World of Tanks

[Brother-Captain Gaius]

Just find the "join channel" button and type in "sdn".

[Lonestar]

Ah, I thought we were talking about voice chat.

[wautd]

You're actually expecting the tank equivelent to EVE to be balanced? Really?

Err, it's not like EVE at all. It's Navyfield with tanks.

edit: I just had a kamikaze hummel driving straight into my KV-3 and died. I think he was out of ammo lol.

[Narkis]

I've never seen anyone talking in the SDN channel. Many people online, but not one conversation.

[Lonestar]

Me and Bluewolf/D. Turtle are battling

[Mr. Coffee]

I've never seen anyone talking in the SDN channel. Many people online, but not one conversation.

You're either full of shit or you're blind then. I've seen several times where we've said everything from "hello" to "Who the fuck are you and why are you lurking in our chat".

[Narkis]

Why would I lie about that? Look, I'm online right now, and I've been for quite a while. The channel is empty of words. I'll even upload a screenshot: http://img214.imageshack.us/img214/7113/shot007u.jpg

[Lonestar]

We've spoken when you're in there today, I don't know what to tell you.

[Narkis]

Sounds like another bug. I'll post in their forums.

[D.Turtle]

Oh man, I am such an asshole - I just played Soviet Commissar in my VK 3601. We were on Lakeville, camping the Valley in the west, when this little T-28 comes up to the gap, and starts retreating.

So I tell him: "Scout or die" and shoot a warning shot next to him.

He continues to retreat and tells me: "I dare you too."

So I one-shot him

We continued on to absolutely massacre the other team, while he was complaining

This game is fun

[Mr. Coffee]

It was hilarious, that T-28 was driving past me and Turtle executed his ass like a fucking Commissar.

[Slacker]

That's freaking awesome.

[Stark]

TK = awesome?

I wonder if they'll ever try to spread the tanks in a more reasonable fashion, or if they're happy with the late-game railgun play. Changing some of the mechanics around gunfire would make the expensive equipment more meaningful.

[Ritterin Sophia]

So DTurtle, Blue Wolf, and myself are in a match. It just started and everyone's heading their own separate way. All of a sudden I see Blue swerve to avoid hitting a tank that swerved in front of him and accidentally hits a T-34-85 in his A-20, breaking both their tracks. Then the T-34-85 turns his turret around and one-shots Blue.

So I turn off, go down in my T-28 and start tearing into him with my 85mm. Took five shots to take him out and he never hit me. Then he starts bitching and saying he just wish he got a screenshot, to which the entire team tells him to shut the fuck up because he deserved it.

[D.Turtle]

To be honest I don't see too many problems balance wise - yes there are differences, and some tanks are definitely better than others, but the differences aren't big enough to make skill irrelevant. As for the "railgun" play: I like it better than the full speed turning matches you have in matches with all lower tier tanks.

This excludes Artillery of course.

Stark, what do you want to change with the mechanics around gunfire?

[Vanas]

When the matchmaking deigns to throw up a decent game it's really quite fun. Running as TD, I'm pretty much seeing my role as hanging back a bit and attempting to put as many holes as possible in the enemy's light tanks. At the moment, my Hetzer's gun just doesn't quite have the oomph to seriously threaten heavy tanks. (Though I did kill a KV in my Marder. Just used up all my AP rounds doing so.)

I've also installed a new engine in my Ausf A and I'm quite suprised. It's still a POS, but now it's a realtively fast, semi-useful POS. Pity the Pz III\IV's tend to one-hit it, really.

[Mr Bean]

The real joy comes in the Panzer III with it's WTF 60 kmph speed combined with the fact it can mount the 75mm L/24. Use nothing but HE and if you get behind the lines all artly is one-shot DEAD. As well as most light tanks if you can get the side shot. Even worse an L/24 who's firing gold cost HEAT rounds because that lets you threaten T-34's, A20's, KV1's and even Panthers and the like.

[Vanas]

I'm getting temptingly close to the PzIII at the moment. Depressingly, I'm surviving longer in my Ausf A than in my Hetzer.

[Mr. Coffee]

The PzIII is fun to drive fully up graded with a good crew. It's a straight up artillery/tank destroyer hunter, though against anything bigger than a hetzer even point blank 75mm HE starts to get iffy on doing damage and don't even bother trying to do it to a Ferd or a JagdTiger unless you're aiming for their tracks so your team's heavies and arty can kill it.

[Serafina]

Well, i still can't aim manually. But i have learned to use auto-aim quite well, i get good hit rates (between 50-75%) in my A-20, unless i really just want to distract my enemies and fire more-or-lessblindly.
That being said, it really starts to kick ass - that rapid-fire cannon can chew trough anything that isn't heavy, i can take out most medium tanks by now (except top-tier upgraded ones). I don't always win, so i don't bother unless they follow me (in which case i run to allies if possible) or the are about the same tier as me.
As for artillery and tank-destroyers - it's NOT pretty. 2 HE-salvoes and they are history, at that firing rate it takes about three seconds.

[Commander 598]

Well, i still can't aim manually. But i have learned to use auto-aim quite well

Yeah, I can't hit shit most of the time unless I'm in a TD but when I'm autoaiming at someone's ass from point blank I'm not sure it really matters.

[Stark]

To be honest I don't see too many problems balance wise - yes there are differences, and some tanks are definitely better than others, but the differences aren't big enough to make skill irrelevant. As for the "railgun" play: I like it better than the full speed turning matches you have in matches with all lower tier tanks.

This excludes Artillery of course.

Stark, what do you want to change with the mechanics around gunfire?

The way stabilisation, conefire and thus tactics around moving and shooting (ie the shape of battles) are basically the same as any tactical shooter, except your man looks like a tank. Since there's no breakdown by time period and the internal damage system is a bit broken to say the least, you thus get early games of shooting and praying and lategames of sniping vision blocks at 2km. Even if you assume the progress will be much, much slower in the release game, having '150 tanks' of which 140 are only there to make it take longer to get the 'good' tanks is pretty sad (and doesn't help them get people to pay money).

If they want a fast-paced game, lower the maximum effectiveness of stuff like skill so you're not a ridiculous shot lategame and change the damage model so that penetrations are more like armor in a 'regular' game (especially for the larger tanks). If they want a more sim game they need to try and model the issues around tank gunnery instead of just assuming it'll come out of 'conefire' + 'skill bonus'. The spotting mechanics seem to be pretty undervalued, for instance.

It's a shame they don't have a breakdown by time period. It'd be very different to FPS games, but given the small maps, the conefire and the slavish adherence to wikipedia armour stats, the game is going to get really boring really fast if you can use any tank you own anytime, even if some tanks weren't obviously superior to others.

[Serafina]

The way stabilisation, conefire and thus tactics around moving and shooting (ie the shape of battles) are basically the same as any tactical shooter, except your man looks like a tank.

Actually, no - there are significant differences.
First of all, the crosshair needs much longer to stabilize than in a tactical shooter. Yes, that makes quite some difference, especially when you are on the attack. Most tactical shooters also do not decrease your accuracy when you turn your character - but WoT does when you turn your tank or turret.

If they want a fast-paced game, lower the maximum effectiveness of stuff like skill so you're not a ridiculous shot lategame and change the damage model so that penetrations are more like armor in a 'regular' game (especially for the larger tanks). If they want a more sim game they need to try and model the issues around tank gunnery instead of just assuming it'll come out of 'conefire' + 'skill bonus'.

Why does it have to be either very fast-paced or a sim-game? What's wrong with mixing the two - right now they seem to be aiming for "plays fast but has sim-mechanics (such as armor and sighting). Which is totally fine by me.

The spotting mechanics seem to be pretty undervalued, for instance.

How so?
Spotting is a pretty damn important job if you know how to do it. The mechanics are simple - but what's wrong with that? You are more visible if you move and/or fire, and less if you have cover/camonets. Some tanks are better spotters than others, which get's modified by your commander and some equipment.

It's a shame they don't have a breakdown by time period. It'd be very different to FPS games, but given the small maps, the conefire and the slavish adherence to wikipedia armour stats, the game is going to get really boring really fast if you can use any tank you own anytime, even if some tanks weren't obviously superior to others.

So you want to have more historical accuracy (tank limitations/balance) - but you find it deplorable at the same time?

[Stark]

Actually, no - there are significant differences.
First of all, the crosshair needs much longer to stabilize than in a tactical shooter. Yes, that makes quite some difference, especially when you are on the attack. Most tactical shooters also do not decrease your accuracy when you turn your character - but WoT does when you turn your tank or turret.

Do you have a point? It's a shoot-n-scoot game (at least once you get past the 20mm spam of jousting). Do you honestly think conefire reduced by settle line isn't in tactical shooters?

Why does it have to be either very fast-paced or a sim-game? What's wrong with mixing the two - right now they seem to be aiming for "plays fast but has sim-mechanics (such as armor and sighting). Which is totally fine by me.

The emphasis on Big Book of Tanks stuff is where most of the dodgeyness comes in (like the balance and damage model). Either focusing on it or going UT3 would solve that problem.

If you think the armor and sighting are 'sim mechanics' you're an idiot. UT2k4 mods had proper armour modelling too, but they put more emphasis on things like vision, stabilisation etc and so they had a very different kind of play. They also didn't base speed of simple power/weight ratios.

How so?
Spotting is a pretty damn important job if you know how to do it. The mechanics are simple - but what's wrong with that? You are more visible if you move and/or fire, and less if you have cover/camonets. Some tanks are better spotters than others, which get's modified by your commander and some equipment.

And when you're seen, you're magically transmitted to everyone in radio range right down to a red outline that lets you know you have LOS. Gee, I wonder why sniping is so easy? Even better, actual cover doesn't seem to do anything, so being visually obscured only affects your own manual shooting by getting in the way.

]So you want to have more historical accuracy (tank limitations/balance) - but you find it deplorable at the same time?

Where did I mention historical accuracy? It's just lame to have no real reason to use 85% of the tanks at the high end (outside preference and avoiding the high-tier matchmaking anyway). It'd redirect the Diablo aspect of the game, which is perhaps the common element for all the game mechanics that are problematic. As Coffee alluded to earlier, it really isn't unusual for balance to break down highend.

[Serafina]

Do you have a point? It's a shoot-n-scoot game (at least once you get past the 20mm spam of jousting). Do you honestly think conefire reduced by settle line isn't in tactical shooters?

Aaand you did not get what i said.
Because i did not say that that concept does not exist in tactical shooters - i said that it takes considerably longer here than it does in those, which DOES make a difference.
Oh, and nice to see that you ignored my point about turret/tank rotation.

The emphasis on Big Book of Tanks stuff is where most of the dodgeyness comes in (like the balance and damage model). Either focusing on it or going UT3 would solve that problem.

Again - WHY does it have to be one of those extremes in your opinion?

If you think the armor and sighting are 'sim mechanics' you're an idiot. UT2k4 mods had proper armour modelling too, but they put more emphasis on things like vision, stabilisation etc and so they had a very different kind of play. They also didn't base speed of simple power/weight ratios.

Oh, i get it. As long as you say it's not a sim mechanic, it's not!
Guess what - a sim mechanic is anything that tries to model real life - to simulate it. Those ARE sim mechanics - small ones, but they are.

And when you're seen, you're magically transmitted to everyone in radio range right down to a red outline that lets you know you have LOS. Gee, I wonder why sniping is so easy? Even better, actual cover doesn't seem to do anything, so being visually obscured only affects your own manual shooting by getting in the way.

And you have a better idea? Or is that one of your usual "i am stark, i am complain about eeverything"-drivels?
It might be that cover doesn't work right now (it's certainly supposed to be implemented), but it appears to do so with me - i see people in cover later than i do those without, and it works the other way round as well.

Where did I mention historical accuracy? It's just lame to have no real reason to use 85% of the tanks at the high end (outside preference and avoiding the high-tier matchmaking anyway). It'd redirect the Diablo aspect of the game, which is perhaps the common element for all the game mechanics that are problematic. As Coffee alluded to earlier, it really isn't unusual for balance to break down highend.

If you want to balance it, who the hell cares about time periods? Game balance should be the factor then, not historical accuracy.
Who cares which tanks were historically superior to others - game balance is what matters?

Also, there already IS a tier system. The matchmaking doesn't work all that well quite often - but that's also due to the fact that you are not kept out of matches if you are in a high-tier tank, so it throws you into matches even if you are overpowered for them.


Oh - and do you even PLAY this game?