Jump to content


Top 5 things wrong with WoT


  • Please log in to reply
68 replies to this topic

laulaur #1 Posted 06 September 2017 - 11:42 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 46450 battles
  • 986
  • [FOXX] FOXX
  • Member since:
    08-11-2011

I do not agree with some of the points made in this video, but it is a nice rant video and sums pretty well the state of WoT.

I do fail to see some russian bias in accuracy, and i don't care about premium ammo because most of the time i don't rely on my tank armor, but more on dodging the incoming shots.

 



AliceUnchained #2 Posted 06 September 2017 - 12:04 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 37820 battles
  • 8,522
  • [322] 322
  • Member since:
    10-18-2011

It would be nice if you could actually elaborate on the points you do not agree with, why. Same for those you do agree with. Now it's just tossing in a video and spend 1 minute to write a couple of general sentences. I'll watch the video in the mean time.

 

Edit: So, watched the video and there's quit a load of hooey in it.

 

5.) Is just a subjective stance on maps; I'll take Malinovka and Prokhorovka over all the corridor brawl maps any day. I do hope Wargaming will rework the removed maps and re-introduce them, yet I'm not very optimistic about their ability to actually improve these maps. It's quite hilarious that the video maker is talking about fast paced gaming on those removed maps while showing a base camping Obj. 268... I do believe maps are abig issue currently, but certainly not in the way the video maker describes it. The major issue is with current corridor brawl map design.

 

4.) Russian bias by Russian company? They're Belorussian actually, and while certain game design choices certainly do favor the Russian vehicles and type of play, there's not enough to expose a bias really. Again it's just subjective mumbo jumbo based on very little substantial.

 

3.) & 2.) Yes, the power creep is real unfortunately. Introducing premium Tier VIII better than their (perceived) counter parts was a big mistake in my opinion. Overbuffing superheavies, and that while we have maps already which favor armor heavily, is another big mistake. Now we get a next round of buffing some of the regular vehicles, which will screw over the remaining underperforming vehicles even more (and there are plenty of those), after which we'll probably see another round of buffs, and the cycle will repeat most likely. 

 

1.) Premium ammo isn't a root cause, it's a symptom (see points 2 and 3 for some explanation). And no, it really isn't that simple as double tapping '2' and auto-aiming away. This is sheer nonsense stemming from predisposition. Showing the T-54 100 mm gun as 'example' demonstrates this quite nicely. Suggesting a 50% damage reduction is just beyond idiotic, as it will ruin game balance even more, not fix it.


Edited by AliceUnchained, 06 September 2017 - 12:30 PM.


laulaur #3 Posted 06 September 2017 - 12:14 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 46450 battles
  • 986
  • [FOXX] FOXX
  • Member since:
    08-11-2011

View PostAliceUnchained, on 06 September 2017 - 11:04 AM, said:

It would be nice if you could actually elaborate on the points you do not agree with, why. Same for those you do agree with. Now it's just tossing in a video and spend 1 minute to write a couple of general sentences. I'll watch the video in the mean time.

 

Points that i dont agree:

-russian bias in landing shots/accuracy: i simply fail to see this thing in game

-nerfing the gold ammo damage: that would mean you should shoot twice as many shells at a Type5 or Maus, it would be even more of a credit sink than it is now

-he does not say a thing about the retarded HE gold ammo on the Type5, that thing is plain ridiculous.

I slapped a 'superheavy spall liner' on my T110E3 and still those japanese nuke-launchers manage to do @500 damage per shot....:sceptic:

 

Later edit: A thing that bothers me and is not mentioned in the video is the roflstomps, i hate the fact that an average WoT random takes 4 minutes now and often ends in 15-3, 15-3 results... I like/liked more tensionate and longer games.


Edited by laulaur, 06 September 2017 - 12:17 PM.


Spurtung #4 Posted 06 September 2017 - 12:16 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 60085 battles
  • 5,479
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

View Postlaulaur, on 06 September 2017 - 01:14 PM, said:

-nerfing the gold ammo damage: that would mean you should shoot twice as many shells at a Type5 or Maus, it would be even more of a credit sink than it is now

-he does not say a thing about the retarded HE gold ammo on the Type5, that thing is plain ridiculous.

No need to nerf it by 50% like he mentions, but something like 10-15% could do the trick.

 

He does say a thing, it's actually the #1 of the list.



laulaur #5 Posted 06 September 2017 - 12:22 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 46450 battles
  • 986
  • [FOXX] FOXX
  • Member since:
    08-11-2011

View PostSpurtung, on 06 September 2017 - 11:16 AM, said:

No need to nerf it by 50% like he mentions, but something like 10-15% could do the trick.

 

He does say a thing, it's actually the #1 of the list.

 

I really fail to see where he says something about Type4/5 HE premium round.

 



Spurtung #6 Posted 06 September 2017 - 12:25 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 60085 battles
  • 5,479
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

View Postlaulaur, on 06 September 2017 - 01:22 PM, said:

 

I really fail to see where he says something about Type4/5 HE premium round.

 

 

When speaking about all premium rounds? Yeah, it's hard to spot.

Cobra6 #7 Posted 06 September 2017 - 12:29 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16295 battles
  • 15,009
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

I honestly think every heavy tank should have viable weakspots for same tier standard ammo if the heavy tank is not played properly (angling/sidescraping/hulldown), after this you can completely remove premium ammo which will make the whole balancing of tanks much easier.

 

It is simply impossible to balance armour to both regular and premium ammo at the same time.

 

======

 

As for OP premium tanks, Wargaming should properly test their premium tanks with a larger audience of competent players before releasing them. It's funny that they insist they didn't know the Defender was going to do so well while every good player could tell you it would be at least broken (and possibly overpowered) by just looking at the stats.

 

If they are going to insist they didn't know this was going to happen then they prove themselves to be incompetent at balancing tanks. If they admit they knew this was going to happen then they prove to only care about the money. Either is bad for this game in the long run.

 

Cobra 6


Edited by Cobra6, 06 September 2017 - 12:31 PM.


Bucifel #8 Posted 06 September 2017 - 12:30 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 27744 battles
  • 1,373
  • [3NRGY] 3NRGY
  • Member since:
    03-18-2013

View Postlaulaur, on 06 September 2017 - 12:14 PM, said:

 

-nerfing the gold ammo damage: that would mean you should shoot twice as many shells at a Type5 or Maus, it would be even more of a credit sink than it is now

 

wrong

because if they rebalance it like this, they must decrease costs too...so nothing wrong here about credit sink anymore.

 

you really want to pen a tank almost everywhere? Then do less damage !

You want full dmage? Then find weakpoints !

 

its simply...and balanced.

 

anyway..my top 5 wrong things sounds like that:

1. gold ammo

2. new premium tanks

3. overbuffing armor and weakpoints removal

4. bad designed maps

5. too much RNG


Edited by Bucifel, 06 September 2017 - 12:39 PM.


laulaur #9 Posted 06 September 2017 - 12:47 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 46450 battles
  • 986
  • [FOXX] FOXX
  • Member since:
    08-11-2011

View PostSpurtung, on 06 September 2017 - 11:25 AM, said:

 

When speaking about all premium rounds? Yeah, it's hard to spot.

 

At 8:15 he just compares the proposed drawbacks for premium rounds to the regular HE mechanics.

He did not say a word about premium HE japanese mini-nuke...



sgtYester #10 Posted 06 September 2017 - 12:50 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 52226 battles
  • 1,412
  • [RANGF] RANGF
  • Member since:
    04-10-2011

oh geeh, unicorns that dont want a nerf to prem ammo.. i wonder why...

 

prem SHOULD be nerfed to do half damage so it becomes more of a tactical choice 

this IN COMBINATION!  with certain weakpoint on every tank.  however not stupid ones like the huge cuploa's on many tank (e5, sta2,type 62, etc

 

after this some balance in armor is needed but let heavies keep their armor, thats their role.

 

to many ppl got lazy and instead of trying to flank or make a move to get around an enemy they just press 2 and pen and done.  much fun (not)

 

rework HE shells. After the last nerf u can do zero damage with HE!  very nice if u use it on a hull down is3 thats capping and u cant reset with any shell u have.

 

ofc the concept of prem ammo is just broken and a huge p2w factor.  i dont know of any other game that has prem ammo like we have in wot

 

 



Spurtung #11 Posted 06 September 2017 - 12:54 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 60085 battles
  • 5,479
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

View Postlaulaur, on 06 September 2017 - 01:47 PM, said:

At 8:15 he just compares the proposed drawbacks for premium rounds to the regular HE mechanics.

He did not say a word about premium HE japanese mini-nuke...

Let's try it differently, just to see if it works.

 

For example: when talking about dogs in general, not specifically mentioning the Poodle makes the point less valid?



shishx_the_animal #12 Posted 06 September 2017 - 12:54 PM

    Colonel

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 30171 battles
  • 3,861
  • [FAME] FAME
  • Member since:
    04-06-2013

I wonder what would people accuse unicums if they completely balanced the game and removed prem ammo...

 



Spurtung #13 Posted 06 September 2017 - 12:55 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 60085 battles
  • 5,479
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

View Postshishx, on 06 September 2017 - 01:54 PM, said:

I wonder what would people accuse unicums if they completely balanced the game and removed prem ammo...

Fort Knox haxx

 


Edited by Spurtung, 06 September 2017 - 12:58 PM.


Bucifel #14 Posted 06 September 2017 - 12:55 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 27744 battles
  • 1,373
  • [3NRGY] 3NRGY
  • Member since:
    03-18-2013

View Postlaulaur, on 06 September 2017 - 12:47 PM, said:

 

At 8:15 he just compares the proposed drawbacks for premium rounds to the regular HE mechanics.

He did not say a word about premium HE japanese mini-nuke...

 

because he already mentioned how premium ammo works...and this is valid for all premium shells whatever type they are:

 

premium ammo have 0 drawbacks !

 

what you need more? Doesnt matter if its AP, APCR, HEAT or HE...all are just better than standard shells and just if you...PAY MORE...

P2W..like another player said...just another one, in another video...:D

 

all "normal" prem. shells have better penetration and same damage...in HE case is oposite...better damage and same penetration...its sape p2w crap.


Edited by Bucifel, 06 September 2017 - 12:57 PM.


OreH75 #15 Posted 06 September 2017 - 12:57 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 46108 battles
  • 1,741
  • [3V] 3V
  • Member since:
    05-29-2013

View PostBucifel, on 06 September 2017 - 12:55 PM, said:

 

 

premium ammo have 0 drawbacks !

 

 

They have at least 1 drawback: they cost more credits.



shishx_the_animal #16 Posted 06 September 2017 - 12:57 PM

    Colonel

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 30171 battles
  • 3,861
  • [FAME] FAME
  • Member since:
    04-06-2013
My secret fetish / wish is that they removed premium ammo so I could roll a super fat heavy tank on a small corridor map... mmm wet dreams for later.

Bucifel #17 Posted 06 September 2017 - 12:58 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 27744 battles
  • 1,373
  • [3NRGY] 3NRGY
  • Member since:
    03-18-2013

View PostOreH75, on 06 September 2017 - 12:57 PM, said:

They have at least 1 drawback: they cost more credits.

 

thats not a drawback...not for a wallet warrior

its just a P2W factor...biggest in this game...

 

and anyway its not a drawback for balance...its just for players


Edited by Bucifel, 06 September 2017 - 12:59 PM.


shishx_the_animal #18 Posted 06 September 2017 - 12:58 PM

    Colonel

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 30171 battles
  • 3,861
  • [FAME] FAME
  • Member since:
    04-06-2013

View PostOreH75, on 06 September 2017 - 11:57 AM, said:

They have at least 1 drawback: they cost more credits.

 

HEAT gets absorbed by tracks super easy.

APCR loses pen over distance, gl sniping a heavy across the field.

 

Not really drawbacks, just sayin' yo.



Thejagdpanther #19 Posted 06 September 2017 - 12:58 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 33033 battles
  • 4,244
  • [TKBS] TKBS
  • Member since:
    07-16-2012

View PostCobra6, on 06 September 2017 - 12:29 PM, said:

 

It is simply impossible to balance armour to both regular and premium ammo at the same time.

 

Pretty much this.
 

And that why, for me, it all start when premium rounds become available for credits.

Everything... also arty hate bibles.

 

You cannot put in a started game a feature that "challenge" another feature without any kind of skill.

I am with you all, that say that premium ammo are not auto-pen or auto-win, it's absolutely clear, but the effects on the entire game are evidents.

 

The response at this are of course uber armors. Good? Bad? I don't care. The problem started a long time ago.

Cause>Consequence/Effect


Edited by Thejagdpanther, 06 September 2017 - 01:02 PM.


Bucifel #20 Posted 06 September 2017 - 01:03 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 27744 battles
  • 1,373
  • [3NRGY] 3NRGY
  • Member since:
    03-18-2013

View Postshishx, on 06 September 2017 - 12:58 PM, said:

 

HEAT gets absorbed by tracks super easy.

APCR loses pen over distance, gl sniping a heavy across the field.

 

Not really drawbacks, just sayin' yo.

 

and all those differences are not because those shells are premium..you know? :)

are simply differences between shells types...and all those shells can be standard too

difference between standard and premium is just penetration (and costs...p2w better said)

 

AP better normalization and less velocity, lose some pen over distance

APCR high velocity, lose more pen over distance and less normalization

HEAT same pen at any distance but less effective vs spaced armor 

 

now whats the reason to just give extra 100 penetration value to one of this shell type if are already balanced like this?

what else if not p2w?


Edited by Bucifel, 06 September 2017 - 01:06 PM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users