ZXrage

Supertest: Obj. 277 (Tier X after T-10)

124 posts in this topic

1 hour ago, tajj7 said:

Tanks was too good if not OP, WG balanced it and it's probably the first new tier 10 for a while that is not obvious power creep.

Seems a very logical upgrade on the T-10 as well, as it's basically an all rounder heavium.

Still has plenty over the 5A, but is now not obviously a better 5A like it was before. 

I think youre underestimating the nerfs theyve slapped the 277 with.

The thing is, this tank has the exact same accuracy as the T-10 and not significantly better aiming stats, same 340 pen HEAT, and the DPM is only 200 more than the T-10, resulting in less DPM than the E5. All in all, the firepower isn't much of an upgrade tier-for-tier, compared to the T-10's nearly best in class bloom and DPM.

It has a higher speed limit but is significantly less agile on medium terrain due to soft stats, so about the same as the T-10 I guess.

The armour is the one thing that is clearly better than the T-10 tier-for-tier, it's even more troll, is easier to abuse, and has even smaller weakspots. But since the current measure of Tier 10 armour is how well it stands up to 340 pen HEAT ammo, I don't think the armour of the 277 makes that much difference, especially since tier 10 is full of broken tanks.

As a result of all this, it's really a sidegrade to the T-10. I guess, this is more of a testament to how strong the T-10 really is than the 277's fault. However, the fact remains that tier 10 heaviums has become a very crowded niche as of late, with the 5A, the IS-7, and the 430U (and 268) all occupying irreplaceable roles. I don't think the 277 in its nerfed state will be able to compete with any of them - it will be more of a play for fun tank like the E5 or the Mle 54, except better than both, I guess.

PS I forgot the 260

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now if only they nerfed the 5A, Bobject, 430U and Super conq slightly. 

 

 

and then nerf the bobject another 5 times. 

Share this post


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

As a result of all this, it's really a sidegrade to the T-10. I guess, this is more of a testament to how strong the T-10 really is than the 277's fault.

At least all tier 10 has pref matchmaking. I see T-10 is strong for something that 277 had it wrong, nice turret armour with unreliable hull armour, which 277 probably having too much. If its base on a method of copy, having a T-10 at tier 10 with just a better gun and mobility, not touching anything else wouldn't hurt.

The shape of the turret already making 277 less vulnerable than the 5A, pretty similar to both of their tier 9s. If they are having crap hull then probably be good just keeping it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@lavawing Personally I don't see the T-10 as that strong, it's too generalist IMO for the current meta. The gun, the armour, the mobility are not just quite good enough for the tank to be effective. You have meds with comparable armour (like 430), and heavies with better guns (like Conqueror) that are then better in the armour (in Conqs case) or mobility (in 430s case) plus things like the 263 which is fast, armoured, with a big gun and just lacks the turret. The something like the M4 51 which is pretty mobile, has better armour and arguably a better gun than the T-10.

I feel in the current meta, very good armour + very good gun + poor mobility is more leveragable than average armour + good gun  average mobility

But the 277 fits as a an upgrade, the armour, the alpha, the pen, the DPM, and the mobility all get a bit better without anything being too absurd.

The first 277 version was just too good all round, it had good armour, good mobility and then had a gun that was the best bits of a heavy tank gun with the best bits of a medium tank gun. 

Now it's more like a heavium, but I don't see it being any worse than a 5A.  It's a bit more mobile than the 5A, it's got more pen, better soft stats, probably about the same armour and then lags in the gun depression and DPM.  That seems a good level of balance to me. 

The 430U is OP and needs nerfing, so not going to count that. 

This tank was on first test pure power creep, now it's not, that to me is a good thing.

I also think they fixed the right things with this tank, the gun was just too good, too accurate, gun handling was medium levels, DPM was up there.

The only way you could balance that gun on a platform like that was if the armour was basically the same as the T-10, which it clearly isn't.  That might have been a better approach and made the 277 more unique but there was no way WG was going to nerf the armour layout before release and change the whole tank so the gun nerfs were the most realistic change they could do.

It's a very mobile, decently armoured 490 alpha wielding, high pen and good gun handling heavy tank, can't see it not being competitive to be honest. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, tajj7 said:

@lavawing Personally I don't see the T-10 as that strong, it's too generalist IMO for the current meta. The gun, the armour, the mobility are not just quite good enough for the tank to be effective. You have meds with comparable armour (like 430), and heavies with better guns (like Conqueror) that are then better in the armour (in Conqs case) or mobility (in 430s case) plus things like the 263 which is fast, armoured, with a big gun and just lacks the turret. The something like the M4 51 which is pretty mobile, has better armour and arguably a better gun than the T-10.

I feel in the current meta, very good armour + very good gun + poor mobility is more leveragable than average armour + good gun  average mobility

But the 277 fits as a an upgrade, the armour, the alpha, the pen, the DPM, and the mobility all get a bit better without anything being too absurd.

The first 277 version was just too good all round, it had good armour, good mobility and then had a gun that was the best bits of a heavy tank gun with the best bits of a medium tank gun. 

Now it's more like a heavium, but I don't see it being any worse than a 5A.  It's a bit more mobile than the 5A, it's got more pen, better soft stats, probably about the same armour and then lags in the gun depression and DPM.  That seems a good level of balance to me. 

The 430U is OP and needs nerfing, so not going to count that. 

This tank was on first test pure power creep, now it's not, that to me is a good thing.

I also think they fixed the right things with this tank, the gun was just too good, too accurate, gun handling was medium levels, DPM was up there.

The only way you could balance that gun on a platform like that was if the armour was basically the same as the T-10, which it clearly isn't.  That might have been a better approach and made the 277 more unique but there was no way WG was going to nerf the armour layout before release and change the whole tank so the gun nerfs were the most realistic change they could do.

It's a very mobile, decently armoured 490 alpha wielding, high pen and good gun handling heavy tank, can't see it not being competitive to be honest. 

The T-10 is a well-rounded package yes, but it has quite a few tricks up its side skirts which are unparalleled in its tier and class: turret armour, DPM, HEAT pen, speed, side armour. It's a generalist that does most things as good as, if not better than most specialists IMO. The 430 is a brawling med which gets fucked by superheavies; the T-10, with its HEAT, doesn't. The Conq gets fucked by arty and can't flex: the T-10 can. (also the T-10 gets 250 pen at 500m which is like 15mms better than the Conq's AP, for some reason).The Mle 51 is a mammoth and has trouble against high tier gold; the T-10 is a low-rider that has slabs of spaced armour and a sharp pike, not to mention it's much faster. The T-10 can also reverse sidescrape when you need to manfight superheavies.

Long story short: the T-10 can do almost everything, and it can do everything as good as everyone else.

Coming back to the 277. I just think that the abundance of broken and gimmicky tanks makes it much harder for a generalist to survive in Tier 10, especially in the 277's nerfed state. Unlike the T-10, the 277 winds up being worse than the specialists in most departments except speed, and it loses out especially on the gun. I think the 277 is fine, for the reasons you mentioned, and it's good that WG didn't go full Bobject with it, and its pure speculation right now: no one's played the nerfed 277, but I can't shake the feeling that the T-10, all things considered, will be the better tank than the 277.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I said I think 1-2 years ago the T-10 was a strong generalist, but now it kind of does everything well, but not close enough to other stuff. 

To me it used to be a good all round tank, now it more feels it's a jack of all trades master of none. 

Also the mirror matchmaking I feel hurts it, you can often end up facing genuine heavies on brawling/city maps that are just better in that role. 

Tier 10 is fucked balance wise, but it's nice to see two new tier 10s, Soviet as well, that are a bit different, still look good, but are not obvious power creep. And to even see WG actually tone down a clear power creep Soviet vehicle, gives me a little hope for the balancing deparment.

I am actually with @MagicalFlyingFox they need to tone down the Super Conq, 5A, Fatton etc.  which are not really OP but are power creep and if they do that together with nerfing the OP/Broken tanks we can get back to some sort of semblance of tier 10 balance. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tajj7 said:

Like I said I think 1-2 years ago the T-10 was a strong generalist, but now it kind of does everything well, but not close enough to other stuff. 

To me it used to be a good all round tank, now it more feels it's a jack of all trades master of none. 

Also the mirror matchmaking I feel hurts it, you can often end up facing genuine heavies on brawling/city maps that are just better in that role. 

Tier 10 is fucked balance wise, but it's nice to see two new tier 10s, Soviet as well, that are a bit different, still look good, but are not obvious power creep. And to even see WG actually tone down a clear power creep Soviet vehicle, gives me a little hope for the balancing deparment.

I am actually with @MagicalFlyingFox they need to tone down the Super Conq, 5A, Fatton etc.  which are not really OP but are power creep and if they do that together with nerfing the OP/Broken tanks we can get back to some sort of semblance of tier 10 balance. 

Touching any of these before thinking long and hard about the T10 balancing and where they want it to be, won't leave the game in a good state. The tops need to be cut before you should think about the 2nd places. People already foresee, that while the nerfs for the 268v4 are going to tone it down, that they won't be enough and if you've been in the CWs this campaign, you know what things were like. It's 268 or GTFO with, depending on the map, 2 IS7s or 2 SConqs and maybe a light or a handful of mediums for specific maps. Everything is a support tank to that probably biggest balancing fuckup in WoT-history (that is, before 279 and 726 become a reality, which I hope they realize, they should not touch with a ten foot pole) and things were bad enough with the Type 5 and Maus already. And this is so incredibly tiresome. That this hasn't boiled over into the T10 random meta is a wonder on the scale of Jesus returning.

As for mirror match-making, WarGaming failed to implement their finer classification system for some reason. Their rebalancing of some tanks has clearly helped in masking that very issue, as even those tanks that were, for example, pure support heavies, suddenly can act like heavies and trade damage despite being a completely different tank in makeup than, say, an IS3. However the fact, that their rebalancing effort somehow managed to fall asleep between T9 and T8 still leaves a lot of tanks in the dust. Think of the Panthers, which are a cross-breed somewhere between heavies, mediums and TDs in necessary playstyle, even though they can't keep up in terms of armor, mobility and gunnery with almost anything. Yet a Panther II gets matched against a P44 Pantera, a tank that out-DPMs, outruns and, argueably, outarmors the Panther, despite not actually being a hybrid like the Panther, but a pure-breed medium with a semi-autoloader. Granted, part of that is down to the map design (and fuck me sideways, Province got a lot better, but an 850m map of which easily 90% are nothing but a giant death-bowl that nobody can use in any ways even late into the game, just has no goddamn fucking place in this game; much less even on T8+), but it isn't just that. Question is, do you really want more team-homogeny? Isn't this exactly the reason why we ended up with the 3-5-7 joykiller?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly think they have ended up with the tank we probably deserve as a successor to the T-10.  Its a solid tier X tank that is clearly going to be competitive in any situation - but its also clearly not going to be brokenly OP. 

All in all I think its a good step, during the Murazo era it would have been released with its laser cannon and eventually nerfed down to just silly OP.  At least it appears they are aware of how badly they fucked up with the V4 during the bald wookies term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Madner Kami No I agree that the bobject, Type 5, 430U etc. need massive nerfing too, but I think the tier 2 tanks need to go down as well.

Big nerfs to the Type 5 (re-balance so it wasn't dependent on broken HE and whether people spammed prem at it), Bobject (which will need further nerfs after these I rekcon), 430U etc.

Then little nerfs, tone downs for like the Super Conq, 5A, Fatton etc. 

Then buffs for the likes of the IS4, Leo, STB-1, 268 etc.

Then re-balances for the 183 and JpE100 to bring their alpha down.

That would be a better tier 10 balance for me.

 

@Archaic_One Here's hoping that it might be a change of direction for the balance team.  Two balanced Soviet tier 10 tanks that are not pure powercreep. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, tajj7 said:

@Madner Kami No I agree that the bobject, Type 5, 430U etc. need massive nerfing too, but I think the tier 2 tanks need to go down as well.

Big nerfs to the Type 5 (re-balance so it wasn't dependent on broken HE and whether people spammed prem at it), Bobject (which will need further nerfs after these I rekcon), 430U etc.

Then little nerfs, tone downs for like the Super Conq, 5A, Fatton etc. 

Then buffs for the likes of the IS4, Leo, STB-1, 268 etc.

Then re-balances for the 183 and JpE100 to bring their alpha down.

That would be a better tier 10 balance for me.

 

@Archaic_One Here's hoping that it might be a change of direction for the balance team.  Two balanced Soviet tier 10 tanks that are not pure powercreep. 

IMO nerfing the Type too much will just make it useless. Instead, give it the same 900 damage HE shells as the O-Ho but with something like a 10 second reload. Then it will have to expose itself constantly to do the damage as opposed to outrading everything. Just picture triple Type 5's platoons spamming HE every 3 or so seconds. Glorious.

Anyway, 183s, Jagdzillas, 4005s are common these days because of too much armour. Take away the overarmoured tanks so that meds have a proper role again, and the meds will naturally make it much less viable for the high alpha TDs to be run. Almost everything since the E5 nerf has had too much armour, turning Tier 10 games into a hulldown corridor HEAT/HESH/HE-fest.

We need armour to be toned down except on the superheavies, then med guns to be buffed, then maps made bigger. That will probably end in a medium meta, but a medium meta is fine.

Right now, the meta is to carry gold-resistant armour while going 50s, while packing 340 pen HEAT or above. Barring that you carry absurd HE alpha damage that fucks up everything your shots connect with. It's simply not fun for everyone else, and tier 10 burns more credits than ever. IMO so long as tier 10 remains fucked, incentive to grind lines beyond tier 9 will be low. 

The problem of people not grinding new tanks is a problem with tier 10 balance, and WG really needs some sort of global rebalance of 10s before adding new fucked up tanks to the mix.

 

Share this post


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

IMO nerfing the Type too much will just make it useless. Instead, give it the same 900 damage HE shells as the O-Ho but with something like a 10 second reload. Then it will have to expose itself constantly to do the damage as opposed to outrading everything. Just picture triple Type 5's platoons spamming HE every 3 or so seconds. Glorious.

Anyway, 183s, Jagdzillas, 4005s are common these days because of too much armour. Take away the overarmoured tanks so that meds have a proper role again, and the meds will naturally make it much less viable for the high alpha TDs to be run. Almost everything since the E5 nerf has had too much armour, turning Tier 10 games into a hulldown corridor HEAT/HESH/HE-fest.

We need armour to be toned down except on the superheavies, then med guns to be buffed, then maps made bigger. That will probably end in a medium meta, but a medium meta is fine.

Right now, the meta is to carry gold-resistant armour while going 50s, while packing 340 pen HEAT or above. Barring that you carry absurd HE alpha damage that fucks up everything your shots connect with. It's simply not fun for everyone else, and tier 10 burns more credits than ever. IMO so long as tier 10 remains fucked, incentive to grind lines beyond tier 9 will be low. 

The problem of people not grinding new tanks is a problem with tier 10 balance, and WG really needs some sort of global rebalance of 10s before adding new fucked up tanks to the mix.

 

10s reload is a VERY bad idea. Permatracking tanks with HE guns. Think about it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Type 5 just needs the 14cm gun to be buffed giving it 300-310ap gold pen. There is no need for the derp gun and they should remove all the derps from this line. They are just bad for the game. In this way German superheavies will be on par with this monstruosity.

Derp guns are a bad idea in general 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only way to fix the Type 5 is to completely rework it. Simply nerfing it wont fix it - either it stays like it is now (broken, also OP if you spam full prem HE) or it becomes trash like it was before the buffs. Remove the derp or at least remove prem HE and alter the gun stats a bit, buff the 14cm, and completely rework the armor layout

Share this post


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

By rework the armour layout, we mean give it cheeks that are actually fucking pennable? 

 

Irrc legolas suggested some armour changes to give the Types 5 no cheeks, better UFP, but actual pennable LFP. I.e. strong parts stronger, but with actual weakspots like a silver pennable cupola.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, lavawing said:

silver pennable cupola

What a rubbish idea, that will never catch on. 

 

-WG

Share this post


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

By rework the armour layout, we mean give it cheeks that are actually fucking pennable? 

 

Cheek weakspot is a terrible concept, unless you make the front so strong that it reliably resists premium ammo when you angle your front on the cornerns. If you dont make the front that strong, we are on the absolute same situation as we were before the buffs. It works okay on the Liberte, but again, that thing has strong enough frontal to bounce same tier prem ammo when angled, and it has no frontal weakspots other than cupola so it also works on flat ground. 

Like already mentioned, make the UFP significantly stronger, remove the hull cheeks altogether (no arguments to defend this - not even historical accuracy, because the Type 4/5 hull was most certainly was more like the O-I without tits than a bigass Chi-To/Chi-Ri) make the mantlet absorb shots as well, make the cupola smaller but weaker (kinda like E75 cupola), make the spaced side less BS and make the LFP pennable. 

Share this post


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

The only way to fix the Type 5 is to completely rework it. Simply nerfing it wont fix it - either it stays like it is now (broken, also OP if you spam full prem HE) or it becomes trash like it was before the buffs. Remove the derp or at least remove prem HE and alter the gun stats a bit, buff the 14cm, and completely rework the armor layout

I totally agree only that they could rework the gun as it is easier and after re-do the armour as it would take more testing and time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this likely to be used in CW's? I don't have 5a or 113 and for those maps end up in my 140 for a different role normally. But I could buy this tonight if it's likely to be a CW staple

Share this post


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

5A and 277 are close enough to each other, to be interchangeable if you ask me. The 113 is just inferior to the 5A.

IMO 113 is inferior to the 430U, not the 5A. 113 can do things 5A can't and vice versa. 430U can do everything the 113 can do better, and do more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Skipped buying 277, was hyped, but ppls telling me frontal shots = ammo rack (kinda of like 113 gettin shot in sides = ammo rack. If not ammo rack, can catch on fire. Play 5A instead.

 

Took extra xp and went down the DeathStarII line, it's on sale! ^^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/14/2018 at 2:21 AM, lavawing said:

Irrc legolas suggested some armour changes to give the Types 5 no cheeks, better UFP, but actual pennable LFP. I.e. strong parts stronger, but with actual weakspots like a silver pennable cupola.

Pfft... Silver pennable... so 240 after normalization i.e. total troll?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.