Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Ruthless4u

An honest question for PVE mains

69 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

88
[BNKR]
Members
274 posts
358 battles

Yes I know I'm new with garbage stats. But I'm genuinely confused about something.

 

Why is it that some( not all) PVE mains feel that rewards should be equal to PVP players. I've seen a few imply PVE is just as challenging as any PVP match, ( not referring to longer grinds due to lower rewards)

How is facing preprogrammed bots, which are limited in their ability to respond or adjust to tactics on the fly require more skill than players who are capable of making of such adjustments? From my perspective from playing other games generally playing against other players is more challenging and rewarding than bots.

I know that not having 5k battles and garbage stats( according to some) disqualifies me from asking such questions or from even having an opinion on the game, but I figure why not ask anyways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,757
Members
9,862 posts
Just now, Ruthless4u said:

Yes I know I'm new with garbage stats. But I'm genuinely confused about something.

 

Why is it that some( not all) PVE mains feel that rewards should be equal to PVP players. I've seen a few imply PVE is just as challenging as any PVP match, ( not referring to longer grinds due to lower rewards)

How is facing preprogrammed bots, which are limited in their ability to respond or adjust to tactics on the fly require more skill than players who are capable of making of such adjustments? From my perspective from playing other games generally playing against other players is more challenging and rewarding than bots.

I know that not having 5k battles and garbage stats( according to some) disqualifies me from asking such questions or from even having an opinion on the game, but I figure why not ask anyways.

I seriously doubt that many PvE mains believe that they should receive equal rewards with random...

I'm sure they do however feel that it's not unreasonable to expect that event rewards should be possible in co-op, even if they require more work.:cap_hmm:

 

  • Cool 13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,752
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
6,103 posts
1,313 battles
1 minute ago, awiggin said:

I seriously doubt that many PvE mains believe that they should receive equal rewards with random...

I'm sure they do however feel that it's not unreasonable to expect that event rewards should be possible in co-op, even if they require more work.:cap_hmm:

 

Like the badges for example... would love if you could do those missions in co-op... :Smile_sceptic:

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
359
[DAY]
Members
1,154 posts
11,500 battles

*my guesses*

bots dont value their ship, they dont worry about things like their WTR

they are willing to trade 50k of their HP for 5k of yours

random players usually dont do those unworthy trades

 

so its super frustrating when bots yolo rush you just to get DS'd by your teammates meanwhile you cant do any damage to all the bow on bots

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,822
[ARRGG]
[ARRGG]
Members
5,770 posts

HuLlegC.gif

Bots don't count I am Human so I want what other humans get

. Even if The Bots are easy I still sail the same ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
64
[SHAN]
Beta Testers
325 posts

Actually what I have seen is don't double tax me when I play PvE. What I mean is don't keep the auto coast of sailing out of my anchorage the same as it is in PvP. You don't make as much in PvE (and should not) but you pay the same amount of tax to play your ship in PvE as you do in PvP. That point is what I have seen over and over being asked to be fixed on the forums. The only other point I have seen is being included in events and campaigns. Make the grind longer if you want but include PvE in events and campaigns. 

Cirran

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,669
[TBW]
Members
6,315 posts
11,863 battles
11 minutes ago, jason199506 said:

dont value their ship, they dont worry about things like their WTR

they are willing to trade 50k of their HP for 5k of yours

Thought you were defining Potato.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,942
[PVE]
Members
8,811 posts
7,241 battles
20 minutes ago, Ruthless4u said:

Yes I know I'm new with garbage stats. But I'm genuinely confused about something.

 

Why is it that some( not all) PVE mains feel that rewards should be equal to PVP players. I've seen a few imply PVE is just as challenging as any PVP match, ( not referring to longer grinds due to lower rewards)

How is facing preprogrammed bots, which are limited in their ability to respond or adjust to tactics on the fly require more skill than players who are capable of making of such adjustments? From my perspective from playing other games generally playing against other players is more challenging and rewarding than bots.

I know that not having 5k battles and garbage stats( according to some) disqualifies me from asking such questions or from even having an opinion on the game, but I figure why not ask anyways.

 

I would go so far as to say that few PvE players want the same rewards in a PvE task as a PvP task. I have seen a few that think, PvE is as hard as PvP, but they are few and far between. Now high tier PvE is harder than some PvP players say, but it is not as hard as PvP and very few PvE players would say that.

 

As for why play PvE, I don't like the sit, hide and shoot meta in PvP. I tend to be aggressive in my play and in PvP aggressiveness gets you sunk. PvE to me is just fun and I play for fun. YMMV.

 

9 minutes ago, Cirran said:

Actually what I have seen is don't double tax me when I play PvE. What I mean is don't keep the auto coast of sailing out of my anchorage the same as it is in PvP. You don't make as much in PvE (and should not) but you pay the same amount of tax to play your ship in PvE as you do in PvP. That point is what I have seen over and over being asked to be fixed on the forums. The only other point I have seen is being included in events and campaigns. Make the grind longer if you want but include PvE in events and campaigns. 

Cirran

 

Well, they did drop the PvE service fee by 25%, but the silver is cut by 50% or more. Since all perma-camo now has at least a -10% service fee and you can get a clan building with another -10% service fee, I think that the silver earnings in PvE are ok now. If they cut the service fee by another bit to make it 33% or even better 50%, that would be fine too. It is not like it would be unbalancing in my opinion. But I do think that WG would like to keep the PvP queues fuller and that *MAY* be why they have not. That might also be why they don't put a single PvE task in campaigns as well. I think that is short-sighted and if that is the reason, then just come out and tell us PvE players. The majority of PvE players would like PvE tasks for events and campaigns to be hard enough that they are not a cheap replacement for the PvP tasks.

 

2 minutes ago, Sovereigndawg said:

Thought you were defining Potato.

:Smile_teethhappy:

Edited by Kizarvexis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
359
[DAY]
Members
1,154 posts
11,500 battles
4 minutes ago, Sovereigndawg said:

Thought you were defining Potato.

eh, im sure potatoes dont want to make those trades, they just dont know how to trade 1:1(or better)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
88
[BNKR]
Members
274 posts
358 battles
7 minutes ago, Kizarvexis said:

 

I would go so far as to say that few PvE players want the same rewards in a PvE task as a PvP task. I have seen a few that think, PvE is as hard as PvP, but they are few and far between. Now high tier PvE is harder than some PvP players say, but it is not as hard as PvP and very few PvE players would say that.

 

As for why play PvE, I don't like the sit, hide and shoot meta in PvP. I tend to be aggressive in my play and in PvP aggressiveness gets you sunk. PvE to me is just fun and I play for fun. YMMV.

 

 

Well, they did drop the PvE service fee by 25%, but the silver is cut by 50% or more. Since all perma-camo now has at least a -10% service fee and you can get a clan building with another -10% service fee, I think that the silver earnings in PvE are ok now. If they cut the service fee by another bit to make it 33% or even better 50%, that would be fine too. It is not like it would be unbalancing in my opinion. But I do think that WG would like to keep the PvP queues fuller and that *MAY* be why they have not. That might also be why they don't put a single PvE task in campaigns as well. I think that is short-sighted and if that is the reason, then just come out and tell us PvE players. The majority of PvE players would like PvE tasks for events and campaigns to be hard enough that they are not a cheap replacement for the PvP tasks.

 

:Smile_teethhappy:

I tend to be too aggressive for my own good. Sitting in the back waiting to fight I find is dull, and in my ( admittedly) limited experience here I see more camping in PVE than PVP.  For myself the other teams ability to adapt to the changing situation is what makes PVP more appealing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,669
[TBW]
Members
6,315 posts
11,863 battles
On 1/27/2018 at 8:08 PM, jason199506 said:

eh, im sure potatoes dont want to make those trades, they just dont know how to trade 1:1(or better)

I was was making a joke you see, and potato play happens to even the best of us sometimes. I was comparing (lightly mind you) bot play with potato play. Granted potatoes know how to back up (I think) after running into an island.

I also think that most PVE players, would play it even if the difficulty level was far above Random difficulty.

There really isn't anything quite so fun as going out in your Derzki and crushing 6 or 7 ships in a battle.

 

Edited by Sovereigndawg
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,942
[PVE]
Members
8,811 posts
7,241 battles
17 minutes ago, Ruthless4u said:

I tend to be too aggressive for my own good. Sitting in the back waiting to fight I find is dull, and in my ( admittedly) limited experience here I see more camping in PVE than PVP.  For myself the other teams ability to adapt to the changing situation is what makes PVP more appealing.

 

Well, I don't know what PvE you are playing, but I see a lot of camping in PvP. In fact, it is one of the things PvP players seem to complain most about.

 

12 minutes ago, Sovereigndawg said:

I was was making a joke you see, and potato play happens to even the best of us sometimes. I was comparing (lightly mind you) bot play with potato play. Granted potatoes know how to back up (I think) after running into an island.

I also think that most PVE players, would play it even if the difficulty level was far above Random difficulty.

There really isn't anything quite so fun as going out in your Derzki and crushing 6 or 7 ships in a battle.

shot-17_12.27_23_51.32-0637.thumb.jpg.259c94e12c9c347ede041edda7ab9b88.jpg

 

Wickes is fun to squash bots with as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
205
[RIPQP]
WoWS Wiki Editor, Supertester
725 posts
7,624 battles

I wish PvE would have reduced repair/resupply costs, cause I occasionally run a tier 10 in it for lols, but then get dinged with a huge repair bill on any ship that doesn't have a premium camo on it + econ flags.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
88
[BNKR]
Members
274 posts
358 battles
10 minutes ago, Kizarvexis said:

 

Well, I don't know what PvE you are playing, but I see a lot of camping in PvP. In fact, it is one of the things PvP players seem to complain most about.

 

 

Wickes is fun to squash bots with as well.

Well low tier PVE of course:Smile_teethhappy:

 

Most of the PVE matches I been in, there's always seems to be 2-3 ships that sit and wait for half the match to move, while in PVP it seems it's just 1 slow starter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
126 posts
303 battles

If I am paying for a premium account, expending the same doubloons and XP on my ships as everyone else, investing time and actual money to support the game to everyone's mutual benefit, then why should I be penalized in any form because I choose a different style of game mode than someone else? Is PvE less challenging? Sure, but who suffers for that? How does my choice of PvE or Random negatively impact the gaming experience of other players? I'm in full agreement that rewards should be proportional to the challenge, but I also believe that there should be a common and equal disbursement of value relative to a common investment, anything else is discriminatory.

Edited by kagero__
...
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,119
[NBGC]
Members
3,041 posts
10,248 battles
1 hour ago, awiggin said:

I seriously doubt that many PvE mains believe that they should receive equal rewards with random...

I'm sure they do however feel that it's not unreasonable to expect that event rewards should be possible in co-op, even if they require more work.:cap_hmm:

^^This^^

Personally, I don't see it as unreasonable to have "either/or" options for various missions and challenges, based on whether or not one wants to have a go at them in PvP or PvE. For example, a weekend challenge based around sinking X amount of Japanese ships to earn Y amount of Type Z camouflages couldn't have an X + n modifier for Co-op play, thus enabling PvE mains to still complete the mission. The modifier would be there as an adjustment in difficulty, to ensure that the same or similar amount of effort would be necessary to finish it the mission and claim the rewards. Daily challenges, such as Set X amount of fires for Y amount of signals, could have a modifier of X + n when done in PvE as well.

I can understand why the higher-tier campaigns don't have much (or anything) in the way of PvE content, given the rewards, but it would be nice if there was some concession given in that realm. At this point, I would be content to see the above done for missions and challenges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
687 posts
3,667 battles

I play ca. 85% PvE and would never suggest equal levels of rewards.  Heck I'm rarely up-in-arms about Co-Op being excluded from one campaign or another.  After all not every PvP main has T8 and above ships to play the Yamamoto campaign (and if some did it might serve the community better if they learned how to play them first).  You don't see a big frenzy over those restrictions. 

Based on what I read in the forums (which is statistically bogus) I would guess it's only a few PvE mains that clamor for "equal" rewards.  And likely some of those misstate their position. By far the majority just want access to some "WG bling" within the restrictions of PvE modes.  Since base XP and a few other metrics are reduced in PvE mode, these parameters become ideally balanced for determining rewards for both modes.

There is a justified argument that the list of combat missions over a period of time that completely exclude PvE modes (even measured by parameters more difficult to achieve in that mode) makes players who focus most of their involvement in Co-Op, feel a little left out - and some people can get really angry.

As for difficulty?  PvE is easier - no question in my mind.  And technically it shouldn't be easier.  If WGing wanted to devote the manpower and cutting edge level of programming possible in this generations hardware and training, there is simply no way a random collection of humans, with inconsistent team thinking, could defeat the co-ordinated attack of a handful of bots working together.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,942
[PVE]
Members
8,811 posts
7,241 battles
27 minutes ago, Ruthless4u said:

Well low tier PVE of course:Smile_teethhappy:

 

Most of the PVE matches I been in, there's always seems to be 2-3 ships that sit and wait for half the match to move, while in PVP it seems it's just 1 slow starter.

 

There is a lot of sitting and hiding in PvP. You are still in new player PvE. I think you will find PvE players mostly move to the bots, because if you don't, some other player will sink them before you get some shots in.

 

14 minutes ago, Goodwood_Alpha said:

^^This^^

Personally, I don't see it as unreasonable to have "either/or" options for various missions and challenges, based on whether or not one wants to have a go at them in PvP or PvE. For example, a weekend challenge based around sinking X amount of Japanese ships to earn Y amount of Type Z camouflages couldn't have an X + n modifier for Co-op play, thus enabling PvE mains to still complete the mission. The modifier would be there as an adjustment in difficulty, to ensure that the same or similar amount of effort would be necessary to finish it the mission and claim the rewards. Daily challenges, such as Set X amount of fires for Y amount of signals, could have a modifier of X + n when done in PvE as well.

I can understand why the higher-tier campaigns don't have much (or anything) in the way of PvE content, given the rewards, but it would be nice if there was some concession given in that realm. At this point, I would be content to see the above done for missions and challenges.

 

Well, the Yamamoto campaign has earn X thousands of XP and Y millions of silver in PvP. I don't see why tasks like that could also be done in PvE with some slight modifications. Just add another task for PvE with whatever extra XP/silver would be fair. It wouldn't have to be much as you earn a lot less in PvE.

 

11 minutes ago, surratus said:

As for difficulty?  PvE is easier - no question in my mind.  And technically it shouldn't be easier.  If WGing wanted to devote the manpower and cutting edge level of programming possible in this generations hardware and training, there is simply no way a random collection of humans, with inconsistent team thinking, could defeat the co-ordinated attack of a handful of bots working together.

 

Oh yeah, you could make the bots unbeatable, but for those players who just want to have fun, or are trying out a new ship, or are trying to learn a new skill, would not be able to do that if the bots were overwhelming. It was bad enough when you had 8 players vs 16 bots on the test server. They would swarm you under. Bringing 8v16 back for a weekend event would be cool, but not all the time for the above reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
9,434 posts
11,601 battles
1 hour ago, Kitsunelegend said:

Like the badges for example... would love if you could do those missions in co-op... :Smile_sceptic:

   I could see WG offering different set for PVE as well since they've added PVE achievements.      may be they will, given time.  

 

as far as camping,  it is as bad in PVE as in PVP.   only difference is that in PVE,  the bots will charge the players.            most PVE players were even worse for camping when I played it in t9 for hsf cartons in mushi.  I got like 3x the dmg of second placed player  and half the kills. 

Edited by centarina

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,942
[PVE]
Members
8,811 posts
7,241 battles
1 hour ago, Kitsunelegend said:

Like the badges for example... would love if you could do those missions in co-op... :Smile_sceptic:

 

2 minutes ago, centarina said:

   I could see WG offering different set for PVE as well since they've added PVE achievements.      may be they will, given time.  

 

I wonder what they are going to do after Feb 7th when the badge missions end. Will they make more missions? Will new players be left out? Will badges end for now? Curious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
880
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
2,220 posts
8,387 battles
1 hour ago, Ruthless4u said:

Why is it that some( not all) PVE mains feel that rewards should be equal to PVP players. I've seen a few imply PVE is just as challenging as any PVP match, ( not referring to longer grinds due to lower rewards)

 

This "challenging" aspect is a complete red herring when talking about whether PvE players "deserve" the same rewards as PvP players.

Think about it: if a mission requires X amount of XP to complete, any potato can do it in PvP if they play enough games. These sort of missions have innately nothing to do with difficulty.

Some missions, such as those in the Yamamoto or Honorable Service campaigns, require you to get achievements like "Dreadnaught" or "High Caliber". Getting these can be difficult, but it won't be more difficult than say killing six or seven of the eight bots in a typical PvE match. It seems to me that WG is too lazy to decide what is an equivalently difficult mission is for PvE, and therefore prefer to lock out all the PvE players entirely, and that is what's lame.

 

Edited by pikohan
  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,009
[ABDA]
Beta Testers
16,017 posts
11,538 battles

Why do PvP players care what co-op players get?

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
853
[HINON]
[HINON]
Members
3,803 posts
4,224 battles
1 hour ago, Kitsunelegend said:

Like the badges for example... would love if you could do those missions in co-op... :Smile_sceptic:

Takes Midway Out in Co-op for 100 battles. Immediately earns CV Expert Emblem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
608
[NMKJT]
Members
2,676 posts
1 hour ago, Ruthless4u said:

Yes I know I'm new with garbage stats. But I'm genuinely confused about something.

 

Why is it that some( not all) PVE mains feel that rewards should be equal to PVP players. I've seen a few imply PVE is just as challenging as any PVP match, ( not referring to longer grinds due to lower rewards)

How is facing preprogrammed bots, which are limited in their ability to respond or adjust to tactics on the fly require more skill than players who are capable of making of such adjustments? From my perspective from playing other games generally playing against other players is more challenging and rewarding than bots.

I know that not having 5k battles and garbage stats( according to some) disqualifies me from asking such questions or from even having an opinion on the game, but I figure why not ask anyways.

I don't think we expect the same rewards but it would be nice if we had weekend events to work through even if it's for lesser rewards

And getting 5 stars in an operation is quite challenging. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
687 posts
3,667 battles
Just now, Kizarvexis said:

Oh yeah, you could make the bots unbeatable, but for those players who just want to have fun, or are trying out a new ship, or are trying to learn a new skill, would not be able to do that if the bots were overwhelming. It was bad enough when you had 8 players vs 16 bots on the test server. They would swarm you under. Bringing 8v16 back for a weekend event would be cool, but not all the time for the above reasons.

This is true, it's just a pet peeve that players think bots are easy, when it's really the programming that is limited.  I don't know anyone who feels protective of WR in Co-OP.  While 8v16 would be "exciting" it's simply throwing more bot fodder into the mix, granted it's a change from the status quo, and I'd be happy to see it.  I expect something similar to a swarm, or up tier'ing will be in store under "Hard" level of operations.  However they could make the bots more challenging by improving the bots programing and co-ordination.  I have my suspicions that "smart or better" bots somehow effect WG's bottom line.

One thing to mention.  I really enjoy playing all my collection and Co-Op is one place I don't feel like a Seal Clubber when I want to take out a low tier favorite.  The bots don't seem to mind, where humans can get very salty.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×