Jump to content


First Look at Global Map Season 11


  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

Community #1 Posted 26 March 2019 - 12:13 PM

    Sergeant

  • Content Team
  • 0 battles
  • 28,505
  • Member since:
    11-09-2011
The milestone has been reached: the Global Map now enters in the double numbers era. Check season 11 now!

The full text of the news item

Vitezpomijar #2 Posted 26 March 2019 - 12:17 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 41895 battles
  • 205
  • [TAKE] TAKE
  • Member since:
    03-02-2013
Amazing rewards..

FireflyDivision #3 Posted 26 March 2019 - 12:26 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 24677 battles
  • 3,970
  • [-GO] -GO
  • Member since:
    04-18-2011

Yeah, RIP CW.

 

We said alliances are too big: they make them bigger.

We said clans are afraid to fight or lack motivation to fight: they associate a cost to divisions and make them expensive

We said the global map is getting too many unnecessary features making it too compicated: they add a new currency (administrative points)

 

All we needed was:

- smaller alliance size (max 7 clans per alliance?)

- Removal of the influence currency completely. Divisions need modules such as Engineer Company integrated by default. Want to put a limitation? Limit the amount of max divisions (to i.e. 10).

 

And now influence is a major thing, people expect information on:

- how to earn influence

- how much influence is earned per battle

etc etc

Now people have to search for this information. Alot of people don't know and many of those who knew forgot it. 

 

And no word on things the community really desires, i.e. MORE CW instead of 2-month freezes


Edited by FireflyDivision, 26 March 2019 - 12:30 PM.


Alexison #4 Posted 26 March 2019 - 01:12 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 24334 battles
  • 26
  • [-NO1-] -NO1-
  • Member since:
    09-18-2011

Rewards are a bit lacking for sure...

Medal on tier10 front is the same for position 2 and top 10%.


Edited by Alexison, 26 March 2019 - 08:30 PM.


SlyMeerkat #5 Posted 26 March 2019 - 01:16 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 17592 battles
  • 2,693
  • [FILO] FILO
  • Member since:
    01-29-2013
Nice

maldito06 #6 Posted 26 March 2019 - 01:19 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 26988 battles
  • 105
  • Member since:
    06-29-2013
so no tank rewards ? meeh

Geno1isme #7 Posted 26 March 2019 - 01:37 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 45880 battles
  • 9,531
  • [TRYIT] TRYIT
  • Member since:
    09-03-2013

View Postmaldito06, on 26 March 2019 - 02:19 PM, said:

so no tank rewards ? meeh

 

It's a season, not a campaign. Next campaign will apparently be in summer (last part of the news), hopefully featuring not just the crap tanks again.

 

View PostCommunity, on 26 March 2019 - 01:13 PM, said:

The milestone has been reached: the Global Map now enters in the double numbers era. Check season 11 now!

 

So season 10 wasn't double-digit?

 

Regarding the changes, not really that interesting. Increasing the amount of minor powers is welcome as it reduces the need for nesting which was really annoying, AP seem to be mostly a one-time sink for influence with no real effect. Apparently though the core issues of alliances haven't been touched: No cost for joining/leaving an alliance, and no obligations for major powers to actually help their minors.

 

Most interesting feature is somewhat hidden (assuming it isn't an error):

"Receiving income from a large number of provinces will also change—now, if a clan owns more than 10 provinces, gold will be added to its Treasury from the 10 provinces providing the smallest income."

 

So owning more than 10 provinces is now a really bad idea actually. Personally I'd even reduce that limit to 7 or 8 so top clans really have to focus on quality over quantity (if they even care about gold).


Edited by Geno1isme, 26 March 2019 - 01:59 PM.


cro001 #8 Posted 26 March 2019 - 02:34 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 32032 battles
  • 2,719
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    10-21-2012
The break is long as the season. :medal:

FireflyDivision #9 Posted 26 March 2019 - 04:04 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 24677 battles
  • 3,970
  • [-GO] -GO
  • Member since:
    04-18-2011

View PostGeno1isme, on 26 March 2019 - 01:37 PM, said:

 

It's a season, not a campaign. Next campaign will apparently be in summer (last part of the news), hopefully featuring not just the crap tanks again.

 

 

So season 10 wasn't double-digit?

 

Regarding the changes, not really that interesting. Increasing the amount of minor powers is welcome as it reduces the need for nesting which was really annoying, AP seem to be mostly a one-time sink for influence with no real effect. Apparently though the core issues of alliances haven't been touched: No cost for joining/leaving an alliance, and no obligations for major powers to actually help their minors.

 

Most interesting feature is somewhat hidden (assuming it isn't an error):

"Receiving income from a large number of provinces will also change—now, if a clan owns more than 10 provinces, gold will be added to its Treasury from the 10 provinces providing the smallest income."

 

So owning more than 10 provinces is now a really bad idea actually. Personally I'd even reduce that limit to 7 or 8 so top clans really have to focus on quality over quantity (if they even care about gold).

 

what is your definition of nesting and how does this prevent it? Furthermore, how would you imagine inciting majors to help their minors more than they did previous season?



GhostBomb #10 Posted 26 March 2019 - 04:06 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 42215 battles
  • 47
  • [OXIDE] OXIDE
  • Member since:
    03-23-2013
6 weeks or more of campaign....thats crazy. what incentive do players get to play that much time ? last time i got like 5-6k gold which is about 20 euro.....and to get 3 euros of gold worth per week in which i have to play a lot....its just not worth my time. Should have been 2 weeks, max 3. Just my opinion.

TijgernootTank #11 Posted 26 March 2019 - 04:31 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 51662 battles
  • 285
  • [TOURN] TOURN
  • Member since:
    03-31-2013

Well put your self in position of cannonfodder clans - that have players that like to participate in cw --  we need to try get players motivated to show up for this because its nice clan activity -- but can only get very minor rewards from clantasks --

my players would be very happy to receive 6000 gold for efforts --  there is absolutely no incentive rewardwise to play ---

i try again to make my clan play this , but can be pretty hard at times .

We can only play landingtournaments untill knocked out thats it .

So all these changes and rules and stuff with alliance will go passed us like last seasons .

 

Still good to see this anouncement as its time for action .



Geno1isme #12 Posted 26 March 2019 - 04:53 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 45880 battles
  • 9,531
  • [TRYIT] TRYIT
  • Member since:
    09-03-2013

View PostFireflyDivision, on 26 March 2019 - 05:04 PM, said:

what is your definition of nesting and how does this prevent it?

I didn't say prevent, I said it reduces the need to do it as you can include the same number of clans with fewer hierarchy levels. Which makes it easier to see who is actually in the same alliance.

 

View PostFireflyDivision, on 26 March 2019 - 05:04 PM, said:

Furthermore, how would you imagine inciting majors to help their minors more than they did previous season?

 

Many options available, just two examples:

- add an AP cost to declining battle takeover requests

- reduce tax for declining battle takeover requests

 

From a purely mechanical POV minors currently don't have any benefit from joining an alliance, only the drawback of having to pay tax eventually.

And did majors actually help minors last season? Personally I didn't see that, only the other way a few times. But then our alliance was basically restructured every other day so just keeping track of that was quite a task for people not involved in the diplomacy aspects.

 

View PostGhostBomb, on 26 March 2019 - 05:06 PM, said:

6 weeks or more of campaign....thats crazy. what incentive do players get to play that much time ? last time i got like 5-6k gold which is about 20 euro.....and to get 3 euros of gold worth per week in which i have to play a lot....its just not worth my time. Should have been 2 weeks, max 3. Just my opinion.

 

It's a season, not a campaign. No need to play constantly.


Edited by Geno1isme, 26 March 2019 - 04:53 PM.


S_L_A_V_A_U_K_R_A_I_N_E_ #13 Posted 26 March 2019 - 04:57 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 16827 battles
  • 33
  • [-AND-] -AND-
  • Member since:
    05-14-2014

View PostFireflyDivision, on 26 March 2019 - 11:26 AM, said:

Yeah, RIP CW.

 

We said alliances are too big: they make them bigger.

We said clans are afraid to fight or lack motivation to fight: they associate a cost to divisions and make them expensive

We said the global map is getting too many unnecessary features making it too compicated: they add a new currency (administrative points)

 

All we needed was:

- smaller alliance size (max 7 clans per alliance?)

- Removal of the influence currency completely. Divisions need modules such as Engineer Company integrated by default. Want to put a limitation? Limit the amount of max divisions (to i.e. 10).

 

And now influence is a major thing, people expect information on:

- how to earn influence

- how much influence is earned per battle

etc etc

Now people have to search for this information. Alot of people don't know and many of those who knew forgot it. 

 

And no word on things the community really desires, i.e. MORE CW instead of 2-month freezes

 

I think WG should end/retire current CW game mode completely since indicates a lack of ideas and stagnation !

 

 

What I propose is a 2-3 side faction mode game mode with existing or modified maps under code name "World War II extended" !

Simply landing would be between oppositete faction tank battalions (as landing) then finals could be 30vc30 with 4 tank tank battalions.

 

Event should run once every month. In the name of realism and historical aspect maybe be would good idea to have same nation tanks only, (except trophy tanks ie m60, obj907, 121B and so on...). 

Again in the name of new balance & realism would make sense to freeze tanks, will be no need for overlapping battles, could extend to 20 minutes game. Various bonuses for owning the lands/regions.

 

This is just for starters.........

 

So then we could have something approximately of 50% new and 50% old.

 

 

 

 


Edited by S_L_A_V_A_U_K_R_A_I_N_E_, 26 March 2019 - 07:06 PM.


urmzz #14 Posted 26 March 2019 - 07:21 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 28402 battles
  • 2
  • [KURSI] KURSI
  • Member since:
    08-07-2015
lol, where are the rewards?

FireflyDivision #15 Posted 26 March 2019 - 07:56 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 24677 battles
  • 3,970
  • [-GO] -GO
  • Member since:
    04-18-2011

View Posturmzz, on 26 March 2019 - 07:21 PM, said:

lol, where are the rewards?

 

Reward is on the global map and it's called gold you smartass.

 

This isn't a campaign. 

 

Note for WG: this is your fault. Because you're having such long freezes, people expect normal seasons to be special. 



dikacarkralj #16 Posted 26 March 2019 - 08:08 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 16612 battles
  • 9
  • Member since:
    06-25-2013
We just needed gm to be fixed. what wargaming do? they fix it in wrong way.

Simona2k #17 Posted 27 March 2019 - 10:55 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 2429 battles
  • 606
  • [GGLT] GGLT
  • Member since:
    10-01-2017

View PostSlyMeerkat, on 26 March 2019 - 01:16 PM, said:

Nice

 

Nice

Silas001 #18 Posted 27 March 2019 - 05:08 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 49260 battles
  • 1,775
  • [JUST] JUST
  • Member since:
    01-27-2011

It is allways kinda funny how WG writes in every announcement they listened to feedback and then "solved" problems that I never heard of around here.

Meanwhile most issues raised in this community are not even addressed at all.

 

I get that they dont write these announcements themselfs but copy 90% of the stuff Minsk sends their way, but that doesnt make it better.

 

Actually I had a lot of fun in the campaign and was very excited to play another CW-season but that has dissipated by now and is replaced by pure anger and frustration.

 

After a 2 months winter-break we had 2 weeks of campaign followed by another 2 months break, finally we get a 2 month-season but apparently followed by another break for several months until a short CW-event launches in the summer. The consensus amongst end-game players is clear that we dont want long random-breaks from CW - even to the point where the breaks are longer than the Seasons/Campaigns.

Alltogether apparently we get 5 months/year to play CW at best (if there are no random 9 months breaks for no reason).

That limited time WG apparently uses CW to beta-test unfinished "features" that nobody wanted. Because of "feedback".

 

Alliances always have been an essential part of CW and it makes sense to incorporate that into the system so we dont have to use some mechanics in non-intended ways for diplomacy (battle-delays and stuff). However the current system is massively flawed and instead of improving/fixing those issues that should have never been added in that state to begin with, WG doubles down and adds more weird uninspired features without addressing the flaws at all. History repeating itself.

 

Something positive: At least I have some hope with the different income-zones which sounds like the high-income provinces are not just blobbed in the center of the map again. Including a zone with no income at all actually sounds not that bad as well.

That was probably the highest priority issue raised here and we have no idea why WG moved away from this in the first place since we had the same argument already. Anyway I am happy to see it in the announcement, however I am prepared to be disappointed on this as well. SInce we havent seen the map yet, I am sure WG found a way to [edited]it up in some way.


Edited by Silas001, 27 March 2019 - 05:08 PM.


FireflyDivision #19 Posted 27 March 2019 - 05:29 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 24677 battles
  • 3,970
  • [-GO] -GO
  • Member since:
    04-18-2011

Good CW map:

 

goodmap.jpg

 

BAD cw map:

 

badmap.jpg

HOW you want to fight your equals with this? They are on the other side of the map! 



Obsessive_Compulsive #20 Posted 27 March 2019 - 09:26 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 28628 battles
  • 8,444
  • Member since:
    09-09-2014





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users