DisconnecT83

Update 14.02.2017 (Server Update)

1 minute ago, Senio said:

 

 

You are wrong, The feeback has been gathered, sumamrized and passed to the devs

so you give update when comunity say about it -this, this and this is bad and we want this and this?

p.s.- one question, how to penetrate tiger II with zis-53 fro mt-34-85? thanks :) 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


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

 

 

You are wrong, The feeback has been gathered, sumamrized and passed to the devs

 

I edited my post to reflect my new finding about possible changes.

 

Doesn't change that the time period was really short though, especially for econ changes.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

to be fair the M56 is faster and has at least a pseudo turret 

 

if you open a feedback thread and tell people it will take some time to review that feedback (in said feedback thread)  people will expect that their feedback is actually considered which didnt happen here at all

 

 

 

The changes that were implemented were based on the feedback from all over the forum in the first place (as well as on the statistics). 

There were some adjustments made according to the newly given feedback, but most of the suggestions were either completely different than statistics or controversive, the others were given a second thought and we will watch the vehicles behaviour - the changes are not permament and things may and will change in the future. 

2 minutes ago, tizianenel said:

 

I edited my post to reflect my new finding about possible changes.

 

Doesn't change that the time period was really short though, especially for econ changes.

 

Economy changes are based firmly on economic performance of the vehicles, they can be revoked if there some real mistakes in it. But none were found so far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Senio said:

Economy changes are based firmly on economic performance of the vehicles, they can be revoked if there some real mistakes in it. But none were found so far.

 

Since winning provides a big bonus to income the R2Y2's appear to have good income - in any RB match where an R2Y2 spawns, the team cannot have another bomber instead. And since as we all know, R2Y2's are used as if they were fighters with airspawn, and enemy teams' bombers do not get an R2Y2-like bomber the end result is effectively a fight where Japan always has numerical advantage in fighters, some of which are very suited to bomber interception both because of armament and because of their spawn. Add to the mix that R2Y2 cannot be matched up with the Sabre because of BR difference.

 

Please remove the airspawn of R2Y2 and see how the R2Y2 would perform if it was truly a fighter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Senio said:

Economy changes are based firmly on economic performance of the vehicles, they can be revoked if there some real mistakes in it. But none were found so far.

@Senio quick question - do you use mechanism to prevent "catch 22"? what I mean:
-plane is expensive to use and hard to profit in so it's used mostly by pros that do good in it

-plane is used mostly by pros so it have good stats and it gets repair cost buffed

-plane is even more expensive to use so even smaller group of even better player stick to fly it

-... and so on.

This is borderline example but I think you know what I had in mind. Is there a way to normalise planes/tanks based on average skill of the player using it?
I do not ask for details as I'm sure they are both confidential and boring so just high level question.

Edited by przybysz86

Senio (Posted )

Of course
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Senio said:

 

[...]

 

Economy changes are based firmly on economic performance of the vehicles, they can be revoked if there some real mistakes in it. But none were found so far.

 

Maybe I found some real mistakes ... at least I see no reason why there are such big differences:

 

I just copied that from the feedback thread for economic changes ...

1) SU-100 => Cost to purchase should be reduced from 610.000 to 360.000 (or 310.000) SL because other tank destroyers (which are SU-100s counterparts) at the same BR (6.3/6.7) like Jagdpanther, Ferdinand, Tortoise and M36 only cost between 300.000 - 360.000 SL.

 

2) T26E1-1 => Same as above, cost to purchase should be reduced from 610.000 to 360.000 SL because similar tanks at the same BR (6.7) like Kingtiger H, IS-2 1944 and Caernarvon  only costs 360.000 SL. Caernarvon  only cost 360.000 SL.

 

It would be nice if you (or someone else) could explain why other similar tanks only cost half as much SL than the tanks mentioned above? :)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Increasing effectiveness of attackers" - I guessing that's from 0,0001% to 0,0002%? And why is that, you ask?

 

Because thanks to completely different game balance of bombers and attackers between Mixed RB and Air RB.

-Attacker/Bomber balanced in Mixed RB => Useless in Air RB due lack of firepower

-Attacker/Bomber balanced in Air RB => Becomes Finger of God in Mixed RB

 

Currently there's nothing in Air RB that attacker does better that a lawnmowing fighter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Senio said:

 

The changes that were implemented were based on the feedback from all over the forum in the first place (as well as on the statistics). 

There were some adjustments made according to the newly given feedback, but most of the suggestions were either completely different than statistics or controversive, the others were given a second thought and we will watch the vehicles behaviour - the changes are not permament and things may and will change in the future. 

 

Economy changes are based firmly on economic performance of the vehicles, they can be revoked if there some real mistakes in it. But none were found so far.

So once again the invisible statistics won :beee:

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

RIP 22 pages of feedback

Tanks with horrible br like 76 jumbo at 6.0 or the super Pershing at 6.7 remain unchanged:facepalm:

Still good update, the panther II is 7.0 now and the jumbo 75 at 4.7 and the T32 at 7.0

My exact thoughts, how can they leave those tanks at those BRs but put the Porsche Tiger at 5.7 -.-

 

Increasing the Hellcats BR to 5.3 makes zero sense. It used to be 4.7 got nerfed to hell and then put at 5.0, now they introduce hull break and put it at 5.3....

76mm M4A2 makes should not have a higher BR than the M4A1 and the M4A3 is now the same BR as the IS-1 which it can hardly penetrate. 5.0 would be decent since 5.3 is too high and 4.7 too low.

M26 with its mobility of a heavy at 6.3 makes no sense when all Tiger Is are now at 5.7 tank but hardly better armor than the Tigers. Heck, the IS-2 can do everything the M26 can but better.

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well nothing change. Continues with the stupid compresion, good change move Panther 2 to 7.0 but is useless if left behind Tiger 2, T 29, Caernarvon, etc... 5.7 the 90% of the battles fight with 6.7 and 5.0/5.3 vs 5.7. Or expand top BR to 9.0 or bring back the old 0.7.

Now see a lot of Allies ex 4.7 now 4.3 in 3.7/4.3 battles but germans 4.7 continues rotting in his  BRs. Good change move KV-1 zis 5 and T-34/57 but why dont decrease Hetzer o jagdpanzer 4???

And continue greatest wtf how German Panther A in 6.0 when soviet one have 5.7 or KV-2 and Brummbar have both 5.0 in Arcade but in RB KV-2 decrease to 4.3 and Brummfail continues in 5.0.

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some afterthought about the Coelian - might make sense to put its BR down to 6.0 or at least 6.3. At its current battlerating it will most likley be ignored aswell since it is prefereable to build a german 7.0 lineup with Panther and Kugelblitz instead of a 6.7 lineup. At 6.0 it would be with the other Panthers and the 37mm Cannons won´t cause any problems to the meta of that BR anyways.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uhhh hey mods, on the BR adjustment sheet, you forgot to add the Finnish KV-1B to the chart being moved to 4.0, even though the KV-1B is the same exact tank as the KV-1E. I gave AMPLE feedback about you all forgetting to move the KV-1B, but it seems that it has been ignored. Please fix that problem. Please. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi There,

 

In the game the economics are not the same as the new list.

 

For example:

61   790000 790000 0 8200 8200 0 4010 3280 -730 8000 8000

The type 61 should be 8200 no changes in AB but if i check it out it is 3133

The M42 duster Japanese is now 19940 but accoring to the list it should be 6800 in AB in RB it is 1227 but that is also different then in the list ?

 

If i go over it this complies to a lot of tanks over all nations it is different then the list, i restarted the game have checked out use work in progress but no change.

Is this just me or do other people have this or am i not getting the prices in that list or do i have to divide or multiply by a formula ?

61

  790000 790000 0 8200 8200 0 4010 3280 -730 8000 8000

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have one query most of the tier 1-3 vehicles that have had price changes i already obtain them so will i be charged for it or will my silver lion courrency count stay the same hasnt changed yet just wondering 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

gaijin i know i've been giving you grief about the recent game changes. but i'm glad to see yall doing something that's been long over due.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I won't be able to launch up the game until tomorrow, but I have a question: Is the ISU-152 still 6.0 in AB? I didn't see it being mentioned in the notes except for RB, but it seems weird that a 6.0 tank would be before the ISU-122(5.3)...

Ouiche (Posted )

At the moment, yes. Current place and BR are logical in RB and SB, i will ask for AB.

Share this post


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

Some afterthought about the Coelian - might make sense to put its BR down to 6.0 or at least 6.3. At its current battlerating it will most likley be ignored aswell since it is prefereable to build a german 7.0 lineup with Panther and Kugelblitz instead of a 6.7 lineup. At 6.0 it would be with the other Panthers and the 37mm Cannons won´t cause any problems to the meta of that BR anyways.

The armor is quite thick though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We currently have a small bug regarding the vehicle purchasing price and crew training cost of the kugelblitz and Coelian - it will be fixed tomorrow.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


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

We currently have a small bug regarding the vehicle purchasing price and crew training cost of the kugelblitz and Coelian - it will be fixed tomorrow.

and the module cost doesnt changed....

Ouiche (Posted )

Yep, i've been told it will be fixed.

Share this post


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

conomy changes are based firmly on economic performance of the vehicles, they can be revoked if there some real mistakes in it. But none were found so far.

 

Sorry but this doesn’t make any sense!!!!

As your old "BR is based on statistics"

 

air plane is expensive in repair

=> It will mainly be flown by experts, which will have high success with it

    =>  economic performance of the vehicles will be VERY high

         => repair cost will increase

              => Loop start from the beginning

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not gonna lie, pretty meh update in all.

While it seems that there are improvements in brs, frankly this has made no difference to the mm at all. In fact, after playing 13 games at 5.7 I can say it's worse than ever. At most, 3 of the 13 games were below 6.3br. I was fully uptiered for at least half, and the rest of the time I was fighting 6.3 vehicles.

Lots of tanks should have been moved around which weren't. Moving the Panther II to br 7.0 makes no sense unless at least the t29, if not the tiger II h also move up. All this has done is make German 6.7 limited in tanks, and will force everyone to either spam Tiger II hs or suck on t10s in their panther II all the time. 5.7 vehicles are just as screwed as they ever were when uptiered to face 6.7.

Pershing could have been moved to br 6.0, and Panther A should have been placed at  br 5.7 - especially considering the IS 2s have both been moved down. The 76mm jumbo is still at br 6.0 for some reason, when it was probably one of the most obvious tanks in need of a move down in br. 

Frankly, when "huge br changes" were announced, I was expecting a full on overhaul which would actually make mm consistently fair like everyone has been asking for for years. Raising the top br to 9.0, or reducing the spread to 0.7 is what was needed. Instead, it's just another update moving tanks around without really fixing much, just changing up which fotm vehicle is worth playing currently.

Not saying it's the worst update ever, certainly better than the absolute travesties which were the previous major br updates. Still, the devs not even close to sorting this game's mm system out.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.