Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Edgecase

Dear WG: Please stop incentivizing bad play

54 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

3,370
Members
5,201 posts
9,061 battles

AMEN! Much better to have these badges rewarded using base XP.

Damage farming encourages terrible play. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,314
[-K-]
[-K-]
Members
3,877 posts
13,844 battles
30 minutes ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

IIRC Base XP is tier-dependent as well as achievement-dependent, and if that's the case then using base XP would bias the metric in favour of higher-tier ships and (statistically at least) lock the lower-tier players out.

Lower-tier ships receive a (fairly large) bonus to base XP for damage dealt to higher-tier ships. Higher-tier ships have reduced XP rewards against lower-tier ships. It honestly sort of balances out.

Regardless, the achievement is restricted to Tier X ships only, so it's not an issue here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,538
Members
21,864 posts
5,725 battles
5 hours ago, grizzly95 said:

 

I mean, i average 87,000 damage a game over 75 battles with a 78.67% winrate in Z-52, and i consider myself a poor DD player.

That's no more valid than someone with 18k damage and a 22% WR  considering themselves a good player. You're suffering from Kruger-Dunning. (as opposed to Dunning-Kruger)

If there's one thing that's a constant here, it's that how good/bad a player you consider yourself to be is irrelevant. Your stats tell the story.

You may consider yourself a poor DD player, but few would agree, thus making your opinion on the difficulty of the task invalid.

Edited by Skpstr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,480
[WOLF7]
Members
11,209 posts
6 hours ago, grizzly95 said:

Its beyond stupidly easy even with regular DDs like Z-52 without "playing stupidly".

 

I mean, i average 87,000 damage a game over 75 battles with a 78.67% winrate in Z-52, and i consider myself a poor DD player. 

 

In fact, of my T10 DDs, only Grozovoi falls in at under 64k average.

And you seriously think you have anything in common with 99% of the player base?:Smile_amazed:

Why do the few serious players in this game refuse to recognize who the vast majority of players are, even when the evidence is staring you in the face....:Smile_teethhappy:

I should note I could care less about the badges, but considering who the player base is, and the fact they've failed for two years to change it, I hardly see this as anything but another salt generator....

Edited by awiggin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
820
[R-F]
Members
1,143 posts
7,541 battles
3 hours ago, Brhinosaurus said:

 

Average damage done by tier X DDs, according to na.wows-numbers.com:

Khab 59,556

Yueyang 59,502

Shimakaze 46,458

Gearing 44,862

Z-52 43,743

Grozovoi 43,066

Warships-Today is now working and reporting different damage numbers.

Khab 62,635

Yueyang 61,212

Shimakaze 46,107

Z-52 44,956

Grozovoi 44,718

Gearing 44,718

 

I wonder what the difference is.  Anyhow, now we can look at some curves.  Here's the Khab, with the damage needed to win the "Destroyer Commander, Elite Forces" badge highlighted.

khab.png.383c660d4ad428cb6e2814ceaa4bf104.png

Soooo... to be an elite destroyer captain, just play the khab, and be average, I guess.

On the other hand, here's the Gearing:

gearing.png.d6f84ea1c86ef302f319195ed4542e3e.png

To earn the badge with the Gearing, you need to be well in front of the bell curve.  Which is fine, right?  I mean, that's what "Elite" means.

 

And for the record, here's where grizzly95, who considers himself a "poor DD player", fits on the Z-52 curve with his 87,449 average damage:

Z52.png.1c50578ebd0f3675b58fc8458194b498.png

If he can sustain that for enough battles, he will literally be the 5th best Z-52 player on the server by damage done, just ahead of, oh hey, @Kombat_W0MBAT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
637
[ARRGG]
Members
4,863 posts
8,128 battles

It’s evident when you see yollo players what there up to... looking to spot ships first, sink so many German American ships yada yada yada .. such is mission life in team games

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,865
[NMKJT]
Beta Testers
22,184 posts
3,895 battles
4 hours ago, Edgecase said:

The real problem isn't whether it's achievable with normal play or not; the real problem is that the requirement is set up using a metric that incentivizes damage farming. Why wouldn't they use Base XP instead?

Probably because WG thinks destroyers should be measured by damage like everyone else already is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,370
Members
5,201 posts
9,061 battles
11 minutes ago, Brhinosaurus said:
Spoiler

 

Warships-Today is now working and reporting different damage numbers.

Khab 62,635

Yueyang 61,212

Shimakaze 46,107

Z-52 44,956

Grozovoi 44,718

Gearing 44,718

 

I wonder what the difference is.  Anyhow, now we can look at some curves.  Here's the Khab, with the damage needed to win the "Destroyer Commander, Elite Forces" badge highlighted.

khab.png.383c660d4ad428cb6e2814ceaa4bf104.png

Soooo... to be an elite destroyer captain, just play the khab, and be average, I guess.

On the other hand, here's the Gearing:

gearing.png.d6f84ea1c86ef302f319195ed4542e3e.png

To earn the badge with the Gearing, you need to be well in front of the bell curve.  Which is fine, right?  I mean, that's what "Elite" means.

 

And for the record, here's where grizzly95, who considers himself a "poor DD player", fits on the Z-52 curve with his 87,449 average damage:

Z52.png.1c50578ebd0f3675b58fc8458194b498.png

If he can sustain that for enough battles, he will literally be the 5th best Z-52 player on the server by damage done, just ahead of, oh hey, @Kombat_W0MBAT

 

 

 

Grizzly is a humble gent. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,538
Members
21,864 posts
5,725 battles
1 minute ago, Kombat_W0MBAT said:

 

Grizzly is a humble gent. 

Or just has impossible standards lol.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,848
[OO7]
Members
4,067 posts
10,699 battles

My thoughts exactly. At least by going off of base xp they would have some semblance of encouraging team play. Now all I have to do is run the best ship I got and focus bbs and who cares about capping, spotting, killing dds etc. 

Stupid, stupid, stupid!!! WG,  quit using damage as a way to show a player is "elite" or good!!!

The other thing this will do is cause me to run some ships over others while I'm still under 100 battles. I'll be running Khabarovsk and hindenburg almost exclusively if I want the badges. Forget groz, gearing, minotaur, dm, etc... 

Why should I take something that I will have a harder time getting the badges with. 

Yeah, I could forget all about the badges and probably should, but I have a problem seeing something obtainable and not going for it... 

Edited by Ducky_shot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
572
[WOLF4]
Members
1,091 posts
4,681 battles

I agree on the use of metrics that conflict with longer term goals. 

What's worse is they force people to do it in Random or, even worse, Ranked, where the impact is magnified. Why not let people do it in Co-Op?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
621 posts
7,298 battles
22 hours ago, Edgecase said:

The real problem isn't whether it's achievable with normal play or not; the real problem is that the requirement is set up using a metric that incentivizes damage farming. Why wouldn't they use Base XP instead?

 

Is capping 3 points really that much more indicative of teamplay than getting damage? I've had games in Khabarovsk where i did not even get a cap assist, but yet single handed chased down and killed a Shimakaze and Gearing preventing them from doing anything against my team. Was that not helpful to the team? Moreso even than if i had capped?

 

Same thing with Z-52, my game in that ship is predicated on taking the other teams destroyers out of the fight as early as i can, or at least denying them the opportunity to make a a large impact on the game. Is that also not teamplay, even though i can achieve incredibly surprising damage results? (I was very surprised by my own numbers in that regard, had never looked) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,683
[ARGSY]
Members
9,607 posts
6,255 battles
18 hours ago, DingBat said:

Why not let people do it in Co-Op?

Said it before, will say it again: the frustrating thing is, sometimes they DO.

The only thing I can think of is that Random team compositions are dependent on the players who are actually available to select from; in co-op they could potentially be accused of cheating or trolling by saying "spot one British BB" (for example) and then not loading any such bot in, or loading it in way towards the back of the map behind everyone else so potatoes and seals had to YOLO and die in order to get to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
621 posts
7,298 battles
Just now, Kombat_W0MBAT said:

 

That was a compliment. 

 

Just remarking on how i'm going to club myself out of that now that i know about it lol

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,370
Members
5,201 posts
9,061 battles
17 minutes ago, grizzly95 said:

 

Is capping 3 points really that much more indicative of teamplay than getting damage? I've had games in Khabarovsk where i did not even get a cap assist, but yet single handed chased down and killed a Shimakaze and Gearing preventing them from doing anything against my team. Was that not helpful to the team? Moreso even than if i had capped?

 

Same thing with Z-52, my game in that ship is predicated on taking the other teams destroyers out of the fight as early as i can, or at least denying them the opportunity to make a a large impact on the game. Is that also not teamplay, even though i can achieve incredibly surprising damage results? (I was very surprised by my own numbers in that regard, had never looked) 

 

I think Edge's point is that doing meaningful damage should be rewarded. In general, base XP captures that fairly well. If you deal 50k to destroyers, you'll net more XP than if you dealt 100k to battleships.

By using something as simple as a raw damage, a lot of people will farm higher damage numbers instead of dealing meaningful damage, such as you do in your destroyers. 

In short, the play style that you employ in DDs should be encouraged. This method doesn't do that. 

Edited by Kombat_W0MBAT
  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
820
[R-F]
Members
1,143 posts
7,541 battles

I assume there is a similar badge for each of the other classes, just with a different damage target?  I haven't actually had time to log into the game for a few days to see for myself.

 

If so, it would bring the "The Conqueror does 20% more damage than the other T10 BBs butkeep in mind a lot more of that can be healed so we don't consider it unbalanced" argument into a new light.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,538
Members
21,864 posts
5,725 battles
1 hour ago, Kombat_W0MBAT said:

 

That was a compliment. 

And he complimented you by calling you Jesus! :Smile_teethhappy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,916 posts
10,762 battles

I've long resigned to the fact that this game is Battleship centric and most if not all incentives are to cater BB population. Damage-based rewards are just that because damage farming is what BBs do best.

This is literally Battleships' world and we are just living in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,370
Members
5,201 posts
9,061 battles
28 minutes ago, chewonit said:

I've long resigned to the fact that this game is Battleship centric and most if not all incentives are to cater BB population. Damage-based rewards are just that because damage farming is what BBs do best.

This is literally Battleships' world and we are just living in it.

 

A. The damage based emblems are different for each ship type. It does not favor BB play in the slightest.

B. These rewards will lessen the quality of life for BB players because people are trying to farm them.

C. Battleships feel like the most difficult class to carry a game in, at least for me personally. Saying this is a battleship's world is lunacy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
116
Members
309 posts
On 18/01/2018 at 12:43 AM, Wolcott said:

I read many times that WG wants to encourage teamwork, yet they still come up with stupid missions like these. I seriously doubt they will ever make up their bloody minds.

Wargaming doesn't deserve all the blame.

 

Unicums who keep whining about how bad teams screw them over, and how special they are and how they should always be rewarded for their unicum-ness are also to blame.

 

They demand that their specialness be rewarded, WG responds.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,848
[OO7]
Members
4,067 posts
10,699 battles
5 minutes ago, intixw said:

Wargaming doesn't deserve all the blame.

 

Unicums who keep whining about how bad teams screw them over, and how special they are and how they should always be rewarded for their unicum-ness are also to blame.

 

They demand that their specialness be rewarded, WG responds.

As a whole, unicums complain the least out of the player base. 

They learnt that they can control their their wr to a good degree despite their team. 

They realize that they cannot depend on their teams and that potatoes will be evenly divided over time between the green team and the red team and their skill will push their wr higher. 

They have learned that complaining about their team does pretty much nothing.

That being said Unicums are extremely quick to realize bad design and mechanics. In this case, recognizing that farming damage does not win games and is not a good metric for measuring good play. 

Edited by Ducky_shot
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
572
[WOLF4]
Members
1,091 posts
4,681 battles
2 minutes ago, Ducky_shot said:

As a whole, unicums complain the least out of the player base. 

They learnt that they can control their their wr to a good degree despite their team. 

They realize that they cannot depend on their teams and that potatoes will be evenly divided over time between the green team and the red team and their skill will push their wr higher. 

They have learned that complaining about their team does pretty much nothing.

So much this. 

 

I did an informal study on "player toxicity" in game in WoT. My findings were:

  • Red players were pretty much oblivious and were hardly toxic at all
  • Yellow players pretty much understood they sucked and were more interested in getting friendly help than anything else
  • Purple players just pretty much treated all other players as sources of frustration and, as a result, ignored everyone
  • Blue and Green players were, by far, the most toxic of all the groups. 

The data set size was large enough to say that the results were "interesting". Informal study is informal. 

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
820
[R-F]
Members
1,143 posts
7,541 battles
36 minutes ago, Kombat_W0MBAT said:

 

A. The damage based emblems are different for each ship type. It does not favor BB play in the slightest.

I think what chewonit is arguing is that raw damage done is a reasonably good way to judge BB player performance, but not so good for other classes.  So they've developed a judging system that is appropriate for BBs but not for other classes.  I think there's some merit to that argument.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×