[Flamu] Clan Battles - What A S**tshow

[Beneej_Spoor]

Please view below prior to submissions if possible

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wMobjY3lvw

 

I have this posted with no embedding since the Thumbnail may not be presented due to censorship on the forum, so I've taken that precaution.

 

I will note. I largely agree with his perspective with the sole exception of his perspective of how this will increase Battleship play; however, that aside, given it only takes up the middle three minutes from 8:00 to 11:00, I will not focus on that. I want to see what everyone else thinks of course as now we finally have *some* uniformity in feedback, albeit, I feel key issues are overlooked here and there, but finally it seems the four "names I dropped" unanimously think the moves as of late have been horrible

 

I really do deeply appreciate the contradiction narrative he points out. That is refreshing and critical to why these change are punishing to everyone, even a "potato name dropper" like me. Perhaps we can focus on that, since basically WG is comitting a low form of gas-lighting (basically calling *you* crazy and making you question your own memory or points of reference as if you do not recall them accurately).

[Anumati]

WG is like a SJW with its double think and contradictions. Unable to give a straight answer when it comes to hard topics and refuses to work on something for the betterment of the community while instead spurting out lines of ships that are powercreeping others and doling out premium ships like its going out of style.

[anonymised]

whoo boy.

[Herr_Reitz]

I've asked in other threads - but the mod he is using on the minimap to indicate ship direction... is that really a legit, legal mod? If so I have to have it because quite often I cannot determine quickly which way the targeted ship is heading. 

[Spartias]

4 minutes ago, Herr_Reitz said:

I've asked in other threads - but the mod he is using on the minimap to indicate ship direction... is that really a legit, legal mod? If so I have to have it because quite often I cannot determine quickly which way the targeted ship is heading. 

 

It's part of Aslains and yes, it's fine.

 

 

 

 

Thank jeebus for Flamu and the fact that his brain still works... since obviously Wargamings isn't.

[Herr_Reitz]

I thought the best they could do for clan wars was make it two or three tiered. The clan competes at the entry tier - say tier 6. Win so many battles and the clan can, if they choose, move up to the next tier, say tier 8. Rinse repeat and finally reach tier 10. Three groups/levels for play. 

 

It would seem the tier ten matches could have involved larger teams as to include one carrier per side. Maybe 9v9. The rest of the team makeup would be left to the clans. You want a carrier and eight shimas, you got it. Tier ten clan wars would be very intense with such parameters.

 

I would make rewards/gifts available across all three levels, making them somewhat on-par across all three. And yes - I'd allow for an ally situation, where  your clan doesn't have enough players available to  battle, you can recruit/add another clan's member(s) up to half of your clan size to assist in battles. 

 

Could have been awesome. 

[IronWolfV]

Notser and Zoup said the same.

[Beneej_Spoor]

Just now, Herr_Reitz said:

I thought the best they could do for clan wars was make it two or three tiered. The clan competes at the entry tier - say tier 6. Win so many battles and the clan can, if they choose, move up to the next tier, say tier 8. Rinse repeat and finally reach tier 10. Three groups/levels for play. 

 

It would seem the tier ten matches could have involved larger teams as to include one carrier per side. Maybe 9v9. The rest of the team makeup would be left to the clans. You want a carrier and eight shimas, you got it. Tier ten clan wars would be very intense with such parameters.

 

I would make rewards/gifts available across all three levels, making them somewhat on-par across all three. And yes - I'd allow for an ally situation, where  your clan doesn't have enough players available to  battle, you can recruit/add another clan's member(s) up to half of your clan size to assist in battles. 

 

Could have been awesome. 

 

Now that's some constructive thinking in response to my critical points. Thank you :D

[Beneej_Spoor]

Just now, IronWolfV said:

Notser and Zoup said the same.

 

Oh I know, that's what I said. I didn't want to "drop names" again. Zoup though it was instantaneous, and I gave him credit for that.

[_WaveRider_]

Well he definitely hopped on to the Rant Train lol.

 

However, having watched the vid I have to say much of what he says makes sense. I have been told that WG do engage with the community (and for Clan Wars they had feedback from the Russian server); I guess that leaves me questioning whether those that talk to the community actually relay that info to the guys and girls that actually implement the stuff into the game?

[Beneej_Spoor]

Just now, _WaveRider_ said:

Well he definitely hopped on to the Rant Train lol.

 

However, having watched the vid I have to say much of what he says makes sense. I have been told that WG do engage with the community (and for Clan Wars they had feedback from the Russian server); I guess that leaves me questioning whether those that talk to the community actually relay that info to the guys and girls that actually implement the stuff into the game?

 

That's a head scratcher, the "Rant Train" I mean you can make valid points in the midst of a rant (occasionally), but I wouldn't say Zoup or Notser ranted. To answer your rhetorical question, someone else said to me I cannot presume that the Community Contributors are listened to, and in part I do and I do. There are wheels within wheels, and obviously depending on design or profit motive they may disguise or build in a feature that appears to meet one criteria, overlooks the next. Another layer potentially would be say if a game choice "I.E. 1 BB a team in clan wars" was implemented in, they may use the excuse "Well our CC's said they were overpopulated, why are the potatoes complaining?".

 

Just like my last thread, normally then when we try to unpack the layers of issues, rather than analyzing the likelihood or the stats that may reinforce a perspective or historical precedents; we just end up pointing fingers at each other sadly. I'm no exception I will admit.

[_WaveRider_]

Just now, Beneej_Spoor said:

 

That's a head scratcher, the "Rant Train" I mean you can make valid points in the midst of a rant (occasionally), but I wouldn't say Zoup or Notser ranted. To answer your rhetorical question, someone else said to me I cannot presume that the Community Contributors are listened to, and in part I do and I do. There are wheels within wheels, and obviously depending on design or profit motive they may disguise or build in a feature that appears to meet one criteria, overlooks the next. Another layer potentially would be say if a game choice "I.E. 1 BB a team in clan wars" was implemented in, they may use the excuse "Well our CC's said they were overpopulated, why are the potatoes complaining?".

 

Just like my last thread, normally then when we try to unpack the layers of issues, rather than analyzing the likelihood or the stats that may reinforce a perspective or historical precedents; we just end up pointing fingers at each other sadly. I'm no exception I will admit.

I was only commenting on Flamu video. Both iChase and Notser were negative about the whole thing but I wouldn't state they were ranting. Haven't seen Zoup's video yet. Whether ranting or not all 3 have made valid points which makes me wonder why we are where we are.

 

I notice the usual pro WG CCs or players haven't really said too much either, that kind of reflects the situation too!

[Seadog_Supreme]

Just now, Herr_Reitz said:

I've asked in other threads - but the mod he is using on the minimap to indicate ship direction... is that really a legit, legal mod? If so I have to have it because quite often I cannot determine quickly which way the targeted ship is heading. 

The mod trained me to know ship direction so that I don't need it any more. It's the pressure of battle that makes you misjudge.

[Turbotush]

So in the vid Flamu says "CV's changed the way WWII was fought"  since this is a game with ships with big guns that want to shot at each other, why would anyone think there was a big part of the player base that doesn't mind that CV's are not in Clan battles?  Also, when did we all decide this was not a lose interpretation of how these ships would perform in real life and should be truly historical in all aspects.  Just ask any one that spent weeks doing one battle using the Seakreag WG method and then played this game, this is an arcade game that is just way to much speculative fantasy, its fun, but it really is a stretch to say its a true sim of these ships.  I do get his point and do sympathize with those few T10 CV players that are going to be left out (you know, the good ones), but it is only the first season and I bet there was a big enough stink that has been made by so many in the player base, that CV's will be in Clan Battle in the future (maybe). 

During the last Ranked season, most players voiced at the start of a match that they were glad a CV was not in with them, and I know many that would jump out of the queue when they saw 2 CV's waiting to go in (yep, I was one of those).

CV's will all ways be a part of this game, I just wish they weren't, but hay, I'm ok ether way.  Just don't be thinking you represent all players when you jump on the "CV's need to be a bigger part of the game" band wagon, there are some of us that think they change this from a Naval warfare sim to a "How do I hide from the sky cancer" game.

[IronWolfV]

9 minutes ago, Turbotush said:

So in the vid Flamu says "CV's changed the way WWII was fought"  since this is a game with ships with big guns that want to shot at each other, why would anyone think there was a big part of the player base that doesn't mind that CV's are not in Clan battles?  Also, when did we all decide this was not a lose interpretation of how these ships would perform in real life and should be truly historical in all aspects.  Just ask any one that spent weeks doing one battle using the Seakreag WG method and then played this game, this is an arcade game that is just way to much speculative fantasy, its fun, but it really is a stretch to say its a true sim of these ships.  I do get his point and do sympathize with those few T10 CV players that are going to be left out (you know, the good ones), but it is only the first season and I bet there was a big enough stink that has been made by so many in the player base, that CV's will be in Clan Battle in the future (maybe). 

During the last Ranked season, most players voiced at the start of a match that they were glad a CV was not in with them, and I know many that would jump out of the queue when they saw 2 CV's waiting to go in (yep, I was one of those).

CV's will all ways be a part of this game, I just wish they weren't, but hay, I'm ok ether way.  Just don't be thinking you represent all players when you jump on the "CV's need to be a bigger part of the game" band wagon, there are some of us that think they change this from a Naval warfare sim to a "How do I hide from the sky cancer" game.

And guess what. A few people like me had AA spec'd for days. BFT/AFT(was almost at 19 and would of specc'd for Manual AA), had every AA module(including the module that extends AA duration[radar mod hasn't popped up for me yet]). So my Des Moines was specced to be a no fly zone.

 

And that would change up builds in game would it not?

 

But now that build is useless. Already dropped all mods except the AA extension(no real need to change till radar shows up) to be more gunnery focused. Picked range for Des Moines because guns already fire fast enough. Half a second won't mean much, but I can fire at ships as they close in now and harass BBs at longer ranges.

[Herr_Reitz]

20 minutes ago, Seadog_Supreme said:

The mod trained me to know ship direction so that I don't need it any more. It's the pressure of battle that makes you misjudge.

 

Yea - got it... it's a helpful aid actually... aside from the obvious reason to like it... there's an (X) over the target on the minimap... you can tell by watching it where it will cross the outer marker of your range - which helps in firing a salvo that will be undetected but have a decent chance of hitting the target. Also the large sweeps made when  target is dodging is helpful too. 

 

Another good mod in the current Aslains gets rid of the extraneous garbage text from the display. It works really nicely with the crosshairs which don't appear until you target a ship. Nice. 

 

Thanks mucho

[HazeGrayUnderway]

55 minutes ago, IronWolfV said:

Notser and Zoup said the same.

 

Haven't seen Zoup's vid but I did see Notser's and now Flamu's take on this mess.  You can see this coming a mile away.

[IronWolfV]

Just now, HazeGrayUnderway said:

 

Haven't seen Zoup's vid but I did see Notser's and now Flamu's take on this mess.  You can see this coming a mile away.

Zoup didn't swear as much but he called it a screw up.

[MDTJ]

I'm seriously curious why he (or others) feel T10 is less balanced than T8. Or vice versa? At T10, 7V7 what limits if any would be recommended based on this wealth of experience in community events? WG has made it clear why they chose both of these figures (T10 end game/type balance and 7V7 to allow more clans to queue and boost population). There are quite a number of limits on SL and KOTS as well and tend to showcase basically the same team composition each match. I'm not even going into the no CV thing as I understand and relate to both pro and con arguments and view their exclusion as quite unfortunate. I'm legitimately interested to understand here as I haven't heard data supporting these comments, only claims that it is such a bad implementation.

[IronWolfV]

6 minutes ago, MDTJ said:

I'm seriously curious why he (or others) feel T10 is less balanced than T8. Or vice versa? At T10, 7V7 what limits if any would be recommended based on this wealth of experience in community events? WG has made it clear why they chose both of these figures (T10 end game/type balance and 7V7 to allow more clans to queue and boost population). There are quite a number of limits on SL and KOTS as well and tend to showcase basically the same team composition each match. I'm not even going into the no CV thing as I understand and relate to both pro and con arguments and view their exclusion as quite unfortunate. I'm legitimately interested to understand here as I haven't heard data supporting these comments, only claims that it is such a bad implementation.

Cause Flamu even said it and it's a contradiction. WG said tier 10 is by far the most balanced, but then severely limits one class and omits the other entirely.

 

If it was well balanced, why the omissions?

[HazeGrayUnderway]

Ranked had smaller team numbers than Randoms already and worked, why that simply couldn't be ported over for Clan Wars, I don't know.

[MDTJ]

That point is true of T8 or T10 though, so what's the difference in balance?

[Beneej_Spoor]

2 minutes ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

Ranked had smaller team numbers than Randoms already and worked, why that simply couldn't be ported over for Clan Wars, I don't know.

 

I'd prefer something in the middle since Clan Wars in my opinion are supposed to be distinct from Ranked. I would have done 10 v 10 so it's not as hectic as randoms, but not as under-populated as ranked.

[LoneStormchaser]

Anybody want to predict, even before a date has been set and what exactly the rules will be, which clan will win "Clan Wars" ?

[chewonit]

How much weight should we put on the claim that some top clan lobbied for the exclusion of CV because they don't have a good CV player?