Jump to content


Two Things That MUST Be Addressed Before Ranked Battles Are Implimented: Premuim Rounds and Tier 10 ...


  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

Poll: Potetial Changes to Premium Rounds and Tier 10 Economy (read my post first) (58 members have cast votes)

What should be done with premium ammunition?

  1. Rework it as a Secondary-Ammo type (18 votes [30.51%])

    Percentage of vote: 30.51%

  2. Make it only purchasable with Gold (6 votes [10.17%])

    Percentage of vote: 10.17%

  3. Limit how much a tank can have (13 votes [22.03%])

    Percentage of vote: 22.03%

  4. Leave it the way it is (22 votes [37.29%])

    Percentage of vote: 37.29%

Should Tier 10's be made Sudo-Premiums?

  1. Yes (24 votes [41.38%])

    Percentage of vote: 41.38%

  2. No (34 votes [58.62%])

    Percentage of vote: 58.62%

Vote Guests cannot vote Hide poll

Crabybaby #1 Posted May 06 2017 - 00:10

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 20095 battles
  • 23
  • [GUNS] GUNS
  • Member since:
    01-18-2014

At first glance, I was really interesting in the idea of Ranked Battles, but then it occurred to me that this mode will be broken by two things, Premium Rounds and the Economy at Tier 10.

In the case of premium rounds, many players will definitely opt to just spam them in this mode so that they can rise through the ranks, as they offer nothing but benefits over normal ammo with a higher price tag as the only drawback (there are exceptions, but this is the general case).  This will most likely make this "competitive battle mode" a game mode where the players with the deepest pockets come out on top, and will make heavily armored tanks nearly unplayable as the constantly get penetrated in cases where they wouldn't by standard ammo.  To fix this, there are three options.  The first option is to make premium rounds purchasable with gold only, as this will make it so players will think twice before firing rounds they can only purchase with real money, improving gameplay, however this will likely generate a massive amount of toxicity from the player base, which will definitely hurt the game as a whole.  The second option will be to limit the amount of ammo each tank can hold (for example the FV215b 183 can only load 5 and a T62A can only load 10), and while I personally think this is the path WG is most likely to take, it still wont solve the issue of preventing heavily armored tanks from being competitive, as players will likely reserve their Premium rounds just for them, so the gameplay wont improve much for around 1/3 of tier 10 tanks.  The final option, and my favorite, is to rework premium rounds to make them an alternative form of standard ammo.  The way this would work will be to reduce the damage a shell does, in relation to what we now have as standard ammo, by the same scale that the penetration increases (for example a shell that gains 20% more pen should lose 20% of its damage).  The amount of additional penetration gained by using premium rounds should be scaled back for some tanks, and I feel the that the increase in penetration/decrease of damage should be no less than 10% and no more than 25%.  There of course are cases where premium ammunition provides additional damage, and in these cases the penetration should be reduce by a higher amount than the increase in damage (for example damage going up 20% but penetration going down by 25%-30%) to allow HE to still be competitive.  The way this will look, if implemented at Tier 10, would be like this: the HEAT ammo on the E100 will have 49-50mm (20%) more penetration than standard ammo, but its damage will be reduced by 150 (20%), so that its HEAT has 296mm of penetration and 600 damage.   Another example is the HESH ammo of the FV215b 183 and FV4005 Stage 2, which will have 300 more damage (30% more) than standard ammo, but also have its penetration reduce by 110mm (35%) in regards to standard ammo, giving the HESH 1500 damage and 200mm of penetration.  Of course, in the case of these changes, the price of the ammunition should be reduced to the same cost as normal ammo as to compensate for these "nerfs", but this will also make it so premium rounds will instead tank up a role of secondary rounds, holding advantages and disadvantages over standard ammo so that it cannot be relied upon and may even perform worse in certain conditions.  Also, since nobody with a brain buys premium rounds with gold anymore, these changes wont hurt WG's wallet, so there is some motivation.  If these changes were to be implemented for every tank in the game, players will certainly have to consider what ammo to use in certain situations, and should add more diversity to the game and vastly improving gameplay.  While the issue of heavily armored tanks having their armor negated will still be noticeable, it wont be nearly as problematic as it is now, and should also make having premium rounds fired at you less annoying (in most cases).  Of course, WG could leave premium rounds the way they are, but that will (hopefully) not be the case.

The other issue is the Tier 10 Economy, as battling in a tier 10 tank is almost never profitable, especially if you are using a standard account.  To fix this, I suggest making all tier 10's sudo-premiums, enabling them to generate a decent amount of credits.  This should provide additional motivation to play tier 10's as well as to participate in Ranked battles, but this shouldn't be overdone so premium tanks can still provide more credits and remain viable ways of obtaining them.

Those are my opinions on changes that should help promote Ranked Battles, make them more fun to play, and improve gameplay, and if you agree, share this post with other players, because if it has more views, WG will be more likely to notice it and listen.



Crabybaby #2 Posted May 06 2017 - 00:22

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 20095 battles
  • 23
  • [GUNS] GUNS
  • Member since:
    01-18-2014
Something seems wrong with the poll on my end where I cant submit a vote of my own.  If anyone else is having this problem, I don't know why it is happening, but it could just be me.

Gravtech #3 Posted May 06 2017 - 00:30

    Major

  • Players
  • 27324 battles
  • 4,042
  • Member since:
    09-18-2013

paragraphs pls

 

Also, for the TL;DR

 

View PostCrabybaby, on May 05 2017 - 16:10, said:

People will spam premium rounds more often than in normal random battles in order to get a better chance to obtain a higher rank and more rewards to purchase the ehanced equipment.

 

To solve the "inevitable" issue of gold spam here are some options to balance out gold

  1. Make gold rounds purchasable via gold only for ranked battles that way it's pay to win
  2. Limit the number of premium rounds a tank can take into battle. The amount is up for discussion
  3. Nerf premium rounds so that they have more pen but deal less dmg.

 

In order to compensate for the loss in dmg from premium rounds, the price of each round can be reduced to the same price of standard ammo. The main goal of #3 is to make premium shells a secondary munition instead of a primary by providing the bonus of more penetration while off setting it with less damage than a standard round. 

 

As for the economy and to help those with standard accounts not lose it all when playing Ranked Battles; the economy should be set to pseudo-premium levels (x1.25 credit making for all tanks) 

 

Btw WG has stated a while back that they make most of their gold sales on stuff like gold rounds and prem consumables because bad players can't make enough credits to buy gold rounds with silver. 



fred_632 #4 Posted May 06 2017 - 00:32

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 4907 battles
  • 121
  • [TBM] TBM
  • Member since:
    09-15-2015

View PostCrabybaby, on May 06 2017 - 00:10, said:

The other issue is the Tier 10 Economy, as battling in a tier 10 tank is almost never profitable, especially if you are using a standard account.  To fix this, I suggest making all tier 10's sudo-premiums, enabling them to generate a decent amount of credits.  This should provide additional motivation to play tier 10's as well as to participate in Ranked battles, but this shouldn't be overdone so premium tanks can still provide more credits and remain viable ways of obtaining them.

Those are my opinions on changes that should help promote Ranked Battles, make them more fun to play, and improve gameplay, and if you agree, share this post with other players, because if it has more views, WG will be more likely to notice it and listen.

 

That actually makes sense, with tier 10 it's really too bloody expensive to play Ranked Battles there's really no reward, even if you win you still lose. I played my E100 did 3000 dmg with AP and HE rounds no gold rounds fired, lost almost 15k credits because of repairs and ammo cost, so if Ranked battles do come to the live server I won't play it that much. I'll play 3 games and lose at the most 20k if I'm lucky, so I won't gain anything from playing Ranked Battles

 

Or they should change it where only Tier 8, 9 and 10 play like Random Battles, because with Tier 8 and 9 you can still make a decent amount of credits assuming you didn't spam Gold, then you'll actually gain something from playing Ranked Battles.



TheLordZeus #5 Posted May 06 2017 - 00:37

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 29731 battles
  • 968
  • [ANVIL] ANVIL
  • Member since:
    08-21-2011

Wargaming wants broke players. They know if people use gold rounds....then they will lose credits.....credit bundle anyone???

 

Look....you want to know how expensive it is.....how are those t10 advances going for you people? I'm hearing people lose a hefty amount of credits doing them :)



Katamori #6 Posted May 06 2017 - 01:01

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 9851 battles
  • 60
  • [SP3AR] SP3AR
  • Member since:
    11-05-2013

View PostTheLordZeus, on May 05 2017 - 18:37, said:

Wargaming wants broke players. They know if people use gold rounds....then they will lose credits.....credit bundle anyone???

 

Look....you want to know how expensive it is.....how are those t10 advances going for you people? I'm hearing people lose a hefty amount of credits doing them :)

 

Just wait till the eventually put out that 30v30 mode and watch the credits melt.

Dratt_Dastardly #7 Posted May 06 2017 - 01:02

    Major

  • Players
  • 27200 battles
  • 2,082
  • Member since:
    11-07-2011

View PostGravtech, on May 05 2017 - 18:30, said:

paragraphs pls

 

Also, for the TL;DR

 

 

Btw WG has stated a while back that they make most of their gold sales on stuff like gold rounds and prem consumables because bad players can't make enough credits to buy gold rounds with silver. 

 

 

Wow.  I think I suck and not that wealthy in silver.  However, never used gold to buy premium ammo or consumables.  Maybe those noob players don't know there is a drop down to change those to silver?

 

As for premium rounds, I've said a few times, like in World of Warships, have over-penetration be a thing.  Light Cruisers and Destroyers hit by AP (really APHE) suffer less damage because the shells pass right through the ships before exploding.  

 

If WoT had something like over-penetration, then spamming rounds like APCR would be ineffective with lightly armored tanks.  They should still do module or crew damage but if it doesn't, then it should do less damage.  After, if it over-penetrated, then it didn't bounce around inside the tank to cause more damage.  Not sure if it would be the same for HEAT though with the different mechanics they are in RL.

 

As for just tier ten.  I see their reasoning to try and retain those players that may be burning out towards playing the game.  But they are limiting the number of players that want to play ranked battles.  In WoWs and from what I glanced about WoT Console, they have lower tiered ranked battles.  If I remember from WoWs, ranked battles started at tier five and would require a higher tier, as you climb the ranks, ultimately needing a tier ten at the top.

 

Now with the way the top three players on the losing team not getting demoted (actually promoted)  is a nice deal.  Many on WoWs would get upset when they just needed one more win to go up a rank but constantly got demoted from their team losing.



Nudnick #8 Posted May 06 2017 - 01:44

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 21204 battles
  • 2,354
  • Member since:
    01-06-2013
It's almost like Tier 10 is punishment for anyone less than the elite to play. What's the point of the grind up the ladder only to get negative credits at Tier 10. I know I'll never be that good, so why bother.

KingAuthur #9 Posted May 06 2017 - 01:47

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 2181 battles
  • 102
  • Member since:
    11-12-2012

the devs really should all be fired

they really got this once good game all **** up

some one should tell them to take there Russian take tree and shove it up there ***



nickalaso123 #10 Posted May 06 2017 - 01:48

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 15429 battles
  • 173
  • [9ATD] 9ATD
  • Member since:
    12-08-2012
People already fire "skill" rounds and if this doesn't change for ranked there won't be any heavies and the battlefield will be filled with the constant sound of *pppppsssssssssstttttttttttt* *pssssssssssssssssttttttttttttt* *pppppssssssssssttttttttttttttt*

LpBronco #11 Posted May 06 2017 - 01:57

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 36816 battles
  • 2,042
  • [_F_] _F_
  • Member since:
    11-19-2010
Ranked battles is going to be a pride/ego thing, so either you suck it up and earn your credits elsewhere or spend a little and don't get that soda with lunch. End game content has never been "profitable" except for a privileged few. 

oldewolfe #12 Posted May 06 2017 - 16:33

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 11639 battles
  • 1,987
  • [1STBN] 1STBN
  • Member since:
    11-08-2014

Just a Thought here, but if you're at Tier 10 and you're Good enough to maintain a Reasonable Level of Play, why not just take Premium Riunds out all together......       If you're that Good, what do you need a Crutch for....????

 

And if f you DO need the Crutch, maybe you don't need to be there in the First Place.....      



LittleBlackRainCloud #13 Posted May 08 2017 - 01:03

    Staff sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 46163 battles
  • 451
  • [FCF] FCF
  • Member since:
    10-24-2010
Looks like someone already posted what I was going to say, it's pointless to have a better game design, if you can't play it as well as no one else wanting to either.

Tahllol #14 Posted Jun 25 2017 - 02:04

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 7446 battles
  • 542
  • Member since:
    01-31-2016
First thing before they brought out the ranked crap is deal with all the idiot that botted to tier 10, then actually balance the Tier 10's as unless you are German or American lines you're screwed. As the Russian tier 10 heavies at least are a complete joke hence why the Maus and E100 rule in ranked and it takes most the team to take 1 down.

Mojo_Riesing #15 Posted Jun 25 2017 - 04:48

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 16094 battles
  • 382
  • [R8DER] R8DER
  • Member since:
    11-26-2011

First, thank to the OP for reasoned commentary, rationality matters.  Sorry to say, so does spelling, grammer and sentence/paragraph formatting.

 

Regarding premium rounds, i think leave them as they are.  You can grind in random battles at lower tiers to used the credits to buy the rounds.  If that's a problem, use your (or daddy's) VISA card.  I can buy them, i am going to use premium rounds whenever i feel like it.  That's life kids and you don't have to like it, cause life doesn't care.  Despite anything you might think, or what anyone says on official Dev or other videos, this IS a pay to play game.  Nothing is free in life, SOMEONE pays for all this.  Ask your daddy.

 

Making a secondary economy the, "psuedo" premium tanks is hmm...i think not the right answer.  I think i would rather see the concept of ranked battles at Tier VIII, or..just as a hoot, do it for Tier VII and IX.  Let players work up into it.

 

Overall, despite some problems, Ranked Battles IS a beta and has problems but has some promise to the concept i think.  It could be more successful than other modes of the past like Domination, with tweaks.  

 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users