tier 10 matches are so unrewarding

[Xinyon]

So recently i had this game.

 

 

I think i did pretty okay but if i wouldn't have premium i would have ended up with -25.000 credit which is nonsense. 

 

Do you guys find it fair how the game rewards tier 10 play? i think wargaming should balance it so if you play good at least u end up in positive. You would still get negative anyway cuz there are situations where u just get oneshotted by autistic carriers anyway or other stuff

[hellhound666]

imho they are far too rewarding ...

shoot right targets instead of burning down bb's

[ColonelPete]

14 minutes ago, Xinyon said:

I think i did pretty okay but if i wouldn't have premium i would have ended up with -25.000 credit which is nonsense. 

 

Do you guys find it fair how the game rewards tier 10 play? i think wargaming should balance it so if you play good at least u end up in positive. You would still get negative anyway cuz there are situations where u just get oneshotted by autistic carriers anyway or other stuff

Yes. As everyones rewards are based on the same calculation. It is fair.

I would prefer a harsher economy, that bad play is punished more.

 

Hint: Farming fire damage on BB does not make many credits.

[Hades_warrior]

Thats why there are TX premium camos for -50% servise with +20% credit income.

[Xinyon]

im a f2p player but thanks for the advice, im gonna try a different playstyle then, thought i was supposed to farm bb-s with fire

[lovelacebeer]

For what it’s worth the rewards are greater when you do damage on Destroyers or Cruisers because rewards are based on the percentage of a ships health.

 

Whilst you can get great damage scores scores by burning battleships and of course that’s not to say you shouldn’t shoot them, you will get more reward for better target selection.

[159Hunter]

This screenshot is useless to evaluate performance. At least show us the detailed statistics.

[Sweedish_Gunner]

I thought this was gonna be a thread on how T10 balance is non existant and T10 isn't fun anymore but it's a Credit thread. Bamboozled. 

[Yedwy]

2 hours ago, hellhound666 said:

shoot right targets instead of burning down bb's

This

2 hours ago, Xinyon said:

Let me guess - Conqueror?

[Xinyon]

Zao

[lameoll]

There u go u played zao Dont do that... Problem solved 

 

Annyhow ye what others said damage is not rewarded % damage is so doing 20k dd damage is equal to 100k BB damage

 

[Verblonde]

1 hour ago, Xinyon said:

im a f2p player but thanks for the advice, im gonna try a different playstyle then, thought i was supposed to farm bb-s with fire

Setting BBs on fire is (generally) a bit useless as a primary aim for a couple of reasons: firstly, fire damage is 100% healable, so all you're doing is wasting your damage on something that is a damage sponge as one of its primary functions, rather than shooting at something that matters. Incidentally, this is one reason why long-range sniping BBs are generally worthless - they remove themselves from their tanking function.

 

The second reason, which is more pertinent to this thread, is that damage to BBs is generally the least rewarding from an earnings perspective. Whilst it's true that damage is the key reward driver in the game, the specific damage matters more - what you're really after is % damage i.e. the proportion of a target's hp that you remove, not the absolute number of hp that you remove. In short, you'll be rewarded more for doing 1,000 hp of damage to something small like a DD, than for doing identical damage to a fatty like a BB.

 

For more on how earnings are generated, this wiki page is a good starting point: https://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Base_Earnings

 

17 minutes ago, Xinyon said:

Zao

Luckily, for the purposes of this discussion, a lot of the primary targets for a cruiser are also the most rewarding; rather than wasting time on BBs, focus the enemy DDs and their supporting cruisers (*especially* radars) - besides being more likely to win (killing opposing DDs before they get yours often leads to victory), you'll make a lot more silver.

 

All of that is not to say that fire isn't a useful tool (if a BB target has just fixed a flood, you might as well set him on fire if there isn't a DD that needs sinking, and/or if something puts out your fire, then they may be vulnerable to flooding from allied torps), but that only burning BBs to the ground is often foolish, if you aim to win, and earn decent rewards in the process.

 

[GulvkluderGuld]

Play Ranked 7v7 where you have an actual possibility to 1v7 carry.

 

I cant stomach the lack of control over the outcome in 12v12 any longer. 

 

[lameoll]

sadly ranked is not mutch better 

[ghostbuster_]

4 hours ago, Xinyon said:

So recently i had this game.

 

 

I think i did pretty okay but if i wouldn't have premium i would have ended up with -25.000 credit which is nonsense. 

 

Do you guys find it fair how the game rewards tier 10 play? i think wargaming should balance it so if you play good at least u end up in positive. You would still get negative anyway cuz there are situations where u just get oneshotted by autistic carriers anyway or other stuff

And what info should we get from this picture? You dint have kills. Did you farm BBs with HE whole time? Why should this get rewarded? 

 

Tier 10 economy is way too rewarding. It should be like 3 times harsher so poor plays can get actually punished.

[ghostbuster_]

6 hours ago, Xinyon said:

im a f2p player but thanks for the advice, im gonna try a different playstyle then, thought i was supposed to farm bb-s with fire

Where the hell did you get that idea from? 

[geschlittert]

2 hours ago, lameoll said:

There u go u played zao Dont do that... Problem solved 

 

Annyhow ye what others said damage is not rewarded % damage is so doing 20k dd damage is equal to 100k BB damage

 

zao is a good ship. 

[geschlittert]

7 minutes ago, ghostbuster_ said:

And what info should we get from this picture? You dint have kills. Did you farm BBs with HE whole time? Why should this get rewarded? 

 

Tier 10 economy is way too rewarding. It should be like 3 times harsher so poor plays can get actually punished.

which would lead to more farming. playing T10 tech tree ships already lets you lose money quite often if you dont run premium and i dont think that my stats indicate that i dont play for the win

[lameoll]

zao was a good ship  its not that great annymore 

[Tordenskjold23]

3 hours ago, 159Hunter said:

This screenshot is useless to evaluate performance. At least show us the detailed statistics.

And what  signals did you use

[Zemeritt]

The eco at T10 is actually far to forgiving.

What did you do the entire match? Farm 2 BBs and not once shoot a DD or cruiser?

 

19 minutes ago, lameoll said:

zao was a good ship  its not that great annymore 

 

Thsi has nothing to do with the Zao. Any ship just farming BBs for just 130k will get this mediorcre credit income.

[lameoll]

1 minute ago, Zemeritt said:

Thsi has nothing to do with the Zao. Any ship just farming BBs for just 130k will get this mediorcre credit income.

i guess you did not get the sarcasm :P 

 

But yes in general BB farming is bad business

[ghostbuster_]

42 minutes ago, geschlittert said:

which would lead to more farming. playing T10 tech tree ships already lets you lose money quite often if you dont run premium and i dont think that my stats indicate that i dont play for the win

Which would lead people stop playing tier 10 whole time and play some lower tiers to grind credits. 

If you have premium, its quite easy to make profit in tier 10 which shouldnt be the case. 

[ForlornSailor]

21 hours ago, ghostbuster_ said:

Which would lead people stop playing tier 10 whole time and play some lower tiers to grind credits. 

If you have premium, its quite easy to make profit in tier 10 which shouldnt be the case. 

 

I couldnt agree more! The game absolutly should be balanced in a way, that you have to play lower tier ships to compensate for the high tier ships. This way, the playerbase would spread and we have a healthy balance across the tiers. We keep seeing the impact of WGs policy to ease up high tier economy more and more. Games with 95% bots below T4. 3vs3 on T6 outside of the prime time. Constantly playing against T9 ships when playing T7. And this all pushes more and more players to go to T10, since none of this is even remotly fun. Whats the end game here? All tiers below T8 are dead or WG introducing bots up to T7 in randoms? Do we want that? Whats wrong with playing ships between T5 and T8 - might aswell ask this the OP? @Xinyon ?

[ghostbuster_]

49 minutes ago, ForlornSailor said:

 

I couldnt agree more! The game absolutly should be balanced in a way, that you have to play lower tier ships to compensate for the high tier ships. This way, the playerbase would spread and we have a healthy balance across the tiers. We keep seeing the impact of WGs policy to ease up high tier economy more and more. Games with 95% bots below T4. 3vs3 on T6 outside of the prime time. Constantly playing against T9 ships when playing T7. And this all pushes more and more players to go to T10, since none of this is even remotly fun. Whats the end game here? All tiers below T8 are dead or WG introducing bots up to T7 in randoms? Do we want that? Whats wrong with playing ships between T5 and T8 - might aswell ask this the OP? @Xanyon?

You wrote his name wrong tho  its @Xinyon