Jump to content


Does WG have any clue about their own game?


  • Please log in to reply
37 replies to this topic

brumbarr #1 Posted 08 July 2017 - 10:35 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 38626 battles
  • 6,326
  • Member since:
    07-30-2012

I was reading a Q&A from WG and was just baffled by the ignorance of their answer:

 

  • The T-62A after the Object 140 buff won’t loose it’s meaning, since the T-62A still has a better turret. Yes, we know that the tanks are similar, but there’s still the 430, 907 and T-22. And as we saw by the Batchat rebalance, you can imagine what would happen if we poked at the high tier soviet meds. At this time, we’re not ready for that.

 

 

Do they have any clue about their own game? Like really?  They buff the obj140, one of the strongest meds in game. They do that by bufing the turret, and then say the T62A will still be equally good while its in unbuffed form already considered a better tank. Taking the one disadvantage of the obj140 and makign it much smaller defeats the point of the T62a entirely. Have they ever played these tanks at all??

And at the same time, they leave the 430 alone, one of the worst tier10 meds in the game, where is the sense in that???

 

 

But atleast there is some good news:

  • Besides that one, more machines are waiting for the Supertest, the Patton family included. Big turrets, a slew of weakspots. You could say that they were already deprecated by the other tanks. There will be some changes in the stats, but we’ll mostly focus on visual changes. The 59-Patton will also be changed.

 

Cant wait for WG to [edited]that up ( visual changes my [edited])

 

If WG actually wants balance, get a small ammount of top players together and let them give feedback about your buffs,  they  actually know what needs buffing and nerfing...  Just putting a list of forumites I know together would do a better  job then WG...


Edited by brumbarr, 08 July 2017 - 10:37 AM.


Erwin_Von_Braun #2 Posted 08 July 2017 - 10:41 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 38254 battles
  • 4,952
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    01-25-2014

View Postbrumbarr, on 08 July 2017 - 09:35 AM, said:

I was reading a Q&A from WG and was just baffled by the ignorance of their answer:

 

  • The T-62A after the Object 140 buff won’t loose it’s meaning, since the T-62A still has a better turret. Yes, we know that the tanks are similar, but there’s still the 430, 907 and T-22. And as we saw by the Batchat rebalance, you can imagine what would happen if we poked at the high tier soviet meds. At this time, we’re not ready for that.

 

 

Do they have any clue about their own game? Like really?  They buff the obj140, one of the strongest meds in game. They do that by bufing the turret, and then say the T62A will still be equally good while its in unbuffed form already considered a better tank. Taking the one disadvantage of the obj140 and makign it much smaller defeats the point of the T62a entirely. Have they ever played these tanks at all??

And at the same time, they leave the 430 alone, one of the worst tier10 meds in the game, where is the sense in that???

 

 

But atleast there is some good news:

  • Besides that one, more machines are waiting for the Supertest, the Patton family included. Big turrets, a slew of weakspots. You could say that they were already deprecated by the other tanks. There will be some changes in the stats, but we’ll mostly focus on visual changes. The 59-Patton will also be changed.

 

Cant wait for WG to [edited]that up ( visual changes my [edited])

 

If WG actually wants balance, get a small ammount of top players together and let them give feedback about your buffs,  they  actually know what needs buffing and nerfing...  Just putting a list of forumites I know together would do a better  job then WG...

 

I'm gonna say......................NO

No, they don't have a Scoobies.


Edited by Erwin_Von_Braun, 08 July 2017 - 10:41 AM.


Enforcer1975 #3 Posted 08 July 2017 - 10:48 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 20760 battles
  • 10,861
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014
I don't know about having top players decide what needs a buff or not, they should at least listen to players down to who still has a grasp of their tanks. Balance can mean 100 things to 100 people even if they are on the same level.

Edited by Enforcer1975, 08 July 2017 - 10:49 AM.


Strappster #4 Posted 08 July 2017 - 10:51 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 23968 battles
  • 9,019
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    10-20-2015
Sod the Pattons, restore the turret armour in every British tank that got a nerfed HD model first. :sceptic:

_Anarchistic_ #5 Posted 08 July 2017 - 10:51 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 38694 battles
  • 1,081
  • Member since:
    01-07-2015

dude I gave up years ago !!

 

everything they do is over kill

 

grille too powerful, don't tweak it, kill it.  e5 destroy it, bat chat proposed nerf, who even asked for it?  never ever seen any posts about bat chat needs a nerf !!  

then there is overbuff and over powered tanks Maus? Defender? etc

Mission tabs?   god they more confusing than before

arty changes?  makes it even more frustrating for me personally

ranked battles, seems they chose a mode designed to enhance the worst aspects of the game and encourage camping not to encourage active gameplay,  although as its beta hopefully they will listen to feedback

light tanks, hey lets make new tier 10 lights just bad, and nerf the view range of light tanks so they cannot perform their main role of scouting properly

 

it seems everything they do is deliberately designed to piss us off

 

its a game, meant to be fun yet many of the basic game mechanics like rng seem designed to enrage and frustrate

 

Its WG, just gotta go with it I guess, after all, AW failed to provide any competition and there aint anything else out there going to make WG care



IncandescentGerbil #6 Posted 08 July 2017 - 10:54 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35679 battles
  • 1,443
  • Member since:
    11-24-2015
I think WG is fully aware that for every player with the brains to see that their game is a wildly unbalanced excercise in p2w, another 10 are happy just to give them money. I do not doubt that in their own minds they imagine themselves to be doing a good job.

AC130Pilot #7 Posted 08 July 2017 - 10:55 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 15165 battles
  • 174
  • Member since:
    12-14-2013

Of course not.

 

I mean... Just look at this.



brumbarr #8 Posted 08 July 2017 - 10:55 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 38626 battles
  • 6,326
  • Member since:
    07-30-2012

View PostEnforcer1975, on 08 July 2017 - 10:48 AM, said:

I don't know about having top players decide what needs a buff or not, they should at least listen to players down to who still has a grasp of their tanks. Balance can mean 100 things to 100 people even if they are on the same level.

 

Why not? They are pretty objective and can se the big picture,  you dotn have to put them in charge, but WG (im)balance departement asks and considers their input.  If that where the case:

-maus would not be OP

-type5 would be usefull and not broken

-obj907 wouldnt be OP

-obj140 wouldnt get a pointless buff

- no OP prem tanks.

-lights would be usefull

- actually bad tanks would get buffed 

 



brumbarr #9 Posted 08 July 2017 - 10:57 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 38626 battles
  • 6,326
  • Member since:
    07-30-2012

View PostStewie2ie, on 08 July 2017 - 10:51 AM, said:

dude I gave up years ago !!

 

everything they do is over kill

 

grille too powerful, don't tweak it, kill it.  e5 destroy it, bat chat proposed nerf, who even asked for it?  never ever seen any posts about bat chat needs a nerf !!  

then there is overbuff and over powered tanks Maus? Defender? etc

Mission tabs?   god they more confusing than before

arty changes?  makes it even more frustrating for me personally

ranked battles, seems they chose a mode designed to enhance the worst aspects of the game and encourage camping not to encourage active gameplay,  although as its beta hopefully they will listen to feedback

light tanks, hey lets make new tier 10 lights just bad, and nerf the view range of light tanks so they cannot perform their main role of scouting properly

 

it seems everything they do is deliberately designed to piss us off

 

its a game, meant to be fun yet many of the basic game mechanics like rng seem designed to enrage and frustrate

 

Its WG, just gotta go with it I guess, after all, AW failed to provide any competition and there aint anything else out there going to make WG care

 

tbf on the E5: when you look at the ranked battle stats provided by WG; the E5 bounces as much dmg as the is7 and only a bit les than the E100.

tajj7 #10 Posted 08 July 2017 - 10:59 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 25424 battles
  • 13,836
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

View Postbrumbarr, on 08 July 2017 - 09:35 AM, said:

 

If WG actually wants balance, get a small ammount of top players together and let them give feedback about your buffs,  they  actually know what needs buffing and nerfing...  Just putting a list of forumites I know together would do a better  job then WG...

 

Warthunder tried that, they had a player's council to advise on balance changes and improvements, not sure how it worked but thought it was a good idea. 

 

Thing is, any such action would only be on RU anyway, they don't even let NA and EU players super test which is ridiculous in itself. 

 

I've always thought their idea on the first sandbox iteration, where they made the RU meds close range brawlers was a good idea, they gave them poor view range, poor accuracy, long aim times, but excellent dispersion and DPM. 



brumbarr #11 Posted 08 July 2017 - 11:08 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 38626 battles
  • 6,326
  • Member since:
    07-30-2012

View Posttajj7, on 08 July 2017 - 10:59 AM, said:

 

Warthunder tried that, they had a player's council to advise on balance changes and improvements, not sure how it worked but thought it was a good idea. 

 

Thing is, any such action would only be on RU anyway, they don't even let NA and EU players super test which is ridiculous in itself. 

 

I've always thought their idea on the first sandbox iteration, where they made the RU meds close range brawlers was a good idea, they gave them poor view range, poor accuracy, long aim times, but excellent dispersion and DPM. 

 

I dont need or expect a perfect balance of them, but atleast stopping the  retarded buffs and nerfs to tanks that dont need it...

And I think WG should do balance for servers individually. THey said themselfes that tanks on different servers behave differntly. So it would be better to balance it that way aswell, and we would also get rid of russians crying when a russian tank isnt the best in game. ( and stopping a  russian med tank rebalance cause WG is afraid)


Edited by brumbarr, 08 July 2017 - 11:11 AM.


_Anarchistic_ #12 Posted 08 July 2017 - 11:12 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 38694 battles
  • 1,081
  • Member since:
    01-07-2015

View Postbrumbarr, on 08 July 2017 - 10:57 AM, said:

 

tbf on the E5: when you look at the ranked battle stats provided by WG; the E5 bounces as much dmg as the is7 and only a bit les than the E100.

 

​I bounce more in my fv215b than I do in my is-7, as I have not bought the E5 I cant say

 

just want to add siege mode to the ranks of irritating as fxxx :teethhappy:

 



Sfinski #13 Posted 08 July 2017 - 11:13 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 31704 battles
  • 2,617
  • [-PJ-] -PJ-
  • Member since:
    09-26-2013
WG is most incompetent big company I've ever seen. 

HukLee #14 Posted 08 July 2017 - 11:16 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 24054 battles
  • 40
  • [TRIGG] TRIGG
  • Member since:
    05-09-2011
No(?!)

Temid23 #15 Posted 08 July 2017 - 11:16 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 53313 battles
  • 691
  • [G-STR] G-STR
  • Member since:
    12-20-2013
NO

a_noob_in_his_ #16 Posted 08 July 2017 - 11:23 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 47235 battles
  • 310
  • Member since:
    09-29-2013

i wouldn't mind so much if the Brits had some decent tanks

or at least some accurate guns

 

i'd like to be able to hit what i'm fully aimed at, you see...

 

peace



Folau #17 Posted 08 July 2017 - 11:28 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 15254 battles
  • 2,561
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    05-19-2013

"BatChat rebalance"

 

Just those two words are enough to drain me of confidence in their ability to impartially balance this game. It's a nerf, say it how it is.


Edited by Folau, 08 July 2017 - 11:28 AM.


brumbarr #18 Posted 08 July 2017 - 12:22 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 38626 battles
  • 6,326
  • Member since:
    07-30-2012

Update: they worded it differently:

 

– T-62A will not lose popularity after the Obj. 140 buff. The T-62 still has a better armored turret. Yes, we do know that the tanks are quite similar, moreover, we also have the 430 and the 907 and the T-22 med. We do want to separate all these vehicles somehow. But if you look at how players react to the BatChat, which is, mind you, not a nerf, but a rebalance, I became afraid of the reaction if we start touching the Soviet MT’s. Maybe we will look into them sometime later, but we aren’t quite ready for that right now.

 

And about pattion changes:

– By the way, several vehicles will appear on the supertest next week. We’ll test the Pattons – M46 and M48A1. They are almost all right, except that they aren’t very popular vehicles. Big turret, many weakspots. The vehicle is basically made obsolete by all other mediums. They lack something in the overall characteristics.

 



Strappster #19 Posted 08 July 2017 - 12:41 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 23968 battles
  • 9,019
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    10-20-2015

View PostSfinski, on 08 July 2017 - 10:13 AM, said:

WG is most incompetent big company I've ever seen. 

 

You've clearly never worked in financial services. It's worse than the Wild West for cowboys.

panter22 #20 Posted 08 July 2017 - 01:33 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 15008 battles
  • 385
  • Member since:
    05-23-2011
LOL the answer is NO that what happens when you have [edited]running the game




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users