Jump to content


The planned buffs on prem tanks

premium KV-5 KV5 IS6 IS-6 matchmaker mm preferential update

  • Please log in to reply
53 replies to this topic

Poll: The new planned buffs to prem tanks (144 members have cast votes)

You have to complete 250 battles in order to participate this poll.

Is it enough to buff the pen to 182mm for preferential-matchmaking-heavytanks?

  1. Yes (35 votes [24.31%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 24.31%

  2. No (49 votes [34.03%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 34.03%

  3. At least 200mm pen (60 votes [41.67%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 41.67%

Vote Hide poll

Search_Warrant #21 Posted 27 July 2018 - 03:21 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 27780 battles
  • 6,435
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    02-08-2011
T-34-3 needed the pen buff but the gundep? not really. id take aimtime/accuracy buff over gundep any day.

nc30_guy #22 Posted 27 July 2018 - 04:40 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 24534 battles
  • 315
  • Member since:
    12-23-2011

I also feel they have made their own problem with the creep which should not happen they have super testers supposedly to stop that.

Every vehicle in the game should be looked at and adjusted if necessary this needs to happen or the game will just get more and more out of whack.

There is also a small amount of sacrifice made when you get a prem vehicle knowing it makes more creds/xp and crew training that was always the angle they where sold on.


Edited by nc30_guy, 27 July 2018 - 04:43 PM.


luxgil #23 Posted 28 July 2018 - 12:43 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 26979 battles
  • 37
  • [-TB-] -TB-
  • Member since:
    08-18-2013

View PostCobra6, on 27 July 2018 - 12:14 PM, said:

The buff to pen is only enough if seeing tier 9 becomes a rarity in these tanks like it used to be in the old matchmaker.

 

If you fight tier 9 more then 10% of the time the pen should be buffed further.

 

In my IS-6 I almost never fought in tier 9 battle, heck most of the time I wasn't even fighting in tier 8 ones either. Rather I was top tier most of the time fighting against tier 6 and 7.

 

Edit: Simeon85 beat me to it it seems, exactly what mean.

 

Cobra 6

 

View PostDr_Oolen, on 27 July 2018 - 11:16 AM, said:

Depends on what the MM changes actually turn out to be. If, say, only 30% of games will be full t8s and t9 games and the remaining 70% of games are against mostly t7s/t6s, then sure, those changes are good (well, in that case one could argue the buffs wouldnt even be needed), but if the MM doesnt even get past 50% of games being with t6s/t7s present, then those buffs are completely pointless. 

 

These days, even if you are talking only about fighting t8 tanks, anything less than 200 pen is really bad on anything that isnt a light tank or something completely op in other characteristics. And less than 220 is bad against t8 heavies. So yeah... depending on the MM, they might have to buff the pens not to 182, but to at least 210 on the heavies and 192 on the meds.

 

View PostSimeon85, on 27 July 2018 - 08:57 AM, said:

A lot of tier 8s can't pen a type 4 frontally, even with premium ammo, that is the Type 4 being problematic.

 

Even if you buff it to 200mm (which is more than the T32 btw that sees tier 10) it won't change much because you still can't pen a Type 4 and you still won't pen a defender or whatever. If you want reliable pen on tier 8 you need 225 at least if not about 230, they are not going to give limited tanks that sort of pen. 

 

People need to remember that the more crucial thing about this change is not the minor buffs the pref-MM tanks are getting, it's the MM change, these tanks used to be fine not because they could easily pen other tier 8s (they couldn't, even an IS3 hull is tough for an IS6) but that these tanks mainly fought tier 6 and 7 tanks most of the time.

 

That is the key, these buffs are just little token quality of life buffs, what is important is that they fix tier 8 MM so that these tanks get into much less tier 9 games and consistently see tier 6 and 7. 

 

View Postfalcon_96, on 26 July 2018 - 07:13 PM, said:

For the T-34-3 182mm might be workable, but the 122mm heavies need at least 200mm to perform their combat role adequately, penetration will not make them OP vs lower tiers, since they already can pen them even with 175mm, but against higher tiers pen is essential. Those tanks are designed to be frontline close range brawlers, a role they cannot fulfill due to the poor pen and bad MM.

 

Good to see, that other players think like me and good points there too.

 

I have not thought about the fact that the prem tanks used to fight mostly tier 6's and 7's and rarely tier 8's and 9's, which by then would be "okay" with the 182mm pen.

But if it turns out to be like 50/50'ish, then the pen clearly needs to be above the 200mm pen.

So yeah, is it up to the secret changes that they will make to the mm.

Is the mm for the preferential mm-tanks also subject to be reworked / updated or just the mm for the normal tanks ?



ValkyrionX #24 Posted 28 July 2018 - 08:59 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 48176 battles
  • 1,438
  • [O-L-T] O-L-T
  • Member since:
    02-07-2015

all 122 mm guns of premium tanks with pref MM need a basic penetration of +200mm and for "gold" rounds about 250mm to be competitive against tier 9 and some retarded tier 8 like Defender , AMX Libertè and Chrysler GF with very strong frontal armor...a buff of about +7 or +8 mm in terms of penetration (like on the is6) to all 122 MM gun is a joke..

 

And ofc a reduction of the dispersion for tanks like is6 , wz111 and T34-3 is necessary



Wintermute_1 #25 Posted 28 July 2018 - 10:42 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 45974 battles
  • 1,756
  • Member since:
    11-25-2013
Someone is going to have to explain to me why WG think its necessary for Mediums to have over 200 pen when they are generally able to hit the enemy flanks and weakspots but pref mm heavies need only 182 pen while facing frontal heavy armour most of the time with inaccurate guns incapable of hitting anything smaller than the lower plate.

Edited by Wintermute_1, 28 July 2018 - 10:43 AM.


hasnainrakha57 #26 Posted 28 July 2018 - 12:11 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 15030 battles
  • 714
  • [WFTTE] WFTTE
  • Member since:
    08-01-2013
Yes they need at least 200mm of penetration!!

vasilinhorulezz #27 Posted 28 July 2018 - 12:29 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 22813 battles
  • 1,109
  • Member since:
    09-26-2014

It is very tricky to buff PMM tanks without removing the PMM,

and not make them equally strong or even stronger than normal MM

tanks, but personally, on some cases I find the buffs not enough.

Although a mobile tank could work with 182 pen, like the t 34-3,

the KV 5 and maybe the is 6, will still not work with that pen.

I think, the pen should be around 200mm, on those, but

it all comes to my first point, not making them better than tanks

with normal MM.



hasnainrakha57 #28 Posted 28 July 2018 - 04:37 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 15030 battles
  • 714
  • [WFTTE] WFTTE
  • Member since:
    08-01-2013

View Postvasilinhorulezz, on 28 July 2018 - 11:29 AM, said:

It is very tricky to buff PMM tanks without removing the PMM,

and not make them equally strong or even stronger than normal MM

tanks, but personally, on some cases I find the buffs not enough.

Although a mobile tank could work with 182 pen, like the t 34-3,

the KV 5 and maybe the is 6, will still not work with that pen.

I think, the pen should be around 200mm, on those, but

it all comes to my first point, not making them better than tanks

with normal MM.

Ya ya buff Soviets nerf others? Where's 112 mate?



vasilinhorulezz #29 Posted 28 July 2018 - 10:51 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 22813 battles
  • 1,109
  • Member since:
    09-26-2014

View Posthasnainrakha57, on 28 July 2018 - 04:37 PM, said:

Ya ya buff Soviets nerf others? Where's 112 mate?

 

What was that supposed to mean?

*edited* am I talking about nerfs?

I just used two tanks as an example.

What's your frickin problem?


Edited by NickMustaine, 30 July 2018 - 01:58 PM.
Inappropriate remarks


Panzergame2018 #30 Posted 28 July 2018 - 11:15 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 79583 battles
  • 141
  • Member since:
    07-03-2011

 i bought those tanks because of the PMM .And now all the problems with MM is because of them LOL .WG must think we all are *edited*

If they want them not having PMM we need another advantage .And a little buf will not do it.

Give me back my entire money or gold.And not that RUSSIAN REFUND OPTION.

Finally WG get youre MM in order it is not the PMM that's not OK it is youre programming.


Edited by NickMustaine, 30 July 2018 - 01:59 PM.
Inappropriate remarks


vasilinhorulezz #31 Posted 28 July 2018 - 11:26 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 22813 battles
  • 1,109
  • Member since:
    09-26-2014

View PostPanzergame2018, on 28 July 2018 - 11:15 PM, said:

 i bought those tanks because of the PMM .And now all the problems with MM is because of them LOL .WG must think we all are*edited*

If they want them not having PMM we need another advantage .And a little buf will not do it.

Give me back my entire money or gold.And not that RUSSIAN REFUND OPTION.

Finally WG get youre MM in order it is not the PMM that's not OK it is youre programming.

 

They're not removing PMM from these tanks,

did you read the announcement?

https://worldoftanks...chmaking-fixes/



axell92108 #32 Posted 29 July 2018 - 12:24 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 3075 battles
  • 127
  • Member since:
    01-30-2013
Useless buffs. 112/WZ-111/IS-6 all need at least 200 pen and better accuracy to be even remotely useful in current meta. 0.46 base accuracy is a joke when you have to fight laser mediums like faggeto and strong tier 8 heavies that have 0.32-0.37 accuracy.

Rock_n_Rollie #33 Posted 29 July 2018 - 08:23 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 13604 battles
  • 685
  • Member since:
    10-11-2017

How about -besides the mild buffs-  just doubling the Credits/XP/Crew_XP  making potential for Premium tanks as compensation for all the power-creep and being bottom-tier agony have to go through?

 

I would not mind being cannon-fodder so much if it means i get to a 5-point crew faster... :)

 

But what use is the 0.50 extra in your Premium Tier-VIII (7.5) when you are killed and bottom tier 80% of the time? 

It might well be possible that using a "regular" T-8 or T-9 (with better armor/guns) nets you more credits/XP because you make it to the end and maybe even get more wins.  Someone should run the numbers.

 

 



shane73tank #34 Posted 29 July 2018 - 08:37 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 29913 battles
  • 2,066
  • [BC-X] BC-X
  • Member since:
    03-01-2014

View PostRock_n_Rollie, on 29 July 2018 - 07:23 AM, said:

How about -besides the mild buffs-  just doubling the Credits/XP/Crew_XP  making potential for Premium tanks as compensation for all the power-creep and being bottom-tier agony have to go through?

 

I would not mind being cannon-fodder so much if it means i get to a 5-point crew faster... :)

 

But what use is the 0.50 extra in your Premium Tier-VIII (7.5) when you are killed and bottom tier 80% of the time? 

It might well be possible that using a "regular" T-8 or T-9 (with better armor/guns) nets you more credits/XP because you make it to the end and maybe even get more wins.  Someone should run the numbers.

 

 

Interesting alternative, I wonder would it work 



luxgil #35 Posted 29 July 2018 - 07:39 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 26979 battles
  • 37
  • [-TB-] -TB-
  • Member since:
    08-18-2013

View PostRock_n_Rollie, on 29 July 2018 - 07:23 AM, said:

How about -besides the mild buffs-  just doubling the Credits/XP/Crew_XP  making potential for Premium tanks as compensation for all the power-creep and being bottom-tier agony have to go through?

 

I would not mind being cannon-fodder so much if it means i get to a 5-point crew faster... :)

 

But what use is the 0.50 extra in your Premium Tier-VIII (7.5) when you are killed and bottom tier 80% of the time? 

It might well be possible that using a "regular" T-8 or T-9 (with better armor/guns) nets you more credits/XP because you make it to the end and maybe even get more wins.  Someone should run the numbers.

 

 

 

I personally would not like to be cannon fodder, not even for getting a better crew faster or getting more XP.

Since the IS-6 and KV-5 are not competitive anymore, you don't see them very often and those who still play it,

are probably the ones who would be fine with your crew and XP suggestion.

 

Besides that, every tank should be competitive for it's own tier and one tier above. There should be no

cannon fodder tank in the first place, which is one of the reason that some of the pref-mm-tanks are

mostly gathering dust in the garage.



iuytr #36 Posted 29 July 2018 - 08:13 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 10357 battles
  • 590
  • Member since:
    06-04-2015
I'd like the Pz T15  to get a better gun. It's a tier 3 prem with a tier 2 gun :facepalm:

Edited by iuytr, 29 July 2018 - 08:14 PM.


Mike_Mckay #37 Posted 30 July 2018 - 02:49 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 21838 battles
  • 1,557
  • [-AWF-] -AWF-
  • Member since:
    09-02-2015

I don't think 200mm is that high nowadays so its pretty fair

For none PMM tanks they should have similar stats to fully upgraded TT tanks at the same tier, many of which are well over 200mm pen on their standard ammo.

The idea that premium tanks should be crippled just because they are premium tanks is total BS to begin with, they shouldn't be MORE powerful than a fully upgraded TT tank, but they should be equally competitive and equally able to penetrate with their shots as without that a tank is pretty worthless apart from light tanks

So I think 200mm as a minimum for not just PMM tanks, but all tanks at tier 8 is quite reasonable, and tanks that face tier 10 should really be weighting in around 230mm pen now as a minimum



NoobySkooby #38 Posted 30 July 2018 - 07:48 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 15479 battles
  • 4,068
  • Member since:
    09-23-2011

View Postluxgil, on 26 July 2018 - 07:27 PM, said:

Hello everyone :)

 

I wanted to know what everybody thinks about their new plans to buff the preferential matchmaking tanks.

For example as asked in the poll, is 182mm enough to be competitive in tier 8 and 9 ?

What does everyone think about the armor buffs ?

 

Me personally, I can't imagine 182mm pen being enough. I always think about a type 4 heavy for example.

 

No it is nowhere near enough for the IS6, in fact the IS6 needs the Defenders gun, also needs an armour buff as does the IS3, just Defenderise both the IS3 and the IS6

mikedee #39 Posted 30 July 2018 - 10:57 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 22280 battles
  • 86
  • Member since:
    07-16-2010

View PostNoobySkooby, on 30 July 2018 - 06:48 AM, said:

 

No it is nowhere near enough for the IS6, in fact the IS6 needs the Defenders gun, also needs an armour buff as does the IS3, just Defenderise both the IS3 and the IS6

 

How about just an "I win" button? Or rather, "я выигрываю"

arthurwellsley #40 Posted 30 July 2018 - 11:05 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 52528 battles
  • 3,324
  • [-B-C-] -B-C-
  • Member since:
    05-11-2011

Type 59 worked just fine with 181 penetration.

 

But looking at the KV-5 WG seem to be suggesting buffing to penetration from 168 to 182. No comment on the premium round which is presently 219. WG are also suggesting buffing the armour and aim time; https://worldoftanks...chmaking-fixes/

 

Previously I suggested a penetration buff of 197/244/54

with detailed reasons here http://forum.worldof...1#entry15802921

in the same thread xx984's suggestion of "All it really needed was a standard pen buff up to 190-200 area, and a prem buff to 240 area, and keep the pref MM".

 

200 is too high for the standard round. It should be somewhere in the 190-199 range. I chose 197 based on the other guns mentioned in the detailed reasons.


Edited by arthurwellsley, 30 July 2018 - 11:09 AM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users