Jump to content

The rift widens - New premium account

premium account p2w review f2p

  • Please log in to reply
50 replies to this topic

Poll: Premium Account (98 members have cast votes)

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

Do you believe there should be a Standard equivalent for the WoT PA benefits?

  1. Yes, indeed. (28 votes [28.57%])

    Percentage of vote: 28.57%

  2. No, not at all. (54 votes [55.10%])

    Percentage of vote: 55.10%

  3. Hard to say. (16 votes [16.33%])

    Percentage of vote: 16.33%

If so, which? (some are already provided for both. In that case, please, cast a vote on what should be improved for F2P accounts instead)at

  1. Map blocking (26 votes [21.49%])

    Percentage of vote: 21.49%

  2. Missions (12 votes [9.92%])

    Percentage of vote: 9.92%

  3. Platoon bonus (8 votes [6.61%])

    Percentage of vote: 6.61%

  4. Reserve Stock (5 votes [4.13%])

    Percentage of vote: 4.13%

  5. Flexible Experience Bonus (11 votes [9.09%])

    Percentage of vote: 9.09%

  6. None, I have voted "NO" on the previous (51 votes [42.15%])

    Percentage of vote: 42.15%

  7. Hard to say (8 votes [6.61%])

    Percentage of vote: 6.61%

Finally, assuming all proposed changes go live, do you believe this sets players further apart (standard X premium)?

  1. Yes, absolutely (22 votes [22.45%])

    Percentage of vote: 22.45%

  2. In some fields, it does (36 votes [36.73%])

    Percentage of vote: 36.73%

  3. No, not at all (31 votes [31.63%])

    Percentage of vote: 31.63%

  4. Hard to say (9 votes [9.18%])

    Percentage of vote: 9.18%

Vote Hide poll

SaintMaddenus #41 Posted 10 April 2019 - 04:05 PM


  • Player
  • 38911 battles
  • 2,806
  • Member since:

I think what's really missing is a way of sending emotes to people after a battle  I think the premium account should offer this...  we know you all want something like this...



vasilinhorulezz #42 Posted 10 April 2019 - 04:13 PM


  • Player
  • 28823 battles
  • 2,082
  • Member since:

Worst parts for me is probably the bonds, they supposed to reward good game-play, now the PA users will get them for free, not sure though, how a big of a deal will it be (probably most of the players don't use them on equipment, but to get tanks, if and when WG decides to implement this in game), and yea, it could probably not be a good idea to let players ban more than one map, still, not sure if it will affect the game as much as people are afraid that it will.

Now the other stuff, I don't really care, but some of them should probably be also available for FtP players too, and finally, I find the "reserve stock" probably a bit silly, I mean just buff the credit income by 10-15% more and it still be the same, why bother implementing that in the first place?


As for if it will increase the gap, between FtP and PA players, I think it will, but will it be enough to actually make paying customers "untouchable" for FtP players?

Really, I can't answer that with certainty.

seXikanac #43 Posted 10 April 2019 - 04:37 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 13381 battles
  • 1,135
  • [-YU-] -YU-
  • Member since:
I wanted one option, that is flexible premium time. I would buy premium time but I never know when I will be able to play. Sometimes I play a few days in a row, sometimes I can't play for 10 or more days. I don't buy premium account because I did in past and wasted most of the days I bought. I was super fine with current bonuses

Verblonde #44 Posted 10 April 2019 - 04:49 PM


  • Player
  • 2622 battles
  • 154
  • Member since:

I play both WOT and WOWS, so title-specific premium is of zero interest to me.


WOWS has gone down this route for a while now, and my main gripe (which is a first world problem, undoubtedly) is that all earned freebies of premium time are for the title-specific version now, making it less valuable if you play more than one title. Ditto special offers - buy x and get x premium time free.

Bordhaw #45 Posted 10 April 2019 - 06:26 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 15319 battles
  • 5,250
  • Member since:

View PostRilleta, on 09 April 2019 - 09:36 PM, said:

TL;DR on the bottom for those with ADD.


Although I am a PA holder myself, I do not agree with most changes proposed. Don't feel offended as this isn't against good/great players but this is just like CW where most rewards go to few. But in that case it's understandable since there are players who really worked their rear armour off to actually get there and should be rewarded for it. Maybe this is a poor example but it shows the gist of what I mean.



The point of premium accounts is to cut the time it takes to make credits, make XP, go up the tech tree, research modules etc.


If the player is poor skill-wise then even with all of those achieved.... they will still be poor skill-wise. 

FatigueGalaxy #46 Posted 10 April 2019 - 06:53 PM


  • Player
  • 22310 battles
  • 2,373
  • Member since:

View PostSorata_, on 10 April 2019 - 03:51 PM, said:

I think some perspective is needed. Free to play players already get FULL access to the game for free. There is no human right to have access to WoT. There is nothing wrong with giving the paying players some macro advantage in terms of XP and credit gains. Without paying players, there would be no WoT.


Define "free to play" because there are many players who buy 2-3 premium tanks but don't pay for premium account. What about players who spend gold on XP or credit conversion? Personally, each year I spend on WoT equivalent of several AAA-games, yet 75% of the time I don't have premium account because I play very irregularly (mostly during big events or FL).

So now we have:

- free to play players,

- paying players (premium tanks, gold, xp conversion, boosters, etc.),

- paying players with premium benefits.


Next year WG will introduce "improved premium tanks" which will earn additional 25% credits because new premium account and weekly 750k pay-check caused people to play less and spend less on new premium tanks. Of course, in addition to improved XP boosters with 200% and 300% bonus since new premium account caused people to spend less on booster because now they have selectable x3 XP boost.

Don't you see where this is going?

Dorander #47 Posted 10 April 2019 - 07:17 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 21025 battles
  • 6,042
  • Member since:

View PostSchepel, on 09 April 2019 - 11:29 PM, said:


It is BS feedback, though. Do you really want WG to listen to the feedback from hordes of rotten tomatoes who want nothing more than to hide their MAUS in A0? I sure don't, because that is how we gotten to the point of a large pool of strictly linear maps.


I want to hide my Maus in A0... on every map where we spawn at or near K1 :B


View PostPervyPastryPuffer, on 09 April 2019 - 10:15 PM, said:

Platooning should provide a bonus for everyone...this game desperately needs people to play together as a team, if even in small groups...many platoons in a team should be an advantage, it needs to be encouraged.


Also blocking the same amount of maps could be done for both types of players, at least from the start...hoping they fix/remove some of the most hated/blocked maps. There's free feedback for ya WG. Track it.


Going by your account date, you should be old enough to remember when platooning with 3 people required a commander who had a Premium account, otherwise you were limited to one person. That was made free for all so the free to play people already got the bonus for platoons Premium used to give. Now it rains boosters every weekend, providing a lot of bonuses for free that people used to pay for. The premium account no longer has anything unique associated with it because it's all shifted to the free to play players already, the only advantage of it is that it stacks.


Platooning already provides a bonus for everyone. It vastly increases the impact the platooned individuals have on the game by giving 1/5th of the team the opportunity to behave in a coordinated and focused manner. It doesn't need an additional bonus, though I'll take it... assuming I'll actually bother to ask for platoons.


View PostHedgehog1963, on 10 April 2019 - 08:04 AM, said:


On the forums of just about any game with premium content there is always someone saying that the benefits enjoyed by premium players should be available to those who don't pay...  without recognising that this couldn't work.  The game relies on people buying premium product.  That is why this is being introduced.


That being said this is a bad move.  Being able to exclude two maps will significantly increase the ability of the player to perform well if they play specific tank types.  Imagine being in a HT and never playing Prokhovoka or Malinovka again.  A LT with no Himmelsdorf or Ensk.  At the lower tiers you can even exclude maps where higher tier tanks play which will improve your MM.  This will increase performance of the player and is too much of a benefit.


I never did like the bond system and the new premium time also gives access to more bonds.  That advantage is too much.


And as has been observed buying this WoT specific premium does not sit well with those like me who span WoWS with the premium time. I don't see me buying WoT Premium time and WoWS premium time.  This is cynical and it won't work.


One final thing is that anyone who pays €10 a month is really missing the discount buying a yearly account.  You shouldn't be paying more than €5.64.  This is actually great value, or used to be when it covered all WG "World of..." games.


I'm sceptical about the effect this'll have on premium account sales for those who play multiple games too. It mostly seems a benefit to those who only play WoT. Wargaming may shoot themselves in the foot with it, but we'll have to wait and see.


Regarding bonds, we have no info on the earning rate last I checked, and bonds aren't all that impactful. Unless you play tier X constantly and well, using Directives every battle is going to burn your bonds faster than you can earn them. The improved equipment bonus is nice but marginal and really expensive. I'd be surprised if bonds currently have any measurable impact on game outcome at all.


Regarding the map blacklist comment, I'm not sure how you see this working. You can't just swap maps at will (also, why do people keep thinking HTs are bad in Prok/Malinovka??), there's a cooldown of four hours before you can swap out a map you blacklisted. For most people that'll in practice mean choosing their blacklisted maps per day at best. The vast majority of WoT players play multiple tank types daily, so in order to make use of this benefit as you describe it they'd have to limit their entire playing session to the tank type they chose their blacklisted maps for. I really doubt this is the behaviour we'll primarily see as a result from this.


Similarly regarding the "low tiers blocking high tiers map" comment, it relies on certain people only playing certain tiers during their playing session, it requires them knowing exactly which maps are limited to which tiers, it requires those maps actually being undesirable for the tank types they want to play, and it won't prevent them from being matched at tier-2 on other maps which aren't tier limited this way. It also assumes the matchmaking system chooses the map first and the tier spread second, rather than the other way around.

gunslingerXXX #48 Posted 10 April 2019 - 07:41 PM


  • Player
  • 13194 battles
  • 3,528
  • Member since:
Doesn't matter much to me. 

Cobra6 #49 Posted 11 April 2019 - 07:51 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16531 battles
  • 17,656
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:

View Posttajj7, on 10 April 2019 - 09:53 AM, said:


I think you are over estimating how observant the playerbase is, people have to remember to select maps to blacklist and most players barely open their options or increase the size of their mini-map.


Realistically I doubt more than about 30% of players will actually end up using this option, half or less will have the improved premium account and even less will remember to change this depending on the tanks they play. 


Well it will take time for sure but more and more people will find the option to blacklist. Thing is, if 30% blacklists a set of maps, these maps will be occupied by *MORE* players that haven't yet blacklisted. These people will then find the blacklist feature as well because they get annoyed by getting that same map over and over as the MM has less people to occupy it with.


Cobra 6

4nt #50 Posted 11 April 2019 - 11:24 AM


  • Player
  • 29691 battles
  • 1,605
  • Member since:

View PostCobra6, on 11 April 2019 - 07:51 AM, said:


Well it will take time for sure but more and more people will find the option to blacklist. Thing is, if 30% blacklists a set of maps, these maps will be occupied by *MORE* players that haven't yet blacklisted. These people will then find the blacklist feature as well because they get annoyed by getting that same map over and over as the MM has less people to occupy it with.


Cobra 6

I agree, but I'm also hopeful (maybe futilely) that WG would take notice and start working on a rework. Ofc, they won't have a clue why players dislike certain map... Unless they come up with some feedback channel or start to use forums.

tajj7 #51 Posted 11 April 2019 - 01:56 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 28465 battles
  • 16,733
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:

View Post4nt, on 11 April 2019 - 10:24 AM, said:

I agree, but I'm also hopeful (maybe futilely) that WG would take notice and start working on a rework. Ofc, they won't have a clue why players dislike certain map... Unless they come up with some feedback channel or start to use forums.


Yeh you would hope that but then you'd also worry that loads of Steves blacklist prohk not because there is a problem with the map but because they do not have any ability to handle it, thus you could have good maps being 'corridorified' to satisfy the bad masses. 

Also tagged with premium account, p2w, review, f2p

2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users