MagicalFlyingFox

Tier 10 LT rebalance - WG missing the point again

114 posts in this topic

2 hours ago, Archaic_One said:

...

Artificially gimping LTs view range so they are forced to use optics and thus gimping them in a gun-fight was one of the single stupidest things to ever come out of Minsk.  This is what happens when all of the developers you hired in 2012 have moved on to playing other games but still work for you. 

I think what they had in mind for LT equipment is revealed by the amazingly good handling and aimtime stats even though dispersion is poor. They seem to want LT players to drop vstab (unnecessary with great handling and aimtime) for vents - which bumps VR up by 10m and tweaks the dispersion a little. Ive done that on all my high tier lights and its seems to pay off well.

There must also be a reason why the Sheridan has 20% drop-off in pen from 50-500m. Do the other T10 lights have this issue? (Cant see the ammo popup unless you own it). If they all have this curse, it must be to stop people Chai sniping.

Beyond that, though, I dont know what they were thinking. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Their accuracy remains bad so camo sniping is still in their bad books... but then they release the strv...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gryphon_ said:

I think what they had in mind for LT equipment is revealed by the amazingly good handling and aimtime stats even though dispersion is poor. They seem to want LT players to drop vstab (unnecessary with great handling and aimtime) for vents - which bumps VR up by 10m and tweaks the dispersion a little. Ive done that on all my high tier lights and its seems to pay off well.

Agree with this. Re-bought T54 LT and played first few games with rammer+stab+optics, but then dropped stab for vents, and it seems to work better. Don't really even notice difference in gun handling, but extra VR with extra little bit everything is really nice. 496 VR at the moment, I guess it's now max you can have on that tank :D 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Gryphon_ said:

I think what they had in mind for LT equipment is revealed by the amazingly good handling and aimtime stats even though dispersion is poor. They seem to want LT players to drop vstab (unnecessary with great handling and aimtime) for vents - which bumps VR up by 10m and tweaks the dispersion a little. Ive done that on all my high tier lights and its seems to pay off well.

There must also be a reason why the Sheridan has 20% drop-off in pen from 50-500m. Do the other T10 lights have this issue? (Cant see the ammo popup unless you own it). If they all have this curse, it must be to stop people Chai sniping.

Beyond that, though, I dont know what they were thinking. 

Yes for what i know. If i recall properly when lts were tested on Sandbox, i believe, players were worried about unicums camo sniping with these "better medium". So WG nerfed the lts all round, because for them only tds and mediums should snipe. So they went full reverse Maus on them (aka super exaggerated nerf) releasing the tanks we get now live.

This is why part of me still believes that the "balancing deparment" does not exist, it is just a meme. When i found out that it actually exist i was shocked and surprised. Cant believe they pay people to "balance" the game and get these results. 

Funny thing is these things are not that bad. The mobility buff was right (i always felt my lts to be too slow to run away from engagements) so as the camo one. The real problem is how the MM works and their firepower: you see putting 3 of them in a battle is not good, there are just too many, so they are forced to play a non-scounting role (you can scout on most maps, even on Paris; the only map that is totally useless is Hitlersdorf) so they have to become a firesupport class meaning they simply are worst mediums. And i believe when you are one of the top three tier tanks none would waist HP in scouting or time, but you would rather be a dmg dealer. At that point you would rather have a medium with more hp and firepower.

So WG should both increase fire and make maps bigger, allowing tanks to spot in different areas. Since they will not the latter they are doing the first one. This explains why they are buffing firepower and not "scoutability".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, nabucodonsor said:

Yes for what i know. If i recall properly when lts were tested on Sandbox, i believe, players were worried about unicums camo sniping with these "better medium". So WG nerfed the lts all round, because for them only tds and mediums should snipe. So they went full reverse Maus on them (aka super exaggerated nerf) releasing the tanks we get now live.

This is why part of me still believes that the "balancing deparment" does not exist, it is just a meme. When i found out that it actually exist i was shocked and surprised. Cant believe they pay people to "balance" the game and get these results. 

Funny thing is these things are not that bad. The mobility buff was right (i always felt my lts to be too slow to run away from engagements) so as the camo one. The real problem is how the MM works and their firepower: you see putting 3 of them in a battle is not good, there are just too many, so they are forced to play a non-scounting role (you can scout on most maps, even on Paris; the only map that is totally useless is Hitlersdorf) so they have to become a firesupport class meaning they simply are worst mediums. And i believe when you are one of the top three tier tanks none would waist HP in scouting or time, but you would rather be a dmg dealer. At that point you would rather have a medium with more hp and firepower.

So WG should both increase fire and make maps bigger, allowing tanks to spot in different areas. Since they will not the latter they are doing the first one. This explains why they are buffing firepower and not "scoutability".

Sorry but this is so wrong.

1. Bigger maps will kill slow tanks unless you increase the number of tanks. Hell even then it's a nerf to them and it will make playing them late game horrible

2. Being a light in a non scout map is not a problem because the enemy team also gets a light on your place. To have a positive impact in the long run you just have to be better than the lights you meet.

3. Making them have med firepower would make them better meds (at least vs soft ones) since they could play vision games better and have same firepower. Though I assume with armor buffs to meds they may think they may increase light firepower incrementally. If that happens leopard will be super fucked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hazz and nab, 1, the issue imo is mostly how much of the map matters / is viable in combination with the engagement ranges. It's less about map size or speed. The meta slowly boils down to armor even in big maps if there is one critical short range engagement.

2, arbitrary one per side balance is like them saying they can't be competitive. It's a poor balance work around that doesn't address the class / meta issues.

3, to your point, if non armoured meds were killing the meta, then maybe allowing lights to join those ranks would be an issue....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Ezz said:

Hazz and nab, 1, the issue imo is mostly how much of the map matters / is viable in combination with the engagement ranges. It's less about map size or speed. The meta slowly boils down to armor even in big maps if there is one critical short range engagement.

2, arbitrary one per side balance is like them saying they can't be competitive. It's a poor balance work around that doesn't address the class / meta issues.

3, to your point, if non armoured meds were killing the meta, then maybe allowing lights to join those ranks would be an issue....

1. I think we sort of agree. Lights don't need bigger maps but firing and spotting lanes that are closer to long range. The problem is making maps in such a way those lanes don''t encourage static gameplay. As for armored tanks even if there is a critical short range engagement you still have to get there. If the map is too big heaviums will get there waaaay before superheavies and farm them on the way. Also even if it's possible to get there without farming you still forget about late game. Even on current maps when you are in a tank which has around 25kph cruising speed vs a speedy TD or a med you are fucked if that's not a pure brawling map. 

2. I agree. I think they should give lights some extra vision but do it incrementally every patch and observe. Do it only in 5m increments and don't only watch regular players but see how much better ones can abuse it.

3. I didn't say non armored meds were killing the meta. Quite the contrary. I know the softer meds are shit. The thing is if you introduce tanks with other advantages over them but their firepower that would make soft meds even lower on the pecking order. The only choice is to give all meds some sort of armor and keep all lights soft

 

@MagicalFlyingFox I am actually stating the opposite. Leopard is shit but introducing tanks that have similar firepower but more mobility, camo and vr would make it even worse and WG can't really buff it's armor like it did for other meds

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, hazzgar said:

1. Bigger maps will kill slow tanks unless you increase the number of tanks. Hell even then it's a nerf to them and it will make playing them late game horrib

I still waiting for 1200-1400m maps, not so big but with more options. 

Slow tanks euther way camp base in current meta. But more space to work with fast tanks would be great. 

On the side note, 75 games yesterday. Malinovka 0 games, Prokhorovka 2 games, top maps Pilsen, Shitenberg 5 times. :doge: so much about map and MM balance. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BlackAdder said:

I still waiting for 1200-1400m maps, not so big but with more options. 

Slow tanks euther way camp base in current meta. But more space to work with fast tanks would be great. 

On the side note, 75 games yesterday. Malinovka 0 games, Prokhorovka 2 games, top maps Pilsen, Shitenberg 5 times. :doge: so much about map and MM balance. 

Map rotation is a problem but forcing big maps on slow tanks only because some slow tank players camp is stupid. I for once own a few superheavies and like to play them from time to time. If maps get bigger I will probably stop. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, hazzgar said:

Map rotation is a problem but forcing big maps on slow tanks only because some slow tank players camp is stupid. I for once own a few superheavies and like to play them from time to time. If maps get bigger I will probably stop. 

200m isn’t that big of difference especially with choke points. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, hazzgar said:

Map rotation is a problem but forcing big maps on slow tanks only because some slow tank players camp is stupid. I for once own a few superheavies and like to play them from time to time. If maps get bigger I will probably stop. 

Map rotation is a problem but forcing confined maps on fast paper-tanks only because some slow superheavy-players can't have both speed and impenetrable armor is stupid. I for once own a few lights and paper-mediums and like to play them from time to time. If maps stay as confined as they are I will probably stop. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, BlackAdder said:

200m isn’t that big of difference especially with choke points. 

I think we can increase the size incrementally. 1200m is ok IF done well (that's a big problem for wg)

 

27 minutes ago, Madner Kami said:

Map rotation is a problem but forcing confined maps on fast paper-tanks only because some slow superheavy-players can't have both speed and impenetrable armor is stupid. I for once own a few lights and paper-mediums and like to play them from time to time. If maps stay as confined as they are I will probably stop. 

Your post suggeests there is no middle ground. Either 10km x 10km fiery sailent or Kharkov. What you want is actually maps that have areas useful for meds and lights too not bigger maps. This is a completely different topic. WG can easily create a big map where the key areas are still brawls and your meds will still be useless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, hazzgar said:

This is a completely different topic. WG can easily create a big map where the key areas are still brawls and your meds will still be useless.

And or they do what they did to steppes and turn the 9 line from a med brawl area to one where heavies are still in favour.

These days most maps have meds as contributors via heat but not really dominators. It wasn't like making lights competitive with meds was going to kill the meta. In fact i suspect even if there were another malinovka / prok style open map thrown into rotation, it wouldn't suddenly make meds / lights dominate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ezz said:

And or they do what they did to steppes and turn the 9 line from a med brawl area to one where heavies are still in favour.

These days most maps have meds as contributors via heat but not really dominators. It wasn't like making lights competitive with meds was going to kill the meta. In fact i suspect even if there were another malinovka / prok style open map thrown into rotation, it wouldn't suddenly make meds / lights dominate.

I'm not worried about lights dominating. I sense a really strong need to pidgeonhole what I write into one of the stereotypical wot player opinions of (Meds are op, Heavies are op etc etc). 

What I am saying we need to make the game playable for everyone. Yeah we are in the heavy meta. I agree. I also agree buffed lights won't still be able to contest key areas of the maps unless we change those maps and allow lights to do damage to heavies going to those areas and spotting tanks going to them. 

Sill I think we need to be careful with balancing lights for 2 reasons. 1. Is not to make soft meds like leo EVEN MORE obsolete. 2. Is to not make late game when the map opens up horrible. Remember those games where you are in your IS and the enemy has an e25? Yeah those games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Making lights more medium like doesn't mean giving it a medium tank gun.

All it means is giving them the fucking ability to actually hit shit from over 300m away and pen the sides of heavies. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, hazzgar said:

 I sense a really strong need to pidgeonhole what I write into one of the stereotypical wot player opinions of (Meds are op, Heavies are op etc etc). 

To be honest i usually quote someone, respond, then just say general thoughts, so not trying to pigeon hole. Everyone has perspectives. To me the perspective of a light player is one WG don't seem to care about. In fact for them to get to the point of coming out and announcing that lights shouldn't be able to compete with meds is one of the clearest examples of something that WG seem to have concocted. Of course i'm not saying it's you who came up with this, so apologies if you feel like i'm disliking your views.

Side note - but i was trying to think up maps where >445m VR could kill the map. Lakeville obvious one. As is the meta was go near mid, farm the idiots who cross straight to town. Then they learned to take back route. Now going all the way to spot the back route people is almost suicide. If you extend >445m VR that back route would be dead. Of course just stretching the map might work as well... but still...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BlackAdder said:

200m isn’t that big of difference especially with choke points. 

1.2kmx1.2km means actually an almost 50% bigger map (44%). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, TAdoo87 said:

1.2kmx1.2km means actually an almost 50% bigger map (44%). 

I was referring to choke points. If you deduct red lines it’s bigger map but not so usable big. If you look Malinovka for example, most of map is empty and not usuable if you want live. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, hazzgar said:

Your post suggeests there is no middle ground. Either 10km x 10km fiery sailent or Kharkov. What you want is actually maps that have areas useful for meds and lights too not bigger maps. This is a completely different topic. WG can easily create a big map where the key areas are still brawls and your meds will still be useless.

No, it does not. On the contrary, your statements constantly read like "but muh superheavies!!!!11" an this is the whole issue. Momentarily, we have a superheavy-meta, where map-pool, map-design and even game-design (in terms of balance at the very least), caters to slow fat bricks that annihilate everything in front of them, while being mostly untouchable except by other superfat superslow fuck-bricks. Argueing, that one should look at the playability of superheavies when the discussion is about tanks that do not work on confined spaces, are reliant on support-fire from their team, absolutely can not stand their ground but need to work with their mobility and can not even penetrate said superheavy from the rear reliably, is cynical at best. I agree that all sides need to be pleased and I think you are smart enough to not actually argue that point, but you can not look at the king on the hill and argue, that he needs help, when everything at the foot of the hill is a smoldering ruin..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For whatever reason WG has taken an absolutely militant stance against sniping in any form by anything other than specific TDs.  Then they make the TDs that can snipe utterly useless at doing anything else.  So if you're not in a Grille or 103B you are forced into closer and closer quarters to try and fight tanks that you have zero business ever getting within 200 meters of.

This really became evident when they destroyed the T37 gun.  The T37 had a decent gun in 9.17 that could be used to accurately break OI camps in strongholds by sniping.  After the LT changes it was unable to snipe at all, instead  now it 0.45 accuracy and great handling so you can 'circle stuff'.  FFS, do you know what would happen to a T37 that tried to drive in and get close to an OI camp?  WG 'solution' is the retarded 'Arty Strike' mechanic to break camps instead.  They were willing to go to that length to prevent sniping . . . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, hazzgar said:

2. Is to not make late game when the map opens up horrible. Remember those games where you are in your IS and the enemy has an e25? Yeah those games.

I disagree that this is to be avoided.  camo/vr increase in importance as the game goes on and the tank count diminishes (as does mobility).  This is where I say, "make sure your team doesn't suck and leave you alone to die."  Early game in a corridor, the IS can blast the e25 to shreds, and this is why good players don't take their french autoloaders into the early brawls too aggressively.  This is simply a dynamic of the game flow and inescapable, IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I don't see why IS should have any chance against E-25 1v1 on open map. On most maps IS has a lot possibilities to impact game before that. Same goes for lights, they should be very good in the late game. If buffing lights make some tanks obsolete, then it happens, I don't see it as a huge problem. Same has happened so many times already, buffing some tanks makes some other useless. And to be honest Leo is already so obsolete that you barely see them in the games.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Madner Kami said:

No, it does not. On the contrary, your statements constantly read like "but muh superheavies!!!!11" an this is the whole issue. Momentarily, we have a superheavy-meta, where map-pool, map-design and even game-design (in terms of balance at the very least), caters to slow fat bricks that annihilate everything in front of them, while being mostly untouchable except by other superfat superslow fuck-bricks. Argueing, that one should look at the playability of superheavies when the discussion is about tanks that do not work on confined spaces, are reliant on support-fire from their team, absolutely can not stand their ground but need to work with their mobility and can not even penetrate said superheavy from the rear reliably, is cynical at best. I agree that all sides need to be pleased and I think you are smart enough to not actually argue that point, but you can not look at the king on the hill and argue, that he needs help, when everything at the foot of the hill is a smoldering ruin..

Given the fact that I hate to play superheavies yeah I am really saying "but muh supetheavies". One should not look at superheavies ONLY one should look at all tanks to create a balanced game. If you think otherwise call for a job at WG balancing that when helping one class, fucks up the other.

Also please read my posts. I have never said that superheavies need help. All I have said is to not go from Superheavies = shit to superheavies = op to again superheavies = shit. I agree superheavies are too strong currently but maps favor them only mid game. Early and late game they are useless. This is also one of the reasons why currently most good players perform best in heaviums or armored meds.

 

22 minutes ago, Tanager said:

I disagree that this is to be avoided.  camo/vr increase in importance as the game goes on and the tank count diminishes (as does mobility).  This is where I say, "make sure your team doesn't suck and leave you alone to die."  Early game in a corridor, the IS can blast the e25 to shreds, and this is why good players don't take their french autoloaders into the early brawls too aggressively.  This is simply a dynamic of the game flow and inescapable, IMHO.

 

10 minutes ago, HS5 said:

Yes, I don't see why IS should have any chance against E-25 1v1 on open map. On most maps IS has a lot possibilities to impact game before that. Same goes for lights, they should be very good in the late game. If buffing lights make some tanks obsolete, then it happens, I don't see it as a huge problem. Same has happened so many times already, buffing some tanks makes some other useless. And to be honest Leo is already so obsolete that you barely see them in the games.  

Yeah and that's why e25 was removed and everyone thinks it is broken. I'm not saying IS should be able to easily fight camo tanks late game. I used e25 because it is an example of a broken tank. There are other tds, lights and meds that can still rip an is to shreds but it's not an instaloose as it is in the case of e25, hell even if 3 heavie are alive and the map is semi open.

2 hours ago, BlackAdder said:

I was referring to choke points. If you deduct red lines it’s bigger map but not so usable big. If you look Malinovka for example, most of map is empty and not usuable if you want live. 

Maybe lets wait for the new 30x30 map to be released and see if bigger map from wg = more fuckups. I am afraid it is that. I only hope they are small enough it doesn't ruin the mode

 

PS. Have in mind that if WG fucks up bigger maps and decides it needs to help superheavies to be competitive they will buff speeds. You want the Maus to cruise at 30kph? Wg is stupid enough to do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, hazzgar said:

PS. Have in mind that if WG fucks up bigger maps and decides it needs to help superheavies to be competitive they will buff speeds. You want the Maus to cruise at 30kph? Wg is stupid enough to do th

But that’s skewing tanks around stupid super heavys. 

You gotta go for one thing, if you have fuck you armor which Maus currently have, you have to face the truth when your team fail and LTs/MTs overruns you. It’s just the way it is. Until then you have armor, gun and HP for choke points on even semi open maps. I think it’s fair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.