Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
JervisBay

WG....two simple ways to - perhaps - improve game-play.

25 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

704
[FLEE]
Members
2,194 posts
4,953 battles
  • Equal-tier match-ups. Remove the three-tier mix.
  • Axis vs Allies - Japan & Germany vs USA, Great Britain (incl Commonwealth), the Soviet Union and Poland. That French battleship can be classified as either Vichy or Free French and be played on either side. :)

 

Okay?

Off you go, then!!

Edited by JervisBay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,148
[O7]
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
11,904 posts
8,707 battles

They tried national battles in WOT and it failed miserably because it highlights the balance issues between nation trees. They ended up removing it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,679 posts
8,111 battles

Errr....No IMO.

Here's my reasons. Striking up and down two tiers adds gameplay variety. Or else it's a fair fight all day long. And what about Online games is the most satisfying? Unfairness. Unfairness to you enemies when you first overmatches the bow of New Mex with your Gneisenau before torping it to oblivion. Unfairness when you strikes above your weight level and solo kill enemy Nagato with your Konig. 

 

And nation system? Don't even think about it. How on earth are IJN and KMS dd supposed to fight USN and VMF dds? How can Montana stand against Yamato/Grossser Kurfurst Combined force? Unless there's some sort of Co-op historic scenario mode made available, I won't stand for the idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[KNTAI]
Members
3,133 posts
8,728 battles

Errr....No IMO.

Here's my reasons. Striking up and down two tiers adds gameplay variety. Or else it's a fair fight all day long. And what about Online games is the most satisfying? Unfairness. Unfairness to you enemies when you first overmatches the bow of New Mex with your Gneisenau before torping it to oblivion. Unfairness when you strikes above your weight level and solo kill enemy Nagato with your Konig. 

 

And nation system? Don't even think about it. How on earth are IJN and KMS dd supposed to fight USN and VMF dds? How can Montana stand against Yamato/Grossser Kurfurst Combined force? Unless there's some sort of Co-op historic scenario mode made available, I won't stand for the idea.

 

I will stand for the idea. I love standing :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33,575
[HINON]
Alpha Tester
24,690 posts
19,844 battles

First one: We simply don't have the population to do that, would lead to serious MM queue time problems. Personally speaking, I wouldn't even want it, there is something about the challenge of being bottom tier as well as the feeling of being top tier.

 

Second one: Yeah that won't work, would lead to all sorts of MM queue problems as well as imbalance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
704
[FLEE]
Members
2,194 posts
4,953 battles

I just LOVE the negativity which pours forth when anyone suggests (even tongue-in-cheek) changing anything. :D

 

ZOOOM! You're like wasps after their nest has been disturbed. :P

Edited by JervisBay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
495 posts
12 battles

I just LOVE the negativity which pours forth when anyone suggests (even tongue-in-cheek) changing anything. :D

 

ZOOOM! You're like wasps after their nest has been disturbed. :P

 

Because what you suggest was already tried in WoT and failed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
131 posts
1,343 battles

  • Equal-tier match-ups. Remove the three-tier mix.
  • Axis vs Allies - Japan & Germany vs USA, Great Britain (incl Commonwealth), the Soviet Union and Poland. That French battleship can be classified as either Vichy or Free French and be played on either side. :)

 

Okay?

Off you go, then!!

 

first one NYET NYET NYET.

 

I love the idea but its not really possible, like some other people had stated.

 

Edited by MR_BATTLESHIP_2016

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,214
[GWG]
[GWG]
Supertester
27,119 posts
14,728 battles

  • Equal-tier match-ups. Remove the three-tier mix.
  • Axis vs Allies - Japan & Germany vs USA, Great Britain (incl Commonwealth), the Soviet Union and Poland. That French battleship can be classified as either Vichy or Free French and be played on either side. :)

 

Okay?

Off you go, then!!

 

  • Equal-tier match-ups. Remove the three-tier mix.
  • Axis vs Allies - Japan & Germany vs USA, Great Britain (incl Commonwealth), the Soviet Union and Poland. That French battleship can be classified as either Vichy or Free French and be played on either side. :)

 

Okay?

Off you go, then!!

 

Single tier matches would only magnify the differences between ships within their types and would lead to a balancing nightmare.

 

They tried national battles in WOT and it failed miserably because it highlights the balance issues between nation trees. They ended up removing it. 

 

The idea was good but the implementation was flawed. People all wanted to drive the really rare heavy tanks so there was never enough in the light and medium tanks. If implemented right, scenarios maybe, particularly if they could create true night actions it could be wild and interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,890
[V_KNG]
Beta Testers
13,067 posts

Let me suggest a counter... see what you think... 

 

Call it Rodeo Mode (heh heh)... or the Box 'O Choclates... here's how it works...

Random ships with ZERO POINT commanders with specific tiers. You could get stuffed into any of the ship types - with an option to avoid carriers as a lot of folks dont carry carriers very well. But otherwise you dont know what you gonna get... like the box of chocolates. 

 

Then it's pure luck and pure skill... no premiums, no spiffs, no nothing... just folks in random ships in random combat. 

 

I'd tie it to the ability to repeat the same team over... if the majority want to go another round as the same team, they could, up to a max of three or four matches. 

 

Just something to think about... could be great fun. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,148
[O7]
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
11,904 posts
8,707 battles

The idea was good but the implementation was flawed. People all wanted to drive the really rare heavy tanks so there was never enough in the light and medium tanks. If implemented right, scenarios maybe, particularly if they could create true night actions it could be wild and interesting.

 

No you are thinking of historical battles, national battles is a different thing that they also tried and didnt work because the balance between nations was terrible in WOT and is bad here too. Especially with the national flavor stuff so KM teams would have lots of trouble burning down BBs, IJN teams would have huge issues against CVs. Plus there is the fact that several tiers are terrible for various different lines (tier 7 USN, tier 6 KM, tier 9 IJN etc.) Plus the RN and VMF lines dont have enough lines to field balanced teams because they are missing BBs and CVs at the least. Really the only options for national battles would be IJN vs USN. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,214
[GWG]
[GWG]
Supertester
27,119 posts
14,728 battles

 

No you are thinking of historical battles, national battles is a different thing that they also tried and didnt work because the balance between nations was terrible in WOT and is bad here too. Especially with the national flavor stuff so KM teams would have lots of trouble burning down BBs, IJN teams would have huge issues against CVs. Plus there is the fact that several tiers are terrible for various different lines (tier 7 USN, tier 6 KM, tier 9 IJN etc.) Plus the RN and VMF lines dont have enough lines to field balanced teams because they are missing BBs and CVs at the least. Really the only options for national battles would be IJN vs USN. 

 

Yeah, the balance issues would be another factor to overcome. That is why I said scenario, think of the Halloween scenario with human players against bots. Also with this game engine the great carrier battles would be impossible to cover and the surface actions were almost always tilted heavily in one sides favor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,389
[INTEL]
Members
13,459 posts
37,299 battles

Lots and lots and lots and lots of people have asked for dynamic +/- tier MM during peak server hours. It is easily doable, and would dramatically improve play, especially at the high tiers where power creep is a problem for T8 ships facing T10 monsters. The alleged "variety" problem is being solved with the provision of additional ship lines. 

 

But instead of what people have begged for since Day 1, we got RDF and a capt's skill makeover, with alterations of the meta... that... nobody asked for. Because reasons. 

Edited by Taichunger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
5,082 posts
5,575 battles

They tried national battles in WOT and it failed miserably because it highlights the balance issues between nation trees. They ended up removing it. 

 

Funny that they even had to try. The outcome should have been obvious ahead of time. You can't have artificial tree specialization AND teams restricted to particular fixed trees, especially when players are free to choose their side.

 

It's as flawed an idea in WoWs as it was in WoT. One glaring issue is that Allies have all the gunboats while Axis has all the torpedoboats.

Edited by gurudennis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
229
[-_W_-]
Members
1,089 posts
2,418 battles

 

Funny that they even had to try. The outcome should have been obvious ahead of time. You can't have artificial tree specialization AND teams restricted to particular fixed trees, especially when players are free to choose their side.

 

It's as flawed an idea in WoWs as it was in WoT. One glaring issue is that Allies have all the gunboats while Axis has all the torpedoboats.

 

USN ships, VMF cruisers, and even the high-tier RN cruisers have some of the best AA. IJN ships have some of the worst. At the same time, most IJN carriers walk all over their USN counterparts. The only ships with Radar are Allied.

 

The recent, particularly gimmicky lines (RN CLs, and to a lesser extent all the German lines) would just make the whole thing an even worse idea. German battleships get nigh-impossibility to citadel and hydroacoustic search, German cruisers get increased AP damage and decreased HE damage plus their extra Hydro range, German destroyers sometimes get 150mm guns and have Hydro, but also get ridiculously inflated gun bloom relative to other lines (I think stealth fire needs to go, but until you remove it for all lines this is just silly), and the entire RNCL line is just one big gimmick. Would be particularly bad for, say, a battle between British and German cruisers - because the German cruisers' gimmick is one of the best counters to the British cruisers' main gimmick, while also greatly reducing the British cruisers' ability to make up for one of their major gimmick-induced limitations (go ahead, try and kill an angled opponent that has uber-Hydro active).

 

Even if they did it without all the artificial gimmicks, the point of adding a new line (from a gameplay perspective) is to add variety. The same general playstyle might apply for every cruiser line, but to really excel in each particular line should require at least some changes in how you play them. Otherwise, there's no point. And that really doesn't lend itself well to a mode where those different playstyles are split up in what is for all intents and purposes a completely arbitrary manner (because gameplay doesn't care what side the nation was on 70 years ago).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,442 posts
8,824 battles

Another problem with the proposed "Axis vs Allies" mode is the fact that this game covers both world wars and some countries (notably Japan and, when they are eventually added, Italy) weren't on the same side for both wars.  The French and Italian navies technically weren't even on the same side for the full duration of WW2.

 

So either the lower tiers of this mode would just be Germany vs everyone else because Germany was the only major naval power in the Central Powers or they'd throw history out the window for their "more historical" game mode by putting low-tier Japanese and Italian ships on the same side as Germany to keep the teams more diversified, which would raise the question of why not just let anybody play any ship they want?

Edited by Vaidency

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
704
[FLEE]
Members
2,194 posts
4,953 battles

 

........ (because gameplay doesn't care what side the nation was on 70 years ago).

 

Exactly!

And therein lies a problem when the "skins" with which we are clothed represent historical ships.

The only aspect of this game which attracted me from the outset (when I was first told about it by a friend) was that it depicted historical warships....a subject which I had been modelling for many, many years.

Very quickly the initial attraction was lost. I've come to accept the fact that we may as well be clothed as amoeba and wallow around in WG's representation of slimy ponds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
704
[FLEE]
Members
2,194 posts
4,953 battles

Another problem with the proposed "Axis vs Allies" mode is the fact that this game covers both world wars.....

 

No problem...set it at what alliances existed between 1939 and 1945.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,442 posts
8,824 battles

 

No problem...set it at what alliances existed between 1939 and 1945.

 

But that is a problem.  What's the point of putting the national navies on their historical "teams" if you're not actually going to do that?  If the Karlsruhe and Isokaze had encountered each other during the First World War they would have shot at each other.  If it's not a problem to put them on the same team then it's also not a problem to have American and British and Russian ships on that team too, which is what we have now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,853
[-K-]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
7,300 posts
9,645 battles

  • Equal-tier match-ups. Remove the three-tier mix.
  • Axis vs Allies - Japan & Germany vs USA, Great Britain (incl Commonwealth), the Soviet Union and Poland. That French battleship can be classified as either Vichy or Free French and be played on either side. :)

 

 

1) Why do you want less variety in the game? Being top tier and bottom tier requires fairly different strategies. Also, the matchmaking time will suffer significantly.

2) This was tried in WoT, didn't work well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6
[SEA]
Beta Testers
66 posts
10,145 battles

Same tier VS Same tier = much more wait time.

 

I know a lot of people blame the match making. The fact is, if you play your ship correctly, you can still do your job. I played atago a lot and entered countless T10 games. Sometimes I can still get the 1st XP.

On the contrary, if u do not play correctly, even you are in a t10 bb, you will die super fast.

But play properly does not mean hide behind in a bb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
5,082 posts
5,575 battles

Most of us would rather wait an extra minute for a fair MM to materialize than be spawned into a match where everything sees you as food.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
104 posts
2,032 battles

As the rest of the thread has stated, both ideas would make both matchmaking and balance a nightmare. If we're talking new gamemodes, though, I've always wanted an official training room+ where you can modify the stats of ships and then test drive them. It'd let people test various mechanics, allow for crowd-sourced balancing and also let people do silly crap like pitting two teams of Shimas with 0 torp reload time against each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
704
[FLEE]
Members
2,194 posts
4,953 battles

Same tier VS Same tier = much more wait time.

 

It'd work with PvE.

Bots already tiered and then just the humans to collate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×