Jump to content
Guardian54

Tier 9 Balance Analysis by a Barely-Blue

Recommended Posts

The 201 pen T-54 gun should never have been added to the game. It is one of the best examples of pay to win out there - while HEAT can be bought with credits, in this case having the ability to spam it basically turns a low pen gun with good handling (a legitimate trade off situation with the D-54) into a straight upgrade. 

 

Replace the 330 HEAT with 251 pen APCR and your problem is solved. Both guns gain 50 penetration with SPREM, and are now both viable options. D-54 for pen, D-adhditz (or wtf it is) for gun handling.

IMO T54 is subpar with D54 (tried it with both guns). Too much aimtime and dispersion for the current meta (cant snapshot at range and the 18mm+ pen is moot). Too much downtime when you can get punished by the multitude of high pen/high alpha that keep being added.

251APCR is a tad low. 268 would be ok. HEAT 330 is retarded but there are many tanks that have it (416 at T8 is an OPmobile as well).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who cares about the out-of-battle silver economy?

Because that's half the definition of the different tiers; the next tier up costs more credits AND has a noticeable improvement to stats. If Tier 10 tanks cost umpteen googol kajillion credits but had stats only marginally superior to their Tier 9 predecessors, what would be the point of spending the credits a all? Who spends that many credits for a marginal improvement to the tank stats?

The power gap between 9 and 10 already likely one of the smallest in the game, while some people complain about the power gap between 8 and 9. Buffing the weaker performing 9s instead of nerfing the stronger ones merely grows the 8-9 gap while shrinking the 9-10 gap.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Because that's half the definition of the different tiers; the next tier up costs more credits AND has a noticeable improvement to stats. If Tier 10 tanks cost umpteen googol kajillion credits but had stats only marginally superior to their Tier 9 predecessors, what would be the point of spending the credits a all? Who spends that many credits for a marginal improvement to the tank stats?

The power gap between 9 and 10 already likely one of the smallest in the game, while some people complain about the power gap between 8 and 9. Buffing the weaker performing 9s instead of nerfing the stronger ones merely grows the 8-9 gap while shrinking the 9-10 gap.

If anything, the tier gap should be reduced. Maybe better players will stand a chance against higher tiers instead of being rendered to "support" and having to rely on the hordes of top-tier potatoes. This is one of the main reasons 'cums play T10 mostly. MM cant fuck you over. I am considering stopping grinding after i get 3 T10s simply because of the "bottom tier" bullshit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If anything, the tier gap should be reduced. Maybe better players will stand a chance against higher tiers instead of being rendered to "support" and having to rely on the hordes of top-tier potatoes. This is one of the main reasons 'cums play T10 mostly. MM cant fuck you over. I am considering stopping grinding after i get 3 T10s simply because of the "bottom tier" bullshit.

So shrink the 9-10 gap but grow the 8-9 gap cuz fuck Tier 8?

You have too many matches and too high a recent WR to be complaining about the tier spread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mediums rely on shooting on the move. They dont have the staying power to take the time to aim for ages or accelerate like a whale. Personally i dont mind the element of twitch. Pure tactical shooters are jsut boring.

i would rather they relied on flanking, its that they are better at the whole game than other tanks is my issue, when they should be worse at everything instead.  like they are at tier 7 and below. 

 

lets face it, why is a tier 8 medium the first of them with 330 pen guns? why are tier 9/10 mediums better scouts than light tanks? why can they carousel pretty much any tank while being nearly immune to it themselves? its stupid twitch level play. 

 

i mean think about the tactic of rubbing against your enemy so they waste shots on your turret or miss.... fake ass bullshit. .

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lel. That thing sounds so bad. I mean that list. Too much nerfing of the competitive tanks or of those that are even slightly better. Too much medium nerfs. Too much nerf based on biased (selective) math that renders most of the suggestions moot.

ST-I is a beached whale. A decent beached whale. No need for nerf.

T54 only needs HEAT replaced with 270 pen APCR on the D10 gun and it is fine.

430-2 is so mathematically OP because only 'cums bothered with the third russian clone

Many other are just your opinion (and vision), and i personally dislike most of them.

.

You are welcome to publish your own analysis, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i would rather they relied on flanking, its that they are better at the whole game than other tanks is my issue, when they should be worse at everything instead.  like they are at tier 7 and below. 

 

lets face it, why is a tier 8 medium the first of them with 330 pen guns? why are tier 9/10 mediums better scouts than light tanks? why can they carousel pretty much any tank while being nearly immune to it themselves? its stupid twitch level play. 

 

i mean think about the tactic of rubbing against your enemy so they waste shots on your turret or miss.... fake ass bullshit. .

 

Why, exactly?  If you were commanding a Sherman and had a platoonmate with you in a Sherman, and you two caught a Tiger in a cramped area of a little French village...would it not work to grind up against the side of the Tiger with your Sherman so that your buddy could pelt the Tiger in the sides?

 

If you're looking for a hardcore simulator, WoT isn't it and never has pretended to be.

Link to post
Share on other sites

because shermans move about 24-30mph on flat terrain with rubber tracks. and changing gears and turning them isnt fast. have you ever seen ww2 tanks on damp ground? you can out run them on foot.  in mud, you can walk faster. and thats assuming they move in a straight line. 

 

here, a t54 at combat speeds.... compare it to how to see them move in game. 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6DxTRVE9gY#t=114

(it starts its laps at 1:53ish)

Link to post
Share on other sites

mobility doesnt mean what we see in wot.  cruising speed on tarmac is now how tanks operated across open terrain. modern tanks can do that due to stabilization, etc. ww2 tanks, no. 

im not saying turn it into a torture simulator, but crap like carouseling, etc, needs to be a rare event, not a common one. mediums shouldnt be running full speed across the terrain and making snapshots, quickly sniping and pulling behind cover, etc. you just dont get 60 tonnes to move like that. it needs to be more strategic and less first person shooter.

 

To be honest, calling even Russian hover tanks "twitch" is a bit of a stretch. There's still much more to it than just that. The thing making the game more "twitch" at the moment is WG's hard on for brawling maps.

because shermans move about 24-30mph on flat terrain with rubber tracks. and changing gears and turning them isnt fast. have you ever seen ww2 tanks on damp ground? you can out run them on foot.  in mud, you can walk faster. and thats assuming they move in a straight line. 

 

here, a t54 at combat speeds.... compare it to how to see them move in game. 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6DxTRVE9gY#t=114

(it starts its laps at 1:53ish)

 

Apparently that's a Type 59?

Link to post
Share on other sites

So shrink the 9-10 gap but grow the 8-9 gap cuz fuck Tier 8?

You have too many matches and too high a recent WR to be complaining about the tier spread.

Im talking about shrinking all gaps. And maybe bring back BT12. I admit T8 is a pain now.And what do my stats have to do with it?

i would rather they relied on flanking, its that they are better at the whole game than other tanks is my issue, when they should be worse at everything instead.  like they are at tier 7 and below. 

 

lets face it, why is a tier 8 medium the first of them with 330 pen guns? why are tier 9/10 mediums better scouts than light tanks? why can they carousel pretty much any tank while being nearly immune to it themselves? its stupid twitch level play. 

 

i mean think about the tactic of rubbing against your enemy so they waste shots on your turret or miss.... fake ass bullshit. .

Well, nobody said WoT has to resemble reality. Making them slow would kill them with the current maps. They are pretty much the only class that can break stalemates and hard camps through vision and mobility (twitch as you call it). They very noob-unfriendly as well. If anything, most tier 7- meds should be buffed to perform (statistically) like the heavies (like they do at T9/10).

because shermans move about 24-30mph on flat terrain with rubber tracks. and changing gears and turning them isnt fast. have you ever seen ww2 tanks on damp ground? you can out run them on foot.  in mud, you can walk faster. and thats assuming they move in a straight line. 

 

here, a t54 at combat speeds.... compare it to how to see them move in game. 

 

(it starts its laps at 1:53ish)

Well, im not sure whether thats Type59 or T54 but whatever. Want realism? Give Maus 13kph, make heavies start moving after 3-5s after pressing W, make them turn like beached whales (more so than now) and BOOM you have the snail-like gameplay my grandpa could think through before anything happens. It would be bullshit. Look at WT:GF. Utter crap.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i would rather they relied on flanking, its that they are better at the whole game than other tanks is my issue, when they should be worse at everything instead.  like they are at tier 7 and below. 

 

lets face it, why is a tier 8 medium the first of them with 330 pen guns? why are tier 9/10 mediums better scouts than light tanks? why can they carousel pretty much any tank while being nearly immune to it themselves? its stupid twitch level play. 

 

i mean think about the tactic of rubbing against your enemy so they waste shots on your turret or miss.... fake ass bullshit. .

Want realism? Join the army!

Link to post
Share on other sites

there is a large gap between wot and realism. i dont want full realism. i also dont want full arcade like we have now. 

 

I like that we have hitpoints and that you can live through a mistake.

I like that we can flank effectively, using terrain

I like that we can aim for weakspots. 

 

I dont like twitchey gameplay where a tank can zig and zag to avoid fire this isnt remotely tank like behavior. 

I dont like that some tanks get historical accuracy shoved down our throats while others are entirely made up or ignored. 

 

no, i dont think we need tanks to have to shift gears, lock their turrets, stop to fire, etc. but just imagine adding a 1 second delay between forward and reverse. 

but i do think that we can make it so doing those things is a benefit, and not doing them doesnt help you. shots on the move should be mostly misses. peek-a-boom battles should be more risk to the mover and less risk to the waiter. (right now thats more a spotting system problem, the tank is in view long before it gets spotted in some cases)

 

basically i would like to see light and medium tanks be the flankers they are, and not the MBTs they are not. let heavies do that role of the dangerous target to attack, rather than the easy prey you circle to death.

 

I just want something between where we are and more toward a simulation of what tanks actually are. maybe when they introduce the 3k maps it will be more feasible to do. straight line speed without also having excellent combat maneuver. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

because shermans move about 24-30mph on flat terrain with rubber tracks. and changing gears and turning them isnt fast. have you ever seen ww2 tanks on damp ground? you can out run them on foot. in mud, you can walk faster. and thats assuming they move in a straight line.

here, a t54 at combat speeds.... compare it to how to see them move in game.

(it starts its laps at 1:53ish)

You're assuming that the video is showing Shermans moving as fast as they can...which is not likely under that situation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

there is a large gap between wot and realism. i dont want full realism. i also dont want full arcade like we have now. 

 

Games like Battlefield and Planetside exist and you think this is "full arcade"? What are they? Super full arcade?

 

I'm not really sure why you're so interested in driving away players. If I wanted to play Red Orchestra I would.

Link to post
Share on other sites

there is a large gap between wot and realism. i dont want full realism. i also dont want full arcade like we have now. 

 

I like that we have hitpoints and that you can live through a mistake.

I like that we can flank effectively, using terrain

I like that we can aim for weakspots. 

 

I dont like twitchey gameplay where a tank can zig and zag to avoid fire this isnt remotely tank like behavior. 

I dont like that some tanks get historical accuracy shoved down our throats while others are entirely made up or ignored. 

 

no, i dont think we need tanks to have to shift gears, lock their turrets, stop to fire, etc. but just imagine adding a 1 second delay between forward and reverse. 

but i do think that we can make it so doing those things is a benefit, and not doing them doesnt help you. shots on the move should be mostly misses. peek-a-boom battles should be more risk to the mover and less risk to the waiter. (right now thats more a spotting system problem, the tank is in view long before it gets spotted in some cases)

 

basically i would like to see light and medium tanks be the flankers they are, and not the MBTs they are not. let heavies do that role of the dangerous target to attack, rather than the easy prey you circle to death.

 

I just want something between where we are and more toward a simulation of what tanks actually are. maybe when they introduce the 3k maps it will be more feasible to do. straight line speed without also having excellent combat maneuver. 

 

Peek a boo and on the move shooting is already next to impossible (except for a few special exceptions) and zig zagging to avoid shells is 100% impossible, only pre-nerf T-50-2 could do it (before there where physics)

 

wot is almost perfect in terms of arcade  <> realism

 

they should only make clear they want ``realistic models`` and state: we will remove all fake tanks, so that bs discussing also ends for good (im 100% sure WG will, but i will quit wot before they are finished...)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I strongly disagree with nerfing any tier 9s (apart from waffle for highly biased reasons). I don't want to grind lines with pispoor high tier tanks, maybe people here are masochists or something, but nerfing tier 1-9 tanks just makes game feel like a brutal and boring grind. Buff the tanks, which are underperforming and the numbers should even out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Games like Battlefield and Planetside exist and you think this is "full arcade"? What are they? Super full arcade?

I'm not really sure why you're so interested in driving away players. If I wanted to play Red Orchestra I would.

is it just that you want to argue the point or ?

 

lets set this up proper for a moment, WW2 and korea era:

1. real tanks almost never fight other tanks. 

2. real tanks almost never fight at close range to enemy armor when they did engage them.

3. real tanks almost never traveled without infantry. 

4. real tanks almost always had artillery and or air support. 

5. ww2 era tanks largely could not fire on the move. 

6. ww2 era tanks had much less agility, but some could travel at speed under the right conditions.

7. real tanks aimed at a tank, sometimes at the turret or the hull, not a spot on the tank.

8. flanking and closing on your opponent was a factor of penetration of your weapon system and not something done as a matter of course 

 

so, if you see that as "real tank battle", then what is what but an arcade game? 

 

yes, wot has some tanking aspects, like historical models, some historical guns, a very decent ballistics and penetration model, a simplistic, yet interesting spotting system, etc. they emulate some things about tanks. they emulate some things about tank combat. 

but its none of it close to simulator quality.  and i dont think that anyone here would want to play that game.  but we can get closer to tanks, and further away from arcade without also ruining the game. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

My input:
 
-E50 and T-54: gold spam shits on balance, otherwise the tanks are fine. T-54 could maybe have its mobility reduced slightly, in exchange buff the guns a bit (maybe even remove one of the guns and give the other 210 pen and otherwise same stats as the D-10T2S.
 
-Patton: pretty well balanced, but I'd rather have the M48 (with upgrades to T54E2 standard) at tier IX and M60A2 at tier X.
 
-T95 is far from overpowered, sometimes it stomps everything but its unbelievably craptastic mobility severely limits its strategic and tactical options. I actually agree on RoF and camo nerfs, but I would buff its top speed to 20 and give it the 704hp engine. Nerf the angle on the cupolas so their effective armour goes from ~240 to ~210, buff roof armour to 50mm to counter retarded overmatch mechanics No longer crippled every other game, but it can't snipe or smash face as well.
 
-E75: a bit too agile for its bulk, I'd also nerf depression (to make it more distinct from the M103 and ST-I) but to a lesser extent, somewhere between 6 and 7 degrees.
 
-AMX 50 120: no idea but the lack of gun elevation is just painful to watch.
 
But really, some balance issues in the game stem from the mechanics themselves and not just individual tanks. It's hard to make the game truly balanced without chaning things from ground up.
 

but we can get closer to tanks, and further away from arcade without also ruining the game.

 

Except your proposal would make the game worse, that's what people are getting at.

 

Things that can potentially make the game more realistic and more fun:

-Nerf turret traverse speeds a bit so it's easier to flank

-Reduce the effect of not penetrating on HE damage, non-penetrating hits are affected by vehicle weight (an ELC should get rekt by HE even if it doesn't get penetrated)

-Add the ability to cause spalling damage that works kind of like HE (depends on armour and weight), this stops a paper box from tanking hits like a boss because it hits an armoured zone the size of a postage stamp and structural integrity isn't modeled. A Hellcat would just have its turret ripped off if a 152mm shell hit the mantlet, even if it lacked penetration to just punch through.

-Limit premium shells and give them drawbacks, but make them cheaper. Economic decisions should be separate from gameplay, and blatantly superior rounds just dumb down the game. In RL terms, subcaliber/HEAT rounds generally did have tradeoffs (though usually minor) and a tank was supplied with a given amount of ammo, the crew couldn't just throw money at the problem nor did they have to invest anything to get a limited amount.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I strongly disagree with nerfing any tier 9s (apart from waffle for highly biased reasons). I don't want to grind lines with pispoor high tier tanks, maybe people here are masochists or something, but nerfing tier 1-9 tanks just makes game feel like a brutal and boring grind. Buff the tanks, which are underperforming and the numbers should even out.

.

1. Buff underperformers

2. Other tanks begin to underperform

3. Buff new underperformers

4. Tier 8s seem useless compared to 9s, and who bothers buying a Tier 10 when the 9 is as good if not better?

5. Buff Tier 8s and 10s

6. Tier 7-8 gap grows

7. Buff more...

8. Etc.

.

To balance a game you cannot just buff, that is called power creep.

Link to post
Share on other sites

is it just that you want to argue the point or ?

 

lets set this up proper for a moment, WW2 and korea era:

1. real tanks almost never fight other tanks. 

2. real tanks almost never fight at close range to enemy armor when they did engage them.

3. real tanks almost never traveled without infantry. 

4. real tanks almost always had artillery and or air support. 

5. ww2 era tanks largely could not fire on the move. 

6. ww2 era tanks had much less agility, but some could travel at speed under the right conditions.

7. real tanks aimed at a tank, sometimes at the turret or the hull, not a spot on the tank.

8. flanking and closing on your opponent was a factor of penetration of your weapon system and not something done as a matter of course 

 

so, if you see that as "real tank battle", then what is what but an arcade game? 

 

yes, wot has some tanking aspects, like historical models, some historical guns, a very decent ballistics and penetration model, a simplistic, yet interesting spotting system, etc. they emulate some things about tanks. they emulate some things about tank combat. 

but its none of it close to simulator quality.  and i dont think that anyone here would want to play that game.  but we can get closer to tanks, and further away from arcade without also ruining the game. 

 

What real tanks did has precisely no relevance to this game, do you have an actual argument or just a fetish for this stuff? You've failed to impress upon anyone any basis for thinking that removing dynamic elements in a game that already favors immobile vehicles when it comes to camo and accuracy is necessary.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I won't say historicity is entirely meaningless. I do believe that they should be as realistic as possible with the armor models, since very precise data for armor models exists. Same thing with penetration, gun depression, and things like top speed. If it's something precise data exists for, stick to the historical data.

Where they have some wiggle room is things like reticle bloom, aim time, terrain resistance, view range, and so forth, and they should use that wiggle room when needed.

As for mediums as a class, they aren't overpowered relative to heavies as a class. Some individuals probably are (looking at you, Mr. T-54) but not as a whole.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont get all the T54 hate. Its 100% balanced with AP. Only HEAT shits on the balance. But its not the only tank in this situation, but it gets all the hate. Why?

Hurk. This game is fine as it is in terms of realism. Your kind (realism fetishishists are very rare in wot, thus statistically irrelevat (in WGs eyes for example). Slower=\=tactical , realistic=\=fun , mildly faster=\=twitch. Also, every real-time game has an element of twitch. Even simulators (even more so). Look at ARMA, loot at RTS game like C&C. In video games its all about the twitch. WoT is one of the most twitch-less games on the market IMO (that isnt turn based).

Link to post
Share on other sites

tactical =\= slower. i said strategic. 

realistic = fun! otherwise you wouldnt be playing this game!

twitch is twitch, when someone is wagging a turret at you or bouncing back and forth to causes misses ***IN A FUCKING TANK*** thats twitch. total make believe bullshit that doesnt belong in the game to me. 

 

im ok with elements of twitch, im not ok with medium tanks taking on a almost unique game play aspect starting at tier 8. to me its as jarring as playing a midevil fantasy game, then at the end of progression, suddenly they add ninjas while everyone else is using platemail and long swords. 

 

to me i define twitch over tactical movement as aspects that rely on your human ability over the interface/game design, rather than letting you command a vehicle that has its own reaction values which even the playing field for most players. 

a tank game in my mind in close combat like WoT should be more about knowing your power stance and finding an opponent off guard and less about wiggling my hull to prevent someone shooting a machine gun hatch. 

 

that said, upcoming changes may provide what im after anyway. they have a new physics movement engine coming, they have larger maps which should stretch out the ranges and they are going to nerf accuracy. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

tactical =\= slower. i said strategic. 

realistic = fun! otherwise you wouldnt be playing this game!

twitch is twitch, when someone is wagging a turret at you or bouncing back and forth to causes misses ***IN A FUCKING TANK*** thats twitch. total make believe bullshit that doesnt belong in the game to me. 

 

im ok with elements of twitch, im not ok with medium tanks taking on a almost unique game play aspect starting at tier 8. to me its as jarring as playing a midevil fantasy game, then at the end of progression, suddenly they add ninjas while everyone else is using platemail and long swords. 

 

to me i define twitch over tactical movement as aspects that rely on your human ability over the interface/game design, rather than letting you command a vehicle that has its own reaction values which even the playing field for most players. 

a tank game in my mind in close combat like WoT should be more about knowing your power stance and finding an opponent off guard and less about wiggling my hull to prevent someone shooting a machine gun hatch. 

 

that said, upcoming changes may provide what im after anyway. they have a new physics movement engine coming, they have larger maps which should stretch out the ranges and they are going to nerf accuracy. 

So remove machine gun weak spots.

Or ban moving. I'm kinda partial to the ban moving one myself, playing with 2 hands is hard.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...