Jump to content
FreddBoy

Buffs to Underwhelming Tanks - How would YOU buff them, and why?

Recommended Posts

30 minutes ago, TheMarine0341 said:

Nail on the head. Its a TD, NOT a MT. Get it replaced. And while you have had good luck in it, doesn't mean its not a complete shit and gimmick tank. Thousands of battles with thousands of players show its garbage for WR, damage, damage ratio, etc. 

There's also a case to be made for variety. We have 9 different flavours of Sherman in game already, why replace an iconic production tank with yet another prototype Sherman?

Edit: also, having a fixed gun doesn't make it a TD. Historically it was classed as a medium tank. The only re-classing I'd like to see is the Super Pershing to heavy, to line up with the fact that the Pershing was temporarily classed as a heavy tank.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, woe2you said:

There's also a case to be made for variety. We have 9 different flavours of Sherman in game already, why replace an iconic production tank with yet another prototype Sherman?

There's never enough Shermans.  We still need a Russian Sherman and a Chinese Sherman.  There's even room in the French tree for a non-premium French Sherman.  And while we're at it, how about a captured German Sherman.  German Sherman... that's fun to say.  ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

@woe2you

If you're mad at another Sherman, that's okay, but it doesn't change that the Lee is dogshit and in the wrong part of the tech tree. You wouldn't want an Object 263 as the end of the RU medium line, would you? I mean, it's an okay TD and it certainly fulfills typical medium demands like speed, DPM and decent armor in the right spots :doge:

I'm pretty sure if the Lee had proper TD stats and was put in the TD tree, the problems people have with it would be significantly less or at least different. However, it is a bad medium tank without a turret at an early point in the game where everything can either one-hit-kill you or speed past you and go pewpewpew. 9/10 people can't deal with such strict limitations at a time where they have 50% crews, no equipment and less than 200 battles to their name.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TheMarine0341 said:

Data for this statistics is based on 1.97 million public random games of the last 30 days with 59.18 million tanks participated.

Effects of premium accounts, daily and event bonuses have been removed. 
This is taken from VBAddict

There are 43 tier 4 tanks. How does the Lee rate?
36th for WR
32nd for average damage
32nd for overall damage ratio
34th for kills per battle

So again, please tell me how its, again, not an underwhelming tank
 

but there will always be a ``worse tank`` regardless of what you do (unless you make everything the same)

And thats excluding the tremendous skill gap (in wot) which greatly changes the opinion of people on tanks, see KV4 or Lowe, imo 2 massive underrated tanks, bads cant play it because the armor requires some effort and the slowness forces you to carefull position yourself, while most unicums hate slowness, put a unicum (me) in them, which likes slow tanks AND which is capable of parking at the right place, and you have a winner combo)

Same I myself like Jagdpanzer IV more as hellcat (YES, Jp-IV > hellcat, just dont use the fuckbad 88mm, use the L70)

Spoiler

shot_747.jpg

(its a bit hard to see on german tanks, but its 3 moe)

So what is good and bad is also subjective

(the lee does suck, but its not that awefull, it gets a OP gun afterall, whats ruins it are O-I exps, hetzers and arty, but thats not an m3 lee problem but an OP tank problem)

ps: the problem is not ``UP tanks``, the problem is ``OP tanks``, nerfing the shit out OP stuff like O-I Exp is a much better solution as buffing 10 tier 4/5 tanks because they get butchered all the time.... and that applies to all tiers, if 112 is useless because of OP IS3 / IS6 armor, it makes more sense to nerf the armor as to buff the 112, buffing the 112 only makes T-34-3 / T-34-2 / Wz-111 useless and so on...

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Zinn Can we have a little consistency here, please: if we're talking about people with 50% crews, no equipment and under 200 battles how do they magically know what a medium tank is supposed to be like? And how do these same people manage to play tier 4 TDs under the same conditions?

@TheMarine0341 I just checked and you played 27 games in it at sub 250 WN8, which suggests to me that your personal experience of the tank is about 5 years out of date. I'll cheerfully grant you that I owe my D2 record to luck, but I deliberately set out to play the M3 Lee to 100 games to see what could be done with it (and overshot 100 slightly cos it was so much fun). I'll be doing the same with a whole list of "bad" tanks, do you have any requests?

As @GehakteMolen points out, there will always be some tanks that are better and some that are worse. The best thing for balance would be to make them all exactly the same, but that would be bland and boring.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, M4A3E8sherman said:

Give the AMX40 scout MM, it's a tier 4 light tank :serb:

GO AWAY. Already too many Shermans around here, as mentioned above. :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

A-32 is easy to improve. It has several horrible flaws and reducing some of them will make the tank more fun to play and give better performance.

  • it looses a lot of speed when turning
  • bad gun accuracy
  • bad gun handling
  • bad penetration
  • i think the shell is slow, don't remember though
Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with the Lee, and a LOT of other tier 4 tanks is that just when a new WoT payer is starting to get out of the auto-cannons and into something resembling real tank play, they get shit upon by some of the crappiest grinds in the game.  I had to grind the T1 Heavy and M4 out of the Lee and believe me, I was over that POS pretty quick.

The real irony is that the 2-3 most powerful tier 4 tanks (matilda, hetzer, luchs) are maybe the best tanks in their respective lines.

Not only does the Lee get shit on by tier VI tanks, it gets wrecked by most tier IVs and a lot of tier IIIs.  There is no worse sight for a Lee driver than an fast approaching PZ 1c just out of your gun arc.  Tracked, circled, straffed, tracked again, circled some more, detah.

The tier IV tanks should be good enough to ease players into more advanced play, not so bad that it makes them quit.  I'd love to see the stats of how many potential WoT players last tank is the M3 Lee or AMX 40.

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

The problem with the Lee, and a LOT of other tier 4 tanks is that just when a new WoT payer is starting to get out of the auto-cannons and into something resembling real tank play, they get shit upon by some of the crappiest grinds in the game.  I had to grind the T1 Heavy and M4 out of the Lee and believe me, I was over that POS pretty quick.

The real irony is that the 2-3 most powerful tier 4 tanks (matilda, hetzer, luchs) are maybe the best tanks in their respective lines.

It's your problem when you define being best as stomping clueless players.

For the Luchs, tier 8 9 10 is quite good. (okay it's probably just me who say the Leo PT is good, but it works perfectly for me as a ghost sniper)

For the Matilda, tier 9 10 is also quite good.

For the hetzer, well I'd say tier 8 and 10 are decent too.

 

Regarding the topic

A-44 should have some more mobility and a slight improvement in handling or accuracy. Also less fire and maybe more module HP

The Sturer should have more mobility. So are the mid-tier UK HT.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, EthanDuong said:

It's your problem when you define being best as stomping clueless players.

For the Luchs, tier 8 9 10 is quite good. (okay it's probably just me who say the Leo PT is good, but it works perfectly for me as a ghost sniper)

For the Matilda, tier 9 10 is also quite good.

For the hetzer, well I'd say tier 8 and 10 are decent too.

 

Regarding the topic

A-44 should have some more mobility and a slight improvement in handling or accuracy. Also less fire and maybe more module dmg

The Sturer should have more mobility. So are the mid-tier UK HT.

OK, I'll grant you that there are good tanks in those lines a 150k XP down the line. 

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

- AMX M4: give it 100mm from 50 100 without autoloader. With proper adjusting of gun stats, it would be actually very interesting T7 HT.

- Foch 155: give it 120mm with 6 round autoloader, 2.5 sec between shots. Magazine reload around 30 - 35 sec. Make it fire APCR (320mm pen) as standard round and HEAT with around ~380mm pen as premium ammo. Give it old engine back.

- Foch: give it same gun as above (apcr as standard, HEAT as gold) expect no autoloader OR keep old gun but give it 4 round autoloader

- tier 6 - 8 French TDs: improve gun stats; improve loadlimit on stock suspension of ARL V39 and give it wider gun arc

- SAU-40: give it 17 pdr from S 35 CA with around 10 - 11 RoF. Bit like SU-85B with insane pen but lot worse camo, mobility and slightly worse alpha.

- B1: give it French version of 6pdr (used on UE 57 and i think SARL 42 too?), remove pref MM

- AMX 40: increase HP to ~400, give it 2nd gun from ELC with very underwhelming (around same as current 76mm) to balance it out. OR keep old gun but give it new engine that allows it actually gives it solid mobility. Would be very unique and hilarous to play when top tier.

 

 

I swooned a bit when you started buffing French tanks. Since I've played all of these on the live server (except Foch 155, which I've played on the test server), I'll add my .02

-AMX M4: A terrain resistance buff would be nice too, or at least give it more than -1 gun depression to the sides. If you are going to add the 100mm from the 50 100 (no autoloader), improving the handling of the DCA 45 and the 105 would make multiple guns viable and allow for varies playstyles

-Foch 155: With your proposed changes it would be back to being OP, with a clip potential of 2400 (6x400), uber high pen, and its old mobility back. I'd propose a slightly different set of changes. Clip reload 41s, inter-clip rld of 2.73s, 5 round drum. Base pen (APCR) of 302 and HEAT getting 386 pen. Reverse speed buff to -20kph. Give old side armor back (50mm IIRC)

-Foch: Fine as it is but a pen buff is in line, maybe in the 270 range. The strength of French TDs has always been high pen until this tank when all of a sudden it isn't. Give old side armor back (50mm IIRC)

-Tier 7-8 French TD's: I like your changes. Maybe a slight hp buff for each. Gun handling buffs (not too extreme) would be great. No reason that you shouldn't be shoehorned into choosing between good gun stats and good gun handling...

-ARL V39: Improve stock suspension. This line needs a clunker, and if I had to suffer through the (pre-buff) ARL V39, then others should too! But at the same time being forced to mount a tier 3 gun as the stock gun is a bit under-handed.

-SAu S40: Give it some advantage over the Hetzer, giving it a stupidly dangerous gun on a crap chassis would be nice. Not sure if the 17pdr would fit but high dpm/high pen would be a deadly combo on an otherwise awful tank.

-B1: Tricky to balance, given the power gap that exists between tier 3s and tier 6s (what this tank can see without pref.MM) I'd be happy with a slight pen buff (+10-12mm) as long as it kept the pref. MM, otherwise it's fine. Maybe have the hull-mounted 75mm as an option, where you either get to use the turret or play it as a casemate TD. Remove hull-mounted gun as a weakspot, compensate with a weakspot elsewhere.

-AMX 40: Actually being able to reach it's listed top speed, and adding a derp gun (similar to the one on the SAu S40) is all this tank would need to go from a turd to a fun little bugger. If not, a big pen buff (to around 118-125mm) would help. It's time to stop being pwned by Matildas.

 

I also haven't played the Churchill GC, but this tank is easily the worst in the game. Whenever I complain about how bad a tank is, I just remember that I could be driving a Churchill Gun Carrier. The only saving grace is that it isn't needed to advance down a line (you can go down either line w/o playing it). Give it much better traverse, good viewrange, and some armor. Make it OP for all I care by giving it AT-series armor and decent mobility to boot. It's time to polish this turd and make it shine!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, FavreFan4ever said:

I swooned a bit when you started buffing French tanks. Since I've played all of these on the live server (except Foch 155, which I've played on the test server), I'll add my .02

-AMX M4: A terrain resistance buff would be nice too, or at least give it more than -1 gun depression to the sides. If you are going to add the 100mm from the 50 100 (no autoloader), improving the handling of the DCA 45 and the 105 would make multiple guns viable and allow for varies playstyles

-Foch 155: With your proposed changes it would be back to being OP, with a clip potential of 2400 (6x400), uber high pen, and its old mobility back. I'd propose a slightly different set of changes. Clip reload 41s, inter-clip rld of 2.73s, 5 round drum. Base pen (APCR) of 302 and HEAT getting 386 pen. Reverse speed buff to -20kph. Give old side armor back (50mm IIRC)

-Foch: Fine as it is but a pen buff is in line, maybe in the 270 range. The strength of French TDs has always been high pen until this tank when all of a sudden it isn't. Give old side armor back (50mm IIRC)

-Tier 7-8 French TD's: I like your changes. Maybe a slight hp buff for each. Gun handling buffs (not too extreme) would be great. No reason that you shouldn't be shoehorned into choosing between good gun stats and good gun handling...

-ARL V39: Improve stock suspension. This line needs a clunker, and if I had to suffer through the (pre-buff) ARL V39, then others should too! But at the same time being forced to mount a tier 3 gun as the stock gun is a bit under-handed.

-SAu S40: Give it some advantage over the Hetzer, giving it a stupidly dangerous gun on a crap chassis would be nice. Not sure if the 17pdr would fit but high dpm/high pen would be a deadly combo on an otherwise awful tank.

-B1: Tricky to balance, given the power gap that exists between tier 3s and tier 6s (what this tank can see without pref.MM) I'd be happy with a slight pen buff (+10-12mm) as long as it kept the pref. MM, otherwise it's fine. Maybe have the hull-mounted 75mm as an option, where you either get to use the turret or play it as a casemate TD. Remove hull-mounted gun as a weakspot, compensate with a weakspot elsewhere.

-AMX 40: Actually being able to reach it's listed top speed, and adding a derp gun (similar to the one on the SAu S40) is all this tank would need to go from a turd to a fun little bugger. If not, a big pen buff (to around 118-125mm) would help. It's time to stop being pwned by Matildas.

 

I also haven't played the Churchill GC, but this tank is easily the worst in the game. Whenever I complain about how bad a tank is, I just remember that I could be driving a Churchill Gun Carrier. The only saving grace is that it isn't needed to advance down a line (you can go down either line w/o playing it). Give it much better traverse, good viewrange, and some armor. Make it OP for all I care by giving it AT-series armor and decent mobility to boot. It's time to polish this turd and make it shine!

 

adding derp, 50kph speed with that armor? Sorry, hell no. It would be like Hetzer but 3x better side, better top speed and turret. I dont think adding derp gun on it is good idea

also you wont get that churchill gc feel with type 95 heavy. Seriously, i played both, and how can i compare them? Type is so bad i would rather let Churchill GC fuck in my ass as much it wants than playing a single game with Type 95. Its that fucking bad.

Link to post
Share on other sites

last i checked the STA-2 was fine, one of my favorite t8 prems in fact.

Though now that i think about it, its likely that since i last played it has become obsolete due to the introduction of so many new premiums.

But from the time i spent playing it, i would recommend a pen buff to 190, along with buffs to terrain resistance that's it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

im going to be weird and like the 59 fatton. EXCEPT the cupola. If it wasnt for the tumor the tank would be so much better. But in terms of buffs? Well here are a few options

-VR buff

-Gun handling/slight pen buff, change HEAT to APCR

-REMOVE or buff the tumor so it can bounce something, anything

 

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

The tier IV tanks should be good enough to ease players into more advanced play, not so bad that it makes them quit.  I'd love to see the stats of how many potential WoT players last tank is the M3 Lee or AMX 40.

I can do a test a bit like that. I looked at accounts with <1k battles created since a recent patch (9.13, to make the Czech tanks valid). I divided accounts into active & dormant, and then compared the proportion of battles played in tier 4 tanks by each account category. Here's the bottom ten:

Tank		Ratio
M3 Lee		1.25
Valentine	1.22
SAu 40		1.15
ST vz. 39	1.13
SU-5		1.11
Chi-He		1.10
M5 Stuart	1.09
T40		1.09
AMX 40		1.08
SARL 42		1.07

A tank with ratio 1.25 is 25% more likely to be played by a quitter.

Playing terrible tanks is probably a factor in quitting the game early, but I doubt it's the only factor. Some lines may simply look more attractive to the sort of players who don't enjoy the game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't play around with penetration values too much, especially in the higher tiers.  Instead, for tanks like the M46 Patton, consider giving it a slight accuracy buff.  I don't even think it's underpowered to begin with.  However, compared to the T-54...

The Maus desperately needs the Jagdtiger's gun.  In fact, the tank would probably still suck.

The Obj 263 needs either better mobility/camo or better alpha.  This is a tank I think people would love to play.

The IS4 needs stronger frontal armor AND slightly better gun handling.

Just a few thoughts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, tsizzle98 said:

The Maus desperately needs the Jagdtiger's gun.  In fact, the tank would probably still suck.

The IS4 needs stronger frontal armor AND slightly better gun handling.

Just a few thoughts.

I know these tanks seem bad, but the IS-4 is one of the best T10s and the Maus is perfectly fine. These slow bruiser tanks lack the damage output and speed to farm WN8 (not being able to run around farming damage after the game is won is a huge deal when it comes to DPG), but they do just fine in the WR departments. Their only issue is being terribly boring to play and not being quite as good when you become a really good player. There's still nothing wrong with them, though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, tsizzle98 said:

I wouldn't play around with penetration values too much, especially in the higher tiers.  Instead, for tanks like the M46 Patton, consider giving it a slight accuracy buff.  I don't even think it's underpowered to begin with.  However, compared to the T-54...

It's better?

The M46 has been on the receiving end of a multitude of buffs already. It's one of the best performing tier 9 mediums and is frequently considered to be one of the best tier 9s in general. That was true even before the last rebalance that reduced its turret dispersion.

So I'm not sure where you're getting it that the tank needs another buff, but WG HQ can feel free to think so, perhaps they'll make it even stronger.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, M4A3E8sherman said:

It's one of the best performing tier 9 mediums and is frequently considered to be one of the best tier 9s in general.

So I'm not sure where you're getting it that the tank needs another buff...

I'd agree with you.  Some people were discussing it on the first page, however.  The T-54 has been widely regarded as being the best tier 9 tank in the game, alongside the E75 and 704.  However, I've had this game uninstalled for over a year until last week, and I know the T54 had its turret nerfed or something since then, so I don't know how well that comparison stacks anymore.  I highly regard my patton's comfort, but I feel even more comfortable in my T54.

 

27 minutes ago, Rexxie said:

I know these tanks seem bad, but the IS-4 is one of the best T10s and the Maus is perfectly fine. Their only issue is being terribly boring to play and not being quite as good when you become a really good player. There's still nothing wrong with them, though.

That's a pretty bold claim to make!  I play the IS4 on my friend's account, and like it a lot.  I guess my thoughts are more related to clan wars and improving the game as a whole.  I think there's value in making heavy tanks play more like true heavy tanks, because I think it would make clan wars and pub matches more fun.  Those tanks ARE true heavies, but other tanks do things better.  Imagine a clan fielding a group of IS4s or 113s for a brawling city push.  Imagine if that was more viable than it currently is.  That frickin' excites me.  From a WN8 and DPG standpoint, I think you're absolutely right.  But why would anybody in their right minds want to play an IS4 or Maus when they can play an E100 or T57 if all they're worried about is WN8 and DPG?  They don't.  But, I'm getting off topic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just buff the maps to form a better meta? If underperforming TD's like Lee or all the AMX's suffer then just improve dispersion values while inflating gun arcs and allow them to function where only their guns counts. Make AMX'es pseudo E-25's and done.

This entails bigger maps and TD meta. Just make slow trash tanks faster and make truly balanced maps. Put the city/objectives middle and allow MT's/TD's/LT's to play their own sides left and right.

If one class fails then they all fail.

If you win the sides but lose central then it's heavy meta: hull down/sidecrape palooza edition all over again that pubs oh so love.

If you win central but lose sides then prepare for a 4-way rapefest by the non-HT classes.

No one really cares about historical accuracy. Let me emphasize the fact that very feepeople care about historical accuracy. This is game not a documentary. One is important and the other is objectively non-essential. If they stick to that then WG is on a sinking ship because WT wins on historical accuracy anyhow & the fact that the T-22reroll exists ;_;

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have an idea!!!

Every single tier heavy tank that isn't an IS-3???

VK4502a Should move like tier 8 medium tank speed+ Tiger 2 gun depression!!! 259 APCR Pen

110 Can you give it gun dispersion values of the IS-3?

Tiger 2/KV-4 : Better reload by .5 secs

IS-5 : Seriously... we don't play campaigns for shitty tanks with gun handling that is equivalent to ebola

Caern: 1sec Better reload. 230 alpha and it still has shit DPM.

O-HO: I don't know? Never played. Look at SchnitzelTruck's post

Tier 8 medium tanks 

T 34-2: Better turret armor? Better gun handling? 

T-44: Does this thing need another buff. Yeah probably

Panther II : More mobility with a gun that doesn't have 237 APCR pen

TVP: I feel that this has been discussed A LOT!!!

Centurion 1: HD model will actually nerf the Turret. What a great idea WG really. 40k/ph speed limit to prevent getting pulled over from the Serb Police

Indien Panzer: Gun handling buff (Aim time and dispersion values) Maybe a gun mantlet that isn't made with holes!

T 69: HEAT round pen to 275 and a slight gun handling buff

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, rojo180 said:

 

O-HO: I don't know? Never played

Give the 105mm a premium round to make it a viable gun.

Oooooor give it the type4's stock gun.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I'd agree with you.  Some people were discussing it on the first page, however.  The T-54 has been widely regarded as being the best tier 9 tank in the game, alongside the E75 and 704.

Not anymore, 704 is not even in the picture now.

Quote

However, I've had this game uninstalled for over a year until last week, and I know the T54 had its turret nerfed or something since then, so I don't know how well that comparison stacks anymore.

T-54 got its turret nerfed back in 2014, so yeah, you're kind of out of the loop here.

Since then, M46 has had:

  • Accuracy go from 0.42 to 0.39
  • Aim time go from 2.3 s to 2 s
  • Turret dispersion change from 0.12 to 0.08 (overall bloom reduction of 38%)
  • Dispersion upon moving, turning the hull go from 0.12 to 0.11 (overall bloom reduction of 15%)
  • RPM go up from 6.45 to 6.67
  • Camo has been nerfed somewhat, by about 3% for sitting still and 2.2% for moving, nothing you can't compensate for and then some by simply applying camo paint.
Quote

I highly regard my patton's comfort, but I feel even more comfortable in my T54.

 I personally liked the M46 more even before WG applied the 2nd and 3rd rounds of buffs.

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...