Jump to content


[Sandbox] A New Round of Equipment 2.0 Testing Kicks Off June 25


  • Please log in to reply
192 replies to this topic

KapiteinRooibos #41 Posted 23 June 2020 - 04:57 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 16974 battles
  • 3
  • Member since:
    08-03-2016

Binos and Camo net still costs credits

Binos up to 600.000 for class 1

My suggestion is to make the binos the same price as the camo net

Even better is for free as it is today.



Dwigt #42 Posted 23 June 2020 - 05:11 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • WG Staff
  • 1519 battles
  • 489
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    01-29-2018

View PostUnicorn_of_Steel, on 23 June 2020 - 03:42 PM, said:

Just two things to say on this:

 

1) Don't try and fix what aint broken.

 

2) If anything, this will make the game a lot more complicated for new players. You push them to higher tiers before they're experienced enough and now you plan to implement an equipment system that almost requires an engineering degree to understand. Do you know that this is a hobby and not a job for 99% of the players?

The current equipment state was not broken but it lacked a lot of things that we're trying to fix with these changes. It lacked a lot of variety and a lot of equipment pieces were not used because they didn't improve any stats. Now you will have a wider choice and some tanks will benefit from the changes maybe they'll perform better.

 

Yes there will be a larger choice now for new players but it will be easier for them to choose the right equipments on their tank (at least the first slot). 

 

View PostWindSplitter1, on 23 June 2020 - 02:51 PM, said:

I have mixed feelings.

I like the idea of merging the radio with the jammer but nerfing the latter stats to be included is disappointing.

 

A word of advice to WG is, provide vehicles with one specialization slot with two options.

 

Heavy Tank: allow players to choose from Firepower or Survivability

Medium Tank: Mobility or Firepower

Light Tank: Mobility or Scouting

Camperbot: Firepower or Scouting

 

SPGs can remain just firepower as they're literally just a gun on tracks. If not, same as TDs.

I see what you mean and this could be a good idea as well but in my opinion if will still be the same as now. 
You will still be able to add the Firepower equipment in the second slot.

Best way to get rid of the mixed feelings is to test the changes :teethhappy: 

 



Maltratatoru #43 Posted 23 June 2020 - 05:16 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 43493 battles
  • 171
  • Member since:
    08-28-2013

View PostHomer_J, on 23 June 2020 - 04:26 PM, said:

I'm not forcing you to do anything.

 

If you think rammer/vents/vstab is still the best combination then stick with it.

i'm sorry, my bad, i wasn't clear, i was talking about the fact that on heavys for example, you are forced to mount survivability equipment in a slot, ( if i understand correctly ) to get extra bonus, while tds have firepower slot. why?  i don't want that. why don't pure and simple make a slot in i can mount anything that i want, to get an extra bonus 



Elefantas #44 Posted 23 June 2020 - 05:17 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 59612 battles
  • 313
  • Member since:
    05-02-2011

View PostUnicorn_of_Steel, on 23 June 2020 - 03:42 PM, said:

Just two things to say on this:

 

1) Don't try and fix what aint broken.

 

That doesn't apply to WG

remember tier 8 mm tinkering


Galaxy_class #45 Posted 23 June 2020 - 05:18 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 12781 battles
  • 47
  • Member since:
    06-05-2015

Yay! I'm surprised the next test has come around so quickly. My initial thoughts are:

 

1) I suggested they combine some of the equipment so people would actually use them and it looks like they took that advice, (probably not just me that suggested it). Now the survivability equipment becomes more useful imo.

 

2) Bit gutted they removed the mobility slot from the IS7. I really enjoyed the speed builds. The Turbocharger has also been nerfed, which is a shame but then it probably had to be done as some of the autoloading mediums were getting a bit fast. It is good to see they buffed the Additional Grousers so it might make up for the nerfed turbocharger but at the cost using up 2 equipment slots. I will test it to see if it is worth it but I don't think it will be enough to make me want to drop Bounty/Bond vents to be honest. The third slot I would like to run improved hardening for the suspension durability so I will have to make some choices...

 

3) Buffing the Aiming unit and the Improved Rotation Mechanism is a worry for anyone facing Arty or FVs on the test server. If they are spamming HESH or HEAT again it's going to ruin testing on the server even worse than before. :(

 

4) EBRs. I commented that the Triplex and Commanders Vision System was too powerful a combination in the EBR when they had 2 scouting slots to use. Now they are combined into one equipment (!) so EBRs can run this with Bounty/Bond optics and either improved radio set or better camo at the same time. I think that just made them even more powerful. However, at least other lights get these options as well so it might help in that regard and they get to use binocs. I suspect all the glass cannon TDs will quickly abandon the servers again with lights having nothing to spot, not being able to counter EBRs and then EBRs will be the only lights fighting.

 

5) I assume Bounty/Bond equipment bonuses are the same as the first sandbox iteration?

 

6) No distinction between Glass cannon TDs and Assault TDs? I think this is a massive oversight to put it mildly. The firepower slot really isn't great for those classes that would rather prefer mobility slots or survivability tbh. I hope this changes although having the turbocharger mixed with the speed boosting equipment helps. The Improved rotation mechanism might be useful but really, the difference between putting that in a firepower slot or standard slot is negligible.

 

That's all I can think of right now. :)

 



MarveII #46 Posted 23 June 2020 - 05:39 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 16453 battles
  • 48
  • [TRIGG] TRIGG
  • Member since:
    07-12-2011

View PostDwigt, on 23 June 2020 - 04:03 PM, said:

Improved aiming equipment will reduce the radius of the circle while the Vstab will reduce the dispersion of your gun while moving. 

There's a difference between the two pieces and it will depend on your tank.

Dispersion in this game = how big is your aiming circle

 

If you put Vert. Stabs on a tanks it will make it's aiming circle smaller. My question still stands. Your aiming circle would be always at it's smallest if you wouldn't move your tank. Do you understand this? You have to move your tank to get a bigger aiming circle. That is why everybody use vertical stabilizers, it makes the aiming circle smaller when moving and moving is the only situation when aiming circle can get bigger. It doesn't make aiming circle smaller at fully aimed but aiming circle won't "disperse" as much when moving thus smaller aiming circle. Do you understand this game mechanic?

 

When does Improved aiming unit reduce the aiming circle:

1. at fully aimed,

2. at not aimed (moving),

3. or both (it always makes it smaller)?



Speed_Of_Pain #47 Posted 23 June 2020 - 05:39 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 8984 battles
  • 200
  • [D-SEN] D-SEN
  • Member since:
    03-04-2012

View PostDwigt, on 23 June 2020 - 10:11 AM, said:

The current equipment state was not broken but it lacked a lot of things that we're trying to fix with these changes. It lacked a lot of variety and a lot of equipment pieces were not used because they didn't improve any stats. Now you will have a wider choice and some tanks will benefit from the changes maybe they'll perform better.

 

Yes there will be a larger choice now for new players but it will be easier for them to choose the right equipments on their tank (at least the first slot). 

 

I see what you mean and this could be a good idea as well but in my opinion if will still be the same as now. 
You will still be able to add the Firepower equipment in the second slot.

Best way to get rid of the mixed feelings is to test the changes :teethhappy: 

 

I think he meant it's useless to mount survivability equipment on 50B for example, so it would make sense to have an option to make that slot give firepower bonus instead. 

 

Say E100 will get a bonus from survivability slot, but 50B won't because who in their right mind will choose +10% hit points or ammo rack protection and better track repair speed on 50B ? So frontline HT will get extra benefit from having a dedicated slot, while support heavies won't and effectively will get a small nerf.

 

I understand that you might not want to give them firepower slot because then everyone will stick with current rammer+vstab +vents/gld/optics loadout, but you'll nerf about half of heavy tanks by keeping that slot reserved only to survivability. Suddenly enemy Maus/E100/whatever "tank" is harder to keep tracked, has more HP and what not, while you still have same old 50B without any benefits from new euqipment.

I'd argue there are more heavies that don't need/ won't benefit from survivability slot amx 50B is juist most obvious example.


Edited by Speed_Of_Pain, 23 June 2020 - 05:53 PM.


Kevirus #48 Posted 23 June 2020 - 05:44 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 33365 battles
  • 17
  • [TR4GE] TR4GE
  • Member since:
    01-03-2016

These are very welcoming changes

Combining equipment will definitely make some a lot more attractive, but i think the goal should be to make every equipment equally attractive, nerfing bonus vents is a good start but maybe nerf bonus of rammer as well? I think it would create more variety and less rammers be used -> less dpm - > less shorter battles
Great job on letting every tank mount Binocs and Optics again
Just please make Bounty and Improved equipment equal as it was advertised

View PostWindSplitter1, on 23 June 2020 - 03:51 PM, said:

I have mixed feelings.

I like the idea of merging the radio with the jammer but nerfing the latter stats to be included is disappointing.

 

A word of advice to WG is, provide vehicles with one specialization slot with two options.

 

Heavy Tank: allow players to choose from Firepower or Survivability

Medium Tank: Mobility or Firepower

Light Tank: Mobility or Scouting

Camperbot: Firepower or Scouting

 

SPGs can remain just firepower as they're literally just a gun on tracks. If not, same as TDs.

This is by far the best idea, not every tank in a class plays the same and it would give more choice, and it would be better than 2 tank specific bonuses.

And now consider this, two of the same heavies or meds brawling against each other, one can't even profit from the bonus of his rammer and has -10% loading time, the other has an improved rammer with -13.5%, guess who will win? this is an unfair big boost to improved equipment



Buoze #49 Posted 23 June 2020 - 05:44 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 20105 battles
  • 42
  • [CRBER] CRBER
  • Member since:
    01-09-2013

Perfect plan WarGaming. Lets make this test in the middle of Summer, just after Covid-19 quarantine has ended and everyone is just hesitant to be outside. Playing WoT or any other game is the last in the priority list or is not even on the list. Imagine how informative your results will be... or don't... I wonder if you even realise what you are doing with these changes... you are only adding bonuses, without any drawbacks. Of course it will distort the game play! Like it is not distroted aleady with Turbo-Battles...

 

Standing ovations!



xidex #50 Posted 23 June 2020 - 05:51 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 39608 battles
  • 122
  • Member since:
    02-18-2012

Game became unbalanced and instead of fixing tanks WG introduces new equipment, which makes the game even more unbalanced. Now WG is reverting back some changes, so the entire equipment 2.0 looks pathetic. Classic clown fiesta, and there is yet to be seen how WG will screw everyone who has all their tanks already equiped. GG.

 


Edited by xidex, 23 June 2020 - 05:53 PM.


m4inbrain #51 Posted 23 June 2020 - 05:51 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 15338 battles
  • 320
  • Member since:
    11-19-2010

I'm okay with the changes, though i disagree that bounty equipment should be worse than improved equipment. I bought the battle pass just to get the bounty optics (otherwise i wouldn't have bothered). 

 

I don't think they should be worse than improved equipment. Doesn't make sense anyway, they're as rare - if not rarer, since you can't just buy them - than improved equipment. What exactly is the thought process behind making them worse?



OSBTrebek #52 Posted 23 June 2020 - 06:10 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 14762 battles
  • 119
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    03-24-2013

My first impressions are generally more positive than the first round:

The points that look very good up front:

+Improvement in that many of the less useful pieces of equipment have been merged, such as the 'improved hardening' getting the effects of suspensions rolled in.

+Improvement in that 'Improved configuration' now does essentially roll the cyclonic filter, CO2 in tanks, and wet ammo rack in to a single piece of equipment! This might be enough to earn it a spot on some vehicles on the semi regular.

+Improvement that forward and reverse speed modules have been rolled in to the turbo booster.

+Reduction in the 'power creep' factor that was brought in in the previous round.

 

The points that up front need testing to classify:

~Grousers still look to be of little value, will have to test them.

~I think the reduction of the spread between base and boosted gear is the right approach.

~I think the elimination of one of the 'specialized' slots is the right approach

 

The points that seem to be negative and need testing:

-The radio module that extends the spotting duration needs a change to the way sixth sense works so players will know conclusively when they are no longer spotted. In the base game it was 10 seconds, possibly 12 if someone had a specific skill and was tracking you. Then directives boosted that to 10,12, or 14 seconds. Now this radio is coming along and boosting it up to potentially 16 seconds, making it a 60% RNG range. This is down from 18 seconds last patch, but really doesn't seem to be healthy for interactive skill based game play.

 

As to the situation with bounty gear versus bond gear, it was advertised as being equivalent when the battle passes were being sold, so it needs to be kept in line with bond equipment or the gold refunded - it's that simple.

edit: added image

Bount equipment advertised as equivalent to improved equipment.

 

 

 

 

 

 


Edited by OSBTrebek, 23 June 2020 - 06:12 PM.


WindSplitter1 #53 Posted 23 June 2020 - 06:35 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 21765 battles
  • 4,146
  • [WINDY] WINDY
  • Member since:
    02-07-2016

View PostUnicorn_of_Steel, on 23 June 2020 - 03:42 PM, said:

You push them to higher tiers before they're experienced enough and now you plan to implement an equipment system that almost requires an engineering degree to understand.

 

I disagree with this stance.

 

Although I myself am not a good player, I understand the basics of the game and its mechanics. I can tell when a player is cheating and provide substance and when server/client is acting up.

This doesn't mean that upon learning the mechanics you'll be a good player as you still need to play such learnings and this is where people fail at, including me.

 

Also, understanding the mechanics (or knowing "how to English") is the only requirement to know how these pieces of equipment might be better for a given vehicle.

I play LTs, didn't take me long to grasp which build could be better for my playstyle and vehicles.

 

WG is in the right direction with this and Ranked changes.



MajstrBajt #54 Posted 23 June 2020 - 06:46 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 14204 battles
  • 17
  • Member since:
    11-05-2012

Don't try to fix or change what ain't broken please. And hold up on the EBR nerf for another couple months, as you said on your Q&A you need to do it step by step just to be sure not to overdo it. Balancing obj430u and progetto 65  before EBR's is far more important because of their game braking 90° instant turns while going 100km/h and getting critted 3 times in row with guns bigger than that toy Ferrari car doing no damage and slowing it down just a touch. All this time invested having these sandbox changes is more important than fix or balance what players think is a problem for quite some time now, and instead change things that are not related to the problem. Also the new ammo and hp rework is same as this, over thinking where there shouldn't have been any. Limit the premium shells you can carry then, don't rework the ammo system because of it.

I had to get this rant out of me, and yes i know this topic is for sandbox/equipment but frankly i don't give a DAMN like you WG :)



Fr4kt #55 Posted 23 June 2020 - 06:57 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 25131 battles
  • 57
  • [SPIKE] SPIKE
  • Member since:
    01-28-2012

 

Is it really that hard to understand that giving us higher bonuses from the right equipment slots will cause battles to last even less?

 

Please stop the powercreep, we are already suffering from 15-3 battles lasting less than 5 mins as the most common result.

 

Otherwise, please state the thought process behind one team steamrolling the other being something good for the game.

 

 



RedoubtableSpirit #56 Posted 23 June 2020 - 07:22 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 7748 battles
  • 72
  • [CHIRO] CHIRO
  • Member since:
    09-13-2015

View PostDwigt, on 23 June 2020 - 04:03 PM, said

 

Bounty equipment is still better than the standard equipment but we wanted to adjust the value of Improved equipment to it's actual cost.
Changes are not final so if you feel that this is an actual nerf to the Bounty equipment please feel free to report it for our final feedback.

 

No-one 'feels' it is a nerf; it IS a nerf. WG scammed me from my time for RtB and scammed a ton of people for gold on the Season Pass. If you feel... sheeesh!



O_o_Babbuino #57 Posted 23 June 2020 - 07:23 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 44515 battles
  • 513
  • [SCOBA] SCOBA
  • Member since:
    06-15-2011

WG: "we need you to test on sandbox"

 

(spend hours/days testing....)

 

reward = 1 day of premium account???????????

 

So what you lose on main account cos you want to help and test for WG is significantly more than the reward :D

 

WG where is your head???

 

You give 1 day of PA??? What about 7 days of PA?....but may be that means less caviar for you.....



Draconic #58 Posted 23 June 2020 - 07:31 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 18789 battles
  • 359
  • Member since:
    04-18-2011
By reading the topic at a glance, it seems to me like a severe heavy tank nerf, or to be more precise, they don't profit much of their equipment choices. What you're actually making of them is bigger hp pinatas.

Kevirus #59 Posted 23 June 2020 - 07:46 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 33365 battles
  • 17
  • [TR4GE] TR4GE
  • Member since:
    01-03-2016

View PostFr4kt, on 23 June 2020 - 06:57 PM, said:

 

Is it really that hard to understand that giving us higher bonuses from the right equipment slots will cause battles to last even less?

 

Please stop the powercreep, we are already suffering from 15-3 battles lasting less than 5 mins as the most common result.

 

Otherwise, please state the thought process behind one team steamrolling the other being something good for the game.

 

 

I agree, maybe Rammer should be the only equipment that doesn't get any bonus and the Improved rammer stays at 12.5% as it is now.
Maybe more people would instead consider mounting different equipment then and the game wouldn't be only about the reaching the highest dpm.
 

View PostOSBTrebek, on 23 June 2020 - 06:10 PM, said:

My first impressions are generally more positive than the first round:

The points that look very good up front:

+Improvement in that many of the less useful pieces of equipment have been merged, such as the 'improved hardening' getting the effects of suspensions rolled in.

+Improvement in that 'Improved configuration' now does essentially roll the cyclonic filter, CO2 in tanks, and wet ammo rack in to a single piece of equipment! This might be enough to earn it a spot on some vehicles on the semi regular.

+Improvement that forward and reverse speed modules have been rolled in to the turbo booster.

+Reduction in the 'power creep' factor that was brought in in the previous round.

 

The points that up front need testing to classify:

~Grousers still look to be of little value, will have to test them.

~I think the reduction of the spread between base and boosted gear is the right approach.

~I think the elimination of one of the 'specialized' slots is the right approach

 

The points that seem to be negative and need testing:

-The radio module that extends the spotting duration needs a change to the way sixth sense works so players will know conclusively when they are no longer spotted. In the base game it was 10 seconds, possibly 12 if someone had a specific skill and was tracking you. Then directives boosted that to 10,12, or 14 seconds. Now this radio is coming along and boosting it up to potentially 16 seconds, making it a 60% RNG range. This is down from 18 seconds last patch, but really doesn't seem to be healthy for interactive skill based game play.

 

As to the situation with bounty gear versus bond gear, it was advertised as being equivalent when the battle passes were being sold, so it needs to be kept in line with bond equipment or the gold refunded - it's that simple.

edit: added image

Bount equipment advertised as equivalent to improved equipment.

Maybe even combining Additional Grousers and Improved Rotation equipment in one would be good since WG is very unlikely to add another slot.
I would even go so far and say that Improved Configuration should be split into Spall Liner and Improved Hardening.
Additional to this create only one Category for Survivability and Mobility since a lot of heavies play like meds and the other way around.

This would give would give meds and heavies more interesting choices for Bonuses if WG doesn't want to give bonus slots 2 specialization as proposed by WindSplitter1.

I agree that Sixth sense needs to be adjusted according to the spotting duration but maybe Crew 2.0 will do that, apparently sixth sense will be default on tanks but maybe we can have a skill that will show the entire duration of being spotted?
 

View PostO_o_Babbuino, on 23 June 2020 - 07:23 PM, said:

WG: "we need you to test on sandbox"

 

(spend hours/days testing....)

 

reward = 1 day of premium account???????????

 

So what you lose on main account cos you want to help and test for WG is significantly more than the reward :D

 

WG where is your head???

 

You give 1 day of PA??? What about 7 days of PA?....but may be that means less caviar for you.....

Yes it's more like a compensation only instead of a reward



OSBTrebek #60 Posted 23 June 2020 - 08:23 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 14762 battles
  • 119
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    03-24-2013

View PostDwigt, on 23 June 2020 - 04:03 PM, said:

Improved aiming equipment will reduce the radius of the circle while the Vstab will reduce the dispersion of your gun while moving. 

There's a difference between the two pieces and it will depend on your tank.

 

Bounty equipment is still better than the standard equipment but we wanted to adjust the value of Improved equipment to it's actual cost.
Changes are not final so if you feel that this is an actual nerf to the Bounty equipment please feel free to report it for our final feedback.

Dwigt, The specific issue is that the bounty equipment was advertised as being equivalent to improved equipment when we were being enticed to spend gold on the battle pass:

This is a completely separate issue from what the basic and improved equipment ends up being, it's that it's false advertising and scammy to try to make the bounty equipment anything other than equal to improved equipment. WG is free to improve bond equipment as much as they want (feedback on whether they should buff it is completely separate), they just have to make bounty equipment equivalent or it's false advertising.

 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users