Jump to content


Why do people only use camo on their hull now?


  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

r0f #1 Posted 13 July 2018 - 10:31 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 6028 battles
  • 275
  • [AFUNM] AFUNM
  • Member since:
    10-19-2012
Heh heyy ehh yeahhh mani mani yeah what are you doing? :)

8126Jakobsson #2 Posted 13 July 2018 - 10:36 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 62779 battles
  • 3,099
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014
It's all you need to get full effect, all else is decoration. It looks like *edited* though.  

Edited by G_Bg_82, 13 July 2018 - 10:56 AM.
inappropriate remaks


Browarszky #3 Posted 13 July 2018 - 10:40 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 15980 battles
  • 3,520
  • [I-S-L] I-S-L
  • Member since:
    12-03-2013

View Post8126Jakobsson, on 13 July 2018 - 09:36 AM, said:

It's all you need to get full effect, all else is decoration. It looks like whore though.  

 

Looks ok on some tanks, depending on tank paint and camo colors. What is nice about it is that you can save on how much you need to spend on camos, three 'camos' vx. nine, makes a difference of 6x50 meaning 300 gold per tank. Also, it now allows you to pick any combination for hull+turret+barrel, not sure why, and even less sure how historically accurate that would be. The biggest advantage IMO is you can save on gold.

 

Having said that, I agree with you in the sense that I did prefer when these were one camo for one season for a cleaner look.


Edited by Browarszky, 13 July 2018 - 10:41 AM.


Enforcer1975 #4 Posted 13 July 2018 - 10:42 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 20559 battles
  • 10,543
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014
Every piece of camo should only provide a third of the full camo value. Why does a tank get full camo when the topmost spot isn't camouflaged?

Evilier_than_Skeletor #5 Posted 13 July 2018 - 10:44 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 17642 battles
  • 370
  • [TSOP] TSOP
  • Member since:
    02-05-2016
Plebs can't afford to go all the way :P

MaxxyNL #6 Posted 13 July 2018 - 10:44 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 11097 battles
  • 782
  • Member since:
    04-05-2013

View PostEnforcer1975, on 13 July 2018 - 11:42 AM, said:

Every piece of camo should only provide a third of the full camo value. Why does a tank get full camo when the topmost spot isn't camouflaged?

 

WG logic :hiding:

vasilinhorulezz #7 Posted 13 July 2018 - 10:45 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 22780 battles
  • 1,097
  • Member since:
    09-26-2014

Because only using camo on the hull gives you the bonus, if you have some free camos from events, you get the most out of them by using them on a lot more tanks,

and if you want to save on Gold you can buy only one piece instead of three.



Element6_TheSprout #8 Posted 13 July 2018 - 10:52 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 29043 battles
  • 10,342
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    01-06-2013

View PostMaxxyNL, on 13 July 2018 - 10:44 AM, said:

WG logic :hiding:

It's actually "less pay to win" if you think about it...

 

So there is logic.



250swb #9 Posted 13 July 2018 - 11:07 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 21699 battles
  • 4,862
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-23-2015

View PostEnforcer1975, on 13 July 2018 - 09:42 AM, said:

Why does a tank get full camo when the topmost spot isn't camouflaged?

 

I would imagine it wasn't a fair play choice by WG to let all tanks need only one section of camo where previously some needed three and some two.

 

I think the policy takes it's lead from supermarket 'twofer' offers, in that you sell the customer two items for the price of one, but the supermarket doesn't lose out because they got a discount from the manufacturer, and the customer probably wouldn't have bought the product anyway without the offer. So WG sells one section of camo to somebody who previously would have refused to buy three, and as the camo doesn't cost WG anything selling one is therefore better than selling none. Of course players then consider that their tank looks a bit stupid with just the hull in cam, so they end up buying three anyway, so they've been suckered.



TungstenHitman #10 Posted 13 July 2018 - 11:16 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 20671 battles
  • 3,810
  • Member since:
    08-28-2016
It's "economy camo" lol. I'm guessing most players that have this ugly cheap-[edited]offering on their tanks don't have any extra camo to spare(since we can re-use perma-camo we own now once we sell a tank that had it) and are just grinding through that tank, don't really like that tank much, won't be making it a keeper and so rather than waste extra credits or even gold, just throw a bit of temporary or spare slap on it for the grind.

r0f #11 Posted 13 July 2018 - 11:16 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 6028 battles
  • 275
  • [AFUNM] AFUNM
  • Member since:
    10-19-2012
It does look silly.

Search_Warrant #12 Posted 13 July 2018 - 11:34 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 26690 battles
  • 5,875
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    02-08-2011
I do it because it triggers Somegras and Leggasiini. ether only the hull or the hull/turret and not the gun. :trollface:

Bexleyheath #13 Posted 13 July 2018 - 12:21 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 4268 battles
  • 279
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    01-07-2018

I use custom textures for a more athentic look, then use linchpins mod (or whatever its called) to hide the ingame applied camo so it doesnt interfere with the textures. With that setup, it doesnt make any sense to apply goldcamo to anything but the hull since I wont see the result and all Im after is the bonus.

 

 



Three_Rounds_Rapid #14 Posted 13 July 2018 - 12:24 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 34459 battles
  • 542
  • [W__F] W__F
  • Member since:
    02-24-2015
I suspect lazy WG coders, they didn't want to mess about with different values for turret, hull, gun, when you have casemate TD's, SPG's etc which would all require different values. Just slap the camo bonus on the hull which everything has and be done with it....

Element6_TheSprout #15 Posted 13 July 2018 - 12:33 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 29043 battles
  • 10,342
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    01-06-2013

View PostThree_Rounds_Rapid, on 13 July 2018 - 12:24 PM, said:

I suspect lazy WG coders, they didn't want to mess about with different values for turret, hull, gun, when you have casemate TD's, SPG's etc which would all require different values. Just slap the camo bonus on the hull which everything has and be done with it....

So it has nothing to do with the fact that you can buy one camo for each nation and then take it off and put it on any tank you want for zero cost, thus making the game less pay to win? Everyone can get virtually the same camo value for just about noting.



Geno1isme #16 Posted 13 July 2018 - 02:37 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 41469 battles
  • 7,219
  • [TRYIT] TRYIT
  • Member since:
    09-03-2013

View PostEnforcer1975, on 13 July 2018 - 11:42 AM, said:

Every piece of camo should only provide a third of the full camo value. Why does a tank get full camo when the topmost spot isn't camouflaged?

 

Not all tanks can use three pieces of camo, many TDs and arties can only equip two. And giving camo on the gun the same effect as camo on the hull is equally stupid when look at the size of many low-tier guns that are barely visible without a microscope. The "hull-only" policy was a simple solution to those problems as the hull is the biggest part of practically all tanks (so hull-camo has the largest visible surface by far).

 

View PostThree_Rounds_Rapid, on 13 July 2018 - 01:24 PM, said:

they didn't want to mess about with different values for turret, hull, gun, when you have casemate TD's, SPG's etc which would all require different values.

That would certainly have resulted in people complaining why camo on "normal" tanks costs more than camo on TDs while providing a lesser bonus (as the cost-per-piece can't be adjusted per tank when they aren't bound to that tank).


Edited by Geno1isme, 13 July 2018 - 02:37 PM.


Lord_Edge #17 Posted 13 July 2018 - 02:55 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 5951 battles
  • 821
  • Member since:
    11-26-2016

View PostEnforcer1975, on 13 July 2018 - 10:42 AM, said:

Why does a tank get full camo when the topmost spot isn't camouflaged?

Why does camo that actually makes the tank more obvious than the base paint did provide any camo? :P



Enforcer1975 #18 Posted 13 July 2018 - 03:34 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 20559 battles
  • 10,543
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014

View PostLord_Edge, on 13 July 2018 - 02:55 PM, said:

Why does camo that actually makes the tank more obvious than the base paint did provide any camo? :P

 

Patterns are meant to break up the silhouette of objects. Some are good and some are bad. Guess why gun barrels are wrapped with twigs and foliage so they don't stand out. 


Edited by Enforcer1975, 13 July 2018 - 03:35 PM.


Robbie_T #19 Posted 13 July 2018 - 03:34 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 15012 battles
  • 236
  • [BBMM] BBMM
  • Member since:
    07-08-2016

Looks horrible.

For me  its full camo or its no camo at all.

 



SaintMaddenus #20 Posted 13 July 2018 - 03:43 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 33907 battles
  • 1,170
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    03-04-2011
yea  saw a VK 100 last night with just it's bottom covered the rest was grey   SO UGLY.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users