Stona

Server Update 11.02.2019

Best answer

Regarding the removed. Ha-Go, FCM 36 and H.35. We will have some news to share on them in the future as well as the possibility of their return / obtainment. 

 

The developers are currently hard at work on the current change and we will have further updates and news to share in the near future. 

 

Thank you all for your continued feedback. We are still reviewing and passing daily :salute:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Stona said:

M22 — has been moved to the 1st rank and is placed now after LVT(A)(1).

thats doesn't even seem related to the penetrationchange

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would you implement something so obviously wrong?

 

105mm L7: M774 APFSDS-T 3000 440 1509

 

That is the correct armour penetration value and speed for the M774 round at 10 meters!!!

This practically makes American tanks at high tiers unplayable!

Edited by JFG80
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 3
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Stona said:

 

First we need to check how the specific vehicles perform on battlefield after this changes.

 

I dislike this practice of making a change and letting it fester before changing anything. I guess the hope with that move is to not need to change anything, yet some changes are obvious. 

 

Especially if a vehicle took a turn for the worse, people are not going to use it and the data you expect to get is just not going to happen... 

  • Like 4
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unpopular opinion but I personally think it wasn't that bad of a decision/idea to use a formula for every shell, especially if the shells haven't changed that much from their previous penetration values for which historical sources were used before. In the end it will probably be easier to determine the penetration for a shell, shells no longer need constant changes in penetration because of a new source popping up that says something different and people can stop arguing about a shell penetration being wrong because one source says it has 120mm pen at 100m and another source says 150mm pen at 100m for example. 

 

On the other hand I think the shell changes should have come with battle rating/ammo loadout changes as well. In specific tanks at lower tiers, a few French tanks that now have a lot of penetration for their battle rating, the Tiger II (10.5cm KwK) that now has a stock shell with only 175mm at 0m and might as well be removed and the T29 that now has better shells options compared to the Tiger II (10.5cm KwK). Its also kind of a shame that the Ha-Go, H35 and FCM36 got removed. I saw someone saying on the forum that there was at least a Ha-Go (Late) variant with a better 37mm main gun and probably shell as well, wouldn't it make more sense to upgrade the current Ha-Go to that one instead of just removing a unique vehicle? 

Edited by *Arkel-99
  • Confused 4
  • Sad 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

any reason why this wasn't tested on the devserver before it went live, i mean ammocost and Br alone are probably going to take a month to change.

---

i kind of like the change for the Tiger 105

it's either dropping in Br hard or the PzGr.43 is going to be the new stock shell

Edited by Hardmoor
  • Upvote 11
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, I_NAMELESS_I said:

I do not understand the deleting of Japanese Type 95 Ha-Go !!!

(...)

Deleting a very iconic tank as i said, is very lame and cheap. The devs must know this! ..

Also didn't get this...

 

I was NEVER a fan of Japanese tanks...but HaGo was ok-ish...i have memories of really bad tanks...and HaGo wasn't one of them...

Not really the best tank in the world...but manageable...

 

And yes...a historically relevant tank...one of the few Japanese i actually knew before playing warthunder...

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Stona said:

 

18 hours ago, Merlin1809 said:

You guys should adjust BRs and ammo cost fast... Some tanks are unplayable now and some ammo is just overpriced right now.

 

First we need to check how the specific vehicles perform on battlefield after this changes

 

See that’s not good. So players need to ‘suffer’ through a learning curve before changes are made. Those changes in BR’s and cost should have coincided with the ballistics calculations. 

  • Upvote 1
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, JFG80 said:

Why would you implement something so obviously wrong?

 

105mm L7: M774 APFSDS-T 3000 440 1509

 

That is the correct armour penetration value and speed for the M774 round at 10 meters!!!

This practically makes American tanks at high tiers unplayable!

You got that from Steel Beasts right? Steel Beasts is not a very good source at all since most of their figures are roughly guessed. Also practically noone uses M774 anyway since it costs 900 SL per shot and the M735 can perfectly kill anything if you know how to aim for the obvious weakspots.

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, duckmartin said:

I thought we had L23A1 mostly sorted out in this bug report ?

 

Agree, same for the 120mm DM 23 (flat pen now 410mm instead of 460mm as shown in the documents) for the Leopard 2A4 (which btw still has the transmission bug reported half a year ago)

  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ammunition which could have been bought with golden eagles can't be stock for everyone because that would alienate players that bought them so some tanks are truly screwed. Seriously, when are you going to add new ammunition to tanks that already needed them before this change that now need new ammunition even more now? sigh......

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Jaddman said:

This is a very harmful update for the game, and your decision to roll it out without ANY community testing completely baffles me.

Even if you ignore the tanks that were made unplayable by these changes, something of this magnitude SHOULD NOT be pushed out without appropriate BR changes.

It's been 4.5 months since the release of Helicopters, it's been 2.5 months since the release of Italian GF, and we've yet to see any meaningful balance changes to both.

You have TOWs without range limit, you have a glorified Leopard I at 8.0, you have 1980's stabilized go-kart at 3.3

Instead of making even the tiniest of tweaks, you decide to make even more massive changes affecting 90% of the tanks in game, without any consideration of their effects on balance.

How long will we have to wait for you to "check" how they perform? Another 2.5 months? Half a year?

 

What's even the point of this all? It's not any more transparent, since your new values differ from what people calculated themself using your own formula.

When it comes to APFSDS, you have not provided any formula at all, and Willi Odermatt's website requires much more information than what's avaliable to players or even what you seemed to use yourself.

If I'm forced to dig up documents regarding Frustum length, why won't YOU use official documents regarding AP penetration?

Why not only use this method when you don't have actual documents for the shells? Why conflict with official documents and multiple corroborating sources to make everything one-size-fits-all?

 

I very much hope you reconsider this ridiculous idea, as it might send massive reverberations for the rest of the War Thunder lifetime, alienating more and more players.

Guess what? Buff for AP and APCBC and Variants is welcome. But nerfing NATO APDSFS into oblivion (Abrams M774 350mm Flat Pen, DM 23 less flat pen than DM 13, 60° pen from 260! to 220!). Very weird that the M735 and DM 13 were not recaltulated as the remium Leo L44 and the XM 1 use it. And of course, not applying any BR/Ammo cost changes as well as buffing/nerfing round which were stated as having trustworthy documents and test to not be recalculated by this formula (originally they said that rounds with official/trustworthy documents won't be changed).

  • Upvote 3
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The King Tiger 10.5cm KwK now has 175mm of pen at battle rating 7.0. It's horrible and needs to be rebalanced. Either it needs the good shell stock, or a lower BR

medal

Share this post


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

Ammunition which could have been bought with golden eagles

 

:blink:

  • Like 3
  • Confused 2
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Stona said:
2 hours ago, USVIKILLER said:

Ammunition which could have been bought with golden eagles

 

:blink:

 

Unlocking better ammo with GE (not buying the shells).

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


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

 

Unlocking better ammo with GE (not buying the shells).

 

I thought I missed some crossover with Game With Health Bars. Thanks.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 5
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Stona said:

 

First we need to check how the specific vehicles perform on battlefield after this changes.

Can you give us a rough timeline?  Are we looking at weeks or months?

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that it is a good idea, although i'm not sure it's well executed... There are some weird things like APHE having higher pen than  AP for the same tank (like M46 where APHE has like 40mm more pen than given by the formula).

 

And there are tanks where nothing changed, like the otomatic, it's APHE still have 60mm pen while the formula says it should have double that...

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see this new "penetration calculation patch" as something very positive, freshes up the game, gives vehicles that maybe werent so great before a new start. Its a game everyone, no need to scream just because your favorite historical vehicle lost 15mm of penetration according to your "historically reliable soucre from a nation at war, 80 years ago". Give it a rest, and just have fun in the game :)

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
  • Confused 5
  • Sad 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why did you guys opt to remove the Ha-Go instead of giving it access to the Type 1 APHE shell that the later models could use? This would have kept it a viable tank. The tank model is the same. So it seems to me that just giving it a new round was all that needed to be done.

 

EDIT: Here is a post discussing the Ha-Go Late model

Edited by TANK082
  • Upvote 1
medal

Share this post


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

I see this new "penetration calculation patch" as something very positive, freshes up the game, gives vehicles that maybe werent so great before a new start. Its a game everyone, no need to scream just because your favorite historical vehicle lost 15mm of penetration according to your "historically reliable soucre from a nation at war, 80 years ago". Give it a rest, and just have fun in the game :)

Well the new penetration of AP etc is not too bad (but needs major BRs/shell cost adustments)

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will come, dont worry :) Seeing how they already fixed some problems, I dont think it will take too long before we see a BR patch

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


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

It will come, dont worry :) Seeing how they already fixed some problems, I dont think it will take too long before we see a BR patch

I hope so. If then APDSFS gets recalculated, it would probably be balanced again.

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, VILLICY said:

I see this new "penetration calculation patch" as something very positive, freshes up the game, gives vehicles that maybe werent so great before a new start. Its a game everyone, no need to scream just because your favorite historical vehicle lost 15mm of penetration according to your "historically reliable soucre from a nation at war, 80 years ago". Give it a rest, and just have fun in the game :)

I also am waiting to see...

Not sure if players are overreacting or not...

 

Some oddities sound bad...like AP having less penetration than APHE...but gameplay didn't feel as broken as some state here...it is a game, not a military grade simulation environment!

 

IMHO still too early to demand a rollback...and apparently some of the major issues were corrected...

(a bit odd that a shell that was considered wrong...the Tiger II...was simply removed...but at least SOMETHING was fixed)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Byebye360 said:

Not all of the tanks where reserves is what they are saying, and so they do not have the fcm.36.

 

Yes I played the game for years, more than 5 thousand hours, it's frustrating to lose a vehicle from the tech tree, I want to keep all these vehicles that Gaijin removed from trees through the years (like the italian planes in the german tree). Many lost the FCM as well, even old "Old Guard" players, this shouldn't be the case, players who followed the game for years should keep this vehicle.

 

I think this needs to be addressed by Gaijin, I hope they will give some time to unlock it.

Edited by Electrolite_xyz
  • Like 1
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.