Jump to content


Developers seem to think 1.0 was a great update, but what do a lot of players truly experience?

1.0 laggs bad

  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

NL_Jens #1 Posted 29 April 2018 - 11:48 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 33126 battles
  • 30
  • [OXIDE] OXIDE
  • Member since:
    03-14-2014

Dear readers,

 

Fairly recently update 1.0 was released. Of course there was a huge hype for this what was meant to be an amazing update. 

Me honestly was never hyped for this update, more afraid that it would just ruin my gaming experience and make it way too laggy. Developers promised us that the graphics would improve w/o ruining gaming experience. Even on worse PC's. I have a decent laptop and even though the promises I still was afraid for 1.0.

 

And obviously as I am writing this topic on the forums, my feelings were right. For me there is only two options now in the game.

1. I can play on the standard client (I don't mean the SD client, but the option in the settings>graphics), with not too many laggs. But the game ugly as hell, which makes it unplayable for me. Also because shooting at 300+ meters becomes vague and finding the shots becomes a lot harder. 

2. I can play on the improved client, with so many laggs in battle. The game looks a bit nicer than it did before 1.0, but honestly I don't really care that much. I was playing on high graphics before 1.0 w/o laggs. And now if I play on improved client, even with the minimal graphics I am experiencing laggs constantly. The worst is when I am either driving my tank or aiming through some concealment i.e. bushes. 

 

I already tried so many things to solve this problem for me and so many of my clanmates have tried to help me with this. Some things may have helped a little bit, but definetely not enough. I know I am not the only one with these problems, so many players with reasonable, average or bad PC's/laptops are experiencing the same issues. 

 

I know it's been a while since 1.0 so I am very surprised that WG did not manage to fix this, but it looks like Developers did an amazing job and the game is so much better now. 

*But it is not!, not for everyone* 

On youtube I hear the developers saying they fixed problems like the well-known laggs that players expierence get when aiming through bushes. I don't see how they can say that. I noticed some micro patches, but they did not help me at all. I still hear many people including me experiencing tons of lagg with these bushes. 

 

Sometimes in random battles I ask my teammates before battle is starting if they like me think 1.0 is really bad. And a lot of players seem to agree. 

 

With the release of 1.0 I am "only" scoring a recent WN8 of 2,6-2,7k. I know that most players can only dream of getting this WN8 score, but before 1.0 I was easily scoring between 3.5-4k WN8 consistently. And also 3-marking tier 10 tanks if I just did some tryharding. This huge difference does show that 1.0 is literally killing it for me and getting me so many laggs, which absolutely get me tilted in so many battles. 

 

It's been some time since 1.0 release and developers seem to think they did fine, so this gives me very little hope that these problems will ever be fixed if no one stands up. 

That's why I took my time writing this topics. Also hoping developers will see it. 

 

This was the first Topic I created on the forums, but I hope it is alright.

Feel free to share your opinions below.

 

Cheers,

NL_Jens

 



HundeWurst #2 Posted 29 April 2018 - 12:11 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 67549 battles
  • 4,160
  • [FAME] FAME
  • Member since:
    02-06-2012

I dont know what you expected, but I got what was promised - the same game just looking a bit prettier than before.

 

We now have a polished turd, instead just a turd. But if WG feels it being a huge success its good for them. I mean they are only interested in money so everything is alright for them.

 

Just leave the game if you dont like it.



Jigabachi #3 Posted 29 April 2018 - 12:32 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 17726 battles
  • 17,597
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011
^ What he said. ^

It was a graphical update, nothing more, nothing less. And nothing I cared about. For the game it was a success, the game is now a lot prettier. Certain aspects got worse, but we should be used to that by now.

btw: I went back to standard graphics, too. Simply because the improved ones look like crap on lower settings. Already because everything is too bright.

Enforcer1975 #4 Posted 29 April 2018 - 12:33 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 18309 battles
  • 9,832
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014

OP what is your hardware? Some people think their hardware is decent while it's potato in reality and it's especially bad on laptops since they are way weaker than their desktop counterparts: GTX 980 =/= GTX 980M and so on.

Are you running the game on a SSD? That improved loading time and also reduced lag and microfreezes since data can be picked up faster. 

 

Also if players say the game is bad but still keep playing then it can't be that bad in the first place

 

Many "problems" that come up are often the result of players expecting the game to run on potato PCs or laptops. 

 

The devs never said that they are done...there are still many improvements to do. 



torloisk #5 Posted 29 April 2018 - 12:33 PM

    Corporal

  • Clan Diplomat
  • 29543 battles
  • 133
  • [SHOR] SHOR
  • Member since:
    04-06-2013

To put it more frankly: The same "poop" as before, just a bit more shiny.

Annoying with the new look is the havok crap littering the landscape. It does not even fall apart naturally.

Some maps are made much worse, congrats to the part of WG doing the most work: the Imbalance Department. Their master piece is the Bobject, they even outdid the Type 4 and 5 monstrosities. Not to forget the matchmaking WG calls a success. Gives you an impression about the level of cynism of WG's decision makers.


Edited by torloisk, 29 April 2018 - 12:36 PM.


Enforcer1975 #6 Posted 29 April 2018 - 12:34 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 18309 battles
  • 9,832
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014

View PostJigabachi, on 29 April 2018 - 12:32 PM, said:

^ What he said. ^

It was a graphical update, nothing more, nothing less. And nothing I cared about. For the game it was a success, the game is now a lot prettier. Certain aspects got worse, but we should be used to that by now.

btw: I went back to standard graphics, too. Simply because the improved ones look like crap on lower settings. Already because everything is too bright.

 

Have you lowered gamma? I had that too then i looked into the settings and voila....way better. 

 



Bulldog_Drummond #7 Posted 29 April 2018 - 12:36 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 27826 battles
  • 9,232
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    08-10-2014
Seems fine to me.  Mind you, I bought a top end PC and monitor in December, so it whizzes along with high FPS on max graphics.

Jigabachi #8 Posted 29 April 2018 - 12:41 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 17726 battles
  • 17,597
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011

View PostEnforcer1975, on 29 April 2018 - 12:34 PM, said:

Have you lowered gamma? I had that too then i looked into the settings and voila....way better. 

I think I tried various things. If I remember correctly, the problem is that brightness can only be altered when you use the improved graphics.



Mr_Burrows #9 Posted 29 April 2018 - 01:13 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 43185 battles
  • 1,624
  • Member since:
    02-17-2012

Maps got a bit worse, actually. Too bad, but true. Had hopes that would not be the case, but... Oh well. 



_Anarchistic_ #10 Posted 29 April 2018 - 01:22 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 34798 battles
  • 1,027
  • [SKIL3] SKIL3
  • Member since:
    01-07-2015

honestly don't even notice the graphics now

 

I do notice weird spotting mechanics

I do notice appaling shot boxes

I do notice terrible map redesigns on erlenberg and fjords

I do notice how the hits are still not registering

 

I do notice how all of these bugs were reported in tests 1 and 2 but they were not sorted before release

I do notice how they are still not sorted now after all this time

 

hence why I refuse to give wg any money

 



Mr_Burrows #11 Posted 29 April 2018 - 01:24 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 43185 battles
  • 1,624
  • Member since:
    02-17-2012
Yeah, like getting hit for 430 HP from behind, and the only indication you get is that you HP bar drops. Amazingly bad not having such an easy thing sorted. Just for example. 

NL_Jens #12 Posted 29 April 2018 - 01:49 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 33126 battles
  • 30
  • [OXIDE] OXIDE
  • Member since:
    03-14-2014

View PostEnforcer1975, on 29 April 2018 - 12:33 PM, said:

OP what is your hardware? Some people think their hardware is decent while it's potato in reality and it's especially bad on laptops since they are way weaker than their desktop counterparts: GTX 980 =/= GTX 980M and so on.

Are you running the game on a SSD? That improved loading time and also reduced lag and microfreezes since data can be picked up faster. 

 

Also if players say the game is bad but still keep playing then it can't be that bad in the first place

 

Many "problems" that come up are often the result of players expecting the game to run on potato PCs or laptops. 

 

The devs never said that they are done...there are still many improvements to do. 

https://imgur.com/Cl3s3Kb 

 

This is what I can find about my laptop

 

Yes I have the game in SSD client. I don't think the game is that bad, I still like the battles with the clan. Though 1.0 did make the game worse than it was for me.

 

View Post_Anarchistic_, on 29 April 2018 - 01:22 PM, said:

honestly don't even notice the graphics now

 

I do notice weird spotting mechanics

I do notice appaling shot boxes

I do notice terrible map redesigns on erlenberg and fjords

I do notice how the hits are still not registering

 

I do notice how all of these bugs were reported in tests 1 and 2 but they were not sorted before release

I do notice how they are still not sorted now after all this time

 

hence why I refuse to give wg any money

 

 

I also noticed many of these things and I like erlenberg before, now it is the worst map in the game imo
 

VarzA #13 Posted 29 April 2018 - 01:53 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 17396 battles
  • 1,030
  • [USAGI] USAGI
  • Member since:
    06-17-2011

It's only graphics, and it doesn't address a few issues :

- 3rd straight patch with buffs (indirect ones) to russian tanks

- hitboxes on corners are a nightmare now

- less and less maps

- the maps that have remained were made even worse (fjords .... christ)

- tons of gold spammage, while the corridor meta becomes even more entrenched



Manamune #14 Posted 29 April 2018 - 01:58 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 20516 battles
  • 129
  • Member since:
    09-19-2012
The only thing annoyed me is maps....to flat promoting camping and they removed two city maps if im not mistaken?

CmdRatScabies #15 Posted 29 April 2018 - 01:59 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 35165 battles
  • 3,538
  • Member since:
    10-12-2015
Graphics got better, at the expense of gameplay.

NL_Jens #16 Posted 29 April 2018 - 02:02 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 33126 battles
  • 30
  • [OXIDE] OXIDE
  • Member since:
    03-14-2014

View PostVarzA, on 29 April 2018 - 01:53 PM, said:

It's only graphics, and it doesn't address a few issues :

- 3rd straight patch with buffs (indirect ones) to russian tanks

- hitboxes on corners are a nightmare now

- less and less maps

- the maps that have remained were made even worse (fjords .... christ)

- tons of gold spammage, while the corridor meta becomes even more entrenched

 

Yeah that is also very true

NL_Jens #17 Posted 29 April 2018 - 02:03 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 33126 battles
  • 30
  • [OXIDE] OXIDE
  • Member since:
    03-14-2014

View PostManamune, on 29 April 2018 - 01:58 PM, said:

The only thing annoyed me is maps....to flat promoting camping and they removed two city maps if im not mistaken?

 

Charkov and Stalingrad yes. And also some other non city maps like Highway and Sacret valley



gunslingerXXX #18 Posted 29 April 2018 - 02:09 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 9920 battles
  • 1,386
  • Member since:
    11-16-2014

Potato pc so not really enjoying the update to full potential.

Got only 1100 base xp in entire italian challenge (2 weeks?) So that says alot. Playing the testserver more than regular server, as progressing f2p is just too painfull. First you have the tier 7/8 stock turds. By the time you get to tier 10 they've introduced 5 other OP tanks so your grind is a bit pointless.

But still playing so I guess its still ok.



Enforcer1975 #19 Posted 29 April 2018 - 03:44 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 18309 battles
  • 9,832
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014

View PostNL_Jens, on 29 April 2018 - 01:49 PM, said:

https://imgur.com/Cl3s3Kb 

 

This is what I can find about my laptop

 

Yes I have the game in SSD client. I don't think the game is that bad, I still like the battles with the clan. Though 1.0 did make the game worse than it was for me.

 

Link doesn't work. 

Yaccay #20 Posted 29 April 2018 - 03:56 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 31559 battles
  • 1,823
  • Member since:
    11-21-2012

The game got prettier.

Nevertheless I was able to play improved graphics in the past over or around 60 fps.

Now improved graphics means lower fps, often hitting 30 fps, which is not acceptable for me.

This is not in line with WG's promise. i.e: The client fps will not decrease.

I really do not like unfulfilled promises.







Also tagged with 1.0, laggs, bad

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users