Jump to content


Would you be surprised if WG decided to buff 430U


  • Please log in to reply
39 replies to this topic

Dava_117 #21 Posted 25 September 2019 - 01:59 PM

    Major General

  • Moderator
  • 23549 battles
  • 5,985
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014

View Postsplash_time, on 25 September 2019 - 01:51 PM, said:

I won't be surprised if i see that one day WG decides to even buff obj 279e's armour.

 

They already did it. Originally it had a 25mm hull floor, so anyone could pen it when it crested ridges. There were so much moaning about it from the people who rushed to it that WG buffed it to something like 50-55mm, so now it has no proper weackspot anymore and can merrily cross any ridges without any problem.



splash_time #22 Posted 25 September 2019 - 02:05 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 15118 battles
  • 1,052
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    02-20-2018

View PostDava_117, on 25 September 2019 - 04:29 PM, said:

 

They already did it. Originally it had a 25mm hull floor, so anyone could pen it when it crested ridges. There were so much moaning about it from the people who rushed to it that WG buffed it to something like 50-55mm, so now it has no proper weackspot anymore and can merrily cross any ridges without any problem.

 

I know about this, but i meant armour layout.

And yet another stupid choice made by WG, I sold my E 100, and I was thinking that it gonna be buffed with IS 4 to re-buy it and grind IS 4, but as we can see, they just ignored all this people and canceled it.

I really hope that at least when they finally understand that it needs nurfing, they won't nurf it like FV 4005. :D



Dava_117 #23 Posted 25 September 2019 - 02:10 PM

    Major General

  • Moderator
  • 23549 battles
  • 5,985
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014

View Postsplash_time, on 25 September 2019 - 02:05 PM, said:

 

I know about this, but i meant armour layout.

And yet another stupid choice made by WG, I sold my E 100, and I was thinking that it gonna be buffed with IS 4 to re-buy it and grind IS 4, but as we can see, they just ignored all this people and canceled it.

I really hope that at least when they finally understand that it needs nurfing, they won't nurf it like FV 4005. :D

 

Well, they didn't cancelled E100 buffs. They postponed them after the ammo rebalance. Which I can understand being the main complain about armour.

Is IS-4 that I can't understand, as armour is the only thing that works. :D



LCpl_Jones #24 Posted 25 September 2019 - 03:10 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 14111 battles
  • 1,430
  • Member since:
    06-17-2017
i'd bet that the upcoming ammo rework will indirectly buff it :unsure:

Dava_117 #25 Posted 25 September 2019 - 03:24 PM

    Major General

  • Moderator
  • 23549 battles
  • 5,985
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014

View PostLCpl_Jones, on 25 September 2019 - 03:10 PM, said:

i'd bet that the upcoming ammo rework will indirectly buff it :unsure:

 

To be fair, the UFP and turret are already almost premium ammo immune, while the zone you can pen it are asy to pen for bot standard and premium ammo. Never felt the need to use premium ammo at 430U. 



tajj7 #26 Posted 25 September 2019 - 03:29 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 29084 battles
  • 17,317
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

View PostDava_117, on 25 September 2019 - 12:59 PM, said:

 

They already did it. Originally it had a 25mm hull floor, so anyone could pen it when it crested ridges. There were so much moaning about it from the people who rushed to it that WG buffed it to something like 50-55mm, so now it has no proper weackspot anymore and can merrily cross any ridges without any problem.

 

Having played it, it is going to be absurd under the premium ammo changes as its basically immune to standard ammo from the front, whilst still bouncing a lot of premium ammo (unless from like tier 10 TDs), so the premium ammo changes if they go ahead would effectively be like giving the tank an HP buff to 3200. 

 

 



Flicka #27 Posted 25 September 2019 - 03:42 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 23628 battles
  • 364
  • [CELL] CELL
  • Member since:
    10-25-2011

Ill say….they will give it weakspots (cupolas from 257 to 220) and give it -10 degrees of gun depression to compensate...

Yep, reading that back just sounds so unbelivably wrong that is just might be something they would do.



Schepel #28 Posted 25 September 2019 - 05:14 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 66877 battles
  • 3,919
  • Member since:
    05-13-2013

Well, the 430U is a bit slow for a proper med... :hiding:



Cradle_2_The_Grave #29 Posted 25 September 2019 - 06:00 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 22327 battles
  • 64
  • Member since:
    04-05-2016
Poors ruining the life for other poors yet again, how dumb! Instead of thanking WG for giving us one decent "TECH TREE" tank that can stand OP reward tanks, everyone is complaining about it... boy, why aren't you mad about the much better 907? 279e? Chieftain? So people who don't want to play in clans or simply never have enough time to get one of those reward tanks doesn't even deserve any decent tank? If you think it's so OP why don't you research it and play it by yourself and stop complaining? I think it's a good tank and I did researched it. Do the same, if they must nerf 430U, first they have to nerf 907, 279e and give chieftain turret weakspots too. Only then it will be fair.

Mimos_A #30 Posted 25 September 2019 - 10:58 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 29330 battles
  • 2,472
  • [SPESH] SPESH
  • Member since:
    05-30-2015

View PostCradle_2_The_Grave, on 25 September 2019 - 06:00 PM, said:

Poors ruining the life for other poors yet again, how dumb! Instead of thanking WG for giving us one decent "TECH TREE" tank that can stand OP reward tanks, everyone is complaining about it... boy, why aren't you mad about the much better 907? 279e? Chieftain? So people who don't want to play in clans or simply never have enough time to get one of those reward tanks doesn't even deserve any decent tank? If you think it's so OP why don't you research it and play it by yourself and stop complaining? I think it's a good tank and I did researched it. Do the same, if they must nerf 430U, first they have to nerf 907, 279e and give chieftain turret weakspots too. Only then it will be fair.


People want to play whatever tank they want, instead of having every game lamed up by the few "meta" tanks. Screw them, right? The 430u is borked beyond belief, the fact that others are has nothing to do with that and should be no excuse for leaving it like this.



kubawt112 #31 Posted 25 September 2019 - 11:00 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 3378 battles
  • 795
  • [-UM] -UM
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View PostSchepel, on 25 September 2019 - 05:14 PM, said:

Well, the 430U is a bit slow for a proper med... :hiding:

 

Plenty fast for a heavy tank. :child:



tajj7 #32 Posted 26 September 2019 - 09:37 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 29084 battles
  • 17,317
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

View PostCradle_2_The_Grave, on 25 September 2019 - 05:00 PM, said:

Poors ruining the life for other poors yet again, how dumb! Instead of thanking WG for giving us one decent "TECH TREE" tank that can stand OP reward tanks, everyone is complaining about it... boy, why aren't you mad about the much better 907? 279e? Chieftain? So people who don't want to play in clans or simply never have enough time to get one of those reward tanks doesn't even deserve any decent tank? If you think it's so OP why don't you research it and play it by yourself and stop complaining? I think it's a good tank and I did researched it. Do the same, if they must nerf 430U, first they have to nerf 907, 279e and give chieftain turret weakspots too. Only then it will be fair.

 

279e is OP, as is T95/FV4201 but less so, but not sure how this ignores the 430U being OP? Both those tanks are also likely to be played by better players who are likely to do well anyway whatever tank they play in, so even if someone is facing one they are going to be facing a good player whatever.

 

907 is worse than a 430 btw. 

 

430U is accessible to everyone and can make average players perform better.

 

Also there are 102k 430Us on the EU server.

 

In comparison there are - 2,200 279es and 9,600 T95/Fv4021s.

 

So which one are you more likely to meet and is more likely to impact your game, considering even combined you are about 10 times more likely to face a 430U than either of those other two tanks.

 

I also have the 430U and its frankly easy mode, it has no real weaknesses, makes most other meds at tier 10 look complete trash and even obsoletes many heavies as well. It basically combines the best elements of a medium and heavy tank without any of the drawbacks. 

 

It needs nerfing. 

 

 



Dava_117 #33 Posted 26 September 2019 - 09:57 AM

    Major General

  • Moderator
  • 23549 battles
  • 5,985
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014

View Posttajj7, on 26 September 2019 - 09:37 AM, said:

 

279e is OP, as is T95/FV4201 but less so, but not sure how this ignores the 430U being OP? Both those tanks are also likely to be played by better players who are likely to do well anyway whatever tank they play in, so even if someone is facing one they are going to be facing a good player whatever.

 

907 is worse than a 430 btw. 

 

430U is accessible to everyone and can make average players perform better.

 

Also there are 102k 430Us on the EU server.

 

In comparison there are - 2,200 279es and 9,600 T95/Fv4021s.

 

So which one are you more likely to meet and is more likely to impact your game, considering even combined you are about 10 times more likely to face a 430U than either of those other two tanks.

 

I also have the 430U and its frankly easy mode, it has no real weaknesses, makes most other meds at tier 10 look complete trash and even obsoletes many heavies as well. It basically combines the best elements of a medium and heavy tank without any of the drawbacks. 

 

It needs nerfing. 

 

 

 

While I agree with most of your post, I wouldn't consider it better than 907 (that is far more versatile thanks to mobility and 1530m/s APCR), nor even close to how OP 279e or the T95/FV4201 are.

It deserves nerf, but if WG ask which tank is better to nerf first, the 2 reward HT would be the first on the list as at least the 430U can be take out quite easily by shooting the LFP or the overmatchable hull top.



Kartoshkaya #34 Posted 26 September 2019 - 10:22 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 27916 battles
  • 974
  • [HAPY-] HAPY-
  • Member since:
    01-01-2015
Not sure why you guys struggle so much against that tank.
If I have to choose the ennemy team have a chieftain or a 430U i'll pick all day long the 430U.

So, why you would nerf the 430U instead of the chieftain ?

Mimos_A #35 Posted 26 September 2019 - 01:36 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 29330 battles
  • 2,472
  • [SPESH] SPESH
  • Member since:
    05-30-2015

View PostKartoshkaya, on 26 September 2019 - 10:22 AM, said:

Not sure why you guys struggle so much against that tank.
If I have to choose the ennemy team have a chieftain or a 430U i'll pick all day long the 430U.

So, why you would nerf the 430U instead of the chieftain ?


Edited by Mimos_A, 26 September 2019 - 01:37 PM.


CmdRatScabies #36 Posted 26 September 2019 - 01:45 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 38551 battles
  • 5,838
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    10-12-2015

View PostKartoshkaya, on 26 September 2019 - 10:22 AM, said:

Not sure why you guys struggle so much against that tank.
If I have to choose the ennemy team have a chieftain or a 430U i'll pick all day long the 430U.

So, why you would nerf the 430U instead of the chieftain ?

Exactly.  Since they are unlikely to nerf the Chieftain or the 279e or the 907 I'd expect them to level things over time by buffing other tanks to compete - while at the same time introducing a new OP must have tank at the same time to promote unpopular game modes.



tajj7 #37 Posted 26 September 2019 - 02:02 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 29084 battles
  • 17,317
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

View PostDava_117, on 26 September 2019 - 08:57 AM, said:

 

While I agree with most of your post, I wouldn't consider it better than 907 (that is far more versatile thanks to mobility and 1530m/s APCR), nor even close to how OP 279e or the T95/FV4201 are.

It deserves nerf, but if WG ask which tank is better to nerf first, the 2 reward HT would be the first on the list as at least the 430U can be take out quite easily by shooting the LFP or the overmatchable hull top.

 

907 has troll armour, 430U has better armour than most heavies, you can rely on 430U armour, if people don't have a clean shot on your lower plate they will struggle. They have similar gun handling but the 430U has 440 alpha and their mobility is very similar. The 907 also gets ammo racked really easily and the whole turret roof is a giant overmatch spot, which means a 430U can just sit hull down and bounce a 907's HEAT rounds with ease whilst it overmatches it's roof with AP -

 

Posted Image

 

Yet 907 HEAT vs 430 -

 

Posted Image

 

Is that worth a difference of slightly more troll side armour, a little more top speed, a bit more DPM (but way worse alpha) and a little more hp/ton? I don't think so. 

 

Overall IMO whilst the 907 is annoying to shoot at much like a 257 is and gets away with things it shouldn't, its nowhere near as reliable.

 

430U and T95/FV4201 are not really that far apart, if the T95 was as available for the masses you'd probably see it perform worse than the 430U as its less idiot proof, 430U has the better mobility, better camo and is probably more forgiving when not hull down. It's just not as universally versatile as the 430U is IMO, its an exceptional hull down heavy with decent mobility, the 430U is like the best bits of an IS7 crossed with the best bits of the Obj. 140, it has alpha, gun handling, camo, view range, mobility, good hull armour, an exceptional turret, DPM, 340 pen HEAT, can overmatch things, the only average and I mean average not bad things are the so so accuracy (which is massively compensated for by the soft stats and the armour) the -5 gun depression and the hp/ton. 

 

It's a tank with zero weaknesses, which I don't think applies to the T95/FV4201, which is more just overly exception hull down heavy. 

 

279e is like a level above for randoms as its stupidly idiot proof but like I said there are 2k of them, and 102k 430Us, the 279e is more but a minor issue in comparison IMO. 



reklakazala #38 Posted 28 September 2019 - 05:23 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 23391 battles
  • 389
  • [V-S-B] V-S-B
  • Member since:
    04-15-2015

View PostBalc0ra, on 25 September 2019 - 11:50 AM, said:

 

True... But then again if the old Murazor lead crew had said it. I would not have been surprised at all. 

HEAR HEAR. 



Karasu_Hidesuke #39 Posted 28 September 2019 - 07:51 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 17338 battles
  • 4,790
  • [I-S-L] I-S-L
  • Member since:
    12-03-2013

Not nearly as surprised as I'd be if they were about to buff Sta-2. :confused:

 

 

... if they did, I'd actually fall of my zabuton.


Edited by Karasu_Hidesuke, 28 September 2019 - 07:54 PM.


Alukat123 #40 Posted 28 September 2019 - 08:12 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 19908 battles
  • 2,118
  • Member since:
    03-21-2016

Nah, if they buff it, then they gonna give it a real buff.

double-autoloading gun, armor thickness of a maus, while the armor is still angled like it currently is, on top of that, the mobility of an EBR... i mean, why be modest?






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users