Jump to content


Improve game play and MM

EXAMPLE

  • Please log in to reply
33 replies to this topic

PASAN_1 #1 Posted 14 December 2017 - 09:19 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 71347 battles
  • 69
  • [Z-A-G] Z-A-G
  • Member since:
    12-02-2014

I will give solution for only RANDOM battles in WOT and this is my example.

Random battles are massive play in WOT so most off us have issue with teams and MM in random battles.And it is stupid to play 30 battles and have 2 wins.It is frustrating. 

So my example:

Delete bases in random and

First 5 players by dmg and exp will got win,exp and credit 

Second five players will got draw with lees exp and credit 

Last five will got lose and more lees credit.

I think that this solution will improve game and bring you back players WG because you losing them rapidly.THINK.

WHAT YOU THINK PLAYERS?



Slyspy #2 Posted 14 December 2017 - 09:22 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 14202 battles
  • 16,695
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011

View PostPASAN_1, on 14 December 2017 - 09:19 PM, said:

I will give solution for only RANDOM battles in WOT and this is my example.

Random battles are massive play in WOT so most off us have issue with teams and MM in random battles.And it is stupid to play 30 battles and have 2 wins.It is frustrating. 

So my example:

Delete bases in random and

First 5 players by dmg and exp will got win,exp and credit 

Second five players will got draw with lees exp and credit 

Last five will got lose and more lees credit.

I think that this solution will improve game and bring you back players WG because you losing them rapidly.THINK.

WHAT YOU THINK PLAYERS?

 

I think that you are using exp to determine who gets what exp. You should stop and THINK.

PASAN_1 #3 Posted 14 December 2017 - 09:27 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 71347 battles
  • 69
  • [Z-A-G] Z-A-G
  • Member since:
    12-02-2014
Can you be more specific please Slyspy 

Balc0ra #4 Posted 14 December 2017 - 09:29 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 66275 battles
  • 16,279
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View PostPASAN_1, on 14 December 2017 - 09:19 PM, said:

WHAT YOU THINK PLAYERS?

 

I think you just found the fastest way to punish bad and good players and force them to leave the game even faster, not coming back. Effectively making most never earn credits, and the good players earn more. Making bad players and sub 50% player spend 3 to 4 times longer pr grind, as they get zero XP more often then the rest. I can see that working. And going by how ranked was on season 1. The only thing this will do when it's "lost". Is force half the team to run for the red line to farm damage to not lose credits, leaving the rest to die faster. We have all seen it before.  And console already has a game mode without bases. It's the worst one they have. 

Edited by Balc0ra, 14 December 2017 - 09:29 PM.


Slyspy #5 Posted 14 December 2017 - 09:35 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 14202 battles
  • 16,695
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011

View PostPASAN_1, on 14 December 2017 - 09:27 PM, said:

Can you be more specific please Slyspy 

 

You are using dam and exp to determine exp and credit.

OreH75 #6 Posted 14 December 2017 - 09:37 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 47894 battles
  • 2,137
  • [RANGR] RANGR
  • Member since:
    05-29-2013

View PostPASAN_1, on 14 December 2017 - 09:19 PM, said:

THINK.

WHAT YOU THINK PLAYERS?

 

WORST IDEA AFTER HISTORICAL BATTLES

Edited by OreH75, 14 December 2017 - 09:44 PM.


PASAN_1 #7 Posted 14 December 2017 - 09:39 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 71347 battles
  • 69
  • [Z-A-G] Z-A-G
  • Member since:
    12-02-2014
But what need to determinate exp and credit.Here is example to force all to play smart.Force all to earn win.I don t think what you saying.This solution is for every player individual.How you play you will got reward,not like now 2 or 3 players win and half team have 0.

PASAN_1 #8 Posted 14 December 2017 - 09:42 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 71347 battles
  • 69
  • [Z-A-G] Z-A-G
  • Member since:
    12-02-2014

View PostOreH75, on 14 December 2017 - 09:37 PM, said:

 

WORST IDEA AFTER HISTORICAL BATTLES

 

Can you enplane me why is that?

Edited by PASAN_1, 14 December 2017 - 09:44 PM.


OreH75 #9 Posted 14 December 2017 - 09:47 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 47894 battles
  • 2,137
  • [RANGR] RANGR
  • Member since:
    05-29-2013

View PostPASAN_1, on 14 December 2017 - 09:42 PM, said:

 

Can you enplane me why is that?

 

Shooting Tigers and panthers with shermans with "historical"pen values wasn't very successful.

PASAN_1 #10 Posted 14 December 2017 - 09:52 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 71347 battles
  • 69
  • [Z-A-G] Z-A-G
  • Member since:
    12-02-2014

View PostOreH75, on 14 December 2017 - 09:47 PM, said:

 

Shooting Tigers and panthers with shermans with "historical"pen values wasn't very successful.

 

But 5 Sherman kill tiger in hysterical battle 

OIias_of_Sunhillow #11 Posted 14 December 2017 - 09:57 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 24548 battles
  • 2,549
  • Member since:
    07-20-2011

View PostPASAN_1, on 14 December 2017 - 08:52 PM, said:

 

But 5 Sherman kill tiger in hysterical battle 

 

Yeah, that was funny.

Balc0ra #12 Posted 14 December 2017 - 10:03 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 66275 battles
  • 16,279
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View PostPASAN_1, on 14 December 2017 - 09:39 PM, said:

But what need to determinate exp and credit.Here is example to force all to play smart.Force all to earn win.I don t think what you saying.This solution is for every player individual.How you play you will got reward,not like now 2 or 3 players win and half team have 0.

 

Again... 9 out 10 games it won't reward those that did "good" or everything. It will reward those that sat at the back farming damage. And when you lose and everyone does nothing, it will reward bad play as well.

Aikl #13 Posted 14 December 2017 - 10:03 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25547 battles
  • 4,349
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

Ugh. Winning should be the ultimate objective, despite leading to some dumb two-minute mark caps on encounter. This sounds like an even worse idea than rewarding 'top losers' equally as the winners; another way to ensure that the goal of the gameplay will only be to farm damage/experience - not doing things that makes you win. Compare to the first edition of ranked battles, for instance. Pretty stupid.

 

The true fix to MM is not having a dumb pattern where your top three tanks are very likely to decide the outcome of the battle. Ultimately that leads to only one- and two-tier matches. For credit drain purposes, increase repair costs while enabling more of a profit on decently good games. Ideally this would lead to T8 credit farming being a bit more reliant on 'playing for the win' rather than sheer bot-like damagefarming. I've tried playing extremely passively, and it's staggering how much credits you make even when you don't win. Yes, even with a JT88. It's not very fun, but many people think sitting in one spot all game is fun and dynamic, apparently. It's also rather effective, sadly.


Edited by Aikl, 14 December 2017 - 10:06 PM.


PASAN_1 #14 Posted 14 December 2017 - 10:11 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 71347 battles
  • 69
  • [Z-A-G] Z-A-G
  • Member since:
    12-02-2014

View PostAikl, on 14 December 2017 - 10:03 PM, said:

Ugh. Winning should be the ultimate objective, despite leading to some dumb two-minute mark caps on encounter. This sounds like an even worse idea than rewarding 'top losers' equally as the winners; another way to ensure that the goal of the gameplay will only be to farm damage/experience - not doing things that makes you win. Compare to the first edition of ranked battles, for instance. Pretty stupid.

 

The true fix to MM is not having a dumb pattern where your top three tanks are very likely to decide the outcome of the battle. Ultimately that leads to only one- and two-tier matches. For credit drain purposes, increase repair costs while enabling more of a profit on decently good games. Ideally this would lead to T8 credit farming being a bit more reliant on 'playing for the win' rather than sheer bot-like damagefarming. I've tried playing extremely passively, and it's staggering how much credits you make even when you don't win. Yes, even with a JT88. It's not very fun, but many people think sitting in one spot all game is fun and dynamic, apparently. It's also rather effective, sadly.

 

My point is that WG punish players with lose and credits who playing good in losing team.And if you play like i sad above 30 battles and win just 2 it is frustrating and stupid.Point is that you need to do your job for win,to win.That is my point. And it don t need to be just dmg who will decide who goes in top 5 or top last,spot,dmg blocked,driven distance.You know what i mean.

Homer_J #15 Posted 14 December 2017 - 10:15 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 28767 battles
  • 30,039
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

View PostPASAN_1, on 14 December 2017 - 08:39 PM, said:

But what need to determinate exp and credit.Here is example to force all to play smart.Force all to earn win.

 

The current system rewards winning.  If that doesn't encourage people to play well and win then I don't know what will.  Though in your case it seems to have failed.

Stat_Padder #16 Posted 14 December 2017 - 10:20 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 39969 battles
  • 559
  • Member since:
    04-29-2011

View PostPASAN_1, on 14 December 2017 - 08:19 PM, said:

I will give solution for only RANDOM battles in WOT and this is my example.

Random battles are massive play in WOT so most off us have issue with teams and MM in random battles.And it is stupid to play 30 battles and have 2 wins.It is frustrating. 

So my example:

Delete bases in random and

First 5 players by dmg and exp will got win,exp and credit 

Second five players will got draw with lees exp and credit 

Last five will got lose and more lees credit.

I think that this solution will improve game and bring you back players WG because you losing them rapidly.THINK.

WHAT YOU THINK PLAYERS?

 

"Da.. daaaaaaaa" what a surprise another 40% player posting a MM post. 

Balc0ra #17 Posted 14 December 2017 - 10:29 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 66275 battles
  • 16,279
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View PostPASAN_1, on 14 December 2017 - 10:11 PM, said:

 

My point is that WG punish players with lose and credits who playing good in losing team.And if you play like i sad above 30 battles and win just 2 it is frustrating and stupid.Point is that you need to do your job for win,to win.That is my point. And it don t need to be just dmg who will decide who goes in top 5 or top last,spot,dmg blocked,driven distance.You know what i mean.

 

On high tiers? It's done like that for a reason. It's not to make you earn less. It's to spread the population. So that free players play mid tiers for income. If good players never lost credits on high tiers. Why buy a premium tank for income? Why buy premium time if WG only punish you with less credits and XP if you don't carry hard each game? 

 

Be honest. How often do you get top 5 on tier 8+? I suspect not as often as you want to as you have a sub 50% WR. And the system would royally screw any stock grind you do on tier 8 with the current MM. I mean a stock tier 8 tank with 170 pen vs tier X and 1700 DPM. You are not gonna get any bonus. More so then not, you will get punished for not doing "good enough". Is that what you want to?

 

 

Here is the thing. It's not how much damage you do. It's how and where you do it. Would you rather reward the E100 sitting in base that did 6K damage, 4K after half his team died. Or the Tiger II that did 2500 damage vs tier 9 and X HT's up on the front line? If anything your idea would create solo players more so then team players. WG should reward assist more, should make a system for covering someone back, by killing a target on your rear flank. Giving more XP and credits for helping your team, even if you did little damage. Not for sitting the red line doing the most damage.


Edited by Balc0ra, 14 December 2017 - 10:31 PM.


RamRaid90 #18 Posted 14 December 2017 - 10:31 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 21467 battles
  • 6,480
  • [D0NG] D0NG
  • Member since:
    12-14-2014

Your battle results show that you will regularly end up earning next to zero xp or credits per battle with your own improved system. Great job OP... :facepalm:

 

 



Aikl #19 Posted 14 December 2017 - 10:33 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25547 battles
  • 4,349
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

View PostPASAN_1, on 14 December 2017 - 09:11 PM, said:

 

My point is that WG punish players with lose and credits who playing good in losing team.And if you play like i sad above 30 battles and win just 2 it is frustrating and stupid.Point is that you need to do your job for win,to win.That is my point. And it don t need to be just dmg who will decide who goes in top 5 or top last,spot,dmg blocked,driven distance.You know what i mean.

 

Yes, it is frustrating, but your main problem is finding a way to quantify 'playing for the win'. The most likely solution is basing it on time, i.e. whether you dealt a certain portion of your damage before a set 'tipping point' (e.g. dead tanks) or not. That would in turn only lead to risky and headless plays to deal damage earlier than the 'tipping point'. How's that for 'improving gameplay'?

 

Anyway, 2/30 games won sure has a statistical chance of happening (5,5% for a simple coin-flip variant, which isn't accurate), but you're equally likely to win 28 games and lose two. How fudgin' frustrating would it be to get punished for winning games but not being able to keep up with 'too good' teams?



RamRaid90 #20 Posted 14 December 2017 - 10:34 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 21467 battles
  • 6,480
  • [D0NG] D0NG
  • Member since:
    12-14-2014

View PostPASAN_1, on 14 December 2017 - 08:52 PM, said:

 

But 5 Sherman kill tiger in hysterical battle 

 

Think about what you wrote there, then realise why that idea is idiotic for gameplay purposes when each team has an equal amount of players. Just for a moment lets see if you can engage those very few brain cells.





Also tagged with EXAMPLE

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users