CraBeatOff

The Bond Farm

77 posts in this topic

It should be no secret that I want to fully outfit my T49 with improved equipment. This means obtaining 14,000 bonds, and with limited ranked battle participation that means a TON of pub battles. The patch that added bonds for medals was a nice bonus (WG really should do a 1 time retroactive medals payout, it'd be like maybe 1-2 pieces for most people...but that is another conversation). 

@dualmaster333 did some math a while back to check and see if anything except 10s are viable for bonds earning, and sadly the answer is no, not if your goal is to obtain 14,000 of them. Particularly because those same medals are worth much more at tier X. So this means we must play tier X. Since the change to LTs and the advent of 3/5/7 MM platooning 10s has been interesting. You either get to be super king shit (3/5/7), mostly king shit (5/10) or fodder for TDs in a super shitty campy game (15 across). But the problem is, the games where you're super king shit or mostly king shit ... you don't earn bonds. Sure you get 2 for High Caliber, but that's not going to get you to 14,000! And the super shitty campy TD fest at tier X means you aren't going to be winning or earning 400 base XP at what I consider a reasonable rate. And this is all solo, where maybe 35% of your games are straight tier X. So in your dice roll to get a bonds match you're now depending on not having a bad game - odds I just don't like. 

And finally, I'm realistically only going to play a LT, because cmon...GO FAST

I played a whole bunch of solo X LT games to try to estimate my bond's earning rate. Playing well, I was seeing about 2 bonds/game. Simply because I couldn't always get tier X matches - but then I wasn't really always getting bonds from those games, because its fairly hard to win in those paint scratchers (thanks @Kolni for the appellation, ha!). Platooning a pair of derp Sheridans with dualmaster got me just under 4 bonds/game, and while funny, it wasn't particularly fun and yielded 55% win-rate. Plus then WG buffed the Sheridan 105mm gun to make the 152mm completely unjustifiable :-( Bond earning is a bit better in a MT or HT, but see point above.

From the derp Sheridan experiment I did observe (and this is old news and well known now) that platooning Xs and particularly LTs forces you heavily into 15 across battles. Generally a good thing for bonds, except you know LTs being sucky at doing damage to get that 400 base XP. So all of this is to say - what platoon combo, including a LT preferably, gets me the highest win-rate in tier X games?

This is hardly a new problem of course, as we've been working on finding winning combos for a long time. At various times we've had viable comps like 2x Batchat + 1 Bat arty (remember that @jacg123?), 2x E-100 and 1x WaffleE-100, 3x MAUS, 3x 50B, T-62A and 2x E4, etc etc. So what is the new meta comp?

I believe we've hit upon it though, almost by accident. Strv 103B, Light Tank (T-100LT preferred), and Heavy Tank (IS-7 preferred but lots of latitude really, as long as it has some armor to hold). Over the past few weeks I've played approximately 160 games using this combination and estimated bond earnings. Because of the improved win-rate AND forcing MM to spit out 90% 15v15 tier X battles, the bond farm is real. I've averaged about 9 bonds/game! At that rate a full set of equipment is ~1,555 games, as opposed to ~3,500 or ~7,000 in the other scenarios I tested

So how much are we winning? I'd put the floor at 70% (worst session), but we've seen 80% in the month of November and so I think its safe to say that 75% is realistic, and that 80% might be sustainable with 3 good players. Here is yesterday's session (not shown assisted damage ~2000 average)
q03YUy4.jpg

A little bit about how to play this set-up - I was explaining it to Illusion yesterday (one of the best players ever on NA!) in that its not a "winning" comp. but that its a "not losing" comp. Basically you're able to lock down the map to the point where its simply very hard for your team to get wiped out. The enemy simply cannot push enough to snowball your team and so you either create a Lanchester's derived advantage somewhere, or else you sit and grind them down. 

The hardest*  and certainly most important role goes to the S-tank because that driver has to make the decisions about whether to support the LT or the HT in the platoon, and has to know their camo and engagements really well, plus he/she isn't allowed to die. But really no one is allowed to die, the whole point is simply to outlast and force-feed your S-tank. @thedivision (fuck why aren't my mentions working) has been my reliable Strv driver through all these battles, so I will ask him to post his thoughts but from my observations of his play and his discussions on TS he really focuses on staying alive, and being patient forcing the enemy into mistakes. He uses my LT vision, or the stalling HT to just annihilate the enemy OR simply deny them the lane. Oh and tracking shots, constant, brutal, punishing tracking shots. He'll got for tracking shot on the first 2-3 shots on any target, at any distance. And it pays off, the enemy just gets helplessly stuck in place eating 4k dpm. And he's not afraid to brawl when the engagement is right - this means little to no arty, guns under 122mm caliber, low flank chances (as the LT driver you can help with this) and hills preferable to "hulldown". He often says he's going to hulldown, but how you do that in a tank that is only hull...I do not quite grok. As we all know, an S-tank that you can't see can lock down half a map or more in many situations, so I guess you need to learn all those situations. 

The LT role is nothing special, except that you simply need to trust your platoon to live/grind the enemy long enough to make your tank really effective. You just scout a bunch, and then wait for things to open up and do LT things. The T-100LT is best because its the best. Fastest accel, lowest profile, best camo, 0.1+ armor effectiveness, 2800 dpm and fast enough reload to perma-track. The RhmPz or 13 105 are probably the next best as they are the next best scouts. The RhmPz has the very high VR and comfy gun and pen. When you get a mid/long shot you're gonna do more damage than the T-100LT's potato cannon. 13 105 works nicely because its got the high camo, and the burst for end-game. But its fragile and slow compared to the T-100LT and doesn't have the gun handling to hit tracks in close/medium distance like the T-100LT. If you get the first tracking shot in, you can be sure your S-tank is going to be following that up...

HT role is an interesting switch from some folk's play style. You're literally just defaulting to denying space, playing defense and in the case of being rushed, doing as much damage as possible. In some cases you're just baiting stuff into the Strv 103B behind you. Its very much a slow-play style. You can push when you have an overwhelming advantage for sure, but the goal is first and foremost to make sure you don't lose the brawl, which means staying alive. Your S-tank and T-100 can bail you out of some shit, and at the very worst, they can ensure that your eventual demise is paid for dearly. That said, with armor and hitpoints and 75% wins you're still going to be surviving 60%+ of the time if you do it right. IS-7 works really well because of the strong armor, deployment speed and hp pool - its best role is naturally the one that compliments this platoon well (hulldown, defensive). We've seen similar success with SuperConq, IS-4, 113, T110E5. The Germans can work also, but are a bit less flexible due to speed. PzVII and VK7201 are pretty good though. Type 5? 215b? No one has tried them. But basically you stay alive - slow play - stall a flank, push if you can safely, otherwise keep falling back into your S-tank or wait while your LT flanks the things. 

Of note - none of these roles are going to be garnering the high WN8 you'd see solo. High damage losses are rare obviously. And you're not smashing on 8s and out armoring 9s like you might in solo play. And nothing quite gets the WN8 of MTs, but that isn't the point here, the point is to farm the wins to get the bonds. 

Charge for the community - can this be replicated? Meaning is it the comp or the players? @TheDivision and I have played these 160 games, with a variety of HT drivers @1stTanks, @meirzin and @Illusion, but he and I are constants. Who will test it? We need more data!

*This statement may be filtered through my personal biases towards LT play, LT play might be harder, but I have to leave that up to others to decide

@TheDivision @1stTanks @Meirzin @Illusion

mentions since they broke in the first post

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting idea (and I reminder I have no friends to try this..poor me <sigh>) but I'm thinking it relies far more upon the skill of the players involved, rather than the 1HT/1Sniper/1!LT composition.

If any of them make any kind of real mistake, they're going to get wiped out (well maybe not the HT) so basically you have to have 3 players who aren't going to make any big mistakes. Plus 3 players who know how to actually move and support each other, rather than the TD hiding a little to far back, the scout moving somewhere he can't be covered etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Kolni said:

Grinding bonds is ridiculous. Tank sniper is worth more than high caliber. 

Agreed, but so is this whole pursuit (the game!)

23 minutes ago, Canadian_Reaper said:

Interesting idea (and I reminder I have no friends to try this..poor me <sigh>) but I'm thinking it relies far more upon the skill of the players involved, rather than the 1HT/1Sniper/1!LT composition.

If any of them make any kind of real mistake, they're going to get wiped out (well maybe not the HT) so basically you have to have 3 players who aren't going to make any big mistakes. Plus 3 players who know how to actually move and support each other, rather than the TD hiding a little to far back, the scout moving somewhere he can't be covered etc.

Well, knowing how to play is sort of a pre-requisite for...playing? I mean, this post isn't about how to not suicide your tank, but about how to win games in Xs, and farm bonds

6 minutes ago, GoodEyeSniper14 said:

I volunteer as tribute.

You played a few!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting but imo a medium, say E50M or STB will prove more useful than a light in the majority of situations. Obviously your setup works very well, as you've proven, but I like the added survivability and damage-dealing capabilities mediums offer over lights are well worth the lesser speed/camo especially considering the map pool and preponderance of tanks that lights struggle to damage. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, flare_phoenix said:

Interesting but imo a medium, say E50M or STB will prove more useful than a light in the majority of situations. Obviously your setup works very well, as you've proven, but I like the added survivability and damage-dealing capabilities mediums offer over lights are well worth the lesser speed/camo especially considering the map pool and preponderance of tanks that lights struggle to damage. 

Thats why I want people to test it! I can certainly see a 907 doing the role passably. But I do a LOT of bush sitting for the Strv. Plz test and report back!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Top 1% clans and top 1% players will net you 7000 bonds. So there's that.

Depending on playstyle, successful tank compositions will naturally vary. Having played with you before, I felt that our perspectives on the game clashed. On one hand, @CraBeatOff is more of a slower pace attrition style, whilst mine was an (admittedly) overly-aggressive style that bordered all-or-nothing. This clash in perspective has led to constant "camp" reminders, which I found borderline impossible to do as I prefer to do something like this...

tenor.gif

Unfortunately sometimes the person on the other side of the door has a gun.

When I platoon, 2 heavies and a high alpha TD or 1 medium, heavium, and a superheavy/TD are the most optimal as they suit my kind of play.
Your setup clearly works as it forces a slower environment where you ensure vision for both the heavy and td to position accordingly and have the ability to hold with the heavy and discourage pushes with the strv. I don't think replacing the light with a medium will work as well for Crab's style as it simple cannot deny/ensure vision in the same way the T-100 can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

interesting, if out of my league:)
 

what still applies to mortals is how to platoon FTW
would you be willing to post replays, (here, yt, p0rnhub whatever)  just to see how do u coordinate as a platoon, caring first and foremost for winrate?

cheers and show us the way!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, CraBeatOff said:

HT role is an interesting switch from some folk's play style. You're literally just defaulting to denying space, playing defense and in the case of being rushed, doing as much damage as possible. In some cases you're just baiting stuff into the Strv 103B behind you. Its very much a slow-play style. You can push when you have an overwhelming advantage for sure, but the goal is first and foremost to make sure you don't lose the brawl, which means staying alive.

Really interesting reading your thoughts on this Crab, and thanks, you articulate yourself very well and it helps for scrubs like me to get a bit of perspective.

My little take on the above: the Type 5 might be pretty good for the HT position given the role you want the HT to play is very defensive and an attrition battle. It has excellent armour (a bit vulnerable to gold-spam but if you can hide the shoulder and only poke showing a heavily angled front you can still bounce plenty) and with the derp, is pretty good in an attrition battle because 'HE always does damage'. Because of the derp and HP pool a lot of people also aren't keen on pushing into you.

Main disadvantage over the IS7 is lack of mobility (important if you need the HT to get somewhere quick) and lack of DPM, meaning very vulnerable to being rushed if on your own, but in a platoon, that shouldn't happen. Oh, the other main disadvantage is probably that most skilled players probably hate driving it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just play a triple platoon with similar tanks, like all mediums or a mix of 5as and 907s. Dominate a flank and murder the shit out of it.

A good one would be for example a IS7/5a+907+50m where tanks are all similar but the small differences (like accuracy, armour ecc) will allow you to be perfectly fine in any situation and map and rotate players between support and attack role.

If you want to use a t100lt i'd suggest you not using the strvb since is kinda bad on (sh)city maps so maybe bring a 50b or even a 263 that can play very well on all kinds of maps and still be very dangerous snipers. 

Or just simply bring 3 907s and yolo a flank. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if you can't platoon, just solo like this.   But honestly,  this set up doesn't feel as fragile as it sounds.  Even when one of us dies, the other tanks are strong enough to help force the battle.  The key is communication and patience.  I don't find the s tank hard to play in city maps and honestly it works great for baiting people out of corners for infinite track damage.   

received_10156994202072178.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea @Canadian_Reaper it's not that fragile. Per class those 3 optimal tanks are some of the most durable armorwise, well camoed and mobile. Like TheDivison said it's mostly about patience. You feed your S tank either by funneling them in as the HT or by baiting them in via the LT. Kharkov is probably the worst map but with the tracking potential of a coordinated T-100 and 103b all mistakes are punished!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Meirzin watching the is7 perspective was very enlightnening, thank you for replay pack;
shows a patience in a HT that's hard to see/learn. Guess that's why that setup seems weird for more aggressive players.

There are some pointers for corner peeking and then withdrawing to lure them into platoonmates/team fire that i hadn't realized on my own.

About the LT: do you think that a medium (as some have suggested) could work similarly? and which one? again, not to farm bond$ but to
try better ways of platooning "defensively"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to post replays @mistervanni. Personally i don't think a MT can do what the T-100 can do. The firepower upgrade isn't worth the teleport and invisibility. You already have firepower for frontal engagements in your semi-intelligent S-tank dpm bitch....err friend. I just don't see a MT being able to assist 2k/game. That's a free (usually no trade) dead enemy every battle.

Related - my play style preferences are to play like @Fulcrous and just drive heaviums and stronk turret rasha tanks and roll a flank. But i can't mentally handle the arty focus so that's why I've just decided to play an extended game of keep away with the T-100. I think the oft mentioned IS-7/ChinaHT/907 platoon has real merit though and maybe we need a more strict comparison to get some data. I personally don't think it would work as well BUT I'm bad at all those tanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

isee

i doubt that with my friends i could replicate that setup well enough, and also no LT100 availability...maybe wz/rhm can do similar.

in tier X usually we bring more similar tanks, as someone suggested, like 3 hovermeds or 2 heavies a med or TD but i find our gameplay frustrating from a strategic point (force push and pray we make through) and also our winrate can suffer; of course our skill leaves to be desired, but so does our opponent's too :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, mistervanni said:

@Meirzin watching the is7 perspective was very enlightnening, thank you for replay pack;
shows a patience in a HT that's hard to see/learn. Guess that's why that setup seems weird for more aggressive players.

There are some pointers for corner peeking and then withdrawing to lure them into platoonmates/team fire that i hadn't realized on my own.

About the LT: do you think that a medium (as some have suggested) could work similarly? and which one? again, not to farm bond$ but to
try better ways of platooning "defensively"

You have no idea how weird this playstyle is for me. I normally play hyper aggressive and Crab has to keep telling me to camp more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is no longer  an aggressive man's game. If you want to constantly be winning, you have to play slow and intelligent defense with out giving up map control. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mistervanni said:

isee

i doubt that with my friends i could replicate that setup well enough, and also no LT100 availability...maybe wz/rhm can do similar.

in tier X usually we bring more similar tanks, as someone suggested, like 3 hovermeds or 2 heavies a med or TD but i find our gameplay frustrating from a strategic point (force push and pray we make through) and also our winrate can suffer; of course our skill leaves to be desired, but so does our opponent's too :D

With a proper VR set-up any X LT works, but Sheridan is worst, because its the worst scout (but it still works). WZ is a little slow and the gun is derpy. RhmPz would be my personal choice for repeated play, because of the high speed, VR and reliable gun. But its an AWFUL counter-scout/skirmisher and never bounces anything randomly. Its actually harder to play int his role than T-100 because you get less mistakes/margin. But it does work, I've done extended runs at 70%+ with this set-up. 

1 hour ago, Meirzin said:

You have no idea how weird this playstyle is for me. I normally play hyper aggressive and Crab has to keep telling me to camp more.

Apologetically true. You don't try to win, you just sit there trying not to lose. 

46 minutes ago, TheDivision said:

This is no longer  an aggressive man's game. If you want to constantly be winning, you have to play slow and intelligent defense with out giving up map control. 

And it's WG's fault. The shift to the flat MM, the TD re-emergence. Like @Illusion said, we're back to pre 9.0 meta, where you just camp to victories. HanZulu should come back. The arty re-buff put us back to where being seen is too punishing, so its back to the days of kemp boosh and spot for TDs, counter-pushing, and breaking enemy TD camp. Vision is dead, except where it isn't (because every team is sitting behind their bases). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, CraBeatOff said:

I personally don't think it would work as well BUT I'm bad at all those tanks.

Falling over laughing as I try to imagine Crab's idea of "bad."   Probably anything under 3k WN8...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.