Jump to content


Update 9.22: the most broken patch ever


  • Please log in to reply
258 replies to this topic

DragonSenpai_ #1 Posted 11 January 2018 - 05:03 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 10767 battles
  • 43
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    07-22-2016

*
POPULAR

Okay, so as many people will have done, I read the patch notes for the upcoming patch and after finishing reading it I had just 1 thought...

 

What the actual hell WarGaming?

 

Although I haven't played this game for as long as most people have, this is honestly the most stupid idea I have ever seen from you, even worse than releasing the Defender. I mean, just look at the stats of the new tanks:

Spoiler

OK, this doesn't seem too bad, 'only' 183mm on the lower plate

But then we get to the upper plate

300+ effective!? ON A MEDIUM TANK!? WHAT!? This is a highly mobile tank with almost 2.6k DPM and it gets better armour than most Heavy Tanks? How is this supposed to be balanced?

 

And that's just the surface of this patch, there's so much more wrong with this patch. Next up on the 'list of stupid tank designs' is the IS-M

Spoiler

Uuhhm, what? An almost 200mm effective LOWER PLATE? So yeah, this tank is a massive 'f*ck you' to tier 8 mediums, and again, there's more

Spoiler

This tank is impenetrable when side-scraping, except if you look at the 150mm cupola's that are smaller than the amount of f*cks WG gives about their players as they've proven with this patch.

 

The Obj. 705A makes this even worse

Spoiler

What is this? a 250mm effective lower plate that's quite well angled and NO OTHER WEAKSPOTS. Like, for real. Your best shot at this is playing a tall tank with a bigger gun than 120mm as the area around the 'cupola's' is 40mm thick, so that's the only place you'll pen without gold. This tank is just like the line it comes in; completely broken and needing of a nerf.

 

Now for some news which at first, I was quite happy with; a new tier 9 tank to the IS-7, called the Obj. 257, replacing the T-10 while moving the T-10 to it's own mini-branch, the tier 10 of which isn't known yet.

But then I looked at the stats and OMG, this tank is literally a Defender at tier 9, with better accuracy and DPM, while keeping the T-10 mobility. Oh, and it's somehow better armoured than the IS-7, a tank that's supposed to be an upgrade to it. Note though, I'm not saying that the IS-7 needs to be buffed so it makes sense, as I find the IS-7 a completely fine tank as is.

Now, it's stats currently are as a tier 10, so we can't say anything about it yet, but if it goes in the game as it is now, it might be a more mobile Maus with a better gun

 

And now, for the absolute worst decision of them all, the changes to the rear mounted Tank Destroyers.

So a few months back, WG announced these changes. A large amount of both the EU and RU community complained about these changes, and about a week later WG decided to cancel them......or so we thought

Cause guess what, they're going through with them anyway cause they don't care about what the players want anymore it seems.

So, they're removing the SU-122-54, slamming the Obj. 263 down to tier 9, and making a new tier 10 called the Obj. 268 Variant 4.

Oh, and while doing this, they're also removing the uniqueness of the line, and making it your generic rear mounted Tank Destroyer line. Basically, they're nerfing the DPM and accuracy of all the tanks in it.

And the Obj. 268 is, just like every other new tank in this patch, completely broken

Yeah, 330 effective plate on the front. that little plate under it 'only' 200mm effective, but with that angeling you'll probably bounce 9/10 shots anyway, so it doesn't matter.

This is literally the weakest point on the tank that you can 'reliably' pen

It's so tiny, there's no way you can hit that reliably. This tank is just....I don't even have the words to describe it in a way the forum rules allow.

 

So, in general patch 9.22 is just so stupid, and to top it off, I have a quote from my good friend Waffle: 'Even Rubicon is better than this crap'

A lot of my friends are planning to quit simply cause of these patch notes, and I honestly don't blame 'em. I'll probably do the same.

 

I just have 1 final message to WG that they probably won't even see since I'm a nobody and they ignore the EU community anyway. but screw it;

Don't do this. If you keep this as the actual patch, you will kill the game. Nerf the hell outta these tanks, and don't ever think of these stats again.

 

EDIT: so my good friends Fishbob101 and leggasiini did some calculations after factoring in normalization, and this does kind of change my opinion about these tanks and how OP they are, but have a look for yourself:

View Postfishbob101, on 12 January 2018 - 09:26 PM, said:

Not sure if its already been said here, but WGs armour viewer doesn't account for normalisation, so here are the frontal armour profiles for the 9.22 tanks with normalisation:

 

 


Edited by DragonSenpai_, 12 January 2018 - 09:44 PM.


brumbarr #2 Posted 11 January 2018 - 05:07 PM

    Lieutenant General

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

Agreed,  Ithought WG learned from balancing mistakes wth premium tank/maus etc.

They already ruined T10 balance this year to uttter crap. 

 

But WG was like: " hold my beer" and completely destroy any balance that was left. People have been crying about weakspots, what do they do? just make tanks with no weakspots at all. 

 

We need more armoured tanks in this game dah!

 

Srsly. RETARDED.



undutchable80 #3 Posted 11 January 2018 - 05:09 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 7232 battles
  • 1,721
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    10-30-2014
And here I thought WG was well on their way with release of balanced T92, Mauerbrecher etcetera... *triple facepalm*

brumbarr #4 Posted 11 January 2018 - 05:10 PM

    Lieutenant General

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

View Postundutchable80, on 11 January 2018 - 05:09 PM, said:

And here I thought WG was well on their way with release of balanced T92, Mauerbrecher etcetera... *triple facepalm*

 

Just imagine T8s in the current MM agaisnt these kind of tanks... its a slaugher...

FluffyRedFox #5 Posted 11 January 2018 - 05:11 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 22958 battles
  • 8,370
  • Member since:
    12-05-2012

View Postbrumbarr, on 11 January 2018 - 05:07 PM, said:

We need more armoured tanks in this game dah!

Ivan: Hey Ivan, people complain about arma being useless against gold ammo, what we do?

Ivan2: Maybe we should make more tanks with weaksp-

Ivan3: DA HOW BOUT WEI MAIK ARMA BE TOO STRONK FOR PREMIUM AMMO DA

Ivan: Da Ivan! Gud idea! More crayons for you!


Edited by fishbob101, 11 January 2018 - 05:11 PM.


Aikl #6 Posted 11 January 2018 - 05:12 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25517 battles
  • 4,349
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

Oh, new FOTM tanks.

 

While it sure looks broken, are these armor values before normalization, or is it with AP, APCR?



brumbarr #7 Posted 11 January 2018 - 05:14 PM

    Lieutenant General

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

View PostAikl, on 11 January 2018 - 05:12 PM, said:

Oh, new FOTM tanks.

 

While it sure looks broken, are these armor values before normalization, or is it with AP, APCR?

 

Before normalisation, but it doesnt matter much, most of these tanks are either flat armor, or 330mm+ which becomes like 280 with normailistion.

__H3H3__ #8 Posted 11 January 2018 - 05:15 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 30726 battles
  • 577
  • [OXIDE] OXIDE
  • Member since:
    12-09-2013
Oke this game is dead :amazed:

DragonSenpai_ #9 Posted 11 January 2018 - 05:15 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 10767 battles
  • 43
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    07-22-2016

View PostAikl, on 11 January 2018 - 05:12 PM, said:

Oh, new FOTM tanks.

 

While it sure looks broken, are these armor values before normalization, or is it with AP, APCR?

 

I honestly don't know, I took the pics from here:

https://worldoftanks...-tree-revision/

if it's before normalization, then it might be better, but I have no idea to find out



Balc0ra #10 Posted 11 January 2018 - 05:19 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 66235 battles
  • 16,231
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

Issue is, it's Russian tanks. And if the RU server don't mind it. Not much will happen on CT. As we all know, if they don't hate it. It goes on live.

 

 



Envoy_MT #11 Posted 11 January 2018 - 05:19 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 38190 battles
  • 451
  • [ABI] ABI
  • Member since:
    09-17-2013
Drink more votka pls...

leggasiini #12 Posted 11 January 2018 - 05:20 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 14117 battles
  • 6,190
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012

View PostDragonSenpai_, on 11 January 2018 - 06:15 PM, said:

 

I honestly don't know, I took the pics from here:

https://worldoftanks...-tree-revision/

if it's before normalization, then it might be better, but I have no idea to find out

To be fair, even if normalization is not factored, its not gonna make things any better in the Object 268 V4's case. The lower plate is actually not even very well angled and it's 290 mm thick. So even against AP/APCR its still not much weaker than against HEAT. And the cupola is flat, so its still 250. 

 

Object 430U also doesnt have super duper sloped UFP like the 113 so I wouldn't be surprised if the armor was more than 300 against AP, AKA more than pretty much any AP shell in the game.

 

705A's LFP is probably more like 230-240 effective but even then it can be completely immune to everything but HE and maybe HEAT from JPE when it sidescrapes. IS-M very likely still can get all around protection that makes it immune against standard rounds when angled well enough.

 

Soooooo even if normalization is not factored, these values are absolutely, absolutely ridiculous. But of hell if normalization is actually factored on these...



TsundereWaffle #13 Posted 11 January 2018 - 05:21 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 27090 battles
  • 11,013
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    03-31-2013

View PostBalc0ra, on 11 January 2018 - 05:19 PM, said:

Issue is, it's Russian tanks. And if the RU server don't mind it. Not much will happen on CT. As we all know, if they don't hate it. It goes on live.

 

 

 

Problem is that the Russians were complaining about this more than us, and WG is ignoring even that

VsUK #14 Posted 11 January 2018 - 05:22 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 14288 battles
  • 1,301
  • Member since:
    06-19-2012
I would have hoped people would have realised by now that WG don't balance anything other than their books. They don't balance a tier out by making some OP tanks less OP. They're in a continuous revamp of the game to remove all weak spots from tanks & they'll eventually phase out standard ammo. Because it'll be so useless at that point. The Type 5 heavy is a prime example. Even on the sides or the rear, I had my T57 Heavy bounce every shot. Only when I switched to the 4 premium rounds I have if I really need to use it, do those 4x shots pen.

Also, all your spoilers are blank.

WG have done what I call, entrapment. They know you have too much invested to just quit!

Edited by VsUK, 11 January 2018 - 05:25 PM.


ZlatanArKung #15 Posted 11 January 2018 - 05:24 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 5,112
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014
BTW, on the test server WG will find out how these new tanks underperform in some obscure statistic, like the Maus did, and buff them before release.

Edited by ZlatanArKung, 11 January 2018 - 05:24 PM.


TsundereWaffle #16 Posted 11 January 2018 - 05:26 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 27090 battles
  • 11,013
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    03-31-2013

View PostVsUK, on 11 January 2018 - 05:22 PM, said:

Also, all your spoilers are blank.

 

Works fine for me



DragonSenpai_ #17 Posted 11 January 2018 - 05:34 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 10767 battles
  • 43
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    07-22-2016

View PostBalc0ra, on 11 January 2018 - 05:19 PM, said:

Issue is, it's Russian tanks. And if the RU server don't mind it. Not much will happen on CT. As we all know, if they don't hate it. It goes on live.

 

 

 

Yeah, sadly that's the case with WG. Allthough, the RU people did complain about the rear mounted TD line changes, so let's have that small hope they might listen to everyone concerning this

View PostEnvoy_MT, on 11 January 2018 - 05:19 PM, said:

Drink more votka pls...

 

Do you mean me or the devs at WG?

View Postleggasiini, on 11 January 2018 - 05:20 PM, said:

To be fair, even if normalization is not factored, its not gonna make things any better in the Object 268 V4's case. The lower plate is actually not even very well angled and it's 290 mm thick. So even against AP/APCR its still not much weaker than against HEAT. And the cupola is flat, so its still 250. 

 

Object 430U also doesnt have super duper sloped UFP like the 113 so I wouldn't be surprised if the armor was more than 300 against AP, AKA more than pretty much any AP shell in the game.

 

705A's LFP is probably more like 230-240 effective but even then it can be completely immune to everything but HE and maybe HEAT from JPE when it sidescrapes. IS-M very likely still can get all around protection that makes it immune against standard rounds when angled well enough.

 

Soooooo even if normalization is not factored, these values are absolutely, absolutely ridiculous. But of hell if normalization is actually factored on these...

 

Yeah, these tanks are going to be the most gamebreaking things out there since the Maus and Type 4/5 buffs, while being more mobile

View PostZlatanArKung, on 11 January 2018 - 05:24 PM, said:

BTW, on the test server WG will find out how these new tanks underperform in some obscure statistic, like the Maus did, and buff them before release.

 

Probably, that'd be just like WG to pull that off

undutchable80 #18 Posted 11 January 2018 - 05:36 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 7232 battles
  • 1,721
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    10-30-2014

View Postbrumbarr, on 11 January 2018 - 05:10 PM, said:

 

Just imagine T8s in the current MM agaisnt these kind of tanks... its a slaugher...

 

Aye, might as well put the Defender up for sale / in the standard premium shop since it's no longer OP and fits nicely with the planned update... 

SandDanAdua #19 Posted 11 January 2018 - 05:39 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 10333 battles
  • 127
  • Member since:
    12-11-2016

All this armor.

It would be a shame if...

You were getting shot by gold HE of certain asian nation :teethhappy:
 



Balc0ra #20 Posted 11 January 2018 - 05:54 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 66235 battles
  • 16,231
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View PostDragonSenpai_, on 11 January 2018 - 05:34 PM, said:

 

Yeah, sadly that's the case with WG. Allthough, the RU people did complain about the rear mounted TD line changes, so let's have that small hope they might listen to everyone concerning this

 

They did complain about the the TD changes. But there the issue was that WG tests showed the current tier 9 did not bounce anything, even on tier 8. And the new tier X was to good as a tier 9 vs the current tier X. So they still ignored that. But RU did complain about the Swedish HT's on CT. So they did change the hull armor on those.

 

 

I don't get the med armor tho, as that will make even the 907 look bad. As his upper plate is an easy pen vs it. Tho his lower plate, besides dead center is thicker then those.

But on the HT's? I mean the VK B has more effective lower plate armor then that. And not easy to pen head on for most. Tho the cupola has a 170mm line. It's not easy to hit that either unless you are close. So idk how that would hold up vs the new HT's. As that thing will be seen holding a corner with the side armor I suspect more so then yoloing down the 1 line on Firey Salient to "spot".

 

 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users