Jump to content
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
LunaticRed

0.5.12's economical problems

96 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Super Tester
341 posts
2,790 battles

 

Hi,

 

With the upcoming economy changes, I decided to do some simple maths to determine the actual benefits of it. Changes can be found here.

uhdYDem.jpg

As you can see from these results, you are getting taxed higher if you fall below a threshold of damage taken. Allow me to explain these results.

 

Repair 0.5.11(E) Is the repair cost without maintenance tax.

Repair/% 0.5.11 (F) is the cost in credit per percentage % lost.

Placebo Maintenance 0.5.12 (I) is the cost in credits for repair without the maintenance of 0.5.11.

Repair/% 0.5.12 (J) is the cost in credits per percentage HP lost without the maintenance of 0.5.11.

(Repair)+maint per % 0.5.12 (K) is the cost in credits per percentage HP lost with the maintenance of 0.5.11 (Basically maintenance cost of 0.5.12).
(THRESHOLD) Break Even HP (L) is the HP lost required to surmount the maintenance and repair cost of 0.5.11.
(THRESHOLD) Break Even comparison (M) is the percentage of HP required to be lost to surmount the maint and repair cost of 0.5.11.

Credits/% 0.5.11 (N) is the credits lost if you hit the threshold of the new tax compared to 0.5.11. (L*F)

Effective Damage in Credits (O) is basically the cost in credits if it was compared to 0.5.12 (N+C)

 

So what does this tell us? Basically as of 0.5.12, the game is taxing you in a way that it assumes you hit a threshold of damage taken. This threshold is L (In numerical HP of ship) and M (% of HP of ship). This means that every single game as of 0.5.12 will assume you take 28k damage in your Hakuryuu or 44.4% or 15k damage in your Shimakaze or 83.3%.

Seeing the big picture here now?

 

PROS

The pros of this change is that if you take damage over the threshold limit, it won’t cost anything more. This benefits players or classes who have a more aggressive style and does not punish them. Note that this doesn’t affect every class or group of players. This means that DDs, who should and does take damage as they’re in the front lines should suffer less and BBs who take the majority of the fire don’t need to worry as much as the repair costs if they happen to sink. It also promotes a better and (fun and engaging) play style which IMO is a lot better for the gameplay.

CONS

There are a lot of negatives in this. WG is assuming you take a theoretical threshold amount of damage. It insignificantly promotes players to suicide into the enemy team like a kamikaze. A whole list of co-op problems and finally a class by class breakdown:

 

-DDs

DDs predominately take damage as they are the first group to lead the battle into caps. They take damage from enemy DDs and CA/CLs. Now let’s hypothetically say 66% of players die (average in stats of TX DDs is about 37% survive). This new economy will greatly benefit these 66% of players. The remaining 33% however, if they do not take past the threshold will ultimately suffer a loss of credits compared to 0.5.11’s economy.

 

-CAs/CLs

CAs have an average survival rate of 51.75% (average stats of TX CAs). Now high tier CAs can repair damage, reducing the cost of their repairs. CAs are “supposed” to help escort DDs and BBs but as anyone knows, being right out in the open means you will almost die instantly from BBs or torpedos from DDs. This means some CAs are better off playing it safer (dying contributes way less to your team than being alive on 1% HP) by staying behind cover. The breakeven is around 80% for cruisers so that means that any CAs of the 51.75% that do not take more than 80% damage are punished.

 

-BBs

A huge improvement for BBs as they constantly take damage from every other class. However BBs at TX have a 52.6% survival. They are more geared to finishing the battle on less HP because let’s face it, if you were at 80% HP in a CA, you would most likely be dead. Not only this but BBs can repair a lot more HP than cruisers and don’t suffer from massive bursts of damage (1 citadel or torp does only around 10% compared to cruisers which suffer from ~25%).

 

-CVs

The biggest victims in this update. CVs normally don’t take damage from any sources unless a DD sneaks up, you’re in a bad position (which means you’re dead) or when an enemy CV attacks you. Apart from this, most of the time you’re at 100% HP. However, despite having the lowest threshold, CVs are now taxed for having 45% hypothetical damage applied to them every single game. Despite the fact that and I quote “This feature (and other individual characteristics of ships and types) was taken into account in the calculation of maintenance and in the proportions of a reward for the battle.”

 

Conclusion

How does this affect the player base? Ruling out the gameplay styles, players with less skill generally die more while the better players will survive and take less damage (good CV players should only take damage once per 10 games due to CVCides). This means that ultimately, better players are punished and will earn less credits compared to 0.5.11.

Yes, I know about the addition of spotting and potential damage. However if the compensation of potential damage and spotting does not outweigh the threshold gained then again, better players are punished. Not to mention the fact that spotting for CV heavily relies on MM (if there are DDs or not) and spotting for DD heavily replies on your team (DD spots another DD but CA and BB decides to burn the poor Yamato). Potential damage for CAs and DDs are also hazardous when faced against their respective weakness class. DDs require every single HP and a CA or BB can easily halve that in one salvo while a BB can outright delete a CA.There is also the contradiction of surface to surface ship detection. What this means is that a when a DD detects another DD and that DD fires, that DD is detected by nearby allies or when a DD detects another CA and that CA fires, making the CA detectable by not just the DD but by the other CAs and BBs etc.

 

Also, I highly doubt spotting for my team in say a Hakuryu will compensate me 80k credits (maybe 35k for Shokaku but unlikely) especially with the new exp changes to CVs in my other thread.

 

I think WG’s direction with the economy is good but the execution is extremely poor. CVs and better players suffer a whole lot more from this economical change (like the rich getting taxed more).

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
139 posts
5,876 battles

I'm not particularly concerned, as I go into every battle assuming that I'll sink and incur the max repair cost anyway. 

 

In a way, the restraint to kamikaze yourself is still there - With the new changes, you'll still want to survive and perform useful actions for as long as possible to earn back the credits, instead of rushing in willy nilly and sucking seawater.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,167 posts
7,460 battles

Yeah, the idea is still not to die, but to spend (or perhaps more accurately, risk) your health pool in useful ways without being financially penalised for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
2,500 posts
1,535 battles

Pjotr i wolk?


 

 

 

 

Am I going to earn more or less?

It depends on your style. In the 0.5.12 economy, those who play actively and in a variety of ways will get bigger reward. We recommend trying new tactics on all types using the information from this article. If we are talking the higher tiers, then positive effect from these changes will be more pronounced there. For example, general test data show that on average, after battle balance of tier X ships increased by 50 000 credits.

-

 

 

 

So, is thoughtless death now encouraged? I always survive in battle, but am now economically equal to the “o-lo-lo rushers”?

No. Final profit after the battle depends on the difference between income and expenditure. Yes, for the maintenance all the players will pay a fixed amount, but at a different combat effectiveness they will receive different rewards. A player who mindlessly went ahead and lost a ship, not managing to do anything, will receive very little in comparison to those who sacrifice a ship (or better, a part of the combat capability of points) at the right time, bringing substantial benefits to the team. Let’s not forget that potential damage to your ship is now also rewarded. If you survive due to a skillful maneuver, or the intelligent application of armor, the award will be forthcoming.

 

-

What about aircraft carriers, they almost always survive?

This feature (and other individual characteristics of ships and types) was taken into account in the calculation of maintenance and in the proportions of a reward for the battle.

-

 

Are there going to be any other improvements to the economy?

We are working on a number of changes that will allow players to get additional income as well as save more. Work in this direction will be continued. Stay tuned!

-

Also note this part:

Amount of potential damage (damage received and blocked - maximum damage of all shells, bombs or torpedoes that hit the player's ship or were within 500- radius from her);

-

Source

 

 

Edited by Retia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,043 posts
4,300 battles

CVs:
        -I agree. Fixed repair bill for this class that assumes 44% damage isn't right. CVs should have been exempted in this since they aren't part of the "coward meta" in the first place. Common sense should have exempted them, shame WG, after all the nerfs you've done to them you still find something to make their lives miserable.
DDs:

        -DDs that don't take damage at all are bad DDs. Contesting caps will most likely get you detected and get you damaged. I played a lot of DD games too and the only way to avoid getting damaged is getting away from the caps, staying on the edges of the map and spamming torps and be of no use to your team. So, I don't agree with you here.
CAs:
        -Again, I don't agree with you here. Among all classes except CV, I'm most experienced in CA so I can say that CAs that doesn't take more than 80% damage in most games aren't good CAs. They are cowards always hiding behind teammates and don't maximize the use of their ship. My best scenario of battle is that every ship except cv takes their own share of damage, nobody should leave a close battle unscathed.

BBs:

        -I can't believe you still find something to say here. This change is predominantly because of those camping BBs not maximizing the use of their health pool. They benefit the most on this change.

 

Conclusion

players with less skill generally die more while the better players will survive and take less damage

 

The coward campers at high tiers and the bots that AFK on the edges of the map agree with you, I don't. I rather sink doing everything I can in a losing battle than survive.

 

Ultimately, yes CV suffer from this, and it seems like they are reducing credit gains from CV damage too after all the nerfs. WG really hates CVs. But other classes are bound to get benefits from this, specially in conjunction with the new tanking and spotting rewards. Let's all see tomorrow.

Edited by Deicide

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
4,163 posts
1,874 battles

Okayyy....?

http://forum.worldofwarships.asia/index.php?/topic/18890-incoming-economy-changes-in-0512/

 

Increase Hiryu repair cost from 25000-30000 to 42000.

 

lol

Goodbye.

 

Not sure if you've read it. 23000 was the complete base maintenance cost, not counting any planes lost in battle or any damage suffered. If you were sunk in Hiryuu, your repair cost was 53000. If you lost planes, that would bump it up to 76000. The shift to a flat 42000 is a pretty significant reduction, not to mention CVs received an extensive economy rework on top of the maintenance chances - look up Vaexa's threads on /r/worldofwarships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
359 posts
2,819 battles

 

Not sure if you've read it. 23000 was the complete base maintenance cost, not counting any planes lost in battle or any damage suffered. If you were sunk in Hiryuu, your repair cost was 53000. If you lost planes, that would bump it up to 76000. The shift to a flat 42000 is a pretty significant reduction, not to mention CVs received an extensive economy rework on top of the maintenance chances - look up Vaexa's threads on /r/worldofwarships.

 

Co-op. No damage taken. 23000+plane lost,torp cost

 

OTOH. My Ashigara may see more battles. 16000 reduced assume I'm always sunk. Spotting is nice too.

Edited by Hero_of_Zero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
341 posts
2,790 battles

Pjotr i wolk?

 

Covered all this in my conclusion.

 

CVs:

        -I agree. Fixed repair bill for this class that assumes 44% damage isn't right. CVs should have been exempted in this since they aren't part of the "coward meta" in the first place. Common sense should have exempted them, shame WG, after all the nerfs you've done to them you still find something to make their lives miserable.

DDs:

        -DDs that don't take damage at all are bad DDs. Contesting caps will most likely get you detected and get you damaged. I played a lot of DD games too and the only way to avoid getting damaged is getting away from the caps, staying on the edges of the map and spamming torps and be of no use to your team. So, I don't agree with you here.

CAs:

        -Again, I don't agree with you here. Among all classes except CV, I'm most experienced in CA so I can say that CAs that doesn't take more than 80% damage in most games aren't good CAs. They are cowards always hiding behind teammates and don't maximize the use of their ship. My best scenario of battle is that every ship except cv takes their own share of damage, nobody should leave a close battle unscathed.

BBs:

        -I can't believe you still find something to say here. This change is predominantly because of those camping BBs not maximizing the use of their health pool. They benefit the most on this change.

 

 

The coward campers at high tiers and the bots that AFK on the edges of the map agree with you, I don't. I rather sink doing everything I can in a losing battle than survive.

 

Ultimately, yes CV suffer from this, and it seems like they are reducing credit gains from CV damage too after all the nerfs. WG really hates CVs. But other classes are bound to get benefits from this, specially in conjunction with the new tanking and spotting rewards. Let's all see tomorrow.

 

Hey, I'm a CA main too as well as having my fair share in DDs. The problem isn't with taking damage, it is taking a threshold of damage. Look at CAs, if they do not take between 80-90% damage each and every single game, you are simply losing money compared to 0.5.11. The average threshold now is the assumption of taking 80% damage every game. As for BBs, that should've been in the pros as it is a mainly positive thing but the main difference between BBs and CAs is if a CA is below 20% HP, it pretty much is dead while a BB more often than now will survive the match on lower HP. DDs too that take more than 80% HP should play it safe but those that cap, spot and finish the game above 20% HP are punished.

 

 

Not sure if you've read it. 23000 was the complete base maintenance cost, not counting any planes lost in battle or any damage suffered. If you were sunk in Hiryuu, your repair cost was 53000. If you lost planes, that would bump it up to 76000. The shift to a flat 42000 is a pretty significant reduction, not to mention CVs received an extensive economy rework on top of the maintenance chances - look up Vaexa's threads on /r/worldofwarships.

 

The shift to 42000 does not include planes down (I think). Not to mention those changes are from 1.5.11 >  1.5.12 PT, not live. They introduced this economical change after 0.5.12 PT which negates the maintenance and repair prices of CV. Naturally this would exclude changes to prices of planes as the 0.5.12 patch notes mentions nothing of this. (I could be wrong).

 

  • Cost of ship repair for aircraft carriers decreased for all tiers (the higher the tier, the more the decrease)
  • Reward structure was modified in favor of destroying enemy aircraft. Now rewards for causing damage to enemy ships and combat for air superiority will be better balanced in game economy terms.

 

And as I mentioned before, the changes to 0.5.12 to CV's exp rates means they are going to earn less as well as being taxed more on average.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[IMSDF]
Beta Tester
218 posts
4,648 battles

 

CONS
There are a lot of negatives in this. WG is assuming you take a theoretical threshold amount of damage. It insignificantly promotes players to suicide into the enemy team like a kamikaze. A whole list of co-op problems and finally a class by class breakdown:

 

-DDs

DDs predominately take damage as they are the first group to lead the battle into caps. They take damage from enemy DDs and CA/CLs. Now let’s hypothetically say 66% of players die (average in stats of TX DDs is about 37% survive). This new economy will greatly benefit these 66% of players. The remaining 33% however, if they do not take past the threshold will ultimately suffer a loss of credits compared to 0.5.11’s economy.

 

Conclusion

How does this affect the player base? Ruling out the gameplay styles, players with less skill generally die more while the better players will survive and take less damage 

 

I agree with the OP. I'm more of a DD player......and I am not stupid enough to go force myself and die in a cap where there are lots of enemies up front (without reinforcements, nor support fire), so basically I am part of those 33%...........if compared to WoT, DD's are the LT's........we rely much on our speed and agility, therefore we are mostly spotting, or ninja shooting/torping, support fire is a second thing, capping is only a necessity when we are at an advantage.........this is already a bad thing...

 

The prem ships are also affected with this, it a bit an advantage for the "wallet warriors" since they just buy the ship for lolz and go kamikaze on something that is not worth dying for...........but it is a disadvantage for those who use the ships effectively, even considering the necessity of survival.........we cannot even do "a great job" on every battle.....so the probable return for the player is basically the prem ship is more like an ordinary ship anymore............this is already an another bad thing especially those who "bought" ships...

 

 

(unless this whole economical thingy is WG's conspiracy bait for all players to use prem accounts 0.5.12 and beyond)

 

 

:honoring:

Edited by IJN_Akashi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[KGHSF]
Member
3,203 posts
6,030 battles

Only Lost and Lost if  you died with expensive repair cost I decided not play with high tier forever I will stop at T8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,043 posts
4,300 battles

Hey, I'm a CA main too as well as having my fair share in DDs. The problem isn't with taking damage, it is taking a threshold of damage. Look at CAs, if they do not take between 80-90% damage each and every single game, you are simply losing money compared to 0.5.11. The average threshold now is the assumption of taking 80% damage every game. As for BBs, that should've been in the pros as it is a mainly positive thing but the main difference between BBs and CAs is if a CA is below 20% HP, it pretty much is dead while a BB more often than now will survive the match on lower HP. DDs too that take more than 80% HP should play it safe but those that cap, spot and finish the game above 20% HP are punished.

 

I could say a lot more, but I'll just say that we wait how much credit does tanking do. It's just 1 sleep away so let's all see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[IMSDF]
Beta Tester
218 posts
4,648 battles

Only Lost and Lost if  you died with expensive repair cost I decided not play with high tier forever I will stop at T8

 

tier 8 above matches is already meh...........(if at early morning/nighttime, it doubles.........if it is the weekend, nevermind playing at all :teethhappy:)

 

 

:honoring:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
403 posts
8,177 battles

As far as I know my survival rate is half the server average due to my highly aggro playstyle (read: incompetence), so as far as Im concerned, this is great!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
4,163 posts
1,874 battles

 

I agree with the OP. I'm more of a DD player......and I am not stupid enough to go force myself and die in a cap where there are lots of enemies up front (without reinforcements, nor support fire), so basically I am part of those 33%...........if compared to WoT, DD's are the LT's........we rely much on our speed and agility, therefore we are mostly spotting, or ninja shooting/torping, support fire is a second thing, capping is only a necessity when we are at an advantage.........this is already a bad thing...

 

The prem ships are also affected with this, it a bit an advantage for the "wallet warriors" since they just buy the ship for lolz and go kamikaze on something that is not worth dying for...........but it is a disadvantage for those who use the ships effectively, even considering the necessity of survival.........we cannot even do "a great job" on every battle.....so the probable return for the player is basically the prem ship is more like an ordinary ship anymore............this is already an another bad thing especially those who "bought" ships...

 

 

(unless this whole economical thingy is WG's conspiracy bait for all players to use prem accounts 0.5.12 and beyond)

 

 

:honoring:

 

Rushing in and getting killed quickly isn't going to recoup the maintenance cost. The economy change favours players who're skilled enough to stay alive to rack up the potential damage statistic. And in the first place, premium vessels already have good enough credit multiplier where the situation you describe already exists - kamikaze and still turn a profit. I know I've had Atlanta games where I've lasted 5 minutes, but put out enough shells downrange to recoup about 500k of profit.

 

If you're already hanging out and spotting for your team and taking captures out of opportunity (instead of mindlessly farming base captures - you should see some DD players ignoring the entire enemy team to drive across the map to an unguarded base area), you shouldn't be adversely affected by the economy changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
525 posts
7,946 battles

 

What... you sold her?

 

yea..... im not proud of that.

im too aggressive in the yamato which caused me to got focussed fire a lot, and i lose credits too much

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×