Jump to content


Light tank drivers, hear me out!


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
124 replies to this topic

Eokokok #21 Posted 11 February 2014 - 12:48 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 18742 battles
  • 6,162
  • Member since:
    04-20-2012
This is true, but hopefully the change from square (lolwut) to circle draw distance will help solve at least some of the problems. Then spotting and accuracy might once more become relevant.

Orlunu #22 Posted 11 February 2014 - 01:03 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 8380 battles
  • 142
  • [PRAVD] PRAVD
  • Member since:
    08-01-2011

View PostEokokok, on 11 February 2014 - 12:48 PM, said:

This is true, but hopefully the change from square (lolwut) to circle draw distance will help solve at least some of the problems. Then spotting and accuracy might once more become relevant.

Yeah, I'm just worried that they'll have the circle with diameter of the sides of the square, not the diagonals, which would just make it worse.  Is there something I don't know on this?  I often miss important announcements &c.



Eokokok #23 Posted 11 February 2014 - 01:06 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 18742 battles
  • 6,162
  • Member since:
    04-20-2012
As far as I remember the drawing distance will be set at 700 meters, so no need to worry about this making it worse.

Orlunu #24 Posted 11 February 2014 - 01:12 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 8380 battles
  • 142
  • [PRAVD] PRAVD
  • Member since:
    08-01-2011

View PostEokokok, on 11 February 2014 - 01:06 PM, said:

As far as I remember the drawing distance will be set at 700 meters, so no need to worry about this making it worse.

Thanks, now I'm very happy.  :smile:



Tazilon #25 Posted 11 February 2014 - 03:46 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 966 battles
  • 1,746
  • Member since:
    03-31-2012

View PostZarax999, on 11 February 2014 - 08:03 AM, said:

Tazilon, history has a lot to do with buffs we can ask WG as anything without some historical backup is simply met with "How terrible...".

As for the feedback, I will wait until this weekend then I'll sum it up in a post and if you guys are happy with it I will post it on FTR along with some historical suggestions.

 

 

Zarax - the entire concept of this game is ahistorical.  Tanks without infantry were sitting ducks, especially in urban settings.  Many of the tanks we have are paper designs which were never performance tested.  Again, history shows us with example after example design specs were rarely actual performance specs.  Even tanks where the actual performance is known rarely meet their real world parameters.

 

In many battles we find early WWII - or even older - tanks matched up against 1950s and 1960s tanks.  Historical? Hogwash!

 

Wargaming needs to drop the charade of being historical and just give us a balanced game.


Edited by Tazilon, 11 February 2014 - 03:54 PM.


Zarax999 #26 Posted 11 February 2014 - 03:51 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 10117 battles
  • 3,249
  • [TWC] TWC
  • Member since:
    04-08-2011
Tazilon, it doesn't matter what your opinion on the subject is, if WG puts conditions on feedback we just have to accept them...

Tasiorowski #27 Posted 11 February 2014 - 03:55 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 29813 battles
  • 535
  • Member since:
    08-21-2011

From my point of view:

1. Back in the days tank classes were more of a stone paper scisor. Everyone waited for you as a LT to spot and then go and kill arty. They sometimes even help you making the thing. Now when the arties are no longer a threat games are more dynamic, and the HT avantgarde are always in the frontlines, wtihout need of spot. And of course we have now some frankensteins, like mediums that perform as a light, and LTs that perform as mediums. The separate class "SCOUT" has died and I think it wont be back in the game. It was just to demanding to play well in M5 stuart with vanilla crew in T9 battle ( back in the days it was a standard ). I enjoyed it, but many people wont. They will go play Battlefield as "sniper" and spend their money there. Sad but true. 

 

2. Corridor maps - how about Peral River, where fighting is always made in 3 narrow corridors where HTs arre fighting head to head. No need of spot there, armour + apha wins the game. But not only this map. all city maps, arctic maps. Everything would be okay if there were any space to reach top speed, hide, manouver, ir snipe safely. 

 

3. HTs buff - when I bought my Chaffiee first ( some maybe 2 years ago ) I hunted mostly lonely HTs as they were to sludgy for loosing from circle of death. Now there are E5, Fochs, Obj, Brits, almost everything at tier 10 except Maus and E100 are almost imposible to kill with a LT. The balance between LT and other classes in acceleration, hull traverse, turret traverse is just to low. Mainly beacuse of whining about almost any tank ingame. All that whines are leading us for simililarity, and all tanks will perform the same, only the bitmaps will be a difference. As we can see, some TDs got nerf becasue someone cried that his stronk tenk cannot penetrate or cannot spot someone. pure BS... 

 

4. Last but not least - the teams. Throughout the time I see that skill of players is polarized, as many players improve their skill with every next tank unlocked, and many doesnt. There is no chance to make a good spot without decent team that tries to hit targets you spotted. Im often angry when I light up some tanks and I know they are beyond the drawing distance of our camping TDs. Noone gives a single fack to move a bit forward and intercept targets. Many of those tier 10 heavies dont have 6th sense and absurd even grows, as lighten up oponents sit comfortably somewhere without knowledge that they are spoted, my team sees them on minimap but dont move and shoot, and im between them loosing my patience becasue noone bothers to confirm my begging on chat to do something. 

EDIt: I forgot about one thing - the all guns accuracy buff. Playing ELC for example was such a fun. Noone could hit you when you were on full speed. Now even humorous russian monsters tend to hit targets with surgical precision. So making a fast but "visible" manouvers is even harder than it was.  The good solution for me is to just increase "spotting potential" by 25% (not viewrange as it is not a good marker. I mean spotting poential which combines viewrange, camo,  maybe some special perks ) and all LTs will back to business as hiding in camo-TDs wont be so easy anymore. 

 


Edited by Tasiorowski, 11 February 2014 - 04:01 PM.


Flinsenberger #28 Posted 12 February 2014 - 09:12 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 8009 battles
  • 577
  • [OE] OE
  • Member since:
    08-11-2012

View PostEila_Juutilainen, on 11 February 2014 - 10:01 AM, said:

Okay, so the gun is underpowered. That means it needs a buff, not to be changed. I still like the /style/. Mind you, I'm talking purely from Luchs as I played maybe a few matches on the Leo since unlocking it.

 

And ELC is definitely a scout. The game tells me so :P

 

It is - as far as i know - the only machinegun that can enter higher tier games. Give it an autoloader and I am happy. Or reduce shot dispersion. The pure stats do not show the maximum shooting distance (250m?). Why is there a need to have that? Why can't I do damage over 400m, as with any other tank of Tier 4+?

I know that there have to be bad tanks, and the Leopard is one of them. Like the VK 3001H was when it was a medium. A bunch of nice characteristics that just don't go well together.

 

Concerning ELC AMX: Yes it is a scout. But it has abysmal radio for a scout. It is probably the perfect active scout regarding it's size and maneuverability. Too bad active scouting was abandoned with the 2-Sigma Patch.

 

Concerning historical: Forget it. Realism and historical accuracy have no place in a game. You can use them as guidelines, but only for that. "Historical Reasons" is just the Wargaming way of saying "we do it, because we can". e.g. the 8,8 KWK 36 of the Tiger never had a penetration of 132mm. Or when did companies of 15 tanks from mixed nations fight each other?

Realism is stupid, balance and gameplay are King. Realism is for hardcore simulations. And you don't earn much money with that.



Zarax999 #29 Posted 12 February 2014 - 09:17 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 10117 battles
  • 3,249
  • [TWC] TWC
  • Member since:
    04-08-2011

Concerning historical WG cares so little that they are buying most archives around the world, hires historical experts from all over the place and changes model a zillion times to reflect the real thing, heck I spent an evening tracking how much Panzer IV turret weighs because they wanted to be sure to get module weight right.

 

You can believe what you want but I know how much historical work is behind WOT and even though there are lots of fails they are slowly working to fix them.



Amkal #30 Posted 12 February 2014 - 09:32 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 25552 battles
  • 1,007
  • [-BSF-] -BSF-
  • Member since:
    08-26-2012

This is my proposition abou scouts:

1. Not all lts are scouts!

2. Scouts should have guns viable for their battle tiers. This is a problem on low and midtier scouts.

3. Scouts should have proportionally better viewrange and camo. This will help with the current problems of high tier lts.

4. Lower repair costs!

5. Scouts should get more xp from spotting than all other tanks. This will promote more ppl to play scouts.



Lindling #31 Posted 12 February 2014 - 10:42 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 15359 battles
  • 636
  • [-SAS-] -SAS-
  • Member since:
    04-05-2012

For what I see the real issue right now is that this game is taught by trial and error.

The information about which light tanks are scouts NEEDS to be put into the game - right now the only info about which tank has which MM is seen IF the player platoons AND has xvm installed, then hovers the mouse over the platoon-mate in the garage. Any other player can check the wiki, Tankopedia or wotdb - or find out the hard way.

Also the importance of equipment on tanks in general needs to be taught early on. Just like the buying or retraining of a crew there should be a window that gives advises which equipment can be bought, giving information what equipment is useful for that specific tank. No new player can afford them, but actually need them to scout effectively in a tier 8 game with their tier 4 scout (just like a good crew but at least the difference between a 100%, a 75% and a 50% Crew is kind of easy to get).

 

To the tanks themselves - I did grind to the French, US and Chinese tier 6 LT without reaching 6th sense - to make the life of scouts easier obviously better camo and view-range would be the nicest parameters to change. But since active scouting is only limited to very few maps and as a passive scout the binoculars should be up either way I don't really see the improvement of +10 more meters. I believe that the Idea that was thrown around of letting binoculars and camo-net kick in earlier on light tanks would make more of an impact.

Improving acceleration and breaking-power would help greatly to circle and maneuvering between enemy tanks or peaking a hill repeatedly. Would it be possible to make light tanks climb hills faster? For example on El Hallouf there are some mounts (D8) that you really need to take up speed to get up, but if light tanks could climb them more easily they could spot better on demand.

The pen and damage is fine, considering that it they are not supposed to damage a tier X tank head on and aim-time is realistic to be lower/on par with that of a larger tank. As long as the lights have dpm enough to kill arty before its friends appear or to finish of a lone heavy that's on 1/5 of it's health their fighting capabilities are fine. Giving the LTs more HP could make the job more forgiving but then again they wouldn't be able to fight fair in lower tiers...

 

tl;dr: info about battle-tiers IG, help players choose equipment when buying a tank; make binocs kick in faster; improve acceleration; more health?



Zarax999 #32 Posted 16 February 2014 - 02:34 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 10117 battles
  • 3,249
  • [TWC] TWC
  • Member since:
    04-08-2011
http://ftr.wot-news....ld-be-improved/

Tazilon #33 Posted 17 February 2014 - 05:04 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 966 battles
  • 1,746
  • Member since:
    03-31-2012

View PostZarax999, on 11 February 2014 - 08:03 AM, said:

Tazilon, history has a lot to do with buffs we can ask WG as anything without some historical backup is simply met with "How terrible...".

As for the feedback, I will wait until this weekend then I'll sum it up in a post and if you guys are happy with it I will post it on FTR along with some historical suggestions.

 

The historical backup is what recon units were.  Light tanks provided overwatch for the REAL recon vehicles.  THAT is the reason their View Ranges should be longer than Mediums and TDS  - because those tanks didn't have the associated recon forces capable of providing that type of scouting ability.

 



Tazilon #34 Posted 17 February 2014 - 05:07 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 966 battles
  • 1,746
  • Member since:
    03-31-2012

View PostZarax999, on 16 February 2014 - 01:34 PM, said:

 

 

Did you even read what we said?  Sure doesn't seem like it.  If this is the "help" you give us, please quit writing about Lights.



Zarax999 #35 Posted 17 February 2014 - 07:29 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 10117 battles
  • 3,249
  • [TWC] TWC
  • Member since:
    04-08-2011

What did I write that wasn't in this thread Tazilon?

People here asked mostly for view range and MM, followed by camo and mobility followed by everything else.

In order to write anything WG will consider worthy I have to abide to some rules and not just plainly ask WG to change mechanics.

 

WG is never going to get the balance the way you want it (and I read your point of view on proscout) but at least this way they got some visibility.

Perhaps you wanted a "drop history and give us balance" theme but I already know the answer to that: "don't like light tank balance? don't play light tanks" and "how terrible...".

 

But if you want, try to write an article yourself and I will talk with Silentstalker about getting it on FTR, this is something I offered you already.



Longtomsilver #36 Posted 17 February 2014 - 09:26 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 20155 battles
  • 1,300
  • Member since:
    08-11-2011

WG will rise the Hitpoints of Lights by 10% and call it "great Changes"

 

I hope there will be more, but history of "Changes" make me careful

 

Edit:

i have no idea how they could buff the AFK Panther, they can't shrink it nor give it a better gun without breaking the "historical correctness"


Edited by Longtomsilver, 17 February 2014 - 10:19 AM.


Orlunu #37 Posted 17 February 2014 - 01:19 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 8380 battles
  • 142
  • [PRAVD] PRAVD
  • Member since:
    08-01-2011

View PostLongtomsilver, on 17 February 2014 - 09:26 AM, said:

i have no idea how they could buff the AFK Panther, they can't shrink it nor give it a better gun without breaking the "historical correctness"

Historical horsepower to ton ratio would be nice.  Give it that gas-turbine engine with 1100hp for a start.  From my own (small) experience in it and my reading of others' opinions on it it seems to be more of a fun tank than a likely-to-win tank; I don't think that it will ever be balanced, but giving it really nice driving stats would make it even more fun, make it a little better, be more historically accurate and give it some uniqueness of the good type.



Aikl #38 Posted 18 February 2014 - 10:39 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 26849 battles
  • 4,349
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011
1100 horsepower would be hilarious. Even with the current engine I've had a lot games where going Banzai-style against a good enemy medium works well. From what I remember it felt faster than the VK2801, might maybe switch (again) just for the ramming fun.

Askorti #39 Posted 18 February 2014 - 11:20 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 11776 battles
  • 1,137
  • Member since:
    06-24-2012
Afk Panther is actually quite fast. It has no problem with keeping 60kph but... 60kph is just not enough for it. It would need to go 72kph so that enemies might have a chance to miss you. It's just too damn big.

Zarax999 #40 Posted 18 February 2014 - 11:25 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 10117 battles
  • 3,249
  • [TWC] TWC
  • Member since:
    04-08-2011
No WWII tank was designed to keep that speed, 60km/h was pretty much the practical limit all around.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users