Type59 when it first came out and SuperPershing. SP was ridiculous at first.

SP really wasn't OP. It was just the combination of trollish armor and tomatoes who can't aim at all. And then it was mostly the people who didn't have SP who screamed how OP it is (When they couldn't pen it), and the ones who had it were crying for a buff, because the gun and mobility "sucked". Personally I didn't see a need for a buff or a nerf, it was just fine.

 

But a truly OP tank? Pz2J (And I can say this from my own experience).



thewolfpack #30 Posted 02 January 2015 - 04:26 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 59672 battles
  • 1,392
  • [LEOHQ] LEOHQ
  • Member since:
    06-15-2011

View PostGrumblingGrenade, on 16 December 2014 - 06:54 PM, said:

Hello WoT community!

 

So, this has been a thought buzzing around in my head for a while now: how do you define whether a tank is "OP", (Over-Powered)? Many players have different views, which, in turn, should all be respected, though the term "OP" is thrown around an awful lot, and I was wondering: "How Would YOU Define An "OP" Tank?". Should the term "OP" even be in use? Is it ever necessary to call a tank "Over-Powered"? Does the term, in essence, boil down to the relative power of the tank or the skill of the player driving it? If you think that there are some "OP" tanks out there, what are they?

 

For Those of You Who Are Interested: My Opinion, (WARNING: LARGE WALL OF TEXT!)...

 

So, this thread is really just a poll for the masses to see how the majority of players would deem the term "OP", and if they regarded it as being relevant, to specify why and what tanks they'd view as being "OP".

 

NOTE: The opinions expressed in this thread should be respected and not ridiculed. Nor should any offensive language or insults be thrown around in this thread either. I know that the majority of you will already be aware of the forum rules, and for those of you who aren't, you probably know what's appropriate and what isn't, though for those of you who don't, respect the views of others and try not to raise too much tension. Thanks!

 

;)

 

Fixed your negrep, thanks for the poll.

Nebulosa #31 Posted 02 January 2015 - 04:55 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 39246 battles
  • 615
  • [-LOA-] -LOA-
  • Member since:
    12-28-2010

Perceived as overpowered: You occasionally are on the wrong side of a tank's main strength but never learn its weakness. Examples: You face down a T95 in an alley, lose, but don't know how painfully slow it is; you are pwned by a Bat-Chat from behind before you even realized it was there but never realize how easily it is penetrated; you get rammed to death by a KV-5 and never realize he needs to do this because his gun can't penetrate you. 

If enough players have been on the wrong side of a tank's strength, it finds its way on the forum, and since people who rationally mention its weakness to are dismissed as not wanting it nerfed out of self-interest, a hype is built.

 

Actually overpowered: There is no weakness that fully makes up for the strength(s) of the tank. Examples: None.

 

Subtle difference, but not trivial.



knoxySR #32 Posted 02 January 2015 - 07:44 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 7472 battles
  • 270
  • Member since:
    05-23-2012
A tank that 50k 40% clickers can perform well in.

Elhazzared #33 Posted 02 January 2015 - 08:43 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 22236 battles
  • 830
  • [GUP] GUP
  • Member since:
    03-23-2011

View PostEscapeArtist, on 01 January 2015 - 05:39 PM, said:

It's funny how bad players talk about tanks which they don't even have. You obviously have no idea how IS7 works.

 

Well I think it's established that the Isu-152 I have.

 

The IS-7 is a pretty accurate statement. Let's see, all my heavy tanks rarely penetrate it anywhere even with gold. My TDs do penetrate it reliably (not always but enoguh to be considered reliable). Let's add that I have a friend who has an IS7 and I've played in his house in his account for a few games to get a feel for the IS-7 and it's a completly brainless tank to play.

 

Last but never least. last 1000 battles (more like last 3000) I have over 2000 WN8. Unicum is a bad player? Right! Now I've heard everything. Granted you are a better player than I am, I do not claim otherwise. But to call me a bad player is either retarded or stupidity on your part not to even check things before you make claims.


Edited by Elhazzared, 02 January 2015 - 08:43 PM.


chris562 #34 Posted 28 April 2015 - 08:38 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 5613 battles
  • 35
  • Member since:
    03-21-2012

Simple - E25.

 

Now there are people who will say 'get one and then post' well I don't care if you are an OK player then you can easily be super OP the rate of fire bro, i mean come on that is just a joke.



camels13 #35 Posted 28 April 2015 - 10:32 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 28304 battles
  • 238
  • Member since:
    12-03-2013

View PostNebulosa, on 02 January 2015 - 03:55 PM, said:

Perceived as overpowered: You occasionally are on the wrong side of a tank's main strength but never learn its weakness. Examples: You face down a T95 in an alley, lose, but don't know how painfully slow it is; you are pwned by a Bat-Chat from behind before you even realized it was there but never realize how easily it is penetrated; you get rammed to death by a KV-5 and never realize he needs to do this because his gun can't penetrate you. 

If enough players have been on the wrong side of a tank's strength, it finds its way on the forum, and since people who rationally mention its weakness to are dismissed as not wanting it nerfed out of self-interest, a hype is built.

 

Actually overpowered: There is no weakness that fully makes up for the strength(s) of the tank. Examples: None.

 

Subtle difference, but not trivial.

 

exactly that. the term "OP" is used very loosely and it seems not alot of people understand its exact meaning. a synonym to "OP" would be "broken", as in breaking the game balance. OPness only concerns the stats of a tank, and player skill is completely irrelevant. To hypothetically determine whether a tank is OP you would have to take 2 players with exact the same skill level and let them play against each other. If one tank wins consistently against all other tanks, such a tank would actually be OP. but to say something like "OP only in the hands of a skilled player" is nonsense, and by definition such a tank would NOT be OP, as its not breaking the balance of the game.

 

The only example of a tank that comes close to OP that i can think of is maybe T18, cause it has way more armor and way more pen than all the other tier2 tanks. and most other tier2 tanks cant pen the T18. or maybe the WTE100. but both of these tanks are not really OP, just very strong. 

 

Other than that certain mechanics can be OP, for example autoloaders, because they can deal alot of damage in short amount of time. but even autoloader tanks are balance with for example weak armor or long clip reload time or other weaknesses. Also alot of people claim arty is OP, but if they were you could prove it by looking at the accumulated statistics. If arty had higher Winrate and higher damage per battle than other tank classes, then yes, they would be OP. but since arty doesnt have higher Winrate OR higher damage per battle, clearly they are NOT OP, no matter how annoying they are.

 

Overall i think WG did a decent job at balancing the tanks. You can find good example of OPness in other games. Im pretty sure WoT Generals will have some OP cards, as TCG are much harder to balance than a RTS.

 



Troubledove #36 Posted 28 April 2015 - 10:39 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 46267 battles
  • 2,386
  • [KOFF] KOFF
  • Member since:
    09-07-2011

Quite simply: OP tank is Tank that has very good aspects and way to easily navigate around it's weaknesses. 

 

Old KV-1S was example of this. It had extremely good gun that was quite inaccurate and it had long reload time. To compensate this KV-1S was actually really fast as far as heavy goes and the cannon had usable gun depression too. This allowed KV-1S play like super-alpha medium - while retaining some amount of relevant heavy-armor especially on turret - HE resistance due generally quite OK armor - and large HP pool to avoid HP-sapping tactics. It could quickly retreat to reload in peace and then repeat it's peek-a-BOOM reliably - creating tank that would win in encounters simply because it would out-alpha and out-hp rivals easily while trading peek-a-boo shots - and avoid quite easily the retaliation or even escape any harm due armor. 

 

The OP:ness didnt come from the perfect mix of everything (all the goodies and no drawbacks) but from the ability to circumvent or hide its weaknesses quite completely and from the forgiveness of heavy tank, its HP pool and armor making it even forgive few player mistakes. 

 

That concept made it OP, having more than perfect meta for its use characteristics, having good sides backing even better sides, and some cherries and topping to make it leave competition far behind. 

 

Similiary tanks can be broken by design if they have good/great characteristics that don't back each other up. Such example is T-34-2. Having mobile medium with great camo values and huge alpha and awesome turret armor sounds nice... but when it lacks accuracy to snipe the camo loses its meaning, when it has lacking penetration it's high alpha loses its meaning, when it has no gun depression its turret armor becomes niche, to overcome gun depression you have to expose your hull. Because of long gun reload your flanking as very mobile tank become liability - you got one shot in, enemy retaliated two or three times before you get your gun loaded.... and then he is facing you and your lack of pen becomes issue... so the mobility won't save you... So there are individual strong sides that do not add up and have synergy. T-34-2 sucks badly despite having so many good sides. 


Edited by Troubledove, 28 April 2015 - 10:46 PM.


somegras #37 Posted 28 April 2015 - 11:01 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 53539 battles
  • 8,736
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    09-04-2013

An overpowered tank would be fast as a t-54, have HEAT pen like a t-54 and would have armour and camo like a T-54.

 

Wait a minute.....



Shnuks #38 Posted 28 April 2015 - 11:56 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 42558 battles
  • 4,990
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    06-16-2012

Something that needs little effort to do well in AND have a large impact on the battle. The ones that come to mind are the old KV-1s which had [edited]175 pen at tier 6, 390 alpha on a mobile platform with troll armor.

 

WTE100 when it came out, without as many corridor maps as know, insane view range and camo could have an insane impact on the battle just by camping at the back. A clip caused like 2.5k damage if i remember correctly (maybe even more) so every noob could have a tremendous impact on the battle with it.  

Same goes for the Borsig. While it had no armor, it had insane camo, reload time, alpha and view range, anybody could camp at the back, spot for himself, while staying hidden. I hated facing that thing when it came out. 

 

Even though i love it, i'd still say the T54 is OP because of the insane HEAT pen. Its a med with almost no drawbacks, when taking account HEAT.



Slyspy #39 Posted 29 April 2015 - 12:58 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 15292 battles
  • 17,937
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011

Poll doesn't quite work: Question two is dependent on question one but must still be answered.

 

Answered "I couldn't care less" because I don't. Generally, however, anything which kills someone appears to be OP or unbalanced. Anything which can be killed with ease is fine and well balanced. If one is to believe chat.



hembba #40 Posted 29 April 2015 - 10:31 AM

    Corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 30688 battles
  • 121
  • Member since:
    01-03-2011

OPness comes in my opinion from having way more upsides than average tank of the same tier with minimal downsides. Like old KV-1S, which had speed, hull down capability, gun and armor all better than t6 average, and this was balanced by lowish view range and tendency to burn. This tank was the one that made me confident that WG is not even trying to balance tanks.

 

Current well-known OP tech tree tanks are imho:

M53/55

T29

T67

(...US is the new Russia!) 

 

Then there are some that are too rare to have any opinion on, like Charioteer, Obj. 430-2


Edited by hembba, 29 April 2015 - 10:45 AM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users