Jump to content


Na`Vi.G2A quitting eSports in WoT


  • Please log in to reply
64 replies to this topic

_EXODUZ_ #1 Posted 30 June 2017 - 02:53 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35449 battles
  • 1,941
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    11-05-2014

Source: http://read.navi-gam...ease_wot_roster (in Russian).

 



Reasons:

- No development of eSpots in WoT

- Same prize pool over years and years

- Other teams quitting (Virtus.pro, PENTA sports, HELLRAISERS, etc).



Dundato #2 Posted 30 June 2017 - 02:57 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 26390 battles
  • 715
  • Member since:
    06-09-2012
Never heard of them

Dragonlordcv #3 Posted 30 June 2017 - 02:58 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 23986 battles
  • 861
  • Member since:
    03-10-2012
WG cries a river now :trollface:

Achibot #4 Posted 30 June 2017 - 02:59 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 17959 battles
  • 2,225
  • [HUSH-] HUSH-
  • Member since:
    05-16-2012

View PostDundato, on 30 June 2017 - 01:57 PM, said:

Never heard of them

 

A top Russian team, which is why it matters as the Russian market is *at least* 5x the EU one. Interesting times.

Edited by Achibot, 30 June 2017 - 02:59 PM.


Phobos4321 #5 Posted 30 June 2017 - 03:06 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 43360 battles
  • 8,550
  • Member since:
    09-27-2011
perhaps their parents just didnt want to drive them around anymore ...

Balc0ra #6 Posted 30 June 2017 - 03:07 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 67385 battles
  • 17,103
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

So the people that run it are saying $ 800.000 in price money last year was not enough to keep going? I mean WOT as an E-sport has never really "exploded" vs other games. It's grown, but way slower them anything. And when the sport don't grow, prices and the contest won't either. And Wot E-sport early on for most was simply just to go to the stream, and spam "when is the type 59 contest" in chat. As that's what WG did to pull people to watch their streams. Thus it ended up with hardly anyone caring about the event vs the stream prizes. Thus when the contest was over, 99% of the viewers left the stream. And in the end... no one cared about who won.

 

That and I suspect the constant spam in the garage to go watch their stream did not help either. I never cared for it since the early seasons was just 8 min of camping, and a staring contest. And the team that lost patience first and rushed, usually lost. Was better last year with more aggressive play. But when the first seasons are like that, you can't expect people to stick with it.

 

 


Edited by Balc0ra, 30 June 2017 - 03:10 PM.


_EXODUZ_ #7 Posted 30 June 2017 - 03:31 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35449 battles
  • 1,941
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    11-05-2014

View PostBalc0ra, on 30 June 2017 - 03:07 PM, said:

So the people that run it are saying $ 800.000 in price money last year was not enough to keep going? I mean WOT as an E-sport has never really "exploded" vs other games. It's grown, but way slower them anything. And when the sport don't grow, prices and the contest won't either. And Wot E-sport early on for most was simply just to go to the stream, and spam "when is the type 59 contest" in chat. As that's what WG did to pull people to watch their streams. Thus it ended up with hardly anyone caring about the event vs the stream prizes. Thus when the contest was over, 99% of the viewers left the stream. And in the end... no one cared about who won.

 

That and I suspect the constant spam in the garage to go watch their stream did not help either. I never cared for it since the early seasons was just 8 min of camping, and a staring contest. And the team that lost patience first and rushed, usually lost. Was better last year with more aggressive play. But when the first seasons are like that, you can't expect people to stick with it.

 

 

 

The prize pool this year was 300k. 800k is what NAVI earned during their career.

 

https://www.esportse...and-finals-2017


Edited by _EXODUZ_, 30 June 2017 - 03:32 PM.


kripton69 #8 Posted 30 June 2017 - 03:32 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 1208 battles
  • 389
  • [-UM] -UM
  • Member since:
    06-23-2016

It's not surprising. The game is almost exclusively balanced based on the complaints of below average 48% win rate players and all the broken things are inevitably going to. Most notably Maus as the most recent example. There are lots and lots of players who think it's the correct approach to balance the game to cater the incompetent below average players instead of making them feel that they have to improve. Why exactly? Why would you want advice from someone who obviously doesn't know what they are talking about? If you are to invest your money would you take the advice of Warren Buffett or someone who's consistently losing his money in the stock market?

 

It's the same concept. If you invest your money based on how someone who doesn't have a clue tells you how to, you're going to lose badly. The same way you can't balance a game based on how players who don't understand the game at all want it to be changed. These players want. The Maus nerf thread(should be on the first or second page of this forum) had a typical example of a player whose average win rate at tier 10 was around 47-48% and his second best performing tank had a win rate of like 51% with many tanks having win rates like 45%. With Maus though his win rate was over 59% and this player also did 20% more damage with his Maus than his second best tier 10 tanks. Perfectly balanced. This player was obviously opposing the Maus nerf and saw nothing wrong with it in its current iteration although all the statistics point that it's the most overpowered tier 10 tank for a long time(maybe ever). This player was convinced that "Maus can be easily penned in the turret and low plate and the job is monkey proof with gold ammos". Gold ammo 

 

But Wargaming wanted to cater to the needs of these players by making a tank that's impossible to fail with. Now what did people really expect? You can't have a successful competitive game if all the balancing considerations are made with short term greed and the complaints of players who don't have the slightest idea about the game. It's just an impossible equation.


Edited by kripton69, 30 June 2017 - 03:35 PM.


Raffy5 #9 Posted 30 June 2017 - 03:33 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 26711 battles
  • 1,977
  • Member since:
    07-09-2012
Cri mi a river.

speedphlux #10 Posted 30 June 2017 - 03:35 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 44206 battles
  • 1,813
  • [TZAR] TZAR
  • Member since:
    01-28-2011
*edited* 

Edited by Jbnn, 01 July 2017 - 06:55 AM.
This post has been edited by the moderation team due to inappropriate remarks.


unhappy_bunny #11 Posted 30 June 2017 - 03:40 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 18577 battles
  • 2,862
  • [-OC-] -OC-
  • Member since:
    08-01-2012

We're doomed. Doomed I tell ya.

 

As someone who has taken no interest in e-sports I can honestly ask: Does it really matter? Is it going to have a major impact on the game? If it is then I will start to care, but if not, then so what?

 



gpalsson #12 Posted 30 June 2017 - 03:40 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 22331 battles
  • 8,132
  • Member since:
    04-13-2013

Thank the wg balance team. You can't have both p2w,, terrible balance,  huge rng and esport. 

Then again, who the duck cares. 


Edited by gpalsson, 30 June 2017 - 03:52 PM.


HundeWurst #13 Posted 30 June 2017 - 03:40 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 70294 battles
  • 4,380
  • [ROIDS] ROIDS
  • Member since:
    02-06-2012

What a "surprise" that was...

 

They tried for ages now to promote WoT as something it is definetly not. An "E-Sports" capable game.

We have all the major and minor mechanics which just cry out if you want them to be something E-sports like.

 

Also Wargaming should know who their customers are, or who their players are. I mean they should know the best. But for sure they are not only 14+ years old childen spending their pocketmoney on the game but grown up adults with a paying job (and a family). They are most likely not intersted in something like E-Sports.

 

So we have to big flaws. Its just the only right thing to pull the plug. I am just surprised that all this did not happen any earlier.



lonigus #14 Posted 30 June 2017 - 03:41 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 32631 battles
  • 7,996
  • Member since:
    09-26-2011

Iam actually surprised they stayed for so long including other teams which specialize in other games with multiple times higher prize pools.

 

And if we are being serious... WoT is utterly horrible for e-sports with all the terribly balanced maps and tanks with SO MUCH rng included on top of that.



250swb #15 Posted 30 June 2017 - 03:44 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 23153 battles
  • 5,265
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-23-2015

I'm glad they were good at something in their life, but I pity the poor people who have to hear about 'when I played eSports.........' for the next seventy years.



Troubledove #16 Posted 30 June 2017 - 03:44 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 43007 battles
  • 2,377
  • [METAL] METAL
  • Member since:
    09-07-2011

What has eaten WoT's and WG:s value as eSport platform:

 

- Balance ... when 2/3rd of tier 10 tanks are unusable in competitive scene its obvious something is wrong

- Lack of Fair Playground ... WG has only lately made some effort against cheating and unfair advantage giving modding. It simply feels that WG doesnt care about fairness of the playground at all, that eats away the eSports credibility incredibly effective.

- Statism ... Essentially WoT is still in beta status. While it works well - the concept of the game is still "throw bunch of tanks in the field and fight" in essence. Still no larger maps, still no "grand" game. Things are added and removed but the core issues of this game are not touched - I'm talking about things like map size where bigger maps would allow greater tactical approaches. Currently on competitive games the maps are so tiny that you know what enemy is doing by spotting few tanks.

- Powercreep ... It doesnt seem decent at all that game is f2p but some of the greatest assets in competitive games are gotten by money. This overlaps with balance, feeling that you need to toss money to WG to keep the edge is unreasonable.

 

WoT is fun game with decent competitive branch. But because WoT's core is casual shooty-tooty-tanky-spanky the competitive side is always lagging because of that, nothing is designed competitiveness in mind - everything is designed for pleasure of masses and average minds. That's why WoT is not hot thing on eSports - it lack the some of the qualities that GAMERS needs to enjoy the game and feel comfortable playing and committing.



NUKLEAR_SLUG #17 Posted 30 June 2017 - 03:48 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 30529 battles
  • 2,561
  • Member since:
    06-13-2015
So what? If they leave then it just means someone else will take their place. I'm sure there's plenty other teams would like a shot at that prize pool.

Dragonlordcv #18 Posted 30 June 2017 - 03:49 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 23986 battles
  • 861
  • Member since:
    03-10-2012

View Postunhappy_bunny, on 30 June 2017 - 02:40 PM, said:

We're doomed. Doomed I tell ya.

 

As someone who has taken no interest in e-sports I can honestly ask: Does it really matter? Is it going to have a major impact on the game? If it is then I will start to care, but if not, then so what?

 

 

Its the end of WOT as we know it :harp:

Jigabachi #19 Posted 30 June 2017 - 03:53 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 17948 battles
  • 19,584
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011
Who cares?
"Progaming" a game like this is and always was a joke.

Schmeksiman #20 Posted 30 June 2017 - 04:02 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 16406 battles
  • 6,601
  • [INC] INC
  • Member since:
    03-10-2012

View PostTroubledove, on 30 June 2017 - 03:44 PM, said:

What has eaten WoT's and WG:s value as eSport platform:

 

- Balance ... when 2/3rd of tier 10 tanks are unusable in competitive scene its obvious something is wrong

- Lack of Fair Playground ... WG has only lately made some effort against cheating and unfair advantage giving modding. It simply feels that WG doesnt care about fairness of the playground at all, that eats away the eSports credibility incredibly effective.

- Statism ... Essentially WoT is still in beta status. While it works well - the concept of the game is still "throw bunch of tanks in the field and fight" in essence. Still no larger maps, still no "grand" game. Things are added and removed but the core issues of this game are not touched - I'm talking about things like map size where bigger maps would allow greater tactical approaches. Currently on competitive games the maps are so tiny that you know what enemy is doing by spotting few tanks.

- Powercreep ... It doesnt seem decent at all that game is f2p but some of the greatest assets in competitive games are gotten by money. This overlaps with balance, feeling that you need to toss money to WG to keep the edge is unreasonable.

 

WoT is fun game with decent competitive branch. But because WoT's core is casual shooty-tooty-tanky-spanky the competitive side is always lagging because of that, nothing is designed competitiveness in mind - everything is designed for pleasure of masses and average minds. That's why WoT is not hot thing on eSports - it lack the some of the qualities that GAMERS needs to enjoy the game and feel comfortable playing and committing.

 

And in between all that you've missed the most important reason why WoT isn't working out as esports - there isn't a widely available mode that would resemble the current 7/68 format.

 

I do like WGL but I can perfectly understand why majority of players aren't interested in it. Nothing you see there is usable for you personally in randoms, since it's mostly tactical based you'll never be able to learn much unless you're a serious FC analysing the impact of various positions they use. 7/68 isn't a bad mode and can be a lot of fun without Maus spam but the game needed something like that accessible to the rest of us within the client.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users