Thursday, December 12, 2013

shells will do damage to tanks through objects in 8.10

 

Destructible Objects and How They Fit Into Wargaming's Model


Working As Intended

 

Having previously written about Wargaming's design for this game, World of Tanks, I'd like to expand on that a bit. It's quite well known that many of the mechanics and features in the game are both not suitable for e-sports, and indeed quite frustrating beyond that. They know that if they develop a fun enough game, and then add certain elements into it that are different and potentially aggravating, that many people will still play and possibly pay anyway. If you've played less than 5-10k battles, and you haven't experienced a huge level of frustration, then you are likely in this category. 


Patch 8.10


In the upcoming patch, 8.10, they plan to introduce a new game mechanic where AP and APCR shells will be able to fly through destructible objects and potentially do damage to a tank on the other side. Previously, any shell that hits even the smallest fence, car, wall, or anything else, would simply be eaten by that object and would never do damage to the enemy. Keep in mind that AP and APCR are the vast majority of shells fired in this game, other than a relatively small number of tanks that fire a lot of HE or HEAT shells. As the round travels through the object, the greater the distance, and the more objects it hits, the greater the loss of penetration there will be. This does not mean you can shoot a tank through 10 houses in a row, but you will be able to do damage much more effectively, even if the enemy has cover. Wargaming thinks that although it is realistic for a 120mm subcaliber (APCR) round to penetrate through many 'softer' objects in a row, it would change the game too significantly. In the future, it is also planned for shells to travel through buildings as well, further making cover that much more useless.

This mechanic is yet another of Wargaming's attempts to create an environment where tanks can be much more easily damaged and destroyed. Powercreep is the primary vehicle for this of course, but supposedly small things like adding destructibility to 'soft' cover and buildings end up being much more important once you experience it. Gold rounds for credits was another tactic, as this provided almost everyone with the ability to shoot gold ammo, in any given match. This negates armor even moreso, as if the already increasingly ridiculous high tier high penetration gun powercreep wasn't enough. 

this won't work anymore

Who Needs Tactics?


Trying to use that little wall to hull down? Well now they can just shoot through the wall and negate your clever use of cover. Previously they would've had to waste a round on the wall, letting your know that someone is shooting at you, if you didn't already know, giving you time to move away or fire back. This further discourages smart tactical decisions and makes it so you either have to keep moving all the time no matter what, or simply hide behind hard cover a lot more. Tanks that rely on armor have been going out of style for awhile, but this only makes it worse. The current meta for this game involves either having excellent mobility, or excellent firepower, or both. There's a big reason why not many play the Maus anymore.

the sad Maus


Given that the majority of objects in the game are soft cover, meaning cover that is actually destructible by firing at it, this is going to change the game quite a bit. A previously non-damaging shot will now damage in many cases, which in my view is another buff to TDs. Now they can sit back as they always do, fire through objects, and remain hidden, meanwhile doing damage where once they would've alerted the enemy who then would've likely moved away if he's not a potato. Now, don't get me wrong, of course that's how you're supposed to play a TD, as an ambush vehicle. I just believe that the way they currently work, especially for high tiers, is somewhat broken. I've covered this in detail in my previous article, "World of TDs". 

This new game mechanic will only make that worse, particularly for guns with high alpha. An Object 268 or T110E4 would've had to either shoot the turret (not always the best idea) or waste a round on the soft cover protecting an enemy's hull, but now, they will do damage with the first shot, and likely have a good chance of destroying the tank completely.

the happy T110E4


Map Design


I've talked about how Wargaming designs their maps before, but there maybe some aspects of it that go unnoticed. Of course everyone knows that the majority of the maps are simply too small, particularly for fifteen versus fifteen tanks in the higher tiers. For how large and powerful the vehicles get at this level, some of the maps are like a bunch of acrobats performing in a large closet, amazing but ridiculous. Although I understand this game is not supposed to be a simulation, bigger maps would make for a more interesting experience. This is because you would have more possibilities for flanking, tactics, and you know, things other than going down one of the three lanes and slugging it out face to face.

One aspect of the maps that people may not realize is that they have many bumps, ridges, hills, and terrain similar to this. This essentially makes sniping harder, and rewards in-your-face brawling. This is another thing that makes the game more arcadey, and less about shot placement and skillful accuracy. It also reduces the survivability and usefulness of sniper tanks, such as many of the German and British vehicles. 

The small size of the maps is another feature they use to keep the battles shorter, more arcade-like, and to keep people dying faster. Having rounds able to pass through objects and still do damage will make the maps even smaller, and negate much of the cover that currently exists on said maps. The smaller maps and shorter battles cater more towards the ADHD generation, and less towards people who want actual tactics, actual teamwork, and a much more fulfilling armored warfare gameplay experience. I'm not asking for a simulation, just less arcade.

I have no problem with arcade games, but in my opinion, if you're going to make a (mostly) World War II tank game, it should really be more realistic. Save the arcade games for things like racing games, FPSs, etc.

GG, was close


Wargaming Wants Your Tank Dead 


If you constantly survive every battle, do well, and have a very pleasant experience with the game, are you going to be frustrated or angry? Of course not. What Wargaming doesn't see or simply chooses not to implement is that if players had the previously described experience, they may spend money on the game because they're not being frustrated into doing so. Instead, they've opted for the method of aggravation and constant struggle against the odds. Perhaps they believe that using negative methods to achieve success works better than the opposite? This isn't to say I don't enjoy a challenge or never want one, but the never-ending uphill battle that public battles have become simply isn't really enjoyable. Adding destructible cover will only make it worse for those who previously used it as a tactic.    






 

 


4 comments:

  1. Good article.
    I agree that this new mechanic may result in smaller battle duration, like you said.
    .
    However, you also say you would like a bit more realism in the game. This mechanic does exactly that. Right now it is just plain stupid that a small stone pillar "eats" a 122 mm shell, for example. This will be fixed, and I for one appreciate this.
    .
    Furthermore, this is an indirect nerf to hull down tanks. Due to WG map design, hull down tanks have a strong advantage. Just look at the T29. Even after some nerfs it is still the best in it's tier IMO. My best stats are with that vehicle, I can see it is somewhat OP. This happens because most maps consist of hilly terrain, so you can just expose your invincible turret and fire away. Not anymore, in the case you are using soft cover for the effect, which I think is good.
    This is explicit in your example with the KV-1 in Sand River (although the KV-1 isn't an all-out hull down tank,it still proves my point).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good points, you are right about this increasing realism in the game, and so on that front, it is a good thing. I just feel WG keeps taking the game in the wrong direction for the most part, and it's a bit troubling.

      Delete
  2. Just came across your blog and looks really nice, already bookmarked. I am much more happy to read this kind of articles than others...

    Keep up the good job.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thanks a lot man, I will try my best to write as often as I can. Somewhat busy at the moment however.

    ReplyDelete