Jump to content


Gameplay and snowballing effect in random battles.


  • Please log in to reply
73 replies to this topic

Somnorila #1 Posted 07 July 2020 - 10:32 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 58607 battles
  • 2,234
  • Member since:
    10-13-2012

I feel that this effect might be a big problem regarding having fun in random battles. There is too much random, some might be mitigated some may not, regardless there are costs some may not be willing to pay such as getting bored or waiting too long for battles to start. I also see evidence from WG to embrace the arcade approach on gameplay, specially with the future changes to come regarding equipment. 

So wouldn't be at least a good topic to talk of some changes to somewhat push back on the snowballing effect?

I was thinking maybe like automatically live buffs or nerfs as the battle progresses. The better your team is and dropping enemies, the higher their buffs or your nerfs increase. In a sense, firepower and hp pool would be in a balance until the end. I believe it may stop snowballing and also keep the randomness high like WG likes, specially when only two opponents remain, as to be on the winning side would rather be a game of chance. Basically fighting the the enemy and yourself at the same time and even if you're way better than the enemy you still might die if you're unlucky. At least steamroll matches will be a thing of the past then.



BattleMetalChris #2 Posted 07 July 2020 - 10:41 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 11269 battles
  • 8,016
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-18-2011

Not a fan. Punishing you for playing well is also not particularly fun.

 

Imagine you're fighting one-on-one when the enemy team loses some tanks.and suddenly the guy you were outplaying, magically has a more powerful tank.


Edited by BattleMetalChris, 07 July 2020 - 10:41 AM.


UserZer00 #3 Posted 07 July 2020 - 10:51 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 15069 battles
  • 1,283
  • Member since:
    03-05-2013
Solution:
Don't play randoms.

If you want a more balanced match play skirmishes or clan battles.

Trying to "balance" a match during gameplay just so the results are more often 15 to 14 instead of 15 and 2 is just silly (opinion).

The time to try to balance things is before the battle begins, and to be honest even this is next to impossible.  Do they need to account for:
- how each players internet connection is behaving that day
- if a player really has to pee and realises only after pressing battle?
- the likelyhood of someones wife hitting the wrong switch or unplugging the wrong plug
- etc

The majority of complaints from the chat is that WG is manipulating things so that people win or lose and you are basically asking that they do just that.

Also, if you implemented such a system then you'd basically have to throw away all the statistics as they'd be pretty much meaningless.


NUKLEAR_SLUG #4 Posted 07 July 2020 - 10:55 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 37491 battles
  • 6,525
  • [FISHY] FISHY
  • Member since:
    06-13-2015

View PostBattleMetalChris, on 07 July 2020 - 10:41 AM, said:

Not a fan. Punishing you for playing well is also not particularly fun.

 

Imagine you're fighting one-on-one when the enemy team loses some tanks.and suddenly the guy you were outplaying, magically has a more powerful tank.

 

This. 

 

I outplay you hard and hit you several times. Suddenly the game decides you've taken too much damage so my aim dispersion gets racked right up and damage dragged down so I can't hurt you more and your gun suddenly turns into a laser that does double damage because you mustn't die until you've been able to get a few return hits in, equalled things out and dragged out the game an extra minute in case you don't have enough 'fun'.

 

Sounds delightful. 



Homer_J #5 Posted 07 July 2020 - 11:00 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Moderator
  • 33999 battles
  • 38,718
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

View PostSomnorila, on 07 July 2020 - 10:32 AM, said:

 

I was thinking maybe like automatically live buffs or nerfs as the battle progresses. The better your team is and dropping enemies, the higher their buffs or your nerfs increase. In a sense, firepower and hp pool would be in a balance until the end.

 

You mean the better you play the more the game will rig things against you?

 

But if I just go hide at the back and let half my team die then I can roll out with some kind of superpower?  Imagine a 3 man platoon playing those tactics.

 

I'm struggling to see the fairness in this at all.

 

The "solution" to steamrolls is for the players to accept they are part of the game.



DutchBaron_ #6 Posted 07 July 2020 - 11:17 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 14467 battles
  • 213
  • [FDAD] FDAD
  • Member since:
    10-06-2016

Maybe introduce more crewskills like adrenaline rush, giving low hp players better stats to offset the steamrolls a little bit.

 



Kdingo #7 Posted 07 July 2020 - 11:20 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 33415 battles
  • 9,083
  • Member since:
    07-05-2011
No thx, i don't want enemies to recive more and more artificial buffs just cause i took out their teammates.

What you suggest is a equality of outcome (equity) approach that ensures a certain outcome no matter what. i find that disgusting as it punishes effort, skill, dedication while rewarding those that don't even care at all.

NUKLEAR_SLUG #8 Posted 07 July 2020 - 11:29 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 37491 battles
  • 6,525
  • [FISHY] FISHY
  • Member since:
    06-13-2015

The snowball effect is the natural outcome of a gamemode that has no respawn mechanic. It's happens just as much at high tier and with skilled teams as it does at low tiers. Just as much in randoms as it does in ranked/CW games.

 

The only way that is going to change is if WG introduce either the Frontline respawn mechanic into randoms or something like turning the friendly cap point into a repair zone, again like Frontline so you can retreat and repair if you take too much damage. But even then, are you really doing more than just dragging out the inevitable? 



Cobra6 #9 Posted 07 July 2020 - 11:36 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16624 battles
  • 18,556
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

This game already is punishing skill on multiple levels in the gameplay and balancing, we don't need even more punishment of skill on top.

 

Rather then trying to "fix" snowballing with balancing (doesn't work in the long run), the only *VIABLE* long term solution is educating players to increase overall skill of the player base, because that is where the majority of the problem lies.

 

Cobra 6


Edited by Cobra6, 07 July 2020 - 11:36 AM.


Kdingo #10 Posted 07 July 2020 - 11:52 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 33415 battles
  • 9,083
  • Member since:
    07-05-2011

View PostCobra6, on 07 July 2020 - 11:36 AM, said:

This game already is punishing skill on multiple levels in the gameplay and balancing, we don't need even more punishment of skill on top.

 

Rather then trying to "fix" snowballing with balancing (doesn't work in the long run), the only *VIABLE* long term solution is educating players to increase overall skill of the player base, because that is where the majority of the problem lies.

 

Cobra 6

 

You can't educate close minded people that think they know it all, are gods of gaming and just held back by rigging and other tinfoil stuff.

And as this forum shows there seems to be quite a number of those.

Then you have those that just do wrom wrom and pew pew without ever realizing what is going on around them, or the kinda equivalent of cs player that hides with a shotgun behind a box all game waiting for the chance to get one shot of if someone comes looking.

You can't educate any of those.



azakow #11 Posted 07 July 2020 - 12:02 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 87720 battles
  • 5,379
  • Member since:
    05-23-2011

View PostSomnorila, on 07 July 2020 - 10:32 AM, said:

I feel that this effect might be a big problem regarding having fun in random battles. There is too much random, some might be mitigated some may not, regardless there are costs some may not be willing to pay such as getting bored or waiting too long for battles to start. I also see evidence from WG to embrace the arcade approach on gameplay, specially with the future changes to come regarding equipment. 

So wouldn't be at least a good topic to talk of some changes to somewhat push back on the snowballing effect?

I was thinking maybe like automatically live buffs or nerfs as the battle progresses. The better your team is and dropping enemies, the higher their buffs or your nerfs increase. In a sense, firepower and hp pool would be in a balance until the end. I believe it may stop snowballing and also keep the randomness high like WG likes, specially when only two opponents remain, as to be on the winning side would rather be a game of chance. Basically fighting the the enemy and yourself at the same time and even if you're way better than the enemy you still might die if you're unlucky. At least steamroll matches will be a thing of the past then.

/tinfoil hat off

I can tell when a battle will be won by the opponents.

  • sudden crits only
  • point blank ghost shells
  • ...

/tonfoil hat off

 

In case you get a full of incable RL players WG advanced bots you will always get snow ball effect matches.

But hey next match you be in the other team and might show small balls and try to implement what you have learned from the other matches.

The problem is, learning takes time and effort.

Neither of them WG advanced bots is willing to spend either.



jabster #12 Posted 07 July 2020 - 12:04 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 12856 battles
  • 28,290
  • [WSAT] WSAT
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View Postazakow, on 07 July 2020 - 11:02 AM, said:

/tinfoil hat off

I can tell when a battle will be won by the opponents.

  • sudden crits only
  • point blank ghost shells
  • ...

/tonfoil hat off

 

In case you get a full of incable RL players WG advanced bots you will always get snow ball effect matches.

But hey next match you be in the other team and might show small balls and try to implement what you have learned from the other matches.

The problem is, learning takes time and effort.

Neither of them WG advanced bots is willing to spend either.

A double tinfoil hat, impressive.



Bora_BOOM #13 Posted 07 July 2020 - 12:28 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 32966 battles
  • 4,345
  • [DID0] DID0
  • Member since:
    08-23-2014

Snowballs are mainly players related. Sure, a good player in an OP tank can help winning one flank significantly (or even winning by himself).

I mention flank because snowballs come most often by losing one of the flanks and then the "aggressive" team pushes and the "passive" team gets surrounded.

Simply, players can’t see where the team will fall and relocate, regroup forces, or once in a blue moon rotate completely.

Too few tanks going to crucial sides on certain maps can immediately alarm that fall is inevitable.

To be honest, poor map design and reaching top tiers faster than ever doesn’t help players to perform or learn at least. So many mediocre players are around that people just can't learn cause they have nobody to learn from.

They can’t see what happens on the map, there are not enough good players around to perform such moves for others to learn from. If you are lucky, max 2-3 players in a team might react, even less doing it in time.


Edited by Bora_BOOM, 07 July 2020 - 12:32 PM.


24doom24 #14 Posted 07 July 2020 - 12:46 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 9571 battles
  • 2,068
  • [WW3] WW3
  • Member since:
    10-20-2012

View PostNUKLEAR_SLUG, on 07 July 2020 - 10:29 AM, said:

The snowball effect is the natural outcome of a gamemode that has no respawn mechanic. It's happens just as much at high tier and with skilled teams as it does at low tiers. Just as much in randoms as it does in ranked/CW games.

 

The only way that is going to change is if WG introduce either the Frontline respawn mechanic into randoms or something like turning the friendly cap point into a repair zone, again like Frontline so you can retreat and repair if you take too much damage. But even then, are you really doing more than just dragging out the inevitable? 

But if the loss was inevitable regardless then surely snowballs are not the result of no respawns. Frontline is good way to test this but unfortunately that mode has been ruined by EBRs capping out far too quickly just to farm points. 

 

Games would certainly be longer with respawns but without testing it on regular randoms maps on a test server there is no way to know if respawns do in fact stop snowball losses. And perhaps even if the loss is inevitable at least the loss might not be as crushing as often as it is now. 



Bora_BOOM #15 Posted 07 July 2020 - 12:57 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 32966 battles
  • 4,345
  • [DID0] DID0
  • Member since:
    08-23-2014

Respawns work in FL only because the mode favors the attacking team so the battle front moves, otherwise, the battle would be a stall.

In randoms you cant make respawns cause the maps are too small and the battle goal is not limited by time (It is winning, not like a given time-span for you to gain a higher level as in FL).

Introducing spawns in randoms for a 15-minute battle would probably cause more snowball effects as bad players would just rush the choke points or where the enemy is or simply camp base infinitely.

Would not work or solve the problem. Winning would be probably impossible - killing all the enemies or capping with the defenders spawning back. Most of the games would be draws IMO.


Edited by Bora_BOOM, 07 July 2020 - 01:03 PM.


NUKLEAR_SLUG #16 Posted 07 July 2020 - 12:57 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 37491 battles
  • 6,525
  • [FISHY] FISHY
  • Member since:
    06-13-2015

View Post24doom24, on 07 July 2020 - 12:46 PM, said:

But if the loss was inevitable regardless then surely snowballs are not the result of no respawns. Frontline is good way to test this but unfortunately that mode has been ruined by EBRs capping out far too quickly just to farm points. 

 

Games would certainly be longer with respawns but without testing it on regular randoms maps on a test server there is no way to know if respawns do in fact stop snowball losses. And perhaps even if the loss is inevitable at least the loss might not be as crushing as often as it is now. 

 

The snowball happens when someone makes a mistake and the team loses a gun permanently which weakens a flank and increases the chance of it happening again and again. If there are respawns then you don't permanently lose that gun, just for n seconds until they respawn and roll back to the same position to reinforce the flank and then the game has effectively been 'reset'. 

 

It doesn't stop a less skilled team making more mistakes and eventually running out of respawns and allowing the enemy team to progress as they would have done anyway, it's just artificially dragging the game out for few extra minutes than it would otherwise have been resolved in because some people think a 12 minute game is 'more fun' than a 7 minute game. 

 

 



Slyspy #17 Posted 07 July 2020 - 01:38 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 15474 battles
  • 18,199
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011

Not keen on the idea of such a handicap system. Since I am currently playing really badly (worse than I ever have, even when I had just started) I would like to know how badly I'm actually playing and so when I hopefully improve that it is my own doing. Not that I really expect to improve since I seem to have lost all connection to the game when actually playing. The disconnect is weird. But the point stands - if my team is being slaughtered then I'm happier to see my own lack of contribution helping to lead to that slaughter than to have it covered up by a handicap system. 

 

Some might call such a system rigging. 

 

Snowballs are a result of the game format.

12:43 Added after 4 minute

View Post24doom24, on 07 July 2020 - 12:46 PM, said:

But if the loss was inevitable regardless then surely snowballs are not the result of no respawns. Frontline is good way to test this but unfortunately that mode has been ruined by EBRs capping out far too quickly just to farm points. 

 

Games would certainly be longer with respawns but without testing it on regular randoms maps on a test server there is no way to know if respawns do in fact stop snowball losses. And perhaps even if the loss is inevitable at least the loss might not be as crushing as often as it is now. 

 

I remember playing various Battlefields and regularly being squeezed into one corner because they we the only "safe" spawn points. Spawn-die-spawn-die until the timer was out or the objectives finally gained. Fun for those few times in which you could coordinate a break out but most of the time an exercise in futility since the result was already established. 



Steeleye_Spam #18 Posted 07 July 2020 - 01:57 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 39142 battles
  • 494
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    08-31-2014
The main game mechanic for stopping snowballing is re-spawns. I don't like this mechanic, and I find it annoying in modes like Frontlines (but hey, if people want it, they can play it). Once you're dead, you should be dead. There should be winners and losers, and there should be consequences for being stupid, or being outplayed. TBH I suspect decreasing game length and the increased occurence of snowballing is a WoT meme/myth caused by the usual suspect of confirmation bias.

Homer_J #19 Posted 08 July 2020 - 11:55 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Moderator
  • 33999 battles
  • 38,718
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

View PostSlyspy, on 07 July 2020 - 01:38 PM, said:

 

I remember playing various Battlefields and regularly being squeezed into one corner because they we the only "safe" spawn points. Spawn-die-spawn-die until the timer was out or the objectives finally gained. Fun for those few times in which you could coordinate a break out but most of the time an exercise in futility since the result was already established. 

 

Indeed, being spawncamped until the timer ran out was much more annoying than steamroll losses in WoT and generally led to one team emptying pretty fast.

 

Since you can't just leave half way through a battle in WoT it would be even more annoying.



Balc0ra #20 Posted 08 July 2020 - 12:11 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 77944 battles
  • 23,766
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

Won't go away even if you balance teams, tanks and equipment 100% perfectly. As most move on the map based on the enemy line up. If parts of the enemy don't go where some expect. As an HT platoon that appears on the medium lane and starts to take out targets there. That flank will lose faster as they face more guns, and your HT lane might not have time to react if they are already dealing with fewer targets on the HT lane. Or even it's nothing, they still have to push or go back, and thus more time goes past before their guns get into play. As tbh, that's a fair bit of the 15-3 games I see.  And when most of your guns are not in play due to it. Any "nerfs" to balance the match will have little impact. 

 

And I doubt many would like to suddenly have a view range nerf or a DPM nerf as if they were stunned just because their flank was doing good. Because then you could argue it's more controlled by the game then the players. As we don't want to push yet on this flank. As if we do we will get an ROF nerf. It will just work against your team. I can see it a mile away. You lost that match. Because your team did not want to use their massive advantage in fear of getting "nerfs". 


Edited by Balc0ra, 08 July 2020 - 12:13 PM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users