Jump to content


Two big changes WG need to make


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

NoHeal4u #21 Posted 11 December 2012 - 04:17 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 10310 battles
  • 550
  • Member since:
    05-05-2011
Some of my RL friends stopped playing because of frustration which A20,M5, Pnz3/4 bring to new players. I was lucky to play KV1 line avoiding that frustration and got myself addicted.  Ive got my share of A20 too. It was a horror back then for a newbie, id play it better now but thats not the point. Those tanks are for veterans and forcing newbs to play them will just send them away from the game. All in all out of 4 people from my close friends circle im the only one thats still playing. System made 3 people out of 4 to leave the game because of A20 frustration, someone from marketing part of the company should tell them to change it if developers cant see it for themselves.

EDIT: Not to mention AMX40 with its MM back then. My friend told me: " I'm insane to play this ****"

Edited by NoHeal4u, 11 December 2012 - 04:21 PM.


Kirage #22 Posted 11 December 2012 - 04:29 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 32469 battles
  • 277
  • Member since:
    08-11-2012
I like the idea for more skilled players to be able to play with equals :)

lewisunderwood #23 Posted 11 December 2012 - 04:38 PM

    Warrant Officer

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

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.

Well i'd assume, if you face a good 3 man platoon in a 9vs9 battle, your chances to win are slightly decreased as they are 1/3 (and coordinated) of the enemies force. In 15vs15, 3 man platoons are only 1/5 which is usually fine.

TempSGK #24 Posted 11 December 2012 - 04:54 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 9072 battles
  • 1,035
  • Member since:
    07-09-2010
Yeah astonishingly I still remember the days of using the A-20 back in beta, Hell I tell you. Hell

LandyDave #25 Posted 11 December 2012 - 05:02 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 13915 battles
  • 333
  • [-P7-] -P7-
  • Member since:
    05-12-2012
I think the lights help players to think about camo, spotting and being useful in a low tier. The A 20 forced me to go on you tubeand learn fom experienced players replays.

Skill based mm doesn't belong in wot. We already have tank companies and clan wars. Let me tell you something you may complain about noob teams now wait until you get ripped apart by really good team a few times. You'll soon want the random noobs back.

TRL #26 Posted 11 December 2012 - 05:05 PM

    Staff Sergeant

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

View Postlewisunderwood, on 11 December 2012 - 04:38 PM, said:

Well i'd assume, if you face a good 3 man platoon in a 9vs9 battle, your chances to win are slightly decreased as they are 1/3 (and coordinated) of the enemies force. In 15vs15, 3 man platoons are only 1/5 which is usually fine.

True. But I've never minded losing to good players playing well, and well co-ordinated 3 man platoons don't seem that common tbh.
Not a game breaker, and I'd gladly run with that possibility.

Edited by TRL, 11 December 2012 - 05:07 PM.


disklord #27 Posted 11 December 2012 - 05:22 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 26299 battles
  • 378
  • [TURBO] TURBO
  • Member since:
    07-12-2011

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

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.

There is no metric that works for this. It is still based on teams and so any metric will converge to the same values we have now. There are two main cases:

Case 1: Random & Leagues have their own stats

Players will be assigned to the leagues from their random stats as league stats are only valid in their own league and aren't comparable: Every league will have roughly the same XP and Winrate distribution despite the different skills in the leagues. This forces players to have enough 'meaningful' random battles to be sorted into the leagues. (There'll still be an average winrate of 50%-draw% and the total amount of xp permatch is also lower with smaller teams.)

Case 2: Shared stats over random and leagues

Shared stats over both random and leagues will lower the stats of people who are on the lower end of their league's skill range and boost stats of those who are on the upper end of a league's skill range. This makes the stats of league players meaningless and can lead to players who oscillate between leagues.

disklord #28 Posted 11 December 2012 - 05:25 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 26299 battles
  • 378
  • [TURBO] TURBO
  • Member since:
    07-12-2011

View PostLandyDave, on 11 December 2012 - 05:02 PM, said:

Skill based mm doesn't belong in wot. We already have tank companies and clan wars. Let me tell you something you may complain about noob teams now wait until you get ripped apart by really good team a few times. You'll soon want the random noobs back.

Nah. It'll just force him down a league (decreased stats) where he will be top. This increases his stats and he ends up one league up as bottom and it continues.

Cuddly_Spider #29 Posted 11 December 2012 - 05:45 PM

    Major

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

View Postdisklord, on 11 December 2012 - 05:22 PM, said:

There is no metric that works for this. It is still based on teams and so any metric will converge to the same values we have now. There are two main cases:

Case 1: Random & Leagues have their own stats

Players will be assigned to the leagues from their random stats as league stats are only valid in their own league and aren't comparable: Every league will have roughly the same XP and Winrate distribution despite the different skills in the leagues. This forces players to have enough 'meaningful' random battles to be sorted into the leagues. (There'll still be an average winrate of 50%-draw% and the total amount of xp permatch is also lower with smaller teams.)

Case 2: Shared stats over random and leagues

Shared stats over both random and leagues will lower the stats of people who are on the lower end of their league's skill range and boost stats of those who are on the upper end of a league's skill range. This makes the stats of league players meaningless and can lead to players who oscillate between leagues.

In a 9vs9 battle any such system need not be so exact. Simply place people in the appropriate league for whatever stat you care to use (winrate and average XP for the current vehicle over the last 50 matches is what I'd go with personally), but include overlaps between the leagues. Players who are on the top/bottom of any particular league could find themselves in either league match depending on what the matchmaker has available, if they did particularly well in those matches they'd be raised even further. Such buffer zones between the leagues would help make this system run with more matchmaking stability too.

Even with this mode people will mostly play randoms (9vs9 doesn't give a lot of spare damage to make silver or XP on), so I doubt that such a mode would pollute the stat data too much.

View PostLandyDave, on 11 December 2012 - 05:02 PM, said:

I think the lights help players to think about camo, spotting and being useful in a low tier. The A 20 forced me to go on you tubeand learn fom experienced players replays.

Very few people looking to just play tanks is going to care to "be useful" as a tank without effective weaponry. There some who will do that (go look up my T-50-2 or VK2801 performance), but for the most part what attracts people here is the idea of being in a steel machine tearing the hell out of some village as you march on to destruction of your enemies. "Forcing" people to basically not play tanks as tanks, when all they want to play is tanks, is telling them to stop playing altogether. And most people who want to play this game certainly aren't going to bother watching replays and such.

At what tier does the game lose the most players?

http://overlord-wot....t=1354814979397

Tier 4.

View PostLandyDave, on 11 December 2012 - 05:02 PM, said:

Skill based mm doesn't belong in wot. We already have tank companies and clan wars. Let me tell you something you may complain about noob teams now wait until you get ripped apart by really good team a few times. You'll soon want the random noobs back.

I'm not complaining about this at all. A few others are, and really they do have a legitimate issue. There is no bot or AI support in this game. If they want to have a tactically challenging and interesting intellectual combat experience they need to piss-ball about with clanwars, which is basically unsuitable for that. First you need a clan, then you need to organize a match, then you need to make the cut for the match, etc etc and all for one match.

A way for players to get those matches with as much, or at least some, simplicity and speed really is required in a game like this, or it will basically not retain as many hardcore players (and therefore community members) as it needs.

Slyspy #30 Posted 11 December 2012 - 05:53 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 14731 battles
  • 17,503
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011
I suspect that the "special" MM for light tanks will be reduced as more actual high tier lights are added to the game. At the moment the Chaffee et al fill the gap at high tier. That said though they couldn't go to a normal +/-1 MM because they are so much more effective than the other tier fives. Agree that it would be better for the game as a whole if scout tanks were a branch of the main slog up the tech tree.

spichopat #31 Posted 11 December 2012 - 05:58 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 20371 battles
  • 412
  • [EFE-X] EFE-X
  • Member since:
    03-28-2012
I don't want to play with competitive players.

Cuddly_Spider #32 Posted 11 December 2012 - 06:19 PM

    Major

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

View Postspichopat, on 11 December 2012 - 05:58 PM, said:

I don't want to play with competitive players.

Exactly. If this were done you wouldn't have to.

Ribba #33 Posted 11 December 2012 - 06:36 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 5418 battles
  • 956
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

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

Seperate Players via WR : NO

I agree. I see no way to make this work over time.

But if there was implemented leagues in WoT, maybe we should be able to choose ourself which league we would play in and be able to jump between them as we want? For instance if we ha a Beginner and a Standard league for the players that play WoT for fun (standard league would basically be what the random game is today), and a Competition league for they who are looking for a more serious challenge? And each of the leagues then should have separate stats.

And to avoid/reduce the chance of good players to play to much in the Beginner league, there could for instance be a handicap system based on, for instance, either win ratio, efficiency or average xp (excluding premium) etc etc, which reduces you XP and credit income with a given percantage. For instance if you are a 60% player (if we use win ratio for the Beginner league), you get for instance 40% reduction on both XP and credits in any vehicle you play in the Beginner league. If you have a 55% win ratio, you would for instance get a 20% reduction.

To avoid inexperience to jump into the competition league, there should be some "qualification" or something. For instance a player can only enter this league in vehicles he/she has performed very good in (again average XP or efficiency could be used as a measurement) over time (for instance must have played at least 100 matches in this vehicle). Also the cost/reward could be a solution (good play gives you high credit reward (not XP), bad play gives you high repair bills).

Edited by Ribba, 11 December 2012 - 06:39 PM.


Fawlty_Turrets #34 Posted 11 December 2012 - 08:42 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 21087 battles
  • 1,582
  • [THRIL] THRIL
  • Member since:
    04-18-2011
I agree here with Cuddly. The whole scouting thing is just fliipin' crazy. Not implimented properly AT ALL. A-20 is crazy frustrating, as is M5. If WG want taks to go in first and "spot" then they need to be able to:
Go un-noticed ( many high tiers can see as far, if not further than you)
Be survivable (Lol, oneshot city)
Be USEFUL besides spotting ( maybe have a damage bonus, or grant bonus xp to scout and first hitter on a target they request fire on etc)

As for ranked matches, yes please! The only reason I have not done companies is the INSANE amount of cash you lose if you lose. Why is that even needed? WG, FRUSTRATING players is NOT the best way to keep em keen. Keeping em HAPPY is.
If I get mashed in matches like this, I know it's because I got outplayed-I'm cool with that. Also, you will probably get more even and fun battles! Now who does not want that?

Slyspy #35 Posted 11 December 2012 - 08:50 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 14731 battles
  • 17,503
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011

View PostFawlty_Turrets, on 11 December 2012 - 08:42 PM, said:

I agree here with Cuddly. The whole scouting thing is just fliipin' crazy. Not implimented properly AT ALL. A-20 is crazy frustrating, as is M5. If WG want taks to go in first and "spot" then they need to be able to:
Go un-noticed ( many high tiers can see as far, if not further than you)
Be survivable (Lol, oneshot city)
Be USEFUL besides spotting ( maybe have a damage bonus, or grant bonus xp to scout and first hitter on a target they request fire on etc)

As for ranked matches, yes please! The only reason I have not done companies is the INSANE amount of cash you lose if you lose. Why is that even needed? WG, FRUSTRATING players is NOT the best way to keep em keen. Keeping em HAPPY is.
If I get mashed in matches like this, I know it's because I got outplayed-I'm cool with that. Also, you will probably get more even and fun battles! Now who does not want that?

Actually I enjoy playing scout tanks. I may not be great at it (some replays you see truely show that skill certainly effects individual performances) but IMO the tanks themselves don't need much doing. A little more view range and acceleration would help most of them. The M5 for example is actually a decent tank if you get to know it, though it is easy to hate. The only real problems are: Firstly, that scout tanks feature in the main grind, which they shouldn't because it puts people off the game and wastes a slot on the team because the driver doesn't know or care what to do. Secondly, scouts are much more crew dependant than other tank types. Since few people seem to carry crews over (or so it seems on the battlefield) especially when tank types switch from light and medium at various points in the tree alot of tier four tanks are likely working with suboptimal crews.

Edit:

I believe I've made my opinion of ranked matches know in other threads.

Edited by Slyspy, 11 December 2012 - 08:51 PM.


Dronier #36 Posted 11 December 2012 - 10:55 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 9909 battles
  • 444
  • [DEFY] DEFY
  • Member since:
    04-14-2011
Cuddly my love when are you taking the top devs job at wargaming if not why the hell not.. Love the idea through and through.. well put over all too ..  :arta:

OMG HAHAHHA come on who neg reped me for that comment FAN Boy no doubt bless you come on be brave and say why you neg repped this harmless jokey comment . LMAO...  :Smile_veryhappy::Smile-tongue::facepalmic:

Edited by Dronier, 12 December 2012 - 02:40 PM.


Homer_J #37 Posted 12 December 2012 - 12:48 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Moderator
  • 33120 battles
  • 36,608
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

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.

I agree with this and always have done, maybe the admission from Overlord means WG have also realised it.

Quote

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'm against any kind of ranked mode, we already have company battles and special competitions.  We had a 2 min wait tonight for a tier 8 company battle which pretty much shows how much people actually want an organised fight.

Your idea is doomed to failure because it will never have the numbers needed to keep it going, (even with 9v9 teams), especially when people start seeing how it ruins their precious stats.  For that reason I don't think WG should spend development time trying to introduce it.

Cuddly_Spider #38 Posted 12 December 2012 - 09:48 AM

    Major

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

View PostHomer_J, on 12 December 2012 - 12:48 AM, said:

I'm against any kind of ranked mode, we already have company battles and special competitions.  We had a 2 min wait tonight for a tier 8 company battle which pretty much shows how much people actually want an organised fight.

Your idea is doomed to failure because it will never have the numbers needed to keep it going, (even with 9v9 teams), especially when people start seeing how it ruins their precious stats.  For that reason I don't think WG should spend development time trying to introduce it.

In a sense I agree with you though. Where rankings are concerned we are talking about a lot of trial and error and a possibly difficult development process to get such a thing working. But a smaller mode such as the described, 9vs9 with a single tier spread, would be less "spammy" and the better players who want less spammy matches would have that option. It would hardly drag a lot of players out of the main pool either.

In another sense I disagree with you. Why wouldn't it have the numbers to keep it going? There are well over a hundred thousand players on during the typical daytime play, if just 1 or 2 percent decide they are up for that sort of battle then it'd turn out ok population wise.

Indy_Bones #39 Posted 12 December 2012 - 10:24 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 34015 battles
  • 1,605
  • [WHO] WHO
  • Member since:
    06-06-2011

View PostHomer_J, on 12 December 2012 - 12:48 AM, said:

We had a 2 min wait tonight for a tier 8 company battle which pretty much shows how much people actually want an organised fight.

A point to consider here is that it may well be the necessary organisation and 'messing around' to get into a company battle that puts a lot of players who would enjoy the games off them.

If someone's in a competitive mood and wants a strong game against good players, they can't simply click "Ranked Battle" (or whatever), they have to find 11 other people who want to do the same in order to make their 'company', and then the MM needs to find another company doing the same for them to play against as well.

So you're maybe talking 10-15 mins to get your 'company' together, then another 2-3 mins for the MM to find someone to play, so maybe up to 20 mins or more for a single match, and IMHO - THAT'S what puts players off stuff like CB/CW, as against the competitive aspect.

If however you could simply click a button which would cut the 10-15 min prep time out instantly and you've then got just a short wait for a game - I'm sure a lot of people would be willing to give it a try (even if they prefer Randoms overall).

EDIT - Nice to see random Neg Rep for no apparent reason - GJ guys...

Edited by Indy_Bones, 24 December 2012 - 07:02 PM.


SIPU #40 Posted 12 December 2012 - 11:34 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 19414 battles
  • 724
  • Member since:
    03-31-2012
I play to have fun, I do not want to be forced into certain group.
Randoms is enough fun for me, for more competitive play I join company battles when I feel I want to.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users