You Want Proof That World of Tanks Is Pay To Win?

[Omega Sirius]

World of Tanks has premium ammo that has much better performance than regular ammo.
This is the literal definition of pay-to-win. This is not a debate.

So players investing money into the game may possibly have an advantage over you.
I've played this game for 9 years, and came on and off to check up on it every now and then. They still have this premium ammo mechanic and it most likely will never go away.

Conclusion: Don't waste your time with this game, War Thunder is better alternative than this.

[gsw mer]

Messaggio originale di DiceWrangler:

Messaggio originale di gsw mer:

since wargaming added angling on shots, i have noticed ppl are using their SIDE armor more to deflect shots than their FRONTAL armor. b/c the rigged game logic gives them advantage to blocking MORE shots with side than front for the angling factor. #realism

Huh? Angling has always been a part of World of Tanks and increases effective armor and the in-game tutorial demonstrates this.

so when a paper armor relative to ur big gun gets hit on the side it just deflects all damage. meanwhile irl it would rip a giant hole in the tank going lengthwise and cause plenty of damage. but for this game, even paper armor can deflect any size calibre shots. LOGIC. no it hasnt always been. they updated the angled shots on armor. a troll attempting to deceive and lie, nothing new here

[gsw mer]

Messaggio originale di DiceWrangler:

Messaggio originale di gsw mer:

I hit the target 2 times, I penned the target 2 times, and I got ZERO DAMAGE both times. if I ask any cancer shill it's, "nope not wargaming cheating"

You hit the "tracks" (suspension) that may temporarily immobilize a tank but does not reduce its health. I say "may" because a tank's suspension system has "hit points" too and if you inflict enough damage it will disable them otherwise damage will just accumulate until they are either disabled or repaired.

according to this troll, the tracks on the tank are a separate tank altogether! so they can just be magic and absorb all damages.

[Jackie Daytona]

Messaggio originale di Rodders:

Messaggio originale di gsw mer:

wot is trash to win. since most ppl who willing to pay money to this bad game are trash to begin with already. if u want to find out just play the game and u see the trash get advantage through riggedness

Want to hear a funny story about my first ace? I decided one day to buy the Patriot. And having such a fast reload and huge ammo capacity i took 30 gold rounds. I had premium activated and i had my premium tank and my premium rounds and the game PUT ME IN WITH ALL TIER 8!!!


TLDR i butchered 9 of them, It would of been 10 as i raced to the enemy spawn to get the arty but alas someone else barely beat me! Those premium rounds are beastly. Every one went through the enemy i spent around 70k silver and the game rewarded me with 250k back. Ladies and gentlemen of you think thats not toxic, Pay to win and encouraged by Wargaming then you are in denial of factual reality. And no i do not fire that ammo currently i am inactive.

Sounds like you had a great match. Surely, you took a screenshot. Kept the replay.

You mind sharing either one of those?

[Nibori]

Messaggio originale di gsw mer:

since wargaming added angling on shots, i have noticed ppl are using their SIDE armor more to deflect shots than their FRONTAL armor. b/c the rigged game logic gives them advantage to blocking MORE shots with side than front for the angling factor. #realism

You know even less about WoT than i thought.

[Việt Nam Cộng Hòa]

remove or change ammo gold. Fk ammo gold no skill

[Rod]

Messaggio originale di DiceWrangler:

Messaggio originale di Rid-ESL Rainbow Six:

remove or change ammo gold. Fk ammo gold no skill

This ONE change would make games more fair (and fun) by making armor actually helpful. As it is now, and has been since they changed it so premium rounds could be purchased with (in-game) silver, heavy tanks and assault TDs (like the T95 or Tortoise) are outclassed in almost every way by medium tanks because armor rarely offers any protection against "gold" rounds.

It does not seem like WG themselves like heavy tanks either. Look at all the streamers, etc they all game this mechanic hard and use it to win. Thats why they wont change it until the big streamers cry like they cried about high explosive shells until they cry about premium ammo i bet it wont change.


You look at WG own forum, And you look on Steam the general opinion of 90% of players is premium ammo should be removed. Its the 10% or more like 1% holding the game back from advancing into mainstream. Its this that really broke the camels back for me not the fact they ruined my KV2 Premium but the fact WG are ignoring what we the customers want on purpose!

[gsw mer]

i got a joke for ya's. imagine the jag pz 4 with their paper armor blocking an arty shell from the fv304. you know your game's broken when paper armor tanks can block arty shells. Also had a tier 8 french heavy block a shot from a tier 8 gun arty shell. There is no justification for this. just a broken game.

[Nibori]

Messaggio originale di gsw mer:

i got a joke for ya's. imagine the jag pz 4 with their paper armor blocking an arty shell from the fv304. you know your game's broken when paper armor tanks can block arty shells. Also had a tier 8 french heavy block a shot from a tier 8 gun arty shell. There is no justification for this. just a broken game.

Or you have no idea what happened in the first place, because i noticed that you have no idea about WoT in general.

[Lord von Games]

Been playing this game since early Beta, I was one of the first Tier X players in the game (got the T-Shirt, no... I "actually" got the T-Shirt (roll out - lol) ... and the premium ammo... whether its gold or absurd credits IS p2win... take for example the Maus (tier x) you can't win hardly a single battle without premium ammo AND with the cost of repairs... to say everything is available to F2Play is true - only without real money, the Maus is not playable, unless I play a day in low tier tanks to earn enough in-game money to play a few battles of the Maus - so that would mean I have 1/20 the time to invest and be a more experienced winning Maus-player than other pay-to-win players playing the same tank... so no matter how you try to spin it - paying - equals winning over non-paying.

[Lord von Games]

Most people consider playing to and at then at highest level... a form of winning... (I'm not saying you have to play Tier X) ...

IE: I still like Skyrim, and while "winning" is picking a faction and ending war with what becomes the highest level character.... I still play it for the open-world, do my own thing game... (so, yes, I get your arguement), but most would be ticked if they had to keep paying to play a winning endgame. My point is and will remain... premium AMMO, the whole design, the whole reason IS pay-to-win. Are there other games out there with more blatant pay-to-win? YES.

Most people who defend pay-to-win mechanics confuse pay-to-win, with "pay-to-play" - no one (or at least not me) is accusing this as a barrier to play some of the game, but it is most certainly "paying" to increase the odds of winning (making it easier for noobs to spend their way to victory).

I can play a "good" game, but be shot to he*l by someone's wallet who has little need to learn the finer points of the weakest armor spots, and proper aiming... (etc).

[Desparado]

here is more proof

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3n2wqOS41zg&t=252s

[Jackie Daytona]

Messaggio originale di Lord von Fleck:

Most people consider playing to and at then at highest level... a form of winning...

Well, the game has objective conditions for winning and losing. Perception is subjective, and therefore, meaningless to your particular argument.

Messaggio originale di Lord von Fleck:

IE: I still like Skyrim, and while "winning" is picking a faction and ending war with what becomes the highest level character.... I still play it for the open-world, do my own thing game... (so, yes, I get your arguement), but most would be ticked if they had to keep paying to play a winning endgame. My point is and will remain... premium AMMO, the whole design, the whole reason IS pay-to-win.

Your comparison doesn't work. I have much better one.

In Skyrim, I could gather a ton of crafting materials. Transport them all to the correct "workbench". Then gain levels by combining those into end-products. Which takes hours.

Alternately, I could just take gold to a trainer and then instantly get the same results. Gold, which I can just add to my character with console commands.

It's just like in WoT. I could grind for credits in a mid-tier premium. (Which can easily be acquired for free.) Then spend those credits on premium ammo for a high-tier vehicle. OR I could buy gold and use that, instead.

It's the exact same thing. In either case, no winning has occurred. All you've done is save yourself some time.

You cannot win by spending money. No amount of money will make you good at the game.

Messaggio originale di Lord von Fleck:

Most people who defend pay-to-win mechanics confuse pay-to-win, with "pay-to-play"

No.

[Jackie Daytona]

Messaggio originale di Renegade_Wolf:

here is more proof

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3n2wqOS41zg&t=252s

That isn't proof of anything.

He types in the description, "It's not bad players. It's bad RNG." Despite him losing because he very obviously has a bad team. Four of his allies dealt no damage, and one did only 12. That's a bad team.

Then, he descends into mental gymnastics to try to justify his opinion. Which is that they aren't actually bad players. Like describing someone with 600 average damage per game as "average" or "good".

He literally goes through each team. Looks at each of them. And just pretends that what's on the screen isn't what is on the screen. The other team was, on average, a little better. Both in terms of overall stats and performance for the match.

Also, he has all the best "p2w" stuff active. AND HE LOST. His 300k gold didn't magically make him win.

Every interpretation he's made in that video, is wrong.

Why not articulate an argument. With facts and logic? Nah, that would take effort. Just post a link to a youtube video. Which doesn't even address p2w. He blames everything on RNG! Neither you (or Claus) have any idea what you are talking about. Please stop.

[Nibori]

Messaggio originale di Renegade_Wolf:

here is more proof

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3n2wqOS41zg&t=252s

As a veteran WoT player i can say: there is no pay to win in this video.
Maybe you posted the wrong link.

[Desparado]

Messaggio originale di Jackie Daytona:

Messaggio originale di Renegade_Wolf:

here is more proof

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3n2wqOS41zg&t=252s

That isn't proof of anything.

He types in the description, "It's not bad players. It's bad RNG." Despite him losing because he very obviously has a bad team. Four of his allies dealt no damage, and one did only 12. That's a bad team.

Then, he descends into mental gymnastics to try to justify his opinion. Which is that they aren't actually bad players. Like describing someone with 600 average damage per game as "average" or "good".

He literally goes through each team. Looks at each of them. And just pretends that what's on the screen isn't what is on the screen. The other team was, on average, a little better. Both in terms of overall stats and performance for the match.

Also, he has all the best "p2w" stuff active. AND HE LOST. His 300k gold didn't magically make him win.

Every interpretation he's made in that video, is wrong.

Why not articulate an argument. With facts and logic? Nah, that would take effort. Just post a link to a youtube video. Which doesn't even address p2w. He blames everything on RNG! Neither you (or Claus) have any idea what you are talking about. Please stop.

and why are the shots going bad the whole night and day by this game.......RNG is realy bad in this game