Jump to content


430v2 getting a huge nerf to its armor


  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic

_EXODUZ_ #1 Posted 04 May 2018 - 04:04 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35102 battles
  • 1,938
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    11-05-2014

...and a buff to its gun.

 

On mobile, so... 


- hp с 1700 на 1600;
- hull с 120 на 80;
- sides с 80 на 60;
- turret с 248 на 180;
- sides с 185 на 120;
- vr с 390 на 400.

- deleted (100 мм Д-54); 
- added (100 мм Д-54У):
• dpm с 2502.9 на 2669.7;
• reload с 7.671 на 7.192; 
• accuracy с 0.364 на 0.336; 
• aim time с 2.78 на 1.92; 
+ general gun handling significantly improved 



brumbarr #2 Posted 04 May 2018 - 04:06 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 38626 battles
  • 6,326
  • Member since:
    07-30-2012
Makes sense, the line would be pretty weird  with the current 430 V2 between the 416 and K91. This makes more sense and fits the line.

Search_Warrant #3 Posted 04 May 2018 - 04:07 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 27235 battles
  • 6,314
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    02-08-2011

View Post_EXODUZ_, on 04 May 2018 - 03:04 PM, said:

...and a buff to its gun.

 

On mobile, so... 


- hp с 1700 на 1600;
- hull с 120 на 80;
- sides с 80 на 60;
- turret с 248 на 180;
- sides с 185 на 120;
- vr с 390 на 400.

- deleted (100 мм Д-54); 
- added (100 мм Д-54У):
• dpm с 2502.9 на 2669.7;
• reload с 7.671 на 7.192; 
• accuracy с 0.364 на 0.336; 
• aim time с 2.78 на 1.92; 
+ general gun handling significantly improved 

 

erm..sauce? or numbers pulled out of your special place? :trollface:

K_A #4 Posted 04 May 2018 - 04:08 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 13643 battles
  • 4,665
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    04-18-2013
Any news about a possible buff to the 268 4?
 

View PostSearch_Warrant, on 04 May 2018 - 03:07 PM, said:

 

erm..sauce? or numbers pulled out of your special place? :trollface:

 

Judging by the cyrillics it's probably one of the Russian blogs, they always dig up the new stuff first.
 

Igor_BL #5 Posted 04 May 2018 - 04:10 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 40142 battles
  • 1,396
  • [GX] GX
  • Member since:
    06-10-2015

i have played 416 and 430 II completely different.

 

430 II is full brawl tank. and i liked it a lot. but this is logical step after K91.

i expect K91 buffs before hiting live servers.

 

p.s. is 416 100mm geting changed also?



Strappster #6 Posted 04 May 2018 - 04:14 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 24805 battles
  • 9,558
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    10-20-2015

Anyone else coping with the disappointment of realising it's not a typo for 430U in the title?

 



_EXODUZ_ #7 Posted 04 May 2018 - 04:15 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35102 battles
  • 1,938
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    11-05-2014

View PostIgor_BL, on 04 May 2018 - 04:10 PM, said:

i have played 416 and 430 II completely different.

 

430 II is full brawl tank. and i liked it a lot. but this is logical step after K91.

i expect K91 buffs before hiting live servers.

 

p.s. is 416 100mm geting changed also?

 

Nope 



Search_Warrant #8 Posted 04 May 2018 - 04:16 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 27235 battles
  • 6,314
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    02-08-2011

View PostStrappster, on 04 May 2018 - 03:14 PM, said:

Anyone else coping with the disappointment of realising it's not a typo for 430U in the title?

 

 

Indeed.... i actually missread it the first time and was happy..then i got sad..

Strappster #9 Posted 04 May 2018 - 04:18 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 24805 battles
  • 9,558
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    10-20-2015

View PostSearch_Warrant, on 04 May 2018 - 03:16 PM, said:

Indeed.... i actually missread it the first time and was happy..then i got sad..

 

I was getting progressively more excited until I reached the gun stats and realised the 430U doesn't have a 100mm gun. :(

All_up_in_ur_grille #10 Posted 04 May 2018 - 04:24 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 33193 battles
  • 108
  • [SCRUB] SCRUB
  • Member since:
    08-08-2016

430v2 has sat in my garage without crew & unplayed since getting the 430U

 

Only kept it to see what the new tier X in the line would be like. Not only does the new tier X look garbage, but these changes if accurate will take any fun out of the tank.

 

Looks like I'll have an extra garage slot soon



DaddysLittlePrincess #11 Posted 04 May 2018 - 05:04 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 25209 battles
  • 238
  • Member since:
    08-14-2012

View PostIgor_BL, on 04 May 2018 - 03:10 PM, said:

430 II is full brawl tank. and i liked it a lot. but this is logical step after K91.

Another logical step could also be making K91 brawling tank, but it would make the tank fun and we all know how much WG hates fun. Instead we get another line of wonky bush wanking TDs with no real impact on the battlefield. 



Strappster #12 Posted 04 May 2018 - 05:12 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 24805 battles
  • 9,558
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    10-20-2015

View PostDaddysLittlePrincess, on 04 May 2018 - 04:04 PM, said:

... another line of wonky bush wanking TDs with no real impact on the battlefield. 

 

:D

 

I'm having "wonky bush wanking TDs" and will apply it to every narty* complaint thread. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

* not arty



Jethro_Grey #13 Posted 04 May 2018 - 05:21 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 4302 battles
  • 534
  • [KAIN] KAIN
  • Member since:
    08-01-2015

They leave the 430U as it is?

Good, so it's not waste of time grinding the line to the 430U.



Balc0ra #14 Posted 04 May 2018 - 05:22 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 66525 battles
  • 16,562
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

I hate that tank atm, as it's to sluggish, and not great for brawling unless the map is 100% flat, thus brawling up hill is a no go like you have to on most maps. And the gun is "meh" in a support role as the pen is not great for it's tier. More or less the complete opposite of the Obj 416 that was fantastic for it's tier, as it was mobile, had good camo and a great gun with a fast aim time and good DPM. If this gets the same deal, and a camo value boost. It might turn out better to my liking.

 

Then again going by how WG want's the line to be with the current K91 stats and the 416. This would be the "odd" one out still unless they buffed the gun. And with that buffed support gun vs the armor it has now. It would not work.



ExistanceUK #15 Posted 04 May 2018 - 06:15 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 15185 battles
  • 176
  • [SKIL1] SKIL1
  • Member since:
    08-29-2015
I really didn't get on with the 416, it's not a med it's a TD. I can see the potential of the tank but the lack of gun depression and ultra low profile together killed it for me.

The 430vII on the other hand I really liked and did quite well in it, ok some games the lack of gun depression and non-fully rotating turret are issues but more often than not the tank is a beast if you side scrape correctly.

I really don't like what they are doing with the new tier 10, I'd much rather have a tier 10 430vII than the tier 10 416 that we are currently getting. So yeah I can see the changes to the tier 9 make sense with what they are currently doing but I just don't think it's the right direction at all.



Draqutsc #16 Posted 04 May 2018 - 09:38 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 18821 battles
  • 89
  • Member since:
    11-02-2012

So they are turning it into garbage, the tier 10 also looks like complete garbage, since its huge it will have garbage camo and rest of the tank is rather awful.

Also that gun handling buff is something you will not notice with a good crew, so its just a nerf.

 

This tank line has so many drawbacks, i mean they can't even rotate their turret fully and the heavy line can do that for some reason. No gun depression and engine fires aloof. 

Now it will lose its armor, some health and gain some rather worthless gun handling, since you will be bush camping in it anyway.



_b_ #17 Posted 04 May 2018 - 09:41 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 55227 battles
  • 4,033
  • Member since:
    04-06-2011
not sure why you care about that ... playing arty and all u *edited*:P     (got smacked on a map earlier by u)

Edited by NickMustaine, 05 May 2018 - 10:46 AM.
Inappropriate language


Thrael7 #18 Posted 04 May 2018 - 11:57 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 23382 battles
  • 2,000
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    11-17-2012

People use the word "fun" when trying to describe the 430ver.2. Sure, the difference in armor is immense when compared to 416 but that's what makes it as it is.

Is it another case of "FreeXP while you can before it turns to *edited*"?


Edited by NickMustaine, 05 May 2018 - 10:48 AM.
Inappropriate language


Simeon85 #19 Posted 05 May 2018 - 09:47 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 1097 battles
  • 3,277
  • Member since:
    04-19-2013

https://thearmoredpatrol.com/2018/05/04/supertest-object-430-version-ii-changes/

 

Block Quote

 

ussr.png <a href='https://i2.wp.com/wot-news.com/uploads/icons/small/ussr-r104_object_430_ii.png' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'>https://i2.wp.com/wo...ject_430_ii.png</a> Object 430 Version II. Proposed parameters:

Tier: MT-9, USSR, standard
HP: 1 700  1 600
Max speed/Min speed : 55 / -20 km / h
Hull turning speed: 50,06 °/s   48 °/s
Turret turning speed: 41,72 °/s   40 °/s
View range: 390 m    400 m

Hull armor: 120 / 80 / 40   80 / 60 / 40 mm
Turret armor: 248 / 185 / 63   180 / 120 / 50 mm

Gun: 100 mm D-54 100 mm D-54U
Alpha Damage: 320 / 320 / 420
Rate of fire: 7,821   8,343 rounds/minute
Damage per minute: 2 502,9   2 669,7
Penetration: 219 / 330 / 50 mm
Reload time: 7,67 s   7,192 s
Accuracy at 100 m: 0,36   0,336
Aiming time: 2,78 s   1,92 s
Depression/Elevation: -4 / +16

 

Frankly I think this ruins the tank, the mobility and gun buffs are not enough to compensate that the armour is basically useless, this is pretty much the armour layout of the T-100 lt and realistically that tank barely bounces anything.

 

Plus this is an awkward rear turreted tank with bad gun depression, it survives by being able to sidescrape positions, now it will be a lot worse doing this.

 

It also still has rubbish penetration, the proposed tier 10 is getting 276mm of penetration, why not at least give this thing close to that? 

 

I can't see any reason to play this tank over a T-54, the T-54 has similar mobility, similar gun handling, same pen, no rear turret and now vastly better armour. 

 



ares354 #20 Posted 05 May 2018 - 10:17 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

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

View PostSimeon85, on 05 May 2018 - 09:47 AM, said:

https://thearmoredpatrol.com/2018/05/04/supertest-object-430-version-ii-changes/

 

 

Frankly I think this ruins the tank, the mobility and gun buffs are not enough to compensate that the armour is basically useless, this is pretty much the armour layout of the T-100 lt and realistically that tank barely bounces anything.

 

Plus this is an awkward rear turreted tank with bad gun depression, it survives by being able to sidescrape positions, now it will be a lot worse doing this.

 

It also still has rubbish penetration, the proposed tier 10 is getting 276mm of penetration, why not at least give this thing close to that? 

 

I can't see any reason to play this tank over a T-54, the T-54 has similar mobility, similar gun handling, same pen, no rear turret and now vastly better armour. 

 

 

T54 will have 300 of so less dpm on 219 pen gun, that it. 201 pen gun have more dpm. 

WG love to change tanks they dont need to, and dont care at all for very bad tanks...he need to fit line...




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users