v0632-update-preliminary-discussion

devxcil, on 15 January 2011 - 10:40 PM, said: Nice to see something is being done for the Panther II, though I wish the T54 were simply toned down instead. Will there be any additional adjustments to the Pershing?


jackal40, on 15 January 2011 - 10:41 PM, said: Nice to see the upcoming changes, although I'm a bit disappointed there was no mention of matchmaking or the spotting issues. Can we hope that fixes for these are coming soon?


zawisha, on 15 January 2011 - 10:42 PM, said: omg get over it already, t54 is as it is, theyre buffing P2 and you still whine about t54, mby lets all play IS4 instead... seriously.
nice changes overall, seems like you try to balance few things
and yey for clan wars


Overlord, on 15 January 2011 - 10:44 PM, said: Pershing, surprisingly for many, has the best stats of all tier 9 mediums. Nothing is planned for it currently.


UWT4nK, on 15 January 2011 - 10:45 PM, said: why play is-4 when currently a skilled t-54 player can get over an is-4?
I wish I wud have seen some armor been taken from the t-54 honestly...an armor nerf was what I was expecting...but whatever...making it more expensive can and most likely persuade some from playing the dev-54 less...
good job though, look forward to the next one.


_DC_, on 15 January 2011 - 10:46 PM, said: patch v.0.6..3.0:
- Reassembled audio output libraries.
This means artifacts repaired?
I know those patch notes arent complete, but any ETA on the new spotting system?


Overlord, on 15 January 2011 - 10:47 PM, said: 0.6.3.0 is a minor "interim" update, more substantial changes/fixes and content are in development. Need to remove these Christmas trees first. Guess, the majority got tired from them.


zawisha, on 15 January 2011 - 10:47 PM, said: yeah, thx for approving my words, skilled is4 vs skilled t54 and t54 is burning wreck.
skilled t44 > noob is4 so, yeah.


woookash, on 15 January 2011 - 10:49 PM, said: T-54 ... clearance increased by 15 cm.
This means that it will be higher or im wrong?


tuccy, on 15 January 2011 - 10:49 PM, said: Can you keep the girls there, please?


JulianFTW, on 15 January 2011 - 10:50 PM, said: Skilled IS-4 vs skilled T-54 ---> IS-4 wins with 20health left and modules damaged. Consider 2 IS-4= 3 T-54 can't you see the problem? A 20health tank isn't much of a victory bringer.
Enough offtopic.
Why did they buff the 8.8 /71? It was strong enough.


zawisha, on 15 January 2011 - 10:51 PM, said: imo it means that the gap between ground and tanks floor will be 15cm more, overall means tank will be 15cm higher


Iggith, on 15 January 2011 - 10:53 PM, said: Think that means more hitpoints on the gun, not the dmg it does. So it will be less likely to get knocked out now.


Eagle18, on 15 January 2011 - 10:57 PM, said: I've just installed the the russian test patch, but i can't see that:
"Increased hit points for guns: 75mm_KwK_L70, 75mm_KwK45_L100, 88mm_KwK_43_L71, 105mm_KwK45_L52_ausf_B."
The damage is the same. (135, 220, 390)
Iggith: sure, i misunderstood it.


Overlord, on 15 January 2011 - 10:59 PM, said: See the post above. Not damage, but hit points. They are not displayed.


devxcil, on 15 January 2011 - 11:03 PM, said: This increase, how much of an increase is it? Is it a big increase, or just a minor adjustment?


needtohate, on 15 January 2011 - 11:04 PM, said: nice work guys


andrzejas, on 15 January 2011 - 11:08 PM, said: why t54 got only 15% where Object 212 got 100% or maybe that is mistake and that is 10%?
next overlord please give us a new values hit points for guns: 75mm_KwK_L70, 75mm_KwK45_L100, 88mm_KwK_43_L71, 105mm_KwK45_L52_ausf_B.
and why there is no new values for 10,5 cm KwK 46 L/68? when buffs get 8,8 cm KwK 43 L/71 and 105mm_KwK45_L52_ausf_B?
the 105mm_KwK45_L52_ausf_B. use only panther II
the 10,5 cm KwK 46 L/68 use king tiger II, VK 4502 (P) Ausf. B
and why that big buff for panther II? Pershing is weaker and nothing for him?, that same with VK 4502 (P) Ausf. B . VK 4502 (P) Ausf. B vs is4 or t54 is like free frag


Charcharo, on 15 January 2011 - 11:10 PM, said: Can we make it so that T54 has 100mm of frontal armor and moves as fast as it does now OR give it the 120mm but decrease speed and turning?


sastusbulbas, on 15 January 2011 - 11:10 PM, said: The 88's do not do enough damage, and bounce too many shells.
Tiger armour and tier should be reviewed. It is not good enough, at least seems out of it's class.
Spotting and invisible tanks is still an issue.
Track and module damage from arty should be reviewed. It is too frequent, and at times regardless of objects.
Memory leaks still not addressed.
T-54 and IS-4 etc are scary, can pump 88's into them all day in average battle conditions, HE is useless in that gun, and I ain't paying for premium.
No option to quit a game you have no place in, where you cannot do any damage, nor spot, nor make any XP or credits.
Rounds that bounce of etc, this should be reviewed regarding XP gained. I did not choose to be put in with vehicles my gun cannot scratch, yet after numerous spot on hits I get no XP but still a 2700 credit bill for my A-20's ammo use?
Costs of modules? Why does a US heavy get a medium rammer? Yet The VK has an 88 with medium rammer, the Tigers a heavy rammer with the same gun?
Sorry to sound dissapointed, but have any of this patches developers read any of the forum complaints? I do not see any real improvement for gameplay regarding the average user. Oh and we are losing the girl posters too?


OJ191, on 15 January 2011 - 11:10 PM, said: Yeaaaah I just wish they would do the same thing for the tank destroyer versions of the guns. Not fun getting the gun on your Jagdpanther knocked out in one hit by just about anything short of a loltraktor.


6ep3a, on 15 January 2011 - 11:10 PM, said: If the pantherII gun gets buffed to compensate for its price per shot or what the reason is, why doesnt the 10.5 used by TigerII, Panther, VK4502 get same bonuses or lower their shell cost?
Its mathematically impossible to say yes to using 10.5 L52 mostly L68 when its less then 20%(approx) "better" then 88mmL71 at 400% the cost.
Paying 1050 credits per shot hurts if you know you can do more damage with 4 shots 88mm AP rounds.
Also noted that the L52 gun of the pantherII has same "damage modeling" as a 122mm (avg.390dmg) where a longer gun same calibre has less (320dmg)(L68-105mm.


Doomlord52, on 15 January 2011 - 11:14 PM, said: Hm... not much gameplay changes for most tanks, but im surprised at the nerfs to russian tanks (repair cost, etc.). Maybe there is hope left.
Anyway, what about making it so the Panther 2 doesn't start with a tier 5 gun (or whatever the l/70 is)...


exoriou, on 15 January 2011 - 11:16 PM, said: T-54 model should be enlarged to real sizes, so would go with enlarging hitboxes and less T-54 is OP whines.


Overlord, on 15 January 2011 - 11:16 PM, said: T-54 will become higher, allowing enemies to shot its sides a bit easier. Its height should be approx the same as T-44 now.
If you have access to RU open server (your account on main RU server was created prior to January 14), you can compare the models.


Diastant, on 15 January 2011 - 11:19 PM, said: Great, thank you, the T-54 does have a very low profile. What does the UI web-thing mean?


WolfHeart, on 15 January 2011 - 11:19 PM, said: Hmmm may I ask about average survival rate for Tier IX mediums?
It was pretty obvious that the Pershing would have the best damage output... but how often does it survive a battle in comparison to other tanks? If that's not confidential
EDIT: Also, Panther II's poor average performance is probably caused by its stock cannon. Not everyone can use free xp to mount a 75/l100...


Tzorion, on 15 January 2011 - 11:20 PM, said: kinda funny to read that the T30 got a increased repair cost.... guys, it is paper thin, or as some of my friends says "its a moving free xp powerup box..."
Why increase its repair cost when you have stated it is currently not worth its place in T10 heavy line?
atleast wait untill you move it to TD tree (if it happens)


Overlord, on 15 January 2011 - 11:21 PM, said: The game client is being prepared for clan wars beta. Initial "web<->client" integration.


boggintuff, on 15 January 2011 - 11:21 PM, said: Seriously? As if the IS7 wasnt expensive enough to repair? Now an additional 5%? Lame


Overlord, on 15 January 2011 - 11:23 PM, said: Pershing - 37%, Panther II and T-54 - 35% each.


Schurmeyer, on 15 January 2011 - 11:28 PM, said: Not a single nod of the head about the biggest gamebreaker of them all, SPOTTING.
Hi Overlord, can you advise if the daft spotting thing is going to be fixed?
Cheers
Stevie


WolfHeart, on 15 January 2011 - 11:32 PM, said: Thanks for the reply Overlord
P II buffs are quite nice, considering they aren't going to make it unstoppable. Reduced dispersion for the 10.5 probably wasn't needed, but still very welcome, as well as reduced repair cost.
What pleases me the most however, are the tweaks to the engine. Countless times I've had mine damaged.


FlatCat, on 15 January 2011 - 11:34 PM, said: yes the 88 gets some more bang.


Taxen0, on 15 January 2011 - 11:39 PM, said: will anything be done to the JagdTigers weak front before the release? also the "gearbox" aka engine should be removed in my opinion (on all tanks that have it in the front, not only JT), even a MarderII can cause engine fire on the JT frontally, (I have tested this, and yes, its sad).
if the lower body weak-spot and the gunmantle ones are removed it will be on par with the obj704, only keep the MG weak-spot.


6ep3a, on 15 January 2011 - 11:41 PM, said: *105mm L68*
Penetration 169-281
Damage 240-400
Cost credits 1030
Rate of fire 6.32 rpm
How come pantherII has better statistics all around in general when the L68 is 1680mm "longer" barrel? Oh wait the L68 has 5 more average penetration?
I still wonder this.


SkttLes, on 15 January 2011 - 11:48 PM, said: Clearly the panther II is overpowered and should be nerfed.


6ep3a, on 15 January 2011 - 11:54 PM, said: Im not saying that PantherII needs nerf - im saying its more important to explain how a shorter barrel can have such a statistical advantage over a longer barrel if all game revolves around the biggest longest fattest gun.
Its physically impossible to grant a L52 better long range characteristics over a L68 unless motivated by something. 1680mm(7½foot~~) of gun barrel only gives 5 more average penetration in advantage to a shorter barrel? With worse accuracy, worse damage, worse everything really? - And this is before the buff of the P2 gun?


skilshaw, on 15 January 2011 - 11:57 PM, said: Maus gets to reload faster? Wth? It already has 1k more HP than IS7, and bounces nearly every IS7 shot...
So much for the russian tanks being OP... German ones are OD..


JerryLopez, on 15 January 2011 - 11:57 PM, said: wait they complained last patch about russian tank buffs, maus gets a buff and now this? make up your minds please


Agnellini1021, on 16 January 2011 - 12:05 AM, said: You know what can really help the Panther II? Not making people who have grinded 164,535k xp use a tier 6 gun... With the change coming with this patch (being able to mount the turret w/o the new suspension) will help a lot, but I literally JUST got my Panther II and it is almost impossible to do anything with the fragile build and pathetic gun. Don't tell me that I have to flank , even if I somehow manage to survive flanking something w/o getting tracked or being lit on fire, I will barely damage anything. And seeing as I'm placed with tier 7-10, there aren't many options to engage the enemy.
And anyways, whats the point of putting the L/100 (16,100xp) as an upgrade if you will rush to get the suspension(23,500xp) and then the turret (23,670xp)? I could see it being relatively useful if someone uses free xp to get the L/100 and then grind 46k+ xp for the suspension and turret but that is still a stretch.


Benden, on 16 January 2011 - 12:06 AM, said: No change to the T54 track repair time yet ? You said it would be corrected.
Also there's no information nor acknowledgment about Jagdtiger's problems despites tons of report. Any agenda on fix for mantlet problem, visibility... ?


haineken, on 16 January 2011 - 12:11 AM, said: will this new ground clearance for t-54's affect their abilities fighting Maus tank? couse now if i see maus alone i just go to his side and kill him, without getting hit.


SgtNuker, on 16 January 2011 - 12:14 AM, said: I'm actually surprised there's no mention of the T-54's armour getting a de-buff. I won't mention how far the T-54's armour is above 100% (because apparently that information isn't allowed to be posted on the forum), but if the American heavies got taken down from 120% to 100%, then the T-54 should be put back in line as well
At least the L/71 is getting shown some love. Now if only the Tiger's L/56, or the Tiger itself would get a bit of a buff.
Also see no mention about correcting the T29/T32/T34/T30's and Tiger I's tracks. The tracks are far too thin, and each tank is using its transport tracks. The Tiger II's were fixed last patch, how about fixing the US heavy's and Tiger I's this patch?


WolfHeart, on 16 January 2011 - 12:22 AM, said: Rifling? Better compression in the loading chamber? Just some thoughts.


Benden, on 16 January 2011 - 12:25 AM, said: Yes it's surprising. Survivability of 37 compared to 35, not related to play style ?
Any information about population of T54 vs Panther 2 vs Pershing available ?


Overlord, on 16 January 2011 - 12:28 AM, said: Good point. Included this into patch notes:
T-54:
- decreased armor of tracks by 5mm (now the same as for T-44)
- track repair time increased by 10% (now the same as for T-44)
JT does have some performance issues. The list of adjusments is not complete.


KoenigsTiger1944, on 16 January 2011 - 12:33 AM, said: Hmmmmmm yes sure i think the ammunition costs for german 105mm L52 and L68 is a little bit to expensive also the russian 100 mm shell ammunition!
As a non Premium Player you can't earn enough credits to cover your costs for shells.
Also i understand why the German Guns a little bit weaker as the Russians, because German Tanks got more HP as a Russian Tank or a American Tank, but i think for the reload times, the guns should do a little bit more Damage. Aehm the 105mm German L52 and L68 should do 350 to 370 Dmg per shell.
And now to the 88mm gun L56 and L71 of the german tanks. Historically this gun was the best gun on the Battlefields of Second World War and so i think this guns should do also more Dmg than 220!!!
I know the Tiger got only the L56 in real but with this gun the Tiger can penetrate the russian T34 or a Sherman over a distance of 2,5 km and in the best Situation over a Distance of 3,5 Km. So i Think in refer to the INCREASE of the IS-4 front Armor (Historically) the German 88's should increase the Dmg to 250 or 270 Dmg per Shell.
The best Solution was to give a alternative Shell Type (Panzergranate 40) For the German 88 L71 and the penetration Rate and Dmg Rate was real in fact of historically Data.
And Now to the Last fact. The German 7,5mm L70 who was in first Action on the Battlefield and used by a Panther in 1943, should also increase the Dmg to 150 to 170 Dmg per Shell.
Best wishes
KoenigsTiger


Overlord, on 16 January 2011 - 12:34 AM, said: Overall battles: Pershing - X, Panther - 2.5X, T-54 - 4X.


Ivin, on 16 January 2011 - 12:37 AM, said: really you both want to whine...what about the T30? talk about a tank needing some love!


Badnewcastle, on 16 January 2011 - 12:45 AM, said: Ouch... I agree with the repair time increase and height increase, but DAMN! The tracks were the only weak point now they will be weaker? People that don't drive the 54 will underestimate this nerf.


ady5, on 16 January 2011 - 12:48 AM, said: You can't have too many changes from 0.6.27 to 0.6.32, it's just a minor patch, so guys, I really don't see the point of arguing why the game is not like you want it to be just yet. Also, you are not the only ones who are playing the game, and your point of view is not necessarily the good one, in terms of balance and whatnot. I'm not saying that there are no problems, I play mainly german, and what russians I have for moneymaking are OP(KV, T-34), but don't expect great changes in such a short patch. You asked for more frequent minor patches instead of big rare ones, so here you go.
Anyway, i say good mini patch so far. I like the stug being decreased in battle tiers, i often got him against tier8-9s, with no hope of at least putting some damage out there.
Also, I like the increase in repair costs. This way, A T54 won't just rush in without considering what's infront of it, and it'll play more cautiously. Subtle changes like these are what makes the balance in a game.
Exactly, that was THE ONLY weak point of a T54


zayack, on 16 January 2011 - 12:49 AM, said: Wrong. The guns may be the same but did you ever consider the round was diffrent?. Good example 128 L/55 shoots diffrent rounds then the 128 L/61.
Also is there any change coming to the German gun mantles?


Homer_J, on 16 January 2011 - 12:54 AM, said: Will 5mm of armour make any difference when you are facing guns with 200mm+ penetration?


Benden, on 16 January 2011 - 12:56 AM, said: Thank you for answering those points. I'm damn glad JT issues are acknowledged. errr btw aren't we saturday late evening ?
Mate, T30 is about to be moved to Tiers 9 Tank destroyer so I doubt they'll work on balancing it as a tiers 10 heavy. I dont know though about what term.


ramp4ge, on 16 January 2011 - 01:03 AM, said: Wait what? They were quick to jump down the throats of the US tanks for having the armor bugged..Can anyone confirm this?


Troika, on 16 January 2011 - 01:04 AM, said: I am cautiously optimistic about these changes thus far. Any particular reason for the StuG one? Not that I'm complaining, just that it is already quite nice and being tiered lower will make it even nicer. :>


vcadoda, on 16 January 2011 - 01:10 AM, said: IS-7: repair costs increased by 5%.
Т30: repair costs increased by 10%.
I see what you did there


ramp4ge, on 16 January 2011 - 01:11 AM, said: Did we need any less reason to play US heavies above tier 8?