Jump to content


The issues of premium tanks


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

FjalarOlomon #1 Posted 13 February 2019 - 05:24 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 13629 battles
  • 5
  • Member since:
    04-23-2013

I need to get this off my chest after coming back to the game again. I hope I dont break any forumrules, or such to make this rant unvalid. This is my opinions and my alone, they are not facts. Just how I persive things after playing for awhile.

 

My issues are with the Defender, IS3A, LT-432, Skorpion G and the SU-130PM or whatever its called.

 

Lets start with the Defender, it is just like IS3 but better. It has alot better armour and alpha. If you create a tank that is better then the ingame vehicle then you are creating a pay-to-win game. This tank is a pay-to-win tank. It needs to be nerfed or simpler, just lift it up to a tier 9 tank.

 

Secondly IS3A. It is almost exactly like the ingame vehicle IS3 except the autoreloader mechanic. However, this tank gets worse reloadtime the more shells that are in the gun. This makes no sense. It means you give it an autoloader that is better then the french autoloader, since you dont rly need to think before you shoot. Secondly it has almost the same reloadspeed as an IS3 when its emptied. So you are encouraged to throw away chancy shots. Basicly its an IS3 but better. Nerf it or just lift it up a tier to tier 9.

 

Thirdly LT-432, this tank is an abomination. It was created in the 60s, but it gets to be in the same tier as a Ferdinand from 1943. That is almost 20 years difference, that makes no sense at all. If you overlook the historical background, it is just a much much better version of the LTTB. Making it a pay-to-win tank. This tank could easily be a tier 9.

 

Fourthly, the Skorpion G. It is very similair to the Borrsig, but has better gundepression. The problem with this tank is its alphadamage of 490. This is detremental to the game, since being hit with this tank can be devastating in a game. It locks down the potential for pushes and flanks, making the game more stale. Its not a healthy tank for the game. It needs its gun nerfed, make it lower alphadamage to 420.

 

Fifthly, the SU-130PM. This tank is just dumb. Its a copy of the Skorpion but russian and even better alphadamage. Whoever suggested this tank should be fired, because that person doesnt play the game.

I like your game, i realy do. The problem is there are so many overpowered premium tanks nowadays. It saps all the fun out of it. When I started playing back in 2013, you had a simple rule. Premium tanks are not allowed to be better then ingame vehicles. This was a good rule of thumb. It kept premium tanks in check. Now you are just making better and better tanks and selling them for easy money. The problem is that the game is less fun. There will always be players that will stick around and play your game, but as you can see in your statistics of the game. As I have understood, the russian server is still doing ok. But the realy money is not made in russia, its made in the west and it is declining thanks to the overpowered premium tanks. If you want to stay competative, you better pay up. This makes the game pay-to-win.

 

I would like to known if there is a majority of players that feel the same, and how we can potentially change things for the better.



Homer_J #2 Posted 13 February 2019 - 05:35 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 30428 battles
  • 32,786
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

You know when you have been away then it pays to take some time to browse around the forum before leaping in with both feet.

 

Most of your well written rant has been done already.

 

But....

View PostFjalarOlomon, on 13 February 2019 - 04:24 PM, said:

 

Thirdly LT-432, this tank is an abomination. It was created in the 60s, but it gets to be in the same tier as a Ferdinand from 1943. 

Nope, they are both pixel tanks from 2019



Noo_Noo #3 Posted 13 February 2019 - 05:39 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 22195 battles
  • 2,512
  • Member since:
    05-05-2013

View PostFjalarOlomon, on 13 February 2019 - 05:24 PM, said:

I need to get this off my chest after coming back to the game again. I hope I dont break any forumrules, or such to make this rant unvalid. This is my opinions and my alone, they are not facts. Just how I persive things after playing for awhile.

 

My issues are with the Defender, IS3A, LT-432, Skorpion G and the SU-130PM or whatever its called.

 

Lets start with the Defender, it is just like IS3 but better. It has alot better armour and alpha. If you create a tank that is better then the ingame vehicle then you are creating a pay-to-win game. This tank is a pay-to-win tank. It needs to be nerfed or simpler, just lift it up to a tier 9 tank.

 

Secondly IS3A. It is almost exactly like the ingame vehicle IS3 except the autoreloader mechanic. However, this tank gets worse reloadtime the more shells that are in the gun. This makes no sense. It means you give it an autoloader that is better then the french autoloader, since you dont rly need to think before you shoot. Secondly it has almost the same reloadspeed as an IS3 when its emptied. So you are encouraged to throw away chancy shots. Basicly its an IS3 but better. Nerf it or just lift it up a tier to tier 9.

 

Thirdly LT-432, this tank is an abomination. It was created in the 60s, but it gets to be in the same tier as a Ferdinand from 1943. That is almost 20 years difference, that makes no sense at all. If you overlook the historical background, it is just a much much better version of the LTTB. Making it a pay-to-win tank. This tank could easily be a tier 9.

 

Fourthly, the Skorpion G. It is very similair to the Borrsig, but has better gundepression. The problem with this tank is its alphadamage of 490. This is detremental to the game, since being hit with this tank can be devastating in a game. It locks down the potential for pushes and flanks, making the game more stale. Its not a healthy tank for the game. It needs its gun nerfed, make it lower alphadamage to 420.

 

Fifthly, the SU-130PM. This tank is just dumb. Its a copy of the Skorpion but russian and even better alphadamage. Whoever suggested this tank should be fired, because that person doesnt play the game.

I like your game, i realy do. The problem is there are so many overpowered premium tanks nowadays. It saps all the fun out of it. When I started playing back in 2013, you had a simple rule. Premium tanks are not allowed to be better then ingame vehicles. This was a good rule of thumb. It kept premium tanks in check. Now you are just making better and better tanks and selling them for easy money. The problem is that the game is less fun. There will always be players that will stick around and play your game, but as you can see in your statistics of the game. As I have understood, the russian server is still doing ok. But the realy money is not made in russia, its made in the west and it is declining thanks to the overpowered premium tanks. If you want to stay competative, you better pay up. This makes the game pay-to-win.

 

I would like to known if there is a majority of players that feel the same, and how we can potentially change things for the better.

 

yeah the Defender signaled a fundamental change in WG's thinking of premium tanks. Yes they became P2W or at least pay to be a little better. I think the Scorpion was just before the Defender and is more of a nuisance than being too strong. 

the problem is that premium tanks cant be nerfed. People paid money for them and any change to them means that they have a right to a refund. For example if the Defender was moved to tier 9 then people have every right for a refund given that they paid for a tier 8 tank, not a tier 9 one. 

Basically the only way round it is to bring everything else up to that level, and so we have power creep well more like power sprint to be honest

malowany #4 Posted 13 February 2019 - 05:45 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 5883 battles
  • 548
  • [H-O-A] H-O-A
  • Member since:
    06-24-2011

View PostNoo_Noo, on 13 February 2019 - 05:39 PM, said:

 

yeah the Defender signaled a fundamental change in WG's thinking of premium tanks. Yes they became P2W or at least pay to be a little better. I think the Scorpion was just before the Defender and is more of a nuisance than being too strong. 

the problem is that premium tanks cant be nerfed. People paid money for them and any change to them means that they have a right to a refund. For example if the Defender was moved to tier 9 then people have every right for a refund given that they paid for a tier 8 tank, not a tier 9 one. 

Basically the only way round it is to bring everything else up to that level, and so we have power creep well more like power sprint to be honest

 

And soon every tank will have to have 300mm front armor, 500 alhpa and 50km top speed if it goes this way. In perfect world they would apologise for the mistake and rebalance all premiums and accept all refunds.

 

In real world they planned it to be that way and they dont care if game dies in next 3-4 years due to that as long as the expected profit margins were met for that period.

 

The moment they started selling OP premiums is clearly the moment when they gave up with developing the game and instead decided on its death date and started milking hard.



Noo_Noo #5 Posted 13 February 2019 - 05:52 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 22195 battles
  • 2,512
  • Member since:
    05-05-2013

View Postmalowany, on 13 February 2019 - 05:45 PM, said:

 

And soon every tank will have to have 300mm front armor, 500 alhpa and 50km top speed if it goes this way. In perfect world they would apologise for the mistake and rebalance all premiums and accept all refunds.

 

In real world they planned it to be that way and they dont care if game dies in next 3-4 years due to that as long as the expected profit margins were met for that period.

 

The moment they started selling OP premiums is clearly the moment when they gave up with developing the game and instead decided on its death date and started milking hard.

 

I can believe that. Sad but quite  possibly true. 

Even though it does feel like a strange decision for what is a very strong product idea. 

malowany #6 Posted 13 February 2019 - 05:59 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 5883 battles
  • 548
  • [H-O-A] H-O-A
  • Member since:
    06-24-2011

View PostNoo_Noo, on 13 February 2019 - 05:52 PM, said:

 

I can believe that. Sad but quite  possibly true. 

Even though it does feel like a strange decision for what is a very strong product idea. 

 

My guess is that they are aware that the engine can be pushed only so far, graphics will be outdated every 2-3 years, and the plethora of other limitations I imagine. They had a choice to keep things balanced and deal with natural steady decline or go all out, corner the balance of the game with OP premiums but make a load of cash in the process. 

 

Short term income boost for a price of health of a declining ageing game? In corporate eyes thats a logical move.



Noo_Noo #7 Posted 13 February 2019 - 06:12 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 22195 battles
  • 2,512
  • Member since:
    05-05-2013

View Postmalowany, on 13 February 2019 - 05:59 PM, said:

 

My guess is that they are aware that the engine can be pushed only so far, graphics will be outdated every 2-3 years, and the plethora of other limitations I imagine. They had a choice to keep things balanced and deal with natural steady decline or go all out, corner the balance of the game with OP premiums but make a load of cash in the process. 

 

Short term income boost for a price of health of a declining ageing game? In corporate eyes thats a logical move.

 

Ah I must admit I hadn't given any thought to actual hardware. That certainly adds more sense to the philosophy if that is indeed what is happening. 

Lee3452 #8 Posted 13 February 2019 - 06:22 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 15591 battles
  • 399
  • Member since:
    07-16-2011

The majority of players will keep paying so why would WG not keep selling. There here to make money not do  it as a social favour. If you don't think it's fair don't play. I used to pay for premium time but when they got too greedy with new tanks every month that negated my hard grind on the tech tree. I vowed never to pay them again. So now I just provide cannon fodder for premiums and rage at my computer but keep reminding myself I play for free.

 


Edited by Lee3452, 13 February 2019 - 06:22 PM.


EldritchRogue #9 Posted 13 February 2019 - 07:35 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 4426 battles
  • 69
  • [-B2C-] -B2C-
  • Member since:
    03-15-2014

Stop complaining. World of Tanks is based around Premium tanks. It's the main income of the game, its how the game makes profit and is kept alive by WG.

If you don't want to buy a premium, either don't complain or play another game.



Hechaton #10 Posted 15 February 2019 - 01:38 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 48059 battles
  • 154
  • Member since:
    06-25-2014
Agreed. I liked this game much better in the early years when it was a pay-to-lose. More fun to play premium tanks back then.

Rati_Festa #11 Posted 15 February 2019 - 02:00 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 45654 battles
  • 1,850
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    02-10-2012

View Postmalowany, on 13 February 2019 - 05:59 PM, said:

 

My guess is that they are aware that the engine can be pushed only so far, graphics will be outdated every 2-3 years, and the plethora of other limitations I imagine. They had a choice to keep things balanced and deal with natural steady decline or go all out, corner the balance of the game with OP premiums but make a load of cash in the process. 

 

Short term income boost for a price of health of a declining ageing game? In corporate eyes thats a logical move.

 

That's an interesting view on the situation. Id argue though the graphics engine isn't as relevant in this game as it would be on average due to the average age of the player. Most older players would vote for gameplay over graphics I would guess. Also there will be a high volume of players that won't have another alternative to WOT, I have a regular scan through Steam and see the odd game I play for a couple of weeks but then return. The way WOT rewards progression is very clever and has worked well up to now. It appears a lot of players ( me included ), play it out of habit even though they might not be enjoying it as much as they would like.

 

Introducing FL on a regular basis creates a scenario where I can now play WOT for a set time of the month but then play something else for the FL downtime.

 

Premium tanks and balance issues are only a minor concern for me compared to stale gameplay/meta/maps in randoms. 



gpalsson #12 Posted 15 February 2019 - 02:00 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 23508 battles
  • 8,582
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    04-13-2013

Correct on all points. Many of us agree, but there isn't much to be done sadly. But it needs to be written once in a while, so it's all good.

Ignore the apologist in the thread. He is on autopilot and will always tell people to "stop complaining".

The reason artillery have been changed 2 times is because of player feedback, and if WG sees too many players complaining and leaving the game because of an issue, they will try to fix it.



TankkiPoju #13 Posted 15 February 2019 - 02:01 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 21625 battles
  • 6,694
  • Member since:
    05-20-2011

View PostHechaton, on 15 February 2019 - 01:38 PM, said:

Agreed. I liked this game much better in the early years when it was a pay-to-lose. More fun to play premium tanks back then.

 

Yeah because Type 59 was such a weak tank :)

 

I remember playing tier 5 T-34 against Type 59s, and of course without premium ammo because it was for gold only. Oh boy total fun.

 

The game has been pay to win from the start, it's just even more so now.

 



Bordhaw #14 Posted 15 February 2019 - 07:32 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 13163 battles
  • 3,214
  • Member since:
    01-29-2017

View PostFjalarOlomon, on 13 February 2019 - 04:24 PM, said:

I would like to known if there is a majority of players that feel the same, and how we can potentially change things for the better.

 

Sorry but players what OP tanks and that's what WG tries to provide. 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users