Jump to content


Upcoming balance adjustments


  • Please log in to reply
1128 replies to this topic

Oicraftian #1041 Posted 15 March 2019 - 11:19 PM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 15135 battles
  • 940
  • Member since:
    12-19-2014

AMX 13 75's buff is still completely pointless and fails to solve the problem it had in the first place. All you've managed to do is make it better than the tier 6 in the sense it is now actually slightly faster and partially un-[edited]the DPM.

 

In reality the tier 6 actually has a fairly large edge if they are both moving.

 

 

Also I have a feeling the Charioteer will proceed to murder the Chinese tech tree mediums.


Edited by Oicraftian, 15 March 2019 - 11:22 PM.

65% scrublord

Remember only tier 8/9/10 stats mean anything


Dark_Magician_Girl #1042 Posted 16 March 2019 - 03:46 AM

    #1 Reroll NA

  • Players
  • 32211 battles
  • 4,859
  • [_STR8]
  • Member since:
    10-02-2016

View PostRibbleStripe, on 14 March 2019 - 02:07 AM, said:

 

I don't know where did you get this. But all tier 7 LT will be buffed in 5.9. 

 

Thank god


I am now the #1 ranked E75 on the NA server!

 

 

 

 


Dark_Magician_Girl #1043 Posted 16 March 2019 - 11:59 AM

    #1 Reroll NA

  • Players
  • 32211 battles
  • 4,859
  • [_STR8]
  • Member since:
    10-02-2016
Moreover, the Superpershing is not fine where it is.  It sucks horribly.

Edited by Dark_Magician_Girl, 16 March 2019 - 12:00 PM.

I am now the #1 ranked E75 on the NA server!

 

 

 

 


RibbleStripe #1044 Posted 18 March 2019 - 07:01 AM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Administrator
  • 247 battles
  • 672
  • Member since:
    10-04-2017

View PostPosit1ve_, on 15 March 2019 - 11:09 AM, said:

Do you guys plan on nerfing IS-4? It's too fast for the amount of armor it has. Maybe nerf the traverse or speed limit?

 

Also, would you consider buffing the speed limit on the AMX 50 B to 55 or 60? and the DPM on the T57 heavy? Both the autoloader heavies have pretty low winrate for tier 10; and their damage isn't even very high either

 

Tier 10 heavies are totally fine and fortunately don't deserve any attention. 

 

View Postzeur0sis, on 15 March 2019 - 07:19 PM, said:

 

While you guys are in a “buff happy” mood.   How’s about buffing some tier 8 mediums?

 

Tier 8 mediums are also okay. The gap between the most and the least effective vehicles is minor.

 

View PostDark_Magician_Girl, on 16 March 2019 - 02:59 PM, said:

Moreover, the Superpershing is not fine where it is.  It sucks horribly.

 

Well, stats say the opposite. 

 

 


Chariot_Solace #1045 Posted 18 March 2019 - 12:09 PM

    Stug Life

  • Players
  • 36619 battles
  • 2,742
  • [_STR8]
  • Member since:
    12-06-2016

View PostRibbleStripe, on 18 March 2019 - 01:01 AM, said:

 

Tier 10 heavies are totally fine and fortunately don't deserve any attention. 

 

 

Tier 8 mediums are also okay. The gap between the most and the least effective vehicles is minor.

 

 

Well, stats say the opposite. 

 

You said the same thing about the Kpz 70, but you still gave it a small buff anyway. Just consider buffing the Super Pershing’s gun handling please. That would do wonders. I mean, the turret armor is horrible (it gets penned with AP rounds by the lowest pen tier 7 mediums), and it gets penned with HEAT rounds through the spaced armor routinely. But it’s the gun’s bloom that really kills it. Other than mediums with 122mm guns, it has worst in class dispersion factor while moving. It can’t snap shot anything unless at point blank range. So you’re forced to aim fully which ends up making you take unnecessary damage quite often. And it has a small caliber gun which means you will almost always lose an hp trade. And it doesn’t have the mobility to dance around the flanks. It’s a difficult combination of traits to work with.

Tier Xs; E100, E50M, JgPzE100, Maus, Grille, IS-7, AMX 50B, WZ-113, STB-1, VK 72.01(K). Lines I'm Grinding: 121(VIII), FV215B(VIII), FV4202(VII), IS-4(VIII), T-62A(VIII), Obj. 268(VII) Favorite Tank: E75. Top 100 Tanks: AMX M4 45, ARL 44, IS-2Sh, Chi-To, Chi-Nu, M41 90mm, Sturer Emil, Pz Sfl IV C, Type 58, Panzer IV Anko, Nashorn, BT-SV, Panzerjager I, IS-2, WZ-110, Type T-34, T-34-1, BDR G1B, Sherman V, Chieftain/T95, Pz IV Hydrostat, STRV 74A2, 112 Glacial, IS-2 Berlin, Kuro Mori Mine, M6A2E1, Panzer IV S, T-44-100, Black Prince, AC IV Sentinel, SU85i, T-34-2, Firefly, VK 100.01(P), Jagdtiger 10.5cm, Dicker Max, VK 45.03, T34 Indy, T-150, Type 64, AMX M4 49, Skorpion G, WZ-111 1-4, Ram II, Jackson, Super Pershing, T-44, T-43, Mäuschen, 


Oicraftian #1046 Posted 18 March 2019 - 02:04 PM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 15135 battles
  • 940
  • Member since:
    12-19-2014

Its almost like the weakspot against low pen guns is relatively small and forcing it to aim, is there to prevent it from snap shooting against tanks that often can barely hit-pen the weakspot in the first place.

 

Horrible turret? Lol no.

 

 

Tier 8 mediums are fine? Average damage is barely higher than tier 7's. Aside from that, balance by pick rate, your stats aren't as reliable because your player base is not capable of exploiting their inferiority.

 

The problem is that 55-65% group can farm the average player, and because average player is struggling to drive straight they die easily no matter what disparity. Each game is like a repeat of Golan Heights except with random outcome.

 

Team A has 1 uni who can complete basic tasks. Team B is the average. Drive through the open and get shot by 7 tanks, go AFK after 2 hits because of some unknown reason. Attack heavy tank head on. Show side armor to highest DPM in tier, etc. The result is naturally the best farmer has high damage score.

EDIT Actually tier 8 mediums aren't good at damage farming either because their base DPM is fairly poor

 

WR difference is because many tier 8 heavies just aren't able to influence outcome in early public battle which is crucial. Fighting against the average player allows a fast tank to shut down like half the map because the enemy doesn't know that they should be contesting it.

 

But the reality is that in competitive tier 8 they are never played because they cannot do this in competitive. Its an uphill battle from purchase onwards.

 


Edited by Oicraftian, 19 March 2019 - 07:20 PM.

65% scrublord

Remember only tier 8/9/10 stats mean anything


andyllinger #1047 Posted 18 March 2019 - 09:16 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 26887 battles
  • 2,213
  • [--M--]
  • Member since:
    09-07-2014

View PostChariot_Solace, on 18 March 2019 - 07:09 AM, said:

 

You said the same thing about the Kpz 70, but you still gave it a small buff anyway. Just consider buffing the Super Pershing’s gun handling please. That would do wonders. I mean, the turret armor is horrible (it gets penned with AP rounds by the lowest pen tier 7 mediums), and it gets penned with HEAT rounds through the spaced armor routinely. But it’s the gun’s bloom that really kills it. Other than mediums with 122mm guns, it has worst in class dispersion factor while moving. It can’t snap shot anything unless at point blank range. So you’re forced to aim fully which ends up making you take unnecessary damage quite often. And it has a small caliber gun which means you will almost always lose an hp trade. And it doesn’t have the mobility to dance around the flanks. It’s a difficult combination of traits to work with.

 

^ this is so true.

Superpershing's gun handling is horrible. 

 


Tier X: Leo.1, E50 ME100, Jageroo, MAUS, E4E5, M48, T57, Obj.140, T-62, IS-7, IS-4, Obj.268, STB-1, 4202, BC.25T.


Poigente #1048 Posted 19 March 2019 - 10:49 AM

    Private

  • Players
  • 402 battles
  • 2
  • Member since:
    10-07-2017

View PostBefallen2, on 06 December 2017 - 01:28 PM, said:

 

Very good!  Now please look at the balance between tier 4 and tier 5.  It's laughable to try to pen tier 5 tanks with tier 4 guns.

 


Edited by Poigente, 19 March 2019 - 10:49 AM.


Poigente #1049 Posted 19 March 2019 - 10:51 AM

    Private

  • Players
  • 402 battles
  • 2
  • Member since:
    10-07-2017

View PostOicraftian, on 15 March 2019 - 11:19 PM, said:

AMX 13 75's buff is still completely pointless and fails to solve the problem it had in the first place. All you've managed to do is make it better than the tier 6 in the sense it is now actually slightly faster and partially un-[edited]the DPM.

 

In reality the tier 6 actually has a fairly large edge if they are both moving.

 

 

Also I have a feeling the Charioteer will proceed to murder the Chinese Obrigado por nos atualizar,vamos conceder isto

 



Dark_Magician_Girl #1050 Posted 20 March 2019 - 01:52 AM

    #1 Reroll NA

  • Players
  • 32211 battles
  • 4,859
  • [_STR8]
  • Member since:
    10-02-2016

View PostRibbleStripe, on 18 March 2019 - 02:01 AM, said:

Well, stats say the opposite. 

 

The stats say it performs similar to the centurion 1, which also sucks.


I am now the #1 ranked E75 on the NA server!

 

 

 

 


fangs58 #1051 Posted 20 March 2019 - 03:03 AM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 34636 battles
  • 830
  • [WHC]
  • Member since:
    10-11-2016

View PostRibbleStripe, on 18 March 2019 - 07:01 AM, said:

Well, stats say the opposite. 

 

I know what you are going to say but I am going to say this anyway. You statistical model is flawed. Any model that only measures the tanks performance by how well it performs when driven by top players is bound to give you false data. 


ANOTHER COMMENT OR QUESTION BROUGHT TO YOU BY A BLISSFULLY ABOVE AVERAGE PLAYER.

 

https://www.blitzsta.../1022508815.png

 

 


j0nn0 #1052 Posted 20 March 2019 - 03:33 AM

    F2P Skrub

  • Players
  • 17597 battles
  • 2,832
  • [XREGS]
  • Member since:
    06-27-2014
It's already been pointed out, but good players will always be good in any tank you leave them in. The stronger something is simply gives us a higher potential to hit while the weaker something is means we have to work harder to get the results we want or simply drop the tank and stop playing it. It'd also be good to look at how general players perform in something. If an average player is suddenly outperforming or underperforming in a particular tank relative to the rest, that should be a red flag that something's not right. 

Sometimes, you just gotta sit back and watch them all burn. Don't forget to bring popcorn. You're going to need a snack.


RoadKutter #1053 Posted 20 March 2019 - 04:26 AM

    Polish Demolish

  • Players
  • 33536 battles
  • 4,571
  • [III-H]
  • Member since:
    07-08-2014
Hey Ribble, I got to say I was pleasantly surprised with the ads for gold. 

                         

                    Ghosting reds since 2014

 

                

                                                                  


Oicraftian #1054 Posted 20 March 2019 - 04:39 AM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 15135 battles
  • 940
  • Member since:
    12-19-2014

That's not strictly true. Competitive usage usually gleans an idea of exactly how effective a tank is in coordinated play.

 

The issue, is that the bottom players are too incompetent and even a basic skillset is enough to gather dark purple stats simply because it is exceedingly easy to <farm> them.

I fully admit I don't deserve to be considered a dark purple. The problem is that I'm dark purple anyway because the average player is too bad.

That is, within a certain limit, you can give them incredibly powerful tanks, and they will still fail to deviate that much from the norm.

 

I am sure, that if you consider the full statistical range, the aver geventually fail the scores low enough to 

 

Provided medium tank A can farm typical pubbie B with even remote consistency, medium tank A will be able to gather enough stats in the 55-65 player range, to 'not' deserve a buff.

Often, tanks that do not perform well statistically (T-62A) also do not perform well in the game (T-62A in competitive scene is 'uncommon;). However, comparing them statistically is not a good choice.

 

I do not like to say 'top players' in this case either; this is the 55-65% range after all. When you say top you should actually refer to 'top players'.


65% scrublord

Remember only tier 8/9/10 stats mean anything


RibbleStripe #1055 Posted 20 March 2019 - 06:33 AM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Administrator
  • 247 battles
  • 672
  • Member since:
    10-04-2017

View Postfangs58, on 20 March 2019 - 06:03 AM, said:

 

I know what you are going to say but I am going to say this anyway. You statistical model is flawed. Any model that only measures the tanks performance by how well it performs when driven by top players is bound to give you false data. 

 

Maybe i really should stop sharing flawed stats? Informing you about balance changes in news section might be enough i guess.
BTW, your top players image is much more flawed than our stats approach. Just humble opinion.

 

View PostDark_Magician_Girl, on 20 March 2019 - 04:52 AM, said:

 

The stats say it performs similar to the centurion 1, which also sucks.

 

Stats say it's decent. 


 

 


Oicraftian #1056 Posted 20 March 2019 - 02:52 PM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 15135 battles
  • 940
  • Member since:
    12-19-2014

Except that the Cent 1 isn't even remotely competitive at the moment.

T-44 hasn't been played in high tier 8 level competitive in how long? About the time you added Type 59?

STA-1 is still bad, mostly because for a gun tank it has a remarkably mediocre gun.

 

And the reason tier 8 mediums aren't played (in competitive) is because they can't do very much damage even if they were good at dealing damage in the first place.

Why? They have around as much DPM as heavy tanks. Do they have advantages?

Gun handling, accuracy and... Acceleration & speed.

 

These are supposed to make up for lacking DPM advantage, often less DPM if both tanks have shells reloaded, not enough alpha for good hit kill values, sometimes not enough armor to pen, truly 'medium' agility (ie not exceptional), and not enough armor.

Lol no.

Even if they flanked they have roughly same DPM accounting for loaded shots. That makes the effort useless, especially considering how tier 8 heavies can just do better in a head to head slug out.

 

But OK your stats say they are balanced.

 

Hence why they will continue to rarely show up in competitive. But WG... You really don't care do you?


Edited by Oicraftian, 20 March 2019 - 03:09 PM.

65% scrublord

Remember only tier 8/9/10 stats mean anything


Dark_Magician_Girl #1057 Posted 20 March 2019 - 10:55 PM

    #1 Reroll NA

  • Players
  • 32211 battles
  • 4,859
  • [_STR8]
  • Member since:
    10-02-2016

View PostRibbleStripe, on 20 March 2019 - 01:33 AM, said:

Stats say it's decent. 

 

If you consider decent below the 50th percentile (given the bar charts you posted on discord) I don't know what to say really.  

 

Let's keep in mind that you continued to voice the opinion in multiple rant threads/posts on the forums about the 183 being balanced given its place on the charts for "lvl 55-65% players" in its most recent pre-nerf state only to later see it get nerfed for exactly the same reasons players have been saying for over a year.

 

Ribble, I hate to be the one to put this on the table, but I have played the game far more than you have, unless you keep another account somewhere that none of us know about.  I'd like to think my feedback is in some small way meaningful after 30k+ games at 71%+.  So when I tell you that the T26E4 SuperPershing is nearing complete unviability and there is something wrong with the armor, I mean it seriously.  I'd like to be acknowledged instead of being blown off by being told "the stats say it is decent."  I'm not a 50% player who you can simply wall away with irrelevance using a stats comment as enough argument..

 

You don't need to be a meteorologist to say it's raining outside.  In the same manner, I don't need to work for the WG Blitz department, but my ethos points to being more than competent enough (rather than some random 50% who hasn't learned how to play) to say that the SuperPershing is weak.  I'd like to think that because of my experiences I'm not just some average Joe giving their uninformed opinion after 9k battles.  The concept that my opinion is being outright dismissed because of some charts that only track a small sample of the player base, I find quite disrespectful.


Edited by Dark_Magician_Girl, 20 March 2019 - 11:14 PM.

I am now the #1 ranked E75 on the NA server!

 

 

 

 


StronkTenks #1058 Posted 20 March 2019 - 11:45 PM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 14692 battles
  • 912
  • [ATLS]
  • Member since:
    09-09-2015

View PostRibbleStripe, on 19 March 2019 - 10:33 PM, said:

 

Maybe i really should stop sharing flawed stats? Informing you about balance changes in news section might be enough i guess.
BTW, your top players image is much more flawed than our stats approach. Just humble opinion.

 

 

Stats say it's decent. 

 

I would say that the Centurion 1 is decent, but the playstyle is really dependent on team play, which in the current state, means it can't carry, which gives a negative perception.

 

The thing is a house on wheels. Decent RoF, but if you get into a brawl with other mediums, you'll loose, and you're slower than many heavies in it which is pretty pathetic. As long as you put the gun to use, it's good, but overall it's really not something i'd play.



Oicraftian #1059 Posted 21 March 2019 - 01:56 AM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 15135 battles
  • 940
  • Member since:
    12-19-2014

View PostDark_Magician_Girl, on 20 March 2019 - 10:55 PM, said:

 

If you consider decent below the 50th percentile (given the bar charts you posted on discord) I don't know what to say really.  

Its a medium, and this is WG. 

Let's keep in mind that you continued to voice the opinion in multiple rant threads/posts on the forums about the 183 being balanced given its place on the charts for "lvl 55-65% players" in its most recent pre-nerf state only to later see it get nerfed for exactly the same reasons players have been saying for over a year.

Useless. Ribble isn't in charge of balance departments choices. Don't make him responsible for that.

In reality nerfing the 183 aligned with their interest of dumbing down the game which they have done for the past 4 years.

Ribble, I hate to be the one to put this on the table, but I have played the game far more than you have, unless you keep another account somewhere that none of us know about.  I'd like to think my feedback is in some small way meaningful after 30k+ games at 71%+.  So when I tell you that the T26E4 SuperPershing is nearing complete unviability and there is something wrong with the armor, I mean it seriously.  I'd like to be acknowledged instead of being blown off by being told "the stats say it is decent."  I'm not a 50% player who you can simply wall away with irrelevance using a stats comment as enough argument..

This could literally have been summed up as "you have a substantially lower skillset than I do."

You don't need to be a meteorologist to say it's raining outside.  In the same manner, I don't need to work for the WG Blitz department, but my ethos points to being more than competent enough (rather than some random 50% who hasn't learned how to play) to say that the SuperPershing is weak.  I'd like to think that because of my experiences I'm not just some average Joe giving their uninformed opinion after 9k battles.  The concept that my opinion is being outright dismissed because of some charts that only track a small sample of the player base, I find quite disrespectful.

But you do need to be more intuitive than 'buff the gun handling so I can snap shot low pen low acc mercilessly.' when thinking about buffing tanks.

 

View PostStronkTenks, on 20 March 2019 - 11:45 PM, said:

 

I would say that the Centurion 1 is decent, but the playstyle is really dependent on team play, which in the current state, means it can't carry, which gives a negative perception.

Its really not decent. I couldn't even 2k that tank. That is sad. This is different from when my T-44 was facing Object 140's on a daily basis.

The thing is a house on wheels. Decent RoF, but if you get into a brawl with other mediums, you'll loose, and you're slower than many heavies in it which is pretty pathetic. As long as you put the gun to use, it's good, but overall it's really not something i'd play.

Its a piece of trash with 3 redeeming features; DPM that isn't less than a heavy tank all heavies but the Caern, a gun that is accurate and pens, the gun arc is good.

 

While that's *decent* for a tier 8 medium that has more to do with how exceptionally trash the lot of them are.

The Caern is actually a really good example of WG's well raised middle finger to medium tanks. It has 2744 DPM with 1st shell loaded, and 2554 sustained. You'd expect its DPM advantage would be at the cost of speed, but it actually trades speed for armor, so it really leaves you wondering why.


Edited by Oicraftian, 21 March 2019 - 02:00 AM.

65% scrublord

Remember only tier 8/9/10 stats mean anything


fangs58 #1060 Posted 21 March 2019 - 02:20 AM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 34636 battles
  • 830
  • [WHC]
  • Member since:
    10-11-2016

View PostRibbleStripe, on 20 March 2019 - 06:33 AM, said:

 

Maybe i really should stop sharing flawed stats? Informing you about balance changes in news section might be enough i guess.
BTW, your top players image is much more flawed than our stats approach. Just humble opinion.

 

 

Stats say it's decent. 

 

Stats can be made to say whatever you want them to say. So maybe you should stop sharing flawed stats till you have the time to review the validity of your current model. 


ANOTHER COMMENT OR QUESTION BROUGHT TO YOU BY A BLISSFULLY ABOVE AVERAGE PLAYER.

 

https://www.blitzsta.../1022508815.png

 

 





4 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 4 guests, 0 anonymous users