Jump to content

Recommended Posts

22 hours ago, NThirtyTwo said:

Right now:

Maus rrrs in a long corridor. He gets tracked and shit on by high pen ammo and quickly dies. Bad play is punished.

Maus player learns to play the tank and charges the same corridor while doing zigzags (with his hull) and keeping his turret angled properly the whole time. He might get tracked a few times, and even take a couple of shots of damage because RNG, but with some support, he will make it to the next cover and help his team break a strong opposing force. Good play is rewarded.

What I gather from Sandbox:

Maus rrrs in a long corridor. Nobody in the enemy team can do much about it since most guns won't penetrate anyway, but he takes some damage regardless thanks to RNG. Maus reaches next cover point somewhat damaged, but alive. Bad play is not punished. One could argue bad play is rewarded.

Maus player learns to play the tank and charges the same corridor while doing zigzags and keeping his turret angled properly the whole time. Maus is God, unbreakable, even if he somehow crashed halfway through with his shit still angled okay, nobody could do shit about it even in their wildest dreams. Good play is hugely rewarded.

It really might just be me, but I find the idea retarded.

Also, which T10 tanks exactly are we talking about when we say they are unplayable? In my experience, only 3 tanks are "that bad" at the moment: FV4005, Foch 155, Obj. 268, and even then, some very good players might argue that they can make them work.

The sandbox changes as I understand them would make every tank that isn't properly adapted to short range brawly combat at minimum "less relevant", and at worse "unplayable".

So really, it's not breaking 4 tanks so that 10 may be fixed.

Rather, it's (maybe) fixing 2 tanks: Foch 155 and Obj 268, and hurting / breaking 15 or so others in the process (just on top of my head): 121,STB-1, AMX 30B, AMX 50B, Bat. Chat. 25t, Centurion AX, FV4005, TVP 50/51, E50M, Leopard 1, Grille 15, M48 Patton, M60, Obj 140, Obj 430, Obj. 907, T-62A

Now I don't want to start an argument on how much those tanks are actually affected by it. Maybe I'm wrong about some of them all together and maybe it's not that bad for others, but it seems pretty clear to me that these tanks will at minimum suffer from those changes. Point is we're pretty darn far from the Fix 10, break 4 figure, which if true, would be a net improvement.

Now i need to go back 3 steps, but before that, there are way, way more as ``just 3 tanks`` shit on tier 10:

Anything below the maus is basically not balanced proper (rexxie posted the elimination order), thats 10 tanks already, imo E3 and leopard can also be considered not balanced proper, while E5, E100, TVP, and bat chat also have isseu`s (OP, 100% reliant on gold, too high skill ceiling / floor (tvp) and way too much yolo (5x390 dmg is stupid)

Thats half the tanks...

Your logic (the bolded part) is also terrible flawed, it doesnt work that way (hence the need for a massive rebalance) a maus can not ``r-r-r, zig zag and do something``, you get insta raped by anything, especially tanks like Type 4, Type 5, VK-B before the buff and so on, they get raped by TDs, gold ammo and anythign else...

The whole purpose of those tanks is NOT ``defend a chokepoint``, the purpose is too attack! We have big TDs to defend a choke points:

  • Heavys attack
  • Mediums flank / attack / defend (the all-rounders!)
  • TDs defend

Thats the meta-meta, Heavys attack, Mediums flank, TDs defend!

If we go a step forward, we see that the meta swings, from heavys (beta), to arty (after beta), a little shift to big tds, massive shift to arty, untill patch 8.6, when it went full tier 10 TDs, till the current mash of TDs / arty / autoloaders / (tier 10 mediums)

The reason it swings is simple: People will play what they perceive as ``the best``, if arty rules the game, people play arty, if big TDs kill everything, they play TDs and so on.

if we combine the above with 2 very basic rules which apply to any game:

  1. Perfect balance is impossible, there will always be ``best`` and ``worst`` weapons / classes / tanks / shipts
  2. The average player is not good, if not downright terrible

Logic says that heavy tanks should thus be ``the best``, and thats for mutiple reasons, which all combined make suchs strong case for: heavys = best class, that i really, really can not understand why so many people fail to understand (just keep in mind rule 1 and 2..)

1: In wot, the better the player, the better you are at ``reading the minimap``, relocating and understanding the gameflow, this makes mediums by default better for good players, since they are all-round, and allow said player to make optimal use of the player hes strengths, the weaknesses of the tank, low penetration, bad accuracy, lack of armor, can also be compensated better by a good player as by a bad player.

2: There will always be a class better, but making heavys the best, all the average players will flock towards those, if all the average players truck along in heavys, they can not:

  • Suicide rush in the first minute
  • Herp Derp yolo better players (a bat chat can yolo you in the first minute an IS4 cant)
  • Bomb people on the other side of the map (like arty can)
  • Camp, since camping wont be reward, no camo / relative poor gun (compared to TDs) makes them exp pinata`s

3: Heavys scale the worst of all classes vs high tiers, their armor is useless, they dont have mobility / camo to flank or scout and they dont have powerfull guns to contribute much, the few heavy tanks / tiers who do scale well (tier 7 heavys, IS3) are mostly cases of bad balance. By making heavys by default a bit better as mediums / TDs this problem gets undercut, especiallt if heavy players are on average worse

4: By making heavys ``better``, everything else can balanced much easier, since you have a starting point, if heavys are say ``20``, then mediums can be ``19,5`` and TDs ``19``, on all tiers below that mediums = TDs for average players (average as in 48% winrate or whatever number WG picks) this way WG can finally quantify which tanks are OP / UP and fix them...

5: Tier 10 should be only marginal better as tier 9, if all tiers are 1 point difference in strenght, then tier 10 should be only half a point better, this way people will only play tier 10 ``for fun``, and not because its ``the best tier``, combine this with high running cost, and many of the worst players will simply stick to tier 8-9, and not play tier 10 so much

6: It benefits unicums, because when all the orange and below mostly drive heavys:

  • You wont be yoloed by bat chats / TVP`s
  • No 5 arty every game to fk u
  • No 6 TDs defending base
  • Your team might actually do something (since all a heavy can do is crawl forward and stomp the other team head on)

A team full of slow heavy with no camo and bad gun handling are the ultimate kind of game set ups...

7: When there are lots of heavys tanks (and thus not many TDs and artys) WG can add open maps again, this adds variaty etc etc etc, open maps however ONLY WORK if heavy tanks are capable of still charging in, without risk of getting annihilated by arty or TDs (and thus heavy tanks need to be by default ``better``)

8: When people think of a tank they think of something with a big gun, strong armor, a loud engine and something that can take a beating (see all the ``tanks`` in RTS games) people dont think of a paper bag like the leopard when they thing of ``tank``, they think of a Maus or E75, big bulky vehicles with armor and large guns. People ``want this``, so why not give them? Its for all of the above reasons also better for the game...

The problem now two-fold:

  1. What is the reason heavys are not that good for average players? (and what are average players? 47%, 49%? where you draw the line?)
  2. How do we make heavy tanks ``better``, and how much better? and for who should it better? everyone, people with <50% winrate?

WG clearly considered open maps the problem, the added / reworked many maps, and nerfed / buffed some stuff, but it didnt change much, if i now look at sandbox server, they consider ``everything`` a problem (which is correct) but their changes are both too harsh (penetration drop) and not harsh enough (gold ammo nerf is too little)

Those are the real questions which need answers, sandbox is a massive step in the right direction, both from a meta-balance point of view, a shift towards heavy tank, aswell as a tank fix, almost every ``problem tank`` gets proper rebalanced.

So no, sandbox is not flawless, and yes, sandbox will add a whole host off other problems (too much little things to name here) but the overall direction / balance swings massively in the direction of: This are good changes.

ps: and thats ignoring the arty changes, stuns are lame, but getting 1 shot is even lamer, and since arty will turn in a real support class i bet numbers will also drop a lot after a while, beiing pure support is quite boring and when you cant one shot people you also cant grief with it anymore....

 

5 hours ago, Madner Kami said:

As far as I can see, everyone is argueing and agreeing that premmo in particular needs a nerf and that artillery is a problem (as well as maps). The criticism isn't in what they want to achieve, but in how they want to do it.

Prem ammo, arty and map changes are all closely tied to tier 10 tank balance, on tier 5-9 only minor changes are needed (more or less) even if the meta would change wildly (like by removing gold ammo) the fact tanks can be both bottom and top tier and that tanks have often clear roles / strengths / weaknesses makes the whole system much more ``WG proof`` (probably luck from WGs part, but still, tier 5-8 are as good / bad as always, some weeks its fun, other weeks its suffering but its all in all solid, except for the tier gap, which is a bit too big

ps: tier 1-4 need a massive rework, those tiers are awefull, best would be serious hp buffs, coupled with many smaller rebalances (dpm, gun handling, aim time etc etc etc)

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, GehakteMolen said:

Too long to quote

 

Please tell me, how all that what you wrote, can not simply be achieved by pushing artillery into more of a support-role (lowering single-shot damage output, removing oneshot-potential, adding stun) and giving premmo a meaty kick in the balls. What is the reason to also force everyone into a close combat role, by lowering overall accuracy and nerfing sniping-capacity into the ground?

Also, I am perfectly on board with the introduction of "roles", as it's easy to see that, for example, not all heavies are actually heavies (hello Caernarvon, Tiger I and Tiger II for obvious examples or Churchill I and VII in particular). However, what is the reasoning behind introducing these roles and then changing the game in a way that makes all except one of the roles practically irrelevant? As Tajj7 states so nicely: What the flying fuck are you going to do in your support-sniping medium, when half the enemy team is Mauses? This is just the old problem we had with artillery back in the day, as most everyone willl simply flock to what is the easiest and most effective to use and while one tank being OP as fuck is big enough of a problem in an of itself, but can be dealt with, an entire class role being OP by design is outright gamebreaking. Why are you not seeing this?

 

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

 

Please tell me, how all that what you wrote, can not simply be achieved by pushing artillery into more of a support-role (lowering single-shot damage output, removing oneshot-potential, adding stun) and giving premmo a meaty kick in the balls. What is the reason to also force everyone into a close combat role, by lowering overall accuracy and nerfing sniping-capacity into the ground?

Also, I am perfectly on board with the introduction of "roles", as it's easy to see that, for example, not all heavies are actually heavies (hello Caernarvon, Tiger I and Tiger II for obvious examples or Churchill I and VII in particular). However, what is the reasoning behind introducing these roles and then changing the game in a way that makes all except one of the roles practically irrelevant? As Tajj7 states so nicely: What the flying fuck are you going to do in your support-sniping medium, when half the enemy team is Mauses? This is just the old problem we had with artillery back in the day, as most everyone willl simply flock to what is the easiest and most effective to use and while one tank being OP as fuck is big enough of a problem in an of itself, but can be dealt with, an entire class role being OP by design is outright gamebreaking. Why are you not seeing this?

 

because the supposed ``overpowered-ness`` of heavys is massive exaggerated, the amount of super heavys 9Maus, E100 and type 5) is quite low (roughly equal to the amount of arty) and they still have many, many foes which easy kill them:

  • 1vs1 any ``brawler medium`` will kill them 9/10 times, the difference is mobility is so massive, the heavys stands no chance (so a maus without support is a dead maus)
  • Many TDs got HP buffs, making them excellent anti-heavy tank TDs, Obj 263 and E4 got a serious hp buff, combined with good penetration, though armor, and good mobility/ a turret and they can easy kill any heavy tank head on. an E3 is very hard to kill aswell while a Jp-E100 or 183 still have big guns (and powerfull HE)
  • Some tanks got specific changes, making them powerfull vs heavys, M48 and 50B both have 290 AP penetration, allowing them to easy kill any heavy, even head on.

Its also important to realize that because tanks now actually bounce stuff, you can attack, and thus maus and type 5`s no longer play like cowards, they just charge in, they wont sidescrape and wait for the enemy, they just try to push and go foward, and due to all the changes, this is rewarded, while camping gets punished.

The game made a huge shift to attacking:

  • Heavys can now attack
  • Mediums can not snipe (and thus also have to flank / attack)
  • TDs can now actually fight heavys head on, they are no longer all dedicated third line campers with OP guns (not all TDs, some)

ps: and the time of ``every tank can play every role`` is over, and thats good, there are still all-rounders, so people who want to play all-rounders can, but there are now also snipers, rushers, brawlers and tank-tanks

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, GehakteMolen said:

*Snip

I think that either you have issues playing at high tier or you just love to over-complicate things.

Some tanks are better than others, but no, there are not 10 tanks at T10 that are "broken" or "unplayable". This is backed up by the fact that large numbers of good players make all of these tanks work very well.

A list of "favorite" or "best" tanks is not a "proof" that 10 tanks are broken at all. For example, the Type 5 is apparently hated, but I think it's a hilarious and somewhat effective pubbie stomper. Played correctly, even by a mediocre player like myself, it nets me a nice 65% WR and 2800 DPG, which is actually above average for my T10s.

 

Now if I indulge your religious-like fanaticism over some absolute need to create an artificial overpopulation of heavy tanks in this game:

Thing is heavy tanks already are the most popular class in the game at high tiers. This is quite clearly caused by corridor-y maps and emphasis on brawly mechanics that has been the focus of WG over the last few years.

We have already seen the effects of this:

Positives:

- Pubbies are less campy.

- Higher HP pools to farm.

- Less pubbie yolo (speed limit).

 

Negatives:

- Much faster games: It is now pretty much the norm that games are over within 4 minutes.

- Games are more one sided: 15-5 is also sort of the norm now. This is a normal result of large brawl zones which create exponential synergy, i.e. one more tank on one side can mean the difference between a 5 tanks surviving a fight versus only 1 or 2.

- The game is becoming more dumb: Vision mechanics are almost not "a thing" anymore. Most players I've seen, myself included, are dropping optics on most of our tanks. Large portions of the maps become either totally unusable or extremely tricky to use, which limits the number of available strategies or flanking routes.

- Gold ammo is being used more than before. This is because medium tanks and support heavies are often forced to fight highly armored heavies and TDs head on, and gold improves the odds of trading favorably.

- Light tanks are becoming an almost padding only mechanic. On almost all maps, light tanks are now essentially low HP, high camo medium tanks. As such, medium tanks are a straight up better choice, and using lights only becomes relevant for: fun, padding, missions.

 

Sandbox changes, and the entirety of what you describe above would only serve to increase the mentioned positive / negative aspects and as such, would constitute a net deterioration of the game.

In other words, I believe almost everyone will agree that the current meta (brawly corridors) is not as bad as the previous TD and arty fests, but it has already gone a bit too far in making everything brawly and corridory. What you are saying above would only make this worse.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, NThirtyTwo said:

snip

We have tunnel maps because otherwise heavys are unplayable, and even now mediums > heavys (on tier 10)

Fact is, sandbox gameplay works, even without gold ammo and with crazy russians, it needs polishing and fixing, but the overall concept is good, WGs reasoning behind it is also also solid and logical (see my wall of text above) and it will fix more problems as it creates

And if you think tanks like Fv-183 and Type 5 are ``fine tanks`` then im afraid there is no further point in talking....

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, NThirtyTwo said:

Played correctly, even by a mediocre player like myself

When did 3k WN8 become mediocre?

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, GehakteMolen said:

We have tunnel maps because otherwise heavys are unplayable, and even now mediums > heavys (on tier 10)

Fact is, sandbox gameplay works, even without gold ammo and with crazy russians, it needs polishing and fixing, but the overall concept is good, WGs reasoning behind it is also also solid and logical (see my wall of text above) and it will fix more problems as it creates

And if you think tanks like Fv-183 and Type 5 are ``fine tanks`` then im afraid there is no further point in talking....

- Medium > heavies is only true if you consider that the majority of good players favor mediums over heavies. If you strictly compare the 2 classes in the hands of an average player, heavies are  better than mediums.

- You literally are the only person I have seen who thinks that the sandbox changes are an overall improvement over the current live server.

- FV-183 and Type 5 are perhaps not perfectly balanced, but they most definitely are "fine" enough to work in the current meta. The Type 5 in particular has suffered a lot of "bad press", but the vast majority of people complaining about it or calling it bad have never even tried driving it. It is actually good enough to work on most maps and quite fun to play if you enjoy slow bricks at all. If you are too close minded to see that, then I suppose there is no point in talking indeed.

 

23 minutes ago, woe2you said:

When did 3k WN8 become mediocre?

It is if you put yourself in my shoes. I strive to improve my play just as much as someone at 1200 WN8 strives to become blue or purple. Furthermore, I am becoming increasingly aware of my flaws as a player and my slowness in adapting and fixing those flaws is frustrating (I have been at a 3k plateau for roughly 5k games). As such, 3k WN8 is in my perspective mediocre, as I believe I should be able to achieve close to 4k if I correctly executed what I already know about the game.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, NThirtyTwo said:

It is if you put yourself in my shoes. I strive to improve my play just as much as someone at 1200 WN8 strives to become blue or purple. Furthermore, I am becoming increasingly aware of my flaws as a player and my slowness in adapting and fixing those flaws is frustrating (I have been at a 3k plateau for roughly 5k games). As such, 3k WN8 is in my perspective mediocre, as I believe I should be able to achieve close to 4k if I correctly executed what I already know about the game.

Thanks for the autobiography, but in the context of what you were talking about (whether someone can realistically be expected to get the most out of a bad tank) it's not mediocre. You're literally in the top 0.01% of players.

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

- Medium > heavies is only true if you consider that the majority of good players favor mediums over heavies. If you strictly compare the 2 classes in the hands of an average player, heavies are  better than mediums.

- You literally are the only person I have seen who thinks that the sandbox changes are an overall improvement over the current live server.

- FV-183 and Type 5 are perhaps not perfectly balanced, but they most definitely are "fine" enough to work in the current meta. The Type 5 in particular has suffered a lot of "bad press", but the vast majority of people complaining about it or calling it bad have never even tried driving it. It is actually good enough to work on most maps and quite fun to play if you enjoy slow bricks at all. If you are too close minded to see that, then I suppose there is no point in talking indeed.

Uh, I now get accused of not beiing able to play slow bricks? The best lowe player of EU, the only one who thinks IS3 > KT > KV4 > rest, the person who rates E100 above almost everything on tier 10 and who considerd ST-1 to be the best tier 9 tank?

And most people i see complaining here are blues who havent even played the sandbox server, so your opinion is even less valid as mine, i atleast played it (250 or so games now)

ps: and unlike the vast, vast majority of the wot playerbase:

  • Im a good player ((dark)purple is best 1/10000)
  • I play every tier between tier 5 and 10
  • I play every class, including trash tanks
  • I never skid grinds, and even suffer most stock grinds
  • I dont use gold to train crews, dont waste millions of credits on gold ammo or use other ``unfair advantages``

Im all in all the ultimate player for the WG balance team, i can play all tiers and classes and my performance is relative consistent, on top of playing a lot for a very long time.

My opnion has thus more value as 10 random players, because im flat out better in any aspect of the game and i have seen almost everything, and managed to do well in almost any situation

Wot is right now stagnant, and these sandbox changes are just whats needed to shake things up again.

ps: i would be amazed if we have even seen half of the stuff wg will change, also expect:

  • New mm, 3-5-7, so tier 3 tier 10, 5 tier 9, 7 tier 8, this way no more games where you are lone bottom tier (this is sort of confirmed, i guess it will come in 2 weeks or so on sandbox)
  • Total rework of tier 1-4 (its a shitfest down there)
  • Many other fixes, like banning arty platoon`s, perhaps banning the stats part of xvm,
  • Total rework of crew skills

Current sandbox is just the first step (i bet)

ps ps: im also most of the time fairly ``correct`` with my guesses in regards to what should / would / needs to be changed, this post from half a year go looks suprising much to the first version of sandbox server:

(the gold ammo part got scraped, but the rest? arty got reworked as i hoped it would be, and the overall trend is also about the same)

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, woe2you said:

Thanks for the autobiography, but in the context of what you were talking about (whether someone can realistically be expected to get the most out of a bad tank) it's not mediocre. You're literally in the top 0.01% of players.

You make a good point.

However, I do not say that the Type 5 is a "good" tank. It is objectively "bad". I say that it is not anywhere near "bad enough" that it is "unplayable", or cannot be enjoyed.

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

You make a good point.

However, I do not say that the Type 5 is a "good" tank. It is objectively "bad". I say that it is not anywhere near "bad enough" that it is "unplayable", or cannot be enjoyed.

Slightly off-topic, but if you're insisting on playing tanks like the Type 5 I think we've tracked down the cause of your 3k plateau...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, woe2you said:

Slightly off-topic, but if you're insisting on playing tanks like the Type 5 I think we've tracked down the cause of your 3k plateau...

Haha, while I enjoy it, I don't enjoy it that much :)

The "typical" tanks I play are the M48 and E100, i.e. the "heavy frontline" role or the "medium frontline" role.

The cause of my plateau is mostly bad tilt management, inconsistency and being too stubborn. Keep playing after 4 horrible games in a row, trying different / dangerous routes because I am bored, and trying to hold a lost flank too long are respective examples.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, GehakteMolen said:

Argentum ad statum

You just completely proved his point. You refused to entertain his argument and resorted to arguing stats and why your opinion is better than his because *reasons*. That's the definition of close minded. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, GehakteMolen said:

*snip

 

6 minutes ago, BoilerBandsman said:

You just completely proved his point. You refused to entertain his argument and resorted to arguing stats and why your opinion is better than his because *reasons*. That's the definition of close minded. 

To be fair, being a better player does makes him by default better qualified to give his opinion on how the game works. Logically, if he plays better, he likely understand the game better.

 

However, understanding how something works and being able to abuse it does not mean you are better placed to know what is better for everyone else. This is something that requires understanding, yes, but also empathy, i.e. the ability to put yourself in other peoples' shoes.

I completely understand where you come from when you say that an ultra brawly, super aggressive playstyle, role centered tanks and heavy uncontested king meta would be an improvement for this game. However, I also believe you are wrong, because you ignore the fact that most other players AFAIK, and some of them not dipshits, disagree with you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, BoilerBandsman said:

You just completely proved his point. You refused to entertain his argument and resorted to arguing stats and why your opinion is better than his because *reasons*. That's the definition of close minded. 

What point?

(below is also not an attack or anything, its just so many crap is said about sandbox, it annoys me a bit (i know, readin comments on ritas blog is stupid)) but still)

hes entire argument is wrong from a to z and he in the meantime completly ignores 3 years of wotlabs complaining (land-arty, 268 / foch beiign worthless) and fails to understand (or also ignores) the reason for tunnel maps

We have tunnel maps to heavys are ``good``, but all it did was fix a symptom, not the cause.

So again:

The following points are key:

  1. Many players are terrible, joe avg sucks, especially in a casual game like wot, many daddys and young kids
  2. WG wants many players, especially casual`s and daddy`s

This means the game needs to be designed in suchs way that joe avg can have fun, BUT

  1. There are also good players
  2. A game needs good players to which joe avg can look up to, so he has a reason to improve (like some1 said above, those lol pro`s, all 1337 wannabees want to be like them

So what WG needs to do is offer a game in which joe avg can do reasonable well (``pwn``) while it should also have depth (check) and complexity (check) to reward good players.

THE most important thing is thus that all the bads are channeled in a certain direction, in wot that means they either all play arty, TDs or heavys.

Go guess whats the best for both bads and unicums?

If all bads play:

  • Arty they can pwn once in a while due to RNG, but its incredible retarded for the rest (no explanation needed)
  • TD`s, we saw that in 8.6-9.6, tier 9/10 TDs everywhere, almost as retarded as arty-party`s, except now the bads also cry, due to gold ammo and ``OP mediums`` (camo (ab)used etc)
  • Heavys, we saw that in beta and now (a bit)

If all idiots truck along in heavys, they can not:

  • Suicide rush
  • Herp Derp yolo better players (or atleast, not how an T62 can fuck a purple KT, because ``purple must die``)
  • Bomb people on the other side of the map (like arty can)
  • Camping wont be reward, since no camo / relative poor gun (compared to TDs)

It does reward going forward and doing something, since standing in the base means crap game after crap game, if they all herp-derp to some random places they can do something.

It also alows them to ``pwn`` something once in a while.

Having all joe avg in heavys is for unicums also better since:

  • You wont be yoloed by bat chats
  • No 5 arty every game to fk u
  • No 6 TDs defending base
  • Your team might actually do something (since all a heavy can do is crawl forward and stomp the other team head on)

So if WG wants to make wot succesfull: Heavys need to be the best class by some margin for average players!!

The above logic is flawless, since the 3 starting points are 100% true:

  1. Many players are terrible, joe avg sucks, especially in a casual game like wot, many daddys and young kids
  2. WG wants many players, especially casual`s and daddy`s
  3. Perfect balance does nto exsist, there will always be a class ``better`` (more suited)

If you start reasoning from that point onwards, its very clear that heavys should be the best class, and the reason heavys are not at this moment is:

  • Gold ammo
  • Too high base penetration
  • Arty

Sandbox adresses all problems, and 2 pages ago i explained why imo nering penetration via penetration drop is better as chaning it via normalisation or base penetration

So please, where am i wrong, and not random ``Fv-183 is balanced``, because that only shows that you dont understand balance

Tier 8 and 9 are balanced, both when playing and when facing and for a wide array of plauers, there are some ouliers (IS3 says hi) but thats it, Tier 10 on the other hand has both OP tanks, tons of lame tanks and totally pointless tanks (obj 268) aswell as brainfarts like the Fv-4005 or the Foch-155....

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, GehakteMolen said:

*snip

I don't blame you for your opinions. I think they are valid.

The point I bring to the table, which is backed up by fact, is that at the moment, heavy tanks are the best class for "Joe Average". Medium tanks are better and favorite of good players, and this brings the overall performance of mediums slightly above that of heavy tanks. (Correct me if I am wrong.)

Because of this, we know what really happens in this type of meta. While it's not as bad as some of the previous metas, too much of it is in effect "bad".

Sandbox changes would in turn be "too much of it", and thus, I think it would be a "bad" thing, and I am far from alone with that opinion.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Heavies ALREADY ARE the best idiot class in the game, as tajj or NThirty showed above. 

Your entire argument rests on anecdotal YOLOing meds and the idea that perfect balance can't exist so we might as well favor heavies. 

It further rests on the idea that heavies tardrushing somewhere results in good gameplay, and that enabling them to do so can be done in a way that does not fundamentally break the tactical, skillful nature of this game. 

Those are far from self-evident, and in fact I and many others would disagree with each. 

1. A YOLO med cannot hurt me more that he hurts his own team if I am properly positioned. Any player who suicides like this is unlikely to contribute to the team in any tank outside of arty. Non-issue.

2. Perfect balance may not be possible, no. But the idea that one class should dominate as an alternative does not follow. The 268 being bad needs to be addressed on a 268 level, not a class meta-shifting level. One of the good bits of sandbox is the idea to make meds more differentiated, but they're going about it all wrong. At any rate, that's an issue to approach tank by tank, not by making a class dominate. 

3. Heavies being able to derp somewhere regardless of tactical considerations is stupid. Yes, good players can work around it, but having to work around an unstoppable E100 pushing tracks on Ensk or mid on Fishermans or any line on Abbey isn't good gameplay. It's contrived and limiting. 

4. Heavies CANNOT be made idiot-proof without breaking the nature of the game. Unless they have no mobility or no gun, neither of which is fun for shitters, they will be stronger for good players as well. You can already see this a bit with the E5. It's popular with scrubs because of forgiving armor and a good gun, and OP for skilled players. Unless you give it T95 mobility, thus ruining shitters' fun, you can't buff it any more without making it an even better pwnmobile for good players.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/19/2016 at 11:11 AM, NThirtyTwo said:

What I gather from Sandbox:

Maus rrrs in a long corridor. Nobody in the enemy team can do much about it since most guns won't penetrate anyway, but he takes some damage regardless thanks to RNG. Maus reaches next cover point somewhat damaged, but alive. Bad play is not punished. One could argue bad play is rewarded.

 

That's simply not accurate (coming from someone in and actually playing on the SB fairly regularly).

Link to post
Share on other sites

k guys dont narc me out on nda, imma post some super exclusive sb footage w/o permission from wg

(Mostly I just really wanted to repost this because lol)

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

That's simply not accurate (coming from someone in and actually playing on the SB fairly regularly).

Would you be able to provide a better description? As stated, this is what I gather from videos / comments / stats and numbers interpretation, but I could be incorrect.

Logic being that in a long corridor, it seems that very few guns are actually able to reach the 260ish pen required to reliably pen the Maus, even un-angled. And that's assuming you hit weak spots, which is obviously more difficult with guns that are now more inaccurate at range. For info, for "long corridor", I had in mind something like a Karelia south push, or Abbey lower west, or Steppes west, or Cliff west, etc.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I do believe the point is that you are not supposed to reliably pen maus weakspots from the front. (radical concept alert) You're supposed to flank it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, NThirtyTwo said:

Would you be able to provide a better description?

No.  Even though WG is doing a shit job of enforcing it the SB is supposedly under an NDA.  Right now I find it more enjoyable than AW (I quit WoT well over a year ago) so in case they get off their asses and start enforcing it I'd like to maintain my ability to log in and play there.

Given the NDA and limited access this whole thread is an exercise in futility.  Commenting on it  without playing it (or coming to hard conclusions after only a few games like some have done) is straight up foolishness.  I'm puzzled as to why mods haven't locked this yet (unless they have info contradictory to the announcements on the SB forums in which case I'll gladly explain).

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

Heavies ALREADY ARE the best idiot class in the game, as tajj or NThirty showed above.

On every tier but X. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, tajj7 said:

Can't quote everyone, but will try to deal with a few points

1. E100s and IS7s driven by bobs do not just fall over die in the current meta.

I played a game yesterday where an AFK IS4, yes that's a not moving IS4, blocked over 2k damage, by literally just being an IS4 sat in the open.

How many times have you seen some tomato idiot in an IS7 literally drive out into the open against basically a whole team and he doesn't die, go stare at the front of an IS7 with like an E50M from 300m, the aiming circle is bigger than the tank, add in penetration RNG even idiotic play like that can often be gotten away with in heavy tanks.

The E100 has 2700 HP, that is like an E5 firing at it non-stop for over a minute penning every shots, which does not happen.

Look at VBaddict, even with the prevalence of premium ammo and 3 arty games on tier 10, giant slow block tanks like the Maus and E100 block around 45-50% of the shots fired at them, they have both have over 40% survival rates as well, despite having fairly poor WRs. 

Heavies are already forgiving, they are already bouncing a lot of shots and they are already very popular (IS7, E5 and E100 are all in the top 5 most played tier 10s), slight changes to artillery and premium ammo massively boosts the competitiveness of those tanks, for all skill ranges. 

@MacusFlash

Link to post
Share on other sites

So I got to play around on sandbox a bit.

Few major impressions I've had so far:

I still enjoy mobile tanks. I enjoy batchat on sandbox a lot, despite being "nerfed". It still has good view range, it can go fast(albeit it turns like ISU now), lost by far least health(lost only 200 HP, compared to 50b which lost 450, STB lost about 300 etc, etc.) and got base penetration increased. Also, it doesn't have blunderbuss most tanks have on sandbox(0,4 accuracy on RU mediums, nice meme WG). Couple that with stun effect of arty, and dumping a clip into heavies has never been easier. On the other hand, LTs have major issues now, since only thing they have now is view range, which is basically retarded since you spot for guys with derpy guns and horrible penetration on distance, and yet, T-62 now doesn't slow down below 50 km/h.

3 biggest issues I have with sandbox is accuracy nerf coupled with penetration drop makes some engagements absurdly hard. Example being E-100 vs Type 5, I didn't play a lot but E-100 has neither speed or penetration to reliably penetrate Type 5. Having crap accuracy so you miss shoulders is just icing on the cake (despite penetration drop change, most ricochets on sandbox come because guns are derpy as fuck, not because penetration drops so hard it plinks of weakspot IMHO). Which brings us to worst aspect of sandbox - extreme niche of every class. Basically every class of tanks is gimmick compared to other.

Also, alpha nerf is a nice visual illusion, once you realize most tanks have their HP nerfed. Oh nice, JPE-100 doesn't do 1k damage now! That's OK, since your 50b has 1600 HP now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...