33 thoughts on “Balance 2.0 – When, if ever?”

  2. I’ve been very sceptical to this rebalance aswell, especially after they said that they would turn arty, which holds the biggest guns in the entire game, into a debuff class… But I guess we can only wait and see:/

    1. If arty was realistic it would rip any(or almost any?) tank to pieces with one(even indirect) shot.
      That would work great! Then I would stop laughing and leave.

      1. I think you mean a concentrated artillery barrage… but I get what you are seeing.
        We will see what happens, though. Soooo… let\’s just wait it out.

        Couldn\’t take more than 5 years!

      2. True, I\’d also not be able to have a satellite view and would have to fire by coordinates. And the arcs would be so much worse.

      3. Well if they\’re not going to keep it realistic, they don\’t need to make the shots blow tanks to peices either. But turning a 240 mm howitzer into a debuff gun just sounds stupid…

        1. Sounds stupid. How does it play is what I care about.
          The way it is now is closer to reality and it plays like shit(for both sides).

          1. If you cared about how it was for both sides, you wouldn\’t be so positive to making it a debuff class. I can\’t imagine that anyone grinded a 240 mm howitzer so they could temporarly paralyze someones driver or gunner. That\’s what sounds stupid…

            1. \”But turning a 240 mm howitzer into a debuff gun just sounds stupid…\”

              \”Sounds stupid. How does it play is what I care about.\”

              \”That’s what sounds stupid…\”

              Keep repeating it \”Sounds stupid\”, that will help your argument.
              Sounds smart to me.

              1. Yes, it also sounds stupid from you to only read the part where I write \”sounds stupid\”… Maybe you missed this entire part?

                \”If you cared about how it was for both sides, you wouldn’t be so positive to making it a debuff class. I can’t imagine that anyone grinded a 240 mm howitzer so they could temporarly paralyze someones driver or gunner\”

                Or maybe you\’re out of arguments? Or maybe you\’re just here to troll my comment like last time? 😀

                1. \”Or maybe you’re out of arguments?\”

                  I wrote my argument and you keep repeating; sounds stupid like a damn echo.
                  Does that make it a better argument?
                  And why would I try to make additional arguments when you keep repeating the same thing?

                  All my questions in this post are rhetorical as I do not expect an actual reasoned reply.

                  Sounds stupid!

                  1. Let\’s try again, maybe the troll needs to buy a pair of glasses 😀

                    HINT: LOOK HERE -> “If you cared about how it was for both sides, you wouldn’t be so positive to making it a debuff class. I can’t imagine that anyone grinded a 240 mm howitzer so they could temporarly paralyze someones driver or gunner”

        2. I\’m guessing it will have even less accuracy with a bigger splash damage that will do less damage, but cause your crew to perform less efficiently.

          1. LOL less accuracy? 😀 Soon we can just aim at enemy base, RNG will propably make the shell fly to one of the flanks 😀

              1. The shells already fly all around the aiming circle, if they really want to \”fix\” arty, buffing accuracy is the only option :/

                1. I don\’t think that going the AW\’s arty route isn\’t good either.

                  I think it should have less accuracy in the middle but do more splash with more consistent damage.

                  1. Yes, but where does player skill come into the picture when RNG decides if you\’re going to hit or not? 🙂

  3. I\’m afraid of living the day when Sliphantom\’s words become truth.
    *sigh*

      1. Seb said that a plug-in or whatever costs… 40 Euro a year?
        I have no idea what the details were.
        Welp, what I am proposing is that Seb makes a poll about this whole editing function thingy, asks the readers if they want it (yes we do), and then, if he needs help with paying for it, start a donation poll or what.
        I\’m fairly certain that many of the readers would be able to join in and give for the cause, a couple Euros from here and there makes the difference.

        I would help him out too, but I\’m broke as fuck. 😐

    2. I corrected your comment.

      Previous discussion:

      I know… My past few comments made me look like an illegible retard. I need a edit button but none are to be found ;_;

      Liked by 1 person
      Reply

      Sgt_Zephyr
      2016-05-21 at 1:44 am

      Seb said that a plug-in or whatever costs… 40 Euro a year?
      I have no idea what the details were.
      Welp, what I am proposing is that Seb makes a poll about this whole editing function thingy, asks the readers if they want it (yes we do), and then, if he needs help with paying for it, start a donation poll or what.
      I’m fairly certain that many of the readers would be able to join in and give for the cause, a couple Euros from here and there makes the difference.

      I would help him out too, but I’m broke as fuck.😐

      Liked by 1 person
      soviettenkdestroyer
      2016-05-21 at 2:34 am

      I have like $10

      Sebastianul
      2016-05-21 at 7:44 am

      I don’t want to beg for money xD

      It’s 99 dollars a year.

      1. Seb, I think if I ask you, I voice all of the active commenters here.
        Please get that feature. It\’s for a whole year. Please.

        1. \”I don’t want to beg for money xD\”

          From what I see people are literally asking to buy this feature for AP since they want to use it.
          Also making it possible for people to support you is not begging.

          1. Dude. Chill.
            If people are offering you money, you are NOT begging for it!
            So, suck up your pride, make a poll asking how many people would like to see the edit feature and how many would like to donate a couple moneys for it.

            Seriously, stop fussing about begging, it\’s not only stupid, it\’s also illogical and childish.
            Just to be clear: WE WANT THE EDIT FUNCTION!

              1. Name me in the poll, if you must, see if I care.
                We, the active readers and commenters, want the edit feature.
                I take full responsibility for this action, even though there is literally nothing that could happen if you just ask your readers.
                -.-\’

  4. Edit button is available for an amount of greens. Last time I\’ve begged the Boss for it, he has agreed to provide one for lots of cash 🙂 🙂 🙂

  5. In my opinion, it will happen. Why? Because WG is running out of content they can easly produce. They have been heavily exploiting new tech trees and tanks for years to a point where it take a long time to research and produce non-clone trees. They have tried new maps with mixed results. New game modes were a masive fail. Personal missions were ok-ish, some missions are intentionally \”harder\” (ekhm… RNG) to make you strugle, so they take a long time to do. There are probably a lot of people who didn\’t finish them – including myself. WoT is at a point in time when it\’s probably hard for WG to think of something that will really make players happy.

  6. Honestly turning clickers into some kind of debuf class that is gonna permanently wreck my modules/crew would be even worse than it is now. I mean sure, I absolutely hate losing any HP when I get hit by arty, but I can still fight even if I lose 1k HP ( redline 😛 ). If I lose my gunner, commander, gun, ammorack etc, my tank is useless, I can\’t spot for myself or team if I lose commander, I can\’t hit anything if I lose gunner, I am largely a support vehicle if I don\’t have a loader or ammorack… No, just no.

    Same with detracking or spotting shells.

Comments are closed.