Jump to content


Wastar's guide on how to fix World of Tanks


  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

Wastar1970 #1 Posted 11 February 2020 - 09:04 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 49824 battles
  • 101
  • [TAKE] TAKE
  • Member since:
    11-19-2011
Dear Wargaming,

 

The fact that there is a serious issue with game balance is obvious to everyone at this point. Here is my guide on how to fix this problem and rescue the game.

Lets list all problems with World of Tanks for now:

 

  • Huge de-balance on tier VIII and up deepening the gap between better and weaker players.
  • Artillery - type that was meant to encourage aggressive gameplay and punish campers does the exact opposite.
  • Match Maker - wrong matchmaking with huge de-balance makes battles with final score 15:0 happen a lot.
  • Inflation of statistics - mainly tier VIII and X
  • Little changes to balance - for example since Kranvagn buff is-4 is ignored completely for over a year without temporary solutions (you promised it will be balanced after "new balance" it became unplayable tank and is outclassed by most heavy tanks.

 

Here, ill post my ideas and solutions to these problems. My goal is to make the game fair for both sides and less frustrating for those who care about score and achievements.

Artillery

 

Match Maker

 

About Sandbox 10.02.2020

 

Balance

 Balance - biggest topic here so im going to focus on tier X only for now. My goal here is to make each tank good in its role with unique play style.

 

Medium Tanks
Heavy Tanks
Tank Destroyers
Light Tanks

 

 

Please do not compare those statistics to the tanks in the game at the moment. My goal here is to eliminate "meta" tanks that outclass others.

 

@edit1 stb-1 and centurion ax rof was changed.


Edited by Wastar1970, 12 February 2020 - 02:15 PM.


gunslingerXXX #2 Posted 11 February 2020 - 09:30 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 13861 battles
  • 3,786
  • [GUNSL] GUNSL
  • Member since:
    11-16-2014
That is A LOT of work! Nice commitment. 

GodTank2 #3 Posted 11 February 2020 - 09:48 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 9477 battles
  • 495
  • [RF_] RF_
  • Member since:
    12-14-2012
Nice work but alot of these dont make sense and would just make all tanks the same.

Wastar1970 #4 Posted 11 February 2020 - 09:50 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 49824 battles
  • 101
  • [TAKE] TAKE
  • Member since:
    11-19-2011

View PostGodTank2, on 11 February 2020 - 09:48 PM, said:

Nice work but alot of these dont make sense and would just make all tanks the same.

which ones exactly? there are 2-3 tanks max with very simmilar role and they are almost interchangable.



GodTank2 #5 Posted 11 February 2020 - 10:01 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 9477 battles
  • 495
  • [RF_] RF_
  • Member since:
    12-14-2012

View PostWastar1970, on 11 February 2020 - 10:50 PM, said:

which ones exactly? there are 2-3 tanks max with very simmilar role and they are almost interchangable.

I wont look at all but i will give you an example.

Why buff the Obj 140 to the point where its better than the Clan war reward tank Obj 907.

Why make the Centrurion AX slower at traversing but same gun as the STB-1 then change the STB-1 back to its previous gun and buff the M48 Patton by giving it more alpha and better armor when its already better than the centurion AX



24doom24 #6 Posted 11 February 2020 - 11:14 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 9052 battles
  • 1,051
  • [WW3] WW3
  • Member since:
    10-20-2012

Lol buffing the bobject are you mad? This is why I never listen to specific stat change proposals from other players. A lot of your suggestions for tank balances just don't make sense, at least tell us why certain stats are being changed. Also it's far easier to say "buff/nerf gun handling" instead of giving specific stats since it gives a better picture about what's wrong with a certain tank. 

 

I mean looking a bit more a lot of your changes are just bizarre. Why a flat out buff to the 277? It's already meta. Also a measly traverse nerf to the 279e? Do you know why that tank is infamous among the player base? Certainly not because of it's traverse speeds. 

 

Changing every tank simultaneously makes predicting the resulting balance extremely difficult. It's much better to change a few tanks, maybe even just 1, at time since it's easier to evaluate it against everything else which isn't being changed. Following that it's ok to suggest specifics since you can compare it against the current meta.


Edited by 24doom24, 11 February 2020 - 11:26 PM.


Wastar1970 #7 Posted 11 February 2020 - 11:30 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 49824 battles
  • 101
  • [TAKE] TAKE
  • Member since:
    11-19-2011

View PostGodTank2, on 11 February 2020 - 10:01 PM, said:

I wont look at all but i will give you an example.

Why buff the Obj 140 to the point where its better than the Clan war reward tank Obj 907.

Why make the Centrurion AX slower at traversing but same gun as the STB-1 then change the STB-1 back to its previous gun and buff the M48 Patton by giving it more alpha and better armor when its already better than the centurion AX

better? its faster tank with less armor. just because its clan reward tank doesnt mean it should be better, does it?

i made AX slower and more sturdy with better dpm. STB gun is the same but damage is back. m48 armor would be worse than AX.

22:34 Added after 4 minute

View Post24doom24, on 11 February 2020 - 11:14 PM, said:

Lol buffing the bobject are you mad? This is why I never listen to specific stat change proposals from other players. A lot of your suggestions for tank balances just don't make sense, at least tell us why certain stats are being changed. Also it's far easier to say "buff/nerf gun handling" instead of giving specific stats since it gives a better picture about what's wrong with a certain tank. 

 

I mean looking a bit more a lot of your changes are just bizarre. Why a flat out buff to the 277? It's already meta. Also a measly traverse nerf to the 279e? Do you know why that tank is infamous among the player base? Certainly not because of it's traverse speeds. 

 

Changing every tank simultaneously makes predicting the resulting balance extremely difficult. It's much better to change a few tanks, maybe even just 1, at time since it's easier to evaluate it against everything else which isn't being changed. Following that it's ok to suggest specifics since you can compare it against the current meta.

bobject.... care to explain what tank do you mean? 277 is meta unless teammates have chieftain or 279e. i didnt nerf 279e because i buffed 277 and other tanks that needed to be buffed.

A agree that changing all tanks can be difficult to predict. but it has 1 serious advantage over changing few - if you succeed you will have balanced game - if you dont you can just adjust those few tanks that are too good or bad.

Please do not compare my version of buffed/nerfed tank to other tanks. compare tanks that i changed to each other. that way you will understand that there are no power gaps between them like it is now between 279e and is-4 for example.



GodTank2 #8 Posted 11 February 2020 - 11:44 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 9477 battles
  • 495
  • [RF_] RF_
  • Member since:
    12-14-2012

View PostWastar1970, on 12 February 2020 - 12:30 AM, said:

better? its faster tank with less armor. just because its clan reward tank doesnt mean it should be better, does it?

i made AX slower and more sturdy with better dpm. STB gun is the same but damage is back. m48 armor would be worse than AX.

 

The M48 patton armor is already better than AX atm so buffing the hull will make it even better?

AX doesnt need to be slower, thats why we have the Patton which is the AX but slower with better gun and more armor.



Galan7891 #9 Posted 11 February 2020 - 11:45 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 7506 battles
  • 58
  • Member since:
    02-22-2018

Arty focuses single targets because usually those single targets are out of position and easier to hit.If there is a choice between shooting 1 target or 2-3  the second option provides more damage and stun assist...

Removing stun will have no effect on camping.

Similar making the atrocious dpm of arty worse will have zero effect on those people that whine about arty.It doesnt matter if they die in 1 or 2 minutes of constant shelling .

More increase in splash can lead to abuse of the splash mechanic to hit targets behind cover.

Shell speed is irrelevant to sniping people that drive in straight line.Arty players will just have to lead more.

I guess the rest of your suggestions are of similar quality?I cant bother to read more...its painfull.



Wastar1970 #10 Posted 11 February 2020 - 11:52 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 49824 battles
  • 101
  • [TAKE] TAKE
  • Member since:
    11-19-2011

View PostGodTank2, on 11 February 2020 - 11:44 PM, said:

 

The M48 patton armor is already better than AX atm so buffing the hull will make it even better?

AX doesnt need to be slower, thats why we have the Patton which is the AX but slower with better gun and more armor.

please dont ignore half of my post. which one has better armor now? AX is supposed to be frontline hulldown medium while patton is more support-flank type.

M48 Patton:

Increase view range from 420 to 430

Increase APCR/HEAT damage from 390 to 410

Increase HE damage from 480 to 510

Reduce ROF from 7.49 to 7.2

Increase hull armor from 152 to 180

Centurion AX:

Reduced hull turn rate to from 52 to 45

Reduced turret rotation from 48 to 42

Increased aimtime from 2.01 to 1.5

Reduced dispersion from 0.31 to 0.33

Reduce APCR/HEAT damage from 390 to 360

Reduce HESH damage from 480 to 440

Increase ROF from 7.28 to 8.19

Increase turret armor from 254 to 270

Reduced view range from 410 to 400

 



Balc0ra #11 Posted 11 February 2020 - 11:53 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 75702 battles
  • 22,120
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

Faster firing arty with no stun? I would rather be stunned every 40 seconds, then smacked every 20.

 

As for MM? Iron out the players WR, or even recent WR won't reduce 0-15 alone. MM doesn't need a ladder or ranked system first, or at all.  It needs to balance the tanks on the teams first. Most of my steamrolls are not due to bad players more so than having two VK 100.01 as a top tier on their team, and we have an IS-6 and T32 that can't even pen it. Or a 50 100 platoon vs a Tiger II platoon. 50 100 goes the med lane and eats up half our team before the Tigers can react that went the HT lane. Thus you lose 8 guns before the Tigers even fire at the 50 100's, as they only did find a KV-85 on their side of the map. So when you have a mobile team, and they have slow sluggers. You have a bigger chance to roll over if you all went bridge on Live oaks if they sent all their sluggers to town. I see it all the time. And it's getting old.


Edited by Balc0ra, 11 February 2020 - 11:55 PM.


Wastar1970 #12 Posted 11 February 2020 - 11:57 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 49824 battles
  • 101
  • [TAKE] TAKE
  • Member since:
    11-19-2011

View PostBalc0ra, on 11 February 2020 - 11:53 PM, said:

Faster firing arty with no stun? I would rather be stunned every 40 seconds, then smacked every 20.

 

As for MM? Iron out the players WR, or even recent WR won't reduce 0-15 alone. Or at all tbh. MM doesn't need a ladder or ranked system. It needs to balance the tanks on the teams first. Most of my steamrolls are not due to bad players more so then having two VK 100.01 as a top tier on their team, and we have an IS-6 and T32 that can't even pen it. Or a 50 100 platoon vs a Tiger II platoon. 50 100 goes the med lane and eats up half our team before the Tigers can react that went the HT lane. Thus you lose 8 guns before the Tigers even fire at the 50 100's, as they only did find a KV-85 on their side of the map.

sorry. mistake. smacked  every 1 min +

 

ranked or ladder system no. blanace the tanks and then balance players so for example when there are 30 players waiting there wont be cases where team 1 has 45% wr x 3 and team 2 has 60% wr x3. thats all.

 

first priority for mm should be tanks then players. that will reduce 15:0



Balc0ra #13 Posted 12 February 2020 - 12:04 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 75702 battles
  • 22,120
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View PostWastar1970, on 11 February 2020 - 11:57 PM, said:

sorry. mistake. smacked  every 1 min +

 

ranked or ladder system no. blanace the tanks and then balance players so for example when there are 30 players waiting there wont be cases where team 1 has 45% wr x 3 and team 2 has 60% wr x3. thats all.

 

first priority for mm should be tanks then players. that will reduce 15:0

 

But that's just it. It will just reduce it. Still a chance you will see it several times a day. As it was not rare on Ranked even.

 

I've always thought randoms should be just that, randoms in terms of skill. If we wanted ranked. They should have set that up as a permanent mode for all tiers. But... bad players are not my issue. Tank balance gaps are. And the VK 100.01 vs the IS-6 is the best example. It's why I think +1 MM won't fix anything. As most gaps are not vs +2. But their equals. And why it's not the worst idea to kinda balance the top tiers at least. With clip vs clip, and super heavy vs super heavy.

 

As Live oaks is one I see 15-0 the most on. Why? One team has more sluggers going town facing nothing. The other team has more heaviums and clip guns going bridge and rolling over everything. It's getting old.

 

 


Edited by Balc0ra, 12 February 2020 - 12:08 AM.


Wastar1970 #14 Posted 12 February 2020 - 12:12 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 49824 battles
  • 101
  • [TAKE] TAKE
  • Member since:
    11-19-2011
Ranked battles are where the players you play against are at your level. This is not the case here. MM's job is to put top 2 players in opposite teams regardless how they compare to each other, mm will not match you with someone at your level because thats how ranked battles work.
Matching by tanks will reduce 15:0 but there will be the cases where pros are put against newbs and battle result will be clear. MM should just put few of them to team 2 to even the odds.

_cro_magnon #15 Posted 12 February 2020 - 12:15 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 34529 battles
  • 2,964
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    10-21-2012
LMAO at buffing the [edited]V4.

r2pp2r #16 Posted 12 February 2020 - 12:29 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 40748 battles
  • 124
  • Member since:
    11-02-2013

This Ain't It, Chief


Edited by r2pp2r, 12 February 2020 - 12:29 AM.


malachi6 #17 Posted 12 February 2020 - 08:49 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 51360 battles
  • 4,432
  • Member since:
    04-14-2011

To my mind, the game is balanced over time rather than balanced per single game.  Over a sufficient number of games, better players will rise due to factors the game should not be controlling.  Problems come when for whatever reasons, people feel their place in whatever arbitrary pecking order it is they have picked, does not conflate with their conceived ability.  To my mind, if people were better educated as to logical and critical thinking many of these apparent issues could be solved.  

 

Not good for marketeers though.  After all, it could be you.



GodTank2 #18 Posted 12 February 2020 - 11:14 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 9477 battles
  • 495
  • [RF_] RF_
  • Member since:
    12-14-2012

View PostWastar1970, on 12 February 2020 - 12:52 AM, said:

please dont ignore half of my post. which one has better armor now? AX is supposed to be frontline hulldown medium while patton is more support-flank type.

M48 Patton:

Increase view range from 420 to 430

Increase APCR/HEAT damage from 390 to 410

Increase HE damage from 480 to 510

Reduce ROF from 7.49 to 7.2

Increase hull armor from 152 to 180

Centurion AX:

Reduced hull turn rate to from 52 to 45

Reduced turret rotation from 48 to 42

Increased aimtime from 2.01 to 1.5

Reduced dispersion from 0.31 to 0.33

Reduce APCR/HEAT damage from 390 to 360

Reduce HESH damage from 480 to 440

Increase ROF from 7.28 to 8.19

Increase turret armor from 254 to 270

Reduced view range from 410 to 400

 

Listen to what i am saying

The patton is already better than the AX because it has better hull and turret armor. Increasing the hull armor of the Patton and lowering the speed of the AX makes it even better. It doesnt matter if you buff the turret of the AX . The AX is supposed to be a fast alternative of the patton while the patton is supposed to be this slower but more sturdy tank with a good gun.



WhoCares01 #19 Posted 12 February 2020 - 11:22 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 26012 battles
  • 847
  • Member since:
    04-21-2015
Increasing view range on Patton is also "funny" - I'd say reduce view range of all tier 10 tanks except tracked LTs by 20m, to give the tracked LTs some spotting margin they can work with.

TheFluffyVehicle #20 Posted 12 February 2020 - 11:38 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 10382 battles
  • 64
  • [SPESH] SPESH
  • Member since:
    05-16-2016
I love that you aknowledge the Foch 155 but proceeds to [edited]about the Deathstar. almost as if you have a bias or something




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users