Jump to content


Poll does the Russian meds need a buff?

Russian bias russian meds buffing poll

  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

Poll: Poll does the Russian meds need a buff? (60 members have cast votes)

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

Poll does the Russian meds need a buff?

  1. Of course they need buffing, they arent very good at all (12 votes [20.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 20.00%

  2. Heck no! (18 votes [30.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 30.00%

  3. T-44 and the T-54 mod 1. need a buff not the Obj. 140 or the T-54 (30 votes [50.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 50.00%

Vote Hide poll

maali #1 Posted 03 July 2017 - 08:29 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 20309 battles
  • 45
  • Member since:
    10-12-2011

So in my opinion the supertest chanches are really bad mostly. Here are the chanches for the guns and armor from armored patrol

 

T-44:

  • LB-1 – aim time reduced from 2.3s to 2.1s
  • D-25-44 – accuracy increased from 0.43 to 0.42, aim time reduced from 3.4s to 3.2s, reload time reduced from 19.2s to 15.2s

T-54 Mod. 1

  • turret armor front buffed from 180mm to 190mm
  • view range buffed from 360m to 380m
  • aim time buffed from 2.4s to 2.2s

T-54:

  • D-54: accuracy increased from 0.39 to 0.33, aim time reduced from 2.9s to 2s, reload speed increased from 8.2s to 8.5s
  • D-10T2S: accuracy reduced from 0.35 to 0.39, aim time increased from 2.3s to 2.5s, reload time reduced from 7.8s to 7.4s

Object 140:

  • roof armor put on par with T-62A (hatches stay the same)

So i have never played the Object 140, i am currently griding it in the T-54. And in my opinion all the chanches to the T-54 and Object 140 proposed here are tottally unnecessary. T44 and T54 mod 1. do need those buffs tho. But tell your opinon in the poll and below!


Edited by maali, 03 July 2017 - 08:30 AM.


SABAOTH #2 Posted 03 July 2017 - 08:34 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 36802 battles
  • 2,915
  • [-133-] -133-
  • Member since:
    08-28-2011

Obj 140 was a surprise to me, it is far better than t62a while I expected a very similar tank.

 

T 54 mod 1 could use some better power to weight :girl:



fighting_falcon93 #3 Posted 03 July 2017 - 08:45 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 31396 battles
  • 4,061
  • Member since:
    02-05-2013
I don't get the Obj.140 buff. What's the point in playing T-62A now? :mellow:

NiemandXL #4 Posted 03 July 2017 - 08:48 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 37955 battles
  • 2,934
  • Member since:
    01-30-2013
Compared to the tier XI tanks Maus and Type 5 every tank needs a buff^^

Bora_BOOM #5 Posted 03 July 2017 - 08:58 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 23122 battles
  • 3,022
  • [D0NG] D0NG
  • Member since:
    08-23-2014

T-54 Mod 1. got the armour buff, which is the way WG "solves the problem". Buff exactly what wasn't needed!

It will just die 2 shots later when fired at, without being able to do anything in the meanwhile, as it wasn’t able before.

Unless gun handling helps, which I doubt, since all you will be able to do better would be aiming at the target that you still cant pen, its on a voyage out of the garage at the first trade (if that comes back).



Sfinski #6 Posted 03 July 2017 - 09:02 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 32001 battles
  • 2,685
  • [-PJ-] -PJ-
  • Member since:
    09-26-2013
T8 tanks and 430 need a buff. Rest do not.

imendars #7 Posted 03 July 2017 - 09:07 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 10983 battles
  • 1,086
  • Member since:
    04-17-2014

While i voted for the last, i'm happy Object 140 gets turret armor buff. Its brother enjoys its good turret armor and lack of fires WAY too much.

But i agree, compared to Maus and Type 5 every tank needs a buff. :D



JuliusCheddar #8 Posted 03 July 2017 - 09:12 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 30523 battles
  • 564
  • [3BPAN] 3BPAN
  • Member since:
    08-27-2014
Are people on these forums unable to create an unbiased poll? Yes/no? Is it too hard? 

Cobra6 #9 Posted 03 July 2017 - 11:07 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16333 battles
  • 15,830
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

Both the T-54 and the Obj.140 do not need any buffs, they are nowhere near the bottom of the spectrum in their respective tier and class.

 

T-44 needs a penetration buff, nothing more.

 

Cobra 6



tajj7 #10 Posted 03 July 2017 - 11:35 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 25575 battles
  • 13,836
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

View Postmaali, on 03 July 2017 - 07:29 AM, said:

So in my opinion the supertest chanches are really bad mostly. Here are the chanches for the guns and armor from armored patrol

 

T-44:

  • LB-1 – aim time reduced from 2.3s to 2.1s
  • D-25-44 – accuracy increased from 0.43 to 0.42, aim time reduced from 3.4s to 3.2s, reload time reduced from 19.2s to 15.2s

T-54 Mod. 1

  • turret armor front buffed from 180mm to 190mm
  • view range buffed from 360m to 380m
  • aim time buffed from 2.4s to 2.2s

T-54:

  • D-54: accuracy increased from 0.39 to 0.33, aim time reduced from 2.9s to 2s, reload speed increased from 8.2s to 8.5s
  • D-10T2S: accuracy reduced from 0.35 to 0.39, aim time increased from 2.3s to 2.5s, reload time reduced from 7.8s to 7.4s

Object 140:

  • roof armor put on par with T-62A (hatches stay the same)

So i have never played the Object 140, i am currently griding it in the T-54. And in my opinion all the chanches to the T-54 and Object 140 proposed here are tottally unnecessary. T44 and T54 mod 1. do need those buffs tho. But tell your opinon in the poll and below!

 

The Obj. 140, T-62A and very clearly the Obj. 907 need nerfs IMO.

 

I'd make the tier 10 Russian meds like they were on the very first sandbox, which was basically brawlers, longer aim times, worse accuracy but better dispersion on the move so they were close range brawling tanks but not so good at medium to long ranges and thus the NATO meds have a clear advantage.

 

T-44, T-44-100 and T-54 proto, probably yes need some buffs, but the most obvious one to me would be penetration. 183mm of pen is just not enough on tier 8 these days and they are hampered by 235 APCR as well. Give them like 200 - 205 base pen and 244 APCR (same as like Type 59)

 

I also don't think giving the T-54 proto 190mm turret armour is going to change much, most tier 8 guns will go straight through the gun mantlet whether it's 180 or 190. 



SuperDuperOtter #11 Posted 03 July 2017 - 11:54 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 15107 battles
  • 1,312
  • [_7TH_] _7TH_
  • Member since:
    08-19-2013
The Tier 8 ones need some buffs. But that's mostly because they are Tier 8 meds more than anything else. And like most Tier 8 meds, they are kindda meh as Tier 8 mediums have a hard time fitting in the current meta.

imendars #12 Posted 03 July 2017 - 11:59 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 10983 battles
  • 1,086
  • Member since:
    04-17-2014

View Posttajj7, on 03 July 2017 - 01:35 PM, said:

 

The Obj. 140, T-62A and very clearly the Obj. 907 need nerfs IMO.

 

I'd make the tier 10 Russian meds like they were on the very first sandbox, which was basically brawlers, longer aim times, worse accuracy but better dispersion on the move so they were close range brawling tanks but not so good at medium to long ranges and thus the NATO meds have a clear advantage.

 

T-44, T-44-100 and T-54 proto, probably yes need some buffs, but the most obvious one to me would be penetration. 183mm of pen is just not enough on tier 8 these days and they are hampered by 235 APCR as well. Give them like 200 - 205 base pen and 244 APCR (same as like Type 59)

 

I also don't think giving the T-54 proto 190mm turret armour is going to change much, most tier 8 guns will go straight through the gun mantlet whether it's 180 or 190. 

 

Since they wont nerf 907 and Maus nerf is a joke, they have no other choice but to buff object 140. They made theyre choices and now they wont tell us that they [edited] up this and need to rebalance LOTS of stuff. Perhaps they should but they wont...

NiemandXL #13 Posted 03 July 2017 - 12:10 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 37955 battles
  • 2,934
  • Member since:
    01-30-2013

View Postimendars, on 03 July 2017 - 12:59 PM, said:

 

Since they wont nerf 907 and Maus nerf is a joke, they have no other choice but to buff object 140. They made theyre choices and now they wont tell us that they [edited] up this and need to rebalance LOTS of stuff. Perhaps they should but they wont...

 

Which is stupid because that basically means that they eventually have to buff pretty much all the other tanks --with few exceptions like Batchat and TVP-- as well. It's way easier to nerf 2 or 3 tanks that are too strong than to buff all the other tanks. Not to mention that tiers are not isolated. Buffing all tier X tanks to Maus levels will make things even more "pleasant" for tier 8.

ZlatanArKung #14 Posted 03 July 2017 - 12:14 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 5,112
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014
In one way I think WG should buff every tank in T10 except Maus, Type 5 and objectives 907.
And give them a rather significant buff aswell.
Then do same for T9 except Type 4.
Same for T8 except Defender/Scorpion/Liberte/Patriot/Skorpion G/IS-3

And same for T7 and down to T1.

imendars #15 Posted 03 July 2017 - 12:16 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 10983 battles
  • 1,086
  • Member since:
    04-17-2014

View PostNiemandXL, on 03 July 2017 - 02:10 PM, said:

 

Which is stupid because that basically means that they eventually have to buff pretty much all the other tanks --with few exceptions like Batchat and TVP-- as well. It's way easier to nerf 2 or 3 tanks that are too strong than to buff all the other tanks. Not to mention that tiers are not isolated. Buffing all tier X tanks to Maus levels will make things even more "pleasant" for tier 8.

 

Also remember they will evaluate how useful the tank is for its role, not current maps.

this is a key why LOTS of tanks wont get buffed...   :trollface:   :bajan: 

 

But they need in rus tree something thats not worse than 907 cause 907 is only for pros and lucky ones. And they need some diversity in official WG league fights...


Edited by imendars, 03 July 2017 - 12:18 PM.


anonym_YNch2j0j5oJ9 #16 Posted 03 July 2017 - 12:45 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 689
  • Member since:
    09-24-2018
I've said this before and i'll say it again: These changes to the T54 are nerfs, not buffs.. i have to switch guns in the T54, to gain 0.01 better dispersion and 0.1 better aimtime, but an extra 0.57 reload... gun handling was good enough, those small buffs mean nothing, and that extra .57 reload wtf? stupid stupid stupid. im basing these stats with rammer vents + bia.

leggasiini #17 Posted 03 July 2017 - 12:49 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 14923 battles
  • 6,216
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012

Tier 8 buffs are needed. T-44 is good at nothing, Mod 1 is one of the worst T8 meds now and T-44-100 is basically marginally  better T-44 aka still bleh.

 

T-54 needed rework (to be fair, better turret I sorta agree with, the T-54 turret is terrible VS tier 10 hovermeds), but not like this. The AP pen needs to be buffed and HEAT pen needs to be nerfed on both guns.

 

140 buff is not needed.

 

Dont be scared of T62A though, they said they will change both 140 and T62A. They tend to not announce every change they do in supertest. Just look at 9.17.1, only really the tier 10 German HT buffs as well as Type 4/5 changes were announced before the patch. There was nothing said about the Grille or E5 nerf, for example.


Edited by leggasiini, 03 July 2017 - 12:51 PM.


Bucifel #18 Posted 03 July 2017 - 12:55 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 31609 battles
  • 1,373
  • [B4DD] B4DD
  • Member since:
    03-18-2013

sure...they buff OBJ140 and nerf BC25T....great logic...AGAIN

 

:facepalm:



Cobra6 #19 Posted 03 July 2017 - 01:18 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16333 battles
  • 15,830
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

View Postimendars, on 03 July 2017 - 10:59 AM, said:

 

Since they wont nerf 907 and Maus nerf is a joke, they have no other choice but to buff object 140. They made theyre choices and now they wont tell us that they [edited] up this and need to rebalance LOTS of stuff. Perhaps they should but they wont...

 

But that would create the same situation we find ourselves in now with regards to heavy tanks, let me explain:

 

Look at the past:

Heavy tanks were losing too much HP due to artillery and premium ammo so what does Wargaming do? Make all maps into linear corridors so heavies can't get flanked anymore.

Then they start removing weakspots from heavy tanks completely and now they've reverted to overbuffing the armour to idiotic levels.

 

Granted, they did finally nerf artillery as a mechanic after 4-5 years so they've got one part of their original 5 year old problem solved. They still haven't properly solved the other part, premium ammunition yet (but they intend to not call it that anymore it seems and that would somehow "fix" the problem).

 

But even if they fix premium ammo by removing it and making sure every tank has frontal weakspots which are viable for same tier guns (there, I gave you the solution Wargaming, no cost attached) they've created so many more problems over the past 4-5 years that the game will still be a mess.

 

If they buff the 140 they are in effect not fixing the actual problem, just creating new ones. What should be done is bringing the armour of the Maus and Type5 heavy down again to levels where you an take them on with standard AP(CR) if they are not angling their tank correctly.

As for the 907 armour buff was not needed although I must say I notice very little difference, so that can be reverted back.

What *SHOULDN'T* be done is buffing every damn tank in the game to fix a situation that could be easily repaired by actually balancing the class that causes the disparity (over armoured heavies).

 

And if this causes bad players to die too fast in their heavies then tough luck, they should learn how to angle/play their class properly. Game mechanics should never compensate in any way for bad play.

 

Cobra 6


Edited by Cobra6, 03 July 2017 - 01:24 PM.


imendars #20 Posted 03 July 2017 - 02:02 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 10983 battles
  • 1,086
  • Member since:
    04-17-2014

View PostCobra6, on 03 July 2017 - 03:18 PM, said:

 

But that would create the same situation we find ourselves in now with regards to heavy tanks, let me explain:

 

Look at the past:

Heavy tanks were losing too much HP due to artillery and premium ammo so what does Wargaming do? Make all maps into linear corridors so heavies can't get flanked anymore.

Then they start removing weakspots from heavy tanks completely and now they've reverted to overbuffing the armour to idiotic levels.

 

Granted, they did finally nerf artillery as a mechanic after 4-5 years so they've got one part of their original 5 year old problem solved. They still haven't properly solved the other part, premium ammunition yet (but they intend to not call it that anymore it seems and that would somehow "fix" the problem).

 

But even if they fix premium ammo by removing it and making sure every tank has frontal weakspots which are viable for same tier guns (there, I gave you the solution Wargaming, no cost attached) they've created so many more problems over the past 4-5 years that the game will still be a mess.

 

If they buff the 140 they are in effect not fixing the actual problem, just creating new ones. What should be done is bringing the armour of the Maus and Type5 heavy down again to levels where you an take them on with standard AP(CR) if they are not angling their tank correctly.

As for the 907 armour buff was not needed although I must say I notice very little difference, so that can be reverted back.

What *SHOULDN'T* be done is buffing every damn tank in the game to fix a situation that could be easily repaired by actually balancing the class that causes the disparity (over armoured heavies).

 

And if this causes bad players to die too fast in their heavies then tough luck, they should learn how to angle/play their class properly. Game mechanics should never compensate in any way for bad play.

 

Cobra 6

 

I"m kinda happy for buffs to Object 140 cause i play it (obviously... :trollface: ). I'm feeling kinda pissed that its brother can troll so well while this tank get smashed if enemy just sees its turret. Plus all the fires. Many say that object 140 is better in clan wars and its brother - in pubs. I dont play clan wars, only pubs so i feel kinda betrayer lol. I once asked what to get and was told obj 140 is so much better...

 

But on the other hand, what about its forgotten brother object 430? Its accuracy is a bad joke and its not like enemy cant damage it. So that guy doesnt have accuracy, it still have fires and it doesnt have armor either...

And from what i'm told Leopard 1 is complete junk.

And IS-6 + china premium mach-making heavies are not having fun in current meta. Specially since poor SuperPershing got proper penetration and with all the new premiums + current match making means it all the time gets some tier 9 oponents. In past it was rare. So atm they can be sold, except for SuperPershing...

And there are many other tanks that have issues.

They probly should have started at these tanks first...

 

And i admit that among all my tier 10 FAIL win rates object 140 is the highest (still low but oh well)...  :trollface:







Also tagged with Russian bias, russian meds, buffing, poll

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users