World of Tanks

[Gravitas Free Zone]

Originally Posted by TheFluff

Man, the SU-85B is just unfair. It's overpowered as fuck. It shits out 2150 base DPM with great accuracy and pen, it has 22.9% base camo and 390m view range. At tier 4. If you want to stat pad, I'm hard pressed to think of a better platform for doing it.

There's the T40:



Which is a lot larger, but has a hugely better gun traverse and elevation arc, so it doesn't have to move the hull as much and can fight more easily on things that aren't totally flat... and a 400-meter view range. However, the SU-85B is generally more maneuverable and its best gun has huge alpha for a non-derpgun for the tier.

The Marder 38t seems sandwiched between the two, getting the best ROF in exchange for in-between size but not as good a view range.

I was doing well, but I haven't used the 85B as much lately.

Images

Sorry; dynamic content not loaded. Reload?

[Tempester]

This is what platooning does:

Images

Sorry; dynamic content not loaded. Reload?

Interesting news from FTR:

- Storm confirms that it is possible for 150-152mm tier 10 TD guns to have alpha lowered to 750 (with appropriate decrease of reload time), but this decision is not confirmed yet

[Gravitas Free Zone]

Some of the usual matchmaking oddities.

50K damage mission? BRING OUT THE TDs. Plus tiering.

Images

Sorry; dynamic content not loaded. Reload?

I was surprised to get this.

Images

Sorry; dynamic content not loaded. Reload?

Damage all (nine) of the things.

Images

Sorry; dynamic content not loaded. Reload?

Currently running vents, rammer, camo net on my JagdPanther. Thinking of trading the vents for a GLD... even though the 100% crew (and vents) aim time is 1.63 (1.59) seconds already, sometimes that feels sluggish. Alternatively, since the JP is has a 370-meter base view range, trading the vents for Coated Optics.

I could drop the camo net and do both, but I very much prefer to run the JP from the second line, where I can sit back and shoot without worrying about whether things will bounce off of my not-that-thick frontal armor or not. In the 4000-damage game, I placed myself at the northern end of the river bend and got in perhaps half of my shots before I was detected, at which point it became peekaboo at the city fighters, and where I started to ponder the benefits of GLD on a 1.6-second aim time.

At least I could test out the view situation by using binoculars in the meantime.

[Achiuakuna]

Originally Posted by Tempester

This is what platooning does:

Images

Sorry; dynamic content not loaded. Reload?

Interesting news from FTR:

- Storm confirms that it is possible for 150-152mm tier 10 TD guns to have alpha lowered to 750 (with appropriate decrease of reload time), but this decision is not confirmed yet

also

- according to SerB, winrate is the (best) skill indicator, average winrate is 49 percent, if you have a 55 percent winrate, you your skill is much higher than the average player skill in game. Other developer later adds: “Skill is the ability to win, not to deal damage. If you dealt a lot of damage and lost, you dealt in wrong place”

THANK YOU. I honestly don't know why people care about made-up stats like efficiency and WN. If you can win, who cares if all your battles are in the BT-7?

This is the other reason why people love the TDs. The more your team sucks, the more damage you do because you're obviously camping base and when the enemy starts capping, you can deal a ton of irrelevant damage before you die(and farm defender by resetting, which is a huge buff to those made-up stats btw), buffing up your pretty stats to pretty colors.

[Gravitas Free Zone]

In most cases I would guess that high WR and good WN7 go together though. I can't think of any situation where you could have a 55% or better WR while also being The Load to your team all the time; maybe playing SPGs exclusively, or only seal-clubbing at Tier 1, which carries some efficiency rating penalties.

[Achiuakuna]

But it's quite possible to do well in those ratings but fail at WR. When I was a 51%er I increased my efficiency by about 400 in a very short time because I actively tried to reset cap all the time and tried to get my irrelevant damage in at end games. My WR was staggering but the other stats skyrocketed, turned me from red to a yellow almost skipping orange entirely.

Though that was efficiency back then and WN7 now does take into account of win rate(so that you get a penalty for deliberately making your team lose just so that you can camp base, reset and do a lot of damage like I did with efficiency), which in my opinion is redundant because if that's the case why not just look at win rate then. At least efficiency had the decency to not just repeat what WR says.

[LeoXiao]

WN7 takes WR into account? That's lame; if I see a guy with 55% but only 40 eff., I want to know that he probably plays a low average tier or that he consistently gets carried via platoon.

[Sumeragi]

WN8 will be reducing the influence of lower tiers. I noticed that I have a 20 point difference between WN7 and WN8 due to the relatively high number of low tier vehicles I played.

[Tempester]

Originally Posted by Achiuakuna

THANK YOU. I honestly don't know why people care about made-up stats like efficiency and WN. If you can win, who cares if all your battles are in the BT-7?

I find it funny how you said that while quoting an image where I showed the results of platooning E-25s with unicums from OTTER and Enjoy.

Padding winrate is easy for obvious reasons. Padding WN7 can also be done by alternating between farming damage at high tiers and farming kills at low tiers. For example, let's say I play a game in the Object 268 (tier 10) and deal 3500 damage and 1 kill, which is above average but nothing terribly impressive considering the TD. Then I jump into the T1 Cunningham (tier 1) and deal 150 damage and 7 kills. WN7 is calculated from this session assuming I did 1825 damage and destroyed 4 tanks at tier 5.5, which is extremely impressive. The WN7 formula doesn't take in account the exact tier for every game I played during the session, just the average.

Assessing a player's skill can come down to many things, including winrate, WN7/8, damage ratio, kill ratio, average tier, the classes of tanks one plays the most (TD/arty players will have disproportionally high damage ratios), and stats for individual tanks especially in top tiers. Good, discerning Clan Wars recruiters look at all of these things, they don't just see that you have a high winrate/WN7 plus 5 tier 10 tanks and just throw you in.

[Achiuakuna]

Originally Posted by Tempester

Good, discerning Clan Wars recruiters look at all of these things, they don't just see that you have a high winrate/WN7 plus 5 tier 10 tanks and just throw you in.

So at the end of the day, it's just more things to pad. I think SerB is right, but maybe there is a disclaimer that should say "player with good personal skills"=/="good player". Clan wars obviously want people with good personal skills, but to be a good player at the game in general, it's not a requirement. I take SerB's line as "win by all means necessary". If you can find unicums to platoon with and carry you while others don't, then that's just too bad. You're a better player than them because you are skilled enough to convince people to do the work for you. And the inflated winrate is a direct reward for that. I think that is quite admirable and would consider this kind of leech a good player. This is a team game after all. If you can consistently be a parasite, that takes real life skills, and it should be rewarded accordingly with the title "good@tanks", maybe just not "good@clanwars" specifically.

[Sumeragi]

There is a reason why average players like myself have more influence on actual balancing than unicums.

[Achiuakuna]

Originally Posted by Sumeragi

There is a reason why average players like myself have more influence on actual balancing than unicums.

Which is why I always judge tanks without taking into account of player skills. Except I always get attacked by the anecdotal fallacy of "XXX tank is a good tank you just don't know how to use it. Look at ___, who's a unicum with 60% winrate in it. And with this awesome statistics with a grand total sample size of 1, I rest my case."

Using an unbalanced bad tank and do well in it to make a point is no different from the people who used no equipments or items to beat those those 1990's single player RPG games to make a point. Both are possible, but it doesn't change the fact that the game provides a strictly better and a strictly worse option. I personally finished the T-43 grind without a single drop of free xp and ended up with a final winrate of 74%. It's a much hated tank and I thought it would be funny if I did well in it. So I did that to make a point. Would I object to any considerations of buffing the tank? Absolutely not. It's a severely inferior tank and deserves every bit of buff it gets. The fact I had a nice experience with it doesn't mean anything.

I heard that WG does balance based on the average player experience, and I hope it never changes.

[Gravitas Free Zone]

Images

I'll just be going now.

Sorry; dynamic content not loaded. Reload?

[LeoXiao]

My view is that not all tanks are equal. Some are simply going to be better than others, some worse. Are some clearly in need of an overhaul? Yes. Should they all be "balanced" perfectly? Hard to say, because ultimately as long as the tanks are different at all, there's going to be WR differences.

The same goes for maps. I feel like the new maps are designed to be more or less fair to each team, but they sacrifice bold features that make the maps unique. Whether I'm playing on Severogorsk or Sacred Valley, both of them are bumpy and rocky hellholes. Serene and South Coasts are similarly frustrating. However, while WG's new maps are sometimes lackluster, I find that they are good at balancing old ones. Still waiting for Dragon Ridge to come back though, I liked that one a lot.

[Irenicus]

Yeah, well, don't forget this company is the one that gave us the WTF-100.

They don't know shit about balance.

[Sumeragi]

Originally Posted by Irenicus

Yeah, well, don't forget this company is the one that gave us the WTF-100.

They don't know shit about balance.

Go complain about yourself.

[Irenicus]

Originally Posted by Sumeragi

Go complain about yourself.

Oh, please, like building that tank line was anything like a good idea.

Enough alpha to clip a Maus, accuracy and bloom time to match (the French autoloaders always had that weakness to compensate), more than sufficient penetration, and an ability to turn turret around. Nothing in the game could defeat it one on one, and a half-decent player can keep it safe while killing everything in sight.

If that's your idea of balance, you can go complain about yourself. I'd like to complain here thank you very much.

[Silver-Throne]

3 tiers left remaining for tier 10. --> US Turreted TD line

The research exp is getting higher and higher

[Newhope]

Don't worry the new high tier German TD's will be nerfed and nerfed hard all of them are massively over performing.

[Gravitas Free Zone]

I'd forgotten from the test server how much the 128mm slows down the Panzersniffle 5... and that it only holds 15 rounds.

Looking like the equipment layout with the second gun will be rammer, GLD, and a camo net. Not so much in the mood for optics as I don't think I should be close enough to spot anything myself, it's not safe out there.