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

Go Navy: What Wargaming Did Wrong

81 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

157
[VVV]
Members
391 posts
2,400 battles

As the Go Navy! event is winding down, it looks like Eagles are going down with a W/L of 0-25. What happened? Why was the event so lopsided? And more importantly, why should we care about these questions? This post is dedicated to providing my opinions on what happened. I would also like to summon @Pigeon_of_War to read this, as he deals a lot with community feedback (and does an amazing job with communication between fans and developers).

Note 1: I do have a slight slant to Eagles, but I'll try to remain unbiased

Note 2: Not trashing or insulting the developers or any WG Staff, they do an amazing job. I am merely suggesting stuff they could do better.

Let's start with the rules of the event and then go to the other points.

There are two teams: Sharks and Eagles, and you pick which one you want to join at the beginning of every day.

Sharks were always in the lead due to the sheer amount of people joining sharks., but there are things the devs should have done to keep the event competitive.

First: why is one team a sea dwelling animal and the other an air dwelling animal in a game about fighting on the sea? This was just asking for lopsided numbers. Also the classic "red v. blue" coloring that almost always gives the advantage to blue. (If anybody wants me to, I'll explain that below this post)

Second: other Forumites complained about how multiple big clans planned to join Sharks to get them to win. This is fine in my view, as the event forced people to choose sides, and wouldn't you side with your clan? (Scheming between two separate clans is also bound to happen in any MMO).

Third: Why do you have to pick your side every day? I think if you picked a team to join at the start and continued with that team until you got a recruiter message would have been just better game design.

You get loyalty each day, and recruiter messages will pop up after good games and ask you to switch sides for a container.

The loyalty each day mechanic was fine in my eyes, but the recruiter messages could have done a lot better.

First: Why do the recruiters only appear after good games? They should appear after good games and games where you barely got any points for your team. Think, if I am close to a Shark container after a good game, why am I suddenly going to switch to Eagles?

Second: Why was the Shark recruiter like "You've been an Eagle, and that's fine, but you can join Sharks and dominate the seas and win!" while the Eagle recruiter was like "It's okay if you still want to be a Shark, just if you want to you can join Eagles". This was a horrible mistake from a player and a game designer perspective. You're just asking for people to switch and stay on Sharks.

Third: Why was the award for switching a container, while the award for staying was a measly 2 loyalty. The award for staying should have been at least 3 or 4 loyalty.

The team that looses continually gets a bigger point multiplier each day.

And yet Eagle got the bonuses every day (up to a 150% multiplier one day) but never won. Why? The multiplies should have kept increasing until the Eagles won, then reset instead of just fluctuating on the designers whim. Also, after many people switched to Eagles after maxing out their points on Sharks the multiplier actually went DOWN! Why, why, why Wargaming did that happen? It was like they said, "yeah, Eagles aren't going to win, even with a bunch of people switching". This, in my view, was the biggest mistake Wargaming actively made during the event.

You get Tokens and Containers for doing well and staying loyal to your team. You can buy stuff from the Arsenal with the Tokens. The containers give flags, camo, and coal.

I'm good with this system, not much to say. Containers were also available in the Premium Shop that just gave Tokens directly, but this is fine as it was WG's way of monetising the event. My only small complaint is that the containers should have had a very small chance to give you a big prize (Like an USA Premium ship or a boatload of camos) to just increase that feeling of "Am I going to get something super rare and cool" when you earn/buy one of the containers.

Finally, the biggest question, why should any of us care about this event at all?

Because it was something that we participated in, and a game should always attempt to make something the community participates in as fun and engaging as possible.

Many people adopted the attitude of "this isn't a showdown of two teams that I have fun in, it's just a way for me to get free goodies". This attitude is a sign that the developers failed at engaging and entertaining players, which is what game development is all about. I'm sure from the financial or population standpoint the event was a full success, as it did increase the amount players played and paid (heh, I'm proud of myself for that alliteration), but from the standpoint of "How did this make me enjoy the game and community more", the event shows it's shortcomings. There SHOULD be (friendly) arguments on the forums over which team was better, it SHOULD be a fierce competition between teams, seesawing back and forth between the teams, it SHOULD foster a spirit of friendly competition. That's just signs that the event is engaging and entertaining the players and also bettering the community and the game.

Why did you even write this post? Was it just to complain?

Partly, yes, but mainly to inform Wargaming of some of the communities views on the Go Navy! event and how it could have been improved. I do hope that if they run another event like this, that they take some of these complaints and suggestions and use them to design a better event that better engages and entertains players, and gives us that feeling of "Man I like this game even more because of these events", instead of "That event was alright, it gave me free goodies".

At the end of the day, I'll still be here, at my keyboard, playing WoWS for a long time to come. I made this post because I care about the game. I want it to be healthy and foster a love of the game in it's players. I  want the developers to keep doing stuff like this to make the game funner and better, but the Go Navy! event just didn't achieve everything it set out to be.

  • Cool 14
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
494
[CK5]
Members
1,058 posts
9,581 battles

To be honest, I barely looked at the scores each day.  I played to win some freebies and accomplished my goals.  The event wasn't bad and I enjoyed it.  

  • Cool 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,184
[OO7]
Members
5,047 posts
11,754 battles

Honestly, it didn't matter whether one team won or lost... It was more about the opportunity to get some free t10 camos. 

Now, here was the simple way to mess around with people's minds and make it teeter back and forth. The recruiter reward should have increased containers by how many days in a row the other team had won previously. 

So if sharks had won 5 days in a row, the recruiter should have offered 5 extra containers. Then some people would have switched wanting to make sure they didn't miss out on increased rewards like that. Of course to make it work well they would also have to remove the initial question about what team to join at the beginning of each day. 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
420
[KRAB]
Members
827 posts
7,260 battles

Some things were messed up - I think the clan conspiracy was a big one, although some other factors as the OP presented may have been significant.

Either way, I got a free T10 perma camo, so I am not complaining. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,034
Members
4,729 posts
8,233 battles

I contend it mostly was all in the name from the get-go and you start off by mentioning that.  Then Sharks began winning every day and the snowball effect kicked in which made the imbalance even worse sucking more players into the open maw of the bottom feeders. Yup. :Smile_teethhappy:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
951
[ARGSY]
Members
1,832 posts
11,934 battles

I thought it was great. I got tonnes of free stuff, and clans got loads of oil from all those containers, to boot. I was an Eagle all the way through, too, cuz I like to Take it Easy when I'm not living Life In The Fast Lane. When it comes to getting resources, flags and camo, I'll always Take It To The Limit. GO EAGLES!

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
656
[LOU1]
Members
3,678 posts
9,992 battles

I really have no issues with the event.  One observation is that the Shark perma-camo looks a bit sleeker than the Eagles.  I would also have preferred the Eagles to be Blue.  Otherwise, it was just a bit of fun to earn some coal and free perma-camos.  The team concept was very loosely applied because in battle, you have both Sharks and Eagles as team mates.  This made it difficult for me to form a very strong bond.

As far as the Recruiter message, why would the other team try to recruit you unless you had demonstrated some performance?  And, why would the other team want to recruit you if you were holding your current team back with low results (why bring a low results player onto their team)?

Now that I think about it, I do have an issue with points for kills.  That seemed to affect game play, including my own, in a negative way.  The "one more shot" syndrome got me killed more often than I would like to admit.

Edited by ExploratorOne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
157
[VVV]
Members
391 posts
2,400 battles
10 minutes ago, ExploratorOne said:

As far as the Recruiter message, why would the other team try to recruit you unless you had demonstrated some performance?  And, why would the other team want to recruit you if you were holding your current team back with low results (why bring a low results player onto their team)?

The thing is, there is no penalty for not getting many points per battle, thus there is no downside to getting a low results player. By switching his loyalties, you're still gaining points and the enemy is losing potential points. He can't take away points from the team, he can only add.

And about the "kills for points/rewards" that's another big topic in itself and WG seems to keep doing it even if some community members have spoke out against it.

Edited by AtlanticRim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
155
[PVE]
Members
902 posts
30,087 battles
13 minutes ago, legozer said:

I thought it was great. I got tonnes of free stuff, and clans got loads of oil from all those containers, to boot.

^^^^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
69
[RQL]
Privateers
261 posts
10,543 battles

My only beef was adding a blatently political slogan to the signature camo. 

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
656
[LOU1]
Members
3,678 posts
9,992 battles
2 minutes ago, AtlanticRim said:

The thing is, there is no penalty for not getting many points per battle, thus there is no downside to getting a low results player. By switching his loyalties, you're still gaining points and the enemy is losing potential points. He can't take away points from the team, he can only add.

Factually true, now that you mention it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
5,570 posts
6,295 battles
50 minutes ago, AtlanticRim said:

Also the classic "red v. blue" coloring that almost always gives the advantage to blue. (If anybody wants me to, I'll explain that below this post)

Now this I'm interested in hearing, as the Fire vs. Water event was the complete opposite(at least on the NA server) with Fire (red) having land slide wins throughout the vast majority of the event.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51
[OPEC]
[OPEC]
Members
80 posts
2,445 battles

Sharks vs. Narwhals would have fixed most of the issues with lopsided teams.  Regardless of not getting a bunch of extra shark crates (I played on the eagles first), I still appreciate all of the free crates, the DM perma-camo, coal, and other stuff...

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
157
[VVV]
Members
391 posts
2,400 battles
17 minutes ago, legozer said:

I thought it was great. I got tonnes of free stuff, and clans got loads of oil from all those containers, to boot.

Well, I just though WG should do better. I have no qualms about saying this event was a positive one, that many people got good loot from it, my thread is mostly about what they could have done better.

However, that said, I'd rather them run the same unchanged and unbalanced event again than no event at all.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51
[OPEC]
[OPEC]
Members
80 posts
2,445 battles
4 minutes ago, TheBigM145 said:

My only beef was adding a blatently political slogan to the signature camo. 

Couldn't get past how absurd the camos were to even think about the slogan...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
157
[VVV]
Members
391 posts
2,400 battles
9 minutes ago, GhostSwordsman said:

Now this I'm interested in hearing, as the Fire vs. Water event was the complete opposite(at least on the NA server) with Fire (red) having land slide wins throughout the vast majority of the event.

Well, that was associating the colors with something (red with fire and blue with water). In just a pure Red v. Blue, no associations whatsoever, blue would win just through so many people saying "Well I like blue better than red as a color so I'm going to pick blue."

Also can I say I love the quote in you signature, that one gave me a good laugh.

Edited by AtlanticRim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
157
[VVV]
Members
391 posts
2,400 battles
Just now, Compassghost said:

The eagles depicted in the Sharks vs Eagles event are bald eagles, which are a type of sea eagle.

Well, the event should have been Sharks v. Sea Eagles (Which would have actually been better). You see, when you think of sharks you immediately think of water, but with eagles you immediately think of air. It would take prior knowledge and an observant mind to think: "Those are sea eagles" in the 5 seconds it takes you to pick a team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
842 posts
9,792 battles
1 hour ago, AtlanticRim said:

Finally, the biggest question, why should any of us care about this event at all?

Because it was something that we participated in, and a game should always attempt to make something the community participates in as fun and engaging as possible.

Many people adopted the attitude of "this isn't a showdown of two teams that I have fun in, it's just a way for me to get free goodies". This attitude is a sign that the developers failed at engaging and entertaining players, which is what game development is all about. I'm sure from the financial or population standpoint the event was a full success, as it did increase the amount players played and paid (heh, I'm proud of myself for that alliteration), but from the standpoint of "How did this make me enjoy the game and community more", the event shows it's shortcomings. There SHOULD be (friendly) arguments on the forums over which team was better, it SHOULD be a fierce competition between teams, seesawing back and forth between the teams, it SHOULD foster a spirit of friendly competition. That's just signs that the event is engaging and entertaining the players and also bettering the community and the game.

Please tell us all about the competitive part of GO NAVY. (Hint: There is none, because logging in to click the Battle button is nowhere close to being competitive!)

What are actually competitive? Clan Battles and King of the Seas, where real effort is actually spent (at an exponential rate the higher you go) on planning and execution to win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51
[OPEC]
[OPEC]
Members
80 posts
2,445 battles
17 minutes ago, Compassghost said:

The eagles depicted in the Sharks vs Eagles event are bald eagles, which are a type of sea eagle.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_eagle

I mean, to be honest, aside from another sea creature, a sea eagle is pretty apt.

 

Not as menacing as this...

Capture.JPG

  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
157
[VVV]
Members
391 posts
2,400 battles
1 minute ago, AchievementsToYou said:

Please tell us all about the competitive part of GO NAVY

It's between the teams to see which one can accumulate points faster. I've seen threads of people who try to carry and play many games just to get their team to win. It was kind of muffled with the curb stomping of the Eagles, though.

Besides, there is a certain part of human nature that once we pick a side, we think our side is the best and all others are bad, hence the arguments that happened in small bursts before the event actually began.

4 minutes ago, AchievementsToYou said:

What are actually competitive? Clan Battles and King of the Seas, where real effort is actually spent (at an exponential rate the higher you go) on planning and execution to win.

I am by no means trying to take away respect for Clan Battles and KotS. They are pinnacles of strategy and working together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,010
[OPRAH]
[OPRAH]
Beta Testers
6,550 posts
16,537 battles

Nothing wrong at all with the event! It tested integrity those who stayed with the team they first chose have integrity and those who switched back and forth and accepted recruiters offer have no integrity.

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,034
Members
4,729 posts
8,233 battles
31 minutes ago, Get_Kraken said:

Sharks vs. Narwhals would have fixed most of the issues with lopsided teams.  Regardless of not getting a bunch of extra shark crates (I played on the eagles first), I still appreciate all of the free crates, the DM perma-camo, coal, and other stuff...

I have had fun and stayed an Eagle. My name suggestion was Eagle Raptors (bad azz) and it makes sense since the theory is that birds evolved from dinosaurs. Narwhal?  How many know what the hell a Narwhal is? Heh heh.  Carry on mate!:Smile_honoring:

Edited by dmckay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
336 posts
17,889 battles

I think there should be special reward for players who never switched side. For example, Eagle players should get  a unique commander "Dasha" if they didn't switch side and played a certain number of battles. Same thing for Sharks who should get Dasha Jr's pic (*). I originally joined Eagle not because I like bird and hate fish but because I was Dasha's fan. There's no incentive for loyalty but just rewards for switching sides/ jumping ships.

Edited by SoftAndCute

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×