9.17 December 5th Update

World of Tanks RU portal have put up details for the recent 12.5MB update. Vehicle changes include:

Strv 103B:

  • HP  increased from 1700 to 1800.
  • Reload speed in drive and siege modes reduced from 7.7 to 7 seconds.

Strv 103-0:

  • HP increased from 1450 to 1500.
  • Reload speed in drive and siege modes decreased from 9 to 8.6 seconds.

Emil II:

  • 12 cm akan L / 40 drum reload time reduced from 3.5 to 3.33 seconds.
  • 10.5 cm TK 105-9 shot reload time reduced from 3.5 to 3 seconds.

Emil I:

  • 10.5 cm TK 105-9 drum cooldown reduced from 37 to 34 seconds.
  • 10.5 cm TK 105-9 drum reload time changed from 3.5 to 3 seconds.
  • 10.5 cm lvkan m / 42 shot reload time has been changed from 3.5 to 3 seconds.

The update also includes some general fixes, including a fix to the Signal Relay perk.

Liked it? Take a second to support jerryatrick53 on Patreon!
9.17 December 5th Update

60 thoughts on “9.17 December 5th Update

  1. fighting_falcon93 says:

    – HP increased from 1450 to 1500.
    – Reload speed in drive and siege modes decreased from 9 to 8.6 seconds.

    I’m still waiting for the 6.5 seconds reload and 0.15 accuracy WG…😡

    1. Bruh, woth rammer it was 6.6swc, it’s going to be a 6.3 sec reload and if you cant hit anything with a 0.25 accuracy then that’s completely your fault and not the guns

      1. fighting_falcon93 says:

        No, before it was 6.5 reload stock, with rammer and vents it got under 6. And you don’t get the point, it’s not about not being able to hit a tank, it’s about hitting where you aim… You know, as it should be.

      2. Well i just got on the test server and the stats in the patch notes are higher then in game. With rammer and vents its got a 5.9sec reload speed for a 3,962 dpm. And im sorry but the only tank that can match the Strv for gun accuracy is the Grille 15… no matter how you try to word it 0.25 is really fucking accurate and could be called a lazer. I have had no issue with my shots not going where i aim them. 0.15 with such a high DPM? Do you want to be able to cross map snipe small weakspots? No thanks

      3. fighting_falcon93 says:

        Yeah because keeping the 0.15 accuracy would break the entire game wouldn’t it? We finally get one tank with little RNG and bobs already complain… 😐

      4. Do you not realise that guns, especially the large caliber on tanks, will not always shoot where you aim them? Even in reality rounds weren’t produced 100% the same, small differences to the amount of propelent can cause a larger muzzel velocity which means less dip over distance, small differences in weigh cause mean more dip over distance, small difference in how well the shell is streamlined can cause it to deviate path, wind can also push it off target.

        If you think that a tank shell will fly to where you aim it all the time, that the is no degree of probability, then you are actually ignorant as all hell.

      5. fighting_falcon93 says:

        The variation that you’re talking about is nowhere near the accuracy levels we have in WoT. You’d propably have to set the accuracy to something like 0.05 to be able to compare it to how it works in real life. But hey, I guess you’re one of those that say it’s “interesting” to have RNG in the game… you know it’s “interesting” to miss your shots or to low roll penetration/damage 😐

      6. We are talking about tanks from between 1914 to 1960… funnily enough the guns and fire control systems aren’t exactly top notch in that era of warfare

      7. fighting_falcon93 says:

        Tiger could just hit targets 1-2 km away… While ingame tanks struggle to reliably hit things from 500 meters away…

      8. fighting_falcon93 says:

        Same distances applies to Panther and Köningstiger. And Ferdinand. Oh and Jagdtiger. All those are from different tiers and different guns. And since we’re talking about tier 10s here, I really don’t know what you want to say with all this?

    2. fighting_falcon93 says:

      Quoted the wrong stats… Should have been:
      – HP increased from 1700 to 1800.
      – Reload speed in drive and siege modes reduced from 7.7 to 7 seconds.

    3. Tanks that aimed their shots in ww2 actually hut the target almost 100% of the time.
      What was the issue in most cases when fighting other tanks was the penetration and effective range of the shell.

      Rng is wot is utter bs as it is anyway. And the grille misses plenty of fully aimed shots that just crit hit or fly off on some random trajectory. 0.25 is not accurate at all

      Compare to AW who have a much better system:
      Most accurate tank – 0.04
      Least accurate tank – 0.26
      That’s a difference of over 6 times less accurate.
      In WoT :
      Most accurate tank – 0.27
      Least accurate tank – 0.6
      Difference is only slightly more than double. This means accuracy is an almost completely irrelevant stat to start off with. Add in the fact that almost all maps are close in corridor maps that massively support brawling playstyles. And then add in the ridiculous amount of RNG in this game.

      And this is why accuracy in this game isn’t even a thing. And trust me I’ve played both the grille and KV2. I can easily say that my E100 150mm gun is way more reliable for most engagements and especially for snapshots than the grille.
      The most important factor is the hidden gun handling stats and then the aiming time.

      And as always this is where WG ‘balance’ Russian tanks in hidden stats. Where the is3 has the same gun handling stats as the tier 10 m48 Patton and better than a lot of other tier 10 mediums. This is just one example of how broken the accuracy system in this game is.

      1. “I can easily say that my E100 150mm gun is way more reliable for most engagements and especially for snapshots than the grille.” Thats because of the turret traverse accuracy E100 (0,10) and grille (0,40)

      1. fighting_falcon93 says:

        You fuck off stupid demented clown. Fucking retarded monkey has nothing better to say so he just tells others to fuck off…

      2. Infernal969 says:

        Exactly what I was talking about.
        Your nickname suggests that you are 23 years old, yet you behave like a 13 year old that has no access to porn to vent the teenage rage.

      3. fighting_falcon93 says:

        You talk about other peoples age when you yourself can’t refrain from triggering people with your stupid comments. I have no idea why you even posted that comment in the first place, since it didn’t contribute with anything. I’m not going to fuck off just because some demented retard doesn’t like my opnion. If you don’t like my opinion, then don’t give a damn about commenting about it. The only 5 year old here is you.

      4. Infernal969 says:

        This is exactly how you sound like whenever there’s news about Swedish tanks, shitting up the comment section with your cries. I’m tired of your shit and I bet I’m not the only one on this blog.

      5. fighting_falcon93 says:

        The TD was already perfectly balanced before the first nerf. But then, just because you’re unable to write anything constructive you also think that everyone else shoulnd’t. I’ll give you a hint: If “fuck off” is the only thing you can say in your response to someone else’s comment, maybe you should fuck off yourself…

      1. blockhaj says:

        If u cant pe etrate a tank from the side then u just suck. If u cant pen a tank frontally then u flank it.

  2. Uuuhhh says:

    I played the 103b in the common test and that thing was awesome even without the buff. The one that really needs some attention is the kranvagn. That heavy is terrible. It accelerates like the AC4 experimental. I never got close to the top speed. The reload between shells prevented me from playing it like the other autoloading tier x heavies. I’ll def go down the TD line, but I lost all desire to go down the heavy.

      1. Its only a 15cm, not a 155mm so damage would only be 700 not 750. And a 15cm with the Kranvagns armor? Did you not see what the WT E100 was like with no armor? Just make it a single shot gun, same with T58

    1. Well actually WG isn’t actually wrong with the power to weight of the Kranvagn. While it did get a 900hp engine only 723hp was actually transmitted to the drive shaft with the remaining 177hp going to the cooling system. But because WoT doesnt have anything to represent the loss in power like in reality they changed the engine power to reflect what the Kranvagn could achieve

      1. Uuuhhh says:

        Damn, they want to be accurate with the acceleration but not the armor. On the bright side I know not to waste my time on that line lol. If they decide to keep the -10 depression on the 50b then I’ll spend the time on that.

      2. Anonymous says:

        150mm or 155mm has nothing to do with damage, its the ammo that makes it hit 700 or 750 – the lower tier “derp guns” have 700 ap damage and 900 he damage for balance reasons not caliber reasons. thats E 100 has 150mm gun and has 750 damage while O-I and KV-2 which uses 149mm and 152mm only has 700 damage

        reply to -Its only a 15cm, not a 155mm so damage would only be 700 not 750.

      3. Anonymous says:

        Except that its total horsepower for the conversion has been cut down by 252HP which gives you 648HP
        -SFA F12 engine power reduced by 28%
        then on top it got
        Acceleration of the best engine reduced by 22%

  3. Ion7 says:

    Not as much a buff to the TDs as the heavies, but they all look pretty good to me. Reload on the TDs is not a problem, and hopefully WG will introduce the overmatch later on down the road.

  4. SpeedyCraft51 says:

    Dpm isnt the problem. Dpm on TDs is fine, its what it should be for a tier X TD…

    The problem is the freaking armor that doesnt work unless either the overmatch is back to what it was, either it gets buffed enough to bounce all calibers below JPZ and FV183. The tank is still playable but honestly I rather play the Ocject263, which has better dpm, similar mobility, good camo, reasonable accuracy AND unpenetrable front armor with a few weakspots. This tank didnt bother anyone for the past few years, why would the Sweedish TDs not get the autobounce armor they should have then ?

    1. How about instead of fighting heavies and other TDs that will always overmatch your armor you take it to fight against MTs that will bounce 100% off the front if they dont hit your comanders capola

  5. Layla says:

    “including a fix to the Signal Relay perk.”

    Which might be the single most useless perk in the game. Has anyone ever taken it?

  6. Keke says:

    Least we are getting closer what those tanks should be.
    Earlier nerfed versions were joke compared to first released versions.

    8 and 9 tier td:s should still get bit more dmp to be actuall usefull.
    Because they dont have any armor to actuall protection.
    cant say 10 tier have it but least dmp is compined to mobility/camos
    is somehow ok. Cant say much about heavys because i dint play them
    that much.

      1. 170mm actual armor thickness (240mm effective, 290mm when using max gun depression) compared to the 152mm of flat armor on the T57 or the 100mm on the AMX50b… Yer, more then good enough, it means you have to play it a bit more strategically instead of sitting on a ridge being immune to all ammo types front on

      2. You do know the reason they nerfed the gun is be ause they gave it unhistorical armor right? Historical armor means it gets better gun as balance factor

      3. fighting_falcon93 says:

        WTF are you even talking about? “A bit more strategically”? In WOT you either have enough armor or you don’t it’s as simple as that. If you want to adopt a strategy where you can’t count on your turret armor, we already have 50B. Kranvagn are for those that want the turret. And no, a tank is not invinceble just because it has impenetratable frontal turret armor…

      4. fighting_falcon93 says:

        Also: 290 mm with max gun depression… Guess how many gold rounds on tier 10 that have less than 290 mm pen… Is it 1 or 2? All other have like 300 mm or more…

      5. I’m sorry but clearly when it comes to game balance you know jack shit. Waste of my time trying to explain things to you. Enjoy your ignorance and stupidity

      6. fighting_falcon93 says:

        Only stupid here is you… You’re an ignorant clown that want to be able to penetrate everything from the front. “Hey look a heavy tank hulldown, I’m to lazy to flank or create a crossfire and my 2-2 ammo isn’t working!!! WG WTF this is not balanced!!1!!11!”. Go play whack-a-mole instead please…

      7. *sigh* what ever you say cunt, clearly know exactly how i play despite never having played with or against me so you must be right…. yer nar cunt go fuck yourself

      8. fighting_falcon93 says:

        Ok then, I’ll drop down to your level for a while 🙂 Look at this retarded monkey… Fails his stupid arguments so the fucktard must call people stupids or cunts. I’m sure there’s someone else that want to continue this stupid discussion with you demented cunt 🙂 Bye!

      9. stormcrow99 says:

        Falcon… No.
        Armor values are not something you bend on the move for balance. It’s perhaps the holiest of the values a tank is ever given, and what is has is what it should have.
        And then we have the issue of tier 10 tank destroyer gold ammo. My Maus, yes, MAUS has trouble holding up on STANDARD AP from those. If you think ANYTHING should withstand against something like monstrous One Hundred and Seventy (not teen) mm caliber High Explosive Anti Tank, I don’t exactly have much to talk about with you.

        Then we have impenetrable turrets. A completely forked design since the birth of the very idea. There is no point to having a tank be able to stand still the entire game and bounce everything coming at it from the front while returning utter devastation hint hint T29 in a proper terrain. Now you (apparently, feel free to correct me) you desire such insanity for an autoloader of all things.

        And last but by far not least. Is your tank not doing what you want it to? Is it never going to do that? Was it ever designed for that? If your answer to all three is no, then you probably should (“strategically as Deadarashi said) relocate and do something else. I’m guilty like everyone else of failing that more often than I’m willing to admit, but it’s that conversation you sometimes have to have with yourself in battles.

        The Löwe is not a brawler, the IS is not a sniper, the AMX 50 isn’t a tanker, The Kranvagn isn’t a T29. Let’s not treat them as such. It really is just that simple, the tank doesn’t give half a fuck what you want from it, it does it’s shit and you obey, and command accordingly. Or you end up with a fourty-fuckall winrate like I did. And once you stop raging about shit tanks you find your curves in a 45 degree angle going up instead.

  7. ar those patch notes incorrect? I just jumped onto the test server and with 100% crew with no equip,emt amd consumables the starts look like this:

    Emil 1: 33.28 clip reload
    Strv 103-0: reload 8.2
    Strv 103b: reload 6.7

    1. Ion7 says:

      Everyone is whining that they are underpowered now, while Rita is secretly feeding us fake info so that WG can slowly overbuff the swedes because of “community input.” ;P

  8. stormcrow99 says:

    So the S tanks either have crap for armor or they singlehandedly break the entire game. Can’t the overmatch be applied to a single tank? And can’t the armor be adjusted without changing the weight? That could be adjusted to reasonable nukbers fir the current overmatch and be displayed as historical thickness in the garage and tanks.gg? I honestly know nothing about this but I’ve always thought these are all adjustable and hideable numbers with no connection to one another.
    Secondly the siege mode. Obviously the elevation could be assigned to the drive mode, why bother foch around with a fighting mode that cripples everything besides shooting beyond recognition. The maps of WoT let alone the game modes don’t allow the S tank to do what it was designed for so the whole idea is very ambitious to begin with though.

  9. 1CDM says:

    i wish that the entire drum reload time for the emil 2 was 3,33 sec for the four shots in the magazine but i think thats a typing error

Leave a Reply