Jump to content


Victor Kislyi Talks Future of World of Tanks


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
304 replies to this topic

Deputy276 #21 Posted Apr 04 2016 - 17:50

    Major

  • Players
  • 19942 battles
  • 5,780
  • [3_NZ] 3_NZ
  • Member since:
    06-17-2013

View PostGwennifer, on Apr 04 2016 - 10:37, said:

  • >M56 Scorpion (Amerian tier VII tank destroyer)

I'm a little bit iffy with this one, because outside of the high cost of shell, firing camo, turret traverse, and reverse speed--it's pretty fine. I have a poor winrate in mine because I play it up by the heavies and mediums. The DPG is at the top of the tier, though.

 

Agree. I have no problem with the Scorpion the way it is. I don't want to see it turned into another E25. I am also going to take a cautious approach to all the new talk. It may just be talk. WG is notorious for making promises they don't keep or shooting themselves (or us) in the foot with changes they do make. 

FOGofWAR #22 Posted Apr 04 2016 - 17:53

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 29307 battles
  • 1,093
  • [-FU-] -FU-
  • Member since:
    01-20-2011
  They will be buffing a lot of premium vehicles.  You heard them players, #STARTDROPPINGBANK

CelticArchangel #23 Posted Apr 04 2016 - 17:59

    Captain

  • Players
  • 14389 battles
  • 1,471
  • Member since:
    07-14-2011

I feel more comfortable now with WG and seeing what they are doing to get this game going in the right direction. I took a peek at the premium list and noticed 75% of those tanks are hardly ever see because they are super rare.... but if they need it they need it. At least the 112 will be getting the love it sorely needs.

WG also needs to watch their modern day rival game thats recently been taking the genre by storm and see what they are doing right. They themselves are banking some of their success of WG's failures and inability to listen to the community. Now with WG shaking off the cobwebs, maybe its time to see what the other game is doing correct and come up with their solutions based of that to put into World of Tanks. 

Just my opinion though. It IS nice to see you guys trying though. Well done. 



4GOD #24 Posted Apr 04 2016 - 18:02

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 33801 battles
  • 888
  • Member since:
    12-02-2013

View PostFOGofWAR, on Apr 04 2016 - 11:53, said:

  They will be buffing a lot of premium vehicles.  You heard them players, #STARTDROPPINGBANK

 

I'll believe this when the fix the AC Is damage, aim time and ground resistance values. Don't get me started on the T-22 decision, which has caused me to stop sending money to WG. Considering I've spent around $6K on this game, that says a lot.

Edited by 4GOD, Apr 04 2016 - 18:05.


Verblonde #25 Posted Apr 04 2016 - 18:07

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 17996 battles
  • 2,978
  • [FUNTB] FUNTB
  • Member since:
    02-08-2015
I note the Kanone 90 is on the re-balance list too; it would be nice if they could make this vehicle not suck - it's one of my favourite 'real life' AFVs and I was sorry not to be able to buy it because it was a stinker in the game...

Cl0r0x_4_U #26 Posted Apr 04 2016 - 18:16

    Major

  • Players
  • 28279 battles
  • 2,788
  • Member since:
    04-29-2012
why wasnt I invited? :(

articblast #27 Posted Apr 04 2016 - 18:19

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 16120 battles
  • 25
  • [FTF] FTF
  • Member since:
    05-27-2011

View PostWolf_Attack, on Apr 04 2016 - 16:33, said:

Some good stuff there...

 

Here's an idea for artillery that might make some happy...remove the drone like view of being able to zoom in on a specific tank, but instead have arty provide support fire on a designated area...it might hit an odd tank, it might not hit anything....?

 

Matchmaker needs rebalancing in terms of a fairly equal number of tank classes on each side....what we see now is that one side has 8 heavies, the opposite side has 3? Also...one side as an example will have a much higher number of tier 9s, others side will have many more tier 8s etc.

 

I applaud the improvement/buff to the premium tanks listed especially the...STA-2 (overall outperformed), 112( FIre's R Us, extremely bad gun handling, poor sidescraper, two major weakspots, weak UFP), 59 Patton (penetration issues, bad gun handling, oversized tumor)

 

Will RNG every be adressed? What is the logical explanation for it being upped to 25% from the previous 15%?. It is very frustrating watching shots go into space or hit dirt on the moments when it matters..Is there any chance RNG could be decreased back to its original levels?

 

Any chance the Super Pershing could see a speed or hp/ton ratio or penetration increase?

 

To add on reworking artillery and to make it more realistic.  Instead of Artillery firing a single shell, it should fire multiple shells (perhaps based on tier or what ever) and then have the tanks max damage divided among the shells.  The shells would land randomly within the aiming area, so taking time to aim would decrease dispersion.  It would sorta be like how artillery strikes are in Skirmishes.

 

I believe that this would help out both Arty and Non Arty Players.

Arty players wouldn't be as upset that a shot that they planned for over 30s misses entirely and Non Arty players wouldn't be pissed about being one-shot without a tank in range.

 



PoliticallyIncorrectName #28 Posted Apr 04 2016 - 18:21

    Captain

  • Players
  • 55840 battles
  • 1,242
  • Member since:
    03-21-2013
"Player questions" were only so general... I mean, what happened to questions that were collected in topic here in forum? The question I asked was, "Will be there possibility to move account from one region to another?" Not roaming (logging with Na acc to EU) but manual moving of account from one server to another.

PoliticallyIncorrectName #29 Posted Apr 04 2016 - 18:22

    Captain

  • Players
  • 55840 battles
  • 1,242
  • Member since:
    03-21-2013

View Postarticblast, on Apr 04 2016 - 17:19, said:

 

To add on reworking artillery and to make it more realistic.  Instead of Artillery firing a single shell, it should fire multiple shells (perhaps based on tier or what ever) and then have the tanks max damage divided among the shells.  The shells would land randomly within the aiming area, so taking time to aim would decrease dispersion.  It would sorta be like how artillery strikes are in Skirmishes.

 

I believe that this would help out both Arty and Non Arty Players.

Arty players wouldn't be as upset that a shot that they planned for over 30s misses entirely and Non Arty players wouldn't be pissed about being one-shot without a tank in range.

 

 

OR OR OR !!!!!!!!! When arty shoots somewhere, there will be red circle  on ground indicating "incoming shell" just like that "meteor strike" in lunar battles.....

Suryia #30 Posted Apr 04 2016 - 18:23

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 13548 battles
  • 63
  • Member since:
    08-17-2012

View PostOmega_Weapon, on Apr 04 2016 - 11:48, said:

 

I like win rate, but admittedly struggling to keep it good kind of takes some of the fun out of the game. It might be nicer if they replaced it with player efficiency. Damage ratio (caused/suffered) and kill ratio (frags/deaths).

 

I'm in favor of any metric that is based on recent performance (admitted a subjective term) rather than a metric which has a foundation on performance going back to your first battle.

mlinke #31 Posted Apr 04 2016 - 18:24

    Captain

  • Players
  • 52751 battles
  • 1,393
  • [DD-S] DD-S
  • Member since:
    06-14-2011

what are you doing wrong?? YOU GAVE US LTP AS A REWARD FOR 5 YEAR PLAY!!

 

You will nerf arty??? It is useless as it is... wth


Edited by mlinke, Apr 04 2016 - 18:28.


Uryangkhai #32 Posted Apr 04 2016 - 18:27

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 66649 battles
  • 130
  • Member since:
    09-15-2012

View PostGhostPrime, on Apr 04 2016 - 16:40, said:

 

Glad you liked the video! It was great to have Victor here, and get some player's questions answered! 

 

i liked the video too!

:angry:

 

One minor quibble on the kudos idea.  Positive feedback is good, yes.   To make the most of it though maybe add specific good things to be constructive than just a generic interwebs high-five.

 

e.g. Nice shot.  Good spotting.  You tracked him something fierce.  Nice work on the flank.  That was one wicked wolf-pack.  Sneaky peek and boom.  Crazy hull-down.  That was sporting, old chap.  Funny joke.  (And so on.)

 

In a way it would mirror the existing complaints system.  But instead say something nice about a player's behaviour/performance in battle.


Edited by Uryangkhai, Apr 04 2016 - 18:29.


mattwong #33 Posted Apr 04 2016 - 18:28

    Major

  • Players
  • 30470 battles
  • 17,333
  • Member since:
    03-03-2012

View Postcgralphy, on Apr 04 2016 - 11:13, said:

ps can you get rid of the guy who keep giving us tanks with giant tumors on the turret

 

Have you ever seen the real-life tanks that these models are based on?  Those large cupolas are real.



madogthefirst #34 Posted Apr 04 2016 - 18:36

    Major

  • Players
  • 24158 battles
  • 8,919
  • Member since:
    12-28-2011

View Postmlinke, on Apr 04 2016 - 09:24, said:

what are you doing wrong?? YOU GAVE US LTP AS A REWARD FOR 5 YEAR PLAY!!

 

You will nerf arty??? It is useless as it is... wth

The only way to fix arty is to give it buffs and a nerf or two.



MajorRenegade #35 Posted Apr 04 2016 - 18:36

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 30182 battles
  • 8,770
  • Member since:
    11-18-2010

WG if you're listening. Please read this

 

Bring the Hide stats option over from World of Warships over to World of Tanks. This will give people the ability to hide their stats from 3rd party websites/programs. So this way, there will be less Xvm sniping and more enjoyable gameplay for others. It not like I want to hide my stats, but I'm sure lots of people on this forum will agree that this need to happen for the sake of the game future



Roadhardputawaywet #36 Posted Apr 04 2016 - 18:44

    Captain

  • Players
  • 488 battles
  • 1,393
  • [RHINO] RHINO
  • Member since:
    09-10-2011

All this sounds good - A+ for seeing that changes need to be made.

 

My two sense:

 

1. Maps, more maps, more random.

2. With the rebalance it needs to be recognized that some of the tier pair ups are silly. Some tanks just don't fit the MM model for their tier.

3. I think xvm fog of war during the battle should added during all battles. Maybe have it on loading but during battle removed. Like CW.

4. SH battles should also have fog of war. Strategy is greatly affected by tank make up and knowing what the team has removes the surprise of the plan.

5. I even think a strong argument can be made to remove XVM ranking completely in game. It adds to much of the pre game whining and shaming that occurs in game.

6. I feel xvm has damaged proper light tank play. XVM focuses on damage delivered only, and for the most part ignores assisted damage (track, spot and radio).  Vision control done well should be greatly rewarded. It wins more battles than not. 

7. Arty - I disagree with the elitist/purple madness of arty complaining. I see alot of coolaid drinkers falling on this ban wagon to remove or nerf it more, and I could not more strongly disagree. Arty plays a strategic importance in game, both in CW and SH.  In fact arty right now it has been nerfed to far on accuracy rng wise. The players know it and WG knows it. Stop crying about it, move and use the maps to stay arty safe. In fact if point 1 would be focused on much of the crying would slow down. Also point 5 - xvm sniping is real. Plus a simple arty cap per battle would be awesome.

8. Tank training - if a crew member was 100% trained in a previous tank - then that crew member should retain that training!

9. Having played for over 5 years I am a little miffed by the reward for the 5th anniversary. As a Senior Technical Engineer (all tanks researched) a LTP seems a little weak really. At least let me buy a few unique prems - I don't have in the garage.

10. In game Kudos is a great idea - some thumbs up would be nice.

 

xoxo

 


Edited by oldsurferjoe, Apr 04 2016 - 18:51.


Digital_Malamute #37 Posted Apr 04 2016 - 18:47

    Major

  • Players
  • 46759 battles
  • 10,179
  • [SHIMP] SHIMP
  • Member since:
    09-02-2011
Did they ask him why cheaters, most in top clans got to keep T-22's instead of having accounts banned?

Roadhardputawaywet #38 Posted Apr 04 2016 - 18:49

    Captain

  • Players
  • 488 battles
  • 1,393
  • [RHINO] RHINO
  • Member since:
    09-10-2011

View Postmp31b30q9, on Apr 04 2016 - 09:47, said:

Did they ask him why cheaters, most in top clans got to keep T-22's instead of having accounts banned?

 

I have seem many a poor player with them as well!

GhostPrime #39 Posted Apr 04 2016 - 18:50

    Community Coordinator

  • -Players-
  • 805 battles
  • 1,530
  • Member since:
    04-22-2013

View PostOmega_Weapon, on Apr 04 2016 - 08:45, said:

Sounds like good things are going to happen. Good bye silly Rampage mode, re-balance of all tanks (including buffs to under powered premiums), and they have admitted their "match maker is dated" and also needs rework. He even mentioned that a 1 tier spread is being looked at. Thumbs up.

 

We are taking a lot of player feedback to heart.  Things are moving in the fight direction for sure!

TigersLovePepper #40 Posted Apr 04 2016 - 19:00

    Captain

  • WGLNA Gold League Player
  • 33377 battles
  • 1,128
  • Member since:
    04-17-2011

Victor has the right vision and is trying to steer the company in the right direction. We'll see whether the executives below him can properly execute that vision, because that has been the problem in World of Tanks development. Nonetheless, their PR department is certainly doing a much better job, and this is a step in the right direction.

 

For context, there was a lot of pressure a few months ago from RU in response to the 10.0 update made infamous as the "rubicon" update as a result of several key bugs. It seems the company is primarily responding to that pressure. 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users