Jump to content


Update 1.10 CT1 - Vehicles Rebalance

Common test Update 1.10

  • Please log in to reply
134 replies to this topic

Dwigt #1 Posted 07 July 2020 - 04:15 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • WG Staff
  • 1595 battles
  • 559
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    01-29-2018

Greetings commanders,

 

Please feel free to share your feedback on the vehicles balacing changes here.

 

Thank you!



_SpartanWarrior_ #2 Posted 10 July 2020 - 11:02 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 40270 battles
  • 939
  • [BLOJ] BLOJ
  • Member since:
    01-09-2013
Progetto 65 nerf unnecessary!

Hunter_Ro_destroyer #3 Posted 10 July 2020 - 11:17 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 6264 battles
  • 4
  • [AYDA] AYDA
  • Member since:
    09-13-2019
Dont nerf progetto , 430u and ebr.. and dont make OP  E100.. all are bad changes

sebastianflorentin #4 Posted 10 July 2020 - 11:39 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 37102 battles
  • 21
  • [AC-RO] AC-RO
  • Member since:
    04-01-2013
I disagree about the progetto 65 nerf it wasn't necessary it's not that overpowerd like the obj430u which you want to decrease the armor on the top of the vehicle decrease it on the hull as well it can't be penetrated with AP or APCR shells.I ask you to reconsider i think me and other players are agree about the nerf on progetto it is not necessary.

Celution #5 Posted 10 July 2020 - 11:57 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 29176 battles
  • 1,726
  • Member since:
    09-26-2010

Overall great changes, but there are some things that should be addressed.

 

T32

Problem: The addition of the new gun "T5E1/45" is nice, even if only the AP penetration was increased by +10 mm. However, removing the regular T5E1 gun is a major nerf to the tank, as transitioning from the T29 to the T32 means you now have to play the T32 with the stock 90 mm gun, which still is absolutely horrible.

 

Solution: Return the T5E1 gun, and/or buff the stock 90 mm gun to a decent level.

 

KV-4

Problem: By replacing the 122 mm D-25T with the 122 mm D-25TS, the stock grind became even worse now that players are forced to use the 107 mm ZiS-6, or the even worse 122 mm D-2-5T.

 

Solution: Replace the 122 mm D-2-5T with the 122 mm D-25T, and buff the stock 107 mm ZiS-6 to a decent level (same as on the KV-5).

 

KV-3

Problem: The KV-3 is a big mess in terms of available guns and modules.

 

Solution: Simpify by removing some of the useless guns (e.g. both 85 mm guns, and make the 107 mm ZiS-6 the stock gun). Remove some of the worse radios.

 

8.8 cm KwK 43 L/71

Problem: Be it a renamed gun or not, it is completely ridiculous to make this change concerning the alpha damage only affect the Tiger, Tiger II, and E75.

 

Solution: Apply the change across the board to all tanks featuring this gun (Indien-Panzer, Tiger (P), VK 45.02 (P) Ausf. B, Panther II, VK 45.02 (P) Ausf. A, E 50, Ferdinand, Jagdpanther II, Nashorn, Jagdpanther, Jagdtiger 8.8)

 

10.5 cm KwK L/52

Problem: Same as above, it is completely ridiculous to make this change only affect the Tiger II, and E75.

 

Solution: Apply the changes across the board to all tanks featuring this gun (VK 45.02 (P) Ausf. B, VK 45.02 (P) Ausf. A, VK 100.01 (P), Ferdinand, Jagdpanther II, Jagdpanther)

 

10.5 cm KwK L/68

Problem: Same as above, it is completely ridiculous to make this change only affect the Tiger II, and E75.

 

Solution: Apply the changes across the board to all tanks featuring this gun (VK 45.02 (P) Ausf. B).

 

E 100

The armor buff was definitely needed, and seems balanced. The turret isn't impenetrable, but definitely more sturdy, especially at angles.

 

Problem: Making the 128 mm the primary gun with a niche alpha damage is lovely and suits the line better. However, 2650 base dpm on such an armored behemoth is simply put too much. It's like we didn't learn anything from the Maus-meta a few years ago, which was horrible for the overall game health.

 

Solution: Revert or reduce the rate of fire increase.

 

IS-4

Problem: Still lacks too few shells to be efficient.

 

Solution: Increase ammo rack size to at least 40 shells.

 

Italian medium tank nerfs

Excellent changes, especially the removal of the gun rammer. There is little to no disadvantage to having an autoreloader, and they truly made conventional autoloaders feel a lot worse as a result. Furthermore, they do have an incredible oppressive tendency against single shot guns. These nerfs were absolutely justified and necessary. Hats of to this change, especially that it was also applied to the premium vehicle!

 

 


Edited by Celution, 11 July 2020 - 12:18 AM.


MeNoobTank #6 Posted 11 July 2020 - 12:51 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 19351 battles
  • 1,247
  • [GT_WC] GT_WC
  • Member since:
    02-16-2017

To the italian tanks I would agree to only remove the gun rammer, but you also had to make the guns potato accuracy. You nerfed DPM + gun handling and to the Standard B you made it an useless boring worse Leo proto by nerfing gun handling + DPM + mobility + turret traverse nerf.

 

Standard B was my favorite tier 9 now it sucks.



Desyatnik_Pansy #7 Posted 11 July 2020 - 02:00 AM

    Bartender

  • Moderator
  • 19840 battles
  • 28,010
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    04-19-2013

After a bit of testing, Tiger II Turret is just.. oh yes. This was one of things I was most interested in learning about since while the other turret buffs were nice, I was worried the roof would still be lulpen for Russian 122mms.

 

The roof appears to have been buffed to 50mm (O-Ho's 149mm couldn't overmatch it, but the 60TP's 152mm could), which is really nice on top of the turret buffs and the alpha as well. M103 Turret roof is also stronger though the center of the roof does appear to still be 122mm overmatch, didn't test the sides with higher calibres though but it might be like the Tiger II And only 152mm+ overmatch, I'll have to check when tanks.gg updates or do more personal testing.


Edited by Desyatnik_Pansy, 11 July 2020 - 02:01 AM.


Zagy_BG #8 Posted 11 July 2020 - 05:35 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 12614 battles
  • 87
  • Member since:
    02-01-2019
I'm always glad when autoloaders/autoreloaders are getting axed.

rush0620 #9 Posted 11 July 2020 - 05:49 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 25689 battles
  • 199
  • Member since:
    01-03-2012

Dear WG!

 

Are you buff tier 8 and tier 9 heavys, and IS6, 112, WZ 111 very weak standard shell penetration. 186 mm penetration at 100 m very small at tier 8. Pls buff this tanks standard AP shell, like IS5 gun 221 mm pen or like IS M 212 mm AP pen good and enough. Pls WG more love this tanks! All tier limited premium tanks very low standard shell penetration and other tanks, Type 59,  IS6, Su 122 44, T 54 mod 1 me garage total joke!

 

Sorry bad english!


Edited by rush0620, 11 July 2020 - 07:20 AM.


edevjoe #10 Posted 11 July 2020 - 08:01 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 4418 battles
  • 23
  • Member since:
    02-12-2015
Progetto and Standard B nerf is not necessary ! The tank already has some weaknesses to not make it OP like 430 U and 430 .The tank rewards calculated combat which i truly enjoy (unlike arty which is aim and click :P ) now it just feels now you are at an even more disadvantage and why would play an auto-reloader ?For example it has (patch 1.9.1) one of worst worst DpM of tier 10 medium around 2100 base and it only has 360 alpha when playing single shot .Also the lower side armor has 30mm of protection so it can be over matched by 91mm caliber guns and higher and so at high tier people can absolutely  obliterate this tank and whole magazine (WITH EQUIPMENT and SKILLED CREW EVEN ) take for me in patch 1.9.1 around 40 SECONDS to reload full magazine and same as bat chat but clip potential is a lot lower than bat chat of 1440 compared to 1950 .Also standard B same thing absolutely no armor and i have been one shotted by arty or taken 800 dmg from T92 arty. So pls WG reconsider this nerf these tanks already has disadvantages i listed to above to take advantage of in current patch and these nerfs would just in my opinion break the tank.  Also WHO ASKED FOR PROGETTO AND STANDARD B NERFS ? NO ONE ASKED FOR IT ! It feels like thats MORE IMPORTANT THAN game BREAKING tanks like 279 , chieftain and 907 .They are fine as they are and already punishes you for playing full auto loader in the tank with AWFUL DpM. I will type as long as possible to save these tanks from the nerf hammer. 

Edited by edevjoe, 11 July 2020 - 08:39 AM.


baratoz1701 #11 Posted 11 July 2020 - 09:01 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 28213 battles
  • 473
  • [DNUTZ] DNUTZ
  • Member since:
    05-31-2012
If peope didnt notice - progetto 46 got nerf as it can no longer use a rammer also

edevjoe #12 Posted 11 July 2020 - 09:20 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 4418 battles
  • 23
  • Member since:
    02-12-2015

View Postbaratoz1701, on 11 July 2020 - 09:01 AM, said:

If peope didnt notice - progetto 46 got nerf as it can no longer use a rammer also

Nice - i only agree the nerf to the progetto 46 as its better overall compared to panthera aka P2W. Pls dont nerf the panthera , standard b and progetto 65 as it would be one step closer to less pay to win :) WG , pls dont say" they payed money so standard tank should be nerfed as well......" Thats the exact meaning of pay to win where premium tank is better than standard tank and nowadays gj WG u are making premium tanks little worse than standard tank like ISU-152K to ISU-152 the ISU -152 is superior to ISU-152K thats the way it should be wargaming ! :) I hope upcoming premium polish med is little worse than standard tank as well....


Edited by edevjoe, 11 July 2020 - 10:04 AM.


ExistanceUK #13 Posted 11 July 2020 - 10:05 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 23221 battles
  • 261
  • [NAMES] NAMES
  • Member since:
    08-29-2015
As I have said before, if the stated aim of the nerfs to the Italian tanks is to fix the tier 10 because it is too good as a clip tank then they should just remove the 4th shell from the clip. This would bring the tier 10 into line with the rest of the tree and stop it from encroaching on the autoloaders territory. The rest of the nerfs are unnecessary then if the clip is reduced. 

ZDN #14 Posted 11 July 2020 - 11:08 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 30688 battles
  • 301
  • [-WTB-] -WTB-
  • Member since:
    12-14-2011

Italian nerfs is not necessary,progetto 65 is trash now,amx 30b is more fun to play! Serios it takes years to reload now,and the gun will troll you,full aim and miss 2 shoots on non moving target in the side.Using gld,mk2 and vents, all for bonds.Plus food and the gun is derp now.People dont use this tanks in cw,after this nerf the random will lose the italian tanks.

 


Edited by ZDN, 11 July 2020 - 11:09 AM.


edevjoe #15 Posted 11 July 2020 - 11:27 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 4418 battles
  • 23
  • Member since:
    02-12-2015

View PostExistanceUK, on 11 July 2020 - 10:05 AM, said:

As I have said before, if the stated aim of the nerfs to the Italian tanks is to fix the tier 10 because it is too good as a clip tank then they should just remove the 4th shell from the clip. This would bring the tier 10 into line with the rest of the tree and stop it from encroaching on the autoloaders territory. The rest of the nerfs are unnecessary then if the clip is reduced. 

Like i have stated above if u do go full auto loader then the DpM is so bad u might even become useless in the tank i only go full auto when im not firing for next 40 seconds so also i would argue what is the point of progressing up the tree if clip size is reduced all of them would have 3 shells ?If u would really want to reduce clip then alpha dmg buff is a must.


Edited by edevjoe, 11 July 2020 - 11:37 AM.


Elleriel #16 Posted 11 July 2020 - 11:44 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 35789 battles
  • 228
  • [0ZAMI] 0ZAMI
  • Member since:
    05-12-2012

Once more WG shows they don't see where are the real problems :

 

- Modify E100 : why new bad gun ? 

- Modify IS 4 : should be more ressistant (but with TD gold ammo high pen you are still a pinata) and now you'll be a pinata unable to hit his target => overall debuff not a buff.

- Modify Progetto : was not (nearly never) seen in CW tiers 10, and will disappear from the FFA also. Don't understant this nerf

- Modify T110E5 : if you don't remove weak spot on cuppola (or reduce it's size), you can make all buffs you want, this tank is crap and will stay crap. 

- Modify obj 430U : all this tank had for him was a correct armor, now will be slow, not more accurate, not faster reload and be paper scrap => TY WG to "destroy" one more tank and show if we don't have time to get a rewaard tank, we have no chance against ubber reward tanks (for campaigns or CW). 

- Modify EBR : could be good, not yet tried it. 

 

=> those rebalance is just :

1/ unusefull because debuffs negates buffs (e100-is4).

2/ unjustified (progetto).

3/ not let a tank not rewards being competitive (obj 430U).

4/ nice try but miss the objective (T110E5).

 

So if it's losing the time of your teams to do this, just try to solve real problems of the game you are just pushing to his end with your blindness of community demands. 



edevjoe #17 Posted 11 July 2020 - 11:59 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 4418 battles
  • 23
  • Member since:
    02-12-2015
WG , in general pls limit gold spam to just 5% so we can actually get meaningful armor test and would give us a better opinion and improve the game more with more meaningful and realistic statistics.We dont want another 268 v4 era again and that is how we failed to get meaningful test of the tanks and got into the game as an OP tank because now more standard rounds are hitting compared to CT.

Edited by edevjoe, 11 July 2020 - 12:01 PM.


Mettkrieger #18 Posted 11 July 2020 - 12:20 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 43655 battles
  • 651
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    01-31-2012
I absolutely do not agree with the changes made to the italian tree. You're slaughtering a complete tech tree to the point where it's not even worth to play anymore

Elleriel #19 Posted 11 July 2020 - 12:21 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 35789 battles
  • 228
  • [0ZAMI] 0ZAMI
  • Member since:
    05-12-2012

In tiers 10 limit premium ammos to 5 / tank. 

Will give back some survavibility to tanks who should rely on armor. 

But then another problem will show again : chieftains, obj 279e , ...

 

There is no good solution to this problem since WG created monsters than most tanks can't match.



Backfischklatscher #20 Posted 11 July 2020 - 12:24 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 21809 battles
  • 1
  • [4R34L] 4R34L
  • Member since:
    08-10-2011

The e-100 armor buff is to weak. +20mm on frontturret, really? please try +40mm. When this is the buff, then it isnt worth it to take care of the e-100.

 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users