Jump to content


Removing gold-ammo would improve the game?


  • Please log in to reply
52 replies to this topic

Warfare80 #1 Posted 12 January 2019 - 05:28 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 1531 battles
  • 20
  • Member since:
    03-02-2012

It would remove loads of frustration, and yes, it would also remove money to WG.

But imo it would improve the fun in the game, longer lasting battles and attract players, wich means more income to WG. 

I`m wrong,this is like the hundred whining post about this subject and i should slap myself?

 

This is not a whining post,its a honest question and im curious what the community thinks about it. 

 

Regards,

Mr Frustrated


Edited by Warfare80, 12 January 2019 - 05:45 AM.


SuedKAT #2 Posted 12 January 2019 - 05:51 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 12154 battles
  • 7,039
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-21-2014

Yes, just imagine how much fun it would be to be bottom tier and/or using a stock gun, or for gods sake imagine the fun when you in your paper armored tank load into one of the countless of corridor maps only to notice that the tanks your forced to face frontally have zero frontal weakspots, sounds like a lot of fun.

 

People shooting premium ammo is the symptom of countless of horrific design decisions WG have put into practice recently, removing the ability for people to negate some of them before fixing the real issues will end up in one thing and one thing only, frustration. WG have now announced that premium ammo will do less damage than regular ammo, which is a direct buff to HT's (the most dominate class) which they've also stated won't be getting any frontal weakspots and a direct nerf to every other class/tank, especially the ones that already was under-performing, so all they're doing is digging themselves a deeper hole.


Edited by SuedKAT, 12 January 2019 - 05:58 AM.


Warfare80 #3 Posted 12 January 2019 - 05:59 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 1531 battles
  • 20
  • Member since:
    03-02-2012

View PostSuedKAT, on 12 January 2019 - 04:51 AM, said:

Yes, just imagine how much fun it would be to be bottom tier and/or using a stock gun, or for gods sake imagine the fun when you in your paper armored tank load into one of the countless of corridor maps only to notice that the tanks your forced to face frontally have zero frontal weakspots, sounds like a lot of fun.

 

People shooting premium ammo is the symptom of countless of horrific design decisions WG have put into practice recently, removing the ability for people to negate some of them before fixing the real issues will end up in one thing and one thing only, frustration. WG have now announced that premium ammo will do less damage than regular ammo, which is a direct buff to HT's (the most dominate class) which they've also stated won't be getting any frontal weakspots and a direct nerf to every other class/tank, especially the ones that already was under-performing, so all they're doing is digging themselves a deeper hole.

 

Oh crap i totally missed this info, it kinda makes my post useless hehe. 

Thanks for sharing :)



SuedKAT #4 Posted 12 January 2019 - 06:02 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 12154 battles
  • 7,039
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-21-2014

View PostWarfare80, on 12 January 2019 - 05:59 AM, said:

 

Oh crap i totally missed this info, it kinda makes my post useless hehe. 

Thanks for sharing :)

 

No problem, start grinding armored tanks, since everything else will be nerfed when this hits, to avoid frustration and so on.

Balc0ra #5 Posted 12 January 2019 - 08:50 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 68025 battles
  • 17,647
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View PostWarfare80, on 12 January 2019 - 05:28 AM, said:

It would remove loads of frustration, and yes, it would also remove money to WG.

But imo it would improve the fun in the game, longer lasting battles and attract players, wich means more income to WG. 

I`m wrong,this is like the hundred whining post about this subject and i should slap myself?

 

Removing gold ammo alone would break more than it would fix. It might remove frustration in one area. But add more in a different area. As all that would do is just give more power to some thanks like the Defender, armored TD's like the 268 4 or super heavies in general. And screw stock grinds and tanks that were good 10 metas ago without a balance to compensate for the change. in both guns and armor layout. 

 

But as SuedKAT pointed out. WG already has a plan for it. Tho it's not 100% final yet, and still testing. They plan to go for a 20 to 30% alpha reduction on most guns. And even swap out the HE gold ammo on the Type 4. And ofc balance out most guns to make them less reliant on gold ammo. They only listed a few tier X's as examples for it. If the effect of it will be good or bad overall remains to be seen. As if the buffs they spoke The first tests showed the Russian 122mm guns with 270 alpha with gold, and 390 with AP as an example. Or the E100 with 550 alpha with gold. And that loss of dpm might screw some tanks like the IS-6 vs a Defender. Or it might work out if they balance it again to make it less reliant on gold vs such targets. 



JocMeister #6 Posted 12 January 2019 - 09:05 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 25008 battles
  • 2,284
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    08-03-2015

Once the gold ammo nerf goes through it will be world of heavy Tanks hurling HE at each other. Much fun will be had

 

It already is kind of World of heavy Tanks. Every game is 50-60% HTs, 20-30% TDs, 1-3 arty and the odd hipster MT/LT.


Edited by JocMeister, 12 January 2019 - 09:25 AM.


SABAOTH #7 Posted 12 January 2019 - 09:20 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 38915 battles
  • 3,141
  • [-133-] -133-
  • Member since:
    08-28-2011

View PostBalc0ra, on 12 January 2019 - 08:50 AM, said:

 

Removing gold ammo alone would break more than it would fix. It might remove frustration in one area. But add more in a different area. As all that would do is just give more power to some thanks like the Defender, armored TD's like the 268 4 or super heavies in general. And screw stock grinds and tanks that were good 10 metas ago without a balance to compensate for the change. in both guns and armor layout. 

 

But as SuedKAT pointed out. WG already has a plan for it. Tho it's not 100% final yet, and still testing. They plan to go for a 20 to 30% alpha reduction on most guns. And even swap out the HE gold ammo on the Type 4. And ofc balance out most guns to make them less reliant on gold ammo. They only listed a few tier X's as examples for it. If the effect of it will be good or bad overall remains to be seen. As if the buffs they spoke The first tests showed the Russian 122mm guns with 270 alpha with gold, and 390 with AP as an example. Or the E100 with 550 alpha with gold. And that loss of dpm might screw some tanks like the IS-6 vs a Defender. Or it might work out if they balance it again to make it less reliant on gold vs such targets. 

 

And this is not half bad actually.

 

Less damage for a higher penetration is a fair trade, like you risk HE with higher damage for lower pen.

 

It would start to make sense to use them as part of a strategy not not just p2w spam. :girl:

 

 

You barely need premium ammo at all by the way, I almost only use them vs Type 5 frontally, every other tank like Maus, Defender, IS 7, even the dreaded 268 4 can be dealt shooting weakspots with regular ammo on same tier.

 

Sure lower tiers sometimes need to shoot gold or is not going to work, so completely removing it would be stupid.

 

I think the concept I saw in some modern tank game that wanted to compete with WoT (armore warfare iirc, but is dead and never played it) was interesting when coming to use high pen ammunition vs lightly armored targets:

 

  • If the ammunition was enough to penetrate so much of the tank that would go out the other way, the damage was abysmal, like 80 / 90 % less than potential damage
  • We could get something like this in WoT, maybe adapted to fit this game, like if you have more than 3 times the penetration of the impacted armor the damage will get ridicolously low, this maybe punishing the gold spam vs lights and paper mediums.

 

They could give more differentiation between AP, APCR, HEAT, HE, HESH by balancing the kind of damage reduction the gold ammo would cause, as well as for module damage would make sense that a HEAT round on a fuel tank would have more chances to give nasty results than an APCR, an AP or HE could be better at tracking than any other ammo (tracks should be stronkerer to make sense of it), HESH could be terrible towards crew and ammo racks due to spalling, and a penetrating HE is just OMG...

 

I mean, they have a huge chance to pump new life in the game with just a little added complexity, let's see if they frack it up :coin: or do it right. :girl:

 

 

I bet 2 cents that they will :coin: but I still hope they will listen and :girl:

 

 


Edited by SABAOTH, 12 January 2019 - 09:21 AM.


Mr_Burrows #8 Posted 12 January 2019 - 11:37 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 46789 battles
  • 2,064
  • [D-NUT] D-NUT
  • Member since:
    02-17-2012

View PostSABAOTH, on 12 January 2019 - 09:20 AM, said:

 

And this is not half bad actually.

 

Less damage for a higher penetration is a fair trade, like you risk HE with higher damage for lower pen.

 

It would start to make sense to use them as part of a strategy not not just p2w spam. :girl:

 

 

You barely need premium ammo at all by the way, I almost only use them vs Type 5 frontally, every other tank like Maus, Defender, IS 7, even the dreaded 268 4 can be dealt shooting weakspots with regular ammo on same tier.

 

Sure lower tiers sometimes need to shoot gold or is not going to work, so completely removing it would be stupid.

 

I think the concept I saw in some modern tank game that wanted to compete with WoT (armore warfare iirc, but is dead and never played it) was interesting when coming to use high pen ammunition vs lightly armored targets:

 

  • If the ammunition was enough to penetrate so much of the tank that would go out the other way, the damage was abysmal, like 80 / 90 % less than potential damage
  • We could get something like this in WoT, maybe adapted to fit this game, like if you have more than 3 times the penetration of the impacted armor the damage will get ridicolously low, this maybe punishing the gold spam vs lights and paper mediums.

 

They could give more differentiation between AP, APCR, HEAT, HE, HESH by balancing the kind of damage reduction the gold ammo would cause, as well as for module damage would make sense that a HEAT round on a fuel tank would have more chances to give nasty results than an APCR, an AP or HE could be better at tracking than any other ammo (tracks should be stronkerer to make sense of it), HESH could be terrible towards crew and ammo racks due to spalling, and a penetrating HE is just OMG...

 

I mean, they have a huge chance to pump new life in the game with just a little added complexity, let's see if they frack it up :coin: or do it right. :girl:

 

 

I bet 2 cents that they will :coin: but I still hope they will listen and :girl:

 

 

 

So if you are barely using prem ammo, what tanks are you driving exactly? 

Because let me tell you that bouncing a full mag of ammo from the side of a Type 4 when running around in my EVEN really makes you cringe. Standard ammo is for those that cannot afford other. 

 


Edited by Mr_Burrows, 12 January 2019 - 11:37 AM.


UrQuan #9 Posted 12 January 2019 - 12:16 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 20629 battles
  • 6,718
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-19-2011

A TX game I had yesterday where they refused to fire gold at my Maus. So very balanced.

Do not attempt to resist, accept your fate and embrace your End. You cannot harm me with your feeble shells.

 

The current state of the game, with all the over-armored tanks around means that any change to premium ammo for the worse is a direct buff to them. But reducing their HP/armor in turn means a buff to the high alpha TD's & derp tanks, as often these over-armored tanks can survive a few shots from them, so more fragile tanks can make use of this distraction.

 

Note that for a long time I actually advocated for the lower damage for prem shell option, as a trade-off for the higher pen. But then came along the very heavy armored tanks & the removal of weakspots & hence i can no longer support that solution, unless the game gets a large rework & I don't see that happening.

 

Imo the announced prem ammo damage reduction feels more like a way to buff Chuck the armored tank driver. the type of guy who drives armored tanks, then proceeds not to angle & not to maximize his armor usage and then whines everything pens him. At least he might live longer now before he succumbs to his fate.

But for people who enjoy their armored tanks? Beware them. Sure 'load prem ammo & armor is nullified' (lol at this tho) but his support in weaker tanks will also thank you, because now, thanks to the presence of Mr Armored driver, they get less damage too! They get penned anyway (usually) so getting hit by a shell loaded for that armored tank? Nice, reduced damage ipv a full damage standard shot.

 

Honestly, if that prem ammo damage reduction happens, I fully expect HE spam to rise even more & people will once more realize what the phrase 'be careful what you wish for!' means.


Edited by UrQuan, 12 January 2019 - 12:24 PM.


qpranger #10 Posted 12 January 2019 - 12:21 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 34517 battles
  • 5,241
  • [HAMMY] HAMMY
  • Member since:
    12-25-2013
OP, without gold ammo how would you maintain your impressive stats?

Bigtime_Alarm #11 Posted 12 January 2019 - 12:28 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 18907 battles
  • 380
  • Member since:
    05-14-2013
games would be a draw as the heavies would be bouncing shots off each other for whole 15 minutes with no penetrations.

Hero_of_Tython #12 Posted 12 January 2019 - 12:53 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 25040 battles
  • 819
  • [AOTO] AOTO
  • Member since:
    04-19-2014
Whilst I would love to see Gold ammo (oh sorry "special ammo") removed from the game completely. WG would first have to completely rebalance virtually every gun in the game (upping the pen of the under-performing boom-sticks) as well as the armour profiles of a large number of the tanks by changing armour thickness or the adding of proper weakspots. If you simply removed gold ammo right now there are just too many tanks that would become nextr to invulnerable to anything other than Arty HE, I mean do you really want to be the T32 driver who finds himself face to face with an Type 5.

BR33K1_PAWAH #13 Posted 12 January 2019 - 01:23 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 4300 battles
  • 792
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    04-11-2018

View PostWarfare80, on 12 January 2019 - 07:28 AM, said:

Removing gold-ammo would improve the game?

 

No.



SABAOTH #14 Posted 12 January 2019 - 01:25 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 38915 battles
  • 3,141
  • [-133-] -133-
  • Member since:
    08-28-2011

View PostMr_Burrows, on 12 January 2019 - 11:37 AM, said:

 

So if you are barely using prem ammo, what tanks are you driving exactly? 

Because let me tell you that bouncing a full mag of ammo from the side of a Type 4 when running around in my EVEN really makes you cringe. Standard ammo is for those that cannot afford other. 

 

 

Even is a pain with those. I load golds only for types as their @Weakspots@ are not really weak.

 

With guns with ¬250 pen however the other heavies aren't much of a trouble if you can target weakspots.

 

The issue with gold ammo is that a huge portion of the player base just spam gold freely, even if they shot your ELC Even that resulting in more armor powercreep and more pay to win gameplay.

 

Reworking the ammo with a bit more complexity and different damage is only going to be a good thing, also replace Type 5 and 4 gold with a HEAT round rather than a +300 HP would do good.

 

Type 5 and 4 are the only really broken superheavy tank because enforce gold spam from both sides they should at least nerf the cupola armor to give one spot you can pen reliably if you can hit (and it's hard to hit a tall cupola).

 

I think the Maus is a good example of superheavy armor done right: angled properly will bounce even gold reliably, unangled can be penned by a Lowe (or any tier 8 with good pen) frontally with regular ammo at least at a 50/50.

 

Gold ammo @nerf@ or rather rework is necessary, otherwise tell me, why wouldn't I just load gold only and not bother to aim? For the credit costs? :coin:



Gixxer66 #15 Posted 12 January 2019 - 01:36 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 18559 battles
  • 589
  • [-AWF-] -AWF-
  • Member since:
    01-11-2013

The problem isn't a black and white issue, the game is balanced around "special ammo" as it is now. Change or remove "special ammo" without fixing all the other more important issues, and the game will implode.

 

Fix MM

Fix arty - 2 per game max - reduce the no risk - high reward play of arty - mark their position on the mini map after firing for 12 seconds.

Fix over armored tanks

Fix guns with poor std round pen

Fix Tech tree tanks to be at least equal with Premium vehicles - Classic example the Type 59 has 10mm more turret armor than the WZ120 - true story bro

Fix high tier light tanks

Fix maps - remove the OP camping positions ( platforms ) - drop some corridor maps for more open, soft cover maps.

Then balance "Special Ammo"

 

 


Edited by Gixxer66, 12 January 2019 - 01:40 PM.


Jigabachi #16 Posted 12 January 2019 - 01:39 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 17948 battles
  • 19,991
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011

View PostWarfare80, on 12 January 2019 - 05:28 AM, said:

This is not a whining post,its a honest question and im curious what the community thinks about it.

It's a question that got answered 100 times already. And the answer is quite simple and obvious.

Removing premammo would just be like pulling a broadhead arrow out of your chest and calling it done without treating the wound.


Edited by Jigabachi, 12 January 2019 - 01:39 PM.


Kejoz #17 Posted 12 January 2019 - 01:44 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 36547 battles
  • 58
  • [PRICE] PRICE
  • Member since:
    04-25-2011

There are only few broken superheavies so "you will be bouncing" argument is invalid. Goldspam is a problem on every tier nowdays, and stupidly armored tanks are on tier 9 and 10 (and the VK 100.01 on tier 8 but lets be honest, this tank to slow to be broken).   2019 should be the year of the nerfhammer, to both, superheavies (including bobject and superheavy meds - obj 430 and 430U) and special shells.

 

 



4nt #18 Posted 12 January 2019 - 02:09 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 24167 battles
  • 327
  • Member since:
    04-09-2013
This vector of approach to 'gold problem' is foolish and short-sighted in gameplay sense, but of course from profit sense very good one.

The difference between ammo would have been more readily been (IMHO, naturally) resolved by:
- decreasing premmo cost.
- implementing overpenetration: an penetrating APCR or HEAT loses x mm pen from initial armor plate, travels y mm through tank and if penetration still exeeds (initial - x - y mm) the 'back plate' of target vehicle it deals half or so damage, plus module/crew
- APCR and HEAT fired at or through external modules do reduced damage (HEAT- track interaction remains the same)
- angle of HEAT 'bouncing' increased to represent the fragile detonator cap deforming in a way that warhead doesn't activate

And so forth. To make the premmo more even with AP it should have more negative conditional so that it'd require a modicum of thought to use. Reducing dpm merely pushes people loading up front on premmo, effectively reducing amount of AP carried and directly increasing ammo costs. The need to prepare for types and stuff will override sensible spending, and frankly those who carry 100% premium will do so anyway.

SABAOTH #19 Posted 12 January 2019 - 02:45 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 38915 battles
  • 3,141
  • [-133-] -133-
  • Member since:
    08-28-2011

View Post4nt, on 12 January 2019 - 02:09 PM, said:

This vector of approach to 'gold problem' is foolish and short-sighted in gameplay sense, but of course from profit sense very good one.

The difference between ammo would have been more readily been (IMHO, naturally) resolved by:
- decreasing premmo cost.
- implementing overpenetration: an penetrating APCR or HEAT loses x mm pen from initial armor plate, travels y mm through tank and if penetration still exeeds (initial - x - y mm) the 'back plate' of target vehicle it deals half or so damage, plus module/crew
- APCR and HEAT fired at or through external modules do reduced damage (HEAT- track interaction remains the same)
- angle of HEAT 'bouncing' increased to represent the fragile detonator cap deforming in a way that warhead doesn't activate

And so forth. To make the premmo more even with AP it should have more negative conditional so that it'd require a modicum of thought to use. Reducing dpm merely pushes people loading up front on premmo, effectively reducing amount of AP carried and directly increasing ammo costs. The need to prepare for types and stuff will override sensible spending, and frankly those who carry 100% premium will do so anyway.

 

Part of it is what I posted.

 

Reducing the price is still a no go imho, WG makes money on that, fair enough they are costly.

 

Reducing dpm is a good way to go, because you don't carry large amount of ammo on every tank, so it will force you to change from a full gold approach to a more sensible ammo choice; it will also give an edge to obsolete tanks like E 100 that can carry a lot of ammo, undirect buff much welcomed.

 

Overpenetration for @special@ ammo reducing damage even more is a good thing, skill and decision making will count more than a "2" key tap.

 

But also a different crew / module damage approach can be a cool addition:

  • HEAT is molten metal, should be dreadful on Fuel tanks and ammoracks, not much use on tracks
  • HESH is a bad news for crew and ammo as well as for tracks, the spalling does nasty things
  • APCR is fast, accurate, good penetration but should be less dangerous for modules in general apart an engine hit
  • HE penetrating is... well is a bomb... go figure :trollface:

 

Ammo rework has potential to be very refreshing for the game.

 

Removing gold ammo is a no go, reworking? definitely good.



4nt #20 Posted 12 January 2019 - 04:26 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 24167 battles
  • 327
  • Member since:
    04-09-2013

View PostSABAOTH, on 12 January 2019 - 02:45 PM, said:

 

Part of it is what I posted.

 

Reducing the price is still a no go imho, WG makes money on that, fair enough they are costly.

 

Reducing dpm is a good way to go, because you don't carry large amount of ammo on every tank, so it will force you to change from a full gold approach to a more sensible ammo choice; it will also give an edge to obsolete tanks like E 100 that can carry a lot of ammo, undirect buff much welcomed.

 

Overpenetration for @special@ ammo reducing damage even more is a good thing, skill and decision making will count more than a "2" key tap.

 

But also a different crew / module damage approach can be a cool addition:

  • HEAT is molten metal, should be dreadful on Fuel tanks and ammoracks, not much use on tracks
  • HESH is a bad news for crew and ammo as well as for tracks, the spalling does nasty things
  • APCR is fast, accurate, good penetration but should be less dangerous for modules in general apart an engine hit
  • HE penetrating is... well is a bomb... go figure :trollface:

 

Ammo rework has potential to be very refreshing for the game.

 

Removing gold ammo is a no go, reworking? definitely good.

Hmm. 

 

 E100 IIRC carried some 35-40 rounds? IS-4 (which has good AP, but horrid gun handling) carries even less. The fact is that already out of meta tanks that require more bling atm will need to decide- effectiveness vs. potential. Not too fun choice... Current situation is effectiveness vs. cost. Too simple and quite frankly anyone can carry as many prem rounds as they can provide with patience or skill.

 

Btw... And completely OT, but my ocd flips... HEAT has little to do with temperature. The nose cap crumples upon impact, the circuit closes and detonates the plastic? explosive in the base of the muntition. The explosive is lined with copper plate shaped into inverse of conical 'point' of the round. This lining achieves such a initial speed that it achieves hyperplasticity, forming a 'jet' (or in some cases several). This loses speed very rapidly, depending upon caliber, rifling and such. Penetration is directly porpotional to copper jet's mass and velocity, usually 1-3 times per caliber during WW2- early cold war. The jet fragments that enter vehicle are hot, but this is due energy transformation on penetration, not factually about Munroe/M-S effect. (Sorry if wrong on one or other point, plz correct if necessary)

 

 

 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users