Jump to content


Another Obj268v4 thread


  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

Mr_Beefy #1 Posted 31 March 2018 - 08:29 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 23265 battles
  • 597
  • [OZ77] OZ77
  • Member since:
    09-13-2015

Prior to the change, the Object263 was a rare td.

Applicable in very few maps in SH/Advances/CW, and very rarely seen in randoms.

 

When I encountered it, in most instances, it was played by 1500+ wn8 players at the very least, and as a result of that, it's statistics were rather good.  A similar comparison would be the CW reward tanks.  Looking at WoT-Life, one might notice that the CW tanks have the highest average wn8 of all tanks (""shocking"" as that may be, yuk yuk)  When only the higher skilled players play a tank/td, then there will always be an anomaly on it's statistics vs say IS7's and E100's.

 

Now we come to the 268v4.  It could be due to it being a new td, and players are still having new tank syndrome in having a tougher time killing/damaging it on the opposition side, and on the player side, playing it more to get stats on it and determine if it is a good fit to one's play style.

I think that the 3rd option is the one.  That being that frontally, this TD is broken.  Speedwise, this td is broken.  (a td that is played with the meds in SH/CW?  Tell me that ain't broken)

 

WG devs should take a brave pill, come up with a replacement at tier 9 since they obviously want to sell the SU-122-54 as a T8 premium, and remove the 268v4 and reinstate the 263 as tier 10.  

 

The only thing I have yet to see is a team of 10 Obj268v4's with 5 type 5's in Himmelsdorf covering the A line base.  That will be an interesting nut to crack.


Edited by Mr_Beefy, 31 March 2018 - 08:30 AM.


evilchaosmonkey #2 Posted 31 March 2018 - 08:50 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 16674 battles
  • 1,756
  • [EIGHT] EIGHT
  • Member since:
    05-04-2013

Out of interest, putting aside that it appears to tick the holy grail of stats (armour, speed, handling) - how much of the tank's over performance is a consequence of the flatter maps in v1.0?

Wondering whether it was balanced on the old map meta or the new one as they were sort of introduced around about the same time.

 

Have avoided higher tiers for a while now, so haven't come across this tank except in the test server.

 



RamRaid90 #3 Posted 31 March 2018 - 08:55 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 22025 battles
  • 6,600
  • [D0NG] D0NG
  • Member since:
    12-14-2014
430U is far more of a problem than the 268 v4.

TheWarrener #4 Posted 31 March 2018 - 09:21 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 3587 battles
  • 355
  • Member since:
    10-31-2017

View PostRamRaid90, on 31 March 2018 - 08:55 AM, said:

430U is far more of a problem than the 268 v4.

It really isn't. 430u is just OP, 268v4 is flat out broken 



gunslingerXXX #5 Posted 31 March 2018 - 09:26 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 11187 battles
  • 2,086
  • [GUNSL] GUNSL
  • Member since:
    11-16-2014

Inb4 someone wrongfully compares the obj 268 v4 with the T110E3.

 



Mr_Beefy #6 Posted 31 March 2018 - 09:35 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 23265 battles
  • 597
  • [OZ77] OZ77
  • Member since:
    09-13-2015

View Postevilchaosmonkey, on 31 March 2018 - 09:50 AM, said:

Out of interest, putting aside that it appears to tick the holy grail of stats (armour, speed, handling) - how much of the tank's over performance is a consequence of the flatter maps in v1.0?

Wondering whether it was balanced on the old map meta or the new one as they were sort of introduced around about the same time.

 

Have avoided higher tiers for a while now, so haven't come across this tank except in the test server.

 

 

This is a great point.

the flatter maps are absolutely a factor.  Both for USSR and Chinese tanks, both with cwap gun depression, absolutely a buff of epic proportions for both lines.



Mr_Beefy #7 Posted 31 March 2018 - 09:40 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 23265 battles
  • 597
  • [OZ77] OZ77
  • Member since:
    09-13-2015

View PostRamRaid90, on 31 March 2018 - 09:55 AM, said:

430U is far more of a problem than the 268 v4.

 

I disagree.

While the 430U is surely stronk.  It can be dealt with frontally.

The 268v4 is faster, has ludicrous levels of frontal armor with mini-weakspots that have to be hit at the pixel level, or switch to HE to at least damage the gun 2 times and have the 268v4 driver deal with a broken gun as well as the broken armor and speed.

Once again, how ludicrous is it that a td with insane armor is faster then a medium tank? (EDIT: usually, for balance purposes, a tank/td has either stronk armor, or excellent mobility, except in 2 vehicles.  IS7, and 268v4, rather ironic that both are sovet eh?)

How ludicrous is it that an FC calls for 2 268v4's to run with the 907's in SH to give the 907's some seriously effective meatshields?

 


Edited by Mr_Beefy, 31 March 2018 - 09:41 AM.


Mr_Beefy #8 Posted 31 March 2018 - 09:45 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 23265 battles
  • 597
  • [OZ77] OZ77
  • Member since:
    09-13-2015

View PostgunslingerXXX, on 31 March 2018 - 10:26 AM, said:

Inb4 someone wrongfully compares the obj 268 v4 with the T110E3.

 

 

Yup.

No comparison really.

The E3 is a stronk frontally armored TD, and it sacrifices mobility for this armor.

The 268v4 has both mobility AND sick frontal armor.

 

WG has seriously dropped the ball here.  I mean, the storm that occurred prior to the switch, the fake announcement that they are '"listening"" to the player base regarding the switch.

 

The only way to effectively kill a 268v4 is to flank it.  GL in flanking it in a random without you getting wasted.  In a SH/CW, if your fc says to do it, then u do it and hope for the best.

 

 



Mr_Beefy #9 Posted 31 March 2018 - 09:56 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 23265 battles
  • 597
  • [OZ77] OZ77
  • Member since:
    09-13-2015

New name for the 268v4 drivers.

Jingles said Steve the IS7 driver.

268v4 = Bobo.  As in Bobo the Clown.



RamRaid90 #10 Posted 31 March 2018 - 10:17 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 22025 battles
  • 6,600
  • [D0NG] D0NG
  • Member since:
    12-14-2014

View PostMr_Beefy, on 31 March 2018 - 08:56 AM, said:

New name for the 268v4 drivers.

Jingles said Steve the IS7 driver.

268v4 = Bobo.  As in Bobo the Clown.

 

I have a 70% win rate in mine :(

Mr_Beefy #11 Posted 31 March 2018 - 10:20 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 23265 battles
  • 597
  • [OZ77] OZ77
  • Member since:
    09-13-2015

View PostRamRaid90, on 31 March 2018 - 11:17 AM, said:

 

I have a 70% win rate in mine :(

 

​It is an absolutely broken vehicle.  Worse then the WTFE100 for gameplay.

WindSplitter1 #12 Posted 31 March 2018 - 07:13 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 16244 battles
  • 2,564
  • [ORDEM] ORDEM
  • Member since:
    02-07-2016

View PostMr_Beefy, on 31 March 2018 - 08:56 AM, said:

New name for the 268v4 drivers.

Jingles said Steve the IS7 driver.

268v4 = Bobo.  As in Bobo the Clown.

 

I'll edit the Wiki to reflect these nouns

AvalancheZ257 #13 Posted 31 March 2018 - 10:10 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 3973 battles
  • 230
  • [3WCST] 3WCST
  • Member since:
    05-26-2017

View PostMr_Beefy, on 31 March 2018 - 09:45 AM, said:

 

Yup.

No comparison really.

The E3 is a stronk frontally armored TD, and it sacrifices mobility for this armor.

The 268v4 has both mobility AND sick frontal armor.

 

WG has seriously dropped the ball here.  I mean, the storm that occurred prior to the switch, the fake announcement that they are '"listening"" to the player base regarding the switch.

 

The only way to effectively kill a 268v4 is to flank it.  GL in flanking it in a random without you getting wasted.  In a SH/CW, if your fc says to do it, then u do it and hope for the best.

 

 

 

Don't forget the T110E3 actually has a frontal weakspot that dosen't require gold ammo and British/German gun accuracy to hit. The entire lower plate is a weakspot so you can't just hold W and win. 

 

 

 


breeeze #14 Posted 31 March 2018 - 10:17 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 30798 battles
  • 540
  • [S4] S4
  • Member since:
    03-11-2014

View Postevilchaosmonkey, on 31 March 2018 - 08:50 AM, said:

Out of interest, putting aside that it appears to tick the holy grail of stats (armour, speed, handling) - how much of the tank's over performance is a consequence of the flatter maps in v1.0?

Wondering whether it was balanced on the old map meta or the new one as they were sort of introduced around about the same time.

 

Have avoided higher tiers for a while now, so haven't come across this tank except in the test server.

 

 

Very little. The 268 4 would be just as OP in SD, a handful of flattened positions wont make much of a difference.

GB3000 #15 Posted 31 March 2018 - 10:30 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 17749 battles
  • 54
  • [CH3SS] CH3SS
  • Member since:
    05-13-2015
there are no problems at all with 268 v4 ... well balanced like 430u heavy tank ... ehhhhmmm .. med

HundeWurst #16 Posted 31 March 2018 - 10:53 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 70100 battles
  • 4,359
  • [ROIDS] ROIDS
  • Member since:
    02-06-2012

View Postevilchaosmonkey, on 31 March 2018 - 08:50 AM, said:

Out of interest, putting aside that it appears to tick the holy grail of stats (armour, speed, handling) - how much of the tank's over performance is a consequence of the flatter maps in v1.0?

Wondering whether it was balanced on the old map meta or the new one as they were sort of introduced around about the same time.

 

Have avoided higher tiers for a while now, so haven't come across this tank except in the test server.

 

 

Hardly any difference. The tank is so well armored, that it can just drive in the face of the enemy and the fire the gun. The lack of weakspots allow such stupid plays. So the tank does not really care about any gundepression since the armor allows the most stupid plays.

 

View PostRamRaid90, on 31 March 2018 - 08:55 AM, said:

430U is far more of a problem than the 268 v4.

 

No its not. 430U most certainly is OP. But its not even close to as OP as the other tank is. 430U would be as OP if the lower plate would have the same effective arnor as the upper has. Thats not the case. Again. 430U is op no doubt. It should not have been introduced like that in the game. Its not a medium but an MBT.

As far as I know the 430(U) are protodesigns for the T64 the first true Russian MBT. 430U is more a MBT than a medium.

View PostTheWarrener, on 31 March 2018 - 09:21 AM, said:

It really isn't. 430u is just OP, 268v4 is flat out broken 

 

Broken is the tank not. Its insanly OP however. THere is a difference.

View PostgunslingerXXX, on 31 March 2018 - 09:26 AM, said:

Inb4 someone wrongfully compares the obj 268 v4 with the T110E3.

 

 

There are always special snowflakes who are going to defend their OP toys. Thats just how it is.


Edited by WunderWurst, 31 March 2018 - 10:57 PM.


brumbarr #17 Posted 31 March 2018 - 10:55 PM

    Lieutenant General

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

View PostWunderWurst, on 31 March 2018 - 10:53 PM, said:

 

Hardly any difference. The tank is so well armored, that it can just drive in the face of the enemy and the fire the gun. The lack of weakspots allow such stupid plays. So the tank does not really care about any gundepression since the armor allows the most stupid plays.

Thats how i 3 marked it: take advanced position, drive in peoples face , blab them for 650, reverse at 22kph , repeat.



Mr_Beefy #18 Posted 31 March 2018 - 10:58 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 23265 battles
  • 597
  • [OZ77] OZ77
  • Member since:
    09-13-2015

tonight in Wargames.

Minimum of 3 268v4's per team.

 

How many times has anyone seen a 263 in a battle that is not Steppes or MAYBE Malinovka prior to the switch?



Mr_Beefy #19 Posted 31 March 2018 - 11:00 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 23265 battles
  • 597
  • [OZ77] OZ77
  • Member since:
    09-13-2015

On Prokhorovka, there was a team with 7 of the things.

Totally ridiculous.



mrscartman66 #20 Posted 31 March 2018 - 11:10 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 24281 battles
  • 16
  • Member since:
    10-14-2016

View PostMr_Beefy, on 31 March 2018 - 11:00 PM, said:

On Prokhorovka, there was a team with 7 of the things.

Totally ridiculous.

That will eventually kill it. When everybody will be driving around in one of them, then the powercreep wont be visible anymore ;)






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users