Jump to content

Use SL multipliers instead of repair-costs


I've agreed in the past that SL is needed to prevent some of the issues mentioned by Arium above.

But I can't come at using it for vehicle balance...I've seen that video and linked in the past where the dev said they don't but in the very next sentence said they do.

 

Just have a look at the SL repair costs for some of the new Battleships.  What's the point of even having them in the game, come on Gaijin balance the game properly.

This is where World of Tanks eat War Thunder for breakfast.  They go to great lengths to properly balance tech tree vehicles and OP premiums are generally removed if they aren't eventually power-crept.

The community still whines and whines for sure but they do take actual real balance seriously.

If this game would do the same there would be no competition just IMO.

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Aizuk said:

One year ago, Dita made a good experiment with a friend. B29 was a black hole for silver lions, and that hasn't changed at all.

Not every vehicle works well in every mode. For me, the B-29 was a great earner, while I had T5 planes left to research. This was the case while her repair price was still very high. After the community demanded cheaper repairs, they got cheaper repairs and lower income. Currently, she holds #3 in my US vehicle income ranking.

  • Confused 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Fulth said:

I've agreed in the past that SL is needed to prevent some of the issues mentioned by Arium above.

But I can't come at using it for vehicle balance...I've seen that video and linked in the past where the dev said they don't but in the very next sentence said they do.

 

Just have a look at the SL repair costs for some of the new Battleships.  What's the point of even having them in the game, come on Gaijin balance the game properly.

This is where World of Tanks eat War Thunder for breakfast.  They go to great lengths to properly balance tech tree vehicles and OP premiums are generally removed if they aren't eventually power-crept.

The community still whines and whines for sure but they do take actual real balance seriously.

If this game would do the same there would be no competition just IMO.

They said they don't use it for vehicle balance like BR, which I believe was the question at the time, like "why do you use SL to balance vehicles like BR?" or something similar. BR is the main balance factor. SL comes in as a minor balancer, more regarding "risk vs reward" and "quantity".

 

Wargaming has a substantial investment in data analytics, which I believe has been talked about at some recorded conference. Here's some info about it - Wargaming data analytics

How deep the rabbit hole Gaijin have gone we don't know, I believe. I can't say for certain if they have talked about it at some point or not. But I would pressume they have something going on that they analyse. It would make the most sense. Since making the game reach out to people and have it work is important. I believe they have some third-party connected, if I recall.

 

6 hours ago, Aizuk said:

Now I see the **** guy you are.

Thank you for noticing.. I guess. :dntknw:

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The SL economy needs to exist as any F2P game needs a carrot and stick to get some players to pay cash; there has to be some risk element for losing/performing badly. Where it falls apart with WT is the reason for this thread: Gaijin use excessive SL penalties in a flawed attempt to balance vehicles that are basically overperforming at their BR. Where this is the case, surely the BR of the vehicle should be changed? If Vehicle A and Vehicle B are deemed to have a similar enough 'combat value' when you look at all their attributes (ergo same BR) then the repair cost should be virtually the same. If statistics suggest that one of Vehicle A and B is significantly outperforming the other then it would suggest that at least one of them is at the wrong BR.

 

If Gaijin do not want to put vehicles in their 'proper' BR based on in-game combat performance, then reducing the reward for overperforming vehicles makes more sense than having overly-punitive repair costs. It would not be difficult to trial such a system (all the assets, e.g. multipliers, already exist) in order to evaluate the outcome of the change. A bad player who has rushed up the trees will still run out of SL, but they wouldn't be able to blame certain over-costed vehicles.

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


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

The SL economy needs to exist as any F2P game needs a carrot and stick to get some players to pay cash; there has to be some risk element for losing/performing badly. Where it falls apart with WT is the reason for this thread: Gaijin use excessive SL penalties in a flawed attempt to balance vehicles that are basically overperforming at their BR. Where this is the case, surely the BR of the vehicle should be changed? If Vehicle A and Vehicle B are deemed to have a similar enough 'combat value' when you look at all their attributes (ergo same BR) then the repair cost should be virtually the same. If statistics suggest that one of Vehicle A and B is significantly outperforming the other then it would suggest that at least one of them is at the wrong BR.

 

If Gaijin do not want to put vehicles in their 'proper' BR based on in-game combat performance, then reducing the reward for overperforming vehicles makes more sense than having overly-punitive repair costs. It would not be difficult to trial such a system (all the assets, e.g. multipliers, already exist) in order to evaluate the outcome of the change. A bad player who has rushed up the trees will still run out of SL, but they wouldn't be able to blame certain over-costed vehicles.

There's still another way to balance it without resorting to repair cost discrepancies, increase the number of BR steps....

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Snake509 said:

There's still another way to balance it without resorting to repair cost discrepancies, increase the number of BR steps....

 

As the productivity of the vehicle may come from action vs environment, this would not change much. As long as the vehicle is unopposed it will prevail, no matter which BR. The moment it meets opposition is when BR enters the game. And ususally, the chosen BR is already high for that moment.

  • Confused 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 20/01/2021 at 06:20, Catskinner said:

The SL economy needs to exist as any F2P game needs a carrot and stick to get some players to pay cash; there has to be some risk element for losing/performing badly. Where it falls apart with WT is the reason for this thread: Gaijin use excessive SL penalties in a flawed attempt to balance vehicles that are basically overperforming at their BR. Where this is the case, surely the BR of the vehicle should be changed? If Vehicle A and Vehicle B are deemed to have a similar enough 'combat value' when you look at all their attributes (ergo same BR) then the repair cost should be virtually the same. If statistics suggest that one of Vehicle A and B is significantly outperforming the other then it would suggest that at least one of them is at the wrong BR.

 

If Gaijin do not want to put vehicles in their 'proper' BR based on in-game combat performance, then reducing the reward for overperforming vehicles makes more sense than having overly-punitive repair costs. It would not be difficult to trial such a system (all the assets, e.g. multipliers, already exist) in order to evaluate the outcome of the change. A bad player who has rushed up the trees will still run out of SL, but they wouldn't be able to blame certain over-costed vehicles.

The trouble is that they're clearly correlated to different in-game metrics. Repair costs are directly tied to SL income per death, which is also indirectly a function of deaths/game; how good an investment it is for you. BR is correlated more to kills per game or kills per death, how dangerous you are to others. It's very possible (as in the case of bombers for instance) to have a disjointed situation where a vehicle earns a lot but doesn't kill other vehicles as much, relative to others in its current BR. The B-29 would be a good example of that. (The R3 is another example of a vehicle which is held down in BR by its current survival chance per game. Yes, it can kill higher, but overall, most players just take it out, cap and die, so it has a very low system-wide K/D (or so we've been told).) Balancing purely on BR isn't always possible for those vehicles for those reasons.

  • Like 1
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...