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

Another approach to it all instead of just 'Winning' ?

66 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

104
[KOOKS]
[KOOKS]
Members
449 posts
1,962 battles

Ok, so I've been with WoWs since CBT on EU before coming to NA thus seen on two communities games, players and how their approaches to the game as whole has developed throughout the years. And the topics that come up again and again, that creates frustration for many is winning and getting less rewarding for players with the lopsided games, losses and all that which has already been discussed to death. This post is not going to remotely touch that, but will present an alternate possible solution to how Random Battle matches are played and rewarded.

What if we instead of going for the 'Win' made all games about personal performance in battles. How well you perform, how well you do, is how you get rewarded at the end of the battle. Now it will still be split up in to teams as we need someone to play against, and technically there is a win or a loss, but the importance of that is hopefully taken out of the equation and instead people that do well on both teams get good rewards, people that do medium on both teams get medium rewards and so on and so forth. This should give people more of an incentive to improve their gameplay further as you will no longer be 'carried', if you play poorly you get poor rewards. This is not a 'curved' system, should all 12 on a team perform admirably they would all get max rewards. Wargaming need of course find a system on how to measure personal contribution to the match and find a balance in such, which of course can be hard enough in itself, but could it end up more a more rewarding and I hesitantly use the word 'fun' for all or the grand majority of the players. The focus on Win Rate, hopefully, will be overshadowed by a system that will show how well you as a player do. Win or loss, contribution is the key.

Now why take an age old tradition like 'Wins' out of a competitive game? Well, as we've seen here in countless discussions and even in the last days the 'Win' isn't the main goal for most gamers any more and oldtimers both know and feel that, not only in this game but in other games we play as well. It creates insane frustrations when two gaming generations meet like this and try to interact in the same "sandbox". Instead of continuing down that road, could it not be possible to have a new system that could please both old and new generations, where the old generation have something to be measured by and the new generation sail on like they love to do. We'd both be in the same arena, but we can both pursue the goals we want without it affecting the other to such a degree that it does today. Again, this proposal is for Random Battle mode only.

This is to try, at least try, to imagine something constructive and/or possible solution to what is often fiery topics both here, and other WG titles as well. Looking forward to your input on the matter, wish you all a good day sailing! :Smile_honoring:

player_participation_reward.jpg

  • Cool 4
  • Bad 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
868 posts
10 battles

The reason why you don't take win rate out of the equation is the good player will still win at a high rate, 60% plus. If they can do it, so can everyone else. If you do nothing but farm damage and get kills did you REALLY help your team win? All your proposed system does is allow bad players to feel better about themselves through a false sense of achievement. 

You are a decent player, your next step in player progression is learning how to read the map, the enemy team and placing yourself where you will have more of an impact in the decision.

Edited by UssIowaSailor
  • Cool 3
  • Bad 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
104
[KOOKS]
[KOOKS]
Members
449 posts
1,962 battles
3 minutes ago, UssIowaSailor said:

The reason why you don't take win rate out of the equation is the good player will still win at a high rate, 60% plus. If they can do it, so can everyone else. If you do nothing but farm damage and get kills did you REALLY help your team win? All your proposed system does is allow bad players to feel better about themselves through a false sense of achievement. 

 

Thank you for your input. Will they though have a false sense of achievement? If they end up  at the two lower categories with 25-50% bonus only, that's like a loss today, how will that make anyone have any sense of achievement if this even matters to them? There are, as we have seen for a long while, many players who just play to sail, shoot and have fun and that is what fulfillment they are seeking. Achievement doesn't seem to be that important in that category.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,782 posts
795 battles

The problem with this?

DD's don't get rewarded properly as it is now.  If you did all the things that don't get rewarded (bait a radar, draw and avoid fire, spot), win, and get a low reward for that it will be worse than it is now.

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
256
[FGNE]
Members
435 posts
728 battles
10 minutes ago, UssIowaSailor said:

The reason why you don't take win rate out of the equation is the good player will still win at a high rate, 60% plus. If they can do it, so can everyone else. If you do nothing but farm damage and get kills did you REALLY help your team win? All your proposed system does is allow bad players to feel better about themselves through a false sense of achievement. 

You are a decent player, your next step in player progression is learning how to read the map, the enemy team and placing yourself where you will have more of an impact in the decision.

Too bad in randoms it really only rewards damage.  I can walk out of a loss and 145k damage with 1500 base experience.  Had I gone for the objective with no back up, got the objective and then died, I would have 300 base exp.  The game is not designed to reward doing objectives, so you farm damage as an insurance policy, and it greatly rewards when you win.

1 minute ago, DrHolmes52 said:

The problem with this?

DD's don't get rewarded properly as it is now.  If you did all the things that don't get rewarded (bait a radar, draw and avoid fire, spot), win, and get a low reward for that it will be worse than it is now.

Essentially this.  The game needs to reward team play for people to want to play as a team.  Right now, it doesn't reward helping others.

 

Edited by JonnyFreedom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
147
Members
707 posts
8 minutes ago, UssIowaSailor said:

The reason why you don't take win rate out of the equation is the good player will still win at a high rate, 60% plus. If they can do it, so can everyone else. If you do nothing but farm damage and get kills did you REALLY help your team win? All your proposed system does is allow bad players to feel better about themselves through a false sense of achievement. 

You are a decent player, your next step in player progression is learning how to read the map, the enemy team and placing yourself where you will have more of an impact in the decision.

 

"win rate" can be perturbed simply by putting your 19pt commander in a very low tier premium ship, and going seal clubbing new players rather than more seasoned players that are on a par with you at higher tiers.

Edited by b101uk
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11
[0456]
Members
17 posts
1,725 battles

This is also a good way to push new players out, who have yet to learn any of the skills needed to be "good."

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
256
[FGNE]
Members
435 posts
728 battles
1 minute ago, Ghawain said:

This is also a good way to push new players out, who have yet to learn any of the skills needed to be "good."

New players are not going to be scoring 100k a game either.  So they may get unintended bonuses for spotting etc, because they are bee-lining to a cap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
104
[KOOKS]
[KOOKS]
Members
449 posts
1,962 battles
3 minutes ago, JonnyFreedom said:

<snip...>

The game needs to reward team play for people to want to play as a team.  Right now, it doesn't reward helping others.

 

We've been asking for that for ages and nothing that works comes of it, so there is essentially no real if any team play to speak of. Which was why I suggested instead of looking at what we've always been looking at instead reward personal contribution to each match. Not saying this is gonna work, it may very well not, but the current system doesn't quite work either and is constantly bringing frustration to many. On both sides.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
256
[FGNE]
Members
435 posts
728 battles
Just now, Krautjaeger said:

We've been asking for that for ages and nothing that works comes of it, so there is essentially no real if any team play to speak of. Which was why I suggested instead of looking at what we've always been looking at instead reward personal contribution to each match. Not saying this is gonna work, it may very well not, but the current system doesn't quite work either and is constantly bringing frustration to many. On both sides.

I am 100% on your side man.  You don't need to convince me of anything.  It needs to reward the top performers with bonuses, not just the winning team that might have been carried by some Unicum.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11
[0456]
Members
17 posts
1,725 battles
1 minute ago, JonnyFreedom said:

New players are not going to be scoring 100k a game either.  So they may get unintended bonuses for spotting etc, because they are bee-lining to a cap.

The whole reward system does need a bit of an overhaul. Doing damage is the ultimate goal, sure, but other things should be rewarded. If I'm not mistaken they have overhauled the reward system a few times in WoT, perhaps they could apply something from that here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
256
[FGNE]
Members
435 posts
728 battles
1 minute ago, Ghawain said:

The whole reward system does need a bit of an overhaul. Doing damage is the ultimate goal, sure, but other things should be rewarded. If I'm not mistaken they have overhauled the reward system a few times in WoT, perhaps they could apply something from that here?

Half of your posts are in this thread and you have 1k battles.  Welcome out of lurking!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
309
[KRAB]
Members
615 posts
6,037 battles

One thing which could work is to remove the win bonus from base exp, but apply it later so the player still gets the same rewards. Then, you can see player performance on equal ground regardless of the result in the post-battle screen. That would probably fix half of the problems. 

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15
[LWA]
Members
47 posts
4,191 battles

Under the current system this looks like it would result in people just trying to farm damage for a better score and throwing away wins and objectives to do so. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
104
[KOOKS]
[KOOKS]
Members
449 posts
1,962 battles
1 minute ago, Musouka said:

Under the current system this looks like it would result in people just trying to farm damage for a better score and throwing away wins and objectives to do so. 

Yes, which is why a new system on how personal performance in each battle is counted would have to be looked at by Wargaming like stated in the original post.

Edited by Krautjaeger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
286
[PLPT]
Members
635 posts
6,825 battles

Isn't the intent of the missions to give you alternative objectives other than (just) winning?  Maybe you lose, but you got that Arsonist achievement to get an RN DD container...

Also, I agree with other people that XP is broken and making rewards even more damage- or XP- based is the wrong direction to go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
104
[KOOKS]
[KOOKS]
Members
449 posts
1,962 battles
8 minutes ago, n00bot said:

 

Also, I agree with other people that XP is broken and making rewards even more damage- or XP- based is the wrong direction to go.

I've not seen anyone, including myself, advocate this in this current thread though. I think we're all in agreement that this will not work in this scenario, and some new way needs to be thought up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
834
[ICE9]
Members
831 posts
49 minutes ago, Krautjaeger said:

Ok, so I've been with WoWs since CBT on EU before coming to NA thus seen on two communities games, players and how their approaches to the game as whole has developed throughout the years. And the topics that come up again and again, that creates frustration for many is winning and getting less rewarding for players with the lopsided games, losses and all that which has already been discussed to death. This post is not going to remotely touch that, but will present an alternate possible solution to how Random Battle matches are played and rewarded.

What if we instead of going for the 'Win' made all games about personal performance in battles. How well you perform, how well you do, is how you get rewarded at the end of the battle. Now it will still be split up in to teams as we need someone to play against, and technically there is a win or a loss, but the importance of that is hopefully taken out of the equation and instead people that do well on both teams get good rewards, people that do medium on both teams get medium rewards and so on and so forth. This should give people more of an incentive to improve their gameplay further as you will no longer be 'carried', if you play poorly you get poor rewards. This is not a 'curved' system, should all 12 on a team perform admirably they would all get max rewards. Wargaming need of course find a system on how to measure personal contribution to the match and find a balance in such, which of course can be hard enough in itself, but could it end up more a more rewarding and I hesitantly use the word 'fun' for all or the grand majority of the players. The focus on Win Rate, hopefully, will be overshadowed by a system that will show how well you as a player do. Win or loss, contribution is the key.

Now why take an age old tradition like 'Wins' out of a competitive game? Well, as we've seen here in countless discussions and even in the last days the 'Win' isn't the main goal for most gamers any more and oldtimers both know and feel that, not only in this game but in other games we play as well. It creates insane frustrations when two gaming generations meet like this and try to interact in the same "sandbox". Instead of continuing down that road, could it not be possible to have a new system that could please both old and new generations, where the old generation have something to be measured by and the new generation sail on like they love to do. We'd both be in the same arena, but we can both pursue the goals we want without it affecting the other to such a degree that it does today. Again, this proposal is for Random Battle mode only.

This is to try, at least try, to imagine something constructive and/or possible solution to what is often fiery topics both here, and other WG titles as well. Looking forward to your input on the matter, wish you all a good day sailing! :Smile_honoring:

player_participation_reward.jpg

Interesting concept. I'd be more than willing to play-test it on PTS or whatever if WG decides to experiment with it.

One thing though, instead of a replacement for Random, it might be more acceptable as an alternate mode, like Arms Race, the reason being that there is a large and very vocal segment to which winning is everything.

More options creates opportunities without eliminating existing schemes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,102
Alpha Tester
5,073 posts
2,434 battles

Personally, I think WG needs to do more to entice players into being aggressive and taking the objectives. I think that if massive XP and credit bonuses were given for killing enemies at ranges under 10 km and for killing enemies while inside a cap circle, that would make sure that teams are aggressive and PTFO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
104
[KOOKS]
[KOOKS]
Members
449 posts
1,962 battles
2 minutes ago, So_lt_Goes said:

Interesting concept. I'd be more than willing to play-test it on PTS or whatever if WG decides to experiment with it.

One thing though, instead of a replacement for Random, it might be more acceptable as an alternate mode, like Arms Race, the reason being that there is a large and very vocal segment to which winning is everything.

More options creates opportunities without eliminating existing schemes.

That is certainly one way to implement it as well.

One way this can actually be viable is Wargaming toying with the idea of local-login-global-server where matches are sorted by ping, like they do on Total War Arena (Wargaming and CA) where it works very well. If they do this, it means a global WoWs player base thus more players constantly online and that could open up for more modes. Future will see, but I personally have a strong feeling they may be going down this road. Thank you for your input on the matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
144
[SF-E]
Members
354 posts
9,801 battles
56 minutes ago, TheDreadnought said:

"Losers whine about 'their best'.  Winners go home and [edited] the prom queen."

This^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,615
[-K-]
[-K-]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
5,779 posts
6,788 battles
1 hour ago, Krautjaeger said:

What if we instead of going for the 'Win' made all games about personal performance in battles

I think a team-based game should reward behavior that is beneficial to the team. If you think randoms are bad now, just imagine how bad they will be when there will be no incentives to help the team out. There are plenty of cases when I knowingly sacrificed my ship, or at least sacrificed potential kills and damage in order to help the team out, so that we may win. Would I do that if there was no carrot involved? Well, probably, but definitely less so.

1 hour ago, Krautjaeger said:

How well you perform, how well you do, is how you get rewarded at the end of the battle

Which happens already anyway. Team's win/loss is simply a modifier on top of that.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
306
[-WPG-]
Members
806 posts
3,352 battles
1 hour ago, Krautjaeger said:

What if we instead of going for the 'Win' made all games about personal performance in battles. 

We have this. It's operations. 

Its a PvP competitive game. By it's very nature it rewards winning. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,734 posts
9,888 battles

This is nothing more than a system of participation trophies.

Why dont we sing a nice song in a safe space by a camp fire while we're at it?

GTFO with this nonsense.  Winning matters.  Winning is fun.  I quit this game the moment something like this is implemented.

  • Cool 5
  • Funny 2
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,793
[SALVO]
Members
17,056 posts
17,716 battles
1 hour ago, 1Sherman said:

Personally, I think WG needs to do more to entice players into being aggressive and taking the objectives. I think that if massive XP and credit bonuses were given for killing enemies at ranges under 10 km and for killing enemies while inside a cap circle, that would make sure that teams are aggressive and PTFO.

Absolutely NOT!!!  I'm sick and tired of people trying to force the game into being all about brawling.  Naval battles of this time period are NOT about brawling!  Trying to change this game into it being all about brawling would kill this game with as much certainty as if WG just wiped the code from all its servers and archives.

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×