Jump to content


Changes to Vehicles With Preferential Matchmaking + Notes on Trade-in


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
1086 replies to this topic

Kelimas #981 Posted Jun 11 2018 - 16:45

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 61585 battles
  • 13
  • Member since:
    04-30-2013

View PostDahkoht, on May 21 2018 - 23:03, said:

How about this , I have almost all of the preferred MM tanks , and bought them because of preferred MM so I could have tier 8 games with no Type 5's igniting me instantly to death.

 

I also own most of the premiums too, I like the game , I've given you lots of money , and never minded that , until now.

 

I don't have any premiums I want to trade for , I don't care what buffs you make I bought the pref mm tanks for preferred mm. Period.

 

It's fairly simply , full gold refund has to be an option also.


Otherwise you're [edited]ting on your paying customers.

 

Couldn't agree more: as of last 4 years most of the changes made bring only the worst expected.

Kelimas #982 Posted Jun 11 2018 - 16:50

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 61585 battles
  • 13
  • Member since:
    04-30-2013

View PostTedsc, on Jun 07 2018 - 22:00, said:

 

I don't mind them exploring new revenue streams.    Here are a few ideas :

 

 - Premium plus - kick up the percentages and kick up the price.  Other games have bronze silver and gold packages.

-low tier premiums - Most premium tanks are too expensive for many people.  They churn out loads of tier 8 tanks, but not much in the $10-20 range like the tier 5 and 6 stuff.  For example I would totally buy a premium KV1  (similar to what they did with the KV2).  We also don't have tier 3-5 premiums user's can buy for Sweden, Cz, Italy, France, or China.  I Like to use my premium tanks for crew training but hate showing up in tier 8 battles with green crews so I still use my low tier premiums for green crews.

- non-bundled reserves.  Just like it sounds like, $5 reserve packs for a dozen 1 hour reserves.  I don't like the bundled reserves because I usually only need one category at a time and the bundled stuff includes a bunch of stuff I don't won't for the money.

 

The premium tank suggestions are all based on the assumption this issue is resolved and we can trust buying premium tanks again.

 

One of the worst ideas ever. If they implement this they will definitely lose majority of players. And counting the total quantity in NA (which is not sufficient as it is) the game would simply sieze to exists on this continent.

Harmless55 #983 Posted Jun 11 2018 - 18:09

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 11385 battles
  • 1,033
  • [L0ST] L0ST
  • Member since:
    07-18-2015
Simpler and less angry:

WG wants money. Some of us want to give it to them.

WG wants to eliminate pref MM in some off its tanks. It should give up on that idea in a hurry. 

After not not removing pref MM, they should carefully buff tanks with it into renewed relevance so that they're more fun to play—not game-breaking monstrosities like the e25, just fun again. 

Once they've got that together, they should look into other ways of monetizing their player base by offering things that make the game easier and more fun for people willing to open their wallets, like BIA crews that train faster or that start out with multiple intense skills, or that were more easily transferred between vehicles of the same nation. Once they've got that done, they should come up with historical skins/emblems/vehicle numbers, gas cans and camouflage nets, and sell them depending on some players to want their tanks to look *really* good but not in a way that conveys an immediate advantage. 

Wargaming should do all of this and more to extract money from the game. It should do everything it wants to do that doesn't rip off its player base. 

It's simple. 
 

Edited by Harmless55, Jun 11 2018 - 18:12.


DrKrieg #984 Posted Jun 11 2018 - 23:48

    Captain

  • Players
  • 22307 battles
  • 1,999
  • Member since:
    05-16-2011

Id like a cash refund please, i purchased premium tanks for their preferential Matchmaking, cant even fathom how would you "balance" a jagdtiger 8.8 if you plan to do this to a kv-5 in order to face tier 10's

 

 


Edited by DrKrieg, Jun 11 2018 - 23:51.


tod914 #985 Posted Jun 12 2018 - 00:19

    Major

  • Players
  • 59291 battles
  • 4,333
  • Member since:
    12-23-2013
Cash refund would work.  Paying more for the same tier as a trade, will not work.

SassanidShockCavalry #986 Posted Jun 12 2018 - 12:31

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 29271 battles
  • 93
  • [P2WIN] P2WIN
  • Member since:
    12-12-2011
if you dont give us the option to trade in for any tier 8 prem without any charge then there should be an option for full gold price refund.

Lexers615 #987 Posted Jun 13 2018 - 20:53

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 15607 battles
  • 384
  • [ZOMB] ZOMB
  • Member since:
    11-01-2013

View PostKelimas, on Jun 11 2018 - 10:50, said:

 

One of the worst ideas ever. If they implement this they will definitely lose majority of players. And counting the total quantity in NA (which is not sufficient as it is) the game would simply sieze to exists on this continent.

 

Dude, they already lost more than half the playerbase they had 4 years ago (that would qualify for the "majority" as you said it), thanks mostly to their not-doing-a-thing-against-modders attitude.

It went so bad that, now, with a single active server (US-CENTRAL), at peak hours, they only reach less than half the number of players they had on a single one (NA-EAST)...



CapPhrases #988 Posted Jun 14 2018 - 10:42

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 7276 battles
  • 3,495
  • [TXV] TXV
  • Member since:
    03-28-2015

the first tank I ever bought in this game The T-34-3 I bought specifically for the pref mm, I've wanted to trade it in for another prem tank but even thought it was one of the most expensive tier 8 prems you wanted to charge me to trade in so I never did (early russian refund i guess) if you change the tank I demand a full refund for it.

4 weeks now and nothing from Belarus proper, what WG needs to do is apologize for this half baked idea and apologize for trying to blame the players for the problems caused by YOUR matchmaker.

here's an idea instead of spending so many hours and manpower on "buffing" pref mm tanks why don't you try testing +-1 mm? you have a sandbox server, a supertest server, and a friggen common test server. surely ONE of these could play with the idea?



Omega_Weapon #989 Posted Jun 15 2018 - 02:07

    Major

  • Players
  • 48500 battles
  • 2,064
  • [GRIEF] GRIEF
  • Member since:
    11-15-2011

View PostCapPhrases, on Jun 14 2018 - 04:42, said:

4 weeks now and nothing from Belarus proper, what WG needs to do is apologize for this half baked idea and apologize for trying to blame the players for the problems caused by YOUR matchmaker.

here's an idea instead of spending so many hours and manpower on "buffing" pref mm tanks why don't you try testing +-1 mm? you have a sandbox server, a supertest server, and a friggen common test server. surely ONE of these could play with the idea?

 

​They don't want to test it, because they have already decided that they like the +2/-2 model. If they ever did test +1/-1 then they would have to admit that it actually works pretty well. :unsure:

UTurnTerminator #990 Posted Jun 15 2018 - 20:36

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 9127 battles
  • 641
  • [RGS-V] RGS-V
  • Member since:
    08-25-2015

View PostKCM36B2, on Jun 03 2018 - 20:54, said:

Yo, Listen UP WOT Dev team!!!!

 

I think everyone agrees we can call complete B.S. on what WG suggested about the preferential MM tanks breaking the MM.... does not even pass the 50 ft. (15.4M for those outside the U.S.A.) sniff test.  They really stepped in it this time..  makes the Save Sir Foche debacle seem minor.  Wow.  This even pushed MarkGFL to finally quit as a WOT community contributor.

 

Four Tankers and a Dog is one of the guys who puts together some really good You Tube videos about WOT. 

He has suggested what could be a very workable solution to the MM issues (overall):

 

 .  

 

 

 

He also posted another video with some suggestions about the KV5 and preferential MM specifically: 

 

 

 

Come on WG!  Don't kill the golden goose with stupidity and greed.  Make your customers happy and they will stay.  Piss them off, and they will just stop playing (and paying).  I have pretty much stopped playing almost all of my preferential MM tanks because of the bias to place them in games as bottom tier.  Just stop it.  The MM should pick pref MM tanks to be mid or top tier at least 60% of the time, not be bottom tier 95% of the time.  Stop making tier 8s be xp fodder for the tier10s  it isn't fun, and if it isn't fun, people will stop playing (and paying).

 

Before patch 9.18, I actually had 20+ battles in a row in my skoda t25 when I was bottom tier, and about half of those there were only 1 or 2 tier 6 tanks in the battle.  There were numerous battles when I was playing a T5, T6, T7 or T8, and I was a minority bottom tier in a battle, and could not get into a battle as top tier at all (I actually kept a log for a while) - I got really, really sick of that! 

I had really hoped that the 3/5/7 MM would help before it was implemented on the live server -  but that hope was in vain once I realized that the numbers game ended up making the bottom tier tanks of each 3/5/7 selection rarely get to be top tier - in some ways it was way worse than before patch 9.18! The MM needs to be fixed so that you are only bottom tier about 1/3 of the time at best.  I would be ok with that.  4 tankers suggestions look like they would form the basis for a new computational algorithm which can yield a fun and fair MM for all tiers.  If that was implemented the preferential MM tanks would be workable, playable, profitable and enjoyable again.

 

I have 56 premium, gift and reward vehicles in my garage (out of over 200 vehicles in my garage), the vast majority I have paid for with real money.  That will end.

 

Listen UP WG NA!!!!!

Until this crap is fixed I will stop buying premium tanks, gold, and premium time!

 

Well, would you look at that, 4Tankers has spelled out exactly what needs to get done, outstanding!

Also, I stand by the motion bolded in red there; the cash I would have spent on premium time this summer is sitting in my Steam wallet instead. :B

hungariantank123 #991 Posted Jun 17 2018 - 15:04

    Private

  • Players
  • 12791 battles
  • 4
  • Member since:
    08-19-2012

Alrighty! this is my first time ever saying something on the world of tanks forum. So basically let me give you guys at wargaming some constructive feedback. I agree with the frontal armour buffs however i strongly disagree with the side and rear armour nerfs as the armour that the kv-5 has is what defines a kv-5 to be; but heres the thing, the penetration buff is not enough, if the preferential match maker were to be removed the KV-5 would have and extremely difficult time to penetrate more than half of the enemy tanks on the other team, however i would agree with a penetration buff up to 225-236mm at least as 219mm is not enough and we would just be wasting credits on premium/gold ammunition, the kv-5 wouldn't be a russian giant, what you guys are doing is creating a giant U.S.S.R punching bag instead of creating a formidable opponent. So why do i say 225-236mm of penetration at least? because those are two figures that i have come across in world of tanks or as you may want to call it the average/common penetration of tier 8 guns however some premium 122mm guns only pen 175mm which i find to be ridiculous (and this is why we spend irl money for gold rounds way back when you could use gold to purchase them). 

 

So Wargaming heres the bottom line:

1.) The revision of the armour is fine for the frontal armour, BUT (really big BUT), DO NOT TOUCH THE SIDE AND REAR ARMOUR AT ALL.

2.) Do not mess with the maneuverability of the KV-5 AT ALL PERIOD!

3.) The Revision of the 107mm KV-5's gun penetration needs to be reconsidered again and most likely be buffed slightly more to either 225 or 236mm (Standard AP Rounds)or something along those lines.

 

Thanks again for considering buffing the KV-5, hope to see more buff for the gun.  


Edited by hungariantank123, Jun 30 2018 - 18:59.


JimmyJimboJimBob #992 Posted Jun 17 2018 - 16:16

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 24954 battles
  • 22
  • [VIPR] VIPR
  • Member since:
    02-22-2012
Still not a single peep out of WG? Looks like they are circling the wagons, crossing their arms, shouting "to hell with the player base!", and going through with it. On the plus side, Armored Warfare que times are getting shorter because of this.  :coin:

Ironclad73 #993 Posted Jun 17 2018 - 16:43

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 20640 battles
  • 3,448
  • [DHO6] DHO6
  • Member since:
    07-26-2014

View PostOmega_Weapon, on Jun 14 2018 - 17:07, said:

 

​They don't want to test it, because they have already decided that they like the +2/-2 model. If they ever did test +1/-1 then they would have to admit that it actually works pretty well. :unsure:

 

While the +1/-1 model would be nice, the wait times during non-peak times would be extremely long at times in the US. Another reason they won't do it is because it forces the bottom tier tanks to use premium ammo more often which means profit.

 

I have a quite a few pref matchmaking tanks and enjoy jumping in one of them occasionally when I'm bottom tier all night. I also have all of the premium tanks I am interested in and agree with full gold refund if they remove the pref mm as many of mine would be of no interest to me anymore.



_tube_ #994 Posted Jun 17 2018 - 16:51

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 11891 battles
  • 56
  • [AR-15] AR-15
  • Member since:
    03-10-2011
If they never get rid of the 3-5-7 MM, could another possibility be to buff PMM Tanks up to true Tier IX status, that way they can still have max +1 MM, but not suffer for it vs Tier X, and that way they count as Tier IX tanks to the MM program, and still earn credits as Premium Tanks? What do you guys think?

Tahllol #995 Posted Jun 17 2018 - 17:04

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 10826 battles
  • 1,016
  • Member since:
    01-31-2016

The problem is the MM Pref tanks the problem is the broken MM system across the board. The 3/5/7 is a complete failure especially in the tier 8 system as most tier 8's do not compete against tier 10s worth a crap due to the massive power gap between the 2. If anything it should be changed to 3/9/3.


The main problem is power creep and the WG devs having ZERO clue how to balance the tanks and refusal to deal with the Russian tank BIAS.


WG should refund everyone's money that bought the Pref MM tanks and let them keep the new version as an apology.


Edited by Tahllol, Jun 17 2018 - 17:05.


Tahllol #996 Posted Jun 17 2018 - 17:06

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 10826 battles
  • 1,016
  • Member since:
    01-31-2016

View Post_tube_, on Jun 17 2018 - 16:51, said:

If they never get rid of the 3-5-7 MM, could another possibility be to buff PMM Tanks up to true Tier IX status, that way they can still have max +1 MM, but not suffer for it vs Tier X, and that way they count as Tier IX tanks to the MM program, and still earn credits as Premium Tanks? What do you guys think?

 

They were never meant to be tier 9's they are actually supposed to be slightly weaker than there respective tiers.

_Kradok_ #997 Posted Jun 18 2018 - 12:52

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 28942 battles
  • 1,253
  • [NUFFS] NUFFS
  • Member since:
    10-09-2014

View PostJimmyJimboJimBob, on Jun 17 2018 - 10:16, said:

Still not a single peep out of WG? Looks like they are circling the wagons, crossing their arms, shouting "to hell with the player base!", and going through with it. On the plus side, Armored Warfare que times are getting shorter because of this.  :coin:

 

Right now, their bean counters are trying to plot out the worst-case scenario if they push forward.  What's their most viable option?  Which saves them $$? How can they bend us over more without losing the bulk of the remaining player base, and still attract new players?

 

They offered the KV5 idea, then they watch the fallout, adjust (if they see that as the most advantageous - for them not the player base), decide then act.  It's the OODA loop.

 

 

 

 

They've done ever bit of this by design from the get-go IMO. 



Donny_Do_Not #998 Posted Jun 18 2018 - 15:31

    Private

  • Players
  • 13585 battles
  • 9
  • [TBK] TBK
  • Member since:
    08-05-2011

View Post_Kradok_, on Jun 18 2018 - 07:52, said:

 

Right now, their bean counters are trying to plot out the worst-case scenario if they push forward.  What's their most viable option?  Which saves them $$? How can they bend us over more without losing the bulk of the remaining player base, and still attract new players?

 

They offered the KV5 idea, then they watch the fallout, adjust (if they see that as the most advantageous - for them not the player base), decide then act.  It's the OODA loop.

 

 

 

 

They've done ever bit of this by design from the get-go IMO. 

 

You nailed it _Kradok_.  This is Wargaming and nothing happens by accident, you can bet that it was planned that way. 



Blackhorse_One_ #999 Posted Jun 18 2018 - 15:57

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 5606 battles
  • 1,387
  • [HHT] HHT
  • Member since:
    12-30-2017
Let the exodus begin ...

Omega_Weapon #1000 Posted Jun 18 2018 - 22:24

    Major

  • Players
  • 48500 battles
  • 2,064
  • [GRIEF] GRIEF
  • Member since:
    11-15-2011
Hey look at that. Took a while but we hit 1000 posts. Now if Wargaming would only come back and talk about this issue...

Edited by Omega_Weapon, Jun 18 2018 - 22:25.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users