Jump to content


No gold for Tier X guns

gold gold rounds gold balance gold ammo

  • Please log in to reply
38 replies to this topic

Poll: Gold rounds for tier X guns? (73 members have cast votes)

Should tier X guns get gold rounds?

  1. Yes (44 votes [60.27%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 60.27%

  2. No (29 votes [39.73%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 39.73%

Vote Guests cannot vote Hide poll

CloneSociety #1 Posted Apr 30 2017 - 02:44

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 19012 battles
  • 131
  • [QSF] QSF
  • Member since:
    07-29-2013

It's my opinion that any tier X rated gun shouldn't have gold rounds.


As I see it, gold rounds are there to make up for the short comings of a stock gun when facing superior enemies.


Tier X is the top of the pyramid.  There are no tanks above them, so it doesn't make sense to give them gold rounds.

Specifying tier X guns means this would apply to any tank with access to a tier X gun, and not limited to tier X tanks.

Letting tier X guns punch above their weight like this just negates armor for what should be the toughest tanks in the game.
 



Strike_Witch_Tomoko #2 Posted Apr 30 2017 - 02:47

    Major

  • Players
  • 15574 battles
  • 11,951
  • Member since:
    05-04-2013

View PostCloneSociety, on Apr 29 2017 - 18:44, said:

It's my opinion that any tier X rated gun shouldn't have gold rounds.


As I see it, gold rounds are there to make up for the short comings of a stock gun when facing superior enemies.


Tier X is the top of the pyramid.  There are no tanks above them, so it doesn't make sense to give them gold rounds.

Specifying tier X guns means this would apply to any tank with access to a tier X gun, and not limited to tier X tanks.

Letting tier X guns punch above their weight like this just negates armor for what should be the toughest tanks in the game.
 

 

hulldown e3

hull down angled maus.

 how will you fight without gold


don't get me wrong. i agree with you on gold.  but right now theres alot of tanks we need gold for.    

 

i just wish people didnt use gold for situations they don't need it for.....



Rin_ #3 Posted Apr 30 2017 - 02:56

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 17695 battles
  • 3,085
  • [R-7] R-7
  • Member since:
    11-11-2015

View PostStrike_Witch_Tomoko, on Apr 30 2017 - 02:47, said:

 

hulldown e3

hull down angled maus.

 how will you fight without gold



Omega_Weapon #4 Posted Apr 30 2017 - 03:14

    Captain

  • Players
  • 42224 battles
  • 1,353
  • [GRIEF] GRIEF
  • Member since:
    11-15-2011

View PostCloneSociety, on Apr 29 2017 - 20:44, said:

It's my opinion that any tier X rated gun shouldn't have gold rounds.


As I see it, gold rounds are there to make up for the short comings of a stock gun when facing superior enemies.


Tier X is the top of the pyramid.  There are no tanks above them, so it doesn't make sense to give them gold rounds.

Specifying tier X guns means this would apply to any tank with access to a tier X gun, and not limited to tier X tanks.

Letting tier X guns punch above their weight like this just negates armor for what should be the toughest tanks in the game.
 

 

​They are the toughest tanks. And they should have very powerful guns to match. Removing premium ammo as an option would limit their guns though, and render them less effective. The well armoured tanks would become unbalanced as people bounce shots off them constantly. And yes, weak points, know where to aim, blah, blah, blah. That is okay in theory, but when a well armoured enemy is actively twitching around, and/or RNG is unkind, and/or lag is affecting your accuracy, premium ammo gives you some room for error. Your idea would throw the whole meta out of wack in favour of heavy armour.

Salty_Socks #5 Posted Apr 30 2017 - 04:14

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 11826 battles
  • 620
  • [KANTO] KANTO
  • Member since:
    08-09-2013
Because terribads that like playing the type 5 heavy and shoot [edited]ter HE need more of a reason to play that AIDS tank line.

Wirbelfeld #6 Posted Apr 30 2017 - 04:36

    Captain

  • Players
  • 19952 battles
  • 1,055
  • [R-7] R-7
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011

View PostCloneSociety, on Apr 30 2017 - 01:44, said:

It's my opinion that any tier X rated gun shouldn't have gold rounds.


As I see it, gold rounds are there to make up for the short comings of a stock gun when facing superior enemies.


Tier X is the top of the pyramid.  There are no tanks above them, so it doesn't make sense to give them gold rounds.

Specifying tier X guns means this would apply to any tank with access to a tier X gun, and not limited to tier X tanks.

Letting tier X guns punch above their weight like this just negates armor for what should be the toughest tanks in the game.
 

 

so make tier 10s worse than tier 9s?

Dirizon #7 Posted Apr 30 2017 - 05:00

    Major

  • Players
  • 26145 battles
  • 3,693
  • Member since:
    06-05-2011

lt is my opinion,  that Tier X Tanks should gold 0NLY FlRE as main ammunition. Secondary ammunition comprises of HE. This only furthers the current position that T X already cost a huge amount to operate,  why not make them cost more to run.

 

This means that superheavy tanks,  which are running rampant now,  have to THlNK in what they do. Rather than drive straight into a batch of enemies - 75% of which consist of self righteous egotistical clowns that think gold ammunition ruins the game.

 

Gold rounds are a tool to use. The only problem with them, a former problem,  was when were N0T AVAlLABLE to everyone because of fixed gold cost. lf an individual is too idiotic to understand and implement the expensive use of gold ammo in order to contribute towards a team effort, by helping throw down damage......then rethink the game you play.

 

 

 

 

 



General_Greg101 #8 Posted Apr 30 2017 - 05:36

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 12142 battles
  • 509
  • Member since:
    03-20-2014
     The problem OP is that most of the Tier X tanks have been balanced around people using gold. Limiting everyone to stock ammunition in Tier X would require a complete overhaul of the armor values, and the penetration for values for every gun in Tier X. Way too big of a job, and would make some tanks either ridiculously OP, or ridiculously UP. The only way we could balance Gold rounds if you ask me is either impose a limit per tank, or decrease the alpha damage. 

pepe_trueno #9 Posted Apr 30 2017 - 21:13

    Major

  • Players
  • 38245 battles
  • 5,923
  • Member since:
    05-21-2011

View PostGeneral_Greg101, on Apr 30 2017 - 05:36, said:

     The problem OP is that most of the Tier X tanks have been balanced around people using gold. Limiting everyone to stock ammunition in Tier X would require a complete overhaul of the armor values, and the penetration for values for every gun in Tier X. Way too big of a job, and would make some tanks either ridiculously OP, or ridiculously UP. The only way we could balance Gold rounds if you ask me is either impose a limit per tank, or decrease the alpha damage. 

 

only maus and type got balanced around gold and that was becouse gold made them useless in the first place, people complaining about super heavys hability to bounce shots from the front either have no idea of balance or they simply dont want a class they dont use to be a threat.

 

slow tanks got a lot of drawbacks that many seem to ignore, like how many matchs are over in one or another way before they even get to the fight, how they cant get to the good spots (unless that spot is 10 mts from spawn) or how they cant react to the battlefield with all what that imply (flank, quick push, run away from a dangerous spot, go back to reset, etc..).

 

the only real issue with super heavys are the idiotic maps and mechanics  that push everyone into brawling in predeterminated tiny areas with little to no chance of flanking manuvers, fix that and we wont need gold at all. 

 

 



BigDaddySmith #10 Posted Apr 30 2017 - 21:30

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 41642 battles
  • 174
  • [PIAGO] PIAGO
  • Member since:
    10-08-2012
IMO remove all Gold rds and force people to aim at the weak spots for a change.

Dustychild44 #11 Posted May 01 2017 - 01:46

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 15435 battles
  • 44
  • Member since:
    07-18-2015
Gold rounds equal money so they are never going away for the pay to win player that can't do without them.

Mudman24 #12 Posted May 01 2017 - 01:52

    Major

  • Players
  • 36183 battles
  • 11,886
  • Member since:
    04-06-2012
If this happened there would be 13 Maus every match.

Tahllol #13 Posted May 01 2017 - 02:22

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 7446 battles
  • 542
  • Member since:
    01-31-2016

I think they should limit gold rounds 5 per match. That or make them so expensive people rarely use them instead of just spamming them as normal rounds since they are so cheap. APCR was so rare in the time frame of these tanks they were almost never used.

 

Make them 50k a round and the spamming of them would stop. Its basically useless [edited]that can't aim the run around spamming them. It ends up ruining the game.



Tahllol #14 Posted May 01 2017 - 02:23

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 7446 battles
  • 542
  • Member since:
    01-31-2016

View PostDustychild44, on May 01 2017 - 01:46, said:

Gold rounds equal money so they are never going away for the pay to win player that can't do without them.

 

They don't equal money, people just use silver for them instead of gold. Change them back to gold only and they would be back to being rare again.

Tahllol #15 Posted May 01 2017 - 02:24

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 7446 battles
  • 542
  • Member since:
    01-31-2016

View PostGeneral_Greg101, on Apr 30 2017 - 05:36, said:

     The problem OP is that most of the Tier X tanks have been balanced around people using gold. Limiting everyone to stock ammunition in Tier X would require a complete overhaul of the armor values, and the penetration for values for every gun in Tier X. Way too big of a job, and would make some tanks either ridiculously OP, or ridiculously UP. The only way we could balance Gold rounds if you ask me is either impose a limit per tank, or decrease the alpha damage. 

 

Gasp no it would require them to learn to play and move around instead of just spam gold at front of tank.

Tahllol #16 Posted May 01 2017 - 02:26

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 7446 battles
  • 542
  • Member since:
    01-31-2016

View PostOmega_Weapon, on Apr 30 2017 - 03:14, said:

 

​They are the toughest tanks. And they should have very powerful guns to match. Removing premium ammo as an option would limit their guns though, and render them less effective. The well armoured tanks would become unbalanced as people bounce shots off them constantly. And yes, weak points, know where to aim, blah, blah, blah. That is okay in theory, but when a well armoured enemy is actively twitching around, and/or RNG is unkind, and/or lag is affecting your accuracy, premium ammo gives you some room for error. Your idea would throw the whole meta out of wack in favour of heavy armour.

 

News flash, lights and most mediums running around beating up heavies head on shouldn't be happening period, and tanks penning most mediums and heavies from long range should almost never happen, as the round wouldn't have the pen left like they do right now and thanks to Premium ammo unbalances the game in favor of the tanks with high mobility and rate of fire.

Omega_Weapon #17 Posted May 01 2017 - 05:47

    Captain

  • Players
  • 42224 battles
  • 1,353
  • [GRIEF] GRIEF
  • Member since:
    11-15-2011

View PostTahllol, on Apr 30 2017 - 20:26, said:

 

News flash, lights and most mediums running around beating up heavies head on shouldn't be happening period, and tanks penning most mediums and heavies from long range should almost never happen, as the round wouldn't have the pen left like they do right now and thanks to Premium ammo unbalances the game in favor of the tanks with high mobility and rate of fire.

 

​Actually they should be, because its realistic. Ever wonder why all countries abandoned heavy tanks? Because they could not make the armour thick enough to actually stop enemy guns from penning them. Every time armour got thicker, guns got more powerful to compensate. Heavy armour increases survivability, but it is never a guarantee of indestructibility.

pepe_trueno #18 Posted May 01 2017 - 16:06

    Major

  • Players
  • 38245 battles
  • 5,923
  • Member since:
    05-21-2011

View PostOmega_Weapon, on May 01 2017 - 05:47, said:

 

​Actually they should be, because its realistic. Ever wonder why all countries abandoned heavy tanks? Because they could not make the armour thick enough to actually stop enemy guns from penning them. Every time armour got thicker, guns got more powerful to compensate. Heavy armour increases survivability, but it is never a guarantee of indestructibility.

 

lets not start with the " its realistic" comments, WoT is far from realistic specialy when you are comparing a  194x design vs early mbt  designed years later.

 

not an expert by any mean but i think the lost of interest with super heavys had more to do with logistics, performance and flexibility, as long as the engine can pull the weight its posible to design a tank capable of enduring the most powerfull guns but given their excesive weight, manteinance cost and lack of mobility they had no real use other than being overpriced bunkers that could move a bit.  


Edited by pepe_trueno, May 01 2017 - 16:09.


Omega_Weapon #19 Posted May 02 2017 - 04:13

    Captain

  • Players
  • 42224 battles
  • 1,353
  • [GRIEF] GRIEF
  • Member since:
    11-15-2011

View Postpepe_trueno, on May 01 2017 - 10:06, said:

 

lets not start with the " its realistic" comments, WoT is far from realistic specialy when you are comparing a  194x design vs early mbt  designed years later.

 

not an expert by any mean but i think the lost of interest with super heavys had more to do with logistics, performance and flexibility, as long as the engine can pull the weight its posible to design a tank capable of enduring the most powerfull guns but given their excesive weight, manteinance cost and lack of mobility they had no real use other than being overpriced bunkers that could move a bit.  

 

​The point is that even if they made a huge expensive complicated "mobile bunker" that could not be penned by anti-tank weapons, it would probably be slower than a walking person and still somebody would just invent a better anti-tank weapon. Anti-tank weapons are usually much cheaper than the tanks too, so yeah not feasible in any realistic sense. As for realism in the game I know its not a completely realistic simulator, but we all want some basic foundation of realism right? Like relative speeds for instance. Who thinks the Maus should drive at 100 km/hour? Or fog of war. Its nice that enemy tanks show up when actually spotted, rather than all tanks being 100% visible at all times. And gravity. Its nice that we have gravity in the game similar to real life so our tanks don't float into the sky. People like this game because it is realistic enough without becoming a tedious simulator. Realism isn't everything, but it is represented in the game.

Edited by Omega_Weapon, May 02 2017 - 04:16.


Avrien #20 Posted May 02 2017 - 16:27

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 9913 battles
  • 540
  • [SAF-E] SAF-E
  • Member since:
    05-26-2013

I think they need to change it so tanks can only use so much gold based on the tank and nation. Then some tanks can spam it and some only get like 5. Go with what was real per tank. Use what they could physically put in( incase some shells needed special slots to hold them) then use money. Make the money cost different per nation based on what they could afford to make it at or buy it at. Then make it so in non random matches you actually produce your ammo, normal and gold. And you have to keep territory to keep facilities to manufacture it. Then in guild warfare they only have so much gold.

 

Then if and when they go further we will have WORisk and can also put territories on a map and fight for it to win the map.


Edited by Avrien, May 02 2017 - 16:28.






Also tagged with gold, gold rounds, gold balance, gold ammo

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users