Jump to content


Remove Commander hatches and cupolas as the number 1 weakness


  • Please log in to reply
46 replies to this topic

aethervox #21 Posted Aug 20 2016 - 08:44

    Major

  • Players
  • 26394 battles
  • 2,845
  • [PFLL] PFLL
  • Member since:
    08-19-2011

 

Thing is, if the shot is allowing damage it's cause the tank is being hit thus doing cumulative damage no matter where it's being hit .... so, No to OP.



_Gungrave_ #22 Posted Aug 20 2016 - 13:22

    Major

  • Players
  • 42920 battles
  • 16,299
  • [X-OUT] X-OUT
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011

umm...no as you would break the balance for most of the game

 

Imagine fighting the british AT casemate line with none of those "tophat" hatches or trying to fight a hull down american high tier vehicle I mean the M103 and E5 would become godlike well the E5 more so than it already is.



nuclearguy931 #23 Posted Aug 20 2016 - 13:51

    Major

  • Players
  • 76948 battles
  • 9,629
  • [UMM] UMM
  • Member since:
    08-16-2011

I would say leave the commanders hatch alone. If another tank can take the commander out they are disabling an important part of the tank's crew, as well, the commanders hatch is also a view port if I am not mistaken.

 

Besides, if they start removing sections of the tank like this for damaging it, what's next, removing the ammo racking capabilities or setting the fuel tanks on fire?



NK_33 #24 Posted Aug 20 2016 - 13:59

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 19319 battles
  • 3,380
  • Member since:
    12-24-2014

Yes, let's make the hatches invulnerable.  That'll really fix the Premium Spam and now artillery WILL be the only thing able to kill these monsters.

 

Thank you Hillary Trump, great way to make the game great again, I'll send you your prize through classified e-mail.



RedStarZhukov #25 Posted Aug 20 2016 - 14:25

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 3037 battles
  • 457
  • Member since:
    12-28-2015

View PostPlanetos, on Aug 20 2016 - 00:00, said:

Hear me out. i know the topic is probably going to cause a lot of flaming, but i have an idea.

 

After having been a WOT player for almost 5 years i have noticed a number of very annoying, and very unnecessary trends in the game. however 1 trend is the most annoying and it ruins a majority of my games, and that would be commander hatch spam. honestly, shooting the commander hatch 5+ times should in no way shape or form put a tank completely out of action. it is only ONE part of the tank. many of my favorite tanks, and what used to be one of my favorite tier 8 premiums, the KV 5 have been parked in my garage for too long because of this one stupid vulnerability. 

 

what i propose is a mechanic installed in the game that gives the commanders hatch a set amount of the tanks TOTAL HP, say maybe 10-15%. once this HP is depleted the commanders hatches and cupola's no longer take damage. HOWEVER you may still shoot them to injure or kill the commander, but they do NOT drain the tank of its total HP pool.

 

now this may sound OP or unbalanced, but can any of you count how many times you have been taken out of a battle PURELY because the enemy was NOT skilled enough to find another weakness on your tank? the frontal machine gun turret (aka R2D2) on the KV-5 should NOT be able to drain an ENTIRE tank of its HP when there is still 90% of the tank and crew that are still functional.

 

i have used the KV 5 as my prime example, purely because it is one of the most recognized tanks in the game for its prime weakspot. however there are a number of tanks that i am sure players know about that have 1 weakspot that can easily get them killed for no reason at all. 

 

now many of you may be thinking, "well you just need to learn to play better" or "just hide the weakspot", its not always that simple, and when you look at the big picture, it is pretty stupid that 1 small spot can destroy a multi-ton vehicle. 

 

after doing some deep thinking, and research, the mechanics to make this happen are already in the game. however the mecanic is only used for specific modules like tracks, ammo racks, turret rings, etc. so i believe the same mechanic can be applied to other parts of the tank as well as long as they are isolated and done properly. for example, tracks take a specified amount of damage to become critically damaged (orange), and then additional damage to BREAK (red) the module, however these modules slowly get repaired by the crew. some modules that are BROKEN will put a tank completely out of action (ammo rack, fuel tanks) and cannot be repaired as the tank is knocked out.  the commander hatch could be designed as a separate damage model with a specific HP pool that would NOT repair. the crew member, most commonly a commander or radio operator would still be able to be healed/recovered with a med kit, and as such can still be knocked out even after the machine gun turret/cupola has lost all of its HP. to clarify, the machine gun turret/cupola can still be shot in order to hamper the performance of the tank crew, it just would not contribute to additional HP loss of the rest of the tank

 

overall this may sound like a rant, and i am sure there will be plenty of debate, but in the end this change could help prolong battles across the board, and slowly push players to become more skilled in their attempts to overpower and knock out enemy tanks. 

 

please only provide constructive criticism and your opinions below, thank you.

 

Okay folks, batten down the hatches and brace yourselves.  This one is going to sting very closely for those complaining about Hatches and Copulas..............

 

Now the idea here is basically when the rest of the tank gets damaged a "bonus" HP should be applied to the hatch as a last ditch matter in battles for tanks.  Thoughts?

 

 

The reason is simple, NOT all tanks are created equal.  Some have better frontal armor, or even better angle armor for that matter.  Several British TD's have this advantage.  Case in point?

 

 

AT 8

 

And also......................

 

 

AT 15 as well.

 

Now with that being said, YES they are Tank Destroyers, and YES have excellent frontal armor.  So if "everything" was hard to hit?  Then where the heck are players suppose to shoot at then?  That is where skill and marksmanship come into play.  There are two possibilities here.......

 

 

1:  Hit them in the Lower Glacius or the Commanders Hatch.

 

OR................

 

 

 

2:  Flank for the Side or Rear to shoot.

 

 

These are all factors that come into play as game mechanics that help balance out the game.  Yes, while the argument of being hulled down, and only exposing your turret is a valid one, not all tanks work well hulled down.  The concept and tactic is know your tank, and know your weak spots.  Compensate for that, and you should be fine but hey what do I know...............

 

I'm just a guy with over 1k in battles..............:bajan:  :teethhappy:  :trollface:

 

 


Edited by RedStarZhukov, Aug 20 2016 - 14:28.


Planetos #26 Posted Aug 21 2016 - 22:21

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 25039 battles
  • 85
  • [VENUM] VENUM
  • Member since:
    05-30-2011

you guys are getting the wrong idea and not using your heads. 

 

if you are afraid of the heavily armored TD's thats good. you should be. and if you are having to shoot ONLY at the commaders hatch, then you are clearly not smart enough to flank. 

 

making the commanders hatch and machine gun turrets a modular hit box is to prevent cowardice and try to promote tactics. 

 

most of the ones on here whining clearly lack the tactical knowledge to flank, and will of course reject this idea.



Dobsje25 #27 Posted Aug 21 2016 - 22:50

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 12996 battles
  • 279
  • [-JSOC] -JSOC
  • Member since:
    11-13-2011

View PostPlanetos, on Aug 19 2016 - 21:00, said:

Hear me out. i know the topic is probably going to cause a lot of flaming, but i have an idea.

 

After having been a WOT player for almost 5 years i have noticed a number of very annoying, and very unnecessary trends in the game. however 1 trend is the most annoying and it ruins a majority of my games, and that would be commander hatch spam. honestly, shooting the commander hatch 5+ times should in no way shape or form put a tank completely out of action. it is only ONE part of the tank. many of my favorite tanks, and what used to be one of my favorite tier 8 premiums, the KV 5 have been parked in my garage for too long because of this one stupid vulnerability. 

 

what i propose is a mechanic installed in the game that gives the commanders hatch a set amount of the tanks TOTAL HP, say maybe 10-15%. once this HP is depleted the commanders hatches and cupola's no longer take damage. HOWEVER you may still shoot them to injure or kill the commander, but they do NOT drain the tank of its total HP pool.

 

now this may sound OP or unbalanced, but can any of you count how many times you have been taken out of a battle PURELY because the enemy was NOT skilled enough to find another weakness on your tank? the frontal machine gun turret (aka R2D2) on the KV-5 should NOT be able to drain an ENTIRE tank of its HP when there is still 90% of the tank and crew that are still functional.

 

i have used the KV 5 as my prime example, purely because it is one of the most recognized tanks in the game for its prime weakspot. however there are a number of tanks that i am sure players know about that have 1 weakspot that can easily get them killed for no reason at all. 

 

now many of you may be thinking, "well you just need to learn to play better" or "just hide the weakspot", its not always that simple, and when you look at the big picture, it is pretty stupid that 1 small spot can destroy a multi-ton vehicle. 

 

after doing some deep thinking, and research, the mechanics to make this happen are already in the game. however the mecanic is only used for specific modules like tracks, ammo racks, turret rings, etc. so i believe the same mechanic can be applied to other parts of the tank as well as long as they are isolated and done properly. for example, tracks take a specified amount of damage to become critically damaged (orange), and then additional damage to BREAK (red) the module, however these modules slowly get repaired by the crew. some modules that are BROKEN will put a tank completely out of action (ammo rack, fuel tanks) and cannot be repaired as the tank is knocked out.  the commander hatch could be designed as a separate damage model with a specific HP pool that would NOT repair. the crew member, most commonly a commander or radio operator would still be able to be healed/recovered with a med kit, and as such can still be knocked out even after the machine gun turret/cupola has lost all of its HP. to clarify, the machine gun turret/cupola can still be shot in order to hamper the performance of the tank crew, it just would not contribute to additional HP loss of the rest of the tank

 

overall this may sound like a rant, and i am sure there will be plenty of debate, but in the end this change could help prolong battles across the board, and slowly push players to become more skilled in their attempts to overpower and knock out enemy tanks. 

 

please only provide constructive criticism and your opinions below, thank you.

You were most likely correct in this topic causing a lot of flaming, as for some tanks the commander's hatch is practically the ONLY weakness for some tanks. Without it the game would be horribly less balanced than it already is. People seem to have more displeasure from simply never being able to pen the front of a tank than they do with having one weakness in their tank. 

 

Reading over your post one thing pops to mind. You talk about the KV-5. It makes me feel that you are upset that you aren't completely invincible. I feel that you offering up this "suggestion" on biased and selfish grounds. 



chieftain20 #28 Posted Aug 22 2016 - 16:56

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 13959 battles
  • 31
  • Member since:
    05-26-2011

View PostDobsje25, on Aug 21 2016 - 15:50, said:

You were most likely correct in this topic causing a lot of flaming, as for some tanks the commander's hatch is practically the ONLY weakness for some tanks. Without it the game would be horribly less balanced than it already is. People seem to have more displeasure from simply never being able to pen the front of a tank than they do with having one weakness in their tank. 

 

Reading over your post one thing pops to mind. You talk about the KV-5. It makes me feel that you are upset that you aren't completely invincible. I feel that you offering up this "suggestion" on biased and selfish grounds. 

 

I too am a 4+ year player with a KV5. I've rarely played it in the last two years. Why? Because the R2D2 is such an obvious destructo point that it's annoying to play it. And it doesn't earn near the credits as my Type59 does.

While you may think that "Well the KV5 has imperviable armor for it's preferred MM." you'd be wrong. Over the last couple years they have been reworked the gun mechanics, and added in tanks that didn't exist when KV5 was around. Case in point is when you have tier 7 tanks with generally tier 8 guns as full upgraded and multiple 8's with 10's (9 generally). Now I don't see you complaining because "My gun does too much damage" or "My gun pens way too much" because players like the OP-ness. 

 

While the KV5 is quite the beast when up against tier 6's, up against 7's and other 8's it's just a big shell absorbing target with a junk gun that struggles to pen many tier 7s. 

 

While I am only referring to the R2D2, it's just because it's much more obvious and lessly armored than the coupla. But same mechanics should apply.

 

I play my VK4502.B daily and it's front armor is nuts and trolly, but having that top hatch the weak spot that can destroy the tank is an annoyance. For some reason I feel like even the optics port in front is a damage point. Side scraping on the tank has been underpowered because anything more than 25deg will pen.

 

Removing these weaknesses will allow for much more dynamic play with even less camping than now. And/or a more reliance on arty to take out camped enemies. At least in my opinion. But with all the lemming games that are decided within the first two minutes I can't see why this wouldn't be an ok thing to implement.



Alterinus #29 Posted Aug 22 2016 - 17:51

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 7998 battles
  • 835
  • Member since:
    06-25-2015

There's already supposed to be a mechanic for this, which is that shots which pass through non vital areas don't spall as much damage into tank HP, as long as its not HE. In fact, I've gotten worse results trying to HE copulas, which is against what the game guides say.

 

However, if HE hits the top of a copula, it should explode in the penetrated stuff into the tanks innards causing damage.



Alterinus #30 Posted Aug 22 2016 - 17:59

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 7998 battles
  • 835
  • Member since:
    06-25-2015

View Postaethervox, on Aug 20 2016 - 08:39, said:

 

AW has the same tanks? Surprise, surprise. What would you think, arcade vehicles?

 Who knows cause they haven't changed it.

A masterly job of conjuring a nothing something out of thin air.

 

Didnt you hear? If one game has a T-60 tank in it, that is copyrighted and no other game can include it /s

 



DiePanzerGeist #31 Posted Aug 22 2016 - 19:17

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 7211 battles
  • 5,495
  • [DHO6] DHO6
  • Member since:
    04-28-2014

View PostGhostUnitVII, on Aug 20 2016 - 00:31, said:

 

Because, AW is a competitor's game, if they followed the same concept, they would be accused of copying another companies code, or concept, which would violate copyright laws... Also it would require alot of coding as each individual tank would need to be reconfigured that have a commander hatch to take little or no damage. This game has a lot of tanks, and still more to come, AW already had the system in placed at the start, so things are a little easier for them.

 

Honestly, doubt Wargaming would consider this, as tanks like the E100 police bar would be removed, and various other commander hatches that actually make rolling fortresses a punching bag... I was surprised about the E5 honestly, that tank was plagued by its comm-... Top hat... as it was the weakest part of the tank, and still is, just not as weak. The KV5 well... That tank was just doomed, a feared tank in the beta, but now, it's just another punching bag with a BB gun for a cannon...

 

The dead can't accuse anyone of anything...and that game is...

 



Sunserrae #32 Posted Aug 22 2016 - 20:53

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 15441 battles
  • 2,486
  • Member since:
    07-19-2014

 

This is just more of the same nonsense from stat padders who want to make it OP for their super tanks to dominate. 

 

It is of now use or value to the 99% player base who does not take stats and being "leet" so seriously in the game.

 

This idea ranks up there with the taking away of premium ammo, banning players for drowning themselves at the end of games, removing arty so lesser players can't hit your leet OP tanks, XVM so that you can't be sniped or focused on because of your stats, and so forth. In short, these are all requests of absolutely no value to anyone beyond stat padders.

 



landedkiller #33 Posted Aug 23 2016 - 07:23

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 8488 battles
  • 1,504
  • Member since:
    04-01-2013
In real life one shot kills a tank these cupolas are a nessesary weakness though I would like to see some Chinese and other cupolas get smaller In size

Planetos #34 Posted Aug 25 2016 - 13:36

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 25039 battles
  • 85
  • [VENUM] VENUM
  • Member since:
    05-30-2011

View PostSunserrae, on Aug 22 2016 - 14:53, said:

 

This is just more of the same nonsense from stat padders who want to make it OP for their super tanks to dominate. 

 

It is of now use or value to the 99% player base who does not take stats and being "leet" so seriously in the game.

 

This idea ranks up there with the taking away of premium ammo, banning players for drowning themselves at the end of games, removing arty so lesser players can't hit your leet OP tanks, XVM so that you can't be sniped or focused on because of your stats, and so forth. In short, these are all requests of absolutely no value to anyone beyond stat padders.

 

 

i am clearly not a stat padder if that is what you are accusing me of. and second use spellcheck, poor spelling makes you look like a poorly educated child. 

 

premium ammo is fine because those shells actually existed, drowning yourself should be punished because it is cowardice and unsportsmanlike conduct, artillery are still considered tanks. 

 

so that pretty much debunks your little whine fest.

 

now back to the matter at hand. reducing the damage that cupolas and machine gun turrets would take will most definitely increase the time a tank can stay in action in this game. on average games last from 5-8 minutes, they they should be taking upwards of 10.  not to mention if the ONLY thing you are shooting at is the cupola, then you have no skill or tactical capabilities of note. if you cannot figure out how to get behind a heavily armored vechicle, then you really need practice, because while you are trying to snipe at the cupola from miles away, your team is suffering from your lack of skill, and the enemy tank is probably eating you for breakfast. 

 

think before you speak, and take notice that its the stat padders that want the cupola to remain a weakspot so that they don't have to do any real work. and you guys seem to keep missing the point, i don't want them REMOVED as a weakspot, but they should NOT constantly take damage and be able to knock out a tank. shooting the cupola is not hitting the hull of the tank, its not hitting the ammo rack of the tank, its not shooting the other parts of the tank that have hit points, and lastly it just doesn't make any sense. 



Tolos #35 Posted Aug 25 2016 - 13:42

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 25997 battles
  • 17,445
  • [GDF] GDF
  • Member since:
    09-22-2010

View PostPlanetos, on Aug 21 2016 - 21:21, said:

you guys are getting the wrong idea and not using your heads. 

 

if you are afraid of the heavily armored TD's thats good. you should be. and if you are having to shoot ONLY at the commaders hatch, then you are clearly not smart enough to flank. 

 

making the commanders hatch and machine gun turrets a modular hit box is to prevent cowardice and try to promote tactics. 

 

most of the ones on here whining clearly lack the tactical knowledge to flank, and will of course reject this idea.

 

Wrong. Your idea is just bad. Thanks for tryin though

Sunserrae #36 Posted Aug 25 2016 - 18:46

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 15441 battles
  • 2,486
  • Member since:
    07-19-2014

View PostTolos, on Aug 25 2016 - 12:42, said:

 

Wrong. Your idea is just bad.

 

Exactly right. 

:trollface:

 

All of his wasted insults on a [edited]ter idea just as bad if not worse. Comical. He had gotten so caught up in the trying to belittle others, he forgot to put as much thought into the tomato idea he was presenting. I am sure he one of those frothing neckbeards raging in pub chat as well for comedy gold. 

 

 


Edited by Sunserrae, Aug 25 2016 - 18:48.


Planetos #37 Posted Oct 22 2016 - 01:51

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 25039 battles
  • 85
  • [VENUM] VENUM
  • Member since:
    05-30-2011
if anything, making the Cupolas less of a killjoy on the tanks, it would make games last a lot longer and actually require skills and tactics to kill enemy tanks. as the game sits right now we are mainly playing FRONTAL assault battles, rarely do i see anyone try to flank to get to weakpoints. they just sit and attempt to snipe Cupolas. aiming for tracks, and getting behind a tank causes more damage than attempting to snipe a cupola. 

Manimal__ #38 Posted Oct 22 2016 - 13:55

    Major

  • Players
  • 38763 battles
  • 3,469
  • Member since:
    08-20-2013

View PostGhostUnitVII, on Aug 19 2016 - 21:31, said:

 

Because, AW is a competitor's game, if they followed the same concept, they would be accused of copying another companies code, or concept, which would violate copyright laws...

WG wouldn't be accused of copying anything because concepts and ideas are copied all the time. With your logic the entire AW game is a copy of WOT because the concept is driving tanks. :facepalm:

mob12345678 #39 Posted Oct 25 2016 - 02:10

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 20549 battles
  • 433
  • [VAHLA] VAHLA
  • Member since:
    11-08-2013
Not to burst anyone's bubble but don't you think if WOT changes that Hatch problem into a smaller damage taking object that they would have to work on something else to replace that?

Skippie_422 #40 Posted Apr 15 2018 - 05:17

    Private

  • -Players-
  • 18029 battles
  • 3
  • [1VETS] 1VETS
  • Member since:
    05-14-2015

Could you make the KV-4 anymore vulnerable....take out the hatch or at least reinforce it....we cant hide anywhere...wth

 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users