Jump to content


Tier 6 CW hate - please explain

CW tier6 clans

  • Please log in to reply
77 replies to this topic

_Mik_ #21 Posted Jul 19 2016 - 20:36

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 22024 battles
  • 134
  • [ROHAN] ROHAN
  • Member since:
    07-30-2011

View PostSilvers_, on Jul 19 2016 - 20:04, said:

 

It's not a myth. What part of it only teaches you FOCUS FIRE. did you not get? if it taught you anything that equated to T10 you'd see everyone running full 15v15 Deathstar strats or 15v15 all medium TVP/Batchat strats..........

 

Actually the last I have seen from a few Top Tier clans. and the auto loader focus fire can finish a team pretty quick.

 

Point is T6 CW doesn't do anything to teach you about end game CW play outside of focus fire.

 

I think you're a bit dogmatic in how you present it, but your point is interesting. Perhaps, the better way to express the issue is that the concepts that are most prevalent in tier 6 are not the concepts that are most prevalent in tier 10? For example, passive scouting is a viable option in tier 6 that offers a usable form of map control. However, passive scouting is much less effective at higher tiers due to the often-cited view range creep at higher tiers. Obviously, we have little insight into what would be a perfect game in WGs eyes. Perhaps we should ask "Is passive scouting meant to be part of the game? Or is it a form of play that exists due to the circumstances of the tier 6 meta?"

 

I would like to also question the seemingly prevalent mindset that all roads lead to tier 10. I understand that they are the top of the tree, but does that make that level somehow inherently suggestive of more skill? I might argue that they are simply a different meta, and that what makes tier 10 generally more complicated is the larger usable tank pool, which allows for admittedly greater variation in tactics. Perhaps that is by design, but why put up the economy barrier if the higher tiers are meant to be the more relevant tactical arena? Logically, players exist whose participation in the "endgame" would generate value regardless of how much time they have to grind. On the other hand, surely people would not pay for premium accounts if they could afford to maintain their in-game currency needs and be able to perform at the purportedly more venerable "endgame" level.

 

Perhaps a good solution to getting more of the player base interested in the "endgame" arena would be to make the economy of the competitive high-tier arenas more forgiving. Although, that might lead to poorly-skilled players infecting the "endgame" arena in which all TOP CLANS congregate. 

 

 

 



__Worm__ #22 Posted Jul 19 2016 - 20:38

    Major

  • Players
  • 28273 battles
  • 3,677
  • [WANKO] WANKO
  • Member since:
    04-29-2011

For some reason I had an itch and went with a team that was going to try and start from the bottom ( tier 6 ) and progress to be a tier 10 Clan. So, for that reason I have had some experience in the Tier 6 CW.

 

Things that I noticed that didn't seem very "progressive".

 

1) We had been doing good for awhile and I thought it would be good to start emphasizing that we needed to start working on tier 8. It was told to me that we didn't have the amount of people with the right tanks but were not going to push everyone to get T-8 tanks because we needed more tanks for T-6. In my opinion that reflects there is going to be a stagnation in T-6 and that is not working towards T-10 it is more staying at T-6. Why is that bad? Because it has been stated over and over that T-6 is a launch point but it is to easy to just not care and never launch.

 

2) Callers that were good at calling T-6 didn't want to call 8's or 10's I believe realizing that it was a whole new world and didn't want to fail even if it meant getting better by trial and fire. That in itself is not progressive.

 

3) Only having a certain "click/group" of tanks available due to T-6 game play got old real quick and it felt like the better players in the Clan were fading away from being enthused.

 

4) Strats that get worked for T-6 were in no way going to be carried over to T-8/10 and with everything throttling progression the Clan was not going to improve towards T-10.

 

It seems that instead of getting players motivated to do T-10 Clan Wars all it does is create a zone for those that are happy playing T-6 tanks, to do just that and only that.

 

One thing would be to have T-6 stronks but, not CW. Have the ability to run a lower SH tier so it is fiscally sound if you have to but for no reason have T-6 CW's.

 

Tier 6 stronks should be a good way to make boxes and some cash without having the expense of the other Tiers but not for CW's.

 

I think it would be a fair bet that most clans that are on the T-6 CW map are probably gonna be there for a long long time and saying it is a jumping off point for T-10 is ... well just absurd.

 

Tier 6 CW's are bad umkay children?



_Mik_ #23 Posted Jul 19 2016 - 20:50

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 22024 battles
  • 134
  • [ROHAN] ROHAN
  • Member since:
    07-30-2011

View PostJimmy53722, on Jul 19 2016 - 20:24, said:

I believe the initial intent for tier 6 clan wars was to enable small new clans and new players a taste of clan wars.  It allows them a chance learn the basics of clan wars (mostly how the map actually works) and help them with recruiting.  Once a clan becomes large enough and good enough to hold multiple provinces they should move on to tier 8 and then 10.

 

I have seen the suggestion that successful tier 6 clans should move up a couple of times now. Is the prevailing opinion that a lot of tier 6 clans have the tier 8s and 10s or could get them easily, but just choose to fight at 6 instead? It comes back to a time thing for me. For example, I have 2 toddlers at home and so I don't get a lot of time to grind. I am pretty lucky to get like 20-30 games per day on a weekend. It's nice that tier 6 is there as a team-based form of play that doesn't require hours of grinding to get the requisite tanks. 

 

I have a question based on this. Would tier 6 get more respect if the teams were larger?


Edited by _Mik_, Jul 19 2016 - 20:52.


BaerenGott #24 Posted Jul 19 2016 - 20:50

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 22313 battles
  • 3,033
  • [7CR] 7CR
  • Member since:
    07-28-2011

View Post_Tsavo_, on Jul 19 2016 - 13:04, said:

There's a few ideas, I think, as to why that is

 

1.) The tier 6 meta isn't overly difficult, speed is king, which means successful comps are generally going to be Crommies, T37s, Type 64s, and the occasional odd ball A-43 or such

-----To elaborate on this: it's 7 v 7, which isn't a large number of players and the fast boi meta is boring.  There's a reason I don't do tier 6 stronks, it's boring as all hell.  As mentioned in a post above, you should have more participants in a fight.  I feel CW fights should be 15 v 15 at all tiers, so allow callers to learn how to handle 2 or more groups, to allow for more flex, and so on.  As it is, tier 6 CW is just tier 6 strongholds with a map and a few dollars of gold for a clan for a month.  Just like tier 6 stronks, hardly worth the effort

 

2.) This one's purely my opinion- the tier 6 map shouldn't be a place for a clan to choose to stay.  Once you're able to hold land, go to tier 8 and improve on what you needed to do to get onto, and then stay on, the tier 6 map and once you can hold land on tier 8, go to tier 10.  

 

3.) There's been a few instances of tier 6 clans boasting about their achievements against middling and new clans

 

4.) The real meat of Clan Wars with widely varying strats, compositions, and some of the best players is at tier 10; if you can succeed at tier 10, you're probably doing something right

 

I agree with the wise guy...

vurhd1 #25 Posted Jul 19 2016 - 20:53

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 27110 battles
  • 223
  • [FIFO] FIFO
  • Member since:
    03-08-2013

Without reading previous posts:

1. 7v7 is closer to a platoon than an actual team fight

2. Of the 5 classes, only 2 are useful, lights and heavies (the cromwell counts as a light). For the most part all tank destroyers and mediums aren't useful and playing arty should never happen. This makes the variety in these battles very minimal. Tier 8 and 10 intermingle many more classes and use arty. As much as I hate arty, I have to admit that it has an important role in organized team play. 

3. While higher tier clan wars is like 50-50 with regards to player / team skill and strategy. Tier 6 CW is closer to 80% individual / team skill.

4. Going along with the 7v7 point. You can win a 14v15 but you can't win a 6v7 (usually). This strongly discourages splitting up

5. Armor means nothing at tier 6. At tier 10 you have tanks like the IS7 and E100 where angling properly and positioning is essential. At tier 6 the most heavily armored tank is the OI, which is still an easy pen with gold.

I've ran out of effort, I'll make these next ones short:

6. Clans on the tier 6 map are bad. Its not a challenge.

7. Many clans with capabilities to do tier 8 and 10 are just sitting on tier 6 to farm off bad clans. (No this is not specifically directed)

8. Global map wise, having more members has a bigger impact than actual clan skill. You can win land too easily just by spam chipping. AFAIK this problem is lessened on the other maps.

9. Its not as fun when a tank can die in 3 seconds as opposed to tier 10s which take much longer. A slower paced game allows for more precise movements and strategy.

 

After reading post / Repsonce:

- Jimmy must be really tired at work.

- Getting high tier tanks does not require a premium tank if you simply match your hp in damage.

- You should always make money in tier 8 strongholds unless you're firing more than 50% gold.

- As soon as the KV1s / Hellcat nerf, tank companies also fell into fastbois meta.

"Point is T6 CW doesn't do anything to teach you about end game CW play outside of focus fire." - YES

- Focus fire is only of the only things you learn, and pushing together. Rotating hp is extremely difficult with the current meta. It doesn't require any other skills. So its a watered down version of proper organized play.

 

/endRant

 



Silvers_ #26 Posted Jul 19 2016 - 20:55

    Major

  • Players
  • 40141 battles
  • 5,066
  • [REL2] REL2
  • Member since:
    06-12-2012

View Post_Mik_, on Jul 19 2016 - 13:50, said:

 

I have seen the suggestion that successful tier 6 clans should move up a couple of times now. Is the prevailing opinion that a lot of tier 6 clans have the tier 8s and 10s or could get them easily, but just choose to fight at 6 instead? It comes back to a time thing for me. For example, I have 2 toddlers at home and so I don't get a lot of time to grind. I am pretty lucky to get like 20-30 games on a weekend. It's nice that tier 6 is there as a team-based form of play that doesn't require hours of grinding to get the requisite tanks. 

 

I have a question based on this. Would tier 6 get more respect if the teams were larger?

 

It's why the suggestion be that T6 be 10v10, T8 be 15v15.

And I don't know if you get "respect". would be like some HS football team bragging that they are doing better than College (T8) and NFL (T10). you'll get respect at T6 but the pro's aren't going to respect you until you come to their level and prove you can do it.

 

or in a MMORPG T6 is the beginner dungeon, T8 the intermediate one and T10 the end game dungeon. People fail to realize this I think and want to play at T6 all the time.



Tolos #27 Posted Jul 19 2016 - 20:56

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 25997 battles
  • 16,969
  • [GDF] GDF
  • Member since:
    09-22-2010

View PostSilversound, on Jul 19 2016 - 19:34, said:

If tier six CW's was not an option, people would just hate on tier eight like they hate on tier six now.

And these folks would state all of the same reasons.

 

It's all about the big dogs pissing on the little dogs. ~fin~

 

Clan wars should be end game content.

 

/winsthread.



vurhd1 #28 Posted Jul 19 2016 - 20:57

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 27110 battles
  • 223
  • [FIFO] FIFO
  • Member since:
    03-08-2013

View Post_Mik_, on Jul 19 2016 - 14:50, said:

I have a question based on this. Would tier 6 get more respect if the teams were larger?

 

No. That isn't the main problem. It would just be a larger fight with the same strategies. Heavy tanks below tier 7 are flawed since they don't rely on armor. That's the fundamental problem.



Mudman24 #29 Posted Jul 19 2016 - 21:04

    Major

  • Players
  • 35679 battles
  • 11,447
  • Member since:
    04-06-2012
Most points have been made. Another thing that is annoying is when tier 6 clans think that they are big stuff for accomplishments on the tier 6 map. They get big heads and spout off and when challenged they always tell people to come fight them at tier 6, they never say, "we will meet you on the tier 10 map". It's like youth league players telling the pros they are better because they won their league.

Meows_Nyanpasu #30 Posted Jul 19 2016 - 21:14

    Captain

  • Players
  • 29324 battles
  • 1,499
  • [VILIN] VILIN
  • Member since:
    05-27-2013

View Postiron_crosstx, on Jul 19 2016 - 10:40, said:

big clans full of unicoms talk trash about tier 6 CW, yet they still play it.

 

Examples pls

_Mik_ #31 Posted Jul 19 2016 - 21:23

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 22024 battles
  • 134
  • [ROHAN] ROHAN
  • Member since:
    07-30-2011

View Postvurhd1, on Jul 19 2016 - 20:53, said:

Without reading previous posts:

1. 7v7 is closer to a platoon than an actual team fight Can you elaborate? Team battles and gold league are 7v7

2. Of the 5 classes, only 2 are useful, lights and heavies (the cromwell counts as a light). For the most part all tank destroyers and mediums aren't useful and playing arty should never happen. This makes the variety in these battles very minimal. Tier 8 and 10 intermingle many more classes and use arty. As much as I hate arty, I have to admit that it has an important role in organized team play. I agree that this is a big problem with tier 6 tanks at the moment.

3. While higher tier clan wars is like 50-50 with regards to player / team skill and strategy. Tier 6 CW is closer to 80% individual / team skill. Is tier 6 not then a better indicator of relative skill?

4. Going along with the 7v7 point. You can win a 14v15 but you can't win a 6v7 (usually). This strongly discourages splitting up True in most cases. A lot could be done to expand tier 6.

5. Armor means nothing at tier 6. At tier 10 you have tanks like the IS7 and E100 where angling properly and positioning is essential. At tier 6 the most heavily armored tank is the OI, which is still an easy pen with gold. This is a really good point. 

I've ran out of effort, I'll make these next ones short:

6. Clans on the tier 6 map are bad. Its not a challenge. 

7. Many clans with capabilities to do tier 8 and 10 are just sitting on tier 6 to farm off bad clans. (No this is not specifically directed) I think that recent changes to clan wars suggest that this is often true of tier 10 as well. 

8. Global map wise, having more members has a bigger impact than actual clan skill. You can win land too easily just by spam chipping. AFAIK this problem is lessened on the other maps. Amen

9. Its not as fun when a tank can die in 3 seconds as opposed to tier 10s which take much longer. A slower paced game allows for more precise movements and strategy. Implying that tanks cannot die in 3 seconds in tier 8 or 10 is kind of funny. I know what you're saying, but it's a bit shallow. Tier 10 has a lot of high alpha guns that can bring certain tanks to their knees very swiftly. 

 

After reading post / Repsonce:

- Jimmy must be really tired at work.

- Getting high tier tanks does not require a premium tank if you simply match your hp in damage. 

- You should always make money in tier 8 strongholds unless you're firing more than 50% gold. 

- As soon as the KV1s / Hellcat nerf, tank companies also fell into fastbois meta.

"Point is T6 CW doesn't do anything to teach you about end game CW play outside of focus fire." - YES

- Focus fire is only of the only things you learn, and pushing together. Rotating hp is extremely difficult with the current meta. It doesn't require any other skills. So its a watered down version of proper organized play.

 

/endRant

 

 



pmdanie96 #32 Posted Jul 19 2016 - 21:33

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 36718 battles
  • 615
  • [_F_] _F_
  • Member since:
    04-23-2013

View Post_Mik_, on Jul 19 2016 - 13:36, said:

 

I would like to also question the seemingly prevalent mindset that all roads lead to tier 10. I understand that they are the top of the tree, but does that make that level somehow inherently suggestive of more skill? I might argue that they are simply a different meta, and that what makes tier 10 generally more complicated is the larger usable tank pool, which allows for admittedly greater variation in tactics. Perhaps that is by design, but why put up the economy barrier if the higher tiers are meant to be the more relevant tactical arena? Logically, players exist whose participation in the "endgame" would generate value regardless of how much time they have to grind. On the other hand, surely people would not pay for premium accounts if they could afford to maintain their in-game currency needs and be able to perform at the purportedly more venerable "endgame" level.

There is not a greater level at skill in Tier 6. For the most part, if you make a mistake at Tier 6 you might lose 20-30% of your hit points. At tier 10 if you make a mistake, you are losing a huge chunk of hit points. Angle wrong with a T-150 you lose what 200 points? You make the same mistake with an FV183 or JPE, you lose pretty much 50% of your health...and if that was not bad enough, then there is a plethora of auto-loaders to clip you out. Make a mistake against those, you are dead. Many more tanks at Tier 10 that can destroy your game in seconds. You need to be more cognizant of what you are doing at the higher tiers. The higher you rise, the worse the punishment for mistakes gets. That is why I look at the skill level being higher. You need to think a lot more about what and when you do something. 

 

They also make the higher tiers economically unfriend so that people still play the lower tiers. If you always made money at the highest tier, the population at lower tiers would suffer drastically. 



_Mik_ #33 Posted Jul 19 2016 - 21:41

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 22024 battles
  • 134
  • [ROHAN] ROHAN
  • Member since:
    07-30-2011

View Postpmdanie96, on Jul 19 2016 - 21:33, said:

There is not a greater level at skill in Tier 6. For the most part, if you make a mistake at Tier 6 you might lose 20-30% of your hit points. At tier 10 if you make a mistake, you are losing a huge chunk of hit points. Angle wrong with a T-150 you lose what 200 points? You make the same mistake with an FV183 or JPE, you lose pretty much 50% of your health...and if that was not bad enough, then there is a plethora of auto-loaders to clip you out. Make a mistake against those, you are dead. Many more tanks at Tier 10 that can destroy your game in seconds. You need to be more cognizant of what you are doing at the higher tiers. The higher you rise, the worse the punishment for mistakes gets. That is why I look at the skill level being higher. You need to think a lot more about what and when you do something. 

 

They also make the higher tiers economically unfriend so that people still play the lower tiers. If you always made money at the highest tier, the population at lower tiers would suffer drastically. 

 

An SU-100Y or KV-2 can have the same impact. The admitted problem is the tank variety.



Georgietheprincess #34 Posted Jul 19 2016 - 21:47

    Captain

  • WGLNA Bronze League Player
  • 34107 battles
  • 1,616
  • [RELIC] RELIC
  • Member since:
    12-30-2012

There are a lot of reasons tier 6 is widely disliked, but the biggest is that is fails utterly in its intended role to prepare clans for clan wars and encourage and foster young cw clans. It's also just not what clan wars was supposed to be like, cw has been 15 v 15 tier x, end game. and a lot of people, myself included, don't like  diluting that idea. 

 

Tier 6 is supposed to act as a stepping stone to prepare young and developing clans for clan wars. The problem is tier 6 teaches you the wrong things. Look at tier 6 meta. Meta is dominated by a handful of tanks and strategy amounts to yolos and camps. Arty has no real place, flex calling might as well not exist, and the hp and dpm of the tier create a very different meta than at tier 8 or 10. Clans learn a series of things that they then have to unlearn to become good at the next level, which is idiotic. The point of a training ground should be to introduce the basics of clan wars and allow clans to practice at them so they can improve. Things like calling for a large group, flexing, clan wars positioning and meta, the usefulness of tank types and roles. These are things that take a while to learn and a training ground for them would be a great idea, but we don't have one, instead we got tier 6.

 

Additionally splitting the maps in general was a terrible idea, and its led to a lot of stagnation. Howe ever, this is less a problem with tier 6 as a concept and more a problem with their existing 3 (now 4) separate maps. 

 

tldr: tier 6 is bad clan wars that doesn't even do what it was intended to do.



_Mik_ #35 Posted Jul 19 2016 - 21:56

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 22024 battles
  • 134
  • [ROHAN] ROHAN
  • Member since:
    07-30-2011

View PostGeorgietheprincess, on Jul 19 2016 - 21:47, said:

There are a lot of reasons tier 6 is widely disliked, but the biggest is that is fails utterly in its intended role to prepare clans for clan wars and encourage and foster young cw clans. It's also just not what clan wars was supposed to be like, cw has been 15 v 15 tier x, end game. and a lot of people, myself included, don't like  diluting that idea. 

 

Tier 6 is supposed to act as a stepping stone to prepare young and developing clans for clan wars. The problem is tier 6 teaches you the wrong things. Look at tier 6 meta. Meta is dominated by a handful of tanks and strategy amounts to yolos and camps. Arty has no real place, flex calling might as well not exist, and the hp and dpm of the tier create a very different meta than at tier 8 or 10. Clans learn a series of things that they then have to unlearn to become good at the next level, which is idiotic. The point of a training ground should be to introduce the basics of clan wars and allow clans to practice at them so they can improve. Things like calling for a large group, flexing, clan wars positioning and meta, the usefulness of tank types and roles. These are things that take a while to learn and a training ground for them would be a great idea, but we don't have one, instead we got tier 6.

 

Additionally splitting the maps in general was a terrible idea, and its led to a lot of stagnation. Howe ever, this is less a problem with tier 6 as a concept and more a problem with their existing 3 (now 4) separate maps. 

 

tldr: tier 6 is bad clan wars that doesn't even do what it was intended to do.

 

I think this makes the most sense so far. People were already used to one type of CW, were promised a CW that would help expand interest, and got a completely different meta that didn't expand interest in the original. 

 

So, WG was trying to make CW easier to climb into and instead split it up?



pmdanie96 #36 Posted Jul 19 2016 - 21:57

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 36718 battles
  • 615
  • [_F_] _F_
  • Member since:
    04-23-2013

View Post_Mik_, on Jul 19 2016 - 14:41, said:

 

An SU-100Y or KV-2 can have the same impact. The admitted problem is the tank variety.

 

No they don't. Once in a great while, maybe. But not with any regularity. Their view range is poor at tier and often will not pick of the targets until it is too late. You already noted the difference in view ranges for tiers earlier so you should be aware of the issue. Everything has pretty much max viewing range at tier 10 with all the equipment and crew perks on tanks (arty excluded of course). Which means pretty much the view ranges are on an even platforms. No so at tier 6. Much larger discrepancy in view ranges.

 

Also, the KV-2 was a rough boom to deal with, especially for its tier. On top of that, even a remotely competent player can circle a KV-2 and kill it without him getting a shot off as the turret traverse is awful. If I remember correctly, the SU-100Y has the same boom issue. Also, while it has a better traverse, the fixed turret gives poor gun depression meaning it has to expose more of itself to get a clean shot. I tank that big is easily spotted making that move. 



pmdanie96 #37 Posted Jul 19 2016 - 21:58

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 36718 battles
  • 615
  • [_F_] _F_
  • Member since:
    04-23-2013

View Post_Mik_, on Jul 19 2016 - 14:56, said:

 

I think this makes the most sense so far. People were already used to one type of CW, were promised a CW that would help expand interest, and got a completely different meta that didn't expand interest in the original. 

 

So, WG was trying to make CW easier to climb into and instead split it up?

 

I would say that is a fair assessment. 

_Mik_ #38 Posted Jul 19 2016 - 22:03

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 22024 battles
  • 134
  • [ROHAN] ROHAN
  • Member since:
    07-30-2011

View Postpmdanie96, on Jul 19 2016 - 21:57, said:

 

No they don't. Once in a great while, maybe. But not with any regularity. Their view range is poor at tier and often will not pick of the targets until it is too late. You already noted the difference in view ranges for tiers earlier so you should be aware of the issue. Everything has pretty much max viewing range at tier 10 with all the equipment and crew perks on tanks (arty excluded of course). Which means pretty much the view ranges are on an even platforms. No so at tier 6. Much larger discrepancy in view ranges.

 

Also, the KV-2 was a rough boom to deal with, especially for its tier. On top of that, even a remotely competent player can circle a KV-2 and kill it without him getting a shot off as the turret traverse is awful. If I remember correctly, the SU-100Y has the same boom issue. Also, while it has a better traverse, the fixed turret gives poor gun depression meaning it has to expose more of itself to get a clean shot. I tank that big is easily spotted making that move. 

 

I just meant in terms of the alpha. I agree with you that you usually do not lose too much HP in poking (unless the enemy is pre-aimed) in tier 6. However, I think it is because they need to make the other tank classes more useful. 



pmdanie96 #39 Posted Jul 19 2016 - 22:14

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 36718 battles
  • 615
  • [_F_] _F_
  • Member since:
    04-23-2013

View Post_Mik_, on Jul 19 2016 - 15:03, said:

 

I just meant in terms of the alpha. I agree with you that you usually do not lose too much HP in poking (unless the enemy is pre-aimed) in tier 6. However, I think it is because they need to make the other tank classes more useful. 

 

OK, that you for clarifying. Yes, the other classes should somehow be made more relevant. I agree with that statement.

vurhd1 #40 Posted Jul 19 2016 - 22:22

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 27110 battles
  • 223
  • [FIFO] FIFO
  • Member since:
    03-08-2013

Its giving me a hard time quoting so I'll just list it out.

 

Can you elaborate? Team battles and gold league are 7v7

Just like i mentioned how making tier 6 CW 7v7 is similar to a large platoon, this is also true of team battles and league. In ranked team battles I made minimal calls while everyone gave suggestions.I have minimal league experience (silver), but from the little bit I did it, the callers makes the strategy but everyone reviews it and during the battle everyone gives counter call suggestions. The only reason for a single caller is to resolve disputes in minimal time. So even TBs and League act similar to platoons. I'm sure this will very from team and team and from gold to silver.

 

Is tier 6 not then a better indicator of relative skill?

This would make tier 6 a better indicator of individual skill, not the skills of the caller. And going along with thats only an indicator of a limited subset of skills. Like I mentioned and you agreed too, armor usage means nothing at low tiers.

 

I think that recent changes to clan wars suggest that this is often true of tier 10 as well. 

I'm not fully sure what you're saying here, but the 2 different maps at tier 10 give appropriate gold based on skill level. (Well TBH all CW gold is terrible).

 

Implying that tanks cannot die in 3 seconds in tier 8 or 10 is kind of funny. I know what you're saying, but it's a bit shallow. Tier 10 has a lot of high alpha guns that can bring certain tanks to their knees very swiftly. 

 Lets list the high alpha guns at all the tiers.

Tier 6: OI - 1 shots most things

KV-2 occasionally

Tier 8: ???? RHM might be meta - usually 2 shots with the 150

Tier 10: E100 - Still requires 3 shots to kill anything

E3 - Same as above

Pretty much on average tanks at tier 6 die faster. Here's a quick example without derps guns

Main fast tank at tier 6: T-37 . The reload is about 3 seconds and takes 6 shots to kill another t37. Not counting the first shot that's 15 total seconds.

Main fast tank at tier 8: T54LT. The reload is about 6.25 seconds and takes 5 shots to kill another T54LT. Not counting the first shot that's 25 total seconds.

Main fast tank at tier 10: OBJ140. The reload is about 5.75 seconds and takes 6 shots to kill another T54LT. Not counting the first shot that's 29 total seconds.

 







Also tagged with CW, tier6, clans

2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users