monjardin

Object 268 version WTF were they thinking?

100 posts in this topic

On 2/20/2018 at 5:51 AM, hazzgar said:

It needs an LFP weakspot too. I think Dez posted a battle with 20k bounced. I get it the tank only works vs morons but since most players are morons it's still broken. Because who cares you can deal with a certain tank if your pubbies will get stomped by it. You can't be on all flanks and if it rolles over them too fast you are screwed.

It needs one or the other.  A large mobility nerf would negate the need for a bigger frontal weakspot - call it like 35 forward/10 or even 5 reverse, nerf terrain resistances a little bit so it can't power up hills the way it does now, same hull traverse speed... or make it easier to pen frontally without gold so you can't just yolo out, aim while bouncing everything, and then duck back into cover after firing.

I like that it rewards aggressive gameplay, but it goes way too far in enabling bullshit yolo strats that you can't even think about trying to pull in pretty much any other tank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, PlanetaryGenocide said:

It needs one or the other.  A large mobility nerf would negate the need for a bigger frontal weakspot - call it like 35 forward/10 or even 5 reverse, nerf terrain resistances a little bit so it can't power up hills the way it does now, same hull traverse speed... or make it easier to pen frontally without gold so you can't just yolo out, aim while bouncing everything, and then duck back into cover after firing.

I like that it rewards aggressive gameplay, but it goes way too far in enabling bullshit yolo strats that you can't even think about trying to pull in pretty much any other tank.

Sorry mate but every tank needs weakspots. Stop thinking like WG morons because that is what you are doing. Making the tank more frustrating to play instead of making it less frustrating to play against. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I said bigger frontal weakspot - you can pen the little radar bar:

 bRhU8VB.png

 with most Tier 10 regular rounds (albeit not reliably because lol 25% rng lol 250mm "weakspot), the problem is that the damn thing moves too fast to get a reliable shot off on it.  Nerfing the mobility gives you a much better chance to both hit it, and not have the stupid fucking thing retreat behind cover in half a second like it can now, without having to sling HEAT at the UFP.

 

That being said, giving it a bigger weakspot would arguably still make it more frustrating to play - nobody likes getting shot.  No matter what you do, making it less frustrating to play against will make it more frustrating to play - the goal is to find the sweet spot where the tank isn't absolute cancer for one side or the other.


Or they can go true WG style and make it cancer for both groups - see artillery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find the T110E3 pretty easy to pen frontally in the open BECAUSE IT'S SO SLOW. This thing is moving so damn quick that you can't hit the weak spots.

I agree with @PlanetaryGenocide, nerf the armor or the mobility, but not both. Nerfing both would totally kill the tank.

On the other hand, that would make it just as useful as the original Object 268. So, that's exactly what I expect to happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, PlanetaryGenocide said:

I said bigger frontal weakspot - you can pen the little radar bar:

 bRhU8VB.png

 with most Tier 10 regular rounds (albeit not reliably because lol 25% rng lol 250mm "weakspot), the problem is that the damn thing moves too fast to get a reliable shot off on it.  Nerfing the mobility gives you a much better chance to both hit it, and not have the stupid fucking thing retreat behind cover in half a second like it can now, without having to sling HEAT at the UFP.

 

That being said, giving it a bigger weakspot would arguably still make it more frustrating to play - nobody likes getting shot.  No matter what you do, making it less frustrating to play against will make it more frustrating to play - the goal is to find the sweet spot where the tank isn't absolute cancer for one side or the other.


Or they can go true WG style and make it cancer for both groups - see artillery.

Sorry but this is not a weakspot where 4-5/10 shots will bounce even if they hit perfectly. Sorry but your argument of "lets not give it weakspots" because it will be hard to play is bad. WG has for the past year developed a policy of no weakspots so we all have to shoot gold. Do you really think Type5, Chrystler GF, Defender have reasonable armor profiles for their triers? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, hazzgar said:

WG has for the past year developed a policy of no weakspots so we all have to shoot gold. Do you really think Type5, Chrystler GF, Defender have reasonable armor profiles for their triers? 

Defender yes, if only because that LFP is garbage and it's almost impossible to hide it and still play effectively due to a combination of map design, pike nose, and gold rounds making it a moot point.  Also the roof hatches, tiny as they are.

I don't own or fight against Chrysler GF often enough to say for that one.  I don't remember ever having trouble with them - usually because I'm either A. not a tier 8 or lower, or B. just get around to the side lol.  I do remember people crying that it was OP when it was first released but I've seen no evidence of that - it still gets turbodunked outside of its own tier like it should be.

Type 5 is mad gay bullshit and we all know it, but the problem with that tank isn't just the armor, it's that both the armor and the gun are basically retard-proof.  The extra alpha on the gold round is just adding insult to injury at that point.

 

Quote

Sorry but your argument of "lets not give it weakspots" because it will be hard to play is bad.

Sorry, but so is your argument of "don't nerf the mobility because it'll be more frustrating to play".  You're missing the fucking point

I said nerfing the mobility would negate the need for a larger frontal weakspot, because it makes the existing one much easier to hit if the thing isn't zipping around like a hamster on crack.  I never said I don't want it to have bigger frontal weakspots - I would love for the lower plate to be absolute swiss cheese like the Badger's or the pick-a-russian-tank.  The part about making it more frustrating to play was just parroting your own dumb point about how nerfing the mobility would make it more frustrating to play - no matter which method you go with, you're going to lessen the enjoyment of people who currently own the tank, because that's what nerfs fucking do.

 

tl;dr - Nerf mobility or add a LFP weakspot.  Both is overkill, as @monjardin said

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, PlanetaryGenocide said:

tl;dr - Nerf mobility or add a LFP weakspot.  Both is overkill, as @monjardin said

There's a problem I think with nerfing mobility.

If you nerf it enough for the current 250mm "weakspot" on top to be reliably hittable (and even then not reliably pennable without sprem) it'll need to be like pre-power-creep T95 in a swamp.

 

I think the top weakspot needs to be much thinner (e.g. 220 face-on) or thinner and bigger (235-240 face-on but twice as big) even with a reasonable mobility or LFP nerf. If you stack both "reasonable" nerfs then maybe you can just bust the hatch to 235-240 and leave it the current size, still hard enough to hit at any reasonable range...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Guardian54 said:

it'll need to be like pre-power-creep T95 in a swamp.

tbh I'm okay with that :kappa: but that's just cause I don't own one and mobility as garbage as that would make the T49 even more fun.

You're probably right though - nerfing the mobility too much just means dudes will sit and snipe with it from 350+ meters, which makes the lack of big-ass snipeable weakspots even more of an issue due to pen dropoff at range.  I figured 35/10 or 35/5 like I suggested earlier would be a reasonable compromise - that's the speed of the slightly slower heavy tanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, PlanetaryGenocide said:

Defender yes, if only because that LFP is garbage and it's almost impossible to hide it and still play effectively due to a combination of map design, pike nose, and gold rounds making it a moot point.  Also the roof hatches, tiny as they are.

I don't own or fight against Chrysler GF often enough to say for that one.  I don't remember ever having trouble with them - usually because I'm either A. not a tier 8 or lower, or B. just get around to the side lol.  I do remember people crying that it was OP when it was first released but I've seen no evidence of that - it still gets turbodunked outside of its own tier like it should be.

Type 5 is mad gay bullshit and we all know it, but the problem with that tank isn't just the armor, it's that both the armor and the gun are basically retard-proof.  The extra alpha on the gold round is just adding insult to injury at that point.

 

Sorry, but so is your argument of "don't nerf the mobility because it'll be more frustrating to play".  You're missing the fucking point

I said nerfing the mobility would negate the need for a larger frontal weakspot, because it makes the existing one much easier to hit if the thing isn't zipping around like a hamster on crack.  I never said I don't want it to have bigger frontal weakspots - I would love for the lower plate to be absolute swiss cheese like the Badger's or the pick-a-russian-tank.  The part about making it more frustrating to play was just parroting your own dumb point about how nerfing the mobility would make it more frustrating to play - no matter which method you go with, you're going to lessen the enjoyment of people who currently own the tank, because that's what nerfs fucking do.

 

tl;dr - Nerf mobility or add a LFP weakspot.  Both is overkill, as @monjardin said

Sorry but it is YOU WHO IS MISSING THE POINT . Your suggestion to nerf mobility but still leave it with no weakspots is New WG school of balancing. I agree doing both may be too much but the idea to nerf mobility is stupid. Armor should be nerfed to not turn it into type5. If you keep the speed but nerf the lfp the tank will still work for green+ players but it won't be idiot proof and you won't be able to yolo drunk and bounce everything as long as people don't shoot gold (and even that sometimes bounces). This will mean the tank won't be useless but will require thinking. If it's slow and has no weakspots it's annoying to play against, idiot proof and not really strong even if you play well. Type5 with non derp that sacrifices a turret for pen. So still a stupid tank, even if not a good one.

 

Also please don't use arguments "I don't have trouble with tank a therefore that tank is ok/balanced/not broken". We are not on the pub forums, this argument makes no sense. The Defender is clearly overperforming. Stats show that so I don't care if you can deal with them. The LFP also isn't trash. On flat ground same trier meds except centurion won't reliably pen it. Sorry but that is NOT trash. As for Chrystler - you go to it's side? The tank has amazing traverse so if you go to its side then it's not the tank being bad but the driver. Not to mention I was not talking about them being OP but them being a part of a trend of no weakspots. That's bad because it promotes flinging gold instead of actually knowing where to aim. So by wanting another tank to be like them you are supporting the shitty meta. Don't get me wrong I have nothing about gold spam and I don't complain about it but the no weakspot trend is plain dumb and I'm pretty sure most of wotlabs agrees it's bad for the game.

3 hours ago, Guardian54 said:

There's a problem I think with nerfing mobility.

If you nerf it enough for the current 250mm "weakspot" on top to be reliably hittable (and even then not reliably pennable without sprem) it'll need to be like pre-power-creep T95 in a swamp.

 

I think the top weakspot needs to be much thinner (e.g. 220 face-on) or thinner and bigger (235-240 face-on but twice as big) even with a reasonable mobility or LFP nerf. If you stack both "reasonable" nerfs then maybe you can just bust the hatch to 235-240 and leave it the current size, still hard enough to hit at any reasonable range...

Just make the LFP 220-240. Old obj263 somehow could hide it's LFP and no one claimed it was shit. It was a balnced TD. This would make it a similar tank to old 263 though with less acc and more armor. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, hazzgar said:

Sorry but it is YOU WHO IS MISSING THE POINT . Your suggestion to nerf mobility but still leave it with no weakspots is New WG school of balancing. I agree doing both may be too much but the idea to nerf mobility is stupid. Armor should be nerfed to not turn it into type5. If you keep the speed but nerf the lfp the tank will still work for green+ players but it won't be idiot proof and you won't be able to yolo drunk and bounce everything as long as people don't shoot gold (and even that sometimes bounces). This will mean the tank won't be useless but will require thinking. If it's slow and has no weakspots it's annoying to play against, idiot proof and not really strong even if you play well. Type5 with non derp that sacrifices a turret for pen. So still a stupid tank, even if not a good one.

 

Also please don't use arguments "I don't have trouble with tank a therefore that tank is ok/balanced/not broken". We are not on the pub forums, this argument makes no sense. The Defender is clearly overperforming. Stats show that so I don't care if you can deal with them. The LFP also isn't trash. On flat ground same trier meds except centurion won't reliably pen it. Sorry but that is NOT trash. As for Chrystler - you go to it's side? The tank has amazing traverse so if you go to its side then it's not the tank being bad but the driver. Not to mention I was not talking about them being OP but them being a part of a trend of no weakspots. That's bad because it promotes flinging gold instead of actually knowing where to aim. 

Oi, don't make me regret upvoting you earlier to balance his downvote.

At least try to be reasonably civil. He has already conceded that mobility nerf would result in even more cancerous play.

 

...Though I do agree with you that defender LFP is far from trash. My WZ 111 1-4's gun shows orange on it on flat ground from 20 meters. Yes, I might be standing too close, but it's still cancer.

I also agree with the dire need of frontal weakspots instead of squeezing people for creds for premium ammo to be able to play past Tier 6 (as that's when you start meeting the Tier 8 cancer prems, though max 3 per match is not unbearable). I've shot maybe 1% prem in all my matches put together but I can seriously see the temptation whenever I can't flank a Type 5 (or sic a friendly Type 5 or heavy TD on him, as most Type 5 drivers fail angling class and get cheesed in shoulders by heavy TDs)

@PlanetaryGenocide consider nerfing the pen dropoff to discourage camping to overcome the new weakspots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, hazzgar said:

Sorry but it is YOU WHO IS MISSING THE POINT . Your suggestion to nerf mobility but still leave it with no weakspots is New WG school of balancing. I agree doing both may be too much but the idea to nerf mobility is stupid. Armor should be nerfed to not turn it into type5. If you keep the speed but nerf the lfp the tank will still work for green+ players but it won't be idiot proof and you won't be able to yolo drunk and bounce everything as long as people don't shoot gold (and even that sometimes bounces). This will mean the tank won't be useless but will require thinking. If it's slow and has no weakspots it's annoying to play against, idiot proof and not really strong even if you play well. Type5 with non derp that sacrifices a turret for pen. So still a stupid tank, even if not a good one.

 

Also please don't use arguments "I don't have trouble with tank a therefore that tank is ok/balanced/not broken". We are not on the pub forums, this argument makes no sense. The Defender is clearly overperforming. Stats show that so I don't care if you can deal with them. The LFP also isn't trash. On flat ground same trier meds except centurion won't reliably pen it. Sorry but that is NOT trash. As for Chrystler - you go to it's side? The tank has amazing traverse so if you go to its side then it's not the tank being bad but the driver. Not to mention I was not talking about them being OP but them being a part of a trend of no weakspots. That's bad because it promotes flinging gold instead of actually knowing where to aim. So by wanting another tank to be like them you are supporting the shitty meta. Don't get me wrong I have nothing about gold spam and I don't complain about it but the no weakspot trend is plain dumb and I'm pretty sure most of wotlabs agrees it's bad for the game.

Just make the LFP 220-240. Old obj263 somehow could hide it's LFP and no one claimed it was shit. It was a balnced TD. This would make it a similar tank to old 263 though with less acc and more armor. 

tl;dr dude, but clearly we disagree and that's fine with me.

14 minutes ago, Guardian54 said:

..Though I do agree with you that defender LFP is far from trash

...

@PlanetaryGenocide consider nerfing the pen dropoff to discourage camping to overcome the new weakspots.

To be fair, I get a lot of tier 10 matches in the Defender and the entire tank is ~mediocre~ at that tier anyways, so that's probably what's biasing my view of the LFP as trash.

TBH I would love a pen dropoff nerf but that's because I hate HEAT rounds and love me some APCR.  But it was mostly a joke, I doubt they'll ever really mess with it since pen dropoff doesn't seem to be a huge balancing factor anyways other than nerfing redline sniping... maybe that's why the STRVs have such high base pen?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Guardian54 said:

Oi, don't make me regret upvoting you earlier to balance his downvote.

At least try to be reasonably civil. He has already conceded that mobility nerf would result in even more cancerous play.

 

...Though I do agree with you that defender LFP is far from trash. My WZ 111 1-4's gun shows orange on it on flat ground from 20 meters. Yes, I might be standing too close, but it's still cancer.

I also agree with the dire need of frontal weakspots instead of squeezing people for creds for premium ammo to be able to play past Tier 6 (as that's when you start meeting the Tier 8 cancer prems, though max 3 per match is not unbearable). I've shot maybe 1% prem in all my matches put together but I can seriously see the temptation whenever I can't flank a Type 5 (or sic a friendly Type 5 or heavy TD on him, as most Type 5 drivers fail angling class and get cheesed in shoulders by heavy TDs)

@PlanetaryGenocide consider nerfing the pen dropoff to discourage camping to overcome the new weakspots.

Sorry. I had to be a bit (or rather very) aggressive at work today. I am sometimes called to tell people to f.off in a polite manner but it gets me worked up afterwards. 


@PlanetaryGenocide sorry for my tone. 

 

As for pen drop off - Look at light tanks. They get huge pen drop off. WG is using it as a balancing factor just not on the right tanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, PlanetaryGenocide said:

Defender yes, if only because that LFP is garbage and it's almost impossible to hide it and still play effectively due to a combination of map design, pike nose, and gold rounds making it a moot point.  Also the roof hatches, tiny as they are.

I don't own or fight against Chrysler GF often enough to say for that one.  I don't remember ever having trouble with them - usually because I'm either A. not a tier 8 or lower, or B. just get around to the side lol.  I do remember people crying that it was OP when it was first released but I've seen no evidence of that - it still gets turbodunked outside of its own tier like it should be.

Type 5 is mad gay bullshit and we all know it, but the problem with that tank isn't just the armor, it's that both the armor and the gun are basically retard-proof.  The extra alpha on the gold round is just adding insult to injury at that point.

 

Sorry, but so is your argument of "don't nerf the mobility because it'll be more frustrating to play".  You're missing the fucking point

I said nerfing the mobility would negate the need for a larger frontal weakspot, because it makes the existing one much easier to hit if the thing isn't zipping around like a hamster on crack.  I never said I don't want it to have bigger frontal weakspots - I would love for the lower plate to be absolute swiss cheese like the Badger's or the pick-a-russian-tank.  The part about making it more frustrating to play was just parroting your own dumb point about how nerfing the mobility would make it more frustrating to play - no matter which method you go with, you're going to lessen the enjoyment of people who currently own the tank, because that's what nerfs fucking do.

 

tl;dr - Nerf mobility or add a LFP weakspot.  Both is overkill, as @monjardin said

Agree with the second part, vehemently disagree with the first. The point is that neither the Defender, the Chrysler, or the Type have anything close to balanced armour profiles for their tiers. It's all very well to say that one tier higher, it's pretty easy to pen a Defender's LFP with gold. However, all three tanks pretty much require gold or a higher tier shell to reliably pen. @hazzgar's point as I understand it isn't just that these tanks are a fucking pain to deal with, but that they have no frontal weakspots (which are weak in the sense we know it, against standard ammo), and require gold to pen.

In my mind, anything that goes 55 will have an easy time mitigating exposure of its weakspots. You could nerf the hatch to 200 and it's still going to bully everything next to effortlessly, just that people would actually have to wiggle then, E5 style. IMO This tank needs it's lower plate nerfed to 200 effective at most, and its reverse speed cut down to something like 15. If people complain the nerfed tank is trash, WG might as well give people who have unlocked it a free Tier 10 263 with the old stats. That way people will want to grind/free-exp this shitbag line while not having to deal with the V4 as it is now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fuck this tank. My hull-down IS-7 got abused by one of these abominations slinging HEAT straight through the turret face while I missed the tiny as fuck cupola. It's fucking bullshit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22/02/2018 at 7:13 AM, monjardin said:

I agree with @PlanetaryGenocide, nerf the armor or the mobility, but not both. Nerfing both would totally kill the tank.

Knowing WG this is exactly what they will do. They will just wait for enough people to grind it and then drop the hammer.

 

They are so bad at balancing it’s not even funny.

The kran went from WTF to POS in one patch in TS, S.Conq went from meh to wtf godlike by buffing, gun handling, DPM and depression to absurd level. Maus went from worst HT to Best in ONE patch.. It’s like they are clueless at how changes affect a tank.

 

Also E5.. All it needed was lowerplate nerf because it was just stupid, turret and cupola was fine it’s an American HT that should hulldown, now it’s complete crap and S.conq has a better turret than E5 ever had.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

E5 gets nerfed right before powercreep started, which seemed a reasonable nerf bur nowadays E5 sucks.

Type 5 was a massive pos before buffs, being way shittier than the Maus, and then it became one of the best tier 10 HTs, and then they gave it the most useless nerf they have ever given to any tank. If anything, these recent armor changes has negated those nerfs completely because the Type 5 can damage all these overarmored piece of shits in situations where others couldnt.

Funnily enough, the last time WG actually nerfed anything was the Maus and Type 5, and latter didnt even get an actual nerf. At this rate its more likely they just keep buffing everything to the 268 V4’s level instead of nerfing the 268 V4 cus LOL powercreep

WG hasnt done almost anything properly recently tbh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, PlanetaryGenocide said:

No worries. 

I don't care about light tank pen dropoff - HE doesn't have pen dropoff after all :doge: 

As a light tank player I care. FFS 0.4 acc with 190pen at full range and you won't pen an angled type5 butt. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, leggasiini said:

WG hasnt done almost anything properly recently tbh

Then perhaps it's time for a new tank game to sweep the field clean, start anew...

Especially as they're thoroughly wasting Patch 1.0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Guardian54 said:

Then perhaps it's time for a new tank game to sweep the field clean, start anew...

Especially as they're thoroughly wasting Patch 1.0

yeah we can call it armored warfare or someth-

 

oh wait

 

we don't need just a new tank game, we need one that isn't from garbage RU devs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dunno, WG seems really reluctant to change armor thickness (well, nerf it anyway), apart from adding Type 4/5 a "weakspot" I don't really remember any straight up nerfs - O-I got something in return IIRC, VKA/B both got stronger UFP to compensate for weaker LFP's....

I think WG will simply trash the mobility and nerf the gun, so it isn't fun to play, but leave the armor layout more or less the same so it's annoying to play against - this seems to be their way to balance tanks as of late. Both of these things can be done through soft stats only aswell so your average 48%-er who doesn't read any news about the game won't even notice something changed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PlanetaryGenocide said:

we don't need just a new tank game, we need one that isn't from garbage RU devs

UPVOTED!

...

GODDAMN IT WHY CAN'T I UPVOTE MOAR!!!111!!!

1 hour ago, Marty said:

I dunno, WG seems really reluctant to change armor thickness (well, nerf it anyway), apart from adding Type 4/5 a "weakspot"

I'm quite curious how exactly the Japanese crewmen were expected to push a 20+cm thick block of steel out and prop it up to be a vision port for the driver. In fact I'm curious how you can even hang that thing off those hinges at the top without it being like a quarter-circle in cross-section front to back and having to be hooked/anchored in place to not rotate out on its own.

Did the Russians miss the memo that the average WWII Japanese tanker was about the size of a WWII Russian tanker i.e. not exactly hulking bears of men when it comes to pushing out giant thick hatches that don't turn sideways?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, PlanetaryGenocide said:

They weren't, because it's a made-up fucking tank

I'm aware it's made up, I'm just expressing amusement at WG's complete irrationality when making it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.