Jump to content


WoT staff...When is Tier 5 premium rares going to get some love?


  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

Maverick__1971 #1 Posted 26 December 2017 - 06:38 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 22697 battles
  • 25
  • [BC-X] BC-X
  • Member since:
    11-18-2016

Dear WoT Staff,

  I know that the majority of sales for premium tanks occurs in or around the Tier 8 range.  However, some of us who do use our armor premium tank rares need some help in the Tier 5 area where most, not all, players use this tier to grind out our crew skills and perks to get us over the "hump" if you will so that we can be ready for those upper ranks.  For some time now rares such as:  Soviet SU-85I, German Pz.Kpfw. V/IV,  German Pz.Kpfw. V/IV Alpha, German Pz.Kpfw. III Ausf. K, German Turan III prototipus, American T14 and M4A2E4 Sherman, and finally the KV-220-2 are no where to be found for a long time.  Again I want to point out that I understand from a business aspect that the Tier 8 level and above is where your main source of income most likely comes from during the sale of premium and premium rares.  But is it possible to show some love for those of us that are desperately looking for something else much lower than Tier8? Instead of having massive sales all the time for T8 and above.  Can you give us the chance to have something at the Tier5 level of massive sales instead?  Please!  Thank you.  



Havenless #2 Posted 26 December 2017 - 07:06 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 454 battles
  • 435
  • [-UM] -UM
  • Member since:
    12-18-2014

I think Wargaming have realized that selling one tier 8 premium makes them more money than selling 5 tier 5 ones. That's not even the main concern though.

 

Making tier 5 attractive would also have very negative impact on the gameplay health because it would drive a lot of experienced and skilled players into low tiers. Although most players on WoT pretend to be stupid about this matter and often seem to believe all tiers are equal, the truth is that low tiers were designed for the beginners. Good examples of this are the bad gun handling and shell speed at low tiers, to limit the skill cap on the tanks. All those numerous derp guns eliminate a lot of skill from the game, and the base view range is typically bad. Of course there are plenty of players who are happily putting a 5 perk crew on their tier 5 tank, having full equipment, loading gold and food and playing hundreds of battles "because it's fun". The "fun" comes from getting a large, cheap edge over the players those tiers are designed for. I think deep inside everyone knows this to be true but are just content to keep their mouth shut because it allows them to pedóbear without being called out on it.

 

My opinion is that if you're a decent player you should just leave the low tiers for the players they were designed for, which is newcomers. Not guys with 20k battles and a super crew. If you have to grind through a tank go for it, but at tier 5 the grinds shouldn't take long anyway and if you find yourself being a good player and spending a lot of time playing tier 5, you are just pedóbearing. Now I know that I've probably upset a bunch of 55% players whose win rate at high tiers is 45% who are going to get offended by this post because they just "prefer low tiers because they're more fun", but I'll try to survive.


Here's the KV-220-2 that you were looking for. Do we need more of these tanks to make the game "fun" for the new players? It's got all the broken characteristics, plus it's on a tier that's full of bot level players. I think the last thing we need is good players ruining the low tiers and promoting low tier gameplay in general is just plain bad.

 


Edited by Havenless, 26 December 2017 - 07:22 AM.


Pandabird #3 Posted 26 December 2017 - 08:12 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 33973 battles
  • 4,526
  • [KOFF] KOFF
  • Member since:
    05-19-2013
Pretty much what havenless said. There's a reason the PM's go to t6+ minimum in the later stages, it's all a combined effort to keep those capable of reaching those stages from playing T5 and below.

A T5smm tank can carry t6 games solo waaaay easier than a T8smm in t9, causing disturbances in their balance system which consists of map choice and tank line-up. I mean a Kv220 doesn't give a **** if it's in steppes when it can sidescrape a kv85 while out-trading a cromwell, but hey it's way more fair for the inexperienced type 4 heavy platoon if we put your t-34-3 in Paris again.

Red_Dragon_Firkraag #4 Posted 26 December 2017 - 08:35 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 15486 battles
  • 1,682
  • Member since:
    08-13-2011

View PostHavenless, on 26 December 2017 - 07:06 AM, said:

Making tier 5 attractive would also have very negative impact on the gameplay health because it would drive a lot of experienced and skilled players into low tiers.

 

Tier 5 and below are already attractive:

 

a) To ensure newcomers have both allies and enemies, Wargaming needs volunteers to play at the middle tiers (Tiers 3 to 7). Without them, the playerbase at the "leveling tiers" will inevitably run dry. This is true for every MMO out there. Which is also why profitability peaks at tier 5 for normal tanks and falls again at higher tiers.

b) People are tired of being food for tier 10 players, hence people who used to farm credits on Tier 8 premium tanks are now (rightly so) looking for alternatives, which currently are the mid tier premium vehicles.

c) Currently, low tiers (especially Tier 3) are, due to the limited view ranges those vehicles have, the best tiers to obtain a commander with Sixth Sense. You tend to be food for Tier 7 players if you attempt this at Tier 5. I'd not recommend playing Tier 5 and up without Sixth Sense anymore, thanks to the "improved" matchmaker.

 

The templated matchmaker has caused more issues than it intended to solve.


Edited by Red_Dragon_Firkraag, 26 December 2017 - 08:36 AM.


Havenless #5 Posted 26 December 2017 - 08:52 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 454 battles
  • 435
  • [-UM] -UM
  • Member since:
    12-18-2014

View PostRed_Dragon_Firkraag, on 26 December 2017 - 10:35 AM, said:

 

Tier 5 and below are already attractive:

 

a) To ensure newcomers have both allies and enemies, Wargaming needs volunteers to play at the middle tiers (Tiers 3 to 7). Without them, the playerbase at the "leveling tiers" will inevitably run dry. This is true for every MMO out there. Which is also why profitability peaks at tier 5 for normal tanks and falls again at higher tiers.

b) People are tired of being food for tier 10 players, hence people who used to farm credits on Tier 8 premium tanks are now (rightly so) looking for alternatives, which currently are the mid tier premium vehicles.

c) Currently, low tiers (especially Tier 3) are, due to the limited view ranges those vehicles have, the best tiers to obtain a commander with Sixth Sense. You tend to be food for Tier 7 players if you attempt this at Tier 5. I'd not recommend playing Tier 5 and up without Sixth Sense anymore, thanks to the "improved" matchmaker.

 

The templated matchmaker has caused more issues than it intended to solve.

 

As you explained, the F2P players who are grinding credits will play tier 5 anyway, which is why there are no concerns about the tier 5 games completely dying. The good thing about these players is that are rarely good because more advanced players make more credits at tier 8, and I find it very unlikely that a tier 5 credit grinder can afford premium consumables and gold spam. He can still have a 5 perk crew but he's less of a problem than the guy who is doing the same while spamming gold. He is also less likely to have a super crew if he hasn't run premium or trained crews in premium tanks.

 

If you are playing tier 3 to "train your commander" the chances are you're taking any excuse to avoid playing against borderline decent players and are already playing mostly low tiers. This is known as "pedóbearing". 



_Dunc_ #6 Posted 26 December 2017 - 09:00 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 38700 battles
  • 1,937
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    05-28-2011

KV-220 is still broken - played mine a couple of times in the last week, just to get the boxes for blocking more than your HP. It was filthy; There's still very little that can reliably kill one at V, and even at VI you can just mindlessly derp in with a lot of the enemies.

 

Putting your six skill Tier X med crew into a Hydro or Matilda BP (or whatever) still counts as seal clubbing - at 15k games your knowledge of mechanics, maps, and so on, not to mention the massive advantage a decent crew gives you in terms of RoF and spotting is a huge advantage.

 

In fact, I'd argue that with the increase in Tier III TDs and high pen guns, the old club-wagons like the Pz.B2, SU-76I, Pz.IIJ, and so on are just garage tinsel now. Tier V is the realm of the true clubber... so stop beating up the noobs and pick on people your own size



Red_Dragon_Firkraag #7 Posted 26 December 2017 - 09:03 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 15486 battles
  • 1,682
  • Member since:
    08-13-2011

View PostHavenless, on 26 December 2017 - 08:52 AM, said:

If you are playing tier 3 to "train your commander" the chances are you're taking any excuse to avoid playing against borderline decent players and are already playing mostly low tiers. This is known as "pedóbearing". 

Fine if you think so, but I intend to leave tier 3 as soon as I have the required commanders because of the lack of profitability.


Edited by Red_Dragon_Firkraag, 26 December 2017 - 09:03 AM.


Lycopersicon #8 Posted 26 December 2017 - 10:57 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 10610 battles
  • 3,570
  • Member since:
    07-30-2014
Isn't it sad. The only reason people don't play lower tiers is that they think they are not supposed to (or they think others think they are not supposed to). So we have a WW2 themed tank game, where tiers 4-7 are full of interesting historical tanks that are barely played because people feel they are obliged to run through them as quickly as possible (or, better yet, skip them entirely with free XP), so that they could finally get hold of some obscure vehicle from 1950s and begin playing the game.

SirDixie #9 Posted 26 December 2017 - 11:10 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 19901 battles
  • 748
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-08-2012
I'm going to play the tanks I want to play, some are at tier 4 some are at tier 10 but most are between there. 5,6,7 have most of the stuff I'm interested in, if that makes me some sort of seal clubber by someone's definition then so be it. I'll even use my low tier gift tanks when I'm bored and want some actual fun without the need to think at all. Why would I play a game if I'm not enjoying it? This is meant to be fun, it's not another job where I have to do what someone else tells me even though it's most likely gonna be dull.

Graeme0 #10 Posted 26 December 2017 - 11:14 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 25415 battles
  • 508
  • [M-O-M] M-O-M
  • Member since:
    02-15-2015

Personally I really enjoy the mid tier tanks and often play them for fun. There are some very nice tanks to play.



Frostilicus #11 Posted 26 December 2017 - 11:16 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Clan Diplomat
  • 22489 battles
  • 3,066
  • [-ZNO-] -ZNO-
  • Member since:
    07-12-2011
I'll play any tier I like, when I like, with whatever crew I want, as long as the game allows me :)

Havenless #12 Posted 26 December 2017 - 12:06 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 454 battles
  • 435
  • [-UM] -UM
  • Member since:
    12-18-2014

View PostLycopersicon, on 26 December 2017 - 12:57 PM, said:

Isn't it sad. The only reason people don't play lower tiers is that they think they are not supposed to (or they think others think they are not supposed to). So we have a WW2 themed tank game, where tiers 4-7 are full of interesting historical tanks that are barely played because people feel they are obliged to run through them as quickly as possible (or, better yet, skip them entirely with free XP), so that they could finally get hold of some obscure vehicle from 1950s and begin playing the game.

 

I'd love to play more historical tanks but when the gameplay has all the idiot shields on and super dumbed down game mechanics, I just can't be bothered. When I play low tiers, "not supposed to" is exactly what I feel when I observe the gameplay. The same kind of "not supposed to" as I would get if I went to take part in a math contest designed for 8-year-old kids.

_Dunc_ #13 Posted 26 December 2017 - 12:19 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 38700 battles
  • 1,937
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    05-28-2011

View PostHavenless, on 26 December 2017 - 12:06 PM, said:

 

I'd love to play more historical tanks but when the gameplay has all the idiot shields on and super dumbed down game mechanics, I just can't be bothered. When I play low tiers, "not supposed to" is exactly what I feel when I observe the gameplay. The same kind of "not supposed to" as I would get if I went to take part in a math contest designed for 8-year-old kids.

 

Exactly that - it's not exactly an entertaining challenge putting a pimped crew in an unusual tank and going out to play against a load of beginners... but, whatever floats your boat, and lets not forget that for a long time a very sad proportion of the experienced playerbase would spend a lot of time in the old T18.

 

I sometimes dip into 2/3, just for the derpy nature of it, but usually give up after a couple games before I have a stroke from the incessant rattle of Pz.II autocannons,


Edited by German_Dunc, 26 December 2017 - 12:21 PM.


Lycopersicon #14 Posted 26 December 2017 - 12:21 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 10610 battles
  • 3,570
  • Member since:
    07-30-2014

View PostHavenless, on 26 December 2017 - 01:06 PM, said:

 

I'd love to play more historical tanks but when the gameplay has all the idiot shields on and super dumbed down game mechanics, I just can't be bothered. When I play low tiers, "not supposed to" is exactly what I feel when I observe the gameplay. The same kind of "not supposed to" as I would get if I went to take part in a math contest designed for 8-year-old kids.

 

I understand that (except the "idiot shields" part). But see, it would not be so if you didn't make it so. It is like in chess, where in most countries it is customary that grandmasters don't play in local or even national championships, because the competition is too weak - of course, if they actually played in those championships then the competition would not be weak, but such is the tradition.

Havenless #15 Posted 26 December 2017 - 12:26 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 454 battles
  • 435
  • [-UM] -UM
  • Member since:
    12-18-2014

View PostLycopersicon, on 26 December 2017 - 02:21 PM, said:

 

I understand that (except the "idiot shields" part). But see, it would not be so if you didn't make it so. It is like in chess, where in most countries it is customary that grandmasters don't play in local or even national championships, because the competition is too weak - of course, if they actually played in those championships then the competition would not be weak, but such is the tradition.

 

The competition would still mostly be weak even if you threw in a couple of grandmasters. The grandmaster isn't going to the local event because he acknowledges that and sees no point in playing against overall weak competition.

 

Also chess is not a good example because technically chess is an absolute game without any variety in mechanics. In World of Tanks if you play low tiers the game mechanics are very much dumbed down compared to high tiers to limit the skill cap and make it "beginner friendly". If Wargaming wants the good players to play low tiers, why is that?



Lycopersicon #16 Posted 26 December 2017 - 12:40 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 10610 battles
  • 3,570
  • Member since:
    07-30-2014

View PostHavenless, on 26 December 2017 - 01:26 PM, said:

 

The competition would still mostly be weak even if you threw in a couple of grandmasters. The grandmaster isn't going to the local event because he acknowledges that and sees no point in playing against overall weak competition.

 

Also chess is not a good example because technically chess is an absolute game without any variety in mechanics. In World of Tanks if you play low tiers the game mechanics are very much dumbed down compared to high tiers to limit the skill cap and make it "beginner friendly". If Wargaming wants the good players to play low tiers, why is that?

 

It's not just the competition in chess; grandmasters are usually happy to play local opens with even weaker competition, it is the championships they avoid. And skill cap there is differences there are basically infinite, a casual player has exactly zero chance against a master, but the game is still enjoyable for both.

 

Whatever you exactly mean by "dumbed down mechanics", I suppose this comes from the need to keep lower tier tanks weaker than upper tiers, and simply fiddling with hitpoints, armour, penetration, and alpha would have left all tanks feel pretty much the same.


Edited by Lycopersicon, 26 December 2017 - 01:18 PM.


kaneloon #17 Posted 26 December 2017 - 12:44 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 28731 battles
  • 1,936
  • [OBLIC] OBLIC
  • Member since:
    11-18-2011

There are already tiers V premiums in the regular tree.

I have the Turan III (gift) but I don t think it is superior to the Pz.T25.

And wg could sell them in bundles if the price was the issue.



Mr_Beefy #18 Posted 26 December 2017 - 12:45 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 23798 battles
  • 654
  • [OZ77] OZ77
  • Member since:
    09-13-2015

for me, playing low tiers is just a stress reliever.  It is not that much of a challenge.  

I honestly believe that WG should further refine real noob protection and insulate them further from the seal clubbers.

Sort of recognizing the battle count of the player, then battle count at that tier, and then send the seal clubbers into a secondary MM and have them wait 5 minutes to get into a 7 v 7 scenario with other seal clubbers.

 

EDIT:

This for tier 5 and lower.


Edited by Mr_Beefy, 26 December 2017 - 12:45 PM.


Havenless #19 Posted 26 December 2017 - 12:52 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 454 battles
  • 435
  • [-UM] -UM
  • Member since:
    12-18-2014

View PostLycopersicon, on 26 December 2017 - 02:40 PM, said:

 

It's not just the competition in chess; grandmasters are usually happy to play local opens with even weaker competition, it is the championships they avoid. And skill cap there is basically infinite, a casual player has exactly zero chance against a master, but the game is still enjoyable for both.

 

Whatever you exactly mean by "dumbed down mechanics", I suppose this comes from the need to keep lower tier tanks weaker than upper tiers, and simply fiddling with hitpoints, armour, penetration, and alpha would have left all tanks feel pretty much the same.

 

I meant things like gun handling and shell speed. If you think the low tier tanks have worse stats "for historical reasons" over gameplay you're just putting way too much emphasis on the historical aspect of the game.



SnowRelic #20 Posted 26 December 2017 - 01:39 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 23356 battles
  • 589
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    11-14-2012

I don't think any of the preferential MM tier 5 premiums need much loving, except maybe for the Mathilda IV. Never played it, but I assume it's severely lacking in speed and penetration. It can go nowhere and once it gets there it can't do anything. Except donate hit points.

 

I love the SU-85I. I don't understand why it even has preferential MM. The gun's good enough for a KV-1, so it's good enough for a tier 5 tank destroyer.

 

The M4A2E4 and M4 Improved Shermans could use some loving; 92mm of penetration is very underwhelming, but it's combined with an iffy accuracy. Superheavies got introduced and tanks like the KV-1 had their frontal weak spots removed. I think both those tanks should get preferential MM. And perhaps a bit less dispersion, to 0.38 or something like that.

 

Both the Hungarian Turán and the Pz III K have terrible gun handling and hugely restrictive ammo capacities (32 and 40 shells, the M4's have at least 90). I would probably have bought both if they didn't have those downsides.

 

And just to illustrate how bad the Pz III K gun handling is, look at this:

 

 

It looks terrible even when compared to a KV-2. It cannot drive forward without having to re-aim. And remember, because of the low ammo count you have to make every shell count unless you want to risk running out of ammo exactly when you have to start carrying the team. I guess it's WG's way of telling me "don't give us your money! We don't want it!" So many sales were lost because the testers didn't do their job correctly. Tanks must be fun to play. Terrible gun handling is not fun, except when it's a feature like on the KV-2. Imagine a Pz3K with a 150mm derp.

 

 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users