In response to Nasty Little Things post,
the feedback actually appeared to be more applicable for PC WoT than for WoT Blitz, since in the latter we either have done many things differently (aiming, crews, key bindings, interface, etc) or have already accounted for what was suggested (platoon restrictions, MMing spreads, vehicle filters in garage, etc).
So I have forwarded the summary below to Storm for his review, he said it was useful. Probably I can squeeze some more from him in future. Right now it's rather difficult because of the workload related to 0.8.9 (EU and NA) update which is being tested publicly at the moment. By the way how do you like the update so far?
the feedback actually appeared to be more applicable for PC WoT than for WoT Blitz, since in the latter we either have done many things differently (aiming, crews, key bindings, interface, etc) or have already accounted for what was suggested (platoon restrictions, MMing spreads, vehicle filters in garage, etc).
So I have forwarded the summary below to Storm for his review, he said it was useful. Probably I can squeeze some more from him in future. Right now it's rather difficult because of the workload related to 0.8.9 (EU and NA) update which is being tested publicly at the moment. By the way how do you like the update so far?
Mechanics
It's really annoying having aimed at a tank far away with no ground behind him and shoot just a split second after the tank disappears and when your gun immediately raises itself making it a definite miss.
Aiming/reticule automatically moves up a bit when I aim at a target far away. Normally you would have to aim higher than the target, because the shell drops while it is in the air. But WoT does this automatically. At first this seems like a good way to help inexperienced players. But in the end it hinders me hitting my targets. When a target is moving and I have to aim in front of it, I would just aim a bit higher to account for shell drop and a bit the the left or right, so the target "drives into the shell".
But in WoT this happens: As soon as I move my reticule away from the target, to account for it's speed/direction of travel, the automated vertical correction no longer aims at the distance of the target but it aims at whatever I am currently aiming at. If it is a hill, or even the sky, my shot will be too high, or too low, and I can't do anything about it.
Also why are there still no tier limitations on platooning to prevent the Maus + Leichtraktor troll platoons? I can't think of a single reason for not preventing this from being possible.
My biggest bugbear in WoT is that often it's possible to peek over a bit of terrain / round a building in in sniper mode, place the reticle squarely over an enemy tank, (without that red outline showing up, but WHOLE targeting reticle over tank), fire, and just hit the terrain because the collision model doesn't match what's visible.
Also, make it possible for the red highlight around enemy vehicle when you target it, to show up when aiming at the enemy tank across a wreck of a tank. At the moment, for instance, if you aim at enemy tank through a wreck e.g. between wreck's gunbarrel and hull, you have your penetration indicator work, but no red highlight show up.
When in a rush and using hot keys for repair kits and you hit the wrong one you are basically fucked. You need to move your hand to the ESC key to close it, retype the hotkey to get it right. Very bad.
camera's settings reset after each battle (really senseless feature)
Get rid of the forced f1 help key binding in game. I mean, FFS, who uses the help key after 100, 1000, 10,000 batles? Yet, its FORCED bound to one of the MOST useful F keys. For god sake, allow that F1 key to be rebound to something useful.
Ability to rebind ctrl and alt
AFK tanks and bots.
The existence of premium ammo and the ability to spam it endlessly without any limitations. Every tank is designed and balanced with its armor and penetration of its gun taken into account.
Chat
I would also like a notification if someone adresses me in chat - a ping sound or something. Clanchat, whispers, etc. in battle. Chatlog.
Not being able to private message with those in my clan is annoying. I'm forced to add people already in my clan list, to my friends list, just to send them a message.
For me, lack of any indication in e.g. clan chat, that someone is AFK or in battle, it would be really nice if I could set some infos for their mates (or if I'm in battle, system would set it for me), similar you can do that on communicators like Skype.
Limited ignore list size (256?)
No counter for clan members online
Interface. Lobby
The absence of ping in garage. Not funny when you go to battle with 999 ping.
Plane/Tank viewer. In EVE Online you can see in the market your ship in a 3D fashion (even if it in the game the shape has it no meaning.). As for WOT where shape (slope) has a meaning, it should be in the game. How? To save space add a magnifying glass symbol on the picture of the Tank/Plane details; if you click it a window opens and you can see your plane/tank and can scroll in, look it from all sides.
better indication of an invite or chat request, something should popup in the middle of the screen to get your attention, rather than the button/icon simply glowing.
Transaction logs
Interface. Vehicle Specs
how much HP the turret uprgade adds to the tank is to either buy it and find out or look on youtube at videos of upraded tanks
The horizontal gun velocity is one of the most important stats for an arty.
You can find that info nowhere ingame.
A warning on light tanks that suddenly get Scout Tiering, as in the Pz38na.
Interface. Platoons
Tank Tier in platoon window. I cannot believe your UI designers missed this out, and we have to rely on a mod such as XVM to show our platoon mates tank tiers (and battle tiers).
Special Battles, Tank Company, Platoon, Training Room interfaces (and possibly Team Battles - have not seen its interface yet). These need to show tank tier, battle tiers.
Tank sorting in TC and CW waiting room. Currently the sort is based on when the player joined the room, which is useless. It means the caller is constantly having to go down the list multiple times making sure there are enough mediums or T57s or whatever for the plan. A simple sort by tank would make this 100x easier.
If anything the platoon/TC should just transfer leadership to the last guy standing in it so he has the option to invite others again instead of making a new group.
Interface. Tank carousel
Why are there still no tier and premium filters in the tank ribbon?
Tank Tier filtering in garage - this is an absolute must, especially if you have a large amount of tanks in your garage.
Option to have few rows of tanks "portraits" instead of big useless tank
Tank Carousel. I want more then Primary markers. Tier, Grinding, Clan Wars, Tank company, and favourites are a must for me. As this list is different for each player, just let us create and name our own filters and select which tanks are in it.
Possibility to sort tanks in any order I want (according to my prefereable order of playing them
Interface. Missions
Very often the missions are simply named mission, There should be a name for every one of them.
Some missions although have measurable parameters (like damage done, XP earned etc), dont have progress bar attached to them.
Mission after battle interface could be improved so that you do not have to click to every mission to see what they are. 1 line of explanation under the mission name would be enough.
Interface. Battle
Fire notification. Especially a problem on large screen monitors, it should be a great big message in the middle of the screen.
Reload timer. Come on guys, how hard can it actually be if mod developers have implemented this in the various cross hairs for a long time. Minor UI tweak.. major usability improvement.
Interface. Crews
XVM's didn't have a crew transfer/send option and it was torture transferring crews one by one again.
Garage - send entire crew to barracks /pick best crew. Again, we have to wait for XVM to step up and give us a major usability improvement especially when loading a crew into a premium tank.
Crew manipulation. Without XVM's update it is tedious and slow to reuse crew on premium tanks. Send all crew to barracks, use own crew, use best crew, use same type crew.
Option to assign a crewmember to many different tanks at the same time - of course if a specific tanker is in battle in one tank, player is not able to play any other tank where this tanker is assigned. That way I will need absolutely no crewmemeber swapping while using the same crew on premium and normal vehicle.
Misc
Whenever you patch an existing tank you drop all equipment, consumables and stuff from him and you don'T tell us- So we login and play with stock and no modules the first time as you usually don't notice this. MARK THE TANK and force us to check equipment first when you do this. Its rude not doing so.
No automatic server change when joining CW
a checkbox on the login page below the "save password" checkbox labeled "atomatic login"
the checkbox is greyed out if "save password" is not enabled
if "save password" and "automatic login" is enabled the client will go directly into the garage if the player presses "play" in the launcher or launches worldoftanks.exe directly
to disable auto login, change the user or change the server the player has to "disconnect from server" form the game menu
Thanks for the feed back Overlord.
ReplyDeleteI found a new quality of life issue the other day in a part of the garage I'd not really used before. More interestingly its something that Microsoft had spotted and dealt with 15 years ago...
The Contacts list is one giant mess at the moment. Can we please have a filter that puts all the people who are on-line at the moment at the top, and can we please stop it closing automatically when entering a battle. Because its a real niggling annoyance to have to re-open it every time I exit battle, then scroll through my 100 odd contacts looking to see who has logged on.
Another filter for clan members would also be useful.
Thanks, just a thought.
Contacts and everything related to chat is going to be completely overhauled in the new chat system that is currently in development.
DeleteAre there any plans to make people on your friendlist more visuable when entering a battle, i don't always care about reading all 29 nicknames to look for friends during battle start, some highlight (color?) or message would be nice.
DeleteThere are mods where you get your clan logo up, but friends not in clan there is no option for.
Do you mean those friends that are not currently in platoon with you?
DeleteThank you very much for forwarding our feedback. I yet have to try the testserver.
ReplyDeleteGuess who's back, ME!
ReplyDeleteSo, about those artillery changes.
So they're buffing both of the GW Tigers but not the GW 100? The GW 100's current win rate is 49.8% and it doesn't need a buff, too? As a reference, the GW T is 49.4% and GW T(P) is 49.1%.
Lets go down the list of what's being buffed and what isn't..
SU-14-2, WR: 51.1% getting buffed
Su-14-1, WR: 50.% getting buffed
Object 212, WR, 50.4% getting buffed
Su-8, WR 51.1% getting buffed
Su-122, WR 50.9% getting buffed
Su-26, WR 50.9% getting buffed
GPz 4e, WR 49.8% getting buffed
AMX 13 105 AM, WR 52.6% getting buffed
M41, WR 51.1% getting buffed
Now lets look at what's NOT being buffed, but probably should
Renault BS, WR 50.5%
AMX 105AM, WR, 49.1%
Hummel, 50.6%
Lorrain155 50, 49.9%
B. chat 155 55, WR 50.4%
GW E-100, WR 49.8%
B. Chat 155 58, WR 50.6%
T92, WR 50.7%
Note: Since this data only comes from relatively active players with a set number of battles. the average win rate for all vehicles in WoT with this data set is ~52.5%.
Note 2: There art three tier 10 arty in the "not getting buffed" list. The average win rate for a tier 10 is 53.2%. The highest performing one listed has a 2.5% lower win rate than its tank counterparts. A 2.5% difference in win rate is the difference between an average player with 3k battles, and a player with 3k battles who starts every one by driving off of a cliff. This means that these tier 10 arty are effectively irrelevant.
Soooo, lets buff all the Russian arty, and lets leave the arty that really needs buffing alone. I don't know what kind of drugs the QA department is on. This is not game balancing, this is an example of Russian bias. Please expand your QA department to the U.S. so we can put a stop to this. This is an international game, please some some international hires to prevent national bias.
Not sure where you got the data from. Moreover, win rate is not the only parameter that is taken into consideration.
DeleteSpecifically, 49.8% is quite good taking into account that 1-2% of all matches are draws.
I highly suggest you check out noobmeter.com, they're the only site that keeps track of actual tank win rates, rather than win rates on a player basis. There are some good reasons why WG wouldn't want that info public, since it would show just how horribly unbalanced some tanks are.
DeleteColdt, I don't think noobmeter is a fully valid measurement tool for all purposes. I believe it only checks players that have been entered into their database, there are countless players that play WOT but have never been bothered to check noobmeter. I think the numbers would be slightly unreliable from noobmeter for tank balancing at least.
DeleteEvery player is in the database.
DeleteWhy would they only have the data of players requested?
Because it requires a cookie to be downloaded to your PC that catches the data being sent from the WG servers to your computer and retransmits it to their database. It's really a legal thing. They could phish the WG network but that would cause a significant drain on the WG servers each time they did. The way they do it is just easier for everyone.
DeleteAnyway. The exact win rate isn't important here, since players registered with noobmeter are better than the average Joe they have a higher winrate. This is known. What you need to look at is the difference in win rate from one tank to another. Given the large sample size, the ratio of that winrate difference should transfer to the full live server data with great accuracy. This means that what you see as a 49.8% win rate on noobmeter is around 47.4% on the liver server. And a winrate of 55.4% like on the T57H on noobmeter would really be around 53% on the live server.
Given Overlords statements over, being 1-2% of games are draws, then each tank in the game SHOULD, in a perfect world, have a win rate of around 49-49.5% average win rate live, or 51.5-52% on noobmeter.
The numbers for artillery are usually around 1-1.5% lower than their tank counterparts. This number doesn't seem significant, however, it's statistically enormous when you realize we're talking about millions of battles.
Flip a coin 100 times, if you're off by 1% that's pretty even, only one coin flip. Flip it 1000 times and you're off by 10, still not much. However, flip it 1,000,000 times and you're off by 10,000 coin flips. At that point you need to start thinking the coin is weighted.
There's something egregiously wrong with the way arty performs right now, and with what exactly is getting buffed and what isn't. I've stated this time and time again. The problem is, there's a whole lot of don't-give-a-fuck arty haters who couldn't tell the difference between an even duel and a knife in a sword fight. (Oh, but if the guy with the knife stabs my jugular I bleed out and die and there's nothing I can do wah, wah. So the fuck what you have a sword! It's kinda like what I say to tanks that complain about getting his by arty. OMFG HE JUST KNOCKED ME TO HALF HEALTH WITH ONE SHOT NERF HIM! How much health do you have left? Oh, 1000+? He only has half that TO BEGIN WITH!)
So, here you go. Proposed fixes to top tier artillery, and all artillery is as follows. Increased health pools, for tier 8 and up about doubled so a single suicidal scout can't claim the heads of an entire team of arty so reliably. And, a simple 20% reduction in aim time across the board. Done, that's it, easy. Clan Wars would barely be affected and arty would get the much needed help it needs to remain a viable option in random battles.
Coldt,
Deletethe full sample does give better representation than some fraction of it.
I do understand that the current balancing methodology has some obvious issues and not all the changes are accepted warmly. Here I mean arty situation and how it was treated. The current balance (arty as well) needs to be improved.
Yes, a sample of the full server data would be better, but I don't have access to it, do I? Fix that. Until I do I'll use what I can, and this data set is so large it can be used and adjusted to get the live server data within about 0.3%. So, is the GW-100's winrate for you guys between 47.1% and 47.7%? If so, I think my data works well.
DeleteHow about this for better artillery?
DeleteRemove satellite view, add fulscreen version of map instead, vehicle type and hull direction displayed.In this indirect fire mode, lock the hull (the same way TD's are in sniper mode - able to rotate with movement control but not by cursor) but gain additional reload speed.
Increase splash radius to compensate for some of the lost vision.
In direct fire mode gain aimtime but lose reload speed (probably okay at current levels). You could add sniper mode as well.
Restore some of the accuracy. Still targets being aimed at should be hit more likely than they currently are.
Review the critical damage artillery shells cause. It's the most frustrating part when being shot at by them.
That's a bit complicated. I did recommend, a while back, that the splash radius be increased for HE shells while changing the sigma for calculating damage so they have a large area of low damage while the high damage area is about the same size as it is now. That will fix a lot of the artillery accuracy problems and help with the long reload times if you're usually going to do at least some damage.
DeleteYou shouldn't have to completely change the way the system works just to make a class of tanks work. I'm not even sure the engine supports some of those solutions.
Noobmeter data bank has around 3 million players.
DeleteThe sample size is more than big enough. Its not about the absolut numbers in WR, its about the difference between the various tanks.
@Overlord:
What about with the XP-income for arti? I still havnt seen anthing mentioned it by the devs or in patchnotes. Atm its a joke :-(
Overlord - Where/how can I contact you outside of the blog btw?
DeleteHeh, the last entry in the Misc section seems very similar to another WW2 themed military game I will no mention here.
ReplyDeleteBut totally unrelated cause I don't know that game you're not speaking of :)
DeleteJust remove premium ammo from game and everything will be perfect! ( :
ReplyDeleteNot.
DeleteYup, not for those who know that you can aim only with right click.
Deletewat
Delete/Signed
DeletePlease do something with the matchmaking. This whoevery has more luch gets to the bottom, and who has more lost matches gets to the top is not / not supposed to be a working matchmaking system.
ReplyDeleteJust an example Personally I had several battles during this weekend (20) and won 2 on tier 9 heavy. What happened is me and another or max 2 of my teammates did 4k-ish damage while the rest died with 0-800 damage - still talking about tier 9. Enemy team had 10-12 players well over 1500 damage.
This proves that the current matchmaking is not working. There is no "battle till the last survivor" 1 vs 1 at the end. Either your team completely brainded or you are in the other team which erases the other (this is 10%of the cases).
We would need a "skill" perhaps tank-winrate (NOT global wr !!) based matchmaking with ranges like: 10-30%; 40-50%; 50-60%; 60-80%; 80-100%
Just a suggestion as the current one is clearly not working as it should be / as it was designed to work.
This "whoever has more luck gets to the bottom, and who has more lost matches gets to the top"... corrected some typo.
DeleteSame here.
DeleteYou might want to try new team mode if you want smth skill-based.
Like the new team skill based mode, but what with T9 and T10 tanks? At least T9 tanks, they only have place in randoms, even in TC you can't use T9 tanks.
DeleteThs issue is with the current system is that - if "not so lucky players" from the previous battle gets to the top in my current team - that could mean 2 things.
Delete1., he is a complete wacko and cant hangle his tank or
2., he really had just an unlucky roll,
BUT if Im being placed at the bottom as tier 8-9 in a random battle I cannot do anything to correct the mistakes of 5-6 tier 10 player's mistakes and usually that leads to "fail-teams" in 80% of the cases.
I experience this more and more lately, and personally it bothers me that I cannot break away from the current WR I have, because it is no matter how hard I try ((even with 8 kills by me)) my team still looses.
We would need a system where ppl with 40%ish winrate gets separated from people above 50-55%, so everyone would have a challanging game, not jsut a "roll of dice" whether one is in the brain-dead team or in the completely OP-one.
In this scenario WR of each player will converge to 50%. regardless of how good you are.
Delete^Than don't count WR at all, use average damage per tier as a main factor for skill based MM or just use WN7 or WN8 formula.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteIn the current situation where 7 of 10 teams are "completely garbage" - and I was polite now - it is a fact!
DeleteI am sure that all the players would support a working WN7 / WN8 formula based MM.
True, players with 60+% winrate would complain since they would not win so often, but players under 50% (unfortunately majority) would enjoy the game more.
I dont like the mm since they changed it secretly and massively with 8.6.
DeleteI think mm is such a central core part of the game, that any big changes should be made in the open. With time, we all get to know at least to some extend what was changed, but the taste of it is bad (i dont want to know every loophole in the system, just the big things that get changed).
That said, i see people overreacting all the time because of the team balance.
When i platoon up with others than my regular mates, i hear them saying "the team is so bad", "how can i always get the bad team!", "blablablabla", all the time.
Its like a mantra. And its really tireing to hear.
If you would be a logical person, you would know that you are in the bad team like 49% of the time (assuming 1% draws). And the other 50% of matches mostly rely on the few good players (exceptions in the tier 10 bracket where you can often find more good players, especially in the evening/night).
So, if you are good, you can turn a lot of games, and in many games the team relys on you to make the win happen, but often you just cant make the difference.
Thats just how a 15 man random-team match works. People should deal with that.
But i observe that maybe this is the central part.To acceppt, that you cant always make the difference, to win the match. Often and for a few, sometimes, its out of your hands. People just dont like to lose. And i have seen people quit or rage massively over the fact, that they sometimes can influence nothing.
I dont like the idea of any form of skill or winrate mm.
And i think many ppl dont like the idea.
There wouldnt be any incentive in being good, if you play always against really good guys. And i think one thing is not often seen. When the bads/mediocre only play with the bads, they might enjoy the game more, but they may not improve as much, as they can, when they play and learn against good players.
@True, players with 60+% winrate would complain since they would not win so often, but players under 50% (unfortunately majority) would enjoy the game more.@
DeleteHaving their challenge increased even more? I doubt. They will be always put into tough battles regardless of how good or bad they are.
Overlord it pains me that you are not even trying to understand this.
DeleteTough are better than impossible! Which player has more chance?
1, low wr vs. high wr.
2, low wr vs. low wr.
3, high wr. vs.high wr.
2nd and 3rd would lead to more won matches in all together and since majority of the flaers are around 50% - it would not change for them but for the ones under 50% woudl mean a lot.
I will put this in a financially more undersandable way:
-Players wit lower winrate would have much fun since they would not go against players with winrate of 60-65% but agains the same level they are.
- from the previous point come that: more happy players will buy more gold... I think you as the member of Wargaming woud appreciate this approach and see what I want to say with all this.
@Silberfalke,
DeleteIt is clearly obvious that you are in the 60-65% wr team and it would hurt you to see you wr drop as you would not be able to pup-stomp soo much as I believe you do nowadays.
WN7/WN8 based system would be good for everybody except for the ones with high WR now. As it follows:
- players under 50% would converge to 50%
- players at 50% would not feel a thing
- players above 50% (~60) would have ther WR drop. And hey woudl be forced to preform even better. Only they will complan against this and they would cry a lot.
Sure, the situation for us would be worse.
DeleteThere surely are some good players, that would prefer some kind of skill mm to dodge the bad players, but i think they are clearly a minority.
Most good player benefit from the situation we have now,
and i think thats the incentive for us in this game.
You are good, you can own others.
Its like in every other game out there, that i know.
A skill or wn based mm would take that incentive away.
You are wrong in many things.
Delete1., Previously you mentioned that players would not learn anything by competing against same level players.
- Wrong. check Starcraft for example. If you are a "noob" you start in a bronze league then when you play better you move up to silver. Case could be the same here. If a player would get better and better WN7 would increase so they would need to adapt to more experienced playstyle and learn from step by step more and more.
- Your idea is to throw them in to the deep water. Like you must win agains word champion SC player. You would have absolutely no chance and yet you woudl be judged by your preformance (XVM)
2., "some good players, that would prefer some kind of skill mm to dodge the bad players, but i think they are clearly a minority"
- Wrong again based on personal experience: Just base on my friends - 10 of 10 would get rid of the 700 efficiency from the team while the enemy team has 1400 all over. Clearly does not makes battles even. Low efficiency players dies from your team early - in all of the battles - due to their lack of experience. So your team is lacking of players right from the first few minutes. Which means you are already outnumbered best scenario 1:2. and if you manage to kill 2 tanks in a battle from 100% hp, It is not a guarantee that your teammates could do the same. Disadvantage only by getting players not in your WN range (lower than yours).
3., "Sure, the situation for us would be worse."
Just confirmed you are one of the precious ~60% WR players whose only against this idea because you are afraid to face more players with your experience - as your WR would drop or you would have to work lot harder to keep your current WR.
In addition to the previous point: True, you would have to work more/harder to keep your excelent WR but at least you would know that all the players in your team are competent players and you would exclude the possibility to get a retarded team if you are an experienced player.
DeleteI mean to get better, it should and must require more effort and more skill not just pure luck that the other team has more bots AND retards than yours. (current matchmaking system) that is why a WN7 based matchmaking would work perfectly.
You are wrong in many things. ;-)
Delete1. Dont twist my words. I just said bad players can learn faster if they play with good ppl, not that they wouldnt improve in the system you describe. For me the current system is fine, where you start with mostly bad players, and until tier 8, you just have normally the occasional 1-4 good players per battle. Its not like you get roflstomped often. You have a slow learning curve, and sometimes you see good players, you can learn something from.
I think a system like in SC2 or a wn7 system is only appropriate, if you have to protect the players to get stomped too often. Have you ever played SC1 in later stages? You could hardly find ANY bad player. So, when i tried to get back into the game after a few years, it was a pain in the ass. And its a big difference if you play a 1vs1 and 2vs2 game, or if you play 15vs15 game. A good player in a sea of bad players can not win the match alone. Thats a big difference in the game.
2. I dont know if i understand you correctly here.
Yes, bad players die fast, that happens often. But it doesnt prevent the good player to kill the other teams baddies in the same time when they do something stupid.
Like i described above, half of the time you are on the good team, half of the time not.
I dont see a problem with this. If you play intelligent, you can have fun.
3. I am generally not the guy that takes stats too seriously, although i know they can tell a lot. Its nice to see some sort of progression, and to see you get better as a player, but besides that, i dont need it as form of status symbol.
If i enjoy the company of someone and he is a "yellow" player, i dont mind.
So, a wr or wn7 drop doesnt bother me too much.
On the contrary, i think its better if people think you are a baddie, and you are actally pretty good, then when you are pretty good and people know that.
What i fear is, that i dont have as much fun in the game, as i have now.
Addition to 3.
I dont need experienced players in my team.
If i have some, thats fine, if not thats fine too.
I can adapt to the situation, as long as xvm can show me how good which player is.
Maybe i am an exception with that mindset, i dont know.
As long as i perform okay, i am happy.
Second point is bs and completely invalid.
It has nothing to do with pure luck.
If you are good, statistics will show.
So the next question is how could you implement a system like this, if good players vs. good players and bad players vs. bad players, leading to their stats converging upon the average(in pretty much all respects).
DeleteHow would you differentiate between a good player and a bad player in the long run? All that would happen is waste development time for a system designed to homogenise everyone's stats.
Also makes recruitment for clans more difficult as recognising new, good players without a clan early on nearly impossible. Hurting smaller clans as picking up these players early and helping them get tier 10s for clan wars is vital not only for their growth but to be competitive on the global map.
Hurting revenue for the game, as being in a clan helps retain people and from my experience, some of the biggest spenders are those involved with clan wars as premium time and tanks are essential.
Account's got the same name on the SEAPACASIA server if you want to see my average stats.
@Silberfalke "Second point is bs and completely invalid. It has nothing to do with pure luck"
Delete- Sorry, I just lol'ed on this. For me it seems, that you are just determined to write anything just to make my points invalid.
- this "random" MM / "luck based" MM is broken. I will repeat myself here just for clear understanding:
///////////////////////////
Ths issue is with the current system is : that "not so lucky players" from the previous battle gets to the top in my current team - this could mean 2 things.
1., he is a complete wacko and cant hangle his tank (low eff/no experience)or
2., he really had just an unlucky roll of battles <<< like 4-5 in a row and taht is kind of...suspicious for me
///////////////////////////
- I haven't even mentioned Premium insta-tier8 players, geting in to tier 7-9 battles with 0 battle on a tier 8 vehicle... I would forbid that too. Since this would bring no profit, clearly this will not be done by WG.
"Yes, bad players die fast, that happens often. But it doesnt prevent the good player to kill the other teams baddies in the same time when they do something stupid."
- In an ideal world yes. When good players meet bad ones from both team exactly in the same time... you know how rare is this? 1 from 20 battles!
- I really envy you if you have battles where you can correct average 5 players stupidity in random. This is the standard unfortunately from the 15 random, 5 are usually bot/not so experienced. Handicap from the beggining.
- Usually case is that lemming trains froms from unexperienced players - just following good players - they die fast team looses
- other scenario: enemy team just eats through team on 1 flank since they dont know how to use their tanks defensive / attacking capabilities.
@Collision
"How would you differentiate between a good player and a bad player in the long run? ":
- Simple. If someone would want to keep their WR on 60%ish then they would need to beat more player with 60% windrate - they would ahve to work more and harder to earn the 60% or keep it. They would be forced to be even better to stay on the same level of winrate. And if they are not soo god then yes, they would converge back to 50%.
From this point i will stop proving that I am right. I see no point in explaining my idea over and over again just by repeating myself and making the obvious even clearer. It just takes too much time from me to try to convince you guys to open your eyes. Though why woudl you agree with me?! I see your point. Why would anyone want to change a system where they have benefits over others.. I get it.
How would a persons bracket be determined then? Based of their overall stats or just their stats in that specific tank, because most people's performance isn't uniform across the tanks. but lower bracket battles will then have higher ratios of lower win rate tanks and higher brackets will have higher ratios of higher win rate tanks.
DeleteAnd then for that guy to retain a 60% win rate, as he would be required to win more against other high players, pushing them out of the higher brackets and therefore there will be less people with a 60% win rate, as they would only be allowed into fights in the higher bracket.
Leading to longer waits in queue for those in the extreme brackets, as such a system would create further divisions in the community amplified by the restrictions based on tiers. And if they were just placed in lower brackets not only will it be a similar system to what we have now, but how will MM determine the priority in queue for players, will a higher bracket player only get a game if there is not enough lower bracket players? Or will they have to wait a certain period of time before being placed in queue for a lower bracket?
This here is a clear reduction in quality of gameplay, whilst ignoring further issues such as reduced ability for people to learn off good players, not just how to drive a tank but also positioning on a map.
And what about platoons, not all friends have the same ability at the game and maybe they platoon with a friend to be taught it. So how will this skill based MM determine which bracket a platoon will be based? Will it take a lower bracket allowing the higher skilled person to 'cheat the system', or take the higher bracket by punishing not only the lower skilled player for wanting to play with his friend, but also punishing the team by having a less skilled player?
The reason we don't agree with you is not because it provides us benefits (I'm only average with approx. 50% win rate), but because your argument is weak in that I've just poked enough holes in it, that without answers too, leaves the system more flawed then our current one and therefore a waste of development time that can be better spent else where like everything else that is on the pretty big list above.
@Sandor Nagy:
DeleteDo you even understand the results of your own proposal? Everyone will have a 50% WR after a time and the differences in DpB, Kills/games and so on will also shrink.
What you are proposing will not work in the currenct environment (random battles). It can only work in a seperate thing beside random battles, with a seperate option under the battle button see upcoming 7/42, which is boring in my opinion and one of the reasons I dont play ESL.
@Sandor Nagy:
DeleteIf i think something is invalid, i will write that.
If i agree with you, i would admit that. We just have different positions here.
I dont think that the mm is perfect, and i liked the mm a lot more before 0.8.6.
If it is true what the devs confirmed, and good players get worse mm cause they win often, then i think they should change that. Its understandable why they do this, but they clearly give us a disadvantage that makes the game less fun, and thats not fair.
The average player does benefit from this, and as i understand it, you speak more in favor of the average players.
I doubt WG will ever change something about the 0k premiumtank players, they simply dont care enough. Especially when we concider they dont even change troll platoons, which is a much bigger problem then this.
I think you didnt understand me before on the bad player thing.
Yes, it often sucks to some extend what people do, but the fact is that everyone will experience this, and therefore this balances out over all players in the long run.
Sometimes you get lucky, sometimes not.
Collision brought up some pretty good points.
Thought about the longer waiting queue myself.
I just dont think that some form of skill mm would be good for the game.
It would worsen the experience for many.
i think the only reasonable guy is Sandor here. the problem is that you statpadder 60% "imthetankergodandihavetherighttotramplenoobs" cant realise that for most players not the stats are important but to get a fair enjoyable battle. I don't give a **** for my wr but im very much annoyed by any of these: trampling noob enemy and racing for some hit. getting trampled in a noobteam. being teamkilled/blocked/pushed by monkeys... these could be removed by a ranked system or improved even a simple "balancing" solution which would not need leagues simply just put equal number of good and bad players on both sides (and its proven would not increase the waiting in lobby). first of all it would remove the frustration issues what makes the players: suicide, TK-ing, playing arse, getting ignorant, getting uninterested, playing only for grinding etc... sure it will never happen cos the statpadders pay WG and the statpadders would cry against it. WG isnt stupid to bite its own tail
DeleteNo more premium ammo is one hell of a good idea.
ReplyDeletePremium rounds don't make good shots better, but they make shitty shots not matter. On top of that a regular player can only afford to bring a few rounds into a match, while a player that's willing to pay to buff his stats can spam the shit. That's pay to win.
Premium consumables, I'd be cool if they left the game completely, too. However, it'd be nice if a repair kit or a first aid kit worked more than once, and it'd also be nice if you could carry more than one of the usable items.
/signed
DeleteTotally agree to the premium ammo subject!
RE: 8.9 Test
ReplyDeleteLooks pretty good so far. Excited to get into the 7/42 Team Battles mode once it goes live, and the new German TDs look like they're gonna be lovely. Also like the Chi-Nu Kai, it seems like it's shaping up to be quite a nice little tier 5 premium.
Overall it's good stuff, but I am worried about the T-44-85. The tank itself is alright in most respects, but the gun really lets it down. 126mm average pen is truly dismal for tier 7. I was originally quite excited about this vehicle when it was first rumored, but I can't really see myself buying one now that it has such a crap gun. It'd just disappoint me more than anything, which is a shame.
If you guys gave it a better gun (even just the 85mm D5T-85BM, the one with 144 pen) that would go a long way towards improving it.
We are going to do smth with T-44-85.
DeleteAs a followup to my previous message:
ReplyDelete"It's really annoying having aimed at a tank far away with no ground behind him and shoot just a split second after the tank disappears and when your gun immediately raises itself making it a definite miss."
Usually I'd use the right-click to lock the aim position, but since the tank is visible at that time, it's not possible to use that either, since it activates auto-aim, which I very rarely use.
Would it be possible no not activate the auto-aim if the RMB is kept held down instead of just clicking it?
tldr: game option: Don't engage autoaim when pressing right mouse button, just lock turret movement.
DeleteThat wouldn't be good enough, since there are times when auto-aim is useful.
Deletegame option: Engage auto aim when pressing the "auto aim release" button, right mouse button just locks turret movement.
Deletebetter? cause a click is also a short hold down action, and to complicated for the normal user if you make some fancy rules there
I do not see the one I posted in the "nasty little things" - HE shell explosion radius as part of gun description.
ReplyDeleteright now, we have to find the ammo for the gun just to see its explosion radius, and the gun description doesn't even include ammo name.
"better indication of an invite or chat request, something should popup in the middle of the screen to get your attention, rather than the button/icon simply glowing."
I actually like the glowing thing and would hate to have something pop in the middle of my screen. add a bit of audio instead of just the simple glow would make it perfect - right now, I keep my game behind everything but make everything else fit in a way I can see the bottom part of WoT where the glowing buttons are just so I know something is up (adding some audio would let me minimize WoT but still know when something is up).
Interface.... Why am I still unable to invite my friends and clan mates to a platoon by right clicking? It would be nice if the platoon could be created automatically when inviting someone :)
ReplyDeleteMechanics... I've been in some matches lately where one team seemed to penetrate every shot while the other barely one or two. Also, online users have gone up by a substantial amount recently, are you sure your hardware is up to it? ;)
About 8.9 Test. Almost everthing is great. The new new TDs are mostly good. I like the Chi Nu Kai and Type 64. There have been some good balance changes to tanks that have been underpowered for ages.
ReplyDeleteOn the bad side the Type 64 apparently has standard light tank matchmaking. There is no reason to buy a tank that suffers that.
On the ugly side the Waffentrager E-100 is broken. It can destroy any tank in the game in ten seconds. Or two tier 8 tanks. It's not a matter of power really. Its just that having such massive burst completely negates what makes WoT such a great game. Since it normally takes a while to kill a tank there is time for manuver and tactics. Making the burst bigger and bigger means I could just go and play Call of Duty.
Overall I'm giving the patch 1/10 because the JPz E-100 -> Foch 155 -> FV215b -> WFT E-100 trend is making the game worse and needs to be reversed. All of those need rebalancing and all TD guns with more than 750 alpha need scaling back too.
Didn't get that - "almost everthing is great" and "Overall I'm giving the patch 1/10".
DeleteThe WTF E-100 is so horrible that it drops the patch from 8 or 9/10 to 1/10 all by itself.
DeleteThing of the WT 100 as horizontal artillery. It has weak pen for a TD so what it's really there for is to punish stupid players that don't know how to angle their tank, just like how artillery is meant to punish stupid players who sit out in the open. If it really pisses you off that much, remember, every time you see one, it only has 20mm ot turret armor, load HE and you crit the gun, kill a loader, and do a metric shit ton of damage with each shot. Nobody has good numbers on the tank yet. Don't whine, just play smart until they do.
DeleteBY THE WAY OVERLORD! Tell your guys to ease the hell off the nerfs right after launch. You need a month, maybe to for the data stream to stabilize. The players that get a new tier 10 first are pretty good, and they skew the data. I have a good feeling that since the WT 100 is so unique that it's going to have a very wide range between its good/bad players, that means when the good ones get to it first it'll have a higher win rate than you'd seen on say, the 113. I expect the winrate to drop sharply as time goes by as people get used to the tanks weaknesses and less skilled players start getting it.
DON'T MAKE THE SAME MISTAKE YOU MADE WITH THE JPZ-100!
Coldt,
Deletethat's actually a common practice not to make quick changes on first-hand data. We usually wait at least 2 updates which 2-3 months basically.
This pattern is followed most of the time with few exceptions.
I can think of two examples where the gun was jumped pretty hardcore. The T110E5, which needed the nerf, and the JPZ-100, which didn't. The JPZ-100 could really use that 100 average damage back, since now it's regularly the worst performing thing in the game that isn't an artillery.
DeleteI'm just saying you guys have been hit and miss on the subject, quite a bit. I also sense a nerf coming to the Conqueror GC soon, maybe in the next patch. This time you waited at least.
Also, when the french tanks were added, can't forget that! The 50B was beaten to hell not two weeks after it was launched.
DeleteALLOT of these issues can be fixed with simple mods.
ReplyDeleteRight, the actual development takes much longer though.
DeleteHi @All!
ReplyDeleteI also would like to see the Premium Ammo disabled in our favourite Game WoT. It is realy useless to have a well armored Tank as long as the Enemy is able to use Amme that completely disables the advantage of your Tank.
For me balancing is for example to play a heavy armored Tank that does not much Damage. Or a "Glas Canon" wich has not much armor but does lots of Damage. Every Tank should have its advantage and disadvantage making it the ONE Tank for a special Situation.
Premium Ammo disables exactly that...
For example you play a T95.... nice armored Tank.... but easy to kill from sides or behind. With Premium Ammo it is also possible to kill him frontal. So what is this Tank usefull now? it is very very slow and easy to kill from premium Ammo users.
Another nice thing is for example E100 players. For most of this guys it is a must to play there 150mm Gun with Premium Ammo because of its low penetration! Give that gun a more powerful Penetration and they also dont need that ammo type anymore.
For me Premium Ammo actually is the maincause of why i would stop playing WoT as there is no more tactics and fun in a game where a lower tier tank can easy shoot through your armor and kill you laughing...
As addition to Interface: Vehicle Specs:
ReplyDeleteShow on the gun, how much shots an autoloadergun has.
Sucks too look it up on youtube everytime if you want to know that.
Peace.
Fixed in 8.9.
DeleteCool.
DeleteAnother thing:
Would be a real good quality of life feature, to see on one glimpse, if you need a new suspension for a gun or not. Its not really hard work to do the math, but it just makes things easier, and for beginners its a great feature i guess.
There are some serious issues with object loading in WoT. It seems like there is no pre-loading of tank models out there. At the moment the game freezes for 1-2 sec if there is more than 1 tank being suddenly detected in Your view range. You should enable an option in the options menu to pre-load all tank models of vehicles currently in the battle. Make a limitation for systems wit 4G of ram for that, but allow us to have that ...
ReplyDeleteAnother issue is "floaty" tank carousel. It gains some momentum while scrolling, and resists on start. It's fun at start, but I have 40 tanks in my gatage, and need some different kind of that carrousel that would not make my eyes bleed fire under 1080p. Most mods that try to address that issue only make these icons smaller that is not the best option at all.
Another issue is lack of separate FX options independent from what we have in graphics. Make a built-in WoTtweaker, and add an FoV slider as ome of us play widescreen that really is WIDE ;)
Next to address is the highlight of enemy outline. When You are to close to a wreck, or an ally tank, the outline only triggers for the nearest item, even if Your recticle is not on it! This makes some situations highly one sided as You can not tell if You aim at Your ebemy or not.
At the same time there is one feature missing IMO. There should be an option to highlight outlines of all spotted tanks with one button. This should help raise the general situational awareness during the battle. It should also give a great tool for commanders during CW and companies.
I actually think currently the WT E-100 have such huge problems because of the crew damge. As you take by every shoot some crew damage. My suggestion would be here:
ReplyDeletehttp://forum.worldoftanks.eu/index.php?/topic/288687-brauche-hilfe-beim-dt-forschungsbaum/page__pid__6201884#entry6201884
In english: http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fforum.worldoftanks.eu%2Findex.php%3F%2Ftopic%2F288687-brauche-hilfe-beim-dt-forschungsbaum%2Fpage__pid__6201884&sandbox=1 (The third post).
In russian: http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&tl=ru&u=http%3A%2F%2Fforum.worldoftanks.eu%2Findex.php%3F%2Ftopic%2F288687-brauche-hilfe-beim-dt-forschungsbaum%2Fpage__pid__6201884&sandbox=1 (The Third post).
The short form: Buff the shilds-front to 80mm, give the tank a Panther hull=more mobil, etc... That way you still have your class cannon, but it is less painful to drive.... because many tanks couldnt pen it frontally (see list in post), on the side would be the same (but if someone gives his side he should be punish :P ). Less crew damage, less damage gun.... etc....
Just my 50 cents.
Typo:
Delete"I actually think currently the WT E-100 have such huge problems because of the crew damge. " I actually think, that the WT E-100 has such huge problems because he takes crew/modul damage alot".
"pen it frontally" =pen it frontally with HE"
WTE 100 with view range 420 (+binos) and drum with 3,3k dmg in 12 sec. and you want buff armour and mobility LOL. It has big problems but from second line in the bush he can wipe 2 incomings tanks in seconds with 80% both unspoted. lol
Deletehow about playing Maus or E100 vs lets say... e3, e4, e5, is7 is4 OR even other Mauses/E100s? l2p dude if you cant use gold ammo properly and you dont know anything about autobounce
ReplyDelete- SerB doesn't care about trollplatoons on tier 10
ReplyDelete(from http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/10/16/16-10-2013/)
So please, let him know that we care.
Love the new model on the Pz V/IV, major props for that!
ReplyDeleteJust wish it got more then - 4 gun depress, Aufk Panther has -7 with the same hull and turret basically. - 6 would be great for the V/IV
About the ridiculous / unrealistic IS3 lower plate change (no russian Bias ofc... there is none):
ReplyDelete- Just the opinion of several hunred players: at 02:17 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCqZDc-IjFE
E75 engine had to be taken away because it was historically not authentical.
DeleteIS3's front however can get a complete remodelling because: who gives a fuck about history and authenticity?
I sincerely regret that I have ever spent money on this game (over 500Euro).
BTW, now finally you cannot deny that the origin of the company influences the game/gameplay/game mechanics.
Only 500 euro?.... I feel rich, now.... What did I get for my time and effort? My favorite class of tank nerfed into irrelevance.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteWG's hypocrisy is what makes me annoyed /angry and dissapointed.
DeleteOn one hand for the same reason you told us Coldt - same for me with E75 - when it reached the live servers WG said everything is fine with that tank and it is authentical as it could be based on the blueprints. Later when they realized it climbs mountains very well (even better than some russian tanks) suddenly the top engine became not so authentical. - Qestion is: When did they lie to us?
On the other hand Russian tanks' supremacy over Germans tanks cannot be more obvious from this point. When they are screaming from pain that E75 is not historically authentic, then they just change the complete model of a Russian tank and that is completely OK. Since when?! Said answer is: Since we are "only" paying customers, Our "privilege" is to be allowed to play this "balanced" game. Thank you WG!
Actually the Russian top tier are fairly underperforming... That being said they only need to buff the Russian tanks, not nerf everything in existence. The IS-7 could use a damage buff while the IS-4 could do with some more fire rate. That being said all the heavy tanks, in general, could use some buffs.
DeleteRussian MT's are fairly middle of the road, but their TD's both insanely good. But... TD's in general could use a nerf.
Since I'm exlcuding the CGC because it hasn't got enough data to give a valid sample, the only adequate SPG in the game... is the Russian one. It's the same Russian SPG that's using a repurposed naval gun from the Kirov class cruisers. These guns were notoriously meh. However, the T92, which used the 240mm Howitzer M1, a legendarily accurate artillery piece, performs like a wet noodle compared to the 180mm Russian E-Penis. In real life, at the ranged that we fight in WoT, the T92's gun would have a deviation of less than 1m with direct fire.
I'm just telling that:
Delete- Any tank which does not look like IS3 should not be called IS3 anymore - Rename it !!
- WG must never again mention the words "not historicaly authentic" and never use this as a reason for nerf.... because of the reasons I wrote earlier.
They've said again and again that game balance takes precedence over historical accuracy. At this point, it's a complete lie. The IS-3 is doing a bit too well as it is while German tanks could use a decent buff.
DeleteThis is a Russian bias heavy update. There can be no arguing against that. Except, at this point, Overlord is ignoring us.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteDouble clicking the tank carousel to either skip to the other end or scroll through faster is something I've noticed the lack of since CBT. Having over 50 tanks with an un-modded client is a nightmare. I don't like/want more filters just this, as I know where the tank is I want, it just takes way longer than it should to scroll there.
ReplyDeleteIf you still take feedback: move dismiss platoon / leave platoon button or at least add confirmation. It's too easy to hit it accidentally if you move window much around the screen.
ReplyDelete