Jump to content

dfnce

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    264

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

Posts posted by dfnce

  2. Posted

    I support the idea of separate  PvE balance (at least separated dpm), but i think that the main manifistation of imbalance in pve exists not because mbt are universal class, but what are goals given by devs to player and how it  can be best archived. The most rewarding goal is getting most of damage and kills, and it can be best archived it with vehicles like York, Murder or T-15, so the obvious question arises if these mbt are needed for more than meatshields. 

    Another bad thing happenened in last year with PvE was the way of self-preservation (read - careful and vigilant gameplay) was replaced with dumb down max aggressive push forward, because

    • players have 3 lifes
    • it is possible to restore health 3 times with most advanced kit
    • it is possible to play dumb and rely on mechanics of Ophelia white shield

    We used to manage 200% HP over PvE mission. Now it is 600%. Does average mission time increased 3 times? Does amount of total bot HP increased 3 times? No and No. But we got average DPM of MBT increased by 1.5-2 times. 

  3. Posted · Edited by dfnce (see edit history)

    I think it is not worth to pursue every new premium they sell in shop.

    For me it is hard to accept price of 50 ZTQ boxes (which may not be enough to get my 40 missing parts), worth of 2-3 AAA titles on steam. 

    Beside i think ZTQ is not that kind of tank worth much attention or sacrifices. 

    Premium tanks available in BP you get for 5-10% of price tag (assume BP preorder), which they place later in loot boxes.

     

     

  5. Posted

    Quote
    • Fixed an issue that arose in Update 0.33, where the PCs with their GPUs significantly more powerful than their CPUs would suffer from performance losses

    "GPUs significantly more powerful than their CPUs" sounds like quite regular case these days unless you use some very old, pre-CUDA video card or intel embedded chipset, right ?

  6. Posted

    Arty class reward brings the possibility that group of of BP missions can be dedicated to arty class (or where arty is most obvious choice but other  tier 4-9 BP vehicles are not), for example deal damage/kills from long  distance using HE and 152 mm caliber.

    If such case going to be truth, players are going to be locked between rules :

    - unfavorite arty class with generally inferiour kill and damage potential 

    - class with PvP mode disabled

    - only BP vehcile rule to complete missions (BP arty or final vehicle)

    - forced grind of level 50 post-soviet dinosaur giving convenient alternative

     

     

     

  7. Posted

    Tier 4 and below per PvE are poorly balanced and half-dead. Adding new vehicle here is poor use of resources and effort, considering how fast first tiers can be completed, like few hours. Even if accept any absurd from AW "balance team", where fantasy world PELE Shilka can be more powerful than York, VBL and Kasted combined, such approach won't help. 

  9. Posted

    Per queue management - if one is waiting about 2 minutes for SO (normal or weekends), it is faster sometimes to quit queue and enter again. There is some issue or behavior in PvE matchmaker which can keep a player forever in futile attempt to assemble impossible team (sort of).

    • Upvote 1

  10. Posted · Edited by dfnce (see edit history)

    8 hours ago, Katsumoto said:

    Going through some of this, I just keep in that December 10th, the new DLC for MW5 comes out.  I know where I'll be at on December 11th.

     

    Now there is a new battle path with "MOAR DAKKA DAKKA".  A Shilka (to be honest I'm surprised that it wasn't one of the first tanks ever added to the game), a modified BMP-3 (now with MORE MISSILES!), a mini-me version of the T-15, and then something else with a 152mm in the form a huge Russian MBT?  Something I enjoyed getting 033'd from the previous battle path makes it really hard to want to be excited about this new battle path.

    Speaking of Dec 10, Cyberpunk 2077 is supposed to be released that date, oh well possibly. 

  13. Posted

    1 hour ago, Silentstalker said:

    So if I understand your feedback correctly: under the current circumstances, the event made no sense because of long waiting times. Got it.

    But imagine if the waiting times were instant.

    1) Would something like that be fun, such playthroughs?

    2) Or would it be something you'd do just for the rewards?

    3) If the rewards were the same, would you rather play (current) standard PvE or (current) Spec Ops?

     

    My opinion

    - Rewards for weekend SO ( 1mission=1container) were fine and leave them in peace. 

    - Fun factor cannot be good with very long gameplay. Having ideal waiting and boot times up to 1 minute, the average time to complete four SO missions (one season) with 100% WR is usually just below or about 1h. But from my random experience considering all delays and failures, it usually takes no less than 2 hours to finish a single SO on tier 10. 

    - PvE vehicle damaging potential was and is in imbalance. Making all sorts of damage competitions in PvE with expensive prizes rewards serves to the pretty much same group of players playing on same meta vehicles. I think it is very counter-productive to PvP mode and its community as you show big finger to them, and makes angry players who either get these vehicles in BP with real effort or has to pay insane price for lootboxes.

    - Standard PvE is utterly boring and poorly balanced vs high DPM meta which is now granted to all main classes. Even most of SO (except SH and MC) are in limbo of previous assumptions how much damage every player could produce. And we have shitload of Bradleys and other light armored trash everywhere which makes up to huge dominance of AC vehicles. 

  17. Posted · Edited by dfnce (see edit history)

    The not so exciting thing to me that following BP principle 2 of vehicles will be legacy ones from 60-70. Basically i don't care of them. Can be (one of many) BTR, Tunguska, there are so many of them.

    This leaves us 2 spots for more modern vehicles , where traditionally one of them will be tier 7-8 and one tier 10.

    For  tier 7-8 it can be AFV/TD - MANUL or BUMERANG. Also consider TOS or SPAAG Panzir. There is also quite nice looking T80BVM.

    For tier 10 if it has to be  MBT - easily another prototype from 80-90, like even 195. Unlikely AW but it could a surprise in very positive way if they roll T90M.

     

     

  19. Posted

    10 hours ago, Katsumoto said:

    I have never understood why an as-designed IFV is classed as a TD in Armored Warfare.

    The game doesn't focus much on fighting infantry, or deliver said infantry to specific point to archive sort of "point territorial conquest". Also there no need to support MBT in the same way as it is envisioned in IFV usage doctrines. Every vehicle simply has to fight other vehicles. At the game start and for a while Termi and T-15 were AFV, Kurganets simply belongs to place, where T-15 already is, adding infantry didn't change much things.

  20. Posted

     

    31 minutes ago, Quantum_Ranger said:

    I hope new BP doesn't require BP tanks to complete BP missions.

    It was criticized by many for being so repetitive, but previously it wasn't that good for new players either. Some missions could be done best in 490, CATTB (or AFT-10) in time of their apex.

    Another example - so called "high caliber" missions you would need either premium MBT70 or one specific tier 10 non-prem (like XM1A3, AX etc). I think it is not "forced" BP tanks are to blame, but very similar and repetitive missions. And here is another explanation, devs choose dull and simple rules to avoid difficulties for themselves - when these missions were unique many players experienced as much issues in BP as number of missions, in addition different vehicles could interact differently to mission objectives.

  23. Posted

    I recall some my extra settings

    In-game settings

    • FPS cap - 120 (this is how much frames you want AW to produce, between 50% and 100 % of additional frames makes video more fluid even if you won't see them mostly)
    • V-Sync - yes (less flickering)

    nVidia settings

    • Max refresh rate - 60 Hz (this is compatible with my monitor)
    • Low Latency  - Ultra (You can pick between this and just Enable, but Ultra seems very nice)
    • Vertical Sync - Fast (trade between some minimal flickering and lesser waiting of rendering of next frame)

     

  24. Posted

    5 hours ago, Pesa_ said:

    they even closed russian forum to maximize budget. it really looks like they are running out of budget and players thanks to their latest fuckups, but we all knew that. 

    It funny that mygames are publishing 4 tank games now - aw, ground wars, tank force, battle tanks legends of ww2. It is even strange they didn't yet add Burning Engine to their collection.

     

  25. Posted

    Yes, there was performance drop on max settings in 0.33. 

    Only thing i can advise is to turn off the windowed mode, it cuts easily 20-40 % of performance and gives unstable FPS too.

    There is AW connectivity to Amsterdam, there is TLS session connection to Moscow, and there is world-access public udp port which aw creates (or tries to) on your home router using upnp.

     

×
×
  • Create New...