Jump to content

Every major broken issue in WoT listed and fixed without any bulls#!t

no bullshit broken issues make wot great again matchmaking gold spam

  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

Poll: Few more questions! (14 members have cast votes)

You have to complete 250 battles in order to participate this poll.

Was this topic interesting?

  1. Yes (3 votes [21.43%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 21.43%

  2. Meh (6 votes [42.86%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 42.86%

  3. No (5 votes [35.71%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 35.71%

Will these changes work in your opinion?

  1. Yes (2 votes [14.29%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 14.29%

  2. Probably (3 votes [21.43%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 21.43%

  3. Unlikely (3 votes [21.43%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 21.43%

  4. No (6 votes [42.86%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 42.86%

Vote Hide poll

AbsoluuttinenPossu #1 Posted 30 March 2018 - 09:11 PM


  • Player
  • 10669 battles
  • 12
  • Member since:

Almost every topic considering to this subject in this forum in a nutshell involves only mocking and raging towards Wargaming. The following text has nothing like it and includes sensible solutions for the problems which are making this game worse. But without any further explanations, let's go straight to the point.




What's wrong?

1. Too low or too high tiers to compete with, for example T29 versus Stug III.

2. Too easy or too challenging opponents for you and your team.



1. The matchmaking must build matches where are only maximum of two different tiers in one team, three is too unfair.

2. The matchmaking must lead players together according to their ingame stats, but not too absolutely. If so, the players should have to wait for minutes for one game and the skilled players wouldn't be able to play low tier matches at all. That's why it can't be made too absolute.



+ The amount of broken screens, keyboards, mouses etc. reduces for raging over bad matches.





What's wrong?

1. People who have too much money to spend, spam these gold rounds at the enemies if they can't penetrate them with their first shot and there are lots of them.

2. By firing gold rounds your credit vault drains empty in front of you, unless you are very skilled in WoT.



1. The penetration value of a gold shell must be reduced to the same level as the standard shell of the vehicle, any better penetration or damage values cause serious imbalance.

2. The price of a gold shell must be reduced so the players can save up some credits, but only if the penetration value is reduced too!



+ The players who were used to spam gold have to forced to look for weakspots on the vehicle they're fighting with and learn that what each shell type actually does, which reduces highly the amount of hate and disrespect towards these players. By the way, the shell mechanics are explained in that video under this text.

- A completely new problem appears, some tanks can't be penetrated from the front without better penetration.
  Those tanks are:
  - Object 705 (commander's cupola too thick)

  - Object 705A (commander's cupola too thick)

  - Object 430U (commander's cupola too thick)

  - Object 430 version II (commander's cupola too thick)

  - Object 268 4 (lower plate too thick)

  - IS-M (lower plate a bit too thick)

  Those tanks were recently added so it is expected that they will get nerfed sooner or later.

  The premium tanks in the other hand are impossible to nerf, because it's illegal to sell something good with a high price and then make it worse. So we just have to deal with them...

  + However, the problem should be fixed after performing those nerfs.



So, those were the major problems in World of Tanks explained without any bulls#!t. Now I will see that will my topic get some attention or did I wrote this for nothing.

Thanks for reading and have a nice day, morning, evening, night... erm... Or at any time you are reading this. :)




Aikl #2 Posted 30 March 2018 - 09:31 PM


  • Player
  • 25167 battles
  • 4,253
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:

Props for a tidy, fancy-looking first post. I don't disagree; both are issues, and even Wargaming knows that. Premium ammo to the point where they've mentioned a rework a few times. Matchmaking is continually tweaked; though the 3-5-7 system is the main issue here, less so the +/- 2 MM. Anyone remotely familiar with this forum knows the deal with that.


These are not new or original suggestions either. Without even touching your 'solutions', any attempt at correcting these issues should consider the interests of Wargaming and the players.

Regarding premium ammo, Wargaming wants players to use credits, for instance. There are also more than likely plenty of players who prefer WoT as a 'point-click-adventure' kind of game. That also falls back to Wargaming's interests.

Matchmaking is a bit more complex. +/-1 MM can surely work. There are arguments for it. However, 3-5-7 happens to have a couple of advantages for Wargaming (and some players, depending on how you look at it). It encourages T9/10 gameplay and use of premium ammunition. Also, 3-5-7 happens to be very cool for the top three tanks. It encourages the occasionally awesome game. I.e. it seeks to increase the highs at any cost, because it's how the human mind works.


A game with easier matchmaking and less premium ammo use would likely lose players and reduce earnings per player. This is likely Wargaming's conundrum as well.

Balc0ra #3 Posted 30 March 2018 - 09:45 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 64364 battles
  • 15,423
  • Member since:

View PostAbsoluuttinenPossu, on 30 March 2018 - 09:11 PM, said:



If they make this game +1, and make randoms ranked or skill based. I'm leaving. +2 MM is not perfect and needs some tweaks still. But it still brings more to the table on keeping me around vs what +1 would. And skilled based MM worked so well for that other game right? A bit to good you might say. As there it made more broken keyboards vs less tbh. I'm willing to bet it would work the same way here if it worked to well. Bad playing with bad made them leave. And good playing with good made them not keep their 60% WR, as it dropped like a rock since two 60's don't make a 100. Making them leave to. Randoms are just that, random. And that aspect should stay.


View PostAbsoluuttinenPossu, on 30 March 2018 - 09:11 PM, said:




This might fix gold ammo, but make a whole heap of new issues. All the skill in the world don't help when even equal tier HT's have more weakspot armor then you have normal pen. It's one of the big issues with pure tier 8 games in the current MM. Like a T32 vs the VK 100.01. And he should aim where at him head on with gold ammo that has the same pen as his AP? Exactly, all the skill in the world won't help him then. This would only force more HT's on the medium line with a balance fix for normal ammo on top of it. Not saying the T32 should be able to pen a Maus. But still.



View PostAbsoluuttinenPossu, on 30 March 2018 - 09:11 PM, said:

  The premium tanks in the other hand are impossible to nerf, because it's illegal to sell something good with a high price and then make it worse. So we just have to deal with them...


Exactly. And what do you think happens to premiums if you nerf the ammo? You could argue that the tank is no longer what you payed for. And that argument has been used on a nerf before. And WG gave refunds. I suspect they don't want to do that for every single premium tank in the game. And if they only did that no normal tanks. But not premiums. Tier 8 would be even more broken. Just imagine a 3 man Defender platoon on the enemy team when you are in your Tiger II in a 3-5-7 game and you have nerfed gold ammo and they don't. Because what would be bulls#!t then... would be your Defender to name one. And I suspect the population on some tiers would drop faster then it did for PVP on AW.


View PostAbsoluuttinenPossu, on 30 March 2018 - 09:11 PM, said:

- A completely new problem appears, some tanks can't be penetrated from the front without better penetration.
  Those tanks are....



Some of these are still easier to deal with then super heavies etc. And again, if you do nerf the gold pen. You need to compromise the normal ammo to work better for it. Most don't use gold ammo because they don't need to. It's because they face equal tier HT's they can't deal with.

Edited by Balc0ra, 30 March 2018 - 09:49 PM.

Nazgarth #4 Posted 30 March 2018 - 10:07 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 28472 battles
  • 1,135
  • [-TWO-] -TWO-
  • Member since:

Every issue? You must be joking.

breeeze #5 Posted 30 March 2018 - 10:22 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 28465 battles
  • 480
  • [S4] S4
  • Member since:



Wrong in both accounts. I don't think +/-2 by itself is the problem with MM, its that with 3/5/7 the top tiers have way too much weight and are very likely to decide the outcome of the battle. The second thing you suggest is basically skill MM which is an absolutely horrendous idea. It sounds nice on paper, but in the end it just completely shafts good players for zero reward (unlike in ranked where higher ranks will give better rewards) and just means that then the chosen tank decides the battle. What do you think is gonna happen if a 60% player in a Leo1 is matched against a 60% player in a 430U? A certain other tank game tried this and failed miserably, good players were pissed off and battle quality didn't improve at all.



Correct on identifying the problem, but wrong solution. Premium ammo shouldnt be the same as regular one as you suggest, it needs to be different instead of flat out better like it is now. Something like AP = average pen, average damage, APCR = better pen but less damage


HaZardeur #6 Posted 30 March 2018 - 10:30 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 33257 battles
  • 1,160
  • Member since:

I go with what Circon said on his stream a couple of days back....


- prio MM 5/10 over 15/0 over 3/5/7


Less chance of having 5 bots in top tier then 3 which causes current rofl stomps, less need of prem ammo ( which is sadly the reason WG will never go for that )

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users