21 replies to this topic

[Tident]

Well as am guessing from the russian forum that has a 100 post discussian on this , am looking for insite on it.

As a player of said game and liking its format, but also a huge mech fan can see there being alot of discussion come to play.

Am hoping to get input here from what was actually discussed on forum as cannot be bothered to start translating it all (its got 100 plus pages to go through), and maybe if aloud express some opion on topic, after all there was question at top of beta questionair saying if WOT player.

This game is as far can guess emulating the format to some degree of WOT, i.e free to play, exp gerneration not just from kills. Which I like alot and works well, it gives room for alot of diversity and plays well with game play.

Though MOT has a huge following (me included) that could possiblly dirupts some of the balance that could be had following simple rules like this. Please lets discuss the ins and outs of topics title to see what you all like and do not like about what could happen.

Regards

Tri

[Joanna Conners]

I'm not really sure what you're asking, but then I've never understood the comparison to world of tanks either.

[HellJumper]

well i would just suggest you to read this topic

http://mwomercs.com/...-pretty-please/

this will clear a lot of things for you.. oh and dont think MWO is any way close to WTO...only commonality i see is that you earn C-bills (silver) and exp by batteling...

and i am a long time wot player as well..

[Team Leader]

Oh no.. Not another WoT to MW:O discussion. But just to sum up everything anyone is gonna say "MW:O better not be pay-to-win"

[HellJumper]

It wont be a pay to win like WOT...

[BadWolf]

WoT isn't pay to win. It's just that instead of understanding game mechanics and paying attention (or situational awareness), many players in WoT just jump to the conclusion of "OMFG Gold Ammo! How else could my armor have gotten penetrated !?!?"

[tabaskao]

i play wot without gold and im not afraid of any gold tanks , premium ammo is mostly used on clanwars for normal play its 2 expensive so aint afraid of no ghost

[HellJumper]

BadWolf, on 09 June 2012 - 10:34 AM, said:

WoT isn't pay to win. It's just that instead of understanding game mechanics and paying attention (or situational awareness), many players in WoT just jump to the conclusion of "OMFG Gold Ammo! How else could my armor have gotten penetrated !?!?"

ummm.....so you are saying that their are not players in wot who dont use Gold ammo?? and i am not speaking about clan wars.. CW is one format of wot where armor, angel etc makes no use...it all about guns with bigger penetration/ damage..

and i know what i am talking about....

[Felicitatem Parco]

Here's a rundown of MW:O vs. WoT:

A tank rolls over the crest of a hill. The tank Commander sees a 100ton Atlas Mech. The Atlas steps on the tank.

[done]

[HellJumper]

WOT is pay to win for those people who got lots of money they can waste..and They use it in random battle as well// wot gives you the option to buy better ammo in random battles as well but imo people are stupid who do it...but oh well its their money...

[BadWolf]

HellJumper, on 09 June 2012 - 10:41 AM, said:

ummm.....so you are saying that their are not players in wot who dont use Gold ammo?? and i am not speaking about clan wars.. CW is one format of wot where armor, angel etc makes no use...it all about guns with bigger penetration/ damage..

and i know what i am talking about....

Yes obviously you do....after all, angling and range has no effect on penetration / pen drop mechanics in WoT at all...And gold ammo ignores all of these same mechanics right...

Anyway yeah...Atlas steps on tank, the end, LoL.

Edited by BadWolf, 09 June 2012 - 10:45 AM.

[Alicorn]

The main reason WoT is compared so often, is that it's a successful, free MMO that is based on armored combat.

There are other similarities, such as the very basis of role combat, (You won't go scouting in a 188-ton Maus, for instance) but the similarities more or less end there. The comparisons are more or less because there are so few games of this type to work off of.

(And as a note, WoT DOES have some balance issues, but I find it a lot better than some games I've played in the past - the same goes for it being "pay-to-win.")

Edited by Alicorn, 09 June 2012 - 10:47 AM.

[Tident]

HellJumper cant wait to see you in game as yourll be my easiest C-bills....

[HellJumper]

Prosperity Park, on 09 June 2012 - 10:41 AM, said:

Here's a rundown of MW:O vs. WoT: A tank rolls over the crest of a hill. The tank Commander sees a 100ton Atlas Mech. The Atlas steps on the tank. [done]

HAHAHAAH...nice 1

BadWolf, on 09 June 2012 - 10:45 AM, said:

Yes obviously you do....after all, angling and range has no effect on penetration / pen drop mechanics in WoT at all...And gold ammo ignores all of these same mechanics right... Anyway yeah...Atlas steps on tank, the end, LoL.

sorry if i sounded harsh...was not my intentions mate... was just trying to clarify to OP that this game will be diff with WOT...thats all

[UncleKulikov]

BadWolf, on 09 June 2012 - 10:34 AM, said:

WoT isn't pay to win. It's just that instead of understanding game mechanics and paying attention (or situational awareness), many players in WoT just jump to the conclusion of "OMFG Gold Ammo! How else could my armor have gotten penetrated !?!?"

I won't mind similarities to WOT as long as there isn't that line of sight system in MWO.

[Skylarr]

I would say that in many ways it different and in may ways its the same. SInce I nave not Played in MW:O I cannot actually tell you how much better MW:O is to WoT.

Prosperity Park, on 09 June 2012 - 10:41 AM, said:

Here's a rundown of MW:O vs. WoT:

A tank rolls over the crest of a hill. The tank Commander sees a 100ton Atlas Mech. The Atlas steps on the tank.

[done]

Yes 3025 Mech will most likely ignore the shots from a 1940 tanks and just step on it. But, lets put the atlas against a Behemoth or a Challenger.

[HellJumper]

Tident, on 09 June 2012 - 10:46 AM, said:

HellJumper cant wait to see you in game as yourll be my easiest C-bills....

i wont be the easiest one that is for sure...but you can try

[CumpyLustard]

Prosperity Park, on 09 June 2012 - 10:41 AM, said:

Here's a rundown of MW:O vs. WoT:

A tank rolls over the crest of a hill. The tank Commander sees a 100ton Atlas Mech. The Atlas steps on the tank.

[done]

I've never played WoT but I can only assume this is the most accurate comparison.

[Black Sunder]

Prosperity Park, on 09 June 2012 - 10:41 AM, said:

Here's a rundown of MW:O vs. WoT:

A tank rolls over the crest of a hill. The tank Commander sees a 100ton Atlas Mech. The Atlas steps on the tank.

[done]

This is not an accurate statement. What really happens is that the tank crests the hill and is immediately pounded into the ground a few feet because of a Highlander coming down on it. Atlas is too slow.

[Tacticalspoon]

Demona, on 09 June 2012 - 10:19 AM, said:

I'm not really sure what you're asking, but then I've never understood the comparison to world of tanks either.

I see essentially this same question posed all over these boards, frustrated oldschool 'mech heads that wish people would just stop talking about that unrelated tank game. Let me try to explain where all these posts are coming from, in hopes of easing your frustration.

Essentially, the two games share a very similar format, structure and general features:

• Instanced arena battles, balanced with an automated matchmaker, with similar victory conditions and team size
  
• Competitive shooter focused less on twitch and more on mechanics knowledge / strategy
  
• Battles composed of war machines of various weights, armaments, capabilities and roles
  
• Each battle earns XP / ingame currency which will be used to increase the performance of current vehicles / get new ones.
  
• Premium vehicles bought with real money that have an increased ingame currency earning potential.
  
• After-battle repair costs likely to highly incentivise the use of income boosting premium accounts and vehicles, even if they are not strictly required.

Even the preorder packages offer similar content between the two games (though MWO's seems to be a better deal ). While the actual battle mechanics between the two different games are likely to be quite different, its safe to say that the two games appeal to the same types of gamers, and sit close to each other in genre. Just hold out until people have the game in their hands, then all the WoT talk is liable to stop.