Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.

21 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
105 posts
2,291 battles

Hello everyone.

I'm seriously wondering why the repair servicing cost for T8 is so much higher than T7, and it doesn't get any better on any of the higher tiers, it just gets way worse. Of course it makes sense that its gets more expensive, but then one should also respectively earn more, which certainly isn't the case in coop games. For most of the time even for a great game where I didn't get sunk I might end up with 10-20k profit, but it also happens that I lost a few thousand credits on the match. To me it seems its a way to try and make it more time consuming to get through the tier so you get much needed experience for the current ship, and possible also to try and even it out so you don't earn too much surplus that could be spent on other ships.
I'm currently a premium so I can imagine that it would be way worse without. It might be that co-op matches is an expense for them and considering its free to play, they have an incentive to try an dissuade people from the PvE and encourage them into playing PvP, however fact is that its a matter of design and appeal. Fact is that premium doesn't help much with this aspect, only signals and camos can, and why would one want to spend premium and camos on a PvE match just to be able make a little bit more when its much better and efficiently used for PvP match? They should really make both PvE and PvP appealing, have servicing, ammo and repair costs be more reasonably lower, like base it on amount of points repaired and on ammo spent, rather than base it on the tier.

 

Thoughts?


// Inc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MIAU]
[MIAU]
Players
4,043 posts

It's essentially there to force you back in the mid- and low-tiers to earn the credits necessary to maintain the bigger ships.

 

Otherwise a lot of us would end up playing tier 10 battles only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
5,871 posts
10,273 battles

This is intentional. If there'd be no service cost (or lower than previous tiers), nobody would remain in the mid tiers. According to WGs definition of the service cost.

 

Service cost are independent from you taking damage or not, so there is little reason to conserve your health if a battle is surely to be lost. In that case charge and try to dish out as hard as you could.

 

 

 

Greetings

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
3,688 posts
15,906 battles
Just now, Egoleter said:

It's essentially there to force you back in the mid- and low-tiers to earn the credits necessary to maintain the bigger ships.

 

Just now, Allied_Winter said:

This is intentional. If there'd be no service cost (or lower than previous tiers), nobody would remain in the mid tiers. According to WGs definition of the service cost.

 

Service cost are independent from you taking damage or not, so there is little reason to conserve your health if a battle is surely to be lost. In that case charge and try to dish out as hard as you could.

 

 

 

Greetings

 

Also, Coop Battles :cap_haloween:

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UNICS]
Players
4,320 posts
15,747 battles
4 minutes ago, InfinityIncarnate said:

.... have servicing, ammo and repair costs be more reasonably lower, like base it on amount of points repaired and on ammo spent, rather than base it on the tier.

 

Thoughts?


// Inc.

It would incentivize players to stay back to preserve their health and repaircosts, making battles worse in whole. They had it, changed it, improved gameplay somewhat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Supertester, Players, Sailing Hamster
3,400 posts
4,117 battles

The official reason for the fixed service cost being introduced was that a lot of people were camping in the back i  their ships, trying to avoid taking damage and reducing the bills. That led to great amoints of uselessness, because not only can't you be hit at extreme range, neither can you hit anything, and thus people who were closer to the enemy had zero support and after some time all the attention of the enemy team (when said enemy team got bored of trying to hit far away targets). 

I cannot say how well it worked, I personally never had the problem of systematically losing money at any tier ever (had the odd detonation game with 10k damage where I lost money, but nothing regular), but now people can only make a profit, be it a win or a loss, if they actually go and deal damage, or, paradoxally, tank damage. Passivity no longer pays. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
9,423 posts
11,039 battles
8 minutes ago, InfinityIncarnate said:

Hello everyone.

I'm seriously wondering why the repair servicing cost for T8 is so much higher than T7, and it doesn't get any better on any of the higher tiers, it just gets way worse. Of course it makes sense that its gets more expensive, but then one should also respectively earn more, which certainly isn't the case in coop games. For most of the time even for a great game where I didn't get sunk I might end up with 10-20k profit, but it also happens that I lost a few thousand credits on the match. To me it seems its a way to try and make it more time consuming to get through the tier so you get much needed experience for the current ship, and possible also to try and even it out so you don't earn too much surplus that could be spent on other ships.
I'm currently a premium so I can imagine that it would be way worse without. It might be that co-op matches is an expense for them and considering its free to play, they have an incentive to try an dissuade people from the PvE and encourage them into playing PvP, however fact is that its a matter of design and appeal. Fact is that premium doesn't help much with this aspect, only signals and camos can, and why would one want to spend premium and camos on a PvE match just to be able make a little bit more when its much better and efficiently used for PvP match? They should really make both PvE and PvP appealing, have servicing, ammo and repair costs be more reasonably lower, like base it on amount of points repaired and on ammo spent, rather than base it on the tier.

 

Thoughts?


// Inc.

Repair cost used to be tied to damage taken, and players camped HARD to preserve their precious. WG changed that to fixed fee (and its lower than it used to be). Thanks to that hightier playerbase only camp hard, believing they save credits on repairs:Smile_smile:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
105 posts
2,291 battles
7 minutes ago, lup3s said:

Also, Coop Battles :cap_haloween:


Yeah? Thats sometimes a necessity when not many players are on, furthermore Coop battles is primarily for practice but could also be used when not up for playing PvP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[H_FAN]
Players
2,485 posts
38,687 battles
6 minutes ago, InfinityIncarnate said:


Yeah? Thats sometimes a necessity when not many players are on, furthermore Coop battles is primarily for practice but could also be used when not up for playing PvP.

 Naturally, but if you play a PvP battle in T4/5 you are likely to make a big profit to finance your coop battles

 

You do as you want, but I prefer to lower the tier when I am less concentrated, the coop gives me nothing. On lower tiers action is there, with small maps and players firing just like the bots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SERBS]
Alpha Tester, Players, In AlfaTesters
2,291 posts
7,150 battles

Best way to fix it is to get maybe prem camos. WG wants more of your money! :Smile_trollface:

 

Prem acc is not enough sometimes 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Players
758 posts
4,095 battles

Prem acc is enough ,even if you play t10 all day.

 

If you lose too much credits t8+, maybe its time to play some t6 for money and get better so you dont lose that much at higher tiers

 

 

Edited by Asakka
typo, i think

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
[THESO]
Moderator
3,394 posts
9,476 battles

for tier 8, when you play above average, you can have a positive average to keep you going but nothing to collect money to buy ships.

On tiers 9 and 10 you generally have a negative income average If you are not a unicum!

This is the way it is..

 

 

Either you F2P then you have to go back to middle tiers and make it populated for the newcomers and keep the game alive,

or you pay for a prem ship to finance your high tier plays, or you buy premium acc to have a positive income on tiers 9 and 10.. hence you keep the game alive.

 

Its your choice.. somehow you have to help WG to keep the game alive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8,241 posts
11,737 battles

Higher tiers are a privilege not a right...

 

I'd even want WG to refund all those T10 Perm camos so people can't yolo play top tier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SINT]
[SINT]
Players
696 posts
19,363 battles

With all options to limit repair costs and bonusses for income due to camo’s, flags and clan perks i think neither premium or permanent camo is required.

 

I have tier 9’s and 10’s (ok only one t10) without premium time or permanent camo (or any camo that changes silver income). The 10% cost reduction flag (sometimes the 20% bonus inc. flag is added) together with clan perk repair discount is enough to enable break even taking into account the 2-3 premium consumables i use at this tier. 

 

And i am far away from an unicum.

 

If more silver would be needed then i would be playing my 5-8 premiums and regulars more. Not that i dont play them now, but there is no need for financial compensation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[L4GG]
Players
2,714 posts
9,933 battles
On ‎24‎-‎02‎-‎2018 at 1:48 PM, Allied_Winter said:

This is intentional. If there'd be no service cost (or lower than previous tiers), nobody would remain in the mid tiers. According to WGs definition of the service cost.

 

I find that a bit difficult to believe.

Because if a person stays or linger in a tier it's because a lot more than that.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BYOB]
[BYOB]
Players
4,274 posts
18,419 battles

Repair cost? Service cost? Consumable cost? I have a Missouri! :Smile_trollface:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
5,871 posts
10,273 battles
14 minutes ago, Butterdoll said:

I find that a bit difficult to believe.

Because if a person stays or linger in a tier it's because a lot more than that.

 

 

 In reality? Yes. But that was the official reason given by WG .... at least, I can't remember anything different.

 

 

Greetings

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
[THESO]
Moderator
3,394 posts
9,476 battles
8 hours ago, Aragathor said:

Repair cost? Service cost? Consumable cost? I have a Missouri! :Smile_trollface:

RAPPOOART!! HAAXXX!!

 

I want one too :( but not enough Fxp):Smile_sad:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
182 posts
3,083 battles

It's understandable that you wont get super good rewards from co-op games, people would just farm those for credits and wargaming would lose income.

 

And with premium account and some flags and camos one good game in T10 would allow you to play several other T10 games where you probably will have another good game at some point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BYOB]
[BYOB]
Players
4,274 posts
18,419 battles
12 hours ago, Excavatus said:

RAPPOOART!! HAAXXX!!

 

I want one too :( but not enough Fxp):Smile_sad:

Sorry about that, I hope they bring the ship back. It's not only a great premium but also a piece of important history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×