Developers posts on forum
In this section you'll find posts from the official developers forum. The base is updated every hour and stored on a server wot-news.com. If you encounter any bugs, have suggestions or comments, write to info@wot-news.com
BigDaddyLaxative
1v1: LT-432 | No invite for next battle bug
25.11.2018 02:48:08
Subject: 1v1: LT-432 | No invite for next battle bug
Link on message: #11886670
joethered, on Nov 25 2018 - 00:31, said: Any particular way you want this formatted to make sure you see it?
I never got a Special Battle" after my first round and I messaged
my opponent and it was the same for him. Thanks for looking in to
it.Are we supposed to send in a ticket or will you guys be doing
figuring this out on your own?
Sh4d0wSt412, on Nov 25 2018 - 00:36, said:
Link on message: #11886670
joethered, on Nov 25 2018 - 00:31, said: Any particular way you want this formatted to make sure you see it?
I never got a Special Battle" after my first round and I messaged
my opponent and it was the same for him. Thanks for looking in to
it.Are we supposed to send in a ticket or will you guys be doing
figuring this out on your own?BigDaddyLaxative: The main information we will need is to include the tournament
name/bug in the subject, and the prize you would like. We
will be doing an investigation and identify everyone that was
affected and then move on to crediting. So if you never
received an invite due to the bug, contact us. We'll confirm
it and then credit your reward.
Sh4d0wSt412, on Nov 25 2018 - 00:36, said: BigDaddyLaxative:
Hambijon
1v1: LT-432 | No invite for next battle bug
25.11.2018 02:48:08
Subject: 1v1: LT-432 | No invite for next battle bug
Link on message: #11886670
joethered, on Nov 25 2018 - 00:31, said: Any particular way you want this formatted to make sure you see it?
I never got a Special Battle" after my first round and I messaged
my opponent and it was the same for him. Thanks for looking in to
it.Are we supposed to send in a ticket or will you guys be doing
figuring this out on your own?
Sh4d0wSt412, on Nov 25 2018 - 00:36, said:
Link on message: #11886670
joethered, on Nov 25 2018 - 00:31, said: Any particular way you want this formatted to make sure you see it?
I never got a Special Battle" after my first round and I messaged
my opponent and it was the same for him. Thanks for looking in to
it.Are we supposed to send in a ticket or will you guys be doing
figuring this out on your own?Hambijon: The main information we will need is to include the tournament
name/bug in the subject, and the prize you would like. We
will be doing an investigation and identify everyone that was
affected and then move on to crediting. So if you never
received an invite due to the bug, contact us. We'll confirm
it and then credit your reward.
Sh4d0wSt412, on Nov 25 2018 - 00:36, said: Hambijon:
Jambijon
Just Received A Tech Loss When Readied
25.11.2018 02:32:46
Subject: Just Received A Tech Loss When Readied
Link on message: #11886660
The_UnLegit_Pro, on Nov 25 2018 - 00:12, said: Thank you for the response. Some of the players who won
their brackets still got a few wins unfairly due to technical
victories or not having an opponent therefore limiting the
opportunity for some of us to win. Also ONLY the people who
experienced the invite bug will get the first place prize what
about the rest of us who where unable to participate due to the
bugs? What will likely happen Monday some sort of compensation or a
rescheduling?
Canadian_Mano, on Nov 25 2018 - 00:13, said: http://forum.worldof...7#entry11882997
But jambo, 3 minutes is the sweet spot between battles? 3
minutes is kind of a sweet spot for our server. When our
tournament system is processing upwards to around 1k matches at the
same time, its best to give it and other players connection speeds
a big enough window to get ready for the next battle. When we
initially started tournaments back up, we lowered it to 2
minutes which doesn't seem like a big change, but it caused a
couple tournaments to crash and not progress after the first couple
matches. Snip:First time I've heard a negative thing about
Erlenberg haha. A lot of this comes down to personal opinion, but
we do listen to feedback
RC_1140, on Nov 25 2018 - 00:14, said: Would it be possible to get the 2nd place prize? Would I
need to send a pm or ticket? I made it to the final then the battle
stopped popping.
Link on message: #11886660
The_UnLegit_Pro, on Nov 25 2018 - 00:12, said: Thank you for the response. Some of the players who won
their brackets still got a few wins unfairly due to technical
victories or not having an opponent therefore limiting the
opportunity for some of us to win. Also ONLY the people who
experienced the invite bug will get the first place prize what
about the rest of us who where unable to participate due to the
bugs? What will likely happen Monday some sort of compensation or a
rescheduling?Jambijon: It's for all who were affected by the bug, which we are
still investigating. So if someone got the bug and it caused
you not progress, then you are included with the compensation.
Canadian_Mano, on Nov 25 2018 - 00:13, said: http://forum.worldof...7#entry11882997
But jambo, 3 minutes is the sweet spot between battles? 3
minutes is kind of a sweet spot for our server. When our
tournament system is processing upwards to around 1k matches at the
same time, its best to give it and other players connection speeds
a big enough window to get ready for the next battle. When we
initially started tournaments back up, we lowered it to 2
minutes which doesn't seem like a big change, but it caused a
couple tournaments to crash and not progress after the first couple
matches. Snip:First time I've heard a negative thing about
Erlenberg haha. A lot of this comes down to personal opinion, but
we do listen to feedback Jambijon: Yes, this is the time we settled on and had success with in
the past, but for tournaments with this amount of battles happening
simultaneously we may have to increase it. Thats just at
first glance however, we'll still have to do a deep dive into this
and work with our devs to figure out exactly what happened.
RC_1140, on Nov 25 2018 - 00:14, said: Would it be possible to get the 2nd place prize? Would I
need to send a pm or ticket? I made it to the final then the battle
stopped popping. Jambijon: Yes, I updated my other post with this info. It's your
choice depending on what you would like. We'll start
crediting on Monday after we complete our investigation.
BigDaddyLaxative
Just Received A Tech Loss When Readied
25.11.2018 02:32:46
Subject: Just Received A Tech Loss When Readied
Link on message: #11886660
The_UnLegit_Pro, on Nov 25 2018 - 00:12, said: Thank you for the response. Some of the players who won
their brackets still got a few wins unfairly due to technical
victories or not having an opponent therefore limiting the
opportunity for some of us to win. Also ONLY the people who
experienced the invite bug will get the first place prize what
about the rest of us who where unable to participate due to the
bugs? What will likely happen Monday some sort of compensation or a
rescheduling?
Canadian_Mano, on Nov 25 2018 - 00:13, said: http://forum.worldof...7#entry11882997
But jambo, 3 minutes is the sweet spot between battles? 3
minutes is kind of a sweet spot for our server. When our
tournament system is processing upwards to around 1k matches at the
same time, its best to give it and other players connection speeds
a big enough window to get ready for the next battle. When we
initially started tournaments back up, we lowered it to 2
minutes which doesn't seem like a big change, but it caused a
couple tournaments to crash and not progress after the first couple
matches. Snip:First time I've heard a negative thing about
Erlenberg haha. A lot of this comes down to personal opinion, but
we do listen to feedback
RC_1140, on Nov 25 2018 - 00:14, said: Would it be possible to get the 2nd place prize? Would I
need to send a pm or ticket? I made it to the final then the battle
stopped popping.
Link on message: #11886660
The_UnLegit_Pro, on Nov 25 2018 - 00:12, said: Thank you for the response. Some of the players who won
their brackets still got a few wins unfairly due to technical
victories or not having an opponent therefore limiting the
opportunity for some of us to win. Also ONLY the people who
experienced the invite bug will get the first place prize what
about the rest of us who where unable to participate due to the
bugs? What will likely happen Monday some sort of compensation or a
rescheduling?BigDaddyLaxative: It's for all who were affected by the bug, which we are
still investigating. So if someone got the bug and it caused
you not progress, then you are included with the compensation.
Canadian_Mano, on Nov 25 2018 - 00:13, said: http://forum.worldof...7#entry11882997
But jambo, 3 minutes is the sweet spot between battles? 3
minutes is kind of a sweet spot for our server. When our
tournament system is processing upwards to around 1k matches at the
same time, its best to give it and other players connection speeds
a big enough window to get ready for the next battle. When we
initially started tournaments back up, we lowered it to 2
minutes which doesn't seem like a big change, but it caused a
couple tournaments to crash and not progress after the first couple
matches. Snip:First time I've heard a negative thing about
Erlenberg haha. A lot of this comes down to personal opinion, but
we do listen to feedback BigDaddyLaxative: Yes, this is the time we settled on and had success with in
the past, but for tournaments with this amount of battles happening
simultaneously we may have to increase it. Thats just at
first glance however, we'll still have to do a deep dive into this
and work with our devs to figure out exactly what happened.
RC_1140, on Nov 25 2018 - 00:14, said: Would it be possible to get the 2nd place prize? Would I
need to send a pm or ticket? I made it to the final then the battle
stopped popping. BigDaddyLaxative: Yes, I updated my other post with this info. It's your
choice depending on what you would like. We'll start
crediting on Monday after we complete our investigation.
Hambijon
Just Received A Tech Loss When Readied
25.11.2018 02:32:46
Subject: Just Received A Tech Loss When Readied
Link on message: #11886660
The_UnLegit_Pro, on Nov 25 2018 - 00:12, said: Thank you for the response. Some of the players who won
their brackets still got a few wins unfairly due to technical
victories or not having an opponent therefore limiting the
opportunity for some of us to win. Also ONLY the people who
experienced the invite bug will get the first place prize what
about the rest of us who where unable to participate due to the
bugs? What will likely happen Monday some sort of compensation or a
rescheduling?
Canadian_Mano, on Nov 25 2018 - 00:13, said: http://forum.worldof...7#entry11882997
But jambo, 3 minutes is the sweet spot between battles? 3
minutes is kind of a sweet spot for our server. When our
tournament system is processing upwards to around 1k matches at the
same time, its best to give it and other players connection speeds
a big enough window to get ready for the next battle. When we
initially started tournaments back up, we lowered it to 2
minutes which doesn't seem like a big change, but it caused a
couple tournaments to crash and not progress after the first couple
matches. Snip:First time I've heard a negative thing about
Erlenberg haha. A lot of this comes down to personal opinion, but
we do listen to feedback
RC_1140, on Nov 25 2018 - 00:14, said: Would it be possible to get the 2nd place prize? Would I
need to send a pm or ticket? I made it to the final then the battle
stopped popping.
Link on message: #11886660
The_UnLegit_Pro, on Nov 25 2018 - 00:12, said: Thank you for the response. Some of the players who won
their brackets still got a few wins unfairly due to technical
victories or not having an opponent therefore limiting the
opportunity for some of us to win. Also ONLY the people who
experienced the invite bug will get the first place prize what
about the rest of us who where unable to participate due to the
bugs? What will likely happen Monday some sort of compensation or a
rescheduling?Hambijon: It's for all who were affected by the bug, which we are
still investigating. So if someone got the bug and it caused
you not progress, then you are included with the compensation.
Canadian_Mano, on Nov 25 2018 - 00:13, said: http://forum.worldof...7#entry11882997
But jambo, 3 minutes is the sweet spot between battles? 3
minutes is kind of a sweet spot for our server. When our
tournament system is processing upwards to around 1k matches at the
same time, its best to give it and other players connection speeds
a big enough window to get ready for the next battle. When we
initially started tournaments back up, we lowered it to 2
minutes which doesn't seem like a big change, but it caused a
couple tournaments to crash and not progress after the first couple
matches. Snip:First time I've heard a negative thing about
Erlenberg haha. A lot of this comes down to personal opinion, but
we do listen to feedback Hambijon: Yes, this is the time we settled on and had success with in
the past, but for tournaments with this amount of battles happening
simultaneously we may have to increase it. Thats just at
first glance however, we'll still have to do a deep dive into this
and work with our devs to figure out exactly what happened.
RC_1140, on Nov 25 2018 - 00:14, said: Would it be possible to get the 2nd place prize? Would I
need to send a pm or ticket? I made it to the final then the battle
stopped popping. Hambijon: Yes, I updated my other post with this info. It's your
choice depending on what you would like. We'll start
crediting on Monday after we complete our investigation.
Jambijon
1v1: LT-432 | No invite for next battle bug
25.11.2018 02:23:30
Subject: 1v1: LT-432 | No invite for next battle bug
Link on message: #11886650
Link on message: #11886650
Jambijon: Just a small update. It looks like some would rather have the
2nd place prize instead of the 432. This is completely fine,
just be sure to contact us via PM or customer support ticket and
we'll start the credits on Monday.
BigDaddyLaxative
1v1: LT-432 | No invite for next battle bug
25.11.2018 02:23:30
Subject: 1v1: LT-432 | No invite for next battle bug
Link on message: #11886650
Link on message: #11886650
BigDaddyLaxative: Just a small update. It looks like some would rather have the
2nd place prize instead of the 432. This is completely fine,
just be sure to contact us via PM or customer support ticket and
we'll start the credits on Monday.
Hambijon
1v1: LT-432 | No invite for next battle bug
25.11.2018 02:23:30
Subject: 1v1: LT-432 | No invite for next battle bug
Link on message: #11886650
Link on message: #11886650
Hambijon: Just a small update. It looks like some would rather have the
2nd place prize instead of the 432. This is completely fine,
just be sure to contact us via PM or customer support ticket and
we'll start the credits on Monday.
Jambijon
1v1: LT-432 | No invite for next battle bug
25.11.2018 02:15:52
Subject: 1v1: LT-432 | No invite for next battle bug
Link on message: #11886637
Link on message: #11886637
Jambijon: Hello all! First, we apologize if you were one of the effected
with a bug that happened with our tournament. Affected
players found that they never received an invite for their next
round and the tournament progressed past the scheduled time for
their matches which caused other players in that same bracket to be
affected as well, causing that "bracket line" to completely
halt. We are currently investigating match by
match as to why the battles only popped for some and will update
you as soon as we have a definitive answer. However, for
those affected we will be paying you out with the 1st place prize
as soon as we can. Again, we apologize for those affected and
congratulations for those who made it through the entire
tournament!
BigDaddyLaxative
1v1: LT-432 | No invite for next battle bug
25.11.2018 02:15:52
Subject: 1v1: LT-432 | No invite for next battle bug
Link on message: #11886637
Link on message: #11886637
BigDaddyLaxative: Hello all! First, we apologize if you were one of the
effected with a bug that happened with our tournament.
Affected players found that they never received an invite for their
next round and the tournament progressed past the scheduled time
for their matches which caused other players in that same bracket
to be affected as well, causing that "bracket line" to completely
halt. We are currently investigating match by
match as to why the battles only popped for some and will update
you as soon as we have a definitive answer. However, for
those affected we will be paying you out with the 1st place prize
as soon as we can. Again, we apologize for those affected
and congratulations for those who made it through the entire
tournament!
Hambijon
1v1: LT-432 | No invite for next battle bug
25.11.2018 02:15:52
Subject: 1v1: LT-432 | No invite for next battle bug
Link on message: #11886637
Link on message: #11886637
Hambijon: Hello all! First, we apologize if you were one of the
effected with a bug that happened with our tournament.
Affected players found that they never received an invite for their
next round and the tournament progressed past the scheduled time
for their matches which caused other players in that same bracket
to be affected as well, causing that "bracket line" to completely
halt. We are currently investigating match by
match as to why the battles only popped for some and will update
you as soon as we have a definitive answer. However, for
those affected we will be paying you out with the 1st place prize
as soon as we can. Again, we apologize for those affected
and congratulations for those who made it through the entire
tournament!
Jambijon
Just Received A Tech Loss When Readied
25.11.2018 02:03:03
Subject: Just Received A Tech Loss When Readied
Link on message: #11886617
Canadian_Mano, on Nov 24 2018 - 23:30, said: Jambijon: No, tournaments are working as intended and we are
happy with the way they are going!
Link on message: #11886617
Canadian_Mano, on Nov 24 2018 - 23:30, said: Jambijon: No, tournaments are working as intended and we are
happy with the way they are going!Jambijon: Obviously they aren't working as intended and we're aren't
happy with the way they are going, which means I get more work on
the weekend. Trust me, I want this to work as mush as anyone
else. At first speculation, it seems there might not have
been enough time between the rounds. A similar issue happened
before we had automation with our 50tp tournament which caused us
to increase to 3 minutes. Since some brackets went through
and some players didn't get an invite it leads me to believe its
related to a connection between our server and players
connection. I'm not saying this is on the players end as it
is completely on us to make sure we are in the correct margin
of error when setting these up.
To further understand what caused the invites to halt for some players, we will need the assistance from the devs which yes, will be on monday. For now, for the players who made it through to the end. Congrats! Also, for those affected with invite bug, we'll be giving you the 1st Prize as well.
To further understand what caused the invites to halt for some players, we will need the assistance from the devs which yes, will be on monday. For now, for the players who made it through to the end. Congrats! Also, for those affected with invite bug, we'll be giving you the 1st Prize as well.
BigDaddyLaxative
Just Received A Tech Loss When Readied
25.11.2018 02:03:03
Subject: Just Received A Tech Loss When Readied
Link on message: #11886617
Canadian_Mano, on Nov 24 2018 - 23:30, said: Jambijon: No, tournaments are working as intended and we are
happy with the way they are going!
Link on message: #11886617
Canadian_Mano, on Nov 24 2018 - 23:30, said: Jambijon: No, tournaments are working as intended and we are
happy with the way they are going!BigDaddyLaxative: Obviously they aren't working as intended and we're aren't
happy with the way they are going, which means I get more work on
the weekend. Trust me, I want this to work as mush as anyone
else. At first speculation, it seems there might not have
been enough time between the rounds. A similar issue happened
before we had automation with our 50tp tournament which caused us
to increase to 3 minutes. Since some brackets went through
and some players didn't get an invite it leads me to believe its
related to a connection between our server and players
connection. I'm not saying this is on the players end as it
is completely on us to make sure we are in the correct margin
of error when setting these up.
To further understand what caused the invites to halt for some players, we will need the assistance from the devs which yes, will be on monday. For now, for the players who made it through to the end. Congrats! Also, for those affected with invite bug, we'll be giving you the 1st Prize as well.
To further understand what caused the invites to halt for some players, we will need the assistance from the devs which yes, will be on monday. For now, for the players who made it through to the end. Congrats! Also, for those affected with invite bug, we'll be giving you the 1st Prize as well.
Hambijon
Just Received A Tech Loss When Readied
25.11.2018 02:03:03
Subject: Just Received A Tech Loss When Readied
Link on message: #11886617
Canadian_Mano, on Nov 24 2018 - 23:30, said: Jambijon: No, tournaments are working as intended and we are
happy with the way they are going!
Link on message: #11886617
Canadian_Mano, on Nov 24 2018 - 23:30, said: Jambijon: No, tournaments are working as intended and we are
happy with the way they are going!Hambijon: Obviously they aren't working as intended and we're aren't
happy with the way they are going, which means I get more work on
the weekend. Trust me, I want this to work as mush as anyone
else. At first speculation, it seems there might not have
been enough time between the rounds. A similar issue happened
before we had automation with our 50tp tournament which caused us
to increase to 3 minutes. Since some brackets went through
and some players didn't get an invite it leads me to believe its
related to a connection between our server and players
connection. I'm not saying this is on the players end as it
is completely on us to make sure we are in the correct margin
of error when setting these up.
To further understand what caused the invites to halt for some players, we will need the assistance from the devs which yes, will be on monday. For now, for the players who made it through to the end. Congrats! Also, for those affected with invite bug, we'll be giving you the 1st Prize as well.
To further understand what caused the invites to halt for some players, we will need the assistance from the devs which yes, will be on monday. For now, for the players who made it through to the end. Congrats! Also, for those affected with invite bug, we'll be giving you the 1st Prize as well.
Felipe6666Original
Torneos de noviembre
25.11.2018 01:43:14
Subject: Torneos de noviembre
Link on message: #11886587
Link on message: #11886587
Felipe6666Original: Bien, batallas por el tercer puesto (y cualquier otra batalla que
no se haya producido, hay pocos casos en otros puestos)
oficialmente canceladas porque el sistema no nos permite
reiniciarlas. Determinaremos las compensaciones a realizar por lo
ocurrido durante la semana. ¡Saludos!
Felipe6666Original
Torneos de noviembre
25.11.2018 01:34:46
Subject: Torneos de noviembre
Link on message: #11886571
Apoca3110, on Nov 23 2018 - 02:14, said: Creo que las quejas eran porque se entendia que al ser 3v3
de tier alto el premio era mayor a los de tier bajo, el tema es que
con la incorporacion de los bonos, se redujo considerablemente la
proporcion de oro de cada puesto. Por dar un ejemplo, el 4v4 pago
el mismo oro siendo tier 7 y de a 4 que el 2v2 tier 6 de la semana
pasada, es decir que por cabeza te llevabas 3k de oro en tier 6 y
ahora en tier 7 1.5k, entonces creo que me pasa lo mismo que a la
mayoria cuando considero que se le esta dando un valor
extremadamente alto a los bonos como premio. Una alternativa seria
aumentar lo mas posible las recompensas en oro manteniendo la
cantidad de bonos actuales o aumentar la cantidad de bonos y
mantener el oro, porque en el formato actual se siente como una
reduccion de premios camuflada.
Link on message: #11886571
Apoca3110, on Nov 23 2018 - 02:14, said: Creo que las quejas eran porque se entendia que al ser 3v3
de tier alto el premio era mayor a los de tier bajo, el tema es que
con la incorporacion de los bonos, se redujo considerablemente la
proporcion de oro de cada puesto. Por dar un ejemplo, el 4v4 pago
el mismo oro siendo tier 7 y de a 4 que el 2v2 tier 6 de la semana
pasada, es decir que por cabeza te llevabas 3k de oro en tier 6 y
ahora en tier 7 1.5k, entonces creo que me pasa lo mismo que a la
mayoria cuando considero que se le esta dando un valor
extremadamente alto a los bonos como premio. Una alternativa seria
aumentar lo mas posible las recompensas en oro manteniendo la
cantidad de bonos actuales o aumentar la cantidad de bonos y
mantener el oro, porque en el formato actual se siente como una
reduccion de premios camuflada.Felipe6666Original: Dejo esto para contestar bien después. Para los que
están reportando problemas en el torneo de hoy (concretamente por
las batallas por el tercer puesto), ya estamos al tanto de lo
sucedido y estamos investigando qué pasó. De momento, estamos
intentando editar las batallas manualmente para que arranquen en
unos minutos. ¡Saludos!
Felipe6666Original
[Supertest] Panhard EBR 105
23.11.2018 19:50:27
Subject: [Supertest] Panhard EBR 105
Link on message: #11885099
chambax, on Nov 23 2018 - 13:32, said: Cuando va a estar disponible este vehículo en el test server?
Link on message: #11885099
chambax, on Nov 23 2018 - 13:32, said: Cuando va a estar disponible este vehículo en el test server?Felipe6666Original: Todavía no hay una fecha establecida, pero no será pronto
(la Prueba Común de la Actualización 1.3 está en marcha todavía).
¡Saludos!
Felipe6666Original
[Supertest] Panhard EBR 105
23.11.2018 16:28:55
Subject: [Supertest] Panhard EBR 105
Link on message: #11884878
Link on message: #11884878
Felipe6666Original: ¡Saludos, tanquistas! En el día de hoy, comienzan las
pruebas internas de la línea de vehículos con ruedas franceses. Las
mecánicas básicas ya fueron revisadas con el automóvil blindado de
nivel VIII, así que ahora puliremos la línea entera, empezando
desde arriba. El primero en la lista es el Panhard EBR 105,
el nivel X que corona la línea, dado que reúne mejor que ninguna
las características únicas de los vehículos con ruedas.
Imágenes 
¿Qué clase de vehículo es este? Ya están en su lugar,
entre otras, las características distintivas (y mejoradas): ocho
ruedas, dos modos de conducción, característica de bloqueo
“magnético”, y mecánica de carga. Por su baja cantidad de puntos de
vida y su blindaje casi inexistente, este vehículo es
extremadamente vulnerable al fuego enemigo, por lo que deberán
depender de su movilidad y tamaño pequeño para sobrevivir. Se toma
en cuenta como un tanque ligero, pero su rango de detección es
mucho menor al de sus amigos con orugas. Su poder de fuego es
suficiente para rematar a un enemigo dañado sobre el final de una
batalla, pero no para un enfrentamiento de uno contra uno. El as
bajo la manga del Panhard es su movilidad. Su cañón de 105 mm posee
una estabilización extraordinaria que le permite disparar en
movimiento, pero su tiempo de recarga recuerda que ocasionar daño
no es la función primaria de los automóviles blindados. En
resumen, el Panhard EBR 105 reúne todas las fortalezas y
debilidades de los vehículos con ruedas, pero potenciadas. Solo
tenemos que pulirlas. ¿Cómo debe jugarse? Al comienzo
de la batalla, como un explorador extremadamente activo. A la mitad
de la batalla, como un vehículo de reconocimiento muy ágil con
poder de fuego limitado. Y al final de la batalla, como un rápido y
peligroso predador. “Velocidad y agresión” es el credo de un
vehículo con ruedas. El Panhard será relativamente complicado de
controlar, así que será perfecto para tanquistas experimentados y
seguros de sí mismos. De acuerdo con los resultados de las
pruebas, puede que cambiemos las especificaciones del Panhard EBR
105. ¡Sigan las noticias y que la suerte esté de su lado en
el campo de batalla!
¿Qué clase de vehículo es este? Ya están en su lugar,
entre otras, las características distintivas (y mejoradas): ocho
ruedas, dos modos de conducción, característica de bloqueo
“magnético”, y mecánica de carga. Por su baja cantidad de puntos de
vida y su blindaje casi inexistente, este vehículo es
extremadamente vulnerable al fuego enemigo, por lo que deberán
depender de su movilidad y tamaño pequeño para sobrevivir. Se toma
en cuenta como un tanque ligero, pero su rango de detección es
mucho menor al de sus amigos con orugas. Su poder de fuego es
suficiente para rematar a un enemigo dañado sobre el final de una
batalla, pero no para un enfrentamiento de uno contra uno. El as
bajo la manga del Panhard es su movilidad. Su cañón de 105 mm posee
una estabilización extraordinaria que le permite disparar en
movimiento, pero su tiempo de recarga recuerda que ocasionar daño
no es la función primaria de los automóviles blindados. En
resumen, el Panhard EBR 105 reúne todas las fortalezas y
debilidades de los vehículos con ruedas, pero potenciadas. Solo
tenemos que pulirlas. ¿Cómo debe jugarse? Al comienzo
de la batalla, como un explorador extremadamente activo. A la mitad
de la batalla, como un vehículo de reconocimiento muy ágil con
poder de fuego limitado. Y al final de la batalla, como un rápido y
peligroso predador. “Velocidad y agresión” es el credo de un
vehículo con ruedas. El Panhard será relativamente complicado de
controlar, así que será perfecto para tanquistas experimentados y
seguros de sí mismos. De acuerdo con los resultados de las
pruebas, puede que cambiemos las especificaciones del Panhard EBR
105. ¡Sigan las noticias y que la suerte esté de su lado en
el campo de batalla!MA77
[Superteste] Panhard EBR 105
23.11.2018 14:08:40
Subject: [Superteste] Panhard EBR 105
Link on message: #11884802
Link on message: #11884802
MA77: Saudações, tanqueiros. Hoje, o Panhard EBR 105 entra no
Superteste e vamos compartilhar algumas informações sobre ele com
vocês. Confira: 
A Progressão dos Veículos com
Rodas: Nível X A mecânica básica foi verificada
anteriormente com o veículo blindado de Nível VIII, e
agora podemos ajustar a linha inteira, começando pelo topo. O
primeiro na fila é o Panhard EBR 105, o Nível X do ramo,
expressando as características exclusivas dos veículos com
rodas. Que tipo de veículo é esse? Oito rodas, dois modos
de condução, mira travada "magnética" e outros recursos distintos
estão em vigor (e aprimorados). O veículo é extremamente vulnerável
ao fogo inimigo, com seu pequeno HP e blindagem quase inexistente,
portanto, conte com sua mobilidade e tamanho pequeno para
sobreviver. Ele conta como um tanque leve, mas seu alcance de visão
é menor que os veículos leves com lagartas. Seu poder de
fogo é suficiente para acabar com um inimigo danificado no final de
uma batalha, mas não o ideal para combates em igualdade de pontos
de vida ou combates diretos. A melhor característica do Panhard EBR
105 é a sua mobilidade. Um canhão de 105mm tem excelente
estabilização, permitindo disparar em movimento, mas alto dano não
é a especialidade dos carros blindados. Assim, o Panhard EBR 105
tem todos os lados fortes e fracos dos veículos com rodas
pronunciados e reunidos. Nós só temos que ajustá-lo. Como vai
ser jogar com ele? No início de uma batalha, como um batedor
extremamente ativo. No meio, como um veículo de reconhecimento
muito ágil com poder de fogo limitado. No final de uma batalha,
como um predador rápido e perigoso. "Velocidade e agressividade"
são palavras de ordem em um veículo com rodas. O Panhard será
relativamente difícil de manusear e atenderá aos
tanqueiros experientes e confiantes.
A Progressão dos Veículos com
Rodas: Nível X A mecânica básica foi verificada
anteriormente com o veículo blindado de Nível VIII, e
agora podemos ajustar a linha inteira, começando pelo topo. O
primeiro na fila é o Panhard EBR 105, o Nível X do ramo,
expressando as características exclusivas dos veículos com
rodas. Que tipo de veículo é esse? Oito rodas, dois modos
de condução, mira travada "magnética" e outros recursos distintos
estão em vigor (e aprimorados). O veículo é extremamente vulnerável
ao fogo inimigo, com seu pequeno HP e blindagem quase inexistente,
portanto, conte com sua mobilidade e tamanho pequeno para
sobreviver. Ele conta como um tanque leve, mas seu alcance de visão
é menor que os veículos leves com lagartas. Seu poder de
fogo é suficiente para acabar com um inimigo danificado no final de
uma batalha, mas não o ideal para combates em igualdade de pontos
de vida ou combates diretos. A melhor característica do Panhard EBR
105 é a sua mobilidade. Um canhão de 105mm tem excelente
estabilização, permitindo disparar em movimento, mas alto dano não
é a especialidade dos carros blindados. Assim, o Panhard EBR 105
tem todos os lados fortes e fracos dos veículos com rodas
pronunciados e reunidos. Nós só temos que ajustá-lo. Como vai
ser jogar com ele? No início de uma batalha, como um batedor
extremamente ativo. No meio, como um veículo de reconhecimento
muito ágil com poder de fogo limitado. No final de uma batalha,
como um predador rápido e perigoso. "Velocidade e agressividade"
são palavras de ordem em um veículo com rodas. O Panhard será
relativamente difícil de manusear e atenderá aos
tanqueiros experientes e confiantes.MA77
AJUDEM POR FAVOR, Estranho lag na mira (somente na minha conta)
23.11.2018 13:49:23
Subject: AJUDEM POR FAVOR, Estranho lag na mira (somente na minha conta)
Link on message: #11884793
GradorGamer, on Nov 22 2018 - 15:53, said: Caramba, to me sentido um idiota agora kkkkkk, to sofrendo
atoa com isso faz uns 2 meses e era algo tão simples assim... A
Wargaming bem que poderia deixar mais claro o que é essa tal mira
pelo servidor né? Mas muito obrigado mesmo cara, TU ME SALVOU! Meu
herói S2
Link on message: #11884793
GradorGamer, on Nov 22 2018 - 15:53, said: Caramba, to me sentido um idiota agora kkkkkk, to sofrendo
atoa com isso faz uns 2 meses e era algo tão simples assim... A
Wargaming bem que poderia deixar mais claro o que é essa tal mira
pelo servidor né? Mas muito obrigado mesmo cara, TU ME SALVOU! Meu
herói S2MA77: Disponha!
Entre nas batalhas e divirta-se.
Entre nas batalhas e divirta-se.
The_Chieftain
T110's Transcontinental Transplant
23.11.2018 06:24:49
Subject: T110's Transcontinental Transplant
Link on message: #11884558
FrozenKemp, on Nov 22 2018 - 23:19, said: In case anyone is interested -- British researcher Philip
Knight has released another of his "Technical History" books, this
one about the Black Prince. https://www.amazon.com/Black-Prince-Tank-Technical-History/dp/0244125791/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1542906665&sr=8-1&keywords=a43+black+prince
Expect this to be full of technical detail (enough to probably make
my head spin). Full disclosure: Phil has helped me
enormously by photo'ing documents for the Archer book I am working
on.
Link on message: #11884558
FrozenKemp, on Nov 22 2018 - 23:19, said: In case anyone is interested -- British researcher Philip
Knight has released another of his "Technical History" books, this
one about the Black Prince. https://www.amazon.com/Black-Prince-Tank-Technical-History/dp/0244125791/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1542906665&sr=8-1&keywords=a43+black+prince
Expect this to be full of technical detail (enough to probably make
my head spin). Full disclosure: Phil has helped me
enormously by photo'ing documents for the Archer book I am working
on. The_Chieftain: Why do these books keep coming out after I've already done
the filming?
MA77
AJUDEM POR FAVOR, Estranho lag na mira (somente na minha conta)
22.11.2018 20:13:32
Subject: AJUDEM POR FAVOR, Estranho lag na mira (somente na minha conta)
Link on message: #11883955
Link on message: #11883955
MA77: Oi Grador, tudo bem?
Vá na aba "Geral" das opções de sua conta no jogo e desmarque a opção "Mira pelo Servidor". Quando esta opção está marcada, a mira que aparece para você é qual realmente está contanto no servidor com a sua latência e possíveis percas de pacotes. Quando ela está desmarcada, a mira que irá aparecer para você é a do seu cliente de jogo. Grande abraço!
Vá na aba "Geral" das opções de sua conta no jogo e desmarque a opção "Mira pelo Servidor". Quando esta opção está marcada, a mira que aparece para você é qual realmente está contanto no servidor com a sua latência e possíveis percas de pacotes. Quando ela está desmarcada, a mira que irá aparecer para você é a do seu cliente de jogo. Grande abraço!
Felipe6666Original
propuesta a wargaming sobre server SA BOTS
22.11.2018 19:31:24
Subject: propuesta a wargaming sobre server SA BOTS
Link on message: #11883911
Link on message: #11883911
Felipe6666Original: Por favor, utilicen el thread oficial para dejar sus opiniones o
sugerencias respecto de los bots. ¡Saludos! P.D.:
Thread cerrado para concentrar todo en un solo lugar.
The_Chieftain
The Chieftain's Random Musings Thread
22.11.2018 19:04:05
Subject: The Chieftain's Random Musings Thread
Link on message: #11883877
Link on message: #11883877
The_Chieftain: My hole was much less neat, and rather bigger.
The_Chieftain
The Chieftain's Random Musings Thread
22.11.2018 18:39:22
Subject: The Chieftain's Random Musings Thread
Link on message: #11883849
Link on message: #11883849
The_Chieftain: Ok. PSA for other foreigners like myself. Apparently attics in
Texas are not designed for storage and will not hold the weight of
an adult male in all places. There is now a substantial hole in my
new kitchen ceiling. Which is annoying, especially the evening
before a four day weekend.
Anyone know a good contractor in northern San Antonio?
Anyone know a good contractor in northern San Antonio?
Felipe6666Original
Torneos de noviembre
22.11.2018 18:38:49
Subject: Torneos de noviembre
Link on message: #11883848
sector7ge, on Nov 22 2018 - 09:26, said: Que haya habido buena participación no implica que todos los
que se anotan esten conformes con la medida adoptada ya que en este
caso los premios estaban repartidos. Una prueba para ver qué
prefieren los jugadores es que organicen dos torneos iguales en el
mismo horario en que solo difiera el premio (oro o bonos) y
analicen cuál se llena primero. Y con respecto al pago de los
bonos, no hubiese sido más práctico esperar (prolongar este cambio)
para que el sistema lo pudiese hacer de forma automática en lugar
de tener ustedes tener que cargar todos los datos manualmente? Más
trabajo para ustedes y una espera innecesaria para los que
participaron.
Link on message: #11883848
sector7ge, on Nov 22 2018 - 09:26, said: Que haya habido buena participación no implica que todos los
que se anotan esten conformes con la medida adoptada ya que en este
caso los premios estaban repartidos. Una prueba para ver qué
prefieren los jugadores es que organicen dos torneos iguales en el
mismo horario en que solo difiera el premio (oro o bonos) y
analicen cuál se llena primero. Y con respecto al pago de los
bonos, no hubiese sido más práctico esperar (prolongar este cambio)
para que el sistema lo pudiese hacer de forma automática en lugar
de tener ustedes tener que cargar todos los datos manualmente? Más
trabajo para ustedes y una espera innecesaria para los que
participaron.Felipe6666Original: No hace falta, porque si comparamos esos resultados con el
último torneo que organizamos en un día de semana (fue un
miércoles, en donde la cantidad promedio de usuarios suele subir
con respecto al lunes y martes) y que tenía como premio principal
oro (el secundario eran potenciadores) tuvo 1.528 participantes. Es
claro que la gran mayoría quiere ver más variedad en los premios
(una variación del 10% no es algo contundente). Además, no vamos a
reemplazar una cosa con otra, así que una prueba de oro vs. bonos
arroja resultados que no tienen que ver con lo que estamos
haciendo, que es dar variedad (porque si el caso fuera que solo
quieren oro por su practicidad y el resto no importa tanto,
entonces también quitamos a los vehículos premium nuevos, a los
potenciadores, a la Cuenta Premium, al equipamiento y los
consumibles de nuestras ecuaciones; y reducimos drásticamente la
cantidad de oro que podemos dar, claro). Esto no quita que
la decisión de incorporar bonos como parte de los premios sea
definitiva, los resultados en la participación nos lo dirán. En un
punto relacionado, el próximo 7 vs. 7 tiene la misma cantidad de
oro por premio que el anterior 7 vs. 7 que no tenía bonos, y no
estoy viendo quejas sobre ese. Y ya que traigo el tema a colación,
los torneos (sea 3 vs. 3, 2 vs. 2, o lo que sea) no tienen una
cantidad asignada de oro por formato. Basta con revisar cada uno
para darse cuenta que la cantidad de oro dada por el mismo formato
varía considerablemente de un torneo al otro, lo que me hace
preguntarme por qué recién ahora que hay bonos como parte de los
premios hay quejas por eso cuando ha habido 3 vs. 3 que daba 25.000
de oro y el del fin de semana siguiente (mismo formato y todo) daba
2.000 con potenciadores. Y sobre el pago automático,
preferimos hacerlo nosotros hasta que el sistema pueda hacerlo
porque no tenemos una fecha definitiva en la que será incorporada
dicha funcionalidad, y no podemos esperar indefinidamente.
¡Saludos!
Felipe6666Original
Torneos de noviembre
22.11.2018 01:29:47
Subject: Torneos de noviembre
Link on message: #11883271
sector7ge, on Nov 21 2018 - 13:52, said: Buenas tardes Franco No sé si te llegó alguna consulta al respecto
pero del torneo de ayer 4vs4 tier VII se acreditó el premio en oro
pero no hubo noticias de los bonos correspondientes para cada
jugador, tenés idea qué pasó?
sector7ge, on Nov 21 2018 - 16:25, said: La mitad del premio (oro) se pagó en tiempo y forma. Los bonos se
van a acreditar en una o dos semanas... para qué cambian el premio
si van a tener problemas con los pagos??? Como siempre hay que
llevar la lista con lo que adeuda WG, porque si uno no se acuerda
de reclamar pasa de largo.
agtdetructor, on Nov 21 2018 - 16:22, said: que paso ? porque se cerraron las inscripciones del 1 vs 1 ?
Link on message: #11883271
sector7ge, on Nov 21 2018 - 13:52, said: Buenas tardes Franco No sé si te llegó alguna consulta al respecto
pero del torneo de ayer 4vs4 tier VII se acreditó el premio en oro
pero no hubo noticias de los bonos correspondientes para cada
jugador, tenés idea qué pasó?Felipe6666Original: En todas las descripciones de los torneos que incluyen bonos
como premio se aclara que, por ser la acreditación manual, se puede
demorar hasta una semana en entregarlos.
sector7ge, on Nov 21 2018 - 16:25, said: La mitad del premio (oro) se pagó en tiempo y forma. Los bonos se
van a acreditar en una o dos semanas... para qué cambian el premio
si van a tener problemas con los pagos??? Como siempre hay que
llevar la lista con lo que adeuda WG, porque si uno no se acuerda
de reclamar pasa de largo.Felipe6666Original: Para el primer torneo que paga bonos tuvimos 1.388
participantes. Teniendo en cuenta que se hizo un martes (día en el
que a varias personas se le complica jugar, por eso la mayoría de
los torneos se hacen los fines de semana), es una cifra más que
decente. Los jugadores y su participación convalidan lo que
hacemos, veremos cuál es la participación en el resto de los
torneos.
agtdetructor, on Nov 21 2018 - 16:22, said: que paso ? porque se cerraron las inscripciones del 1 vs 1 ?Felipe6666Original: Se alcanzó el límite máximo de inscriptos posibles, los
datos que figuran inmediatamente luego del texto descriptivo lo
indica. ¡Saludos!
CabbageMechanic
If you aren't sold on the LT-432...
21.11.2018 21:51:10
Subject: If you aren't sold on the LT-432...
Link on message: #11883052
InfinityShadow, on Nov 21 2018 - 11:40, said: hey! you don't get to tell me not to pay him back, it's
personal!!
Link on message: #11883052
InfinityShadow, on Nov 21 2018 - 11:40, said: hey! you don't get to tell me not to pay him back, it's
personal!!CabbageMechanic: Fair enough, just don't get him a Defender ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Jambijon
4v4 Tier 7 Midweeek Brawl Bonds not paid out
21.11.2018 21:48:00
Subject: 4v4 Tier 7 Midweeek Brawl Bonds not paid out
Link on message: #11883049
Link on message: #11883049
Jambijon: Unfortunately we couldn't include the bonds on our automation so
we'll have to credit them manually. It shouldn't take more
than a week to get those credited out. I included it on the
rules and the tournament description.
BigDaddyLaxative
4v4 Tier 7 Midweeek Brawl Bonds not paid out
21.11.2018 21:48:00
Subject: 4v4 Tier 7 Midweeek Brawl Bonds not paid out
Link on message: #11883049
Link on message: #11883049
BigDaddyLaxative: Unfortunately we couldn't include the bonds on our automation so
we'll have to credit them manually. It shouldn't take more
than a week to get those credited out. I included it on the
rules and the tournament description.
Hambijon
4v4 Tier 7 Midweeek Brawl Bonds not paid out
21.11.2018 21:48:00
Subject: 4v4 Tier 7 Midweeek Brawl Bonds not paid out
Link on message: #11883049
Link on message: #11883049
Hambijon: Unfortunately we couldn't include the bonds on our automation so
we'll have to credit them manually. It shouldn't take more
than a week to get those credited out. I included it on the
rules and the tournament description.
CabbageMechanic
If you aren't sold on the LT-432...
21.11.2018 21:37:34
Subject: If you aren't sold on the LT-432...
Link on message: #11883038
Rush_91, on Nov 20 2018 - 20:20, said: Well sir enjoy your new LT-432. Hopefully it sent it to you and I
didn't type your name wrong lol.
Awestryker, on Nov 21 2018 - 04:27, said: WG must of done something pretty shady to lose Amazon... I
can use card, but I get a fraud alert call from my bank every time
and it has in the past cause my card to be canceled, which is a
pain... Not sure why WG chooses to use questionable banks or banks
in questionable locations...
Link on message: #11883038
Rush_91, on Nov 20 2018 - 20:20, said: Well sir enjoy your new LT-432. Hopefully it sent it to you and I
didn't type your name wrong lol.CabbageMechanic: That is an incredibly generous thing to do and it didn't
escape our notice. Don't worry about paying him back - we'll cover
it.
Awestryker, on Nov 21 2018 - 04:27, said: WG must of done something pretty shady to lose Amazon... I
can use card, but I get a fraud alert call from my bank every time
and it has in the past cause my card to be canceled, which is a
pain... Not sure why WG chooses to use questionable banks or banks
in questionable locations... CabbageMechanic: The current situation we're dealing with has nothing to do
with a relationship between WG and Amazon, it's an issue involving
an Amazon Pay partner that is affecting all vendors that used their
services.
Jambijon
Tournament Feedback or How I Learned To Stopped Worrying And Love The Purple...
21.11.2018 20:57:43
Subject: Tournament Feedback or How I Learned To Stopped Worrying And Love The Purple...
Link on message: #11882997
BlazeZero, on Nov 20 2018 - 22:09, said: Some Feedback because Jambijon apparently can't read an entire
thread to get to the good stuff. Alright dude you wanted this you
got it. My observations after the OP are going to be italicized.
Rulesets: Draws must count as a loss for both teams. This
was a problem for a long time even in old tournaments and is the
reason attack/defense exists at all. Fix this permanently. We
only use this in our single elim tournaments that are almost always
for a new premium tank. Are you referring to a round robin
format (tie in points)? We were going to try it but it made
the tournaments take much, much longer. Breaks between battles
should last no longer than 2 minutes. 3 minutes is just too much. 3
minutes is kind of a sweet spot for our server. When our
tournament system is processing upwards to around 1k matches at the
same time, its best to give it and other players connection speeds
a big enough window to get ready for the next battle. When we
initially started tournaments back up, we lowered it to 2
minutes which doesn't seem like a big change, but it caused a
couple tournaments to crash and not progress after the first couple
matches. Multi day tournaments and large scale challenges. Yes,
they are coming. Double elimination brackets for multi day
tournaments and challenges. Yes, they are coming. Prizes:
Get rid of this [edited]battle share system. No, this is gives the
player who participated in more battles a better Gold cut. Clearly
state exactly what each player stands to receive in rewards. They
are, unless you are only referring to Gold Gold prizing should
always be better than the cost of retraining 1-2 crews for say top
50% of prize earning teams. This is an odd request, though we have
had tournaments that award upwards to 6k+ Gold per person. If
a tournament is going to cost you more than the prize is worth to
you, then I recommend not playing in it, unless you're just doing
it for fun. We are offering up a variety of prizing. A
gold only prize is still going to be available, but I want to give
other players a chance to restock on booster, consumables, bonds,
tanks, equipment, etc. if they want to. If not, I'd
wait for a tournament prize that works best for you. Standardized
gold rewards per tournament i.e. 5 battle group stage type
tournament equals 5k gold for first place, 4k for second, and
so on. They are other factors when determining how much gold can go
into a tournament so this standardization won't be feasible
unfortunately. Prize saturation. You need to have rewards going
down quite a ways beyond the top 4. See this example on how to do
this properly: https://worldoftanks...nts/1000000101/
Though a caveat I would put out is lessen the playoffs prize and
increase the group stage prize. In 2014 and 2015 we had 50% of the
prizes were given out in the group stage and 50% for the playoffs.
This is what brought people out of the woodwork and kept them
coming back every week. The example is for a week long
tournament. Our group stages award at least around top
60%. So a group of 6 will generally have 4, sometimes 5
places for prizing. Do not let the top 3 rewards be vastly superior
to everything below it. Don't understand the logic of this
one. Yes, the awards get a lot better the higher you get.
Enough with this idea that tournaments are there to help people
grind. They should inherently be an egalitarian, competitive
environment where player skill is king. If you can win you will, if
you can't you won't. Now I have no problem whatsoever with
there being split brackets like the old alpha and beta or the
current mastery and challenger. This is perfectly fine and should
be kept. But keep the prizes commensurate with the level of
competition. This came up in the other thread a couple of
times. If you want a more competitive play, participate in
the Mastery bracket. If you don't like the prizes, or don't
need them, or feel they aren't worth you retraining or reequipping
a tank then again, I'd recommend not playing in them. This might be
reaching a bit but give rewards dispersal to the team captains. If
we have someone who didn't show or was toxic to our team let us
deal with it. Allow for a reporting system to lock out team
captains who abuse this functionality. Players themselves will self
regulate this but allow the tournament administrators to lock an
abuser from creating teams in the future. I don't agree with this
at all. Seems more like a CW request. 1k gold for a 4v4 in
tier 7 on el halluf was a slap in the face to everyone that had to
slog through it. This was our introductory tournament with
Bonds. 750 were awarded to each player on top of the 1k gold
prizing. Again, these are voluntary. Team
Sizes: Enough with the 4v4 and under tournaments. Especially with
these giant [edited]maps that you're playing us on. It's FAR too
easy to run 1 tank away and draw it out because you don't have
enough people to run down a tank. Plus the highest player
engagement in the old tournaments was at about the 7v7 format.
It's enough people for almost every map in the game and allows for
lots of creative strategies to be made as well as more interesting
battles. Yes I know small tournaments can be interesting and fun
but not every tournament for a whole weekend. Generally, for
lower "XvX" tournaments, Encounter is used so players are forced
into a close quarters clash. 7v7's still happen. The
lower "XvXs" aren't going anywhere. Sometimes players don't
have the availability to fill a 7v7. Reserves should equal 50% of
the fielded team rounded up in every tournament. This is video
games, not a professional sport. We have work and lives
outside of the game(well some of us do) and are all subject to our
ISPs BS for our internet. As stated above do not punish reservists
for being there. They make the same time commitment as everyone who
actually plays and deserve the same rewards. You are correct, this
is just video games and the tournaments usually only last around an
hour. Unfortunately, even if we added more reserves they
would only get paid based on the battles they played.
Maps: For the love of all that is good and holy in this world
PLEASE make map selection tied to team size. 3v3 on anything bigger
than ensk is terrible for both the teams and the maps. Its a valid
point. Like our recent Abbey tournament.. We only have
a small limit on how much we can test a tournament map format for
its viability OMG DO NOT USE ERLENBERG FOR TOURNAMENT MAPS! IT'S
GOD AWEFUL AS IT IS IN PUBS. First time I've heard a negative thing
about Erlenberg haha. A lot of this comes down to personal opinion,
but we do listen to feedback. We ran tournaments on Paris,
which is a map only a few enjoy in pubs, but it wasn't as bad since
it wasn't 15v15. Preferred competitive tiers: Preferred
tiers for competitive play are odd tiers, 1 3 5 7 9, as they have
among best inter tier balancing, tier 8 is to be avoided at all
costs, it is a cesspit of balance. Tier 9 is actually the most
balanced and competitive tier in the game and should be used for
every "High end" tournament. All tournaments are competitive, and
we won't be removing tiers out of the pool. If all tiers are to be
played then ban the usage of ALL premium tanks as their
use(whether OP or not) is inherently uncompetitive. That's a
no from me dawg. Automated system: Registration end and
seeding should take place more than 24-48 hours before the start
time of a tournament to allow for any mistakes to be found and
corrected. Thats not how our automation works, and giving the
players as much time to register is a positive. There is
plenty of time to contact support for any changes a team wants to
make. Emails should be sent to all players upon payout
of rewards detailing their rewards so that we may keep track of
them. I think the in game notification is enough for now. If
there are disputes, we can provide details for you if you contact
support. I will be editing this OP throughout the week as
new gripes are found. I'll mark edits clearly and will post
replies in this thread when it is updated. Thanks for all
the feedback! This format is a lot better than the 8 pages of
debating/insults on a post titled "TY Wargaming"
haha!
Link on message: #11882997
BlazeZero, on Nov 20 2018 - 22:09, said: Some Feedback because Jambijon apparently can't read an entire
thread to get to the good stuff. Alright dude you wanted this you
got it. My observations after the OP are going to be italicized.
Rulesets: Draws must count as a loss for both teams. This
was a problem for a long time even in old tournaments and is the
reason attack/defense exists at all. Fix this permanently. We
only use this in our single elim tournaments that are almost always
for a new premium tank. Are you referring to a round robin
format (tie in points)? We were going to try it but it made
the tournaments take much, much longer. Breaks between battles
should last no longer than 2 minutes. 3 minutes is just too much. 3
minutes is kind of a sweet spot for our server. When our
tournament system is processing upwards to around 1k matches at the
same time, its best to give it and other players connection speeds
a big enough window to get ready for the next battle. When we
initially started tournaments back up, we lowered it to 2
minutes which doesn't seem like a big change, but it caused a
couple tournaments to crash and not progress after the first couple
matches. Multi day tournaments and large scale challenges. Yes,
they are coming. Double elimination brackets for multi day
tournaments and challenges. Yes, they are coming. Prizes:
Get rid of this [edited]battle share system. No, this is gives the
player who participated in more battles a better Gold cut. Clearly
state exactly what each player stands to receive in rewards. They
are, unless you are only referring to Gold Gold prizing should
always be better than the cost of retraining 1-2 crews for say top
50% of prize earning teams. This is an odd request, though we have
had tournaments that award upwards to 6k+ Gold per person. If
a tournament is going to cost you more than the prize is worth to
you, then I recommend not playing in it, unless you're just doing
it for fun. We are offering up a variety of prizing. A
gold only prize is still going to be available, but I want to give
other players a chance to restock on booster, consumables, bonds,
tanks, equipment, etc. if they want to. If not, I'd
wait for a tournament prize that works best for you. Standardized
gold rewards per tournament i.e. 5 battle group stage type
tournament equals 5k gold for first place, 4k for second, and
so on. They are other factors when determining how much gold can go
into a tournament so this standardization won't be feasible
unfortunately. Prize saturation. You need to have rewards going
down quite a ways beyond the top 4. See this example on how to do
this properly: https://worldoftanks...nts/1000000101/
Though a caveat I would put out is lessen the playoffs prize and
increase the group stage prize. In 2014 and 2015 we had 50% of the
prizes were given out in the group stage and 50% for the playoffs.
This is what brought people out of the woodwork and kept them
coming back every week. The example is for a week long
tournament. Our group stages award at least around top
60%. So a group of 6 will generally have 4, sometimes 5
places for prizing. Do not let the top 3 rewards be vastly superior
to everything below it. Don't understand the logic of this
one. Yes, the awards get a lot better the higher you get.
Enough with this idea that tournaments are there to help people
grind. They should inherently be an egalitarian, competitive
environment where player skill is king. If you can win you will, if
you can't you won't. Now I have no problem whatsoever with
there being split brackets like the old alpha and beta or the
current mastery and challenger. This is perfectly fine and should
be kept. But keep the prizes commensurate with the level of
competition. This came up in the other thread a couple of
times. If you want a more competitive play, participate in
the Mastery bracket. If you don't like the prizes, or don't
need them, or feel they aren't worth you retraining or reequipping
a tank then again, I'd recommend not playing in them. This might be
reaching a bit but give rewards dispersal to the team captains. If
we have someone who didn't show or was toxic to our team let us
deal with it. Allow for a reporting system to lock out team
captains who abuse this functionality. Players themselves will self
regulate this but allow the tournament administrators to lock an
abuser from creating teams in the future. I don't agree with this
at all. Seems more like a CW request. 1k gold for a 4v4 in
tier 7 on el halluf was a slap in the face to everyone that had to
slog through it. This was our introductory tournament with
Bonds. 750 were awarded to each player on top of the 1k gold
prizing. Again, these are voluntary. Team
Sizes: Enough with the 4v4 and under tournaments. Especially with
these giant [edited]maps that you're playing us on. It's FAR too
easy to run 1 tank away and draw it out because you don't have
enough people to run down a tank. Plus the highest player
engagement in the old tournaments was at about the 7v7 format.
It's enough people for almost every map in the game and allows for
lots of creative strategies to be made as well as more interesting
battles. Yes I know small tournaments can be interesting and fun
but not every tournament for a whole weekend. Generally, for
lower "XvX" tournaments, Encounter is used so players are forced
into a close quarters clash. 7v7's still happen. The
lower "XvXs" aren't going anywhere. Sometimes players don't
have the availability to fill a 7v7. Reserves should equal 50% of
the fielded team rounded up in every tournament. This is video
games, not a professional sport. We have work and lives
outside of the game(well some of us do) and are all subject to our
ISPs BS for our internet. As stated above do not punish reservists
for being there. They make the same time commitment as everyone who
actually plays and deserve the same rewards. You are correct, this
is just video games and the tournaments usually only last around an
hour. Unfortunately, even if we added more reserves they
would only get paid based on the battles they played.
Maps: For the love of all that is good and holy in this world
PLEASE make map selection tied to team size. 3v3 on anything bigger
than ensk is terrible for both the teams and the maps. Its a valid
point. Like our recent Abbey tournament.. We only have
a small limit on how much we can test a tournament map format for
its viability OMG DO NOT USE ERLENBERG FOR TOURNAMENT MAPS! IT'S
GOD AWEFUL AS IT IS IN PUBS. First time I've heard a negative thing
about Erlenberg haha. A lot of this comes down to personal opinion,
but we do listen to feedback. We ran tournaments on Paris,
which is a map only a few enjoy in pubs, but it wasn't as bad since
it wasn't 15v15. Preferred competitive tiers: Preferred
tiers for competitive play are odd tiers, 1 3 5 7 9, as they have
among best inter tier balancing, tier 8 is to be avoided at all
costs, it is a cesspit of balance. Tier 9 is actually the most
balanced and competitive tier in the game and should be used for
every "High end" tournament. All tournaments are competitive, and
we won't be removing tiers out of the pool. If all tiers are to be
played then ban the usage of ALL premium tanks as their
use(whether OP or not) is inherently uncompetitive. That's a
no from me dawg. Automated system: Registration end and
seeding should take place more than 24-48 hours before the start
time of a tournament to allow for any mistakes to be found and
corrected. Thats not how our automation works, and giving the
players as much time to register is a positive. There is
plenty of time to contact support for any changes a team wants to
make. Emails should be sent to all players upon payout
of rewards detailing their rewards so that we may keep track of
them. I think the in game notification is enough for now. If
there are disputes, we can provide details for you if you contact
support. I will be editing this OP throughout the week as
new gripes are found. I'll mark edits clearly and will post
replies in this thread when it is updated. Thanks for all
the feedback! This format is a lot better than the 8 pages of
debating/insults on a post titled "TY Wargaming"
haha! Jambijon: I've highlighted my answers/feedback in Red.
BigDaddyLaxative
Tournament Feedback or How I Learned To Stopped Worrying And Love The Purple...
21.11.2018 20:57:43
Subject: Tournament Feedback or How I Learned To Stopped Worrying And Love The Purple...
Link on message: #11882997
BlazeZero, on Nov 20 2018 - 22:09, said: Some Feedback because Jambijon apparently can't read an entire
thread to get to the good stuff. Alright dude you wanted this you
got it. My observations after the OP are going to be italicized.
Rulesets: Draws must count as a loss for both teams. This
was a problem for a long time even in old tournaments and is the
reason attack/defense exists at all. Fix this permanently. We
only use this in our single elim tournaments that are almost always
for a new premium tank. Are you referring to a round robin
format (tie in points)? We were going to try it but it made
the tournaments take much, much longer. Breaks between battles
should last no longer than 2 minutes. 3 minutes is just too much. 3
minutes is kind of a sweet spot for our server. When our
tournament system is processing upwards to around 1k matches at the
same time, its best to give it and other players connection speeds
a big enough window to get ready for the next battle. When we
initially started tournaments back up, we lowered it to 2
minutes which doesn't seem like a big change, but it caused a
couple tournaments to crash and not progress after the first couple
matches. Multi day tournaments and large scale challenges. Yes,
they are coming. Double elimination brackets for multi day
tournaments and challenges. Yes, they are coming. Prizes:
Get rid of this [edited]battle share system. No, this is gives the
player who participated in more battles a better Gold cut. Clearly
state exactly what each player stands to receive in rewards. They
are, unless you are only referring to Gold Gold prizing should
always be better than the cost of retraining 1-2 crews for say top
50% of prize earning teams. This is an odd request, though we have
had tournaments that award upwards to 6k+ Gold per person. If
a tournament is going to cost you more than the prize is worth to
you, then I recommend not playing in it, unless you're just doing
it for fun. We are offering up a variety of prizing. A
gold only prize is still going to be available, but I want to give
other players a chance to restock on booster, consumables, bonds,
tanks, equipment, etc. if they want to. If not, I'd
wait for a tournament prize that works best for you. Standardized
gold rewards per tournament i.e. 5 battle group stage type
tournament equals 5k gold for first place, 4k for second, and
so on. They are other factors when determining how much gold can go
into a tournament so this standardization won't be feasible
unfortunately. Prize saturation. You need to have rewards going
down quite a ways beyond the top 4. See this example on how to do
this properly: https://worldoftanks...nts/1000000101/ Though a
caveat I would put out is lessen the playoffs prize and increase
the group stage prize. In 2014 and 2015 we had 50% of the prizes
were given out in the group stage and 50% for the playoffs. This is
what brought people out of the woodwork and kept them coming back
every week. The example is for a week long tournament. Our
group stages award at least around top 60%. So a group of 6
will generally have 4, sometimes 5 places for prizing. Do not let
the top 3 rewards be vastly superior to everything below it. Don't
understand the logic of this one. Yes, the awards get a lot
better the higher you get. Enough with this idea that tournaments
are there to help people grind. They should inherently be an
egalitarian, competitive environment where player skill is king. If
you can win you will, if you can't you won't. Now I have no
problem whatsoever with there being split brackets like the old
alpha and beta or the current mastery and challenger. This is
perfectly fine and should be kept. But keep the prizes commensurate
with the level of competition. This came up in the other thread a
couple of times. If you want a more competitive play,
participate in the Mastery bracket. If you don't like the
prizes, or don't need them, or feel they aren't worth you
retraining or reequipping a tank then again, I'd recommend not
playing in them. This might be reaching a bit but give rewards
dispersal to the team captains. If we have someone who didn't show
or was toxic to our team let us deal with it. Allow for a reporting
system to lock out team captains who abuse this functionality.
Players themselves will self regulate this but allow the tournament
administrators to lock an abuser from creating teams in the future.
I don't agree with this at all. Seems more like a CW request.
1k gold for a 4v4 in tier 7 on el halluf was a slap in the face to
everyone that had to slog through it. This was our introductory
tournament with Bonds. 750 were awarded to each player on top
of the 1k gold prizing. Again, these are
voluntary. Team Sizes: Enough with the 4v4 and
under tournaments. Especially with these giant [edited]maps that
you're playing us on. It's FAR too easy to run 1 tank away and draw
it out because you don't have enough people to run down a tank.
Plus the highest player engagement in the old tournaments was
at about the 7v7 format. It's enough people for almost every map in
the game and allows for lots of creative strategies to be made as
well as more interesting battles. Yes I know small tournaments can
be interesting and fun but not every tournament for a whole
weekend. Generally, for lower "XvX" tournaments, Encounter is
used so players are forced into a close quarters clash. 7v7's
still happen. The lower "XvXs" aren't going anywhere.
Sometimes players don't have the availability to fill a 7v7.
Reserves should equal 50% of the fielded team rounded up in every
tournament. This is video games, not a professional sport. We have
work and lives outside of the game(well some of us do) and are
all subject to our ISPs BS for our internet. As stated above do not
punish reservists for being there. They make the same time
commitment as everyone who actually plays and deserve the same
rewards. You are correct, this is just video games and the
tournaments usually only last around an hour. Unfortunately,
even if we added more reserves they would only get paid based on
the battles they played. Maps: For the love of all
that is good and holy in this world PLEASE make map selection tied
to team size. 3v3 on anything bigger than ensk is terrible for both
the teams and the maps. Its a valid point. Like our recent
Abbey tournament.. We only have a small limit on how much we
can test a tournament map format for its viability OMG DO NOT USE
ERLENBERG FOR TOURNAMENT MAPS! IT'S GOD AWEFUL AS IT IS IN PUBS.
First time I've heard a negative thing about Erlenberg haha. A lot
of this comes down to personal opinion, but we do listen to
feedback. We ran tournaments on Paris, which is a map only a
few enjoy in pubs, but it wasn't as bad since it wasn't 15v15.
Preferred competitive tiers: Preferred tiers for competitive
play are odd tiers, 1 3 5 7 9, as they have among best inter tier
balancing, tier 8 is to be avoided at all costs, it is a cesspit of
balance. Tier 9 is actually the most balanced and competitive tier
in the game and should be used for every "High end" tournament.
All tournaments are competitive, and we won't be removing tiers
out of the pool. If all tiers are to be played then ban the usage
of ALL premium tanks as their use(whether OP or not) is
inherently uncompetitive. That's a no from me dawg.
Automated system: Registration end and seeding should take
place more than 24-48 hours before the start time of a tournament
to allow for any mistakes to be found and corrected. Thats not how
our automation works, and giving the players as much time to
register is a positive. There is plenty of time to contact
support for any changes a team wants to make. Emails
should be sent to all players upon payout of rewards detailing
their rewards so that we may keep track of them. I think the in
game notification is enough for now. If there are disputes,
we can provide details for you if you contact support. I
will be editing this OP throughout the week as new gripes are
found. I'll mark edits clearly and will post replies in this
thread when it is updated. Thanks for all the
feedback! This format is a lot better than the 8 pages of
debating/insults on a post titled "TY Wargaming"
haha!
Link on message: #11882997
BlazeZero, on Nov 20 2018 - 22:09, said: Some Feedback because Jambijon apparently can't read an entire
thread to get to the good stuff. Alright dude you wanted this you
got it. My observations after the OP are going to be italicized.
Rulesets: Draws must count as a loss for both teams. This
was a problem for a long time even in old tournaments and is the
reason attack/defense exists at all. Fix this permanently. We
only use this in our single elim tournaments that are almost always
for a new premium tank. Are you referring to a round robin
format (tie in points)? We were going to try it but it made
the tournaments take much, much longer. Breaks between battles
should last no longer than 2 minutes. 3 minutes is just too much. 3
minutes is kind of a sweet spot for our server. When our
tournament system is processing upwards to around 1k matches at the
same time, its best to give it and other players connection speeds
a big enough window to get ready for the next battle. When we
initially started tournaments back up, we lowered it to 2
minutes which doesn't seem like a big change, but it caused a
couple tournaments to crash and not progress after the first couple
matches. Multi day tournaments and large scale challenges. Yes,
they are coming. Double elimination brackets for multi day
tournaments and challenges. Yes, they are coming. Prizes:
Get rid of this [edited]battle share system. No, this is gives the
player who participated in more battles a better Gold cut. Clearly
state exactly what each player stands to receive in rewards. They
are, unless you are only referring to Gold Gold prizing should
always be better than the cost of retraining 1-2 crews for say top
50% of prize earning teams. This is an odd request, though we have
had tournaments that award upwards to 6k+ Gold per person. If
a tournament is going to cost you more than the prize is worth to
you, then I recommend not playing in it, unless you're just doing
it for fun. We are offering up a variety of prizing. A
gold only prize is still going to be available, but I want to give
other players a chance to restock on booster, consumables, bonds,
tanks, equipment, etc. if they want to. If not, I'd
wait for a tournament prize that works best for you. Standardized
gold rewards per tournament i.e. 5 battle group stage type
tournament equals 5k gold for first place, 4k for second, and
so on. They are other factors when determining how much gold can go
into a tournament so this standardization won't be feasible
unfortunately. Prize saturation. You need to have rewards going
down quite a ways beyond the top 4. See this example on how to do
this properly: https://worldoftanks...nts/1000000101/ Though a
caveat I would put out is lessen the playoffs prize and increase
the group stage prize. In 2014 and 2015 we had 50% of the prizes
were given out in the group stage and 50% for the playoffs. This is
what brought people out of the woodwork and kept them coming back
every week. The example is for a week long tournament. Our
group stages award at least around top 60%. So a group of 6
will generally have 4, sometimes 5 places for prizing. Do not let
the top 3 rewards be vastly superior to everything below it. Don't
understand the logic of this one. Yes, the awards get a lot
better the higher you get. Enough with this idea that tournaments
are there to help people grind. They should inherently be an
egalitarian, competitive environment where player skill is king. If
you can win you will, if you can't you won't. Now I have no
problem whatsoever with there being split brackets like the old
alpha and beta or the current mastery and challenger. This is
perfectly fine and should be kept. But keep the prizes commensurate
with the level of competition. This came up in the other thread a
couple of times. If you want a more competitive play,
participate in the Mastery bracket. If you don't like the
prizes, or don't need them, or feel they aren't worth you
retraining or reequipping a tank then again, I'd recommend not
playing in them. This might be reaching a bit but give rewards
dispersal to the team captains. If we have someone who didn't show
or was toxic to our team let us deal with it. Allow for a reporting
system to lock out team captains who abuse this functionality.
Players themselves will self regulate this but allow the tournament
administrators to lock an abuser from creating teams in the future.
I don't agree with this at all. Seems more like a CW request.
1k gold for a 4v4 in tier 7 on el halluf was a slap in the face to
everyone that had to slog through it. This was our introductory
tournament with Bonds. 750 were awarded to each player on top
of the 1k gold prizing. Again, these are
voluntary. Team Sizes: Enough with the 4v4 and
under tournaments. Especially with these giant [edited]maps that
you're playing us on. It's FAR too easy to run 1 tank away and draw
it out because you don't have enough people to run down a tank.
Plus the highest player engagement in the old tournaments was
at about the 7v7 format. It's enough people for almost every map in
the game and allows for lots of creative strategies to be made as
well as more interesting battles. Yes I know small tournaments can
be interesting and fun but not every tournament for a whole
weekend. Generally, for lower "XvX" tournaments, Encounter is
used so players are forced into a close quarters clash. 7v7's
still happen. The lower "XvXs" aren't going anywhere.
Sometimes players don't have the availability to fill a 7v7.
Reserves should equal 50% of the fielded team rounded up in every
tournament. This is video games, not a professional sport. We have
work and lives outside of the game(well some of us do) and are
all subject to our ISPs BS for our internet. As stated above do not
punish reservists for being there. They make the same time
commitment as everyone who actually plays and deserve the same
rewards. You are correct, this is just video games and the
tournaments usually only last around an hour. Unfortunately,
even if we added more reserves they would only get paid based on
the battles they played. Maps: For the love of all
that is good and holy in this world PLEASE make map selection tied
to team size. 3v3 on anything bigger than ensk is terrible for both
the teams and the maps. Its a valid point. Like our recent
Abbey tournament.. We only have a small limit on how much we
can test a tournament map format for its viability OMG DO NOT USE
ERLENBERG FOR TOURNAMENT MAPS! IT'S GOD AWEFUL AS IT IS IN PUBS.
First time I've heard a negative thing about Erlenberg haha. A lot
of this comes down to personal opinion, but we do listen to
feedback. We ran tournaments on Paris, which is a map only a
few enjoy in pubs, but it wasn't as bad since it wasn't 15v15.
Preferred competitive tiers: Preferred tiers for competitive
play are odd tiers, 1 3 5 7 9, as they have among best inter tier
balancing, tier 8 is to be avoided at all costs, it is a cesspit of
balance. Tier 9 is actually the most balanced and competitive tier
in the game and should be used for every "High end" tournament.
All tournaments are competitive, and we won't be removing tiers
out of the pool. If all tiers are to be played then ban the usage
of ALL premium tanks as their use(whether OP or not) is
inherently uncompetitive. That's a no from me dawg.
Automated system: Registration end and seeding should take
place more than 24-48 hours before the start time of a tournament
to allow for any mistakes to be found and corrected. Thats not how
our automation works, and giving the players as much time to
register is a positive. There is plenty of time to contact
support for any changes a team wants to make. Emails
should be sent to all players upon payout of rewards detailing
their rewards so that we may keep track of them. I think the in
game notification is enough for now. If there are disputes,
we can provide details for you if you contact support. I
will be editing this OP throughout the week as new gripes are
found. I'll mark edits clearly and will post replies in this
thread when it is updated. Thanks for all the
feedback! This format is a lot better than the 8 pages of
debating/insults on a post titled "TY Wargaming"
haha! BigDaddyLaxative: I've highlighted my answers/feedback in Red.
Hambijon
Tournament Feedback or How I Learned To Stopped Worrying And Love The Purple...
21.11.2018 20:57:43
Subject: Tournament Feedback or How I Learned To Stopped Worrying And Love The Purple...
Link on message: #11882997
BlazeZero, on Nov 20 2018 - 22:09, said: Some Feedback because Jambijon apparently can't read an entire
thread to get to the good stuff. Alright dude you wanted this you
got it. My observations after the OP are going to be italicized.
Rulesets: Draws must count as a loss for both teams. This
was a problem for a long time even in old tournaments and is the
reason attack/defense exists at all. Fix this permanently. We
only use this in our single elim tournaments that are almost always
for a new premium tank. Are you referring to a round robin
format (tie in points)? We were going to try it but it made
the tournaments take much, much longer. Breaks between battles
should last no longer than 2 minutes. 3 minutes is just too much. 3
minutes is kind of a sweet spot for our server. When our
tournament system is processing upwards to around 1k matches at the
same time, its best to give it and other players connection speeds
a big enough window to get ready for the next battle. When we
initially started tournaments back up, we lowered it to 2
minutes which doesn't seem like a big change, but it caused a
couple tournaments to crash and not progress after the first couple
matches. Multi day tournaments and large scale challenges. Yes,
they are coming. Double elimination brackets for multi day
tournaments and challenges. Yes, they are coming. Prizes:
Get rid of this [edited]battle share system. No, this is gives the
player who participated in more battles a better Gold cut. Clearly
state exactly what each player stands to receive in rewards. They
are, unless you are only referring to Gold Gold prizing should
always be better than the cost of retraining 1-2 crews for say top
50% of prize earning teams. This is an odd request, though we have
had tournaments that award upwards to 6k+ Gold per person. If
a tournament is going to cost you more than the prize is worth to
you, then I recommend not playing in it, unless you're just doing
it for fun. We are offering up a variety of prizing. A
gold only prize is still going to be available, but I want to give
other players a chance to restock on booster, consumables, bonds,
tanks, equipment, etc. if they want to. If not, I'd
wait for a tournament prize that works best for you. Standardized
gold rewards per tournament i.e. 5 battle group stage type
tournament equals 5k gold for first place, 4k for second, and
so on. They are other factors when determining how much gold can go
into a tournament so this standardization won't be feasible
unfortunately. Prize saturation. You need to have rewards going
down quite a ways beyond the top 4. See this example on how to do
this properly: https://worldoftanks...nts/1000000101/ Though a
caveat I would put out is lessen the playoffs prize and increase
the group stage prize. In 2014 and 2015 we had 50% of the prizes
were given out in the group stage and 50% for the playoffs. This is
what brought people out of the woodwork and kept them coming back
every week. The example is for a week long tournament. Our
group stages award at least around top 60%. So a group of 6
will generally have 4, sometimes 5 places for prizing. Do not let
the top 3 rewards be vastly superior to everything below it. Don't
understand the logic of this one. Yes, the awards get a lot
better the higher you get. Enough with this idea that tournaments
are there to help people grind. They should inherently be an
egalitarian, competitive environment where player skill is king. If
you can win you will, if you can't you won't. Now I have no
problem whatsoever with there being split brackets like the old
alpha and beta or the current mastery and challenger. This is
perfectly fine and should be kept. But keep the prizes commensurate
with the level of competition. This came up in the other thread a
couple of times. If you want a more competitive play,
participate in the Mastery bracket. If you don't like the
prizes, or don't need them, or feel they aren't worth you
retraining or reequipping a tank then again, I'd recommend not
playing in them. This might be reaching a bit but give rewards
dispersal to the team captains. If we have someone who didn't show
or was toxic to our team let us deal with it. Allow for a reporting
system to lock out team captains who abuse this functionality.
Players themselves will self regulate this but allow the tournament
administrators to lock an abuser from creating teams in the future.
I don't agree with this at all. Seems more like a CW request.
1k gold for a 4v4 in tier 7 on el halluf was a slap in the face to
everyone that had to slog through it. This was our introductory
tournament with Bonds. 750 were awarded to each player on top
of the 1k gold prizing. Again, these are
voluntary. Team Sizes: Enough with the 4v4 and
under tournaments. Especially with these giant [edited]maps that
you're playing us on. It's FAR too easy to run 1 tank away and draw
it out because you don't have enough people to run down a tank.
Plus the highest player engagement in the old tournaments was
at about the 7v7 format. It's enough people for almost every map in
the game and allows for lots of creative strategies to be made as
well as more interesting battles. Yes I know small tournaments can
be interesting and fun but not every tournament for a whole
weekend. Generally, for lower "XvX" tournaments, Encounter is
used so players are forced into a close quarters clash. 7v7's
still happen. The lower "XvXs" aren't going anywhere.
Sometimes players don't have the availability to fill a 7v7.
Reserves should equal 50% of the fielded team rounded up in every
tournament. This is video games, not a professional sport. We have
work and lives outside of the game(well some of us do) and are
all subject to our ISPs BS for our internet. As stated above do not
punish reservists for being there. They make the same time
commitment as everyone who actually plays and deserve the same
rewards. You are correct, this is just video games and the
tournaments usually only last around an hour. Unfortunately,
even if we added more reserves they would only get paid based on
the battles they played. Maps: For the love of all
that is good and holy in this world PLEASE make map selection tied
to team size. 3v3 on anything bigger than ensk is terrible for both
the teams and the maps. Its a valid point. Like our recent
Abbey tournament.. We only have a small limit on how much we
can test a tournament map format for its viability OMG DO NOT USE
ERLENBERG FOR TOURNAMENT MAPS! IT'S GOD AWEFUL AS IT IS IN PUBS.
First time I've heard a negative thing about Erlenberg haha. A lot
of this comes down to personal opinion, but we do listen to
feedback. We ran tournaments on Paris, which is a map only a
few enjoy in pubs, but it wasn't as bad since it wasn't 15v15.
Preferred competitive tiers: Preferred tiers for competitive
play are odd tiers, 1 3 5 7 9, as they have among best inter tier
balancing, tier 8 is to be avoided at all costs, it is a cesspit of
balance. Tier 9 is actually the most balanced and competitive tier
in the game and should be used for every "High end" tournament.
All tournaments are competitive, and we won't be removing tiers
out of the pool. If all tiers are to be played then ban the usage
of ALL premium tanks as their use(whether OP or not) is
inherently uncompetitive. That's a no from me dawg.
Automated system: Registration end and seeding should take
place more than 24-48 hours before the start time of a tournament
to allow for any mistakes to be found and corrected. Thats not how
our automation works, and giving the players as much time to
register is a positive. There is plenty of time to contact
support for any changes a team wants to make. Emails
should be sent to all players upon payout of rewards detailing
their rewards so that we may keep track of them. I think the in
game notification is enough for now. If there are disputes,
we can provide details for you if you contact support. I
will be editing this OP throughout the week as new gripes are
found. I'll mark edits clearly and will post replies in this
thread when it is updated. Thanks for all the
feedback! This format is a lot better than the 8 pages of
debating/insults on a post titled "TY Wargaming"
haha!
Link on message: #11882997
BlazeZero, on Nov 20 2018 - 22:09, said: Some Feedback because Jambijon apparently can't read an entire
thread to get to the good stuff. Alright dude you wanted this you
got it. My observations after the OP are going to be italicized.
Rulesets: Draws must count as a loss for both teams. This
was a problem for a long time even in old tournaments and is the
reason attack/defense exists at all. Fix this permanently. We
only use this in our single elim tournaments that are almost always
for a new premium tank. Are you referring to a round robin
format (tie in points)? We were going to try it but it made
the tournaments take much, much longer. Breaks between battles
should last no longer than 2 minutes. 3 minutes is just too much. 3
minutes is kind of a sweet spot for our server. When our
tournament system is processing upwards to around 1k matches at the
same time, its best to give it and other players connection speeds
a big enough window to get ready for the next battle. When we
initially started tournaments back up, we lowered it to 2
minutes which doesn't seem like a big change, but it caused a
couple tournaments to crash and not progress after the first couple
matches. Multi day tournaments and large scale challenges. Yes,
they are coming. Double elimination brackets for multi day
tournaments and challenges. Yes, they are coming. Prizes:
Get rid of this [edited]battle share system. No, this is gives the
player who participated in more battles a better Gold cut. Clearly
state exactly what each player stands to receive in rewards. They
are, unless you are only referring to Gold Gold prizing should
always be better than the cost of retraining 1-2 crews for say top
50% of prize earning teams. This is an odd request, though we have
had tournaments that award upwards to 6k+ Gold per person. If
a tournament is going to cost you more than the prize is worth to
you, then I recommend not playing in it, unless you're just doing
it for fun. We are offering up a variety of prizing. A
gold only prize is still going to be available, but I want to give
other players a chance to restock on booster, consumables, bonds,
tanks, equipment, etc. if they want to. If not, I'd
wait for a tournament prize that works best for you. Standardized
gold rewards per tournament i.e. 5 battle group stage type
tournament equals 5k gold for first place, 4k for second, and
so on. They are other factors when determining how much gold can go
into a tournament so this standardization won't be feasible
unfortunately. Prize saturation. You need to have rewards going
down quite a ways beyond the top 4. See this example on how to do
this properly: https://worldoftanks...nts/1000000101/ Though a
caveat I would put out is lessen the playoffs prize and increase
the group stage prize. In 2014 and 2015 we had 50% of the prizes
were given out in the group stage and 50% for the playoffs. This is
what brought people out of the woodwork and kept them coming back
every week. The example is for a week long tournament. Our
group stages award at least around top 60%. So a group of 6
will generally have 4, sometimes 5 places for prizing. Do not let
the top 3 rewards be vastly superior to everything below it. Don't
understand the logic of this one. Yes, the awards get a lot
better the higher you get. Enough with this idea that tournaments
are there to help people grind. They should inherently be an
egalitarian, competitive environment where player skill is king. If
you can win you will, if you can't you won't. Now I have no
problem whatsoever with there being split brackets like the old
alpha and beta or the current mastery and challenger. This is
perfectly fine and should be kept. But keep the prizes commensurate
with the level of competition. This came up in the other thread a
couple of times. If you want a more competitive play,
participate in the Mastery bracket. If you don't like the
prizes, or don't need them, or feel they aren't worth you
retraining or reequipping a tank then again, I'd recommend not
playing in them. This might be reaching a bit but give rewards
dispersal to the team captains. If we have someone who didn't show
or was toxic to our team let us deal with it. Allow for a reporting
system to lock out team captains who abuse this functionality.
Players themselves will self regulate this but allow the tournament
administrators to lock an abuser from creating teams in the future.
I don't agree with this at all. Seems more like a CW request.
1k gold for a 4v4 in tier 7 on el halluf was a slap in the face to
everyone that had to slog through it. This was our introductory
tournament with Bonds. 750 were awarded to each player on top
of the 1k gold prizing. Again, these are
voluntary. Team Sizes: Enough with the 4v4 and
under tournaments. Especially with these giant [edited]maps that
you're playing us on. It's FAR too easy to run 1 tank away and draw
it out because you don't have enough people to run down a tank.
Plus the highest player engagement in the old tournaments was
at about the 7v7 format. It's enough people for almost every map in
the game and allows for lots of creative strategies to be made as
well as more interesting battles. Yes I know small tournaments can
be interesting and fun but not every tournament for a whole
weekend. Generally, for lower "XvX" tournaments, Encounter is
used so players are forced into a close quarters clash. 7v7's
still happen. The lower "XvXs" aren't going anywhere.
Sometimes players don't have the availability to fill a 7v7.
Reserves should equal 50% of the fielded team rounded up in every
tournament. This is video games, not a professional sport. We have
work and lives outside of the game(well some of us do) and are
all subject to our ISPs BS for our internet. As stated above do not
punish reservists for being there. They make the same time
commitment as everyone who actually plays and deserve the same
rewards. You are correct, this is just video games and the
tournaments usually only last around an hour. Unfortunately,
even if we added more reserves they would only get paid based on
the battles they played. Maps: For the love of all
that is good and holy in this world PLEASE make map selection tied
to team size. 3v3 on anything bigger than ensk is terrible for both
the teams and the maps. Its a valid point. Like our recent
Abbey tournament.. We only have a small limit on how much we
can test a tournament map format for its viability OMG DO NOT USE
ERLENBERG FOR TOURNAMENT MAPS! IT'S GOD AWEFUL AS IT IS IN PUBS.
First time I've heard a negative thing about Erlenberg haha. A lot
of this comes down to personal opinion, but we do listen to
feedback. We ran tournaments on Paris, which is a map only a
few enjoy in pubs, but it wasn't as bad since it wasn't 15v15.
Preferred competitive tiers: Preferred tiers for competitive
play are odd tiers, 1 3 5 7 9, as they have among best inter tier
balancing, tier 8 is to be avoided at all costs, it is a cesspit of
balance. Tier 9 is actually the most balanced and competitive tier
in the game and should be used for every "High end" tournament.
All tournaments are competitive, and we won't be removing tiers
out of the pool. If all tiers are to be played then ban the usage
of ALL premium tanks as their use(whether OP or not) is
inherently uncompetitive. That's a no from me dawg.
Automated system: Registration end and seeding should take
place more than 24-48 hours before the start time of a tournament
to allow for any mistakes to be found and corrected. Thats not how
our automation works, and giving the players as much time to
register is a positive. There is plenty of time to contact
support for any changes a team wants to make. Emails
should be sent to all players upon payout of rewards detailing
their rewards so that we may keep track of them. I think the in
game notification is enough for now. If there are disputes,
we can provide details for you if you contact support. I
will be editing this OP throughout the week as new gripes are
found. I'll mark edits clearly and will post replies in this
thread when it is updated. Thanks for all the
feedback! This format is a lot better than the 8 pages of
debating/insults on a post titled "TY Wargaming"
haha! Hambijon: I've highlighted my answers/feedback in Red.
Jambijon
November Tournaments - 11/17 to 11/30
21.11.2018 19:49:28
Subject: November Tournaments - 11/17 to 11/30
Link on message: #11882899
Link on message: #11882899
Jambijon: The bonds unfortunately have to be credited out manually until we
can get them added into our automation. The bond payout timeline is
up to a week, and its listed in the rules portion for the
tournament.
BigDaddyLaxative
November Tournaments - 11/17 to 11/30
21.11.2018 19:49:28
Subject: November Tournaments - 11/17 to 11/30
Link on message: #11882899
Link on message: #11882899
BigDaddyLaxative: The bonds unfortunately have to be credited out manually until we
can get them added into our automation. The bond payout timeline is
up to a week, and its listed in the rules portion for the
tournament.
Hambijon
November Tournaments - 11/17 to 11/30
21.11.2018 19:49:28
Subject: November Tournaments - 11/17 to 11/30
Link on message: #11882899
Link on message: #11882899
Hambijon: The bonds unfortunately have to be credited out manually until we
can get them added into our automation. The bond payout timeline is
up to a week, and its listed in the rules portion for the
tournament.
The_Chieftain
T110's Transcontinental Transplant
21.11.2018 18:50:19
Subject: T110's Transcontinental Transplant
Link on message: #11882822
RitaGamer, on Nov 13 2018 - 19:56, said: Met Zaloga and James May. Surreal.
Link on message: #11882822
RitaGamer, on Nov 13 2018 - 19:56, said: Met Zaloga and James May. Surreal. The_Chieftain: Out of curiousity, what was going on that had everyone
there? I was tracking Zaloga's visit, but it seems there was more
to it than just that?
Jambijon
November Tournaments - 11/17 to 11/30
21.11.2018 06:22:44
Subject: November Tournaments - 11/17 to 11/30
Link on message: #11882357
Gran_Castigador_del_Mal, on Nov 21 2018 - 00:52, said: Great Jambijon...
You need to check the tournaments missions... no way to complete that.
Link on message: #11882357
Gran_Castigador_del_Mal, on Nov 21 2018 - 00:52, said: Great Jambijon...You need to check the tournaments missions... no way to complete that.
Jambijon: The tournament missions are going through a rework to make
it a lot easier. Specifically the blocked damage. Also,
the missions in the future will be "once per day" rather than "once
per account" so you're not required to complete every single
mission to get the final reward.
Реклама | Adv