Jump to content


Season 5 global map ... western front (tier X)!


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

Panzerkinjerkin #1 Posted Jan 18 2017 - 00:58

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 51386 battles
  • 180
  • Member since:
    10-27-2011

Let's have a look at this "End Game" content, shall we

 

First let's confine the t10 front ,which should be the end goal of playing CW in the first place, into the corner of the map and give it less than 20% of the map

 

 

Now let's remove the early and late ( 18 and 23 EST) time zones and put about 50% of the provinces in one time zone ( 20 EST)

 

 

and finally, let's align all the gold pots on the map in a single area of the map, sit back, and watch the fire works!

 

 

My one and only question at this point to whoever is responsible for this latest iteration of the global map, how do you still have a job ? 

 

 

 



_Deceive #2 Posted Jan 18 2017 - 01:32

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 15001 battles
  • 17
  • Member since:
    09-24-2011
The fact that you expected wg to do anything of reasonable competence is your first mistake. But yes, I agree with you.

bfp4f360 #3 Posted Jan 18 2017 - 02:21

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 13789 battles
  • 280
  • [LOAD] LOAD
  • Member since:
    06-27-2012
nahh son its all good, everythings better in texas

Loryn #4 Posted Jan 18 2017 - 03:03

    Private

  • -Players-
  • 12121 battles
  • 8
  • [HARM] HARM
  • Member since:
    07-31-2014
You're spot on Panzerkinjerkin!  Season 5 Global Map is a joke.  So sad that WG can't see that this kind of crap is killing the end game for serious players.  :(

Edited by Loryn, Jan 18 2017 - 03:07.


DannyS76 #5 Posted Jan 22 2017 - 18:29

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 15649 battles
  • 68
  • [_CIA_] _CIA_
  • Member since:
    10-17-2013
The map is fine. You have the tier 10 in the south and northwest. Possibly should have been combined, but who am I.

flatstiger69 #6 Posted Jan 25 2017 - 17:12

    Major

  • Players
  • 49035 battles
  • 2,522
  • [TEXAS] TEXAS
  • Member since:
    03-08-2011

View Postbfp4f360, on Jan 17 2017 - 19:21, said:

nahh son its all good, everythings better in texas

 

And Thank you VERY MUCH!

 

 



Silvers_ #7 Posted Jan 25 2017 - 20:55

    Major

  • Players
  • 38859 battles
  • 4,911
  • [REL2] REL2
  • Member since:
    06-12-2012
They should have gotten rid of T6 like the EU/RU servers did. Feed that into the T10 main map with the T10 lite map getting the next highest followed by T8.

Roccandil #8 Posted Jan 25 2017 - 23:23

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 5319 battles
  • 98
  • Member since:
    02-13-2016

View PostSilvers_, on Jan 25 2017 - 14:55, said:

They should have gotten rid of T6 like the EU/RU servers did. Feed that into the T10 main map with the T10 lite map getting the next highest followed by T8.

 

If WG pumped more gold into the map, such that the 250 T6 provinces could be 250 T10 provinces, cool. But if not, then T10 -might- get 20% of the T6 province total.

 

I don't know how much difference adding 50 provinces would make at T10, but removing 200+ total provinces from the map would eliminate clan wars for many of the 200+ clans playing T6. Doesn't sound like a good business move.

 

If WG wants to pay out more gold, great, but reducing the total number of provinces in clan wars seems like a bad idea. If anything, I'd want to see the total increased.

 

Oh, and it's interesting that so far in clan wars, I'm seeing 98 clans earning VPs on T8's 119 provinces, 225 clans earning VPs on T6's 251 provinces, but only 36 clans earning VPs on T10's combined 156 provinces.

 

I'm not getting the impression that the problem at T10 is too few provinces.


Edited by Roccandil, Jan 25 2017 - 23:27.


Frostii_xD #9 Posted Jan 25 2017 - 23:36

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 21748 battles
  • 269
  • [CHAI] CHAI
  • Member since:
    07-14-2012

View PostRoccandil, on Jan 25 2017 - 14:23, said:

 

If WG pumped more gold into the map, such that the 250 T6 provinces could be 250 T10 provinces, cool. But if not, then T10 -might- get 20% of the T6 province total.

 

I don't know how much difference adding 50 provinces would make at T10, but removing 200+ total provinces from the map would eliminate clan wars for many of the 200+ clans playing T6. Doesn't sound like a good business move.

 

If WG wants to pay out more gold, great, but reducing the total number of provinces in clan wars seems like a bad idea. If anything, I'd want to see the total increased.

 

Oh, and it's interesting that so far in clan wars, I'm seeing 98 clans earning VPs on T8's 119 provinces, 225 clans earning VPs on T6's 251 provinces, but only 36 clans earning VPs on T10's combined 156 provinces.

 

I'm not getting the impression that the problem at T10 is too few provinces.

The number of provinces owned by the same clan drastically increases as tiers go up. This lessens incentive for smaller up and coming clans to even try to compete in tier 10 when there is not even enough land to go around for the big boys. The few smaller clans competiting in tier 10 is hoping one of the big clans slip on one of their riot/landing defense so they can ransack the land to get a week of income. The only other option is to go for more stable, but obviously less rewarding income by taking land in tier 8. Let's face it, tier 6 income is a joke.

 

As for why the number of provinces owned by the same clan is high in tier 10? The answer is obvious, to sustain the amount we've been paying to our members for being good at clan wars. Each season WG decreases the amount of gold available in tier 10 front, so to sustain the same level of income and payout, big clans have to take more land than previously. This just leaves less and less room for smaller clans to participate in tier 10 front (ignoring the joke training tier 10 front)


Edited by Frostii_xD, Jan 25 2017 - 23:39.


ff8ff8 #10 Posted Jan 26 2017 - 01:58

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 16507 battles
  • 954
  • [-G-] -G-
  • Member since:
    05-24-2012
We should all just pull off and continuously wipe out the entire T6 map for like a week. Maybe with enough pubby tears WG will actually have someone read their own forum and listen.
Until then, CW will remain dead.

Roccandil #11 Posted Jan 26 2017 - 02:00

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 5319 battles
  • 98
  • Member since:
    02-13-2016

View PostFrostii_xD, on Jan 25 2017 - 17:36, said:

The number of provinces owned by the same clan drastically increases as tiers go up. This lessens incentive for smaller up and coming clans to even try to compete in tier 10 when there is not even enough land to go around for the big boys. The few smaller clans competiting in tier 10 is hoping one of the big clans slip on one of their riot/landing defense so they can ransack the land to get a week of income. The only other option is to go for more stable, but obviously less rewarding income by taking land in tier 8. Let's face it, tier 6 income is a joke.

 

As for why the number of provinces owned by the same clan is high in tier 10? The answer is obvious, to sustain the amount we've been paying to our members for being good at clan wars. Each season WG decreases the amount of gold available in tier 10 front, so to sustain the same level of income and payout, big clans have to take more land than previously. This just leaves less and less room for smaller clans to participate in tier 10 front (ignoring the joke training tier 10 front)

 

At least in T6 this year, owning provinces is counterproductive to earning VPs. The strategy seems to be to hit as many tourneys as possible to rack up kills/damage/exp. You don't even have to capture the province at the end; just beat other challengers.

 

That does appear to be happening in T10, to a lesser extent. Your leader in VPs is a 1200 ELO clan that's earned 2000 gold this season, but they have almost twice the VPs of MAHOU, that's earned 60K+ gold.

 

So, with the current rules, small clans could easily beat land-owners for VPs if enough of them just did landing zone tourneys against each other every night. They wouldn't even need to be good; bad clan versus bad clan in a tourney: someone's going to do damage, kill tanks, get exp, and win. :) Clans can get task gold that way too, no province ownership required. (And it would certainly be better gold than you can get at T6.)

 

In short, WG has structured this season such that you don't need to acquire or hold territory or even be good to win VPs and gold; they've effectively removed that barrier to entry at T10. For that matter, small clans could be "rigging" T10 landing zone tourneys every night to basically get free gold.

 

Despite that, very few clans are participating in T10. That indicates something other than province ownership, map size, or T10 skill is at work in keeping small clans out.

 

Personally, I suspect the cost in time and credits to get T10 tanks has something to do with it, and WG may suspect that too, given their inclusion of that question on their recent survey. Of the total number of (active) WoT NA players, I wonder how many actually have a single T10 tank?



ff8ff8 #12 Posted Jan 26 2017 - 02:24

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 16507 battles
  • 954
  • [-G-] -G-
  • Member since:
    05-24-2012
We don't fight because the current state of CW heavily punishes it. Thus we all just decide where we will sit and stay there.

WGNA doesn't want there to be fighting on the tier 10 map, thus every season they change it so that we will fight less than the previous season.

KyoFyre #13 Posted Jan 26 2017 - 03:20

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 41327 battles
  • 223
  • [TUF] TUF
  • Member since:
    07-14-2011

View PostRoccandil, on Jan 25 2017 - 17:23, said:

 

If WG pumped more gold into the map, such that the 250 T6 provinces could be 250 T10 provinces, cool. But if not, then T10 -might- get 20% of the T6 province total.

 

I don't know how much difference adding 50 provinces would make at T10, but removing 200+ total provinces from the map would eliminate clan wars for many of the 200+ clans playing T6. Doesn't sound like a good business move.

 

If WG wants to pay out more gold, great, but reducing the total number of provinces in clan wars seems like a bad idea. If anything, I'd want to see the total increased.

 

Oh, and it's interesting that so far in clan wars, I'm seeing 98 clans earning VPs on T8's 119 provinces, 225 clans earning VPs on T6's 251 provinces, but only 36 clans earning VPs on T10's combined 156 provinces.

 

I'm not getting the impression that the problem at T10 is too few provinces.

 

thats because only the main tier ten map gives VP

Roccandil #14 Posted Jan 26 2017 - 04:08

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 5319 battles
  • 98
  • Member since:
    02-13-2016

View Postff8ff8, on Jan 25 2017 - 20:24, said:

We don't fight because the current state of CW heavily punishes it. Thus we all just decide where we will sit and stay there.

WGNA doesn't want there to be fighting on the tier 10 map, thus every season they change it so that we will fight less than the previous season.

 

How does the current state heavily punish fighting? No tank lockouts plus VPs and gold for killing tanks, doing damage, and getting exp. If that's punishing, what would rewarding look like?






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users