Jump to content


Type 4 and Type 4 is bad for gameplay


  • Please log in to reply
44 replies to this topic

ZlatanArKung #1 Posted 10 October 2017 - 04:46 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 5,149
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

Since the negative feedback hadn't reached a critical point yet (which is kind of weird since there has only been negative feedback about these tanks (and the other Jap heavies) from the introduction to today), it must be because there isn't enough whine about it being bad. Since everyone thinking it is bad isn't enough.

 

The problems with the Type 5 Heavy:

 

  • Its overpowered (yes it is still OP, it is above average winratio on almost every skill level, and thats at tier 10, where almost every player performs worse than their average, making the OP scale look much smaller than it actually is)
  • Its completely broken.
  • Its completely awful to play against.
  • Its not even fun to play. I am known for playing and enjoying the Japanese heavies alot, and I cant even say that I actually enjoyed playing the Type 5 Heavy during these 146 battles with it. For majority of us I can see it being just as terrible to play with as it is to play against.
  • Its P2W. Its literally the biggest P2W button in the entire game. You basically pay for ~40% damage boost. In shortly, this shortens your exposure time alot, allows you to kill much faster, makes you much scarier opponent to face so no one wants to take a hit (losing 250-450 is not end of world but 450-600 is way worse), and many more. Basically this directly helps you to win battles. I mean, you could argue that any gold ammo is P2W, and maybe it is, but there arent a gold ammo that just flat out boosts your damage output by 40% in literally every possible situation with absolutely no drawbacks. Yes, I would argue that this is practically worse P2W than buying a P2W premium tank. For example, at least the Defender has some drawbacks compared to IS-3 (like bit worse mobility, worse gun handling) and isnt just flat out better version of it. Dont get me wrong, the Defender is extremely overpowered and disgusting tank as well.
  • Due to these traits, it is extremely unhealthy for the game.

 

"BUT HURRDURR YOU WANT TO NERF TYPE 5 BECAUSE IT IS ANNOYING FOR WN8 PADDERS WHO CANT HULLDOWN HURR DURR" - Most stupid thing one can say, which is probably why WoT developers think it is true.

 

(some might recognize the part above, but I was to lazy to write same stuff again).

 

Also, the so called weakspots added to Type 5 are completely irrelevant, they don't change anything. And THEY ARE NOT EVEN WEAKSPOTS.

So WG thinking those "weakspots" are weakspots is just speaking volumes about their bad knowledge about what a weakspot is.

 

But it is hardly surprising that WG doesn't know what a weakspot is, when they add tanks like Defender/VK P and are surprised when they overperforms pretty much more than any other T5+ tank in the game has ever done. When they buff the Maus to absurd levels and are surprised when it goes from 49% avg WR (balanced) to 55% average WR (hugely overpowered). When WG buffs Obj 907 despite it already being balanced.

When WG nerfs light tanks into oblivion (despite them not even overperforming on the test server).

 

A small notice, the best balanced tier in the game (T9) happens to be the tier WG is practicly never ever buffing/nerfing tanks in. A true testiment to competence I guess....



SaintMaddenus #2 Posted 10 October 2017 - 04:58 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35487 battles
  • 1,613
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    03-04-2011
I find T34 and T 34 bad for gameplay...   Get those two mixed up and you got problems....

Dava_117 #3 Posted 10 October 2017 - 05:03 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 20306 battles
  • 3,661
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014

We want weackspot and the removal of the derp! :izmena:

Then you can buff a bit the 14cm gun. :sceptic: 

But weackspot and derp first! :izmena:



Desyatnik_Pansy #4 Posted 10 October 2017 - 05:10 PM

    Bartender

  • Player
  • 16782 battles
  • 25,965
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    04-19-2013

View PostZlatanArKung, on 10 October 2017 - 04:46 PM, said:

I mean, you could argue that any gold ammo is P2W, and maybe it is, but there arent a gold ammo that just flat out boosts your damage output by 40% in literally every possible situation with absolutely no drawbacks.

 

I think you probably know my opinion of the Japanese Heavies but just one thing I wanted to note. Technically that's wrong, since that odd French 105mm exists that boosts the damage from 300 to 330 By pressing the 2 Key, but mind you that's also only a 10% Boost. Still something, but y'know, not as bad of course. And that said, the tanks that it's equipped on are by no means good tanks that can just triple+R Forward and just lolbounce most things that engage them. :P

 

PS: I'm not going to get the actual quote or anything, but according to my brother, Consololol is getting the derps for the Type 4/5 Heavy now but aren't getting the Premium HE. Instead, it gets a 334mm penetration HEAT Round as I understand.



Sfinski #5 Posted 10 October 2017 - 05:10 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 32295 battles
  • 2,755
  • [-PJ-] -PJ-
  • Member since:
    09-26-2013
Guess we have to post this as a new topic few times a week.

Junglist_ #6 Posted 10 October 2017 - 05:11 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 37827 battles
  • 1,353
  • Member since:
    06-17-2013
Typo in the title. Agreed with everything said in OP.

brumbarr #7 Posted 10 October 2017 - 05:15 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 38626 battles
  • 6,326
  • Member since:
    07-30-2012

View PostSfinski, on 10 October 2017 - 05:10 PM, said:

Guess we have to post this as a new topic few times a week.

 

yeahn jsut cope the text and everyone makes 1 post each week, should work.

_EXODUZ_ #8 Posted 10 October 2017 - 05:16 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35518 battles
  • 1,941
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    11-05-2014
This is boring, really...

tajj7 #9 Posted 10 October 2017 - 05:52 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 25830 battles
  • 13,836
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

Can we basically just include all of them? (bar the Tiger and lower tiers) 

 

Posted Image

 

O-Ni and O-I are pretty much as OP as the Type 5, and whilst Type 4 and O-ho are not OP, they are still annoying to fight against for all the same reasons. 



Hyster #10 Posted 10 October 2017 - 06:05 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 27434 battles
  • 583
  • [T-S_K] T-S_K
  • Member since:
    02-14-2012

OH NO, a tank that has armour that works

"MUST BE OP SO LETS ALL WHINE AS 2 KEY NO LONGER AUTO PENS AND I HAVE NO BRAINS TO FIGHT IT." :rolleyes: :child:


 

remove the 2nd gun and buff the 1st gun a little, only change needed


 



Derethim #11 Posted 10 October 2017 - 06:07 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 17784 battles
  • 1,997
  • Member since:
    04-03-2012

I want lega's change of the jap tree. More variety is a plus to balance.

View PostHyster, on 10 October 2017 - 06:05 PM, said:

OH NO, a tank that has armour that works

 

 O-Ho, gold spammer spotted. If you use only gold on that tank, then yes, it's armor does work correctly.

No gold, no pen. Not in the view ports, not in the side of the thread, not even in the cupola.


Edited by Derethim, 10 October 2017 - 06:09 PM.


tajj7 #12 Posted 10 October 2017 - 06:22 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 25830 battles
  • 13,836
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

View PostHyster, on 10 October 2017 - 05:05 PM, said:

OH NO, a tank that has armour that works

"MUST BE OP SO LETS ALL WHINE AS 2 KEY NO LONGER AUTO PENS AND I HAVE NO BRAINS TO FIGHT IT." :rolleyes: :child:


 

remove the 2nd gun and buff the 1st gun a little, only change needed


 

 

Got to laugh at the irony of someone talking about brains when fighting a Type 5, when it's the tank that needs the least brains to operate.

 

Press W, right click, left click.  

 

The armour works on most of the other tier 10 heavies and they have actual weakspots, and you can even bounce lots of premium ammo with them, plus they have guns that require more than just aiming in the general direction of the enemy to do damage. 



leggasiini #13 Posted 10 October 2017 - 06:58 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 15215 battles
  • 6,240
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012

Thanks Muffin, more threads = more hope for WG to do some action.

 

I have said it in the past, and I am gonna say it again.

 

Type 4/5 have 3 major problems that need to be fixed:

 

  1. The derp gun. Its terrible for gameplay as the premium HE as too excessive damage output, and its P2W. They need preferably completely remove it, or at very least remove the premium HE ammo.
  2. The armor needs to be reworked so that it has dinstinct weakspots but is more rewarding to use by angling it (like sidescraping). This can be done by removing the hull cheeks, making the lower frontal plate and cupola into weakspots and make the upper front plate stronger (so its as effective as Maus/E 100 upperplate, to encourage people to aim at weakspots instead of spamming gold at everywhere)
  3. The 14 cm gun needs some buffs in order to be viable gun. It is an awful combination of terrible gold pen, worst-in-class accuracy, bad gun handling and 2nd worst DPM in its tier. In order to make the gun viable, buff the penetration to ~255 / 300 and then either increase rate of fire, increase alpha to 650 (and keep the RoF same) or give a slight buff to accuracy and gun handling. Not all of them, but at very least the penetration needs to be buffed.

 

If you ignore any of these problems, the Type 4/5 will stay broken in a way or another. 

 

I would go in and write a wall of text but its unnecessary because all of you know my opinion already. The answer on that QA though made me more tempted to write on the V2.0 of the Japanese heavy tank line rework proposal.

 

I suggest to edit the thread title to "Type 4 and Type 5". Yeah I know what you meant, but still, just in case.

View PostDerethim, on 10 October 2017 - 07:07 PM, said:

I want lega's change of the jap tree. More variety is a plus to balance.

 O-Ho, gold spammer spotted. If you use only gold on that tank, then yes, it's armor does work correctly.

No gold, no pen. Not in the view ports, not in the side of the thread, not even in the cupola.

 

I expect that you would really like the V2.0 revision that will come at some point in the future. It is more detailed when it comes to each tank, shows multiple potential options and has possibly even more variety.

 

 


Edited by leggasiini, 10 October 2017 - 07:33 PM.


ZlatanArKung #14 Posted 10 October 2017 - 07:31 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 5,149
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

View Postleggasiini, on 10 October 2017 - 06:58 PM, said:

Thanks Muffin, more threads = more hope for WG to do some action.

 

I have said it in the past, and I am gonna say it again.

 

Type 4/5 have 3 major problems that need to be fixed:

 

  1. The derp gun. Its terrible for gameplay as the premium HE as too excessive damage output, and its P2W. They need preferably completely remove it, or at very least remove the premium HE ammo.
  2. The armor needs to be reworked so that it has dinstinct weakspots but is more rewarding to use by angling it (like sidescraping). This can be done by removing the hull cheeks, making the lower frontal plate and cupola into weakspots and make the upper front plate stronger (so its as effective as Maus/E 100 upperplate, to encourage people to aim at weakspots instead of spamming gold at everywhere)
  3. The 14 cm gun needs some buffs in order to be viable gun. It is an awful combination of terrible gold pen, worst-in-class accuracy, bad gun handling and 2nd worst DPM in its tier. In order to make the gun viable, buff the penetration to ~255 / 300 and then either increase rate of fire, increase alpha to 650 (and keep the RoF same) or give a slight buff to accuracy and gun handling. Not all of them, but at very least the penetration needs to be buffed.

 

If you ignore any of these problems, the Type 4/5 will stay broken in a way or another. 

 

I would go in and write a wall of text but its unnecessary because all of you know my opinion already. The answer on that QA though made me more tempted to write on the V2.0 of the Japanese heavy tank line rework proposal.

 

EDIT: I suggest to edit the thread title to "Type 4 and Type 5". Yeah I know what you meant, but still, just in case.

 

 

Next time.

 

We are after all trying to get to a critical point....



Derethim #15 Posted 10 October 2017 - 08:12 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 17784 battles
  • 1,997
  • Member since:
    04-03-2012

View Postleggasiini, on 10 October 2017 - 06:58 PM, said:

 

I expect that you would really like the V2.0 revision that will come at some point in the future. It is more detailed when it comes to each tank, shows multiple potential options and has possibly even more variety.

 

 

The only thing I really want is them actually reviewing and approving at least some of the changes you proposed. Basically what I'd have written if it wasn't so much work, so I appreciate the effort you put into it and WG should too.


Edited by Derethim, 10 October 2017 - 08:12 PM.


leggasiini #16 Posted 10 October 2017 - 08:22 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 15215 battles
  • 6,240
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012

View PostDerethim, on 10 October 2017 - 09:12 PM, said:

The only thing I really want is them actually reviewing and approving at least some of the changes you proposed. Basically what I'd have written if it wasn't so much work, so I appreciate the effort you put into it and WG should too.

 

I will try to get possibility on poking WG and showing the proposal when its done. V2.0 is not coming very soon, though. There are still things I need to do for it and I really need to plan it systematically.

Erwin_Von_Braun #17 Posted 10 October 2017 - 08:25 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 39135 battles
  • 5,261
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    01-25-2014

View Posttajj7, on 10 October 2017 - 05:22 PM, said:

 

Got to laugh at the irony of someone talking about brains when fighting a Type 5, when it's the tank that needs the least brains to operate.

 

Press W, right click, left click. 

 

The armour works on most of the other tier 10 heavies and they have actual weakspots, and you can even bounce lots of premium ammo with them, plus they have guns that require more than just aiming in the general direction of the enemy to do damage.

 

Less brains than arty?

Must be bad...



leggasiini #18 Posted 10 October 2017 - 08:28 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 15215 battles
  • 6,240
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012

View PostErwin_Von_Braun, on 10 October 2017 - 09:25 PM, said:

 

Less brains than arty?

Must be bad...

 

Type 5 still requires more brain but only because of the fact you need to actually use the keyboard a little bit. Sure some knowledge like where to aim and where to go helps with Type 5 but you can literally play it like a zombie and still do well.

Edited by leggasiini, 10 October 2017 - 08:28 PM.


Search_Warrant #19 Posted 10 October 2017 - 08:30 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 27704 battles
  • 6,435
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    02-08-2011

OP?

http://wot-news.com/game/tankinfo/en/eu/japan/J25_Type_4

looks the most "balanced" tank in the game lol. even if it is annoying.



Erwin_Von_Braun #20 Posted 10 October 2017 - 08:30 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 39135 battles
  • 5,261
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    01-25-2014

View Postleggasiini, on 10 October 2017 - 07:28 PM, said:

 

Type 5 still requires more brain but only because of the fact you need to actually use the keyboard a little bit. Sure some knowledge like where to aim and where to go helps with Type 5 but you can literally play it like a zombie and still do well.

 

Then let us remove it immediately...

Along with Farty, Premium Ammo, Redlining TD's, Corridor Maps and other 'game-breaking' things that I can't think of.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users