Jump to content


[Sandbox] HE rebalance results discussion


  • Please log in to reply
34 replies to this topic

Nishi_Kinuyo #1 Posted 19 February 2020 - 06:25 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 10529 battles
  • 7,228
  • [GUP] GUP
  • Member since:
    05-28-2011

As posted on the EU Portal, Wargaming.net has posted the results of the recent Sandbox server, and the testing of the HE rebalance, AP rebalance, techtree changes, etc.

Link: https://worldoftanks...bruary-results/

 

TL;DR: HE rework will not continue as shown on the sandbox server.

 

The results of the HE rebalance were unsatisfactory to Wargaming, and they realised that removing penetration values from it was a mistake.

 

SPG rebalance:

Rebalance only makes sense in conjunction with the shell rebalance, and, as such, will be postponed until further shell rebalance.

The AP shells proved to be ineffective and undesirable in the paradigm tested.

 

Techtree changes:

Mostly successful. If changes make it to the live server, the tier 6-10 vehicles moved from the techtree will remain available for credits.

There is no need to rush-research these vehicles before the changes go live, as you will be able to buy them at any time after the potential update goes live.

 

Hitpoint increases:

The results fully justified their expectations.

Final hitpoint values will be looked at and introduced in a future update.


Edited by Nishi_Kinuyo, 19 February 2020 - 06:32 PM.


SovietBias #2 Posted 19 February 2020 - 06:27 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 40074 battles
  • 1,876
  • Member since:
    06-10-2013
Good.

ChristOfTheAbyss #3 Posted 19 February 2020 - 06:44 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 251 battles
  • 893
  • Member since:
    07-22-2019
HE was the only thing good in that whole rework sandbox. Shame it doesnt stay.

FatigueGalaxy #4 Posted 19 February 2020 - 06:49 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 23566 battles
  • 2,506
  • [SPIKE] SPIKE
  • Member since:
    02-09-2011

So the worst change (destroying low tiers) is mostly successful... How did they even judge that? Because people progressed faster to mid-tiers and ultimately that's WG's goal?

I agree that low tier tech trees are a mess but it can be fixed without reducing them to one tier 1-4 vehicle per nation...



Erwin_Von_Braun #5 Posted 19 February 2020 - 06:53 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 44416 battles
  • 6,806
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    01-25-2014

View PostFatigueGalaxy, on 19 February 2020 - 05:49 PM, said:

Because people progressed faster to mid-tiers and ultimately that's WG's goal?

 


Likely true - no doubt WG have run a million statistical analyses which have indicated to them that new players will start to spend £££ at a given point.



Dava_117 #6 Posted 19 February 2020 - 06:54 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Moderator
  • 23798 battles
  • 6,190
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014
I'm happy they realized that HE rework was a bad mess. On the other hand, the standard vs premium shell rebalance was, IMO, a great success and I think they should have keep it instead of grounding it while waiting for HE.

splash_time #7 Posted 19 February 2020 - 07:09 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 15692 battles
  • 1,518
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    02-20-2018

So they actually did listen to players feedback this time....WOW. :hiding:

 

HE/HESH penetration removal was really bad idea, because sometimes it can finish low HP hull down opponents. But they need to reduce the full damage, e.g from 940 down to 700. So it deals less damage with the same penetration. 

 

Overall, I think they should keep the standard and gold ammo changes, but make a new same tier mm so tanks still competitive. 

 

And then reduce the armour of 279s and chifs turrets or add a bigger hatch. 

 

In short, there are way better solutions than what WG think, they just need to listen to the good ideas of players.....



krismorgan #8 Posted 19 February 2020 - 07:14 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 38348 battles
  • 676
  • [UKT] UKT
  • Member since:
    10-18-2013
Glad it was scuppered,those russki players needed listening to then.

Edited by krismorgan, 19 February 2020 - 07:14 PM.


Element6 #9 Posted 19 February 2020 - 07:15 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 33157 battles
  • 11,865
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    01-06-2013

It's a bit odd that they call removal of HE penetration a mistake, probably a translation issue. You ran a test, which was not a mistake since you learned something valuable. You tested someting and got confirmation it was not a wise thing to do. Nice of them to point out there is no need to rush-research, becuase it seems a lot of people were worried they would lose the opportunity to get these tanks.

 

But...wasn't removal of HE penetration one suggestion in the SPG thread? 

18:18 Added after 3 minute

View PostFatigueGalaxy, on 19 February 2020 - 06:49 PM, said:

So the worst change (destroying low tiers) is mostly successful... How did they even judge that? Because people progressed faster to mid-tiers and ultimately that's WG's goal?

I agree that low tier tech trees are a mess but it can be fixed without reducing them to one tier 1-4 vehicle per nation...

They might want to shift the bulk of battles up a few tiers to make it easier on the MM in the tiers where game knowledge matters more, where armor and ammo selection is more of a factor there than in the low tiers where "everyone pens everyone".



LZ_Mordan #10 Posted 19 February 2020 - 08:39 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 19664 battles
  • 529
  • Member since:
    12-27-2012

View PostNishi_Kinuyo, on 19 February 2020 - 05:25 PM, said:

As posted on the EU Portal, Wargaming.net has posted the results of the recent Sandbox server, and the testing of the HE rebalance, AP rebalance, techtree changes, etc.

Link: https://worldoftanks...bruary-results/

 

TL;DR: HE rework will not continue as shown on the sandbox server.

 

The results of the HE rebalance were unsatisfactory to Wargaming, and they realised that removing penetration values from it was a mistake.

 

SPG rebalance:

Rebalance only makes sense in conjunction with the shell rebalance, and, as such, will be postponed until further shell rebalance.

The AP shells proved to be ineffective and undesirable in the paradigm tested.

 

Techtree changes:

Mostly successful. If changes make it to the live server, the tier 6-10 vehicles moved from the techtree will remain available for credits.

There is no need to rush-research these vehicles before the changes go live, as you will be able to buy them at any time after the potential update goes live.

 

Hitpoint increases:

The results fully justified their expectations.

Final hitpoint values will be looked at and introduced in a future update.

 

so anyone can buy a T X for credits now?

 

That;s dumb.. The reward tank thing was better.



SovietBias #11 Posted 19 February 2020 - 08:56 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 40074 battles
  • 1,876
  • Member since:
    06-10-2013

View PostFatigueGalaxy, on 19 February 2020 - 05:49 PM, said:

 Because people progressed faster to mid-tiers and ultimately that's WG's goal?

 

WG's goal is avoid having to come up with full lines (T1-T10) when introducing new tanks.



Homer_J #12 Posted 19 February 2020 - 08:58 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Moderator
  • 33686 battles
  • 37,622
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

View PostElement6, on 19 February 2020 - 06:15 PM, said:

 

But...wasn't removal of HE penetration one suggestion in the SPG thread? 

 

On it's own I think it would work to make arty less annoying.

 

They changed too much though reducing the alpha as well.



WindSplitter1 #13 Posted 19 February 2020 - 09:55 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 20887 battles
  • 3,677
  • [ORDEM] ORDEM
  • Member since:
    02-07-2016

View PostSovietBias, on 19 February 2020 - 07:56 PM, said:

WG's goal is avoid having to come up with full lines (T1-T10) when introducing new tanks.

 

If so, it really makes no sense.

 

Most lines have plenty of candidates down below, where it is easy enough to find blueprints or historically accurate vehicles. A sizeable amount of Low Tier vehicles went from the drawing board to prototype stages, serial production or even actually saw service.

 

Take lines such as the Type 5. Not much historical accuracy there... It's obvious WG needs to skew some aspects so they fit with a game but there are so many designs you can do such a change, or it is plausible. This need is more evident the higher you progress the tree branch.



Nishi_Kinuyo #14 Posted 19 February 2020 - 10:53 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 10529 battles
  • 7,228
  • [GUP] GUP
  • Member since:
    05-28-2011

View PostLZ_Mordan, on 19 February 2020 - 08:39 PM, said:

 

so anyone can buy a T X for credits now?

 

That;s dumb.. The reward tank thing was better.

1: it is undecided how, exactly, it gets accessed.

2: you can already buy tier 10 tanks for credits, after you research them.

3: the idea for the low tiers was to make them available once the player reaches tier 6.

4: putting the above three into consideration, it isn't unlikely that you need to reach a tank of the respective tier/nation before being able to buy the moved tank.

View PostWindSplitter1, on 19 February 2020 - 09:55 PM, said:

Take lines such as the Type 5. Not much historical accuracy there... It's obvious WG needs to skew some aspects so they fit with a game but there are so many designs you can do such a change, or it is plausible. This need is more evident the higher you progress the tree branch.

I beg your pardon?

Type 89 I-Go; one of Japan's most-produced tanks.

Type 91 Ju-I: produced in limited numbers.

Type 95 Ju-Ro: produced in limited numbers.

O-I Experimental: based on the built O-I prototype that ran trials.

O-I: at least one prototype built that ran trials.

O-Ni: based on artist's impressions.

O-Ho: based on artist's impressions.

Type 4 Heavy: presumably built and captured by soviet forces¹.

Type 5 Heavy: presumably built and captured by soviet forces¹.

¹Based on soviet documentations detailing its cooling systems.

 

If you want a tree with little historical accuracy, look to the Chinese.



gitgud_cannot #15 Posted 19 February 2020 - 11:05 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 33228 battles
  • 1,852
  • Member since:
    10-31-2013

View PostLZ_Mordan, on 19 February 2020 - 09:39 PM, said:

 

so anyone can buy a T X for credits now?

 

That;s dumb.. The reward tank thing was better.

i would still make it so, that only players who has actually researched those tanks can buy them whenever they want to.



psychobear #16 Posted 19 February 2020 - 11:14 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 19985 battles
  • 2,275
  • [7EVEN] 7EVEN
  • Member since:
    06-21-2012

View PostNishi_Kinuyo, on 19 February 2020 - 07:25 PM, said:

As posted on the EU Portal, Wargaming.net has posted the results of the recent Sandbox server, and the testing of the HE rebalance, AP rebalance, techtree changes, etc.

Link: https://worldoftanks...bruary-results/

 

TL;DR: HE rework will not continue as shown on the sandbox server.

 

The results of the HE rebalance were unsatisfactory to Wargaming, and they realised that removing penetration values from it was a mistake.

 

SPG rebalance:

Rebalance only makes sense in conjunction with the shell rebalance, and, as such, will be postponed until further shell rebalance.

The AP shells proved to be ineffective and undesirable in the paradigm tested.

 

Techtree changes:

Mostly successful. If changes make it to the live server, the tier 6-10 vehicles moved from the techtree will remain available for credits.

There is no need to rush-research these vehicles before the changes go live, as you will be able to buy them at any time after the potential update goes live.

 

Hitpoint increases:

The results fully justified their expectations.

Final hitpoint values will be looked at and introduced in a future update.

TL.DR: 

WG: We know we promised to rework gold ammo last year, but we make craploads of money out of it, so FU guys, we've thrown some dust in the eyes of fools by setting up various sandbox servers and pretending to test stuff. In fact we don't intend to change anything. Gold ammo will stay as it is and artillery won't get reworked or removed or limited to 1 per team. Wait for changes to come soonTM (in a couple of years at best), becouse... reasons.


Edited by psychobear, 19 February 2020 - 11:14 PM.


FizzleMcSnizzle #17 Posted 19 February 2020 - 11:27 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 24914 battles
  • 567
  • Member since:
    05-21-2018
Makes you wonder if they ever intended to change it. Seems like an exercise in "we listened, and heard that you love things as they are, so please don't complain anymore."


LZ_Mordan #18 Posted 19 February 2020 - 11:28 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 19664 battles
  • 529
  • Member since:
    12-27-2012

View PostFizzleMcSnizzle, on 19 February 2020 - 10:27 PM, said:

Makes you wonder if they ever intended to change it. Seems like an exercise in "we listened, and heard that you love things as they are, so please don't complain anymore."

 

this is what you get when you live under a communist regime for so long. empty promises. no delivery..

 

i bought stuff thinking the game improved with the new balance.. now I won't buy crapanymore.. And I don't want to play..  [edited]continues.

 

they just had to leave HE as it was.. And everything was GOOD!.. it was done on purpose to torpedo the gold ammo nerf!


Edited by LZ_Mordan, 19 February 2020 - 11:30 PM.


leggasiini #19 Posted 19 February 2020 - 11:50 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 18306 battles
  • 6,510
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012

View PostNishi_Kinuyo, on 19 February 2020 - 11:53 PM, said:

Type 89 I-Go; one of Japan's most-produced tanks. Correct.

Type 91 Ju-I: produced in limited numbers. Never had "Ju" designation, was just "Type 91". The tank itself was indeed real and built.

Type 95 Ju-Ro: produced in limited numbers. Real designation was Type 95 Ro-Go, not Type 95 Ju-Ro. The tank itself was real and built, though, just like the Type 91.

O-I Experimental: based on the built O-I prototype that ran trials. Extremely loosely based on that prototype. With how heavily unhistorically modified from the said prototype you might as well call it completely fictional. It's more than 99% fake anyway. If you take a real tank, like T-34, and then completely modify it into something different but still refer it as "T-34", it's still a fake.

O-I: at least one prototype built that ran trials. Yes, but only one and it presumably was never 100% completed. Completed enough to be in a running condition for mobility tests, but was never fitted with its turrets and full armor. Aside from armor which is still somewhat a mystery, the appearance of the tank in-game is very much like the real tank, making this one actually historical.

O-Ni: based on artist's impressions. Artist impressions based on the incorrect information and rumors. It is technically a fake, but "historical" fake and not made by WG, which is enough for them. Slightly better than complete fake, but still a fake.

O-Ho: based on artist's impressions. See above.

Type 4 Heavy: presumably built and captured by soviet forces¹. Super limited information that all come from Russian sources, with no Japanese source material referencing to it. Only a turret is known to built - although having very tank-like in appearance, there's no valid proof that it's a tank turret instead of a mere fortification turret, making the it 50/50 if the tank is completely fake or somewhat historical. Either way, everything but the turret - including the entire hull design, armor, engine type etc. are all guesswork that are loosely based on a single sketch.

Type 5 Heavy: presumably built and captured by soviet forces¹. See above.

¹Based on soviet documentations detailing its cooling systems.

 

If we leave tier 2-4 out (which are almost always real tanks on pretty much every line apart from Chinese TDs), we have one WG fake, two "historical" fakes that are merely just artist impressions, and two tanks that are 50/50 to be either completely fictional or real designs that are regardless partially modified in-game, making both of them at least partially fictional in any case. Only one tank non-low tier in the entire line being truly real.

 

In terms of historical accuracy, yeah, Japanese HT line slightly better than what some people think but it's still up there as one of the most least historically accurate lines in the game.

 


Balc0ra #20 Posted 20 February 2020 - 01:01 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 76437 battles
  • 22,436
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View PostFizzleMcSnizzle, on 19 February 2020 - 11:27 PM, said:

Makes you wonder if they ever intended to change it. Seems like an exercise in "we listened, and heard that you love things as they are, so please don't complain anymore."

 

They have talked about doing some of this for years. Inc the HP and HE rework. Tho tests tends to be more drastic to find where the line goes, and what we are willing to accept as we have seen in the past. That can cause an even bigger counter-reaction. If the reaction is big enough, it can force them to pullout. As we also have seen several times before.


Edited by Balc0ra, 20 February 2020 - 01:02 AM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users