32 replies to this topic

[Reroll_Noob_DK]

I would really want to have a really fair thoughts about these premium shells. No need to involve any disappointment about these shells. Collect your thoughts and make them objective. Why you like? Why you dont like? Be specific.

Edited by Reroll_Noob_DK, 04 November 2020 - 09:14 PM.

[OniichanSenpai]

War Thunder has perfect shell mechanisms. You can shoot APCR, AP, APBC, HEAT... They are all different and none is outright superior.

WoT is arcade tho, so AP and gold ammo is fine. Without gold ammo, tier X would be pure arty and hulldown [edited].

Edited by Homer_J, 04 November 2020 - 10:48 PM.
Inappropriate language

[CausticSoda]

Not enough options, specific amounts of gold per tank just dont work, some tanks only have a very small loadout anyway and some are massive. Would have to be on a case by case basis.

 

Kind of frustrating that some people only fire gold but it is their credits I guess.

[vasilinhorulezz]

I guess re-roll didn't go as expected.

[NekoPuffer_PPP]

Limit to 5% of ammo rack capacity of each tank. It's fair according to WG's statistics.

[ZlatanArKung]

Just make them cost same as standard ammo imo.

[Homer_J]

Reroll_Noob_DK, on 04 November 2020 - 08:13 PM, said:

I would really want to have a really fair thoughts

 

Would have been good to start with fair poll then.

 

Your third question cannot be answered if you don't want any changes.

 

Also you should not make the votes public.

[Balc0ra]

Limiting them to say 5 per battle, is and will be a silly idea. Why? Not all tanks have the same alpha, nor the same ammo loadout for that to work fairly. Same if they had a % of the ammo locked to gold vs a number.

 

5 shells for the lowest tier X alpha is 1500 damage, for the highest it's 8750. You see how that's kinda silly. 

[Reroll_Noob_DK]

Homer_J, on 04 November 2020 - 10:47 PM, said:

 

Would have been good to start with fair poll then.

 

Your third question cannot be answered if you don't want any changes.

 

Also you should not make the votes public.

Tried. Ou, pff, ok. I pressed what i saw. Making first expierence with polls. Sorry.

[NUKLEAR_SLUG]

ZlatanArKung, on 04 November 2020 - 10:39 PM, said:

Just make them cost same as standard ammo imo.

 

So remove standard ammo from the game you mean. 

[ZlatanArKung]

NUKLEAR_SLUG, on 05 November 2020 - 02:13 AM, said:

 

So remove standard ammo from the game you mean. 

Yes, more or less. 

 

I am not a fan of p2w mechanics. 

[Pitulusu]

It's a p2w mechanism, wg will never renounce at it.

For me fair will be to have the same price as normal ammo, but to do at most 60% damage of normal ammo and 50% less critical hits because smaller explosive content.

Or limit it to 2-8 bullets per battle depending of gun size.

Auto-loaders with full clips of special ammo are now the most p2w definition of this game.

[undutchable80]

Gold spam is a symptom of lack of weakspots pennable by standard ammo. Restricting premium rounds by number without adding viable weakspots means superheavies become way too impactful. 

[Cobra6]

Premium ammo should be removed entirely from this game.

 

You simply can not balance armor properly for two vastly different penetration numbers. Either you make the armor viable for standard ammo and insta-pen for premium or you make the armor viable for premium ammo and impossible to pen with standard ammo.

There is no way to get around this and we see this nowadays where weakspots in many cases have more armor then same tier standard ammo has penetration.

 

Premium ammo needs to be removed, all armor needs to be rebalanced so that it has viable weakspots for standard ammo of the same tier or 1 tier below.

 

Cobra 6

[Pitulusu]

undutchable80, on 05 November 2020 - 08:26 AM, said:

Gold spam is a symptom of lack of weakspots pennable by standard ammo. Restricting premium rounds by number without adding viable weakspots means superheavies become way too impactful. 

Why, i hardly use prem ammo. I have no more than 4-5 per battle, but i don't use them because i can't afford it. Still i'm doing fine. Yeah, will be hard times for gold spammers, but not for a normal player.

[Hedgehog1963]

Reroll_Noob_DK, on 04 November 2020 - 08:13 PM, said:

I would really want to have a really fair thoughts about these premium shells. No need to involve any disappointment about these shells. Collect your thoughts and make them objective. Why you like? Why you dont like? Be specific.

 

 

So where is the "no change" option to question 3 Mr "really fair thoughts?"

 

 

[Hedgehog1963]

[arthurwellsley]

Reroll_Noob_DK, on 04 November 2020 - 08:13 PM, said:

I would really want to have a really fair thoughts about these premium shells. No need to involve any disappointment about these shells. Collect your thoughts and make them objective. Why you like? Why you dont like? Be specific.

 

Completely biased poll.

No voting from me.

Question three fails to give the option of no change

[shikaka9]

OniichanSenpai, on 04 November 2020 - 08:35 PM, said:

 Without gold ammo, tier X would be pure arty and hulldown

 

That's not true ... without gold ammo, standard ammo would be way different 

[WingedArchon]

I fear this topic will end up just like all the others.

Which surprises me that there's no sticky thread for it yet.

 

I remain of the position that gold (redubbed costly-silver) should become its own unique shell that has an advantage versus a penalty, whereby the trade-off is NOT balanced via how expensive it is.

The idea in the direction of lesser dmg for more pen has always beennone I thought to be rather ok.

Now this opens an entirely different can of worms but it must start somewhere.

 

 

In addition: I agree with Cobra 6's point that balancing with current structure is a mess.

WG should always kept the consistency of tanks being balanced around the STANDARD shell, thats why that shell is also called standard. Premium should never have become the new standard, whenever it seemed convienent (looking at you defender)

Edited by WingedArchon, 05 November 2020 - 10:31 AM.