Jump to content


Problems with the game from an experienced player(Please read wargaming)

maps gold Artilery Artillary Matchmaker

  • Please log in to reply
51 replies to this topic

jabster #41 Posted 06 September 2019 - 01:19 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 12721 battles
  • 25,709
  • [WSAT] WSAT
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View PostJauhesammutin, on 06 September 2019 - 12:14 PM, said:

Well, yes and no. If we want to keep the current system where stats are tracked and winning gives a bonus to credits/XP then it's an argument against SBMM. But if we want to change the whole economy and stat system in the game then that argument isn't against SBMM. But if that happens is the game WoT?


Again, and I must stress this, the argument against a skillbased MM is what does it improve.



Jauhesammutin #42 Posted 06 September 2019 - 01:25 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 23608 battles
  • 969
  • [KANKI] KANKI
  • Member since:
    11-05-2013

View Postjabster, on 06 September 2019 - 12:19 PM, said:


Again, and I must stress this, the argument against a skillbased MM is what does it improve.

Like I've previously said:

"It might be that they think that SBMM would somehow create more close games (15-14) because the teams would be "balanced"."

They wan't to make the experience better. 



Stevies_Team #43 Posted 06 September 2019 - 01:36 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 12166 battles
  • 1,195
  • Member since:
    07-14-2016

Skill based MM reduces the number of noobs in your team

 

So all the super duper players get to be on opposing teams

 

And a fabulous 15-14 game happens

 

Under the current system decent players whine about losing or winning a game of football 20 - nil but they don't want a skill based game of football where the winning team wins one - nil

 

duh



4nt #44 Posted 06 September 2019 - 01:38 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 29197 battles
  • 1,584
  • Member since:
    04-09-2013

View PostIf_I_Die_You_Die_Too, on 06 September 2019 - 01:36 PM, said:

Skill based MM reduces the number of noobs in your team

 

So all the super duper players get to be on opposing teams

 

And a fabulous 15-14 game happens

 

Under the current system decent players whine about losing or winning a game of football 20 - nil but they don't want a skill based game of football where the winning team wins one - nil

 

duh

When this is the level of thinking around, it really feels like an asteroid would do good for humanity.

 

You didn't read anything past two pages? I'm not attacking you personally, but that there is really basic thinking and appears little sarcastic. Nuances are hard to get from text.


Edited by 4nt, 06 September 2019 - 01:39 PM.


Stevies_Team #45 Posted 06 September 2019 - 01:47 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 12166 battles
  • 1,195
  • Member since:
    07-14-2016

In a nutshell, stats-slaves are preventing an improvement in WOTs random gameplay

 

Thank god for Frontline


Edited by If_I_Die_You_Die_Too, 06 September 2019 - 01:49 PM.


4nt #46 Posted 06 September 2019 - 02:01 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 29197 battles
  • 1,584
  • Member since:
    04-09-2013

View PostIf_I_Die_You_Die_Too, on 06 September 2019 - 01:47 PM, said:

In a nutshell, stats-slaves are preventing an improvement in WOTs random gameplay

 

Thank god for Frontline

Why are the reds and yellows a problem? What would be improved and how? 



Slyspy #47 Posted 06 September 2019 - 02:08 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 14698 battles
  • 17,434
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011

View PostIf_I_Die_You_Die_Too, on 06 September 2019 - 01:36 PM, said:

Skill based MM reduces the number of noobs in your team

 

So all the super duper players get to be on opposing teams

 

And a fabulous 15-14 game happens

 

Under the current system decent players whine about losing or winning a game of football 20 - nil but they don't want a skill based game of football where the winning team wins one - nil

 

duh

 

No clear link has been demonstrated which connects more even input with very close output in such a reliable way as to make the change worthwhile. There is also no real guarantee that a close game is a good game for any of the players involved, let alone enough to satisfy all thirty participants. 



jabster #48 Posted 06 September 2019 - 02:15 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 12721 battles
  • 25,709
  • [WSAT] WSAT
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View PostSlyspy, on 06 September 2019 - 01:08 PM, said:

 

No clear link has been demonstrated which connects more even input with very close output in such a reliable way as to make the change worthwhile. There is also no real guarantee that a close game is a good game for any of the players involved, let alone enough to satisfy all thirty participants. 


Well I obviously can’t speak for anyone else but close games, win or lose, are the ones I enjoy most. Well as long as I’m in the last five to die.



24doom24 #49 Posted 06 September 2019 - 02:25 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 8343 battles
  • 406
  • [WW3] WW3
  • Member since:
    10-20-2012
just use personal score. That's the one metric that unicums really don't care about since it's wn8 and wr that they are super defensive about. 

Slyspy #50 Posted 07 September 2019 - 10:18 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 14698 battles
  • 17,434
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011

View Postjabster, on 06 September 2019 - 02:15 PM, said:


Well I obviously can’t speak for anyone else but close games, win or lose, are the ones I enjoy most. Well as long as I’m in the last five to die.

 

As you would put it: Well, quite. 



Lagalaza #51 Posted 07 September 2019 - 11:00 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 9179 battles
  • 507
  • [W0WW] W0WW
  • Member since:
    08-11-2018

1.  SBMM would not give you battles where everyone is equal because they are not. They have differemt tanks, different crews, different skills on those crews, different equipment etc etc etc.

2.  SBMM would require very marginal differences between players to make a level playing field as those in favour desire. Less than 3.5% of players are Unicum or Super-Unicum. they would have long waits to get in to battle with equal types of tank. The wait times for all would have to increase. People's attenton span is not long enough in the modern world to put up with that.

3.  SBMM creates "deliberate losing". People want to have some fun "clubbing" the opposition so they go on deliberate losing streaks to get themselves dropped down to lower levels where they can have more "fun". Horrible for those who have them on their team when they are deliberately losing and for those who face them when they have dropped down a couple of levels. (go play War Robots and you'll see this all the time)

4   SBMM creates stagnation in progress. People reach their skill plateau and then move nowhere. Terrible if you are near the bottom of one level as you are constantly facing better players. So you drop down and deliberately start to throw the odd battle when it looks like you are about to go up again. More "clubbing" and deliberate losing. (go play War Robots again)

5.   SBMM removes the opportunity for people to platoon with better players to learn. Surely one of the best features of this game.

6.   SBMM removes the opportunity for people to pit their wits against the best out there and to learn from them by playing with them or against them. (An extension of point 5 I guess)

7.   SBMM would mean a complete change in the core fundamentals of this game and the element that I believe is the very best thing about it... randomness. Whether it's RNG, random MM or anything else, the random gives everyone, Unicum or Tomato, a chance in every battle. That is something most games don't give and is, I believe, one of the best things about this game.

 

Just my thoughts. I hope they never implement SBMM. I'll put up with the odd one-sided battle for the sake of maintaining a chance for all of us to get a win against the very best players.



Ranger772 #52 Posted 07 September 2019 - 09:39 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 38278 battles
  • 302
  • [H-O-T] H-O-T
  • Member since:
    07-02-2013

View PostHassenderZerhacker, on 02 September 2019 - 01:29 AM, said:

 

Regardless of what SCC (Wargaming secret community contributors) write here, the thread starter describes some of the perceived common reasons why more and more strategy-oriented players are leaving the game, while WG dumbs down the game and tries to attract classic FPS players (no brain, just reflexes).

I don't enjoy playing WoT anymore and it depresses me a little because I haven't found another game to replace it and there are also all those vehicles and crews going to waste.

WG just takes the game somewhere I don't enjoy going. So sad.


I agree 100%. In fact, just before I read this I posted "IT'S NO FUN ANYMORE." You are right. The game, which started as a reasonably good tactical game has been changed to an FPS game. I'll be leaving the game, too.







Also tagged with maps, gold, Artilery, Artillary, Matchmaker

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users