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

This is Why I Hate Win and do X Missions

81 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

3,439
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
16,315 posts
9,621 battles

Been having a terrible time the last couple of days and I finally got a couple of kills for the Indy mission. We had a large lead in kills but you know your team is in really deep trouble when you have a couple of Arizona's "racing" back to your cap.

L1c4Hmt.jpg

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
544
[WOLF4]
Members
1,220 posts
2,782 battles
5 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

Been having a terrible time the last couple of days and I finally got a couple of kills. You know your team is in really deep trouble when you have a couple of Arizona's "racing" back to your cap.

L1c4Hmt.jpg

Yeah i feel your pain man. I've had games where i'd get a few kills and it looks like we are ahead and then BAM someone gets detonated and then it falls apart like a house of cards in a tornado and the next thing you know you went from winning to losing the the course of seconds.

Dem dice rolls.

Edited by xalmgrey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,439
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
16,315 posts
9,621 battles
1 minute ago, xalmgrey said:

Yeah i feel your pain man. I've had games where i'd get a few kills and it looks like we are ahead and then BAM someone gets detonated and then it falls apart like a house of cards in a tornado and the next thing you know you went from winning to losing the the course of seconds.

Dem dice rolls.

I have come to the conclusion that there should be another method to complete these stacked requirement missions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,259
Members
2,992 posts
5,204 battles

Simple modification to make them better, using this one as an example:

"Sink two ships in wins, over any number of battles."

Allowing it to be over any number of battles decreases the odds that people will force something that isn't there. You can up the number of ships to sink in compensation, if you want.

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
544
[WOLF4]
Members
1,220 posts
2,782 battles
Just now, BrushWolf said:

I have come to the conclusion that there should be another method to complete these stacked requirement missions.

Whenever the win condition is added to any of these it makes them immensely harder to get done with ease. Good thing we only need to get 21 out of 25.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
544
[WOLF4]
Members
1,220 posts
2,782 battles
1 minute ago, cometguy said:

Simple modification to make them better, using this one as an example:

"Sink two ships in wins, over any number of battles."

Allowing it to be over any number of battles decreases the odds that people will force something that isn't there. You can up the number of ships to sink in compensation, if you want.

That would make it more casual friendly that's for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
310
[KOOKS]
Alpha Tester
2,808 posts
4,780 battles

You always get the desired results when you don't need them...and never when you do need them.

Personal statistics missions such as these mostly depend on you to shine as your team fall around you and you carry it to victory...or in this case, be a better kill stealer...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,259
[ARGSY]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
5,392 posts
19,439 battles
2 minutes ago, cometguy said:

Simple modification to make them better, using this one as an example:

"Sink two ships in wins, over any number of battles."

Allowing it to be over any number of battles decreases the odds that people will force something that isn't there. You can up the number of ships to sink in compensation, if you want.

Jep, that would take alot of salt out of the game, had the same idea earlier today.

Since WG listen to the players @Pigeon_of_War may show some interested into this idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
230
[WPP]
Members
621 posts
6,227 battles

I went 3-13 yesterday.  In those 16 games I had 2+ kills 9 times.  It was maddening.

it’s these missions that drove me away from Tanks last November.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
846
[STW-M]
Members
2,340 posts
6,235 battles

I honestly find that I am most capable of competing missions like these when I don't think about them (although it turns out that having a high tier USN CV also doesn't hurt for fire damage :Smile-_tongue:).

It's really only the missions that encourage an unhealthy playstyle that infuriates me, like those that require you do X amount of torpedo damage in a single battle. Commence dozens of destroyers and cruisers bum-rushing the enemy team and dying en-mass.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,259
[ARGSY]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
5,392 posts
19,439 battles
1 minute ago, pyantoryng said:

You always get the desired results when you don't need them...and never when you do need them.

Personal statistics missions such as these mostly depend on you to shine as your team fall around you and you carry it to victory...or in this case, be a better kill stealer...

Got only a little bit of time the last two days to finish this mission. Had a chance yesterday in a good game, but two potatos gave the match away by chasing a DD for 10 minutes instead of protecting the base.

First battle today was utterly crap from my personal contribution. But I was lucky to secure the second kill on a low health DD, when only two enemies were left but we had stil ten boats up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
544
[WOLF4]
Members
1,220 posts
2,782 battles
4 minutes ago, Erebthoron said:

Got only a little bit of time the last two days to finish this mission. Had a chance yesterday in a good game, but two potatos gave the match away by chasing a DD for 10 minutes instead of protecting the base.

First battle today was utterly crap from my personal contribution. But I was lucky to secure the second kill on a low health DD, when only two enemies were left but we had stil ten boats up.

Ugh people get tunnel vision with missions like this and they do stupid things that normally they wouldn't do which leads you to feel

like  ┻━┻ ︵ヽ(`Д´)ノ︵ ┻━┻

Edited by xalmgrey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
312
[WOLF1]
Members
2,218 posts
17 minutes ago, cometguy said:

Simple modification to make them better, using this one as an example:

"Sink two ships in wins, over any number of battles."

Allowing it to be over any number of battles decreases the odds that people will force something that isn't there. You can up the number of ships to sink in compensation, if you want.

agree, no need to require single battle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
339
[TDRB]
Members
1,322 posts
5,041 battles
Quote

Yeah i feel your pain man. I've had games where i'd get a few kills and it looks like we are ahead and then BAM someone gets detonated and then it falls apart like a house of cards in a tornado and the next thing you know you went from winning to losing the the course of seconds.

It seems when I need to sink ships or get citadels my dispersion increases to the point I need to patch the shell craters around my computer monitor from the shell dispersion. You know, a full broadside at less than 8km and half the shells hit the water before they reach the ship & the other half flies over the ship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,435
[ARGSY]
Members
7,182 posts
4,874 battles

I found the whole thing went better when I walked away from it for an hour and did something relaxing to take my mind off my issues.

Came back and it all came together at once.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31
[IHW]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
193 posts
37 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

Been having a terrible time the last couple of days and I finally got a couple of kills for the Indy mission. We had a large lead in kills but you know your team is in really deep trouble when you have a couple of Arizona's "racing" back to your cap.

L1c4Hmt.jpg

I find with these its all about luck. I managed to get mine done in the first battle that I did last night. So just keep at it im sure you will get it before thursday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,439
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
16,315 posts
9,621 battles
Just now, DemonW0lf said:

I find with these its all about luck. I managed to get mine done in the first battle that I did last night. So just keep at it im sure you will get it before thursday.

This one ends on tomorrows reset, it is tonight or never. Going to go make diner and hopefully lady luck will smile at me. Probably not which is why I never got to the local Indian casinos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
832
[DRACS]
Members
3,624 posts

I feel your pain. As of late, I feel that all the games I'm in where I cap alot and get multiple kills ends with a loss because the rest of my team potatoes hard. Unfortunately, it's been happening a lot lately. I'm getting terribly frustrated at topping the scoreboard on a loss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
809 posts

Sadly it is WG trying to get people to play to win instead of just being a potato. Sadly all it does is turn the potatoes into crispy fries. 

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
478
[-WPG-]
Members
972 posts
3,904 battles

I actually like that it's a challenge to accomplish this and not just going through the motions.  I also got lucky and got this one knocked out in my 2nd game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
429
[INTEL]
Members
871 posts
9,069 battles
19 minutes ago, kgh52 said:

It seems when I need to sink ships or get citadels my dispersion increases to the point I need to patch the shell craters around my computer monitor from the shell dispersion. You know, a full broadside at less than 8km and half the shells hit the water before they reach the ship & the other half flies over the ship.

Know that feeling. Shoot something in the bow that you cant overmatch, dispersion looks like the shells are laser guided to the spot most likely to bounce/shatter. Target turns flat broadside, half the shells are killing fish, the other half are headed for orbit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,439
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
16,315 posts
9,621 battles
11 minutes ago, SteelClaw said:

Sadly it is WG trying to get people to play to win instead of just being a potato. Sadly all it does is turn the potatoes into crispy fries. 

Requirements like this don't promote playing to win they promote selfish game play.

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,259
[ARGSY]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
5,392 posts
19,439 battles
6 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

Requirements like this don't promote playing to win they promote selfish game play.

This. People care more about securing their kills instead of playing for the objectiv. Kills over any number of wins is less stress. Got one, now I wanna win instead of where is another low health boat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,439
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
16,315 posts
9,621 battles
3 minutes ago, Erebthoron said:

This. People care more about securing their kills instead of playing for the objectiv. Kills over any number of wins is less stress. Got one, now I wanna win instead of where is another low health boat.

People do that to an extent without a carrot on a stick asking them to do it. That is the reason that draws were made almost impossible to happen, too many people chasing the final kills instead of securing the win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×