11 replies to this topic

[Anjian]

I just started on World of Tanks just two days ago. My perspective from someone who has played Mechwarrior Online for a year now.

1. I can start to see how many of the design decisions in Mechwarrior Online were made. They seemed to be on the most part, in response to this game. The most obvious is the dead tank left on the battlefield, leaving the game to start a new game with a spare tank. Ditto with the spectator mode after you die. And the Hero editions. The third person perspective. The 15 vs. 15 man player that is adjusted to 12 vs. 12 in MWO. The 300 gold for a new bay. Even the pricing structure for the gold. And so on. Stuff like that actually made me feel at home.

2. Unlike MWO, which is expressed in a single time year, WoT covers a long period, from the early thirties --- the genesis of modern tank warfare (no its doesn't include WWI tanks) --- all the way to the Cold War tanks in the sixties. For that reason it is divided into Tiers, so that Leopard 1 tank isn't going to fight a Renault FT-17. The Tiers are more or less ordered by chronological and technological order, progressing through the Tiers is like progressing through the evolution of tank design itself. If a Panzer Mk II is Tier 2 for example, Mk III would be Tier 3. Should note that all maps are not available for ever Tier. As you progress through the Tiers, the maps become increasingly complex and challenging, with more and more places to hide for ambush.

3. Tiers are allowed to fight each other, through a limited range. A Tier 2 can fight with Tier 1 and Tier 3 tanks or even Tier 4, Tier 3 tanks can end up with games up to Tier 5. When this happens, each side will have the same number of tanks per tier, so if Team A gets 3 Tier 3 tanks, so will Team B.

4. WoT is a simulation. Unlike other games, simulations are not meant to be perfectly balanced. They are meant to be authentic and faithful to the historical canon. Thus when the shells of my Panzer Mark III bounces off a KV-1, tough luck, that's what the Panzers in World War 2 actually experienced. As a player you have to make tactical adjustments to these authentic historical inequalities. If some tanks are better than others, that's how it is supposed to be. Despite the inequalities, the fights however tend to be more equal, cascades and roll overs tend to be less frequent than in MWO. More fights tend to be a fight to the last.

5. Having said all that, right off from Tier 1, the game is outright fun. If a player doesn't want to leave the lower tiers, then its okay.

6. Unlike mechs, tanks can die that quickly. It can go bam, you're dead. Having said that it pays to maximize cover and make use of terrain. Tanks are essentially snipers on tracks. WoT is much more positional than MWO. Mobs don't play well here. Some guy playing a mobile antitank gun (tank hunters) hiding in the hills can decimate a rush. This is also why a game is never won early or midway, and its always fought to the end.

7. P2W? I don't like the fact some premium ammunition is only replenished with gold (the MC here). There isn't a lot of Heroes here, and they're mostly foreign tanks that were adapted to a regional force like the French Somua 35 with the German Panzers, or British tanks with the Russians. There is the usual premium time to boosts cash and experience. I don't feel the P2W here is anything more than I have seen with other games.

8. The graphics feels nothing to complain about, though it doesn't feel that special either Having said that I experienced problems starting the client up in Windows 8 when it had not problems on Windows 7. It turns out it needed some legacy DirectX files that were removed on Windows 8. Download the DirectX9c update from Microsoft restored all those legacy DirectX files and the game runs.

9. No problems running here with WTFast. In MWO, with WTFast when I start a game, the game will disconnects, and puts me back to the main lobby interface.

10. Learning how to move your tank, aim and shoot is easy enough. The game has a short learning curve in learning how to drive and fight in your tank. After a short tutorial, I am already fighting. Mastering the tactical nuances however, is another thing though. I can see why the game is a hit. Its remarkably easy to get into, and quite addictive once you're there. Should note that this game has been around for four years now. That maturity in content, features and stability all shows.

11. I think they have covered every stone in historical tank warfare from the thirties to the sixties. Recently they have added the Japanese. Either they progress into the modern era for content, or just polish the game up like the graphics,

Edited by Anjian, 18 January 2014 - 06:08 PM.

[Sandpit]

I've played WoT. To me THAT game had a tremendous grind, P2W mechanics, and was just a tad too slow for my tastes. It's an ok game and I'll still fire it up from time to time but it's not something I can invest a lot of time in. There's plenty of players who will disagree with me though.

[Alaskan Nobody]

That was actually the first interesting read of WoT I have had so far.

[Anjian]

My observations.

1. From MWO I developed a bad habit of trying to hit people in the front (torso). This is the worst habit to bring into WoT. Frontal hits often result in bouncing the shells off or richochets. In WoT, if you hit something and it doesn't damage it, don't blame hit registration bugs. It just hit and bounced off. It happens when you picked the wrong tank to fight the wrong opponent with, e.g. Panzer I or II facing off a T18.

2. There is a grind to the upper tier tanks. But for me, I don't see the need to go with German Secret Weapons like the Maus etc,. Like I said, every tier looks like fun. Progressing to the next tier tank doesn't give you an advantage to the game since you will only be matched with other tanks of the new tier level. Having said that, I suppose most players are grinding towards their favorite historical tank (mine is the Panzer Mark IV). There is also a particular charm with the prewar or early WWII tanks as opposed to the later counterparts.

3. If you are grinding towards a particular tank, some tanks along the tech tree seem competitive for their tier level, others seems to be outmatched. I am doing well with the Panzer 35T at Tier 2 (the Panzer Mark II seems quixotic) but the Panzer 38T or the Panzer III Ausf A that progresses from it for Tier 3, seem like {Scrap}. My shots seems to bounce off all the time, even with the 5cm gun.

4. With these wargame simulators coming out from Russia, I may expect some bias to the Russian weapons, but in the early low tiers I am now, it seems the strongest tanks are with the British, French and Americans.

5. Lots of camping, but this can't be eliminated. Its the nature of tank warfare. The Germans in the later phases of World War 2 use that a lot, much to the chagrin and pain of the Allies.

6. There are specific roles that you can play now using the tech tree and such: light tank if you like pain or being suicidal; medium tank which is to say master of none; the big tanks which is probably where you should be; tank hunter if you like a big gun but sacrifice the turnability of the turret; mobile artillery which is self explanatory.

[Sybreed]

1. I had an interesting argument about P2W in WoT the other day... the guys, hardcore WoT players, said that gold ammo is not P2W. But, if regular ammo doesn't penetrate, therefore dealing no dmg, while gold ammo does, how is that NOT p2w?

2. The tiers are mostly about the relative "power" of the tank. They follow some kind of chronological order, but if a tank is deemed too strong for its era (hint: TIger P and Panther), they'll up the tier accordingly, which sucks. You know what is hilarious? War Thunder Ground Forces uses a system similar to Battle Value. For example, a PZ IV with a short cannon will be tier 1 with a BV of 2.5 (I think), while the PZ IV with its long cannon will be tier 2 with a BV of 3.3.

3. WoT is, sorry to tell you this, NOT a simulation. Just the other day, I had a panther/M10 directly behind a Tiger P and I couldn't even penetrate its back armor (at extreme close range). I'm sorry, that's now how it worked back in the day. Because a tank had more armor didn't mean absolutely nothing could dent it. It's a mechanic that promotes using gold ammo, that's all.

4. MM is just there to **** you off sometimes. You pick your Tier 6 TD and you're stuck against tier 8 tanks. Even gold ammo will have trouble doing damage there. Urgh. Still, I expect a 8.8cm long gun to hurt a T34, even if it's againts the "game's rules".

War Thunder will be much, much better.

[Anjian]

Maybe I should try the Gold Ammo once in a while, but generally though I don't have problems with penetration except when I am plainly outgunned against more strongly armored opponents. Which is about most of the time because my Tier 2 or Tier 3 light or medium tank is often faced against Tier 4 or Tier 5 tanks.

I am wondering how machineguns in some of the light tanks are able to penetrate armor.

The Panther and Tiger are definitely both overpowered for their eras. But then, that's also exactly what happened in real life. They were a deep shock to the Allies.

The Germans in real life were badly outgunned by Allied tanks in the early phase of the war. They had nothing that would match the Char, and the Matilda was a deep shock on advancing German divisions, especially Rommel's 7th. Rommel countered by turning the 88mm Flak gun at them, which isn't in the game. The Germans were also deeply shocked encountering the T-34 and KV-1, since their tanks in the same eras were not match to them, until they started fitting longer barreled 50mm on the Panzer III and long barreled 75mm on the Panzer IV. The longer barreled 75mms outranged and outpenetrated anything the Allies had.

There are of course, lots of liberal "what if" scenarios here in the game. Panzer 1s and IIs were never fitted with the 20mm Flak gun, and Panzer 1s certainly never entered combat with anything more than twin 7.92mm machineguns.

[MadcatX]

Just my humble observations that havn't been mentionned:

MM is a double-edged sword: You'll remember those time that MM puts you on the bottom of the Tier ranking, but it puts you in the top tier just as often. I don't particularly like this method simply because, like anything else, the bad experience is going to be remembered far longer then the good one.

Seal Clubbing: For those unfamiliar with the term, it's when you get in a match where you know you're going to decimate the opposition. Can be intentional or not. In WoT, there was A LOT of intentional seal clubbing for stat padding purposes.

Has become a bit less P2W: I guess a lesser evil. You used to be able to by gold rounds with real life currency only. You can now use in-game, although it is on the pricey side. Also the effectiveness of gold rounds has been reduced since it was first implemented. It was really nasty when it gave more penetration AND damage, but a patch a while back switched it to be either higher damage but lower pen, or just higher pen and that's it.

XVM: The main reason I'm happy that stats arn't public in MW:o, and the biggest cause of in-game QQ'ing\e-peen. XVM is an add-on that provides statistics in-game, with handy color-coding, of how good all players are using all their stats, right down to calculating a win percentage of your team before the game begins. It caused so much unnecessary BS in PuG matches. Currently the in-game environment around players in MW:o is pretty friendly (or neutral anyways), with usually only dead people being annoying.

For a PvP game, MW:o is refreshingly non-hostile. LoL, the go-to example for the longest time of F2P done right (but then again, when you have a player base their size and are, well, a MOBA, their model is quite feasible), had a very toxic community back when I was playing it several years ago. They did start cracking down on it and raised some eyebrows by banning some of it's top players (e-sports league) who had a track record of harassment, but still unsure how the scene is over there.

[Anjian]

After giving WoT a bit more time, I might look at War Thunder next, see what its land warfare is like.

The other reason I am experimenting with WoT is that I am looking at World of Warships. I just have this need to play some IJN cruiser, a Takao, Mogami or Tone class especially. Warships appears to be in some closed alpha or beta stage, with no fixed date of release yet.

It seems Wargamming.net plans to bring Tanks, Warplanes and Warships into a single universe. I wonder how they can do that. If you are in your tank, how would you fancy being attacked by Stukas and Shurtumoviks? Or in a battlefield near the coast, and the Yamato lobbing shells?

A few more thoughts about WoT. It seems they have uncovered just about every stone they can think of and some more. I do think they need to add the Italians. They do have some tanks of their own. And for the Germans, since they added the SPGs (Self propelled guns), maybe they should add the Flakverling? That's like the Jagermech on tracks. Antiaircraft tanks sounds inevitable if tanks are going to fight off planes, but a quartet of 20mm Flak 38s can also be nasty against ground targets.

[KhanCipher]

Anjian, on 19 January 2014 - 09:22 PM, said:

It seems Wargamming.net plans to bring Tanks, Warplanes and Warships into a single universe. I wonder how they can do that. If you are in your tank, how would you fancy being attacked by Stukas and Shurtumoviks? Or in a battlefield near the coast, and the Yamato lobbing shells?

You're in luck, War Thunder is going to do just that while WG is going to keep all three games separate entities (except for gold, free exp, and prem time)

[Anjian]

More observations.

1. It seems, just like in MWO, there are capwarriors in WoT. But capwarriors are quicker to die here when you have Hetzers, Marders or Tank Destroyers (TDs) hiding in the bushes, waiting for the stupid.

2. A very familiar experience, it seems like WoT also has those {Surat} that try to jam pack into a bottleneck and try shoot their way out of it. And like in MWO, a lot of the times, the lemmings die too.

3. In games there seems to be some kind of David that fights the Goliaths, those little annoying brats. In MWO, its the Ravens, Commandos and Spiders, in Hawken its those Infiltrators and Scouts. In WoT, its the Panzer Ic. It comes in very fast spraying machine guns that when penetrated, cause a lot of damage. They probably won't scratch the heavies, but your TDs and SPGs (Self Propelled Guns aka mobile artillery) are vulnerable to those rushes. Your light or medium tank can suffer some awful damage if they rushed and tried to circle you with machine guns blazing. I have not gone through the immense variety of tanks but there appears to be other lights with machine guns or rapid firing light caliber autocannons.

4. Just like in MWO, there is the role of a small bratty entity that somehow carries a big gun that can one shot anyone. The dreaded Hetzer, which gave the rise of the phrase "Hetzers gonna Hetz!", is kind of like that game's Hunchback 4G with the AC20.

Edited by Anjian, 27 January 2014 - 01:57 AM.

[S3dition]

The last time I played they had a massive pay wall around tier 7. If you didn't have a premium tank or account, you couldn't make enough silver to cover your R&R. That's really the only reason I stopped playing. I didn't mind the laughable mechanics, obvious favoritism, or horrid match making, but the pay wall was too much.

[Anjian]

There is more than enough fun to go around from Tier 2 to Tier 6. It looks to me once you're into higher tiers, its one big tank with one big gun shooting another, akin to a MWO game where everyone is only in an assault, pre ghost heat alpha days. The "wall" is a way to limit the number and frequency of people playing Tier 7 and above, making the heavy and more advanced tanks an increased rarity in the battlefield. As they should be.

As for the favoritism, that would kind of surprise me. Since Wargaming.net is Belarussian, they are kind of both pro and anti Russian at the same time from a nationalistic standpoint. The T-34, which was Russia's darling tank in the Second World War, isn't as common as popular as I would have thought, and none of the Russians below Tier 7 didn't feel OP to me except for the KV-1 which has become my nasty nemesis. Next to that, I would say the M4 Sherman is the best medium tank up to Tier 6, and the third tank that gives me the most problems is the Churchill. The Japanese are proving to be a surprise with the quality of their tanks, because I thought, historically they stank in tank warfare. Tank destroyers are giving me a great impression, something called the T18 (US) in the early tiers; a Panzer IV chassis that looks like a box forgot what its called, the infamous and legendary Hetzer, which is another nemesis of mine. For the light tanks there is that nasty Panzer IC with the two machine guns.

I am not sure how they do the matchmaking, but already I don't sense the game has as many rollovers as MWO has. An initial advantage with one team often does not necessarily result in a victory and its more a fight to the last tank. In MWO, I often sense that a team that has the initial victories, are more likely to roll over the other team.

I don't exactly agree how WoT arranges Tier 4 lights should face a wider range of opponents (up to Tier 8!). Its literally a joke and a masochistic one, since the guns on the light would just bounce off the armor of many tanks in those Tiers. It does not make sense to me that the Panzer 38na, a light tank, has to be the precursor for the Panzer IV and the Hetzer (assuming you are not trying the Marder path). The Panzer 38na is set as a Tier 4 light, which means it can face Tier 6 to 8 opponents, and it seems lights from Tier 4 are deliberately setup that way to act as scouts. Yet Tier 4 mediums like the Panzer III only has to deal with Tier 3 to 5 tanks, the usual range of -1 and +1.

As a light, the 38na already has a tough time against Tier 5 tanks. It would have made better sense that the progression should be Panzer III to Panzer IV, or divide the Panzer IV into 2, the Ausf A to E being a Tier 4 tank that mounts the short barreled 75mm L24, the Ausf F to N for the second as a Tier 5 tank, which mounts the long barreled 75mm L48 guns. Given historically, there are two phases in the Panzer IVs career, the first earlier one as a support tank, and the second, where it become a battle tank.

It is quite disconcerting that repeated shots from my Panzer III's 50mm only bounces off the KV-1's armor --- however, that is actually the historical experience. The Germans during their advance into Russia, where literally shocked by the KV-1 and the T-34s. The Germans countered by introducing more Tank Destroyers into the front, with Marders, Hetzers and most especially the StuGs. I can sense my kill rate starting to rise once I got myself a Hetzer, with the derpy 105mm now fitted no less. Now some targets I can one shot off. Unfortunately for my Panzer 38na, which maxes with the 50mm L60 gun, it can't even scratch many of the heavies it faces, and the victories from it tend to be caps and carries.

I bought some premium tanks to help me farm XP as they were on sale. Getting tired of leveling the Panzer 38na. The Ram 2 and T14, both US tanks, cost me around $6 each. Ah they are much better and started getting serious results from them. I prefer not to use a Premium account, nor Gold aka Walmart ammo. Instead, to use the Premium tanks and transfer their XP to GXP, which I can then do research and bolster my German tech tree.