Jump to content


2 Reward Tanks


  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

Poll: Make 2 reward tanks available for Those with the means (104 members have cast votes)

Make 2 reward tanks available

  1. Yes (43 votes [41.35%])

    Percentage of vote: 41.35%

  2. No (61 votes [58.65%])

    Percentage of vote: 58.65%

Vote Guests cannot vote Hide poll

_Zero___ #1 Posted Dec 20 2017 - 22:22

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 41349 battles
  • 90
  • [MAHOU] MAHOU
  • Member since:
    10-21-2014
So i see a lot of people struggling to get enough bonds for the reward tank. However, what are you going to do for the people that have plenty? I personally will have almost 10000 bonds tomorrow. Would it be possible to get two reward tanks? This personally is my first campaign that i have taken a part of and i would like to have the possibility of having more than one reward tank because i have the bonds to do so. I would really value this as a devoted WoT player.

_DangerNoodle #2 Posted Dec 20 2017 - 22:23

    Major

  • Players
  • 16762 battles
  • 2,372
  • [VILIN] VILIN
  • Member since:
    12-22-2011
From what I understand, you're limited to one no matter how many bonds you have

Kamahl1234 #3 Posted Dec 20 2017 - 22:24

    Major

  • Players
  • 18316 battles
  • 9,670
  • Member since:
    04-06-2012
Likely you'll get one, as that's how normal campaigns work. Did you have bonds starting? As I saw that there were many complaints about worry, regarding getting enough bonds in time. 

_Zero___ #4 Posted Dec 20 2017 - 22:27

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 41349 battles
  • 90
  • [MAHOU] MAHOU
  • Member since:
    10-21-2014

View PostKamahl1234, on Dec 20 2017 - 22:24, said:

Likely you'll get one, as that's how normal campaigns work. Did you have bonds starting? As I saw that there were many complaints about worry, regarding getting enough bonds in time. 

 

I understand that they had said one but I would be interested in that to change to two.

the_dude_76 #5 Posted Dec 20 2017 - 22:55

    Major

  • Players
  • 31450 battles
  • 2,026
  • [GSRM] GSRM
  • Member since:
    12-27-2011
Did you do twice the work or is there some other reason that you deserve twice the reward??

Bad_Oedipus #6 Posted Dec 20 2017 - 23:00

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 36341 battles
  • 1,103
  • [PL1AD] PL1AD
  • Member since:
    08-09-2014
You can get your second tank after next event.... that way you'll have a reason to play.

JakeTheMystic #7 Posted Dec 20 2017 - 23:13

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 20292 battles
  • 551
  • Member since:
    12-30-2011

Thats just ridiculous. You play in one event and you get to pick one reward. Just because you have stockpiled bonds from the past doesnt mean you can bathe in riches. 

Many people have been using our bonds for consumables or equipment, just to be slapped in the face when WG decided that we need to pay for our rewards. 

 

Many people would agree with me in saying they should remove the bond requirement all together. That way, we get bonds, camo, badges, and a reward tank as a prize. Not getting bonds just to sacrifice them to get the tank we should already be awarded with. 



O_P_Hacker #8 Posted Dec 20 2017 - 23:23

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 23848 battles
  • 809
  • [Y0L0] Y0L0
  • Member since:
    02-03-2014
nope not gonna happen

_Hot_Synergy_ #9 Posted Dec 20 2017 - 23:24

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 14539 battles
  • 40
  • [SYNGZ] SYNGZ
  • Member since:
    07-07-2013

View PostJakeTheMystic, on Dec 20 2017 - 22:13, said:

Thats just ridiculous. You play in one event and you get to pick one reward. Just because you have stockpiled bonds from the past doesnt mean you can bathe in riches. 

Many people have been using our bonds for consumables or equipment, just to be slapped in the face when WG decided that we need to pay for our rewards. 

 

Many people would agree with me in saying they should remove the bond requirement all together. That way, we get bonds, camo, badges, and a reward tank as a prize. Not getting bonds just to sacrifice them to get the tank we should already be awarded with. 

 

So your gonna B****  at Zero because he posted a poll about having 2 reward tanks because he has 10k bonds...So what? I dont see a single thing wrong with that. If the tank cost 4k bonds and he has enough for 2? Why the hell not? 

 

Z worked pretty damn hard to acquire his spot in the Campaign. He was on every night calling for us. I would say that would earn him 2 reward tanks. 

 

Just my opinion.

 

 

 



cloudwalkr #10 Posted Dec 20 2017 - 23:25

    Major

  • Players
  • 53242 battles
  • 4,290
  • [SYNGZ] SYNGZ
  • Member since:
    04-05-2011

As someone who owns all the reward tanks, I'd be ok with this as long as i got double bonds received.  ;)

 

Edit:  i do second the sentiment that Z was on every night and worked hard for what he's earned, so whether you agree with him or not...he doesn't deserve negativity.  Just simply disagree.


Edited by cloudwalkr, Dec 20 2017 - 23:29.


JakeTheMystic #11 Posted Dec 21 2017 - 00:45

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 20292 battles
  • 551
  • Member since:
    12-30-2011

View Post_Hot_Synergy_, on Dec 20 2017 - 14:24, said:

 

So your gonna B****  at Zero because he posted a poll about having 2 reward tanks because he has 10k bonds...So what? I dont see a single thing wrong with that. If the tank cost 4k bonds and he has enough for 2? Why the hell not? 

 

Z worked pretty damn hard to acquire his spot in the Campaign. He was on every night calling for us. I would say that would earn him 2 reward tanks. 

 

Just my opinion.

 

 

 

 

Wow, you sure are a fragile one, arent you?

It stated in the rules that players are limited to 1 reward tank regardless if they have the bonds to buy more. 

I only explained that its a stupid idea to think that someone who did one campaign should get twice the rewards simply because he stockpiled his bonds. 

 

But just because you believe he worked harder than anyone else in your clan, doesnt mean he should get double the rewards as anyone else who played in the same campaign. 



Denial_Global_Map_Legend #12 Posted Dec 21 2017 - 01:13

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 1674 battles
  • 42
  • Member since:
    12-17-2015

View PostJakeTheMystic, on Dec 20 2017 - 16:13, said:

Thats just ridiculous. You play in one event and you get to pick one reward. Just because you have stockpiled bonds from the past doesnt mean you can bathe in riches. 

Many people have been using our bonds for consumables or equipment, just to be slapped in the face when WG decided that we need to pay for our rewards. 

 

Many people would agree with me in saying they should remove the bond requirement all together. That way, we get bonds, camo, badges, and a reward tank as a prize. Not getting bonds just to sacrifice them to get the tank we should already be awarded with. 

 

The only people that have a problem with the bond requirement for reward tanks are the people that suck. Plain and simple. Why should some moron in a pubbie clan be able to get a tank because he and his other equally low skilled friends spammed battles? Giving out bonds based off of personal fame and clan fame multipliers rewards people for actually being good. 

 

 

 


the_dude_76 #13 Posted Dec 21 2017 - 01:15

    Major

  • Players
  • 31450 battles
  • 2,026
  • [GSRM] GSRM
  • Member since:
    12-27-2011

View Post_Hot_Synergy_, on Dec 20 2017 - 22:24, said:

 

So your gonna B****  at Zero because he posted a poll about having 2 reward tanks because he has 10k bonds...So what? I dont see a single thing wrong with that. If the tank cost 4k bonds and he has enough for 2? Why the hell not? 

 

Z worked pretty damn hard to acquire his spot in the Campaign. He was on every night calling for us. I would say that would earn him 2 reward tanks. 

 

Just my opinion.

 

 

 

 

I'm sure a lot of people worked hard so why don't you explain why they shouldn't all get two tanks.

I couldn't believe someone would have the gall to ask for a double reward for doing the same thing that everyone else did. The fact that someone would defend such a request blows my mind.



the_dude_76 #14 Posted Dec 21 2017 - 01:17

    Major

  • Players
  • 31450 battles
  • 2,026
  • [GSRM] GSRM
  • Member since:
    12-27-2011

View PostDeniaI, on Dec 21 2017 - 00:13, said:

 

The only people that have a problem with the bond requirement for reward tanks are the people that suck. Plain and simple. Why should some moron in a pubbie clan be able to get a tank because he and his other equally low skilled friends spammed battles? Giving out bonds based off of personal fame and clan fame multipliers rewards people for actually being good. 

 

 

 

How long do you suppose CW would last if only the uber clans get rewarded?? I suspect not long.

Denial_Global_Map_Legend #15 Posted Dec 21 2017 - 01:28

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 1674 battles
  • 42
  • Member since:
    12-17-2015

View Postthe_dude_76, on Dec 20 2017 - 18:17, said:

 

How long do you suppose CW would last if only the uber clans get rewarded?? I suspect not long.

 

That just might be the worst mentality I have ever seen. Why should people get rewarded for being mediocre or not trying at all? If they gave everyone in the top 3000 the same reward, what would be the point in trying? Bad clans could just spam battles for personal fame and not have to give 2 craps about winning because they would get the reward regardless. You don't get rewarded at your job for sub par performance. You get rewarded because you do your job well. Anyone who thinks that people should be rewarded for playing the game poorly clearly needs to see their doctor for a check up. Giving better rewards to the top players should encourage people to play better so they can get the rewards.

Edited by DeniaI, Dec 21 2017 - 01:30.


JakeTheMystic #16 Posted Dec 21 2017 - 01:56

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 20292 battles
  • 551
  • Member since:
    12-30-2011

View PostDeniaI, on Dec 20 2017 - 16:28, said:

 

That just might be the worst mentality I have ever seen. Why should people get rewarded for being mediocre or not trying at all? If they gave everyone in the top 3000 the same reward, what would be the point in trying? Bad clans could just spam battles for personal fame and not have to give 2 craps about winning because they would get the reward regardless. You don't get rewarded at your job for sub par performance. You get rewarded because you do your job well. Anyone who thinks that people should be rewarded for playing the game poorly clearly needs to see their doctor for a check up. Giving better rewards to the top players should encourage people to play better so they can get the rewards.

 

In this campaign you didnt even have to do well to score high, look at -TNT-. They got lucky, beat you guys once and ended up top 13. This whole campaign was a mess, winners were already set within the first week of the campaign.

It does make sense to reward "better" players with more bonds, while lower ranking players get less. But then everyone have to pay 4k to get a tank. The people who rank high enough will have bonds left over, sure. But the players that rank low, wont even get enough bonds for the tank. What is the point in the top 3k being eligible if only 1k can actually get enough bonds through the campaign.

 

But speaking to a MAHOU player about logic is about as effective as trying to teach a rock to tap dance. 


Edited by JakeTheMystic, Dec 21 2017 - 01:57.


Denial_Global_Map_Legend #17 Posted Dec 21 2017 - 02:09

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 1674 battles
  • 42
  • Member since:
    12-17-2015

View PostJakeTheMystic, on Dec 20 2017 - 18:56, said:

 

In this campaign you didnt even have to do well to score high, look at -TNT-. They got lucky, beat you guys once and ended up top 13. This whole campaign was a mess, winners were already set within the first week of the campaign.

It does make sense to reward "better" players with more bonds, while lower ranking players get less. But then everyone have to pay 4k to get a tank. The people who rank high enough will have bonds left over, sure. But the players that rank low, wont even get enough bonds for the tank. What is the point in the top 3k being eligible if only 1k can actually get enough bonds through the campaign.

 

But speaking to a MAHOU player about logic is about as effective as trying to teach a rock to tap dance. 

 

First off, yes, TNT did beat us in a battle and got to shoot up the ranks and that could be considered lucky. But by the same token all the other clans had equal opportunity to try and fight us and beat us for a huge boost in clan fame. If you are in the top 3000, you have to opportunity to purchase a tank with bonds. You try to get into the top 3000 to have to ability to purchase a tank. That is the point in being in the top 3000. Am I saying this system isn't flawed or even good? No. I think, like usual, wg don't have a clue what is good for their game. All i'm saying is that being in the top 3000 should not just automatically grant you a tank.

_Hot_Synergy_ #18 Posted Dec 21 2017 - 02:23

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 14539 battles
  • 40
  • [SYNGZ] SYNGZ
  • Member since:
    07-07-2013

Hey! Good news they extended the grind for bonds until Jan 31st. Good luck! 

 



the_dude_76 #19 Posted Dec 21 2017 - 06:15

    Major

  • Players
  • 31450 battles
  • 2,026
  • [GSRM] GSRM
  • Member since:
    12-27-2011

View PostDeniaI, on Dec 21 2017 - 00:28, said:

 

That just might be the worst mentality I have ever seen. Why should people get rewarded for being mediocre or not trying at all? If they gave everyone in the top 3000 the same reward, what would be the point in trying? Bad clans could just spam battles for personal fame and not have to give 2 craps about winning because they would get the reward regardless. You don't get rewarded at your job for sub par performance. You get rewarded because you do your job well. Anyone who thinks that people should be rewarded for playing the game poorly clearly needs to see their doctor for a check up. Giving better rewards to the top players should encourage people to play better so they can get the rewards.

 

ROTFLMAO!!!! Because if people stop playing there won't be a game at all.... Fcuking duh!

 

I mean seriously, do you think the uber clans are what keeps this game alive or the plebs??? Think!!



_ProtossMaster_Synergy_ #20 Posted Dec 21 2017 - 11:03

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 12940 battles
  • 43
  • [SYNGZ] SYNGZ
  • Member since:
    11-03-2012

View Postthe_dude_76, on Dec 21 2017 - 00:15, said:

 

ROTFLMAO!!!! Because if people stop playing there won't be a game at all.... Fcuking duh!

 

I mean seriously, do you think the uber clans are what keeps this game alive or the plebs??? Think!!

 

This event is endgame content. If a player really.. really.. wants a reward tank but is not a solid player, getting to the top 3000 isn't hard.. However u will need to spend a bunch of time grinding bonds after the event to get the tank. Reward tanks were supposed to be hard to obtain and rare for top players in top clans. This increases the drive for players to grind the appropiate tanks and get good at the game to obtain the tank.

 

 

What is [edited] up in this campaign is the only real reward is the tank, camos are kinda meh after 9.21. Gold and bond rewards are useless.

 

Lets talk about the gold first.. For most clans, you would get more gold playing wargames every weekend than the gold during the campaign (for the time spent). IIRC other campaigns had gold from provinces, allowing clans to atleast get gold if they didn't get the tank.

 

Now lets talk about bonds. I played 128 battles during this event, getting 4500 bonds(900 bonds with a x5 multiplier). this means im averaging about 36 bonds per CW game, lol. I would've gotten more bonds for the time spent grinding 10s in pubs. Would've made massive bank in bonds if i spent that time in ranked battles. So for the time spent, bonds is very mediocre.

 

Therefore the only reward is to obtain the tank.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users