Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
JCC45

A suggestion to help Random Gameplay

35 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,734
[YORHA]
Members
3,323 posts

The problem, as I see it, with random Battles is that you have 12 players on each team with widely different expectations of what they want to get out of the game.  On one side you have the people who just log in for a few games to shoot at ships and have fun.  On the other side you have the highly competitive folks who play to win and go into a fit of rage when they see half the team hiding behind one island or sniping from the A line (See: JCC45).  In the middle you have the players who are making the transition  from "It's only a Game"  to "KILL THEM,  KILL THEM ALL"  mode. 

So... why not 2 levels of PVP Random Matches... Casual and Competitive.

From Tier V upwards when you want to enter a Random Battle you are given two choices.  One, "Casual Random Battles" would have  a messaging screen before you join the battle to the effect "Casual Random Battles are for people who just want to have fun sailing around and shooting at ships."  The "Only a Game" people would be right at home here with like minded individuals and the transitioning folks could use it to sharpen their skills (once they realise there actually  are skills that need to be learned and sharpened) against human opponents.

The second choice "Competitive Random Battles" would say "Competitive is for more experienced players who play to win.  Be prepared to communicate, fight strategically and take the match seriously because your team mates will.  Expect a lot of salt if you don't pull your weight".  This would be for the type of folks that frequent these forums, Reddit , Youtube and Twitch constantly looking to improve their skills and up their game play.  People that believe it is a team based game and who would play accordingly.

So doesn't PVE server the same purpose that "Random Casual" would?   No... it doesn't.   First of all lessons learned in PVE will get you deleted in the first 5 minutes of a Random battle. Secondly the lessons you need to learn to survive in PVP not only can't be learned in PVE but if you try a PVP style of play in PVE welcome to the bottom of the leader board. Success in  PVE demands constant, unremitting aggression, doesn't really care about capping, spotting, angling or any of the techniques that are required in a successful PVP match. .  But more to the point PVE bots do not play like real humans and are no substitute.  PVE is  less stressful, but lacks the variety of opponent actions and reactions that can only come from humans.  After a few hundred PVE battle you pretty much know what the Opfor is going to do every time.  Even after thousands of PVP battles I can still be surprised.

Side Note: Please don't turn this into a "PVE is just as hard as PVP" thread.  That's is not what I am saying and please leave your un-ground axes at the door.

Second objection would be the effect on queue time.  Now I am just guessing but I think that the majority of players would, initially at least, select the Casual Random mode, so queue time would not be a major issue there.  For "Competitive Random" player population could be a problem, but one that is easily solved.  Smaller teams.  Ranked seems to do OK with smaller teams, as do Clan battles, so why not in a new Random Mode.  Depending on the queue size the match maker could put together teams of 7 or more players. And for when it is 7 players only let's be honest here.  In most Random matches the bottom 5 players usually don't contribute too much to their team anyway, so in a more focused battle environment they probably wouldn't be missed that much.

It occurs to me as I type this, you could set it up so that, after a reasonable wait (3-5 minutes?) if MM can't put together Random Competitive teams then you get dumped in to a Random Casual match so nothing is lost from where we are right now.

There is nothing new, innovative or groundbreaking here, it simply carries over a concept from games where you play only against the AI.  In every one I can think of you get two or three choices... Easy Mode (which would equate to PVE),  Medium Difficulty Mode (Random Casual) and Hard Mode (Random Competitive).

I really do believe that separating the Sheep from the Wolves (not making value judgement here, just using an analogy) by putting players with similar expectations together would improve the overall enjoyment of the game for everybody.

Thoughts?

Edited by JCC45
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,307
[PVE]
[PVE]
Members
4,113 posts
8,680 battles
34 minutes ago, JCC45 said:

So... why not 2 levels of Random Matches... Casual and Competitive.

Well I am going to throw in my 2 cents, even if I am a PvE player.

Your idea is not a bad idea, and maybe the Casual Mode limited to teams of seven, that might get me interested. I hate the big cluster F:etc_swear:K groups of ships in Random games where in seems like everyone hangs back in clusters on 4-6 ships doing basically nothing.

BUT this is IMO.:Smile_honoring:

 

Edit: To the person that just gave me the down vote, thank you so much. It is all most like getting a Oscar.:Smile_honoring::cap_haloween:

Edited by Chaos_EN2
  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,734
[YORHA]
Members
3,323 posts
8 minutes ago, Chaos_EN2 said:

Well I am going to throw in my 2 cents, even if I am a PvE player.

Your idea is not a bad idea, and maybe the Casual Mode limited to teams of seven, that might get me interested. I hate the big cluster F:etc_swear:K groups of ships in Random games where in seems like everyone hangs back in clusters on 4-6 ships doing basically nothing.

BUT this is IMO.:Smile_honoring:

Thanks.  You made me think of an edit that will clarify the idea further.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
180
[CAST]
Members
1,195 posts
7,363 battles

I like the thought process here.  Perhaps bump the number up to 8 players, similar to co-op, and 1 size larger than ranked.  At least that will make it a bit different.  Perhaps the timer could dictate the number of players.  If the average wait time is less than 1 minutes, then have 12 player teams.  If the timer passes 1 minute but is less than 2, then have 10 player teams.  If the wait timer passes 2, but less than 3, then have 8 player teams.  Once the wait timer passes 3 minutes, move the players to a casual 12 player match.  The wait timer would be based on averages, not just the wait time of the player that had been in the queue the longest.  I'm sure something could be figured out.

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
82
[-TKS-]
[-TKS-]
Members
275 posts
4,357 battles
48 minutes ago, JCC45 said:

why not 2 levels of Random Matches... Casual and Competitive

Captains hate losing.

 your recommendation are not going to improve your ability to win, in fact, it will probably make them worse. the stats WG collects will draw the same bell curves for each of the game modes. and unfortunately your win rate will remain approximately the exact same and more likely get slightly worse...  because you will play against better captains in competitive, edging you to burn out, and then your team will die within 5 min when you switch to playing casual mode. which will probably make you consider outright quitting. 

When we see the green team disintegrate, we first think of baked potatoes instead of the more likely excellent red team play. 

Edited by skillztowin
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,307
[PVE]
[PVE]
Members
4,113 posts
8,680 battles
2 minutes ago, Murcc said:

I like the thought process here.  Perhaps bump the number up to 8 players, similar to co-op, and 1 size larger than ranked.  At least that will make it a bit different.  Perhaps the timer could dictate the number of players.  If the average wait time is less than 1 minutes, then have 12 player teams.  If the timer passes 1 minute but is less than 2, then have 10 player teams.  If the wait timer passes 2, but less than 3, then have 8 player teams.  Once the wait timer passes 3 minutes, move the players to a casual 12 player match.  The wait timer would be based on averages, not just the wait time of the player that had been in the queue the longest.  I'm sure something could be figured out.

Not bad idea at all. I might even try something like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,734
[YORHA]
Members
3,323 posts
5 minutes ago, skillztowin said:

 I wish you had stated the actual problem you are attempting to solve with your recommendations, the topic of MM is very broad. and i also wish i could provide more constructive feedback where i provide a good recommendation but I can not.

Captains hate losing.

 your recommendation are not going to improve your ability to win, in fact, it will probably make them worse. the stats WG collects will draw the same bell curves for each of the game modes. and unfortunately your win rate will remain approximately the exact same and more likely get slightly worse...  because you will play against better captains in competitive, edging you to burn out, and then your team will die within 5 min when you switch to playing casual mode. which will probably make you consider outright quitting. 

When we see the green team disintegrate, we first think of baked potatoes instead of the more likely excellent red team play. 

As to your first point might I ask you re-read the first sentence I typed? It's all in there.

Methinks you came into the thread with a preconceived notion of what it was about.  It isn't about MM, it's isn't about improving win rates... in fact it isn't about any of the things you stated.

It is about providing environments more suitable to the mindset of various types of players thereby improving everyone's in game experience.

If you are looking for an debate about MMing, then you came to the wrong thread.

Edited by JCC45

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
82
[-TKS-]
[-TKS-]
Members
275 posts
4,357 battles
1 minute ago, JCC45 said:

Methinks you came into the thread with a preconceived notion

yea. kind of. i really feel this thread still comes back to deep seeded opinions about MM. no matter how you approach them.  I probably put cart before horse when i pointed at the elephant. "captains hate losing"

But I also still stand by my predictions for having a split random mode. the salt in the oceans will remain the same. 

58 minutes ago, JCC45 said:

On one side you have the people who just log in for a few games to shoot at ships and have fun.  On the other side you have the highly competitive folks who play to win and go into a fit of rage when they see half the team hiding behind one island or sniping from the A line (See: JCC45).  In the middle you have the players who are making the transition  from "It's only a Game"  to "KILL THEM,  KILL THEM ALL"  mode. 

don't forget about players who are trying to complete missions, campaigns or objectives. But, I believe these "distractions" are what make each game so unpredictable and enjoyable.  Without them you would see very static game play as captains would min/max the ships/the map/ and their strategies.

like clan battles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,195
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,570 posts
8,995 battles

 While the idea isn't bad the salt in a "competitive" match would probably exceed that of the Dead Sea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,307
[PVE]
[PVE]
Members
4,113 posts
8,680 battles
4 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

 While the idea isn't bad the salt in a "competitive" match would probably exceed that of the Dead Sea.

And the Great Salt Lake combined.:cap_haloween:

BUT I still like the idea.

Edited by Chaos_EN2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,734
[YORHA]
Members
3,323 posts
24 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

 While the idea isn't bad the salt in a "competitive" match would probably exceed that of the Dead Sea.

Which would provide a self corrective mechanism.  Casual players that refuse to step up to the required level of play would quickly be driven back to "Casual Random".  After all.. they would have been warned before clicking the "Battle" button.

It would take a little while but the environments would eventually sort themselves out.  New to "Competitive" players would also (hopefully) see the level of communication on their team and would (again, hopefully) get instruction from the other players on what to do.

Of course what would really make this fly would be in game, working team voice comms.  Hey... a boy can dream, can't he?

Edited by JCC45

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,784
[SALVO]
Members
17,035 posts
17,659 battles
2 hours ago, Chaos_EN2 said:

Well I am going to throw in my 2 cents, even if I am a PvE player.

Your idea is not a bad idea, and maybe the Casual Mode limited to teams of seven, that might get me interested. I hate the big cluster F:etc_swear:K groups of ships in Random games where in seems like everyone hangs back in clusters on 4-6 ships doing basically nothing.

BUT this is IMO.:Smile_honoring:

 

Edit: To the person that just gave me the down vote, thank you so much. It is all most like getting a Oscar.:Smile_honoring::cap_haloween:

There is a casual mode already in the game.  It's called Co-op.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,784
[SALVO]
Members
17,035 posts
17,659 battles
21 minutes ago, JCC45 said:

Which would provide a self corrective mechanism.  Casual players that refuse to step up to the required level of play would quickly be driven back to "Casual Random".  After all.. they would have been warned before clicking the "Battle" button.

It would take a little while but the environments would eventually sort themselves out.  New to "Competitive" players would also (hopefully) see the level of communication on their team and would (again, hopefully) get instruction from the other players on what to do.

Of course what would really make this fly would be in game, working team voice comms.  Hey... a boy can dream, can't he?

Teams function as teams with voice comms doesn't qualify as dreaming.  It's delusional.  :Smile-_tongue:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,195
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,570 posts
8,995 battles
9 minutes ago, JCC45 said:

Which would provide a self corrective mechanism.  Casual players that refuse to step up to the required level of play would quickly be driven back to "Casual Random".  After all.. they would have been warned before clicking the "Battle" button.

It would take a little while but the environments would eventually sort themselves out.  New to "Competitive" players would also (hopefully) see the level of communication on their team and would (again, hopefully) get instruction from the other players on what to do.

Of course what would really make this fly would be in game, working team voice comms.  Hey... a boy can dream, can't he?

You see "competitive" as better and "casual" as less good when in reality you are talking about personality types. It isn't that the casuals don't want to win but that they are not going to get an ulcer over losing.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,784
[SALVO]
Members
17,035 posts
17,659 battles
31 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

You see "competitive" as better and "casual" as less good when in reality you are talking about personality types. It isn't that the casuals don't want to win but that they are not going to get an ulcer over losing.

Brush, there's some of this, but it doesn't tell the entire story.  From my experience, some casuals will say that they "don't care" about winning, and that all they want to do is shoot stuff.  I don't consider myself a "casual" player, and yet I'm also not going to give myself an ulcer over losing either.  Basically, I see casual players are not really caring about winning at all.  It's not that they don't mind winning, but that they just don't care enough to do what it takes to help teams win.  They only seem to care about shooting stuff.  From my observational experience, casuals often seem to not even care to learn how best to fight their ship in a more comprehensive way, like angling a BB or cruiser to try to bounce incoming shells.  They'll often just sail on ahead, fat, dumb, and happily shooting at whatever enemy ships they encounter.

I do agree that competitive vs casual is largely about personality types.  But at the same time, I think that the competitive player will feel driven to get better while the casual player will not.

 

Edited by Crucis
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,734
[YORHA]
Members
3,323 posts
18 minutes ago, Crucis said:

Brush, there's some of this, but it doesn't tell the entire story.  From my experience, some casuals will say that they "don't care" about winning, and that all they want to do is shoot stuff.  I don't consider myself a "casual" player, and yet I'm also not going to give myself an ulcer of losing either.  Basically, I see casual players are not really caring about winning at all.  It's not that they don't mind winning, but that they just don't care enough to do what it takes to help teams win.  They only seem to care about shooting stuff.  From my observational experience, casuals often seem to not even care to learn how best to fight their ship in a more comprehensive way, like angling a BB or cruiser to try to bounce incoming shells.  They'll often just sail on ahead, fat, dumb, and happily shooting at whatever enemy ships they encounter.

I do agree that competitive vs casual is largely about personality types.  But at the same time, I think that the competitive player will feel driven to get better while the casual player will not.

 

This guy gets it.

 

 

It's not a value judgement.  If people want to have fun just sailing around for a few games every week (or weekend) and shooting things then great.. have a ball.  It's when they come into collision with different expectations... players that want to win or improve their game play that problems arise.

It's just a recognition that different people come to the game with different expectations but with the way Random battles are set up now they are all lumped together.  This would solve that to a great degree.

Edited by JCC45

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,784
[SALVO]
Members
17,035 posts
17,659 battles
3 minutes ago, JCC45 said:

This guy gets it.

 

 

It's not a value judgement.  If people want to have fun just sailing around for a few games every week (or weekend) and shooting things then great.. have a ball.  It's when they come into collision with different expectations... players that want to win or improve their game play that problems arise.

It's just a recognition that different people come to the game with different expectations but with the way Random battles are set up now they are all lumped together.  This would solve that to a great degree.

JCC, honestly, I will make a value judgment here.  If all one wants to do is shoot up stuff, that person belongs in co-op.  It really annoys the hell out of me when I get a hardcore casual player on my team who can't be bothered to do certain things that are necessary to win at a particular moment, because that would interrupt their quality "shooting up stuff" time.  Something like grabbing a cap, or defending your team's base in Standard mode.  I don't get particularly bothered when they're just shooting up stuff when it's time for shooting up stuff.  And competitive players can often leverage a casual player's shooting stuff efforts for the team's overall effort.  But there are times when the team NEEDS a casual player to do something other than shoot up stuff if the team is going to win.  And that's when the hardcore casual player can be most annoying when they don't give a crap for the team and selfishly continue on their merry shoot up stuff way.  This is why I wish that hardcore casuals would stick to co-op.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13
[PIZZA]
Members
22 posts
1,248 battles

I think Co-Op, Randoms, Ranked, Clan Battles and the soon-to-be-introduced Casual Competitive or whatever it's called, is probably too many queues already. Not because of the waiting time, I just don't think there is enough difference between them.

I am also skeptical that another queue would perfectly align everyone's expectations to everyone's satisfaction. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,784
[SALVO]
Members
17,035 posts
17,659 battles
2 minutes ago, Recury said:

I think Co-Op, Randoms, Ranked, Clan Battles and the soon-to-be-introduced Casual Competitive or whatever it's called, is probably too many queues already. Not because of the waiting time, I just don't think there is enough difference between them.

I am also skeptical that another queue would perfectly align everyone's expectations to everyone's satisfaction. 

First of all, Ranked and Clan Battles, to date, have never run concurrently.  So that's not a problem.  OTOH, you should include operations.

That said, I do agree that perhaps splitting Randoms into Casual and Competitive queues might be too much, and greatly increase wait times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,741 posts
789 battles
9 minutes ago, Crucis said:

JCC, honestly, I will make a value judgment here.  If all one wants to do is shoot up stuff, that person belongs in co-op. 

While they may belong there, nothing exists to keep them there.  And WG isn't going to do anything to keep them there. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,734
[YORHA]
Members
3,323 posts
7 minutes ago, Crucis said:

JCC, honestly, I will make a value judgment here.  If all one wants to do is shoot up stuff, that person belongs in co-op.  It really annoys the hell out of me when I get a hardcore casual player on my team who can't be bothered to do certain things that are necessary to win at a particular moment, because that would interrupt their quality "shooting up stuff" time.  Something like grabbing a cap, or defending your team's base in Standard mode.  I don't get particularly bothered when they're just shooting up stuff when it's time for shooting up stuff.  And competitive players can often leverage a casual player's shooting stuff efforts for the team's overall effort.  But there are times when the team NEEDS a casual player to do something other than shoot up stuff if the team is going to win.  And that's when the hardcore casual player can be most annoying when they don't give a crap for the team and selfishly continue on their merry shoot up stuff way.  This is why I wish that hardcore casuals would stick to co-op.

But that's not fair.  You are imposing your needs on others.  No one, not me, not you... no one outside of WG has the right to dictate what is the proper way to play the game. And even they would do that at great risk

Co-op for a lot of people, becomes boring after a few games. The AI is too predictable and you will never, ever improve doing the same thing over and over ad infinitum.  Players, all players, have a right to expect to have fun in a game and boring is not fun.  But neither is getting shouted at because you are not playing the way some stranger you have never heard of and will never meet thinks you should be.

What I am proposing is a way to separate the players who have every right to enjoy the game to it's maximum potential (ie PVP) into an environment that will put them together with others with the same expectation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,784
[SALVO]
Members
17,035 posts
17,659 battles
2 hours ago, JCC45 said:

The problem, as I see it, with random Battles is that you have 12 players on each team with widely different expectations of what they want to get out of the game.  On one side you have the people who just log in for a few games to shoot at ships and have fun.  On the other side you have the highly competitive folks who play to win and go into a fit of rage when they see half the team hiding behind one island or sniping from the A line (See: JCC45).  In the middle you have the players who are making the transition  from "It's only a Game"  to "KILL THEM,  KILL THEM ALL"  mode. 

So... why not 2 levels of PVP Random Matches... Casual and Competitive.

From Tier V upwards when you want to enter a Random Battle you are given two choices.  One, "Casual Random Battles" would have  a messaging screen before you join the battle to the effect "Casual Random Battles are for people who just want to have fun sailing around and shooting at ships."  The "Only a Game" people would be right at home here with like minded individuals and the transitioning folks could use it to sharpen their skills (once they realise there actually  are skills that need to be learned and sharpened) against human opponents.

The second choice "Competitive Random Battles" would say "Competitive is for more experienced players who play to win.  Be prepared to communicate, fight strategically and take the match seriously because your team mates will.  Expect a lot of salt if you don't pull your weight".  This would be for the type of folks that frequent these forums, Reddit , Youtube and Twitch constantly looking to improve their skills and up their game play.  People that believe it is a team based game and who would play accordingly.

So doesn't PVE server the same purpose that "Random Casual" would?   No... it doesn't.   First of all lessons learned in PVE will get you deleted in the first 5 minutes of a Random battle. Secondly the lessons you need to learn to survive in PVP not only can't be learned in PVE but if you try a PVP style of play in PVE welcome to the bottom of the leader board. Success in  PVE demands constant, unremitting aggression, doesn't really care about capping, spotting, angling or any of the techniques that are required in a successful PVP match. .  But more to the point PVE bots do not play like real humans and are no substitute.  PVE is  less stressful, but lacks the variety of opponent actions and reactions that can only come from humans.  After a few hundred PVE battle you pretty much know what the Opfor is going to do every time.  Even after thousands of PVP battles I can still be surprised.

Side Note: Please don't turn this into a "PVE is just as hard as PVP" thread.  That's is not what I am saying and please leave your un-ground axes at the door.

Second objection would be the effect on queue time.  Now I am just guessing but I think that the majority of players would, initially at least, select the Casual Random mode, so queue time would not be a major issue there.  For "Competitive Random" player population could be a problem, but one that is easily solved.  Smaller teams.  Ranked seems to do OK with smaller teams, as do Clan battles, so why not in a new Random Mode.  Depending on the queue size the match maker could put together teams of 7 or more players. And for when it is 7 players only let's be honest here.  In most Random matches the bottom 5 players usually don't contribute too much to their team anyway, so in a more focused battle environment they probably wouldn't be missed that much.

It occurs to me as I type this, you could set it up so that, after a reasonable wait (3-5 minutes?) if MM can't put together Random Competitive teams then you get dumped in to a Random Casual match so nothing is lost from where we are right now.

There is nothing new, innovative or groundbreaking here, it simply carries over a concept from games where you play only against the AI.  In every one I can think of you get two or three choices... Easy Mode (which would equate to PVE),  Medium Difficulty Mode (Random Casual) and Hard Mode (Random Competitive).

I really do believe that separating the Sheep from the Wolves (not making value judgement here, just using an analogy) by putting players with similar expectations together would improve the overall enjoyment of the game for everybody.

Thoughts?

Thoughts?  The post was too long?  :Smile_hiding:

 

Regarding your paragraph on coop, I disagree.  Oh, you're not wrong that PVE doesn't really teach you all the lessons you need to be successful in randoms.  But if one is a truly casual player, why would you care?  

Secondly, I disagree that success in coop requires constant aggression.  if anything, my experience in coop has shown me that there are many players who are FAR too aggressive, in fact, stupidly so.  They'll take their cruisers into torpedo range of enemy bot cruisers and DDs and get themselves deleted by enemy torps.  This is downright stupid!!!  The smart play for true coop success when playing BBs and cruisers, IMO, is to try to stay outside of any enemy ship's torpedo range and take them with guns.  And if you see a bot torpedo armed ship heading your way, run away and do your best to keep the distance open, even if you're in a slow BB.  The longer and more difficult you can make the chase, the better your chance is of sinking that bot ship before it can get into torp range.

I also disagree about angling not mattering.  I think that it matters a great deal in coop.  Oh, sure, bot BBs may not be all that accurate, but if you actually work your BB's armor properly, you can bounce plenty of shots and take far less damage, and successfully brawl bot BBs even when facing odds that seem unfavorable.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,734
[YORHA]
Members
3,323 posts
13 minutes ago, Recury said:

I think Co-Op, Randoms, Ranked, Clan Battles and the soon-to-be-introduced Casual Competitive or whatever it's called, is probably too many queues already. Not because of the waiting time, I just don't think there is enough difference between them.

I am also skeptical that another queue would perfectly align everyone's expectations to everyone's satisfaction. 

Really?  WG is going to implement it already????          It's only been a couple of hours since I thought of it!

I am flattered beyond description.

 

 

 

 

/s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,784
[SALVO]
Members
17,035 posts
17,659 battles
4 minutes ago, DrHolmes52 said:

While they may belong there, nothing exists to keep them there.  And WG isn't going to do anything to keep them there. 

Oh, I agree, but it might be easier to get more of them to go into coop is coop was made more challenging and commensurately more rewarding.  That said, given that some people even complained about the extremely minor tweak to the coop bot AI, which really didn't make coop bots any more difficult, just less predictable, can you imagine the screeching (from some) if the devs actually did make coop bots more challenging (with greater rewards)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13
[PIZZA]
Members
22 posts
1,248 battles
2 minutes ago, JCC45 said:

Really?  WG is going to implement it already????          It's only been a couple of hours since I thought of it!

I am flattered beyond description.

 

 

 

 

/s

I can't find the thread or remember the exact name (Quick Ranked?) but it was WGs idea that was like ranked but with T5s. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×