Rhm. Trashwagen.

Дата: 22.02.2019 20:21:57

Igor_BL, on 22 February 2019 - 01:56 PM, said: You are insulting us, by claiming RHM is fine as it is. And it is the same type of "high ceiling" tank, like the batcat.
So, please, stop insulting your players, by writing nonsenses like that. Thank-you!

P.S. you requested it... Do you see the difference? Any? I might be civ. eng. and a mathematician, numbers are my thing, but I dont think those two graphs are hard to differ.

14:02 Added after 5 minutes also, what is this?!!?

"I advise you to avoid any Scientific field with your ability to draw conclusions from statements. Please take the time to read again what's been said, then try again. "

You talk to forumite and player like that? as forum CC/moderator or whatever?

eekeeboo: also, what is this?!!?

"I advise you to avoid any Scientific field with your ability to draw conclusions from statements. Please take the time to read again what's been said, then try again. "

You talk to forumite and player like that? as forum CC/moderator or whatever? Yes I do, I'm not here to mollycoddle you, I'm here to present you the facts, whether you like them or not. You can deal with it, or you can go elsewhere, these are your choices. Just like the rules.

gpalsson, on 22 February 2019 - 01:07 PM, said: No, that's not how it is. You can't compare the them because good players can make BC25t work. Yes, they can in fact surpass performance in other tanks that may be easier to drive but have lower potential, because they can use the strengths of the tank to overcome the bad ones. But that is because eg. BC25T actually HAS some strong points that are worth exploiting. My entire point is that it is not possible to surpass the performance of other tanks in this particular tank because all other LTs are just flat out better. The Rhm is the worst. It doesn't matter how good you are, you won't have better performance in it compared to other TX LTs than you do in the others all other things like crew being equal. So you may find one or two players who does for some odd reason have better performance in them than other TX LT's, but I can assure you it doesn't have to do with skill floor.

eekeeboo: And that is a fair point, but that's how it is. Not all tanks need to have a low skill floor, not all tanks need to be easy to play or perform the same way. And like the German Light TX does have some strengths, but they're harder to get to shine, most players don't like trying to shine in lights because they feel more versatile in mediums. You're encroaching on a very different aspect of the tanks performance from damage dealing to mostly supporting and spotting.

peregrine, on 22 February 2019 - 02:07 PM, said:

Please enlighten us where exactly the rhm does what is expected to do? There is not a single data point where the winrate is within 4% of the expected values. Again, someone playing the rhm wins 4% less battles than in the "average" tank. No one can make the tank work. That is the definition of a underpowered tank. Since you brought up the bc25t, recent results show that the tank is not as good as it used to be. So meta changes would require to buff the tank. I am not sure you should be making such statements given your conclusions from reading a simple diagram.

eekeeboo: "On average" you missed this from your post. Add that and you will see what happens with the graph. Just because I don't look at a line and go, that's infallible must be right, anyone who disagrees is wrong, doesn't mean I can't read graphs or data. If you read above, not all tanks have to be a certain perspective on ease of play, that's not how you make games varied.

geoff99, on 22 February 2019 - 02:24 PM, said: Has someone hacked Eek's account? Normally he's friendly, responsive, constructive and open about WG's strengths and failings. Great attributes for a forum mod. Defending the Rhm Pzw is madness though. Clearly its complete cack. Saying that its not just annoys people and loses trust.

eekeeboo: That's once again, I give honest facts, not molly coddle. The fact is a game needs a variety of play style and skill floor/ceiling mechanics. This is something that's a fact. You have in any game that has variety and length mechanics and classes with high skill floor and high skill ceiling rated all the way down to low skill floor and low skill ceiling with variable output from each. This is why you have hatred for low skill floor arty and type 5 etc, but you have respect for high skill ceiling with good light players. People look at the skill floor of something and judge it there but never look at the skill ceiling in 90% (arbritrary number) of cases.

Solstad1069, on 22 February 2019 - 03:14 PM, said: I hear you eekeeboo, but why does any tank get buffed when you can just call them high skill tank.

eekeeboo: Sometimes this comes down to a tank not being played at all or below averages in which case it does get reviewed, but it's why balancing takes a while to make sure you don't nerf the wrong tanks (like T29) and you buff the right tanks (like the Tiger 2). You have to look at the tanks leading up to it and the experience you have, if you go purely on performance you start massively affecting all the tanks around it. This is one of the reasons i mention that balancing is more complex than simply making it like the other tanks at the tier, because you need to look at so much more.

Sfinski, on 22 February 2019 - 03:36 PM, said: So you admit it's not balanced. Good, so what is all this shiet of you repeating over and over again it's fine? If it's not balanced, it is not fine. No matter how specialized it is.

eekeeboo: I admit it's difficult to play, I admit it's got a high skill floor. That means the tank can perform in a game, this means it's balanced in the right hands (like any tank). And that's what you need in a game you can't just have basic easy to play and perform tanks anywhere, no skilled player can distinguish themself and there stops being challenge. This is fundamental PvP game design and if you want to keep a game engaging for a variety of skilled demographics.

tajj7, on 22 February 2019 - 03:41 PM, said: I'm not hearing him, I really don't get what he is trying to say here. The tank is a high skill floor tank, we all get that, any paper tank that relies more on mobility, camo, vision, DPM than alpha, hp and armour is going to be harder to play and harder to do well in. But this is a high skill floor tank with no high potential, people who are top 0.1% of players, probably top 0.01% cannot get this tank to perform at the same levels as even their other tier 10 lights (let alone other more competitive tier 10s) which to me very clearly says underpowered tank. Even if you play this to perfection, to the highest level of play possible, you are still going to be better of in other tanks. Also if you just leave aside the statistics that clearly show it to be very poor, just doing a logical assessment of its attributes in comparison to other tanks on tier 10 shows it to not be very good. It is a large, very paper tank with poor penetration, poor alpha, poor DPM, and so so gun handling. That is not a good combination for a successful tank in the current meta.

eekeeboo: And I'm saying that you can be on par with this vehicle as other tanks if you know how to use it. The problem with those graphs is they rely heavily on averages, now you start doing that and like when you get a new tank and people free xp to it, the skill performance is higher than when the average player will reach it when the spike disappears. Not all tanks need to be easy to play if you want to have challenge in the game and not all tanks need to be difficult to play, but it's important to have variety.

fwhaatpiraat, on 22 February 2019 - 04:44 PM, said: Sorry, but you are wrong on so many aspects. You start with a good point, ofcourse it would be dull if many tanks had the exact same parameters. The 'jack of all trades, master of none' vs 'one-trick-ponies' does make sense in theory, but not if it gets implemented as 'master of all trades, jack of none'. The RHM PZW has no relevant strengths. It's spotting capabilities are mediocre because of its size and sluggish mobility (turning speed). That means it is really easy to counter, either by just shooting the rhm pzw when it is making a spotting run (it is higher than an Obj277, boxy and has no armor, you do the math), or by blind firing at positions like on Malinovka, Redshire or Prokhorovka. The tank is not stealthy to get and when driving around it basically says: "shoot here for easy damage". It's combat parameters are even worse, far worse actually. With a reload of 7.5s (with BiA, gun rammer and vents) it has a worse reload than all NATO meds (and ofcourse all 320 alpha RU meds). That is not a good starting point already, add worse penetration, far worse penetration drop off (194mm penetration on 500meters, 60 meters less than the mentioned meds), 0.35 base accuracy with so so bloom statistics, 20% worse shell velocity (with standard round, with HEAT or HE it is even worse), no clip (which many fast tanks have) and a 280mm heat round, and you should have an idea how the 320 alpha gun performs. If you think that is not a problem since you 'should not snipe the fronts of heavy tanks', it is. Since 1) you will face a lot of heavily armored vehicles frontally. Doing nothing means you're useless, which makes it more likely to lose. 2) You cannot flank them at the start of the game, the fastest way to get rekt is to flank them at the early stages of the game. 3) Even during flanking, the parameters of gun handling, penetration values and dpm are really important, if you have to snap shot the side of an IS-7, Type 5, WZ-5a, etc, you are quite likely to 'ding'. Also the traverse speed (worse than a 907 or Leopard, but better than a Batchat or Centurion) will make you suffer if you quickly want to retreat or try to get some nice shooting angles. This has nothing to do with a jack of all trades. This is just a tank with really mediocre statistics on basically every aspect, while there are tanks around that score much higher on basically all aspects. For instance the 907 or 260. Good luck fighting such 'master of all' tanks.

eekeeboo: Not if you want to give variety in your game, what the person says above you is a fundamental to keep things in the game to be different and cater to different skill levels. Otherwise you'd never have a strong vehicle or a "nice" vehicle to play because they're OP thus they nee to be nerfed and balanced. 18:23 Added after 1 minute

Igor_BL, on 22 February 2019 - 06:15 PM, said: I just cant believe what am I reading. That is it.
This time I am finished with the forum. There is no point. If guys like eekeeboo are in charge for something, telling us "RHM is good as it is now" and similar nonsenses, there is no feedback that can change it. And with Gepard's recent recognition that they dont value our feedback, they have their "way".
I will let them to live in their world, where it is ok to implement 268v4, where you need 2-3 years to buff 260, to nerf e5, where is4, leo1 and similar tanks are still on the list, becase "data is being collected"...

I would love this game to have a long "life", but i doubt it. See ya guys on battlefield.
Cheers.

eekeeboo: And that's your choice, but this balancing system has been in the game and many other games for PvP for years, and you can see how long it's running vs other tank games with "more even balance" and look how that went because there's no challenge and no variety. Like it or not, it's how fact of game design works.

Rhm. Trashwagen.



	Автологин
Забыл пароль?