Jump to content


When are the tier 10 lights going to get the buffs they clearly need?


  • Please log in to reply
122 replies to this topic

DracheimFlug #21 Posted 29 March 2018 - 04:23 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 9984 battles
  • 4,277
  • Member since:
    11-13-2014

View Postbaribal_80, on 29 March 2018 - 03:57 PM, said:

 

Your idea of making all tanks being able to shine is making superheavies unplayable lol.

 

Sorry but you achieve balance by both stats and maps. Using your logic a loltractor at t10 would be balanced if it got the right map. Sorry but currently lights have too many disadvantages compared to other tanks

 

Superheavies should be kings on some maps and paupers on others, and other classes likewise. Add then a good rotation and the classes would balance out over time.

Dr_Oolen #22 Posted 29 March 2018 - 04:49 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 23298 battles
  • 1,844
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    03-13-2012

T10 lights are performing statistically well and dont need further buffs :)

 

Kappa

 

But really, the lights are so bad in so many aspects (or not good enough to be actually better at those than meds) thats its quite difficult to even suggest any buffs, as one might just say "buff everything by 15%" and it would probably still not be good enough.

 

I mean - viewrange advantage? Nope, lighs have worse viewranges than heavies and meds. Camo advantage? Only when moving, when you shoot or sit in a bush you might as well be a heavy tank and it wouldnt really make a difference. Camo combinbed with VR advantage? Yeah, useful maybe on 5 maps total, else might as well be a med/heavy to do spotting.

 

Mobility? Nope, reaching a corridor 5 seconds before your average med does, or 10 seconds before 268v4 or balanced heavies such as is7/5a do doesnt make any difference, after the first shot you might as well turn around and drive off anyway because by then youll be facing and trading with heavies... Cant even outrun a tank like 5a/is7 and any meds as all those are easily fast enough to give you a chase for long enough to reduce you to a oneshot or straight up kill you, since all they really have to do is hit you twice (hit you once, by the time you turn around and get behind next corner/hill you get a second hit) to do that.

 

Maneuvrability? Nope, half the mediums turn faster than the lights and the lights without permatracking cant even outturn things like e100, not to mention its impossible to permatrack anything with those reloads, not to mention literally on 90% of any map you just need to drive probably less than 40 meters to get your [edited]to a rockúhill/building.

 

And then the guns are just atrocious.

 

Buffing VR or camo doesnt do anything because of the maps. Buffing mobility doesnt do anything because of the maps. Buffing maneuvrability does mostly nothing aswell. The only thing to buff that would make actual difference are the guns. Unless of course the camo/speed/maneuvrability buffs werent the usual WG level buffs of 2° hull traverse. Still i dont see any reason why the lights are so slow and unmaneuvrable and why their guns are so potato at long range but then the lights cant even use those guns at close range because they dont have the dpm/HP/maneuvrability/gun handling to go close range... I wouldnt even mind the crappen at range and the potato accuracy (id still see no point why those should be the case anyway) if at least they had the ability to use the guns at short range. I dont see why for example lighs couldnt have 10-15% camo when moving and shooting (with full camo skill, vents, food, camo paint) so that they could at least use those guns at ranges where they can kinda hit something. Althought that would be more complicated change that just buffing the guns for [edited]sake as the poor is7s could be shot at by invisible lights at ranges of 380 meters! How terrible.

 

All this said, theres no reason why any light should have sub 70 top speed considering there are meds with 65 and heavies with 55... alternatively there simply shouldnt be any meds with more than 60 top speed and heavies (tds) with more than 50. RHM cancerwagon could easily have 80 top speed to give it something. Then all lights could flat out get +8-10° hull traverse and +5-10° turret traverse while buffing dispersions by 15-25% to compensate for the higher traverses and to buff them on top of that so that those tanks can actually do some close range shooting without having to stop to aim. And then on top of that buff all their dpms to be 3.3k+ with equipment, you know, to have dpm similar to balanced heavies like 5a or supercanceror. Oh and i guess if rhm cancerwagon is supposed to be the "sniper" light tank it could maybe have more than 200 pen at 400 meters, just saying.



Warzey #23 Posted 29 March 2018 - 05:00 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 58461 battles
  • 992
  • [GOOFY] GOOFY
  • Member since:
    04-29-2011

While T10 lights are without a doubt underpowered I think that buffing them across the board wouldn't have positive impact on the gameplay. By that I mean that increased amount of light tanks in queue and in battle isn't necessarily a good thing. For example it could potentially make more open maps really hard to play for other classes because every move you make could get you spotted and killed, so we would see more camping. Alternatively WG could add even more constrains to MM and platoons but that's not a very good solution.  

 

Light tanks are kind of balanced like arty, both classes need to have a bit less impact in the battle in order to not break the game. I'm sure some of you remember how games were like before initial arty nerf and the only reason that happened was because arty had too much impact on the game.

That being said I personally would really like for WG to get rid of the special penetration drop off for light tanks and get base view range in line with mediums. The main reason I'm advocating for small changes is because WG usually takes ages to react and when they do they hit stuff with heavy nerfs/buffs. 


Edited by Warzey, 29 March 2018 - 05:05 PM.


Igor_BL #24 Posted 29 March 2018 - 05:09 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 42337 battles
  • 1,558
  • Member since:
    06-10-2015

it could be solved by limiting number of LTs per team.

 

Spg Lt  and td classes we can call support.

matches with 5 LTs per team or 7 TDs are not that good nor fun.

 

 

1 SPG, 3 LTs, 3 TDs and 8 MT-HT. 

MTs and HTs are MBT and they should take biggest part in teams.

 

Buff LTs (tierX.. tier9 are really good imo. didnt play ru251 only)

and limit their numbers per team



TheOddRogue #25 Posted 29 March 2018 - 05:11 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 10111 battles
  • 475
  • Member since:
    08-08-2012

They're all trash. The tiers 9 lights are decent though, like amx 13 90. 

 

Biggest problem is piss poor accuracy, I'm not saying it should be medium like accurate, but not this bad. Also I do not understand why t100lt and RHM has 300 alpha dmg, that wont cut it in tier 10, especially with crap DPM. 

 

Also since they introduced tier 10 lights the class has become very oversaturated, there is always loads of light tanks, it's not fun to compete for spotting with 5 other lights. when it was max tier 8 the top tiers would at least be a good place to play and you have no other or at most 1 more light tank to compete against. 


Edited by TheOddRogue, 29 March 2018 - 05:14 PM.


TankkiPoju #26 Posted 29 March 2018 - 05:12 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 22189 battles
  • 6,828
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    05-20-2011

View Postdouglarse, on 29 March 2018 - 01:15 PM, said:

Thing is people play lights like morons most of the time. Hence the poor win rates.

 

Oh yeah and tanks like 268v4 or 430U aren't really good either. They are just played by only competent players.
 

View PostWarzey, on 29 March 2018 - 05:00 PM, said:

While T10 lights are without a doubt underpowered I think that buffing them across the board wouldn't have positive impact on the gameplay. By that I mean that increased amount of light tanks in queue and in battle isn't necessarily a good thing. For example it could potentially make more open maps really hard to play for other classes because every move you make could get you spotted and killed, so we would see more camping. Alternatively WG could add even more constrains to MM and platoons but that's not a very good solution.  

 

So how come this doesn't happen on lower tiers where light tanks do have camo, view range and mobility advantage? Where are the T71 DA platoons?

 

Tier 6-8 light tanks don't dominate game like you describe, yet many of these light tanks are good.

 

And how about platoons of 268v4s? I have seen those plenty in recent times. Seems to me maybe WG should limit that.


 

brumbarr #27 Posted 29 March 2018 - 05:32 PM

    Lieutenant General

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

View PostWarzey, on 29 March 2018 - 05:00 PM, said:

While T10 lights are without a doubt underpowered I think that buffing them across the board wouldn't have positive impact on the gameplay. By that I mean that increased amount of light tanks in queue and in battle isn't necessarily a good thing. For example it could potentially make more open maps really hard to play for other classes because every move you make could get you spotted and killed, so we would see more camping. Alternatively WG could add even more constrains to MM and platoons but that's not a very good solution.  

 

Light tanks are kind of balanced like arty, both classes need to have a bit less impact in the battle in order to not break the game. I'm sure some of you remember how games were like before initial arty nerf and the only reason that happened was because arty had too much impact on the game.

That being said I personally would really like for WG to get rid of the special penetration drop off for light tanks and get base view range in line with mediums. The main reason I'm advocating for small changes is because WG usually takes ages to react and when they do they hit stuff with heavy nerfs/buffs. 

 

I wouldnt worry about that, how many T10 light do you see in battles?  Maybe 1 each battle? 2 at max.

Warzey #28 Posted 29 March 2018 - 05:33 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 58461 battles
  • 992
  • [GOOFY] GOOFY
  • Member since:
    04-29-2011

View PostTankkiPoju, on 29 March 2018 - 04:16 PM, said:

 

So how come this doesn't happen on lower tiers where light tanks do have camo, view range and mobility advantage? Where are the T71 DA platoons?

 

Tier 6-8 light tanks don't dominate game like you describe, yet many of these light tanks are good.

 

 

Maybe because mid tier medium tanks are significantly less powerful tier for tier compared to T9 and T10 mediums. Mid tier lights have a more significant advantage in terms of view range and camo while not having insanely high firepower and of course it should be added that mid tier tanks in general have less view range.

Maybe it's because mid tiers are dominated by heavy tanks. For a light tank driver it's easier to work around big blind heavy tank than a medium tank. 

 

Hmmm now that I think about it, the solution for high tier lights could be to nerf high tier medium tanks to an extent so they don't punish light tanks as much. 

 

 

 



brumbarr #29 Posted 29 March 2018 - 05:36 PM

    Lieutenant General

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

View PostWarzey, on 29 March 2018 - 05:33 PM, said:

 

Maybe because mid tier medium tanks are significantly less powerful tier for tier compared to T9 and T10 mediums. Mid tier lights have a more significant advantage in terms of view range and camo while not having insanely high firepower and of course it should be added that mid tier tanks in general have less view range.

Maybe it's because mid tiers are dominated by heavy tanks. For a light tank driver it's easier to work around big blind heavy tank than a medium tank. 

 

Hmmm now that I think about it, the solution for high tier lights could be to nerf high tier medium tanks to an extent so they don't punish light tanks as much. 

 

 

 

 

Solution could be to nerf all the tanks that have been added or buffed in the last year :p

Warzey #30 Posted 29 March 2018 - 05:43 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 58461 battles
  • 992
  • [GOOFY] GOOFY
  • Member since:
    04-29-2011

View Postbrumbarr, on 29 March 2018 - 04:36 PM, said:

 

Solution could be to nerf all the tanks that have been added or buffed in the last year :p

 

I'm sure you got the general idea behind my argument. Besides I'm not going to go too deep into this, that's the job for the balancing department, they get paid for it, I don't.

HundeWurst #31 Posted 29 March 2018 - 06:01 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 73557 battles
  • 4,542
  • [FAME] FAME
  • Member since:
    02-06-2012

View Postdouglarse, on 29 March 2018 - 01:15 PM, said:

So basically you want your light tank to be as conpetative as a medium tank?

 

Thing is people play lights like morons most of the time. Hence the poor win rates.

 

Thats second sentence is a rather stupid statement. If you would have bothered to look at the graph posted in the first post you would have figured out that light tanks underperform across the entire skilllevel in the game.

Its not about the skill of the player. Anyone playing a light is underperforming. They are bad.

 

I recently picked up the AMX 13 105 and oh boy that gun is the biggest [edited]I have seen in a while. If it would have the same penetration values like the BatChat 25t it would be alright, well maybe give it at least 200 more HP on top.

Right now light tanks, besides the LT100 are stupid and close to trash level. The RHM panzerwagen is as good as a regular tier 8 medium tank. That should be a statement.



brumbarr #32 Posted 29 March 2018 - 06:01 PM

    Lieutenant General

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

View PostWarzey, on 29 March 2018 - 05:43 PM, said:

 

I'm sure you got the general idea behind my argument. Besides I'm not going to go too deep into this, that's the job for the balancing department, they get paid for it, I don't.

 

true, our job is to complain something needs to be done :p

Jigabachi #33 Posted 29 March 2018 - 06:07 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 17948 battles
  • 20,952
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011

View PostWarzey, on 29 March 2018 - 05:43 PM, said:

[...], that's the job for the balancing department, they get paid for it, I don't.

Let's just say they get paid. Not sure for what, though...

 



arthurwellsley #34 Posted 29 March 2018 - 06:28 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 53389 battles
  • 3,778
  • [-B-C-] -B-C-
  • Member since:
    05-11-2011

The light tanks on tier VIII need buffing as well as those on tier X, possibly leave tier IX alone.

 

But I think that the buffs to the tier X in particular should emphasize their differences. This used to be the case when the tier VIII ones were top of the light tank tech trees.

 

AMX 13 105 has the auto loader, buff that gun, and maybe the turning and acceleration.

CN used to be the alpha when brawling, so gun stats again.

Ger - the old top tier RU 251 used to have the most accurate gun, give that to the RHM Panzerwagen

USA - just used to be the derp gun anti scout, given it is the size of a boat it should be that again.

RU - best all rounder of the bunch, probably still is.

 

Buff handling and speed of all of them slightly.

Buff the view range slightly.

Buff the camo rating slightly.

 

They should be able to out scout (camo & spotting combined) a USSR medium, and if they cannot, why not, as that is their optimum role.

 

The tier VIII's need a dpm buff.



Long_Range_Sniper #35 Posted 29 March 2018 - 06:55 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 35901 battles
  • 9,933
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    04-04-2011

I've only got one light tank at tier X (13 105) and it's a tough grind to make it work to tilt games in tier X. I've a 51% winrate in that tank from 50 games, and 58% in the 13 90.

 

I'd be interested to see what difference the tweaks to 1.0 maps make over time. In some cases I've found spotting a lot easier, but then on maps like the new Prok with all the new bushes down at A2 it's sometimes difficult to push against so many well hidden campers. Previously I'd have no real difficulty working down the one line to spot for my team, but it's harder now. I've got very close to some seriously large tanks who've remained unpotted now due to the increase in bushes.

 

The wincurves speak for themselves though, and a tank should be able to influence a win no matter what the role in the team.



WindSplitter1 #36 Posted 29 March 2018 - 08:53 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 18729 battles
  • 3,136
  • [ORDEM] ORDEM
  • Member since:
    02-07-2016

Light tanks are bad. And it has nothing to do with the player behind them as some pointing out. There are bad players in all classes across all tiers.

 

They have no speed. This alone puts them at a ridiculous position where they are unable to do their job right.

They have no camo. TDs can and will outspot them first and are only unmasked after dumping 390HP+ damage to the LT.

They have no pen. To some degree, this is understandable. The huge drop-off is not.

They have no accuracy. Again, avoid redline snipers is understandable. Having worse %ACC than HTs is insanity.

They have no view range. There's no reason to pick one LT over an MT in that sense. Best Tier X LT is still the B-C 25t

They have no DPM. Apart from Chinese LTs, most of them simply can't win a 1-on-1. Factor in the HP difference and boom.

 

WG made this changes to LTs because of Steve.

 

We've came to a point where a bad player in a Super heavy tank is more useful than an unicorn on a medium tank.

But a good player on a light tank can still mop the crap with such Heavy Tank player. And that's a problem for Steve.

 

Ranked Battles showed the bias towards HTs, WunderWurst made a post about it.

You are "forced" to play vehicles with some armour in order to have a remote chance at doing something useful.

 

Vehicles like the Vergeltungswaffeski 4, however, break all records. Those things can even keep up with some "lights".

LT fanboys pretty much have to cry on a corner and pick something else because it isn't just the maps and map rotation that doesn't help. Now what little strong points they had are their Achilles heel.

 

I remember the battles where early spotting was a necessary thing and not just for SPGs. Because if you had a good scout and the enemy didn't, they'd be toasted. Today, it's still like that, but the difference in that regard is more forgiving.

 



pucku #37 Posted 29 March 2018 - 09:50 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 33283 battles
  • 286
  • Member since:
    03-25-2012

Maybe I'm a crap driver, but the speed of an LT is so difficult to use. A small rock will flip your tank, a small bump will take your tracks off when you land (even if you land in water or sand), and tapping lightly on A or D to adjust your course will often throw you into a skid (or into a lake if you are unlucky).

 

And for those who say that most people just don't know how to play LTs, why do people know how to play tier 8 LTs (their graphs of the type above show that)? They are perfectly balanced except for HWK 12, which is slightly OP. So people know how to play LTs at tier 8 but then suddenly forget that when they reach tier 10? Or do tier 10 LTs require some special skills that tier 8s don't require?



Igor_BL #38 Posted 29 March 2018 - 10:37 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 42337 battles
  • 1,558
  • Member since:
    06-10-2015

View PostWindSplitter1, on 29 March 2018 - 08:53 PM, said:

Light tanks are bad. And it has nothing to do with the player behind them as some pointing out.  There are bad players in all classes across all tiers.

 

They have no speed. This alone puts them at a ridiculous position where they are unable to do their job right.

They have no camo. TDs can and will outspot them first and are only unmasked after dumping 390HP+ damage to the LT.

They have no pen. To some degree, this is understandable. The huge drop-off is not.

They have no accuracy. Again, avoid redline snipers is understandable. Having worse %ACC than HTs is insanity.

They have no view range. There's no reason to pick one LT over an MT in that sense. Best Tier X LT is still the B-C 25t

They have no DPM. Apart from Chinese LTs, most of them simply can't win a 1-on-1. Factor in the HP difference and boom.

 

 

why do you write stupid things?]

LTs have speed, they are fast enough. There is a lot of really fast LTs, across the tiers. And they are fastest class in game, in general a lot faster then meds.

LTs have no camo? why the f would you write something liek this? you obviosly have no idea about this aspect of game and LT-gameplay.

Complaining about being outspoted by TD in bushes... FFS

View range is not that big of problem, at all. Yeah, it is stupid, but you can survive that problem... I have 511m on 100LT... without improved eq. it is 494m i think.

While Batcat is a lot better tank then any LT, it cant spot as well as 100LT or 13105 can do. So yeah, there is a reason for picking tierX LTs (especially 100LT), but in CW-SH.

 

also, i am pretty sure that Russian LTs have same/better DPM then Chinese in avg, and USA LTs have far better DPM then both Chinese and Russian LTs.

Even the HP is better on Russian and USA LTs, apart from wz131, i think it is best in class (still, t71 eats wz131 for breakfast)

 

TierX LTs are UP, but there is no need to write stupid things like they dont have camo, camping TD outspot me, kme kme.
posts like these just dilute the problem.

 

so, stop writing those.


Edited by Igor_BL, 29 March 2018 - 10:40 PM.


WindSplitter1 #39 Posted 30 March 2018 - 12:49 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 18729 battles
  • 3,136
  • [ORDEM] ORDEM
  • Member since:
    02-07-2016

View PostIgor_BL, on 29 March 2018 - 09:37 PM, said:

 

why do you write stupid things?]

LTs have speed, they are fast enough. There is a lot of really fast LTs, across the tiers. And they are fastest class in game, in general a lot faster then meds.

LTs have no camo? why the f would you write something liek this? you obviosly have no idea about this aspect of game and LT-gameplay.

Complaining about being outspoted by TD in bushes... FFS

View range is not that big of problem, at all. Yeah, it is stupid, but you can survive that problem... I have 511m on 100LT... without improved eq. it is 494m i think.

While Batcat is a lot better tank then any LT, it cant spot as well as 100LT or 13105 can do. So yeah, there is a reason for picking tierX LTs (especially 100LT), but in CW-SH.

 

also, i am pretty sure that Russian LTs have same/better DPM then Chinese in avg, and USA LTs have far better DPM then both Chinese and Russian LTs.

Even the HP is better on Russian and USA LTs, apart from wz131, i think it is best in class (still, t71 eats wz131 for breakfast)

 

TierX LTs are UP, but there is no need to write stupid things like they dont have camo, camping TD outspot me, kme kme.
posts like these just dilute the problem. ^^

 

 

I agree entirely.

 

Moving on...



Igor_BL #40 Posted 30 March 2018 - 01:02 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 42337 battles
  • 1,558
  • Member since:
    06-10-2015
Great. keep whining about LTs being slow and without camo. That will help to improve game, surely.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users