Jump to content


Can we get an official responce on shell cost injustice?


  • Please log in to reply
35 replies to this topic

Search_Warrant #1 Posted 20 August 2017 - 01:10 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 27736 battles
  • 6,435
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    02-08-2011

FV4202 = 1,799 DPM / 230 alpha / 226pen / 7.67 reload = 680 per shell

 

Patton KR = 1,854 DPM / 240 alpha / 192pen / 7.77 reload = 255 per shell

 

Why the hell is patton KR shell cost less than half of a tank with less alpha and some dpm? why should a small pen increase ramp the price of a shell so insanely high? i want a WG responce at to why this injustice is happening across ALL 20 pounder using british tanks and getting royally screwed over. just because a gun has pen doesent mean its good WG. every other bloom stat sucks on it. fix the shell cost on british 20 pounder.

 


Edited by Search_Warrant, 20 August 2017 - 01:13 AM.


cro001 #2 Posted 20 August 2017 - 01:15 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 30442 battles
  • 2,290
  • Member since:
    10-21-2012

T-54 - 2,5k DPM, 320 Alpha and 1230 credits per shell.

Patton - 2,7k DPM, 390 Alpga and 1000 credits per shell.



Search_Warrant #3 Posted 20 August 2017 - 01:23 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 27736 battles
  • 6,435
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    02-08-2011

View Postcro001, on 20 August 2017 - 12:15 AM, said:

T-54 - 2,5k DPM, 320 Alpha and 1230 credits per shell.

Patton - 2,7k DPM, 390 Alpga and 1000 credits per shell.

 

TBH nobody plays patton. which is kinda sad cuz it looks visually nice.

TsundereWaffle #4 Posted 20 August 2017 - 01:35 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 27233 battles
  • 11,075
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    03-31-2013

View PostSearch_Warrant, on 20 August 2017 - 02:23 AM, said:

 

TBH nobody plays patton. which is kinda sad cuz it looks visually nice.

 

now hold on

cro001 #5 Posted 20 August 2017 - 01:42 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 30442 battles
  • 2,290
  • Member since:
    10-21-2012

View PostSearch_Warrant, on 20 August 2017 - 01:23 AM, said:

 

TBH nobody plays patton. which is kinda sad cuz it looks visually nice.

 

Just because you have a hard on for Brits, doesn't mean other tanks shouldn't be mentioned.

Search_Warrant #6 Posted 20 August 2017 - 01:44 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 27736 battles
  • 6,435
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    02-08-2011

View Postcro001, on 20 August 2017 - 12:42 AM, said:

 

Just because you have a hard on for Brits, doesn't mean other tanks shouldn't be mentioned.

 

You read my scentance wrong. read it again. i actually LIKE Patton, visually. also i think british tanks are the suckiest trash in the game. besides cromwell that is. one of them for being poor credit gain for no good reason.

ExclamationMark #7 Posted 20 August 2017 - 01:47 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 16775 battles
  • 3,727
  • Member since:
    04-12-2013

"injustice"

 

always makes me laugh.



Search_Warrant #8 Posted 20 August 2017 - 02:11 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 27736 battles
  • 6,435
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    02-08-2011

View PostExclamationMark, on 20 August 2017 - 12:47 AM, said:

"injustice"

 

always makes me laugh.

 

Well, at least i made someone happy today. thats good.

DeltaOperator #9 Posted 20 August 2017 - 02:19 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 23988 battles
  • 4,817
  • Member since:
    03-16-2014
I see no problem, the shell price fts the british tanks quite nicely, aka generally being PoS.

xx984 #10 Posted 20 August 2017 - 02:21 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 56486 battles
  • 2,627
  • [SHEKL] SHEKL
  • Member since:
    08-11-2013

Surprised you didnt mention the shell cost of one of the anime tanks :hiding:

 

:popcorn::popcorn::popcorn:

 

 



Nishi_Kinuyo #11 Posted 20 August 2017 - 09:09 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 7891 battles
  • 4,629
  • [GUP] GUP
  • Member since:
    05-28-2011

View Postxx984, on 20 August 2017 - 01:21 AM, said:

Surprised you didnt mention the shell cost of one of the anime tanks :hiding:

 

:popcorn::popcorn::popcorn:

 

 

Last time I checked, the EU server had neither the Edelweiß nor the Nameless.

So what are you going on about?

Searchy-boi

 which is kinda sad cuz it looks visually nice.

 Wut.

Murikan tanks looking nice?

That's got to be a mistake.



SABAOTH #12 Posted 20 August 2017 - 09:16 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 37440 battles
  • 2,915
  • [-133-] -133-
  • Member since:
    08-28-2011

View PostSearch_Warrant, on 20 August 2017 - 01:10 AM, said:

FV4202 = 1,799 DPM / 230 alpha / 226pen / 7.67 reload = 680 per shell

 

Patton KR = 1,854 DPM / 240 alpha / 192pen / 7.77 reload = 255 per shell

 

Why the hell is patton KR shell cost less than half of a tank with less alpha and some dpm? why should a small pen increase ramp the price of a shell so insanely high? i want a WG responce at to why this injustice is happening across ALL 20 pounder using british tanks and getting royally screwed over. just because a gun has pen doesent mean its good WG. every other bloom stat sucks on it. fix the shell cost on british 20 pounder.

 

 

Sure here you go:

 

FV4202 = 1,799 DPM / 230 alpha / 226pen / 7.67 reload = 680 per shell

  • Is British so it is pretty expensive
  • You can't have British tanks to be good in WoT

 

Patton KR = 1,854 DPM / 240 alpha / 192pen / 7.77 reload = 255 per shell

  • Is Chinese copy of US tank
  • Chinese copies sell for cheap

 

If you have any more question please read the FAQ at this link http://because.reasons

 

:girl:



shane73tank #13 Posted 20 August 2017 - 09:19 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 29088 battles
  • 2,042
  • [USAGI] USAGI
  • Member since:
    03-01-2014

View PostSearch_Warrant, on 20 August 2017 - 12:10 AM, said:

FV4202 = 1,799 DPM / 230 alpha / 226pen / 7.67 reload = 680 per shell

 

Patton KR = 1,854 DPM / 240 alpha / 192pen / 7.77 reload = 255 per shell

 

Why the hell is patton KR shell cost less than half of a tank with less alpha and some dpm? why should a small pen increase ramp the price of a shell so insanely high? i want a WG responce at to why this injustice is happening across ALL 20 pounder using british tanks and getting royally screwed over. just because a gun has pen doesent mean its good WG. every other bloom stat sucks on it. fix the shell cost on british 20 pounder.

 

 

even though you love to rant re the anti British bias you are right

 

unlike the normal Patton, t54 and others quoted  the fv and kr are both premium tanks  so are supposed to grind credits



Dundato #14 Posted 20 August 2017 - 09:30 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 26406 battles
  • 717
  • Member since:
    06-09-2012
The fact u have to even pay for the shells is a joke. Imagine that happening in COD or Black ops etc. We must just be all idiots for accepting it.

SABAOTH #15 Posted 20 August 2017 - 09:41 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 37440 battles
  • 2,915
  • [-133-] -133-
  • Member since:
    08-28-2011

View PostDundato, on 20 August 2017 - 09:30 AM, said:

The fact u have to even pay for the shells is a joke. Imagine that happening in COD or Black ops etc. We must just be all idiots for accepting it.

 

This is how WG makes money. Is actually pretty smart.

JocMeister #16 Posted 20 August 2017 - 09:58 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 24131 battles
  • 2,199
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    08-03-2015

View PostSearch_Warrant, on 20 August 2017 - 01:23 AM, said:

 

TBH nobody plays patton. which is kinda sad cuz it looks visually nice.

 

Woah! :(

 

Pattons are frigging awesome man! 



Aikl #17 Posted 20 August 2017 - 10:20 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 26118 battles
  • 4,349
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

Claiming that different shell costs, while it's an arbitrary and pointless balancing parameter, is "injustice" reminds me of people demonstrating in weird hats.

 

Pretty sure that the shell cost realistically only matters if you don't make your shots count. It's pretty obvious that the credit multiplier/gain for every tank isn't the same - though it's kind of obvious that tanks like the 416 and T-54 are huge credit traps. While I was fine with mostly AP in both, it's a minimal difference between penning one premium shell and penning ~30-40% of AP shells - and that's before you count reduced repair costs (because you take down the enemy faster) and the fact that you're more likely to win if you can overpower the enemy quickly. Heck, trying to get a taste of the FOTM-Maus before the end of August I'm spamming APCR liberally in the Mäuschen - and I break even (with a premium account, but still). Probably promotes good gameplay right there, but I might as well conform to the system. :great:

 

Oh, and shell cost is hardly the thing that stops me from buying the Primus-Centurion. Not that over thirty quid is really worth it when I can just remap the voices and reskin the 7/1 anyway - which keeps being a somewhat relevant tank regardless of matchmaking.


Edited by Aikl, 20 August 2017 - 10:20 AM.


TsundereWaffle #18 Posted 20 August 2017 - 10:35 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 27233 battles
  • 11,075
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    03-31-2013

View PostSABAOTH, on 20 August 2017 - 10:16 AM, said:

 

Sure here you go:

 

FV4202 = 1,799 DPM / 230 alpha / 226pen / 7.67 reload = 680 per shell

  • Is British so it is pretty expensive
  • You can't have British tanks to be good in WoT

 

Patton KR = 1,854 DPM / 240 alpha / 192pen / 7.77 reload = 255 per shell

  • Is Chinese copy of US tank
  • Chinese copies sell for cheap

 

If you have any more question please read the FAQ at this link http://because.reasons

 

:girl:

 

Chinese copy? Wut? Patton KR is an American tank, not Chinese

lupinW #19 Posted 20 August 2017 - 11:34 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 19479 battles
  • 111
  • [INC] INC
  • Member since:
    05-03-2013

View PostSearch_Warrant, on 20 August 2017 - 12:10 AM, said:

FV4202 = 1,799 DPM / 230 alpha / 226pen / 7.67 reload = 680 per shell

 

Patton KR = 1,854 DPM / 240 alpha / 192pen / 7.77 reload = 255 per shell

 

Why the hell is patton KR shell cost less than half of a tank with less alpha and some dpm? why should a small pen increase ramp the price of a shell so insanely high? i want a WG responce at to why this injustice is happening across ALL 20 pounder using british tanks and getting royally screwed over. just because a gun has pen doesent mean its good WG. every other bloom stat sucks on it. fix the shell cost on british 20 pounder.

 

 

because british tanks raped russian tanks irl pretty hard and made them look useless, not like they weren't and WG "russians" doesn't forget it. also they are doing this bull$hit in wows too. 

PayMore #20 Posted 20 August 2017 - 11:37 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 23585 battles
  • 93
  • Member since:
    05-24-2013

View PostSearch_Warrant, on 20 August 2017 - 12:10 AM, said:

FV4202 = 1,799 DPM / 230 alpha / 226pen / 7.67 reload = 680 per shell

 

Patton KR = 1,854 DPM / 240 alpha / 192pen / 7.77 reload = 255 per shell

 

Why the hell is patton KR shell cost less than half of a tank with less alpha and some dpm? why should a small pen increase ramp the price of a shell so insanely high? i want a WG responce at to why this injustice is happening across ALL 20 pounder using british tanks and getting royally screwed over. just because a gun has pen doesent mean its good WG. every other bloom stat sucks on it. fix the shell cost on british 20 pounder.

 

 

T34-3.....




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users