Jump to content


A criticism of the World of Tanks 'New Balance Test' update

sandbox World of Tanks balance test feedback criticism

  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

M_Blox #1 Posted 12 February 2020 - 09:17 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 19792 battles
  • 3
  • [DSCRD] DSCRD
  • Member since:
    11-09-2013

On the 10th of February, 2020, Wargaming announced a big update to the Sandbox test server, which has been renamed to the ‘New Balance Test’ server. In this server, Wargaming is testing changes to all types of ammunition for tanks, artillery changes, tech tree rearrangements, general buffs to tank health across the board, and in-game statistics. I will be going through each change and giving criticism to everything in the tests, both positive and negative.

 

Standard and Special Ammunition Changes

 

Ammunition is being reworked for all vehicles, with the general goal of having the different types of ammunition be useful in different situations:

  • Standard shells deal higher damage, and are cost effective.

  • Special shells deal lower damage, and cost far more per shell, in exchange for having higher penetration.

 

In general, the average damage of a standard shell has been increased by between 20% and 25%, depending on the vehicle. As a result, if you use the special ammunition, you will have between 16% and 20% lower damage per minute compared to standard ammunition. When fighting a tank that cannot be penetrated with standard ammunition, such as a superheavy tank, using special ammunition is mandatory in order to be able to deal damage. This results in having a lower damage output when fighting a heavily armoured vehicle compared to when fighting a lightly armoured vehicle.

 

However, not all tanks were created equal, and there are tanks that are far more dependent on the usage of special ammunition to be able to deal damage. I will give a few examples below:

 
  • T32: This tank is a tier 8 heavy tank, designed to be capable of using its turret armour to go ‘hull-down’. This tank has 198 mm of penetration on its standard shells, with a dispersion value of 0.41 metres. When using special ammunition, the penetration increases to 245 mm. When the tank was first introduced, 198 mm of penetration was considered to be average, workable but not fantastic. However, as the years progressed, and powercreep has led to vehicles having gradually higher and higher statistics, the standard for a penetration value that could be considered average has gone up. As a result, the T32 has been left behind in terms of penetration values, and with the increased accessibility to special ammunition in recent updates, it has become far more desirable to use more and more special ammunition in the loadout of the T32. The T32 is designed to fight other heavy tanks on ridgelines with its high frontal turret armour and gun depression values, and its mediocre top speed. As a result, this tank will tend to fight in positions that lead to it fighting enemy tanks with very tough armour, which leads to an increased requirement to use special ammunition.

 
  • Manticore: This next entry can also apply to the Setter, LHMTV and GSOR, as well as various other tanks in the game, due to their incredibly limited ammo capacity. This fact is just accentuated with the Manticore, due to it having a ridiculously low ammo capacity of just 20 shells, leading to it regularly running out of ammunition in battle. As a result, when setting up an ammunition loadout for this tank, it is far more desirable to bring nothing but special ammunition, due to how many vehicles at its tier have far more armour than the standard ammunition is capable of penetrating, and the high explosive ammunition is simply not worth carrying more than one of, as you would sacrifice a lot of combat effectiveness by having less standard/special shells available to use. Every shell counts with this tank, and if one shell misses or bounces off of enemy armour, that is a large detriment to the tank’s fighting capabilities. This is further amplified by its incredibly long reload.

 
  • T-54: This tank is a tier 9 medium tank with a choice of two guns in its top configuration. One gun offers a high rate of fire in exchange for lower penetration and gun handling, and vice versa for the other gun. Both guns deal 320 average damage, which is on the lower end for a tier 9 medium tank. However, when the special ammunition is considered, both guns have the same penetration value, at 330 mm with HEAT ammunition. This results in one gun becoming far superior to the other gun, as the main downside is completely negated, especially when you consider the fact that special ammunition is the most accessible it has ever been in World of Tanks’ history.

 

These vehicles are highly dependent on the usage of special ammunition in order to be effective in the current environment of World of Tanks. However, with the changes being made in the new balance tests, these tanks will become considerably less effective when using special ammunition when compared to their peers in the same tiers. Usage of standard ammunition will not be an option considering the aforementioned dependency on special ammunition, and therefore these vehicles will be constantly in an unfavourable match-up against an opponent driving a different vehicle with an equivalent role in the battle.

 

High Explosive Ammunition Changes

 

After testing the changes to standard and special ammunition, Wargaming proceeded to look at the high explosive ammunition. The proposed changes involved removing all penetration from high explosive shells, and lowering the average damage of high explosive shells. In exchange, they were given more ‘consistent’ damage calculations when hitting an enemy tank. Wargaming intended for these changes to make high explosive ammunition a more viable ammunition type for guns with a calibre of 120 mm or lower, whilst lowering their effectiveness when fired from a gun with a calibre of 150 mm or higher. Whilst this is generally a positive change, there are a few outliers that need to be fixed immediately.

 

In the article posted on the 10th of February, 2020, it was stated that an exception was made for the KV-2, and by extension, the KV-2 ®. It could be speculated that the reason for this is because Wargaming does not like to rework premium vehicles to make them perform worse overall, but that is currently unconfirmed and won’t be considered. However, it is unacceptable that the KV-2 is given a pass during this rework that affected every vehicle in the game, regardless of their dependency on high explosive ammunition. The KV-2 is a tier 6 heavy tank that is capable of dealing over 900 damage with a high explosive shot, and this tank is capable of fighting tier 4 vehicles. Tier 4 is heavily populated by newer players who will have little to no experience with fighting a KV-2, and as a result, they will often be punished instantly for making a mistake against a KV-2, with no room for improvement, as the KV-2 does enough damage to destroy any tier 4 and even tier 5 tank instantly. The KV-2 is also incredibly punishing against tier 6 and even tier 7 opponents. As a result, this tank is very unhealthy for the new player experience, even though the new balance test was designed in part to improve the new player experience, so leaving the KV-2 as is would be counterproductive towards this cause. On top of that, having the KV-2 be an exception to the high explosive changes would lead to more new player confusion, which Wargaming is aiming to reduce with the new balance test, so having the KV-2 as an exception to the rule would go against this ideology.

 

For some tanks, high explosive ammunition was granted higher alpha damage on the test server if, in the current live server, the shell had a higher than normal penetration value, to compensate for the loss in penetration in the new balance test. This has resulted in certain tanks that use special high explosive ammunition to gain increased damage on their special shells. This goes against a balance philosophy that Wargaming put into place in a previous update, where the Type 4 Heavy and Type 5 Heavy had the special ammunition on their 15 cm gun reworked to have the same average damage as the standard high explosive, but with higher penetration. On the test server, this was completely reverted, as due to the higher penetration on the new special ammunition on the live server, this ammunition gained more damage than the standard shell in the new balance test, which goes completely against the design philosophy of the new balance test to rework ammunition so that special ammunition was not objectively better.

 

During the initial high explosive ammunition test, HESH ammunition was omitted from the test as Wargaming had announced that HESH ammunition would be looked at later on in the test cycle. The most well-known tanks that use HESH ammunition are the FV215b 183 and the FV4005 Stage II, due to the fact that they are capable of dealing 1850 damage per shot, with very high penetration for a high explosive shell. When the high explosive ammunition changes on the test server were edited to include the exchange in penetration for damage, these two vehicles became capable of dealing over 1000 damage with a non-penetrating shot on the front of a heavily armoured vehicle, such as the E 100 and the Jagdpanzer E 100. This goes against Wargaming’s statement that high explosive ammunition would lose effectiveness for higher calibre guns, as these tanks are still capable of dealing one third of a tier 10 heavy tank’s health in damage to it with a non-penetration. Fighting against high explosive ammunition as a tank that relies on its armour to perform well is a very frustrating and unfun experience, due to the main advantage of your vehicle being completely negated, with very few other positive aspects of the tank to rely on.

 

Tank Health Changes

 

All vehicles in World of Tanks will be seeing a general increase in their hit points, with varying percentage increases at different tiers. This change puts an emphasis on the lower tiered vehicles, but high tier vehicles are also affected to a lesser extent. The changes to lower tiered vehicles are very positive, as it results in a better new player experience, and they will be less punished for making mistakes and will be given the capacity to learn from it.

 

However, it is a different story for the high tier vehicles. Whilst the health increase is generally a good thing, it becomes highly problematic when applied to tanks with a lot of armour, especially when combined with the aforementioned changes to standard and special ammunition, resulting in the special ammunition dealing less damage than standard ammunition. When the ammunition changes and health changes are considered together, the special ammunition will deal a lower percentage of the target’s maximum hit points after the new balance changes when compared to the current live server statistics. This results in an increased survival rate for heavily armoured vehicles across the board, which is positive for some vehicles that were in need of increased survivability, such as the E 100 and the IS-4.

 

However, other tanks will also be made far stronger due to these changes that were already very strong on the live server, such as the Object 279 (e) and the VK 72.01 K. These tanks are seeing a large amount of success on the live server currently, due to the combination of their great firepower and immense armour that required special ammunition in order to be able to penetrate the tank at all. Once these tanks receive the health changes, they will become even harder to destroy, as they will be able to take more hits from special ammunition.

 

To a lesser degree, this point also applies to all other heavily armoured tanks, such as the Maus, Object 268 Version 4, Tortoise, Object 430U, Type 5 Heavy and Object 907. Tanks such as these are frustrating to fight without the usage of special ammunition, and they will become even more frustrating to fight after these balance changes. These tanks are balanced around the usage of special ammunition to fight them, and when the special ammunition is decreased in effectiveness (due to dealing a lower percentage of the enemy’s total health), these tanks also need to see a decrease in their armour effectiveness, such as introducing weak spots in the armour that can be reasonably penetrated by standard ammunition.

 

Of course, this type of balance change is difficult, as there are tanks that are designed to have effective armour on paper, but in practice, it doesn’t work very well at all, such as the Jagdpanzer E 100, so a blanket nerf to all superheavy tanks would negatively impact other vehicles. As a result, every tank needs to be treated on a case-by-case basis at the same time as the ammunition rebalance, instead of doing tank balance after the ammunition changes are released on the live server.

 

Artillery Changes

 

One of the later changes made in the sandbox tests was the change to ammunition types on artillery. They were given a standard high explosive shell, a special high explosive shell, and an armour piercing shell. The standard high explosive shell is effectively the same as it is on the live server currently. The special high explosive shell gains increased damage and blast radius, but is incapable of stunning opponents. Finally, the armour piercing shell gives artillery an option to deal consistent, relatively low damage to heavily armoured opponents.

 

Personally, I am in favour of these changes, as artillery gameplay has become very stagnant as of late, and it needed to be freshened up. It also gives a meaningful difference between standard and special ammunition, whilst making the special ammunition not objectively better than the standard ammunition. However, it doesn’t fix the inherent flaws with the class, and any changes to artillery that are perceived to be improvements to their performance, whilst not reworking their style of gameplay, will be very controversial within the community, given the class’ current reputation. It doesn’t address the core issues of artillery being capable of dealing damage from long distance, out of sight with no fear of any retaliation from the enemy. In order for artillery to become accepted by the community, it is going to need very drastic changes, which can’t be covered by a simple cover-all balance change.

 

On top of that, there are some very problematic artillery pieces in the game, that could potentially end up even more frustrating to deal with when these changes are implemented, without appropriate vehicle balance changes. A very common example of this is the M44, a tier 6 American artillery that has higher damage per minute than even some tier 10 artillery pieces, with the capability of destroying tier 4 and 5 vehicles in a single shot, without any countermeasures. Vehicles like this would only become more frustrating to fight against with the new artillery changes if they are not rebalanced appropriately.

 

Tech Tree Rearrangements

 

One of the more recent developments in the new balance test was the removal of tanks from the lower tiers to simplify the tech tree. Furthermore, these low tier vehicles that were removed (from tiers 1 to 5) would be able to be bought in a new tab in the store for credits. Whilst it is controversial to remove tanks from the tech tree, this is a very good change, as it would allow players to more easily grind through the lower tiers, which are admittedly not a lot of fun to play in currently, and it would also help to streamline the new player experience somewhat when making decisions about what tank to grind for.

 

However, in the recent Developer Diaries video where the new balance test was discussed, they revealed the removal of several other vehicles from tier 6 and upwards, which is a lot more controversial as Wargaming has announced that unlike the tier 1 through 5 vehicles, they will not be made available for credits in the same way, and will instead be made available through methods that are currently unknown. This will put a lot of pressure on people to grind these vehicles so they don’t feel like they are missing out on a tank when it eventually gets removed from the tech tree (I understand that they are not being removed from the game, but they will be made inaccessible from grinding through the tech tree). On top of that, there is no justification that these tanks were removed to prevent confusion, as at this point in the game, the player is expected to understand what they are grinding towards, and have a grasp of basic game knowledge.

 

Some of the tanks that were chosen to be removed are unusual choices, such as the AMX 30 and AMX 30 B, the 113, the T-62A, the T71 DA and the Jagdpanther II. All these vehicles are high tier and require a reasonable amount of experience to obtain. Based on Wargaming’s current stance, if you have the vehicles researched, but don’t own them in the garage, you will not receive the vehicle, and any experience spent on researching that tank and its modules will not be refunded. This is a very concerning stance to have, as based on a statement by a member of Wargaming’s community management in the official World of Tanks Discord server, ‘It should be, generally (experience) is almost never lost’. The aforementioned vehicles have been justified for removal as such:

 
  • The AMX 30 and the AMX 30 B are being removed based on being incompatible with the rest of the line, whilst not offering unique enough gameplay. Wargaming has been unable to provide a unique gameplay experience for these tanks, and even though there were proposed buffs for the AMX 30 B, they were eventually cancelled, whilst the Leopard 1 and the STB-1 received buffs that would further make the AMX 30 B irrelevant. It is a shame, because I believe these tanks had some serious potential to be fantastic, and I personally enjoyed the AMX 30 a lot, so I don’t understand Wargaming’s reasoning behind removing these tanks. On top of that, if the AMX 30 B is being removed because it doesn’t fit with the gameplay of the previous tiers, surely the AMX 50 B would be removed, since it does not fit the gameplay of the AMX M4 54 line.

 
  • The removal of the T-62A is understandable due to it being far too similar to the Object 140, but at the same time, it was a real and mass produced vehicle used in service in the Russian military, whilst the Object 140 was not, so it is unusual for Wargaming to remove an iconic historical tank, whilst leaving a cancelled prototype tank in its place.

 
  • The removal of the Jagdpanther II is also understandable, as the tank is completely fictional, but the general playerbase would rather see the Ferdinand be removed, as the Jagdpanther II is by far the more popular choice for the playerbase to play in order to grind for the Jagdtiger.

 
  • The removal of the 113 is completely confusing, as it is not an irrelevant tank, and it has a unique gameplay style that isn’t really occupied by any other heavy tank. If Wargaming really decides to go through with the removal of the 113, people who owned this tank should receive the WZ-111 5A to compensate for the lost experience.

 
  • The T71 DA removal is also confusing, since it has a unique playstyle for a tier 7 light tank, and it had a natural progression into the T57 Heavy line. Once the T71 DA is removed from the tech tree, the T57 Heavy line is going to suffer from the same problems that the AMX 30 B line currently does, which led to the decision to remove the AMX 30 B from the tech tree.

 

As well as the tanks that were removed from the tech tree, other vehicles were moved around, and a few new vehicles were added to form a more natural progression into the heavy tank line for each nation. However, this has led to some choices which feel very out of place and careless. Two examples are in the UK tech tree, where the Cruiser I was moved down to tier 1, but maintained its Pom-Pom gun, which would be very powerful to have on a tier 1 tank. The Crusader has been moved up to tier 6, which means that this tank is now able to be placed into a match with tier 8 tanks, such as the Object 252U, without receiving any significant changes to make the Crusader more fitting as a tier 6 tank.

 

Player Statistics

 

For the people who want to improve in World of Tanks, keeping a track of their statistics is very important. Average damage per game and marks of excellence have been well established in the community with guidelines for what is considered to be good. However, with the changes to shell damage and tank health, this will all be shaken up. Players will need to relearn the average damage values for every vehicle, otherwise they risk taking an engagement that would previously have been survivable, but with the damage changes they may suddenly find themselves getting unexpectedly destroyed.

 

There are major concerns about how the damage changes will affect marks of excellence. Since there is no hard gradient on the damage increase that a tank will do in a game, the marks of excellence will have extremely low requirements for the first few days of this test server being released on the live server, followed by a harsh grind to get back to where you were before in terms of percentage once the requirements are properly calibrated to the new damage values.

 

The decision to implement legacy statistics is a very good idea in this context, as otherwise, if a player was looking at their damage per game and seeing it increase whilst in the new damage model, they would either feel a false sense of improvement that was not actually present, or they would feel like they weren’t improving enough as their damage per game is not adjusted to the new damage model.

 

The Community Response

 

In the article posted on the World of Tanks portal about the new balance test, Wargaming stated that these tests had been run previously on the sandbox server and were met with ‘positive player feedback’, which was the reason for their continuation of the tests. However, when observing general community discussion about the tests, they reacted very negatively to a majority of the aspects of the new balance test. In addition, World of Tanks community contributors have expressed their dissatisfaction with the new balance test whilst playing on the test server.

 

Whilst it is true that initial sandbox tests of the ammunition rebalance were met with some positivity, the community had an incomplete image of the full scope of Wargaming’s plans to rework the game’s statistics and mechanics, and members of the community still had concerns over how Wargaming was handling the ammunition rebalance separately to the tank rebalance, specifically tanks with superheavy armour. However, once other changes started being introduced, such as the artillery changes, HESH ammunition changes and the removal of tanks from the tech tree, the overall opinion of the tests shifted towards a more negative stance against the changes proposed.

 

Artillery is a very controversial topic in World of Tanks, so any semblance of artillery receiving a change that would improve their performance whilst not reworking their gameplay will be met with heavy resistance. Removing tanks from the tech tree will naturally be controversial as well, since every tank in World of Tanks will be beloved by at least someone in the community. The community is very much against the prospect that the tanks they could previously earn in the tech tree by playing the game will suddenly be removed and potentially sold back to them for real money, with no promise of any refunded experience for their efforts.

 

Rita, a World of Tanks EU community contributor, has run some polls to find a general overview of the community opinions of different aspects of the new balance test. From this poll, some observations can be noted:

 
  • 65% of players dislike the new balance changes.

  • 65% of players dislike the new ammunition changes.

  • 50% of players dislike the decision to move low tier vehicles to the store tab

  • 55% of players dislike the decision to make an exception for the KV-2 when rebalancing high explosive ammunition.

  • 10% of players would definitely return to World of Tanks if these changes are released on the live server.

 

This poll showcases that there is an overwhelming majority of the community that is unhappy with these changes, and I don’t believe that Wargaming can say that these changes are being implemented based on positive player feedback. However, the poll cannot be taken at face value, as responses could be made due to general player outrage overshadowing how people feel about these changes.

 

Conclusion

 

The new balance test will leave a negative overall impact on the game, but there are a few changes in the tests that I believe could be put into place in the live server without many issues, which would make the game far more enjoyable to play.

 
  • The improvements to tank health are a good idea, as it would allow new players to learn in an environment where mistakes are less heavily punished, and it would also allow games to last slightly longer in the higher tiers, with less one-sided short games.

  • The simplification of the tech tree for tiers 1 to 5 is excellent, as low tiers are not very enjoyable to grind through due to the statistical blandness of most low tier tanks, and the crew mechanics making it very easy for experienced players to have a massive advantage in the lower tiers. However, tanks from tier 6 and above do not need to be removed from the tech tree, as there is no reason for simplification of the tech tree in the higher tiers. Regardless of whether a tank is redundant or not, players will still enjoy playing and grinding for those tanks, and a lot of experience will be spent on these high tier tanks, so removing them without any form of compensation is almost fraudulent.

  • The artillery changes don’t fix the core issues with the class, but it will help to add more variety in the gameplay of artillery, to give players more capacity to perform well in their games and learn the advantages of their vehicle.

  • The ammunition rebalance, whilst done with good intentions, was executed very poorly, and without any form of tank balance being done at the same time, these changes will be disastrous when they reach the live server. On top of that, having a tank be exempt from the changes for no explicit reason is very confusing and unhealthy for the game.

 

There is potential with some of the balance changes, but it will not be successful if there is no individual vehicle rebalancing that occurs at the same time as these changes. Other changes need to be completely cancelled, as they would only reduce the game experience for the players.

 

Sources

 

https://worldoftanks...ndbox-february/

https://www.youtube....h?v=v8oxLTbubLc

https://ritastatusre...-balance-cc-qa/

https://discord.gg/world-of-tanks

https://ritastatusre...s-your-opinion/

 


evilchaosmonkey #2 Posted 12 February 2020 - 09:43 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 19092 battles
  • 2,367
  • [EIGHT] EIGHT
  • Member since:
    05-04-2013

You've made a reasoned argument - ipso facto they won't listen.



NewForces2142 #3 Posted 12 February 2020 - 09:57 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 19536 battles
  • 59
  • [TDARO] TDARO
  • Member since:
    02-07-2011

The artillery changes don’t fix the core issues with the class, but it will help to add more variety in the gameplay of artillery, to give players more capacity to perform well in their games and learn the advantages of their vehicle.

 

 

Dude what? No one in the right mind will use the AP. HE is nerfed because everyone has more HP and HEAT is pay to win. Wtf are you talking about? Have you even played on the sandbox?


Edited by NewForces2142, 12 February 2020 - 09:59 PM.


NekoPuffer_PPP #4 Posted 12 February 2020 - 10:14 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 38112 battles
  • 5,841
  • [VRTC] VRTC
  • Member since:
    09-13-2013

Get WG in here and make them read this.

 

BTW, up in the HE changes paragraph you mentioned the Deathstar/****barn deal 1850 HESH damage, but it's actually 1750.



Richthoffen #5 Posted 12 February 2020 - 10:39 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 33345 battles
  • 2,900
  • [MS-] MS-
  • Member since:
    12-23-2011

wall of text.. arty gets ap.. bad it should lose stun and reduce splash, more variety can be added by playing tanks.

dumbing down the tech trees.. verry bad

 

 

remove stun from arty, lower splash on arty, reduce gold ammo damage by 20% make wheeled lose 20% speed per wheel blown, max it at 60% for 3+ wheels and bring back weakspots like hatches, machinegun mounts and viewports

easy rebalance

 



5everin #6 Posted 12 February 2020 - 11:02 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 81267 battles
  • 1,701
  • [TEC] TEC
  • Member since:
    11-09-2011

Nice Critique.

 

One point tho. High Calibur HESH is a special case and imo should remain devastating.

 

HE on the whole is not an anti-tank weapon, HESH is. 183mm HESH rounds should hurt a great deal no matter what tank they hit. They were a very good example of overkill.

 

To put this thing in context.

 

"The L4 was designed to be chambered for only one type of ammunition, HESH (High Explosive Squashed Head). ... Each shell weighed a combined total of 104.8 kg (231 lbs). A shell of this size understandably produced a substantial amount of fumes and smoke inside of the fighting compartment. As such, a large fume extractor was added to the barrel, a relatively new feature at the time.

The 183 mm was tested in live fire trials against a Centurion and a Conqueror. In 2 shots, the 183 blew the turret clean off the Centurion and split the mantlet of the Conqueror in half. In total, the gun fired 150 shells."

 

Having a lower damage potential for HE would be a stop gap fix. But HESH for these guns at least. Should be feared.

Lastly It really should be the standard ammo type as well but I don't see that happening. (As its the only type of ammo the gun was designed to shoot)

 

 

 

 

 


Edited by 5everin, 12 February 2020 - 11:27 PM.


Aurorab1ade #7 Posted 12 February 2020 - 11:30 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 24408 battles
  • 17
  • [VRTC] VRTC
  • Member since:
    07-07-2011

As it stands HE needed to be edited. The game had devolved heavily into HE slinging because everything is being made as a hulldown god and even gold wasn't reliably getting through anymore. With that said, the proposed HE edits utterly obliterated the Type 5's HE cannon - a disgrace that should never have entered the game anyway but I digress - and pushed the tank into complete pointlessness now. Anything that proped on HE guns from the low tier 105/122mm derps to the entire JP heavy line are simply not viable to play now. You can't afford to be down an entire tank's worth of damage output like that.

 

My biggest irritance with the HE edits were specifically to HEP and HESH though. The M41 90, Centurion 7/1, Centurion AX, FV217 Badger, FV215b, Super Conqueror, FV215b 183 / FV 4005, Leopard PTA, Leopard 1, Progetto M40 mod. 65 and the list goes on.

All of these tanks had HE with solid penetration capabilities that helped to make them what they are. I implore WG to separate HEP/HESH from the generic HE shells and reclassify them as their own type and make them function differently so that they can be rebalanced as appropriate. Currently all they've managed to do is rob a whole host of tanks of their utility without any compensation at all. This only serves to dumb the game down further and adds no value.

 

The extra HP to the lower tiers is a great change that is pretty well accepted throughout the community already from previous sandbox feedback submissions. I don't agree with buffing the damage on standard ammunition but I assume they're doing that to work around nerfing premiums by nerfing gold by proxy. The additional alpha made it possible for the hyper alpha TDs to actually bring a lot of 3 shot kill tier X HTs within a more consistent 2 shot kill due to the disparity between alpha:HP pools with regard to the +/-25% RNG. They should just nerf the original game premium ammo damage values and be more conservative with the lower tier HP buffs so as to not distort the upper vs lower tier balance.


Edited by Aurorab1ade, 12 February 2020 - 11:44 PM.


Homer_J #8 Posted 12 February 2020 - 11:38 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Moderator
  • 34002 battles
  • 38,987
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

I can see you put a lot of effort into that and some of the points you make are possibly valid but even though you said it multiple times you seem to have missed one important word.

 

View PostM_Blox, on 12 February 2020 - 08:17 PM, said:

 

The new balance test

 

That last one.

 

Obviously they don't think the current state is final, so go forth and test, the more data they have the better.



Balc0ra #9 Posted 12 February 2020 - 11:40 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 79019 battles
  • 24,312
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012
Keep in mind. That with regards to the AP pen balance etc. That will be done AFTER the gold ammo balance is done. T32, Tiger II, E100 has been mentioned by WG for that.

evilchaosmonkey #10 Posted 12 February 2020 - 11:51 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 19092 battles
  • 2,367
  • [EIGHT] EIGHT
  • Member since:
    05-04-2013

View PostBalc0ra, on 12 February 2020 - 10:40 PM, said:

Keep in mind. That with regards to the AP pen balance etc. That will be done AFTER the gold ammo balance is done. T32, Tiger II, E100 has been mentioned by WG for that.

 

Wouldn't it be better to test both out at the same time - I mean that's the normal route in modelling complex systems?  

Changing and finalising the values of inherently linked items one at a time, isn't likely to work too well - you'll end with having to over compensate in the second system changed to counter problems in the first.

 

But then this is WG of course.



Balc0ra #11 Posted 13 February 2020 - 12:22 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 79019 battles
  • 24,312
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View Postevilchaosmonkey, on 12 February 2020 - 11:51 PM, said:

 

Wouldn't it be better to test both out at the same time - I mean that's the normal route in modelling complex systems?  

Changing and finalising the values of inherently linked items one at a time, isn't likely to work too well - you'll end with having to over compensate in the second system changed to counter problems in the first.

 

But then this is WG of course.

 

Tbh, the current test is testing 4-5 things as is, thus I doubt they will get solid data on what does what if they add that. As they would have to start that part from scratch vs the rest that already had individual tests.

 

By waiting, WG gets data on how the new balance affects each tank. And will just balance them based on that. But as the line of tanks planned for this are not few. I'm guessing they will still be done in waves as first planned. Vs all of them in one patch for it to matter. So with that in mind... It's not the worst idea to wait a bit either and get it right, vs rushing it in with the rest and screwing it over. As again... it's WG. And we know what happens to tank balance when they rush it.


Edited by Balc0ra, 13 February 2020 - 12:23 AM.


snowlywhite #12 Posted 13 February 2020 - 01:14 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 34431 battles
  • 950
  • Member since:
    01-05-2018

View PostHomer_J, on 12 February 2020 - 11:38 PM, said:

I can see you put a lot of effort into that and some of the points you make are possibly valid but even though you said it multiple times you seem to have missed one important word.

 

View PostM_Blox, on 12 February 2020 - 08:17 PM, said:

 

The new balance test

 

That last one.

 

Obviously they don't think the current state is final, so go forth and test, the more data they have the better.

 

man, you're a nice guy, but really there's nothing to test...

 

Can't rework gold without reworking armor profiles. It's that simple. And can't rework armor profiles if you can't also rework premium tank armor profiles. Guess everyone has an idea what tanks I'm thinking about ;)



SovietBias #13 Posted 13 February 2020 - 02:05 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 40761 battles
  • 2,037
  • Member since:
    06-10-2013

There's nothing inconsistent about today's HE, and for sure lower caliber HE will not  become 'viable' to anyone but the enemy you are shooting at.

 

Have you ever fired HE in an e-25? Will you ever fire an HE round after these changes to live ? I dare you to test its 'viability'.


Edited by SovietBias, 13 February 2020 - 02:07 AM.


snowlywhite #14 Posted 13 February 2020 - 02:27 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 34431 battles
  • 950
  • Member since:
    01-05-2018

was watching orzanel on test the other day. Deathstar/shitbarn seem totally pointless now. Also HE in general.

 

he was dealing ~3-400/shot? With the buff hp that's on test server; so the equivalent of 250-350/shot for current values. Can as well sell them(after I do the stupid td mission so I don't have to play the pos deathstar is).

 

I mean, on test server arty has higher HE dmg than fv =))))


Edited by snowlywhite, 13 February 2020 - 02:27 AM.


FatigueGalaxy #15 Posted 13 February 2020 - 03:34 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 24888 battles
  • 2,627
  • [SPIKE] SPIKE
  • Member since:
    02-09-2011

Let's not forget +25% RNG in correlation with buffed alpha. Look at FV4005 as extreme example with 1440 alpha. If you get max roll (1800), you can one shot some tier 8 heavies despite buffed hitpoints while in the old system you can't (except AMX 50 100 and Emil 1, I guess) - even if they have stock turret. Your min damage roll with 1440 alpha is 1080 damage while with 1150 damage - 862... So 360 less than your average vs 288 less. It doesn't seem that much, until you put it in the context of new hitpoints changes.

 

Since there is a bigger spread between max and min damage rolls, you can get screwed or blessed with RNG even harder. This means game will be more unpredictable and luck-based. Now, if you get 3 low damage rolls and have to shoot enemy one more time to kill it, with new changes you can be in a situation where 2 extra shots will be needed. Imagine what it's going to be to play autoloaders when your difference between high and low damage rolls is going to be even higher.

 

 

 

 



Marcus_Helius #16 Posted 13 February 2020 - 08:26 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 8343 battles
  • 45
  • Member since:
    01-13-2015
I hope the WG devs see this post. If they only see one post about this god awful update I hope it is this post.

M4chu #17 Posted 16 February 2020 - 11:17 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 45322 battles
  • 67
  • Member since:
    12-22-2012

M_Blox you are just right but who will listen?

I also find:

- wheeled vehicles incompatible with current aiming control who is unable to hit a target without 2 seconds on target - that cannot be acomplish when you have to shot whiout having vehicle on the reticule but in front of it..

- what about giving arties more HP?

also numbers in this game are just characters displayed with no link to facts - how it is possible to miss completely a tank at 200m? tanks have dimensions in cm in this game?

- with this "new balanced" you just state you have good programmers who can do everything you ask … yesss! keep them busy good work - bad gameplay

how about no more battles with two tier diff?

indeed you just wiped out half of tech tree(tier1-5) so there will be more battles of 6-10 - that's the idea to move players from low tiers to high tier so waiting time in queue won't increase... remember that were many voices crying for a MM more adequate? now you just pushed a lot of unexperienced users from low tier to be cannon fodder on high tier: soon most of them will leave the game

talking about battles with only one tier up? so tier 4 and 6 won't meet in batle?6-8, 8-10, 5-7 and so on.. this will answer also another WGdesired balance - pref MM everybody gets pref MM :)

only one good change I can see here - for struggling on sand box server you give to players some incentives.

just changes at this scale must be done with small steps not so rude


Edited by M4chu, 16 February 2020 - 11:21 PM.


Geoffrey_Ironfist #18 Posted 17 February 2020 - 04:15 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 34956 battles
  • 553
  • [YBB] YBB
  • Member since:
    06-23-2018

The OP has some good points, but the higher tiers will just become the new low tiers, for the simple reason that new players will skip the lower tiers quickly now. So the disparity between new players and seasoned players will be even greater. The correct approach would have been to make tier II and tier III gameplay exciting to new players, so that they stay there and learn the game, maybe with competitions in which only new players would be allowed to participate.

 

Since you will need more gold to kill heavily armoured vehicles and other types can be killed with normal ammo very easily, since normal ammo has been bufffed, playing a medium would be no fun, you will be tracked and killed with inexpensive normal ammo, same with TDs once spotted. Instead, more players will be playing heavily armoured vehicles for the extra shots in gold the enemy will need to shoot at them to kill them. And since the grind is simplified and it is no fun being in a heavy tank at a lower tier in MM facing higher tier heavies, new players will grind straight to tier X heavy tanks. After all it's much simpler now to do that.

 

Gold ammo will be just spammed more because armour stays the same and the damage caused by gold is less. It's a simple equation.

 

For anyone interested, I put some YouTube reviews and opinions, including my own, in this forum thread: Tank stats comparison: current values vs balance test values http://forum.worldoftanks.eu/index.php?/topic/735754-tank-stats-comparison-current-values-vs-balance-test-values/


Edited by Geoffrey_Ironfist, 17 February 2020 - 04:17 AM.


tajj7 #19 Posted 17 February 2020 - 09:51 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 30708 battles
  • 18,527
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

View PostM_Blox, on 12 February 2020 - 08:17 PM, said:

This poll showcases that there is an overwhelming majority of the community that is unhappy with these changes

 

The overwhelming majority of the community have never looked at their options, never make the mini-map any bigger and barely use it, and are generally just bad at the game.

 

The overwhelming majority of the community can barely string three of shots of damage together, let alone understand complex issues around game mechanics and balance.

 

Which is why listening to the overwhelming majority of such issues is not often a good idea because you are making changes based on their ignorance and lack of ability, rather than changes for better balance and better gameplay. Which is how so much of the game has got dumbed down and how so many problems have been created, too much catering for the lowest common denominator and too much compensating for players who have no ability to actually play the game competently.

 

So if the majority don't like these changes, they are probably doing something right.

 

Certainly I think the general direction/over riding principles of these changes, such as giving premium ammo an actual disadvantage, boosting hit points of lower tiers, removing dumbed down skill HE mechanics, and reducing one shots, is the right one.

 

But of course WG is WG and they often struggle to implement their ideas the right way. As you point out there are issues about the balance of heavy tanks getting too boosted by the changes, which need addressing and the worry is that we get these changes and then the rebalance of vehicles takes many months, despite it being obvious that some armoured tanks in the current meta are already too good.

 

Then there is HESH becoming rather irrelevant which they need to fix as this is important to many tanks, I am less bothered about the 183s as those have always been silly unbalanced tanks, but there are many vehicles that have high pen HE rounds which are for tactical use and are supposed to be about trading damage for pen, but they have taken that away.

 

The tech tree changes I am pretty neutral about. 



Persekettu #20 Posted 17 February 2020 - 09:55 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 26062 battles
  • 8,112
  • Member since:
    05-20-2011

View PostM_Blox, on 12 February 2020 - 09:17 PM, said:

 

  • The AMX 30 and the AMX 30 B are being removed based on being incompatible with the rest of the line, whilst not offering unique enough gameplay. Wargaming has been unable to provide a unique gameplay experience for these tanks, and even though there were proposed buffs for the AMX 30 B, they were eventually cancelled, whilst the Leopard 1 and the STB-1 received buffs that would further make the AMX 30 B irrelevant. It is a shame, because I believe these tanks had some serious potential to be fantastic, and I personally enjoyed the AMX 30 a lot, so I don’t understand Wargaming’s reasoning behind removing these tanks. On top of that, if the AMX 30 B is being removed because it doesn’t fit with the gameplay of the previous tiers, surely the AMX 50 B would be removed, since it does not fit the gameplay of the AMX M4 54 line.

 
  • The removal of the T-62A is understandable due to it being far too similar to the Object 140, but at the same time, it was a real and mass produced vehicle used in service in the Russian military, whilst the Object 140 was not, so it is unusual for Wargaming to remove an iconic historical tank, whilst leaving a cancelled prototype tank in its place.

 
  • The removal of the Jagdpanther II is also understandable, as the tank is completely fictional, but the general playerbase would rather see the Ferdinand be removed, as the Jagdpanther II is by far the more popular choice for the playerbase to play in order to grind for the Jagdtiger.

 
  • The removal of the 113 is completely confusing, as it is not an irrelevant tank, and it has a unique gameplay style that isn’t really occupied by any other heavy tank. If Wargaming really decides to go through with the removal of the 113, people who owned this tank should receive the WZ-111 5A to compensate for the lost experience.

 
  • The T71 DA removal is also confusing, since it has a unique playstyle for a tier 7 light tank, and it had a natural progression into the T57 Heavy line. Once the T71 DA is removed from the tech tree, the T57 Heavy line is going to suffer from the same problems that the AMX 30 B line currently does, which led to the decision to remove the AMX 30 B from the tech tree.

  

 

It's plain as day WG will just sell these on BM eventually, either for gold or bonds.

 

T71 DA was also removed because it's too good and not Russian.







Also tagged with sandbox, World of Tanks, balance, test, feedback, criticism

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users