Jump to content


I heard WG is going to buff Kranvagn

kranvagn buff meta

  • Please log in to reply
37 replies to this topic

Baleent7 #1 Posted 24 January 2019 - 05:19 PM

    Corporal

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 33809 battles
  • 180
  • [DTQ] DTQ
  • Member since:
    07-15-2010

So I hear Wargaming is finally buffing some old/bad tanks to bring them more in line with the current meta tanks (wz, 277, 260, 907, and some other Russian op tanks).

 

Here is my proposed Kranvagn buff:

 

12 cm akan L/40 gun:
Accuracy increased from 0.36 to 0.34
Intra-clip reload reduced from 3 to 2,73 seconds
Alpha damage increased from 400 to 420
Reload time reduced from 32.31 to 30.00 seconds
Rate of fire increased from 5.81 to 6.28 rounds per minute
DPM increased from 2324 to 2639
Penetration increased from 252 to 258
 
Dispersion value changes:
while moving: from 0.19 to 0.17
while tank traversing: from 0.19 to 0.17
while turret traversing: from 0.10 to 0.08
 
Armor changes:
Upper frontal plate from 90 to 110mm
 
Engine power increased from 700 to 800 hp
Power-to-weight ratio up from 15.63 to 17.85 hp/t
 
HP pool increased from 2000 to 2150
 
 
Even with these changes, it would still not live up to the expectations of the above mentioned modern meta tanks, it would be at least a decent tier10 vehicle, which doesn't have to rely on teammate as much as it has to now. After WG buffing the 279, I think these buffs would serve the Kranvagn well. What do you think guys?


XxKuzkina_MatxX #2 Posted 24 January 2019 - 05:28 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 53179 battles
  • 2,707
  • [_B-R_] _B-R_
  • Member since:
    04-02-2016
Gold pen?

hasnainrakha57 #3 Posted 24 January 2019 - 05:37 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 15152 battles
  • 729
  • [WFTTE] WFTTE
  • Member since:
    08-01-2013

I dont know why u guys growled for kranvgan buff all u want is this

Kranvgan>amx50b

Then ppl will shout buff 50b why buy 50b when kranvgan is best because we have too many of these issues

Centurion 5/1 rac>fv42002
121,430u>e50m
Stg>t34-3

And many others

Kranvgan had best turret armor but still this community.....which 50b and t57 never had but buff kranvgan so it becomes better then t57 and 50b gg


Edited by hasnainrakha57, 24 January 2019 - 05:38 PM.


Baleent7 #4 Posted 24 January 2019 - 05:44 PM

    Corporal

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 33809 battles
  • 180
  • [DTQ] DTQ
  • Member since:
    07-15-2010

View PostXxKuzkina_MatxX, on 24 January 2019 - 04:28 PM, said:

Gold pen?

 

no need to buff it

16:45 Added after 1 minute

View Posthasnainrakha57, on 24 January 2019 - 04:37 PM, said:

I dont know why u guys growled for kranvgan buff all u want is this

Kranvgan>amx50b

Then ppl will shout buff 50b why buy 50b when kranvgan is best because we have too many of these issues

Centurion 5/1 rac>fv42002
121,430u>e50m
Stg>t34-3

And many others

Kranvgan had best turret armor but still this community.....which 50b and t57 never had but buff kranvgan so it becomes better then t57 and 50b gg

 

bs, literally every russian tank has better turret armor



ApocalypseSquad #5 Posted 24 January 2019 - 05:48 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 27067 battles
  • 2,204
  • Member since:
    07-31-2011
It's an autoloader and should be matched against its peers, not the OP Russian stuff.  I think it has it's niche; as a hull down autoloader nothing else can match it. Its gun handling is already way better than the T57.  I would leave it alone, or at best give it some minor tweaks.  The tank curves suggest it might need a bit, but good players are already overperforming in it.

XxKuzkina_MatxX #6 Posted 24 January 2019 - 05:48 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 53179 battles
  • 2,707
  • [_B-R_] _B-R_
  • Member since:
    04-02-2016

View PostBaleent7, on 24 January 2019 - 06:44 PM, said:

no need to buff it

 

Very logical and convincing response, how about shell velocity? The APCR that's slower than some AP shells!

Baleent7 #7 Posted 24 January 2019 - 05:53 PM

    Corporal

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 33809 battles
  • 180
  • [DTQ] DTQ
  • Member since:
    07-15-2010

View PostApocalypseSquad, on 24 January 2019 - 04:48 PM, said:

It's an autoloader and should be matched against its peers, not the OP Russian stuff.  I think it has it's niche; as a hull down autoloader nothing else can match it. Its gun handling is already way better than the T57.  I would leave it alone, or at best give it some minor tweaks.  The tank curves suggest it might need a bit, but good players are already overperforming in it.

 

I don't agree at all. It should be matched against meta tanks, because meta means the current best. So if we match it to the 50B, it might be balanced to it, but it will still be crapcompared to everything else. Now that the CW campaign is rolling, all I can see are 907s, some 140s (poor men's 907), 277, wz, type5, and basically that's it. A few arties, batchats, and that's it, no other tanks make it to CW. This means the balance is off with those vehicles that we can't see here.

XxKuzkina_MatxX #8 Posted 24 January 2019 - 05:58 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 53179 battles
  • 2,707
  • [_B-R_] _B-R_
  • Member since:
    04-02-2016

View PostBaleent7, on 24 January 2019 - 06:53 PM, said:

 

I don't agree at all. It should be matched against meta tanks, because meta means the current best. So if we match it to the 50B, it might be balanced to it, but it will still be crapcompared to everything else. Now that the CW campaign is rolling, all I can see are 907s, some 140s (poor men's 907), 277, wz, type5, and basically that's it. A few arties, batchats, and that's it, no other tanks make it to CW. This means the balance is off with those vehicles that we can't see here.

 

Not really, it just means clans are picking the best tanks for the job. There will always be a best tank, whether it's the 907, the 5A or anything else. Balancing means the tank got a place not necessarily the no.1 spot.

fwhaatpiraat #9 Posted 24 January 2019 - 06:00 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 50913 battles
  • 1,000
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    05-04-2013

View PostBaleent7, on 24 January 2019 - 05:53 PM, said:

 

I don't agree at all. It should be matched against meta tanks, because meta means the current best. So if we match it to the 50B, it might be balanced to it, but it will still be crapcompared to everything else. Now that the CW campaign is rolling, all I can see are 907s, some 140s (poor men's 907), 277, wz, type5, and basically that's it. A few arties, batchats, and that's it, no other tanks make it to CW. This means the balance is off with those vehicles that we can't see here.

 

Which means tanks like 50B or NATO meds get even more useless.

 

Game never was balanced and it sadly only gets worse :(.



Balc0ra #10 Posted 24 January 2019 - 06:05 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 68506 battles
  • 18,038
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View PostBaleent7, on 24 January 2019 - 05:53 PM, said:

 

I don't agree at all. It should be matched against meta tanks, because meta means the current best. So if we match it to the 50B, it might be balanced to it, but it will still be crapcompared to everything else

 

Thing is that the 50B last time it was balanced, was vs the 57HT nerf. As in the 50B got those gun stats to be more effective as long-range support. 57HT got nerfs to make it better at close range. Not a long range sniper. 

 

Kranvagn has 2x more effective turret armor on a ridgeline vs the 50B. And with the same stats, as your suggestions gives it the same DPM, dispersion and dispersion on the move as the 50B. It again.. just puts the 50B at the back. As the Kranvagn can do the same role way better with less risks. Those buffs will make the 50B more useless as an option vs the Kranvagn if anything when all stats on the gun are the same. But one can hold a ridgeline all day, while the other can't even be seen vs most guns. 

 

WG and the players should figure out what role this should have vs the 57HT and the 50B.  The idea is not to make all tier X's equal. But to set them apart a little to give them roles they excel at vs others. Not so they can do multiple roles better than their peers. As then we just walk backwards again. 


Edited by Balc0ra, 24 January 2019 - 06:07 PM.


ApocalypseSquad #11 Posted 24 January 2019 - 06:05 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 27067 battles
  • 2,204
  • Member since:
    07-31-2011

View PostBaleent7, on 24 January 2019 - 05:53 PM, said:

 

I don't agree at all. It should be matched against meta tanks, because meta means the current best. So if we match it to the 50B, it might be balanced to it, but it will still be crapcompared to everything else. Now that the CW campaign is rolling, all I can see are 907s, some 140s (poor men's 907), 277, wz, type5, and basically that's it. A few arties, batchats, and that's it, no other tanks make it to CW. This means the balance is off with those vehicles that we can't see here.

 

Surely that approach is just dialling in endless power creep?  And I wouldn't use CW as any kind of guide to balancing - that sort of highly orchestrated action is in no way representative of the 99% of battles a tank will be involved in.

Baleent7 #12 Posted 24 January 2019 - 06:26 PM

    Corporal

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 33809 battles
  • 180
  • [DTQ] DTQ
  • Member since:
    07-15-2010
CW and Stronghold are the best benchmarks, because people only take the best vehicles. While you are right that buffing tanks would introduce more and more powercreep into the game, let's be honest, this is the future of this game. Wargaming already screwed up. By the way, the buffing of Leopard 1, E100, Kranvagn, and a few other tanks has been officially confirmed. All I am doing is giving WG advice how to bring Kranvagn to the level of the other CAPABLE (by which I mean mostly Russian) tanks. WG is buffing object 279, for literally no reason, object 907 is already stupidly overpowered. These buffs wouldn't even bring the Kranvagn REMOTELY CLOSE to those tanks. My purpose with these suggestions is to equalize the tiers, because right now, tier 10 is a huge mess. I want all tanks to be equally competitive at the end of the day. This thread is not about making the 50b or t57 obsolete, it's about bringing the Kranvagn to the levels of the best t10 tanks. We all know WG won't nerf russian tanks, so this is the only option.

backmania #13 Posted 24 January 2019 - 07:39 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 11049 battles
  • 20
  • [-FRI-] -FRI-
  • Member since:
    10-06-2017

I think your suggestions looks reasonable Baleent7!

 

At it's current state it is one of the least popular tanks,

and most people are discouraged to play it.



ApocalypseSquad #14 Posted 24 January 2019 - 07:51 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 27067 battles
  • 2,204
  • Member since:
    07-31-2011

I still disagree.  Admittedly I have not played in CW for some time, but when I did most battles came down to close quarter gun line engagements at known chokepoints, and the designated commander would choose his tanks to contest those critical points.  That meant then (and by your post I guess it still does)  a glut of Russian heavies.  It was IS-7s and a few IS-4s in my day.

 

That does not mean that other tanks cannot perform well, or overperform, in the more chaotic environment of the typical random where 99% of the battles will be played.

 

I also think we should not meekly accept power creep, but as responsible members of the community continue to rail against it.  If we don't, the game is screwed.  I have a Defender.  WG, for the good of the game, nerf it.



SABAOTH #15 Posted 24 January 2019 - 09:48 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 40172 battles
  • 3,494
  • [-133-] -133-
  • Member since:
    08-28-2011

View PostBaleent7, on 24 January 2019 - 06:26 PM, said:

CW and Stronghold are the best benchmarks, because people only take the best vehicles. While you are right that buffing tanks would introduce more and more powercreep into the game, let's be honest, this is the future of this game. Wargaming already screwed up. By the way, the buffing of Leopard 1, E100, Kranvagn, and a few other tanks has been officially confirmed. All I am doing is giving WG advice how to bring Kranvagn to the level of the other CAPABLE (by which I mean mostly Russian) tanks. WG is buffing object 279, for literally no reason, object 907 is already stupidly overpowered. These buffs wouldn't even bring the Kranvagn REMOTELY CLOSE to those tanks. My purpose with these suggestions is to equalize the tiers, because right now, tier 10 is a huge mess. I want all tanks to be equally competitive at the end of the day. This thread is not about making the 50b or t57 obsolete, it's about bringing the Kranvagn to the levels of the best t10 tanks. We all know WG won't nerf russian tanks, so this is the only option.

 

Agree completely.

 

 



Procjon #16 Posted 25 January 2019 - 02:34 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 57172 battles
  • 636
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011

Buff that, nerf this and so on.

 

The only solution to complaining about imbalance in WOT which exists is to do the following:

  • 1 arty
  • 1 light
  • 1 medium
  • 1 heavy
  • 1 TD

 

Total of 5 tanks, that's it. 1 tank per class, less fun and choices but no more complaining this tank is bad and that tank is OP.

 

ps. We would not have complaints about buffing or nerfing tanks if WG did a good job in the first place and tried to balance each new tank to existing tanks instead of introducing more POWER CREEP tanks in order to milk players and leaving old tanks behind.

 

HF

 

 


Edited by Procjon, 25 January 2019 - 02:36 AM.


Baleent7 #17 Posted 25 January 2019 - 10:17 AM

    Corporal

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 33809 battles
  • 180
  • [DTQ] DTQ
  • Member since:
    07-15-2010

View PostProcjon, on 25 January 2019 - 01:34 AM, said:

Buff that, nerf this and so on.

 

The only solution to complaining about imbalance in WOT which exists is to do the following:

  • 1 arty
  • 1 light
  • 1 medium
  • 1 heavy
  • 1 TD

 

Total of 5 tanks, that's it. 1 tank per class, less fun and choices but no more complaining this tank is bad and that tank is OP.

 

Come on man, what you just said is stupid, and you know it. It is possible to balance tank and still have different roles.

 

ps. We would not have complaints about buffing or nerfing tanks if WG did a good job in the first place and tried to balance each new tank to existing tanks instead of introducing more POWER CREEP tanks in order to milk players and leaving old tanks behind.

 

HF

 

 

 

Anyway, while I wholeheartedly agree that WG should not introduce more powercreep into the game, IT IS HAPPENING CONSTANTLY, look at them, they are selling Defenders again and again, they are not listening to their playerbase. If we stay on the grounds of reality, we can all see, that WG is not going to nerf those OP russian tanks, namely, defender (252U), 907, 279, 430U, V4, and maybe some other controversial tanks. Did you hear what was the reason they decided to buff the 279? Here you go: https://youtu.be/nns22pHoDkI?t=323

 

"Players who have earned this tank believed it was not 100% worth the effort required to obtain it."

 

*edited* Was this based on like 40 people? Because I don't think too many players have obtained it yet. And even those who did, did they really say, "man, this tank sucks, it needs to be buffed"? At the same time WG was "collecting data" for 4 months before nerfing the V4 after it came to the live servers. And the most ridiculous thing is that now the only weakpoint of the 279 (the entire floor plate) is GONE, no more weakpoints. Except the 1 pixel cupola which you won't ever hit. The 279 is OP and they are buffing it even further, but apparently people are okay with this. Or not?

 

Why do I not see hundreds of forum threads about these topics? Why are people still paying money to WG to get these OP vehicles faster (or to get them at all, for example the Defender, which can be only acquired for money)? All WG is doing, like every profit-oriented company, is milking the players by intentionally introducing powercreep. If people are stupid enough to fall for this strategy, well, the consequences are what we see in nowadays' World of Tanks. WG has no moral anymore like it had when it was a small studio, but apparently players have no moral either, because by purchasing these OP vehicles means you will outperform those players who don't have them. We all know that in real life a good performance is always backed up by skills. However, in games skills can be replaced by your wallet, unlike in reality, and replacing skills with your money is a very shameful move if you ask me.

 

After all this, I can claim, that WG introduced powercreep into the game, AND PLAYERS ARE FUELING IT. Players approve it by paying money to the company to get access to those features. I HAVE NOT SPENT A SINGLE PENNY on this game so far, and neither am I planning. So next time you want to blame me for introducing more powercreep into the game, just think of 85% of the playerbase, who are fueling the entire process. People have always had the chance to bring it to an end, but they have never lived with it.

 

Trust me guys, I have been playing this game since closed beta, I really like it (less and less recently, though...), and all I want is to make it better! My purpose with threads like this or the previous ones (about Pershing buff and 6th sense) is to help WG to right the wrongs in their game. So please, write constructive comments instead of stupid ones like 1 arty, 1 light tank, 1 med, 1 heavy, 1 td. I would like to see useful and constructive comments.


Edited by NickMustaine, 30 January 2019 - 07:59 PM.
Inappropriate remarks


tajj7 #18 Posted 25 January 2019 - 11:01 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 26422 battles
  • 14,137
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

View PostBaleent7, on 24 January 2019 - 04:19 PM, said:

So I hear Wargaming is finally buffing some old/bad tanks to bring them more in line with the current meta tanks (wz, 277, 260, 907, and some other Russian op tanks).

 

Here is my proposed Kranvagn buff:

 

12 cm akan L/40 gun:
Accuracy increased from 0.36 to 0.34
Intra-clip reload reduced from 3 to 2,73 seconds
Alpha damage increased from 400 to 420
Reload time reduced from 32.31 to 30.00 seconds
Rate of fire increased from 5.81 to 6.28 rounds per minute
DPM increased from 2324 to 2639
Penetration increased from 252 to 258
 
Dispersion value changes:
while moving: from 0.19 to 0.17
while tank traversing: from 0.19 to 0.17
while turret traversing: from 0.10 to 0.08
 
Armor changes:
Upper frontal plate from 90 to 110mm
 
Engine power increased from 700 to 800 hp
Power-to-weight ratio up from 15.63 to 17.85 hp/t
 
HP pool increased from 2000 to 2150
 
 
Even with these changes, it would still not live up to the expectations of the above mentioned modern meta tanks, it would be at least a decent tier10 vehicle, which doesn't have to rely on teammate as much as it has to now. After WG buffing the 279, I think these buffs would serve the Kranvagn well. What do you think guys?

 

I think those are too many changes. 

 

I would say from my experience the main issue with the tank is the gun, it has an awful combination of -

 

  • Poor penetration, largely because it's APCR so performs more like 240 ish AP rounds. It essentially has the worse standard pen of any tier 10 heavy tank. 
  • Poor premium rounds, which are 300 pen HEAT, which are weak in the current meta when other heavies have like 340 HEAT or 325 APCR. 
  • Slow intra-clip speed for an autoloader. The worst of any tier 10 autoloader IIRC, this means you struggle to get your clip damage out because tanks can often get away with the extra time or they have time to reload and damage you back.
  • Bad disperson values coupled with a 'meh' aim time. 
  • And then a long reload for the clip.

 

All of which limits your damage output, you miss or bounce more of your clip than a 50b or even a T57 probably will and then you are out for over 30s. 

 

 

So I would go with -

 

  • Swap standard round to 258 AP, premium round to 310 APCR. 
  • Reduce intra-clip to 2.5s. 
  • Reduce reload down to about 29s base. 
  • Buff movement dispersion down to 0.17/0.17
  • Buff view range to 400 because its 390 for no real reason. 

 

I'd also at the same time give the 50b a buff to it's aim time, dispersions, accuracy and ground resistances, as well as knocking 2s of it's reload as well so that tank becomes more mobile, more accurate, faster aiming and have a little more DPM. 

 

I'd also give the T57 a dispersion/aim time buff as well, closer back to its old stats.

 

As let's be honest, none of the 3 auto-loading heavies are anywhere near meta at the moment. 


Edited by tajj7, 25 January 2019 - 11:01 AM.


Ceeb #19 Posted 25 January 2019 - 11:06 AM

    Major General

  • Beta Tester
  • 31675 battles
  • 5,701
  • [BULL] BULL
  • Member since:
    01-14-2011
I don't think they have enough data for it. So if its due a buff, it'll happen after buffs to the Russian lines.  I hear the 430U is a bit underpowered

arthurwellsley #20 Posted 25 January 2019 - 11:08 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 52684 battles
  • 3,389
  • [-B-C-] -B-C-
  • Member since:
    05-11-2011

View Posttajj7, on 25 January 2019 - 10:01 AM, said:

 

I think those are too many changes. 

 

I would say from my experience the main issue with the tank is the gun, it has an awful combination of -

 

  • Poor penetration, largely because it's APCR so performs more like 240 ish AP rounds. It essentially has the worse standard pen of any tier 10 heavy tank. 
  • Poor premium rounds, which are 300 pen HEAT, which are weak in the current meta when other heavies have like 340 HEAT or 325 APCR. 
  • Slow intra-clip speed for an autoloader. The worst of any tier 10 autoloader IIRC, this means you struggle to get your clip damage out because tanks can often get away with the extra time or they have time to reload and damage you back.
  • Bad disperson values coupled with a 'meh' aim time. 
  • And then a long reload for the clip.

 

All of which limits your damage output, you miss or bounce more of your clip than a 50b or even a T57 probably will and then you are out for over 30s. 

 

 

So I would go with -

 

  • Swap standard round to 258 AP, premium round to 310 APCR. 
  • Reduce intra-clip to 2.5s. 
  • Reduce reload down to about 29s base. 
  • Buff movement dispersion down to 0.17/0.17
  • Buff view range to 400 because its 390 for no real reason. 

 

I'd also at the same time give the 50b a buff to it's aim time, dispersions, accuracy and ground resistances, as well as knocking 2s of it's reload as well so that tank becomes more mobile, more accurate, faster aiming and have a little more DPM. 

 

I'd also give the T57 a dispersion/aim time buff as well, closer back to its old stats.

 

As let's be honest, none of the 3 auto-loading heavies are anywhere near meta at the moment. 

 

Find myself totally agreeing with Tajj.

 

T57 is the inclose auto loader brawler heavy.

50B is the fast accurate more lightly armoured support auto loader heavy.

Kranvagn is the hull down strong turret auto loader. The hull needs no buff the engine needs no buff, the issue is the pentration, and close in accuracy.







Also tagged with kranvagn, buff, meta

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users