Jump to content


WoT Suggestions Thread

Suggestions what should WG implement new (and old) ideas

  • Please log in to reply
1400 replies to this topic

Aikl #741 Posted 23 March 2018 - 12:44 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25552 battles
  • 4,349
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

View Postpooptan, on 23 March 2018 - 11:26 AM, said:

I still can´t understand why I can´t choose to ignore some maps, just like in World of warcraft battleground-que. This is an opportunity for Wargaming to make some extra dollars: Give your premium account-members the option to select or deselect a couple of maps that they dont want to play in "Random battle". And second of all, why oh why do you keep spawning SPGs in small citymaps, there is no point except easy targets for the enemy and a big creditloss for the SPG, its not even realistic, the SPGs would haul up outside the town and bomb from a distance, not in the center of it.

 

The matchmaking has enough strain as-is. Being able to select maps would just make certain problematic vehicles even more problematic. Prokhorovka and Malinovka would be chock-full of SPGs, lights and TDs. That's not fun gameplay. Frankly, the biggest problem with artillery at the moment is (beyond the hilarious mix of no-risk/high-reward gameplay with no skill floor and consistent damage output) how many there are. One is fine, two can be accetable on some maps.

 

You come off as rather narrow-minded in that you only take SPGs into account in your example. No class is excellent on all maps.

If anything, I'd say that SPGs generally have an easier time even on non-ideal maps. They still get to fire at typical chokepoints. I can think of a few, even if I don't play SPGs much: Hill on Himmelsdorf, field/heavy corner on Paris and the field on Pilsen.

Compare that to how a superheavy needs to adapt on Prokhorovka and Malinovka, or a light tank on Pilsen/Paris. The options for said tanks on those maps are extremely restricted, to the point of boredom. I'd argue it's even more limited than SPGs - and that's before you consider that playing SPGs is easily combined with 'multitasking'. Listening to podcasts, eating dinner, keeping an eye on the kids; it's not like you actually have to pay attention to the game most of the time.

 

Also, what I believe was the worst map for SPGs was removed in 1.0.

 

If you're bored with city maps, feel free to join the hordes of SPGs seeking water or walls for a swift return to the garage. Except some 'feedback' however, in addition to WG Q&As suggesting that this kind of 'unsportsmanlike conduct' might face some punishment in the future. Adding to the statistic of suicide-arty wouldn't be in your best interest, of course.



Kandly #742 Posted 23 March 2018 - 12:51 PM

    Community Manager

  • WG Staff
  • 698 battles
  • 788
  • Member since:
    08-23-2016

View PostAikl, on 23 March 2018 - 10:21 AM, said:

Forum-related suggestion again: Actually cleaning up the 'Gameplay' forum and make 'megathreads' for general whining/praising of the 1.0 patch. Some off-topic is fine, since it's basically 'General discussion' at this point, but it's just insanely cluttered. At the moment, out of ~50 threads on the first page:

  • 4 'Sticky threads'
  • 12 topics about performance issues, bugs and whatever.
  • 8-9 topics about 1.0 being good/bad
  • 5-6 topics discussing a particular tank, most of which should be in its proper category.
  • 4-5 topics discussing maps

 

It hardly gives a good impression if some new player ventures into the forums to see what people think of 1.0 after seeing some streamer play it.

 

 

Also, having an option to disable 'scenery' outside the map border would be a good idea, performance-wise. Perhaps disable it entirely with minimum draw distance?
Landscapes seems to work fine, but a ton of objects is both confusing and seems to cause some performance issues. The main problem with performance in 1.0 seems to be the inconsistency. Live Oaks, Ensk and Himmelsdorf all run kind of slow compared to e.g. Paris and Redshire. 

 

We're definitely planning to clean up the forum very soon, I agree with you that it's a bit cluttered atm. I'll be on it as soon as I get some time for it. :)

 

@everyone: thank you all for your latest suggestions. I'm constantly keeping an eye on this thread.

 

Have a nice day! :)



Aikl #743 Posted 23 March 2018 - 04:22 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25552 battles
  • 4,349
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

View PostKandly, on 23 March 2018 - 11:51 AM, said:

(...)

 

Great!

 

In case you need another chat issues-like headache, how about kicking the forum server hamsters a bit? Doesn't annoy me too much, but wouldn't be a bad idea for the forums to be online now that 1.0's a thing and people want to check out the forums.

 

(In case someone wonders, this is the link to WW1: Aerial Trench Ghosts; really cool stuff: http://www.invisible...ts-part-3-lens/)


Edited by Aikl, 23 March 2018 - 04:23 PM.


Berkut_RS #744 Posted 23 March 2018 - 05:33 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 32151 battles
  • 28
  • [AVGJ] AVGJ
  • Member since:
    11-20-2016

Dear WG!

 

How we make game more fair, cheat free and get rid off trolls and players who only in game task is to ruin other players game you have to introduce spectator option to and for every player who is on server, and that you see in spectator mode can be recorded like your own game and can be use like proof for miss behavior. And also to follow him (that specific player) trough all game he play.

For example... You get player name from list or search list, right click and option "spectate".

If player is not online you got that kind of massage, if player is in garage.... your screen is black with notification that player is in garage (you can not see his garage or what he do in garage) and when he go to the battle spectator follow him and can follow him trough all time.

 

Spec. player do not get any kind of information that somebody follow him or he have one or more spectator on his acc. or game play.

 

Spectator video can be used to convict player for cheats or troll. Also you have to change a little bit penalty policy. 



mollethepro #745 Posted 23 March 2018 - 10:19 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 8312 battles
  • 148
  • Member since:
    12-01-2014
add balance.

BomuDicQ #746 Posted 24 March 2018 - 10:09 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 10920 battles
  • 8
  • [PUSAT] PUSAT
  • Member since:
    08-28-2014
Could we buff Bat chat 25t a bit already? Yes, it is a good tank, yes it works great in competitive scene and clan wars, but how does it do in matchmaking actually? It doesn't feel like a medium in terms of carrying capacity at all. Don't get me wrong, I am not asking a buff for hp, mobility, armor, or gun stats etc. All I want is some extra ammunition. Like 40, or 35 at least. Currently it sits at a 11.7k potential damage, which is joint worst and in fact worse than it's light counterpart, which shouldn't bring more firepower than a medium in the first place and we all know landing and penetrating all 5 shots is a wet dream for most if not all bat chat 25t drivers and more often than not you are running out of ammo. With 40 ammo, it will lead to more freedom in terms of clip distribution and potential damage around tvp 50/51, realistically it will be lower considering that gun doesn't work like other mediums and you will still miss shots most of the time but it is better than nothing I guess? Also this buff most likely won't change any high level competitive scene hence 30 is enough for a 7v7 situation, just not for 15v15.
 

View PostRMF_Conjo, on 21 February 2018 - 11:17 AM, said:

Please set arty back how it was, all that confuseing stuff it annoys me.

I`ve liked arty a lot untill you nerved arty, arty belongs yo do high damage and in a real war you also not can say to the other country that their bullets are to styrong i mean come on pls set arty back how it was and raise it up to 2 player artys per platoon.

 

Make max arty pieces allowed per team 2 and make accuracy and ability to shoot equal to history then we got a deal, meaning no god view and you have to line your shoot by looking up to sky and can't shotgun other tanks. Well, realistically arty pieces need to be around 10 of them at least and barrage a field, not sniping engine decks across the map with god view and such. You will get rough idea of which place you are aiming on map tho, but about A0 B5 or something like that, nothing more. Deal? I can't help but laugh when people talk about arty buffs and wg said it is there because of the sake of *edit people should be able to play the game too and I seriously can't see the point of arranging a game purely to cater them. Just make another dedicated to them and be done with it maybe if you really care, like sports. There are branches where *edit people compete against each other anyway.
 

Edited by Jbnn, 03 April 2018 - 03:07 PM.
This post has been edited by the moderation team due to inappropriate remarks.


Kerrigan23 #747 Posted 24 March 2018 - 12:04 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 21538 battles
  • 27
  • [5FPS] 5FPS
  • Member since:
    08-13-2011

View Postclanmcwood, on 20 March 2018 - 04:52 PM, said:

 

Would you like to explain why APCR would have less damage than AP? and remember that some tanks fire this as standard not as premium

Also what about HESH higher Pen HE rounds the British use? no I think ammo is good as it is

So I was looking into the penetration of different guns on some WW2 forums to get the idea of how this was functioning, and by comparison it seemed that APCR was better at penetrating (not sure if simply higher penetration rate or better mechanics) but less devastating, comparing to AP. So I figured a good way to balance the two would be to keep the APCR with higher pen and lower damage.

 

The whole idea behind is that we avoid having on the same gun 2 ammo types, out of which one is clearly better than the other. At this moment, it's pay to win.

What I would like to see is different ammo types, well balanced considering: mechanics, penetration, damage and cost. This way any player would have to rely on skill to choose the most suitable shell to fire, depending on who he's up against. I want to avoid the classic "press key 2 for extra skill".

 

View PostG_host_steel, on 22 March 2018 - 11:55 AM, said:

APCR is solid slug , while AP almost always had some kind of explosive filler. HESH should get its own Pen and Dmg that is not connected to proposed HEAT nerf by Kerrigan23. ALso with that kind of nerf to HEAT not much would change , HEAT would be still sapmmed like crazy

#754

 

Yes, I agree, HEAT would still remain the most powerful shell in the game. It will also be the most expensive, the only issue with it being its mechanics (exploding right after impact).

Now, when I wrote the proposal, I was looking into how HEAT functioned during WW2 and after. Trouble was that HEAT in the beginning was the worst ammo out there, really ineffective, so any tanks using HEAT built before 1948 should probably have the worse version of shell with lower penetration.

But after WW2, HEAT was improved a lot and became one the most powerful in terms of penetration, so considering most high tier guns use HEAT and were manufactured (or blueprinted) after 1950, I considered the buffed version in my proposal.

I think that if the devs really want to, they can find a way to balance the HEAT with the rest of the ammo. I still wouldn't mind having it a little more OP than others and more expensive, since it seems historically true.

 

Note: my research was simply done on forums and random websites I found on google, so it might not be 100% historically accurate. But in the end I think it's a proposal worth building on to remove the pay-to-win current gameplay.



Trounson #748 Posted 24 March 2018 - 03:01 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 10079 battles
  • 13
  • [QSF-X] QSF-X
  • Member since:
    04-29-2013
look at map balance it sucks 

akill01 #749 Posted 24 March 2018 - 07:06 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 62709 battles
  • 16
  • [CFSSE] CFSSE
  • Member since:
    10-12-2012
The graphics of the game is very nice. But the balance of the game is a very wrong work. I suggest to the balance team to look after another job. The plumber or something else jobs pass better to the balance devs. You know you don’t have to use your brians...

PAnzerWhaffle #750 Posted 25 March 2018 - 04:33 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 2666 battles
  • 81
  • [SWEDS] SWEDS
  • Member since:
    01-09-2018
In over all I love the game... Arty though... a unit that can target you without LOS, not talking satelite view an a randomiserad spotter, and who won’t reviel its position when fiering is not oki... make arty visibel on tactical map a fem seconds when they fire at target... 

_Shadow_Walker_ #751 Posted 25 March 2018 - 06:50 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 26650 battles
  • 2
  • [QSF] QSF
  • Member since:
    04-23-2012

get your craptogether and rework some of the maps and stop making them a campfest and corridor fights it's borring as hell....second thing fix the saund cause since 1.0 it's been crap...and 3rd thing whoever is working on balancing tanks replace them cause they are not doing a good job.

i know nobady will do any of this cause the forum is [edited]so i'm ot bye



NajcrnjeNoci #752 Posted 26 March 2018 - 01:06 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 9749 battles
  • 73
  • Member since:
    10-18-2014

1.0 graphics is good, rest is pure 5hit!!!

 

In game report system:

Only 10 complaints in 24h or create a ticket. I suggest that it should be at least 200 per 24h, cause we have so many insulting players, bots, and unsportmenlike conduct idiots. I could use all 10 in just one game.

 

Ticket report:

Just to know admins tolerate NAZI insulting players (happened to me when reported NAZI insult and admin Ben Hope tolerated this). There should be like permanent ban for those insults.

We need tickets to report Admins for not doing their job!! Once they start losing their jobs they are going to care. 



WasherDryer #753 Posted 26 March 2018 - 02:19 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 65012 battles
  • 156
  • Member since:
    12-27-2014

I suggest that players should praise and congratulate the Wargaming staff and in particular the Matchmaking development and testing team.

So- Congratulations and well done to the Wargaming Matchmaking development and testing team!

 

I, for one, don't believe one word of what they say about the MM Dept. and their personal habits, persuasions, and relationships with farm animals.

 


Edited by WasherDryer, 26 March 2018 - 02:22 PM.


DrEsqueleto #754 Posted 26 March 2018 - 11:01 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 22237 battles
  • 672
  • [DSNL] DSNL
  • Member since:
    06-29-2011

I have one and to be honest I hate the moment I decided to buy it.

 

It has only 1 mm armor all around.

It has been promoted to be a very good ridge fighter...  well, it isn't and by far.

Why? 

This TD only has 10 degrees gun depression, for most ridges you need more to be able to only show your gun. You have tos how much more of your vehicle to be able to shoot, also a negative is that most of the times you have to be very close behind or even in front of bushes/cover to be able to shoot.

Next to that, it has a huge hitbox above the gun.!  Don't listen to people who say it hasn't, it has.!  And everyone can easily hit and penetrate it.

This TD is also a oneshot for most tanks and artillery, specially when they use HE.!!!

Reload is mèh, 9.12 shots/minute when using a rammer and BIA.

(With camo net, on 4 crew members camo skill 100% and camo paint (exterior).)

Than Camo is 56% and after shooting 13%, but if someone is closer than 445 meters... you'll be spotted when shooting, even from cover.

(Most maps now don't have an option to go back in cover. It even looks like it that with patch 1.0 WG has removed even more good.descent snipe spots. << They removed the bushes and or flattened the ground or made that bulge or hill steeper.

 

To make this TD work:

- it needs more than 10 degrees depression like 12-15,

- perhaps a more reliable and perhaps faster loading gun 

and most important:

- the gun should be turned around (mounted up side down). >> The gun will be mounted higher, but the positive effect will be that there will be much less (turret) armor sticking above it. Making it much more difficult to hit.  << It has been done on higher tiers, so why not also on a vehicle we actually have payed for.!?!

 

 

If you make lots of credits with it or do a lot of damage... than you really have a good team that spots for you or you're just very very lucky. (Remember, you have to equipe a camo net, binocular and rammer.)



Ville67 #755 Posted 27 March 2018 - 10:46 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 21110 battles
  • 199
  • Member since:
    08-05-2013

Wargaming only listens when their bank account is looking empty (which doesn't happen anymore, because they can just put the Defender or E 25 on sale). Here are my suggestions as to what needs to be done to the game:

1) +1/-1 MM. I know Wargaming already said they won't change it (because they want people to fire premium ammo), but it would improve the game so much. Yes, almost all tanks would need to be changed, but putting Type 58's and Defenders in the same match makes NO sense. I can deal with tier 8 tanks in my KV-2 or Cromwell, because they're the best of their tier, but all the other tanks suffer. I will put some examples to show how ridiculous the MM is (and it used to be even worse): T32 vs E 100, M3 Lee vs Cromwell B or M6 vs E 75. I even picked quite regular tanks, I could've picked something even more ridiculous (like KV-1 vs E 25).

2) Premium rounds. Something needs to be done to them. These days, you can just spam gold and still make a profit. There is NO downside. I think either the shell price needs to be increased by an extra 10-20% on ALL vehicles, or the damage should be decreased by a small margin (maybe 5-10%).

3) Maps. I quite like the maps, there just needs to be a bit more. As long as the rest of the maps get introduced to 1.0, I'm happy. I'd say putting 1-2 maps per year would be enough. That doesn't sound like too much to ask.

 

I could go on about OP premium vehicles, the RNG and annoying tech tree design (where you have to free XP to tier 8), but I think fixing those three things would be enough for me. However, this post is useless since Wargaming will never change those things, and don't even care about customer feedback.



WasherDryer #756 Posted 27 March 2018 - 02:10 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 65012 battles
  • 156
  • Member since:
    12-27-2014

View PostVille67, on 27 March 2018 - 09:46 AM, said:

Wargaming only listens when their bank account is looking empty (which doesn't happen anymore, because they can just put the Defender or E 25 on sale). Here are my suggestions as to what needs to be done to the game:

1) +1/-1 MM. I know Wargaming already said they won't change it (because they want people to fire premium ammo), but it would improve the game so much. Yes, almost all tanks would need to be changed, but putting Type 58's and Defenders in the same match makes NO sense. I can deal with tier 8 tanks in my KV-2 or Cromwell, because they're the best of their tier, but all the other tanks suffer. I will put some examples to show how ridiculous the MM is (and it used to be even worse): T32 vs E 100, M3 Lee vs Cromwell B or M6 vs E 75. I even picked quite regular tanks, I could've picked something even more ridiculous (like KV-1 vs E 25).

2) Premium rounds. Something needs to be done to them. These days, you can just spam gold and still make a profit. There is NO downside. I think either the shell price needs to be increased by an extra 10-20% on ALL vehicles, or the damage should be decreased by a small margin (maybe 5-10%).

3) Maps. I quite like the maps, there just needs to be a bit more. As long as the rest of the maps get introduced to 1.0, I'm happy. I'd say putting 1-2 maps per year would be enough. That doesn't sound like too much to ask.

 

I could go on about OP premium vehicles, the RNG and annoying tech tree design (where you have to free XP to tier 8), but I think fixing those three things would be enough for me. However, this post is useless since Wargaming will never change those things, and don't even care about customer feedback.

 

Yep, complete waste of time posting here or sending tickets to support. It's clear from the responses by the resident "players" (WG shills) on this forum and the cut-and -paste, go-read-Wiki automatic ticket responses that Wargaming have nothing but utter contempt for their non-Russian "customers". Expect nothing but half-truths and outright lies from this company. It's just the culture -  and what passes for standard interaction with non-Russian outsiders.

Look at how many years matchmaking has been the top topic on the forum and incredibly, (in relation to normal human behavior), Wargaming have utterly refused and failed to interact with non-Russian Europeans in any kind of meaningful or non-contemptuous way. All statistical data, which is held by Wargaming, is locked up tight like a KGB filing cabinet. Secrecy is all. And hilariously the shills on this forum then are contemptuous towards all communicated games experiences without Phd-level 1000-game processed statistical data. :)  

It's just the culture. 

 



mollethepro #757 Posted 27 March 2018 - 06:02 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 8312 battles
  • 148
  • Member since:
    12-01-2014

read the comments.

 

 

thats a good one.



akill01 #758 Posted 27 March 2018 - 07:19 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 62709 battles
  • 16
  • [CFSSE] CFSSE
  • Member since:
    10-12-2012
IT is no way to rage wot devs made this game broken. It is clear that they want to make wg bankrupt. You know the are Russians who are very tricky. Maybe wg was loaned and the management have stolen the money. It is clear that they made this game crapdirectly. I can’t think anything else. 

koho11 #759 Posted 28 March 2018 - 08:26 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 25254 battles
  • 7
  • [BUL3T] BUL3T
  • Member since:
    01-02-2014

Suggestions:

1.Dig this nice game from 3 yeas ago dust;

2.Put it back and throw away the 1.0 into the garbage dumb;

3. Fire incompetent fools responsible for all changes 3 years ago;

4. Send e-,mail to all faithfull good 'old players you had betrayed, tell you're very sorry, and It wiil never happen again;

5. Stop garbage updates every 2 weeks and instead of this try to make 1-2-3-4 yearly(but for real reasons and quality);

6. Do this MM to be FAIR. Fair. Fair;

7. Wait for results.



troesmis #760 Posted 28 March 2018 - 05:59 PM

    Private

  • Beta Tester
  • 3218 battles
  • 1
  • Member since:
    11-18-2010

Hello

What about as an evolution, introducing the concept of fuel consumption? I'm imagining that will change the dynamics of the game.

Basically Light Tanks will have a long moving range  vs the Heavy Tanks with a shorter moving range, therefore requiring the heavies to better plan what they will do. A monster like Defender although impressive with armor stats, should also be concerned with his actions otherwise will become static.

An algorithm based on the size of the engine vs the weight of the tank....etc....  just to bring something refreshing into WOT






5 user(s) are reading this topic

1 members, 4 guests, 0 anonymous users


    fighting_falcon93