Jump to content


Poll: Disabling Friendly Fire / Team Damage

friendly fire team damage

  • Please log in to reply
116 replies to this topic

Poll: Disabling Friendly Fire / Team Damage (214 members have cast votes)

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

Impressions on the proposed changes to friendly fire / team damage

  1. Very Good (58 votes [27.10%])

    Percentage of vote: 27.10%

  2. Good (20 votes [9.35%])

    Percentage of vote: 9.35%

  3. Indifferent (21 votes [9.81%])

    Percentage of vote: 9.81%

  4. Bad (32 votes [14.95%])

    Percentage of vote: 14.95%

  5. Very Bad (83 votes [38.79%])

    Percentage of vote: 38.79%

Vote Hide poll

onderschepper #21 Posted 11 July 2019 - 02:27 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 2168 battles
  • 698
  • Member since:
    05-17-2019

View PostBalc0ra, on 11 July 2019 - 02:19 PM, said:

 As console got rather creative with venting frustration once FF was turned off there.

 

^This, I am not going to specify as that may give players ideas but there are a myriad of ways that individuals and more so Platoons can cause problems for a team member without causing any damage - and now without the risk either, as it is the targeted person who is likely to retaliate against their mistreatment who turns Blue and is then TK'd.

Yakito #22 Posted 11 July 2019 - 02:38 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 20031 battles
  • 1,439
  • Member since:
    05-03-2011

View Postspamhamstar, on 10 July 2019 - 09:33 PM, said:

 

If players are abusing a game mechanic does that mean the mechanic itself is broken?  Should that mechanic be removed or should it be those that are abusing it that are removed? 

 

I say keep team damage & just introduce harsher penalties.  The only problem with that is that a lot of those actually getting punished often aren't the ones that are actually abusing the mechanic, but just retaliating against those that are.  I suppose they'd soon learn :D

I'll expand on my thoughts then. What you are saying is that people are retaliating for team damage by giving team damage back, yes? That is exactly why it should be stopped. 

I see absolutely no benefit of having this "feature" available because it brings absolutely nothing positive. It's a way for people to lash out (myself included) and NEVER make you think "what fun I'm having". Whether it's accidental shot because somebody drove in front of another tank that was about to fire or if it was a splash from arty. 

 

No more "scout or I will shoot" threats from camping TDs 

No more arty splashes doing me harm

No more of those awful situations where somebody just ruined your day completely. 

There weren't many battles where I got team killed or damaged by my team on purpose, but I remember most of them because they were awful, infuriating experiences. 

 

This feature is not broken, but people are. We shouldn't let them have it. 

I'd like to know why you'd like to be able to continue to do team damage. What is YOUR reason? Do you want to be able to make threads like:

"Guys! This game sucks. I was shot by my team, I shot them back a few times and now I AM banned. So unfair!". I am tired of those. 

 

And if the rumour is correct you will still go blue if you shoot a friendly a few times, but you just can't do damage. That is fantastic. 



Pedro79 #23 Posted 11 July 2019 - 02:44 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 33817 battles
  • 488
  • Member since:
    06-18-2011

View PostSimeon85, on 11 July 2019 - 02:22 PM, said:

 

Realism is a pointless argument when its not a realistic game, I mean literally none of the other gameplay features are at all realistic so its no justification to keep one in that just annoys people and causes toxicity.

 

'Extra dimension to gameplay' what does that even mean? Extra annoyance is not something positive and that is all that it is, it just completely unnecessary player frustration and allows idiots to ruin games, for what? Nothing, it adds nothing at all, we've ween in frontline and ranked that the game goes along the same without it, most players barely noticed it was not there until it actually saved them from accidentally team damaging someone or some idiot got angry with them.

 

Those two modes have basically proven that removing it is a good idea and all the fearmongering about dumbing down the game, or trolling will go up, is just that, unfounded nonsense. 

 

And please the punishment does nothing, players can shoot you for huge alpha damage shots and all it costs them is a few thousand credits. 

 

Some idiot TD player doesn't like how you are spotting, so take like 90% of your HP, he won't turn blue, he won't get banned and your game is now basically screwed for no good reason.

 

And that is basically the sum of it, there is no good reason team damage is in this game and with it gone, people avoid having their game ruined. 

 

I'll repeat what I said earlier, people for this I can only presume want to have their own ability to dish out their own punishment to players they don't like or don't like how they are playing, which is just another good reason amongst many why this change is excellent. 

 

 

100% agree with Simeon.

SlyMeerkat #24 Posted 11 July 2019 - 02:49 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 18606 battles
  • 3,223
  • [-RLD-] -RLD-
  • Member since:
    01-29-2013
Im kind of indifferent about it, I like to see how things go once its been live for a while before i cast my judgement because you never really know and i think thats what is wrong with the majority of players in this game of which many just like to jump the wagon and over react with any change be it big or small, just give it a chance people :)

Edited by SlyMeerkat, 11 July 2019 - 02:51 PM.


Yakito #25 Posted 11 July 2019 - 02:56 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 20031 battles
  • 1,439
  • Member since:
    05-03-2011

View Postjeffrey_mk2, on 11 July 2019 - 12:06 PM, said:

. Like you shooting with a derp tank and then in the distance far away you suddenly see an ally run into it .....I mean those things are quite funny.

I guess the guy that got hit found it less funny but 

 You can still do that but the poor chap won't get killed, so instead of him being pissed off and you laughing at his expense you won't laugh so much and he'll be ok. I always say that laughing at someone's expense is like bullying. Why do you think this is worth having?



spamhamstar #26 Posted 11 July 2019 - 02:56 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 64313 battles
  • 2,476
  • [WIKD] WIKD
  • Member since:
    12-02-2012

View PostKozzy, on 11 July 2019 - 01:12 PM, said:

 

'Realism' along with all the other realistic aspect of this game?  If you think this game has anything remotely resembling realism then I have some bad news for you.  'Realism' in a game where there is none is a particularly weak argument.

 

Would you say the punishment stop accidental team damage?  It certainly doesn't stop me taking those shots and ruining some chap's game for my own benefit.

 

Don't remove the punishment, remove the stupid mechanic.  Also, as if having team damage on makes the game more complex or rewarding in any way, that is laughable.  I see a target I shoot the target, like everyone else.  All this without even mentioning intentional team damage...

 

Just because something is not realistic does not mean that adding or removing something from it wont make it more or less realistic.  You should try reading what I've written before you jump on your high horse as I never claimed the game was realistic, simply that removing team damage would make it less so.  The fact the game is unrealistic means making it more so is worse, not better.  Flying tanks would be silly right?  Magic shells that only hurt enemies are perfectly fine though?

 

Of course the current system doesn't stop accidental team damage, because it's accidental.  :facepalm:

 

If you shoot a team mate with a risky shot then you may class that as accidental but the system does not.  I don't either & you quite rightly get punished for it.  That punishment clearly does not deter you personally, so you are clearly part of the problem.  They could fix that by introducing harsher penalties, not by removing team damage & making the game easier for you.

 

Stop saying you behave like everyone else, when quite obviously you don't.  I'd suggest that the vast majority of players don't shoot if they might hit a team mate.  I certainly don't.  I also don't believe that it's a stupid mechanic that punishes you for behaving in such a manner.  The player that is shot does get some form of compensation, although admittedly not for loss of earnings which is also something they could have looked at along with the punishments.

 

As for intentional team damage?  Do you seriously think that removing team damage is going to remove the trolls?  I highly doubt it & expect they'll just find another way of doing it.  So it's not going to fix anything, so what's the point?  Just so you can shoot at team mates with impunity?  At the end of the day they're changing the rules to suit those that break them.  I can't see that as a good thing.



Simeon85 #27 Posted 11 July 2019 - 03:02 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 1141 battles
  • 4,131
  • Member since:
    04-19-2013

View Postspamhamstar, on 11 July 2019 - 11:56 PM, said:

 

Just because something is not realistic does not mean that adding or removing something from it wont make it more or less realistic.  You should try reading what I've written before you jump on your high horse as I never claimed the game was realistic, simply that removing team damage would make it less so.  The fact the game is unrealistic means making it more so is worse, not better.  Flying tanks would be silly right?  Magic shells that only hurt enemies are perfectly fine though?

 

Of course the current system doesn't stop accidental team damage, because it's accidental.  :facepalm:

 

If you shoot a team mate with a risky shot then you may class that as accidental but the system does not.  I don't either & you quite rightly get punished for it.  That punishment clearly does not deter you personally, so you are clearly part of the problem.  They could fix that by introducing harsher penalties, not by removing team damage & making the game easier for you.

 

Stop saying you behave like everyone else, when quite obviously you don't.  I'd suggest that the vast majority of players don't shoot if they might hit a team mate.  I certainly don't.  I also don't believe that it's a stupid mechanic that punishes you for behaving in such a manner.  The player that is shot does get some form of compensation, although admittedly not for loss of earnings which is also something they could have looked at along with the punishments.

 

As for intentional team damage?  Do you seriously think that removing team damage is going to remove the trolls?  I highly doubt it & expect they'll just find another way of doing it.  So it's not going to fix anything, so what's the point?  Just so you can shoot at team mates with impunity?  At the end of the day they're changing the rules to suit those that break them.  I can't see that as a good thing.

 

As I and others seem to understand it, players will still turn blue for repeatedly shooting allies and get the usual punishment, the allies just don't lose health.

 

So you'll still lose credits and potentially turn blue. 



Kozzy #28 Posted 11 July 2019 - 03:19 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 42114 battles
  • 3,182
  • [RINSE] RINSE
  • Member since:
    06-29-2011

View Postspamhamstar, on 11 July 2019 - 01:56 PM, said:

 

Just because something is not realistic does not mean that adding or removing something from it wont make it more or less realistic.  You should try reading what I've written before you jump on your high horse as I never claimed the game was realistic, simply that removing team damage would make it less so.  The fact the game is unrealistic means making it more so is worse, not better.  Flying tanks would be silly right?  Magic shells that only hurt enemies are perfectly fine though?

 

 

Insta-repairs, magic healing packs, tanks having hit points, 15 vs 15 arena tank combat with magic red borders, arbitrary flag capture timers, tanks vanishing in front of you eyes... the list goes on.  The game is a fantasy tank shooter with associated realism.  FF-on doesn't fit the fantasy tank shooter narrative.

 

View Postspamhamstar, on 11 July 2019 - 01:56 PM, said:

Of course the current system doesn't stop accidental team damage, because it's accidental.  :facepalm:

 

If you shoot a team mate with a risky shot then you may class that as accidental but the system does not.  I don't either & you quite rightly get punished for it.  That punishment clearly does not deter you personally, so you are clearly part of the problem.  They could fix that by introducing harsher penalties, not by removing team damage & making the game easier for you.

 

 

They could but they never will, and that is part of the problem.  A problem so apparent to all but a few (yourself included) that the company that makes this game is putting a fix to solve this problem.

 

View Postspamhamstar, on 11 July 2019 - 01:56 PM, said:

 

Stop saying you behave like everyone else, when quite obviously you don't.  I'd suggest that the vast majority of players don't shoot if they might hit a team mate.  I certainly don't.  I also don't believe that it's a stupid mechanic that punishes you for behaving in such a manner.  The player that is shot does get some form of compensation, although admittedly not for loss of earnings which is also something they could have looked at along with the punishments.

 

 

Again, if this was someone only a few people were unhappy with then do you believe WG would waste resources on fixing the problem?  The compensation is a joke and anything who thinks that remotely makes up for having a battle ruined is having a laugh.

 

View Postspamhamstar, on 11 July 2019 - 01:56 PM, said:

 

As for intentional team damage?  Do you seriously think that removing team damage is going to remove the trolls?  I highly doubt it & expect they'll just find another way of doing it.  So it's not going to fix anything, so what's the point?  Just so you can shoot at team mates with impunity?  At the end of the day they're changing the rules to suit those that break them.  I can't see that as a good thing.

 

Do you seriously think that leaving team damage in the game will remove the trolls?  I highly doubt it will and expect they will use it as a way of trolling.  Erm, as above, turning FF-off is to fix a problem, one that has caused enough players to let WG know about it who have then allocated resources to fix it?

 

Thankfully what the minority see as a good thing isn't always considered.

14:23 Added after 3 minutes

Excuse the crude drawing but who would/wouldn't take this shot:

 



onderschepper #29 Posted 11 July 2019 - 04:41 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 2168 battles
  • 698
  • Member since:
    05-17-2019

The key thing with team damage enabled was an awareness of one's surroundings, paying attention to the mini map and the immediate area around one's tank.

Failure to do so led to:

Image result for wot friendly fire gif



spamhamstar #30 Posted 12 July 2019 - 06:58 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 64313 battles
  • 2,476
  • [WIKD] WIKD
  • Member since:
    12-02-2012

View PostKozzy, on 11 July 2019 - 02:19 PM, said:

 

Insta-repairs, magic healing packs, tanks having hit points, 15 vs 15 arena tank combat with magic red borders, arbitrary flag capture timers, tanks vanishing in front of you eyes... the list goes on.  The game is a fantasy tank shooter with associated realism.  FF-on doesn't fit the fantasy tank shooter narrative.

 

 

They could but they never will, and that is part of the problem.  A problem so apparent to all but a few (yourself included) that the company that makes this game is putting a fix to solve this problem.

 

 

Again, if this was someone only a few people were unhappy with then do you believe WG would waste resources on fixing the problem?  The compensation is a joke and anything who thinks that remotely makes up for having a battle ruined is having a laugh.

 

 

Do you seriously think that leaving team damage in the game will remove the trolls?  I highly doubt it will and expect they will use it as a way of trolling.  Erm, as above, turning FF-off is to fix a problem, one that has caused enough players to let WG know about it who have then allocated resources to fix it?

 

Thankfully what the minority see as a good thing isn't always considered.

14:23 Added after 3 minutes

Excuse the crude drawing but who would/wouldn't take this shot:

 

 

No I wouldn't take that exact shot & I'd be surprised if anyone who knew what they were doing would.  I'd have expected with your stats & all your games at tier 7 in the e25, you'd know where to shoot a side on tiger.  Hint, you don't need to have your friendly tank inside your aim circle, especially at the range shown in your lovely picture.

 

I've never seen WG claim that this is a "fantasy tank shooter".  Mentioning things that make the game playable is not really an argument for fantasy over reality.  Again should we have flying tanks then?

 

You claim that they could increase the penalties for friendly fire, but never will.  I suppose you have a source for all this inside information?  Oh I see, WG fixed a problem because lots of people were unhappy about it, but they'd never increase the penalties for team damage or compensation for damage caused to fix the same problem without a fantasy solution.

 

Anyway, I can see there's really no point arguing this with you as you seem determined that you are right, to the point where you ignore what I've written & just make up "facts".



Kozzy #31 Posted 12 July 2019 - 08:51 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 42114 battles
  • 3,182
  • [RINSE] RINSE
  • Member since:
    06-29-2011

View Postspamhamstar, on 12 July 2019 - 05:58 AM, said:

 

No I wouldn't take that exact shot & I'd be surprised if anyone who knew what they were doing would.  I'd have expected with your stats & all your games at tier 7 in the e25, you'd know where to shoot a side on tiger.  Hint, you don't need to have your friendly tank inside your aim circle, especially at the range shown in your lovely picture.

 

I've never seen WG claim that this is a "fantasy tank shooter".  Mentioning things that make the game playable is not really an argument for fantasy over reality.  Again should we have flying tanks then?

 

You claim that they could increase the penalties for friendly fire, but never will.  I suppose you have a source for all this inside information?  Oh I see, WG fixed a problem because lots of people were unhappy about it, but they'd never increase the penalties for team damage or compensation for damage caused to fix the same problem without a fantasy solution.

 

Anyway, I can see there's really no point arguing this with you as you seem determined that you are right, to the point where you ignore what I've written & just make up "facts".

 

The example shown was contrived,  the example is missing a lot of information that you have assumed.  I see you've tried to use these assumptions and a little pedanticism to avoid discussing the obvious premise.  Would you take a shot where there is even a small chance that RNG will send the shot into a friendly tank despite clearly not aiming for the friendly tank or do you re-position, hold the shot, change target etc?  I believe, in the heat of battle, a huge majority of people would take that shot.

 

Also, I feel my stats are a reflection of the decisions I have made and not in spite of them.

 

WG are company selling a product, do companies often describe their products, especially entertainment products in literal terms?  You are also not accepting the many, many aspects of this video game that clearly mark it out as a non-realistic tank arena shooter.  You start posting up strange extremes to attempt to undermine my point of view (flying tanks?) when i describe actual things in game (magic bushes, arbitrary view range etc...).

 

The reason I claim they never will is that the pattern of their behaviour on the subject suggests that, wouldn't you agree?  For example this game has been around for around 8 years and in that time the only major change to the friendly fire has has been the banning on 3 shots / turning blue / recording recent team damage thing they did years ago.  The penalties weren't increased then and not only that they are planning on removing FF altogether.  What does that tell YOU about the likely hood of increasing the penalties?

 

As long we as discuss this in a reasonable manner then we should continue to exchange points of view, not always with the intention of convincing the other person but to add detail to the argument for all points of view, especially for those just reading the exchange.  Discourse is nearly always a positive thing.



spamhamstar #32 Posted 12 July 2019 - 11:09 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 64313 battles
  • 2,476
  • [WIKD] WIKD
  • Member since:
    12-02-2012

View PostKozzy, on 12 July 2019 - 07:51 AM, said:

 

The example shown was contrived,  the example is missing a lot of information that you have assumed.  I see you've tried to use these assumptions and a little pedanticism to avoid discussing the obvious premise.  Would you take a shot where there is even a small chance that RNG will send the shot into a friendly tank despite clearly not aiming for the friendly tank or do you re-position, hold the shot, change target etc?  I believe, in the heat of battle, a huge majority of people would take that shot.

 

Also, I feel my stats are a reflection of the decisions I have made and not in spite of them.

 

WG are company selling a product, do companies often describe their products, especially entertainment products in literal terms?  You are also not accepting the many, many aspects of this video game that clearly mark it out as a non-realistic tank arena shooter.  You start posting up strange extremes to attempt to undermine my point of view (flying tanks?) when i describe actual things in game (magic bushes, arbitrary view range etc...).

 

The reason I claim they never will is that the pattern of their behaviour on the subject suggests that, wouldn't you agree?  For example this game has been around for around 8 years and in that time the only major change to the friendly fire has has been the banning on 3 shots / turning blue / recording recent team damage thing they did years ago.  The penalties weren't increased then and not only that they are planning on removing FF altogether.  What does that tell YOU about the likely hood of increasing the penalties?

 

As long we as discuss this in a reasonable manner then we should continue to exchange points of view, not always with the intention of convincing the other person but to add detail to the argument for all points of view, especially for those just reading the exchange.  Discourse is nearly always a positive thing.

 

Are you seriously trying to argue that because they've never introduced any changes to Friendly Fire, they would never have done so, in a thread discussing the changes they're making to Friendly Fire?

 

My point about increasing the penalties was that it could have been part of a solution to the problem that didn't involve removing a mechanic that was working fine apart from for those abusing it.  Instead of punishing them they now let them troll with complete impunity.  Genius.

 

As to my take on your picture, all the information I used was in the diagram.  You could clearly shoot the tiger without having to risk shooting your ally & it would have been a much better shot than the 1 indicated.  No, I wouldn't shoot if there was a risk of hitting an ally, unless that ally was likely to die unless I did. 

 

You keep returning to the realistic argument, even though I've never claimed the game is realistic.  Why do you think flying tanks is more ridiculous than magic shells?  That's a bit like believing in unicorns but not dragons.  Here's how WG describe their own game "WOT - free-to-play online multiplayer tank battles simulator".  Check out the last word :D



Simeon85 #33 Posted 12 July 2019 - 11:39 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 1141 battles
  • 4,131
  • Member since:
    04-19-2013

View Postspamhamstar, on 12 July 2019 - 08:09 PM, said:

My point about increasing the penalties was that it could have been part of a solution to the problem that didn't involve removing a mechanic that was working fine apart from for those abusing it. 

 

In what way is it 'working fine', it is not in anyway 'working fine' its a completely stupid mechanic that has no need to be in the game, and basically brings nothing but player frustration as their games are ruined. 

 

Increasing penalties will always be worse a solution to prevention. No penalty is going to better than the team damage not happening in the first place. 

 

I couldn't give a flying monkeys if a player lost a million credits for ruining my game, my game still gets ruined and simply that should not be able to happen

 

Now, instead of some muppet in a TD crippling my light tank because he's terrible at the game and can't read the current game situation, nothing happens and I can freely get on with my game without having to worry about angry idiots. 

 

No punishment solution is going to be better than that ever. 

 

Hence why this change is so good, its stops there ever being a problem in the first place. 



onderschepper #34 Posted 12 July 2019 - 11:42 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 2168 battles
  • 698
  • Member since:
    05-17-2019

View PostKozzy, on 12 July 2019 - 08:51 AM, said:

WG are company selling a product, do companies often describe their products, especially entertainment products in literal terms?

 

In the UK companies providing Digital products are legally obliged to do exactly that, in accordance with Section 36 (1) of the Consumer Rights Act (2015).

 



Kozzy #35 Posted 12 July 2019 - 11:54 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 42114 battles
  • 3,182
  • [RINSE] RINSE
  • Member since:
    06-29-2011

View Postspamhamstar, on 12 July 2019 - 10:09 AM, said:

 

Are you seriously trying to argue that because they've never introduced any changes to Friendly Fire, they would never have done so, in a thread discussing the changes they're making to Friendly Fire?

 

No I'm not trying to argue that.  Read again.

 

View Postspamhamstar, on 12 July 2019 - 10:09 AM, said:

 

My point about increasing the penalties was that it could have been part of a solution to the problem that didn't involve removing a mechanic that was working fine apart from for those abusing it.  Instead of punishing them they now let them troll with complete impunity.  Genius.

 

Could have, in your opinion.  Not the opinion of the game creators, it would seem.

 

View Postspamhamstar, on 12 July 2019 - 10:09 AM, said:

 

As to my take on your picture, all the information I used was in the diagram.  You could clearly shoot the tiger without having to risk shooting your ally & it would have been a much better shot than the 1 indicated.  No, I wouldn't shoot if there was a risk of hitting an ally, unless that ally was likely to die unless I did. 

 

 

You have missed my point about that picture, again.  I really thought I made it simple with that picture.  It seems I would have to spend more time in paint to make it REALLY clear.​  

 

View Postspamhamstar, on 12 July 2019 - 10:09 AM, said:

 

You keep returning to the realistic argument, even though I've never claimed the game is realistic.  Why do you think flying tanks is more ridiculous than magic shells?  That's a bit like believing in unicorns but not dragons.  

 

​Ironic since YOU brought up realism:

 

View Postspamhamstar, 

 

There are plenty of positives from team damage, from making the game more realistic to adding an extra dimension to game play.  Dumbing down the game again just because a few players can't behave is really sad.

 

This game is not realistic.  Also, if you really want flying tanks then suggest it in the suggestions thread, not sure it will gain much traction though ;)

 

View Postspamhamstar, on 12 July 2019 - 10:09 AM, said:

 

Here's how WG describe their own game "WOT - free-to-play online multiplayer tank battles simulator".

 

I already addressed that point earlier but I will add that you are naive in the extreme if you believe WoT is a 'tank simulator', this made me chuckle IRL actually.  The thought of real life tank crews pressing the red battle button to help in their 'simulate' tank battles.

10:58 Added after 4 minutes

View Postonderschepper, on 12 July 2019 - 10:42 AM, said:

 

In the UK companies providing Digital products are legally obliged to do exactly that, in accordance with Section 36 (1) of the Consumer Rights Act (2015).

 

 

literal
/ˈlɪt(ə)r(ə)l/
Learn to pronounce
adjective

1. taking words in their usual or most basic sense without metaphor or exaggeration.

"dreadful in its literal sense, full of dread"


Do you think WoT is literally the "ultimate strategic shooter"?   Or do you think that is marketing hyperbole?


Edited by Kozzy, 12 July 2019 - 12:00 PM.


onderschepper #36 Posted 12 July 2019 - 12:47 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 2168 battles
  • 698
  • Member since:
    05-17-2019

View PostKozzy, on 12 July 2019 - 11:54 AM, said:

Do you think WoT is literally the "ultimate strategic shooter"?   Or do you think that is marketing hyperbole?

 

Perhaps one should read the relevant legislation prior to making a post which deviates from the point.

 

Also the product description for new players is: "World of Tanks is a massively multiplayer online game featuring combat vehicles from the mid-20th century. Join tankers from all over the world, throw yourself into epic tank battles, and fight for victory!".

 

Thus the product matches the description.



Kozzy #37 Posted 12 July 2019 - 01:35 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 42114 battles
  • 3,182
  • [RINSE] RINSE
  • Member since:
    06-29-2011

View Postonderschepper, on 12 July 2019 - 11:47 AM, said:

 

Perhaps one should read the relevant legislation prior to making a post which deviates from the point.

 

Also the product description for new players is: "World of Tanks is a massively multiplayer online game featuring combat vehicles from the mid-20th century. Join tankers from all over the world, throw yourself into epic tank battles, and fight for victory!".

 

Thus the product matches the description.

 

 Interesting.  You quoted the question but didn't provide an answer.

 

 

 


FTR #38 Posted 12 July 2019 - 01:41 PM

    Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 16054 battles
  • 299
  • Member since:
    08-03-2010

I am against anything that makes this game even less realistic and idiot-proof. Therefore I am strongly against those changes. They should increase penalties for team damage instead of disabling it.

 

I was also against disabling all chat. They just wanna keep restricting this game so eventually all you can do is move your tank and fire.. wait, that's pretty much all we already doing anyway.



spamhamstar #39 Posted 12 July 2019 - 02:48 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 64313 battles
  • 2,476
  • [WIKD] WIKD
  • Member since:
    12-02-2012

View PostSimeon85, on 12 July 2019 - 10:39 AM, said:

 

In what way is it 'working fine', it is not in anyway 'working fine' its a completely stupid mechanic that has no need to be in the game, and basically brings nothing but player frustration as their games are ruined. 

 

Increasing penalties will always be worse a solution to prevention. No penalty is going to better than the team damage not happening in the first place. 

 

I couldn't give a flying monkeys if a player lost a million credits for ruining my game, my game still gets ruined and simply that should not be able to happen

 

Now, instead of some muppet in a TD crippling my light tank because he's terrible at the game and can't read the current game situation, nothing happens and I can freely get on with my game without having to worry about angry idiots. 

 

No punishment solution is going to be better than that ever. 

 

Hence why this change is so good, its stops there ever being a problem in the first place. 

 

Why should it not be able to happen?  Because it's too realistic?

 

Welcome to world of fantasy where magic bullets only damage the enemy & trolls will still troll.  You'll still have to worry about angry idiots.

 

View PostKozzy, on 12 July 2019 - 10:54 AM, said:

 

No I'm not trying to argue that.  Read again.

 

 

Could have, in your opinion.  Not the opinion of the game creators, it would seem.

 

 

You have missed my point about that picture, again.  I really thought I made it simple with that picture.  It seems I would have to spend more time in paint to make it REALLY clear.​  

 

 

​Ironic since YOU brought up realism:

 

 

This game is not realistic.  Also, if you really want flying tanks then suggest it in the suggestions thread, not sure it will gain much traction though ;)

 

 

I already addressed that point earlier but I will add that you are naive in the extreme if you believe WoT is a 'tank simulator', this made me chuckle IRL actually.  The thought of real life tank crews pressing the red battle button to help in their 'simulate' tank battles.

10:58 Added after 4 minutes

 

 

Oh ffs, just because not everything in the game is realistic doesn't mean that making it even more unrealistic is a good thing.  That was my point, not that the game is realistic, so will you stop banging your head off that particular bandwagon.

 

I got what you meant perfectly from your picture & have already answered you twice now, NO I wouldn't shoot if there was a risk of hitting a team mate.

 

Try reading instead of patronising.  You seem a little confused about the differences between an arcade game, a simulation game & actual reality.



Simeon85 #40 Posted 12 July 2019 - 02:55 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 1141 battles
  • 4,131
  • Member since:
    04-19-2013

View Postspamhamstar, on 12 July 2019 - 11:48 PM, said:

 

Why should it not be able to happen?  Because it's too realistic?

 

Welcome to world of fantasy where magic bullets only damage the enemy & trolls will still troll.  You'll still have to worry about angry idiots.

 

Because it serves no positive gameplay purpose and just allows people to be punished for no good reason but some idiot got angry.

 

Realism is a stupid argument, repeating won't change that, the game is not realistic in anyway, thus its no justification for team damage and far more realistic shooters still don't have team damage in because they know in multiplayer games it just serves no real good purpose and just ends up being abused and lets normal players have their game ruined. 

 

And in multiple 1000s of games of WOTs, the most of this 'trolling' I have seen I can literally count on one hand, whereas its common to see team damage at least one or twice a session, and to suffer it at least once probably every 20-30 games from my experience. 

 

So no I won't have to worry about angry idiots because the most common way angry idiots can ruin my game is through team damage and I am now protected from that, thus with this change my game experience becomes much better.

 

That is the simple thing you failed to put up any convincing argument against. 

 

View Postspamhamstar, on 12 July 2019 - 11:48 PM, said:

 

I got what you meant perfectly from your picture & have already answered you twice now, NO I wouldn't shoot if there was a risk of hitting a team mate.

 

The vast majority of players in the game would take that shot and there is no reason they shouldn't, just like there is no reason that the team mate in the background should lose HP purely due to some extreme RNG. 

 

Thus being yet another good example of why this change makes so much sense and is a good thing. People not getting punished for bad luck and bad timing. 

 

 

 

 


Edited by Simeon85, 12 July 2019 - 02:57 PM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users