Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
w4spl3g

Feature idea: Get your captain back.

Get your captain back.  

26 members have voted

  1. 1. Should you be able to spend silver to get your captain back faster when it's trapped in a match you already died in and left?


13 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

370
[P2W]
[P2W]
Members
1,239 posts

Synopsis: Most people have a limited number of high point captains and maximizing their uptime (availability) is key.

So the idea is basically captains act like ships in operations minus the cooldown part. In Operations you can pay like 75K silver to use a ship on cooldown.

In this scenario, you die early in a match, your high point captain is locked in to that battle for maybe 15+ more minutes. You pay like 50K silver and get that captain back to use on a different ship (national restrictions still apply, etc). This also slightly increases the value of premium ships since they would be the ones you could jump directly back in to the quickest (i.e. don't require retraining).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
370
[P2W]
[P2W]
Members
1,239 posts

I am interested in why people voting no are doing so. I see no downside to this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
242 posts
608 battles
1 minute ago, w4spl3g said:

I am interested in why people voting no are doing so. I see no downside to this.

I voted potato so we'll just get that out of the way....

 

however as someone relatively new to the game it already took me quite a while to figure out all the mechanics of captains... and even still I don't understand every part of them. I really don't think we want to convolute the captain system further, especially with the large portion of casual players we have in this game. Just my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
367
[XBRTC]
Members
1,204 posts
7,189 battles

I voted Potato as well, but I do think it's a not-great idea.

Playing well should have rewards--XP, silver, mission/campaign rewards, etc.--and playing poorly should have consequences. Having an enforced period of boredom where you can't use your captain and ship again is an incentive to play better and survive for the whole battle.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,554 posts
6,867 battles

The captain should go down with the ship Sir, not heli-lifted to some new one. Bad for morale.

[potato]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
242 posts
608 battles
15 minutes ago, LT_Rusty_SWO said:

I voted Potato as well, but I do think it's a not-great idea.

Playing well should have rewards--XP, silver, mission/campaign rewards, etc.--and playing poorly should have consequences. Having an enforced period of boredom where you can't use your captain and ship again is an incentive to play better and survive for the whole battle.

Fair point here. True you can get super unlucky, but if you died really early in the battle there's probably a good chance there's a mistake there you should be learning from. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
367
[XBRTC]
Members
1,204 posts
7,189 battles

Also, getting your captain back is probably going to be useless, unless you get your ship back as well, or unless you just have a bunch of premium ships and one captain that you rotate around between them.

If you don't want to sit there and watch the rest of the battle go down, play a different ship. It's not that big of a deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
370
[P2W]
[P2W]
Members
1,239 posts
26 minutes ago, LT_Rusty_SWO said:

I voted Potato as well, but I do think it's a not-great idea.

Playing well should have rewards--XP, silver, mission/campaign rewards, etc.--and playing poorly should have consequences. Having an enforced period of boredom where you can't use your captain and ship again is an incentive to play better and survive for the whole battle.

You aren't talking about good vs bad play, you're talking about aggressive vs passive play. In my opinion, the current meta is [edited]awful and terribly boring. This is exacerbated by stat whoring. This is especially a problem for the guy who often dies pushing the cap at the beginning (which I do). As we all know, the game mostly cares about damage. I can get multiple caps but not getting good damage = craprewards. I'm incentivized to sit in the back and wait for other people to meat shield while I try to farm damage - I think that's bad play even though that's what WG has the game set up to reward currently.

 

5 minutes ago, LT_Rusty_SWO said:

Also, getting your captain back is probably going to be useless, unless you get your ship back as well, or unless you just have a bunch of premium ships and one captain that you rotate around between them.

If you don't want to sit there and watch the rest of the battle go down, play a different ship. It's not that big of a deal.

I have a lot of premium ships, I also doubt I'm alone in that. What it would do most is really for new players who don't. It incentivizes them buying premium ships to grind their first 19 faster  - I have multiple 19s, It's  benefit to me but not as much as it is for them and the grind is probably a reason a lot of people quit (although WG would have to confirm that).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
367
[XBRTC]
Members
1,204 posts
7,189 battles
9 minutes ago, w4spl3g said:

You aren't talking about good vs bad play, you're talking about aggressive vs passive play. In my opinion, the current meta is [edited]awful and terribly boring. This is exacerbated by stat whoring. This is especially a problem for the guy who often dies pushing the cap at the beginning (which I do). As we all know, the game mostly cares about damage. I can get multiple caps but not getting good damage = craprewards. I'm incentivized to sit in the back and wait for other people to meat shield while I try to farm damage - I think that's bad play even though that's what WG has the game set up to reward currently.

 

Um. Not sure who told you that multiple caps and low damage equals crap rewards... Solo caps are BIG XP. I had a game in Shimakaze the other day where I only did 7100 damage... but will wound up with over a thousand base XP and my take home was almost 150k credits. Why? Because I capped, and we won.

 

9 minutes ago, w4spl3g said:

 

I have a lot of premium ships, I also doubt I'm alone in that. What it would do most is really for new players who don't. It incentivizes them buying premium ships to grind their first 19 faster  - I have multiple 19s, It's  benefit to me but not as much as it is for them and the grind is probably a reason a lot of people quit (although WG would have to confirm that).

 

New players shouldn't be spending a lot of time in premiums anyway. New players should be grinding a couple of lines and improving their skills, not jumping from South Carolina up to Tirpitz and then screwing their teams over. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
242 posts
608 battles
21 minutes ago, w4spl3g said:

You aren't talking about good vs bad play, you're talking about aggressive vs passive play.

That is very much not true. There's definitely a difference between "aggressive play" and dying right away. If you know what you are doing, you can be the most aggressive person on the team and make it to the end of the match. I think most people could probably agree that if you died in less than 5 minutes of the game it wasn't because you played aggressive, it was very likely because you made a mistake. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
370
[P2W]
[P2W]
Members
1,239 posts
Just now, LT_Rusty_SWO said:

 

Um. Not sure who told you that multiple caps and low damage equals crap rewards... Solo caps are BIG XP. I had a game in Shimakaze the other day where I only did 7100 damage... but will wound up with over a thousand base XP and my take home was almost 150k credits. Why? Because I capped, and we won.

it's a matter of opinion as to what constitutes a lot of XP.  I have thousands of DD games. Here's an example, this might be the best Shimakaze game I've ever had but it shows the point:

2CweHeB.jpg

No caps. That was a 3251 base xp game. As an aside, thanks for being the only one with any balls to back up your No vote.

2 minutes ago, ArgosRising said:

If you know what you are doing, you can be the most aggressive person on the team and make it to the end of the match.

I'd love to see examples of this. It's exceedingly rare in my experience.

 

Realistically this is basically masturbation. WG doesn't give 2 [edited] about its own forums, they're unlikely to even read this and much less so to act on it, and, even if they did, they would stand to lose money on FXPers (which I think would be made up for by premium sales but I digress).:cap_old:

The forums are what I do between matches.

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,824
[ARRGG]
[ARRGG]
Members
5,770 posts
1 hour ago, w4spl3g said:

I am interested in why people voting no are doing so. I see no downside to this.

If you have just a few High point captains , may I suggest you Grind a small amount MORE?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
367
[XBRTC]
Members
1,204 posts
7,189 battles
1 minute ago, w4spl3g said:

it's a matter of opinion as to what constitutes a lot of XP.  I have thousands of DD games. Here's an example, this might be the best Shimakaze game I've ever had but it shows the point:

2CweHeB.jpg

No caps. That was a 3251 base xp game. As an aside, thanks for being the only one with any balls to back up your No vote.

I'd love to see examples of this. It's exceedingly rare in my experience.

 

I'm not saying that 1098 XP is a lot in the grand scheme of things... but I am saying that I'd have needed about 10x that amount of damage to get the same amount of XP with no caps.

And also just OBTW, you didn't get 3251 xp just for having that damage total. Far more of that is tied up in the achievements than in the damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×