Jump to content


Update 9.20.1: Bonds and Medals


  • Please log in to reply
90 replies to this topic

TheArk_2014 #41 Posted 21 September 2017 - 06:26 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 61133 battles
  • 865
  • [AETOS] AETOS
  • Member since:
    01-03-2014

View PostMR_FIAT, on 21 September 2017 - 05:17 PM, said:

download link for the test client leads to a 404 :sceptic:

 

The link works perfect for me, maybe it is a temporary bug for you.

 

For those who have already the test client installed, just click on the game's icon and the client will start the update.

 


Edited by TheArk_2014, 21 September 2017 - 06:38 PM.


AcedFox #42 Posted 21 September 2017 - 06:40 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 26252 battles
  • 21
  • [_RED_] _RED_
  • Member since:
    09-28-2011
Why just 1, 3 or 10 bonds for medals? a top gun should be IMHO be at least 5? and the really rare ones (pool's medal for example) 20-50? getting bonds is going to take a really, REALLY long time otherwise. most are just going to cap the *** out games just to get that single bond? not that i mind 1 bond for capture. it's the most easiest medal to gain. (some cases cap is the best option yes, but in example: a 10VS3 and 1 guy ruins for the other 9 guys their fun or even, a medal for some, by capping. yeah...)

DoomHerald #43 Posted 21 September 2017 - 06:45 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 60958 battles
  • 169
  • [ANIML] ANIML
  • Member since:
    09-13-2013

The idea is great for sure!

It needs a little tweaking, thought. As mentioned before, 1-3 bonds for a medal (even Top gun!) is way too low. Also, some very rare medals like Tarczay, Raseiniay or Yoshio Tamada deserve much much more (I am with over 50k games, 55% wins, 1850 WN8 and still have none of them, but for example 2 days ago in a full t10 match won 18 bonds with just one good battle). Another thing - in my opinion the amount of bonds should be connected not only with the tier of the player's vehicle, but also with the battle tier - it is much harder to get High caliber or Top gun when middle or bottom tier. For example, in a t10 battle Maus should win 10 bonds with Top gun, Mauschen - 15 or 20, VK100.01P - 20 or 30, or something like that.



tapir #44 Posted 21 September 2017 - 07:03 PM

    Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 54355 battles
  • 263
  • Member since:
    07-25-2010

One Final Thing to Keep in Mind

The new rule doesn’t apply to medals received before 9.20.1 since crediting Bonds for all Epic Medals and Battle Heroes achievements earned to date would disrupt the game economy.

 

 

                                                                               LIE

 

 


Edited by tapir, 21 September 2017 - 07:04 PM.


Asghaad #45 Posted 21 September 2017 - 07:08 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 13273 battles
  • 3,099
  • [PPDCZ] PPDCZ
  • Member since:
    01-23-2013

someone at WG needs to really do over the math for the bonds alltogether at current prices for equipment and pitiful rewards for any of the activities it simply isnt worth the hassle to even TRY to grind for these ... as mentioned above grinding the bonds through these would require tens of thousands of battles even for great players and i would say that anything more than 200-300 for great players or 500 for good ones will result in noone giving a ***** about this "feature"

 

 

as it is now both T10 battle reward and now this medal reward is absolutely irrelevant when it gives basically nothing ...

 

 

T10 only battles should reward 1% of base XP as bonds to top 10 playes in each team

honorary rewards like Fighter, Reaper, Fire for effect should reward 1-2 bonds each

battle heroes (Top gun, High caliber, confederate, Steel wall, etc) should reward 10-20 bonds

and Epic medals should yield at least 100 bonds ... up to something like 500+ for the truly EPIC ones (Pools, Raisenais, Kolobanovs)

 

then the system could be considered actually workable and rewarding allowing people to not to grind for years for one module ... and also allow even average players to go through the grind and actually earn them at all ...

 



Dexatroph #46 Posted 21 September 2017 - 07:27 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 44517 battles
  • 3,044
  • Member since:
    02-09-2013

Hi,

 

I created myself a short script to calculate the bonds I would have earned in my WoT career based on the provided data.

 

I made 38.246 battles in more than 4,5 years and the closer look at the numbers it turns out to be somewhat disillusioning. 

 

15774 battles at tier 4-7 earned  3602 bonds.

17477 battles at tier 8-9 earned 3941 bonds.

711 battles at tier 10  earned 438 bonds. 

 

Total: 7981 bonds  

 

 

The value of each medal  is simply too low. Just crumbs compared with the costs of  only one advanced equipment.

 

 

 



bryanfdny #47 Posted 21 September 2017 - 07:40 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 27330 battles
  • 5
  • [RANGR] RANGR
  • Member since:
    06-15-2012
How would rewarding players like me who have spend years and tens of thousands of games playing and earning these medals with the appropriate amount of bonds for the medals they have disrupt game economy... it doesn't make any sense

laceleste #48 Posted 21 September 2017 - 08:29 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 40964 battles
  • 514
  • Member since:
    03-02-2013

Elegant way of spreading bonds to lower tiers while keeping in line with the original spirit of the reform.

 



CmdRatScabies #49 Posted 21 September 2017 - 08:57 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 37610 battles
  • 4,348
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    10-12-2015
Such a small amount of bonds that it'll be irrelevant.

InfernoJack #50 Posted 21 September 2017 - 08:58 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 37443 battles
  • 174
  • [5REST] 5REST
  • Member since:
    02-01-2012

Am I the only one thinking Wargaming are being very tight with this? It awards such a pathetic small amount of bonds, it would take years to save up enough for improved equipment.

 

Also this, so according to Wargaming:-

 

"The new rule doesn’t apply to medals received before 9.20.1 since crediting Bonds for all Epic Medals and Battle Heroes achievements earned to date would disrupt the game economy."

 

How can they even say that with a straight face? I listed all my medals into Excel and did some calculations.

 

-My total awards received over all medals listed, over the last 4-5 years I've been playing this game is 2734.

 

-So I don't know at which tier these medals were awarded, but if all were awarded at the lower bracket (tier 4-7), my total bonds earned by those medals would be 2958.

 

-If all these medals were awarded at tier 10, my total bonds earned by those medals would be 7890.

 

Now I know the total bonds I would get if WG awarded them for all medals earned before patch 9.20.1 would be somewhere between 2958 and 7890. Since we know that improved equipment costs 3000-5000 bonds, that's only enough bonds to get 1 or 2 bits of improved equipment - from 4-5 years worth of medals. Someone explain please just how in anyone's mind this would "disrupt the game economy"?

 

Bonds need to be awarded in much higher numbers, or the costs of items purchased with bonds needs a drastic reduction, for this to really be worth it at all. Otherwise it will remain that the only way to really get improved equipment in a reasonable time frame is by playing ranked, which many players can't because they don't own tier 10 yet, or because they don't enjoy ranked, or because they can't afford to, because gold spam with premium account is vital to remaining competitive if you want to win ranked games without losing all your credits very fast indeed.

 

 

 

 



Dexatroph #51 Posted 21 September 2017 - 09:04 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 44517 battles
  • 3,044
  • Member since:
    02-09-2013

View PostInfernoJack, on 21 September 2017 - 08:58 PM, said:

 

Now I know the total bonds I would get if WG awarded them for all medals earned before patch 9.20.1 would be somewhere between 2958 and 7890.

 

 

 

You would have 3541 bonds earned in 5 years & 3 months playing WoT



Alabamatick #52 Posted 21 September 2017 - 09:09 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 31849 battles
  • 3,018
  • Member since:
    04-11-2011

View PostPh3lan, on 21 September 2017 - 04:40 PM, said:

 

During the last couple of months we have been fleshing out bonds as a new layer of currency in the game. Once the whole system is in place, adjusted, and working it will provide everyone with a new currency to earn and customize their vehicles with. I hope that once we are finished tweaking bonds you will change your mind about them :)

 

 

Err, no i won't

Geno1isme #53 Posted 21 September 2017 - 11:14 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 42701 battles
  • 7,852
  • [TRYIT] TRYIT
  • Member since:
    09-03-2013

The current numbers are a complete joke. This account would have gotten about 2500 bonds for the medals over 4 years and 35k battles across all tiers. Even my best tanks in that aspect (T110E5, O-Ni, Batchat) only get a rate of like 0.25 bonds per battle for medals, and on average its less than 0.1. A mediocre T10 random battle nets about 5 bonds, and with 10-20 ranked battles you can get easily 300 bonds (based on current season numbers).

 

And to add insult to injury: Those people who already have best access to bonds also get the most out of this feature, while those without access (=without T10 tanks) who are supposed to be the target audience get almost nothing.

(the irony is that the initial supertest announcement actually omitted T10 for this feature and I called that illocial, which they now kinda fixed, just as usual not as intended)

 

I'd suggest to change it like this:

- "easy" medals (Confederate, High Caliber, Top-Gun, Invader, Defender, ...) should be awarded with 3 bonds up to T7 and 5 bonds for T8 and above (no separate level for T10)

- "rare" medals (Radley Walters, Fadins, Kolobanovs, all the "kill higher tiers" stuff) should be awarded with 10/20 bonds

- "legendary" medals (Pools, Raseinei, Bilotte, ...) should be awarded with 100/150 bonds

 

With those numbers for example I'd have gotten just above 9k bonds total, or about 0.25 bonds per battle on average. Still not much, but at least noticable.

 

EDIT: Also, certain medal combinations (e.g. Top-Gun+High Caliber, or Top-Gun+Confederate) should be awarded with an additional bonus as that's usually a good indicator for a carry game.


Edited by Geno1isme, 22 September 2017 - 08:34 AM.


armandio #54 Posted 21 September 2017 - 11:24 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 79848 battles
  • 2,047
  • Member since:
    04-19-2011

WG logic = Raseiniai medal 5-15 bonds :amazed:

 

My logic = Raseiniai medal 100 000 bonds. :)

                 Pool medal = 10 000 bonds. :)

                 Radley medal = 1000 bonds.:)

 

 

 



uglycousin #55 Posted 21 September 2017 - 11:51 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 45136 battles
  • 3,708
  • [TFUK] TFUK
  • Member since:
    09-01-2014

View PostPh3lan, on 21 September 2017 - 07:50 PM, said:

 

Numbers are easy to tweak as long as the system itself is sound. If you think the rewards are too low, let us know (thanks for already doing so) and we will let our developers know and they can look into it. 

 

Right now the numbers seem very low. An epic game does not earn that many bonds, and those games are rare anyway...

 

For starters I would triple the numbers, and see where it goes from there. :)

 

And almost forgot about the rarest medals "that everybody wants". Raiseiniai and Kolobanov ... those should earn at least 100 times more bonds than what it is proposed now. 


Edited by uglycousin, 21 September 2017 - 11:53 PM.


Rato_Black_Baron #56 Posted 21 September 2017 - 11:51 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 31160 battles
  • 459
  • Member since:
    02-22-2013

I've played 1 battle in the 2nd season of Ranked and I'm going to earn 100 bonds.
I've played 1 battle in Nebelburg and earned 6 bonds.
It's more bonds than 15 Radley-Walters at tier X (105)!?
----
With the introduction of the improved equipment, you have to increase a lot the bonds earnings for everybody and faster imho.
- So everyone can buy these equipments. And skill would be rewarded with more equipments bought.
- So Directives can be treated as consumables, and not as a choice that hinders the future possibility of having just one equipment.
- To this new economy become fair, you have to lose your fears of letting the powercreep flow.
- Then you can sell bonds in the premium shop, diving in the Rubicon without shame.

 

I suggest:
- Multiplying that table for 100 at least.
- A marathon for 5000 bonds & the T-29 ("gift" soviet MT tier III), with fail-safe option in the shop.
- Every shop bundle with bonds.
----
Of course, you can keep this economy just to the top players, to give them a couple of pieces of improved equipment, that they desperately need. 
And that's it.



314WTNK #57 Posted 22 September 2017 - 12:21 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 30119 battles
  • 1,038
  • [GO-IN] GO-IN
  • Member since:
    09-23-2012
just give me 15k bonds and stop this last hope to hold the better playerbase in this game

Geno1isme #58 Posted 22 September 2017 - 12:21 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 42701 battles
  • 7,852
  • [TRYIT] TRYIT
  • Member since:
    09-03-2013

View Postuglycousin, on 22 September 2017 - 12:51 AM, said:

And almost forgot about the rarest medals "that everybody wants". Raiseiniai and Kolobanov ... those should earn at least 100 times more bonds than what it is proposed now. 

I wonder how many Raseiniai actually have been awarded on the EU server in total. Wouldn't be surprised if it's only a two-digit number, so there isn't a problem with attaching a huge reward to it.

The Kolobanovs on the other hand, as long as there is also the cheap Assault mode version it shouldn't be classified as legendary.



Dexatroph #59 Posted 22 September 2017 - 01:11 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 44517 battles
  • 3,044
  • Member since:
    02-09-2013

Just some numbers for the latest contributors:

 

@Geno1isme 

Spoiler

You would have to play 71.428 battles  for one piece of advanced equipment (5k) based on your avg. bonds/battle.

 

 

@Rato_Black_Baron

Spoiler

You would have to play 125.000 battles  for one piece of advanced equipment (5k) based on your avg. bonds/battle.

 

@3WI

Spoiler

You would have to play 10.869 battles  for one piece of advanced equipment (5k) based on your avg. bonds/battle.

 

@uglycousin

Spoiler

You would have to play 41.666 battles  for one piece of advanced equipment (5k) based on your avg. bonds/battle.

 

By watchting the  numbers you are going to realize how low the numbers are set right now and how it past the playerbase by miles.

 

 


Edited by Dexatroph, 22 September 2017 - 01:15 AM.


uglycousin #60 Posted 22 September 2017 - 05:02 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 45136 battles
  • 3,708
  • [TFUK] TFUK
  • Member since:
    09-01-2014

View PostDexatroph, on 22 September 2017 - 03:11 AM, said:

Just some numbers for the latest contributors:

@uglycousin

Spoiler

You would have to play 41.666 battles  for one piece of advanced equipment (5k) based on your avg. bonds/battle.

 

By watchting the  numbers you are going to realize how low the numbers are set right now and how it past the playerbase by miles.

 

I know, it's just a nasty tease. You can earn some bonds in randoms, but there is a greater chance of you quitting the game until you can buy one piece of improved equipment than you actually being able to afford one through randoms.

 

Talking about average and slightly above average players here.

 

 

 

View PostGeno1isme, on 22 September 2017 - 02:21 AM, said:

I wonder how many Raseiniai actually have been awarded on the EU server in total. Wouldn't be surprised if it's only a two-digit number, so there isn't a problem with attaching a huge reward to it.

The Kolobanovs on the other hand, as long as there is also the cheap Assault mode version it shouldn't be classified as legendary.

 

Kolobanov is still very hard to earn, stars have to allign even on the assault one.

 

Raiseiniai is however tough. Stars have to allign in the shape of SerB's sexy face in order for one to be able to secure 14 or 15 kills in the same battle. One would expect such an epic achievement to be properly rewarded. With a hefty ammount of bonds, credits, and some gold to spice it up. 15 bonds is quite cheap.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users