Jump to content


Supertest Leak - British Mediums


  • Please log in to reply
43 replies to this topic

Kandly #1 Posted 25 July 2017 - 02:57 PM

    Community Manager

  • WG Staff
  • 697 battles
  • 754
  • Member since:
    08-23-2016

Commanders,

 

The new characteristics of some British Medium tanks are soon to be tested on the Supertest server!

 

British MTs have excellent elevation angles and a good view range, but unfortunately, the turret isn't strong enough for allowing you to fully take advantage of these top British vehicles. That’s exactly why we plan to improve the front armor of Medium tanks turrets starting from Tier VIII to Tier X. 

 

The effective armor will now start from 240mm, which will allow you to play more confidently on terrain folds and to feel less vulnerable.

 

British premium MT FV4202 was not ignored either. Besides improving the front of the turret (common for all top Medium tanks), we’ll also improve the armor of the front hull so it reaches 223mm effective armor. Due to tht, FV 4202 will be able to fight with opponents using its strong front. Moreover, we’ll increase the engine power to 650 h.p., which will allow this tank to reach its maximum speed quicker, become more mobile and dynamic overall.

 

changes_002_eng.jpgchanges_003_eng.jpgchanges_004_eng.jpg

 

We’ll soon share some more details regarding upcoming changes – stay tuned!

 

Cheers,

Kandly



kripton69 #2 Posted 25 July 2017 - 03:10 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 1208 battles
  • 389
  • [-UM] -UM
  • Member since:
    06-23-2016

Excellent. Let's buff the armor on everything and obsolete standard ammo so people are going to be spamming even more gold. Didn't Maus, Type 5 and Defender teach you guys anything at all?

 

The gameplay is already stagnant enough. Can we please have some change that's going to encourage active gameplay for a change instead of pampering mouth-breathers to the point where the game can soon be prescribed as a sleeping medicine because nothing's happening? Right now it's about overpowered heavy tanks camping some nice corner, sitting there patiently, gold loaded(it's the only ammo that penetrates the enemy heavies doing the same) fully aimed and there's nothing you can do to dig them out but they are blocking any plays you can make. Then on the other hand we have a bunch of useless TDs camping from the back and shooting anyone who is trying to dig out the risk averse heavies. All the dynamics from the game are gone.

 

At least get rid of Standard game mode for good so people have some reason to play the game. Force people to fight over some relevant area instead of making it possible for both teams to passively camp a chokepoint or base with the knowledge that if the enemy wants to win the game they eventually have to make a suboptimal, aggressive play.

 

Right now World of Tanks is combining corridors with mongoloid camping. The gameplay couldn't possibly be any more unhealthy and your solution to the problem is yet again buffing the armor and creating more situations where a player can just sit comfortably in a position, fully aimed, ruling out all the plays from the enemy with the knowledge that the enemy can't win the game without making it to your base.

 

Oh man, I'm so looking forward to this. Let's make the gameplay even campier and more passive so people have even less of a reason to learn how to play. We need to make sure everyone either plays pay-to-win heavies with idiotproof armor and spams full gold, or alternatively uselessly camps like a bot with ISU-152 or a Swedish TD and the team that has more patience to camp the corners with heavies and sit in the base with TDs wins while the team that tries to play the game is going to lose. Anyone who's not spamming gold in a heavy tank or playing one of the noobtube TDs with super high penetration and alpha is being punished even further. That's what the game needs. Now that we're at fixing critical gameplay issues can we please give HEAT better normalization than AP and give it overmatch potential? I think right now there are still a few silly situations when shooting standard AP is a viable play and it should be a high priority to eliminate those instances.


Edited by kripton69, 25 July 2017 - 03:13 PM.


Velvet_Underground #3 Posted 25 July 2017 - 03:12 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 22243 battles
  • 3,176
  • Member since:
    12-19-2014

Are you actually going to buff the turret armor of french, american, soviet and british tanks? That's some really amazing variety right there and totally the first thing that comes to mind if you want to make those tanks more appealing:facepalm:

 

I've got to say that stopping to play this game for good 2 months ago (with the exception of 1 platooned session) was my best decision regarding this game in a long, long time. Screw your terrible balancing and decisions.


Edited by Velvet_Underground, 25 July 2017 - 03:19 PM.


cro001 #4 Posted 25 July 2017 - 03:17 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 29332 battles
  • 1,888
  • Member since:
    10-21-2012

World of bland - let's buff every turret in game edition.

Seriously, I'm waiting for Leo1 armor buff and we're done here. F.ck Murazor and whole balancing department, they are all retarded. Community has made a tons of topic regarding tank balance but you still manage to ignore them.


Edited by cro001, 25 July 2017 - 03:17 PM.


Hammerhead20 #5 Posted 25 July 2017 - 03:17 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 25370 battles
  • 1,753
  • Member since:
    06-29-2011
Ok. Just don't forget to "buff" my Leopard PT A and Type 61 turret's armour...

kripton69 #6 Posted 25 July 2017 - 03:21 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 1208 battles
  • 389
  • [-UM] -UM
  • Member since:
    06-23-2016

View PostVelvet_Underground, on 25 July 2017 - 04:12 PM, said:

Are you actually going to buff the turret armor of french, american, soviet and british tanks? That's some really amazing variety right there and totally the first thing that comes to mind if you want to make those tanks more appealing:facepalm:

 

I've got to say that stopping to play this game for good 2 months ago (with the exception of 1 platooned session) was my best decision regarding this game in a long, long time. Screw your terrible balancing and decisions.

 

The game isn't complete until every medium in the game has 8-10 degrees of gun depression plus turret armor. Then everyone can play the tank that looks the coolest in their opinion. How awesome is that?!

ares354 #7 Posted 25 July 2017 - 03:23 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 73789 battles
  • 3,163
  • Member since:
    12-05-2010

So let see on tier 10 MT tank. 

121- effective turret armor from 240 to over 300 +
TVP 50\51- from 120 to plus 200, some more on gun mantlet, but no armor 
BC- no armor,
AMX30b, new armor so no comment
STB 1- from 180 to 400+ armor, but hole in gun mantlet, no HD yet
M48 Patton, turret buff
All Soviet mt, from 240-250 to over 350+

Last: 
Leopard 1-from 100 to 140, plus few autobounce zones, bit sronger at some point, but some 70 mm zone as well, no armor
E50m-190 effective armor!!!Good armor 

Tell me, WTF is WG doing. Why every MT in game is now getting same buff, to turret armor. From this i can see that Germans MT should be big, slow and with no armor. Leo 1 is fast, but has no armor. Why E50m has so paper turret ? That tier 8 has better ? WTF is wrong with WG? 

FV4202 has now better armor then German HT, VK auf A and Tiger 2. And Centurion X turret buff will go on Caernarvon so yea, some good buff.  



 



Norstein_Bekker #8 Posted 25 July 2017 - 03:29 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 19162 battles
  • 4,287
  • [N00T] N00T
  • Member since:
    11-22-2013
So I guess WG is not considering Chieftain/T95 as a british medium, FeelsBad for him, Man.

leggasiini #9 Posted 25 July 2017 - 03:41 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 13389 battles
  • 6,157
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012

All these armor buffs are indirect buffs to Type 5 Heavy because it will have more and more situations where it can do damage when other tanks couldnt. Its going to pretty much negate the nerfs you are introducing in 9.20. Way to go, Wargaming.



StinkyStonky #10 Posted 25 July 2017 - 03:50 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 27762 battles
  • 2,040
  • [-SJA-] -SJA-
  • Member since:
    11-02-2015

View PostKandly, on 25 July 2017 - 01:57 PM, said:

Moreover, we’ll increase the engine power to 650 h.p., which will allow this tank to reach its maximum speed quicker, become more mobile and dynamic overall.

View Postkripton69, on 25 July 2017 - 02:10 PM, said:

The gameplay is already stagnant enough. Can we please have some change that's going to encourage active gameplay for a change instead of pampering mouth-breathers 

 

And you wonder why WG doesn't give a crapabout the drivel you write in the forums.

 

They've improved some tanks that nobody bothers to play because they're so crap and you moan about stagnant game play.

 



ares354 #11 Posted 25 July 2017 - 04:00 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 73789 battles
  • 3,163
  • Member since:
    12-05-2010

View PostStinkyStonky, on 25 July 2017 - 03:50 PM, said:

 

And you wonder why WG doesn't give a crapabout the drivel you write in the forums.

 

They've improved some tanks that nobody bothers to play because they're so crap and you moan about stagnant game play.

 

 

I play Centurion X , and its fine Mt. FV4202 PROBLEM is GUN, that suck. Bad soft stats, bad dpm on 230 alpha. Bad aim time. And you pay ovet 600 credits for one shoot and 230 dmg. 

Laatikkomafia #12 Posted 25 July 2017 - 04:20 PM

    Brigadier

  • Beta Tester
  • 21315 battles
  • 4,229
  • [ELC-P] ELC-P
  • Member since:
    12-27-2010
When will you "supertest" T32's gun with 270mm AP penetration?

fighting_falcon93 #13 Posted 25 July 2017 - 04:39 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 30536 battles
  • 3,611
  • Member since:
    02-05-2013
I like the changes. Finally we can actually use the turret on the hulldown tank and actually do something, instead of sitting locked behind a hill because as soon as you peek you'll get penned in your turret front. This is a step in the right direction, but you must remember to also fix the 2 other major problems: gold ammo and corridor maps. Also interesting to see how much complains there's in this thread because the amount of whack-a-mole peek-a-boo game play got reduced. Please don't listen to those complains WG, those are players that have 0 interest in this game actually being a tactical tank game, all they want is some after-work arcade clicking game.

kripton69 #14 Posted 25 July 2017 - 04:44 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 1208 battles
  • 389
  • [-UM] -UM
  • Member since:
    06-23-2016

View PostStinkyStonky, on 25 July 2017 - 04:50 PM, said:

 

And you wonder why WG doesn't give a crapabout the drivel you write in the forums.

 

They've improved some tanks that nobody bothers to play because they're so crap and you moan about stagnant game play.

 

 

The constant armor buffing just makes for more situations when you can't make a play against a fully aimed enemy who is sitting behind his armor. We've had many buffs like this recently and as result the gameplay has become extremely stagnant. Having armor doesn't mean people grow balls. If they're risk-averse they will still play passively, pick a nice sidescraping or hulldown position and aim their shot fully while minimizing all the risks. They just get rewarded more for it now and it becomes even harder for the active players to do anything because the sheer amount of armor and poor map design are making it unpractical to try to dig out a camping tank with armor.

 

The mobility buff is borderline meaningless. You know why? Because the armor has been overbuffed in this game and mobility doesn't matter anymore as long as it goes beyond certain thresholds. Just watch the performance levels of tier 10 mediums if you want. They're in a worse spot than ever. On the other hand the super slow tanks, Maus and Type 5, dominate the stats despite having absolutely horrendous mobility. Why do you think that is if mobility is so important? Why the slowest tanks of the game are the best if driving around the map quickly matters so much? Contrary to a popular belief in randoms it just doesn't.

 

Lots of clueless players like to highlight the importance of mobility because they don't understand how it works. I won't write an essay about it now but the maps of WoT are very small for a 15 vs. 15 game and the map design has been going towards stagnant tunnel fights so most of the time even the slowest heavies have the time to get in position. This is why Maus wins games. It's outstanding when it gets into action and currently in this game it doesn't matter much if it misses the first minute of combat. In almost all maps mobility works in thresholds, as in whether your tank is fast enough to reach the flank you want to play or not or if it's fast enough for hill rushes. A typical Russian heavy like IS-3/Defender/IS-6 is fast enough to play any flank in most maps. They won't be making hill rushes in Mines but in the big picture most mediums only have marginal advantages in practice over them through their mobility.


There was a time when using armor required skill. You had to know how it works and especially when it works. But people were whining that armor was worthless despite heavies already being the best performing class. Their idea of armor is driving through the field of Malinovka and being penetrated 1-2 times and all the latest patches have been dragging the game towards that direction.

 

The only two problems armor has ever had have been artillery and to a lesser extent premium ammo. I don't think I ever saw anyone whine how standard ammo is too good and it should be nerfed yet that's exactly the approach. Now the only way to damage strong(or in many cases, blatantly overpowered) heavies is to load gold. A mobility buff here or there doesn't change anything. In the grand scheme of things we're seeing just more and more stupid armor buffs in a game in which armor is already far too relevant.


Edited by kripton69, 25 July 2017 - 04:49 PM.


Cobra6 #15 Posted 25 July 2017 - 05:01 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16332 battles
  • 15,686
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

Are you going to also buff the Chieftain/T95 finally? It honestly the *ONE* British medium that actually needs buffing

 

It's all fine and dandy to buff tanks which are already pretty ok but leaving out the only tank that actually needs a buff, the Chieftain/T95 CW reward tank is a bit petty.

 

Give it competitive "British" pen of ~220, give it similar top speed to the (buffed) Centurions of around 50km/h and buff the horrible cupola that makes the complete turret armour irrelevant at the moment.

 

Cobra 6


Edited by Cobra6, 25 July 2017 - 05:14 PM.


Velvet_Underground #16 Posted 25 July 2017 - 05:24 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 22243 battles
  • 3,176
  • Member since:
    12-19-2014

View Postfighting_falcon93, on 25 July 2017 - 04:39 PM, said:

Also interesting to see how much complains there's in this thread because the amount of whack-a-mole peek-a-boo game play got reduced.

Once again, sitting hulldown while being completly invulnerable and shooting whoever might go out in the open is apparently not whack-a-mole but the hulldown-tank having weakspots apparently is. That makes sense dude, there's nothing wrong whatsoever with your logic.



fighting_falcon93 #17 Posted 25 July 2017 - 06:51 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 30536 battles
  • 3,611
  • Member since:
    02-05-2013

View PostVelvet_Underground, on 25 July 2017 - 05:24 PM, said:

Once again, sitting hulldown while being completly invulnerable and shooting whoever might go out in the open is apparently not whack-a-mole but the hulldown-tank having weakspots apparently is. That makes sense dude, there's nothing wrong whatsoever with your logic.

 

Have you ever heard of the term "strategy" before? Have you played an actual strategy game before?

 

If you drive in front of a hulldown tank being hulldown, you are in the strategical disadvantage, and are supposed to get punished for it. You're not supposed to just place your mouse cursor on his turret to counter his strategical advantage, but rather relocate and position yourself in a strategical advantage instead. That's how a tank game should work like, not stupid gameplay around "you click me, i click you back"...



coolathlon #18 Posted 25 July 2017 - 06:53 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 43183 battles
  • 10,304
  • [KAZNA] KAZNA
  • Member since:
    03-08-2011

Balancing Department is running on Belorussian RNG? Throwing Dices?

 

@Kandy: It is not a leak if it comes from the one developing it.


Edited by coolathlon, 25 July 2017 - 06:59 PM.


coolathlon #19 Posted 25 July 2017 - 06:58 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 43183 battles
  • 10,304
  • [KAZNA] KAZNA
  • Member since:
    03-08-2011

View Postfighting_falcon93, on 25 July 2017 - 06:51 PM, said:

 

Have you ever heard of the term "strategy" before? Have you played an actual strategy game before?

 

If you drive in front of a hulldown tank being hulldown, you are in the strategical disadvantage, and are supposed to get punished for it. You're not supposed to just place your mouse cursor on his turret to counter his strategical advantage, but rather relocate and position yourself in a strategical advantage instead. That's how a tank game should work like, not stupid gameplay around "you click me, i click you back"...

 

Unhistorical armor is BS when WG advertises tanks being historical.

The FV is getting the armor of the 4202 on Tier X which was replaced BECAUSE IT HAD F******G UNHISTORICAL ARMOR.

 

Now should I relocate when a Leopard 1 is peeking over a ridge because it is hulldown?



fighting_falcon93 #20 Posted 25 July 2017 - 07:09 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 30536 battles
  • 3,611
  • Member since:
    02-05-2013

View Postcoolathlon, on 25 July 2017 - 06:58 PM, said:

Now should I relocate when a Leopard 1 is peeking over a ridge because it is hulldown?

 

You're talking about 2 different things...

 

- No, WG should not give unhistorical armor to tanks, unless it's really, really needed.

- Yes, if WG decides that Leopard 1 should have turret armor, you should need to relocate.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users