Jump to content


Update 1.0.1 Public Test Feedback - Balance Changes

public test pt

  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

Kandly #1 Posted 12 April 2018 - 10:23 AM

    Community Manager

  • WG Staff
  • 697 battles
  • 754
  • Member since:
    08-23-2016

Commanders,

 

Please share your feedback regarding the Balance changes in the Public Test of Update 1.0.1 below.

 

Cheers,

Kandly



Celution #2 Posted 14 April 2018 - 12:09 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 26226 battles
  • 1,678
  • Member since:
    09-26-2010

T95E6 (Tier X)

Initial thoughts are that the tank is a lot more fun and comfortable to play, it will have a true niche and might actually be worth taking out for a spin now. The mobility buff makes the biggest change, as it now actually reaches its top speed reliably and made the vehicle more agile - very similar to the dynamics of the Centurion AX. The gun is still a bit of a let down with the accuracy, but the rate of fire is insane. I personally would prefer tuning down the rate of fire and further improve its accuracy. Thereofore I'd suggest:

 

  • Rate of fire reduced from 7.5 to 7.1 rounds/min.
  • Reload time from 8 s to 8.45 s.
  • Dispersion at 100 m reduced from 0.38 to 0.36.

 

M60 (Tier X)

The M60 is still nothing to write home about and remains a worse M48A5 in practise - meaning that there still will be no reason to take the M60 over the M48A5 when both are owned. The improved agility is barely noticeable and the gun is still not impressive to make up for the lack of DPM compared to the M48A5. Moreover, the biggest issue with the M60 is that it is a huge silhouette with practically no effective armour whatsoever. The turret should at least be as strong as that of the M48A5 (which includes reducing the size of the cupola), as the hull is infinitely worse. Not to mention that the M60 is significantly taller than the M48A5, which is a huge drawback that is hard to quantify. What would be best however is to simply exchange the turret for the M60A1 turret, which would make the tank visually different and less of a copy-paste from the M48A5. There was also no reason to buff the premium rounds like this. I suggest the following:

 

  • Exchanged the M60 turret for the M60A1 turret, adjusted armouring accordingly
  • Vehicle renamed from M60 to M60A1
  • Rate of fire increased from 6.81 to 7.06 rounds/min
  • Reload time reduced from 8.8 s to 8.5 s
  • Gun depression angle increased from -9° to -10°
  • Top speed increased from 50 to 53 km/h
  • HEAT-T T384E4 shell penetration reduced from 350 to 330 mm

 

VK 72.01 (K) (Tier X)

It seems someone messed with the armour model and didn't actually finish up or revert the changes, because:

 

  • Frontal mid plate was decreased from 300 to 180 mm
  • Lower frontal plate was decreased from 230 to 170 mm
  • Lower-lower frontal plate was decreased from 160 to 40 mm
  • Rear circle superstructure was increased from 160 to 300 mm (all the way around, even the back)
  • Angled side panel is now spaced armour, but there doesn't seem to be any armour behind it (so not actually spaced)
  • Mantlet thickness was fixed and made stronger on pretty much all areas
  • Cupola ring was increased from 100 to 120 mm
  • Bar in front of the mantlet is now 0 mm armour, instead of 120 mm spaced armour
  • Turret tracks are now 0 mm armour
  • Hull side tracks are now 190 mm
  • Hull belly plate was increased from 40 mm to 160 mm

 

All in all, the armour model seems completely messed up right now with all these 0 mm armour zones and the belly suddenly being 160 mm, so it must be fixed before this goes to the live server. While I do think that both the VK72 and PzKpfw VII are too well armoured frontally, this is not the way to go. If anything, the lower frontal glacis should be made weaker since it is actually ridiculous how immune these vehicles are - even towards premium rounds. Please revert these changes and go back to the drawing board since any armour changes to this tank should be copied over to the PzKpfw VII as well for consistency.

 

121B (Tier X)

The improvements seem great and it makes the vehicle a lot more viable and competitive. In fact, it might even be too strong now, with both the mobility and firepower being improved significantly. However, there was absolutely no reason to buff the premium round penetration. I suggest:

 

  • View range reduced from 420 m to 400 m
  • HEAT M456 shell penetration reduced from 350 to 330 mm
  • Rate of fire reduced from 6.9 to 6.67 rounds/min
  • Reload time increased from 8.7 s to 9 s.

Edited by Celution, 16 April 2018 - 06:34 PM.


TheDisturber #3 Posted 14 April 2018 - 06:54 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 31496 battles
  • 59
  • Member since:
    09-10-2013
Why would you give those tanks 350 heat pen? I can't understand it. Also buff to 72.01 armor is ridicules. Do i really need to fire gold at its side? seriously, those buffs are more than stupid.

ares354 #4 Posted 15 April 2018 - 01:59 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 73789 battles
  • 3,164
  • Member since:
    12-05-2010

View PostTheDisturber, on 14 April 2018 - 06:54 PM, said:

Why would you give those tanks 350 heat pen? I can't understand it. Also buff to 72.01 armor is ridicules. Do i really need to fire gold at its side? seriously, those buffs are more than stupid.

 

First for all, VK 72.01 got huge nerf to hull, lower plate is now 180 thick, mid plate 170, lower plate that is very well angled now have 40 mm. So tier 7 tank can pen hull of this tank now. 

Buff to 121b, DPM is sick and stupid. View range better then China LT, top one, like WTF. 

350 HEAT buff are retarded as well, GOOD JOB WG, KEEP UP- and that is joke. 

Those buff to CW tank will make tier 10 more and more broken as those tank are now OVERBUFFED!. i have a lot of tier 10, and I am sick of this tier, thx to WG. 

You won't listen to Celution, you wont listen to me. That forum is waste of time we spend to give you opinions. 

Kopunga #5 Posted 15 April 2018 - 08:45 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 52747 battles
  • 669
  • Member since:
    06-12-2011

I see you have realized how broken the Obj. 268 4 is and have adressed the issue....NOT



Berto72 #6 Posted 16 April 2018 - 08:30 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 58637 battles
  • 925
  • [ORKI] ORKI
  • Member since:
    03-22-2011

Dont know why i cant quote 

Celution #2 post,

but i own T95E6, M60, VK 72.01 (K),

and im totally agree#2

 


HonoredStone #7 Posted 16 April 2018 - 11:38 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 22381 battles
  • 2,288
  • [TRYIT] TRYIT
  • Member since:
    08-04-2013
there seem to be a lot of problems with the vk 72.01k. multiple parts with 0 armor, the gunmantle is 120mm thick with no armor behind it and the lower plate seems to have lost 50% of the armor. please fix that.

Celution #8 Posted 16 April 2018 - 06:32 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 26226 battles
  • 1,678
  • Member since:
    09-26-2010

View PostBerto72, on 16 April 2018 - 08:30 AM, said:

Dont know why i cant quote 

Celution #2 post,

but i own T95E6, M60, VK 72.01 (K),

and im totally agree#2

 

 

Thanks! The quotation feature does not incorporate other quotes, and since I present my changes in quote blocks it is more effort if one wants to copy my content. However, I should perhaps consider a more practical way of presenting my suggestions even though I am quite fond of its clarity..

Edited by Celution, 16 April 2018 - 06:32 PM.


Baleent7 #9 Posted 17 April 2018 - 06:15 AM

    Corporal

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 31948 battles
  • 112
  • [DTQ] DTQ
  • Member since:
    07-15-2010

So I tried the the M60, and my opinion is pretty much what Celution said. It's basically a worse M48. After the M48 turret armor got its buff, the M60 suddenly lost all the value it had before. It's just way to big for a medium tank, and combined with no armor and bad camo, this vehicle is among the worst t10 tanks these days. Better aim time and more horsepower is always welcome, but it won't help the tank unfortunately. Having no armor works only for low profiled, high camo tanks. This tank is simply too huge to not have any armor. Its turret armor needs to be buffed. Also, I'm not sure if the M60A1 turret would solve the problem, as it seems to have the same huge cupola.



paolotk #10 Posted 18 April 2018 - 01:05 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 33453 battles
  • 487
  • [ORKI] ORKI
  • Member since:
    07-26-2012
VK7201K is raped now, GG WG. WTF are you doing?

paolotk #11 Posted 19 April 2018 - 09:45 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 33453 battles
  • 487
  • [ORKI] ORKI
  • Member since:
    07-26-2012

View PostHonoredStone, on 16 April 2018 - 11:38 AM, said:

there seem to be a lot of problems with the vk 72.01k. multiple parts with 0 armor, the gunmantle is 120mm thick with no armor behind it and the lower plate seems to have lost 50% of the armor. please fix that.

 

Second common test and VK72 still garbage...

ITALUX #12 Posted 19 April 2018 - 11:01 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 16352 battles
  • 695
  • [ORKI] ORKI
  • Member since:
    10-18-2014

So, WG, I see that your balancing department has its priorities wrong as usual. Yes, lets change the clan reward tanks while in the game there are actually game-breaking tanks. Yes, let's leave the obj.268 4 as it is, as a tank that just rolls around being frontally impenetrable against everything is definitely a great way to keep people who don't own the tank keep playing the game. Oh, and let me be clear: I'm not talking about it as an OP tank. No, there are many of those in the game (Maus, Type 5, Super Conq, obj.907...), but the obj.268 4 is actually game breaking and the fact that you people don't realise it baffles me...

I, for one, believe I will spend quite a long time at lower tiers where I won't see such an abomination dominating the battle every time I play, until that monster won't be nerfed to the ground. This said, seen how incompetent you are at balancing the game you have created and at using the feedback of statistics and the players' opinions, I guess that before this happens a loooooong time will pass and who knows how many more players you will lose... I, too, may be among them if I see no changes in the near future. Quite frankly, I am absolutely bored of not being able to have a fun game at high tiers because if I find myself an obj.268 4 in front I can't even pen it with gold rounds... 

 

P.s.: and don't you start saying that the obj.268 4 has a weakspot on top of the tank, cause that weakspot is basically as thick as the E100's turret front plate...



paolotk #13 Posted 20 April 2018 - 10:31 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 33453 battles
  • 487
  • [ORKI] ORKI
  • Member since:
    07-26-2012

View PostITALUX, on 19 April 2018 - 11:01 PM, said:

So, WG, I see that your balancing department has its priorities wrong as usual. Yes, lets change the clan reward tanks while in the game there are actually game-breaking tanks. Yes, let's leave the obj.268 4 as it is, as a tank that just rolls around being frontally impenetrable against everything is definitely a great way to keep people who don't own the tank keep playing the game. Oh, and let me be clear: I'm not talking about it as an OP tank. No, there are many of those in the game (Maus, Type 5, Super Conq, obj.907...), but the obj.268 4 is actually game breaking and the fact that you people don't realise it baffles me...

I, for one, believe I will spend quite a long time at lower tiers where I won't see such an abomination dominating the battle every time I play, until that monster won't be nerfed to the ground. This said, seen how incompetent you are at balancing the game you have created and at using the feedback of statistics and the players' opinions, I guess that before this happens a loooooong time will pass and who knows how many more players you will lose... I, too, may be among them if I see no changes in the near future. Quite frankly, I am absolutely bored of not being able to have a fun game at high tiers because if I find myself an obj.268 4 in front I can't even pen it with gold rounds... 

 

P.s.: and don't you start saying that the obj.268 4 has a weakspot on top of the tank, cause that weakspot is basically as thick as the E100's turret front plate...

 

I think that the new soviets upcoming will be OP too. 

GentlemanDZ1991 #14 Posted 23 April 2018 - 09:03 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 35877 battles
  • 34
  • [GG-EZ] GG-EZ
  • Member since:
    05-03-2013
I hope those changes to the VK are not final. 

paolotk #15 Posted 26 April 2018 - 05:34 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 33453 battles
  • 487
  • [ORKI] ORKI
  • Member since:
    07-26-2012
No comments about VK from the staff?

Hiisi #16 Posted 27 April 2018 - 08:20 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 14742 battles
  • 261
  • [-PJ-] -PJ-
  • Member since:
    03-21-2011
121b, 420 viewrange??? It has good gamo values and you want to give it 420 viewrange. No just no. Scouts are useless already, patton has good viewrange but bad gamo. Its balanced, this aint. Just buff 121b in some other are. With these stats it renders scouts obsolete.

ivan224 #17 Posted 11 May 2018 - 08:57 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 20355 battles
  • 3
  • Member since:
    11-09-2012
How can WG be so blind... Obj 268 version 4 is making players quit WOT and they do nothing about it? Im playing for 5 years now and im thinking of quiting until that tanks gets fixed. I dont want to play in my tier 8, 9 and 10 tanks beacuse of that OP tank. Pls WG fix it, at least make him slower and nerf the armor so that we can at least pen him with gold ammo! I mean if 303mm od pen is not enough to pen his lower plate than there is no point in playing this game.

JeSuisParisien #18 Posted 12 May 2018 - 06:19 PM

    Private

  • Beta Tester
  • 62120 battles
  • 7
  • [FUSAG] FUSAG
  • Member since:
    01-07-2011
hehe... at last I just saw battle, here you will laugh: 268 4 with 3k damage and blocked by armor 12k :P so its pew pew :D

Edited by JeSuisParisien, 12 May 2018 - 06:19 PM.


ClintCash #19 Posted 14 May 2018 - 05:02 AM

    Private

  • Beta Tester
  • 11796 battles
  • 1
  • [FCA] FCA
  • Member since:
    07-13-2010
The kv-5 need a change...pls. it is not possilble to play against tier Ix or higher, even if i use goldammunition. in fact the most tier VIII tanks have a much higner penetration then the kv-5 with faster moving. the armour has to big wekspots...r2d2 and more...so please give this tank from the first hours of this game a new chance!





Also tagged with public, test, pt

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users