Jump to content


Why the 5 minute battles?


  • Please log in to reply
60 replies to this topic

anynamethatsleft #1 Posted 30 July 2019 - 11:43 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 38726 battles
  • 1
  • [-IRN-] -IRN-
  • Member since:
    12-28-2012

Is WG running out of server space with the new frontline and homefront games? ~Is the mm just broken?

 



pallie_the_artillerist #2 Posted 30 July 2019 - 11:52 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 20204 battles
  • 1,376
  • [JBAIT] JBAIT
  • Member since:
    01-12-2013
or perhaps 15 vs 15 games, where killing an enemy takes away vision and firepower, inherently has snowball effects causing fast wins and losses occasionally

clixor #3 Posted 30 July 2019 - 12:14 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 54331 battles
  • 3,162
  • Member since:
    08-07-2011

I think there are several reasons, but first i think there is a self-fulfilling prophecy of sorts. Because players expect rofl battles they play accordingly. 4 - 0 in front, yolo. 0 - 4 down, screw this, this battle is lost anyway (this is why i would recommend playing with a HP counter and focus on that instead of just kill score. You could be a few tanks down but several 1000 hp 'in front';).

 

Second i think that it's clear this game caters to average players, anyone aside perhaps unicorns have limited abilities to influence battles. So this game becomes frustrating for 'competitive' players who can play good, but still end up with a 30% wiinrate for a session. So you see less and less of these players. Even with my 2k win8 i'm often the only plus 1k win8 in a battle. So what happens? if you have a bad team there simply aren't enough competent players to defend (both) flanks, and with both flanks melting you get rofl games.

 

Third (surprise) OP vs outdated tanks. I don't even blame WG for powercreep, i think it's a natural process in game development and also keeps me grinding new lines. However, if i see an E-100 in all tier10 battle you can already pretty much predict the outcome.

 

Bonus, bad mm. we are still seeing paper tanks matched against superheavies. If it happens to be a city map then most times it's gg and there is not much you can do about it.

 

 



WhoCares01 #4 Posted 30 July 2019 - 12:18 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 19368 battles
  • 631
  • Member since:
    04-21-2015
Fast battles are good to squeeze more battles into personal reserve time! Just think of 10+ 5mins battles vs 4x 15mins battles. And don't fall for the illusion that you get more from long battles - that's rarely true, except maybe if you play fartys...

Tigerfish_Torpedo #5 Posted 30 July 2019 - 12:49 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 33718 battles
  • 202
  • [BC-V] BC-V
  • Member since:
    10-08-2013

View Postpallie_the_artillerist, on 30 July 2019 - 11:52 AM, said:

or perhaps 15 vs 15 games, where killing an enemy takes away vision and firepower, inherently has snowball effects causing fast wins and losses occasionally  repeatedly

 

And the gargantuan imbalance between teams, where one often has twice the collective wn8 of the other, is merely coincidental and simply not a factor.

 

Not saying I'm biased or anything :)


Edited by Tigerfish_Torpedo, 30 July 2019 - 12:49 PM.


Spurtung #6 Posted 30 July 2019 - 12:49 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 72674 battles
  • 6,234
  • [WG_PT] WG_PT
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

View Postclixor, on 30 July 2019 - 11:14 AM, said:

However, if i see an E-100 in all tier10 battle you can already pretty much predict the outcome.

 

Not so fast.



clixor #7 Posted 30 July 2019 - 12:51 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 54331 battles
  • 3,162
  • Member since:
    08-07-2011

View PostSpurtung, on 30 July 2019 - 12:49 PM, said:

 

Not so fast.

 

That's what the E-100 said :D



staurinsh #8 Posted 30 July 2019 - 01:02 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 34236 battles
  • 278
  • Member since:
    01-21-2012
The problem is gold ammo, high penetration, high alpha dmg, like 650-1150 per shot, high view range for almost all tanks, especially in tier 9 an 10. If in this game is scouts, then you dont need 400+ view range for heavy tank.

malachi6 #9 Posted 30 July 2019 - 01:11 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 50920 battles
  • 4,132
  • Member since:
    04-14-2011

Go look up what a post hoc fallacy is.  The number of times this well used observation is made beggars belief.  Can it be you do not regularly read the forums and see this same, none evidence supported fallacy show up?  This game has been out for 9 years or so and this complaint was almost certainly made on day one certainly within the first week.  I distinctly recall the discussion of it in beta. 

 

Learn about local superiority, central defence or refused flank. Look up the Battles of Alexander, Napoleon, Wellington,  German counter attacks in late WW2 and many more. You will better understand this phenomenon

 

Premium ammo is not the cause either.  It could be at best considered a contributor.  An issue such as this cannot be nailed down to a single issue; especially when it a persons pet project and is presented from a position of bias.


Edited by malachi6, 30 July 2019 - 01:13 PM.


shikaka9 #10 Posted 30 July 2019 - 01:44 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 69437 battles
  • 742
  • [BULL] BULL
  • Member since:
    02-27-2013
nah, i think players just dont care anymore ... 

Tigerfish_Torpedo #11 Posted 30 July 2019 - 01:46 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 33718 battles
  • 202
  • [BC-V] BC-V
  • Member since:
    10-08-2013

View Poststaurinsh, on 30 July 2019 - 01:02 PM, said:

The problem is gold ammo, high penetration, high alpha dmg, like 650-1150 per shot, high view range for almost all tanks, especially in tier 9 an 10. If in this game is scouts, then you dont need 400+ view range for heavy tank.


Gold ammo? (Well, we can always use harsh language to kill a Super Heavy without gold, right?)

Without gold ammo, every last cretin in the game would rush to get a Maus or Type 5 Heavy, because they would be literally invincible.

 

High alpha damage? (Let's replace all the guns with the guns from M2 Light tanks)

 

High view range (How about we make every single tank have the same view range?)

If you reduced every single vehicle to a lower level, it wouldn't help. If, for arguments sake, every tank in the game had a 50m view range, then any tank with 51m (thanks to the addition of coated optics) would still be able to dictate range. That makes that suggestion utterly ridiculous.

 

Especially at tier 9 or 10?  (Here's a radical suggestion; have you thought about playing tiers 2 and 3?)

Lower tiered games feature lower alpha guns, lower view ranges and gold ammo is either partially useless or frightfully expensive. I think you'd be really happy there! :)

 

If you missed the element of sarcasm in my reply, I don't believe those items are 'the problem'. It's imbalance in the MMer; nothing more.



Steve8066 #12 Posted 30 July 2019 - 01:49 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 16996 battles
  • 1,072
  • Member since:
    10-06-2015

View PostTigerfish_Torpedo, on 30 July 2019 - 01:46 PM, said:


Gold ammo? (Well, we can always use harsh language to kill a Super Heavy without gold, right?)

Without gold ammo, every last cretin in the game would rush to get a Maus or Type 5 Heavy, because they would be literally invincible.

 

High alpha damage? (Let's replace all the guns with the guns from M2 Light tanks)

 

High view range (How about we make every single tank have the same view range?)

If you reduced every single vehicle to a lower level, it wouldn't help. If, for arguments sake, every tank in the game had a 50m view range, then any tank with 51m (thanks to the addition of coated optics) would still be able to dictate range. That makes that suggestion utterly ridiculous.

 

Especially at tier 9 or 10?  (Here's a radical suggestion; have you thought about playing tiers 2 and 3?)

Lower tiered games feature lower alpha guns, lower view ranges and gold ammo is either partially useless or frightfully expensive. I think you'd be really happy there! :)

 

If you missed the element of sarcasm in my reply, I don't believe those items are 'the problem'. It's imbalance in the MMer; nothing more.

 

tiers 2 and 3 are absolutely appalling because they are full of either machine guns or OP derps.



Dorander #13 Posted 30 July 2019 - 02:16 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 21025 battles
  • 5,436
  • Member since:
    05-07-2012

View PostTigerfish_Torpedo, on 30 July 2019 - 12:46 PM, said:

 

Especially at tier 9 or 10?  (Here's a radical suggestion; have you thought about playing tiers 2 and 3?)

Lower tiered games feature lower alpha guns, lower view ranges and gold ammo is either partially useless or frightfully expensive. I think you'd be really happy there! :)

 

If you missed the element of sarcasm in my reply, I don't believe those items are 'the problem'. It's imbalance in the MMer; nothing more.

 

Actually tier for tier the lower tier tanks die a lot faster than the higher tier ones do, with the exception of being subjected to HESH spamming deathstars. Low tier tanks are typically dead in 3-4 hits.



4nt #14 Posted 30 July 2019 - 02:30 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 28203 battles
  • 1,101
  • Member since:
    04-09-2013
When they exist mostly in one's brain, no amount of MM tweaking will help.

Ragoutrabbit #15 Posted 30 July 2019 - 02:39 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 10828 battles
  • 1,013
  • Member since:
    11-08-2012
Main cause=god awful MM balance, the MM tends to put most of the good players on one team.

malachi6 #16 Posted 30 July 2019 - 03:07 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 50920 battles
  • 4,132
  • Member since:
    04-14-2011

View PostRagoutrabbit, on 30 July 2019 - 02:39 PM, said:

Main cause=god awful MM balance, the MM tends to put most of the good players on one team.

 

Post hoc fallacy backed up by confirmation bias.  Given the MM does not consider skill you comment is obviously mistaken.



Ragoutrabbit #17 Posted 30 July 2019 - 03:09 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 10828 battles
  • 1,013
  • Member since:
    11-08-2012

View Postmalachi6, on 30 July 2019 - 03:07 PM, said:

 

Post hoc fallacy backed up by confirmation bias.  Given the MM does not consider skill you comment is obviously mistaken.

 

Little tip never install WN8, it'll probably pop the little bubble you live in.



4nt #18 Posted 30 July 2019 - 03:26 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 28203 battles
  • 1,101
  • Member since:
    04-09-2013

View PostRagoutrabbit, on 30 July 2019 - 03:09 PM, said:

 

Little tip never install WN8, it'll probably pop the little bubble you live in.

Yet it has been proven that in sufficient numbers the teams' skill levels even out.

 

Additionally wn8 isn't reliable since it is easily padded. As and in itself it isn't useful at all.



OmniWalou #19 Posted 30 July 2019 - 03:37 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 452 battles
  • 398
  • Member since:
    04-13-2019

View PostDorander, on 30 July 2019 - 02:16 PM, said:

 

Actually tier for tier the lower tier tanks die a lot faster than the higher tier ones do, with the exception of being subjected to HESH spamming deathstars. Low tier tanks are typically dead in 3-4 hits.

 

From recent experience in lower tiers, you blink and half of one team is dead.



staurinsh #20 Posted 30 July 2019 - 04:09 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 34236 battles
  • 278
  • Member since:
    01-21-2012

View PostTigerfish_Torpedo, on 30 July 2019 - 12:46 PM, said:


Gold ammo? (Well, we can always use harsh language to kill a Super Heavy without gold, right?)

Without gold ammo, every last cretin in the game would rush to get a Maus or Type 5 Heavy, because they would be literally invincible.

 

High alpha damage? (Let's replace all the guns with the guns from M2 Light tanks)

 

High view range (How about we make every single tank have the same view range?)

If you reduced every single vehicle to a lower level, it wouldn't help. If, for arguments sake, every tank in the game had a 50m view range, then any tank with 51m (thanks to the addition of coated optics) would still be able to dictate range. That makes that suggestion utterly ridiculous.

 

Especially at tier 9 or 10?  (Here's a radical suggestion; have you thought about playing tiers 2 and 3?)

Lower tiered games feature lower alpha guns, lower view ranges and gold ammo is either partially useless or frightfully expensive. I think you'd be really happy there! :)

 

If you missed the element of sarcasm in my reply, I don't believe those items are 'the problem'. It's imbalance in the MMer; nothing more.


Well, about maus, blame wg who found new historical blueprints about maus turret front armor thickness from 240mm to 260, same is about japanese subarine, dont add idiotic tanks in the game or balance them properly.

About high alpha guns, why heavy tank needs 750 alpha if td have the same alpha, in this case one of them is useless. Gun caliber vs alpha is idiotic as well. For example, is7 has 130mm gun and 490 alpha, historical polish tier 9!!!!  heavy tank with 130mm gun has 560hp, where is the balance or logic? Heavy tanks don't need alpha that is as good as TD.

All tanks has lost it's identity, if you are a heavy tank, then you take or bounce shells and push one direction and td with high alpha will support you, thats why it is called a TD, same is with medium tanks and lights, many of them have same alpha, why? If that is a light tank, then you have a mobility and ability to see further than others. Even that is broken, lot of meds or heavies have a good view range, they don't need a good view range, they need other abilities and perks.

And about playing with tier 2 or 3, new players has no chances vs seal clubbers wtih pz2j for example or fully pimped tanks with lot of perks, gold ammo and gold consumables. Low tiers is even more degraded thank tier 8-10. And what is wg doing about it? Thats right, nothing, they keep adding unwanted stuff, like second front, haloween modes and etc.


Edited by staurinsh, 30 July 2019 - 04:10 PM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users