B1 Draco
- amount of shells in autoloader increased from 8 to 12
- ammo carried increased from 160 to 240
- stock AP shell penetration increased from 293 to 331
- elite AP shell penetration increased from 308 to 348
Seems a reasonable buff, despite i don't see it on tier 9 nonetheless. Yes it is a SPAAG , yes it has a 76mm Shipcannon, yes it is on the Centauro Chassis instead of the OF-40 (Otomatic), yes it is "fairly new", but no it shouldn't be tier 9. The higher the tier goes the more damage they'll do, and the Turret is "big" and will soak up damage even more on higher tiers.
BMPT-72
- hitpoints increased from 1760 to 2000
- ATGM reload time decreased from 24 to 20 secs
- AP shell penetration increased from 177 to 201
- accuracy penalty from movement reduced from 0.25 to 0.2
- accuracy penalty from turning reduced from 0.75 to 0.6
While i agree that HP and ATGM should be buffed, i don't agree with the AP penetration, unless it is intended to introduce the overpenetration mechanic again. BMPT series overall counters all low armored vehicles pretty hard, and this increases the feature quite hard with the AP and reduction while moving buff. They should go more with the ATGM buff so it has better chances against MBT's than being a pure counter to all non MBT's
M2 Bradley
- stock AP shell damage increased from 41 to 45
- middle AP shell damage inceased from 46 to 48
- elite AP shell damage increased from 48 to 51
- stock HE shell damage increased from 31 to 33
- elite HE shell damage increased from 34 to 37
- stock ATGM damage increased from 371 to 420
- elite ATGM damage inceased from 389 to 441
- ATGM reload time reduced from 24 to 18 secs
- stock ATGM penetration increased from 668 to 702
- elite ATGM penetration inceased from 699 to 734
No opinion as i never liked the Bradley, yet i have played not that many games with it. Guess it goes into the right direction
LAV 600
- aiming time reduced from 3,4 to 3 secs
- maximum accuracy (circle smallest) improved from 0.122 to 0.099
- minimum accuracy (circle largest) improved from 1,47 to 1,191
- reload time reduced from 6,4 to 5,82 secs
Seems a solid decision, despite the gun handling improvement is just minor, since you have no gundepression, mediocre camo and a indirect movement when driving, which feels awkward to drive .
T-64
- hitpoints improved from 1220 to 1310
- stock viewrange improved from 320 to 330 meters
Okay .......
T-72
- hitpoints improved from 1415 to 1555
- stock viewrange improved from 320 to 330 meters
Okay .......
I get the same avg. dmg for my T5 MBTs , yet you buff the T-series again. While i agree that the T-72 ain't easy to play, if you use your brain just a bit, you will get the same results as in the Chieftain or Leopard 1A5.
T-72A
- hitpoints improved from 1510 to 1705
- stock viewrange improved from 320 to 330 meters
- reload time of stock AP shell reduced from 9,52 to 9,09 secs
- ATGM reload time reduced from 16,67 to 13,33 secs
Okay .......
T-80
- hitpoints improved from 1875 to 1995
- reload time of stock AP shell reduced from 8,7 to 8,4 secs
- ATGM reload time reduced from 12,9 to 12,12 secs
Okay ....... And the Leopard 2 has the same HP, bigger silhouette, worse gun performance and at best same mobility, yet we have a page here with only T-series buffs. Either you picked the wrong tier for the tanks, which seems solid or 90% of the playerbase is just bad.
Akatsiya
- reload time reduced from 20 to 18 secs
- aimtime reduced from 7 to 6,5 secs
How does it come that you buff a arty ? Last time i saw you changing something for the Akatsiya was just nerfs
A few words to this
Those are just the vehicle changes, although i agree with some of the stuff, i find myself with some issues again, but that will most likely be always the case. If you watched your own game from a competitive point of view in random battles just for a few matches, you will recognize that the average skill level is beyond acceptable , nor will they ever change, as they have different interests and ambition.
People often say, this tank is garbage or this is just bad , i can't club other players as I've seen or expected to do so. The difference here is, players that have interest in improving, will improve themselves, players that don't do it, will most likely be always deadweight to the team and will always do bad in most vehicles, even the ones that are going into the "OP" direction.
I never understood your part of balancing vehicles, even back in the Alpha or EA stages, and it seems it will be that way for the most part in future as well, but one thing you should keep an eye on, the interest and need of improving for the players.
Balancing solely on statistics is one form of balancing, the other one is, to try to educate your players or lets say it like this, the need to improve to get better results.
Vervun what do you find on the fact that they are not buffing the M8 and in your eyes(if you find that it needs to be changed) how or is it the same case as the Draco where it should not even be at tier 9.
ReplyDeletePersonally i think they already made a mistake in splitting the XM8 into 2 vehicles, as themselves didn't plan it in first place. XM8 and M8 were together on tier 8 as the XM8 with both gunoptions.
DeleteWhile i understand, that they could split them up, in the end the result is as seen currently, the M8 is just weak. It has no niché, nor does it has smoke grenades which is essential, nor does it has superior mobility to outplay same tier MBT's, nor does it has some "bully" armor against AFV's like the VFM 5 does at tier 6.
If we for example give the M8 the VFM bully armor, he will do better vs the AFV's on tier 9 and probably be a real threat to MBT's if the map design allows that. Now if he can bully AFV's, what is there task in those match up, since there are just a few non MBT's overall ?
This is my major concern, as there are not that many possible or logical vehicles for this tierrange, even if you buff them with no end in sight . I will always suggest the Toyota Tacoma / Hilux Rebel edition then, since it is possible due their approach of balancing :)
I actually find the Mobility one of the redeeming features of the tank next to the gun. It has freaking insane acceleration(2.55 to 0/32km/h) though the top speed is a bit lacking compared to the acceleration. The thing it lacks more is the turret traverse which is really low(should be stingray 2 levels).
DeleteWell with a superior mobility (hull/turret traverse, top speed, acceleration, ground resistance, braking) the M8 would represent the LT's best i would say. If the M8 does have only a few from previous mentioned features, it keeps him down already, which should be not the case.
DeleteFor example 66km/h for a afv as top speed is just slow (M2 Bradley or BMD-2 for example or even the Stingrays top speed and hull traverse are just mediocre at best for LTs .
Though i can't say on how the M8 or XM8 play, since iam not that ambitious to grind tier 7 and higher, but if you see things like the human evolution, where with every generation you get better, it seems that the MBT's are having huge jumps , while the rest does have only small jumps in performance, which represents a wrong class or vehicle identity, to me at least.
However it seems that my understanding from a well placed vehicle is different to the Obsidian or my.com / mail.ru one .
The tanks and Buffs/changes are all good but:
ReplyDeleteI think the most valuable point u make is the education point!
The most difficult part is the how do you achieve this because most will believe the tutorial is the be all and end all of my education to play this game eg "Ok Tutorial done now lets get to it".
Most players "If they are given the proper education/encouragement" will learn and improve but invariably they will never truly achieve it (education) and only get simple minded abuse and told they are "Retarded or Uninstall etc" simply because they Do Not Know how or why they should do something. Most will now shout "Common Sense" well there is no such thing if it was COMMON every1 at birth and growing up would have the "Common Sense" not to play with knives, run across the road, stick a knife in a plugged in toaster or go hull down IOT protect my tanks hull. Nope u only get "common Sense" after education or in some instances lucky experiences and after those "Lucky Light Bulb moments" they have now developed COMMON SENSE!
I had a player once try to assist me in game and because I was so wrapped up in my own battle couldn't see the chat (as you all know u can't/don't look whilst fighting); however, after I died (my own fault; but others told me it was just common sense to not do what I was doing) I read it and whilst he wasn't busy asked him what he wanted. His response was enlightening so much so he contacted me after battle IOT elaborate and I was very grateful for his insight and could now (after education) see the "Common Sense" in not doing what I did. In fact I was invited to Platoon with him and using TS was given a master class that has led to the development of my skill set and 30% improvement in my wins and competitiveness in general.
Therein lies the challenge when we are more "Educated" it will = satisfied players all round because they will put up a better fight make more balanced decisions or achieved more; however, those who are sanctimonious, small minded superior twats will never accept a loss is down to the whole "in which they all failed" but only the fault of every1 else because they themselves are infallible geniuses; hence they bleat about the result.
What most do not see is the fight or vehicles the other players were involved in; what their sight lines were, what their positioning was and those same things for all those opposing them were etc - I was lucky that a player in another game was behind me and could see those things and the errors arising from my actions; In addition he was willing to give advice and assistance "Not Abuse".
Without all the facts it is very hard to judge how or why a loss occurred but most of those geniuses simply trot out "Retard/Morons team etc" forgetting they were part of said "TEAM" and perhaps some of their decisions/action were a contribuing factor to said Loss !
Anyhow; how are we to achieve that education I would seriously doubt that most other players would take the time that I was the lucky recipient off?
YouTube can be a bonus but most won't get the education because they will need to understand what are they missing.
I would like to see a Replay System implemented as Being able to watch a replay of your battles would be a bonus. In addition a feedback system (perhaps a volunteer pool of players) where u can aske for a review along with advice on what/where u could of made better plays or choices in any engagement.