Jump to content


Medium tank rebalance - almost all Tier 10 meds are currently struggling


  • Please log in to reply
53 replies to this topic

tajj7 #1 Posted 26 April 2019 - 09:27 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 27254 battles
  • 14,865
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

Single shot 'NATO' Tier 10 meds -

 

Posted Image

 

  • There are a lot of these so the picture gets a bit messy, but we can clearly see that the Cent AX, STB-1, E50M, Leo 1, and 30b are all quite a way below the reference line until you get to about 55 - 56% overall win rate players.

 

  • The STB-1 jumping up the reference line at this I would say is more down to how few people play it and those few being a dedicated and good set of players. 

 

  • The Leo 1 and 30b get up there around 59-60% overall win rate players. 

 

  • The E50M and Cent AX pretty much never get there, 60% overall win rate players are dropping like 3-4% win rate playing these tanks. 

 

  • ONLY the M48 Patton seems to get close to the reference line for a good amount of players, and even then dips higher up. 

 

Russian/Chinese meds -

 

Posted Image

 

  • Obviously the 430U with its heavy tank armour is doing fine here. 

 

  • The other 3 are really struggling, the two low alpha Russian meds, much like the E50M and Cent AX, never really get anywhere near the reference line, meaning pretty much every player playing these tanks is going to do worse in these tanks than his overall.

 

  • Again, like the STB-1, I'd say the sharp increase of the 121 is to do with a small amount of data for these very good players. 

 

Autoloaders -

 

Posted Image

 

  • The Bat Chat curve though, the power creep on this tank is pretty obvious, its a relic of like 2015 WOTs. 

 

  • Even the TVP is struggling though not quite as much as some of the single shot meds, showing having 1.3k burst damage in 4.5s is more impactful on a game than the more all round abilities of say an Obj. 140, even with its superior armour. 

 

  • Only the Progetto 65 is doing ok, having burst damage without the drawbacks of a long reload like the Bat Chat, nor the lower pen of the TVP, clearly showing here.

 

I've obviously not included all the reward mediums up here as they are played by a small handful (plus we all know the 907 is doing more than fine). 

 

But out of the 13 tech tree mediums there (yes I know I have forgotten the K-91), You could make an argument that 10 are struggling, 1 (the Patton) is just about there and only two in reality are competitive, the 430U and the Progetto 65. 

 

Obviously 'buffs' are coming for the STB-1, 30b, and Leo 1, though its debatable for the STB-1 if those are actually buffs.

 

But, even if they make those tanks more competitive, that would still leave the Cent AX, Obj. 140, T-62A, Bat Chat, E50M and 121 as clearly underperforming a lot.  With no signs of buffs for these tanks. 

 

So what is causing all these medium tanks to struggle? 

 

IMO -

 

1. General power creep, but not from the other mediums really (though obviously 430U is medium with heavy armour with no real drawbacks and the Progetto 65 is kind of like a better version of the TVP and Bat Chat combined). Instead its stuff like buffs to the IS7, which is now fast, has better gun handling, amazing armour (i'll come on to the heaviums in a second), its stuff like the Bobject, a 50kph super armoured TD with medium like gun handling that can rush forward to positions and punish meds who can barely pen it. Or the Strv 103b that meds will never outspot and hardly any of them can reliably pen.

 

2. The Heaviums, these tanks are just general all round too good at everything. We have seen buffs to the IS7, buffs the Obj. 260, the 277 and WZ-111-5A come into the game. These tanks are fast, getting to forward positions as fast as meds, their gun handling despite the big alpha guns is decent, as is their DPM so meds can't even out DPM them easily, or out snap shot them. But they come with all the armour and hit points a heavy enjoys. Back in the day the 'fastest' heavies were the IS7 which barely struggled to go anywhere above about 40kph and the E5 which has a top speed of 37kph, now we have several genuine heavies that can go 50-60kph with like 16-19 hp/ton, easily able to keep up with many meds.

 

3. The Maps, so many of the maps are corridor or city maps that force frontal brawling, which most meds are bad at, they restrict cross fire and flanking options so meds are left generally with the choice of either brawling or basically trying to snipe from the back.  On the more open maps, campers are massively favoured, there are red line and base positions that have cover, concealment, elevation that you just can't outspot or flank. So if meds do find space to flank or breakthrough the lines they are punished by the hordes of TDs in tier 10 games with either massive alpha or that are near invincible, that they can't spot. 

 

Plus with the nerfs to arty, their lower pen, they tend to chase the paper meds and lights around looking for full damage pens and with their bigger splash radius and damage, its harder for meds to avoid arty hits. 

 

IMO, unless you ease these meta issues, these buffs are going to do little to these meds. I mean if an Obj. 140 is struggling, the former king of tier 10 meds, what good are little changes to these other meds really going to do? 

 

We need better map design desperately, more balanced maps that are bigger and more open, but are not filled with easy mode base camping spots, good map spots need to be in the middle not in base.

 

Heaviums need to be more like the old IS-8 or the T-10, mobile yes but like top speeds brought down to like 40-45kph so meds have a clear advantage, gun handling and DPMs brought down, accuracy for heavies should be heavily nerfed and aim times nerfed, these tanks should be bad at medium ranges.

 

And tone down the power creep/broken tanks that infest tier 10. 

 

  


Edited by tajj7, 26 April 2019 - 10:24 AM.


TungstenHitman #2 Posted 26 April 2019 - 09:55 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 27537 battles
  • 5,043
  • [POOLS] POOLS
  • Member since:
    08-28-2016
Ummm.... but they ARE currently getting rebalanced. Everyone including you already know this, WG have a post and vid about these med changes. Most the tanks you mentioned, Leo, STB etc are mentioned including a breakdown of their stat rebalancing and I'd imagine this is just phase 1 of several such changes so... this thread is baffling to say the least.  

Trostani #3 Posted 26 April 2019 - 10:04 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 49280 battles
  • 1,329
  • Member since:
    11-16-2012
Rebalance is one thing, heaviums issue is another story. IMHO all heaviums should be significantly nerfed (especially with max speed and gun accuracy), without that buffing meds is a little bit pointless - either they will be still strugling vs heviums or will be completly broken vs tiers IX or VIII.

Edited by Trostani, 26 April 2019 - 10:06 AM.


Thornvalley #4 Posted 26 April 2019 - 10:06 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 39903 battles
  • 164
  • Member since:
    01-27-2015
I'd say that the scores of 750+ alpha TD's and big HE derps are also reasons for the lowered performance of mediums at T10. In T9, mediums are really strong. 

tajj7 #5 Posted 26 April 2019 - 10:08 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 27254 battles
  • 14,865
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

View PostTungstenHitman, on 26 April 2019 - 08:55 AM, said:

Ummm.... but they ARE currently getting rebalanced. Everyone including you already know this, WG have a post and vid about these med changes. Most the tanks you mentioned, Leo, STB etc are mentioned including a breakdown of their stat rebalancing and I'd imagine this is just phase 1 of several such changes so... this thread is baffling to say the least.  

 

Only Leo, STB-1 and 30b are getting 'rebalanced', and even then those buffs are debatable, with the STB-1 changes more nerfing the tank.

 

But as I have shown the problem is almost ALL tier 10 meds, not just those 3 and we have had ZERO information about changes for those other ones.

 

Leo 1 and STB-1 have been talked about for MONTHS, they were highlighted along with the E100, IS4, and Kranvagn as ones WG were looking at.

 

But clearly several others are struggling, and its clearly to show that some minor buffs are not going to solve the problem very much, I mean if an Obj. 140 is struggling, then what are some minor buffs to the Leo 1 and STB-1 going to achieve? 

 

On paper the Obj. 140 is a lot better than many of the NATO meds by a clear margin, but it still struggles, something with good mobility, pen, DPM, gun handling and usable armour. 


Edited by tajj7, 26 April 2019 - 10:23 AM.


DeadLecter #6 Posted 26 April 2019 - 10:19 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 29916 battles
  • 1,656
  • Member since:
    05-28-2016

I think MTs have general worse WR because of not having as much armor as HTs. MTs are all rounders, they have more mobility than a HT but less than LTs. Their guns have high penetration with great DPM but lack the alpha of TDs and HTs. Camo wise, they are better than HTs and most TDs but fall behind LTs. 
MTs aren't limited like TDs or LTs or even HTs to specialize in 1 or maybe 2 roles. Based on the flow of the battle, an MT can be a tank destroyer, can be a brawler, or even a scout and to do these things perfectly you need to have a good amount of knowledge of the game mechanics while your average player struggles to even look at the mini map and see that there is a tank behind him. 

So the problem is not MTs, it's their more demanding play style.



Geno1isme #7 Posted 26 April 2019 - 10:20 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 46224 battles
  • 9,856
  • [TRYIT] TRYIT
  • Member since:
    09-03-2013

It's not just the "heaviums":

- The 9.18 arty changes shifted arty damage from heavies+TDs to meds (simply because hitting mobile targets has become much easier)

- General buffs to turret armor and gun-depression across the board, culminating with the introduction of the S-Conq and the T95/Chieftain that will just dominate every med (or other non-HE tank) in a hulldown position

- Introduction of T9+10 Lights, so mobility is no longer the exclusive domain for meds

- Template-MM with lots of T10-only battles caused T10 meds more often have to deal with T10 heavies+TDs, combined with corridor maps ...



pallie_the_artillerist #8 Posted 26 April 2019 - 10:39 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 19543 battles
  • 1,315
  • [TRTD] TRTD
  • Member since:
    01-12-2013

I'm sounding like a broken record, and Taji didn't say this but others did (and WG is doing it wrong AGAIN):

 

We need nerfs not buffs. Buffing 2 weak tanks will make all other underperforming tanks even more pathetic, nerfing the overperforming ones simultaneously buffs all weak tanks.


Edited by pallie_the_artillerist, 26 April 2019 - 10:43 AM.


Rati_Festa #9 Posted 26 April 2019 - 10:48 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 47592 battles
  • 2,154
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    02-10-2012
Map design as you allude too is the main culprit imo. There needs to be more emphasis on end game maps and more reason to play t10 tanks ( other than not being bottom tier ).

I recently bought k91, 268 v4 and jg pz e100 played all of them a few times, got bored with small maps for these tier tanks. Went back to playing t7 and 8 again.

The only tempting reason at the moment for me to play t10 is get some bonds but the rate is so slow, I basically cant be bothered.

I have obj140, t62a, cent ax, leopard, e50m all in my garage unplayed for months. They just dont have a place in meta.

gpalsson #10 Posted 26 April 2019 - 10:52 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 24477 battles
  • 8,929
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2013

Good thing they will buff the STB1 so it will finally be good.

...

wait...



leggasiini #11 Posted 26 April 2019 - 10:56 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 16344 battles
  • 6,331
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012

Yeah a lot of tier 10 MTs are somewhat overlooked; a lot of them got turret armor buffs but thats about it really. Not counting the rebalanced 3 tanks (which are getting rebalanced for a reason), tanks like T-62A, K-91, E 50M and CAX are all mediocre at best. 

 

Heavium issue is there, too - namely the 277, 5A and maybe the 113. IS-7 is there as well, but its still sluggish enough to the point where it doesnt quite outclass mediums, but the 277 in especial is able to straight up outspeed tier 10 MTs. And with other meta tanks like Type 5 and 430U getting nerfed (and considering the overall reception and the fact WG has talked about it makes me feel that Sconq is getting nerfed too), these heaviums are going to be even stronger and I do agree that  they could be toned down. At the same time, it would be easier to make the heaviums different from each other.

 

Simply nerf 5A’s top speed to like 40kph, and then nerf the 277’s armor considerably so that it’s even more a tier 10 T-10 (T-10 hull is worthless against anything but tier 7s and some 8s, 277 should be the same), but keep the speed in 50kph-ish range; keep it’s mobility in line with the T-10. I think their guns are fine for the most part, 277’s gun really is just a tier-for-tier very similar to T-10’s gun, so it should be rather solid. 5A could use a small DPM nerf if needed, but top speed dropping from 50 to 40 is already big. 113 is kinda obsolete right now but if the 277 and 5A gets nerfed, chances are that it will dominate as it’s not that much worse than the 5A and 277. The -7 gun dep over the side could go, though, and maybe reduce its top speed and DPM a little bit. IS-7 isn’t as problematic IMO as I already said, it’s not as quick and it also has considerably derpier gun with bad pen and less DPM. At least it has some sort of drawback. With 277 and 5A getting nerfed, though, they could nerf its mobility closer to previous levels if the IS-7 becomes more dominating, though. However, IS-7’s gun is much worse and it really doesn’t deal with all the overarmored tanks very well, so it’s hard to imagine IS-7 being too strong in a meta like this. Not sure what they should do with problematic reward heaviums like 260 or T95/Chieftain, though. I guess they could unbuff the 260 with a few QOL buffs like ammo capacity and mantlet hole fixes kept. Chieftain is just ridiculous and probably should be smacked hard.

 

Now the tech tree heaviums not only be more balanced but also have specific niches: 

 

277: speed + pen

5A: DPM + better gun dep

IS-7: a lot higher survivability at cost of worse acceleration and significantly worse firepower

113: kind of a mix of all 3 above tanks

 

I dont like meganerfing/buffing tanks at once, though, so I don’t think they should also trash their gun stats like you suggested. I feel lik nerfs like these and then buffs to bunch of tier 10 MTs like 50M, CAX, K-91 and 62A should help with the issue of T10 MTs being in general kinda underwhelming.

 

Then again, the maps and other stuff are also an issue that could help T10 MTs.


Edited by leggasiini, 26 April 2019 - 10:58 AM.


BlackBloodBandit #12 Posted 26 April 2019 - 10:57 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 4611 battles
  • 424
  • Member since:
    12-23-2018

The changes I've seen so far are quite good in my opinion, except for the STB-1. I think they should only have buffed the things they are about to do, not nerf other stats to make them even worse. Biggest example is the damage per shot.

On the other hand, I don't think it will give a significant boost to the amount of players that will buy these tanks.



Cobra6 #13 Posted 26 April 2019 - 10:59 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16470 battles
  • 16,847
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

Basically, in their effort to appease "Dear old Steve the IS-7 player" they've made the game a struggle for most other classes (mediums / lights and even a large portion of TD's).

 

Over armoring and dumbing down gameplay in an attempt to appease bad players is never a good idea for the long term as you need to keep over inflating everything else to keep up. Why are heavies pretty much as capable snipers as mediums (when fully aimed)? I still remember the days the IS-3 could not hit the broad side of a barn at range even when fully aimed which was a good thing.

 

Very nice write up on the subject if you ask me but it again will go totally ignored by Wargaming as usual I fear.

 

Cobra 6


Edited by Cobra6, 26 April 2019 - 11:01 AM.


TungstenHitman #14 Posted 26 April 2019 - 11:01 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 27537 battles
  • 5,043
  • [POOLS] POOLS
  • Member since:
    08-28-2016

View PostDeadLecter, on 26 April 2019 - 09:19 AM, said:

I think MTs have general worse WR because of not having as much armor as HTs. MTs are all rounders, they have more mobility than a HT but less than LTs. Their guns have high penetration with great DPM but lack the alpha of TDs and HTs. Camo wise, they are better than HTs and most TDs but fall behind LTs. 
MTs aren't limited like TDs or LTs or even HTs to specialize in 1 or maybe 2 roles. Based on the flow of the battle, an MT can be a tank destroyer, can be a brawler, or even a scout and to do these things perfectly you need to have a good amount of knowledge of the game mechanics while your average player struggles to even look at the mini map and see that there is a tank behind him. 

So the problem is not MTs, it's their more demanding play style.

 

Pretty much this. You take on a medium tank for that flexibility and jack of all trades, it can dip it's toe in the roll of any tank class(apart from arty obviously) yet never be as good or bad at what the other classes do best nor be as weak in areas the other classes struggle most. This means that whenever you are fighting one of the other classes, it will always have an edge over you at something, aka alpha or speed or armor or dpm but at the same time, you will have many more attributes better than that specialist tank. You will be faster and more agile than the heavy tank along with some camo, you will have better firepower and hp and durability than the light, you will more flexibility and a turret and agility and carry potential over the TD but when the specialist tanks have you on their terms, you are boned. This is the catch and this is why they probably need the most skill level up there light tanks, since at the end of the day, armor is armor and small maps play into the hands of ironclads more so than a light or med. 

 

That said, there is plenty of scope within the medium tank class, you have some that are practically a light tank and some that are more heavy tank like and all in between, big alpha, small alpha, sniper types, auto loaders, just about most things really. The question then is are the bad results more a reflection of bad players rather than bad tanks? Heavy tanks are just more forgiving and probably this has always been this way. Just yesterday I fought on Mines using a T8 B-C light tank, good solid result and died towards the end having done what I THOUGHT was more than enough to see out the win, exposing those last couple of enemy TDs in their nest and so there was 5 Tds and a med left on the team facing just 1 Type4.... the Type4 won the battle I kid you not lol. All remaining players were terrible including the Type4 but on these small maps, armor won. All 7 remaining players were really bad, they attacked him 1 at a time, sat in front of his tank bouncing shots off his armor and all he did was sit there in the open and reload and kill 1 after 1. Point being, if he had a med, he dies, even to 6 terrible players. With the amount of auto aimed noob shoots he had hit his tank, if that was a med, its a loss. So do you guys think it's just a case of meds need a buff or meds just need more skill and that their low win rates can be more likely contributed to them not being as forgiving as a heavy tank and just noobs being exposed with noob play that would worked with a heavy tank? Because good players seem to thrive with medium tanks. I'm not great but I'd certainly prefer meds and lights, be the matador vs the bull, I don't play heavies because I prefer to outplay an enemy not out muscle him, I find that sit and trade playstyle boring. 



Cobra6 #15 Posted 26 April 2019 - 11:10 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16470 battles
  • 16,847
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

View PostTungstenHitman, on 26 April 2019 - 10:01 AM, said:

 it can dip it's toe in the roll of any tank class(apart from arty obviously) 

 

What do you mean? I always spam HE from stealth in my Obj.140! :hiding:

 

Cobra 6



cro001 #16 Posted 26 April 2019 - 11:31 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 32303 battles
  • 2,752
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    10-21-2012

View Postpallie_the_artillerist, on 26 April 2019 - 10:39 AM, said:

I'm sounding like a broken record, and Taji didn't say this but others did (and WG is doing it wrong AGAIN):

We need nerfs not buffs. Buffing 2 weak tanks will make all other underperforming tanks even more pathetic, nerfing the overperforming ones simultaneously buffs all weak tanks.

 

Yeah, well we all know that, but due WG's policy of not nerfing premium tanks, WG has committed itself to endless spiral of buffs. crap, I don't even know why they buffed 279 but here we are.


Edited by cro001, 26 April 2019 - 12:22 PM.


pallie_the_artillerist #17 Posted 26 April 2019 - 12:07 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 19543 battles
  • 1,315
  • [TRTD] TRTD
  • Member since:
    01-12-2013

View Postcro001, on 26 April 2019 - 11:31 AM, said:

 

Yeah well all know that, but due WG's policy of not nerfing premium tanks, WG has committed itself to endless spiral of buffs. crap, I don't even know why they buffed 279 but here we are.

 

A policy they could simply let go, of course.

TungstenHitman #18 Posted 26 April 2019 - 12:37 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 27537 battles
  • 5,043
  • [POOLS] POOLS
  • Member since:
    08-28-2016

View PostCobra6, on 26 April 2019 - 10:10 AM, said:

 

What do you mean? I always spam HE from stealth in my Obj.140! :hiding:

 

Cobra 6

 

HE is Hipster APCR :great:

pecopad #19 Posted 26 April 2019 - 12:44 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 27127 battles
  • 1,685
  • [UGN] UGN
  • Member since:
    09-04-2015

I don't think tank curves apply very well to non premium tanks...specially tier 9 and 10.

 

Tier 9 you have a monster grind with the tank not elite...

Tier 10 the best players are playing reward tanks..

 

Most of the players can't afford playing tier 9's and 10's.



Rati_Festa #20 Posted 26 April 2019 - 12:55 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 47592 battles
  • 2,154
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    02-10-2012

View Postpecopad, on 26 April 2019 - 12:44 PM, said:

I don't think tank curves apply very well to non premium tanks...specially tier 9 and 10.

 

Tier 9 you have a monster grind with the tank not elite...

Tier 10 the best players are playing reward tanks..

 

Most of the players can't afford playing tier 9's and 10's.

 

lol




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users