Nice RNG we got there now
3 Likes
No, you don’t. A ‘difference’ is literally subtracting one value from another. Perhaps a little refresher on statistics is in order?
Maybe they can finally get moved up in BR where they belong
Then don’t ask the playerbase for permission to test something for them to then derail it and make it about something else, actually do the test and then ask the people what they think and what they want to change.
2 Likes
You know what most PVP games have? Fucking balance. The only thing I have seen so far is buffs to APHE and nothing else. If making 60% of vehicles unplayable bc they get outclassed by everything they face, I dont know where to see the fun in that.
2 Likes
A big problem about not having weakspots like cupolas is that stuff like the Foch, T95, Tortoise…etc are going to be practically frontally immune to anything at their BR, if the APHE changes are to be implemented.
If we move them up in BR, their armour then becomes useless as HEATFS and stronger APDS / APFSDS can pen them with ease. At least in this current state, their armour is pretty good, and it isn’t impossible to kill them from the front.
Let’s say 30% of Foch deaths are via the cupola, 20% from CAS, 40% from being flanked, and 10% from being outright frontally penetrated.
Now we remove the cupola weakspot for most conventional shells (due to the APHE rework), and now there’s a greater proportion of the Foch’s deaths being caused by CAS (which is not fun), flanking (which is fair game), and being outright frontally penetrated (which is also not fun). This is the same problem the Maus is facing.
Do we really want more vehicles to behave how the Maus does at the moment?
2 Likes
You are literally shooting at the tank from the sky GHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Try clicking from that angle, and then turn the camera to see it from the side. It’s literally coming from a helicopter. That’s not how the armor viewer works.
3 Likes
The funniest part about this thread is that nobody has been talking about crew vitality. Protection analysis doesn’t account for that
2 Likes
That is true.
However, I don’t know if protection analysis uses maximum crew vitality or minimum.
These changes are gonna mess with the balance so bad.
My one hope is that gaijin can actually balance stuff of the changes go live.
there has always been rng this isnt new
lets say 100 people vote, 51 say yes and 49 say no. If one person had voted for no instead of yes then it would be 50:50. You’re 1 vote away from a 50:50.
8 Likes
Now i want to experiment with this, although it could use your current crew’s vitality stats
APHE hasn’t been ‘buffed’ in many years, and many vehicles with solid shot are significantly better than their APHE-shooting counterparts. See 6.7-7.7 France as an example.
It’s great you’re concerned with balance, but I think you are missing the forest for the trees
Yes however you still need twice that many new votes to actually put it at 50%.
If one new vote shows up and votes in the minority, it will still be minority. It’s only if you change votes that this happens.
In other words, it’s a difference of 3%. 3% more people needed to vote “yes” for it to even reach 50%.
3 Likes
Democracy is awesome can’t we all agree!
It literally got buffed recently and I didn’t see no goddamn vote for that.
Right, don’t ask the playerbase permission to test something and when they say no you do it anyways because you don’t actually give a shit about what the community wants and you’ll do it anyways because what you really wanted to do is psychological manipulation to give them the illusion of choice as half of what Gaijin does is found in chapter one in Psychology 101 for dummies.
But … they did ask the playerbase and people voted…
Except it’s tens of thousands of votes, so suddenly it’s a difference of thousands of votes with a 3-point difference. As I said.
Not sure what you’re trying to argue when p-values exist.
tiger is objectively higher than IS
gnooooooooo you’re aiming from the sky gnooooooooooooooooo