Jump to content


Is the new apha damage buff fatal for the game?


  • Please log in to reply
42 replies to this topic

Jauhesammutin #21 Posted 10 June 2019 - 03:03 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 23668 battles
  • 1,012
  • [FAUF] FAUF
  • Member since:
    11-05-2013

View Posteldrak, on 10 June 2019 - 12:13 PM, said:

Very dumb changes. A slight reduction in premium shell damage would be better received by the community imo.

 

That is still the worst way of balancing premium ammo (not the whole game like this iteration). They just propose something like this so the community would gladly accept the "not as bad" change. 

LincolnTank #22 Posted 10 June 2019 - 03:08 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 10624 battles
  • 430
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    11-17-2015
It’ll be like marmite

Stevies_Team #23 Posted 10 June 2019 - 03:19 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 13575 battles
  • 1,393
  • Member since:
    07-14-2016
Anything that makes camping more profitable is not good IMO

Cobra6 #24 Posted 10 June 2019 - 03:21 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16530 battles
  • 17,552
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

This game needed less alpha, not more. The matches are already going by far too quickly.

 

Cobra 6



HugSeal #25 Posted 10 June 2019 - 03:58 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 22752 battles
  • 2,248
  • [SWEC] SWEC
  • Member since:
    05-10-2012

View Post8126Jakobsson, on 10 June 2019 - 02:06 PM, said:

So basically they are about to screw it all up for nothing since the need for 2 will stay exactly the same.  

 

Nope.

 

I'll just pull some random numbers out of air simply to demonstrate the concept.

 

Say you had a target that you previously had a 84000% chance to pen with standard ammo and a 100% chance to pen with premium ammo and the gun did 400 damage. That would mean over 10 shots standard ammo would deal 3200 damage and premium ammo would deal 4000 damage.

 

Now if standard ammo gets higher damage that changes, The 70%/100% chance stays the same but say the standard ammo damage gets boosted to 500. In that case both types of ammo would deal 4000 damage over 10 shots. The premium ammo with a higher consistency and the standard ammo with a higher dpm and a larger chunk at a time which would be relevant for a target at say 450 hp.

 

And if you press that a tad further to having the standard ammo deal 550 damage that would mean that over those ten shots the standard ammo would deal more damage (4400) even though it would bounce more shells.

 

So basically depending on how they set the numbers the need for 2 won't stay exatly the same since there will be cases where standard ammo is superior to premium ammo instead of the case now where there are in almost all cases better to sling premium shells.



Laatikkomafia #26 Posted 10 June 2019 - 04:22 PM

    Major General

  • Beta Tester
  • 23265 battles
  • 5,095
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    12-27-2010

View PostCobra6, on 10 June 2019 - 04:21 PM, said:

This game needed less alpha, not more. The matches are already going by far too quickly.

 

Cobra 6

 

You are correct.

 

More Soviet premiums is what the game really needs.



Robbie_T #27 Posted 10 June 2019 - 04:24 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 20161 battles
  • 973
  • [BBMM] BBMM
  • Member since:
    07-08-2016

With these changes there will be even more camping.....

 



Rorsch4ch #28 Posted 10 June 2019 - 09:22 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 16293 battles
  • 47
  • Member since:
    09-22-2011

View Post8126Jakobsson, on 10 June 2019 - 02:06 PM, said:

 

Yeah more hp and standard ammo damage. So they screw up all numbers to give an incentive to use more of the cheap stuff. But we already have that in the shell cost. And we don't really want to press 2 unless there is some heavy armour ahead. So basically they are about to screw it all up for nothing since the need for 2 will stay exactly the same.  

 

As if Credit cost stops ppl from just runing full premium loadouts. Try playing some paper tank and the check out the ammount of goldspam you still recive, especialy in T10 battles and even worse in ranked. And no its not only the first shot on sight so they dont have to reload, you get spamed just the same on repating shots, some ppl just dont load normal ammo at all and I cant realy blame them because there is no (effective) incentive to.

 

Something else no one has mentioned yet, HE is going to deal more damage too now since the calculation formula is directly based of the alpha damage so it will be an indirect nerf to those no (hitable) turret weakspots too



vasilinhorulezz #29 Posted 10 June 2019 - 10:21 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 28180 battles
  • 2,022
  • Member since:
    09-26-2014
Armored tanks are affected the least by this change, despite they are the main reason for premium spam. Show me where I can reliably pen a 279, Type 5, Maus, S Conq. and I will stop shooting gold.

Edited by vasilinhorulezz, 10 June 2019 - 10:21 PM.


Rorsch4ch #30 Posted 10 June 2019 - 10:39 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 16293 battles
  • 47
  • Member since:
    09-22-2011

View Postvasilinhorulezz, on 10 June 2019 - 10:21 PM, said:

Armored tanks are affected the least by this change, despite they are the main reason for premium spam. Show me where I can reliably pen a 279, Type 5, Maus, S Conq. and I will stop shooting gold.

 

If your complaining about the Super Conq you gota complain about pretty much any and all soviet based heavy AND med tank in the game, their turrets have even smaller weakspots and are more resistant to HE dmg than the Super Conq. Also the SCs turret weakspot is fairly large and easy to hit unlless your facing him in a situation where he gets to play front up backside down. In that case yes the SC is super annoying to deal with but thats by design, its the one situation the tank excels in so do you realy want to punish players for utillizing that?

The Type 5 is literaly unplayable atm after they nerfed the only thing that made him good into oblivion so you hardly see them at all. If you do encounter one try shooting the side of the flat front part (idk how to describe that so maybe these help: if \___/ is the front, looking down from above the tank you shoot the \ / parts, if the Type tries to sidescrape those have reduced armor efficency, ie flater angle AND the ammo rack is directy behind it so your almost guranteed an ammo rack hit on pen.

Overall yes those super heavys are annoying to deal with if their player knows what they are doing but thats kinda the point, a soviet med in a hulldown position is equaly bad but you rarely see those doing it since the tanks excel at other things and their players use them accordingly. Imho theres a lot of whining about players utillizing the strengths of their tanks in this thread (and in general) but thats a core part of the game, if you just want a free for all point, click and do dmg game you can play CoD or whatever.



SilentFear #31 Posted 11 June 2019 - 12:32 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 26348 battles
  • 3,289
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    01-29-2011

Funny thing - premium ammo was never the problem. The problem was the armor.

So what do WG do ? They buff the alpha on tanks that already have high alpha and ARMOR and they call it balance ...

 

So tell me WG - why should i play anything but my super heavy tanks ? They just got direct buff in dmg, hp and indirect buff to armor - as people will attempt to fire more AP at them. I mean trading with heavy tanks and TD's is already uphill battle. Now its just not worth it.

 

GG WG GG.

 

 

View PostRorsch4ch, on 10 June 2019 - 08:22 PM, said:

 

As if Credit cost stops ppl from just runing full premium loadouts. Try playing some paper tank and the check out the ammount of goldspam you still recive, especialy in T10 battles and even worse in ranked. And no its not only the first shot on sight so they dont have to reload, you get spamed just the same on repating shots, some ppl just dont load normal ammo at all and I cant realy blame them because there is no (effective) incentive to.

 

Something else no one has mentioned yet, HE is going to deal more damage too now since the calculation formula is directly based of the alpha damage so it will be an indirect nerf to those no (hitable) turret weakspots too

 

Right. So you are in a cluster of Bobjects, Type 5's and god knows what - so i should switch from premium ammo in hope that you specifically will show your face ? Really ?

 

If you are in a cluster of broken armor - you are getting heat in the face. But hey rejoice - WG wanted to help the "Steve the Is7 driver". You will be happy for a couple of days till the good players all switch to broken heavy tds and tanks and start blasting you for 600-1300 dmg while you pen them for 250-400 with premium. Good trade right there. 


Edited by SilentFear, 11 June 2019 - 12:36 AM.


FTR #32 Posted 11 June 2019 - 01:58 AM

    Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 16053 battles
  • 298
  • Member since:
    08-03-2010

It's even worse that wg can use this to indirectly nerf/buff many vehicles including premium tanks. 

 

It's like, we won't nerf your tank, we just gonna buff everything else.. more!

 

And idi0ts won't even realize this.



vasilinhorulezz #33 Posted 11 June 2019 - 03:01 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 28180 battles
  • 2,022
  • Member since:
    09-26-2014

View PostRorsch4ch, on 10 June 2019 - 10:39 PM, said:

 

If your complaining about the Super Conq you gota complain about pretty much any and all soviet based heavy AND med tank in the game, their turrets have even smaller weakspots and are more resistant to HE dmg than the Super Conq. Also the SCs turret weakspot is fairly large and easy to hit unlless your facing him in a situation where he gets to play front up backside down. In that case yes the SC is super annoying to deal with but thats by design, its the one situation the tank excels in so do you realy want to punish players for utillizing that?

The Type 5 is literaly unplayable atm after they nerfed the only thing that made him good into oblivion so you hardly see them at all. If you do encounter one try shooting the side of the flat front part (idk how to describe that so maybe these help: if \___/ is the front, looking down from above the tank you shoot the \ / parts, if the Type tries to sidescrape those have reduced armor efficency, ie flater angle AND the ammo rack is directy behind it so your almost guranteed an ammo rack hit on pen.

Overall yes those super heavys are annoying to deal with if their player knows what they are doing but thats kinda the point, a soviet med in a hulldown position is equaly bad but you rarely see those doing it since the tanks excel at other things and their players use them accordingly. Imho theres a lot of whining about players utillizing the strengths of their tanks in this thread (and in general) but thats a core part of the game, if you just want a free for all point, click and do dmg game you can play CoD or whatever.

 

Thanks for the effort, but all this wall of text is pure BS.

Type 5:

All of it's weakspots are 250mm if completely unangled and on even ground, that mean everything but a TD will struggle to pen if the Type sligtly angles it's hull, cupola, at least 260mm effective armor if you hit it head on in the centre. No, those are not weakspots.

 

S Conq: The turret "weakspot" is 60mm and at an auto bounce zone for everything but HEAT armor, also even 155mm guns won't overmatch (only partially overmatcth), this again is not a weakspot.

 

Maus: even if the Maus driver angles it's armor badly, all tier X guns have very high chances to bounce, also, you can no longer track and damage a Maus with the same shot.

 

279: Do I need to talk about this?

 

430U, stronger turret than Chinese heavies xD, Object 268 V4, better armor that a Jageroo, with medium tank mobility and a "weakspot" which is completely pixel sniping. I could talk about a lot of others as well, but I hope you get the point.

 

What's the point?

Everything should be strong in it's role, but when it becomes completely uncounterable, this makes it broken, I hope you remember what happened with the HD E5, right? They did nerf the weakspot and then what happened? Super Conqueror (better turret, better dpm, better gun handling, better gun depression, although historically it is 7, in game is 10 against the E5s 8). In every situation you should have a means to fight off the enemy and contest a key area against such an enemy, not just say f*** it I'm going home. Tanks should be strong in their respective roles, not unbeatable.


Edited by vasilinhorulezz, 11 June 2019 - 01:01 PM.


Mr_Burrows #34 Posted 11 June 2019 - 05:10 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 48944 battles
  • 2,271
  • [D-NUT] D-NUT
  • Member since:
    02-17-2012

Nah, do not worry. With WG's track record I am sure the new changes will serve only benefit the game experience. 

 

 

Edit: And now I turn off sarcasm mode again. 


Edited by Mr_Burrows, 11 June 2019 - 05:11 AM.


Negativvv #35 Posted 11 June 2019 - 07:06 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 13519 battles
  • 1,971
  • [KEKE] KEKE
  • Member since:
    08-08-2015
Have WG ever said why they won't just reduce the alpha for Gold rounds? Say by 10% to 25%?

As it seems the most sensible fix...

Granted it may mess up some tanks that need gold, like the HEAT 54 but it would be less of a crazy overhaul than handing out HP and epic alpha dmg all round.

Maauru #36 Posted 11 June 2019 - 07:20 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 22693 battles
  • 824
  • Member since:
    03-29-2014

View PostNegativvv, on 11 June 2019 - 07:06 AM, said:

Have WG ever said why they won't just reduce the alpha for Gold rounds? Say by 10% to 25%?

As it seems the most sensible fix...

My guess would be that it could be treated as nerf to premium vehicles (if their premium ammo get lowered damage also) but not sure.

And than they went buffing normal ammo damage and HP instead.

 

I personally think it is good concept done bad.

IMHO, it would be enought to buff standard ammo and HE damage for aprox. 15% and than also buff HP for 15% damage too. Buffing 750 alpha guns to 1060 is bit to much, 850-875 would be enough to have clear advantage over premium ammo in any situation where with proper aiming there is good chance for penetration.

For lower tiers as there was planned HP buff anyway they could in light of those changes buff HP more.


Edited by Maauru, 11 June 2019 - 07:21 AM.


NUKLEAR_SLUG #37 Posted 11 June 2019 - 07:21 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 34294 battles
  • 4,581
  • [FISHY] FISHY
  • Member since:
    06-13-2015

View PostNegativvv, on 11 June 2019 - 07:06 AM, said:

Have WG ever said why they won't just reduce the alpha for Gold rounds? Say by 10% to 25%?

As it seems the most sensible fix...

Granted it may mess up some tanks that need gold, like the HEAT 54 but it would be less of a crazy overhaul than handing out HP and epic alpha dmg all round.

 

Because that would mean nerfing premium tanks as well which they can't do because of the whine storm that would follow.

 

Any viable for WG solution needs to work from the principle that premium tanks can't be touched. Unless you can suggest something that can do that they'll go with the lesser of two evils and just not change anything



Slyspy #38 Posted 11 June 2019 - 07:30 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 14703 battles
  • 17,459
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011

View PostMaauru, on 11 June 2019 - 07:20 AM, said:

My guess would be that it could be treated as nerf to premium vehicles (if their premium ammo get lowered damage also) but not sure.

And than they went buffing normal ammo damage and HP instead.

 

I personally think it is good concept done bad.

IMHO, it would be enought to buff standard ammo and HE damage for aprox. 15% and than also buff HP for 15% damage too. Buffing 750 alpha guns to 1060 is bit to much, 850-875 would be enough to have clear advantage over premium ammo in any situation where with proper aiming there is good chance for penetration.

For lower tiers as there was planned HP buff anyway they could in light of those changes buff HP more.

 

Also such a change is more complicated than it seems. For example It becomes an indirect buff to all armoured vehicles, especially those with lots of hit points. This would make them more durable in comparison to tanks with weak armour which is exactly the problem we already have.

 

Edit: Nerfs to premium vehicles are risky for legal reasons, not because of whining. WG have backed themselves into a corner by selling tanks for cash rather than gold. 


Edited by Slyspy, 11 June 2019 - 07:33 AM.


HundeWurst #39 Posted 11 June 2019 - 07:53 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 75365 battles
  • 4,625
  • [FAME] FAME
  • Member since:
    02-06-2012
If anything this game needs alpha damage lowered... 

FatigueGalaxy #40 Posted 11 June 2019 - 08:29 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 21901 battles
  • 2,327
  • [SPIKE] SPIKE
  • Member since:
    02-09-2011

Guys, don't forget about 25% RNG - with higher alpha we will get wider damage spread. We'll be either killing tanks much faster or a lot slower - depending on RNG and despite the hitpoint buffs.

Also, autoloaders will get indirectly nerfed because they'll be even more unpredictable. Did you ever get screw because 3-4 low damage rolls in a row in your Bat.Chat25t? This will happen more often if sandbox changes go live.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users