Jump to content


Mind-boggling Eq 2.0 flaw

equipment

  • Please log in to reply
47 replies to this topic

Nishi_Kinuyo #21 Posted 08 September 2020 - 05:43 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 11724 battles
  • 7,843
  • [GUP] GUP
  • Member since:
    05-28-2011

Oh yes, by the eight million, forbid us from actually having somewhat viable alternatives to the holy trinity of vstab, rammer and optics.

 

The bonus slot is based on the class it has, deal with it.

I don't mind that the slot matches exactly what I, a single player have in mind for that tank, but at least it gives me something to consider to put something other in it than one of the holy trinity.

And even if it doesn't match, the new equipment options give me something to consider to use that isn't one of the holy trinity.

View PostUnicorn_of_Steel, on 08 September 2020 - 11:43 AM, said:

 

Because a pre determined category means a limited choice in what aspect of the tank a player can optimize by using the high bonus. Take my Tiger II for instance, the only thing i do not like about this tank is the lack of speed. I would love to be able to put the turbo charger in the bonus slot, to maximise its effect. But i can't, i am forced to choose equipment that WG pre selected for that slot on this tank. I don't need some extra health or a tiny bit less aim time, i want more mobility. Imo that is not what diversity is about. it's not facilitating experimenting with surprising out of the box builds, it's just hindering that.

 

Just remember mr. Ford about the T-Ford. 'Sure, the customer can order a T-Ford in any colour he or she desires, as long as it is black'...

 

Btw, i want more mobility on my Tiger II not to play it as a medium but to be able to keep up with the meta of (0-5)-15 roflstomps < 3 minutes so i can either do some damage too or be able to escape a collapsing flank. 

And I still put a turbocharger on my VK45.02A despite the fact that it doesn't match the slot, because the bonus mobility is still worth it, imo.

Mind you, the VK45.02A is quite powercrept these days, unlike the Tiggy 2 which got buffs semi-recently.



Robbie_T #22 Posted 09 September 2020 - 03:25 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 24412 battles
  • 1,806
  • [BBMM] BBMM
  • Member since:
    07-08-2016

You dont have to use the bonus.

If i dont like the bonus ill put in what i want.



Unicorn_of_Steel #23 Posted 09 September 2020 - 07:43 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 23972 battles
  • 967
  • [R_D_A] R_D_A
  • Member since:
    12-29-2017

View PostNishi_Kinuyo, on 08 September 2020 - 05:43 PM, said:

Oh yes, by the eight million, forbid us from actually having somewhat viable alternatives to the holy trinity of vstab, rammer and optics.

 

The bonus slot is based on the class it has, deal with it.

I don't mind that the slot matches exactly what I, a single player have in mind for that tank, but at least it gives me something to consider to put something other in it than one of the holy trinity.

And even if it doesn't match, the new equipment options give me something to consider to use that isn't one of the holy trinity.

And I still put a turbocharger on my VK45.02A despite the fact that it doesn't match the slot, because the bonus mobility is still worth it, imo.

Mind you, the VK45.02A is quite powercrept these days, unlike the Tiggy 2 which got buffs semi-recently.

 

Care to share your complete equipment on the VK 45.02A? I'm wondering what to chose next to turbo. 



HerrWizo #24 Posted 09 September 2020 - 01:35 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 45584 battles
  • 146
  • [BEXF] BEXF
  • Member since:
    08-07-2014
Yeah, while for most tanks bonus slot makes sense, for some it is completely off. Like Leopard PTA and 1, AMX30, Patton and most other tier IX meds, which get mobility slot (which is already good enough for the most part) and so you are stuck with vents as your only option if you want this slot to have any effect. Scouting would be great for some of them, firepower also. Ability to change slot class would be great. 

Miepie #25 Posted 09 September 2020 - 01:49 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 7390 battles
  • 3,281
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-19-2018

View PostRobbie_T, on 09 September 2020 - 03:25 AM, said:

 

If i dont like the bonus ill put in what i want.

That... that's what she said... :(



Nishi_Kinuyo #26 Posted 09 September 2020 - 08:17 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 11724 battles
  • 7,843
  • [GUP] GUP
  • Member since:
    05-28-2011

View PostUnicorn_of_Steel, on 09 September 2020 - 07:43 AM, said:

 

Care to share your complete equipment on the VK 45.02A? I'm wondering what to chose next to turbo. 

Spoiler

 



Cobra6 #27 Posted 10 September 2020 - 08:24 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16625 battles
  • 18,760
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

Yeah trying to pigeon-hole tanks was a bad idea when they pitched it a couple of years ago for Rubicon and it still is a bad idea.

 

The role of a tank is up to the player, not up to a pre-determined class.

Most light tanks below Tier 9 are great damage dealers that can also spot very well, for instance.

 

Cobra 6



Miepie #28 Posted 10 September 2020 - 10:34 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 7390 battles
  • 3,281
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-19-2018

View PostCobra6, on 10 September 2020 - 08:24 AM, said:

 

The role of a tank is up to the player, not up to a pre-determined class.

 

Top tier Type 5 Heavy playing the role of passive spotter from the redline behind his own base? :popcorn:



Lanrefni #29 Posted 10 September 2020 - 10:45 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 42389 battles
  • 5,879
  • [_N0D_] _N0D_
  • Member since:
    09-15-2012

View PostBR33K1_PAWAH, on 08 September 2020 - 06:09 AM, said:

Still better lovestory than Twilight.

are we talking about the same twilight



mgns #30 Posted 10 September 2020 - 10:54 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 46238 battles
  • 267
  • Member since:
    03-05-2011

View PostCobra6, on 10 September 2020 - 07:24 AM, said:

Yeah trying to pigeon-hole tanks was a bad idea when they pitched it a couple of years ago for Rubicon and it still is a bad idea.

 

The role of a tank is up to the player, not up to a pre-determined class.

Most light tanks below Tier 9 are great damage dealers that can also spot very well, for instance.

 

Cobra 6


idk why we needed a bonused slot to begin with, but it should have been just whatever you put in the first slot no matter the arbitrary category of equipment.



Cobra6 #31 Posted 10 September 2020 - 11:26 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16625 battles
  • 18,760
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

View PostMiepie, on 10 September 2020 - 09:34 AM, said:

Top tier Type 5 Heavy playing the role of passive spotter from the redline behind his own base? :popcorn:


If they should choose to play so, yes.

 

They will have a legitimate 42% win ratio for a reason and rightfully be reported for botting a lot.

 

Cobra 6



Infryndiira #32 Posted 10 September 2020 - 12:16 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 26492 battles
  • 977
  • [GUP] GUP
  • Member since:
    09-20-2013

View PostNebuched, on 08 September 2020 - 04:53 AM, said:

Some tanks have simply the wrong preferred eq slot. For IS-3 its survivability. That's quite thoughtless and the worst choice. What if I want  the bonus on better aim time, faster reload, more mobility ? More spotting so I get sniped less ?

Nope useless survivability. Its the least useful category for a IS-3 which gets penned at very long distances by WV's and same tier mediums, and for whom a few extra hp wont help. Only useful equipment is vents. Why not two preferred slots ?

 

M41 Bulldog: scouting preferred slot. No option for a bonus on firepower for a better chance against WV and mediums. No option for a mobility bonus to keep up with faster tanks or escape trouble faster with your big, big (by scout standards) tank.

 

I could mention many other tanks, list goes on and on. And no, I don't have the creds or bonds to put food or directives on almost every battle,  to boost the other characteristics of a tank. Aside from WG trying to kill passive scouting, now you're limiting playstyles on tanks even further. 

It's working as intended. The player community rejected the concept of two specialised equipment slots per tank on Equipment 2.0 Sandbox Iteration 1, and thus Wargaming.net removed the second, per-tank specialised slot from every vehicle, leaving us with just the per-class specialised slot that we have now.

 

You seriously underestimate the usefulness of that slot.

 

For the IS-3, a dedicated brawler, a survivability slot can augment its low health, its vulnerable fuel tanks and ammo rack, improve its suspension durability (which is vital for heavy tanks in a lot of scenarios), and more. Equipping Improved Hardening or Modified Configuration is not "the worst choice". Alternatively, you can always fit Improved Ventilation, still enjoying the slot bonus, or ignore the specialisation for mobility or additional firepower equipment.

 

For the M41 Bulldog, you already enjoy ridiculously good base view range, which, if combined with specialised Scouting equipment, you can either exploit more effectively (such as by using Commander's Vision System in that slot), improve further (such as by using Coated Optics in that slot) or augment the vehicle's stealth to render it alright rather than bad for its class (such as by using Low Noise Exhaust System in that slot). I know you want to specialise in as a fast demi-medium, and you still can by using Coated Optics, Gun Rammer and Vertical Stabilisers, but you underestimate how effective the M41 is as a dedicated scout as well.

 

The oddest cases are vehicles like the Somua SM and the AMX 50 series of vehicles; Survivability slots there don't have the same flexibility they do on, say, dedicated brawlers like the IS series of heavy tanks, but they can still find their uses in various setups for different use-cases.

 

The problem is the obsession to always make use of the specialist slot's bonus. That's unnecessary. If your playstyle benefits from abandoning the specialisation bonus, do exactly that.



Lanrefni #33 Posted 10 September 2020 - 01:15 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 42389 battles
  • 5,879
  • [_N0D_] _N0D_
  • Member since:
    09-15-2012
^that is the problem - IS-3 isn't a heavy tank.

Infryndiira #34 Posted 10 September 2020 - 02:55 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 26492 battles
  • 977
  • [GUP] GUP
  • Member since:
    09-20-2013

View PostLanrefni, on 10 September 2020 - 02:15 PM, said:

^that is the problem - IS-3 isn't a heavy tank.


Power crept or not, the IS-3 has, is, and always will be a heavy tank.



Lanrefni #35 Posted 10 September 2020 - 06:27 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 42389 battles
  • 5,879
  • [_N0D_] _N0D_
  • Member since:
    09-15-2012

View PostCobra6, on 10 September 2020 - 12:26 PM, said:


If they should choose to play so, yes.

 

They will have a legitimate 42% win ratio for a reason and rightfully be reported for botting a lot.

 

Cobra 6

What if the player is actually saving hp or holding a flank on their own?

seriously, think outside the box.

 

View PostInfryndiira, on 10 September 2020 - 03:55 PM, said:


Power crept or not, the IS-3 has, is, and always will be a heavy tank.

IS-3 is a heavium, is my point.

an actual heavy tank is the KV-5.



ares354 #36 Posted 10 September 2020 - 11:16 PM

    Colonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 79574 battles
  • 3,839
  • Member since:
    12-05-2010

View PostInfryndiira, on 10 September 2020 - 12:16 PM, said:

It's working as intended. The player community rejected the concept of two specialised equipment slots per tank on Equipment 2.0 Sandbox Iteration 1, and thus Wargaming.net removed the second, per-tank specialised slot from every vehicle, leaving us with just the per-class specialised slot that we have now.

 

You seriously underestimate the usefulness of that slot.

 

For the IS-3, a dedicated brawler, a survivability slot can augment its low health, its vulnerable fuel tanks and ammo rack, improve its suspension durability (which is vital for heavy tanks in a lot of scenarios), and more. Equipping Improved Hardening or Modified Configuration is not "the worst choice". Alternatively, you can always fit Improved Ventilation, still enjoying the slot bonus, or ignore the specialisation for mobility or additional firepower equipment.

 

For the M41 Bulldog, you already enjoy ridiculously good base view range, which, if combined with specialised Scouting equipment, you can either exploit more effectively (such as by using Commander's Vision System in that slot), improve further (such as by using Coated Optics in that slot) or augment the vehicle's stealth to render it alright rather than bad for its class (such as by using Low Noise Exhaust System in that slot). I know you want to specialise in as a fast demi-medium, and you still can by using Coated Optics, Gun Rammer and Vertical Stabilisers, but you underestimate how effective the M41 is as a dedicated scout as well.

 

The oddest cases are vehicles like the Somua SM and the AMX 50 series of vehicles; Survivability slots there don't have the same flexibility they do on, say, dedicated brawlers like the IS series of heavy tanks, but they can still find their uses in various setups for different use-cases.

 

The problem is the obsession to always make use of the specialist slot's bonus. That's unnecessary. If your playstyle benefits from abandoning the specialisation bonus, do exactly that.

You are in Wot from 2013, and you still think WG listen to this community, i cannot image you are serious with this. WG never tested universal slot, and we dont know, how would community react to that idea. period. We got pointless predetermined class which remove any diveristy in equipment. 

 

You seriously overerestimate the usefulness of that slot.

 

IS 3 is, always was, mobilie HT, and this is idea which many would want to build this tank around. He dont need IH, because he dont have armor on hull vs his and higer tier, never will have, only turret front bounce. HE is blind as bat, so he should be fast, also putting Vent in there remove whole idea of EQ 2.0

 

Again, he want build m41 way he want ,and you say he cannot, he sould, that was whole idea. By wg removed with those idiot slots, and weak equipment, many after testing are worthless. 

 

Survivability is weakest class of slot they added. 10% hp is nothing, IC is worthless with big repairkits and they are not single time, as use to be. Spall liner suck because as most eq 2.0 is % base, not flat.

 

The problem is your obsession to always make use of the specialist slot's bonus WG made. That's unnecessary. If mine playsatyle benefits suffers from specialisation bonu WG made, which dont fit, 2.0 eq failed. 



Miepie #37 Posted 11 September 2020 - 12:01 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 7390 battles
  • 3,281
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-19-2018

View PostLanrefni, on 10 September 2020 - 01:15 PM, said:

^that is the problem - IS-3 isn't a heavy tank.

View PostInfryndiira, on 10 September 2020 - 02:55 PM, said:


Power crept or not, the IS-3 has, is, and always will be a heavy tank.

Maybe it is just big-boned! :(



Miller1973 #38 Posted 11 September 2020 - 12:26 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 16837 battles
  • 174
  • Member since:
    08-18-2016
Why not just make the bonus slot player definable regardless of class?

Infryndiira #39 Posted 11 September 2020 - 01:27 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 26492 battles
  • 977
  • [GUP] GUP
  • Member since:
    09-20-2013

View Postares354, on 11 September 2020 - 12:16 AM, said:

You are in Wot from 2013, and you still think WG listen to this community, i cannot image you are serious with this. WG never tested universal slot, and we dont know, how would community react to that idea. period. We got pointless predetermined class which remove any diveristy in equipment. 

 

You seriously overerestimate the usefulness of that slot.

 

IS 3 is, always was, mobilie HT, and this is idea which many would want to build this tank around. He dont need IH, because he dont have armor on hull vs his and higer tier, never will have, only turret front bounce. HE is blind as bat, so he should be fast, also putting Vent in there remove whole idea of EQ 2.0

 

Again, he want build m41 way he want ,and you say he cannot, he sould, that was whole idea. By wg removed with those idiot slots, and weak equipment, many after testing are worthless. 

 

Survivability is weakest class of slot they added. 10% hp is nothing, IC is worthless with big repairkits and they are not single time, as use to be. Spall liner suck because as most eq 2.0 is % base, not flat.

 

The problem is your obsession to always make use of the specialist slot's bonus WG made. That's unnecessary. If mine playsatyle benefits suffers from specialisation bonu WG made, which dont fit, 2.0 eq failed. 


Re-read what I said:

 

Block Quote

 It's working as intended. The player community rejected the concept of two specialised equipment slots per tank on Equipment 2.0 Sandbox Iteration 1

 

Equipment 2.0 Sandbox 1 had Tier 8-10 tanks with two specialised equipment slots; one was universal (eg. Survivability for heavy tanks) and one was tank-specific (eg. Mobility for the IS-7, Survivability for the Maus, etc). This concept allowed further specialisation but was rejected by the community rather overwhelmingly, because, quote, the community didn't like having tanks "shoehorned" into specific equipment setups (typically at the expense of the Holy Trinity Vents/Rammer/Vstab).

 

About the IS-3: Yes, it's a heavium. A medium-like heavy, with decent mobility (especially if you build into it with Turbocharger). Its armour has been power-crept. However, Improved Hardening doesn't rely on armour; it relies on tracks eating shots, and your tank having hit points (which it always does). +10% hp isn't "nothing" - just do the math. An IS-3 can get +150 hp with IH in Survivability, which brings it up to 1650. For context, at 1500 hp it takes ~3.85 shots at 390 alpha to kill it, while at 1650 hp it takes ~4,23 shots at 390 alpha; add RNG, HE splashes, lower-alpha gun hits and whatnot, and that 150 hp can really save your [edited]and allow you to keep your gun in-game much longer. It also helps you repair your tracks faster, and makes you lose your tracks a lot harder, even if you've already lost them once, which plays into techniques like reverse sidescraping and not being immobilised while doing heavium stuff.

 

About the M41: Of course, it can be built as a lightium/LT hunter. It's not how I would build any of my LTs, but it's doable. All I was saying is that the Scouting slot is not useless; it is anything but useless on the M41, considering its base view range, and potential of new equipment (eg by combining CVS+CO as a single example). Besides, why would an LT in any role not use even a single piece of Scouting equipment? At the very least you'll have Coated Optics on, which can still benefit ridiculously from that Scouting slot and the M41's high base view range.

 

As of not using the specialisation bonus, it's a more than viable choice in a lot of tanks. Most mediums still kick [edited]with Coated Optics-Gun Rammer-Vertical Stabiliser, despite none of them being Mobility equipment, and several Heavies can forego Survivability equipment as well.



Cobra6 #40 Posted 11 September 2020 - 07:30 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16625 battles
  • 18,760
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

View PostInfryndiira, on 10 September 2020 - 01:55 PM, said:


Power crept or not, the IS-3 has, is, and always will be a heavy tank.


The IS-3, despite it's classification, is a heavy medium tank in terms of gameplay and performance.

 

View PostLanrefni, on 10 September 2020 - 05:27 PM, said:

What if the player is actually saving hp or holding a flank on their own?

seriously, think outside the box.

 

 

You and I both know that one can hardly attribute such tactical insight to the majority of players of this game. So yes, hypothetically it can be so that they are saving HP or holding a flank, you are right.

 

Cobra 6







Also tagged with equipment

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users