Jump to content


ST-I in HD 9.21


  • Please log in to reply
82 replies to this topic

_EXODUZ_ #1 Posted 13 November 2017 - 05:31 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35435 battles
  • 1,941
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    11-05-2014

Was always considered to be a nice Tier 9 HT. Perhaps a favourite tank to some of you. Visually it looks quite cool in HD.

More:

Spoiler

Now, let's look at the model.

More:

Spoiler

They've increased the size of the commander's hatch which is 250mm. How many of you see it as a nerf?



Sfinski #2 Posted 13 November 2017 - 06:42 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 32201 battles
  • 2,746
  • [-PJ-] -PJ-
  • Member since:
    09-26-2013
Absolutely is a nerf. Also drivers hatch lost some angling. Now it can sidescrape only to the left of any hard cover, so it can keep both weakspots hidden. 

Junglist_ #3 Posted 13 November 2017 - 07:09 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 37766 battles
  • 1,353
  • Member since:
    06-17-2013
Ah I see they done excellent job with the collision model and especially on the lower plate

250swb #4 Posted 13 November 2017 - 09:22 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 23147 battles
  • 5,259
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-23-2015

View PostSfinski, on 13 November 2017 - 05:42 AM, said:

Absolutely is a nerf. Also drivers hatch lost some angling. Now it can sidescrape only to the left of any hard cover, so it can keep both weakspots hidden.

 

 

In other images from above and the side the new cupola has a more sloped leading edge despite it physically being bigger so I would have thought it would bounce more shots when head on.


Edited by 250swb, 13 November 2017 - 09:23 AM.


Dava_117 #5 Posted 13 November 2017 - 09:27 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 20240 battles
  • 3,649
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014

Well, surely the commande hatch is bigger but:

-turret sides are more sloped, giving better side protection

-turret front final area is 270mm, reducing penetration chance in that area

-no more chance of trapshot

So in my opinion ST-I will behave better than in SD.



TankkiPoju #6 Posted 13 November 2017 - 09:33 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 20993 battles
  • 6,417
  • [-PJ-] -PJ-
  • Member since:
    05-20-2011

Interestingly the HD model has a spare tracks in lower plate but they are not modeled as armor, like on IS-3 and IS-4.

 

The model looks nice though.



Uebergewicht #7 Posted 13 November 2017 - 11:43 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 11702 battles
  • 1,070
  • Member since:
    11-15-2015
Are we sure this is the top turret and not the stock turret?

KillingJoker #8 Posted 13 November 2017 - 11:46 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35086 battles
  • 1,501
  • [-EXC-] -EXC-
  • Member since:
    09-07-2015

Despite the sides of the turret are now slightly sloped... and that may increse the armor effectiveness from sideshots, 

its pretty noticeble the commander hatch was nerfed, its bigger and not as well sloped as in the current form...

 

The ST-I is a hull down beast, its really hard to beat it when hull down.... and because the turret is so big, and the hull is well sloped as well its not hard

to find positioning where you can massacre the enemies without the enemies cant do anything to you.... other than load gold and still fail to pen the commander coppula

 

but i supose that will change...

 

 

 



leggasiini #9 Posted 13 November 2017 - 11:47 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 15163 battles
  • 6,237
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012
They are probably going to rework the ST-I / IS-4 line, so I guess this wont be really relevant, anyway.

Dava_117 #10 Posted 13 November 2017 - 12:23 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 20240 battles
  • 3,649
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014

View PostUebergewicht, on 13 November 2017 - 11:43 AM, said:

Are we sure this is the top turret and not the stock turret?

 

It should be the top one. If they don't rearrange the modules, the stock turrey was not compatible with M62T2.

unrealname #11 Posted 13 November 2017 - 12:32 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 24034 battles
  • 1,153
  • Member since:
    10-31-2013
visually cupola is bigger, but effective armor has been increased, so it should be alright. what concerns me though, is that drivers hatch has been nerfed heavily, in HD model when u angle the tank its only around 220 mm. 

Paradox_121 #12 Posted 18 November 2017 - 07:50 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 19179 battles
  • 253
  • [RDDT] RDDT
  • Member since:
    04-20-2011

This is a huge nerf! People awake!

 

The cupola is going to be penned from any angle if you approach hillside. Let's say you don't look at an enemy or just want to peek it's pen, because the cupola height got increased. If you look at an enemy and he uses HEAT, it's a pen too (size of the lower Effective Armor area just got increased). If you want to distract an enemy by moving, won't work as effective because the lower Effective Armor area became 3x times as large as before.

 

If they leave it as it is, this line is going to be a huge disaster, because they intend to remove the only thing this tank excelled in, being able to withstand frontal (-20°- +20°;)shots with the turret.

Open tanks.gg and rotate the view, you'll be pissed!

9.20:

https://tanks.gg/tan...i/model?vm=live

 

9.21:

https://tanks.gg/v09...i/model?vm=live

 

The only reason this whole tank line was worth it so far was KV-4 and ST-I. KV-4 just got powercreeped to oblivion, and now they just butcher ST-I... Nice!



Balc0ra #13 Posted 18 November 2017 - 09:37 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 67348 battles
  • 17,071
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View PostUebergewicht, on 13 November 2017 - 11:43 AM, said:

Are we sure this is the top turret and not the stock turret?

 

It's the top one. As the stock turret has two cupolas. Not one. And is smaller.

 

View Post250swb, on 13 November 2017 - 09:22 AM, said:

 

 

In other images from above and the side the new cupola has a more sloped leading edge despite it physically being bigger so I would have thought it would bounce more shots when head on.

 

After facing a few on test last night in even the tier 8 French HT. It penned every single shot on that cupola with ease. And it's easier to hit vs before.

Uebergewicht #14 Posted 18 November 2017 - 10:09 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 11702 battles
  • 1,070
  • Member since:
    11-15-2015
God damn you WG, you did it again :/ And the tracks on the lower plate arent even modeled :/

Nazgarth #15 Posted 18 November 2017 - 10:15 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 28472 battles
  • 1,188
  • [-TWO-] -TWO-
  • Member since:
    05-07-2011

I'm finding less and less point to play the ST-I over a conqueror.

 

worse gun handling, dpm, aim time and accuracy.

worse mobility.

worse gun depression.

worse armour when hull down.


 

better side armour.


 

ST-I power-crept into obsolescence.



Paradox_121 #16 Posted 19 November 2017 - 03:15 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 19179 battles
  • 253
  • [RDDT] RDDT
  • Member since:
    04-20-2011

It's even worse! The Driver's hatch can't be used by angling anymore... You try to angle it to 15-30° territory and it will be autopen by an IS-3, Tiger II !  Driver's hatch just became 219 Effective Armor from that angle.

 

What the heck is the point of 9.21 Open Test server, if not to notice this?!  From this onward the whole tank line is obsolete, and no one is going to grind it.

Let me sum it up:

-Turret nerf

-Driver's hatch nerf

-Still old lower front plate



Snatch_The_AmmoRacks #17 Posted 19 November 2017 - 04:22 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 29760 battles
  • 274
  • [POWNY] POWNY
  • Member since:
    11-10-2013

View PostJunglist_, on 13 November 2017 - 06:09 AM, said:

Ah I see they done excellent job with the collision model and especially on the lower plate

 

I only just noticed after you mentioned XDDD

Ricky_Rolls #18 Posted 19 November 2017 - 12:34 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 66954 battles
  • 1,330
  • Member since:
    11-10-2010
FeelsBadMan when the only reason to grind this branch is getting nerfed.

Enforcer1975 #19 Posted 19 November 2017 - 01:20 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 20973 battles
  • 10,920
  • [D0NG] D0NG
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014

View PostRicky_Rolls, on 19 November 2017 - 12:34 PM, said:

FeelsBadMan when the only reason to grind this branch is getting nerfed.

Basically the reason for every tomato to grind those tanks is because of the idiot proof armor...no skill needed hiding weakspots then cry in the forum about getting spammed with heat every game. 



Uebergewicht #20 Posted 19 November 2017 - 01:51 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 11702 battles
  • 1,070
  • Member since:
    11-15-2015

View PostEnforcer1975, on 19 November 2017 - 01:20 PM, said:

Basically the reason for every tomato to grind those tanks is because of the idiot proof armor...no skill needed hiding weakspots then cry in the forum about getting spammed with heat every game. 

 

Are you for real? Literally non of the tanks in the entire line has "idiot proof" armor! The T-150 and the KVs have weak lower plates and unangled upper plates that must be manually angled or hidden, while the KV-4 also has a flat turret front and a tumor on top. The ST-1 has to go hulldown with just better than average gun depression or sidescrape due to the immensely weak lower plate and has huge side turret profile to boot which turns at glacial speed, plus a cupola that higher tiers can pen. The IS-4 has to overangle or sidescrape constantly or else the lower plate or even upper plate become autopen, and has an overmatchable roof and engine deck to boot. All suffer from poor to mediocre mobility, gun handling and view range, and only one of them has a bit of gun depression. And then one of the better tanks of this already powercrept line gets an unjustified nerf on top, people have all right to be pissed about it.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users