Jump to content


Is the 252 still OP?


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

jabster #661 Posted 16 July 2017 - 10:12 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 12114 battles
  • 19,097
  • [WSAT] WSAT
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View PostTr0gledyte, on 16 July 2017 - 09:03 AM, said:

 

I edited my post to include one last attempt to make you understand why you cannot objectively make the point you're trying to make when saying it's also the best tank against higher tiers. 

 

You've dodged the age question multiple times so I'm guessing you're <20 and your knowledge of statistics is on par with my grandmother's, so I'm going to stop bothering with this. 

 

To fix the Defender's performance they need to make it vulnerable to tier 8 and below while keeping its effectiveness against higher tiers. In practice I would say this means nerfing the LFP since higher tiers have no issues with that anyway, whereas lower tiers simply can't go through at all, hence why it's so broken. And with that I'm going to leave this thread because I have already wasted enough energy trying to discuss science with kids.

 

You don't have an argument as all you've done is when data is presented to you that indicates your original statement is wrong is to then use a post ad-hoc argument in an attempt to get that data to fit with your original statement. The trick is that you should form your argument around the data and not the other way around otherwise you just come across as dishonest.



straubbazsi #662 Posted 16 July 2017 - 10:13 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 16296 battles
  • 130
  • [TRIGG] TRIGG
  • Member since:
    08-18-2016

Block Quote

I have already wasted enough energy trying to discuss science with kids.

 

Let's just highlight this.



Tr0gledyte #663 Posted 16 July 2017 - 10:16 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 16494 battles
  • 1,081
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    07-12-2011

View Poststraubbazsi, on 16 July 2017 - 10:11 AM, said:

So why not check your own Defender winrate in T8 battles? Is that too complicated to your "statistical research" skills? 

Then maybe in your other T8 tanks too.

 

Even if you are right (...), that would lead us exactly where?

Let's say you are more comfortable in a T10 battle with a Skorpion or with your M4A1. Awesome. Let's say you are winning more T10 battles with those (...), then what? You just don't care about your overall winrate, because you are desperately trying here with your impressive debate skills?

 

Sure, talk about shame. : )

 

I don't manually keep data of my battles so sadly I don't have data about T8 battles either. But what you people are doing in this thread is exactly the same thing Wargaming does wrong when rebalancing tanks. You're simply looking at its global stats and crying "nerf!" without taking a closer look at where those stats come from. You need to do the latter to decide what causes its global effectiveness and which aspect of the tank needs a nerf (or buff). Otherwise you're just whining on a forum instead of being constructive.

 

But, just like the WG balance department everyone seems to despise, you're too shortsighted to do this.

 

As I mentioned, we have a tank that's nearly immortal as top dog and vulnerable as bottom tier. The thickness of the LFP doesn't matter against higher tiers because they go through anyway, meanwhile lower tiers can't go through at all. And that's why it's so plausible that its winrate boost comes from tier 8 battles and that's why it can be balanced by nerfing the LFP.


Edited by Tr0gledyte, 16 July 2017 - 10:18 AM.


jabster #664 Posted 16 July 2017 - 10:17 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 12114 battles
  • 19,097
  • [WSAT] WSAT
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View Poststraubbazsi, on 16 July 2017 - 09:13 AM, said:

 

Let's just highlight this.

 

If they'd written religion not science they'd be right.



jabster #665 Posted 16 July 2017 - 10:19 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 12114 battles
  • 19,097
  • [WSAT] WSAT
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View PostTr0gledyte, on 16 July 2017 - 09:16 AM, said:

 

I don't manually keep data of my battles so sadly I don't have data about T8 battles either. But what you people are doing in this thread is exactly the same thing Wargaming does wrong when rebalancing tanks. You're simply looking at its global stats and crying "nerf!" without taking a closer look at where those stats come from. You need to do the latter to decide what causes its global effectiveness and which aspect of the tank needs a nerf (or buff). Otherwise you're just whining on a forum instead of being constructive.

 

But, just like the WG balance department everyone seems to despise, you're too shortsighted to do this.  

 

So you think the balancing department should be based around whether you personal prefer a tank when facing tier X or not? Excellent argument I must say.



straubbazsi #666 Posted 16 July 2017 - 10:23 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 16296 battles
  • 130
  • [TRIGG] TRIGG
  • Member since:
    08-18-2016

@Tr0g

 

And you are still here and now you started talking about possible nerfs to Defende for some reason. (Btw, they are not changing premium tanks, but hey, stay constructive!)

 

Anyways, I'm out. Jabster said it perfectly. 


Edited by straubbazsi, 16 July 2017 - 10:25 AM.


Noo_Noo #667 Posted 16 July 2017 - 10:24 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 20378 battles
  • 1,243
  • Member since:
    05-05-2013

View PostTr0gledyte, on 16 July 2017 - 09:54 AM, said:

 

1. How old are you? Why are you dodging this question?

2. We both agree that it overperforms overall, but since the tank is nearly invulnerable to tier 8 and below it's quite plausible that the winrate boost almost entirely comes from top tier games. We are not in a position to prove nor disprove this. Once again it helps to think in extremes: imagine a Mutz that magically becomes impenetrable when it's top tier, but is cheese against higher tiers. What would its winrate look like?

 

Get it now?

 

Isn't that the definition of OP?

It's basically invulnerable or too powerful when its top tier and does well when its bottom tier? Give me that tank every time please, especially over the ones that are balanced when top tier and struggle when bottom tier - like most current non premium tier 8 tanks 

I'm sorry I dont see your argument how this makes the Defender balanced.

EDIT. 
Also if the tank was even more effective at Tier 10 (as you seem to want it to be) then it wouldn't be a Tier 8 vehicle. It would be even more ridiculous than it already is

Edited by Noo_Noo, 16 July 2017 - 10:27 AM.


Tr0gledyte #668 Posted 16 July 2017 - 10:24 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 16494 battles
  • 1,081
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    07-12-2011

View Postjabster, on 16 July 2017 - 10:19 AM, said:

 

So you think the balancing department should be based around whether you personal prefer a tank when facing tier X or not? Excellent argument I must say.

 

What the hell? Where did you get this from? I literally stated that before nerfing or buffing a tank that under or overperforms, you need to figure out what exactly is causing the problem. If you don't you end up with things like the Maus. 

 

This entire thread people have only posted graphs and crying that it's OP without taking a closer look at the situation, you're failing just as hard as WG. Why is it OP? Mostly because of its armor. Which armor? The LFP "weakspot" that can bounce tier 8 and below any day. Which then leads to the plausible explanation that the Defender heavily overperforms against equal or lower tiers but not so much against tanks that can damage it. As I said, penetration is an all-or-nothing thing, if people can't pen you they can't kill you except with HE. I wouldn't be surprised if a simple nerf to the LFP would immediately bring its winrate down to around 50%.


Edited by Tr0gledyte, 16 July 2017 - 10:30 AM.


Akathis #669 Posted 16 July 2017 - 10:29 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 65745 battles
  • 1,157
  • Member since:
    12-02-2012

Every person that states defender/252 is not grossly OP is a troll.

 

It's as simple as that.



jabster #670 Posted 16 July 2017 - 10:32 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 12114 battles
  • 19,097
  • [WSAT] WSAT
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View PostTr0gledyte, on 16 July 2017 - 09:24 AM, said:

 

What the hell? Where did you get this from? I literally stated that before nerfing or buffing a tank that under or overperforms, you need to figure out what exactly is causing the problem. If you don't you end up with things like the Maus. 

 

This entire thread people have only posted graphs and crying that it's OP without taking a closer look at the situation, you're failing just as hard as WG. Why is it OP? Mostly because of its armor. Which armor? The LFP "weakspot" that can bounce tier 8 and below any day. Which then leads to the plausible explanation that the Defender heavily overperforms against equal or lower tiers but not so much against tanks that can damage it. As I said, penetration is an all-or-nothing thing, if people can't pen you they can't kill you except with HE.

 

I'm sorry why are we now dicussing how you change tanks that are OP as you originally stated that the Defender wasn't OP so what's it got to do with the subject.

 

Oh and for your information WG have previously stated that win-rate is just one of the factors in how they balance tanks so you're  wrong on that point as well.



ZlatanArKung #671 Posted 16 July 2017 - 10:35 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 3,800
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

View PostTr0gledyte, on 16 July 2017 - 08:55 AM, said:

 

I literally want to light myself on fire and jump off a building head first every time I read this. Maybe bold italic allcaps helps:

 

YOU DO NOT HAVE DATA TO MAKE THIS CLAIM. I REPEAT: YOU DO NOT HAVE DATA TO MAKE THIS CLAIM. NONE. SO STOP PRETENDING YOU DO.

 

Thank god you're not scientists.

 

Hypothesis: Defender wins 75% of its top tier battles (20% of total battle count) because there are almost no guns to contest its armor (penetration is an all-or-nothing thing so even for an average player it's rather hard to lose a game when nothing can penetrate you), and 50% of its mid and bottom tier battles where enemies can penetrate it much more easily. Result: 55% average winrate. Can you actually disprove this? No, you absolutely cannot, so shut up and go back to school.

 

 

You dont have data to make any claim.

Nor are your claima even in the slightest supported by data available. 

 

Take your funking gut feeling and useless opinion somewhere else.



Tr0gledyte #672 Posted 16 July 2017 - 10:36 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 16494 battles
  • 1,081
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    07-12-2011

View Postjabster, on 16 July 2017 - 10:32 AM, said:

 

I'm sorry why are we now dicussing how you change tanks that are OP as you originally stated that the Defender wasn't OP so what's it got to do with the subject.

 

Oh and for your information WG have previously stated that win-rate is just one of the factors in how they balance tanks so you're  wrong on that point as well.

 

Wargaming balances tanks purely based on global performance and vodka. I have no reason to believe otherwise. I'm not going to bother with your first sentence because I'm even talking about a proper nerf to the Defender in the post you quoted. 

 

And yes, I know they won't nerf premium tanks, but unlike every. Single. person. Here. I actually brainstormed about the origin of its overperformance. Are you posting on this forum drinking Vodka too?

View PostZlatanArKung, on 16 July 2017 - 10:35 AM, said:

 

You dont have data to make any claim.

Nor are your claima even in the slightest supported by data available. 

 

Take your funking gut feeling and useless opinion somewhere else.

 

I actually do. Empirical evidence is data. And it's at least as important as global stats that do not accurately reflect where the true issue lies with this tank (remember how everyone complains WG doesn't seem to play their own game?). If you only look at global stats, like everyone here and WG is doing, you'll be inclined to hit every aspect of the tank with a nerfbat and thus making it useless, which has happened countless times in the past.

 

Look at what they're planning on doing to the Batchat, for example. Or why they're not buffing the IS-6. It's because they only look at stats.


Edited by Tr0gledyte, 16 July 2017 - 10:41 AM.


jabster #673 Posted 16 July 2017 - 10:42 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 12114 battles
  • 19,097
  • [WSAT] WSAT
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View PostTr0gledyte, on 16 July 2017 - 09:36 AM, said:

 

Wargaming balances tanks purely based on global performance and vodka. I have no reason to believe otherwise. I'm not going to bother with your first sentence because I'm even talking about a proper nerf to the Defender in the post you quoted. 

 

 

So you're not going to reply to the first point as it shows you've changed your original argument and then denied you ever said it - ok.

 

As to your first point. WG have themselves stated that's not solely how they balance tanks so you're still wrong.



Tr0gledyte #674 Posted 16 July 2017 - 10:43 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 16494 battles
  • 1,081
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    07-12-2011

View Postjabster, on 16 July 2017 - 10:42 AM, said:

 

So you're not going to reply to the first point as it shows you've changed your original argument and then denied you ever said it - ok.

 

As to your first point. WG have themselves stated that's not solely how they balance tanks so you're still wrong.

 

Have they stated how they do balance tanks? It's Wargaming, they're scumbags that will say anything. I still have no reason to believe their balance department uses very important empirical data to balance tanks.

ZlatanArKung #675 Posted 16 July 2017 - 10:46 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 3,800
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

View PostTr0gledyte, on 16 July 2017 - 10:36 AM, said:

 

Wargaming balances tanks purely based on global performance and vodka. I have no reason to believe otherwise. I'm not going to bother with your first sentence because I'm even talking about a proper nerf to the Defender in the post you quoted. 

 

And yes, I know they won't nerf premium tanks, but unlike every. Single. person. Here. I actually brainstormed about the origin of its overperformance. Are you posting on this forum drinking Vodka too?

 

I actually do. Empirical evidence is data. And it's at least as important as global stats that do not accurately reflect where the true issue lies with this tank (remember how everyone complains WG doesn't seem to play their own game?). If you only look at global stats, like everyone here and WG is doing, you'll be inclined to hit every aspect of the tank with a nerfbat and thus making it useless, which has happened countless times in the past.

 

Look at what they're planning on doing to the Batchat, for example. Or why they're not buffing the IS-6. It's because they only look at stats.

 

It is not hard to know why it is overperforming by a huge amount.

 

It has T10 level of alpha.

It has armour that on large part of the tank can bounce 350+ mm pen shells.

It has decent mobility for a heavy.

It has one of the best gun handling characteristics of T8 (except accuracy).

It has good pen at 225/265 (enough for every tank it meets).

 

Surely such a tank wouldn't overperform at T8. When it is just better then every other T8 tank in game.

 

But you seem to be as bright as WG development department that claimed TVP VTU was as good as Defender. ..



GekkoGordon #676 Posted 16 July 2017 - 10:48 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 3027 battles
  • 275
  • Member since:
    04-17-2012

View PostZlatanArKung, on 16 July 2017 - 11:46 AM, said:

 

It is not hard to know why it is overperforming by a huge amount.

 

It has T10 level of alpha.

It has armour that on large part of the tank can bounce 350+ mm pen shells.

It has decent mobility for a heavy.

It has one of the best gun handling characteristics of T8 (except accuracy).

It has good pen at 225/265 (enough for every tank it meets).

 

Surely such a tank wouldn't overperform at T8. When it is just better then every other T8 tank in game.

 

But you seem to be as bright as WG development department that claimed TVP VTU was as good as Defender. ..

 

Well you know, a Defender can't defeat an E100 in a 1v1 therefore it's NOT OP  :sceptic::sceptic::sceptic:

ZlatanArKung #677 Posted 16 July 2017 - 10:48 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 3,800
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

View PostTr0gledyte, on 16 July 2017 - 10:36 AM, said:

 

Wargaming balances tanks purely based on global performance and vodka. I have no reason to believe otherwise. I'm not going to bother with your first sentence because I'm even talking about a proper nerf to the Defender in the post you quoted. 

 

And yes, I know they won't nerf premium tanks, but unlike every. Single. person. Here. I actually brainstormed about the origin of its overperformance. Are you posting on this forum drinking Vodka too?

 

I actually do. Empirical evidence is data. And it's at least as important as global stats that do not accurately reflect where the true issue lies with this tank (remember how everyone complains WG doesn't seem to play their own game?). If you only look at global stats, like everyone here and WG is doing, you'll be inclined to hit every aspect of the tank with a nerfbat and thus making it useless, which has happened countless times in the past.

 

Look at what they're planning on doing to the Batchat, for example. Or why they're not buffing the IS-6. It's because they only look at stats.

 

Your 100 battles in Defender is not enough to back up your ridiculousness about T8 meds being better against T10 tanks.

 

Which imo is a laughable opinion.

 

Also, there is no [edited]data or logic to back it up.



Tr0gledyte #678 Posted 16 July 2017 - 10:48 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 16494 battles
  • 1,081
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    07-12-2011

View PostZlatanArKung, on 16 July 2017 - 10:46 AM, said:

 

It is not hard to know why it is overperforming by a huge amount.

 

It has T10 level of alpha.

It has armour that on large part of the tank can bounce 350+ mm pen shells.

It has decent mobility for a heavy.

It has one of the best gun handling characteristics of T8 (except accuracy).

It has good pen at 225/265 (enough for every tank it meets).

 

Surely such a tank wouldn't overperform at T8. When it is just better then every other T8 tank in game.

 

But you seem to be as bright as WG development department that claimed TVP VTU was as good as Defender. ..

 

It's okay to have an invulnerable part of a tank (the UFP) when you have a huge, vulnerable LFP. The problem is the LFP isn't vulnerable (to tier 8 and below). It's not the alpha or the mobility that allows you to press W and mow down tier 8 and below, it's the LFP. This is something you can't deduce from stats, you need to play the tank. And that's when you realize it's no better (and arguably worse) than an IS-3 against higher tiers. It's just broken against lower tiers.

Edited by Tr0gledyte, 16 July 2017 - 10:54 AM.


GekkoGordon #679 Posted 16 July 2017 - 10:54 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 3027 battles
  • 275
  • Member since:
    04-17-2012

View PostTr0gledyte, on 16 July 2017 - 11:48 AM, said:

 

It's okay to have an invulnerable part of a tank (the UFP) when you have a huge, vulnerable LFP.

 

List of tanks with a vulnerable LFP and NOT INVULNERABLE UFP

Lowe (UFP 230, LFP 140)

T32 (UFP 180, LFP 190)

Tiger II (UFP 210, LFP 160)

 

and many many others, even the IS-3 (UFP 190-220, LFP 180)

 

what makes the Defender qualified for a 300mm+ UFP at Tier 8?

 

The next strongest UFP at Tier 8 is the VK 100.01P, and even that has a weaker LFP (170-190) and it's easier to hit because it's a relatively flat square

 

and it's about 4 times slower than Defender


Edited by GekkoGordon, 16 July 2017 - 10:55 AM.


Noo_Noo #680 Posted 16 July 2017 - 10:57 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 20378 battles
  • 1,243
  • Member since:
    05-05-2013

View PostTr0gledyte, on 16 July 2017 - 10:24 AM, said:

 

What the hell? Where did you get this from? I literally stated that before nerfing or buffing a tank that under or overperforms, you need to figure out what exactly is causing the problem. If you don't you end up with things like the Maus. 

 

 

Now that's a fair comment and agreed WG balanced department does seem to work in cloud cuckoo land sometimes.

Changes should be small and incremental until it reaches the point of balance not a huge step change that results in the tank becoming OP or useless. 

BUT WG also aren't stupid. has it ever occurred to anyone that these changes actually encourage people to spend money one way or another to get that particular vehicle? I wonder how much gold was spent for people to get the Maus recently? I also await another surge when the Defender becomes available in the shop again. I expect it this Christmas.




3 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 3 guests, 0 anonymous users