WoT – 9.20 Supertest – Japanese Heavy Rebalance

Source: WoT FB

Not so long ago we shared the plans about the rebalancing of certain vehicle branches. Today we’re ready to share the first details about the upcoming changes: the Japanese tanks are coming to the Super Test. We plan to test complex changes to medium to top tier Japanese vehicles. The purpose of rebalancing Japanese heavies is to improve the branch balance, to save the battle effectiveness and applicability of Japanese heavies, and at the same time to create equal conditions in battle for the vehicles of other nations.
We plan to test the following vehicles:
  • Tanks of Tier IX and X will have revised armor: We added some parts to the front armor with thickness of 240-260 mm for Tier X and 220-240 mm for Tier IX. Their maneuverability and speed will be adjusted so they are a bit better than what the Maus has. The frontal armor of these vehicles, unlike Germans of the same class, didn’t have any vulnerabilities and could only be penetrated with premium ammo. We have added the changes to some parts of frontal armor to make it possible for their opponents to fight them on equal terms.

  • The Tier VIII O-HO will get premium ammo with an armor penetration value of 250-260 mm for the 10 cm Experimental Tank Gun Kai. Previously, this gun had no AP shells with enough penetration to reliably damage enemy vehicles.This meant that players didn’t have opportunity to choose their game style – the tank was playable only as a derp.
  • The O-I will get a bit weaker rear armor to decrease the tank’s domination in a battle, especially against lower tier tanks. Previously, low-tier vehicles could not damage the O-I even if they managed to flank it. After the changes flanking will work.
  • The Tier V O-I exp. will get improved frontal armor so it can stand a chance against higher tier vehicles and perform the role of a breakthrough tank. Additionally, the 105-mm gun will be removed from this vehicle since it was too effective at Tier V. The mobility of the tank will also be decreased.
Advertisements

76 thoughts on “WoT – 9.20 Supertest – Japanese Heavy Rebalance

  1. Do my eyes deceive me?? WG are adding weakspots to superheavies?!?
    Type 5 is still too strong frontally imo, (slight nerf to the LFP or hatch would do) but the other changes are all good imo

    Liked by 2 people

      1. You understand that with the Chrysler K’s lower plate having about 207mm effective armor, just about any tier 8 heavy or TD can go straight through it, right? Even some mediums will have no problems going through it without gold, and the others typically have the mobility to exploit the weak side armor on the thing. Just for clarification, even if it angles perfectly, it gets 226 effective on the lower plate, and if it angles any farther, the sides are an insta-pen. This is not an invincible juggernaut like people claim it is.

        Honestly though, I expect to be branded as the villain for saying this. It seems that a tank is only “balanced” if you can kill it by just auto-aiming at it long enough.

        Liked by 2 people

        1. The thing is that on the live model on the Chrysler, u can see 2 obvious machine gun ports on the tank. It is modeled on quite a lot of tanks. However, when you look at the armor model, what do you see ? NO machine gun ports ! Why ? Well how can WG make money if people can pen tank from front without pressing 2 ? Also the cupola unlike the liberte is 200mm thick. Hahaha.

          Like

          1. Did you miss the part where I mentioned the lower plate of the Chrysler K? Was I not clear enough? Most tier 8 heavies have 220-230 pen, and nearly all tier 8 TDs have more than that. Almost every medium tank that can’t pen its frontal armor is capable of flanking it. Unless you are someone who doesn’t understand basic tactics in the game, it shouldn’t be that hard to figure out that you don’t need to fire gold at the Chrysler K.

            Also, in case you were unaware: The Tiger II, Jagdtiger (tech tree and 8.8), and the VK 45.02 Ausf. B all had their machine gun weakspots removed as well. Are you going to complain about them too?

            Like

            1. Most t8 Heavies dont have 220 to 230 pen. There are 19 x T8 Heavy Tanks (Regular + Premium).
              8 x T8 Heavy Tanks have got more than 220 mm penetration. At least with standard ammunition.
              Please check your facts next time.
              Well and if you stand infront of a TD with your lower glacis wide open, well then you ve done something wrong.

              Alright the “flank it if you cannot penetrate it” thing. I guess everytime i see a chrysler k he ll be completly alone right? No ll notbe alone, there is such a thing called enemy team. No to mention that the chrysler has got a 1200 horsepower engine (20hp/t) and 33 °/sec hull traverse. You cannot run circles around a chrysler k.

              Weakspot wise i dont bother the machinegunports, as they are also missing on other tanks, as you mentioned.
              What bothers me is that it has got no real weakspot like many other tanks have.
              At least that cupola should be reliably penetrable in a smaller spot, i dont want a big “shot me here”- tumor but at least something that i might can hit and damage.

              Like

              1. For the record, there are 14 tier 8 heavy tanks (that have been available to the public through some manner) have at least 220 penetration (not counting duplicates like the T34 B, Liberté, and Patriot): AMX 50 100 (232), AMX M4 49 (232), Caernarvon (226), IS-3 (225), IS-3A (221), IS-5 (221), KV-4 (227) KV-4 Kreslavskiy (227), Löwe (234) Object 252 (225), T26E5 (230), T34 (248), Tiger II (225), and VK 100.01 P (220) Perhaps you should check your own facts before calling me out on mine.

                That aside, you must understand that there are some situations where you will not be able to flank, or penetrate the enemy you are fighting. Do you complain whenever a T32 is hull down and you can’t flank him or push him? Flanking also doesn’t necessarily mean circle strafing a tank in the center of his team. Try getting into a position where you can see his sides, and take shots of opportunity. If he doesn’t react, you shoot him more; if he does, your team can get shots in while he repositions/doesn’t have his gun aimed at them.

                You also seem to fail to understand that the lower plate has a maximum effective thickness of 226 before the side becomes easier to penetrate than the lower plate. Flat on it’s around 206-208 effective – meaning only 8 (not counting the IS-6 B) tier 8 heavies can’t pen it – all but two (T32 & VK 45.02 A) of which are premium tanks, and among them is the Chrysler K itself. I would not be opposed to a weaker cupola on it, but it is not invincible in its current state, unlike everyone makes it out to be.

                For those of whom who aren’t counting, this means that there are 14 heavy tanks at tier 8 that have 220+ pen, 3 with 210-219 pen (110, Emil I, and O-Ho), and 8 that have less than 206 pen. Keep in mind that unless the Chrysler K sidescrapes or goes hull-down, they will be always be able to fire at armor with ~206-~226 effective thickness. Meaning that in the best-case scenario, all but 8 can pen it; and in the worst possible scenario, 8 of them still have at least a 50% chance of penning it, with 6 others having slightly less than a 50% chance. All while firing their standard round.

                Like

                1. I am sorry, i really thought i had all tier 8 tanks listed up. Dont wanted to sound like a jerk. My bad.

                  I maybe wrote that wrong. I know that flanking is essential. Its the best way to maximise damageoutput and to minimise taking damage. What i wanted to say is that it is not always possible to flank and you have to shoot from the front. i dont complain about a hulldown t32, therfore it has got a relativly weak frontal hull armor (effective ~186mm on the upper front glacis and ~175mm on the lower glacis, unagled).

                  The problem is the chrysler k upper front is effective ~260mm thick, unagled.
                  Its Turretarmor ranges from 250 up to 500mm+ effective. Its cupola ranges from 230mm to 270mm+, and the 230mm part is of the size of the commanders front periskope.
                  Now compare that with the T32, exspecially its hull.
                  Its upper front has got less effective armor than the chrysler k´s lower glacis.

                  The Chrysler K has got a massive 20 hp/t with much better ground resisstances values (0.96/1.05/1.92). T32 has got 13.90 hp/t with worse ground resisstance values ( 1.05/1.44/2.59)
                  And therefore it turns faster. (~26°/sec vs ~33°/sec). They got the same Speedlimit ( 35 kph)
                  Chrysler k`s gun is more accurate and aims faster. (0.36 vs 0.41 dispersion/ 1.81 vs 2.21 aimtime)
                  And indeed it shoot faster ( 6.2 rounds/minute vs 5.9 rounds/minute).

                  So compared to the chrysler k the T32 is inferior in everything except raw frontal turret armor.

                  Okay so much to that stat comparing.

                  And in the moment where you can hide your lower glacis you become practically immune to standard ammunition. And lets be honest a 50/50 % chance for equal tier heavy tanks to penetrate the angled lower glacis is a joke. Every Tiger 2 driver would be happy to have such a lower glacis. Heck its upper front is 210mm effective just 4mm more than the chrysler k`s lower glacis.

                  In short my problem is, that it is to tough to crack for equal and lower tiers. If he stands in the open with its lower glacis smiling at me i want to reliably damage him in my t8, and at least have 50/50 chance with lower tier tanks.

                  Like

                  1. I appreciate that you were willing to admit to a mistake instead of going on the defensive and firing back insults toward me – the latter is something that I have come to expect from the World of Tanks community over the years. I apologize if my reply to your comment came off as condescending.

                    As far as the Chrysler K is concerned, it is indeed a vehicle with powerful armor and decent mobility. However, its drawbacks are often ignored. Firstly, the vehicle’s rear-mounted turret makes it difficult to peek corners and trade. Second, its mobility does not make enough of a difference to counteract its large size, flat sides, and exposed engine deck – meaning that it is vulnerable to flanking fire and especially artillery. Lastly, its gun, while it sports God-tier gun handling, still has limited penetration and poor gun depression, and its alpha is lackluster for a tier 8 heavy.

                    I’m not trying to downplay it as a weak tank that needs a buff, I’m merely trying to offer a different view on the tank – one that analyzes the tank as a whole instead of just writing it off as OP. Hopefully, people can learn these weaknesses and use them to outplay it, instead of playing into its hands by confronting it head on.

                    Like

                    1. No Problem, if you do a mistake –> be honest and dont blame others, it was your own fault. ^^
                      And jea the Wg Community has become really toxic over the years.

                      Indeed there really are other tanks that i am more concerned about,
                      and your right, you often dont see the drawback of some vehicles.
                      But it would be nice, if Wargaming would start do balance the new upcoming premiums a bit more in that way, that lower tier tanks should have a proper chance against them, at least when they are playing decent or better.

                      Like

  2. hm,m overall seem like good changes i know the oi changes are unhistorical but i think their necessary ive avoiding playing lower than tier 6 as much as i can in the game recently because they were just impossible to kill without firing all of the prem rounds in your tank so i think this is a welcome and necessary change. the one change id make to the type 5 is id make the front weak points both 240mm thick because 260mm is still more than most tier 10s have and its a 50/50 for guns like the high tiers 105mms with standard rounds and thats without the tank angling… and in the case of the type 4 pretty much the same change but 230 thickness for the type 4 and maybe remove the cheek weaknesses if that was to happen the tank could angle and make the 230 stronger.

    Like

    1. The O-I would be better balanced at tier 7, to be fair, with major HP, mobility and gun buffs, but I guess this is better than nothing

      Like

  3. Better than nothing, but there are still things to change.

    They should nerf the derp gun gold HE, buff 14cm and probably remove cheek weakspots of Type 4 if they add these stuff things as weakspots, but its better than nothing and these changes are actually going to right direction, which is something.

    Like

    1. “Nerf gold”

      Hahaha you silly,we’re talking about WG !
      If a feature appears to be pay2win, they’ll either ignore it or buff it some more so they can sell more of it !

      Like

  4. P2W ammo stays but lets nerf Type 5 only good thing about it – the frontal armor. It will go back to be the least played heavy on T10 because now it loses the only thing that actually make you want to play it with the -50k every game you get from P2W ammo.

    Like

  5. So now you can shoot at two VHS openings at the front with a same tier vehicles from effectivelly a point blank range (<100m) and have about 25% change to penetrate with normal AP unless the Godzilla in angled? Bwahahaha.

    Let me initiate a slow clap…

    Like

  6. “The frontal armor of these vehicles, unlike Germans of the same class, didn’t have any vulnerabilities and could only be penetrated with premium ammo.”

    Last time I’ve checked Maus lost all of it’s frontal weakspots after that retarded buff as well.

    Like

  7. Actually, if WG renoves the derp from the type 5 heavy, it will just become a worse e 100. Also, they need to give the o-1 some compensation buffs in exchange for the Nerf of side armor

    Like

    1. “it will just become a worse E 100”

      It has better armor and more health so it still has a niche. Worse Maus is a better term, though.

      Just buff the 14cm penetration and maybe the DPM a little.

      Liked by 1 person

    2. Any T8 HTs can pen E-100’s LFP, and Type 5 is more or less immune to credit ammo of ANY HTs. How can that be a worse E-100?

      Like

  8. This is a tricky balancing situation. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that the Type 5 isn’t OP, but with these frontal weakspots added, what will be the point in playing this tank anymore? Show your turret -> you’ll get penned by gold. Show your front -> you’ll get penned in front weakspots. Sidescrape -> you’ll get penned in the hull cheeks. I don’t think that WG can fix these vehicles as long as we have corridor maps in this game.

    Like

    1. Cheeks are not weakspots on Type 5 anymore, just saying.

      They need to make 14cm strong gun and that way the tank would be still competitive. Even if its armor gets penned, it still has 2,9k HP and good, high alpha gun to fight with.¨

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Do you mean the turret cheeks or the hull cheeks? Because the turret is easily penned with premium ammo, and the hull cheeks become unangled when you angle your front…

        Like

        1. I meant hull cheeks. They are no longer a weakspots against non-gold even when angled, as they are 270 mm thick.

          That being said, they should add atleast some option to make the tank “pennable” with AP shells. When you angle the tank it will be still able to resist non-gold ammo reliably. Sure gold spam will suck but thats better done by reworking gold ammo.

          It sucks that you get penned by gold ammo but being completely immune to normal ammo from front is also a terrible game-design.

          And again, they should buff the 14cm into actually strong gun so it still has options other than armor when enemy presses 2, and that is 2,9k HP + strong gun. Thats why E 100 still works pretty well if you play it right.

          Like

          1. Weakspots against non-gold LOL xD
            The only thing that matters is if the tank can bounce or not. If you have weakspots that require gold ammo, then people will load gold ammo and your armor will be useless.
            I can’t agree that it’s bad game design for a HT to be immune from the front. The entire point is that you should flank them (which requires better maps), not kill them from the front. It’s a tank game after all, not whack-a-mole, right? ;)

            Like

      2. And 2.9k hp goes away pretty quickly, especially if you’re a HT that’s supposed to bounce and act as a meatshield for the team.

        Like

        1. It can, if you sit in open. Thats why you need cover. Bouncing and taking hits is not the only purpose of heavies though, hitting hard and having high HP to outrade things is equally important thing for them.

          Like

          1. Maybe we have different point of views on how to balance classes. IMO TDs are supposed to snipe and hit hard. HTs are supposed to bounce, absorb damage and trade, that’s why they have the best armor and hp of all classes. A HT can be completely impenetratable from the front, and still be balanced if it’s side armor is weak, and the maps allow us to flank. Current WoT maps doesn’t allow that. Actually I think it’s more broken to have a Maus with so thick side armor that I can’t even pen his side when he’s angling like 10-20 degrees, than having a completely invurnable front.

            Like

  9. “Previously, low-tier vehicles could not damage the O-I even if they managed to flank it. After the changes flanking will work.”

    Because shooting the ultra-weak sides doesn’t count as ‘flanking’…?

    Liked by 2 people

      1. Even worse, parts of the side are just 35+35mm… meaning partially overmatchable by 75mm guns and fully overmatchable by 107mm guns. Showing even a little side is often too much in O-I.

        Like

        1. you’re an idiot.. go learn the overmatch mechanics before spouting absolute nonsense son. Beggars belief how some of you even manage to instal a game…but does explain how the idiot section of the playerbase (yes I’m afraid that includes you) performs in game….

          Like

          1. Let me quote the Wiki:

            “If the AP or APCR shell’s caliber is more than 2 times the nominal thickness of the armour (Such as a 130mm shell hitting a 60mm thick plate), projectile shell normalization is increased by the following formula: basic normalization * 1.4 * shell caliber / nominal armour thickness. Note that the shell is still capable of bouncing if it strikes the armor at an angle of 70° or more from normal.

            If the AP or APCR shell caliber is more than 3 times the nominal thickness of the armour (such as a 130mm shell hitting a 40mm thick plate), no ricochet will happen even if the impact angle is more than 70° from normal. The increased shell normalization described above will also occur. ”

            There. Partial and full overmatch as described by official sources. Maybe you should go learn game mechanics before spouting absolute nonsense yourself…

            Like

            1. You really are dumb…everyone and thier fucking dog knows it’s the calibre needs to be 3x the armour the thickness not x2…like I said previously you’re just a tard..your last post confirms it, you know fuck all about basic mechanics and that no doubt accounts for your turd like 45% winrates. Don#t reply you rancid little fart…you are the dumbest fuck on here and that is sayng something when you have Seb here.

              Overmatching with x2 calibre.. lol you fucking nugget.

              Like

              1. Wow, I even quoted the bloody Wiki for you but I guess reading is too much. There definitely is a caliber*2 rule, commonly referred to as ‘partial overmatch’ go look at Tanks.gg models and see for yourself if that’s not too difficult for you.

                Like

              2. @hulkageddon2 – Sorry mate, you are indeed completely wrong. Rather than slamming others for their percieved lack of knowledge, you should do your research instead. Partial overmatching takes place at 2x the calibre of armour, and the side is so weak that it will more or less be penned by everybody and their nan who has a gun capable of partial overmatching due to the fact that it’s mostly russian 107 and 122mm guns with penetration in excess of 160mm. And it is also funny how despite you slamming him for his stats, he is infact the right one, so how about you fuck off back to your own little corner and actually l2p before trying to correct others on perfectly right knowledge?

                Like

    1. It was terrible design to be fair. It was only a weakspot when the tank driver actually tried to angle its armor to use it, and when it was unangled, you still needed gold to pen him (too unreliable to not use gold).

      Make the hatches pennable and keep cheeks strong is a way better option

      Liked by 2 people

  10. Why buff O-I exp armour when it has better mobility than its t6 brother and good gun for a t5…..

    Btw WG, is nerfing the P2W HE on Type4/5 really that hard? U did it with 183

    Like

    1. Read the news again, you missed the point.
      O-I Exp. will lose it’s 10cm gun what made this tank OP, without the all mighty gun it’s a huge vulnerable soap box with a shitty 75mm gun.

      Like

        1. That’s the point, WG is soo blind they only nerf what ppl whine about, the only thing that will change is that everyone will use the 12cm with HEAT shells, really it will be even more OP since you get 140pen and 360dmg with the same gun handling the 10cm got.

          Soo, whine as you wish guys, WG cant see the full aspect of how to rebalance a tank.

          Like

    2. They never nerfed the premium HESH on the 183 thought.They did it on sandbox but still,you are able to do 1750 damage with 230 mms of pen right now.

      Like

      1. They nerfed the pen of the prem HESH…..If I remember right it was 270~mm pen which makes armor completely useless at the time

        Like

    1. They aren’t bad, you don’t even have to aim to deal ~500 damage every shot and knock out some modules. Press 2 to do even more damage without any drawbacks.

      Those tanks aren’t bad, they are broken.

      Like

  11. So O-I exp rip or not?

    O-I good change.

    O-HO will be OP and broken with gold ammo on that gun, look on retarded reload on this gun. And what Tiger 2 can do vs O-HO, load gold. O-Ho can pen all day long Tiger 2, dont like this.

    Type 4 and 5, REMOVE this fucking derp gun, buff 140, add weakspot, add strong points, done. But noo WG….U cant

    Like

  12. Historical armor on O-I? Fcuk that, let’s invent our own armor! Retardew WG with all of their latest ultra retarded balancing decisions!
    And 10mm less aromor on small weakspots on Type5? Still you cannot pen that “weakspot” reliably with standart ammo but almost all high tier gold will go through that, so this does not change anything.

    Like

  13. This kind of tanks are better of with around 250mm of armor. People will at least try to use standard ammo (at least I do) and with some angling (skill) you can bounce those shots. Now you press 2 when you encounter those tanks for an autopen. Armor is useless this way.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s