Jump to content


Verified Tanker [NA]
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Embiggener

  • Rank
    Russian Bias Believer

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Server
  1. I'm not saying it's going to be a map that is fun or plays well, I'm simply pointing out that the aesthetics of the prototype are a complete non-issue.
  2. You have no idea what you're on about. This is a bunch of pre-existing assets like perimeter mountains, trees, and lighting settings arranged on top of a placeholder terrain, painted with placeholder alpha blend for details like the road, and placeholder assets for things they don't already have (like giant pyramid things). This is precisely how these things are prototyped and made. We've seen similar early map screenshots released over the years, and I vaguely recall some of them making it to supertest in the same state. Virtually every map looks like this at some point or other. OP should be embarrassed over the thread title, honestly.
  3. This has the potential to somewhat bring back the feel of the old 4 tier spread - by which I mean, kill their 3 top tier heavies before they know what is going on, and then pick off the rest of the enemy team before your own top tiers manage to kill themselves.
  4. That's the point. The more iconic a vehicle is, the more they feel the need to sneak in insults.
  5. That's why they're rigging; the game mode is simply not supportable with NA server populations. It doesn't even matter if the missions are reasonable or not. I'd be honestly disappointed in people if they didn't take advantage in any way they could; the way the new game mode was set up was sort of insulting. It was a transparent attempt to bleed credits as an easy-button solution to fixing game economy issues, and they couldn't even be bothered to do it right on NA. This is exactly the behavior they should expect if they're going to piss on people and tell them it's a cool new game mode.
  6. I don't think fighting an AI KT in a platoon of T-34's is entertaining at all, because with the half-assed sort of AI and spawning behavior you can expect, you'd be able to do it in your sleep. The only saving element of AW's PvE right now is that it's relatively short, and the grinds are short. Tomato controlled KT's in a historical mode would be largely irrelevant, especially if in historical configurations like they were before. They might blap a bunch of opposing tomatoes, but they're not going to determine the outcome of a match with good opponents present. If they're on your team, at least they should keep the enemy busy while you get things done. Any sort of wide scale PvE in WoT is probably out of the question right now. It'd kill NA for sure; I can't even play on NA West most of the time when I'm on anymore due to low count. The entire game revolves around grind in PvP vs. pay-to-skip anyways; I can't imagine they'd shoot themselves in the foot there. I think they're currently taking the right tack in trying to improve their core stuff - physics, tank model updates, sounds. They've fallen behind on the polish end of things. The other pitfall to watch out for with PvE - and this is already happening in AW - is the whining about tank balance from all of the refugees hanging out in PvE. If they give into that whining they'll eventually sink the game, because it drives off PvPers, and then the PvEers leave anyways because they're typically fickle and they get bored of the PvE content. The only real way to handle that is to do what EVE does, and tell them to suck it up (at least in public).
  7. I still think most players aren't going to meet these requirements. This will just make the rigging move along more efficiently.
  8. I like the gun sounds, they seem to be a better representation of the IRL tank fire I've heard. I'm not going to complain about traverse unless they're really unbalanced about which tanks get the glue treatment. Wiggling back and forth was always fucking stupid, basically the tenks equivalent of bunny hopping.
  9. It's worth it again to point out that the goals of the people paying for development of the game are not even remotely related to the goals of those playing it. The primary purpose of the double is to get people playing a lot of different tanks to fill out the MM queue - that's innately tied to how much money they'll make. On the one hand, because of the in-game progression/economy the doubles give the devs a powerful tool to coerce players to play lots of different things; look at some of the older Battlefield series as a contrast, where your motivation to play other classes waned as you ranked up and upgrades became exponentially harder to unlock. On the other hand, there is a powerful incentive for them to not really care what we think about it. WG's general disinterest in the historical battle format is still really disappointing. They failed to solve the classic problem that 6-year-olds face of who is going to play the "good guys" , and who will play the "bad guys". No surprise that we don't see a market-based solution out of a former warsaw-pact location. All they'd really need to do is this: - Have people queue up for a specific battle with a known possible order of battle for each side. Limits on the "big" tanks in a given scenario, be they KT's, IS's, Jpanthers, Ferds, whatever. - People get to select which tanks that are allowed for the battle that they want to queue up in. They're required to have one of the "smaller" tanks in that lineup. - For the "big" tanks, they enter an amount in credits. This is their bid. The highest bidders get to roll the "big" tanks. Those that lose the bid or don't ready up a "big" tank roll out in the smaller tanks. - The smaller tanks - PzIII's, T-34's, Stugs, BT-7's, etc, get a credit income bonus. The key lesson they're missing is that people do what you pay them to do. WG wasn't even trying to pay people to drive T-34-85's and get rekt by KT's, so why the hell would anyone bother? WG would benefit in all sorts of ways from that. It's another venue to create missions for. They'll leech tons of credits just like Domination is designed to because tomatoes will bid silly amounts to try and stomp people in their KT's. Meanwhile, good players could shoot up those tomatoes like credit/XP pinatas while grinding historical missions. Edited to add; Still playing AW, particularly while avoiding 3x/5x weekends in WoT. (never again!). It's fun, but the game is possibly even buggier than WT.
  10. I doubt they'll go all Gaijin on us. Gaijin was never making an honest effort from the beginning; they're apparently happy enough with what they manage to make ripping people off. I've been playing more AW. Its not un-fun; it definitely has some potential. The blatantly unfinished art and effects you find here and there makes it clear this is an actual beta, not a Gaijin "beta". They have a loonnnnng way to go before they catch up to WG in terms of art polish. Not art detail or the tech level; obviously you can't compare the engines... just polish. A lot of what they have in there is hour-long, close-enough type of work. I see what they're trying to do in general. Their biggest problem is going to be PvE; if people log in, hangar-spin a bit, and then log off because they really just don't want to PvE anymore, they're hosed. They should be able to make it work, though. - They can't just dump a bunch more cash/XP, even as bonus rewards; people will blow through the content (tank lines) too fast. - If they hand out retrofits as rewards, that sort of negates the need to grind lines you don't want, which is clearly their point for retrofits. - Credit doubles on random craptanks cluttering your garage might be enough - with PvE - to encourage people to own and drive more tanks. - They're not going to be able to balance tanks in such a way that everyone actually wants all lines just to actually play them in PvP, but the token system may help there. - They will most likely go with longer missions/achievements for premium vehicles, additional commanders, and consumables, etc. Which also brings us to the crew and commanders. They are walking away from a ton of progression headroom there - the commanders and skill trees we have look more like a proof of concept than a working system scaled to a F2P game. And everyone running around with the same commander is exceedingly lame - it's the internet tenks equivalent of playing an MMO and everyone is "the chosen one". It'd be better if there were different backgrounds, or combinations of backgrounds (perhaps their original vehicle class and nations/professions of origin), that you could recruit commanders from. Those give you their skill trees and basic bonus elements. Then pick a random name and portrait, and voila, you're done. They could even use this to ditch the "base" system entirely, and have your commanders train additional skills - in Army terms, send 'em to the War College, etc. Want cheaper repair costs? Send someone to logistics school. That sort of thing. Also, arty. Ugh. I really wish they'd get more creative with indirect fire. I dislike nearly everything about it; the incoming warning makes the entire class almost pointless except for a few specific situations, yet it still manages to be annoying for everyone else. Someone needs to take some of the devs to a mortar range and just let them blow shit up all day, they'll figure it out. They at least get some credit for trying utility rounds rather than just whining about them like WG.
  11. Random positive observation - looks like the new sounds and sound system will actually be pretty good. .. So, at least we got that going for us.
  12. Embiggener

    Leopard 1

    But which gun stats are you sacrificing? If the hull/track dispersion values aren't utter crap like the Leopard, then it's probably just a straight up improvement.
  13. I enjoy the toaster quite a bit. Fun tanking large chunks out of tier 5/6 heavies. Could not for the life of me get the big gun to work for me, probably due to too much time playing assault gun on city maps. Depression is inexplicably bad, sometimes requiring you do back up hills in order to depress. On the other hand, you have just about all the elevation in the world.
  14. It certainly got you thinking about it, didn't it? Sounds pretty effective to me. And I bet you're a lot less likely to do the same thing in the future.
  15. For most players, yes, that's exactly where the easiest improvement in win rate is. Improving bottom tier performance will let good players wring out a few more victories from the bottom, but there simply aren't enough players like that to matter overall.
  • Create New...