Jump to content


Does Obj 260 need a buff?


  • Please log in to reply
32 replies to this topic

Knight_Zao #1 Posted 26 March 2018 - 11:37 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 30234 battles
  • 241
  • [MING] MING
  • Member since:
    08-17-2014

After playing 75 or so games in the 260 it seems that the power creep has made this tank relatively obsolete, the armour generally doesnt work, the alpha is below the 5A and IS7 but has great penetration and decent gun handling;

 

My suggestions for "balancing" is to increase its HP to 2250 (150 hp extra) and made its alpha 490 so dpm is more usable. I do not believe this will make it OP but will make it more competitve and maybe more importantly well worth the long grind in getting it in the first place.

 

Or am i being really greedy?? :p

 



Balc0ra #2 Posted 26 March 2018 - 11:42 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 67361 battles
  • 17,084
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012
It's a medium heavy, not a heavy heavy. So it depends on if you want the buffs to make it a HT, or just a better medium heavy.

Sfinski #3 Posted 27 March 2018 - 05:45 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 32201 battles
  • 2,746
  • [-PJ-] -PJ-
  • Member since:
    09-26-2013
I would be fine by just removing the roof weakspot. Would be fine then. 

VarzA #4 Posted 27 March 2018 - 06:23 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 22634 battles
  • 1,538
  • [USAGI] USAGI
  • Member since:
    06-17-2011

I think WG has stated they plan to look at the mission reward tanks.

T-55A is pretty powercreeped as well, Stug IV is almost useless.



Shaade_Silentpaw #5 Posted 27 March 2018 - 06:58 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 23416 battles
  • 447
  • Member since:
    10-12-2015
I think it could use a bit more ammo...:v

Dr_Oolen #6 Posted 27 March 2018 - 09:21 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 22278 battles
  • 1,638
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    03-13-2012
Maybe wg could instead nerf all the broken and op tanks they added in the last 2 years? Id say we are still in situation where there are fewer op and broken tanks than tanks that need buffing. But at this rate the op broken as [edited]tanks will soon become the majority and it will be the mediocre/craptanks that will be perceived as outliers.

Archaean #7 Posted 27 March 2018 - 09:37 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 15663 battles
  • 1,243
  • [S4LT] S4LT
  • Member since:
    04-25-2015

Give it the pre-nerf obj 257 sides, the IS-7 turret, mobility of a leopard, gun of the FV 4005 and front of the Type 5 Heavy.

 

 

Sounds pretty legit to me.



besinnungslos #8 Posted 27 March 2018 - 09:43 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 20630 battles
  • 74
  • [POWNY] POWNY
  • Member since:
    11-23-2011
Really? This is the problem the community has. Asking to buff the armour of tanks because they have been powercreeped and next complain, that it is all about gold ammo. How about nerfing tanks instead of buffing everything to the moon?

Schepel #9 Posted 27 March 2018 - 09:51 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 61621 battles
  • 3,168
  • [-B-C-] -B-C-
  • Member since:
    05-13-2013
The obj 260 is fine as is. It is a heavium, so use that speed and bully meds into submission. Leave the type 5's to decide whose HE rounds are the biggest...

BlackYeti #10 Posted 27 March 2018 - 09:53 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 15843 battles
  • 589
  • Member since:
    09-07-2011
Instead of constantly buffing X to catch up with Y I think it is high time to start nerfing things again, and globally too. Keeping my hopes up for the gold ammo rebalance/removal.

Edited by BlackYeti, 27 March 2018 - 09:54 AM.


Simeon85 #11 Posted 27 March 2018 - 10:33 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 1097 battles
  • 3,629
  • Member since:
    04-19-2013

View PostDr_Oolen, on 27 March 2018 - 09:21 AM, said:

Maybe wg could instead nerf all the broken and op tanks they added in the last 2 years? Id say we are still in situation where there are fewer op and broken tanks than tanks that need buffing. But at this rate the op broken as [edited]tanks will soon become the majority and it will be the mediocre/craptanks that will be perceived as outliers.

 

Yeh this more the problem, things like the 268v4, the IS7 buffs, the 5A and the 430U made the 260 look weak, when in reality you just need to nerf the collection of too good tier 10s - 268v4, Fatton, Obj. 140, Obj.430U, 907, Maus, Type 5, WZ-111-5A, 705A, Super Conq etc. down to the level of the other tanks.

 

Tanks like the T-62A, Obj. 260, Cent AX, Bat Chat, E100 etc. are at a decent competitive level, bring the other tanks down to that, not the other way round.

 

Just reverse the tier 10 power creep. 

 

EDIT: Forgot Super Conq on my list 


Edited by Simeon85, 27 March 2018 - 01:59 PM.


PervyPastryPuffer #12 Posted 27 March 2018 - 11:49 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 31575 battles
  • 2,385
  • [VRTC] VRTC
  • Member since:
    09-13-2013

While playing Ranked Battles in the 260, I kept getting penetrated straight through the tiny gun mantlet even with standard ammo... It's only 250mm thick with no actual armor behind it, and it ruins the hull-down capabilities of the tank. Checking its armor values on tanks.gg, I found out that its frontal hull armor is actually - on average - effectively 5-10mm thicker than the IS-7's armor, which surprised me. The gun is rather funky... I had to run food to bring down the dispersion to a manageable level. The armor works well at medium-long distances, but the gun sadly doesn't, unless, as I said, you use food.

 

It's a relic... Though some aspects of the tank still hold up to the competition. For example it's top speed is the highest of all tier X heavy tanks (equal to a few others) but unlike the others, it actually has the raw engine power to get up to that speed pretty quickly and maintain it over bumpy terrain. Its ground resistance is a bit high, making it hard to maneuvre, but just having the ability to run away from a falling flank or change positions on the map is an ability that can come in really handy.

 

Personally, the only changes/buffs the vehicle needs is some more armor on or behind the gun mantlet because it's just downright awful, and a slight ground resistance decrease on medium and soft terrain.



Dr_Oolen #13 Posted 27 March 2018 - 12:21 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 22278 battles
  • 1,638
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    03-13-2012

View PostSimeon85, on 27 March 2018 - 10:33 AM, said:

 

Yeh this more the problem, things like the 268v4, the IS7 buffs, the 5A and the 430U made the 260 look weak, when in reality you just need to nerf the collection of too good tier 10s - 268v4, Fatton, Obj. 140, Obj.430U, 907, Maus, Type 5, WZ-111-5A, 705A etc. down to the level of the other tanks.

 

Tanks like the T-62A, Obj. 260, Cent AX, Bat Chat, E100 etc. are at a decent competitive level, bring the other tanks down to that, not the other way round.

 

Just reverse the tier 10 power creep. 

 

Exactly, there are now something like 10 t10s that need to be nerfed/reworked, and if that was done, suddenly 30 tanks will no longer seem UP and useless, but well balanced and all youre left with is buffing like 5-6 tanks.

 

As you said, E100 is imo what a balanced average t10 superheavy should be, cent ax is what a "support/hulldown" med should be, t62 is what a brawling high dpm med should be and 260 is what a slightly above average "fast heavy" should be.

 

Basically, as far as im concerned, id say its something like this:

broken and OP tanks that need complete rework and massive nerf: 268v4 (this crapis in its own category tbh)

broken and OP tanks that need rework and nerf: type 5

broken but not OP tanks that need some rework: 4005, fv183, foch b, foch 155, badger

OP tanks that need nerfing: 907, 5a, 430u, 705a, supercanceror, vk7201, maus, is7

UP tanks (as in tanks that would still be UP even after the above tanks were nerfed to reasonable levels): leopard, 268, 121b, 95e6, grille (although it might be, in a balanced situation, just shy of being truly crap, at an acceptable level of badness), rhm cancerwagon, maybe is4. This list, if we were to consider the level of 5as/supercanceror/430us/268v4s to be the "normal" level of performance for t10, would include pretty much half of curren t10s in the game, including all lights, all meds bar 907/140/430u/patton, all tds except for 268v4 and pretty much half of the heavies too.

 

Then there are some tanks that could use minor changes, but really this is it. If those tanks were nerfed to the level of e100/cent ax/t62/e3 we would end up in a fairly good situation imo. 113 would be the best t10 fast heavy, which imo is a reasonable level of performance, patton/140 would be the best t10 meds - one might argue those would be still a bit too good, but id hardly call them blatantly op, depending on how much e100/705a/type5 were nerfed one of those would be the best t10 superheavy, id personally say that the best superheavy should be at +- the level of current maus, if the maus was nerfed like this: side armor behind tracks 140->100, dispersion on turret traverse 0.05 -> 0.1, aimtime 2.1 -> 2.5 (or instead of gun nerfs nerf its turret armor to the initial levels) (superheavy tank that is supposed to be brawling has no business having gun handling that doesnt even require you to stop in order to shoot, if it had to stop and aim for 3 seconds it would give other tanks actual chance to shoot at the weakspots). 

 

 

 

 


Edited by Dr_Oolen, 27 March 2018 - 12:35 PM.


the_nebuchadnezzar #14 Posted 27 March 2018 - 01:00 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 49160 battles
  • 1,240
  • Member since:
    08-19-2013
Obj 260 is a joke. 

Balc0ra #15 Posted 27 March 2018 - 01:23 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 67361 battles
  • 17,084
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View PostVarzA, on 27 March 2018 - 06:23 AM, said:

I think WG has stated they plan to look at the mission reward tanks.

T-55A is pretty powercreeped as well, Stug IV is almost useless.

 

Tbh I've not played a single game in my 260 yet. T-55A is fine on the gun still IMO, as I like the hybrid of the two T-54 guns. Still has 0.33 dispersion with the same aim time as the sniper gun. Same pen and almost the same dpm as the brawling gun. But it could use the turret buff tho.

 

Stug is fine. Comparing it to the normal Stug that faces tier 7's and saying it needs buffs when it faces tier 6 is a bit silly. It's more or less on pair with every tier 5 pref MM tank in therms of gun. But still better off on other areas then even the +2 Stug III. But considering the "hate" WG has vs pref MM tanks. And that this is a normal tank, not a premium as such. It's easy for them to buff it, and remove the pref MM vs tanks you bought with real money. So I suspect they will at some point on that.

 

View PostBlackPantherKTwo, on 27 March 2018 - 09:43 AM, said:

Really? This is the problem the community has. Asking to buff the armour of tanks because they have been powercreeped and next complain, that it is all about gold ammo. How about nerfing tanks instead of buffing everything to the moon?

 

That's just it. If you buff X to be competetive vs Y. Then Z that was average is now suddenly bad. So then you buff Z to make Y bad again. So then you have to buff Y that will make X seem worse off. So you need to buff that again. And gold ammo makes the Maus armor useless. Then the next week after they buff the Maus, it's armor makes gold ammo needed. And yes I've seen the same people complain about those two things weeks apart.


Edited by Balc0ra, 27 March 2018 - 01:25 PM.


ecefec #16 Posted 27 March 2018 - 01:26 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 49177 battles
  • 76
  • [LVTD] LVTD
  • Member since:
    04-07-2011

1 st good thing is speed, then turet armor. 

 

Problem is with standart rounds pen. and how much ammo can take in battle. 



____Green____ #17 Posted 27 March 2018 - 01:27 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 17503 battles
  • 95
  • Member since:
    01-12-2014
Armament
APCR/HEAT/HE
Shells
1180/5200/608
Shell Cost
440/440/530 HPDamage
260/340/68 mmPenetration
5.22 r/m 
 
Rate of Fire
2098.8 
 
 
 
 
 
Damage Per Minute
0.36 m 
 
Accuracy
2.5 s 
 
Aim time
26 deg/sTurret Traverse
360°Gun Arc
-5°/+15°Elevation Arc
30 roundsAmmo Capacity

 

 

Change it to -7 and it will become a well balanced tank. Ok and ad 5 extra shells.


Edited by ____Green____, 27 March 2018 - 01:28 PM.


Jumping_TurtIe #18 Posted 27 March 2018 - 01:31 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 6268 battles
  • 1,078
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    02-26-2015
They should nerf the others not buff this one.

VarzA #19 Posted 27 March 2018 - 01:48 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 22634 battles
  • 1,538
  • [USAGI] USAGI
  • Member since:
    06-17-2011

View PostBalc0ra, on 27 March 2018 - 01:23 PM, said:

 

Tbh I've not played a single game in my 260 yet. T-55A is fine on the gun still IMO, as I like the hybrid of the two T-54 guns. Still has 0.33 dispersion with the same aim time as the sniper gun. Same pen and almost the same dpm as the brawling gun. But it could use the turret buff tho.

Yeah, that's what i meant, the turret needs some love.

 

Stug is fine. Comparing it to the normal Stug that faces tier 7's and saying it needs buffs when it faces tier 6 is a bit silly. It's more or less on pair with every tier 5 pref MM tank in therms of gun. But still better off on other areas then even the +2 Stug III. But considering the "hate" WG has vs pref MM tanks. And that this is a normal tank, not a premium as such. It's easy for them to buff it, and remove the pref MM vs tanks you bought with real money. So I suspect they will at some point on that.

No, the stug 4 is deffinitely not fine (i did not know it had pref MM but it doesn't matter). It is wayyyyyyy below fine. Stug IIIG can actually use the 75mm L70, which is a very accurate and good gun on that platform and which has 150mm pen with standard rounds.  They have the same view range (crappy), but at least the III G gets that gun. The 75mm L48 needs premium rounds to pen even the sides of heavies within it's own tier, as it only pens 110mm, which drops off with range, and it has to go through tracks ... etc ... it needs 130-135mm at least, and that doesn't even count the inherent derpiness of the L48.

 

That's just it. If you buff X to be competetive vs Y. Then Z that was average is now suddenly bad. So then you buff Z to make Y bad again. So then you have to buff Y that will make X seem worse off. So you need to buff that again. And gold ammo makes the Maus armor useless. Then the next week after they buff the Maus, it's armor makes gold ammo needed. And yes I've seen the same people complain about those two things weeks apart.

 

Answered in bold.

Balc0ra #20 Posted 27 March 2018 - 02:04 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 67361 battles
  • 17,084
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View PostVarzA, on 27 March 2018 - 01:48 PM, said:

 

Answered in bold.

 

And as I said. Vs other tier 5 pref MM tanks.. it's fine. It's not great, it's not bad... just fine, and that's it. It's not worse off then any tier 5 pref MM prem. As tier 5 prem MM pen is 110 average. Just like the SU-85i that has pref MM. It's gun do struggle vs +1 side armor at times, or super heavy armor. As I don't brawl with +1 HT's in my Ram II either. So in a support role they all fair the same in terms of the gun, as he has 110 pen to. And tbh, more so then not. I find AP to work just fine as top tier. It's not often I see KV-1's that has both the hull and turret at extreme angles, even at range to force me to press 2. As 110 pen works vs a majority of the targets I hit with it. And if you give the Stug III gun to a tier 5 with pref MM, or pen close to 150. Then the DPM needs to take a dip I suspect. As you can't make it as good as the normal stug... and keep the pref MM. Even so, if they were to buff it. 125 pen would even more then fine.

 

And sure 310 view range is bad, but it's bad for most closed top TD's on tier 5. You could argue for a 340m buff tho. No one has had great view range on tier 5 TD's since the TD camo and view range nerf. Thus why the Dmax is still great... As it has 257m view range without binocs, as it's a pre nerf premium.


Edited by Balc0ra, 27 March 2018 - 02:10 PM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users