Jump to content


Gold Ammo Nerf, What About Premium Tanks?

Who Thought This Was Good Idea

  • Please log in to reply
47 replies to this topic

Casual_Boops #21 Posted Apr 04 2019 - 02:49

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 36803 battles
  • 1,642
  • [CLAWS] CLAWS
  • Member since:
    05-14-2015

View PostMDizN, on Apr 03 2019 - 19:35, said:

 

So paying Money for a tank just because of its' ability to out damage  in game grind-able tanks is in no way a pay to win argument..

 

That's not what we're talking about. I'm simply saying that when I buy a premium tank, the ammo that it shoots (and the penetration values that it has) are factors that affect whether I want to spend money on it or not. If those things go down, I'll expect a refund option.

Crypticshock #22 Posted Apr 04 2019 - 05:12

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 19611 battles
  • 1,023
  • [TROBS] TROBS
  • Member since:
    03-13-2011

Tanks like the Obj 907, Obj 260 CAN be nerfed at WG's luxury. They are reward tanks. You are not spending real life currency to acquire them.

 

View Postpickpocket293, on Apr 03 2019 - 18:49, said:

 

That's not what we're talking about. I'm simply saying that when I buy a premium tank, the ammo that it shoots (and the penetration values that it has) are factors that affect whether I want to spend money on it or not. If those things go down, I'll expect a refund option.

 

Good luck with that.

The snowflake alpha is changing on every tank in the game. The tank isn't being nerfed. The penetration is staying the same.



AppleTank8 #23 Posted Apr 04 2019 - 07:28

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 19421 battles
  • 318
  • Member since:
    10-10-2011
Considering many armored tanks got soft nerfed when prem ammo was no longer gold only (see: Ferdinand), this would make them less of a bullet sponge. Newer tanks with too much armor compensating for this state should be brought down to be more in line with their tier.

the_Deadly_Bulb #24 Posted Apr 04 2019 - 08:15

    Major

  • Players
  • 29300 battles
  • 6,832
  • [WCTNT] WCTNT
  • Member since:
    03-11-2014

View PostJakeTheMystic, on Apr 03 2019 - 11:27, said:

I'm kind of surprised I didn't think about it earlier;

 

Once they go through with the gold ammo nerf, what happens to all of the reward/premium tanks? They could nerf the ammo as well on those tanks, but a lot of people would demand money back for those tanks and consider them a bait and switch, as they changed the tanks after they have been bought. (Lawsuits have happened for that before.)

 

So if they can't nerf the premium ammo on premium/reward tanks, but nerf the ammo on non-premiums, that would just make it pay-to-win even more than it currently is, which is a whole lot of steps in the wrong direction. Things like the Obj 260, Cheftain, 907, Vk.k, ect would run rampant at tier 10 with un-nerfed premium while tanks like the Maus, 705A, IS-7, 140, ect would have to play without premium (or at least mostly limited unless they want to lose potential damage for that game). 

 

Knowing this, I'd say gold ammo nerf is taking the game in the wrong direction. Not only would it passive-buff every heavy in the game, it also makes the game extremely pay-to-win for tanks 6-8 and would completely ruin competitive play (including clan wars) at tier 10. That's not the type of game I want to participate in. 

 

 

 

Source please.

 

Lots of "I'll sue!" posts and even a few threads, never seen a link to or proof of a successful legal hit on WG for a nerf of a Premium.

 

Of course that could be wrong, and if it is it shouldn't be hard to link some proof.

 

You know what we say 'round these parts, "replay or it didn't happen



F1O1 #25 Posted Apr 04 2019 - 11:54

    Captain

  • Players
  • 60 battles
  • 1,583
  • [SAMUS] SAMUS
  • Member since:
    01-11-2012

KV5 was listed as a prem tank with APCR dmg Nerf already

I really don't see WG refunding every single purchased premium

This isn't just a super pershing. We are talking hundreds of tanks



Devildog8 #26 Posted Apr 04 2019 - 12:17

    Major

  • Players
  • 11334 battles
  • 7,601
  • [XILES] XILES
  • Member since:
    12-26-2011

View PostBad_Oedipus, on Apr 03 2019 - 14:16, said:

 

Seriously, suing for $50 digital tank?  What's in it for a lawyer?  I can see class action suit may attract some starving patent troll, not an individual that suffers from emotional distress due to his "tank" getting nerfed.

 

Best you can win is court ordering WG to provide digital support animal for those tanks. 

 

My guess is its not about a $50 digital tank its about a purchase between a company and a consumer, I agree seems pointless, but lawsuits have happened for a lot less and been rewarded millions off things for lesser value, we live in the all mighty lets sue for anything world so it wouldnt surprise me if some day it happened.

View Postthe_Deadly_Bulb, on Apr 04 2019 - 01:15, said:

 

Source please.

 

Lots of "I'll sue!" posts and even a few threads, never seen a link to or proof of a successful legal hit on WG for a nerf of a Premium.

 

Of course that could be wrong, and if it is it shouldn't be hard to link some proof.

 

You know what we say 'round these parts, "replay or it didn't happen

 

Yeah I also have never seen any legal proceedings for lawsuits against WG, agreed proof or stop saying false statements 

dexatrin82 #27 Posted Apr 04 2019 - 14:50

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 23091 battles
  • 682
  • [AR-PA] AR-PA
  • Member since:
    10-02-2011

View Postthe_Deadly_Bulb, on Apr 04 2019 - 08:15, said:

 

Source please.

 

Lots of "I'll sue!" posts and even a few threads, never seen a link to or proof of a successful legal hit on WG for a nerf of a Premium.

 

Of course that could be wrong, and if it is it shouldn't be hard to link some proof.

 

You know what we say 'round these parts, "replay or it didn't happen

 

I hear a "Schilling" voice, must be that deadly bulb guy earning his WG Paycheque. 

Has anyone ever thought about if WG has ever settled or had a court case that they have a non disclosure agreement in place, this would have a legally binding way of preventing any one of "us" from seeing or hearing about any settlements that have been agreed on.

Flarvin #28 Posted Apr 04 2019 - 15:31

    Major

  • Players
  • 55545 battles
  • 17,765
  • Member since:
    03-29-2013

View Postdexatrin82, on Apr 04 2019 - 08:50, said:

I hear a "Schilling" voice, must be that deadly bulb guy earning his WG Paycheque. 

Has anyone ever thought about if WG has ever settled or had a court case that they have a non disclosure agreement in place, this would have a legally binding way of preventing any one of "us" from seeing or hearing about any settlements that have been agreed on.

 

I think aliens are behind it. lol



AppleTank8 #29 Posted Apr 04 2019 - 17:22

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 19421 battles
  • 318
  • Member since:
    10-10-2011
All I remember is that there was a massive uproar from Type 59 balancing that made WG really wary of moving prem tanks stats around.

Jryder #30 Posted Apr 04 2019 - 17:35

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 14117 battles
  • 2,977
  • Member since:
    11-01-2010

View PostJakeTheMystic, on Apr 03 2019 - 11:27, said:

I'm kind of surprised I didn't think about it earlier;

 

Once they go through with the gold ammo nerf, what happens to all of the reward/premium tanks? They could nerf the ammo as well on those tanks, but a lot of people would demand money back for those tanks and consider them a bait and switch, as they changed the tanks after they have been bought. (Lawsuits have happened for that before.)

 

So if they can't nerf the premium ammo on premium/reward tanks, but nerf the ammo on non-premiums, that would just make it pay-to-win even more than it currently is, which is a whole lot of steps in the wrong direction. Things like the Obj 260, Cheftain, 907, Vk.k, ect would run rampant at tier 10 with un-nerfed premium while tanks like the Maus, 705A, IS-7, 140, ect would have to play without premium (or at least mostly limited unless they want to lose potential damage for that game). 

 

Knowing this, I'd say gold ammo nerf is taking the game in the wrong direction. Not only would it passive-buff every heavy in the game, it also makes the game extremely pay-to-win for tanks 6-8 and would completely ruin competitive play (including clan wars) at tier 10. That's not the type of game I want to participate in. 

 

 

 

The Special Ammo nerf won't ruin anything. In fact, only one actual difference will occur if the SPammo nerf (reduction in damage) goes through as stated:

 

1) SPammo will retain its primary feature-penetration. That being the case, people will continue to need and use it.

2) Because SPammo does less damage, players will simply shoot more in order to achieve the same result.

 

And, YES, it is a backdoor buff for all of the Uber armored vehicles WG has put into the game. People WILL buy and use more SPammo, and they WILL buy more over-armored tanks

 

People complain about SPammo spamming now, wait until the nerf. What once took 5 SPammo rounds to kill will now take 8 (more or less...). How does that reduce SPammo use???



I_QQ_4_U #31 Posted Apr 04 2019 - 17:43

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 24344 battles
  • 7,968
  • Member since:
    10-17-2016

Not that I play it much anyway but I sure won't be playing my Chrysler K much if they nerf premium since if it's bottom tier it's going to be even worse off being that it was made to fire premium to have any chance of penning many higher tier heavies, even some same tiers.

 

They could adjust it so it's standard rounds are significantly better which will make it even more OP when top tier.


Edited by I_QQ_4_U, Apr 04 2019 - 17:43.


the_Deadly_Bulb #32 Posted Apr 04 2019 - 18:24

    Major

  • Players
  • 29300 battles
  • 6,832
  • [WCTNT] WCTNT
  • Member since:
    03-11-2014

View Postdexatrin82, on Apr 04 2019 - 05:50, said:

 

I hear a "Schilling" voice, must be that deadly bulb guy earning his WG Paycheque. 

Has anyone ever thought about if WG has ever settled or had a court case that they have a non disclosure agreement in place, this would have a legally binding way of preventing any one of "us" from seeing or hearing about any settlements that have been agreed on.

 

OP talks out his exhaust pipe so that makes me a schill.

 

Considering the plethora of unsubstantiated posts claiming legal action it would be really nice if just once someone could put up or shut up.

Don't suppose you could either right?

Nope, I suppose not, just keep tossing and supporting childish temper tantrum threats of legal drama around a video game, you know the one where you and everyone else click I agree to the EULA and ToS every time there is an update.

 

Run along idiot.

 

 



Pipinghot #33 Posted Apr 04 2019 - 19:34

    Major

  • Players
  • 25960 battles
  • 10,736
  • [IOC] IOC
  • Member since:
    11-20-2011

View Postdexatrin82, on Apr 04 2019 - 08:50, said:

View Postthe_Deadly_Bulb, on Apr 04 2019 - 08:15, said:

Source please.

 

Lots of "I'll sue!" posts and even a few threads, never seen a link to or proof of a successful legal hit on WG for a nerf of a Premium.

 

Of course that could be wrong, and if it is it shouldn't be hard to link some proof.

 

You know what we say 'round these parts, "replay or it didn't happen

I hear a "Schilling" voice, must be that deadly bulb guy earning his WG Paycheque. 


Has anyone ever thought about if WG has ever settled or had a court case that they have a non disclosure agreement in place, this would have a legally binding way of preventing any one of "us" from seeing or hearing about any settlements that have been agreed on.

No, you hear a voice that is aware of reality.

1) If a case goes to court, there is still a record of the case existing even if it's settled. The contents and details of the settlement may be sealed, but the fact that the case existed in the first place is still a matter of record. A non-disclosure agreement would not make the case magically disappear from the records, you just wouldn't be able to find out what the details of the settlement were.

 

2) There have been very few court cases filed by consumers, or by agencies on behalf of consumer protection, against game companies. Deadly Bulb is right, there have been millions and millions of times people have threatened lawsuits, but in the real world there have only been a few of them, total, ever.



Crypticshock #34 Posted Apr 04 2019 - 21:39

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 19611 battles
  • 1,023
  • [TROBS] TROBS
  • Member since:
    03-13-2011

There are laws in nations where WoT is played. These laws could create situations where things might get hairy.

This was one of the reasons why gold ammo lost the option to buy it with gold and why WG has waited until changing it.

The laws are not the only reason why WG doesn't want to make things you buy with real life currency worse (or nerf).

It looks bad when a company just changes the things you bought and make them worse. It's like Ford recalling your Mustang and replacing your V8 with a V4 and shaking your hand with a smile on their face as they hand you back your keys.

Also - if you've looked at things WG has written down about changing premium tanks... There is a "compensation" clause, now there would be a fight about what constitutes a premium tank being "rebalanced substantially" to trigger the compensation: The Premium Tank is rebalanced substantially in-game and a refund is offered - https://na.wargaming.../article/19061/



AA_13052014 #35 Posted Apr 04 2019 - 23:54

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 57717 battles
  • 44
  • [-NHL-] -NHL-
  • Member since:
    05-13-2014
Main issue with rebalancing/nerfing "gold" rounds is that there are currently tanks in the game that are only more or less functional with present state of affairs (i.e. they are clearly "gold-dependent" and some underperform anyways). Among those it's worth mentioning some preferential mm prems (IS-6, 112, T-34-3 etc), non-preferential mm prems with poor basal penetration rounds (su122-44, isu-122s), explorable tanks with bad standard rounds (many tier 7 meds, T-34-2, T-32, VK 45.02 A, etc), and tanks that are currently not competitive against higher tiers, due to their overall weakness, like KV-4 (big, slow and flat armored, without some super duper firepower to balance it all out). Their already lacking performance will quickly fall all the way down to the Mariana Trench, if prem rounds' nerf is introduced without any changes to their standard rounds' penetration values and/or other buffs. 

Burning_Haggis #36 Posted Apr 04 2019 - 23:57

    Major

  • Players
  • 46397 battles
  • 2,195
  • [_WF_] _WF_
  • Member since:
    04-09-2013

View PostJakeTheMystic, on Apr 03 2019 - 13:27, said:

I'm kind of surprised I didn't think about it earlier;

 

Once they go through with the gold ammo nerf, what happens to all of the reward/premium tanks? They could nerf the ammo as well on those tanks, but a lot of people would demand money back for those tanks and consider them a bait and switch, as they changed the tanks after they have been bought. (Lawsuits have happened for that before.)

 

So if they can't nerf the premium ammo on premium/reward tanks, but nerf the ammo on non-premiums, that would just make it pay-to-win even more than it currently is, which is a whole lot of steps in the wrong direction. Things like the Obj 260, Cheftain, 907, Vk.k, ect would run rampant at tier 10 with un-nerfed premium while tanks like the Maus, 705A, IS-7, 140, ect would have to play without premium (or at least mostly limited unless they want to lose potential damage for that game). 

 

Knowing this, I'd say gold ammo nerf is taking the game in the wrong direction. Not only would it passive-buff every heavy in the game, it also makes the game extremely pay-to-win for tanks 6-8 and would completely ruin competitive play (including clan wars) at tier 10. That's not the type of game I want to participate in. 

 

 

 

The didn't touch the leafblower when they changed arty specs, if that is any indication.

 

 



stubmw #37 Posted Apr 04 2019 - 23:57

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 29458 battles
  • 505
  • Member since:
    02-27-2012
Here's how I think they will work it. The present premium ammo they aren't going to nerf it, they are just going to stop selling it one day. Then going forward the only premium ammo you are going to be able buy is the the nerfed ammo. The old good premium ammo will still work in your tank, still most people will be out of it in short order. A bright fellow might purchase a "life time" supply of the old stuff for a favorite tank.  

DEADLY_WEAPON #38 Posted Apr 05 2019 - 02:14

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 68956 battles
  • 373
  • Member since:
    02-21-2011
I am asking for my money back if WG nerfs my gold rounds. I did not buy these tanks with low alpha ammo. They can give my money back or I will look into a lawsuit. I paid for these tanks ! Don't alter them because the whiners like to complain.

Edited by DEADLY_WEAPON, Apr 05 2019 - 02:14.


Vaprak #39 Posted Apr 05 2019 - 03:26

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 22953 battles
  • 43
  • Member since:
    07-27-2012

Simple fix - 

 

If they will get in trouble moving the stats down on premium ammo, they can go the other way and INCREASE the stats on every other stat that the round has to overcome to be effective so that it effectively nerfs premium ammunition.  

 

Either way, Wargaming gets in the fix.

 

 



I_QQ_4_U #40 Posted Apr 05 2019 - 04:53

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 24344 battles
  • 7,968
  • Member since:
    10-17-2016

View Poststubmw, on Apr 04 2019 - 23:57, said:

 A bright fellow might purchase a "life time" supply of the old stuff for a favorite tank.  

 

Except you can't.





Also tagged with Who, Thought, This, Was, Good, Idea

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users