Jump to content


A msg to WG managment and the latest **** in W.O.T

sucks bend over lube

  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

Hemorrhoids #1 Posted Nov 11 2017 - 11:58

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 19584 battles
  • 71
  • Member since:
    10-15-2014

Been playing world of tanks for 3-4 years so far, and the past 3 patches just killed all the fun in the game,
I will be trying to stick to numbers when it comes to how bad it got to be using my own replays to back those numbers up, and will try to stick to 1000 battles after changes and 1000 battles before changes.


---------------------
1- Arty changes:
    A- Faster reload times
    B- Bigger burst radius
    C- Better Accurecy
    D- Less penetration
    E- Removal of AP
While i play arty i used to shoot AP, nice dmg when i get the Hit+Pen that would kill the pain of playing on a city map in an arty, face derp with AP then die, Now... almost no chance of that.
I have not played a 1000 arty battles, hell maybe not even 50 after the changes, no more fun or derp moments.


Before changes:
When being hit by arty, Avg arty dmg on me per battle 400-450, keep in mind most of what i play are soft skin TDs like the RHM and the Skorpion, Mostly a 1 shot when i get hit, but with longer reload times for arty it was a bit more managable.
Avg first aids used per battle ~0.71, around 2 used every 3 battles, dmgrecieved while being tracked was an avg of 400-450 per battle.
avg time alive 7-8 minutes.

After changes:
Avg dmg from arty remained the same, avg first aids used went up to 1.47 per battle, dmgrecieved while tracked went up to 600-650, avg stun dmg on me ~350, avg time alive 5-6 minutes.

The changes on the arty are not a nurf, its just a way to say **** TDs and light skin tanks players, Heavy tanks now can survive better i guess, as if the IS-7, E-100, MAUS and Japanese heavies needed more help domenating the battles.
--------------------------


2- Mr Match Maker (tier 5 or higher).


The new MM killed the game-play tactics with its new 3-5-7/5-10 policy.

before mm has changed any tank had a 1-3 chance of being top tier/mid tier/lowest tier and the numbers i have sort of shows that.
playing peak hours will result in ~30% for each of those with ~10% where its a single tier or 2 tiers only, it goes up to 48% top tier playing a tier 9, tier 10 is always top tier.
in platoons with a platoon of 3, i had 25% of my battles as top tier, 40% as mid tier, 35% as lowest tier.

after the change:
tiers 5-7:
~20 % top tier
~45 % mid tier
~35 % lowest tier

in a platoon of 3
~ 11% top tier
~ 38% mid tier
~ 51% lowest tier

 

Tier 9:
20 % top tier
35 % mid tier
45 % lowest tier or only tier

in a platoon of 3:
8% top tier
47% mid tier
45% lowest tier or only tier

 

The worst is yet to come, Welcome tier 8
9% top tier
20 % mid tier
71 % lowest tier

pref tier 8 now sees ~20% top tier :( + ~12% single tier battles

in a platoon of 3:
2% top tier
34% mid tier
64% lowest tier

pref 8s platoon of 3
9% top tier + ~7% single tier battle

 

Dear WG:
Really?!?!?
you call that a fix to match maker???

 

A note on the side:
Server merger killed the game for most people outside USA, my avg ping was ~180ms before the merge, now its 220ms or higher, over 2 months now and still WG has not found a way to migrate the accounts for a better playable server, got MM missed up, screwed the people who spend money to buy prem tanks to earn credits by killing the chances of getting top tier battles and doing some dmg, the support center can not help you with crap"i do not blame them - its some idiot at management who forces some stupid policy on them and us".

WG got me (do not know about you guys) to the point where all do is drop my pants, bend over and pray they have lube on (and they do not have that, nor a condom for integrated STD dmg).

Thank you WG and ****

 

****

Moderated by HeadlockMvnky


Edited by HeadlockMvnky, Nov 13 2017 - 20:26.


rich73 #2 Posted Nov 11 2017 - 12:37

    Major

  • Players
  • 44338 battles
  • 5,292
  • Member since:
    10-17-2011
Match maker will always be horrible as long as they ignore player stats in match selection.Why do we even have all these stats if they are not even considered?And also agree with the last 2 letters in your post.

GeorgePreddy #3 Posted Nov 11 2017 - 13:12

    Major

  • Players
  • 14291 battles
  • 6,334
  • [L_LEG] L_LEG
  • Member since:
    04-11-2013

View Postrich73, on Nov 11 2017 - 08:37, said:

Match maker will always be horrible as long as they ignore player stats in match selection.

 

Using SBMM in random battles mode would be a horrible mistake... and WG knows it.

GeorgePreddy #4 Posted Nov 11 2017 - 13:15

    Major

  • Players
  • 14291 battles
  • 6,334
  • [L_LEG] L_LEG
  • Member since:
    04-11-2013

View PostHemorrhoids, on Nov 11 2017 - 07:58, said:

I have not played a 1000 arty battles, hell maybe not even 50 after the changes

 

 

Sounds like the changes have worked in a very positive way in your case.

WIZD #5 Posted Nov 11 2017 - 14:25

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 6178 battles
  • 249
  • [ASP] ASP
  • Member since:
    08-16-2015

View PostGeorgePreddy, on Nov 11 2017 - 13:12, said:

 

Using SBMM in random battles mode would be a horrible mistake... and WG knows it.

 

Why would it be a horrible mistake?

pipecutter #6 Posted Nov 11 2017 - 14:46

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 8126 battles
  • 848
  • Member since:
    10-24-2010
Too bad WG doesn't read these messages.

SlappedbyPatton #7 Posted Nov 11 2017 - 14:54

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 26235 battles
  • 494
  • [CARTL] CARTL
  • Member since:
    12-20-2011
i might just buy back my T92 and join the arty party

JasonLeeStrickland #8 Posted Nov 11 2017 - 15:55

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 14476 battles
  • 360
  • [SHIRE] SHIRE
  • Member since:
    09-20-2014

I remember when arty used to be able to defend itself, now unless I'm a one shot I can face hug a T92 and not really worry about it.

 



_Schneller_Heinz_ #9 Posted Nov 11 2017 - 16:04

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 1931 battles
  • 1,279
  • Member since:
    02-05-2015

View Postpipecutter, on Nov 11 2017 - 14:46, said:

Too bad WG doesn't read these messages.

 

so true

the_Deadly_Bulb #10 Posted Nov 11 2017 - 21:08

    Major

  • Players
  • 18452 battles
  • 2,157
  • [WCTNT] WCTNT
  • Member since:
    03-11-2014

View Postrich73, on Nov 11 2017 - 03:37, said:

Why do we even have all these stats if they are not even considered?

 

So e-peeners can make a pile of gummy Kleenex in their room?

Nixeldon #11 Posted Nov 11 2017 - 21:18

    Captain

  • Players
  • 52965 battles
  • 1,274
  • Member since:
    10-30-2011

View PostWIZD, on Nov 11 2017 - 08:25, said:

 

Why would it be a horrible mistake?

It has been discussed in great detail countless times on this forum.



the_Deadly_Bulb #12 Posted Nov 11 2017 - 21:32

    Major

  • Players
  • 18452 battles
  • 2,157
  • [WCTNT] WCTNT
  • Member since:
    03-11-2014

View PostWIZD, on Nov 11 2017 - 05:25, said:

 

Why would it be a horrible mistake?

 

View PostNixeldon, on Nov 11 2017 - 12:18, said:

It has been discussed in great detail countless times on this forum.

 

Yes it has. The 'search' function will elucidate you.

WIZD #13 Posted Nov 12 2017 - 03:41

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 6178 battles
  • 249
  • [ASP] ASP
  • Member since:
    08-16-2015

View Postthe_Deadly_Bulb, on Nov 11 2017 - 21:32, said:

 

 

Yes it has. The 'search' function will elucidate you.

 

Did some searching some stuff was valid but I still think it's worth a shot. If it doesn't work it can be reverted back.

Nixeldon #14 Posted Nov 12 2017 - 03:52

    Captain

  • Players
  • 52965 battles
  • 1,274
  • Member since:
    10-30-2011

View PostWIZD, on Nov 11 2017 - 21:41, said:

 

Did some searching some stuff was valid but I still think it's worth a shot. If it doesn't work it can be reverted back.

 

Worth a shot for what?

n4cer67 #15 Posted Nov 12 2017 - 07:19

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 15571 battles
  • 1,695
  • [NAAP] NAAP
  • Member since:
    10-18-2010
The only SPG changes i don't like is nerfing their pen and damage. I'd rather lose the stun and get my damage back. All the other changes were long due to allow the SPG's to be able to contribute more to the battle. Spg's should get better accuracy and reload (also need faster aim time) just as everyone else does.

Nunya_000 #16 Posted Nov 12 2017 - 14:50

    Major

  • Players
  • 20706 battles
  • 10,136
  • [PACNW] PACNW
  • Member since:
    09-20-2013

View PostWIZD, on Nov 11 2017 - 18:41, said:

 

Did some searching some stuff was valid but I still think it's worth a shot. If it doesn't work it can be reverted back.

 

That is not the proper way to implement a new aspect in a game.  What makes you think that WG has not already looked at doing SBMM and discounted it?  I can think of a few possible reasons why SBMM is not implemented:

 

1. Impact on queue times.

2. SBMM could migrate players rating closer to the mean (50% WR, mean PR, etc), in which case, SBMM becomes worthless and the time/money spent is wasted.

3. SBMM would be "rigging" the games. 

4. More complaints from players because the SBMM was not perfectly balanced.



Michael_Cochrane_2017 #17 Posted Nov 13 2017 - 09:21

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 5121 battles
  • 178
  • Member since:
    06-04-2017
I'm with the op: spgs have WAY too big of an influence on the game....you have 2 or 3 good players on spg? you win. Mediocre or bad players? you lose. I easily get killed by spg 50% of the time either that or I get so damaged an e can roll right up and kill me with a harsh word. 

An argument was presented to me that in R/L, arty or spg's are controlled by FOs therefore the spg mechanics that they can "see" over mountains and rocks etc is reasonable.

I call bee ess on that crap. No way no how not in any way shape or form should ANY tank be able to see over mountains. The tag? sure, why not. The general vacinity? definitely. But to actually be able to see the tank from "god view"? that's taking retardation to a whole new level. Hell, why don't they just make flying tanks? 

BTW: heavy, light, don't matter. With the MM system I can get pitted up against a +2 tier spg and it can kill me with one shot in my "heavy" which, at -2 tier, is really just a tissue paper tank. 

SpectreHD #18 Posted Nov 14 2017 - 02:47

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 16324 battles
  • 15,818
  • [TT] TT
  • Member since:
    07-12-2010

View PostNunya_000, on Nov 12 2017 - 21:50, said:

1. Impact on queue times.

2. SBMM could migrate players rating closer to the mean (50% WR, mean PR, etc), in which case, SBMM becomes worthless and the time/money spent is wasted.

3. SBMM would be "rigging" the games. 

4. More complaints from players because the SBMM was not perfectly balanced.

 

1. Irrelevant. Balancing the players between teams after the MM pulls from the random queue would not increase queue times when it only needs to swap some players around after the teams have been made. The only thing that affects queue times currently is playing in a platoon and non one is crying about queue times for doing that.

 

2. Assuming the MM can actually make teams that are equally the same. It can't. There are so many factors that prevent this from ever happening.

 

3. Balancing teams in a "random" game mode is not rigging. Many games do it. 

 

4. Just an assumption with no proof.


Edited by SpectreHD, Nov 14 2017 - 02:50.


Nunya_000 #19 Posted Nov 14 2017 - 04:55

    Major

  • Players
  • 20706 battles
  • 10,136
  • [PACNW] PACNW
  • Member since:
    09-20-2013

View PostSpectreHD, on Nov 13 2017 - 17:47, said:

 

1. Irrelevant. Balancing the players between teams after the MM pulls from the random queue would not increase queue times when it only needs to swap some players around after the teams have been made. The only thing that affects queue times currently is playing in a platoon and non one is crying about queue times for doing that.

 

2. Assuming the MM can actually make teams that are equally the same. It can't. There are so many factors that prevent this from ever happening.

 

3. Balancing teams in a "random" game mode is not rigging. Many games do it. 

 

4. Just an assumption with no proof.

 

1. Depends on the method used.  Even swapping player would need to consider the tank they are in.  So, you have just two player that should be swapped, but the player on one team is in a top tier tank and on the other team the player is in a bottom tier tank.  It makes it much more difficult to do swaps when the tank and tier also needs to consider.  Sure, a computer might process it pretty quickly, but it could also hang running through the options, depending on how tight it is designed to be.  Though the new MM might make it a little easier.

 

2. Sure it can.  It just takes time and the larger the pool the better.  Problem is, everybody has their own idea on what is "perfect".  I like the completely randomness that we have now....you seem to want a moderate "swapping" of team members.....and I have no doubt that many want a completely balanced Mm to within a few percentage points.

 

3. Tanks are "balance", tiers are "balance", and now when players are "balanced", it is no longer a "random" MM.

 

4. It is a speculation, not an assumption.  You have been on this forum long enough to know that many people are not happy with anything that is done to this game.  The same people are constantly finding new things to complain about, though some are focused.  If SBMM is implemented, the same people will likely still be complaining.



Michael_Cochrane_2017 #20 Posted Nov 14 2017 - 09:42

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 5121 battles
  • 178
  • Member since:
    06-04-2017

View PostNunya_000, on Nov 13 2017 - 21:55, said:

 

1. Depends on the method used.  Even swapping player would need to consider the tank they are in.  So, you have just two player that should be swapped, but the player on one team is in a top tier tank and on the other team the player is in a bottom tier tank.  It makes it much more difficult to do swaps when the tank and tier also needs to consider.  Sure, a computer might process it pretty quickly, but it could also hang running through the options, depending on how tight it is designed to be.  Though the new MM might make it a little easier.

 

2. Sure it can.  It just takes time and the larger the pool the better.  Problem is, everybody has their own idea on what is "perfect".  I like the completely randomness that we have now....you seem to want a moderate "swapping" of team members.....and I have no doubt that many want a completely balanced Mm to within a few percentage points.

 

3. Tanks are "balance", tiers are "balance", and now when players are "balanced", it is no longer a "random" MM.

 

4. It is a speculation, not an assumption.  You have been on this forum long enough to know that many people are not happy with anything that is done to this game.  The same people are constantly finding new things to complain about, though some are focused.  If SBMM is implemented, the same people will likely still be complaining.

complete randomness? OMG

How is being bottom tier 90% of the time random? (clue, it isn't). with 3/5/7 there is no random.....in tier 4 5 or 6 (and I assume 7 and 8) you will 90% of the time be bottom tier. 

The tanks you're up against may vary, but undoubtedly you will always be against tanks that you literally can't (or have slim chance of) damaging. More so if you're up against russian tanks.

Sure the TEAMS are balanced, but when the vast majority of time it's the top tier tanks left over after all the lower ones are dead, often with NO dp points, how is that enjoyable?

WOT and Wargaming have no integrity, honour, and sense of fair play. Everything they do is designed along that RBM. They will NEVER change the mm system to benefit the players, since to do that that goes against their company policy of "rape em wherever you can". A perfect example is the reserves....time based not battle based. I was just in a battle with someone who posted in chat: I had 3 minutes left on my reserve, and all of a sudden it took 2 minutes to sign on to a battle"....of course it did. I have NO doubt in my mind that WG did some programming on that. 

I also bet they fiddled with the time count on the reserve so that a minute is actually 56 seconds. I bet they also fiddled with the numbers on ammunition. They "say" you get x amount of penn with gold, but I bet you really don't. Who will be able to prove it? 

WOT is pay to win, and if you don't pay, you don't get anything...even IF you pay, say buy a premium account, I bet they even scrimp you on this too. They post "with a premium account you would have earned this per battle"....who has sat down and been able to prove that you actually get that when you buy a premium account? 

I'll give you an example: everyone knows that russian tanks are designed to be just a little better tier for tier than other nations. Keeping that in mind, which is an obvious example of how they have NO integrity, apply that to every other aspect of the game. If they messed with that what else did they mess with?

Take halloween bonuses for eg. "they had problems paying it out" bull crap.....they had all kinds of repair kits, first aid kits etc but while they were dicking around "not being able to pay out" we all spent coin on them in battles. 

Dicker pos max: it was designed as a bunker buster...can't pen tier vi tank frontal armor or the turrent on an M4......they give you a tank, that's supposedly a tank destroyer, that can't destroy tanks head on. Plus they pit you against tier viii ALL the time.....tanks that you cannot damage significantly btw.....they give, yet make you pay through the nose for the "gift". 

I don't know what it was like in the beginning. But I've been around businesses for 40 years and the pattern I see emerging is like many other businesses that are on the ropes: they will do ANYTHING to get more $$ even if that means overcharging, stealing, underproviding, lying, anything to get $$ but the problem with businesses do this? it only accelerates their demise. Companies that weather the storm do so by respecting their customers, giving better value for the money, having integrity......

Wargaming is like a $5.00 crack [edited]: they'd sell their own mother for a dollar.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users