27 replies to this topic

[qpranger]

As in: why is it not added to tanks and/or revoked as necessary to tweak balancing? Changing premium tanks like this might be an issue for legal reasons, but how about ordinary tech tree tanks that are difficult to balance otherwise? And not only limiting uptiers for weaker tanks, but limiting downtiers as well for some OP tanks.

Edited by qpranger, 02 November 2020 - 11:55 AM.

[Discontinued]

Yes STB-1 or Leopard should never face tier 10 

 

 

A TOG a TOG my kingdom for a TOG

 

Taken from the famous Play Richard the Tog 3rd 

[OniichanSenpai]

The main issue is that it's bad from a game design perspective and all cases of PMM are due to awkward balance choices.

 

Most PMM tanks are in fact tanks of one tier below with a slightly worse MM. Example being the Stug IV which has a tier 4 gun and is yet on tier 5 so it has to have PMM in order to not suck completely. Still, it will be matched against full-power tier 5 tanks like the Wolverine or T67 which are arguably superior. 

 

The problem with PMM tanks is that their combat strength is lower than their tier. A Type59 will get roasted by a Progetto as much as a Stug IV gets roasted by a T67 even tho they have the same tier. 

 

So, PMM makes the game overall hard to balance. 

Edited by OniichanSenpai, 02 November 2020 - 12:16 PM.

[Geno1isme]

Because it makes the matchmaking more complicated and will result in more fail platoons.

[saxsan4]

OniichanSenpai, on 02 November 2020 - 11:08 AM, said:

The main issue is that it's bad from a game design perspective and all cases of PMM are due to awkward balance choices.

 

Most PMM tanks are in fact tanks of one tier below with a slightly worse MM. Example being the Stug IV which has a tier 4 gun and is yet on tier 5 so it has to have PMM in order to not suck completely. Still, it will be matched against full-power tier 5 tanks like the Wolverine or T67 which are arguably superior. 

 

The problem with PMM tanks is that their combat strength is lower than their tier. A Type59 will get roasted by a Progetto as much as a Stug IV gets roasted by a T67 even tho they have the same tier. 

 

So, PMM makes the game overall hard to balance. 

but the alternative is tanks like m4 improved or turn which should have PMM and up just being very weak taks with regular mm

 

and its not true that all PMM are worse than their tier, E25 is the best tier 7 TD, more than the non PMM, same with things like at15a, Super Pershing , Mutant , these are competitive in their tier

 

 

as with all things PMM works well when balanced effectively. 

[PayMore]

As far as I've seen WG is allways fixxing balance issues fast when they have collected data. Look at e100, is4, obj430U and obj140.  They have adjusted ebr105 so it equal too rhm. pz in performance. The only balance issue they have left is balancing classes against to other classes.  Arty should have a fair chance to kill ebr at close range(note; ebr can kill arty from 500m+) and so on/have invis cloak at atleast have HE that does the same dmg as ebr..

[m1x_angelico]

PayMore, on 02 November 2020 - 12:41 PM, said:

As far as I've seen WG is allways fixxing balance issues fast when they have collected data. Look at e100, is4, obj430U and obj140.  They have adjusted ebr105 so it equal too rhm. pz in performance. The only balance issue they have left is balancing classes against to other classes.  Arty should have a fair chance to kill ebr at close range(note; ebr can kill arty from 500m+) and so on/have invis cloak at atleast have HE that does the same dmg as ebr..

 

Yes, this is generally the problem with arty after the rework. One EBR penetrating at the beginning or if there's a void in defense means bye bye arty, cause even if you are precise and lucky enough to shoot him, you don't kill him.

[MeetriX]

PMM may had been a balancing factor many years ago, but not today.

PMM tanks still have to fight against same tier power creeping tanks.

[Homer_J]

qpranger, on 02 November 2020 - 11:54 AM, said:

As in: why is it not added to tanks and/or revoked as necessary to tweak balancing? Changing premium tanks like this might be an issue for legal reasons, but how about ordinary tech tree tanks that are difficult to balance otherwise? And not only limiting uptiers for weaker tanks, but limiting downtiers as well for some OP tanks.

 

They used to use battle weighting in that way but it was confusing for players (one team having more high tiers etc.) and causes problems for the matchmaker.

 

And it's really a bad way to balance the game because you are hiding the imbalance rather than fixing it.

 

It would be nice to see rebalancing done faster instead.

[Marco_Is_Legend2019]

Your idea of balance doesn't necessarily matches WG's. They use the word relatively, we use it absolutely. Most of the time anyway. WG utilize it to shift attention between different lines to eventually make profit. We call for it to play the damn game comfortably or play the tanks we like.

 

The main constrain on the MM algorithm is the uneven distribution of players throughout the tiers. Which is also primarily created by WG. Now what? There is no sign of WG stopping or slowing down at promoting higher tiers. Only 4 or so of the available tiers are actually playable. What kind of godlike (deific?) MM algorithm is going to reconcile all those conflicting factors?

 

Let's take the Defender for example. Matching it in +2 battles all the time isn't exactly preferential. It's called punitive. Who'd buy that and what about those who already own one? And after about 4 years of churning out good tier 8 premiums. Would you be willing to buy a tier 5 or 6 with better credits and XP multiplier if that'll generally help the MM and the game? (Not the Ersatz though. This one is mine and mine alone.)

[OniichanSenpai]

saxsan4, on 02 November 2020 - 12:30 PM, said:

but the alternative is tanks like m4 improved or turn which should have PMM and up just being very weak taks with regular mm

 

and its not true that all PMM are worse than their tier, E25 is the best tier 7 TD, more than the non PMM, same with things like at15a, Super Pershing , Mutant , these are competitive in their tier

 

 

as with all things PMM works well when balanced effectively. 

 

I agree but the obvious solution would be to move M4 Improved to tier4 where it belongs

 

E25 is just a weirdo tank. the gun is tier 6, the camo is OP and the DPM is tier 8. that is what i mean, PMM messes up things. give the gun +20 pen and remove PMM and the OP camo (which they can't i know).

 

PMM as well as "Never nerf premium tanks" is the issue here. WG HAS to resort to powercreep because of that.

 

Edited by OniichanSenpai, 02 November 2020 - 04:39 PM.

[saxsan4]

OniichanSenpai, on 02 November 2020 - 03:32 PM, said:

 

I agree but the obvious solution would be to move M4 Improved to tier4 where it belongs

 

E25 is just a weirdo tank. the gun is tier 6, the camo is OP and the DPM is tier 8. that is what i mean, PMM messes up things. give the gun +20 pen and remove PMM and the OP camo (which they can't i know).

 

PMM as well as "Never nerf premium tanks" is the issue here. WG HAS to resort to powercreep because of that.

 

but e25 v tier 9s would be not worth the money 

 

what about stuff like tog, would you have tog at tier 5?

 

 

the issue is in real life some tanks have abnormally amounts of armour and an abnormally weak gun, so how would you balance those without it?
 

 

I think the best way to fix it would be +1/-1mm for all tanks

[OniichanSenpai]

saxsan4, on 02 November 2020 - 04:58 PM, said:

but e25 v tier 9s would be not worth the money 

 

what about stuff like tog, would you have tog at tier 5?

 

 

the issue is in real life some tanks have abnormally amounts of armour and an abnormally weak gun, so how would you balance those without it?
 

 

I think the best way to fix it would be +1/-1mm for all tanks

 

Actually I think they want +1/-1 too. They just have to fix some tanks then... because obviously this buffs all the non-PMM tanks massively compared to the PMM ones.

 

[Slyspy]

Because it plays merry hell with the MM, doesn't fit with the simplified platoon rules and is a redundant mechanic. 

[shikaka9]

its not big enough punishment anymore ...

[Bulldog_Drummond]

There is nothing more amusing to play than a PMM tank that is OP for its tier.  

I don't think that is any longer anything in that category at Tier 8 at there are still excellent PMM tanks at lower tiers

[thetartanbaron]

Block Quote

I think the best way to fix it would be +1/-1mm for all tanks

 This ^^ or at least for all heavy tanks

 

[Randomar]

Slyspy, on 02 November 2020 - 05:39 PM, said:

[...] doesn't fit with the simplified platoon rules [...]

 

Right, when you platoon with a tank that have preferred matchmaking, all three tanks getting this benefit.

So with 3 platoons you might have 6 additional tanks that getting "preferred matchmaking".

 

This isn't a matter of balancing but blatant bug-using.

 

In my eyes all of those "soft stats", "hidden" and "super-hidden" imbalancing attributes have to go.

 

I understand that WG wanted to introduce unique tanks, with their own way of playing. 

 

I agree on that, every tank should be shifted to where it belongs.

 

 

 

[jabster]

Randomar, on 02 November 2020 - 07:15 PM, said:

 

Right, when you platoon with a tank that have preferred matchmaking, all three tanks getting this benefit.

So with 3 platoons you might have 6 additional tanks that getting "preferred matchmaking".

 

This isn't a matter of balancing but blatant bug-using.

 

In my eyes all of those "soft stats", "hidden" and "super-hidden" imbalancing attributes have to go.

 

I understand that WG wanted to introduce unique tanks, with their own way of playing. 

 

I agree on that, every tank should be shifted to where it belongs.

 

 

 

 

[Slyspy]

Randomar, on 02 November 2020 - 08:15 PM, said:

 

Right, when you platoon with a tank that have preferred matchmaking, all three tanks getting this benefit.

So with 3 platoons you might have 6 additional tanks that getting "preferred matchmaking".

 

 

 

 

 

Like most of what you type, this is totally untrue.