Jump to content


creating platoons and something more

platoon tier SPG

  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

zantetsuken #1 Posted 28 June 2017 - 10:31 AM

    Corporal

  • Beta-Tester
  • 43521 battles
  • 27
  • Member since:
    10-03-2012

1. we all know now we cannot create platoon with different tier. idk if this is for preventing players from creating a platoon with a Maus and MS-1 or not, but i don't like it. i bet many either.

to make it clear, here's an example:

- i have a WZ-132, it's a tier 8 LT, and usually get in tier 9-10 battles. this is normal.

- i also have UDES 03, it's a tier 8 TD, and usually get in tier 9-10 battles. this is normal, too.

so why can't i bring those to a platoon with a tier 9-10 vehicle? the current rule of platoon should be change. like: tier of platoon: the highest - the lowest < 3 . so we can all happy.

2. SPGs are now very very bad since i started. but any team can have a platoon of SPGs, so let them in. this is a team game. let players support others. this can't make the game unbalance. 

3. pls buff IS-6. seriously



zantetsuken #2 Posted 28 June 2017 - 10:35 AM

    Corporal

  • Beta-Tester
  • 43521 battles
  • 27
  • Member since:
    10-03-2012

4. sorry, i forgot this: there used to be many maps in this game. where are they now? it makes game boring



_DiscoStu_ #3 Posted 28 June 2017 - 10:59 AM

    Staff sergeant

  • Member
  • 23623 battles
  • 430
  • [-WB-] -WB-
  • Member since:
    01-06-2013

I believe they are reintroducing the ability of arty to platoon, but limiting it to 1 arty per platoon... which is fine with me... you get to play with mates and it somewhat limits the amount of arty in game... less arty the better.

The tier restrictions are to stop fail platoons yes... it was frustrating when  idiots would think it was funny to platoon in massively different tiered tanks... although it was a good excuse to reset your battle buddy.

If you are platooning your tier 8 with a tier 9 you are missing the chance (although now it appears not much of chance) for you to be top tier in your 8... why is that a good idea?

Maps yes... bring back dragon ridge!!

is6... rip... :(


I'm a much better player than I actually am... https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChby0l_z0Lv_S0zLepFQ5sA


zantetsuken #4 Posted 28 June 2017 - 02:36 PM

    Corporal

  • Beta-Tester
  • 43521 battles
  • 27
  • Member since:
    10-03-2012

View Post_DiscoStu_, on 28 June 2017 - 02:59 AM, said:

I believe they are reintroducing the ability of arty to platoon, but limiting it to 1 arty per platoon... which is fine with me... you get to play with mates and it somewhat limits the amount of arty in game... less arty the better.

The tier restrictions are to stop fail platoons yes... it was frustrating when  idiots would think it was funny to platoon in massively different tiered tanks... although it was a good excuse to reset your battle buddy.

If you are platooning your tier 8 with a tier 9 you are missing the chance (although now it appears not much of chance) for you to be top tier in your 8... why is that a good idea?

Maps yes... bring back dragon ridge!!

is6... rip... :(

if i take my tier 8 with higher tier in platoon, i must accept what you said. what i mean is: if my tier 8 tank can be in a tier 10 battle, why not let me in a platoon with 10? it's gonna 10 anyway



_DiscoStu_ #5 Posted 28 June 2017 - 02:44 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Member
  • 23623 battles
  • 430
  • [-WB-] -WB-
  • Member since:
    01-06-2013

View Postzantetsuken, on 28 June 2017 - 06:36 AM, said:

if i take my tier 8 with higher tier in platoon, i must accept what you said. what i mean is: if my tier 8 tank can be in a tier 10 battle, why not let me in a platoon with 10? it's gonna 10 anyway

 

Not always... Tier 8 can get top tier... If you platoon with a tier 10 and get in a battle that only has tier 9 and 10... it can happen... then you are disadvantaging your team... that's why it is called a fail platoon.

I'm a much better player than I actually am... https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChby0l_z0Lv_S0zLepFQ5sA


_EzioAuditore_ #6 Posted 28 June 2017 - 03:56 PM

    Major

  • Member
  • 52640 battles
  • 4,495
  • [CROWN] CROWN
  • Member since:
    12-20-2012
Platooning with anything that does not have same battle tier as you (minimum and maximum) = fail platoon.
More than 1 spg focusing = permastun/track, very obvious example is in ranked battles where you will die the moment you get spotted because 3 arty will shoot you and their team will finish you off. They are allowing 1 spg per platoon soon, which is ideal, anything higher is just [edited].
Is-6 is still good, especially since t8s quite often get pulled into tier x games now. It will probably get buffed soon anyway because its russian.

T55A Get! 263/300 done with honors!  65/75 obj 260 missions done! :^)

3 mark: 1390 leo pta is-7 e5 t26a 2 mark: m46,obj 907, 50100, e100, batchat 25t,  t57 heavy, grille 15, obj 140, is-6, is-3, vkd, pzivh, mutz, spic, CAX, 113

Helljumper, Helljumper, where you been? Feet first into hell and back again! When I die please bury me deep! Place an MA5 down by my feet! Don't cry for me, don't shed no tear!
Just pack my box with PT gear! Cuz one early morning 'bout zero-five! The ground will rumble, there'll be lightning in the sky!
Don't you worry, don't come undone! It's just my ghost on a PT run!

http://cdn-frm-sg.wa...-1407289026.gif
 


Weslam #7 Posted 29 June 2017 - 12:28 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Member
  • 11406 battles
  • 570
  • Member since:
    12-08-2013

Okay... typing this again because the post editor deleted my text when I posted it...

 

All I ask is that preferential matchmaking tanks are allowed to platoon with tanks of a tier below them, for example an IS-6 platooning with a Tiger I.

 

Because currently, single-tier platoons applies to all tanks, both standard-MM and pref-MM tanks included. Which means a Jagdtiger 88 will see tier 10 if it platoons with another tier 8 tank that does not have pref-MM.

 

I can't play my Jagdtiger 88 with a friend in his tier 7 (if he has no tier 8 pref-MM tank), and I'm forced to play tier 10 battles and put my team at a disadvantage if I want to use my Jagdtiger 88 in a platoon.

 

And that's just stupid.

 

That too will disadvantage your team, because if I'm playing in a tier 10 game and see a platoon with two IS-3s and one IS-6 on my team, that means my team has a disadvantage, because IS-6s shouldn't see tier 10.

 

So please just let pref-MM tanks platoon with tanks of a tier below them.

 

That's all I ask.


Edited by Weslam, 29 June 2017 - 12:35 PM.

Rare photograph of Russian infantryman carrying prototype helmet into battle (Stalingrad, December 1942; colourised)


zantetsuken #8 Posted 29 June 2017 - 02:11 PM

    Corporal

  • Beta-Tester
  • 43521 battles
  • 27
  • Member since:
    10-03-2012

View Post_DiscoStu_, on 28 June 2017 - 06:44 AM, said:

 

Not always... Tier 8 can get top tier... If you platoon with a tier 10 and get in a battle that only has tier 9 and 10... it can happen... then you are disadvantaging your team... that's why it is called a fail platoon.

Even when you play solo, you still can be put in a tier 10 game with a 8. So i'm fine if i'm 8 in tier 10 battle and there is a 8 plats with 10 in enemy team. If there's a game in that lowest tier of both teams are not the same, it's a fail MM. 



_DiscoStu_ #9 Posted 29 June 2017 - 10:34 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Member
  • 23623 battles
  • 430
  • [-WB-] -WB-
  • Member since:
    01-06-2013

View Postzantetsuken, on 29 June 2017 - 06:11 AM, said:

Even when you play solo, you still can be put in a tier 10 game with a 8. So i'm fine if i'm 8 in tier 10 battle and there is a 8 plats with 10 in enemy team. If there's a game in that lowest tier of both teams are not the same, it's a fail MM.

 

That is a fail platoon... you may be happy to do it... but other players get very annoyed when players do it... it can ultimately disadvantage one team... mm does not look for another fail platoon to even things up... that is why WG have made it so you can't make a fail platoon...

I agree with Weslam about prem matchmaking tanks... that needs to be fixed.


I'm a much better player than I actually am... https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChby0l_z0Lv_S0zLepFQ5sA


Wodka_Warrior #10 Posted 29 June 2017 - 10:55 PM

    Corporal

  • Member
  • 15732 battles
  • 97
  • [G-I] G-I
  • Member since:
    10-05-2013

View Post_DiscoStu_, on 29 June 2017 - 02:34 PM, said:

 

That is a fail platoon... you may be happy to do it... but other players get very annoyed when players do it... it can ultimately disadvantage one team... mm does not look for another fail platoon to even things up... that is why WG have made it so you can't make a fail platoon...

I agree with Weslam about prem matchmaking tanks... that needs to be fixed.

 

I also a like that...cos it makes sense yo 

Will wait and see if ovaloards agree...

(Holding breath) 

((Turning blue))



zantetsuken #11 Posted 26 July 2017 - 12:23 PM

    Corporal

  • Beta-Tester
  • 43521 battles
  • 27
  • Member since:
    10-03-2012

you guys seem don't understand. here is what i mean: for example:

- if my T34 (US HT) or O-Ho is in a tier 10 battles, it's normal, right? 

- so it's not a disadvantage if enemy team also have tier 8

- if you guys remember, you would receive a notification if MM couldn't find a match for your platoon.

MM is pretty good at tier now, so if my tier 8 tank gets in tier 10 almost every time, why not let me in a plat?



reasnd #12 Posted 27 July 2017 - 06:46 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Beta-Tester
  • 31689 battles
  • 862
  • [WFPK] WFPK
  • Member since:
    09-27-2012

View Postzantetsuken, on 26 July 2017 - 04:23 AM, said:

you guys seem don't understand. here is what i mean: for example:

- if my T34 (US HT) or O-Ho is in a tier 10 battles, it's normal, right? 

- so it's not a disadvantage if enemy team also have tier 8

- if you guys remember, you would receive a notification if MM couldn't find a match for your platoon.

MM is pretty good at tier now, so if my tier 8 tank gets in tier 10 almost every time, why not let me in a plat?

 

I think the issue that people are trying to point out is that a tier 10 tank can be put in a all tier 10 game! In the past when different tier tank platoons were permitted MM would look at the highest tier tank and place the platoon as if all platoon members were that tier. So if they allowed tier 10 tanks to platoon with tier 8 tanks you could be put in an all tier 10 game. So in an extreme case a platoon of one tier 10 and two tier 8's could be matched against an all tier 10 team. Your team would be an a disadvantage because you have to tanks that are 8's and the opposition has no 8's.

OK "change MM so that this platoon would only see games with the 3-5-7 tier split" I hear you say. The problem is that this would allow platoons to ensure that their tier 10 member never saw the all tier 10 and 5-10 games.

 

Regarding preferential MM tanks, WG probably should never have allowed such a game mechanic. It's just another ill thought out marketing decision that only complicates the issues with the game.



Weslam #13 Posted 27 July 2017 - 10:05 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Member
  • 11406 battles
  • 570
  • Member since:
    12-08-2013

View Postreasnd, on 27 July 2017 - 06:46 AM, said:

Regarding preferential MM tanks, WG probably should never have allowed such a game mechanic. It's just another ill thought out marketing decision that only complicates the issues with the game.

 

I would take preferential matchmaking tanks which complicates the game's matchmaking any day over blatantly overpowered premiums.


Rare photograph of Russian infantryman carrying prototype helmet into battle (Stalingrad, December 1942; colourised)


iDd_Sloth #14 Posted 27 July 2017 - 12:36 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Member
  • 24041 battles
  • 788
  • [ANKOU] ANKOU
  • Member since:
    12-26-2014

View PostWeslam, on 27 July 2017 - 10:05 AM, said:

 

I would take preferential matchmaking tanks which complicates the game's matchmaking any day over blatantly overpowered premiums.

 

With the current trend nowadays, that ship has long sailed.

Specially with this: Who would part with real money for a CRAP product?  I know most of you won't, if not all.

Since sub par tanks don't sell well and average tanks get so/so reviews thereby translating to slow sales.

The best way is entice new tankers to tanks that would compensate for their lack of gaming mechanics hence more reds in Tier 8 games and to balance this out is to put them in Tier 10 games most of the time leading to a buyer's regret feeling. This would lead to Tier 8 being a heck of grind with stock or even fully upgraded. The obvious downside to this is when you put competent tankers on said tanks of which they would obliterate the competition.


When an enemy Arty "one shots" 2 of your teams' heavies and you're in a heavy tank, you know you're screwed.

A heavy tank should have armor and a big gun, if you don't have either then you're not.


reasnd #15 Posted 27 July 2017 - 02:22 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Beta-Tester
  • 31689 battles
  • 862
  • [WFPK] WFPK
  • Member since:
    09-27-2012

View PostWeslam, on 27 July 2017 - 02:05 AM, said:

 

I would take preferential matchmaking tanks which complicates the game's matchmaking any day over blatantly overpowered premiums.

 

I would too, but as iDd_Sloth said "that ship as already sailed". WG put out OP tanks because they sell, but they can't see the forest for the trees. These OP tanks destroy the game play for the majority of their player population. Although these players probably aren't really contributing much to WGs finances they are the other half of the equation. Sure you need money to keep going but you also need players. Who is going to spend $$$ to log into a garage full of OP tanks when there are only a few other players all with OP tanks playing?

WG need to stop pursuing the low volume high dollar sales and look to low dollar high volume sales. There are a lot of free to play games out there that use the micro-transaction to generate huge revenue. I mean if it's only a few dollars people don't stop to think about the purchase as much and in some cases end up spending a lot more just because they only spent 1-2 dollars, but they spend it 20 times, in other words 20-40 dollars.

For example I believe WG would make a killing by offering 1 hour of premium time for $1. Personally this could encourage $10 a week out of me. And I made a promise to myself that I wasn't going to spend any more money on this game.


Edited by reasnd, 27 July 2017 - 02:23 PM.


Weslam #16 Posted 27 July 2017 - 08:36 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Member
  • 11406 battles
  • 570
  • Member since:
    12-08-2013

View PostiDd_Sloth, on 27 July 2017 - 12:36 PM, said:

Specially with this: Who would part with real money for a CRAP product?

 

The old premiums tanks weren't crap. Stuff like the IS-6, Jagdtiger 88, and T34 were pretty powerful in some areas and fairly fun. They're just difficult to play because they heavily lack in one aspect or another, but usually made up for that in that they didn't get bottom tier.

 

The purpose of premium tanks was never supposed to be giving you a good tank, it's supposed to give you faster grinds.

 

And instead of finding ways to make premium tanks fun without being blatantly overpowered (for example, the AMX CDC and SU-100Y) so they can make more sales, Wargaming instead decided to piss off a good portion of their playerbase by intentionally introducing pay to win elements into the game in the form of a tank that you can buy which performs leagues better than their standard counterparts and makes more in game resources (which can be used to buy gold ammo/consumables, which improves battle performance).

 

Let's not even get started on cosmetic skins and decorations. Why Wargaming decided that they didn't want to use this massive potential gold mine and turn it into massive profit, I have no idea.

 

My point is, there are other ways for a game company to make revenue other than pay to win.


Rare photograph of Russian infantryman carrying prototype helmet into battle (Stalingrad, December 1942; colourised)


J_A_Potato #17 Posted 27 July 2017 - 09:20 PM

    Corporal

  • Member
  • 20719 battles
  • 22
  • [NFB] NFB
  • Member since:
    04-29-2014

View PostWeslam, on 27 July 2017 - 08:36 PM, said:

 

The old premiums tanks weren't crap. Stuff like the IS-6, Jagdtiger 88, and T34 were pretty powerful in some areas and fairly fun. They're just difficult to play because they heavily lack in one aspect or another, but usually made up for that in that they didn't get bottom tier.

 

 

wishing they gave the T34 US HT the same limited 8-9 MM as the previous 2 vehicles mentioned.. it's aiming circle bloom doesn't bode well when missing those rushing tier Xs that have 30~40% more dpm, hp and 200++% better body armour.

 

Besides.. no-one shoots the T34 face anyway..

 

 

I COULD TOTALLY USE A PERMANENT POTATO EMBLEM ^^

example here ..


Edited by J_A_Potato, 27 July 2017 - 09:48 PM.

 

*wobble* *wobble*


reasnd #18 Posted 28 July 2017 - 07:51 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Beta-Tester
  • 31689 battles
  • 862
  • [WFPK] WFPK
  • Member since:
    09-27-2012

I agree with Weslam, WG had a game that offered paying players an enhanced mode of game play. These paying players only had an advantage in they could improve their tanks/crew and climb the ladder faster than the non-paying population. Personally I think that preferential MM tanks were the on the line of being OP and the first sign that WG was going down the pay to win path. Because these tanks were never bottom tier and hence provided a better avenue to effect a win.

I think we can all agree that power creep is a problem with the game, WGs philosophy seems to be: encourage purchases by offering a better tanks, when this gets old follow it up by a still better option, etc...

The continual imbalance between tech tree tanks and the premium versions means that WG are having to re-work the tanks that they re-worked. The programmers are so busy trying to fix the damage being done by the purchasable content that there is no time to actually work on keeping the game fresh and current.



Weslam #19 Posted 28 July 2017 - 05:13 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Member
  • 11406 battles
  • 570
  • Member since:
    12-08-2013

View Postreasnd, on 28 July 2017 - 07:51 AM, said:

I think we can all agree that power creep is a problem with the game, WGs philosophy seems to be: encourage purchases by offering a better tanks, when this gets old follow it up by a still better option, etc...

The continual imbalance between tech tree tanks and the premium versions means that WG are having to re-work the tanks that they re-worked. The programmers are so busy trying to fix the damage being done by the purchasable content that there is no time to actually work on keeping the game fresh and current.

 

> Make people buy premium tanks

> Introduce new premium tanks which are basically a copypasta of the tech tree counterpart to increase sales

> Introduce new overpowered powercreep pay to win premiums to increase sales

> Old premium tanks become useless compared to new powercreep premiums so people are forced to buy those

> Offer a "trade-in" for old premium tanks so people can buy new ones as a "discount"

> Buff old premium tanks to compete with new premiums so people will buy the old premiums again

> Standard tanks are so weak compared to premiums that everyone is forced to buy premiums to stay competitive

> Repeat

> Profit


Rare photograph of Russian infantryman carrying prototype helmet into battle (Stalingrad, December 1942; colourised)






Also tagged with platoon, tier, SPG

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users