Jump to content


T34 Buff Proposal [please tell your opinion]

T34 buff

  • Please log in to reply
42 replies to this topic

Poll: T34 Buff Proposal [please tell your opinion] (8 members have cast votes)

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

Which one of the changes is better? (Primary or Secondary)

  1. Primary (4 votes [50.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 50.00%

  2. Secondary (4 votes [50.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 50.00%

Vote Hide poll

Lentomies1 #1 Posted 10 September 2017 - 07:24 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 28528 battles
  • 320
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    12-05-2012

Hi guys!

 

T34 has been underperforming for a long time. Other premium tanks have been powercreeping this tank to the ground, which is why I have been thinking what kind of buffs it should get.

 

THESE ARE JUST PROPOSALS   

 

Changes:

Increasing the alpha dmg from 400 to 530

Decreasing the RoF from 4 to 3.75 

Decreasing the accuracy from 0.35 to 0.36

 

Gun handling:

moving from 0.28 to 0.24

tank traverse from 0.28 to 0.24
turret traverse from 0.28 to 0.18
​Decreasing the aim time from 3.2s to 2.9
 
​Terrain resistance:
​on hard terrain from 1.40 to 1.10
on medium terrain from 1.70 to 1.30
on soft terrain from 3.40 to 3.00
 
NOTE:  New proposals below
 

Changes:

Increasing the alpha dmg from  to 515/540/600

Standard AMMO pen increased from 248 to 257

​Premium rounds have worse pen (HEAT) (220) but higher alpha dmg

 

Decreasing the RoF from 4 to 3.65

Decreasing the accuracy from 0.35 to 0.36

 

Gun handling:

Aim time decreased from 3.2 to 2.9

 
​Terrain resistance:
​on hard terrain from 1.40 to 1.20
on medium terrain from 1.70 to 1.50
on soft terrain from 3.40 to 3.20
 
NOTE:  New proposals below (again... :D)
 
 
​Primary Changes:
 
​Firepower:
​Increasing the alpha from 400/400/515 to 425/425/525 =DPM from 1600 to 1720 
 
​Armor: 
​Turret roof armor increased to 55mm
 
 

Gun handling:

moving from 0.28 to 0.22

tank traverse from 0.28 to 0.22
turret traverse from 0.28 to 0.17
​Decreasing the aim time from 3.2s to 3.0s
 
Terrain resistance/mobility
​on hard terrain from 1.40 to 1.20
on medium terrain from 1.70 to 1.50
on soft terrain from 3.40 to 3.20
Tank traverse from 22 to 25 (°/sec)
 
​Secondary changes
 
 
 
​Gun: from 400/400/515 to 420/420/525
RoF from 4 to 4.2
 

Gun handling:

moving from 0.28 to 0.24

tank traverse from 0.28 to 0.24
turret traverse from 0.28 to 0.19
​Decreasing the aim time from 3.2s to 2.6
 
 
 
 
 
I made these  new changes based on your feedback
 
 
 

Now, tell me what do you think about the new changes?

 

 


Edited by Lentomies1, 11 September 2017 - 10:14 AM.


leggasiini #2 Posted 10 September 2017 - 07:36 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 11463 battles
  • 6,009
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012

Huge alpha buff with quite small RoF nerf, AMONG with major gun handling buffs and terrain resist buffs? That's a very overkill buff.

 

Essentially you are giving it 32% more alpha damage with quite significant gun handling buffs. The alpha damage buff is so big that its DPM also gets buffed by almost 400 to 200 despite RoF nerf, so not only it would have by far the highest alpha and penetration of all tier 8 HTs but it also would have above average DPM on its tier. And as an icing cake it gets quite big gun handling buffs and mobility buffs.

 

So its effectively T30 with worse pen and alpha but better gun handling because of VStabs, better accuracy, better turret rotation speed, only bit worse DPM and ability to train crews and credits. Sounds fair at first...but T34 is a whole tier lower.

 

Not saying that T34 doesnt need buffs but these buffs are bit too overkill. To be honest though, I like your idea and concept on the high alpha damage. However, 530 alpha is arguably maybe bit too much on a tier 8 turretted platform. Instead, implement the gun handling and mobility buffs you proposed, and then either maybe a RoF buff (it should have quite low RoF though because it already has quite high alpha and best pen of all T8 heavies) or get its turret roof buffed to make it harder to overmatch.

 

530 alpha would work if you didnt buff anything else though, maybe still need to nerf RoF because hitting for 530 instead of 400 is kinda big deal

 

EDIT: for some reason my brain thought 560 alpha instead of 530, edited it, however its still bit too overkill


Edited by leggasiini, 10 September 2017 - 07:40 PM.


lord_chipmonk #3 Posted 10 September 2017 - 07:43 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 32570 battles
  • 10,166
  • [-HOW-] -HOW-
  • Member since:
    12-23-2012
The current T34 is fine. Any buffs should be minor. This is far too much. 

Aim_Away_From_Face #4 Posted 10 September 2017 - 07:49 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 31278 battles
  • 708
  • Member since:
    09-10-2011

Whilst at first that alpha might seem insane it's actually not that crazy. An increase to 500 would still not bring it even with the Patriot and then you have the mobility and armour superiority the Patriot already has over the T34. 

I would say:

- 500 alpha

- Turret roof armour increased to 60mm  (seriously, the supposed god like turret really really isn't, literally everything in tier 7 and above can pen the turret roof with ease, 78mm effective at its very very thickest and most angled spot)

- Hull frontal armour increased to 150 and machine gun port removed (why should it have that mega weakspot when nothing else does?)

- Leave everything else the same. 

 


Edited by Aim_Away_From_Face, 10 September 2017 - 07:51 PM.


Lentomies1 #5 Posted 10 September 2017 - 08:02 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 28528 battles
  • 320
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    12-05-2012

View Postleggasiini, on 10 September 2017 - 09:36 PM, said:

Huge alpha buff with quite small RoF nerf, AMONG with major gun handling buffs and terrain resist buffs? That's a very overkill buff.

 

Essentially you are giving it 32% more alpha damage with quite significant gun handling buffs. The alpha damage buff is so big that its DPM also gets buffed by almost 400 to 200 despite RoF nerf, so not only it would have by far the highest alpha and penetration of all tier 8 HTs but it also would have above average DPM on its tier. And as an icing cake it gets quite big gun handling buffs and mobility buffs.

 

So its effectively T30 with worse pen and alpha but better gun handling because of VStabs, better accuracy, better turret rotation speed, only bit worse DPM and ability to train crews and credits. Sounds fair at first...but T34 is a whole tier lower.

 

Not saying that T34 doesnt need buffs but these buffs are bit too overkill. To be honest though, I like your idea and concept on the high alpha damage. However, 530 alpha is arguably maybe bit too much on a tier 8 turretted platform. Instead, implement the gun handling and mobility buffs you proposed, and then either maybe a RoF buff (it should have quite low RoF though because it already has quite high alpha and best pen of all T8 heavies) or get its turret roof buffed to make it harder to overmatch.

 

530 alpha would work if you didnt buff anything else though, maybe still need to nerf RoF because hitting for 530 instead of 400 is kinda big deal

 

EDIT: for some reason my brain thought 560 alpha instead of 530, edited it, however its still bit too overkill

 

Yeah, my first proposals would have made T34 OP, which is why I made changes to them.



Aim_Away_From_Face #6 Posted 10 September 2017 - 08:17 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 31278 battles
  • 708
  • Member since:
    09-10-2011

View PostLentomies1, on 10 September 2017 - 08:02 PM, said:

 

Yeah, my first proposals would have made T34 OP, which is why I made changes to them.

 

They're still OP. Alpha should be 500/500/610, pen 248/290(HEAT)/70. Also you seem to be focusing on mobility, the mobility is completely fine but ONLY if the massively underpowered armour is sorted out. Roof must be made thicker (there are tier 3 tanks which can pen it ffs) and frontal armour must be made thicker. With those relevant changes the mobility is a moot point.

Lentomies1 #7 Posted 10 September 2017 - 08:22 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 28528 battles
  • 320
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    12-05-2012

View PostAim_Away_From_Face, on 10 September 2017 - 10:17 PM, said:

 

They're still OP. Alpha should be 500/500/610, pen 248/290(HEAT)/70. Also you seem to be focusing on mobility, the mobility is completely fine but ONLY if the massively underpowered armour is sorted out. Roof must be made thicker (there are tier 3 tanks which can pen it ffs) and frontal armour must be made thicker. With those relevant changes the mobility is a moot point.

 

​IMO they are not. Maybe the high dmg premium round is bit stupid, but overall it's fine IMO

Ojciec_Director #8 Posted 10 September 2017 - 08:43 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 30259 battles
  • 399
  • Member since:
    01-16-2011
NO. We dont need another damn ALPHA monster in T8 matches, we got way to many already starting with TX monsters and finishing with all T8 fat [edited]TDs. If you want T34 on steroids play T30. This tank need more mobility. Turn rate, acceleration, better soft stats. Gun is very good with 248 pen.

Ojciec_Director #9 Posted 10 September 2017 - 08:53 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 30259 battles
  • 399
  • Member since:
    01-16-2011

View PostAim_Away_From_Face, on 10 September 2017 - 07:49 PM, said:

Whilst at first that alpha might seem insane it's actually not that crazy. An increase to 500 would still not bring it even with the Patriot and then you have the mobility and armour superiority the Patriot already has over the T34. 

I would say:

- 500 alpha

- Turret roof armour increased to 60mm  (seriously, the supposed god like turret really really isn't, literally everything in tier 7 and above can pen the turret roof with ease, 78mm effective at its very very thickest and most angled spot)

- Hull frontal armour increased to 150 and machine gun port removed (why should it have that mega weakspot when nothing else does?)

- Leave everything else the same. 

 

 

Nope, this tank its about turret and gun depression. Still can sidescrape well. Use terrain. This tank lack mobility.

suvicze #10 Posted 10 September 2017 - 09:02 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 19297 battles
  • 655
  • [CS-TB] CS-TB
  • Member since:
    08-07-2010

There is absolutely no need to increase the alpha. Gun handling, dpm and maybe aim time just need a buff so this tank actually has something going for it except pen which is useless when you dont hit anything because of horrible soft stats.

I still remember when it used to be T9. It was my favourite tank when I got the 120mm gun on it and to this day it is my only high tier heavy where I managed 11 kills :D. It had mobility on the level of british high tier medium, turret traverse was basically twice as good and tank traverse was like 50% better. Rof around 6,5 and soft stats good enough that you could snapshot lights and snipe with ease. I still hate WG for what they did to T34 and T30. Both were such unique and still playable heavies with superior guns and mobility and they destroyed both of them.

 

My suggestion would be as follows:

Rof increase to 4,6 +- so it has around 1850dpm which is pretty much standard for current heavies

Reduce aim time from 3.07 to 2,6s

Soft stats:

moving 0.27 -> 0.17

tank traverse 0.27 -> 0.17

turret traverse 0.21 -> 0.12

 

This way it would still have crap armor except front of the turret and crap mobility but the gun would actually work



SuedKAT #11 Posted 10 September 2017 - 09:12 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 12154 battles
  • 6,157
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-21-2014
A mobility buff, some better gun characteristics and a slight RoF buff would be quite enough, there is literally no reason what so ever to increase the alpha though.

Sergeant_Antaro_Chronus #12 Posted 10 September 2017 - 10:04 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 13560 battles
  • 615
  • [EL-G] EL-G
  • Member since:
    06-24-2013

The T34 is okay, currently though it needs a small buff. More specifically;

 

Mobility

  • Engine power: Increase it from 810hp to 850hp.
  • Hull Traverse: Increase it from 22 degrees to 24 degrees.
  • Terrain resistance: Reduce it from 1.34/1.63/3.26 to 1.25/1.53/2.55.

Armor

  • Hull armor: Increase it from 102/76/56mm to 120/85/60mm
  • Turret armor: Increase it from 279.4/127/203mm to 280/130/203mm.

Gun

  • Shell cost: Reduce it from 1060/4800/900 to 1025/4800/608. (Basically as Defender)
  • Damage: Increase it from 400/400/515 to 420/420/530. (Close to Defender)


Dava_117 #13 Posted 10 September 2017 - 10:17 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 18149 battles
  • 2,558
  • [B-BAS] B-BAS
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014

530 alpha for a 120mm gun is too much. At most 440 as tier X 122mm.

Pen is fine as it is, considering that it as an almost invincible turret.

Gun handling buff and terrain resistance buff are fine.


Edited by Dava_117, 10 September 2017 - 10:18 PM.


arthurwellsley #14 Posted 10 September 2017 - 10:22 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 50989 battles
  • 2,723
  • [-B-C-] -B-C-
  • Member since:
    05-11-2011

OP proposals just too much. My proposals are;

 

Mobility

  • Engine power: Increase it from 810hp to 850hp.
  • Hull Traverse: Increase it from 22 degrees to 24 degrees.
  • Terrain resistance: Reduce it from 1.34/1.63/3.26 to 1.25/1.53/2.55.

Armor

  • get its turret roof buffed to make it harder to overmatch

Gun

  • Shell cost: Reduce it from 1060/4800/900 to 1025/4800/608. (Basically as Defender)
  • Damage: Increase it from 400/400/515 to 420/420/530. (Close to Defender)

 

The above should be sufficient to make it competetive again.



HundeWurst #15 Posted 10 September 2017 - 10:36 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 67720 battles
  • 4,266
  • [FAME] FAME
  • Member since:
    02-06-2012

View PostAim_Away_From_Face, on 10 September 2017 - 07:49 PM, said:

Whilst at first that alpha might seem insane it's actually not that crazy. An increase to 500 would still not bring it even with the Patriot and then you have the mobility and armour superiority the Patriot already has over the T34. 

I would say:

- 500 alpha

- Turret roof armour increased to 60mm  (seriously, the supposed god like turret really really isn't, literally everything in tier 7 and above can pen the turret roof with ease, 78mm effective at its very very thickest and most angled spot)

- Hull frontal armour increased to 150 and machine gun port removed (why should it have that mega weakspot when nothing else does?)

- Leave everything else the same. 

 

 

God I am glad that youa re not in charge of balancing.

There are even worse people for that job than what Wargaming employed right now...

 

Do you even think about your propoasls first? I dont think so.

 

E1: Most of your ideas are a total overkill. NEWFLASH... This is NOT a tier 10 tank but a tier 8 one. While It could use a bit better rate of fire it does not need much more. Well mybe a bit better mobility but thats about it.

There is no need to make it better than the Defender by any means. No need for stupid alpha buffs. NO

 

You guys are all trashtalking WG for their balance I bet but your proposals are even more stupid than theirs.


Edited by WunderWurst, 10 September 2017 - 10:40 PM.


Kartoshkaya #16 Posted 10 September 2017 - 11:58 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 22571 battles
  • 335
  • Member since:
    01-01-2015
I have a proposal :  Nerf T34

Mike_Mckay #17 Posted 11 September 2017 - 12:45 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 17862 battles
  • 1,308
  • [-AWF-] -AWF-
  • Member since:
    09-02-2015
I don't think the problems with the T34 is the alpha tbh, its the DPM

The mobility does kind of suck though

So personally if it got buffed I would just be happy with a ROF increase so its DPM is on a par with other tier 8 heavies, perhaps slightly lower due to its pen, but not as low as it is now, I woudnt even mind if we got a sizeable ROF increase but pen went to 235-240 ish with say 5 RPM

Ground resistance buffs and some armour buffs, perhaps engine power would make the world of difference. Perhaps slightly higher armour on the cupola too as many new tanks have quite well armoured cupolas and the T34 one is a pretty huge target


The buffs to the lowe made it a much better tank to play, I think the T34 just needs something similar to that and not being turned into a derp sloth

In fact expanding on that, I think where a premium tank is buffed it should play the same as it already does but "better", changes that turn it effectively into a very different tank entirely requiring a different style of play is wrong
 

Edited by Mike_Mckay, 11 September 2017 - 12:52 AM.


BKatt #18 Posted 11 September 2017 - 12:50 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 30429 battles
  • 359
  • [LGACY] LGACY
  • Member since:
    04-28-2013

T34 only needs a mobility buff.

 

You guys are the reason we can't have nice things.

Shooting sparrows with missiles. Get a grip, and stop throwing acinine moronic ideas out, like 500 alpha, or balancing it against Defender, Patriot or the other already broken fking tanks.

 

Worst part is, WG balance departement might even listen to you.



unrealname #19 Posted 11 September 2017 - 12:51 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 21157 battles
  • 969
  • [TAKE] TAKE
  • Member since:
    10-31-2013

View Postlord_chipmonk, on 10 September 2017 - 08:43 PM, said:

The current T34 is fine. Any buffs should be minor. This is far too much. 

 

cmon it became crap after an accuracy nerf, like 2 years ago iirc? before that i didnt mind it being bad at other stats, but after those accuracy changes it has become really bad, i still play it often just for crew training and creds, but its really frustrating tank to play.

Edited by Bond90, 11 September 2017 - 12:51 AM.


Zodiac1960s #20 Posted 11 September 2017 - 02:36 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 36143 battles
  • 938
  • [VOMIT] VOMIT
  • Member since:
    03-27-2011
A little mobility and aim/bloom buff would be nice.

Edited by Blind_Hate, 11 September 2017 - 02:37 AM.






Also tagged with T34 buff

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users