Jump to content


277 nerfed ,not interesting any more for CW.


  • Please log in to reply
119 replies to this topic

AXIS_OF_RESISTANCE #1 Posted 08 June 2018 - 05:09 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 750 battles
  • 198
  • Member since:
    12-21-2017

I was hoping this would be my tank to start playing CW ,5A still Superior ,feelsbadman :(

https://worldoftanks.eu/en/news/general-news/three-soviet-tanks-get-required-adjustent/

 

Before:


Edited by AXIS_OF_RESISTANCE, 08 June 2018 - 05:38 PM.


Sfinski #2 Posted 08 June 2018 - 05:11 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 32283 battles
  • 2,754
  • [-PJ-] -PJ-
  • Member since:
    09-26-2013
Is it more mobile now? If not 5A still is far better.

StuffKnight #3 Posted 08 June 2018 - 05:11 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 32052 battles
  • 918
  • [_RBP_] _RBP_
  • Member since:
    06-09-2011
i am truley sorry for your lots

Kirusawa #4 Posted 08 June 2018 - 05:12 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 6171 battles
  • 46
  • [CATI] CATI
  • Member since:
    03-06-2016
Its still a joke what they doing, should be equal of other tier x vehicles instead of put them into a shame. Look at the other nations, example germans when do they gonna get some update, cuz they actually need it. Not place a new bugjet's in a game.

AXIS_OF_RESISTANCE #5 Posted 08 June 2018 - 05:15 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 750 battles
  • 198
  • Member since:
    12-21-2017

View PostSfinski, on 08 June 2018 - 05:11 PM, said:

Is it more mobile now? If not 5A still is far better.

 

I have seen daki on stream doing a race 5A vs 277 , 277 faster but by a small margin .



Balc0ra #6 Posted 08 June 2018 - 05:16 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 67404 battles
  • 17,135
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View PostSfinski, on 08 June 2018 - 05:11 PM, said:

Is it more mobile now? If not 5A still is far better.

 

I would have thought it would have been better with the extra gun depression as is etc. But due to the gold ammo with that shells speed and pen combo. It hoped they would slap it a bit more tbh.  

XxKuzkina_MatxX #7 Posted 08 June 2018 - 05:21 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 51344 battles
  • 2,118
  • Member since:
    04-02-2016

View PostBalc0ra, on 08 June 2018 - 06:16 PM, said:

 

I would have thought it would have been better with the extra gun depression as is etc. But due to the gold ammo with that shells speed and pen combo. It hoped they would slap it a bit more tbh.  

 

You prefer 350 mm APCR over 340 mm HEAT?

Shaade_Silentpaw #8 Posted 08 June 2018 - 05:27 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 23428 battles
  • 450
  • Member since:
    10-12-2015
Good.

Balc0ra #9 Posted 08 June 2018 - 05:29 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 67404 battles
  • 17,135
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View PostXxKuzkina_MatxX, on 08 June 2018 - 05:21 PM, said:

 

You prefer 350 mm APCR over 340 mm HEAT?

 

No.. it was the 350 pen with APCR combo I did not like or understood. I get the HEAT pen. But with that shell speed as I said. It makes for a bad combo and should be 320 at the most. As HEAT is not known for its blistering speed for anyone to think I meant that. And since it has the gold ammo it has. I hoped it would be nerfed more due to it overall vs what they did. 

Igor_BL #10 Posted 08 June 2018 - 05:33 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 41215 battles
  • 1,471
  • [GX] GX
  • Member since:
    06-10-2015

View PostXxKuzkina_MatxX, on 08 June 2018 - 05:21 PM, said:

 

You prefer 350 mm APCR over 340 mm HEAT?

 

i would. any day

Dr_Oolen #11 Posted 08 June 2018 - 05:34 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 22345 battles
  • 1,639
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    03-13-2012

im quite sure the stats in that news are wrong and the tank wasnt nerfed since it got buffed in test 2

 

edit: then again, its possible, in previous patch rasha news had wrong info in it (stats of the buffed cw reward tonks) while eu (!) news had the actual stats the tanks had in live version

 

edit2: also, if it will indeed have those stats then im gonna be happy - one less op rashn heavy at t10, instead a tank that will actually be average, after probably like 2 years of every single new t10 being more op than all other t10s


Edited by Dr_Oolen, 08 June 2018 - 05:46 PM.


StinkyStonky #12 Posted 08 June 2018 - 05:36 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 29494 battles
  • 2,247
  • [-SJA-] -SJA-
  • Member since:
    11-02-2015

Your link is broken.  This one works.

 

https://worldoftanks.eu/en/news/general-news/three-soviet-tanks-get-required-adjustent/

 

Not sure what an "adjustent" is.  It sounds painful.



XxKuzkina_MatxX #13 Posted 08 June 2018 - 05:37 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 51344 battles
  • 2,118
  • Member since:
    04-02-2016

View PostIgor_BL, on 08 June 2018 - 06:33 PM, said:

 

i would. any day

 

Why is that? APCR on a heavy is not a good idea.

AXIS_OF_RESISTANCE #14 Posted 08 June 2018 - 05:39 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 750 battles
  • 198
  • Member since:
    12-21-2017

View PostStinkyStonky, on 08 June 2018 - 05:36 PM, said:

Your link is broken.  This one works.

 

https://worldoftanks.eu/en/news/general-news/three-soviet-tanks-get-required-adjustent/

 

Not sure what an "adjustent" is.  It sounds painful.

 

 oh yes sorry i fixed it now .

leggasiini #15 Posted 08 June 2018 - 05:44 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 15215 battles
  • 6,239
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012

View PostDr_Oolen, on 08 June 2018 - 06:34 PM, said:

im quite sure the stats in that news are wrong and the tank wasnt nerfed since it got buffed in test 2

 

They buffed but only the fuel tanks. Reading the Russian forums, it was stated that the tank will be nerfed for the patch release, not for test server or something.

 

I kinda agree it was a bit too powerful, but I'm unsure about accuracy nerf. Oh well.


Edited by leggasiini, 08 June 2018 - 05:49 PM.


LordMuffin #16 Posted 08 June 2018 - 05:48 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 48529 battles
  • 11,268
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    06-21-2011

View PostXxKuzkina_MatxX, on 08 June 2018 - 05:21 PM, said:

 

You prefer 350 mm APCR over 340 mm HEAT?

All day, every day.



Balc0ra #17 Posted 08 June 2018 - 05:49 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 67404 battles
  • 17,135
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View PostXxKuzkina_MatxX, on 08 June 2018 - 05:37 PM, said:

 

Why is that? APCR on a heavy is not a good idea.

 

Due to how the shell mechanics is vs HEAT. And the shell speeds etc. Not really. But if the pen is low enough to balance the other benefits over HEAT. Then sure. But in this case, it's not. 

 

View PostLordMuffin, on 08 June 2018 - 05:48 PM, said:

All day, every day.

 

Using it sure. But on the receiving end when facing a HT is what I suspect he meant. 


Edited by Balc0ra, 08 June 2018 - 05:50 PM.


Dr_Oolen #18 Posted 08 June 2018 - 05:51 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 22345 battles
  • 1,639
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    03-13-2012

View Postleggasiini, on 08 June 2018 - 05:44 PM, said:

 

They buffed but only the fuel tanks. Reading the Russian forums, it was stated that the tank will be nerfed for the patch release, not for test server or something.

 

I kinda agree it was a bit too powerful, but I'm unsure about accuracy nerf. Oh well.

 

Those nerfed stats do seem a bit too bad, but im not even mad. An average t10 heavy tank? I though id never see that again. And im pretty sure if wot players stopped being hypocrites theyd quickly agree that we really dont need a powercreeped 5a.

 

And at the end of the day 277 is still faster with marginally better gun handling, much better AP pen and much better gold shell (if they didnt nerf the velocity) and better turret. In return its less maneuvrable and has noticeably worse dpm. Id call that quite fair tbh.


Edited by Dr_Oolen, 08 June 2018 - 05:57 PM.


LordMuffin #19 Posted 08 June 2018 - 05:52 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 48529 battles
  • 11,268
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    06-21-2011

View PostXxKuzkina_MatxX, on 08 June 2018 - 05:37 PM, said:

 

Why is that? APCR on a heavy is not a good idea.

APCR has better shell velocity, which makes it a better round for shooting moving targets.

APCR have a flatter trajectory aswell, which is also better.

APCR have normalisation, so the effective pen of the APCR is better then that off the heat round.

APCR can also more easily and safely track and damage enemy tanks, HEAT have troubles with this and other spaced armour.

 

The advantage HEAT have are.

1: Dont auto-bounce on STRVs etc until 85+ degrees.

2: Dont lose pen over distance, though this is a marginal difference in this case due to the normalisation of the APCR which would probably make up for that difference.



unrealname #20 Posted 08 June 2018 - 05:55 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 24034 battles
  • 1,153
  • Member since:
    10-31-2013
well i guess that im converting that xp from T-10 to free xp, that dpm nerf is quite harsh for heavium, its now barely better than T-10, so whats the point, if you can play t-10 a whole tier lower, cause armor on 277 is not even close to is7 levels of armor, turret is quite easy penable, if you know its weakspots, so i guess fek it, i will just use that 5 skill crew on some other rasha tank then. But i guess its better for the game to not have it as it was on the test server.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users