47 replies to this topic

[NOVA5]

What I hate about games is the lack of planning for the future,the game has been running for a while,but the gaming heads would like to slow peoples progression down some,by means of kerf weapons add cost to items which were set one way since the begining of the game.
just to slow you down. Just Like WoT did before the last patch,an in this patch 7.0 which was 12-15-2011,artys they made it harder to hit someone's tank,now they reduced the amount of credits one gets after a match an raised cost of the ammo an repairs,this came about when a few people cryed in forums the arty can kill me.well yes they could,after all it is a war game.WoT didn't give any thought to the people who worked long an hard spent money an time to get a high teir arty.On some of the tanks they reduced there armor.An if you have a question for WoT,you can't send a ticket to them,the tech dept is off line,just another slap in the face.
So I guess the question is: Does MWO have a plan for the Future when their players get high ranking equipment an the weapons...??

[Vladdaimpaler77]

actually War Gaming seems to be anti competitive play, they do everything they can to stifle the best players in order to make it so the free to play only players are somewhat happy. They're set on eating the goose that lays the golden eggs. Clan Wars are not fun, there is no reason to buy gold anymore. I only play because there is nothing else out there that captures the team play aspect that tanks does. This is my big hope for MWO, that they keep the team play, but don't cater to the casual players to the extent of alienating the hard core.

[shnbwmn]

Played in the CBT, OBT, and for a few months after release ... game got worse and worse, so did the players.

[Aljo Harra]

I agree totally with the bad things witch were posted about WoT. I'm still playing it but just because atm I have nothing better to do. All the worse about it is allready said and if, god beware, MWO will go in the same direction then I won't play it for long. It's crap and too much dipendent from lucky shots and/or non-stupid-players.

As long as people continue spending money for it to buy gold-tanks and ammo the devs will give a **** on make it more playable and continue doing jokes on twitter or facebook (or where ever) about the balancing.

Last but not least it is not really suitable for Clanwars as long as you won't pay for win.

[mecheze]

Sounds like a game I could get into. I like level grinding type of games.

[ELHImp]

shnbwmn, on 14 December 2011 - 10:24 PM, said:

Played in the CBT, OBT, and for a few months after release ... game got worse and worse, so did the players.

This!

[Black Sunder]

Instead of putting all that money they made into improving WoT they started World of Airplanes and World of Battleships.

[Catamount]

Vladdaimpaler77, on 14 December 2011 - 10:17 PM, said:

actually War Gaming seems to be anti competitive play, they do everything they can to stifle the best players in order to make it so the free to play only players are somewhat happy.

Isn't that slightly backwards?


Wouldn't the "best" players be the ones who didn't elect to get stuff in the game by plunking down money for stuff they didn't earn in-game, rather than the "bad free players" who actually bothered to go and do the work by playing the game?


From day one, I can't say I ever considered the people who bought the 38H735, instantly landing in a tank that they not only didn't really earn, but that was all but impenetrable to the guns of other tanks in those tiers (in other words, quite literally "Pay to Win"), to be the "best" players. That fact gets pretty much worse as worse as you go up in tiers and encounter even worse gold tanks.

Edited by Catamount, 15 December 2011 - 06:40 AM.

[Vladdaimpaler77]

The game isnt about grinding and pubs, its about teamplay. While its true the best players were not always the ones who pre bought gold and started off with the bobble head, they were often the most dedicated to getting to tanks that would be competitive in tank companies and later clan wars. The skill differences I see from players who I played closed beta with and ones I had met later on were often glaring.

If you look at what many consider the best players in the game, most of them pre-bought gold, they often have all 4 tier 10 hvys multiple tier 8 arties and tier 9 meds. They just saw the value in getting a head start and converting exp with gold. For us its not about the grind, thats an annoying thing to get past. It's about playing in a team and dominating, to do that we needed the highest tier tanks.

Now for the "pay to win" I will admit that most players in 59s or lowes are in above their head, but those tanks are imporant as it keeps the cash flowing. A tier 8 arty will often lose money if its shot, making it unplayable in pubs while a tier 10 is so dependent on its team it too is unplayable in pubs.

[Aaron DeChavilier]

I played the beta since last october; never got in a clan, but also never really felt
the grind. For the most part its been skype and 2 friends rolling the pubs with a
platoon. do we lose? yeah, do we fun no matter the win or loss? you better believe
it!

I just don't think the game model or mechanics are really 'competitive' when you
notice that the only way to win is to get a better x,y,z and the matchmaker still
throws light tanks into heavy matches as 'scouts'

to the devs; 'scouts' equal early suicide rush because it's nigh impossible to
successfully extricate yourself from an encounter. There's no falling back and
regrouping really.

[Vladdaimpaler77]

Well the pubs are not competitive. I'll throw out a blanket invite. Anyone who is intrested message me in tanks, my name is Vladdimpaler. I'm usually on in the evening.

[Demi-Precentor Konev]

I still say, instead of referring to them 'hardcore' and 'casual' gamers - we switch to 'alpha' and 'beta' gamers (respectively).

[Kaemon]

WoT makes me sad, it's the quintessential cash grab, $30 vapour ware tanks, abhorred camo/invisi tank/spotting system, poor matchmaking, painful grinding (remember when games were fun?), very poor implementation of clan wars.

It had such great potential, then the $ started rolling in, and they just want to bleed it dry.

why start on carbon copy games before this one is truly fleshed out? Because they know it's a flash in the pan and they're strip mining the players and will blow through WoP and WoBS, and we'll be left with 3 sub standard games.

When players wise up and realize they need to stop playing/paying these cash grabs, the dev shops will stop making them, and everyone will be better off.

Edited by Kaemon, 15 December 2011 - 05:31 PM.

[Orayn]

I play a bit. Currently slogging my way through Tier IV, about 80,000 Tankland Funbucks away from a Pz III/IV. For a game I've spent exactly zero dollars and zero cents on, it's been an enjoyable experience.

Edited by orayn, 15 December 2011 - 11:29 PM.

[Catamount]

orayn, on 15 December 2011 - 11:29 PM, said:

I play a bit. Currently slogging my way through Tier IV, about 80,000 Tankland Funbucks away from a Pz III/IV. For a game I've spent exactly zero dollars and zero cents on, it's been an enjoyable experience.

Yeah, I got as far as Tier 7, spent a grand total of maybe $20 in $6.95 installments, so I could convert experience, then figured I had seen about enough, right about the time I realized that even at that level, making money without a $50 Lowe was going to be more of a grind than it was worth, since I obviously wasn't going to do it blowing 1000 credits a shot with my IS, making what I remember to be maybe 5-15k a round (before ammo, resupply and repairs). $20 was probably about the right amount to spend in terms of the worth of the game, imho.

I did have fun during that time though.

Edited by Catamount, 16 December 2011 - 03:42 AM.

[Striker1980]

Got to Agree on the Grinding Aspect of WOT, it wouldn't be QUITE so bad if there were more game play modes.

A campaign type mode or progressive battle mode with other players would be great, but that would prob. take too much time on the Dev's part I guess, so running around the same 10 maps with the same mid-tier tank surrounded by indestructible uber-killing machines that someone bought or sacrificed hundreds of hours for is all the games gonna be.

I must confess I hope that MWO has a bit more depth and reliance upon player skill, over not seeing ones missus for weeks on end.

The developers are lucky in the sense that they have the customizability side of things to develop to the nth degree, I just hope that it translates into deeper gameplay than what essentially amounts to endless hours of a blend of team deathmatch and capture the flag.

A persistant universe with a Battlemech would rock my tiny little world. (quests etc?) :-D

Oh by which I don't mean kill the 4 elementals that respawn every 10 mins.

More defend x position, or attack y position, escort a VIP, retreat and get back to extract point.


Apologies for my slightly off topic musings.

For the record I do enjoy a short burst of WOT but am loosing interest as the grind increases and my mid tier tank becomes increasingly mediocre.

[Garth Erlam]

I found World of Tanks really fun until around tier 3-4 where you have your awesome Light Tank facing Tier 6 heavies that one shot you every goddamn round, from across the map, because the tier 5 lights have three times the sight distance you do.

[Ghost]

Garth Erlam, on 16 December 2011 - 02:33 PM, said:

I found World of Tanks really fun until around tier 3-4 where you have your awesome Light Tank facing Tier 6 heavies that one shot you every ******* round, from across the map, because the tier 5 lights have three times the sight distance you do.

The sweet spot is the first tier Russian tank destroyer. The AT-1.

This little guy murders everything it is likely to encounter. Just pack high explosive shells and you're good to go. It wasn't until today I learned that it was actually an artillery tank that got pressed into anti-tank duty. Explains a lot actually.

[Striker1980]

Ghost, on 16 December 2011 - 02:54 PM, said:

The sweet spot is the first tier Russian tank destroyer. The AT-1.

Tank destroyers always feel fundamentally flawed in this game to me, equal guns to tanks and none of the manuverability, really tough to play (I know the real world reason for them was you could mount a MASSIVE gun on a lighter chassis for quick production, but yet to see the point in them in WOT).

[Grayson Pryde]

Striker1980, on 16 December 2011 - 03:58 PM, said:

Tank destroyers always feel fundamentally flawed in this game to me, equal guns to tanks and none of the manuverability, really tough to play (I know the real world reason for them was you could mount a MASSIVE gun on a lighter chassis for quick production, but yet to see the point in them in WOT).

Until you get to tier 3 or 4 then the matchmaking ***** you....

I am a 1 shot in my Hetzer for any KV with a big cannon...

Same for my Panzer III/IV btw...I love how my shells scratch the armor of a Tiger II. That will teach him a lesson about shooting on smaller tanks!

Oh...wait...he killed me....