Jump to content


Obj 268 needs to be replaced with obj 268v4 not with 263


  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic

Poll: Replace obj268 with obj268v4 (24 members have cast votes)

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

Should obj 268 be replaced with obj 268v4

  1. Yes (17 votes [70.83%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 70.83%

  2. No (7 votes [29.17%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 29.17%

Vote Hide poll

hasnainrakha57 #1 Posted 09 November 2017 - 12:44 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 13780 battles
  • 583
  • [WFTTE] WFTTE
  • Member since:
    08-01-2013
We need obj268 v4 to be replaced with crapobj 268 and those who say obj 268 line is front superstucture IT CANNOT BE REPLACED WITH 268V4 THEN EXPLAIN me why su122 54 front super structure placed in obj 263 line which is rear superstucture and explain t57 being heavy should have tier 7,8 and 9 as heavy but WHOLE line is clown line coz they are scouts and mediums that lead to heavy loool if wg ruined these trees and other then replacing v4 with 268 wont make difference.THATS IT OBJ 268V4 NEEDS TO BE REPLACED WITH crapOBJ 268 I DONT CARE IF OBJ 268V4 HAS WORST GUN HANDLING THEN OBJ 268 AT LEAST WITH V4 I WILL GET BETTER AIM TIME AND BETTER ARMOR.THE OBJ 268 ARMOR IS crapALWAYS GETING PEN BY TIER 8S.THATS WHY U DONT SEE crapOBJ268 IN BATTLES AND FOR 263 ITS LINE NEED BUFF TO TIER 7,8 AND 9 ONLY.RISE YOUR VOICE PLAYERS DONT SAY OBJ 268 IS BALANCED ITS CLEAR ITS WORST TD IN WOT.AS IN NAME OBJ 268V4 U SEE 8 NOT 3. 

Edited by hasnainrakha57, 09 November 2017 - 12:59 AM.


Aikl #2 Posted 09 November 2017 - 09:19 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25167 battles
  • 4,253
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011
Spoiler

 

This is not spam, but the only real way I can comment on OP's rather peculiar writing style without getting a warning point.


Edited by Aikl, 09 November 2017 - 09:20 AM.


leggasiini #3 Posted 09 November 2017 - 10:10 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 12446 battles
  • 6,082
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012

Didnt you just have a poll about this few days ago. Did you really need to make another one? :facepalm:

 

Again, just like I said, its pointless to replace the 268 when you can just buff it. One feature of that line is middle/front mounted casemates, and 268 V4 doesnt make sense there with its rear casemate.

 

Why not just have the 268 V4 as alternate tier 10 in the 2nd line?



rush0620 #4 Posted 09 November 2017 - 10:23 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 22839 battles
  • 113
  • Member since:
    01-03-2012

Min 3000 average dpm! :)

 

Object 268 V3 best option to refresh the Object 268 line!

 


Edited by rush0620, 09 November 2017 - 10:31 AM.


hasnainrakha57 #5 Posted 09 November 2017 - 11:19 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 13780 battles
  • 583
  • [WFTTE] WFTTE
  • Member since:
    08-01-2013

View Postrush0620, on 09 November 2017 - 09:23 AM, said:

Min 3000 average dpm! :)

 

Object 268 V3 best option to refresh the Object 268 line!

 

Lol your giving a birth to new topic but v3 seems same as v5 and the tank has turret it wont fit in that line :(



rush0620 #6 Posted 09 November 2017 - 11:30 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 22839 battles
  • 113
  • Member since:
    01-03-2012

View Posthasnainrakha57, on 09 November 2017 - 10:19 AM, said:

Lol your giving a birth to new topic but v3 seems same as v5 and the tank has turret it wont fit in that line :(

 

Object 268 die after global camo nerf and dmg alpha nerf 850 to 750. Object 268 v4 2,192.9 dpm more useless... Object 268 v3 good option I think.

 

Other option buff Object 704 dpm and HP go tier 10 and add tier 9 SU 203 the line and Object 268 go special premium status!

 

SU 203: http://warspot.ru/10368-zveroboi-bolshogo-kalibra

 

 


Edited by rush0620, 09 November 2017 - 11:31 AM.


Celution #7 Posted 09 November 2017 - 11:32 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 26153 battles
  • 1,678
  • Member since:
    09-26-2010
The Object 268 is awesome, and so is the Object 263. The only thing that needs to be done is improving the predecessors to the Object 263 to make them more appealing and less of a pain to grind through. The Object 268 version 4 could be introduced as an alternative tier X from the Object 704 (similar to the T-62A/Object 140), alternatively be a second research alternative at tier IX towards the Object 263, like the Ferdinand and Jagdpanther II are for the Jagdpanzer E100. With the historical armor, and a 130 mm main gun, that is.

Edited by Celution, 09 November 2017 - 11:33 AM.


hasnainrakha57 #8 Posted 09 November 2017 - 11:39 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 13780 battles
  • 583
  • [WFTTE] WFTTE
  • Member since:
    08-01-2013

View PostCelution, on 09 November 2017 - 10:32 AM, said:

The Object 268 is awesome, and so is the Object 263. The only thing that needs to be done is improving the predecessors to the Object 263 to make them more appealing and less of a pain to grind through. The Object 268 version 4 could be introduced as an alternative tier X from the Object 704 (similar to the T-62A/Object 140), alternatively be a second research alternative at tier IX towards the Object 263, like the Ferdinand and Jagdpanther II are for the Jagdpanzer E100. With the historical armor, and a 130 mm main gun, that is.

Well i agree with u for that.



rush0620 #9 Posted 09 November 2017 - 11:43 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 22839 battles
  • 113
  • Member since:
    01-03-2012

View PostCelution, on 09 November 2017 - 10:32 AM, said:

The Object 268 is awesome, and so is the Object 263. The only thing that needs to be done is improving the predecessors to the Object 263 to make them more appealing and less of a pain to grind through. The Object 268 version 4 could be introduced as an alternative tier X from the Object 704 (similar to the T-62A/Object 140), alternatively be a second research alternative at tier IX towards the Object 263, like the Ferdinand and Jagdpanther II are for the Jagdpanzer E100. With the historical armor, and a 130 mm main gun, that is.

 

Su 152 have 2,474.58 dpm, ISU 152 2,666.40 dpm, Object 704 2,744.36 dpm, Object 268 2,844.16 dpm! Object 268 v4 2,192.9 dpm tier 7 level... get 3000 dpm and replace Object 268! Object 268 armore penetrate all tier 8 and 9 gun!

 

Sorry bad english!



hasnainrakha57 #10 Posted 09 November 2017 - 11:43 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 13780 battles
  • 583
  • [WFTTE] WFTTE
  • Member since:
    08-01-2013

View Postrush0620, on 09 November 2017 - 10:30 AM, said:

 

Object 268 die after global camo nerf and dmg alpha nerf 850 to 750. Object 268 v4 2,192.9 dpm more useless... Object 268 v3 good option I think.

 

Other option buff Object 704 dpm and HP go tier 10 and add tier 9 SU 203 the line and Object 268 go special premium status!

 

SU 203: http://warspot.ru/10368-zveroboi-bolshogo-kalibra

 

 

I dont care about dpm when that 268 got craparmor i always have to camp even chinese tds got better armor and tier8 has 180mm, in russain tier 10 has 180mm:).and aim is not good what positive point does obj 268 has except relode time? Maybe 0.33 accuracy when i am missing shots at enemy weak spots from 300m+.


Edited by hasnainrakha57, 09 November 2017 - 11:44 AM.


tajj7 #11 Posted 09 November 2017 - 11:45 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 24849 battles
  • 13,836
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014
The 268 we have is the version that was actually built, would seem silly replacing it with a paper design that was rejected for the 268. If the 268 needs more buffs just buff it. 

hasnainrakha57 #12 Posted 09 November 2017 - 11:47 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 13780 battles
  • 583
  • [WFTTE] WFTTE
  • Member since:
    08-01-2013
Give obj 268 a nice armor buff or replace it.ONE OF MY GREATES MISTAKE SHOULD HAVE GONE FOR OBJ 263 BUT TIER7,8 AND 9 ARE CRAP THATS WHY DINT GO FOR IT BUT I WISH I DID IT

rush0620 #13 Posted 09 November 2017 - 11:49 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 22839 battles
  • 113
  • Member since:
    01-03-2012

View Posthasnainrakha57, on 09 November 2017 - 10:43 AM, said:

I dont care about dpm when that 268 got craparmor i always have to camp even chinese tds got better armor and tier8 has 180mm, in russain tier 10 has 180mm:).and aim is not good what positive point does obj 268 has except relode time? Maybe 0.33 accuracy when i am missing shots at enemy weak spots from 300m+

 

 

 

Buff HE shell 1400hp. Object 268 gun not anti tank gun only howitzer. Working long range and enemy not penetrated Object 268 armor.

 

Edit: gold ammo kill all armor...


Edited by rush0620, 09 November 2017 - 11:51 AM.


rush0620 #14 Posted 09 November 2017 - 12:02 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 22839 battles
  • 113
  • Member since:
    01-03-2012

D25 and A19 anti tank gun, ML 20S howitzer, BL 10 anti tank gun (high power). M64 howitzer! ML 20 and other (short guns) use real life concrete piercing shells not anti tank guns. WG another useless plans...

 

ML 20 shells : https://en.wikipedia...un_M1937_(ML-20)#Ammunition


Edited by rush0620, 09 November 2017 - 12:06 PM.


Igor_BL #15 Posted 09 November 2017 - 12:03 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 37528 battles
  • 1,173
  • [WZ-CR] WZ-CR
  • Member since:
    06-10-2015

268 armor has so many weakpoints frontally that you will get your [edited]kicked off in short-mid ranges.

DPM is good, pen is awesome... But shell speed ruins the tank.
even the gun arc is now ok...
Depression is Russian, bad, but suitable for that tank. We dont need another -10 gun.

 

acc. is ok, but i remember 268 shells tend to loop... it feels like a big cromwell gun.
I think dispersions are also really ok. they could be buffed, but not too much
 

268 needs either better armor or better shell speed.
I vote for 2nd option. We dont need any more armor in the game.

Give 268 better shell speed, on AP/HEAT. 1200-1300 range would make this tank really god.
960 m/s is still bad.
 

or some disperssion&acc buff. but i feel slow shells are the main problem for this tank.
dont have it atm, sold it year ago, but played 15-20 games on TS after the buff... it is not good enough still

 

P.S. We dont need another replacment. just buff 268... we dont need some v3 v5 v16 versions.


Edited by Igor_BL, 09 November 2017 - 12:05 PM.


Baleroon #16 Posted 09 November 2017 - 12:05 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 38754 battles
  • 344
  • Member since:
    03-20-2011

This obj 268 is unplayable.

Have it. Don't play on it. :trollface:



hasnainrakha57 #17 Posted 09 November 2017 - 12:22 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 13780 battles
  • 583
  • [WFTTE] WFTTE
  • Member since:
    08-01-2013

View PostIgor_BL, on 09 November 2017 - 11:03 AM, said:

268 armor has so many weakpoints frontally that you will get your [edited]kicked off in short-mid ranges.

DPM is good, pen is awesome... But shell speed ruins the tank.
even the gun arc is now ok...
Depression is Russian, bad, but suitable for that tank. We dont need another -10 gun.

 

acc. is ok, but i remember 268 shells tend to loop... it feels like a big cromwell gun.
I think dispersions are also really ok. they could be buffed, but not too much
 

268 needs either better armor or better shell speed.
I vote for 2nd option. We dont need any more armor in the game.

Give 268 better shell speed, on AP/HEAT. 1200-1300 range would make this tank really god.
960 m/s is still bad.
 

or some disperssion&acc buff. but i feel slow shells are the main problem for this tank.
dont have it atm, sold it year ago, but played 15-20 games on TS after the buff... it is not good enough still

 

P.S. We dont need another replacment. just buff 268... we dont need some v3 v5 v16 versions.

That shell loop:) is rly a big problem like u have 0.46 accuracy i think it needs only armor so u can perform well in close combat and they need to remove that tall thing on roof i thinks its observation device or make it no dmg to it.


Edited by hasnainrakha57, 09 November 2017 - 12:22 PM.


Igor_BL #18 Posted 09 November 2017 - 12:30 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 37528 battles
  • 1,173
  • [WZ-CR] WZ-CR
  • Member since:
    06-10-2015
I sold it because of that loop.

You aim fully (and with that crap aimtime, you really need to aim. 2.7 is really too much) and shell falls in front of the enemy.

Never missed so many fully aimed shoots like in 268.
 

rush0620 #19 Posted 09 November 2017 - 12:36 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 22839 battles
  • 113
  • Member since:
    01-03-2012

View PostIgor_BL, on 09 November 2017 - 11:30 AM, said:

I sold it because of that loop.

You aim fully (and with that crap aimtime, you really need to aim. 2.7 is really too much) and shell falls in front of the enemy.

Never missed so many fully aimed shoots like in 268.
 

 

Howitzer...

Celution #20 Posted 09 November 2017 - 01:55 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 26153 battles
  • 1,678
  • Member since:
    09-26-2010

View PostIgor_BL, on 09 November 2017 - 12:03 PM, said:

268 armor has so many weakpoints frontally that you will get your [edited]kicked off in short-mid ranges.

DPM is good, pen is awesome... But shell speed ruins the tank.

 

[...]

Give 268 better shell speed, on AP/HEAT. 1200-1300 range would make this tank really god.
960 m/s is still bad.
 

or some disperssion&acc buff. but i feel slow shells are the main problem for this tank.
dont have it atm, sold it year ago, but played 15-20 games on TS after the buff... it is not good enough still

 

P.S. We dont need another replacment. just buff 268... we dont need some v3 v5 v16 versions.

 

Nonsense, 960 m/s is absolutely fine for such a gun. The pre-buff 760 m/s was indeed annoying (even though it is historically correct), especially since the BL-10 had a higher shell velocity of 880 m/s. The 760 m/s shell velocity on the HEAT round also keeps it somewhat balanced, and promotes the use of AP over HEAT. There is a reason the Grille 15 was ridiculously OP, one of the factors being the insane shell velocity of 1350 m/s, that was reduced down to a still incredible 1200 m/s. The 268 also has the third highest penetration in the game on its standard round, and is second when it comes to premium rounds, it absolutely does not give a single damn about armor with these two shells available. The applied buffs were exactly that was needed; a wider gun arc to reduce the practical aiming time increased shell velocity to ease tracking moving targets. If you can't make the 268 work in its current state, the problem can likely be found in between your monitor and chair.

 

That said, it doesn't take away that other stuff power creeps perfectly balanced tanks (generally speaking). The solution for this is not by introducing more power creep, but rather by toning down the vehicles that cause the actual power creep itself. In other words, fixing the actual problem. The same may be said for "the role of armour" in this game. The actual problem here is that excessive amounts of super-high penetration guns have been added into the game, besides the obvious pay2win premium rounds. These two factors make armour relatively weaker. A lower quantity of high-penetration guns and ammunition means that the relative effectiveness of armour increases. But the current solution by WG is not dealing with the problem at its core, but rather by introducing thicker and beyond ridiculous armour profiles that can resist these high penetration guns and ammunition types. This leads to far bigger problems, where a tank becomes completely invulnerable to many guns without requiring any skill. This shifts the balance and meta completely, where tanks left with their "original" armour profile feel left out. Take the Object 268 for example (even though armour is not meant to be its niche); The armour is actually fairly decent against a lot of default ammunition, especially from lower tiers. But since the meta shifted to needing more premium rounds and high-penetration guns, the armour becomes relatively worse. tl;dr: Buffing armour profiles is not the solution to everything, and neither should all tanks be exceptional at blocking incoming fire.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users