25 replies to this topic

[Fwippo]

Just saw a thread in which people got off topic and were discussing the possibilty of 1v1 matches.  Wow, seriously?  Does anyone out there imagine this turning into anything other than two tanks sitting in a bush waiting for 15 mins for the other person to move forward?  This game gives a massive advantage to the person who is not moving, especially in higher tiers when you aren't fast enough to juke bullets.  1v1 would be nothing other than an excercise in seeing who is willing to out wait the other person.

Horrible, horrible idea.  The only way you could implement this is to remove all camo, bushes, give both tanks 500 view range, and make it so moving and turning does not make shots less accurate.  In other words, change the entire game.

[Sonoskay]

actualy i think the biggest fix to this would be to turn off camo.. problem solved. All other things are hard tank stats and would be interesting to see ho difrent players and difrent tanks would handle..


the biggest issue i have with it is the income repair bills.. killing one tank and barely surviving would not bring a profit for mst tanks.. so they would have to adjust it... or just turn the economy off and have "just for fun" duels

[AbsoluteRoyal]

Fwippo, on Apr 08 2012 - 07:22, said:

Just saw a thread in which people got off topic and were discussing the possibilty of 1v1 matches.  Wow, seriously?  Does anyone out there imagine this turning into anything other than two tanks sitting in a bush waiting for 15 mins for the other person to move forward?  This game gives a massive advantage to the person who is not moving, especially in higher tiers when you aren't fast enough to juke bullets.  1v1 would be nothing other than an excercise in seeing who is willing to out wait the other person.

Horrible, horrible idea.  The only way you could implement this is to remove all camo, bushes, give both tanks 500 view range, and make it so moving and turning does not make shots less accurate.  In other words, change the entire game.

You are allowed your opinion but I dont see why you care, really? If it dosnt interest you dont participate. It is fairly popular and well liked on both the RU and EU server groups and many players including myself would like to parctipate. As to the camo part of your statement, the tier limit is 4. For the Leo and T-50 momentum wins fights, the T-28 amd M3 lee have BAD camo values,combined with a low sight range. The camping tank will have no advantage. IF that still isnt enough for you, make the map himmelsdorf. Done.

[Beerstein]

1v1 isn't really how the game works but if they were to add 1v1 it would only work on super small maps with a lot of destructible objects/buildings to prevent cat and mouse.

[Elepole]

Fwippo, on Apr 08 2012 - 07:22, said:

This game gives a massive advantage to the person who is not moving

Nope.avi, in a 1vs1 situation the game give a HUGE advantage to French tank, they will be on you before you can get in your favorite camping position, they will unload when you will have time to shot only one/two rounds, and if you are still not dead they will just play hide and seek until they are reloaded and kill you.

1vs1 is a bad idea, not because of camping, but because every tank in the game is made and balanced to work in a team situation, the French tank and arty are just an extreme example of that.

[AzraeI]

Remove the capture points and play it only on city maps and I think we would have a winner!

[Beerstein]

lol, totally forgot about french that'd be some total BS in 1v1s xD

[AbsoluteRoyal]

Beerstein, on Apr 08 2012 - 08:17, said:

lol, totally forgot about french that'd be some total BS in 1v1s xD

Again, tier 4 cap. The higher tiers are not used for a reason

[Beerstein]

AbsoluteRoyal, on Apr 08 2012 - 08:24, said:

Again, tier 4 cap. The higher tiers are not used for a reason

Hotchkiss ftw...unless they run into a tetra

[Bear44]

i was the one that suggested 1vs1 in that thread.  and it was relevant because the topic was does stats reflect skill.  and many said no, many said yes, but honestly, if you think about it, how many matches were you put in where you had to rely on the higher tiers cause they were the only ones that can penetrate decently, how many times have you seen match/making put 5 type 59 on their team and give your team inferior counter parts.

when i suggested 1vs1, it was obvious that game mechanics had to be changed.  and hopefully for the final time i will have to say this.

the Standard of competition is equal power vs equal power.  soo of course its not gonna be french tank vs inferior tank unless the under dog wishes for a chance to get some bragging rights if he defeats a stronger opponent.  you know it, i know it, all sports do it, but in this game, it doesn't, there is no balance or equality, matchs are random, so you can honest be up against a same tank who has higher crew %, has all upgrades while your stock, and have better team mates etc etc.

so if we dive back into that previous thread for a moment.  all i'm trying to say is, how can we properly measure skill.  i don't care if you have 20 knock and 0 defeat if all you were fighting is a todler, right?  we don't look for lesser opponents to make a name for ourselfs.  we look for equal or stronger.  and with the current match/making system and the fact that real money buys you better chance, its hard to measure skill with the offered but limited stats.

[Scaevola]

I dunno, there are some players that are affected badly by 1 vs 1s.

Opportunists have honed their ability to swing local engagements to local superiority in tanks. They may suck one on one but their ability to get to flanks and deal easy damage is unparalleled. They're easily more valuable than the superior peek-a-boo player and require a different measurement of skill.

If you really do want 1 vs 1s just play training mode and dictate where the two of you will meet. pretty simple, really.

[AbsoluteRoyal]

Scaevola, on Apr 08 2012 - 08:48, said:

I dunno, there are some players that are affected badly by 1 vs 1s.

Opportunists have honed their ability to swing local engagements to local superiority in tanks. They may suck one on one but their ability to get to flanks and deal easy damage is unparalleled. They're easily more valuable than the superior peek-a-boo player and require a different measurement of skill.

If you really do want 1 vs 1s just play training mode and dictate where the two of you will meet. pretty simple, really.

How fun is a training battle? Really? in the name it says "training". Prizes, competition, and diversity from regular game play are what make tournaments fun. I want the same for 1v1, as it would include all of the features I listed. Competitive and new + prizes = win

[Bear44]

Scaevola, on Apr 08 2012 - 08:48, said:

I dunno, there are some players that are affected badly by 1 vs 1s.

Opportunists have honed their ability to swing local engagements to local superiority in tanks. They may suck one on one but their ability to get to flanks and deal easy damage is unparalleled. They're easily more valuable than the superior peek-a-boo player and require a different measurement of skill.

If you really do want 1 vs 1s just play training mode and dictate where the two of you will meet. pretty simple, really.

not that i really want 1vs1.  more that i want balance/fairness.  entering the battlefield should give you a fair chance, its what you did during the battle that offered you an advantage.  

no body wants to face a enemy that is superior in every way.  but you'll get that alot in this game.  the matchmaking is the biggest problem.  yes, the game is fun, but there is no balance, and thats what i hate the most and why i believe the current stats aren't a true analyst of individual skill.

you know, more and more i think about, all of the issues and the two threads relationship all link to matchmaking.

matchmaking is the most game breaking feature, it controls enjoyment/fairness,success/failure and other aspects which are important to us as players.
if matchmaking is changed, i truely believe that the stats would be more reflective of skill and 1vs1 would not be needed.

[scharnhorst310]

Really so much animosity to 1v1?? I practically make a living out of beating guys who either talk trash in game, or call me out in pub matches and challenge them to 1v1. 22-0 players down (best 3 out of 5) at the moment, and all will tell you its both a real wake up call to the whole; "stats don't matter and i'm just as good as everyone else just unlucky" thing, and its a refreshing challenge.

From my experiences its one of the best ways to teach guys because almost all the fundamentals of this game come out and are used in 1v1 matches. In all seriousness give it a shot in a competitive way and you will quickly learn a lot and have a lot of fun.

Though this was not a 1v1 match it was similar. Absolute and I went head to head against 3 of iron wolves best. It was an insane match that still remember because how well played by sides, coming down to one or two shots made the difference. It was still a fun match and I certainly learned a lot from that and I honestly believe sparring like this within clans could bring many players a ability up substantially

[Bear44]

scharnhorst310, on Apr 08 2012 - 09:08, said:

Really so much animosity to 1v1?? I practically make a living out of beating guys who either talk trash in game, or call me out in pub matches and challenge them to 1v1. 22-0 players down (best 3 out of 5) at the moment, and all will tell you its both a real wake up call to the whole; "stats don't matter and i'm just as good as everyone else just unlucky" thing, and its a refreshing challenge.

From my experiences its one of the best ways to teach guys because almost all the fundamentals of this game come out and are used in 1v1 matches. In all seriousness give it a shot in a competitive way and you will quickly learn a lot and have a lot of fun.

Though this was not a 1v1 match it was similar. Absolute and I went head to head against 3 of iron wolves best. It was an insane match that still remember because how well played by sides, coming down to one or two shots made the difference. It was still a fun match and I certainly learned a lot from that and I honestly believe sparring like this within clans could bring many players a ability up substantially

the issue is balance.  and that has everything to do with stats.  especially for the average gamer.  theres too much variables other then skill in this game.  so long as you are smart enough to do basic angling and aim for the weak spot what chance is there a pro in a KV can take down a IS3 for example in a 1vs1 engagement.  the is3 will always penetrate you while the KV will struggle even when aimming at the weakspot.

Gold ammo
crew percent
crew secondary skill
tank type

these are some factors that contribute to possibility of success, other then skill.  if he has gold ammo, he penetrates more likely, if he has a 100% crew and you have 50% then he will accelerate fast, reticle will strink faster, if he has secondary skill then he might repair tracks faster, if he has a type 59 and you have a KV3 the odds are truely against you.  mixed tiers is the issue.  if every match was an opponent of equal measure, then the stats would be completely different with all the players in this game.  when everything is equal, you have nothing more to put you at a disadvantage then skill and bad choices.

[AbsoluteRoyal]

scharnhorst310, on Apr 08 2012 - 09:08, said:

Really so much animosity to 1v1?? I practically make a living out of beating guys who either talk trash in game, or call me out in pub matches and challenge them to 1v1. 22-0 players down (best 3 out of 5) at the moment, and all will tell you its both a real wake up call to the whole; "stats don't matter and i'm just as good as everyone else just unlucky" thing, and its a refreshing challenge.

From my experiences its one of the best ways to teach guys because almost all the fundamentals of this game come out and are used in 1v1 matches. In all seriousness give it a shot in a competitive way and you will quickly learn a lot and have a lot of fun.

Though this was not a 1v1 match it was similar. Absolute and I went head to head against 3 of iron wolves best. It was an insane match that still remember because how well played by sides, coming down to one or two shots made the difference. It was still a fun match and I certainly learned a lot from that and I honestly believe sparring like this within clans could bring many players a ability up substantially

+1 hit my quota. I like the idea of best of 3 or 5. I'm not sure if capping were to be disallowed if there would be draws? Even so, give the matches a 5 minute timer. If nobody wins, they both lose. I don't think I have seen a double-elimination style tournament yet in WoT and I believe that format would be PERFECT from this type of set-up. Also what tier limits do you think would work Scharn? 4? would you allow the T-50 then? 5 is a really balanced tier when the KV2 is excluded as well(7.3).

[AbsoluteRoyal]

Bear44, on Apr 08 2012 - 09:31, said:

the issue is balance.  and that has everything to do with stats.  especially for the average gamer.  theres too much variables other then skill in this game.  so long as you are smart enough to do basic angling and aim for the weak spot what chance is there a pro in a KV can take down a IS3 for example in a 1vs1 engagement.  the is3 will always penetrate you while the KV will struggle even when aimming at the weakspot.

Why would a KV be fighting an IS3 which is 3 tiers higher? Seems like an asinine example for 1v1.

[Beerstein]

AbsoluteRoyal, on Apr 08 2012 - 09:38, said:

Why would a KV be fighting an IS3 which is 3 tiers higher? Seems like an asinine example for 1v1.

I beat an IS-3 with my KV the other day, derp fall back derp etc etc. and I actually beat the guy.

[AbsoluteRoyal]

Beerstein, on Apr 08 2012 - 09:45, said:

I beat an IS-3 with my KV the other day, derp fall back derp etc etc. and I actually beat the guy.

ok? how does that relate to 1v1? How would that scenario ever possibly happen in a 1v1 setting?

[Scaevola]

Bear44, on Apr 08 2012 - 08:55, said:

not that i really want 1vs1.  more that i want balance/fairness.  entering the battlefield should give you a fair chance, its what you did during the battle that offered you an advantage.  

no body wants to face a enemy that is superior in every way.  but you'll get that alot in this game.  the matchmaking is the biggest problem.  yes, the game is fun, but there is no balance, and thats what i hate the most and why i believe the current stats aren't a true analyst of individual skill.

you know, more and more i think about, all of the issues and the two threads relationship all link to matchmaking.

matchmaking is the most game breaking feature, it controls enjoyment/fairness,success/failure and other aspects which are important to us as players.
if matchmaking is changed, i truely believe that the stats would be more reflective of skill and 1vs1 would not be needed.

Ah, so it's this. There's not much to say aside from yes this kind of stuff happens. You're balanced within your tier. There is no enemy that is completely superior to you in every way, unless you're in a medium or he's two tiers above you.

For heavies you oftentimes just need to play more conservatively. KV-3 may seem completely outclassed by the IS but they have the same alpha and similar armor (in fact the IS can sometimes be more squishy.) KV has outrageous alpha and penetration for its tier. The PZ4 has enough firepower and a playstyle that allows it to cripple its higher tier mediums at long range. The E8 can out maneuver a T20 and in cases of extreme player skill beat it through sheer DPM and agility (usually impossible with any other medium vs higher tier med.) The T-34-85 has a powerful mantlet that typically bounces 175 pen. If you find a tank corpse to hull down on you can take on stupid KV-13, T-43, KV-3, and IS drivers (smart ones will just rape you in brawl.)

T-34 has very high DPM for its tier and given similar exposure as an ally your enemies tend to shoot your ally first. This often gives T-34 drivers outrageous flanking opportunities where it can use its DPM until your enemies fatally realize how deadly you actually are.

It's true that the MM is never "fair" for lower tier tanks. It just provides you a better opportunity to hone your skills in much a much more important skillset.

I often play mid tiers and am very used to not being up top. It's simply a matter of lowering your expectations for the match. You can't wade into a brawl as a KV-3 like you would as the top tier. Instead, you can play with this in mind. Oftentimes if you expose yourself at about the same amount as your higher tier ally your enemies will shoot your ally instead of you. This effect increases with range, as your enemies need to turn their gun AND aim. Usually they won't change at all because they're vulnerable to the bigger threat while they re-aim their gun. Learn to use this to your advantage but realize that when your ally stays behind cover for too long (or is exposed in a way that's difficult to hit,) he's no longer a tempting target    That's your cue to retreat or stop exposing yourself. In the meantime you can get free shots in, relocate, move to a flank, and in general have a lot of opportunities to affect the match. This obviously never works on a 1 vs 1 and is one of the skillsets for a good opportunistic type player.

There are other skills that are irrelevant to one on one fights but are oftentimes more valuable for the team. Knowing when you're free to move despite being in the enemy's line of sight definitely tops that list.

Edit: I specialize in this so much that oftentimes I suck like hell in 1 vs 1 fights. I hate it when I'm top tier of the match. I'll lead the charge like any top tier heavy should, but it means I usually sacrifice myself for the win in doing so