Jump to content


How would YOU buff the STB-1?

STB-1 buff WG planned nerfs

  • Please log in to reply
36 replies to this topic

Poll: STB-1 options (37 members have cast votes)

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

Which of the following do you prefer?

  1. Accurate sniper (15 votes [40.54%])

    Percentage of vote: 40.54%

  2. All-round with ready rack (8 votes [21.62%])

    Percentage of vote: 21.62%

  3. Neither (please explain why and/or provide ideas of your own) (8 votes [21.62%])

    Percentage of vote: 21.62%

  4. Don't care about STB-1, its fate is irrelevant to me (6 votes [16.22%])

    Percentage of vote: 16.22%

Vote Hide poll

SuedKAT #21 Posted 28 April 2019 - 04:59 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 12154 battles
  • 7,967
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-21-2014

Personally I would prefer a more mobile version of the M48, good gun, good mobility and somewhat workable armor but best when hulldown, I wouldn't mind trading some armor for the mobility especially since I get the impression that the STB-1's profile makes it a harder target to hit in the first place. Don't really see all the fuss about making tanks unique all of a sudden, what's wrong with tanks that's similar but have a few different drawbacks and strengths like it used to be, that way you also don't have the problem with some tanks only working on some maps and sucking badly on all other maps. I mean look at the Russian IS and the Chinese IS-2, extremely similar tanks but with a few small differences that makes one better than the other depending on the situation, I got no problem with that what so ever.



gpalsson #22 Posted 28 April 2019 - 05:25 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 24508 battles
  • 8,965
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2013

View Postpihip, on 28 April 2019 - 03:36 PM, said:

STB-1 already has the second highest DPM among L7A1 (legit and derivative) tanks, beaten only by AMX 30B. If the buff has to be small, I'd rather they make the gun more accurate and improve the handling/aimtime.

I know it does, but if STB is to be different yet (somewhat) competitive, it needs to go even higher since it has low alpha after changes.


Edited by gpalsson, 28 April 2019 - 05:26 PM.


XxKuzkina_MatxX #23 Posted 28 April 2019 - 05:31 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 53201 battles
  • 4,347
  • [OBY] OBY
  • Member since:
    04-02-2016

View Postgpalsson, on 28 April 2019 - 08:25 PM, said:

I know it does, but if STB is to be different yet competitive, it needs to go even higher since it has low alpha after changes.

 

Why does the DPM need to be higher?

 

The lower alpha with the same high DPM is to compensate for the substandard gun handling. You shoot faster with less alpha and you'd have a higher chance to hit. That was WG reasoning at least.



VonniVidiVici #24 Posted 28 April 2019 - 05:33 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 38691 battles
  • 12,519
  • Member since:
    03-18-2013
Buff gun handling, buff terrain resistance, job done.

PanzerVor87 #25 Posted 28 April 2019 - 05:36 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 15617 battles
  • 1,112
  • Member since:
    01-11-2013

View Postgpalsson, on 28 April 2019 - 05:25 PM, said:

I know it does, but if STB is to be different yet (somewhat) competitive, it needs to go even higher since it has low alpha after changes.

 

About this, I actually agree with what SuedKAT said above, specifically this part
 

Block Quote

Don't really see all the fuss about making tanks unique all of a sudden, what's wrong with tanks that's similar but have a few different drawbacks and strengths like it used to be, that way you also don't have the problem with some tanks only working on some maps and sucking badly on all other maps. I mean look at the Russian IS and the Chinese IS-2, extremely similar tanks but with a few small differences that makes one better than the other depending on the situation, I got no problem with that what so ever.

 

STB-1 would already become "different" if it were to get the hydropneumatic suspensions (the mechanic has been around for years with the Swedes so I doubt it would be difficult to add it elsewhere), also as posted in the OP I'm not currently examining the tank as it would be WITH WG's changes, but the one we currently have (and have had for ages).

Edited by pihip, 28 April 2019 - 05:38 PM.


gpalsson #26 Posted 28 April 2019 - 05:47 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 24508 battles
  • 8,965
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2013

View PostXxKuzkina_MatxX, on 28 April 2019 - 04:31 PM, said:

 

Why does the DPM need to be higher?

 

The lower alpha with the same high DPM is to compensate for the substandard gun handling. You shoot faster with less alpha and you'd have a higher chance to hit. That was WG reasoning at least.

 

I wouldn't object to giving it better gun handling either :)

I just think it could be fun with a tank with low pen low alpha (like proposed) who when it gets to flank will absolutely decimate with TD DPM.

Anyway, I haven't given it super much thought so maybe I am just being retarded, it's just pixel tanks and we don't have a say anyway.



SuedKAT #27 Posted 28 April 2019 - 05:50 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 12154 battles
  • 7,967
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-21-2014

View Postpihip, on 28 April 2019 - 05:36 PM, said:

 

About this, I actually agree with what SuedKAT said above, specifically this part
 

 

STB-1 would already become "different" if it were to get the hydropneumatic suspensions (the mechanic has been around for years with the Swedes so I doubt it would be difficult to add it elsewhere), also as posted in the OP I'm not currently examining the tank as it would be WITH WG's changes, but the one we currently have (and have had for ages).

 

Well I guess it would be implemented similar to how it at the moment is implemented on the upcoming Swedish MT's so in the end it would turn out kinda like a mix between the M48, CAX and the UDES MT I guess, something which I would be ok with it if it also came with decent gun performance.

kaneloon #28 Posted 28 April 2019 - 06:13 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 30471 battles
  • 3,197
  • [UKN-A] UKN-A
  • Member since:
    11-18-2011
But has someone really understood what WG expected from the changes they plan to do ? What would be its supposed gameplay ?

XxKuzkina_MatxX #29 Posted 28 April 2019 - 06:22 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 53201 battles
  • 4,347
  • [OBY] OBY
  • Member since:
    04-02-2016

View Postkaneloon, on 28 April 2019 - 09:13 PM, said:

But has someone really understood what WG expected from the changes they plan to do ? What would be its supposed gameplay ?

 

The same as before, a 2nd line support medium, apart from using the terrain better because of the new suspension. That's also why the test ended, i guess, without a positive outcome. The overall upgrade didn't result in a better tank or a different function!

PanzerVor87 #30 Posted 28 April 2019 - 06:40 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 15617 battles
  • 1,112
  • Member since:
    01-11-2013

View PostXxKuzkina_MatxX, on 28 April 2019 - 06:22 PM, said:

The same as before, a 2nd line support medium, apart from using the terrain better because of the new suspension. That's also why the test ended, i guess, without a positive outcome. The overall upgrade didn't result in a better tank or a different function!

 

Wait, they already finished testing? I thought only the Object 430/430U nerfs were discarded because of RU whining, did they also drop all the proposed changes to STB-1, Leo and AMX?

XxKuzkina_MatxX #31 Posted 28 April 2019 - 06:53 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 53201 battles
  • 4,347
  • [OBY] OBY
  • Member since:
    04-02-2016

View Postpihip, on 28 April 2019 - 09:40 PM, said:

Wait, they already finished testing? I thought only the Object 430/430U nerfs were discarded because of RU whining, did they also drop all the proposed changes to STB-1, Leo and AMX?

 

The first phase of testing ended miserably as you know and i think a different approach to upgrading those tanks will be implemented. A more generous approach that actually affect the performance and make them interesting and viable choices.

 

Honestly, the reception of these changes was about the same here in EU as in the RU region. The Leopard buffs were not enough and the STB-1 rebalance was ambiguous/unclear to most of the players same as the 30B.

 

The 430 and 430U changes received exactly the same feedback here and in RU. The wrong stuff was changed, instead of toning down the armor profile on the 430U and fixing the stock grind of the 430. They focused on the gun characteristics!



Gruff_ #32 Posted 28 April 2019 - 07:28 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 19414 battles
  • 654
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    09-22-2011
Give it really big wheels and a bright pink paint job?

PanzerVor87 #33 Posted 28 April 2019 - 07:51 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 15617 battles
  • 1,112
  • Member since:
    01-11-2013

View PostXxKuzkina_MatxX, on 28 April 2019 - 06:53 PM, said:

The first phase of testing ended miserably as you know and i think a different approach to upgrading those tanks will be implemented. A more generous approach that actually affect the performance and make them interesting and viable choices.

 

Honestly, the reception of these changes was about the same here in EU as in the RU region. The Leopard buffs were not enough and the STB-1 rebalance was ambiguous/unclear to most of the players same as the 30B.

 

The 430 and 430U changes received exactly the same feedback here and in RU. The wrong stuff was changed, instead of toning down the armor profile on the 430U and fixing the stock grind of the 430. They focused on the gun characteristics!

 

I only knew that Object 430/430U were deemed "fine" and the testing for them was canceled, the rest I had no idea. Thanks for explaining. :)

tajj7 #34 Posted 29 April 2019 - 10:25 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 27578 battles
  • 15,320
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

The proposed buffs they did were fine, it just didn't need the whole host of nerfs to go with it. 

 

Just because it's supposed to be a mid range ridge worker doesn't mean it needs bad accuracy, bad pen drop off, or lower alpha.

 

UNLESS you make it a universal change to ALL brawler tanks, so the ,likes of the IS7, 277, 260, Maus, 430U, Obj. 140 etc. get their accuracy, aim times, penetration at range, view range etc. nerfed.

 

You can't role define the STB-1 on its own, when an IS7 is still faster than it, still has better armour, still has more HP, still has good gun dispersion, still has better pen at range and has the similar accuracy. 

 

There is no reason the STB-1 should be made so bad at longer ranges, when a whole host of vastly stronger tanks for close to medium range combat are still decent at longer ranges. If you make those changes they need to be global across the board. 

 

I'd say - 

 

  • Give it the turret buff
  • Give it the special suspension.

 

Keep the rest the same and see how it does from there to be honest, -13 gun depression with a strong turret is decent enough I think to balance out the poorer gun handling, especially with that DPM.

 

Buffing the gun handling, accuracy etc. starts to power creep the Cent AX and encroach on the Patton. 



BlackBloodBandit #35 Posted 29 April 2019 - 10:38 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 5528 battles
  • 670
  • Member since:
    12-23-2018
In my opinion the buffs WG want to do to the tank are fine. On the other hand I really dislike the nerf to damage per shot. It's bad at tier 10 to have such low alpha these days. Also the accuracy nerf is not good for it's role and it's already not the best.

Cobra6 #36 Posted 29 April 2019 - 11:03 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16505 battles
  • 17,109
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

Simple:

 

- Decrease the dispersion values, especially on rotating the hull, drastically.

- Decrease airtime to 2 seconds.

 

It doesn't need *ANY* other change, the rest about the tank is fine as it is now on the live server.

 

There doesn't need to be a role invented for it in balancing like WG is trying at the moment, it already has the role: DPM machine with gun depression that can fight both at close and at long ranges but has no viable armor to speak off. And it's brilliant in that role if only the gun would behave.

It's basically a hybrid between the Patton and the Obj140.


Edited by Cobra6, 29 April 2019 - 11:05 AM.


Flicka #37 Posted 29 April 2019 - 12:20 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 23017 battles
  • 113
  • [CELL] CELL
  • Member since:
    10-25-2011

As mentioned the tank that this is based on had hydropneumatic suspension, but it also had an autoloader.

Would probably like to see something like a progetto with the new suspension.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users