The Daily Bounce

WOT Leaks, WOWS Leaks, News and much more!

TDB Home » Overmatch Mechanics – Postponed

Overmatch Mechanics – Postponed

3 min read

Hello everyone,

Ph3lan announced today on the EU Official Forum that the new overmatch mechanics has been postponed.

Overmatch Mechanics

“Based on your input from the 1st Common Test, we decided to cancel this feature.

Initially, we planned to revise the ricochet and overmatch mechanics for all vehicles. However, tests showed that it will cause increased ricochets on thinly armored tanks (the IS-3, IS-4, etc.) that used to be generally bad at angling. This disrupted gameplay overall (a lot more ricochets where chances of them used to be zero), which you reported to us during the Common Test. We analysed your feedback and decided to stick to the old, time-proven mechanic for all vehicles including the tier VIII–X Swedish tank destroyers.”

Source: Official EU Forum

I don’t know if I should like or dislike this. I like the fact Wargaming is listening to the Community, but… Was these changes really that bad?

From my perspective, players have been whining about how Heavy Tanks have no armour and how armour is of no significance in the game. Wargaming based on this feedback decides to change the overmatch mechanics because 40mm roof armour could be penetrated by 122mm guns with 175mm penetration but not by 120mm guns with 200mm penetration. Tanks with 40mm side armour were not able to bounce a shot at 80 degree angle because the 122mm gun could just pen… because it’s over three times and that is ultra realistic.

But we don’t play World of Tanks because of realism, right?

These new changes were a nerf for big calibre guns, but they were actually a buff to lower calibre guns. Also, it re-introduced the significance of armour into the game. Of course, some tanks like the IS-3 and IS-4 were a lot better at “tanking”, but so where other tanks like the Tiger II or the MAUS.

The new Swedish tank line was supposed to take advantage of this also, low armour but because of good gun depression means they would be strong at hull down position. Now they won’t, meaning there isn’t a big difference in gameplay of a Swedish Heavy Tank to a French Heavy Tank.

Players started whining so much about it, saying “everyone will just use Gold Ammo from now on”, or “IS-3 and IS-4 are OP and now will be even more OP”, that Wargaming decided to go back on these changes.

When actually the changes would also be a nerf to gold ammunition that everyone as been asking for, APCR rounds for example would suffer a from this, because the way they work in game and the armour buff everyone wanted.

This made me thing: Do players know what they want or do they just whine at everything?

I was looking forward for these changes. Let me know your thoughts in the comments.

15,466 thoughts on “Overmatch Mechanics – Postponed

  1. “Do players know what they want or do they just whine at everything?”

    They whine about everything. You have the players split about basically everything and no matter what you do, half of them will cry you are nerfing their tanks / stealing their money / killing their grandmas. And to appease them means angering the other half.

  2. For real… Probably the best feature wargaming was introducing with this patch, and they drop it…
    IS-4 is bad at angling??? That hull armour side-scraps itself, its a tank made to hold its ground like the Maus is… But what happens in the game now is that the IS-4 sucks at bouncing shots, is it because the roof or the 10mm plates above the tracks or old armour modelling… Damn I played and tested IS-4, it really felt that the tank was doing its job… People just cry because the auto-aim is not working that good any more, and it was starting to be really needed some brains to pick your fight and the place to do it… This decision really disappoints me…

  3. The community in general is stupid, but the other part of the problem is that most of the times WG behaves stupidly too. This is the kind of decision they should have taken by their own without asking about it. Like always! Most players don’t even know how the **** the mechanics work, so how they may possibly know if Overmatch is good or bad?

  4. They could perhaps introduce it as a percentage chance and work the magic formulas over time, step by step to introduce the changes. That said why are they focused on this? Poll any group of players and what most of them want is new maps. Paris was a nice addition but there needs to be more.

  5. No, this was not a good change in the current form. In extreme cases, which taking into consideration the number of games that take place daily would be pretty often, you could bounce a 183mm shell by 1 mm plate just because it was at an extreme angle, that is neither realistic nor desirable.

    Having said that, I wish they wouldn’t have just dropped the feature, but modified it. I for one proposed keeping the new mechanic but giving large caliber bounces off of thin plates (a difference between shell caliber and plate thinckness of maybe of 100mm +/-) a small percentage of damage out of the average potential of the shell. That way you kept most of the benefits of this mechanics, still improving the resilience of armor, but also still making them fear big guns and avoiding stupid situations.

  6. And an M56 Scorpion bouncing shot after shot from an FV215b (183) because angling, is also sooo realistic. An UNARMOURED vehicle bouncing a shell in excess of 70kg because it’s angled at 77 degrees. It was a nice idea to start with, but badly implemented. Back to the drawing board WG.

  7. Swedish tank destroyers looked like great vehicles up until recently. Now with the overmatch cancelled and their aim nerfed I wonder if they are still worth playing?

  8. It’s actually more realistic to bounce that than to always pen 40 mm with 122 mm gun, even at 89 degrees. In my opinion. “This shell always penetrates just because it’s big and heavy” is a nonsense.

  9. “whining for using only gold ammo” they are on Test Server everyone shoots gold ammo. on Live server they gonna use gold ammo no matter if they gonna change the over match penetration. if they wanna improve armour values they should remove the premium ammo.

  10. Premium ammo has been in the game ever since… Never was a problem until armour was “nerfed”… fix armour = fix gold ammo.

  11. And a large caliber heavy (90kg) shell going at high speed always bouncing off of 1 mm plate at angles higher than 76% is also nonsense. Friction will at the very least guarantee a gash in the plate.

    Neither system is perfect, it needs more testing, I just hope the won’t abandon this completely.

  12. had high hopes for this change too, but apparently TD players whine too much and many autoaim/botoaim players…

    in my eyes this change was giving a slight buff to meds, forcing heavies to not be any more static and start moving around, also was nerfing the gold rounds cause now you would thing were to shoot and not just autoaim and load gold.

    I am sad cause in some videos where you had to aim in order to get bounced from a scorpion with a FV gun.. They could add side to the removal of overpen a mechanic, which will add damage cause of the maze of a shot, but not exploding. Cause damn physics when you have a shell moving with such high velocities its easily to bounce, you don’t throw the shells with catapults!

  13. People don’t know what they want and cry at every change wg makes, I agree with wg nerfing the swe-ht’s a bit because they get amazing gun depression and a turret that leaves the T57 and 50b envious, even with nerfed reload times and they aren’t slow though they got less horse power.

    The first iteration of the swe-td’s were far the best imo. But people who got no idea how to work 5km/h in siege mode and the time to switch could nothing but cry instead of change playstyle or play better. Which were the intended purpose, play bad and get punished, play good and make the best of the dpm and accuracy.
    No idea how 10km/h in siege mode is helping anyone really????? why?

  14. They reworked the overmatching between the first iteration and the cancellation and that seemed to me pretty fair and balanced, as it left very thin armor not being able to bounce, but that wasn’t good enough I guess. *facepalm*

  15. You know they actually changed that, so it couldn’t bounce anything again. But people still cried or were unaware about they actually changed the overmatching mechanics a bit on test server that still made the td’s viable to bounce as they used to, but overly thin armor didn’t.

Comments are closed.