14 replies to this topic

[Tornado1555]

I have made it clear previously that I enjoy driving a prestigious, heavily armoured, reliable and iconic heavy tank. I do not mind people who prefer using maneuverability and speed over armour and firepower, or the French drivers who get everything but armour. The problem is, the game as it stands gives only penalties to tanks which are heavily armoured, whilst applying nothing damaging to tanks which do not use armour as one of their primary attributes.

For example, Gold ammunition is now quite common in public matches as a result of being credit bought. Gold ammunition frequently nullifies the other person's attempt at using cover and angling, circumventing most use of strategy. Tanks that use armour as their primary attribute like the heavy E-series are unreliable as a result of their only main advantage over other tanks relying on the enemys ammunition choice.

Also, another big point, is that fast tanks frequently push over their historical designed speeds and load their weapons with historically malfunction-prone systems (i.e. the fragile 1960s autoloader), without being penalized accordingly.

My proposed solutions are:
-Gold ammunition is restricted from public battles. This nullifies the easy-mode granted by having alot of gold or credit income (I have about 6M credits ATM). The Sherman series and other derp tanks will no longer circumvent tactical strategy with their 'movie like' gun performance. Seeing an M4 Sherman one shot a Tiger at over 300 meters is like watching a corny 1950s post-war propaganda flick.'Make it stop!'
-Autoloaders are given a new hardpoint (like the fuel tanks and the ammunition rack), and are treated as such, reducing the loading speed or forcing the crew to manually load it if it breaks down from a shot.

Also, if not to difficult to implement and if it doesn't piss too many people off:
-Engines have a new gear function allowing them to go at top speed and move at the maximum intended RPM, this causes the tank to move faster (perhaps having the Tiger go at the historically accurate 38kph instead of 30kph for instance), but has the increased potential for shots that hit the engine to do more damage.

What are your thoughts on this? Is there anything you personally want changed about the armour system?

Edited by Tornado1555, Feb 07 2013 - 02:33.

[hoboooswagg]

i like the engine thing but i think all the other stuff should not be implemented

[Darcel_Jones]

I like the auto-loader idea,and have wondered why rough driving,falling,etc. wouldn't hurt the auto-loading system,and the gold round thing for creds I think everyone is getting sick of it(even those of us,like me that are guilty of using gold derp machines like the 4 and IV ).Although I don't think gold rounds should be taken out of pub battles completely,though should accaultly cost gold again though.

[hammertime623]

Before I say anything, M4 can't oneshot a Tiger.  The max damage in its derp shell isn't even half Tiger's total HP...  However, it can quickly take a Tiger down with a flanking attack.

Anyway, there are two sides to this coin.  Think about how many tanks really need access to gold rounds.  I'm talking about the tanks that have sub-par penetration.  They are actually playable now because the gold rounds make them not suck.  I also would like to mention that gold rounds like APCR do not get the normalization bonus and lose more penetration over firing distance than standard AP.  And gold rounds are by no means auto-penetration.  You still have to aim at least halfway decently to make use of them.

But I totally agree that derp guns are becoming more commonplace, especially at low tiers.  I'd never been oneshot in my Stug so many times before the gold rounds for credits began.  This is an unfortunate side effect.  I wouldn't object to reverting back to only gold for gold rounds, but some of my tanks would be very sad.

[ket101]

I'm not a fan of premium rounds, but the engine thing can be problematic.  You talk about intended revs for the engine.  To take for example the Ford GAA V8 in the M4, it was rev-limited to 2200 rpm, but removing the rev limiter would allow it to rev to about 3600 rpm, stopped from revving any more than that by the valves bouncing in their seats.  Both are historical limits, but which is to be the intended one?  And some tanks are actually limited by the game itself.  The M18 Hellcat was able to get to 55 mph, which is very roughly 88 km/h, but is limited to 72 km/h by the game engine (except for the brief periods that physics has allowed).  There's any number of things that WG has changed from reality, but it has done so in the name of making the game competitive for all and not favoring to any great extent one tank or another.

[Zebra21]

I realize this isnt a historic representation of real world tanks but it has gotten pretty far off. The Tiger has been noted by both sides as one of the best tanks of the war yet its mediocre performance in this game is a shame. a small French tank can spin around it and take it out pretty easily even after taking a hit from the Tiger.

My solution?....... Bring all the tanks back to a more histocal level and QUIT NOMALIZING/FIXING/NERFING/ADJUSTING the tanks! Start with known tanks like a Tiger or whatever and fix it at tier 8 then build out around from it. OR start at whatever tank you want to be a tier 10 and move down the line assigning them appropreate tiers for the combination of weapons and armor.

I thought the test server is where new tanks get "adjusted". I'm kinda tired of a new tank coming out and 30 days later, just as I have ground up to it, they nerf it. I know this is how the purchase of gold is encouraged but,..... ITS PISSING ME OFF!  

nvm,.. Just my rant for the night.

Edited by Zebra21, Feb 07 2013 - 03:54.

[Mantisman630]

You are kidding right? Without credit gold ammo, the E series, especially the E-100, would become unreliable. The only reason why you get the E-100 would be to shoot gold ammo. Do want to have it be reverted back to the old days when the E-100 has lower pen then tier 8 tanks?

[Zebra21]

Mantisman630, on Feb 07 2013 - 03:54, said:

You are kidding right? Without credit gold ammo, the E series, especially the E-100, would become unreliable. The only reason why you get the E-100 would be to shoot gold ammo. Do want to have it be reverted back to the old days when the E-100 has lower pen then tier 8 tanks?

How about WoT just FIX the darned gun!!!! An E100 should be mobile artillery!! A ONE shot killer! Not the enimic pathetic tank it is without gold rounds.

Edited by Zebra21, Feb 07 2013 - 03:57.

[Mantisman630]

Zebra21, on Feb 07 2013 - 03:55, said:

How about WoT just FIX the darned gun!!!! An E100 should be mobile artillery!! A ONE shot killer! Not the enimic pathetic tank it is without gold rounds.

They did fix the gun, they gave everyone the option of credit gold ammo. It is here to stay and they are not even thinking of removing it. People should just accept it for what it is.

[pathrai]

Gold for Silver rounds - GFS rounds is what I call them are way more common and the OP is exactly correct about their effect on armour-oriented tanks. The Super Pashing is another example. Average gun, very slow and average agility compensated by fantastic fwd facing armour.

The only trouble is that people save their GFS rounds for "hard" tanks and so I'm certain a lot more are being fired at it. My WR in the SP went down about 10% after the GFS patch.

One general problems is that Wargaming keep introducing more and more tanks and then have to keep fiddling with the balance of everything continually. It's like keeping plates spinning on sticks and seems to be getting worse as time goes on.

I like the OPs ideas. However also I would really like to see :
1) no more new tanks for quite a while
2) concentration on better damage model for existing tanks (similar to OP comments)
3) fixing the random number generator effect. It is just game-ruining that sometimes you can hit somethign at range and other times it not only misses but misses by 50ft/30m or something. I suppose even that I can tolerate a bit but it's when someone is close up, aims and fires at point blank range but still misses. Just stupid. The deviation on the RNG I understand is +25% to -25% ie a 50% range. It sounds like an easy answer to a programming problem to me. The percentage range should be greatly reduced and it shoudl take account of range (which it appears not to)
4) more maps
5) more modes

[Madison1234]

I personally like the premium rounds for credits. Load a few in each tank for those over-tiered battles. But in same-tier battles don't waste the credits. Ever try to take on a T-18 in a T1E6? Premium ammo does come in handy selectively.

[1_ace_1]

simple, do not play slow, heavy armored tanks.

This game is about speed, penetration and Alpha now, whether we like it or not.

[Daigensui]

Tornado1555, on Feb 07 2013 - 02:32, said:

For example, Gold ammunition is now quite common in public matches as a result of being credit bought. Gold ammunition frequently nullifies the other person's attempt at using cover and angling, circumventing most use of strategy.

This shows how ignorant you are. Sorry, but short of artillery basics still apply.

[Mieter]

I personally like the Black ammo (okay, Gold :P ). I always carry 5-10 rounds in my tanks for emergencies, but I usually don't have to fire them.

I also own a Super Sponge, and I don't really have any problems. I admit that I did not have the SP before the GFS change, but I find that Tiger IIs, T34s, Lions and some IS's can penetrate me from the front more often than not, but I play accordingly. Whether it's because they are using black rounds or not, I don't know.

[Tornado1555]

hammertime623, on Feb 07 2013 - 02:46, said:

Before I say anything, M4 can't oneshot a Tiger.  The max damage in its derp shell isn't even half Tiger's total HP...  However, it can quickly take a Tiger down with a flanking attack.

Anyway, there are two sides to this coin.  Think about how many tanks really need access to gold rounds.  I'm talking about the tanks that have sub-par penetration.  They are actually playable now because the gold rounds make them not suck.  I also would like to mention that gold rounds like APCR do not get the normalization bonus and lose more penetration over firing distance than standard AP.  And gold rounds are by no means auto-penetration.  You still have to aim at least halfway decently to make use of them.

But I totally agree that derp guns are becoming more commonplace, especially at low tiers.  I'd never been oneshot in my Stug so many times before the gold rounds for credits began.  This is an unfortunate side effect.  I wouldn't object to reverting back to only gold for gold rounds, but some of my tanks would be very sad.

Hammertime, that con-side of the coin is very heavy.
HEAT has rendered armour nearly to completely useless. I'll give you an example similar to what happened to me earlier.

In my Tiger, I was fighting 1 M4 Sherman at range, behind cover, and at 400 meters. The Sherman was behind cover as I was, a destroyed tank in which both of our mantlets were exposed. Somehow due to Germany's 'renowned accuracy', I missed many many shots, and only won when my tank was down to 200 health, had lost the Gunner once, and got caught on fire twice, as well as taking a hit to the ammorack.
Not once did my historically strong mantlet bounce one of his HEAT rounds, and not once did he miss.

Gold rounds in public battles are a HALF ARSE way of dealing with balance. Giving the M4 an overpowered tier 7-8 like gun is easy and provokes less controversy (community-wise), then real solutions which give Sherman players the incentive to work together to bring down a single tank.

Because a tank game is good. A tank game with movie shermans is boring.

So in short, concerning many people's idea of "Don't take away mah HEAT or it'll end me!", haven't you considered the more difficult but more balanced method of giving the tank a proper mechanics buff?

ket101, on Feb 07 2013 - 02:49, said:

I'm not a fan of premium rounds, but the engine thing can be problematic.  You talk about intended revs for the engine.  To take for example the Ford GAA V8 in the M4, it was rev-limited to 2200 rpm, but removing the rev limiter would allow it to rev to about 3600 rpm, stopped from revving any more than that by the valves bouncing in their seats.  Both are historical limits, but which is to be the intended one?  And some tanks are actually limited by the game itself.  The M18 Hellcat was able to get to 55 mph, which is very roughly 88 km/h, but is limited to 72 km/h by the game engine (except for the brief periods that physics has allowed).  There's any number of things that WG has changed from reality, but it has done so in the name of making the game competitive for all and not favoring to any great extent one tank or another.

1. Thanks for the engineering point-out, I knew it would be the hardest to implement, but multi-values like that allow us some space to work around with. Take my counter-argument with hammertime, instead of giving the SHerman HEAT rounds we could (not saying this is the case) give his engine a 3600 RPM limit, along with other buffs, to offset.

And again, the game currently favors tanks with credit-bought gold rounds, even if I were to play extremely smart, a random pub with just the wisdom of purchasing HEAT before the battle would (unless afk) give me quite a fight, especially with the timer ticking down in pubs.

My current most likely biased summary:
If I were a tank designer in the far future, and found this game and dusted off a copy to see how 'my ancestors designed their tanks', I would instantly believe that 'my ancestors' had a shrapnel fetish, because the only 'practical' tank design apparently is a thin metal platform with a giant derp gun, HEAT, and an engine.

Edited by Tornado1555, Feb 09 2013 - 17:56.