Jump to content


SirFoch 2684 video, I am not disappointed. Tan, you should watch this.


  • Please log in to reply
83 replies to this topic

CelestiaLudenberg #41 Posted 10 May 2018 - 01:55 PM

    On Conan's Naughty List

  • Member
  • 19275 battles
  • 887
  • [MYTH] MYTH
  • Member since:
    09-17-2016

View PostAngmar_, on 10 May 2018 - 03:29 PM, said:

If they aren't going to nerf the 268, can they buff the grille 15 back to how it was when it was first released ?

 

They should probably tend to the penetration on it too, 279mm of penetration for a gun with that caliber/shell weight, shell velocity as well as being an APCBC as opposed to standard AP, should have well over 300 mm of penetration, and I suspect that someone at WG did not take physics.

 

Also the HEAT ammunition is laughably weak for a TD, I suspect that they use the same shell as the Borsig 150mm and E100, despite them being different guns.


3 M.O.E Tanks: E-100, Panzer VII, E-50M, Leopard 1,  E-75, Leopard PT A, Type 61, Tiger II, VK 45.02A, Indien Panzer, IS-3, STA-1, T-34-2, Type 59, Tiger P, Jagdpanther, StuG III G.


Hype_ #42 Posted 10 May 2018 - 01:59 PM

    I mean, it could be worse

  • Member
  • 8305 battles
  • 1,061
  • [CHE] CHE
  • Member since:
    09-21-2013
I'm just going to leave this here. :harp:

https://www.change.org/p/wargaming-wargaming-please-nerf-the-object-268-v4

Edited by Hype_, 10 May 2018 - 01:59 PM.

 


TCYH #43 Posted 10 May 2018 - 03:51 PM

    Sergeant

  • Member
  • 35336 battles
  • 102
  • [G-I] G-I
  • Member since:
    03-16-2013
Please also address the problem of how this broken tank passed the test in the first place and what is wrong with the balance department with WG HQ too.

https://m.twitch.tv/sirfoch  ←←←


ksthegreat91 #44 Posted 10 May 2018 - 03:58 PM

    Corporal

  • Member
  • 11638 battles
  • 53
  • [F-S-A] F-S-A
  • Member since:
    12-05-2012

View PostTCYH, on 10 May 2018 - 07:51 AM, said:

Please also address the problem of how this broken tank passed the test in the first place and what is wrong with the balance department with WG HQ too.

 

The v4 is basically the Controversy of the Year.

 

WG needs to slowly powercreep by introducing something wayyy above the power line. Then Nerf it down slightly to keep it in between the old and new.

 

So that they can introduce new OP premium tanks to fund SerB space projects.


Edited by ksthegreat91, 10 May 2018 - 04:02 PM.


BadAtLightTanks #45 Posted 10 May 2018 - 04:27 PM

    Corporal

  • Member
  • 3735 battles
  • 71
  • Member since:
    01-27-2018

Sorry to hijack this thread. Please buff the EVEN 90. This is my Buffing Wish List for the EVEN 90.

 

1.) Increase Damage per shot to 240.

2.) Reduce reload time in between shots to 2 seconds

3.) Reduce clip reload time to 20 seconds

4.) Increase acceleration by 50%. Something is seriously wrong when every light tank from Tier 7-10 and medium tanks are able to overtake it especially going uphill.

5.) Increase camo by another 50% so that it doesn't get spotted so easily.

6.) Preferential match making so that it can seal club and one shot Tier 1 tanks given that it shares the same armor thickness as Tier 1 tanks.

7.) The EVEN 90 is supposed to be air-lifted and air dropped into battle. Please allow EVEN 90 to hover in the air either under the belly of a chopper or the cargo hold of a military transport and give players the option as to when they wished to be released from the aircraft. Ideally to give players the option to drop on the enemy cap circle.

 

That's all that I would like to implement for now as they are what I would deemed as fair and reasonable for buffing the EVEN 90. :great:

Off Topic Posting , User Warned 
~Ephys


Edited by Ephys, 10 May 2018 - 11:39 PM.


SaltyBob_ #46 Posted 10 May 2018 - 05:15 PM

    Major

  • Beta-Tester
  • 44704 battles
  • 2,529
  • [-2AR-] -2AR-
  • Member since:
    09-15-2012
EVEN is OP it needs a nerf     :honoring:

TCYH #47 Posted 11 May 2018 - 02:06 AM

    Sergeant

  • Member
  • 35336 battles
  • 102
  • [G-I] G-I
  • Member since:
    03-16-2013

https://www.twitch.tv/videos/259844466

 

Check skill stream with three 268 4 platoon, gd job balance department.


Edited by TCYH, 11 May 2018 - 07:43 AM.

https://m.twitch.tv/sirfoch  ←←←


SaltyBob_ #48 Posted 11 May 2018 - 07:24 AM

    Major

  • Beta-Tester
  • 44704 battles
  • 2,529
  • [-2AR-] -2AR-
  • Member since:
    09-15-2012
  ....... 3 x 907s   3 x any Tier 10 with good players = mayhem   :honoring:

Proloser_The_Atomistic #49 Posted 11 May 2018 - 01:18 PM

    No hOpE left.

  • Member
  • 26676 battles
  • 4,747
  • [MYTH] MYTH
  • Member since:
    07-13-2014

View PostTanitha, on 10 May 2018 - 01:13 PM, said:

 

 

Thanks for the bump : ) I've gone through the thread, and will continue to do so..

And address the topic with HQ when syncing with them..

 


I can unbiasedly say,, this seems to be the highlight of the thread though .. *cough*

 

 

But seriously.. the thread is nps, (Thanks for the feedback..) but the video itself contains too much in the way of insults and profanity..
So for that reason, i'll leave the thread and pull the video itself.

 

Regards
Tan

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks Tan, the statistics speak for themselves really, don't listen to the players saying it's fine. 57% win rate average is far too high to be considered balanced.

My Replay Thread | YouTube | Want Your Replay Reviewed?

 

"...if that battle had KAC players there would be some of the worst gameplay the server has seen. I'd be yoloing, Ezz would be ramming, Robin would tk siggy, everyone else would likely afk at base as we'd struggle to get more than 5 on at one time. Shit did I just let out our master tier 4 strat?" - King Yolo, PBKAC


SaltyBob_ #50 Posted 11 May 2018 - 05:00 PM

    Major

  • Beta-Tester
  • 44704 battles
  • 2,529
  • [-2AR-] -2AR-
  • Member since:
    09-15-2012
I think we need more data as in who are the players giving such a high average ...... can't be low w/r players surely ...... I see good to very good players making that avg so high ....... so more data please   :honoring:

Proloser_The_Atomistic #51 Posted 11 May 2018 - 05:58 PM

    No hOpE left.

  • Member
  • 26676 battles
  • 4,747
  • [MYTH] MYTH
  • Member since:
    07-13-2014

Considering the fact that it has a better average win rate than the 907 which is usually driven by good players and is limited to only a small group of them, the Bobject coming out on top with 57% which is available to public is enough data to know that it's overpowered.

 

You'd have to be willingly ignorant or just plain stupid to think that it's not OP.


My Replay Thread | YouTube | Want Your Replay Reviewed?

 

"...if that battle had KAC players there would be some of the worst gameplay the server has seen. I'd be yoloing, Ezz would be ramming, Robin would tk siggy, everyone else would likely afk at base as we'd struggle to get more than 5 on at one time. Shit did I just let out our master tier 4 strat?" - King Yolo, PBKAC


Mother_Of_All_Rommel #52 Posted 11 May 2018 - 06:09 PM

    Ambassador of silly strat

  • Member
  • 21248 battles
  • 2,764
  • Member since:
    12-08-2014
It beats the opness of 907 by pretty good margin. Both are broken, but dunno WG realised it or not.

1940- In 2018, we will have flying cars.

2018- Tonk=lyfe, proven by scientist


FramFramson #53 Posted 11 May 2018 - 06:18 PM

    Major

  • Member
  • 40726 battles
  • 3,359
  • [AVAST] AVAST
  • Member since:
    02-22-2015
I got one of those in-client surveys. I... "made my feelings on the matter known".

LT-playing masochist. It's too much fun to be a mosquito.


LightOfDawn #54 Posted 11 May 2018 - 06:52 PM

    Corporal

  • Member
  • 18178 battles
  • 18
  • Member since:
    10-12-2012

i think WG make 268v4 OP intentionally, so they get to keep quite a few below avg. players not losing faith in this game.

 

however in the long run, i also reckon that keep playing 268v4 will make your overall judgement worse because people dont use their brain on easy mode



Proloser_The_Atomistic #55 Posted 11 May 2018 - 06:58 PM

    No hOpE left.

  • Member
  • 26676 battles
  • 4,747
  • [MYTH] MYTH
  • Member since:
    07-13-2014
Exactly why I don't play the 268v4. I feel like it will make me stupid.

My Replay Thread | YouTube | Want Your Replay Reviewed?

 

"...if that battle had KAC players there would be some of the worst gameplay the server has seen. I'd be yoloing, Ezz would be ramming, Robin would tk siggy, everyone else would likely afk at base as we'd struggle to get more than 5 on at one time. Shit did I just let out our master tier 4 strat?" - King Yolo, PBKAC


Proloser_The_Atomistic #56 Posted 11 May 2018 - 07:08 PM

    No hOpE left.

  • Member
  • 26676 battles
  • 4,747
  • [MYTH] MYTH
  • Member since:
    07-13-2014

View PostHype_, on 10 May 2018 - 01:59 PM, said:

 

Just signed it.

My Replay Thread | YouTube | Want Your Replay Reviewed?

 

"...if that battle had KAC players there would be some of the worst gameplay the server has seen. I'd be yoloing, Ezz would be ramming, Robin would tk siggy, everyone else would likely afk at base as we'd struggle to get more than 5 on at one time. Shit did I just let out our master tier 4 strat?" - King Yolo, PBKAC


SaltyBob_ #57 Posted 12 May 2018 - 07:14 AM

    Major

  • Beta-Tester
  • 44704 battles
  • 2,529
  • [-2AR-] -2AR-
  • Member since:
    09-15-2012

I am willfully stupid ....I think according to my wife the jury is still out   :P   I really believe it's too early to call for a heavy nerf bat ...... sure in a good players hands it's very good .... as it should be if you look at the previous Tiers in that line.

 

I actually prefer the OBJ-263, SU-101 with the Tier 7 SU-100M1 very good for it's Tier .... so if you nerf the 268-4 then you'll have to nerf the predecessors ( logic ) then again WG isn't gifted with our logic    :honoring:

 

I do not know what the avg w/r was for the Defender when it 1st came out, probably about the same.   

 

OK so they nerf the OBJ-268-4 .. cool then you will be calling for a nerf to the next OP Tank ....... I think balancing is a good thing in theory but to put it into practice can't be done to all the Tanks in the game imo  :great:

 

So I say live with it .. I very rarely see platoons of the things.  1 here and there .. 1 side gets 1 the other does too ..( not always the case thou   :(  )     I really see it as just another turretless TD  ...... hard to kill front on :B



TheBudgiesmuggler #58 Posted 12 May 2018 - 07:30 AM

    Sergeant

  • Member
  • 24789 battles
  • 223
  • [PXR] PXR
  • Member since:
    03-18-2013

View PostBuck3t, on 09 May 2018 - 02:24 AM, said:

I love the fact that you can very rarely see the difference between a super uni playing it and a tomato. 

It's only once you go into their stats and see that the player struggles to get 2.5k-3k dpg in most tier 10s other than the 4.2k+ dpg they hold in a 268v4 without playing any different to how they normally would.

Balanced, da da da

 

​that's it exactly you don't know who exactly is driving even seen unicorns do stupid crap in game

Ensign_Brendoonigan #59 Posted 12 May 2018 - 07:57 AM

    Staff sergeant

  • Member
  • 5767 battles
  • 468
  • [WOT-U] WOT-U
  • Member since:
    05-25-2016
I'v heard that they're in ST with a nerfed version at the moment. Anyone got any info on the changes?

Ensign

To Leopard 1, or not to Leopard 1 is the question!

British Line (Conqueror & Challenger), Chinese Lines (T34-2, 111 5A & WZ-131), French Line (AMX M4 mle. 45), German Line (Leopard PTA), Italian Line (P43.ter). 

2nd MOE: PZ III/IV, T-34


Bash_sh #60 Posted 12 May 2018 - 09:44 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Member
  • 26974 battles
  • 951
  • [PBKAC] PBKAC
  • Member since:
    05-25-2013

View PostTCYH, on 10 May 2018 - 07:51 PM, said:

Please also address the problem of how this broken tank passed the test in the first place and what is wrong with the balance department with WG HQ too.

 

well how long do you have, and i'll explain ....

or give you the short answer, THERE IS NONE , bad for profits.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users