Jump to content


Update 9.22 Public Test Feedback - Soviet Heavy Tanks

9.22

  • Please log in to reply
123 replies to this topic

Kandly #1 Posted 16 January 2018 - 07:10 PM

    Community Manager

  • WG Staff
  • 698 battles
  • 802
  • Member since:
    08-23-2016

Commanders,

 

Please share your feedback regarding the Soviet Heavy Tanks in Update 9.22's Public Test in this topic.

 

Cheers,

Kandly



Keyhand #2 Posted 19 January 2018 - 03:32 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 62061 battles
  • 5,509
  • [ROIDS] ROIDS
  • Member since:
    10-25-2011

*
POPULAR

Just was made aware of this: you do know, that the armor model fot the Obj 705 is screwed up for the stockturret? Or is 300mm all around wanted?

https://tanks.gg/v09.../model?l=101113

 

Testing all the Tanks tier 9 and up that got introduced or changed as well as the IS-M and will update my post as I do so. So far:

 

Crews which I used for testing - as a reference

 

Obj 257

 

IS-M

 

Obj 705

 

Obj 705A

 

Obj 430

 

Obj 430U

 

Obj 263
 
Obj 268v4

 

Oh one last thing @Kandly: please pass on, that the winrates as well as all the other data that the new tanks on the testserver will produce, are far below what they will achieve on the liveserver, simply because there are more of them in the every match on the test. I have a feeling that the people balancing them might get the wrong picture from the data gathered. Compared to anything else availiable right now most of the the new tanks simply are far superior and frankly overpowered.


Edited by Keyhand, 20 January 2018 - 12:47 AM.


Sfinski #3 Posted 19 January 2018 - 03:52 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 32016 battles
  • 2,689
  • [-PJ-] -PJ-
  • Member since:
    09-26-2013

View PostKeyhand, on 19 January 2018 - 04:32 PM, said:

 

Obj 257

 

 

 

Have to agree with this. Bloody Defender level of broken POS. It's a t10 at t9... At t10 it even would be good. 



ndiver #4 Posted 19 January 2018 - 04:01 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Clan Diplomat
  • 19641 battles
  • 7,160
  • [_7TH_] _7TH_
  • Member since:
    12-10-2011

Object 257

Stock, its turret is currently the one of the IS-3, which is nonlogical. As the 257 is historically derived from the IS-6 then the Object 252, I suggest to put as stock turret the one of either the IS6 either the 252 (in term of armor stats the Defender turret is closer to the IS-3 than the IS-6 turret, but the IS-6 turret might help to equilibrate a bit the tank) :

Additionally the second hull is called 257 Version 2, but can be named 258 or 259 (the differences between these 3 projets are related to the transmission).

See this article explaining the development from the IS-6 to the IS-7 : http://tankarchives....first-is-7.html translated from an article of Yuri Pasholok : http://warspot.ru/62...myy-pervyy-is-7

 

Here is what would look like the 257 with 252 turret (quickly done with Paint.net) :

 

Compared to the 257 full :


Edited by ndiver, 19 January 2018 - 07:03 PM.


muresanur #5 Posted 19 January 2018 - 04:56 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 15017 battles
  • 2
  • [C-D-L] C-D-L
  • Member since:
    02-22-2013

I recently played the Obj. 705A. Note:This is my opinion, don't be mean.

Pros:
Cons:
Recommend: 

 


 


Edited by muresanur, 19 January 2018 - 04:57 PM.


ares354 #6 Posted 19 January 2018 - 05:34 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 73803 battles
  • 3,264
  • Member since:
    12-05-2010
RiP Pz7. 

3 weakspot German HT, 2 of them on turret front. 

705A, one weakspot, non if sidescrape. 

coolathlon #7 Posted 19 January 2018 - 06:18 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 43183 battles
  • 10,331
  • Member since:
    03-08-2011
But why share feedback if it's never taken into account?

Dr_Oolen #8 Posted 19 January 2018 - 06:34 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 22018 battles
  • 1,626
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    03-13-2012

View Postcoolathlon, on 19 January 2018 - 06:18 PM, said:

But why share feedback if it's never taken into account?

 

exactly... im almost tempted to write several pages regarding how all the balance in this patch is completely retarded and nonsensical but i wont bother because not a single time anyone ever pointed out obvious balance issues in the last 5 years was anything changed... (well, i guess the swedish heavies were nerfed partly due to feedback, but thats pretty much the only instance i can remember)

Sfinski #9 Posted 19 January 2018 - 06:36 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 32016 battles
  • 2,689
  • [-PJ-] -PJ-
  • Member since:
    09-26-2013
Do not put the 257 in the game! It is beyond broken. It would be most broken thing you've put in the game EVER! 

Infernomortis #10 Posted 19 January 2018 - 06:49 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 7007 battles
  • 43
  • Member since:
    08-17-2011

I just don't even know where to start.... who on EARTH decided to give the Object 257 that armour profile!

 

At first glance, 140mm on the side seems acceptable, if a little high when you consider that the IS-7 only has 150mm, but you then realise that the entire bottom of the 257 is angled like a wedge shape, effectively making every shot below the tracks an automatic ricochet to almost every single gun in the game, especially as you are often shooting down at it, increasing the angle. Shoot the side flat on with a T9/10 TD gun and watch as it bounces clean off! 

 

Oh, in that case I will fire above the tracks... nope that has magical soviet IS series spaced armour, so that just gets absorbed. This thing is supposed to lead to the IS-7, not replace it....

 

Also don't even get me started on the Object 705A, which basically overnight has obsoleted the PzVII as it can sidescrape with impunity with utterly zero weakspots either on the turret or side.

 

I know Russian bias is a meme in this game, but you really are going full steam ahead in trying to break the game balance with this update huh?



Steffenkbh #11 Posted 19 January 2018 - 06:49 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 38293 battles
  • 621
  • Member since:
    01-22-2012

How can Ob 257 even make into the testserver ?



coolathlon #12 Posted 19 January 2018 - 06:59 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 43183 battles
  • 10,331
  • Member since:
    03-08-2011

View PostSteffenkbh, on 19 January 2018 - 06:49 PM, said:

How can Ob 257 even make into the testserver ?

 

Incompetent "balancing" department.

KosmetskiTigar #13 Posted 19 January 2018 - 07:00 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 47858 battles
  • 42
  • [MAD-J] MAD-J
  • Member since:
    12-19-2012
Obj 705A needs to be nerfed. Come on, that tank is so OP that this game has no more feeling. No weakspot, armor too f***** strong, none other than type4, 5 fv4005 can penetrate it. Even when i aim frontal hull down with 245mm, my crosshair is orange, so... come on.... please guys, please stop... please!!!
Probably if it continues like this i will stop playing this game once forever.



Celution #14 Posted 19 January 2018 - 07:22 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 26288 battles
  • 1,683
  • Member since:
    09-26-2010

Object 257 (Tier IX)

The Object 257 is a joke. Words can't even describe how overpowered this tank is, even if it was a tier 10 vehicle. How the hell did this make it past the Supertest?!?! Besides that it's completely overpowered, the Object 257 is also a really lousy design. The stock turret should be the Object 252 turret, not the IS-3. The top gun is visually identical to the stock gun, meaning that you can't anticipate whether the Object 257 is fully upgraded or not through quick glance. The vehicle is also WAY too mobile and its gun handling is a tad too comfortable.

 

But let's focus on the armour here, which is just plain stupid. Its sides are virtually impenetrable even with the slightest angle from 90 degrees, which is a complete joke. Thanks to the highly angled V-shaped hull, it is also impossible to de-track the vehicle while also dealing damage. The collision model of the hull either doesn't reach far down enough, or is just at a too high angle and thickness to be penetrated by even the best guns in the game. This tank does not belong at tier 9, least of all not with the current armour values. Even at tier 10 this would be way too strong.

 

Object 705 (Tier IX)

The Object 705 feels too good. Either the armour or the gun needs tuning, possibly both. This tank quite literally slaps the VK4502B in the face, since its turret is virtually impenetrable, so it becomes untouchable by anything but HE when side-scraping. Otherwise cool design.

 

Object 705A (Tier X)

The Object 705A is also way too good. While the gun feels fine, the armour is just too strong since it lacks proper weakspots when sidescraping. This tank quite literally slaps the PzVII and VK7201K in the face, as it is both tanks combined and better in every single way, except for lower plate armour.

 

IS-M

Seems pretty balanced from a first glance, but its Lower Front Plate might be too strong, and should get a proper cupola weakspot.

 

 



fighting_falcon93 #15 Posted 19 January 2018 - 07:23 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 31424 battles
  • 4,062
  • Member since:
    02-05-2013
The side armour of Obj.257 is completely rediculous... Shot it 5 times from a 90 degree angle on the side with 270 mm penetration and guess what? Bounce! I usually don't complain about frontal immunity, but if you're going to start making immune sides aswell... Maybe we should start destroying tanks from above?

Edited by fighting_falcon93, 19 January 2018 - 07:23 PM.


Infernomortis #16 Posted 19 January 2018 - 07:26 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 7007 battles
  • 43
  • Member since:
    08-17-2011

View Postcoolathlon, on 19 January 2018 - 05:59 PM, said:

 

Incompetent "balancing" department.

 

Wait they have a balancing department? I thought they just ran the tank stats through an RNG generator and then blindly picked them out of a hat...

Tinbawx #17 Posted 19 January 2018 - 07:28 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 14747 battles
  • 1,251
  • [SNOB] SNOB
  • Member since:
    01-31-2011

View PostDr_Oolen, on 19 January 2018 - 06:34 PM, said:

 

exactly... im almost tempted to write several pages regarding how all the balance in this patch is completely retarded and nonsensical but i wont bother because not a single time anyone ever pointed out obvious balance issues in the last 5 years was anything changed... (well, i guess the swedish heavies were nerfed partly due to feedback, but thats pretty much the only instance i can remember)

 

That´s because there´s "not enough data". So they need to release it on the live servers to collect data for two years before they can make any changes :trollface:.

KosmetskiTigar #18 Posted 19 January 2018 - 08:05 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 47858 battles
  • 42
  • [MAD-J] MAD-J
  • Member since:
    12-19-2012
I can constat by myself - grinding credits will be almost impossible, you’ll need to spend more gold ammo than usual (premium and non premium tanks). So this is a joke.

coolathlon #19 Posted 19 January 2018 - 08:29 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 43183 battles
  • 10,331
  • Member since:
    03-08-2011

View PostTinbawx, on 19 January 2018 - 07:28 PM, said:

That´s because there´s "not enough data". So they need to release it on the live servers to collect data for two years before they can make any changes :trollface:.

 

"No changes to Leo1 because it's slightly OP already."



GameHunter10 #20 Posted 19 January 2018 - 09:41 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 40052 battles
  • 14
  • [QSF-L] QSF-L
  • Member since:
    11-09-2013
Wg...really guys??!? If the 257 would get a touch better DPM and health it would be OP at tier 10 let alone tier 9 fighting against tier 7s... This vehicle has every single advantage that you can think of in this game (V shaped hull, no prominent cupola, good penetration and also incredible armour)...so just add a siege mod to have 0.25 acc and it would be complete :)





Also tagged with 9.22

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users