All Activity
This stream auto-updates
- Past hour
-
I rather feel powerless with these announced changes, i disliked how the balance 2.0 changed most of things to worse in PvE (not because of ATGM) on low tiers. I concern about reducing penetration of MBT over distance, worse vision range and probably the strange note of "bots armor will be made weaker". I always wanted bots armor be exact as strong as player vehicle armor in PvP and more diverse choice of models (vs current case where 70% of everything is dominated with light armored AFV and T-15 bots). I can welcome fixing some oldest bugs (like bots driving with their back) but i doubt that alone can impact the existing behavior - the pre-programmed rush to designed point no matter what. Also i received it as very bad news that PvE won't get any new SO anymore, at least in this present roadmap. The quality (playability, fun factor) of last BP was terrible, I do understand it is difficult COVID situation around the world now and many companies seek for savings and are avoiding investments, but somehow AW (mail.ru) can afford high risk balance 3.0 initiative and they think that PvE community should be happy without any serious content update.
- Today
-
I am thinking about getting a progression T9 MBT for Glops. At the moment, I have an unlock token from the Al Hussein, M1128, and the VBR, which if I've got it right, gets me: Chally 2 (I like the Chally I) T90-MS LEO 2A6 (heard good things about this) Abrams M1A2C the others theoretically within reach, but definitely not right this second, are: Type 99a (I'm halfway through theT99) Leclerc (I'm about 15% into the VCAC, but still, it's somewhat on the table) I don't have anything realistically within reach, from the Israeli line at all, or US line to get me the TTB Any thoughts or suggestions?
- Yesterday
-
To start, thank you for replying, despite my usual torrent of unnecessary cynicism and sarcasm. :-) Anyway, re: all new vehicles being a bit OP, fair enough. If that's what it takes, and *IF* there's seriously no effective way round it, then... I'm OK with that. As long as the intention is that the OPness is kept at reasonable minimum, ie Chally falcon, rather than Strela. Remember you'd just have to make new Prems better than normal tanks, not all the other existing premiums And I was thinking about the credit-printer thing the other day, they eventually became their own downfall. People bought them for the credits, ended up with a ton of credits, and then didn't need to buy more credit-printer Premiums. If you need to spam loot crates, go for it as far as I'm concerned. I can buy them if I want, and they don't screw over my win rate. Fine. Make more camos, I bought a load of historical camos, keep it up. Basically, all I want, is that when I play a Glops match, I get a fair shake of the dice, as to whether I win or not. That's all. And everything else, is a logical extension of that desire.
-
A perfectly balanced vehicle, premium or not, would also not be weaker than other vehicles at least in the sense of gameplay viability. Sure it can be weaker in one aspect (ie. durability) than others, but other aspects can then be made comparatively stronger. That would be the perfect world where nobody could say "X is better than Y" in generalization without examining the specific circumstances, but sadly nothing can ever be perfect. In the case of current balancing, a good premium vehicle could be one that is on par with the best performing (statistically) progression vehicle of the same playstyle, with some differences in characteristics (ie. slightly better mobility for slightly worse firepower) to give players a sense of variety. It certainly wouldn't be as appealing or sell as well as something that is blatantly broken (note: not overpowered, big difference), but that's the price to pay for having well-balanced vehicles to promote healthier gameplay. There has to be some way that balance can be marketed as a selling point, even if the benefits aren't immediately obvious. Vehicles can also be made attractive by having perks that don't directly affect gameplay balance (ie. 640 with its 1.25x multipliers). Assume that the game economy isn't in complete shambles like it is now, extra XP and credit multipliers would easily add appeal to otherwise boring vehicles. Theses perks wouldn't necessarily have to be constant, they could come and go on rotating schedules to periodically refresh the appeal of older vehicles to older players, and entice newer players to purchase them. For example, say there are monthly events that focus on specific categories of vehicles (ie. heavy AFV, light AFV, wheeled TDs, etc), and premium vehicles of said category in focus would receive income bonuses for the duration of the event. This would also have the positive side effect regularly of shaking up the gameplay meta since certain vehicles would become more popular, preventing stagnation without having to keep releasing new vehicles to keep gameplay fresh. If anything, the game desperately need regular and continuous credit sinks NOT in the form of overprogression to bring the economy back down to sane levels. Perhaps the base system would offer a solution, but that's going off on a wild tangent. I realize the goal of any game development is to earn profit, unless it's a pet project of some sort. But even then there are ways to monetize game content without compromising gameplay balance or overall game health (ie. playerbase sustainability). It's like the fishing industry, overfishing will definitely generate great profit at the cost of being unsustainable in the long run, while sustainable fishing will ensure profits to continue a great deal longer, and most likely far more profitable than trying to make all the money as fast as possible.
-
Let's just assume it means what it means to you. There's no point in defining every single term and, quite frankly, it's not necessary for this topic. But the vehicle is still not free. You pay either with your time or with your money (gold can be a sub-group of both). But let's assume this is a sales premium, the question stays the same. Well, no. This problem actually concerns all newly introduced vehicles, be it premium, progression or obtainable otherwise. The new progression machines suffered from the same problems (eg. being powercreeped). If a new premium vehicle was introduced on the level of the vehicles from 2015/2016, it would be significantly inferior to the new progression vehicles. So are new premiums better than old progression vehicles? Yes. Are new progression vehicles better than old premiums? Yes, significantly. Another problem that compounds the issue is that the "credit printer" argument is no longer valid except for new players, which we do have, but it's very different from the 2015 where EVERYONE was new. Most veterans effectively have unlimited credits and/or obscene amounts of gold. So the need to make premium vehicles attractive by other means than just presenting them as credit printers is obvious. Especially when you have nothing to spend the credits on (all new premium vehicles are effectively unlocked on day 1 by veteran players, which is obviously not a desired state). Eventually, if nothing changes, yes. That is a way many games do it. They gradually powercreep (the trick is to make this manageable by powercreeping only slightly, it's called the salami method). Then they either make a BIG RESET (aka 0.33 rebalance) or introduce new "tiers" (typical for World of Warcraft where DLC1 top gear suddenly was inferior to DLC2 basic gear and so on). I'd disagree here. From the statistics, IIRC, it takes about 4 months to get a Tier 10 vehicle without grinding like crazy or paying (you have to add all sorts of stuff to the equation, for example the regular weekly bonuses which we don't even often announce anymore). Compare that to WoT or even WT (without paying) and you'll find AW being easier by an order of magnitude to the point of it being detrimental (players skip low tiers in PvP so quickly the queue has problems and T1-T3 bots have to step in). Like Haswell says, I am not here on official capacity, more like a player interested in some discussions. But no. I think there are other ways. Not that I want to describe them in detail because some ideas weren't accepted by the production, some even depend on you not knowing. Nothing shady. Just different and considerably more difficult than just spamming lootboxes. Alright, but that's still not a system solution. I described the problem above and I will generalize it even more: Let's assume you have a perfectly balanced premium that's not stronger than other vehicles. For everyone, it will be more like "meh why bother, we already better vehicles in the game."How will you make it attractive to players so they buy it? And to make things clear - assume being a "fair developer" (playing the "good guy" card, CDPR style) is not going to work (certainly for AW, even if we are saints, even if you sell the project off to a guy who works charity by day and saves puppies from shelters by night, we'll always get caught by the past actions so there's no point in trying).
-
They can answer or not, or can tag their answer as 'official' or 'just their opinion', whatever they want. I dont intend to harass them - it's just they are the only people i can ask. Actually just forget it.
-
Just to stop the dumpster fire from starting, keep in mind that official game staff are here on the forum in an unofficial capacity unless they state otherwise. Same goes for anything they say, it would simply be their personal opinion unless they indicate differently. Think of it as bumping into your landlord or local management at a pub, they are there to chitchat with people and enjoy themselves just like you and I do. Don't grill or harass them, treat them as you would want to be treated yourself. I have very little experience in PvP, so I'll comment only on the PvE aspect here. And since we don't really have any details for the 0.33 rebalance yet I'll base my comments on the current meta instead. The tier 8 squishy dakka meta right now includes the K21, Marder, Griffin and Bradley. K21 and Marder are damage incarnates, Griffin specializes in high consistent damage over time and great stationary camo, Bradley kind of just derps around. All of them are fairly adept at vision control (except for the Marder, but it's also not bad) with very decent damage output, with moderate mobility. The Stalker could fill the niche of having high mobility and great vision control (but not necessarily both view range and camo at the same time), at the cost of comparatively lower damage output (think BMD-2M levels), which is basically what the article suggested. The hard part would be how to balance it as to not make the VBR completely redundant, since the VBR already do the same things at the cost of having wheels instead of tracks. The obvious way would be to simply let the Stalker have slightly lower vision control capabilities, lower total view range and camo for example, but still higher than the other tracked AFVs. Admittedly this sort of low damage output, high vision control playstyle wouldn't necessarily be friendly or easy for inexperienced players, nor applicable in every map. This may decrease the appeal of the Stalker to the average player, but likely no worse than the VBR already does. Rosomak is a turd who's only saving grace is the autohoming missiles, so I won't even try to compare it.
-
I thought you might like a fair chance say what the actual situation, is rather than me jumping to conclusions, or putting words in your mouth. So, just to get this absolutely clear, is this: you two, @Silentstalker & @Komitadjie …..Official representatives of AW/My.com,... are you/are you not saying: "there's no way we can sell Premiums unless they're OP, it's 'pay-to-win' from now on"? ---------------------------------------------------------------- re: glops & i suppose pvp as well. Personally I don't really care if people have pay-to-win vehicles; the problem is, as I'm pretty sure you know, that AW is a zero-sum game. That is: when one guy in a pay-to-win tank wins, another guy in a normal tank MUST LOSE. There is just no way round it. So what does this mean to me? Shall I grind hundreds of hours maybe, to get a fantastic Tier 10 Challenger ADTU, and then what? I don't want to find out that I'll be forced to eat repeated losses, so the Black Eagle/Type 10 owners can have their ... wins at my expense? That doesn't sound like a great gaming experience, sorry. Someone else's paid-for-fun, becomes them paying for me to not have fun.. And also: where does this leave people who bought old-style premiums with real life money: A Challenger Fionn/Wiesel HOT wolf? now (their skinned progression style) Premiums are just Second Class? They paid real money for those. And to a similar, but lesser extent: battle-hardened vehicles.
-
This should be sufficient for AW. I suppose you're running at 1080p resolution. Please check the following: Are your temperatures sufficiently low while gaming? As Norse_Viking already said check if you've installed the latest drivers. Other than that try to fiddle around with the ingame graphics settings and see if you get any changes.
-
Show us your computer
Norse_Viking replied to TeyKey1's topic in Computer Stuff & Volunteer Tech Support
Have u tried messing arround with the graphics settings. I always turn off shadows, bloom, water reflections and put a lot of other things on low. And update your hardware drivers and windows If the map is the one i belive it is, it was bad when they released it long time ago. -
The Merkavas that rear mounted turret is great for reverse slope hull down tactics, but trying any frontal hull down shots with force you to crest ridges more exposing the lower plate. -
Except that then you find out that most of them are pretty fun to play, too, and so you end up buying a bunch of them so that you have the right vehicle for every map/situation. I mean, sure, I started out slowly with just the VFM and then the RCR, but I kept buying more and more as interesting alternatives popped up. Now I have like 10+ each at Tier 6 (for max Tier PvE) and Tier 8 (for Spec Ops), and like 4-5 at Tier 10. All told I think I have around 50, but a lot of those are low tier that were pretty close to free (and often actually were free). There's basically no reason to play a progression vehicle once you've progressed past it, unless it is OPAF. At least Premiums give you extra credits and so are an occasional enticement (at least for me) to play lower tiers. Note: that's all "the theory" of how they were supposed to work. Due to OPAF Premiums like the BMPT Model 2017, and the added credit bonus on the Object 640, there's little reason to play anything else in PvE other than grinding for progression. Any time I'm "caught up" in the current environment, I default to those two until something new comes out.
-
Seconded. Merkavas don't really get good until the Merk 3.Baz, so take the Magach line to get there. -
I liked the magachs, myself, they're quite powerful for tier. -
Well, the problem there is that it doesn't encourage ever buying more than just one or two premiums at most. If all it does is let you farm a bit better, all you need is one good farming vehicle. That's not a particularly useful marketing strategy.
-
Yep, am working on Sheridan and LAV-600 as part of the grind to get reload and vision retros... definitely a relief after grinding Abrams. The next line I'd develop is probably the Schreiber MBTs, as I have both the T4 Megach and the T4 D'alet. Which is the better path to the Merkava 3.Baz? Merk1-Merk2C-Merk3 or Magach 6B-Maga7C-Merk3? Thanks for the opinions, DVC, QR - Last week
-
As Lenticulas said, the pitch for Premium vehicles back in the day was that they were slightly less powerful than a fully-kitted progression vehicle of the same tier, but provided significant extra credits. You laid out cash for a Premium vehicle for the extra credits it helped you earn. You might (read: probably would) want several of them so that you could a) get the daily 2x more than once, and b) have different Premiums for different maps. My first 2 Premium vehicle purchases (at least as far as I remember) were a Tier 6 VFM Mk 5 and a Tier 8 AMX-10RCR. Neither one of them was ever OP, and in fact they were both pretty meh. But those sweet, sweet credits kept me playing them. The AMX is still to this day my most played vehicle, because I used it constantly to earn credits to buy all of the Tier 9s and 10s as I was grinding. Even the VFM was in my top 5 for the longest time, though I think it's finally been pushed out due to the extra-long grinds of some of the more recent progression vehicles. I still prefer to play Premium vehicles whenever possible even though I have 800M credits saved up. For a PvE player, the credit grind is crazy in this game if you're just playing along and not perfectly stacking boosts and insignias. So even with a fat back account, I still feel the need to earn as much as I can at all times. Ergo, premiums.
-
Smud's on point with that one, grinding just one line over and over gets really darn boring pretty quick. I personally liked having three or four lines I was progressing at a time, especially since that meant I could catch more 2x games a day for progression. The rebalance is really kind of up in the air, we've got no idea what's going to end up happening, so as far as tech tree stuff, I'd be tempted to just carry on as though nothing was gonna happen at all. They might end up better, or worse, but we just don't know enough to really make a good call yet.
-
I would start a new line if I were you and play multiple tanks every day, instead of just progressing with only one line, as it gets on nerves rather quickly and you'll find yourself pushing it, instead of enjoying it. The real beast is XM1A3 and it takes time to get there from M1A1, so enjoy grinding instead of going for one thing only as it keeps you interested with different tiers -
This doesn't actually answer the question, though - Why would someone pay money, or spend the inordinate amounts of time required to get the battle path premiums, to acquire a tank that is no different or better than one they can get for far less effort? These have to be marketable or desirable as well, which means they have to have some kind of selling point. "Here, have this Bradley with a different model" isn't really all that special or desirable. Rather, it might be for a small handful of collectors, but not the wide base of players you need to make money with a premium tank.
-
I thought, a long long time ago, the idea of AW premium vehicles was they wouldn't be OP or anything like that, but they'd just be like a regular progression vehicle, but since it was a Premium, it would shower the owner with Credits. Like the terminator sapphire or whatever. Of course the premium tanks at that time pretty much were all actual progression vehicles, plus a few others. That was one of the things that I thought was a really good idea: you could get an advantage out of a Premium, without anyone screaming "pay to win". Now the situation seems to have changed a bit, am I right? I can see with the newest crop of Premiums, even if they are sometimes also available through the BP, they do tend to be OP. I only have to look at the results screen of an average glops match, to see all the Prems occupying the top positions. I'm not denying those Prems might have very talented players in them, but the best players aren't stupid, and they won't be picking tanks because they are terrible vehicles that you can't win with. And also some of the top players I've seen have a couple of Billion credits, so they aren't in a Prem for the money. Addressing power creep as you are doing now, that's a good thing, you only need to do that, because it becomes a problem... You know you're going to end up in the same situation.... Right? Anyway, enough from me. PS. Oh and this Stalker, its special feature... It's not going to be... "Silent" is it ;->
-
Heres one for u guys Im a returning player who stopped playing the game because my pc couldnt really handle it although well inside the minimum requirements(intel quad 9650 oc to 3.9Ghz and gti 1030gpu and 8G ram). Now im behind a Ryzen7 3800x 8core on a B450 mobo with 32G ram at 3200Hz and on top a radeon 5500 nitro 8gb gpu. I run the game from a samsung 500gb ssd. Althugh everything was bought on sale or special offer it still cost me allmost 800 euro and yet the game runs aufully especially when in pvp where in some maps (secret island or however it is called comes to mind especially) I get 25-30 fps and frame juming and lagging like...... Funny thing I got a 250 euro gpu especially for playing some games including this one which i enjoy very much and with the intention to play pvp because frankly pve is kind of repetitive and boring. any suggestions would be much appreciated
-
SS, This is where the issue lies. There is, based on what all the devs in any game like this says, a base line that says for this thing at that level this is where it should be at performance wise. It is already assumed that any other vehicle is "perfectly balanced" prior to release but when put to the test that isn't the case. It's true. Why would one want to buy another vehicle that gets power crept or nerfed after the fact due to it not actually being balanced when it is put to the test. Most developers such as AW's don't want to mess with a premium vehicle due to the back lash that is caused and hurt sales If this is going to be part of the new contract mission, it's stuff I'll do anyways so if I get it I get it great. But if after 5 or 6 battles in it if it's ~meh~ then it'll collect dust. There in lies the rub. If it is balanced but it is an under-performer compared to other similiar vehicles at that time, then who would want it. If it over performs then it pushes everything else out of the way then when it comes time to fix it you face the back lash. This is not a position I would envy you to be in. I'd love to do more PvP but prime time for AW is after I get home from work/gym and get settled down to want to play AW and there are some others in the same position. If you add in that there are people that do not want to do any sort of PvP that creates a larger issue. That causes an issue with what your definition of balance is, my definition of balance, and anyone elses definition is. They don't meet up in the right place. The Stalker is a prime example.
-
ANTINOR joined the community
-
It's a free premium that you just gotta put in the time to get.... that's enough for some.
-
I'd say just continue the line you're already on, as in you're getting the unlock off of the t8 Abrams, get the t9 Abrams and then t10 Abrams. You're already used to the playing style of them, why change it up? Also pointing out that there's no reason not to get every progression tank in the game unless you stop playing before that happens.
