Jump to content


So you've installed the mod that tells you which kind of ammo just hit you...

public service announcement

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
266 replies to this topic

qwe5 #161 Posted 31 December 2013 - 06:51 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 281
  • Member since:
    11-22-2012
I never use gold ammo but it is always funny to see some kids crying in the chat that I'm gold noob. Last time with my T-34 (57mm) got tier 6 match and dealt pretty hig to some t6 tanks from the side. The funniest thing was that T34-85 was the one that blamed me for using gold but I don't consider it such an armoured beast worth of gold ammo.

DingIsHere #162 Posted 31 December 2013 - 06:55 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Clan Commander
  • 0 battles
  • 3,154
  • Member since:
    12-22-2011

{lang:macro__view_post}AngryBanana, on 31 December 2013 - 05:46 PM, said:


but the 47mm more pen does have less normalization if you switch from AP to APCR, so the effective gain will usually be less than 47mm.

 

how much less??



St4n #163 Posted 31 December 2013 - 08:04 PM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 805
  • Member since:
    07-12-2011

{lang:macro__view_post}Private_Miros, on 31 December 2013 - 11:27 AM, said:

Average Credits received per game: 39626

 

Yes, that's a premium account; so that is 26417 credits on average without premium account.

Nope, wrong assumption.

The average credits per battle shown on vbaddict.net are net earning allready including costs for repair and ammo.

Since they stay the same while only your gross income gets a bonus of 50%, the difference in net is not 50% anymore.

 

Since I can't see your stats for today I take your stats from the 29th. (Since they are good I think it's not name and shame.)

-----

Received 1,438,691 credits.png
Fine for causing damage to allies XXX credits.png
Compensation for damage caused by allies XXX credits.png
Auto-repair vehicle -244,213 credits.png
Auto-resupply ammunition -544,507 credits.png
Auto-resupply consumables -7,500 credits.png
Earned Credits 636,471 credits.png
Average Earning per Battle (37 battles) 17,202 credits.png

-----

This is with premium account, now lets check without premium account.

Received credits without premium bonus, costs stay the same.

-----

Received 959,127 credits.png
Fine for causing damage to allies XXX credits.png
Compensation for damage caused by allies XXX credits.png
Auto-repair vehicle -244,213 credits.png
Auto-resupply ammunition -544,507 credits.png
Auto-resupply consumables -7,500 credits.png
Earned Credits 156,907 credits.png
Average Earning per Battle (37 battles) 4,241 credits.png

-----

So in your case you have an average net income per battle of 17,202cr, while you would only have 4,241cr without premium account.

In your case the bonus for premium is +306%. Or slightly above 4x multiplier.

 

And now tell me, how would you afford gold ammo while grinding for new tanks, equipment and stuff with roughly 1/4 of the credits you currently gain?

I know, in your case gold ammo is propably allready included in the "ammo resupply cost" and therfore the net income will not change further while the same amount of gold ammo is used with and without premium.

But still the standard account player has to decide if he can live with that low gain in credits an grinding years for the next tier X or if he simply can't afford gold ammo if he every plans to spend for something other.

 

And remember, you are an exceptional good player, for the average user the difference in net income is even bigger between standard and premium account.

 


Edited by St4n, 31 December 2013 - 08:11 PM.


Private_Miros #164 Posted 31 December 2013 - 08:21 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 8,632
  • Member since:
    07-09-2011

{lang:macro__view_post}St4n, on 31 December 2013 - 07:04 PM, said:

1. Nope, wrong assumption.

The average credits per battle shown on vbaddict.net are net earning allready including costs for repair and ammo.

Since they stay the same while only your gross income gets a bonus of 50%, the difference in net is not 50% anymore.

 

2. So in your case you have an average net income per battle of 17,202cr, while you would only have 4,241cr without premium account.

In your case the bonus for premium is +306%. Or slightly above 4x multiplier.

 

And now tell me, how would you afford gold ammo while grinding for new tanks, equipment and stuff with roughly 1/4 of the credits you currently gain?

I know, in your case gold ammo is propably allready included in the "ammo resupply cost" and therfore the net income will not change further while the same amount of gold ammo is used with and without premium.

But still the standard account player has to decide if he can live with that low gain in credits an grinding years for the next tier X or if he simply can't afford gold ammo if he every plans to spend for something other.

 

And remember, you are an exceptional good player, for the average user the difference in net income is even bigger between standard and premium account.

 

 

1. Small note: Where I got them from they are gross earning. That's why it was 39k, and not 17k, my net earnings.

 

2. By grinding money, increasing my amount of battles played in tiers 5-7. Now most battles were tier 8-10, with some Japanese low tier thrown in, ending at tier 6.94 average.

You'll find that about 4-5k profit is about average non-premium for a tier 8 heavy without shooting gold.



_Antipathy #165 Posted 31 December 2013 - 09:30 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 4,872
  • Member since:
    10-29-2013

{lang:macro__view_post}Jigabachi, on 31 December 2013 - 05:09 PM, said:


NO! They are kids! Adults are not whiny, not bitchy, not childish and they are intellectually grown up. And... and... meh.

 

Stop ducking up my worldview! It took so long for me to believe all that crap... :arta:


 Still, father Xmas does exist :D



VittuIkkunaPesuvati #166 Posted 31 December 2013 - 09:38 PM

    Junior Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 108
  • Member since:
    08-05-2012

{lang:macro__view_post}Private_Miros, on 30 December 2013 - 11:24 AM, said:

... then please learn which tanks shoot APCR as standard ammo, and don't shoot into a crying fit, raging about gold ammo noobs, the moment my BatChat or Leo PTA hits you and the dreaded notification "you've been hit by a smooth criminal APCR" pops up on your damage counter.

 

Crying about how unfair I am for inadvertedly confusing you into believing I'm a horrible, horrible gold spammer for 10 minutes straight, is not going to change the game mechanics.

 

On a more serious note. These kind of mods seem to be the most commonly used mod to date. I can't shoot APRC or HEAT (be it standard or true gold ammo), I will almost always get a comment on it nowadays. Ironically, it usually stays with a dry comment, and I only get (bad) insults thrown at me in my BatChat and Leo PTA (and E 25, but meh, premiums always induce rage, all the more when they shoot every 2,3 sec) shooting cheap, simple, and more than sufficient, standard ammo.

 


Take a hug >3



AliceUnchained #167 Posted 31 December 2013 - 10:46 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 2,423
  • Member since:
    10-18-2011

{lang:macro__view_post}DingIsHere, on 31 December 2013 - 06:55 PM, said:

 

how much less??

 

Standard AP has 5 degree normalization, while APCR gets 2 degrees (as of 0.8.6 iirc). I am not sure about APCR for Tier X mediums, whether they get 5 or 2.

 

Most important thing to realize here is, that these 3 degrees can make all the difference at high impact angles (in favor of standard AP that is). At low impact angles the difference will be rather small and APCR is far superior. There is no fixed difference, as it depends on the difference between AP and APCR penetration, the nominal armor thickness and the impact angle.


Edited by AliceUnchained, 31 December 2013 - 10:48 PM.


FatigueGalaxy #168 Posted 31 December 2013 - 11:49 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 2,052
  • Member since:
    02-09-2011

Fun fact: japanese tanks use "improved" AP shells as premium ammo till tier 8 ;) You can spam gold shell all day long you'll never be called "gold noob". Damage panel mod labels them as "AP".

Only players who use "received damage announcer" will be able to tell that you're using premium ammo but they rarely call ppl "gold noobs" incorrectly (when APCR is your standard ammo) because this mod labels premium ammo with gold font and gold symbol.



troolenhardy #169 Posted 31 December 2013 - 11:57 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 311
  • Member since:
    03-13-2012

{lang:macro__view_post}AliceUnchained, on 31 December 2013 - 10:46 PM, said:

 

Standard AP has 5 degree normalization, while APCR gets 2 degrees (as of 0.8.6 iirc). I am not sure about APCR for Tier X mediums, whether they get 5 or 2.

 

Most important thing to realize here is, that these 3 degrees can make all the difference at high impact angles (in favor of standard AP that is). At low impact angles the difference will be rather small and APCR is far superior. There is no fixed difference, as it depends on the difference between AP and APCR penetration, the nominal armor thickness and the impact angle.


ill add some stronk math and examples, still talking about the patton gun

 

AP - 5° normalisation, avg pen at 100 m of 218, avg pen at 720 m of 193

APCR - 2° normalisation, avg pen at 100 m of 265, avg pen at 720 m of 221

 

using the new tank inspector, shooting at unangled m103 (upper plate, just above the beak, impact angle from normal of 61°)

 

AP effective thickness 229 mm

APCR effective 248 mm

 

so thats not 47 mm of difference, but 27 mm. Also if you were to shoot that spot at 600 meters, the APCR would only have maybe 2-3 mm of penetration more against that armor. Realistically against your average kind of angled armor in wot (50-65°) apcr will have 10-25 milimeters less of penetration compared to AP, at short ranges. At longer ranges (this depends on particular APCR shell) of around 400 meters the APCR will have perheaps 25-40 mm less penetration and at ranges of 600 meters it will have perheaps 35-75 mm less penetration than AP.

 

Conclusion - when shooting at 400+ meters at sloped armor, APCR with nominal penetration 40 mm higher than that of AP will be generally outperformed by the AP in terms of penetration. So for example on the kv-1s gun that has 175 mm pen on AP and 217 mm pen on APCR, when shooting at ranges of over 400 meters i wouldnt bother with APCR at all (bad example, this gun loses very little penetration on APCR at ranges :D). Also for example the L61 128 mm gun that is on the top tier german TDs loses penetration on APCR so rapidly that already at ranges of around 400 meters the AP will be better against sloped armor (60° +) than the APCR, and the AP has 276 pen and apcr 352, which is 73 mm difference.

 

edit: calculated what the ranges of penetration loses might be, before they were just guesses :D)


Edited by troolenhardy, 01 January 2014 - 12:11 AM.


Alabamatick #170 Posted 01 January 2014 - 12:41 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 1,039
  • Member since:
    04-11-2011

{lang:macro__view_post}Hummus, on 30 December 2013 - 10:42 AM, said:

 

I just stopped paying attention to chat from enemies.

i don't have chat on (battle messenger) they can spam gold noob as much as i spam gold premium ammo, out of sight out of mind



Mymh #171 Posted 01 January 2014 - 01:43 AM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 673
  • Member since:
    07-30-2011
The mod also put a golden moneybag icon on premium ammo, so if a player is stupid enough to scream about premium ammo when it says APCR but has no icon.. well it says alot about what kind of person that is.

Gooakis #172 Posted 01 January 2014 - 04:52 AM

    Junior Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 115
  • Member since:
    01-14-2013

I was been enjoying "gold noob" comments driving my T71 - lol- so much that I installed it myself. It's quite useful, mostly for knowing who is shooting you (especially if he isn't spotted) and not for what kind of ammo they use.

 

BUT now I also find quite enjoyable to distract enemy noobs - who spam premium rounds against light tanks and obviously don't know crap about penetration & armor mechanics, so they have also the potential to get seriously distracted at chat. :trollface:
 

Noticeable fact from my experience with this mod: The biggest gold spam exists at mid tiers by newbies & low eff players. I frankly expected the opposite...



Hornet331 #173 Posted 01 January 2014 - 06:06 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 4,674
  • Member since:
    07-31-2010

{lang:macro__view_post}Gooakis, on 01 January 2014 - 03:52 AM, said:

Noticeable fact from my experience with this mod: The biggest gold spam exists at mid tiers by newbies & low eff players. I frankly expected the opposite...

 

 

why? good players know that you need the gold shells to perform optimal. They also dont spam all the time with it, but depending om the situation.



Gooakis #174 Posted 01 January 2014 - 06:43 AM

    Junior Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 115
  • Member since:
    01-14-2013
Of course they are, that's why I used "spam" instead of "use" or "shoot" :smile: I was expecting more sealclubbing  gold-spam tho, and that's what I meant.

Edited by Gooakis, 01 January 2014 - 06:46 AM.


cherry2blost #175 Posted 01 January 2014 - 07:03 AM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 880
  • Member since:
    12-19-2010

{lang:macro__view_post}Slyspy, on 30 December 2013 - 05:08 PM, said:

I use such mods more for telling me who hit me rather than what they hit me with, although it is amusing to see players using so many HE rounds or wasting premium ammo on targets which don't require it. Yesterday I watched a T34 fire multiple HE rounds at a Type 59 and then, when they didn't work too well, switch to the premium. He probably never uses AP ammo. In such a situation you know that you can press the attack on the HE noob but must become more cautious when he switches to overkill mode instead.

 

sorry but calling HE shooters noobs is a bit ridiculous... during the beta you took half and half AP and HE. If you were up against a tank you couldnt penetrate you lobbed HE. This is a sound tactic as you will do module damage... possibly track the T59 allowing others who CAN penetrate to kill it. This was called teamwork and is still a sound tactic I use to this day. Better some damage than constant bounces.

 

 



AliceUnchained #176 Posted 01 January 2014 - 02:00 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 2,423
  • Member since:
    10-18-2011

{lang:macro__view_post}troolenhardy, on 31 December 2013 - 11:57 PM, said:


ill add some stronk math and examples, still talking about the patton gun

 

AP - 5° normalisation, avg pen at 100 m of 218, avg pen at 720 m of 193

APCR - 2° normalisation, avg pen at 100 m of 265, avg pen at 720 m of 221

 

using the new tank inspector, shooting at unangled m103 (upper plate, just above the beak, impact angle from normal of 61°)

 

AP effective thickness 229 mm

APCR effective 248 mm

 

so thats not 47 mm of difference, but 27 mm. Also if you were to shoot that spot at 600 meters, the APCR would only have maybe 2-3 mm of penetration more against that armor. Realistically against your average kind of angled armor in wot (50-65°) apcr will have 10-25 milimeters less of penetration compared to AP, at short ranges. At longer ranges (this depends on particular APCR shell) of around 400 meters the APCR will have perheaps 25-40 mm less penetration and at ranges of 600 meters it will have perheaps 35-75 mm less penetration than AP.

 

Conclusion - when shooting at 400+ meters at sloped armor, APCR with nominal penetration 40 mm higher than that of AP will be generally outperformed by the AP in terms of penetration. So for example on the kv-1s gun that has 175 mm pen on AP and 217 mm pen on APCR, when shooting at ranges of over 400 meters i wouldnt bother with APCR at all (bad example, this gun loses very little penetration on APCR at ranges :D). Also for example the L61 128 mm gun that is on the top tier german TDs loses penetration on APCR so rapidly that already at ranges of around 400 meters the AP will be better against sloped armor (60° +) than the APCR, and the AP has 276 pen and apcr 352, which is 73 mm difference.

 

edit: calculated what the ranges of penetration loses might be, before they were just guesses :D)

 

So what is the penetration loss at distance? I was under the impression that after 500 meters no more loss occurs, and that the actual penetration loss depends on the gun Tier (read a statement from Devs about that some time ago).

 

While the calculations appear to be correct, the numbers aren't. M103 impact angle would only be 61° if point of origin would be at same height, parallel to the flat ground both vehicles are on. Impact angle changes with distance. Add to that, that APCR has flatter trajectory and thus a lower impact angle to begin with. Which it shouldn't, based on your typical combat ranges in WoT but the difference is easily noticeable.


Edited by AliceUnchained, 01 January 2014 - 02:05 PM.


troolenhardy #177 Posted 01 January 2014 - 02:22 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 311
  • Member since:
    03-13-2012

{lang:macro__view_post}AliceUnchained, on 01 January 2014 - 02:00 PM, said:

 

So what is the penetration loss at distance? I was under the impression that after 500 meters no more loss occurs, and that the actual penetration loss depends on the gun Tier (read a statement from Devs about that some time ago).

 

While the calculations appear to be correct, the numbers aren't. M103 impact angle would only be 61° if point of origin would be at same height, parallel to the flat ground both vehicles are on. Impact angle changes with distance. Add to that, that APCR has flatter trajectory and thus a lower impact angle to begin with. Which it shouldn't, based on your typical combat ranges in WoT but the difference is easily noticeable.

from what the developers said penetration doesnt drop linearly, but there are manualy set penetrations at couple of distances and between these points the drop is linear. I dont think the points in between 100 and 500 meters are anywhere to be found, but the 500 m penetrations are known (https://docs.google....p=sharing#gid=1). But the developers info of several points might even be a lie (or by the several points they simply meant 100 and 500?) and its very well possible there are no set points between 100 and 500 m... Thinking of it I have no idea what made me think up until now that the penetration loss would be greater with greater distances (more penetration loss between 400 to 500 than between 100 to 200 meter, for example) as there has never been any info to support that theory. If thats the case my numbers are a bit off.

 

The m103 is indeed exactly head on, i just wanted to get a nice combination of impact angle/armor thickness to compare with the pattons shells on the 105 gun. The impact angle is a good point, thats probably another 1-3° in favor of AP.



AliceUnchained #178 Posted 01 January 2014 - 02:47 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 2,423
  • Member since:
    10-18-2011

{lang:macro__view_post}troolenhardy, on 01 January 2014 - 02:22 PM, said:

from what the developers said penetration doesnt drop linearly, but there are manualy set penetrations at couple of distances and between these points the drop is linear. I dont think the points in between 100 and 500 meters are anywhere to be found, but the 500 m penetrations are known (https://docs.google....p=sharing#gid=1). But the developers info of several points might even be a lie (or by the several points they simply meant 100 and 500?) and its very well possible there are no set points between 100 and 500 m... Thinking of it I have no idea what made me think up until now that the penetration loss would be greater with greater distances (more penetration loss between 400 to 500 than between 100 to 200 meter, for example) as there has never been any info to support that theory. If thats the case my numbers are a bit off.

 

The m103 is indeed exactly head on, i just wanted to get a nice combination of impact angle/armor thickness to compare with the pattons shells on the 105 gun. The impact angle is a good point, thats probably another 1-3° in favor of AP.

 

Only thing I ever read, from Devs, is that penetration decreases linearly from 100 up to 500 meters. This was a long time ago however, and may have changed or may have been incorrect to begin with. Later I read a statement (which is also on Wiki I think) that penetration reduction depends on Gun Tier: Higher Tier guns lose penetration less rapidly than low Tier guns. 

 

A general recap would simply be, that a few degrees difference only has any significance at high impact angles. As AP will have both better normalization and slightly lower impact angle, it would result in quite a big difference. Simple example: 100 mm armor struck at 70 degrees (would be ricochet in WoT). Effective armor would be 100/cos(70) = ~292.38 mm . This is grossly inaccurate/incorrect as far as slope modifiers vs ammo types go, but it is what we have in WoT. One size fits all. Now let's see about normalization:

 

- AP would get 5 degrees, and thus impact angle would be 65 degrees. Effective armor: 100/cos(65) = ~236.62 mm.

  Now keep in mind that the original impact would be lower, and effective armor will be even lower. The exact difference I don't know, but with 3 degree lower impact angle effective armor would be 'only' ~213 mm.

- APCR would get 2 degrees, and thus impact angle would be 68 degrees. Effective armor: 100/cos(68) = ~266.95 mm.
 

In a way, the difference in normalization does have some merit to it. Not the numbers, but the result that APCR is less effective against highly oblique armor in most cases. WW II penetration was mostly a T/D ratio matter, with T being nominal armor Thickness and D being shell Diameter and based on kinetic energy (relying on weight and velocity of shell to punch through). APCR (and APDS) was sub-caliber, lower weight and diameter and thus had a bigger chance of being resisted by oblique armor, bouncing off. I am not entirely familiar with the mechanics involved, but I always assumed that weight (of the shell) plays a bigger role against highly oblique armor compared to perpendicular hits, where velocity is the main deciding factor. So weight plays a bigger role, when impact angles are higher. 

 

At least, it does make sense assuming this when you try to explain why higher oblique armor has higher resistance to APCR/APDS than to AP©BC.



Plofkraak #179 Posted 01 January 2014 - 03:50 PM

    Junior Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 143
  • Member since:
    08-19-2013

{lang:macro__view_post}Leadbucket, on 31 December 2013 - 12:52 AM, said:

With a statement like that, you don't know much about 'Gold' tanks. You might want to do some reading. :sceptic:

 

- I did plenty of reading. Got a premium account and not that much time on my hands, got a Jagdtiger to be bought, an IS-8 to be bought and a Caernavron... Cant make all the credits to buy any of them and im not also gonna buy a €40,- goldtank also to be able to. Let alone i make enough credits to also buy goldammo.... This just sucks chocolate-balls! I already pay €10,- a month...

 

(And no i dont like playing lower tiers, shoting lemmings all day for weeks, to finaly be able to buy the tanks I WANT to play. And yes, i improve my stats/learn to play better/ etc.. but the tanks I WANT to play don't make much money mainly course of higher shell-costs compared to other tanks, wich also is rediculous and sucks!!!)

 

{lang:macro__view_post}Leadbucket, on 31 December 2013 - 12:52 AM, said:

Edit:- Of all the F2P games out there, this one is by far the fairest.

 

Well thats your personal opinion.


Edited by Plofkraak, 01 January 2014 - 04:01 PM.


Leadbucket #180 Posted 01 January 2014 - 05:06 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 5,609
  • Member since:
    12-29-2010

{lang:macro__view_post}Plofkraak, on 01 January 2014 - 02:50 PM, said:

 

- I did plenty of reading. 

 

 

Well thats your personal opinion.

You lumped premium tanks into the same category as Gold ammo. While Gold ammo can give you an advantage in battle a premium tank does not.

Premium tanks are weaker than their same tier equivalent...so no battle advantage.

If you can't make credits with a premium account then the problem is not the game.

If premium account holders were allowed to make credits regardless of effort and damage they do in game, there would be plenty more just going into battle like bots no giving a flying fig about winning.

Just like those with no premium have to make an effort........so do you.

 

Yes, it is my opinion but its one shared by many here. Having a premium account is strictly for extra XP or credits.....thats it. 

Unlike other F2P games where premium give you access to more powerful weapons that others can't have, in WoT this is not the case.

 

So yeh....read more.