Jump to content


Why Tier 6 Should Not be Removed from CW


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
20 replies to this topic

Papa_Wiskey #1 Posted 24 February 2017 - 03:23 PM

    Corporal

  • Council of Armored Forces
  • 36050 battles
  • 64
  • [O_G] O_G
  • Member since:
    06-05-2015

Intro

I understand that it is being proposed to remove tier 6 from clan wars. This proposal has not been adequately thought through. The argument for this includes:

 

1. Not enough clans are active in clan wars.

2. Tier 6 is pulling clans away from the diminished pool of active clans at tier 8 and tier 10.

 

Why do Clans Play Tier 6?

The first point is true there are not enough active clans in clan wars, however, I would argue the second point is not true except there was one time this did occur with one clan in one season because of the way the rules and pay outs of gold were arranged, see the exception below.

 

Smaller clans or clans that are larger but with few active players have no option but to play tier 6  as:

1. Only seven active players needed as a minimum to play at tier 6.

2. Many of the players do not have the right selection of tier 8 and 10 tanks.

3. Many younger players in clans can only afford to play at tier 6 as they do not have premium tanks and/or premium vehicles necessary to grind credits to play costly tier 8 or 10 battles.

 

Why do clans play at higher tiers?

 

1. It is more interesting with more tanks on the battle field allowing for more complex strategies to be played and normally played to a higher standard.

2. The rewards to the clan a higher. Gold is now almost non-extant at tier 6.

3. Greater prestige playing and doing well at higher tiers.

 

Do clans playing tier 6 diminish the pool of clans playing at tier 8 and 10?

 

My answer to this is probably not given the reasons for clans playing at tier 6. There has been one notable exception to this and that was Flex who in one season just dominated the tier 6's and was constituted by players who probably would otherwise normally be expected to play 8's and 10's. This occurred because the pay out to them during that season for holding land was quite good and it was impossible to do multiple landings in one time zone that made it possible to them to defend against any number of clans.

 

It is true to say that I do not have hard evidence to support my assertion that 6 doesn't detract from 8 and 10 as I do not have access to the data e.g.

 

1. The mean number of tier 8 and 10 tanks owned by clan members that are active in clan wars at tier 6.

2. The average number of players active during clan wars time for tier 6 playing clans.

 

Only if clans that have the people available with the right tanks, and enough credits that choose to play tier 6 would the argument proposed for dropping clan wars at tier 6 be valid. So WG please do an analysis before making a decision. Even if my argument was shown to be false please consider small and new clans who would effectively be excluded from CW and reduced to only playing detaches with  no chance of earning gold.

 

I believe the real issue is why are there not enough active clans. This I would suggest is due to the format of the global map and the rules. I would suggest that the format changes are examined and the effect of the number of clans participating over the seasons. What is needed is to attract clans to play that includes the potential to obtain gold whilst avoiding the potential domination of the map by a few clans to the exclusion of others. Having only tier 8 and 10 would create a barrier to entry that would diminish the total number of clans active in CW.

 

Gold Gold Gold and Alliances

 

Gold is an in game currency distributing via clan wars could be considered as reducing the amount that might be purchased by players, bad for WG business model perhaps. I would however put forward that much of the gold earned by clans with the exception of the elite ones does little to detract from WG's business model as this is distributed to clan members who  often would not otherwise have the opportunity to purchase it. There are certainly a lot of players in our clan that don't run premium accounts or premium vehicles other than the ones they have been awarded by WG. The data held by WG should demonstrate that point but what is certainly true is that without the potential to earn gold CW is dead in the water. Make it so there is something for everyone, more for better and skilled clan, less for those that just try hard. The current format in tier 8 and 10 allows that, but for weaker clans you have to try very hard night after night for very little reward, and at tier 6 the rewards are almost non-existent. The current format also lacks one element that previous seasons had, diplomacy. This was an interesting element in CW, you needed allies and you need to work together with them in order to maximise returns to your allied clans. This adds a real dimension to the game, real people interacting with other real people, screw up the diplomacy and you get screwed. It is true that it is possible that this can lead to a status quo when all parties agree to do nothing but farm gold but is unlikely if there are enough clans active and there are opportunities to defect from your pact and benefit from it by attacking former allies by forming a splinter group of clans.

 

New Strongholds Format

I laud WG for trying a new format in strongholds I think it will work, however, it will probably reduce further the number of from CW. Therefore WG should also consider a new format for CW possible rolling back the clock to earlier season format that was popular and then adjusting that to ensure no domination by a single clan, no farming with inactivity and ensuring there is something from the elite to the "try hards".

 

Summary

 

The issue is the number of clans active in CW and not tier 6. Tier 6 enables smaller and new clans to form and see benefits. Current format is not working as evidenced by the amount of clan participation and removal of tier 6 will only make it worse not better. WG has the data and if properly analysed would indicate the way forward. I would suggest that gold distribution over clans of different skill levels, the amount of land, and the number of landings that can be done in any one time zones to be critical factors.

 

 



JordyBro #2 Posted 24 February 2017 - 04:00 PM

    Captain

  • Council of Armored Forces
  • 20450 battles
  • 1,006
  • [-1AR-] -1AR-
  • Member since:
    12-25-2012

Read the title

 

:facepalm:

 

Now we are here.

 


I bet you made it here.


Tier 6 is trash.


 


stewiejp #3 Posted 24 February 2017 - 05:59 PM

    Captain

  • Community Contributor
  • 37294 battles
  • 1,373
  • [-1AR-] -1AR-
  • Member since:
    06-30-2013

Add a poll OP, since this is in CoaF only a certain amount of players from active clans will be able to vote, negating the chance of players with alts putting in false votes. 

 

Not interested in restarting this long running debate (which seems to go forever in the CoaF channels & social media) but IMO players/clans who can only run tier 6's should be happy with skirmishes, especially now as smaller clans can upgrade their stronghold buildings without fear of the stronger clans pillaging it. No need to wait 15 minutes for a game and the credit bonuses (amongst others) at higher level structures can be ludicrous.


                                                                                                                         stewiejp on youtube #getonboard

Papa_Wiskey #4 Posted 24 February 2017 - 07:33 PM

    Corporal

  • Council of Armored Forces
  • 36050 battles
  • 64
  • [O_G] O_G
  • Member since:
    06-05-2015
Thanks Stew for the input. The reason for making this post is that this is has been a debate for some time but those that don't want tier 6 have provided no rational argument for this. To post a poll will advance nothing except what peoples perceptions are and may be biased to those that are active forum warriors rather than what the average clan thinks. Jordy thinks tier 6 are crap, he will vote "no" to tier 6, I am not interested that Jordy thinks tier 6 are crap, I am interested in why he thinks it is crap and why he thinks it affects his tier 8 or 10 games because I can't see a rational. The data is there, WG could analyse it and provide a constructive argument on how scrapping tier 6 is good for CW or alternatively as I have suggested it provides a useful mechanism of increasing the number of clans that play clan wars.

thommo_nz #5 Posted 25 February 2017 - 05:02 AM

    Sergeant

  • Council of Armored Forces
  • 44615 battles
  • 189
  • [NZAD] NZAD
  • Member since:
    10-03-2012

View PostPapa_Wiskey, on 24 February 2017 - 11:33 PM, said:

To post a poll will advance nothing except what peoples perceptions are and may be biased to those that are active forum warriors rather than what the average clan thinks.

 

So you are afraid of a poll in case it confirms what you fear...  That most clans don't want to see Tier 6 Clan Wars.

 

View PostPapa_Wiskey, on 24 February 2017 - 11:33 PM, said:

The reason for making this post is that this is has been a debate for some time but those that don't want tier 6 have provided no rational argument for this.

 

If ever we start seeing the semblance of one, then people will understand. Without it, you are just crying Wolf.

 



Papa_Wiskey #6 Posted 25 February 2017 - 08:32 AM

    Corporal

  • Council of Armored Forces
  • 36050 battles
  • 64
  • [O_G] O_G
  • Member since:
    06-05-2015

I stated why I think a poll is not appropriate, if WG wanted to poll every clan leader then that would be fine. However, you state most clans don't want Tier 6 CW, and this doesn't make any sense to me. It implies you have done a poll of all clans (you haven't), and it also implies that the argument that tier 6 is pulling clans away from tier 8 and 10 battles is false, the one reason provided so far for getting rid of tier 6. 

 

If you don't want to play in tier 6 don't, that's fine why stop others?



tekno #7 Posted 25 February 2017 - 08:44 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Council of Armored Forces
  • 19977 battles
  • 500
  • [NZAD] NZAD
  • Member since:
    12-08-2012

How tier6 benefits CW & WoT in general

1. Noobs can buy a cromwellB and not invest a single dime more in the game, grind complete.

2. Ensures no need to progress beyond yoloing in pubs(so the rest of us have to suffer even clan tag wearing players being awful)

3. Ensures that the global map continues to shrink due to the lack of participation in higher tiers-> even less participation ->removal of all cw/cps


 

When TierX was the ONLY CW available it encouraged

investment in the game prem a/c / free exp / tier8 premiums of multiple nations to train crews

progression up the tech tree

condensed the active CW pariticipants(players) into clans with enough tierX tanks to do CW....currently those players are spread all over the show.

Steadily increasing your play skills....either get beyond yoloing or get clubbed in higher tiers (improved the teams in both CW and pubbies)


 



thommo_nz #8 Posted 26 February 2017 - 05:27 AM

    Sergeant

  • Council of Armored Forces
  • 44615 battles
  • 189
  • [NZAD] NZAD
  • Member since:
    10-03-2012

View PostPapa_Wiskey, on 25 February 2017 - 12:32 PM, said:

I stated why I think a poll is not appropriate, if WG wanted to poll every clan leader then that would be fine. However, you state most clans don't want Tier 6 CW, and this doesn't make any sense to me. It implies you have done a poll of all clans (you haven't), and it also implies that the argument that tier 6 is pulling clans away from tier 8 and 10 battles is false, the one reason provided so far for getting rid of tier 6.

 

If you don't want to play in tier 6 don't, that's fine why stop others?

 

Please stop assuming things.

When I say 'take a poll', I do mean of ALL clan leaders. From what I have read, both in the forums and in COAF, *I* understand that the majority of opinions I have heard is to remove Tier 6 from clan wars. I've only seen postings from DETOX to the contrary.

The discussion comes from the question 'What can be done with Clan Wars to increase activity?'  It is *my* opinion that having multiple tiers of CW's means that the rewards (gold, tanks, influence - whatever the rewards might be) have to be spread across three areas and that limits what can be available. Then when you add into the mix that SOME of the clans CAPABLE of fielding Tier 10 teams, are CHOOSING to play at lower tiers, then you have to question what the end game really is.


 



IND_Rayudu_ #9 Posted 27 February 2017 - 11:36 AM

    Staff sergeant

  • Council of Armored Forces
  • 38413 battles
  • 375
  • [CRAZY] CRAZY
  • Member since:
    03-09-2013
Remove T6 :P


 


Papa_Wiskey #10 Posted 27 February 2017 - 08:54 PM

    Corporal

  • Council of Armored Forces
  • 36050 battles
  • 64
  • [O_G] O_G
  • Member since:
    06-05-2015

The original suggestion was using a poll here, hence my comment. Polling all clan leaders of at least the top 200 clans would settle the matter. Why any clan would want to play tier 6 if it could go to tier 8 or 10 is beyond as there is basically no reward atm for tier 6. However, the split of rewards between the tiers doesn't have to be a zero sum game, WG can allocate what it wants. Arguments have been put forward that some unscrupulous clans have been monetising gold earned in clan wars therefore WG wants to limit rewards, I would argue that if they did an in-depth analysis of that is that WG isn't losing a penny from that, gold given out is gold given out whether its monetised or not, and the opportunity cost to WG of these sums of gold are very small as they probably end up with people who otherwise can't afford gold or alternatively be spent of things that would not otherwise be spent on.

 

Who the proponents of this topic is not relevant here, what is relevant is data which as I proposed should be analysed. Cutting tier 6 just because people think/feel/believe that would solve the lack of tier 8 and 10 CW being actively being played is foolish. It may have negative long term consequences (it might not) so at least have an analysis done prior to making a decision. If they don't want to do the analysis then I would suggest they modify the format to older  models that were popular, bigger gold pay out, and avoid the ability of clan to farm via inactivity through larger number of landing zones.



cplripley #11 Posted 02 March 2017 - 08:36 AM

    Sergeant

  • Council of Armored Forces
  • 29235 battles
  • 133
  • [PERTH] PERTH
  • Member since:
    03-16-2013

Well, as I said In the other thread I would like to see it stay but have a structure template for the type of tanks in place in order to stop the Crom/type spam.

This game style is no preparation for anything and a quick google search shows it is unpopular on every server except by those who are reaping boxes from it which can be done in Skirmish anyway.

We are planning to have a crack at tier 6 Clan Wars tonight for the first time, we wouldn't be able to field a higher level team regularly as although I have 76 in clan a lot are new recruits we are trying to grind up to something decent.


 



thommo_nz #12 Posted 03 March 2017 - 12:44 PM

    Sergeant

  • Council of Armored Forces
  • 44615 battles
  • 189
  • [NZAD] NZAD
  • Member since:
    10-03-2012

View PostPapa_Wiskey, on 25 February 2017 - 12:32 PM, said:

I stated why I think a poll is not appropriate, if WG wanted to poll every clan leader then that would be fine.

 

View PostPapa_Wiskey, on 28 February 2017 - 12:54 AM, said:

The original suggestion was using a poll here, hence my comment. Polling all clan leaders of at least the top 200 clans would settle the matter.

 

Help me understand what happened over these 3 days...  '... poll is not appropriate...' to ..'Polling all clan leaders would settle the matter...'

 

Follow stewies suggestion and add a poll to the OP, or try and organise one in COAF.  I'm happy to accept what the majority want as long as there is a fair vote and mine is counted.

 

(Not sure that if there is sufficient support for T6 if it will get in past WG though.)

 

TBH, Poll away..  Do it..  lets have a show of hands...  It will serve 2 purposes..  1. to show that running a poll is feasible in such circumstances and 2. to answer the age old question on the level of support for Tier 6 CW.

 

 



stewiejp #13 Posted 05 March 2017 - 06:46 AM

    Captain

  • Community Contributor
  • 37294 battles
  • 1,373
  • [-1AR-] -1AR-
  • Member since:
    06-30-2013

Agree Thommo - a poll would sort out what the majority want once and for all, however I would limit the poll to the CoaF section only, that way only a limited number of people could vote from each clan. Since a lot of players are quite passionate about this topic, it could be very tempting for some clans to get their clan mates to all vote one way thereby skewing the result. 

If Papa Whiskey edits the original topic he should be able to add a poll, but let's be straight forward - whatever side gets the least votes will put forward the argument that the other side is simply wrong and the argument will go on ad nauseum .... forever... 

 

 


                                                                                                                         stewiejp on youtube #getonboard

thommo_nz #14 Posted 06 March 2017 - 06:47 AM

    Sergeant

  • Council of Armored Forces
  • 44615 battles
  • 189
  • [NZAD] NZAD
  • Member since:
    10-03-2012

View Poststewiejp, on 05 March 2017 - 10:46 AM, said:

 the argument will go on ad nauseum .... forever...

 

Aged tankers in wheelchairs feebly yelling... "I remember the day when they removed Tier 6 from Clan Wars...  Spelt DOOM I tell yah...  Game never was the same since then..." and "nooo.. it was the best..  T6 CW was rubbish..."

 

The rest of the people in the Retirement Village lounge are wondering WHAT they are talking about...


Edited by thommo_nz, 06 March 2017 - 06:47 AM.


cplripley #15 Posted 22 April 2017 - 12:30 PM

    Sergeant

  • Council of Armored Forces
  • 29235 battles
  • 133
  • [PERTH] PERTH
  • Member since:
    03-16-2013

In favour of keeping tier 6, we are going for 2 or so nights a week at t6 Stronks, winning a princely 37.5% of them, even though I vocally dislike crom spam this is the start of the road to Clan wars for my guys and currently the only option for many of my newer players.

This means other clans, maybe yours, have a different set of people to maul as we learn the "meta".

We get our wins against other Clans like our self putting a foot onto the organised game side, without this none of us might get players enthusiastic at the start to keep the momentum up to tier 10.



Buncey #16 Posted 08 May 2017 - 09:26 PM

    Corporal

  • Council of Armored Forces
  • 25837 battles
  • 33
  • [-ADF-] -ADF-
  • Member since:
    10-30-2014

I agree with cplripley, you need to have somewhere to start.

We've been using this season to get enough people interested to "want to do Tier 8" next season. At present we don't consistently have enough online every night to do Tier 8.

My hope is to be able to get our 'better players' hitting the Tier 8 map next season, while we continue to use Tier 6 for our newer or lower skilled players. The only way they will improve and get an understanding of what Clan Wars in about is to actually participate. If their first introduction to CW is to get absolutely flogged at Tier 8 by an experienced Clan, they won't wont to come back.

They need to learn how these battles work, and Tier 6 is the perfect place to start.


 

 


 


Slydersneak #17 Posted 11 August 2017 - 06:57 PM

    Corporal

  • Member
  • 51482 battles
  • 39
  • [-1AR-] -1AR-
  • Member since:
    11-04-2012

we use to have influence , it encourages clan below teir 6 to skirmish  and bid , it also stopped  higher teir clans from coming down and actually controlling the map as they had to contend with upkeep which most cant do as they where playing clan wars,in the smaller or lower teir clans it gave them the chance to improve /be more active and not have some teir 10 or teir 8 clan ruin the map for the campaign, without loosing their province or doing alot of skirmished to keep up with their upkeep. these lesser or smaller clans provided a training ground for better players to travel thru and the none professionals to be active and enjoy the game. its all good for Coaf leaders to say teir 6 is shit but every body started some where and those teir 6 clans are a training ground .

 

 

It also encouraged better team play between different clan members in pubbie games

 

 


Edited by Slydersneak, 11 August 2017 - 07:34 PM.


JOC469 #18 Posted 12 August 2017 - 04:00 AM

    Carried by [KELLY]

  • Council of Armored Forces
  • 63047 battles
  • 5,009
  • [PYRO] PYRO
  • Member since:
    06-03-2012

You may have made a number of incorrect assumptions here:

 

- it is not uncommon for active clans to have over 45 (out of 100) players online during prime time. This allows them to run between 2-3 battles concurrently, and when all teams are not in queue for a CW battle they split into smaller skirmish groups to run tier 6 for the greater reward vs time.

 

WG would no doubt have the data to query player tenure vs CW participation, and it might even be something worth investigating. When I look around tierX I see a large number of 'familiar faces' that started CW in tierX - there was no kiddies pool. I also see a number of players not participating in CW, but player engagement is a separate issue.

 

What we don't see is clans that have moved up to tierX. Tier6 and 8 were supposed to be provide a pathway to tierX which hasn't happened. With a limited number of active CW players, providing too many alternatives dilutes the pool. Closing tier6 forces clans to step-up. 

 

Tier6 is closed (for the moment). Perhaps more energy should be put into improving clan/player skills, rather than complaining about tier6 closing? It has been 6 months since this thread was created.

 


 

View PostSir_British, on 11 February 2016 - 11:24 PM, said:

joc469, the great purporter of  'name-changer' and 'clan-leaver' all hail the JOC469!


Slydersneak #19 Posted 13 August 2017 - 03:41 PM

    Corporal

  • Member
  • 51482 battles
  • 39
  • [-1AR-] -1AR-
  • Member since:
    11-04-2012

so why has  your clan hit teir 8 tonight instead of teir 10 , thought you wanted the challenge?

Joc  your arguement died here about lower teirs ,your own clanhas done what you a have stated they shouldnt :P

 

 


Edited by Slydersneak, 13 August 2017 - 03:43 PM.


IND_Rayudu_ #20 Posted 14 August 2017 - 01:49 AM

    Staff sergeant

  • Council of Armored Forces
  • 38413 battles
  • 375
  • [CRAZY] CRAZY
  • Member since:
    03-09-2013
T6 is gone :)


 





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users