Planned economy changes in May

[Oo_Archer_oO 9]

Please, Gaijin for one time do the right thing, You guys have been decreasing SL reward & increasing repair cost across the board for years now, this trend cannot continue. Can't you see that you are nerfing SL reward multiplier AND in the same time increasing repair cost for 80% of the vehicles??

 

Another thing that's extremely annoying to me is that you have been depreciating low tier (Now tier 3&4 are considered low tier by the look of the economy changes lol) premium vehicles for multiple patches, why would I be interested in buying more premiums if I know for certain they would get nerfed in earning capabilities?

E.g., Most of rank III vehicles used to have 450% SL reward ratio, now some are at 315% and you are going to nerf them AGAIN, how wonderful.

 

 

[asd072 73]

Between all nations japan is the only nation literally don't have any top-tier AA and f-16aj its only option to deal with enemy air and now its not just grow up on repair cost but also the most expensive f-16 in the game, why? Is there any gameplay-based logic behind that?

[WarField_15 6]

You pay for the vehicle, you pay for the crew, you pay for the crew experience, you pay for changing and transferring crew, you pay for installing upgrades, you pay for repairing if you die, you pay for repairing if someone collides with you, you pay to spawn in simulation, pay for everything. Depending on the vehicle I have to kill 2 or 3 enemies to pay for the repair. This is not fun.

 

   Paying to buy the vehicle, to buy the modifications and a silver lion penalty for friendly fire is enough.

[x_Shini_ 434]

@Smin1080pI can understand that you guys dont want heli ec being used to farm silver easily, but only the highest tier helis can do that in the first place free to play players and those without premium will suffwr from this high repair costs, could you please give a statement to this or what the specific thought was for this decision?

[Teh0 294]

Could it finally be possible to take Ki-100 out from early Ki-61 group and move it to a group with Ki-61-II Kai where it historically belongs and would better fit for it's performance? Optionally it could be without a group at either rank III or IV.

Take a look at how many planes that fighter line has on each rank:
Rank II - 7
Rank III - 4
Rank IV - 3 (This rank is just the exact same plane with different wing guns and none are grouped.)

[Boris191 7]

 

Decreasing the reward multiplier for every single rank except a miniscule increase for Rank 7, alongside increasing repairs by a very significant amount at ranges where player population is significantly more consistent.

Using USSR as an example here; this is for most nations.

And the fact that many of the lower ranked vehicles got their repair prices reduced will be used as an argument to say that it was a balanced and not solely negative change.

Really says a lot about what the goal here is.

[itsMaverick 0]

No more "USSR is the cheapest tree".

[Fir3_SPARTACUS 0]

6 hours ago, ミーナ said:

I personally believe that the repair cost system should be abolished completely. 

There is no point in punishing people for doing good in a game.

 

If repair costs were removed, people would no longer play a certain vehicle over and over just because playing their favorite vehicle is like a punishment where unless they manage to get 1-2 kills they make negative profit. This is especially true in Sim where your plane can cost upwards of 20,000SL to just spawn which heavily discourages players from playing the gamemode at all while also encouraging scummy behavior and runway bombing.

 

Repair costs currently only serve one purpose and it is to hinder and punish an average player's progress by making them lose Silver Lions every time they die while the few players that are exceedingly good in the vehicle are not affected at all.

 

In summary:

Repair costs that are used to balance out the earnings of vehicles by people who do good in them but punish people that don't do good in them. That is why the Repair Cost feature should be removed.

 

 

As a responce to the comment by Smin1080p:

In order to balance out the removal of repair costs, SL modifiers could be re adjusted in order to reflect on the income the developers wish for the vehicle to have. For example, if a vehicle is seen having poor income average, it could have a higher SL modifier than a vehicle which has a higher income average.

The removal of repair costs will greatly benefit players which want to play the game in a casual way, people that play the game just to have fun and not grind (Where you can just get 1-2 kills per life and be happy) without having to worry about running low on Silver Lions.

Simulator Battles on the other hand could greatly benefit with a massive reduction of Spawn Costs combined with a nerf in research efficiency. Air Simulator is not a viable grinding method and will never be because of how it will be abused so at least make it a viable mode where people can have fun in.

Well, I don't know if you read while you were typing but how is it punishing players for doing well if less than 2 kills mean they pay more than they earn? It is not hard or impossible to earn more than 2 kills + playing objective. In most cases, if the vehicle has a big repair cost it means it is performing better than others so either they increase its br which may lead to said vehicle's increase in br or repair cost. You can make the case that sim battles have the harshest repair costs since those game modes require the most amount of skill but people have been abusing those forever I have seen ridiculous repair costs on some planes in sims just because the group of players abuse sim modes. Repair costs have always been a balancing factor when a vehicle is performing well but an increase in br would be too big of a nerf. In summary, repair costs shouldn't be removed simply because you aren't performing.

[Xermaz 73]

can the type 93 moved to the rank 6?

because let's be honest here, it has no business on rank 7.

and it also affect the repair cost since it is the end of SPAA line + the end of the rank 7. it has similar performance as Ozelot yet after this economy changes, it is still more expensive than the ITO from Sweden, with nowhere near the same performance of it.

Edited May 5, 2023 by Xermaz

[NoNamerR 11]

Japan (and other nation's) rank 5-6 is already expensive to play in the air and these stock prices for us is super terrible, none of our (Japanese) rank 6 jets have countermeasures for these all aspect missiles that we are facing at these BRs, these are bad changes. I would really love to see other nation's rank 5-6 repair costs go down as well don't get me wrong here.

And why add extra repair costs on things that are random/odd numbers like 9 and 41 or something like that?

Also do not change the price of the crew replenishment costing more, it's unnecessary and super random thing to change, also the things regarding un-foldering, it's just unnecessary. Others have worded it better than I did, I want to amplify these things and the other barely playable vehicle's stock prices going up.

 

Gaijin, listen to your players providing feedback.

[Wargroy 19]

I see one benefit from this economy update, for all-tier players you can switch from top-tier 6-7-8 to 3-4-5 and return back again for top-tier experience. In the end top-tier will be more expensive or less SL rewarding but you can play lower ranks instead and get save more Silver Lions. Warthunder I believe, is not only about top-tier, look from wider perspective, from bottom to the top.

 

 

[_The_Aegis_ 5]

So i saw this on facebook and it stated there were BR changes coming too - where are they? they arent stated here?

[Chris4win 366]

Deleting folders at rank 1 will make people loose interest in the game sooner. A better solution would be to add new rank 1 vehicles to all nations. Especially Germany, Britain have still a few options. Playing similar ships with no difference is the problem of naval (in my opinion) and that is way behind ground and air in terms of player count.

 

Edited May 4, 2023 by Chris4win

[duykhanh2k1321 9]

Russian-Soviet ground vehicles are becoming more and more expensive, while their specifications are not superior or even inferior to their rivals.

 

[Unnamed_91 367]

Where are the rank 7 and bellow aircraft RP & SL reductions?

[Flame2512 3,384]

7 hours ago, mz_14_Gelzooz said:

Why is Gaijin taking out a large number of grouped vehicles?Will all groupings be deleted in the future to increase player development costs and time?

What gaijin should do is continue to group more vehicles, such as 2s25 and 2s25m, t54 (1949) and two more t54, ztz99II and ztz99III, instead of taking out the grouping.

 

@Smin1080p  If vehicles are being unfoldered for that reason will the developers consider reducing the RP cost of said vehicles somewhat so that the rate of progression is not decrease as much?

[Horizon333 18]

Can we please acknowledge and lower the cost in rp and sl for HELICOPTERS

if i remember right since the big economy change where you lowered repair cost for all vehicles helicopters have not been touched once.

why is there basically no difference in rp and sl cost between a 9.0 hely and a 11.7 hely, from 380000 to 400000 rp.

for the love of god lower it, it has been like this for years now untouched

[G0NZA587 14]

I find the changes interesting but they also shouldn't expand the Br of naval battles....

Playing 5.0 with the moffet is literally playing 6.0 all the time, unless the moffet goes back to 4.7 just to overheat the guns faster. 
 

[redpipola 49]

Why have so many variations of the Ki-49 if almost all of them are nearly identical? There was one Ki-49 variant, KI-49-IIA which had German Licensed copies of their 7.92mm guns, and that got replaced with Type 89s, completely stripping it from being unique.

 

I think what Gaijin needs to do is to remove redundant planes that are “nearly” identical to each other. This will help with new players much more than unfoldering/foldering them. An example is the KI-49 family. This is just an opinion and I may be wrong, but that sort of redundancy can throw a lot of players off. Why work for a certain plane when all it changes is a bit of its speed and maybe add armor or two in the cockpit, and maybe changes the skin too. Get what I mean?

its just unnecessarily grindy for new players, who have to go through 2 identical variations of Ki-49s with 7.7mms, and 2 identical variations of Ki-49s with 12.7mms, instead of just shortening the gap and just having Ki-49-I to Ki-49-llb/L. The Ki-67 folder does this well, with the late variant having x2 12.7mm machine guns in the back, rather than one, which is an understandable reason to folder it, the plane actually changes, but as of right now, the llA and llB variants of the KI-49 offer no significant changes other than being a gap for players to grind more.

 

 

Edited May 5, 2023 by redpipola

[LordHavePercy 8]

Since repair costs have to be in game, could we have a compromise of maybe nothing higher than 10k so that vehicles like the Buccaneer S2 aren't completely unviable to play.  Using the S2 as an example with the new repair costs will be over 20k SL, that means that you have to bomb at least 3 bases with a premium account to not lose SL, seeing as such planes are targeted by everyone the chances of getting even one base are slim.    

      

    

In short, if repair costs have to be in the game then a compromise of max 10k SL in realistic battles seems reasonable

[MiseryIndex556@psn 13,154]

The purpose of groups was to reduce grinding vehicles that are basically duplicates of each other, while allowing people to research them if they wanted. 
 

The idea that removing the groups somehow helps the players learn the game is completely undermined by the sale of essentially top tier premiums. 
 

This just seems like a way to extend the grind or push people to buy premium. 

[Ub3rshadow 874]

I strongly disagree with un-foldering vehicles. They're there for a reason, being that they're similar vehicles and being forced to research them would increase the length of the already absurd grind, while contributing little more to someone's lineup than a backup - arguably less if it removes variety and versatility from the lineup by taking up a slot. Foldering is a brilliant mechanic, it is universally loved, and we need far more vehicles to be foldered, rather than have vehicles pulled out of them. It feels like the shift away from foldering vehicles more recently is hostile, even if not intentional, because the grind at higher tiers is already absurd at ground RB, and not very pleasant in air RB either (though far better than the former).

 

For starters I'd suggest foldering some top tier MBTs, such as the Challenger 2s, Type 90, and ZTZ-99. The Magach 6s and Merkavas could also do with having some foldered with that pretty long Rank VI line. The Churchill NA75 could be foldered under the Churchill III as there's little difference between the two in terms of play style, as opposed to the jump from the Churchill III to VII where the play style shifts because of the far superior armour but far worse armament. 

 

Foldering doesn't have to be based off of BRs, either, as those vehicles can still be accessed for lineups.

 

Remember that the vehicles people play is based off of preference, and not something that gaijin should be trying to force by un-foldering vehicles. If players choose to push for higher BRs before unlocking some foldered  vehicles similar to those that they already own, then that's their own choice and they get to face both the benefits and drawbacks of that decision.

[Noir89 2,577]

Can we talk about Gunbirds?

 

HS-129 B3 (Rank II) --> dangerous even BR >5.0

BF 110 C-6 (Rank II)

Ki-109 (Rank I)        --> this thing can engange Tiger I´s

LaGG-3-34 (Rank II) --> in the same area of effectiveness as the IL-2 37mm

F.C.20 Bis (Rank II)

 

Its a shame that these are unusable for any kind of event and all 2nd stage daily quests - eventhough they are complete overkill for their BR / the groundtargets they will face (Ground RB). Isnt it possible to get them Rank III just with lower rewards modifiers?

 

IL-2 (some variants) / Me 410 A-1/U2  are Rank III --> rightfully so

 

--> Tempest Mk V (Vickers) even Rank IV at BR 3.7.

 

 

This is only a very small fraction of vehicles which arent used that much anymore because they dont trigger tasks, it would be great if at least some of them get some love in that respect.

 

(if that isnt possible at least consider defineing a linups rank by the highest rank, so that anykind of vehicle can be used for tasks when uptiered)

Edited May 4, 2023 by Noir89

[warthogboy09 196]

I found 30 vehicles in SB with a minimum repair cost in excess of 20,000sl, despite having the highest skill floor for success. I was originally going to count for those in excess of 15,000, but found I was losing count with how many there were. Whoever is making these decisions is up over their head in piles of xxxx. Do better

[_ChiyomiAnzai_ 14]

Why are reward multipliers for some $70 premium pack vehicles going down?

 

I know some people will call me a wallet warrior, but I am not wasting $70 on a plane that not only is bad to begin with, but it now has a horribly bad multiplier. Why is the F-4EJ ADTW going to 370% reward multiplier? That's honestly, not only ridiculous, but also just BS. The Kfir Canard and F-4J (UK) are ALSO going down to 370% multiplier, and it's bonkers to me, as many in the community were already complaining about the rewards of these vehicles being way too low for a pack vehicle. The sole purpose for Rank VII premiums is to literally grind everything faster, and these examples I just gave are not even doing excellent at their assigned BR. The Kfir and the F-4J (UK) are decent, sure, but you can't tell me the same for the F-4EJ ADTW.