Jump to content


Are mediums bad or is it just the maps?


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

AnimalAsLeader #1 Posted 12 January 2018 - 05:15 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 5719 battles
  • 27
  • [ECOL] ECOL
  • Member since:
    10-15-2015

So, obviously, I wont be talking about tier10, since I dont have them, and from the stats they seem okay. Better dpm, mobility and penetration than heavies, but less survivability and alpha damage. Sounds reasonable, right? One would think that this follows the idea of a medium being a good support with its high dpm, but capable of killing a heasvy in 1on1 due to superior mobility and view range if combined with skill.

 

Now the question: Why is that not the case in most other tiers? Well, tier5 (I wont consider lower tiers) is kind of special, since pz4 and m4 have derp guns, but tier 6-9 mediums are basically a worse variant of light tanks. They have significantly less survivability, they're not that mobile, their view range is not that great and worst of all: What does your slightly better dpm give you against heavies if you can't penetrate them? This is going to be a slightly extreme example, but these situations happen: When I'm in a T-43 and I am the last survivor against a Type4 or a Mäuschen, I might as well leave the game and start another one, because there is no chance in hell, I win such a 1v1. Why? Because even premium rounds (which most players dont carry a lot of because not everyone has a premium acc and they cost a crapton of credits) have a shitty 190 penetration that decreases to about 160 at 500 meters distance.(Hint: if I wanted to fight a Type4 I would probably want to keep my distance), so even if I have his side armor unangled (which would be riddiculously hard to achieve on most maps that are designed for Heavies and TDs) , it'S only a 66% chance to penetrate that shot. Quick maths: suppose the Type4 is full hp, I need top(2050:180)*3/2=18 shots to kill him. He would need 3.

 

So far for endgame-doomsday scenarios. Early game, there is almost no opportunity to get side shots on enemies, so what do you do? LemmingRush did a cool video about this:

https://www.youtube....h?v=kwVuGR6fzgg

It has a very fitting title, but were he in the T-43, most of these shots would not have penetrated. (but i guess this could be fixed by increasing the penetration of the gold rounds)

 

SirFoch also did a video about this, I think it was the one following his famous Chrysler rant, where he talked about removing weakspots from tanks that only leads to gold ammo spam etc. 

 

Now, you could argue that mediums are not supposed to fight front to front against heavily armored tanks and that armor wouldn't count for anything if you had weakspots all over the place. The second part of this statement is easier to address, so let'S start with this:

 

No.

 

It would not render armor useless, it would just make playing heavies a lot more demanding. Like, some heavies, like thetype4 or type5 you can just yolo in and kill everything and expect to bounce everything as long as theres no clickers.

However, if the cheeks on the front were slightly weaker (and by that i mean like 210-220 flat armor), you would actually have to bait people to shooting your front, before going around a corner. Now, imagine that! You would actually have to think, before pressing W and the left mouse button. One would almost be tempted to think that players would have mastered such basic mechanics when they get to tier10 anyway, so it would make no difference.

Same goes for the cupola of the T110E5. Just poke in such a way that the cupola is behind cover, while your gun isnt. Or on any tank: Use the terrain and/or wrecks to hide your lower plate. Doesn't sound very hard.

 

So, lets get on to the trickier part: Mediums should not be fighting heavies heads on. But what should they do? Let's look at some maps:

 

1. Himmelsdorf:

You have basically 3 roads: the hill, the banana street and the rails. The rails are where all TDs camp, so heads on fight, the banana street is a heads on heavy fight, and the hill is also like a street. Only one side of the castle is viable, because if you go to the other one, you will instantly get shot by people on the rails. So.... it's also a heads on fight. And in such a fight would you rather have a T-43 hull down, or a T29 hull down? To me, the answer is obvious.

 

2. Karelia:

This is a map with only 2 corridors, because nobody with a sane mind would voluntarily go through the middle. The north side is a graveyeard where the attacking team is slaughtered by base camping TDs, because you have only one way up to the base .... so, it's a corridor. The south has the hill, which mediums and lights will fight for. And once you win the hill, it's fighting the campers right beneath it, which is another heads on fight. By securing the hill, you effectively won nothing, so congratz here ...

 

3. Lakeville:

As LemmingRush said: Only city is viable, because the 1,2 line is a corridor where the attacking team gets slaughtered by base camping TDs. Most of the fights revolve around the church, but you cant flank them through the city, because it is open to the other side of the lake, so base cmping TDs will have shots on you from both sides. So, another heads on fight.

 

4. Arctic Region:

Another map with 2 sides, You have the north where you fight for the small corridor at a5/b5, and you have the south where you fight for the corridor that leads into the eastern base. 2 heads on fights right there.

 

5. Paris: Everyone hates this map, and not without reason. The north is dominated by TDs, and in the south you have heavies fighting heads on. The middle is a completely open spot where you can get shot from both sides and you basically live in constant fear of getting yoloed because there is no cover whatsoever. And what is most important when you have no cover? Thats right, armor. And what has more armor than meds? Thats right, heavies.

 

If you look at stratsketch.com and draw in the areas you can go to and separate them from each other if you cannot shoot from one area to the other reliably, you will find that the 2-3 streets map is a very common design: Highway, Pilsen, Charkow, Abbey, Murovanka,etc. they all fall into this category of maps where you need armor over everything else. LemmingRush points out in his vids quite frequently that you need to shoot at people when they're not looking or when they are reloading, because in a medium you cant really rely on your armor. however, he plays tier10, and since tier10 mediums have great penetration, you can do such things, but if you were to play at lower tiers, this strat often does not work, especially if you have crappenetration values.

 

Apart from laziness when it comes to map design, this also creates many of the commonly known problems: Tanks being called op because of their armor (Maus), campers, aggressive plays being punished, etc.: You would not have op tanks, if they had weakspots, albeit small ones, you would not have campers if you didn't have "corridor-maps", because people wouldnt even know where to point their guns, and aggressive plays would not be punished, because there would not be any positions where a camping TD can take away half of your hp without even being spotted.

 

As you can see, the problem that I have with the medium tank design on tier6-9 is closely tied to the map problem, which is also tied to the problem of campers and arty. Now, I think, the best solution would be to leave meds as they are and rework the maps instead, because it would also solve the other problems, but if WG cannot come up with decent maps (hire some designers!), they could just buff the penetration values for these medium tiers, which is considerably easier to do. Because, good dpm is great, but dpm doesnt do crapif you can't do damage ;)

 

If you have read through all of this, then I should probably congratulate and thank you as it mustve been such a pain in the **** to read this as it was to write it.



SuedKAT #2 Posted 12 January 2018 - 05:50 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 12154 battles
  • 6,152
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-21-2014

I wouldn't say MT's are in a super bad spot and I would never say

View PostAnimalAsLeader, on 12 January 2018 - 05:15 PM, said:

tier 6-9 mediums are basically a worse variant of light tanks. 

However with that aside you got a couple of points that's true, MT's are not as powerful as they used to be and the reason for that is many, but the worst offenders are recent map design in combination with the super HT meta we got going on (due to buffs and new tanks but also arty changes), as well as not limiting some maps to tier 1-4 battles such as for example Mines.

 

Essentially you can say that they are dumbing down the game to assure that even the ones performing very badly can still feel powerful from time to time. The problem with this is that as soon as you start dumbing down an MMO like this and more and more take away skill from the equation you end up with a product that don't offer any challenge, which for a majority of players ain't very interesting.

 

 

 



CoDiGGo #3 Posted 12 January 2018 - 06:14 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 14715 battles
  • 554
  • [MOARR] MOARR
  • Member since:
    05-10-2015

Tier 5 ok

Tier 6 good

Tier 7 worse than average

Tier 8 stupidly underpowered ( why wg, why?) except Lor

Tier 9 good

Tier 10 Some good some average

 

Tier 8 meds need 300 alpha and 100-300 dpm buff only to be average...

 


Edited by CoDiGGo, 12 January 2018 - 06:19 PM.


Nishi_Kinuyo #4 Posted 12 January 2018 - 06:16 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 6985 battles
  • 3,478
  • [GUP] GUP
  • Member since:
    05-28-2011
Himmelsdorf, Karelia, Lakeville, Paris, and Arctic Region are all better maps than Prokhorovka/Fiery Salient because in all five of them you can do something even by yourself while on Prokhorovka all you can do is wank bush because you're likely to be the only player on your team with at least a single testicle. It doesn't matter if I play an LT, MT, or HT; I always groan if Prokhorovka is being loaded because I know it'll be a shitty match. I'd rather be an MT on Stalingrad than an LT on Prokhorovka.

Edited by Nishi_Kinuyo, 12 January 2018 - 06:17 PM.


ZlatanArKung #5 Posted 12 January 2018 - 06:50 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 5,112
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014
I would claim that lights are worse variants of mediums which in turn are worse variants of heavies.

_Flagada_Jones_ #6 Posted 12 January 2018 - 06:52 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 30772 battles
  • 1,059
  • [OMGR] OMGR
  • Member since:
    03-20-2012

View PostCoDiGGo, on 12 January 2018 - 05:14 PM, said:

Tier 5 ok

Tier 6 good

Tier 7 worse than average

Tier 8 stupidly underpowered ( why wg, why?) except Lor

Tier 9 good

Tier 10 Some good some average

 

Tier 8 meds need 300 alpha and 100-300 dpm buff only to be average...

 

 

The same with one point:

T9 = good when full... Because stock are awfull!

AnimalAsLeader #7 Posted 12 January 2018 - 07:12 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 5719 battles
  • 27
  • [ECOL] ECOL
  • Member since:
    10-15-2015

thanks for the replies!

Im gonna try to answer most of you.

 

@SuedKAT: You might be right, but dumbing down the game as a whole is IMO not the way to go. You have lowtiers for that. I tried sidescraping in tier4, it just doesnt work. I love to compare this game to Dota or its les competitive brother LoL which has a huge pub scene but also room for competitive play, and that's because you can get quite far with only basics knowledge. You dont have to dive into the champions to have fun. And I think WOT does a reasonably good job in this, for ecample: You dont need to know the armor of your enemies, the cursor tells you if you can pen. SO you dont have to learn all the values and stuff.

 

@Nishi:

that might be true, however, the most interesting maps IMO were Dragons Ridge and South Coast, which both got removed(why?)

 

@CoDiGGo: now, I guess at some tiers its hard to tell bc mediums really deviate stronlgy from what you could call an "average" theoretical medium. You have the Cromwell or theT34-85 which I find riddiculously strong, but you also have the Easy8 that is just an m4 with more hp. And on the other hand, you have insanely good light tanks like the T37(one of my favorites), not even mentioning the borderline-op Type-64 ... so yeah ... I guess, you could make an argument for both sides.

 

@Zlatan: 

That is also true to some extent. Lights have even less dpm and penetration, but at least the rusian and chinese lights have great camo values and all of them dont have decreased camo while driving around. Also, they have a clearly defined role of being the eyes of the team, and their guns are only for killing weak/wounded enemies, so I would argue that while they are weak at fighting, they are not weak tanks, it's just harder to carry with a light. But such a statement would also apply to arty and many slow TDs. now, ive heard that tier10 lights are quite bad, because not only do meds have more dpm, but they also get more view range. Personally, i dont think it should be like this, maybe lights could have a higher max spotting range than everyone else, so they would not be limited to 450 meters, which pretty much everyone has at tier10.

 

 



sgtYester #8 Posted 12 January 2018 - 07:13 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 52257 battles
  • 1,416
  • [RANGF] RANGF
  • Member since:
    04-10-2011

nope, meds where op and the only tank class u needed to play competitevly in wot,1 tank for all roles, fill it up with gold and win..   making all other classes useless.     with the addition (finaly) of working armor in the game, ppl that relied on meds to rek everything they see are now whining about armor.. cause they are to lazy to flank or change tactic....

 

we need 5 different classes 

 

- heavies... breaktrough tanks, hard to pen frontaly but slow

- meds  flank tanks , no head on warfare.   plug gaps when/where needed

- td   defenders of a flank / support an attack

- lights  support tank and sneaking behind enemy lines to rek arty and attack from behind.

arty... well this donkey class should be removed since it requires zero skill to play and had nothing to do with tactics and learning how to play



dimethylcadmium #9 Posted 12 January 2018 - 07:19 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 4643 battles
  • 770
  • [WGL-A] WGL-A
  • Member since:
    11-24-2017

i cant be arsed to read this big wall of text but i've read some parts

 

tier 5: t-34 is good, 105mm derps are good, everything else is crap

tier 6: vk 30.01p, cromwell, t-34-85m are good, everything else is crap

tier 7: all crap

tier 8: mostly crap, some are good like Obj 416, Ravioli, STG Guard, Lorraine 40t

tier 9 & 10: mostly good mediums, some are weak (Type 61, WZ-120, Cent 7/1 etc)



Slyspy #10 Posted 12 January 2018 - 07:24 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 14169 battles
  • 16,340
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011

View PostCoDiGGo, on 12 January 2018 - 06:14 PM, said:

Tier 5 ok

Tier 6 good

Tier 7 worse than average

Tier 8 stupidly underpowered ( why wg, why?) except Lor

Tier 9 good

Tier 10 Some good some average

 

Tier 8 meds need 300 alpha and 100-300 dpm buff only to be average...

 

 

I am in the rare position of agreeing with you. 

theSwedishTankDriver #11 Posted 12 January 2018 - 07:33 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 23388 battles
  • 950
  • [KITTY] KITTY
  • Member since:
    03-04-2013

View PostAnimalAsLeader, on 12 January 2018 - 05:15 PM, said:

So, obviously, I wont be talking about tier10, since I dont have them, and from the stats they seem okay. Better dpm, mobility and penetration than heavies, but less survivability and alpha damage. Sounds reasonable, right? One would think that this follows the idea of a medium being a good support with its high dpm, but capable of killing a heasvy in 1on1 due to superior mobility and view range if combined with skill.

 

Now the question: Why is that not the case in most other tiers? Well, tier5 (I wont consider lower tiers) is kind of special, since pz4 and m4 have derp guns, but tier 6-9 mediums are basically a worse variant of light tanks. They have significantly less survivability, they're not that mobile, their view range is not that great and worst of all: What does your slightly better dpm give you against heavies if you can't penetrate them? This is going to be a slightly extreme example, but these situations happen: When I'm in a T-43 and I am the last survivor against a Type4 or a Mäuschen, I might as well leave the game and start another one, because there is no chance in hell, I win such a 1v1. Why? Because even premium rounds (which most players dont carry a lot of because not everyone has a premium acc and they cost a crapton of credits) have a shitty 190 penetration that decreases to about 160 at 500 meters distance.(Hint: if I wanted to fight a Type4 I would probably want to keep my distance), so even if I have his side armor unangled (which would be riddiculously hard to achieve on most maps that are designed for Heavies and TDs) , it'S only a 66% chance to penetrate that shot. Quick maths: suppose the Type4 is full hp, I need top(2050:180)*3/2=18 shots to kill him. He would need 3.

 

So far for endgame-doomsday scenarios. Early game, there is almost no opportunity to get side shots on enemies, so what do you do? LemmingRush did a cool video about this:

https://www.youtube....h?v=kwVuGR6fzgg

It has a very fitting title, but were he in the T-43, most of these shots would not have penetrated. (but i guess this could be fixed by increasing the penetration of the gold rounds)

 

SirFoch also did a video about this, I think it was the one following his famous Chrysler rant, where he talked about removing weakspots from tanks that only leads to gold ammo spam etc. 

 

Now, you could argue that mediums are not supposed to fight front to front against heavily armored tanks and that armor wouldn't count for anything if you had weakspots all over the place. The second part of this statement is easier to address, so let'S start with this:

 

No.

 

It would not render armor useless, it would just make playing heavies a lot more demanding. Like, some heavies, like thetype4 or type5 you can just yolo in and kill everything and expect to bounce everything as long as theres no clickers.

However, if the cheeks on the front were slightly weaker (and by that i mean like 210-220 flat armor), you would actually have to bait people to shooting your front, before going around a corner. Now, imagine that! You would actually have to think, before pressing W and the left mouse button. One would almost be tempted to think that players would have mastered such basic mechanics when they get to tier10 anyway, so it would make no difference.

Same goes for the cupola of the T110E5. Just poke in such a way that the cupola is behind cover, while your gun isnt. Or on any tank: Use the terrain and/or wrecks to hide your lower plate. Doesn't sound very hard.

 

So, lets get on to the trickier part: Mediums should not be fighting heavies heads on. But what should they do? Let's look at some maps:

 

1. Himmelsdorf:

You have basically 3 roads: the hill, the banana street and the rails. The rails are where all TDs camp, so heads on fight, the banana street is a heads on heavy fight, and the hill is also like a street. Only one side of the castle is viable, because if you go to the other one, you will instantly get shot by people on the rails. So.... it's also a heads on fight. And in such a fight would you rather have a T-43 hull down, or a T29 hull down? To me, the answer is obvious.

 

2. Karelia:

This is a map with only 2 corridors, because nobody with a sane mind would voluntarily go through the middle. The north side is a graveyeard where the attacking team is slaughtered by base camping TDs, because you have only one way up to the base .... so, it's a corridor. The south has the hill, which mediums and lights will fight for. And once you win the hill, it's fighting the campers right beneath it, which is another heads on fight. By securing the hill, you effectively won nothing, so congratz here ...

 

3. Lakeville:

As LemmingRush said: Only city is viable, because the 1,2 line is a corridor where the attacking team gets slaughtered by base camping TDs. Most of the fights revolve around the church, but you cant flank them through the city, because it is open to the other side of the lake, so base cmping TDs will have shots on you from both sides. So, another heads on fight.

 

4. Arctic Region:

Another map with 2 sides, You have the north where you fight for the small corridor at a5/b5, and you have the south where you fight for the corridor that leads into the eastern base. 2 heads on fights right there.

 

5. Paris: Everyone hates this map, and not without reason. The north is dominated by TDs, and in the south you have heavies fighting heads on. The middle is a completely open spot where you can get shot from both sides and you basically live in constant fear of getting yoloed because there is no cover whatsoever. And what is most important when you have no cover? Thats right, armor. And what has more armor than meds? Thats right, heavies.

 

If you look at stratsketch.com and draw in the areas you can go to and separate them from each other if you cannot shoot from one area to the other reliably, you will find that the 2-3 streets map is a very common design: Highway, Pilsen, Charkow, Abbey, Murovanka,etc. they all fall into this category of maps where you need armor over everything else. LemmingRush points out in his vids quite frequently that you need to shoot at people when they're not looking or when they are reloading, because in a medium you cant really rely on your armor. however, he plays tier10, and since tier10 mediums have great penetration, you can do such things, but if you were to play at lower tiers, this strat often does not work, especially if you have crappenetration values.

 

Apart from laziness when it comes to map design, this also creates many of the commonly known problems: Tanks being called op because of their armor (Maus), campers, aggressive plays being punished, etc.: You would not have op tanks, if they had weakspots, albeit small ones, you would not have campers if you didn't have "corridor-maps", because people wouldnt even know where to point their guns, and aggressive plays would not be punished, because there would not be any positions where a camping TD can take away half of your hp without even being spotted.

 

As you can see, the problem that I have with the medium tank design on tier6-9 is closely tied to the map problem, which is also tied to the problem of campers and arty. Now, I think, the best solution would be to leave meds as they are and rework the maps instead, because it would also solve the other problems, but if WG cannot come up with decent maps (hire some designers!), they could just buff the penetration values for these medium tiers, which is considerably easier to do. Because, good dpm is great, but dpm doesnt do crapif you can't do damage ;)

 

If you have read through all of this, then I should probably congratulate and thank you as it mustve been such a pain in the **** to read this as it was to write it.

 

Himmelsdorf: I almost always go the 3-line and snipe up at the hill at the start.

 

Karelia: On standard mode I usually go north west corner if I have support, other wise I load the skill and snipe the HTs.

 

Lakeville: City, almost always. Sometimes it's a good idea to relocate to the middle in mid-game.

 

Artic Region: From north east side I usually go south east ('HT corner;), unless my team is retarded. From the north east spawn I only go south east if I have a lot of my team with me, other wise I'll go north or start at G6.

 

Paris: Always south, that map is so bad.

 



Bordhaw #12 Posted 12 January 2018 - 09:01 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 9581 battles
  • 1,215
  • Member since:
    01-29-2017

View PostAnimalAsLeader, on 12 January 2018 - 04:15 PM, said:

As you can see, the problem that I have with the medium tank design on tier6-9 is closely tied to the map problem, which is also tied to the problem of campers and arty. Now, I think, the best solution would be to leave meds as they are and rework the maps instead, because it would also solve the other problems, but if WG cannot come up with decent maps (hire some designers!), they could just buff the penetration values for these medium tiers, which is considerably easier to do. Because, good dpm is great, but dpm doesnt do crapif you can't do damage ;)

 

If you have read through all of this, then I should probably congratulate and thank you as it mustve been such a pain in the **** to read this as it was to write it.

 

Unfortunately, you not saying anything new. And WG "will listen to the playerbase". 



Enforcer1975 #13 Posted 12 January 2018 - 10:57 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 18481 battles
  • 9,855
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014

View PostCoDiGGo, on 12 January 2018 - 06:14 PM, said:

Tier 5 ok

Tier 6 good

Tier 7 worse than average

Tier 8 stupidly underpowered ( why wg, why?) except Lor

Tier 9 good

Tier 10 Some good some average

 

Tier 8 meds need 300 alpha and 100-300 dpm buff only to be average...

 

 

I'd rather have them balance tier 9 and 10 to tier 8 and not the other way around. Tier 6 tanks are effed by tier 8 tanks already, no need to continue the powercreep downwards.

Edited by Enforcer1975, 12 January 2018 - 10:57 PM.


AnimalAsLeader #14 Posted 13 January 2018 - 01:39 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 5719 battles
  • 27
  • [ECOL] ECOL
  • Member since:
    10-15-2015

View PostsgtYester, on 12 January 2018 - 07:13 PM, said:

nope, meds where op and the only tank class u needed to play competitevly in wot,1 tank for all roles, fill it up with gold and win..   making all other classes useless.     with the addition (finaly) of working armor in the game, ppl that relied on meds to rek everything they see are now whining about armor.. cause they are to lazy to flank or change tactic....

 

we need 5 different classes 

 

- heavies... breaktrough tanks, hard to pen frontaly but slow

- meds  flank tanks , no head on warfare.   plug gaps when/where needed

- td   defenders of a flank / support an attack

- lights  support tank and sneaking behind enemy lines to rek arty and attack from behind.

arty... well this donkey class should be removed since it requires zero skill to play and had nothing to do with tactics and learning how to play

 

lazy to flank? So, how would you flank on Himmelsdorf? Did you read the map breakdown?

 

Also, I would like to know to which times you refer, because as long as I play, meds are extremely underwhelming. Also, I like to watch some older YT videos (2years and more), and LemmingRush for example always points out "you cant brawl against a heavy in a medium". It must have been in the early days when you could meet tier10 as tier6 and it was 10 times more pay to win than it's now...

 

theSwedishTankDriver correctly pointed out what to do on the maps: Snipe, snipe and snipe. But that's what TDs are supposed to do, right?

I would totally agree with your point if the maps were designed that you could flank, but sadly they are so small and full of chokepoints that any time you want to flank you will get rekt by camping TDs you cant even see. So, basically you can choose between sniping like a TD or being useless. Congratz.

 

View PostBordhaw, on 12 January 2018 - 09:01 PM, said:

 

Unfortunately, you not saying anything new. And WG "will listen to the playerbase". 

 

I do agree, but I dont think that means we shouldn't say anything. Eventually, some of the issues will start to bother so many people that WG will have to do something unless they want to lose a large part of their paying playerbase.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users