Jump to content


Premium ammo

Premium ammo

  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

Thuis001 #1 Posted 11 October 2017 - 08:15 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 5588 battles
  • 383
  • [-SBN-] -SBN-
  • Member since:
    05-29-2015

Hello everybody.

First of, yes, I know there is another prem ammo thread started like a day ago, but this one is a lot different, so please read this one through.

 

Changes:

Premium ammo is (together with map rotation, arty and overall balance) one of the most common things on the forums to be talked about.

And while sometimes it can be necessary because of armor being rediculous OP (Maus line, type 5 line) or pen being plain out terrible for your role in the game (T32, BP, to a certain extend IS) it stays an unbalanced mechanic, also, you can't balance your armor to be effective for Prem ammo, but still be penetrable with normal rounds. So here is my solution, remove premium ammo as it currently exists. BUT, this is not all!!!! Replace them with the current round, but with the same price and pen of the normal rounds so no 330 HEAT rounds on tier X, or goldspamming T-54's.

 

AP:

The standard round on most tanks, this is just your regular round, and as such won't be changed (exept when it is the premium ammo, then it will get changed for a different round, as 2x AP is stupid, and useless) 

 

APCR:

This is the standard round on some, and premium round on most lower tier tanks, and standard to most high-tier tanks. The pen will be around the same as AP rounds, (perhaps slightly higher, no huge amounts, just 10 or 15mm). It will keep it's higher shell velocity, and it will keep it's 2 degrees of normalisation. It will however deal 25% less damage to modules and crewmembers (same to the tank), to balance this out, it's penetration will only have a 10% change from the standard (instead of the 25%).

 

HEAT:

This round will recieve the same penetration change as APCR, but will be the same, or slightly lower then AP, it will however keep it's "loose no pen over distance" trait. It will have worse shell velocity then it currently has, (not by much) and won't normalise. However, it will deal only 85% of module damage to modules, the damage it will deal to crew members is 125% to balance this, since it is basicly a jet of hot particles, something that won't do machinery much, but will basicly cook you alive. And last not but least, since it is a jet of hot particles (or basicly metal) when you hit angled armor some of that jet will just end up going somewhere to the sides, and not straight through. AKA: the bigger the angle, the more pen HEAT looses. How much precisely will have to be balanced out by trial and error. But a starting point could be: Pen decrease in %= Angle it hits/3 so it will loose up to about 30% of pen when hitting something at an 89 degree angle. The amount of HEAT rounds might be limited to balance the rounds out. (let me know if, and how much)

 

HE:

This round will stay the same since it is pretty balanced, however the HE rounds om some tanks will be nerfed. (looking at you, Type 4/5, and FV4005/FV215b 183) since they can be pretty OP.

 

Tanks with ridiculous armor/terrible pen:

This change will however only work when tanks that have terrible pen, like the T32 or T-54 get a penetration buff on it's standard rounds so they can be effective without premium round spam. And tanks like the Maus that might need it's cheek weakspot back or the ENTIRE Type 5 Heavy line that has NO weakspots whatsoever will need some aswell. (and no, like you have been told dozens of times 260 flat armor is not a weakspot when the highest pen on a tier X heavy is 259.

 

So now I want to hear your toughts, do you like it? If yes, what do you like, and if no, let me hear why not. What can be improved what shouldn't happen etc.



arthurwellsley #2 Posted 11 October 2017 - 08:29 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 50497 battles
  • 2,511
  • [-B-C-] -B-C-
  • Member since:
    05-11-2011

WG runs WoT at a profit. This is a good thing as then it pays them to keep the servers up and running, and new content arriving so that I can continue playing.

For such a huge complicated operation I would like to assume that (1) they keep detailed statistics of what is occurring. (2) WG take the time and trouble to analyse the statistics they collect. (3) they have a better view of balance and incremental changes that they might need to make.

 

In one of the other tank games there are more than three types of ammunition that a tank can carry and switch between.

 

tl:dr

NO. Premium ammo has it's uses and should continue to be a game mechanic.



Dava_117 #3 Posted 11 October 2017 - 09:01 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 17598 battles
  • 2,190
  • [B-BAS] B-BAS
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014

I proposed something similar in a gold ammo thread... that was more or less to introduce more ammo type, with the restriction of carrying just 3 in battle, with same cost and different damage and pen.

Someting like

AP as it is

APHE -20% pen +15% damage

APCR +20% pen -25% damage travel double tha distance of AP inside the enemy tank

HEAT +40% pen -50% damage same pen mechanics but produce a 35°cone instead of a line in module damage calcilation.

HE as it is (in most case depends just on caliber)

HESH autopen with 0 damage but 75% chance of injure crew or damage module, spall liner counter it (changing this ammo to a more tactical one)

 

As you can see all the malus are higher than the increments. This plus all the side effect would add a tactical ammo choice in game, while preserving an effective higher cost of high pen ammo (less damage). It would also remove thos silly 201pen AP 330 heat tanks and other strange stuff...

But those are very radical changes, so it hard to belive WG would apply some of them...


Edited by Dava_117, 11 October 2017 - 09:03 AM.


Geno1isme #4 Posted 11 October 2017 - 09:08 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 40053 battles
  • 6,613
  • [TRYIT] TRYIT
  • Member since:
    09-03-2013

Nope, not gonna work.

 

First because you'd simply kill a major revenue stream for WG when you reduce prices of premium ammo to regular levels. Second, you assume people to understand the finer details of penetration mechanics. However many (I'd even say most) players aren't aware of that and only see the values shown in the client: damage and penetration. With your proposal those people would likely just always pick APCR or HEAT over AP due to the higher nominal penetration value for the same cost. Third, the differences between ammo types in your proposal are basically marginal. Nobody is really gonna notice a change of 15-25% in module damages, even the RNG reduction for APCR will likely be unnoticable (as you never really see if a shot bounced due to a low-roll). Also the pen-reduction for HEAT is basically already modelled by the lack of normalization. Fourth, your idea would massively affect the inter-tier balancing, good luck fighting T10 superheavies with a T8 med with 230mm penetration at best. And last but not least, any change that requires a global rebalancing (checking every single tanks penetration and armor values) will take an eternity to be implemented and is prone to new balancing issues. We've seen that on the first sandbox server that completely failed (regarding balancing 2.0).

 

There is a very simple solution to the problem of premium-ammo spam (for HEAT+APCR at least, premium HE(SH) is a bit more tricky): Reduce alpha damage by a small but noticable amount (say 15-20%) across the board. That way it retains its potential to counter heavy armor but using it without need puts you at a disadvantage. And for WG it might even be financially worth it: While less people will use premium ammo at a regular level, the increased cost per damage might be enough to compensate that.



Aikl #5 Posted 11 October 2017 - 09:08 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25141 battles
  • 4,028
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

I find it hard to consider any suggestions that aren't adressing the root cause of this. It's simply beyond stupid to remove premium ammo while not correcting tanks that lack weakspots.

 

Honestly, if they introduced weakspots to tanks so I could at least have a chance with normal ammo, I'd be plenty happy. Pen isn't everything, but I think the part where you aim and consider angling on the enemy tank and whatnot is a fun part of the game. Having to pay for the ability to autoaim (well, not really) would make sense. See how much fun that is for some people (yeah, positioning and awareness are probably both more important than the penetration of a gun).
Just sucks that if I want to kill a Type 4 with backup I need to press that '2' key if he has any clue whatsoever.



SirTogII #6 Posted 11 October 2017 - 10:10 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 46417 battles
  • 541
  • [REQT] REQT
  • Member since:
    11-27-2012

View PostGeno1isme, on 11 October 2017 - 08:08 AM, said:

Nope, not gonna work.

 

First because you'd simply kill a major revenue stream for WG when you reduce prices of premium ammo to regular levels...

 

That's BS though. It's not a direct revenue stream as it only affects the in game credits. All they would need to do is adjust the ammo cost when they're making the change to ensure a status quo for the in game economy. 

 



shishx_the_animal #7 Posted 11 October 2017 - 10:26 AM

    Colonel

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 30181 battles
  • 3,861
  • [FAME] FAME
  • Member since:
    04-06-2013

Oh great, what a refreshing thread!

 

Don't mind if I contribute a completely unconstructive reply:

 

 

Kind regards,

shishx_the_cat_lover



Enforcer1975 #8 Posted 11 October 2017 - 10:32 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 18425 battles
  • 9,848
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014
Premium ammo is more expensive for a reason. They just have to rebalance cost on some tanks that f.e. only have slightly better pen over their standard rounds and those that have especially high damage or pen. I do agree that 330 is somewhat silly and isn't really needed to pen most tanks if you know where to aim but with the recent addition of superheavy tanks it has a place on the game.


Cobra6 #9 Posted 11 October 2017 - 11:11 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16295 battles
  • 15,012
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

Just limit premium ammo to 5=>10% of the total ammo capacity of the vehicle, that way you still have it for emergencies (for which it was meant) but you can't spam it.

 

Alternatively completely remove it and properly balance armour at the same time.

 

Cobra 6



IncandescentGerbil #10 Posted 11 October 2017 - 12:11 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35597 battles
  • 1,443
  • Member since:
    11-24-2015
I think it's outrageous we can't buy depleted uranium rounds. I get loads of pocket money from my parents and would happily pay 100k per shell to be able to pen a Maus frontally from the red line in my Defender. This game is biased against super rich kids.

KillingJoker #11 Posted 11 October 2017 - 12:13 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 28958 battles
  • 1,149
  • Member since:
    09-07-2015

My personal opinion about gold shells is this:

 

1. they should do less 25% damage than regular AP, for the same reason HE shells do more damage than AP because they have less penetration

2. WarGaming should introduce statistics of gold ammunition usage in the game per player/tank, the same way the game have statistics for everything...

 

the reason i am asking this introducing of gold statistics is simply, many players abuse of gold usage to be try harders and get better overall statistics of another players

claiming they are more skilled or better in the game, while that simply doesnt really translate their true skill because they are actually using much more the key no. 2 than other players. 

 

I personaly think that if they released gold usage statistics, combined with a new WN8 algorythm that would also take in consideration that as a penalty...

it would give a much more accurate vision of the player real skil and wich ones are better than other...

 

(IE: quickybaby vs Sirfoch per example, i know one of them rarely uses gold is truelly skilled, while the other as soon as its tested by someone just presses no. 2)

 

 

 

 



Geno1isme #12 Posted 11 October 2017 - 01:52 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 40053 battles
  • 6,613
  • [TRYIT] TRYIT
  • Member since:
    09-03-2013

View PostCobra6, on 11 October 2017 - 12:11 PM, said:

Just limit premium ammo to 5=>10% of the total ammo capacity of the vehicle, that way you still have it for emergencies (for which it was meant) but you can't spam it.

 

Doesn't make sense when you consider the massive differences in ammo capacity and alpha values, e.g. with 10%:

- E100 gets 5 shells with 334mm of penetration and a potential damage of 3750

- Maus (or E100 with small gun) gets 6-7 shells with 311mm of penetration and a potential damage of ~3000

- IS-7 on the other side of the spectrum gets 3 shells with 305mm of penetration and a potential damage of less than 1500, with arguably a worse gun than the Maus

 

And that's just looking at T10 heavies, with other classes or on other tiers it becomes an even bigger issue (e.g. O-I Exp. has almost three times the ammo capacity of a T1 Heavy, or 4 times the capacity of a T24). Also low limits become an issue with autoloaders, e.g. 10% on a BatChat is about half a clip.

 

View PostKillingJoker, on 11 October 2017 - 01:13 PM, said:

1. they should do less 25% damage than regular AP, for the same reason HE shells do more damage than AP because they have less penetration

2. WarGaming should introduce statistics of gold ammunition usage in the game per player/tank, the same way the game have statistics for everything...

 

Less damage is definitely the easiest option to counter the premium-spam quickly. I think reducing the damage by only 10-20% might already be enough as it will put you at a noticable disadvantage when you use it without need while still leaving it as a viable option when necessary. Only problem is with cases where the premium-ammo already has a different alpha, so mostly HESH and Types. But those cases are very limited and can be taken care of individually.

 

Long-Term of course there should be a proper rebalancing of armor and all ammo types.

 

Stats for prem-ammo usage is not a good idea though. First, unless WG has historical data about it overall values would be completely bogus. Second, an average value doesn't really tell you when or against what targets someone used premium ammo. A 20% rate could mean "spams gold-only in every 5th battle" or "uses gold in every battle to 20% depending on situation". And of course those rates need to be interpreted for each tank individually which 90% of the WoT population aren't capable of.



JakeRoook #13 Posted 11 October 2017 - 03:05 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 260 battles
  • 276
  • Member since:
    04-20-2013

View Postarthurwellsley, on 11 October 2017 - 07:29 AM, said:

WG runs WoT at a profit. This is a good thing as then it pays them to keep the servers up and running, and new content arriving so that I can continue playing.

For such a huge complicated operation I would like to assume that (1) they keep detailed statistics of what is occurring. (2) WG take the time and trouble to analyse the statistics they collect. (3) they have a better view of balance and incremental changes that they might need to make.

 

In one of the other tank games there are more than three types of ammunition that a tank can carry and switch between.

 

tl:dr

NO. Premium ammo has it's uses and should continue to be a game mechanic.

Game must have subscription to play, with that monetizable comforts sistem noone will ever respect wot player or game itself. Player cant really be proud what they p2w, maybe among plebs having no clue about, whats why so many nooblords with wn8 signatures. And yes premium rounds must disappear totally with extra ration advantages. Atm WG having profits but having no respect, community is weak, on twitch it is on last places.

There are more advanced ways on monetizing, like weapon skins from csgo - they really affect on interest to play, you play with interest you easyer to win, still fairness untouched. in the end csgo players do crazy stuff in games and it is interesting and respected and overall profits of developers even greater(correct me if not). More (not less) people refuse to play tanks cos of that- thats not a way to success.


Edited by JakeRoook, 11 October 2017 - 03:22 PM.


Cobra6 #14 Posted 11 October 2017 - 03:25 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16295 battles
  • 15,012
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

View PostGeno1isme, on 11 October 2017 - 12:52 PM, said:

 

Doesn't make sense when you consider the massive differences in ammo capacity and alpha values, e.g. with 10%:

- E100 gets 5 shells with 334mm of penetration and a potential damage of 3750

- Maus (or E100 with small gun) gets 6-7 shells with 311mm of penetration and a potential damage of ~3000

- IS-7 on the other side of the spectrum gets 3 shells with 305mm of penetration and a potential damage of less than 1500, with arguably a worse gun than the Maus

 

That is why i said 5%=>10%, vehicles with big ammo amounts will get 5% while tanks like the IS-7/Batchat 25t will get 10%.

 

Cobra6



Bucifel #15 Posted 11 October 2017 - 03:53 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 27748 battles
  • 1,373
  • [3NRGY] 3NRGY
  • Member since:
    03-18-2013

any change is wellcome

 

best way is to reduce prem ammo damage in compensation for better pen and ofcourse, change the prices (make them all standard ammos)

 

anbother variant is to limit them...this wont change a lot but at least, will limit that stupid goldspam



Geno1isme #16 Posted 11 October 2017 - 04:13 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 40053 battles
  • 6,613
  • [TRYIT] TRYIT
  • Member since:
    09-03-2013

View PostCobra6, on 11 October 2017 - 04:25 PM, said:

That is why i said 5%=>10%, vehicles with big ammo amounts will get 5% while tanks like the IS-7/Batchat 25t will get 10%.

 

Still doesn't solve the issue with wildly different alpha values and autoloaders. Even with 5% E100 would still have enough premium firepower to kill an IS-7 with a little RNG luck (or a HE round for finishing), while IS-7 with 10% could only bring the E100 down to ~40% and has less chances to finish him off with HE.

 

So if you're not able to have enough premium ammo to reliably kill a single equal-tier tank (not even talking about +2 enemies), how do you define "emergency"? As an option to ensure a kill of a low-HP enemy? Thought we had HE for that already.



Sirebellus #17 Posted 11 October 2017 - 04:59 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 17471 battles
  • 389
  • Member since:
    02-04-2016

Surely the main function of Premium Ammo is not to penetrate Type 5's armour, but to make players lose tens of thousands of credits...  (which you mitigate to some extent by running a premium account)

If you didn't lose credits by having to fire Premium Ammo at T10 superheavys then all experienced players would have millions of credits, not need a premium account and be running premium consumables and food in every game without having to buy a Fort Knox package every month to do it 

Oh and mid tiers would have no players as you wouldn't need to play them to replace the credits you lose firing gold ammo at T10 tanks

 

So Premium Ammo isn't going to change as

a) it makes WG money

and

b) it stops experienced players being so powerful that new players don't stand a chance

and of course

c) it makes WG money
 



Homer_J #18 Posted 11 October 2017 - 05:35 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 27085 battles
  • 27,736
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

View PostSirebellus, on 11 October 2017 - 04:59 PM, said:

 

So Premium Ammo isn't going to change as

a) it makes WG money

and

b) it stops experienced players being so powerful that new players don't stand a chance

and of course

c) it makes WG money
 

 

d) it makes lots and lots of salty tears.

 

My solution to premium ammo - man up.



shishx_the_animal #19 Posted 12 October 2017 - 10:33 AM

    Colonel

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 30181 battles
  • 3,861
  • [FAME] FAME
  • Member since:
    04-06-2013

View PostSirebellus, on 11 October 2017 - 03:59 PM, said:

 

b) it stops experienced players being so powerful that new players don't stand a chance

 

Because the game is catered for the experienced?

 


Edited by shishx_the_animal, 12 October 2017 - 10:34 AM.


Jigabachi #20 Posted 12 October 2017 - 11:16 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 17753 battles
  • 17,636
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011

View PostCobra6, on 11 October 2017 - 11:11 AM, said:

Just limit premium ammo to 5=>10% of the total ammo capacity of the vehicle, that way you still have it for emergencies (for which it was meant) but you can't spam it.

It was never meant for emergency use. Who said that? It got introduced as a moneymaker for WG and it still is a moneymaker. They didn't bother to change it before introducing the option to buy it for silver - and that is the whole problem.

 

@ topic: We already had this before. Won't happen.


Edited by Jigabachi, 12 October 2017 - 11:17 AM.






Also tagged with Premium ammo

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users