Jump to content


Two big changes WG need to make


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
50 replies to this topic

Cuddly_Spider #1 Posted 11 December 2012 - 02:47 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 28313 battles
  • 2,668
  • Member since:
    08-13-2011

*
POPULAR

...all in my opinion of course, but we shall see how much of the community here agrees with me.

NOTE: I've got severe insomnia at the moment and quite literally haven't slept for over 30 hours (yes I'm being serious). Expect some spelling mistakes and grammatical errors. Apologies in advance and if you point out anything I've got confused I'll correct it.

1. First let us deal with the simple. Remove all your main line light tanks from scouting duties. Dedicated scout line tanks such as leopards getting into high tier battles is fine - that's what they are there for. When you're a M5 or A-20 and you are just trying to grind middles without any interest in being a scout it's unpleasant as you are basically cannon fodder. Yes, I know a lot of people can do well in those scouts. Yes, I know I've done better in those two than most other tanks. But that's me and my unusual way of playing. The average gamer who has joined up for some tank mayhem and wants to grind their way through to something more grand and less graceful is going to find it a chore. If your free to play game feels like a chore people are just going to walk away from it if they've not progressed significantly through it.

2. Introduce a separate ranked match mode leagued mode alongside randoms for the more professionally minded and gifted players to enjoy the sorts of games they like. I've seen Serg B talk about owning and such, and I've heard that WG would never implement such a feature into the random battle mode. I agree wholeheartedly that it's unfeasible, unreasonable, and just not worth bothering to do something like that to randoms. Where would good players grind their stock tanks? Where would weaker players pick up tricks from more skilled players? Even if it worked wouldn't matches become a uniform slog and there would be little to no variability of games. The beauty and terror of randoms is that you never know what is going to happen when you click "Battle".

But there are a lot of people now who have found the game itself to their liking but need something that feels like a fight and less like a tank spam-fest to get satisfaction. WG, basic common sense does suggest that these people are very likely to the be the ones who spend the most money on your product, it would be very sound business to not piss them off too much. Not only that but I feel for these ladies and gents. Your game can be turned from a gleeful melee into an infuriating nightmare by the actions of people playing, and if a complete numbskull like me can find that I really shudder to think what's going through the emotional states of the better players sometimes. They probably need valium.

Arguably Clanwars already provides this. Arguably Clanwars is an extremely inelegant and clunky method to get yourself into a single professional match once a week. It's good for the social aspect or training, not much for the game part of the game.

So how about this. A separate from randoms battle mode. Lighter in mayhem but deeper in substance. 9vs9 players. Maximum of one artillery per team. Maximum of one scout. Two tier, not three tier spread as on the main game mode. No revealing the types of tanks the enemy has (much like CW battles). A minute to countdown before the match rather than thirty (so the teams can try to organize) and an 18 minute battle timer. But still teams which are random, within their leagues. Start out with three leagues:

Iron league WR <50%

Steel league WR <54%

Diamond league consisting of the remaining souls who apparently have bionic reflexes.

The above is a rough idea which can be thrashed out, it needs a bit of refinement of course. Perhaps average XP could be used instead, or some other metric.

As this is a separate ranked mode people won't mind a queue for it. If handled like this it might not take more than a few minutes at a time to get into a match (admittedly I've no data to back this up), and it wouldn't impact your Random Battles demographic too much. Even if a few thousand go play ranked at any one time you'll still have a healthy population for the MM at this point.

A lot of the frustration here will evaporate if you do something like this, and you'll get a more welcoming and friendly community here for newcomers who will be more likely to stay with your game for longer and get to the higher tiers where they need to pick up premium.

Hethwill_Khan #2 Posted 11 December 2012 - 02:48 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 33460 battles
  • 551
  • [WOOF] WOOF
  • Member since:
    07-12-2010
why only 4% difference !?

I agree on the Light Tanks point of view.

Arkhell #3 Posted 11 December 2012 - 02:52 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Beta Tester
  • 16942 battles
  • 6,731
  • Member since:
    09-20-2010
First off

View PostCuddly_Spider, on 11 December 2012 - 02:47 PM, said:

Your game can be turned from a gleeful melee into an infuriating nightmare by the actions of people playing, and if a complete numbskull like me can find that I really shudder to think what's going through the emotional states of the better players sometimes. They probably need valium.


yes, yes you are right sometimes i'm mere seconds away from punching my monitor.


as for the idea's you put forth i agree.

as for average exp, this is to much influnced by premium account or not.

Cuddly_Spider #4 Posted 11 December 2012 - 02:52 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 28313 battles
  • 2,668
  • Member since:
    08-13-2011

View PostHethwill_Khan, on 11 December 2012 - 02:48 PM, said:

why only 4% difference !?

I agree on the Light Tanks point of view.

There isn't that much difference between, for example, a 47% wr player and a 49% wr player. There is a bit more with a 51% wr player though. A lot more with a 53% player. A fairly vast disparity of skill between a 54% player and one of us commoners. For each percentile you go up the difference in skill magnifies pretty much exponentially.

But as I say, it's just a rough idea. I'm not the best qualified to judge whether or not to use those numbers. Others should take that mantle up and thrash out what sort of shape such leagues should take if they like the idea. The notion of this being separate from randoms will ironically not be divisive to the playerbase though.

Hethwill_Khan #5 Posted 11 December 2012 - 02:57 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 33460 battles
  • 551
  • [WOOF] WOOF
  • Member since:
    07-12-2010
Indeed.

Eventually and IF WarGaming ever introduces such a system, it may well be based on <50% ; >50% // taking into account only victory ratio, which owes nothing to premium account.

theghostcat #6 Posted 11 December 2012 - 03:03 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 2,724
  • Member since:
    12-03-2011

View PostHethwill_Khan, on 11 December 2012 - 02:57 PM, said:

Indeed.

Eventually and IF WarGaming ever introduces such a system, it may well be based on <50% ; >50% // taking into account only victory ratio, which owes nothing to premium account.

I saw something odd on the US server this weekend.

The question on the home page was: Would you pay for a premium server.
Simple yes/no question.

I'm not sure what that all entails, my first thought was perhaps a form of a separate match making, ranked or other wise - for those willing to pay a bit more...

aGentleTanker #7 Posted 11 December 2012 - 03:05 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 21043 battles
  • 3,462
  • Member since:
    05-20-2011
I hope you get some sleep soon. I played that night also past 1AM...
I like the suggestion very much, however ... this sounds so much better then random, i would dump that gamemode then ;)

Winrate ... make it maybe
-48, 48-52 (here would be 80% i think),52-55, 55+
So I wont be cannonfodder for the better ones ;)

Edited by aGentleTanker, 11 December 2012 - 03:06 PM.


Titan191 #8 Posted 11 December 2012 - 03:07 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 44058 battles
  • 79
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    06-07-2011

View PostCuddly_Spider, on 11 December 2012 - 02:47 PM, said:

1. First let us deal with the simple. Remove all your main line light tanks from scouting duties. Dedicated scout line tanks such as leopards getting into high tier battles is fine - that's what they are there for. When you're a M5 or A-20 and you are just trying to grind middles without any interest in being a scout it's unpleasant as you are basically cannon fodder. Yes, I know a lot of people can do well in those scouts. Yes, I know I've done better in those two than most other tanks. But that's me and my unusual way of playing. The average gamer who has joined up for some tank mayhem and wants to grind their way through to something more grand and less graceful is going to find it a chore. If your free to play game feels like a chore people are just going to walk away from it if they've not progressed significantly through it.

This +1 and make tier V scouts a bit more profitable so even in a bad match you dont lose a lot of credits. The biggest problem is that scout has to be aggressive (well not allways but I think you get my point) and usually dies first because it has to be on the front line. Please don't tell me you have to know how to play them or don't play them at all...
So my point is, why would anyone want a vehicle, that can't really fight head-on and most of the time lose credits... I know I don't, thats why I sold my T-50-2 after 10 battles and rebought T-50 and lost 20% of crew training in the process...  :Smile_sceptic:

aGentleTanker #9 Posted 11 December 2012 - 03:11 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 21043 battles
  • 3,462
  • Member since:
    05-20-2011
Regarding lights and scout, do we really need a high MM spread for them? Especially now that there are light tanks in higher tiers?

lewisunderwood #10 Posted 11 December 2012 - 03:13 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 10002 battles
  • 811
  • Member since:
    12-04-2011
Agree with the scouts, i personally like them and have no problem. But does not mean others have to suffer through the M5/AMX12 when he's in a higher tier battle.
Keep in mind, an e.g. A-20/AMX12 as top tier is also usually a pain for the enemy tanks ... so you can't have all the good rounds without some low tier battles.

View PostCuddly_Spider, on 11 December 2012 - 02:47 PM, said:

Arguably Clanwars already provides this. Arguably Clanwars is an extremely inelegant and clunky method to get yourself into a single professional match once a week. It's good for the social aspect or training, not much for the game part of the game.
[...]
So how about this. A separate from randoms battle mode.

Isn't Company battle exactly for this ?
I never played it and have no idea. But from what i read it is exactly the place where the elite guys can do their thingy/tactical battles outside of clanwars ?

Kedge39 #11 Posted 11 December 2012 - 03:15 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 5653 battles
  • 251
  • [-OC-] -OC-
  • Member since:
    08-19-2011
Hi Cuddly, Interseting post, and well presented in a rational way - are you sure you're not sleeping?

While I am happy with the game as it is, apart from all the rants and rages in the forums, I can see that this additional mode would have appeal.

Therefore I would suggest that you put this to WG, via support? or direct email?, and see if they will consider it.

AngryBanana #12 Posted 11 December 2012 - 03:17 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 15731 battles
  • 2,896
  • Member since:
    05-27-2011

View PostTitan191, on 11 December 2012 - 03:07 PM, said:

So my point is, why would anyone want a vehicle, that can't really fight head-on and most of the time lose credits...
Because you like seeing the enemy team getting slaughtered because of your spotting? Spotting is kinda the point of playing a scout tank, if you don't like that why grind for a T-50-2? And one might also like spraying 57mm rounds in the ass of a T95, setting it on fire 2 times and killing it.

AngryBanana #13 Posted 11 December 2012 - 03:19 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 15731 battles
  • 2,896
  • Member since:
    05-27-2011

View Postlewisunderwood, on 11 December 2012 - 03:13 PM, said:

Isn't Company battle exactly for this ?
I never played it and have no idea. But from what i read it is exactly the place where the elite guys can do their thingy/tactical battles outside of clanwars ?
A company battle requires you to set up your own team, so you need to be with more people(12 mostly) to be able to play that effectively, whilst his idea is basically trying to get the feel of company games without the need to have your own team, if I understand it correctly. Also with company battles you will always have problems with people leaving and then you'll have to wait untill you can get some new ones in etc etc.

Edited by AngryBanana, 11 December 2012 - 03:21 PM.


TheTianBao #14 Posted 11 December 2012 - 03:23 PM

    Captain

  • Clan Commander
  • 8751 battles
  • 2,251
  • [BRAND] BRAND
  • Member since:
    06-15-2011
Seperate Light Tanks : Yes


Seperate Players via WR : NO

Walker28361 #15 Posted 11 December 2012 - 03:28 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 6624 battles
  • 675
  • Member since:
    08-01-2011
Very good ideas especially regarding "mainstream" light tanks, even if I'm too poor a player to qualify for the League it will be great  for the better players.

TRL #16 Posted 11 December 2012 - 03:29 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 14951 battles
  • 334
  • Member since:
    04-15-2011
I don't even think you need the leagues if you reduce the number of players in a team to 9x9/10x10 etc.
Suddenly the 'top gun' (and better) awards take on a greater significance. A player really would have the chance to turn things around with a great game.

Cuddly_Spider #17 Posted 11 December 2012 - 03:33 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 28313 battles
  • 2,668
  • Member since:
    08-13-2011

View PostTheTianBao, on 11 December 2012 - 03:23 PM, said:

Seperate Players via WR : NO

Not as part of the core game. That's the thrust of this. Furthermore the leagued matches, if made smaller as suggested, would be in and of themselves a new game mode which would be played differently than randoms. So even removing the "ranked" part entirely we'd be getting something new to do with our tanks.

Separating players out entirely? Very bad. Giving better (and indeed worse) players a place to find matches against those who have similar ability? Not so bad. Remember poorer players might appreciate a place to fight without someone murdering their entire team like Jack the Ripper on a coffee high in under three minutes too!

View Postlewisunderwood, on 11 December 2012 - 03:13 PM, said:

Isn't Company battle exactly for this ?
I never played it and have no idea. But from what i read it is exactly the place where the elite guys can do their thingy/tactical battles outside of clanwars ?

It's very clunky and tricky to actually get started in. Right now if you want to fight in the next minute or two you only have the opinion of random battle. After almost two years this really is something that needs to be looked at anyway, not so much ranked battles but something... anything... that isn't "random battle" for a quick fight.

View Posttheghostcat, on 11 December 2012 - 03:03 PM, said:

I saw something odd on the US server this weekend.

The question on the home page was: Would you pay for a premium server.
Simple yes/no question.

I'm not sure what that all entails, my first thought was perhaps a form of a separate match making, ranked or other wise - for those willing to pay a bit more...

That would be a colossal mistake on their part. This business model needs a community around it to really make if viable in the long, or even medium term. In the short term it would net them a tidy profit, but they will need people constantly coming back to keep paying for more if they want to live of this game in their retirement. If they divide the game up into haves and have-nots they'll basically be inviting a community meltdown.

lewisunderwood #18 Posted 11 December 2012 - 03:34 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 10002 battles
  • 811
  • Member since:
    12-04-2011

View PostAngryBanana, on 11 December 2012 - 03:19 PM, said:

A company battle requires you to set up your own team, so you need to be with more people(12 mostly) to be able to play that effectively, whilst his idea is basically trying to get the feel of company games without the need to have your own team, if I understand it correctly. Also with company battles you will always have problems with people leaving and then you'll have to wait untill you can get some new ones in etc etc.

Thanks for the clarification. (Sorry i'm out of +1)

AngryBanana #19 Posted 11 December 2012 - 03:35 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 15731 battles
  • 2,896
  • Member since:
    05-27-2011

View PostTRL, on 11 December 2012 - 03:29 PM, said:

I don't even think you need the leagues if you reduce the number of players in a team to 9x9/10x10 etc.
Suddenly the 'top gun' (and better) awards take on a greater significance. A player really would have the chance to turn things around with a great game.
I hadn't even thought of that, but you're completely right, smaller teams mean good players have to make up for fewer noobs in their team, and can make a difference more easily.

TRL #20 Posted 11 December 2012 - 04:02 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 14951 battles
  • 334
  • Member since:
    04-15-2011

View PostAngryBanana, on 11 December 2012 - 03:35 PM, said:

I hadn't even thought of that, but you're completely right, smaller teams mean good players have to make up for fewer noobs in their team, and can make a difference more easily.

Exactly this.
Credit where credit's due though, this suggestion has already been bandied about in numerous threads.
Personally I think it's a great and easily implemented idea that makes a skill based MM largely unnecessary.

Kudos to whoever suggested it first.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users