You Ask, We Reply: Clans and Ultimate Conquest Answers
Дата: 04.10.2011 15:58:00
NoblePlatoon, on Oct 04 2011 - 03:40, said: SO...monopolies continue. Alliances between monopolies continue.
And a clan cannot compete unless they have several dozen Tier 10's.
Great job, W.o.T. 
Vallter: A clan can make an alliance with another clan and be more
competitive. If players are good in diplomacy, we see no reasons in
punishing them. BUT big clans holding with a big amount of
provinces will suffer from riot and freezing system. For example,
the riot will be in the heart of their territories. They will have
to move chips to it and defend it. After the defense, tanks, which
were destroyed or damaged during the battle will be locked for
certain time. Bigger the clan is - more riots happen within their
lands. And each riot is a minus in amount of their fighters and
their tanks.
Why do we implement tank locking system without riots? I'll answer you. Though we want to make it hard to control big amount of provinces, our intention is to make it much more competitive, but not impossible. That is why we want to balance and test the 'locking' feature before introducing riots. And after that introduce riots and balance them, before adding other feature. Unfortunately, I have to remind you, that Clan Wars are still in Beta, because all updates performed to it have be balanced only after the implementation, since they are changing core tactics and mechanics.
Why do we implement tank locking system without riots? I'll answer you. Though we want to make it hard to control big amount of provinces, our intention is to make it much more competitive, but not impossible. That is why we want to balance and test the 'locking' feature before introducing riots. And after that introduce riots and balance them, before adding other feature. Unfortunately, I have to remind you, that Clan Wars are still in Beta, because all updates performed to it have be balanced only after the implementation, since they are changing core tactics and mechanics.
FaustianQ, on Oct 04 2011 - 04:01, said: So basically, they want large alliances, a stagnant map as people
are punished for battling, do not care or are utterly blind to
smaller clans, and only want people with multiple T10 tanks to
compete in UC.That's what I took away from this.
Vallter: We for sure look through different variants.
Drakenred, on Oct 04 2011 - 04:58, said: I dont know, maybee the plan is for tanks that are frozen can only
be repaired at the rate of 1 tank per owned productive provice per
day and the que placment is autmatic based on when your tank gets
hit or something.(Ie Eventualy even the mega clans will run out of
repaired tanks)Vallter: Probably, we will start a thread regarding timezones and will try
to solve this issue before uniting the servers.
GeneralGeorge, on Oct 04 2011 - 08:01, said: YOU NEED to REVISE your thinking on #12 & #1310pm EDT start of a battle for 2/3rds of the USA is to late!! Then expect to goto 1am next day is outragious.
People DO WORK and goto school...................
8pm EDT is more reasonable
Vallter: About the coastal territories - we will think about it.
Why are we not afraid, that big alliances will just create lots of ghost clans? Because in this manner they will receive chips, but not accounts and soldiers for their war. They will have to transfer people and accounts from one clan to another. After this, all accounts will be locked for 48 hours from changing a clan. This means, that land of the main clan will be much more vulnerable for the next 48 hours. And normally, main land gives much more gold.
Why are we not afraid, that big alliances will just create lots of ghost clans? Because in this manner they will receive chips, but not accounts and soldiers for their war. They will have to transfer people and accounts from one clan to another. After this, all accounts will be locked for 48 hours from changing a clan. This means, that land of the main clan will be much more vulnerable for the next 48 hours. And normally, main land gives much more gold.
xamichee, on Oct 04 2011 - 12:15, said: In regards to the alliance situation that dominates the current
map, the issue is that it's far too easy to control large areas due
to the limited number of landing spots. You are planning to address
part of that issue by not allowing clans that own territories from
applying for landing applications. I expect the clans which are
part of the current alliance can overcome this change by creating
ghost clans to monopolize the landings as they are currently doing.
Why not simply make every coastal territory available for landing?
At present, it's far too easy to control large territories with a
very small group of players. The control of large numbers of
territories, should require large numbers of clans, which isn't the
case at present. Without some changes that make it harder for a
relatively small number of players to control large sections of the
map, clan wars--which is the only real reason to play WoT in the
longer term--will become a joke. Unfortunately, clan wars isn't
competitive at all, which will be an issue that plagues the
continued growth of the player base.Vallter:
World of Tanks News and Information\You Ask - We Reply!\You Ask, We Reply: Clans and Ultimate Conquest Answers