Jump to content


Medium tank rebalance

medium rebalance

  • Please log in to reply
130 replies to this topic

tajj7 #121 Posted 25 April 2019 - 01:52 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 27247 battles
  • 14,839
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

It doesn't seem to mention anywhere that the STB-1s turret dispersion is getting buffed, the article says moving/hull traverse going down to 0.09 (which is very low, like near Obj. 140 levels) but the current turret traverse dispersion is 0.13, so if keeps that then its going to have 0.09/0.09/0.13, with a 2s aim time and 0.37 accuracy.

 

That is not actually that good gun handling overall. 

 

The UDES 15/16 is getting 0.13/0.10/0.08 with 2.11s aim time and 0.34 accuracy, so the two tanks as far as I can see are overall going to have similar gun handling, except the UDES has 440 alpha and the STB-1 is getting 360, and the UDES is only about 150 DPM behind anyway.

 

Plus the UDES has that extra degree of gun depression, faster top speed, will have higher camo, probably the superior turret, overall mobility is going to be about the same considering the 'buffed' STB-1 will have more engine power but the UDES has much lower ground resistances. Pen is very similar, view range is 10m apart. HP is the same as well. 

 

Still to me looks like the UDES is the better tank, hitting for 440 alpha alone over 360, without giving up barely anything in DPM or gun handling is a big advantage, its also going to have best in class camo IIRC, and probably the better turret armour (on test it was pretty much invincible, not to mention the hull armour was very bounce as well). 



The_Georgian_One #122 Posted 25 April 2019 - 01:59 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 40293 battles
  • 1,950
  • [KOFN] KOFN
  • Member since:
    01-05-2015
Thanks Tajj, I got mislead by the max speed and max turning dispersion values, which are insignificant. 

Strizi #123 Posted 25 April 2019 - 02:14 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 40899 battles
  • 801
  • Member since:
    06-16-2011

Had a good laugh in the pursuit of excellence



Geno1isme #124 Posted 25 April 2019 - 02:23 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 46117 battles
  • 9,854
  • [TRYIT] TRYIT
  • Member since:
    09-03-2013

View PostThe_Georgian_One, on 25 April 2019 - 02:25 PM, said:

​The gun stats are massively improved on the new STB though, so it's hard to compare now.

 

Dispersion softstats and aimtime are improved to be on a similar level to the UDES, but accuracy and shell velocity are nerfed and worse than on the UDES.

As said, I think the differences in armor models will have a bigger impact than the guns. The UDES is for 1v1 peek-a-boo playstyle, the STB for constant maneuvering and keeping multiple targets occupied. In theory ...



tajj7 #125 Posted 25 April 2019 - 02:30 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 27247 battles
  • 14,839
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

View PostGeno1isme, on 25 April 2019 - 01:23 PM, said:

 

Dispersion softstats and aimtime are improved to be on a similar level to the UDES, but accuracy and shell velocity are nerfed and worse than on the UDES.

As said, I think the differences in armor models will have a bigger impact than the guns. The UDES is for 1v1 peek-a-boo playstyle, the STB for constant maneuvering and keeping multiple targets occupied. In theory ...

 

My experience on the test server was that because the UDES is all slope basically, even when not using its gun depression, if you wiggled at people they would bounce a lot as its very low profile and the lower plate is quite small, so you are just confronted with this moving cheese wedge that can very easily create auto-bounce angles.  This was also on the test server where 90% of the people you faced were spamming HEAT, against more APCR/AP, its going to be even more troll I reckon, like a more extreme version of the Progetto, which is also seems to be able to pull off funny bounces. 

 

The STB-1 hull is nowhere near as good, plus the top part is overmatched by 112s and the whole tank is a lot bigger and taller, and even with improved turret armour if you have side angles on the STB-1 turret its pretty easy to pen, I can't see it turning into an IS7 turret that is able to bounce pure side shots.

 

I personally think that WG have not noticed they have power crept their own rebalance before they have even finished it, its like the people doing this rebalance have no knowledge of the UDES. 



Strizi #126 Posted 25 April 2019 - 02:40 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 40899 battles
  • 801
  • Member since:
    06-16-2011

View Posttajj7, on 25 April 2019 - 02:30 PM, said:

 

My experience on the test server was that because the UDES is all slope basically, even when not using its gun depression, if you wiggled at people they would bounce a lot as its very low profile and the lower plate is quite small, so you are just confronted with this moving cheese wedge that can very easily create auto-bounce angles.  This was also on the test server where 90% of the people you faced were spamming HEAT, against more APCR/AP, its going to be even more troll I reckon, like a more extreme version of the Progetto, which is also seems to be able to pull off funny bounces. 

 

The STB-1 hull is nowhere near as good, plus the top part is overmatched by 112s and the whole tank is a lot bigger and taller, and even with improved turret armour if you have side angles on the STB-1 turret its pretty easy to pen, I can't see it turning into an IS7 turret that is able to bounce pure side shots.

 

I personally think that WG have not noticed they have power crept their own rebalance before they have even finished it, its like the people doing this rebalance have no knowledge of the UDES. 

 

Please dont question wgs ability to correct mistakes. Surely everything will be allright after 2 or 3 years, be patient.

The balancing department is highly competent and knows for sure what it is doing with meds right now.

 



Geno1isme #127 Posted 25 April 2019 - 02:42 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 46117 battles
  • 9,854
  • [TRYIT] TRYIT
  • Member since:
    09-03-2013

View Posttajj7, on 25 April 2019 - 03:30 PM, said:

My experience on the test server was that because the UDES is all slope basically, even when not using its gun depression, if you wiggled at people they would bounce a lot as its very low profile and the lower plate is quite small, so you are just confronted with this moving cheese wedge that can very easily create auto-bounce angles.  This was also on the test server where 90% of the people you faced were spamming HEAT, against more APCR/AP, its going to be even more troll I reckon, like a more extreme version of the Progetto, which is also seems to be able to pull off funny bounces.

 

Front armor sure (don't think HEAT/AP will make much of a difference there), I'm thinking about the turret sides when you have to deal with multiple enemies, similar issue as with the Heavies or the TDs. The STB turret might be a trickier target in those situations due to its round shape. Of course the hull armor is mostly crap, maybe even more so with the siege mode. But as said, that's pure speculation at this point.

 

View Posttajj7, on 25 April 2019 - 03:30 PM, said:

I personally think that WG have not noticed they have power crept their own rebalance before they have even finished it, its like the people doing this rebalance have no knowledge of the UDES. 

 

WG departments actually communicating? You must be dreaming.



tajj7 #128 Posted 25 April 2019 - 03:22 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 27247 battles
  • 14,839
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

View PostGeno1isme, on 25 April 2019 - 01:42 PM, said:

 

Front armor sure (don't think HEAT/AP will make much of a difference there), I'm thinking about the turret sides when you have to deal with multiple enemies, similar issue as with the Heavies or the TDs. The STB turret might be a trickier target in those situations due to its round shape. Of course the hull armor is mostly crap, maybe even more so with the siege mode. But as said, that's pure speculation at this point.

 

 

WG departments actually communicating? You must be dreaming.

 

STB-1 side turret currently has very low armour thicknesses, its like 100m or 120mm at best, even with the rounding, even at like 20 degrees to the side you are talking about it being about 200 effective currently. It is currently very much a front on 1v1 turret to bounce anything.

 

I suspect, but obviously don't know, that when they talk about buffing the turret armour it'll be the mantlet and turret front which currently has spots that are only about 230 effective to 250 effective. I doubt we'll see the turret sides go up enough to be effective, if you look at IS7, its turret sides are like 240mm and 210mm thick to get that ability to still bounce from side angles, so we are talking about pretty much doubling the thickness of that STB-1 turret, which I doubt.

 

Plus the hull sides are like 35mm, STB-1 armour overall is very poor, its going to need to go a long way to compete with the UDES I think.

 

But we'll have to see, I really hope to be honest that it goes into Super Test and they quickly realise that all those nerfs are too much.

 

You'd also think that they would be the same team as its tank balancing, but maybe not. 


Edited by tajj7, 25 April 2019 - 03:22 PM.


Desyatnik_Pansy #129 Posted 25 April 2019 - 03:53 PM

    Bartender

  • Player
  • 17479 battles
  • 26,365
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    04-19-2013

View Posttajj7, on 25 April 2019 - 03:22 PM, said:

I suspect, but obviously don't know, that when they talk about buffing the turret armour it'll be the mantlet and turret front which currently has spots that are only about 230 effective to 250 effective. I doubt we'll see the turret sides go up enough to be effective, if you look at IS7, its turret sides are like 240mm and 210mm thick to get that ability to still bounce from side angles, so we are talking about pretty much doubling the thickness of that STB-1 turret, which I doubt.

 

I guess the images weren't posted then, or maybe I just missed them when scrolling back a few pages? This from a Community Coordinator over on NA:

Existing armour values
New armour values (subject to change of course)

 



tajj7 #130 Posted 25 April 2019 - 03:56 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 27247 battles
  • 14,839
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

View PostDesyatnik_Pansy, on 25 April 2019 - 02:53 PM, said:

 

I guess the images weren't posted then, or maybe I just missed them when scrolling back a few pages? This from a Community Coordinator over on NA:

Existing armour values
New armour values (subject to change of course)

 

 

It's quite difficult to make sense of those numbers, but looking at it I don't think the turret sides are likely to be any stronger, it looks like they have thickened up the middle around the gun more, though some numbers go down to 80 there for some reason.

 

Which means if I am reading it right, the turret will mainly only work front on and the overmatch hull is still there, so that is IMO still a turret that is a lot worse than the UDES 15/16



FatigueGalaxy #131 Posted 25 April 2019 - 07:41 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 20804 battles
  • 2,236
  • [SPIKE] SPIKE
  • Member since:
    02-09-2011

View Posttajj7, on 25 April 2019 - 10:37 AM, said:

 

Sad that the majority of the playerbase can see what WG can't, I don;t get why they won't just nerf the armour, they eventually got that message on the Bobject and even to some extent the Type 5 (even though those changes were minor) and the T110E5. 

 

Why they think a medium tank with better turret armour and cupolas than several heavies was ever a good idea is beyond me. 

 

 

 

It's a buff, its a decent one, the tank is never going to be amazing because really it needs to meta to change, but it will be a lot more effective with these changes.

 

And an APCR round is much better than a HEAT round, with normalistion 315 APCR will pen more than 330 HEAT. 

 

 

 

Patton cannot brawl or bully tank anywhere near what the 430 is able to do.

 

The 430 changes show what a Russian medium should look like, good at brawling, bad at stuff at medium to long ranges. It should have view range, mobility, gun handling more like a heavy, when it is armoured more like a heavy.

 

It is essentially a heavium, it shouldn't have the full capacity of a medium tank. 

 

I mean -

 

Posted Image

 

Hardly the win rate curve of a balanced tier 9 medium. No real comparison between a 430 and Patton -

 

Posted Image

 

 

 

430's curves are kinda biased since it has no stock grind. I mean, playing stock tank for ~100-150k XP to grind modules takes longer than ~200k XP needed for tier 10 and this is reflected in curves. I did some of those grinds as f2p player (like 70% of players IIRC) and often I wasn't able to recover my stats. Just compare 430's graphs to T-54 which is better in almost every way, excluding slightly worse armour, less penetration and alpha.

I agree that 430 is too strong but IMO they overdid a little with the nerf. I could understand those nerfs it if 430 had 440 alpha but it only has 390 which is pretty standard for tier 9 med.







Also tagged with medium, rebalance

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users