Jump to content


The new Russian tree changes suck. Seriously. Stop it.

New Russian tree changes were planned by a team of monkeys moms spaghetti

  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

Derethim #1 Posted 31 October 2017 - 01:24 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 16663 battles
  • 1,723
  • Member since:
    04-03-2012

I don't see why the devs should remove the Obj. 416. Yes, I know, they're probably planning on making it a premium, but why?

The STG is a very similar tank in looks and gameplay, there is absolutely no reason to remove a tank from a tree, when changing a line. They should make it a choice similar to that of the Ferdinand or Jagdpanther II instead.

I'd be fine in the russian med high tiers having to grind through a cookie-cutter copy of the tier X med, just weaker, if it's only purpose wasn't to remove a tier VIII tank and make it a premium later on, or getting rid of it completely, which I highly doubt will happen.

 

There is also no reason to remove the Obj. 263 from tier X and replace it with another stupid, impenetrable, cookie-cutter, 750 alpha TD they just pulled out of nowhere!

Obj. 263 is a vehicle in the game many people enjoy playing, why change a feature in the game, that people enjoy? Focus on the tanks, that are actually miserable to play, like the Tiger (P) or the Jap meds.

The only reason, people don't play your 2nd russian TD line, is because the tiers 7 and 8 are quite underpowered and need a buff. The excuse of "making every tank in a line match by playstyle" is just stupid.

 

Who the hell wants that? Sure, it would help the newbies, so that they don't have to adapt. But you know what would help them more? If they didn't have to face sealclubbers in OP lowtiers, like the M2, the Panzer II, the PZ I C, or disgustingly OP premium tanks in the high tiers, like the Defender, the Patriot, the Liberté.

 

If they want to add the Obj. 268 V4 they should add it as a second option on tier X, or if you really want them to reduce the variety in the tree, get rid of the SU-122-54 or keep it as a side option and put it on tier IX.

 

There will be a negative backlash to these changes. I don't know what the RU side says about these, but I'd be mad, because these changes are bad from any view point, aside from WG's.



wolfsrain #2 Posted 31 October 2017 - 01:32 PM

    Corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 49362 battles
  • 111
  • [LASO] LASO
  • Member since:
    11-15-2010
Obj 416 is a light tank. It had no business in that tech tree from the start. Though, they could add it to the light tanks line. I agree that the changes to the TD line are weird. The 268 v.4 should be a Tier X option from 704. 

Dis4ster #3 Posted 31 October 2017 - 01:40 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 27944 battles
  • 2,935
  • Member since:
    02-12-2012

The Obj 268 v4 should be the 2nd Tier 10 in line of the current 268 or even replace the current 268 because its crap.

I just hope that WG changes the alpha of the 268 v4 to what the 263 has right now and i think they will because this alpha and that speed would cost fast tanks to much hp for example on mines or other maps where there is an important position to that only meds and lights can get in the first minutes of the battle, but then a 750 aplha TD gets there and the same time and punishes them and they can't even damage it back because of its stupid p2w armor.



Cobra6 #4 Posted 31 October 2017 - 02:49 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16296 battles
  • 15,101
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

Have mutliple tanks in a line indeed like the Ferdi/JP2, don't remove tanks already in the tree.

 

Cobra 6



IRSanchez #5 Posted 31 October 2017 - 04:17 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 50157 battles
  • 1,841
  • [CELL] CELL
  • Member since:
    05-18-2011

I'm not going to miss obj 416 with it's awekward features.

 

Obj 263 changes is a different thing. It's unique, fits the line and is one od the very few "reasonble/viable" turretless TDs.

 

DONT FIX WHAT AINT BROKEN. Please.

 

Just replace T-55-122 and it's all good.

 

The last thing we need is ANOTHER OVERARMOURED LINE OF HEAT SPONGES that will be pretty much crap.



Pandabird #6 Posted 31 October 2017 - 05:36 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 33973 battles
  • 4,520
  • [KOFF] KOFF
  • Member since:
    05-19-2013
263 removal is easily explained.


It's profitable.


Unpopular line, let's promise a free unique special vehicle as a limited time offer, massively boosting premium time purchases from people grinding it and gold gold purchases from those choosing to free exp it.
Meanwhile there will be tons of bad tanks to shoot at ingame.
I mean there's tons of churchills and amx td's still rolling around even though it's already too late to get the foch155/FV


Replacement vehicles could be a bit more original though.
Like what if it was a dual barrel 300 alpha TD, firing twice with normal reload. It'd have potential epic dpm but suffer from rng over range. Sounds fun to me and i just made it up while typing this post. A 268 clone just sounds boring and i bet it'll be powercreep too to keep drawing people towards that line, then later 268 will be replaced by another clone. Meh.

Celution #7 Posted 31 October 2017 - 07:01 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 26088 battles
  • 1,678
  • Member since:
    09-26-2010

The suggested changes to the alternate Russian TD branch that hit the SuperTest are absolutely terrible. The line was originally designed for those who enjoy mobility, dpm and stealth over raw alpha behemoths. Back when this line was introduced, WG already shot itself in the leg by introducing the SU-122-44 as a tier 7 premium rather than incorporating it into the line. Furthermore, the SU-100M1 and SU-101 have always been garbage and the SU-122-54 has some really awkward statistics to it that make it very uncomfortable.

 

The problem is, that these suggested changes are very profitable for WG, and follows their current meta of removing frontal weakspots while adding ridiculous armour values that require the use of premium shells to be penetrated. Not to mention that accuracy, dpm and stealth are not important to your average player. Not having to think (angling, covering weakspots, etc.) and just press 'W' to peek-a-boom someone for 750 damage is appealing; since it is easy and fun.

 

I always hoped for the branch to be like this:

 

SU-100 (t6) -> SU-101 (t7) -> SU-122-44 (t8) -> SU-122-54 (t9) -> Object 263 (t10)

SU-100M1 (t7 premium)

 

But oh well, now we have to deal with what we have. So what cán be done to improve the overall quality of the branch? Well first of all, it needs better progression. The current top gun of the SU-100M1, the 100 mm LB-1C is not available on the SU-101 at all, meaning that you get an incredibly painful stock grind with 175 mm pen on a tier 8 TD. Besides, this gun did not receive the buffs the regular version received.

 

My suggestions:

 

SU-100M1 (tier VII)

  •  Changed the characteristics of the 100 mm LB-1C:
    • Rate of fire decreased from 10.17 rounds/min to 9.42 rounds/min
    • Dispersion at 100 m increased from 0.33 to 0.35
    • UBR-412 AP shell:
      • Penetration increased from 181 to 190 mm
      • Average damage increased from 250 to 270
    • UBR-412P APCR shell:
      • Penetration increased from 235 to 247 mm
      • Average damage increased from 250 to 270
    • UOF-412 HE shell:
      • Average damage increased from 330 to 350

 

SU-101 (tier VIII)

  •  Hitpoints increased from 990 to 1100
  • Tied the SU-122-54 research to the V-2-54 engine rather than the 100 mm D-54S gun
  • Added the 100 mm LB-1C for 16 500 experience, in the research path between the 100 mm D-10S and 100 mm D-54S, with the following characteristics:
    • Gun depression angle: -3 degrees
    • Gun elevation angle: +18 degrees
    • Gun traverse angles: +9.3/-9.3 degrees
    • Dispersion at 100m: 0.35
    • Aiming time: 1.7s
    • Rate of fire: 10 rounds/min
    • Penetration values: 190/247/50
    • Damage values: 270/270/350
  • Changed characteristics of the 122 mm D-25S mod. 1944:
    • Exchanged the UBR-471 AP shell for the ZBM14 APCR shell with 221 mm penetration
    • Exchanged the BR-471D APCR shell for the ZVBK6 HEAT shell with 270 mm penetration
    • Rate of fire decreased from 7.69 rounds/min to 6.77 rounds/min
    • Average base damage per minute reduced from 3000 to 2640
  • Changed characteristics of the 100 mm D-54S:
    • Exchanged the UBR-412B for the UBR-412PB with 264 mm penetration
    • Rate of fire decreased from 8.96 rounds/min to 8.65 rounds/min
    • Average base damage per minute reduced from 2867 to 2767
    • Gun depression angle increased from -2.2 degrees to -3 degrees
  • Changed characteristics of the 122 mm M62-C2:
    • Rate of fire increased from 5 rounds/min to 6 rounds/min
    • Aiming time reduced from 3.1 s to 2.7 s.
    • Average base damage per minute increased from 2200 to 2640
    • Decreased dispersion on gun traverse from 0.16 to 0.12

 

SU-122-54 (tier IX)

  •  Hitpoints increased from 1550 to 1650
  • Moved the 100 mm D-54S out of the main research line (optional research) to the Object 263
  • Changed the characteristics of the 122 mm D-49:
    • Rate of fire decreased from 8.11 rounds/min to 7 rounds/min
    • Dispersion at 100 m decreased from 0.39 to 0.38
    • Average damage per minute reduced from 3000 to 2730
    • UBR-471 AP shell:
      • Penetration increased from 175 to 225 mm
      • Shell velocity increased from 795 m/s to 1007 m/s
    • UBR-471D APCR shell:
      • Penetration increased from 217 to 265 mm
      • Shell velocity increased from 995 m/s to 1259 m/s
  • Changed the characteristics of the 122 mm M62-C2:
    • Dispersion on gun traverse reduced from 0.12 to 0.08

 

Object 263 (tier X)

  •  Changed the characteristics of the 130 mm S-70A:
    • Rate of fire decreased from 5.61 to 5.41
    • UBR-482M:
      • Average damage increased from 550 to 570.
    • UBR-482PM:
      • Average damage increased from 550 to 570.
    • UOF-482M:
      • Average damage increased from 750 to 770.

 

 

We could then easily introduce a the Object 268 version 4 as an alternative tier 10 from the Object 704, which would be a slower but more well armored TD than the Object 268 (but not as ridiculous as currently on the SuperTest). We could even introduce a third branch entirely that includes the the SU-100P/SU-152P/SU-152G, the Object 268 version 5 and possibly other Object 268 prototypes designed on the chassis of the IS-5 (Object 730)..

 

 

TL;DR: The suggest changes to the TD's are terrible, they ruin a potentially unique line of tank destroyers that have a high skill/learning curve. But since Murazor remains Lead Balance Department, nothing will change to the meta of premium ammunition spam and over-buffed armor without weakspots.

 

About the medium line, I quite frankly like the changes a lot, with maybe the exception of the Object 430 version II and the removal of the Object 416. However, I am very happy to see that they diversify this line from the other medium line by giving it some distinct features. The fact that the Object 430U is similar to the 121 does not bother me one bit, since the Chinese tech tree has always been a copy-paste story to begin with. And let's not even start to begin to talk about how much of a copy-paste most tier 10 mediums are..

 


Edited by Celution, 31 October 2017 - 08:40 PM.


leggasiini #8 Posted 31 October 2017 - 07:04 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 10399 battles
  • 5,936
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012

View PostPandabird, on 31 October 2017 - 06:36 PM, said:

free unique special vehicle

Except there isnt one. Object 263 becomes tier 9, you wont get a reward tier 10.



Pandabird #9 Posted 31 October 2017 - 07:28 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 33973 battles
  • 4,520
  • [KOFF] KOFF
  • Member since:
    05-19-2013

View Postleggasiini, on 31 October 2017 - 08:04 PM, said:

Except there isnt one. Object 263 becomes tier 9, you wont get a reward tier 10.

Interesting, didn't know. Just assumed since wg usually starts following a pattern and i saw the concept model replacement for fv 183b earlier that was more like an uptiered tortoise with less pronounced weakspots. 183b is for sure not going to be downtiered with that gun, most likely follow the same route as 115 and fv

 

 

 

 

Makes very little sense to me then. Only dumb powercreep and further dumbification of the game.

 

So they essentially figured out why people prefer E3 over obj268 and hurr durr let's combine best of both?


Edited by Pandabird, 31 October 2017 - 07:36 PM.


leggasiini #10 Posted 31 October 2017 - 07:29 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 10399 battles
  • 5,936
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012

View PostPandabird, on 31 October 2017 - 08:28 PM, said:

Interesting, didn't know. Just assumed since wg usually starts following a pattern and i saw the concept model replacement for fv 183b earlier that was more like an uptiered tortoise with less pronounced weakspots. 183b is for sure not going to be downtiered with that gun, most likely follow the same route as 115 and fv

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah, 183 gets F 155 /fv215b treatment 

Uebergewicht #11 Posted 31 October 2017 - 10:51 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 11702 battles
  • 1,035
  • [ATD] ATD
  • Member since:
    11-15-2015

View PostPandabird, on 31 October 2017 - 07:28 PM, said:

Interesting, didn't know. Just assumed since wg usually starts following a pattern and i saw the concept model replacement for fv 183b earlier that was more like an uptiered tortoise with less pronounced weakspots. 183b is for sure not going to be downtiered with that gun, most likely follow the same route as 115 and fv

 

The main reason I, and probably most others, are so upset with the proposed changes is that the Object 263 as we know it would be gone. The tier 9 would be heavily gimped with a slow firing, derpy gun, and the replacement tier 10 would be a boring, bland, low-dpm TD that has hardly anything in common with what made the 263 appealing. If they let us keep the current 263 as a reward vehicle, I wouldn´t be half as pissed. Probably not even pissed at all.



Baran2401 #12 Posted 01 November 2017 - 02:29 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 27086 battles
  • 32
  • [NOMI] NOMI
  • Member since:
    11-05-2012
263 as special vechicle would be great. It's perfect solution for what they wan't to do. No one will me pissed cuz special is better than normal tank (faster crew training is always good). Honestly its one of my favorite tanks in game and if they will remove it from tier X (with for me means remove it completely, cuz what's the point of playing in normal tier IX tank?) I will probably quit playing in this game.

Derethim #13 Posted 01 November 2017 - 02:33 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 16663 battles
  • 1,723
  • Member since:
    04-03-2012

View PostUebergewicht, on 31 October 2017 - 10:51 PM, said:

 

The main reason I, and probably most others, are so upset with the proposed changes is that the Object 263 as we know it would be gone. The tier 9 would be heavily gimped with a slow firing, derpy gun, and the replacement tier 10 would be a boring, bland, low-dpm TD that has hardly anything in common with what made the 263 appealing. If they let us keep the current 263 as a reward vehicle, I wouldn´t be half as pissed. Probably not even pissed at all.

 

I'd be pissed.

There's no way i'm going to make it in time to tier X unless I spend 5 hours a day at WoT and it was on the list of tanks I wanted to play, right after I reach tier X american TDs I'd have gone for the 2nd Soviet line... well, not anymore. Better grind the Jap mediums, before they decide to fugk that up too.


Edited by Derethim, 01 November 2017 - 02:40 PM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users