As promised, here is Part 2 of the transcription of WG’s last developer stream:
On Ranked Battles
– We’re focusing on a short game cycle, ie Ranked Battles will reset once a week or so. We’re now discussing more deadlines.
– A good game in the losing team will be well rewarded. Playing well, you’ll move forward, regardless of your team. We will take into account not only the achievements of a particular cycle of fighting, but even more so for the long term, we will see who shows consistent results, how fast and how often they achieve top rank and try to reward those players further.
– Awards, what will they be – that’s something we really don’t want to announce. We have an understand that the “carrot” should be something very good, and it will be. It won’t be something like a marathon, to get some kind of tank. Most likely, it will be something new, and that you can probably ring into Random Battles.
– Initially, all this is for 10v10, at least at the start. It will be possible to expand to the 15v15 format. The maps will be the same as Random Battles.
– There will be big differences from warship ranks. It will go a lot faster.
– Being at the bottom of the winning team will not translate well to your progress. Ranks are a reflection of your personal contribution, not your team’s victory. Especially when you can get on 5 winning teams by AFKing 5 matches.
– I always lose, but I am in the TOP, so there is a growth in rank.
– In Belarus, we are trying to assess the contribution and the real skill players.
Miscellaneous
– For AP buffs, it’s something we thought long about, and with the Germans it happened, because there were already machines and modules that were already lying in the trash – Maus etc. Some wanted to make a fast pass for the machines that might need it, a dare clearly lagging behind: IS-7, T-44 … Alas, but not in 9.18
Now we are working on other branches, but it is impossible to speak directly to specific tanks at the moment.
– ST-I, we initially wanted to make a new mechanic, like Slava already discussed. This may not be what everyone is thinking about and discussing on the Internet now … There are some very interesting mechanics, cool and classy. 2 barrels – no more comments.
– People who play on their current (older) machines will be able to continue to play, even when we bring the new graphics. Of course, they can not achieve what’s shown in the screen shots and yes, what was shown will be even better when it launches. As it was, things on those machines will remain at 30 FPS.
– Our goal has always been to keep things at higher, playable FPS for slower machines.
– We have very high hopes for the new renderer.
– After 9.0 large FPS drops have been pretty insignificant.
– No feature or interface goes further or gets added if it has a significant effect on framerates.
– We are bringing in additional hands for test external teams. The main thing is not have any framerate in the first place on weak machines with the new graphics.
– We still have problematic machines, some were easy to fix, but there remained those machines that can not be fixed with a simple adjustment of certain characteristics; They need to be recycled. KV-5 is a prime example.
– This also applies to the T-54 First Prototype and IS-6, but with it a separate history it benefits. I believe that the preferential matchmaking is already quite comfortable in itself and is a great buff. PMM is a big problem for working with balance though.
– Cross chat was toxic, it was used only for insulting rivals or advertising clans. There are no plans for returning it, not even in the form of a tick box option, as many suggested
– We are working on “praise”. This has nothing to do with chat. Good feature to avoid complaining, but it is not in a very high priority.
– One of the most popular resolutions we have in the game 1368×768’13
– In two years I want in-game service-store mods. This thing in the works, and is part of the work on banned mods.
– Revising crews, this is a big thing. Yes, I really want to review the current perks and the mechanics of the game in general, but this is a very expensive decision in terms of resources, especially the question of converting things over. We have a million ideas, including national perks / perks for specific tanks / etc.
-Session statistics with a win rate, etc. and an alert in chat about the “arty targeting me” good stuff, as soon as we get the tools to do it, we could begin working on it.
– There is an in-game training tool that needs to be discarded and be completely remade, and we are working on it, there are no problems. We are going to lead the player by the hand. Thats is the first thing, the second is training the players, and how to make teaching better. We’re think about accessing the videos directly from the client, or at the forums, other things like that.
– Experience for tanking – there’s a lot of potential there for exploiting, so we really do not want to do that.
– We have a few ideas on what to do with team killers, we’ll experiment with them in Sandbox.
– After entering balance/matchmaker, we’ll look at the lower tiers and try to fix that situation there.
– In general, there is a plan for going through Tiers 1 through 7 in terms of the growth of characteristics.
– Hiding statistics won’t be coming not in the near future, but it will be possible. We know the pain.
– There will be a second season of Personal Missions.
– A very important goal for us was to achieve these new and better quality graphics without significantly affecting the framerates.
– We tried to preserve the current geometry when transferring the maps to HD.
Funny how they are now thinking about ideas which the players already suggested years ago…
Probably only is happening now when they already lost several thousand players over the years
Awesome man haha, good grief that must have been a seriously long stream.
I like hearing about more benefits for losing with a good game, mostly positive things to ranked battles, still bummed out it’s essentially a divide in the community but I can’t think of a way around that problem.
Interesting talk about the IS-7, T-44, and ST-1, glad they are saying it won’t be for a while since they’re working on other nations. It seems like wargaming is very confident about going in the arcade direction rather than competing against war thunder in the historical simulator market. There are certainly options of having the best of both worlds.
Good they are talking about the KV-5, honestly, wargaming should stop being so whimsical and rebalance the tank if their numbers say it is a problem. A respectable gold compensation or tank trade option should be more than enough for handling people that want a refund.
As for cross chat, maybe allow short phrases like “good kill” or “well played” to enemy players similar to the quick team chat like “affirmative” so as to satisfies the nice players and keeps the ugly players out of the mix. Sounds insignificant, but better than the current system. Otherwise, the voice acting from tank commanders could be better used to set a good example for player behavior rather than a wasted opportunity.
News on mods and frame rate management is good, looking forward to crew skills revisions
Overall positive stuff, can’t wait to see the proof 🙂
I’m glad to see that they realized, that introducing new tanks into the game, the old ones seem to get increasingly obsolete. I hope they also realize that the IS-7 130 mm cannon does not make sense to do less damage than the 128-mm German cannons, they should transfer the 560 damage from the German cannons to the Russian 130-mm cannons, and the Cannons of 128 mm Germans get 550 damage, after which, only changes in reloading would be necessary
Only a couple 128mm guns do 560.
All the other 128mm guns on German tanks do 490….
That parameter is connected with barrel lenght of the gun. Those Tier9/10 German TD guns are longer than on WZ-111 1-4, IS-7 or Borsig/Skorpion G, thus shoot the shell faster, thus make more dmg. It is not perfect, but makes some sense.
how do you explain the significantly longer 130mm on the Obj 263 doing 550 damage then?
Why, why…. why are they changing the format for the ranked battles? 15 vs 15 is what everybody knows and plays. And now they are making something “special” again, that differs from the “normal” game. For what reason? They have a working system, Why those experiments? 15 vs 15 already suffers from “bad” team set-ups, and now with only 10 tanks per team, the set-up is even more important. And some maps, with only 10 tanks per side? And maybe even two of them arty? What kind of gameplay are they expecting? This may work with TS leaded clan teams. But with random set ups?
And then, only one week long seasons? How many battles can one do in this time? Lets say 4 on a weekday an, more on weekend. Lets say 40 in total. May be low, but there are people who don’t even get so much. And how should the system, based on this 40 games, calculate my rank within thousands and thousands of players? Thats just not enough database for a proper calculation.
Buddy randoms will be the same but there is a new mode which is ranked which will be 10v10. Do some more research next time.
I know, and thats what I am criticising.
Just think about it: Everywhere in the world the soccer rules are the same. Everyone plays it with 11 players per team. And now they would say: In the next world championship, we wil play with only 9 people per team.
How can one make ranked battles, and changing the rules for only those battles?
Thats so dumb.
Each played is a laeger proportion of their team, therefore even over a fewer number of battles their influence on the outcome of the battle is better recorded.
Also 15 vs 15 is ridiculous anyway for the tiny corridor maps in this game. 10 vs 10 on fhe same maps allows previously useless tanks especially lights, soft tank destroyers and many mediums to be useful again instead of heavy tanks dominating corridors along with heavy armoured tank destroyers.
“Everywhere in the world the soccer rules are the same. Everyone plays it with 11 players per team”. Unless it’s indoor soccer or beach soccer, wich are basically the same thing but in a different terrain, with few different rules, and different team sizes. One can chose between soccer, indoor soccer or beach soccer, there is no rpoblem about it.
I would imagine the change in team composition is an attempt to keep queue times down. RB’s would split the community, and being the RB’s would be the newer and more demanding mode it probably wouldn’t draw as many players as standard would, at least not in the long run.
“After entering balance/matchmaker, we’ll look at the lower tiers and try to fix that situation there.”
Translation: After messing with high tiers we will try to remember low tiers exist.
Most paying customers play high tiers although now that a sizable chunk of the player base has left over the years due in no small part to artillery and other “minor” hiccups, wargaming has come to the revelation that new players will play low tiers and not just buy their broken premium tanks right off the bat. What a mind blowing concept.
– For AP buffs, it’s something we thought long about, and with the Germans it happened, because there were already machines and modules that were already lying in the trash – Maus etc. Some wanted to make a fast pass for the machines that might need it, a dare clearly lagging behind: IS-7, T-44 …
And this need to buff ammo for the “worse off guns” rather tthen nerfing the clearly better guns is what results in historical armor getting buffed more then it should
Maybe they are planning to bring the IS4 to tier IX and introduce the ST-II at tier X. 2 barrels= double penetration 😉 huehuehuehuehuehue
What is there to stop giving the IS-4 from getting 2 barrels as well?
*scribbles a drawing on a napkin* [Russian accent] Look everyone! historical document of real tank! Proof! See! Gulag for you liars spreading false rumors shotgun IS-4 does not exist!
“After 9.0 large FPS drops have been pretty insignificant”
“9.0 FPS drops insignificant”
Excuse me but remind me again when was the worst time for WoT, when the population dropped like crazy and the game was so glitchy some people lost over half of their FPS and had random game crashes all the time ??
Wasn’t that between 9.0 and 9.2 ??
Are you fucking retarded ?
And we’re supposed to trust in these guys to improve the game when they cannot even admit the most obvious failure they ever made on live server…
– ST-I, we initially wanted to make a new mechanic, like Slava already discussed. This may not be what everyone is thinking about and discussing on the Internet now … There are some very interesting mechanics, cool and classy. 2 barrels – no more comments.
what an appropriate reaction 😛
cc
– Experience for tanking – there’s a lot of potential there for exploiting, so we really do not want to do that.
Until you realise that people load so much gold that it’s hard to find a tank with the armor to be able to effectively “tank” damage in
Nonsense Deadarashi, if they got rid of the pay2win button, players would get frustrated and leave because they’d have to learn this weird “aiming” mechanic.
The mechanic could certainly work but the rewards would have to be minuscule so an exceptional game won’t produce absurd rewards even for rigging(or just don’t give some tanks enough ammo to kill the enemy team 10 times over). Just enough so players know there is a reward and psychologically, that goes a long way like milking a few cap points at the end of the game when you’re waiting for your team to get the last kill. On paper, it’s pure gold idea.
Doesn’t help wargaming is considering increasing rigging potential with limited maps premium tanks.
They wont be giving the st 1 two barrels i think they are refereeing the MTLS 18 tier 3 Us tank. Which i have seen in battle and its not very glamorous. I think its fire effects were in the middle between the two barresl.
they keep talking about “comfort” and indeed the new MM, light tanks expansion and Maus line split “fit the bill”, yet there’s still a single tech tree in the game with which you cannot feel a “natural” progression and even though it’s rework has been mentioned for at least 2 years but keeps being pushed back
the way it stands nothing will change at least until the end of 2018, with the new nations, LTs, arty rework, new graphics, balance 2.0, etc… and now also rework of the IS-4 line it’s all too much for them to also rework it
conclusion: we can forget the US tech tree rework as well as british LTs and 2nd french heavy line, at least for a while, maybe late 2018 for one of them?
[…] ritastatusreport.live .br-more-posts { width:45%; padding: 20px; float:left; } @media only screen and (max-width: 650px) […]
I don’t really like the idea that wining/losing is much less important than “personal contribution”
It will promote the gameplay not team oriented but parasiting on teammates so you can get more damage done sniping from bush…
It is inevitable consequence of short cycle – how many ranked battles you can play in a week? So obviously winning/losing will be random.
Your contribution in winning/losing shows only after hundreds and thousands of battles.
But still it would be much more fun for me if ranked battles worked like:
you get 1 point +(base experience-300)/1000 for a victory
-1 point +(base experience-300) /1000 for a loss.
Or:
you get base experience + 1000 for every victory and minus 1% of your total ranking for every game played.
So everyone starts at 0 (so first battles are always easy) but at 100 000 you need to keep 50% win ratio with 500 average XP just to keep your rating.
Add 1% reduction extra every day regardless of amount of battles played and divide the teams along the ribbon (best ranked player goes to team A, 2nd and 3rd to B, 5th and 6th to A and so on) and you have ranked battles with no need for seasons.
There may be some rewards based on short term performance additionaly, but personally I think, any ranking needs long cycle to be an effective measure
If anyone has played CS:GO before (don’t bash me for mentioning that cancer meme of a game) will surely be familiar with Ranked battles. Kinda like Competitive battles. Instead of 5v5, it’s 10v10 (10v10 vs 15v15). I think the ranking system will be similar too.
There’s one thing that I do not get: why not implement something similar to Overwatch? Players that get reported more than 10 times will have their battles analyzed by skilled players who know how cheats work. This would encourage Overwatch activity even more if the overwatcher gets some free XP for helping with banning a cheater. This would really work well.
Graphics-wise, I can see that they did one helluva good job. This might come in the next patch, who knows. They already mentioned that 9.18 will be a big patch so something important must’ve been added.
It looks like only now have they ‘illuminated’ themselves and begun adding stuff that players have been proposing for the past 2 to 3 years. Let’s hope they don’t screw it up again à la Rubicon style.
The ranked battles are pretty good on the console and we only use tier 5 machines. Can’t remember whether it was 15 vs 15 or 10 vs 10 either way it was good fun
An easy fix to chat would be allowing cross chat at the countdown clock and then cut it off. It would allow for clan members to give greetings and players to ask the other team to join platoons after the match.
Yeah keep on neglecting the T29, T32 etc.
Cross chat was bad because wallet warriors and skycancer didn’t like to get called out.
That is for clearing that up for us.
Without cross team chat, you may as well play against bots. Probably the real reason for this decision. It makes it much easier for Wargaming to mix bots into your teams without you even noticing the falling player numbers.
That isn’t a thing.
The game is full of bots anyway. WG bots following players to see if they are cheating. (True story).
here’s my idea for those blues (severe TK addicts): completely remove camo, and permanent map marker. if that asshat wants to play bad, let the reds deal with him. maybe throw in a little….bounty bonus, yeah? a 25% income jump would make the reds get the blueboy fast