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

Rati_Festa #41 Posted 30 July 2018 - 12:56 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 44383 battles
  • 1,634
  • Member since:
    02-10-2012

Why is the Pershing getting +200 pen but the heavies aren't? This doesn't really make sense.

 

The IS6 "improvements" are laughable +7mm pen on both ammo types... the aim increase is pointless if you can't pen what you are aiming at.

 

If its going to take 6 months to get the mm "fixed" then they should fire up Frontline permanently while we have to wait for the them to fix something they shouldn't have broke. Or here's a crazy idea why don't they even just revert back to the previous MM while they fix it.



Lord_Edge #42 Posted 30 July 2018 - 01:14 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 5989 battles
  • 834
  • Member since:
    11-26-2016

View Postiuytr, on 29 July 2018 - 08:13 PM, said:

I'd like the Pz T15  to get a better gun. It's a tier 3 prem with a tier 2 gun :facepalm:

 

Pfft, the Pz IIJ is a tier 3 prem with a tier 1 gun! If any tank needs buffing it's the IIJ! (Obviously this is sarcasm).

Speaking as a guy who has played quite a few games in and like his IS-6, I wouldn't mind if they just buffed the gold pen and called it a day.  I don't mind having to use Vstabs+GLD to lower my aim time and I expect to have to use gold against higher tier tanks.
 

Kirusawa #43 Posted 30 July 2018 - 04:19 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 6146 battles
  • 46
  • [CATI] CATI
  • Member since:
    03-06-2016
I think these vehicles must stay tier limited vehicles. Wg made is a stinky sht, now they try to fix the stink but its stays sht only we dont smell it, or at least they think. I mean jgtig 8.8 1400 hp? What you can do with it? Oh abd dont forget the spd buff to 14.  If there comes an fv you die before you could shot. Type 5 same. The rest of the vehicles you dont gonna penetrate cuz the 8.8 is useless there. Could be possible if it gets the gun from the borsig. But anyway nobody gonna buy a tier8 useless crapto face with tier x vehicles, cuz thats whats going on.

Bendysss #44 Posted 31 July 2018 - 03:17 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 36741 battles
  • 2
  • [TGM] TGM
  • Member since:
    11-28-2011

for those of you who said YES 182mm is enough you probably don't have any of these tanks in your garage.... I got WZ 111   superpershing and IS6... I struggle to penetrate even tier 9 right now  with 175mm penetration.... I don't think that 7mm extra wil change something....All of these premium tanks with preferential matchmaking needs significant BUFFS....

jut go and check the other premium vehicles... for example    STG- pen 212mm MEDIUM TANK

                                                                                                 PANZER 58 mutz - 212mm MEDIUM TANK

                                                                                                 LOVE - 234 mm 

                                                                                                 Panther8.8 - 203 mm MEDIUM TANK

                                                                                                T34 - 248 mm               

So do you really THINK that 182mm is enough ???? wake up guys



suvicze #45 Posted 31 July 2018 - 07:48 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 19297 battles
  • 662
  • [CS-TB] CS-TB
  • Member since:
    08-07-2010

View PostRati_Festa, on 30 July 2018 - 12:56 PM, said:

Why is the Pershing getting +200 pen but the heavies aren't? This doesn't really make sense.

 

The IS6 "improvements" are laughable +7mm pen on both ammo types... the aim increase is pointless if you can't pen what you are aiming at.

 

If its going to take 6 months to get the mm "fixed" then they should fire up Frontline permanently while we have to wait for the them to fix something they shouldn't have broke. Or here's a crazy idea why don't they even just revert back to the previous MM while they fix it.

 

Maybe because it has mobility and frontal armor comparable to heavy tanks? You wont be flanking anything with it like you would with T34-3.

Honestly the penetration changes are a joke. 175 vs 182 doesnt really make any difference. Like 95% of tanks you couldnt pen with 175 you wont be able to pen with 182 either. Completely pointless.

The only preff MM tank which will have/have somewhat usable penetration is the FCM, super pershing and JT and even that isnt nearly enough unless the MM gets changed hard and you will see T8/9 only like 30% of times and rest you will be top tier against T6/7.

With the current state of the game. All T8 heavies  should have 230+ standard and 290+ premium pen.  Slowish meds like centurion or pershing should have +- the same. For mobile meds like T44, 210-215/260 would be enough. Light tanks should be similar to mobile meds pen wise. It would probably be better balancing the preff MM tanks with dpm/worse gun handling etc than penetration.

 



luxgil #46 Posted 01 August 2018 - 12:09 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 26892 battles
  • 37
  • [-TB-] -TB-
  • Member since:
    08-18-2013

View PostBendysss, on 31 July 2018 - 02:17 AM, said:

for those of you who said YES 182mm is enough you probably don't have any of these tanks in your garage.... I got WZ 111   superpershing and IS6... I struggle to penetrate even tier 9 right now  with 175mm penetration.... I don't think that 7mm extra wil change something....All of these premium tanks with preferential matchmaking needs significant BUFFS....

jut go and check the other premium vehicles... for example    STG- pen 212mm MEDIUM TANK

                                                                                                 PANZER 58 mutz - 212mm MEDIUM TANK

                                                                                                 LOVE - 234 mm 

                                                                                                 Panther8.8 - 203 mm MEDIUM TANK

                                                                                                T34 - 248 mm               

So do you really THINK that 182mm is enough ???? wake up guys

 

This is actually partially my fault, because at first the poll question was: "Is it enough to buff the pen to 182mm."

After I saw the votes coming in, I thought that maybe the topic name is not that clear enough to know, that I meant the pref-mm-heavytanks and the actual planned update.

Most of the "yes" voters probably haven't read my first post, so that's why I changed the poll question to how it is now.

So, at about 50 votes or so, I edited the poll question to how it is now.....

So, I believe there would've been much more "no" or "at least 200mm" answers.

As I said, I messed this up but still, the "no" and "at least 200mm" answers are in the lead.

 


Edited by luxgil, 01 August 2018 - 12:14 AM.


Bennie182 #47 Posted 01 August 2018 - 09:11 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 54891 battles
  • 1,773
  • [WGL-A] WGL-A
  • Member since:
    03-13-2012

View PostBSHDBCG, on 27 July 2018 - 09:18 AM, said:

Yeah like I wrote in another thread yesterday, baby steps. They can always improve them again later if it isn't enough, however they can not roll back over buffs.

after playing for more then 3 years you still have no clue about WG's definition of "baby-steps"

at their speed it will take another 3 years to fix this issue.



FluffyRedFox #48 Posted 01 August 2018 - 10:14 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 23937 battles
  • 8,713
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    12-05-2012

Heavily dislike the T-34-3 buffs, they don't buff the things that need buffing.

Pen and gun depression is for the most part fine, it just needs to have the 0.46 dispersion buffed to around 0.38-0.4 and it would be completely fine. No idea why they're buffing the gun depression when it doesn't fix whats wrong with the tank.



Search_Warrant #49 Posted 01 August 2018 - 11:34 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 27679 battles
  • 6,435
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    02-08-2011

View PostFluffyRedFox, on 01 August 2018 - 09:14 AM, said:

Heavily dislike the T-34-3 buffs, they don't buff the things that need buffing.

Pen and gun depression is for the most part fine, it just needs to have the 0.46 dispersion buffed to around 0.38-0.4 and it would be completely fine. No idea why they're buffing the gun depression when it doesn't fix whats wrong with the tank.

 

Yes WG have heard your complaints and took them to heart. we will buff the radiomans hitpoints by 20. da conrad.

arthurwellsley #50 Posted 01 August 2018 - 11:45 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 52133 battles
  • 3,188
  • [-B-C-] -B-C-
  • Member since:
    05-11-2011

View PostBendysss, on 31 July 2018 - 02:17 AM, said:

for those of you who said YES 182mm is enough you probably don't have any of these tanks in your garage.... I got WZ 111   superpershing and IS6... I struggle to penetrate even tier 9 right now  with 175mm penetration.... I don't think that 7mm extra wil change something....All of these premium tanks with preferential matchmaking needs significant BUFFS....

jut go and check the other premium vehicles... for example    STG- pen 212mm MEDIUM TANK

                                                                                                 PANZER 58 mutz - 212mm MEDIUM TANK

                                                                                                 LOVE - 234 mm 

                                                                                                 Panther8.8 - 203 mm MEDIUM TANK

                                                                                                T34 - 248 mm               

So do you really THINK that 182mm is enough ???? wake up guys

 

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.

 

Remember also when first sold KV-5 had lower penetration as one of it's balancing factors, due to relatively high ROF. I would like to keep the high ROF as it is a defining factor with the KV-5 and I am willing to pay for that with lower penetration on the standard round.

 



luxgil #51 Posted 01 August 2018 - 05:57 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 26892 battles
  • 37
  • [-TB-] -TB-
  • Member since:
    08-18-2013

View Postarthurwellsley, on 01 August 2018 - 10:45 AM, said:

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".

 

I disagree with the 240mm penetration on premium shells, as in the current pref-mm, you can still face a Type 4 Heavy who is on tier 9, which is the +1 tier-Matchmaking the KV-5 can still get.

With "Still get" I mean that we don't know yet what the changes to the matchmaker will be and if they will also rework the "preferential matchmaker".

 

There is only a very small part of the type 4 heavy, who has like 236mm of armor, every other frontal part is above that 236mm of armor. The most part of the frontal armor is in the 250mm area.

So as the KV-5 does not have the mobility to drive around other tanks, "still" can get a type 4 heavy in the enemy team, I disagree with 240mm of premium pen.

Not to forget that APCR loses pen at long distance, which makes the 240mm premium pen even more questionable.



Frlo10611 #52 Posted 05 August 2018 - 09:54 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 20615 battles
  • 8
  • Member since:
    09-09-2011

Hi!

 

 

The penetration of all pref MM tanks is way too low. You need over 212 to be competitive at tier 8 and 9.

 

And Wargaming you need to fix the MM NOW!! In 1 or 2 months.


 

Its no fun to play bottom tier in so many battles.



Bigbos86 #53 Posted 06 August 2018 - 11:24 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 797 battles
  • 12
  • [-UM] -UM
  • Member since:
    02-08-2012

View PostFluffyRedFox, on 01 August 2018 - 09:14 AM, said:

(...) No idea why they're buffing the gun depression when it doesn't fix whats wrong with the tank.

 

If it's anything like the FCM, I'd guess they're buffing stuff that they know won't have a big impact. Simply classing it as a medium tank would be a pretty decent buff. Same deal with the KV-5 - both individual players and Wargaming notes that the armor effiency is actually really good, yet they still want to buff it.

 

The Type 59 makes most sense, I guess, though it comes of as a little too much seeing as it's already one of the better PMM tanks. Buffing mobility is probably warranted now that the armor isn't particularly noteworthy.


Edited by Bigbos86, 06 August 2018 - 11:24 AM.


Contentious #54 Posted 06 August 2018 - 11:49 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 45789 battles
  • 122
  • Member since:
    07-06-2012
The japanese heavies is the problem here. They were invented from practically nothing, probably with the intention of making then balanced within their own tier, but forgetting to test how they work with lower tiers (or prem guns).They totally OP lower tiers. Even the enourmous areas of unangled side armour is so self-righteus, that you'll be excused if you think armour-modelling or RNG is wrong. 




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users