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

The most broken part of the game

30 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

187
[SCREW]
Members
233 posts
15,713 battles

I scroll through the forums and i see people complaining about CVs being broken, or AA being too strong/weak, destroyers (well, whatever y'all want the best of next, since you're never happy), but i never see anyone ever bring up the biggest problem of the game; the playerbase. 

There's a huge problem here. Nobody seems to be improving. In every match there are maybe 5 or 6 total competent players that actually want to improve their gameplay. Everyone else could care less. They don't make any effort to work with the team, there's no coordination, they don't care to learn (this I've been told directly by these players). So why are they being rewarded for it? Even worse, why are the players that are actually trying and learning not being rewarded more for their efforts?

It's far too easy to get to tier 10 today. Slap some XP flags on your ship, spend the free XP, and you can fail your way to the top in a matter of days. The worst part is you can be the absolute worst player on your team every single time, and you'll still gain XP, and it's killing the game faster than any other aspect. There HAS to be a negative consequence. Loss of XP, credits, and player rank has to be a thing. 

Likewise, rewards for playing well need to be improved far more. Increased income for being top of the team, bonuses for playing your ship in it's designated role (for instance, potential damage and damage received for BBs counts for little or nothing toward your overall score and rewards, so why even do it?)

Reward teamwork. This has to be the most important part or a team based game. Theres zero reward for players focusing fire on a single target, and it's absolutely appalling. Everyone who contributes to a ships destruction should be rewarded for it, based on the percentage of damage they did and how fast it was destroyed, with a bonus based on your distance from the target to discourage players from sitting on the map border all game. 

The matchmaker needs a serious overhaul. The power gap between tiers is bad enough, especially when there's a 2 tier difference, but the overly simplistic way that it finds matches is extremely detrimental to the overall enjoyability of the game. There's absolutely no algorithm for matching players based on their game stats in the specific ship they've chosen for the match. A Montana player with a 60% win rate is significantly better and far more experienced than A Montana player with a 30% win rate. Additionally, a Bismarck player with a 70% win rate is far more impactful than a Republique player with 40%. So basing MM on tier alone is absolutely stupid. Should this not be viable, an alternative would be to double division size. Only allowing three players from a clan makes it almost pointless to even bother, since you can have no real impact on the match. This goes back to rewarding teamwork. Why have clans at all if you never let them really play together except in clan battles? 

Premium ship use is also a huge problem. Frankly, allowing a player to simply buy a high tier ship with no experience in that type of ship is disgraceful. I'm all for premium ships, but they need to be earned. You should only be able to buy it if you've reached that tier in the same type in the tech tree.

  • Cool 8
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
1,878 posts
11,515 battles
6 minutes ago, xTrowax said:

I scroll through the forums and i see people complaining about CVs being broken, or AA being too strong/weak, destroyers (well, whatever y'all want the best of next, since you're never happy), but i never see anyone ever bring up the biggest problem of the game; the playerbase. 

There's a huge problem here. Nobody seems to be improving. In every match there are maybe 5 or 6 total competent players that actually want to improve their gameplay. Everyone else could care less. They don't make any effort to work with the team, there's no coordination, they don't care to learn (this I've been told directly by these players). So why are they being rewarded for it? Even worse, why are the players that are actually trying and learning not being rewarded more for their efforts?

It's far too easy to get to tier 10 today. Slap some XP flags on your ship, spend the free XP, and you can fail your way to the top in a matter of days. The worst part is you can be the absolute worst player on your team every single time, and you'll still gain XP, and it's killing the game faster than any other aspect. There HAS to be a negative consequence. Loss of XP, credits, and player rank has to be a thing. 

Likewise, rewards for playing well need to be improved far more. Increased income for being top of the team, bonuses for playing your ship in it's designated role (for instance, potential damage and damage received for BBs counts for little or nothing toward your overall score and rewards, so why even do it?)

Reward teamwork. This has to be the most important part or a team based game. Theres zero reward for players focusing fire on a single target, and it's absolutely appalling. Everyone who contributes to a ships destruction should be rewarded for it, based on the percentage of damage they did and how fast it was destroyed, with a bonus based on your distance from the target to discourage players from sitting on the map border all game. 

The matchmaker needs a serious overhaul. The power gap between tiers is bad enough, especially when there's a 2 tier difference, but the overly simplistic way that it finds matches is extremely detrimental to the overall enjoyability of the game. There's absolutely no algorithm for matching players based on their game stats in the specific ship they've chosen for the match. A Montana player with a 60% win rate is significantly better and far more experienced than A Montana player with a 30% win rate. Additionally, a Bismarck player with a 70% win rate is far more impactful than a Republique player with 40%. So basing MM on tier alone is absolutely stupid. Should this not be viable, an alternative would be to double division size. Only allowing three players from a clan makes it almost pointless to even bother, since you can have no real impact on the match. This goes back to rewarding teamwork. Why have clans at all if you never let them really play together except in clan battles? 

Premium ship use is also a huge problem. Frankly, allowing a player to simply buy a high tier ship with no experience in that type of ship is disgraceful. I'm all for premium ships, but they need to be earned. You should only be able to buy it if you've reached that tier in the same type in the tech tree.

The problem with the player base has more to do with too much ego, not enough desire to win.

Players seem to only see damage as a validation of their effort. Even though killing dd's and cruisers as quick as possible tends to produce a much higher win rate as well as more credits and XP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
356
[NSEW]
Members
1,725 posts
10,368 battles

A thought just occurred to me. Just because the server is "NA". That doesn't mean that it's restricted to North Americans only. 

I have seen many non English speaking players (or at least perceived to be), on the NA server. Lack of communication only exacerbates the situation further. Maybe the reason why the "player base" is not at it's idealistic finest could be that. Also, I doubt ALL players uses the forum or visits it. 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10
[CELTS]
Members
41 posts
4,725 battles

The biggest problem is there is no incentive to play as a part of the team, there is no reward ie. an air defence cruiser staying close to someone that needs aa defence instead of going for the kills on ships "whats the reward to the player for this other than keeping someone alive a little longer" doesn't help him so why should he?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,736
[TDRB]
Members
4,436 posts
12,602 battles
10 minutes ago, X1LRLRG said:

The biggest problem is there is no incentive to play as a part of the team, there is no reward ie. an air defence cruiser staying close to someone that needs aa defence instead of going for the kills on ships "whats the reward to the player for this other than keeping someone alive a little longer" doesn't help him so why should he?

This ^^^^^^ is a major problem.

Good individual players are not always good team players. The OP does not appear to understand this fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,499
[ARGSY]
Members
18,290 posts
12,748 battles
2 hours ago, xTrowax said:

The worst part is you can be the absolute worst player on your team every single time, and you'll still gain XP, and it's killing the game faster than any other aspect. There HAS to be a negative consequence. Loss of XP, credits, and player rank has to be a thing. 

No.

Are you going to base it on position in team? What if you are a competent beginner but you drew a unicum team and everyone else was simply better? Should you be punished for doing better than you ever have before, but still being outshone by your colleagues?

Are you going to base it on victorious battles? What if you pulled out the game of your life, more base XP than anyone else on either side, but still lost because the carry was just impossible? Should you be penalised for that?

I sympathise with your complaint, but I think the cure you're proposing is worse than the disease. It has the potential to extend the Ranked Battles save-a-star mentality to the entire game, and that would kill it faster than anything else.

 

Edited by Ensign_Cthulhu
  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,059 posts
6,189 battles

Randoms isnt ranked. Randoms isnt cb. Randoms isnt kots. Randoms is random. RNG taketh RNG giveth away. 

I personally will take all the sub 50% you can spare... if theyre good natured and having fun... salty egotistical unicums can go fly a kite. Give me a fun derp over that lot any day.

  • Cool 2
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,587
[WDS]
[WDS]
Members
3,405 posts
10,763 battles
1 hour ago, kgh52 said:

This ^^^^^^ is a major problem.

Good individual players are not always good team players. The OP does not appear to understand this fact.

Good individual players still help win the game though they sink ships at least .The problem is a lot of people are afraid of sinking they play there ship as though if it gets hit twice it will sink . Driving around the boundary or staying behind islands for cover all game . Most ship can take a lot of damage and stay afloat if played right allowing you to do more damage or god forbid cap something . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,736
[TDRB]
Members
4,436 posts
12,602 battles
25 minutes ago, clammboy said:

Good individual players still help win the game though they sink ships at least .The problem is a lot of people are afraid of sinking they play there ship as though if it gets hit twice it will sink . Driving around the boundary or staying behind islands for cover all game . Most ship can take a lot of damage and stay afloat if played right allowing you to do more damage or god forbid cap something . 

They may sink ships but they place farming damage over winning, which I don't understand. A victory is far more rewarding in XP & credits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
229
[PVE]
Members
990 posts
8,098 battles

IMO this is mostly a product of mediocre game design. The rewards favor damage farming. The game's mechanics are too complicated for casual players, honestly they are more complex than they need to be. There are a lot of ships that contradict thier class's 'main role' (DDs cap except Kahaba, harugumo, etc.). A very large number of ships are balanced to particular style of play that CVs can make completely void with practically no effort.

None of these things are breaking by themselves, but it is a lot for new players to learn, it really isn't explained well in game, and its a lot for casual players to remember.

I think if the game mechanics were simpler lopsided matches would happen less often.

The game is fun enough to me to play it several days per week but there are many ships that I really enjoy that simply don't fit into the meta that the game has created. There are plenty of fun choices available at each time, you only have to have them unlocked to play them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
340
[FOXEH]
[FOXEH]
Members
1,750 posts
9,834 battles

The most broken part of the game is the fact they threw away the textbooks on naval tactics when they built this game.  Everything else is superficial.  

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
340
[FOXEH]
[FOXEH]
Members
1,750 posts
9,834 battles
5 hours ago, kgh52 said:

This ^^^^^^ is a major problem.

Good individual players are not always good team players. The OP does not appear to understand this fact.

A team makes practice together to be effective.  12 random people can never make a team without practice together.  So complaints about “lack of teamwork” when you have 12 random players grouped together is laughable at best.  

Edited by comtedumas
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,404
[WOLF7]
Members
12,509 posts
6 hours ago, xTrowax said:

I scroll through the forums and i see people complaining about CVs being broken, or AA being too strong/weak, destroyers (well, whatever y'all want the best of next, since you're never happy), but i never see anyone ever bring up the biggest problem of the game; the playerbase. 

There's a huge problem here. Nobody seems to be improving. In every match there are maybe 5 or 6 total competent players that actually want to improve their gameplay. Everyone else could care less. They don't make any effort to work with the team, there's no coordination, they don't care to learn (this I've been told directly by these players). So why are they being rewarded for it? Even worse, why are the players that are actually trying and learning not being rewarded more for their efforts?

It's far too easy to get to tier 10 today. Slap some XP flags on your ship, spend the free XP, and you can fail your way to the top in a matter of days. The worst part is you can be the absolute worst player on your team every single time, and you'll still gain XP, and it's killing the game faster than any other aspect. There HAS to be a negative consequence. Loss of XP, credits, and player rank has to be a thing. 

Likewise, rewards for playing well need to be improved far more. Increased income for being top of the team, bonuses for playing your ship in it's designated role (for instance, potential damage and damage received for BBs counts for little or nothing toward your overall score and rewards, so why even do it?)

Reward teamwork. This has to be the most important part or a team based game. Theres zero reward for players focusing fire on a single target, and it's absolutely appalling. Everyone who contributes to a ships destruction should be rewarded for it, based on the percentage of damage they did and how fast it was destroyed, with a bonus based on your distance from the target to discourage players from sitting on the map border all game. 

The matchmaker needs a serious overhaul. The power gap between tiers is bad enough, especially when there's a 2 tier difference, but the overly simplistic way that it finds matches is extremely detrimental to the overall enjoyability of the game. There's absolutely no algorithm for matching players based on their game stats in the specific ship they've chosen for the match. A Montana player with a 60% win rate is significantly better and far more experienced than A Montana player with a 30% win rate. Additionally, a Bismarck player with a 70% win rate is far more impactful than a Republique player with 40%. So basing MM on tier alone is absolutely stupid. Should this not be viable, an alternative would be to double division size. Only allowing three players from a clan makes it almost pointless to even bother, since you can have no real impact on the match. This goes back to rewarding teamwork. Why have clans at all if you never let them really play together except in clan battles? 

Premium ship use is also a huge problem. Frankly, allowing a player to simply buy a high tier ship with no experience in that type of ship is disgraceful. I'm all for premium ships, but they need to be earned. You should only be able to buy it if you've reached that tier in the same type in the tech tree.

WG is far more interested in making money than creating a fun and engaging game.

It's not the players fault they aren't engaged......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,988
[PVE]
Members
3,823 posts
16,329 battles

To me, GIMMICKS.......  Sales gimmicks.  Take how a gimmick can radically change a game.  Just recently:  Radar; HE Spam; and now, CV's....  A sales gimmick that changes the entire game flow.  Historic roles go out the window and the expectations of those roles, cease to exist and that, changes the entire game into a arcade FPS only............and hint of SIM or historical pretext and quality, goes out the window....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,736
[TDRB]
Members
4,436 posts
12,602 battles
14 hours ago, awiggin said:

WG is far more interested in making money than creating a fun and engaging game.

It's not the players fault they aren't engaged......

What makes this game fun is different for every player. Some are having a lot of fun others are not. We have a general tendency not to say anything when we are having fun but raise all kinds of commotion when we are not. We also tend to be presumptuous and assume a few unhappy others makes a majority of the player base.

The bottom line is if you change the game to make this group have fun you cause another group to be unhappy and angry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,725 posts
22 hours ago, xTrowax said:

 

There's a huge problem here. Nobody seems to be improving. In every match there are maybe 5 or 6 total competent players that actually want to improve their gameplay. Everyone else could care less. They don't make any effort to work with the team, there's no coordination, they don't care to learn (this I've been told directly by these players). So why are they being rewarded for it? Even worse, why are the players that are actually trying and learning not being rewarded more for their efforts?

 

The only fix that would not adversely effect WG's income is separating players into 2 different leagues. Over half of the active players at Tier 10 have win rates under 45% and about one third have win rates in the 30% range. Skill based matchmaking won't work if you have 30% players and 65% players in the same game, the skill gap is too large.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,438 posts
8,824 battles
23 hours ago, xTrowax said:

There's a huge problem here. Nobody seems to be improving. In every match there are maybe 5 or 6 total competent players that actually want to improve their gameplay. Everyone else could care less. They don't make any effort to work with the team, there's no coordination, they don't care to learn (this I've been told directly by these players). So why are they being rewarded for it? Even worse, why are the players that are actually trying and learning not being rewarded more for their efforts?

I think getting mad at people for not taking randoms seriously enough is kind of missing the point of randoms.  You need to remember that this is the most casual mode in a mostly casual-focused game.  There's almost nothing at stake, and that's by design.  The rewards for winning are minor and the teams are randomly assembled and only loosely balanced.  You set your own goals and just have fun.  For some people, that means pushing themselves to master the game and polishing their skill for more meaningful competitive modes.  For other people, that means collecting model ships to sail around and watch stuff blow up.  Those are both valid ways to play randoms.

Go ahead and get mad at someone in your ranked games who doesn't know how the overmatch mechanics work, but you just need to learn to let stuff slide in randoms.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,600
[FML]
Members
3,656 posts
14,584 battles
17 hours ago, comtedumas said:

A team makes practice together to be effective.  12 random people can never make a team without practice together.  So complaints about “lack of teamwork” when you have 12 random players grouped together is laughable at best.  

I disagree.

If you know your ship’s role, and execute it well, whilst making your individual performance subservient to the team (eg, opting to kill the DD instead of farm damage off the BB) then you have sufficient teamwork to reliably win random battles.

Sure, drilling the same players in the same ships on the same map for 18 hours a day should improve the results, but that doesn’t mean the former isn’t teamwork. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
449
[BUNNY]
Members
534 posts
10,212 battles

The sad part is no matter what anyone says here in the forums the baddies and the players who do not care will never change. This same issue is in every multi player game out their with any type of PVP. Now are their things that WG could do to lessen the sting for players who do try to be good at the game even though they get stuck on bad teams. I fully believe so and I really wish WG did something. One example I feel could help is make rewards in missions require winning and the same time being in the top 6 of your team X amount of times. This would require more players at least trying not to be brain dead. Forget about rewards being given over damage, kills, credits made and XP. Even baddies will get those given enough games played. 

Edited by Scrapyard_
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
9 posts
1,517 battles

I adore my paper British Cruisers where in fact if I do get hit twice, I get sunk... sometimes once. I think actually, if a BB just aims her guns at me I die... no firing required. So, I play cautiously.

But since I have to play cautiously, I know I need to depend on the team, positioning of their ships, smoke, spotters, etc...

9/10 matches I see zero coordination, I get no support for what I do, get yelled at for not doing what others think I should do even though they know nothing of my cruiser, etc.

When coordination is generally tried, who's to say who really leads? ScrubLord5000 says go A, Player_03242687 says go B, 3/4 of the team is going C for whatever reason... There is no rank structure, therefor there is no reason to trust RandomStranger7000 saying I should have my Neptune go brawl with 3 Bismarks. 

Off the top of my head, having a set rank structure of a certain percent of players be Rank A, B, C, D etc. based on some sort of scoring, perhaps current base XP earned (even though that doesn't always reflect the effort put in by players: looking at you awesome spotters). So that way if I see a 'Captain' I know he knows what he's talking about versus n 'Ensign'. Making it a percentage of players rather than just a simple earn X points to get a promotion means demotions can happen.

TL;DR: When two players say 'follow me' and go different directions, I dunno who is Rambo and who is the village idiot. Fix that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,757
Members
5,144 posts
1 hour ago, Vaidency said:

Go ahead and get mad at someone in your ranked games who doesn't know how the overmatch mechanics work, but you just need to learn to let stuff slide in randoms.

Tryhards like the OP need to stop being tryhards about random battles.  If you want to have a fit about other people's play, then go to Ranked or Clan Battles.  Otherwise, you're trying to force competitive play in the 'default' mode of the game, where a lot of people don't care about competitive play at all.  There are a lot of people who will play to win, but, if someone like the OP starts trying to order people around, they'll ignore him, and probably do the opposite of what they're told. 

TLDR: Don't bother with other people's play in Random Battles.  Only the tryhards care in the slightest.  If you're polishing your stats for your resume, for that big job, go to Ranked or Clan Battles.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,261
Members
1,386 posts
7,116 battles
46 minutes ago, Scrapyard_ said:

The sad part is no matter what anyone says here in the forums the baddies and the players who do not care will never change. This same issue is in every multi player game out their with any type of PVP. Now are their things that WG could do to lessen the sting for players who do try to be good at the game even though they get stuck on bad teams. I fully believe so and I really wish WG did something. One example I feel could help is make rewards in missions require winning and the same time being in the top 6 of your team X amount of times. This would require more players at least trying not to be brain dead. Forget about rewards being given over damage, kills, credits made and XP. Even baddies will get those given enough games played. 

I kind of like this idea. 

19 minutes ago, mavfin87 said:

Tryhards like the OP need to stop being tryhards about random battles.  If you want to have a fit about other people's play, then go to Ranked or Clan Battles.  Otherwise, you're trying to force competitive play in the 'default' mode of the game, where a lot of people don't care about competitive play at all.  There are a lot of people who will play to win, but, if someone like the OP starts trying to order people around, they'll ignore him, and probably do the opposite of what they're told. 

TLDR: Don't bother with other people's play in Random Battles.  Only the tryhards care in the slightest.  If you're polishing your stats for your resume, for that big job, go to Ranked or Clan Battles.

 

I think it would not be a bad idea to give better rewards to those who do try harder even on the losing teams. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,757
Members
5,144 posts
1 minute ago, USMC2145 said:

I kind of like this idea. 

I think it would not be a bad idea to give better rewards to those who do try harder even on the losing teams. 

If they want to overhaul scoring so that playing to win is rewarded over damage, that would be quite helpful.  But, the point stands.  If you want to force competitive play, use a competitive mode, not the 'base' game mode.

Edited by mavfin87

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
269
[LSNB]
Members
1,453 posts
4,065 battles

I guess you could compare Random Battles to "casual mode" and Ranked to "semi-competitive", while Clan Battles and tournaments to be "competitive".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9
[4TAC]
Members
19 posts

Most game companies never "get it"  You can't change who people are.  Non team solo style players will not change, just like team players will not become solo players. This is solely related to the personality and style of the individual.  For me the most broken part of the game is CV's.  DD's which are obviously the ship most likely to solo can't go off on their own to scout ahead especially in dual cv games.  2 CV's per team is the dumbest thing they have done. 

  • Boring 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×