Jump to content


Regarding the changes [nerf] of the HE, "rebalancing" of the special ammunition and buff of ...

ammo rebalance sandbox test special ammunition gold spam HE

  • Please log in to reply
32 replies to this topic

ValkyrionX #1 Posted 18 October 2019 - 11:30 AM

    Major

  • Moderator
  • 54354 battles
  • 2,678
  • [RDDT] RDDT
  • Member since:
    02-07-2015

Goodmorning fellas.

 

For the umpteenth time I try to write something about the current situation and the tests carried out so far by the WG in the Sandbox server regarding the changes related to the ammunition and the changes so nonsense of the HP of all the vehicles of the game.


I would like to try , for the umpteenth time to take a position on these potential changes of the game , to express myself against these changes again and to try to refute the approach , in my opinion , totally wrong by the team of developers of the WG , trying to show that at the moment there are much simpler and more effective solutions to achieve the much desired goal ; ,reduce the use of special ammunition and explosive ammunition.

 

Obviously I will make some proposals , as I have done in the past in other threads.
It will be a long thread, so if you have to comment on it , please read it through ; would be really appreciated.

 

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

HE ammunition 

 

I will [try] to be very short on this specific topic.

 

As for the reworking of HE , on the Sanbox server we have basically seen a real nerf of this type of game ammunition.

 

This type of ammunition, in addition to being able to immobilize a vehicle , reset the capture of a base or destroy an opposing vehicle with a few remaining HP or seek penetration of the armor on less resistant vehicles -to be able to inflict the maximum possible damage- ; they also have the role of being able to guarantee a good level of damage [obviously in relation to the caliber of the gun that is being used] to damage a vehicle that cannot be penetrated in certain positions of advantage , when the armor is denied and it is not possible to penetrate an opposing vehicle in advantageous positions [such as hulldown tank or "sidescraping" vehicle].

 

I think the approach seen in the test server is totally wrong and distorts the HE as we have known them up to now , often making them totally ineffective against many vehicles , thus ensuring greater strength for vehicles in advantageous positions , or with an armor that can withstand the potential -and real damage- that an explosive ammunition can inflict , so in reality favoring again the use of special ammunition in many cases.

So in my opinion a wrong approach that would make many iconic tanks of this game useless , making them real garbage.

 

Someone might say to me, "Hey Valkyrion , but at present , many players spam HE and this is a real problem in the game as the special ammo spam!"

I'll reply that it is partially true.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Simple solution:

Limit the number of HE shell that can be equipped on vehicles hold that do not use this type of ammunition as default ammo , to avoid spam and ensure that these ammunition have the role they had in most cases to date.

Fewer of these ammunition in the hold of vehicles that do not use them as primary ammunition , should relegate this ammunition to their true role, avoiding waste or spam.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

An eventual change in this type of ammunition would -again- favor the use of special ammo in many situations and favoring the more armored vehicles of the game -again- especially in positions of advantage when the most resistant part of the armor is exposed.

Then reducing the penetration of this type of ammunition to 0 is the stupidest thing I've ever seen in a Sandbox server.

 

 

 

Special ammunition

 

Like other times, I find myself once again taking my personal proposal for reworking special ammunition out of my hat.

 

Proposal :

 

Reduction of the damage of special ammunition in relation to the number of actual penetrations and a constant reduction of DPM to avoid excessive spam and with a percentage reduction of the real maximum number of special shell that can be equipped in the hold ammunition of the vehicles.**

 

*Penalty for the loading of an excessive number of such special ammunition could be the denial of access to random battles and other game modes.

*Obviously in my opinion this proposal, that is the limitation of the number of special shots should not be applied in the clanwars and in all the competitive modes of the clans and in the tournaments.

 

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Example 1: hold ammunition of the M60 -american medium tank- with 57 total shots available in the hold.

[APCR standard ammo , alpha dmg 390  | Special ammo , HEAT , alpha dmg 390 ]

 

Percentage reduction for up to 20% of the capacity of the hold ammunition to equip special ammo.

 

 

20% of 57 total shots equals a maximum of 11.4 , so by default , the maximum number of special ammunition that can be equipped on an M60 would be 11 rounds.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

In addition to this limitation to the available shots , to increase the effectiveness of my proposal a reduction of damage should be added in relation to the DPM of the vehicle taken as example.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Example 2 : M60 with a number of special shots reduced to 11 [20% of 57] and an increasing reduction in the damage inflicted to enemy vehicles through the use of special ammunition ONLY after each penetration

 

M60 WITH HEAT [390 alpha dmg] VS MAUS ARMOR : Reduction in time of the damage inflicted on each penetration, as would be translated into reality.

 

- First shot , M60 penetrates the enemy MAUS | damage inflicted 390 [no damage reduction on first penetration]

 

- Second shot , M60 penetrates the enemy MAUS | damage reduction , based on 390 alpha damage, the enemy MAUS is then damaged for a total of 370 HP [390-5%]

 

Third shot , M60 penetrates the enemy MAUS, the damage dealt is further reduced by a total of 10%, so the enemy MAUS based on the M60 alpha damage [390] is damaged for a total of 351 HP [390-10% ]

 
- Fourth shot, M60 penetrates again the armor of the MUAS, yet another reduction of the damage but this time with a maximum of 15%, therefore according to the alpha damage of the M60 the MAUS has been damaged for a total of 331 HP [390-15%]
 
- Fifth shot, M60 fails to penetrate the enemy MAUS, no penalty is added to the next shot, if the next hit is to penetrate the armor of the MAUS the reduction would again be 15%
 
- Sixth shot, M60 penetrates the MAUS successfully and the damage, given the previous non-penetration is reduced by 15% as for the fourth shot [331 HP | 390-15%]
 
Seventh shot, M60 penetrates again the MAUS and this time the damage is further reduced, this time with a penalty of 20%, then the MAUS is really damaged for a maximum of 312 HP [390-20%]
 
 
After this example, I would like to point out that obviously this damage penalty [only for consecutive penetrations] must necessarily have a maximum limit of 25% based on the alpha damage on which we are basing the example; it should also be remembered that in addition to this percentage reduction, the RNG factor should also be applied, which could increase or even reduce by another 25% the damage inflicted by a shot that successfully penetrates an opposing vehicle.
 
 

So in this "formula" the calculation of a damage reduction on a fourth consecutive penetration could be, based on the application of the RNG factor + the reduction factor of the constant damage of special shots, to decrease the effective DPM, in this way:

 

Fourth shot, M60 penetrates the MAUS [damage reduction of 15%] the MAUS is damaged for 331 HP

 

RNG applied to this [fourth] penetration:

 

390 - 15% = 331 [addition of RNG + 25%] = 413

 

390 - 15% = 331 [addition of RNG -25%] = 248

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

 

.In addition to this proposal [which I actually did several times on this forum] would, of course in my opinion, be very sensible to increase the penetration value of all the standard ammunition present in the game by about 5%.

This small increase [which could even be of a slightly smaller percentage] would fully encourage the use by players of standard ammunition [less expensive and therefore more convenient] than "special" ammunition; that they would thus have their true role and would be much more precious because the player will have a smaller number at their disposal and will obviously be forced to use them sensibly and only when necessary; this would avoid spam and excessive use.

Less number of shots and DPM reduced in time with each penetration.

 

 

Currently the WG instead proposes to leave the special ammunition intact, to increase the alpha damage of standard ammunition and to increase the HP of all the vehicles in the game, thus leaving intact the substance of the "special" ammunition without reducing in real way their use or going to somehow disadvantage their excessive use.


Therefore the proposal of the WG, seen in the previous test servers would not change anything in substance, the tanks will have more HP than before but the players will be able to perform the spam of ammunition "special" as before without any limitation.

 

My proposal [although it is obviously raw and certainly designed too elementary] could be more sensible and interesting in my opinion than the proposals we have seen so far in the various WG sandbox tests.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

 

 

Changes in alpha damage and HP of the vehicles

 

I was long enough in writing, so I will be brief in this last point and I will say very briefly - in summary points - why this change [in relation to the other changes and to my proposals] makes no sense and are totally misleading.

 

- Increasing the HP of all the vehicles in the game, means learning the HP of every single vehicle in the game as if we were new players.

 

- As in the previous point, increasing the alpha damage of all standard ammunition would force players to learn to memorize all new alpha damage from all vehicles.

 

- Leave the special ammunition intact, without limitations and limitations of these blows in the holds of vehicles, it will not reduce their excessive use at all despite the changes proposed by the WG, that is HP of

vehicles and increased alpha damage for standard ammunition .

 

- Given the current armor of so many tanks, standard ammunition is not enough and even with the changes proposed by the WG, the special ammunition would still remain the best choice to penetrate an excessively armored opponent.

 

-To sweep the game so much [HP, alpha damage etc etc] in my opinion would seriously devastate the game as we knew it and is the worst road that the WG can take to try to find solutions for the excessive use of special ammunition.

 

 

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

 

 

I hope you appreciate the effort and personal contribution, I know that no one in the depths of the WG "balancing" department is really interested in our opinions; but I think that refusing the current WG tests was a necessary act.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



tajj7 #2 Posted 18 October 2019 - 12:04 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 28368 battles
  • 16,661
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

1. I makes HE spam less effective which is a good thing IMO, as HE should not be a primary damage dealer or able to do huge damage to especially armoured targets being used correctly.

 

2. It also allows low calibre HE to actually do something like kill very low HP targets and reset caps etc. giving the round a role on all tanks, also a good thing. 

 

3. It reduces one shots, which again IMO is a good thing, derp guns at lower tiers are OP, at higher tiers they are just broken and too RNG based, overall the hole thing is just too punishing and not proportional to risk, some T49 yolos at you in the open, snaps your tier 9 lights, gets some good RNG, pens and does over 1k damage? whilst you can return with one shot of 240 at best? Nah that is not balanced, a 183 that has been camping in base all game, done nothing, done nothing to try to win the game, one shots your tier 9 medium just because you poked a corner and dared to try to progress the game and win, nah that is stupid.

 

4. Making standard ammo do more damage and increasing HPs all round (as long as they get it right), thus effectively meaning that premium ammo trades more pen for less alpha is a decent solution to actually give premium ammo a drawback and give standard ammo more worth.

 

So overall I think the changes are ok and the direction is ok, my main concern is that currently too well armoured tanks that lack weakspots entirely to standard or have small troll ones like the 430U, Bobject, Type 5, Maus, T95, 279e, T95/Fv4201, Defender, most Japanese heavies, VK 100.01P etc. that are currently dominating the game as it is with the ammo as it currently is, will just become even more OP/strong as they effectively get an HP buff against premium ammo and HE by a large amount. 

 

We have already seen that the current Maus with 3200 HP, was far too good when they made that change (+ giving it extra DPM), this change effectively gives the Maus like what 3800+ hit points against premium ammo? We can easily see that a Maus with 3800 HP would be just too much.

 

So that is my worry, the changes/direction is ok, but we need the nerfs to armour to balance this out, weakspots back for reliable standard ammo pens, otherwise this is just a buff for heavies and armoured TDs

 

 



Flicka #3 Posted 18 October 2019 - 12:15 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 23467 battles
  • 238
  • [CELL] CELL
  • Member since:
    10-25-2011

Still believe this is the standard manipulation practice.

They will "test" these really bad changes, and let everybody get hooked on them, and then just do something somewhere in between what we have now and what sandbox is, and all the community will be ok with it, as long as we did not get the full craparooney.

They did it before, and they will keep doing it.

How many of you still think obj268 v.4 is still OP?



ValkyrionX #4 Posted 18 October 2019 - 12:18 PM

    Major

  • Moderator
  • 54354 battles
  • 2,678
  • [RDDT] RDDT
  • Member since:
    02-07-2015

View Posttajj7, on 18 October 2019 - 12:04 PM, said:

1. I makes HE spam less effective which is a good thing IMO, as HE should not be a primary damage dealer or able to do huge damage to especially armoured targets being used correctly.

 

2. It also allows low calibre HE to actually do something like kill very low HP targets and reset caps etc. giving the round a role on all tanks, also a good thing. 

 

3. It reduces one shots, which again IMO is a good thing, derp guns at lower tiers are OP, at higher tiers they are just broken and too RNG based, overall the hole thing is just too punishing and not proportional to risk, some T49 yolos at you in the open, snaps your tier 9 lights, gets some good RNG, pens and does over 1k damage? whilst you can return with one shot of 240 at best? Nah that is not balanced, a 183 that has been camping in base all game, done nothing, done nothing to try to win the game, one shots your tier 9 medium just because you poked a corner and dared to try to progress the game and win, nah that is stupid.

 

4. Making standard ammo do more damage and increasing HPs all round (as long as they get it right), thus effectively meaning that premium ammo trades more pen for less alpha is a decent solution to actually give premium ammo a drawback and give standard ammo more worth.

 

So overall I think the changes are ok and the direction is ok, my main concern is that currently too well armoured tanks that lack weakspots entirely to standard or have small troll ones like the 430U, Bobject, Type 5, Maus, T95, 279e, T95/Fv4201, Defender, most Japanese heavies, VK 100.01P etc. that are currently dominating the game as it is with the ammo as it currently is, will just become even more OP/strong as they effectively get an HP buff against premium ammo and HE by a large amount. 

 

We have already seen that the current Maus with 3200 HP, was far too good when they made that change (+ giving it extra DPM), this change effectively gives the Maus like what 3800+ hit points against premium ammo? We can easily see that a Maus with 3800 HP would be just too much.

 

So that is my worry, the changes/direction is ok, but we need the nerfs to armour to balance this out, weakspots back for reliable standard ammo pens, otherwise this is just a buff for heavies and armoured TDs

 

 

 

 

As for HE ammunition, it makes sense that even the lower calibres can have "guaranteed" damage and we agree on this.

 

As for standard ammunition, the HP buff of vehicles and leaving the special ammunition substantially intact and my warn is a path with no logical sense undertaken by the WG that will bring nothing but other problems , if not worse than the current ones.

 

Going to modify all these parameters and then thinking later about balancing better than excessively armored vehicles, as you mentioned, is a pretty stupid thing because for a limited period of time [of which we cannot know the time duration] will be even more OP than they are now.

 

I firmly believe in my proposal, especially with regard to the special ammunition, their maximum limitation with respect to the total capacity of the ammunition holds of the vehicles [with the necessary obvious precautions] and in addition the reduction of the damage over time that goes to lower the DPM to prevent spamming of these ammunition.

 

I can't understand the road taken by the WG, leave substantially the special ammo intact and increase many other factors to try to nerf the special ammunition.

 

In my way of thinking, the problem must be struck at the root, instead of going around it and trying to change other things to influence another.



Flicka #5 Posted 18 October 2019 - 12:22 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 23467 battles
  • 238
  • [CELL] CELL
  • Member since:
    10-25-2011

We all know what actually needs to be done, tanks with weakspots and thats is.

But if they make all tanks have the same weakspots, that would make the game a bit more boring.

 

I do find myself bringing more and more HE shells in Tier X matches, especially in TDs.



ValkyrionX #6 Posted 18 October 2019 - 12:24 PM

    Major

  • Moderator
  • 54354 battles
  • 2,678
  • [RDDT] RDDT
  • Member since:
    02-07-2015

View PostFlicka, on 18 October 2019 - 12:15 PM, said:

Still believe this is the standard manipulation practice.

They will "test" these really bad changes, and let everybody get hooked on them, and then just do something somewhere in between what we have now and what sandbox is, and all the community will be ok with it, as long as we did not get the full craparooney.

They did it before, and they will keep doing it.

How many of you still think obj268 v.4 is still OP?

 

I do not think my friend, the developers will do exactly what they want regardless of our proposals or our complaints as the game is exclusive property of Wargaming and have already shown in the past that making unilateral decisions is their main dish.

 

The only thing that can really influence their decisions is the Russian player base.



Slyspy #7 Posted 18 October 2019 - 12:42 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 14709 battles
  • 17,473
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011

View Posttajj7, on 18 October 2019 - 12:04 PM, said:

3. It reduces one shots, which again IMO is a good thing, derp guns at lower tiers are OP, at higher tiers they are just broken and too RNG based, overall the hole thing is just too punishing and not proportional to risk, some T49 yolos at you in the open, snaps your tier 9 lights, gets some good RNG, pens and does over 1k damage? whilst you can return with one shot of 240 at best? Nah that is not balanced, a 183 that has been camping in base all game, done nothing, done nothing to try to win the game, one shots your tier 9 medium just because you poked a corner and dared to try to progress the game and win, nah that is stupid.

 

 

 

Cough *EBR versus LT* cough.



DarkfireGarnett #8 Posted 18 October 2019 - 12:59 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 27007 battles
  • 1
  • [EX-4X] EX-4X
  • Member since:
    09-16-2012

Not only all tthat but those fuckfaced deranged pisshead that call themself programmers also reversed half of the latest changes on the sandbox server - stb has the old apcr gun and no [edited]hydro suspension

 

those idiots cant do jack crapright

 

and now they kill half the iconic tanks by killing HE thus buffing the superheavies (spall liner ftw) and buffing arty too.

 

lets see how long this thread exists before it gets deleted and replaced by a "the overall feedback was very positive " wargaming propaganda

 



Solstad1069 #9 Posted 18 October 2019 - 01:00 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 44990 battles
  • 3,640
  • Member since:
    06-15-2013

View Posttajj7, on 18 October 2019 - 12:04 PM, said:

 

 

3. It reduces one shots, which again IMO is a good thing, derp guns at lower tiers are OP, at higher tiers they are just broken and too RNG based, overall the hole thing is just too punishing and not proportional to risk, some T49 yolos at you in the open, snaps your tier 9 lights, gets some good RNG, pens and does over 1k damage? whilst you can return with one shot of 240 at best? Nah that is not balanced, a 183 that has been camping in base all game, done nothing, done nothing to try to win the game, one shots your tier 9 medium just because you poked a corner and dared to try to progress the game and win, nah that is stupid.

 

 

 

Then they should just remove the derp guns all together.


Like the 105 on the PzIV. Because as it is on sandbox, you just load the heat/gold and do full damage.
Basicly you make it more pay to win.


Edited by Solstad1069, 18 October 2019 - 01:02 PM.


ValkyrionX #10 Posted 18 October 2019 - 01:01 PM

    Major

  • Moderator
  • 54354 battles
  • 2,678
  • [RDDT] RDDT
  • Member since:
    02-07-2015

View Posttajj7, on 18 October 2019 - 12:04 PM, said

3. It reduces one shots, which again IMO is a good thing, derp guns at lower tiers are OP, at higher tiers they are just broken and too RNG based, overall the hole thing is just too punishing and not proportional to risk, some T49 yolos at you in the open, snaps your tier 9 lights, gets some good RNG, pens and does over 1k damage? whilst you can return with one shot of 240 at best? Nah that is not balanced, a 183 that has been camping in base all game, done nothing, done nothing to try to win the game, one shots your tier 9 medium just because you poked a corner and dared to try to progress the game and win, nah that is stupid.

 

Is not at all stupid that a vehicle that can use HE as primary ammunition can penetrate a vehicle there where the armor allows it and cause high damage because the tanks in reality are able to do so.

Honestly, instead of modifying the HE so much, I limit the maximum number that can be loaded on vehicles that do not use them as primary ammunition, leaving intact those vehicles that use them as primary ammunition.

Certainly guaranteeing damage to the lower calibres is a good thing, the rest not.

 

A caliber of 183mm, given that you have taken fv183 as an example, must necessarily cause high damage if the HE [or HESH] ammo can penetrate an opponent's armor since that bullet of that caliber contains about 105 kilograms of high potential explosive, especially since the HE ammunition does not immediately explode on contact with not very thick surfaces and that they are able to penetrate and explode following contact with the inside of an armored vehicle.

 

 

Personally I don't like "derp" vehicles, except fv183 that you mentioned because I find it really a challenge to try to penetrate an opponent's vehicles with relatively low penetration and inflict the highest possible damage, without forgetting the bad gun handling.

And no, I actively play this tank while comfortably on the front lines along with heavy allied armored tanks.

If the most players camps on a fv183 without doing anything throughout the game it is a player's problem.

 

 

The only stupid thing in this game is the continuous introduction of op vehicles with senseless armor or the total absence of weakspots , or with weakspots that are too small or resistant

Whenever I find myself playing my obj279e or the chieftain during the clanwars I realize it perfectly or even worse when I find myself with one of these tanks in randoms against tier 8 vehicles that cannot in any way hope to penetrate certain vehicles.


Balancing tanks and limiting the use of special ammunition , I see nothing else but WGs must do instead of circumventing the problem by changing many other parameters.


Edited by ValkyrionX, 18 October 2019 - 01:10 PM.


Lil_Nas_X #11 Posted 18 October 2019 - 01:07 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 33504 battles
  • 4,208
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    05-02-2013

-Change gets proposed

-Million things wrong with it

-Make topic on forum

-Repeat when step 1 occurs



Solstad1069 #12 Posted 18 October 2019 - 01:21 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 44990 battles
  • 3,640
  • Member since:
    06-15-2013

View PostValkyrionX, on 18 October 2019 - 01:01 PM, said:

 

 

The only stupid thing in this game is the continuous introduction of op vehicles with senseless armor or the total absence of weakspots , or with weakspots that are too small or resistant

Whenever I find myself playing my obj279e or the chieftain during the clanwars I realize it perfectly or even worse when I find myself with one of these tanks in randoms against tier 8 vehicles that cannot in any way hope to penetrate certain vehicles.

 

I was struggling to see the reason for these changes, but maybe thats it.
With the changes you cant even scratch the paint off these OP heavy tanks with HE. As it is now i do 200-400 damage to most tier 10 heavies shooting them in the face, with HE  Rhm big gun.


Edited by Solstad1069, 18 October 2019 - 01:22 PM.


te3434 #13 Posted 18 October 2019 - 01:28 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 34588 battles
  • 26
  • [FE2O3] FE2O3
  • Member since:
    05-18-2011
my entire post erased somehow :(

Edited by te3434, 18 October 2019 - 01:29 PM.


ValkyrionX #14 Posted 18 October 2019 - 01:32 PM

    Major

  • Moderator
  • 54354 battles
  • 2,678
  • [RDDT] RDDT
  • Member since:
    02-07-2015

View PostSolstad1069, on 18 October 2019 - 01:21 PM, said:

 

I was struggling to see the reason for these changes, but maybe thats it.
With the changes you cant even scratch the paint off these OP heavy tanks with HE. As it is now i do 200-400 damage to most tier 10 heavies shooting them in the face, with HE  Rhm big gun.

 

with a change like this you would probably do 150 damage with HE or you would be forced to use special ammunition if the standard ones would not be enough to penetrate the target you are attacking

 

yesterday during a game with my obj279e on airfiled a non-spotted tier 8 rhm forced me to retreat because was shooting me HE instead of special ammunition causing me significant damage per shot, it seems to me a pretty right thing.

 

If he had inflicted me less than 200 damage on my 279 with this shots - how to foresee a similar change  -, I could have continued my advancement without problems.



tajj7 #15 Posted 18 October 2019 - 01:53 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 28368 battles
  • 16,661
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

View PostValkyrionX, on 18 October 2019 - 11:18 AM, said:

 

 

As for HE ammunition, it makes sense that even the lower calibres can have "guaranteed" damage and we agree on this.

 

As for standard ammunition, the HP buff of vehicles and leaving the special ammunition substantially intact and my warn is a path with no logical sense undertaken by the WG that will bring nothing but other problems , if not worse than the current ones.

 

 

 

Going to modify all these parameters and then thinking later about balancing better than excessively armored vehicles, as you mentioned, is a pretty stupid thing because for a limited period of time [of which we cannot know the time duration] will be even more OP than they are now.

 

I firmly believe in my proposal, especially with regard to the special ammunition, their maximum limitation with respect to the total capacity of the ammunition holds of the vehicles [with the necessary obvious precautions] and in addition the reduction of the damage over time that goes to lower the DPM to prevent spamming of these ammunition.

 

I can't understand the road taken by the WG, leave substantially the special ammo intact and increase many other factors to try to nerf the special ammunition.

 

In my way of thinking, the problem must be struck at the root, instead of going around it and trying to change other things to influence another.

 

I don't think whatever WG do with premium ammo they will make most of the people who whine about it happy, if their tank gets penned, those people will complain, if you removed premium ammo those people would start complaining that standard ammo pen is too high. You use like M46 Patton for example with APCR, it has with premium ammo standard pen on most tanks on tier 9/10, you have to aim for lower plates, cupolas etc. Doesn't stop those people you damage complaining about it and sending messages after the game calling me a 'gold noob'.

 

Essentially a lot of people want their heavy tanks to basically be frontally invincible and will always complain.

 

So for the various options I think what they have gone with is ok because it ticks to boxes, it balances premium ammo by giving them a trade off for the higher pen and as someone that tries to use standard ammo as much as I can, I appreciate this it gives people like me more value for our approach. Secondly it allows changes to premium vehicles without actually nerfing them.

 

I seriously do not expect it'll cut down on the whines though, and yes it'll create other problems especially if they don't address the armour problems and from what I saw from the last sandbox the HP buffs seemed to disproportionate to paper vehicles, they seemed to effectively getting nerfed. This will have a big impact on tank balance IMO and its a worry about how long and how effectively WG will fix that.

 

IMO if you reduce ammo numbers available what does that change for the person you shoot at? If I have 10 premium rounds and I fire them all at your Maus, what comfort is it to you that I don't have any left to fire at the Type 5 next to you? Same with HE rounds, if I get derped by a T49 for 1k health, it doesn't make me feel any better or feel any more balanced that he can only do that 3 more times.

 

 

View PostSlyspy, on 18 October 2019 - 11:42 AM, said:

 

Cough *EBR versus LT* cough.

 

I'll take 510 damage over 910 damage all every day, especially as neither pens that often from experience so we are more talking like 400-500 vs 150-200. 

 

View PostSolstad1069, on 18 October 2019 - 12:00 PM, said:

Then they should just remove the derp guns all together.


Like the 105 on the PzIV. Because as it is on sandbox, you just load the heat/gold and do full damage.
Basicly you make it more pay to win.

 

You don't need to if people don't want to use them.

 

And those premium rounds are less effective because they have less alpha now effectively.

 

What people don't get is (where tanks have AP rounds and if they don't they need to add AP rounds for ones that don't) is that the AP rounds are now your HE rounds if you want that big alpha hit but you must gamble that you pen (people also forget overmatch, KV-2 AP can overmatch so much at its tier) you don't get a compensatory large amount of damage if you don't. If you want more chance to pen, you use premium rounds, you pay more and you get more pen chance but less alpha, if you want to just do some damage, you use HE.

 

Derp guns IMO have not become useless, especially at those mid to lower tiers, they just require more brain use and it becomes about aiming correctly and using the right ammo against the right targets at the right time.

 

Like I just watched QB moan about these changes, whilst doing like 1.7k damage in a tier 5 medium, firing shots at sidescraping tanks doing 90-100 damage where AP would do no damage, complaining the gun is useless, which is just utter nonsense. 


Edited by tajj7, 18 October 2019 - 01:54 PM.


ValkyrionX #16 Posted 18 October 2019 - 02:04 PM

    Major

  • Moderator
  • 54354 battles
  • 2,678
  • [RDDT] RDDT
  • Member since:
    02-07-2015

View Posttajj7, on 18 October 2019 - 01:53 PM, said:

 

I don't think whatever WG do with premium ammo they will make most of the people who whine about it happy, if their tank gets penned, those people will complain, if you removed premium ammo those people would start complaining that standard ammo pen is too high. You use like M46 Patton for example with APCR, it has with premium ammo standard pen on most tanks on tier 9/10, you have to aim for lower plates, cupolas etc. Doesn't stop those people you damage complaining about it and sending messages after the game calling me a 'gold noob'.

 

Essentially a lot of people want their heavy tanks to basically be frontally invincible and will always complain.

 

So for the various options I think what they have gone with is ok because it ticks to boxes, it balances premium ammo by giving them a trade off for the higher pen and as someone that tries to use standard ammo as much as I can, I appreciate this it gives people like me more value for our approach. Secondly it allows changes to premium vehicles without actually nerfing them.

 

I seriously do not expect it'll cut down on the whines though, and yes it'll create other problems especially if they don't address the armour problems and from what I saw from the last sandbox the HP buffs seemed to disproportionate to paper vehicles, they seemed to effectively getting nerfed. This will have a big impact on tank balance IMO and its a worry about how long and how effectively WG will fix that.

 

IMO if you reduce ammo numbers available what does that change for the person you shoot at? If I have 10 premium rounds and I fire them all at your Maus, what comfort is it to you that I don't have any left to fire at the Type 5 next to you? Same with HE rounds, if I get derped by a T49 for 1k health, it doesn't make me feel any better or feel any more balanced that he can only do that 3 more times.

 

 

 

Surely what I personally propose is not the definitive solution but certainly better than the current Wg approach.

 

In any case, I find it sensible to reduce the number of special ammunition in the tanks hold and the reduction of damage per shot which negatively affects the DPM , it would be a good part to open the way to a balancing of vehicles and their relative armor to further reduce the need to use special ammunition so frequently.

 

 

Obviously any changes will be made some people happy and unhappy others.

 

However, the current drastic changes proposed by the WG will only create other problems and create a meta game aimed primarily at the most armored vehicles of the game and penalizing all other less armored vehicles of each class.

 

..and this is a very worrying thing.

 

 

edit:

in the same stream of yesterday of QB you see him playing the KV2 with the 107mm gun, while he shoots an HE on an AMX12t without managing to destroy the tracks and without even being able to damage it.

 

"balanced" 

 

 

 


Edited by ValkyrionX, 18 October 2019 - 02:37 PM.


te3434 #17 Posted 18 October 2019 - 02:27 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 34588 battles
  • 26
  • [FE2O3] FE2O3
  • Member since:
    05-18-2011

View Posttajj7, on 18 October 2019 - 11:04 AM, said:

1. I makes HE spam less effective which is a good thing IMO, as HE should not be a primary damage dealer or able to do huge damage to especially armoured targets being used correctly.

 

2. It also allows low calibre HE to actually do something like kill very low HP targets and reset caps etc. giving the round a role on all tanks, also a good thing. 

 

3. It reduces one shots, which again IMO is a good thing, derp guns at lower tiers are OP, at higher tiers they are just broken and too RNG based, overall the hole thing is just too punishing and not proportional to risk, some T49 yolos at you in the open, snaps your tier 9 lights, gets some good RNG, pens and does over 1k damage? whilst you can return with one shot of 240 at best? Nah that is not balanced, a 183 that has been camping in base all game, done nothing, done nothing to try to win the game, one shots your tier 9 medium just because you poked a corner and dared to try to progress the game and win, nah that is stupid.

 

4. Making standard ammo do more damage and increasing HPs all round (as long as they get it right), thus effectively meaning that premium ammo trades more pen for less alpha is a decent solution to actually give premium ammo a drawback and give standard ammo more worth.

 

So overall I think the changes are ok and the direction is ok, my main concern is that currently too well armoured tanks that lack weakspots entirely to standard or have small troll ones like the 430U, Bobject, Type 5, Maus, T95, 279e, T95/Fv4201, Defender, most Japanese heavies, VK 100.01P etc. that are currently dominating the game as it is with the ammo as it currently is, will just become even more OP/strong as they effectively get an HP buff against premium ammo and HE by a large amount. 

 

We have already seen that the current Maus with 3200 HP, was far too good when they made that change (+ giving it extra DPM), this change effectively gives the Maus like what 3800+ hit points against premium ammo? We can easily see that a Maus with 3800 HP would be just too much.

 

So that is my worry, the changes/direction is ok, but we need the nerfs to armour to balance this out, weakspots back for reliable standard ammo pens, otherwise this is just a buff for heavies and armoured TDs

 

 

 

1. and 2. Why should a low hp well armored target be easily destroyed by a small calliber crap gun shooting HE? That would actually make HE "spam" a problem for the first time.

Currently, HE "spamming" is not a problem at all. If someone uses HE constantly while AP is a better choice, it is his problem for not using ammo properly, not disbalance. On the other hand, if someone uses AP on a well aimed paper target, it is also a bad use of ammo.

 

3. They might as well change the name of the game to "World of Imaginary-vehicles-not-related-to-reality-at-all". What is the point of howitzers if they don't use HE, and what is the point of HE if it does less dmg than AP. Paper armor tanks should easily be wrecked if hit. Otherwise, mediocre armor is completelly pointless, since 10mm will do the same.

 

I don't say the game is balanced now, but this is not the way to try to solve it. Instead of solving the problem, they are AVOIDING it by completelly removing some features from the game, while introducing some new crappy illogical imaginary mechanics.

 

At the end, they might make it work (to be "balanced, but again, what would be the point of playing some game about imaginary things?

 

4. Why is it called High-Explosive then, if it does less damage than AP? If the "rebalance" applies, they should definitely change the name, for example to "Guaranteed Damage Crap Shell" (GDCS).

 

As for premium ammo (APCR for example), yes it should do less dmg (it is actually logical). While HE is not premium ammo. What else is standard ammo for howitzers? AP maybe XD?

 

View PostSolstad1069, on 18 October 2019 - 12:00 PM, said:

Then they should just remove the derp guns all together.


Like the 105 on the PzIV. Because as it is on sandbox, you just load the heat/gold and do full damage.
Basicly you make it more pay to win.

 

Agree on that one. Why should Pz IV have a 105mm in a turret.
On the other hand, M4 105 is historically accurate, and removing it would be just dumb, i.e. running away from problems. Although it would be fine to make HEAT shells either do less dmg, less pen or be removed.

 

View Posttajj7, on 18 October 2019 - 12:53 PM, said:

 

I don't think whatever WG do with premium ammo they will make most of the people who whine about it happy, if their tank gets penned, those people will complain, if you removed premium ammo those people would start complaining that standard ammo pen is too high. You use like M46 Patton for example with APCR, it has with premium ammo standard pen on most tanks on tier 9/10, you have to aim for lower plates, cupolas etc. Doesn't stop those people you damage complaining about it and sending messages after the game calling me a 'gold noob'.

 

Essentially a lot of people want their heavy tanks to basically be frontally invincible and will always complain.

 

So for the various options I think what they have gone with is ok because it ticks to boxes, it balances premium ammo by giving them a trade off for the higher pen and as someone that tries to use standard ammo as much as I can, I appreciate this it gives people like me more value for our approach. Secondly it allows changes to premium vehicles without actually nerfing them.

 

I seriously do not expect it'll cut down on the whines though, and yes it'll create other problems especially if they don't address the armour problems and from what I saw from the last sandbox the HP buffs seemed to disproportionate to paper vehicles, they seemed to effectively getting nerfed. This will have a big impact on tank balance IMO and its a worry about how long and how effectively WG will fix that.

 

IMO if you reduce ammo numbers available what does that change for the person you shoot at? If I have 10 premium rounds and I fire them all at your Maus, what comfort is it to you that I don't have any left to fire at the Type 5 next to you? Same with HE rounds, if I get derped by a T49 for 1k health, it doesn't make me feel any better or feel any more balanced that he can only do that 3 more times.

 

 

 

I'll take 510 damage over 910 damage all every day, especially as neither pens that often from experience so we are more talking like 400-500 vs 150-200. 

 

 

You don't need to if people don't want to use them.

 

And those premium rounds are less effective because they have less alpha now effectively.

 

What people don't get is (where tanks have AP rounds and if they don't they need to add AP rounds for ones that don't) is that the AP rounds are now your HE rounds if you want that big alpha hit but you must gamble that you pen (people also forget overmatch, KV-2 AP can overmatch so much at its tier) you don't get a compensatory large amount of damage if you don't. If you want more chance to pen, you use premium rounds, you pay more and you get more pen chance but less alpha, if you want to just do some damage, you use HE.

 

Derp guns IMO have not become useless, especially at those mid to lower tiers, they just require more brain use and it becomes about aiming correctly and using the right ammo against the right targets at the right time.

 

Like I just watched QB moan about these changes, whilst doing like 1.7k damage in a tier 5 medium, firing shots at sidescraping tanks doing 90-100 damage where AP would do no damage, complaining the gun is useless, which is just utter nonsense. 

 

That is the problem of the whole thing I guess: they listen and try to satisfy unargumented and illogical moaning. You can't satisfy everyone. Just make the game properly and listen only to logical critics.

It's almost the same as if people moan: "why tanks have armor!! I can't kill anyone", and they remove the armor from the game (a game about armored vehicles), so where is the logic? ... completely ill way of "solving" problems.


Edited by te3434, 18 October 2019 - 02:30 PM.


tajj7 #18 Posted 18 October 2019 - 02:42 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 28368 battles
  • 16,661
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

View Postte3434, on 18 October 2019 - 01:27 PM, said:

 

1. and 2. Why should a low hp well armored target be easily destroyed by a small calliber crap gun shooting HE? That would actually make HE "spam" a problem for the first time.

Currently, HE "spamming" is not a problem at all. If someone uses HE constantly while AP is a better choice, it is his problem for not using ammo properly, not disbalance. On the other hand, if someone uses AP on a well aimed paper target, it is also a bad use of ammo.

 

3. They might as well change the name of the game to "World of Imaginary-vehicles-not-related-to-reality-at-all". What is the point of howitzers if they don't use HE, and what is the point of HE if it does less dmg than AP. Paper armor tanks should easily be wrecked if hit. Otherwise, mediocre armor is completelly pointless, since 10mm will do the same.

 

I don't say the game is balanced now, but this is not the way to try to solve it. Instead of solving the problem, they are AVOIDING it by completelly removing some features from the game, while introducing some new crappy illogical imaginary mechanics.

 

At the end, they might make it work (to be "balanced, but again, what would be the point of playing some game about imaginary things?

 

4. Why is it called High-Explosive then, if it does less damage than AP? If the "rebalance" applies, they should definitely change the name, for example to "Guaranteed Damage Crap Shell" (GDCS).

 

As for premium ammo (APCR for example), yes it should do less dmg (it is actually logical). While HE is not premium ammo. What else is standard ammo for howitzers? AP maybe XD?

 

 

1. Who says it is easily going to be destroyed? I mean from the vid QB did, he was doing like 11 damage to the front on an O-Ni with an M4 derp, so that O-Ni is going to have to be on very low HP for one HE round to finish it off.

 

HE spam is a problem IMO but largely related to large calibre HE guns, do you see KV-2s use AP ever? I don't even though its penetration and overmatch ability against many targets would make it a more reliable option. How many 183s use AP? Japanese heavy players still won't use the AP guns in most cases. 

 

There is loads of HE spam at the moment IMO.

 

I don't think it doing minute levels of damage is going to increase it.

 

3. The game has no real basis in reality anyway, its about balance not history and when has mediocre armour ever been useful, being a bit 'HE proof' hardly changes a tank from average to good or from bad to average etc. Plus most of these derp gun options have AP rounds with high damage, a KV-2 can still do 700 damage with 110mm of penetration and the ability to overmatch 50mm of armour as well, so lightly armoured tanks can still take huge damage from these derp guns.

 

Clearly WG doesn't want HE to be a primary damage dealer and I agree with them, they want AP/standard APCR to be the biggest damage dealer, HE then has a different role of doing less damage but some damage without requiring pen.

 

High explosive will still do splash damage and do damage without penetration that other rounds can't, so I see no reason to change the name. 

 



ValkyrionX #19 Posted 18 October 2019 - 02:46 PM

    Major

  • Moderator
  • 54354 battles
  • 2,678
  • [RDDT] RDDT
  • Member since:
    02-07-2015

View Posttajj7, on 18 October 2019 - 02:42 PM, said:

 

1. Who says it is easily going to be destroyed? I mean from the vid QB did, he was doing like 11 damage to the front on an O-Ni with an M4 derp, so that O-Ni is going to have to be on very low HP for one HE round to finish it off.

 

HE spam is a problem IMO but largely related to large calibre HE guns, do you see KV-2s use AP ever? I don't even though its penetration and overmatch ability against many targets would make it a more reliable option. How many 183s use AP? Japanese heavy players still won't use the AP guns in most cases. 

 

There is loads of HE spam at the moment IMO.

 

I don't think it doing minute levels of damage is going to increase it.

 

3. The game has no real basis in reality anyway, its about balance not history and when has mediocre armour ever been useful, being a bit 'HE proof' hardly changes a tank from average to good or from bad to average etc. Plus most of these derp gun options have AP rounds with high damage, a KV-2 can still do 700 damage with 110mm of penetration and the ability to overmatch 50mm of armour as well, so lightly armoured tanks can still take huge damage from these derp guns.

 

Clearly WG doesn't want HE to be a primary damage dealer and I agree with them, they want AP/standard APCR to be the biggest damage dealer, HE then has a different role of doing less damage but some damage without requiring pen.

 

High explosive will still do splash damage and do damage without penetration that other rounds can't, so I see no reason to change the name. 

 

 

the spam of HE? you are right

 

In fact it would be enough to limit the number of HE ammunition that can be loaded on vehicles that do not use them as primary ammunition.

 

Simple, easy and fast solution.

 

*as well as the reduction of HE spam is done by reducing the number of arty for each game seen that the main spam comes from those vehicles

since the WG also declared that 3 arty for each team is a problem they want to solve.

if you remove 6 arty and allow a maximum of 2 of them you have already removed 4 vehicles that shoot you on the head with HE and it doesn't seem to me a small thing.


Edited by ValkyrionX, 18 October 2019 - 02:59 PM.


ChristOfTheAbyss #20 Posted 18 October 2019 - 02:59 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 251 battles
  • 500
  • Member since:
    07-22-2019

View Posttajj7, on 18 October 2019 - 12:04 PM, said:

1. I makes HE spam less effective which is a good thing IMO, as HE should not be a primary damage dealer or able to do huge damage to especially armoured targets being used correctly.

 

2. It also allows low calibre HE to actually do something like kill very low HP targets and reset caps etc. giving the round a role on all tanks, also a good thing. 

 

3. It reduces one shots, which again IMO is a good thing, derp guns at lower tiers are OP, at higher tiers they are just broken and too RNG based, overall the hole thing is just too punishing and not proportional to risk, some T49 yolos at you in the open, snaps your tier 9 lights, gets some good RNG, pens and does over 1k damage? whilst you can return with one shot of 240 at best? Nah that is not balanced, a 183 that has been camping in base all game, done nothing, done nothing to try to win the game, one shots your tier 9 medium just because you poked a corner and dared to try to progress the game and win, nah that is stupid.

 

4. Making standard ammo do more damage and increasing HPs all round (as long as they get it right), thus effectively meaning that premium ammo trades more pen for less alpha is a decent solution to actually give premium ammo a drawback and give standard ammo more worth.

 

So overall I think the changes are ok and the direction is ok, my main concern is that currently too well armoured tanks that lack weakspots entirely to standard or have small troll ones like the 430U, Bobject, Type 5, Maus, T95, 279e, T95/Fv4201, Defender, most Japanese heavies, VK 100.01P etc. that are currently dominating the game as it is with the ammo as it currently is, will just become even more OP/strong as they effectively get an HP buff against premium ammo and HE by a large amount. 

 

We have already seen that the current Maus with 3200 HP, was far too good when they made that change (+ giving it extra DPM), this change effectively gives the Maus like what 3800+ hit points against premium ammo? We can easily see that a Maus with 3800 HP would be just too much.

 

So that is my worry, the changes/direction is ok, but we need the nerfs to armour to balance this out, weakspots back for reliable standard ammo pens, otherwise this is just a buff for heavies and armoured TDs

 

 

 

This is perfectly on line what I think.

 

Ammo and HP changes seem great, but the weakspots need to come back on all tanks and pennable to all tanks they meet. If you want Type 5 to be playing against t8s, IS-3 has to be able to do something against it. Make angling and using your armour and hiding your weakspots a skill again!

14:00 Added after 1 minute

View PostValkyrionX, on 18 October 2019 - 02:46 PM, said:

 

the spam of HE? you are right

 

In fact it would be enough to limit the number of HE ammunition that can be loaded on vehicles that do not use them as primary ammunition.

 

Simple, easy and fast solution.

 

*as well as the reduction of HE spam is done by reducing the number of arty for each game seen that the main spam comes from those vehicles

since the WG also declared that 3 arty for each team is a problem they want to solve.

if you remove 6 arty and allow a maximum of 2 of them you have already removed 4 vehicles that shoot you on the head with HE and it doesn't seem to me a small thing.

 

How do you fix them on tanks that DO use them as primary ammo?






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users