Jump to content
TheURLGuy

Naval Battle: New Missions

52 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

43
[DENY]
Members
21 posts
7,491 battles

This is way better than XP. It is so frustration to waste an attempt with a great game just to lose because your team is terrible.  Most of the higher XP bars were only achievable with wins.

WOWS needs to go toward personal achievement as a measure of success in everything as wins isn't something you have that much control over being 1/12th of the team.

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
232
[DPG]
Members
308 posts
10,598 battles

Thank you so much for these changes ! 

I have been pleading my case for damage based targets since supply lines ended - While we are not a PvE clan, The damage based targets allow PvE clans to earn a few extra stars, and the biggest thing is that damage based targets remove the frustration of Weekend warrior syndrome - the one where poor players do their best to lose the match for us all  - I have always been amazed at how many games a captain can find himself on the team being roll stomped in 10 minutes or less. This change will help make a lot of those losses still feel more of a win. At least the damage targets are a personal target, not reliant on the 50% xp boost of a win. 

During supply lines of old - EVERY clan member said they really welcomed the damage targets - the morale visibly improved and the horrible team mates on the weekend became far less an issue.  An extremely positive move WG

Hurrah!  to WG for doing this !  Every member of my clan applauds this move. Thank you for listening and trying

2 thumbs up ! 

Next round is on me !  I cannot express strongly  enough how good a move this is. 

Please make damage based goals the new permanent standard for Naval Battles 

Karandar

Edited by Karandar
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1 post
969 battles

Nice, a way to pull a positive feeling of personal victory from an otherwise frustrating team loss. I'm a little concerned that this will lead to more people ignoring the objectives to boost damage numbers, but the basexp bar alternative is worse.

GJ Wargaming, i dig this change.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
90
[SKI]
Members
217 posts
39,340 battles

we welcome this change WG    very good move .... thanks....

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
412
[SOFOP]
Members
769 posts
6,881 battles

Clarification please:  Is it cause X damage TO that target, or cause that much damage WITH that target?  For example, if the bar is 10000 damage, Japanese Battleships - is it causing that much damage TO a IJN BB, or WITH an IJN BB?

My guess would be WITH that ship (so as to not be reliant on what is on the other team), but we have had many missions that stated to cause damage to a specific nation ship, so just getting clarity.

Regardless, welcome change and will make the Co-op folks really happy!

Edited by Old_Baldy_One

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
232
[DPG]
Members
308 posts
10,598 battles
9 minutes ago, Old_Baldy_One said:

Clarification please:  Is it cause X damage TO that target, or cause that much damage WITH that target?  For example, if the bar is 10000 damage, Japanese Battleships - is it causing that much damage TO a IJN BB, or WITH an IJN BB?

My guess would be WITH that ship (so as to not be reliant on what is on the other team), but we have had many missions that stated to cause damage to a specific nation ship, so just getting clarity.

Regardless, welcome change and will make the Co-op folks really happy!

Supply lines was always "WITH that ship" so  get 60,000 damage with any IJN BB for example  - and this is the way i read the rules for this event also.

 

Another awesome part of the damage targets is we should see more of a variety of ships played for this event now rather than mostly t10  to try maximizing the XP in the old format - more options/variety = more enjoyable game play. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3
[DPG]
[DPG]
Members
4 posts
2,784 battles

Excellent change! Allows for more individual-skill-based instead of overall team competency. That was silly to have it on base XP when your hamstrung by poor MM teammates. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1
[GTF]
Members
5 posts
10,732 battles

Awesome change to the Naval battles as we struggled with our players that aren't high base xp getters so their attempts were lost so hard to win against another clan for a victory. This will allow all to be more evenly helpful. Thank you WG for this change :cap_like:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
330
[RG-1]
Beta Testers
664 posts
2,439 battles

I'll say this right now but...this is a bad idea...

 

Yes, the EXP one needed you to be on the winning side most of the time, but EXP takes into account a lot of factors such as potential damage, spotting damage, plane kills etc etc, DAMAGE is a raw number and it's a lot harder to get bigger damage when being uptiered, specially when you're in a T8 CV on a T10 match, let alone a T8 DD in a T10 match with CV...

 

The best possible solution would be to have the EXP modified regardless of winning or losing, this way It'll be fair to everyone and will be based on the performance of a player, and not the team.

 

EDIT: Having the EXP modified could also be an exclusivity of Naval Battle and apply for the 10 battles, meaning that more people would give it a try since even if they're on the losing side they'd get more EXP, this would help a lot of clan with clueless members that doesn't do the 10 tries, they'd have nothing to lose (besides their tries) and they'd still get rewarded with a battle that no matter the outcome (winning or losing), the EXP given is the TRUE EXP for what he did in the game.

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
412
[SOFOP]
Members
769 posts
6,881 battles
47 minutes ago, ALROCHA said:

I'll say this right now but...this is a bad idea...

 

Yes, the EXP one needed you to be on the winning side most of the time, but EXP takes into account a lot of factors such as potential damage, spotting damage, plane kills etc etc, DAMAGE is a raw number and it's a lot harder to get bigger damage when being uptiered, specially when you're in a T8 CV on a T10 match, let alone a T8 DD in a T10 match with CV...

 

The best possible solution would be to have the EXP modified regardless of winning or losing, this way It'll be fair to everyone and will be based on the performance of a player, and not the team.

 

EDIT: Having the EXP modified could also be an exclusivity of Naval Battle and apply for the 10 battles, meaning that more people would give it a try since even if they're on the losing side they'd get more EXP, this would help a lot of clan with clueless members that doesn't do the 10 tries, they'd have nothing to lose (besides their tries) and they'd still get rewarded with a battle that no matter the outcome (winning or losing), the EXP given is the TRUE EXP for what he did in the game.

Treating everyone as the "winner" for just consideration in Naval Battles probably would have been better, but these damage levels I don't think are that extreme.  That said, using damage means anyone can participate, even on a losing team.

Edited by Old_Baldy_One

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
330
[RG-1]
Beta Testers
664 posts
2,439 battles
1 minute ago, Old_Baldy_One said:

Treating everyone as the "winner" for just consideration in Naval Battles probably would have been better, but these damage levels I don't think are that extreme.  That said, using damage means anyone can participate, even on a losing team.

It's just that Wargaming is forcing the idea that "DAMAGE = GOOD" and removing the rewards for being a good teammate and scouting/offering AA protection, it's aiming for people to be even more selfish about their damage and this will generate scenarios where a ship will be left with 100 HP but the teammate won't shoot him because he won't get enough damage to fill his quota, whereas with EXP everyone would grab the free kill immediately and would also have to either damage or offer more support to fill his EXP quota.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
881
[R-F]
Members
1,204 posts
7,860 battles

In the previous version with xp-based bars, the first couple bars per class/nation were almost trivial to get.  300 xp?  You have to be afk to not get that.  900 xp?  Almost impossible not to get in a win, and can be gotten with respectable effort in a loss.

So that was 40 stars that were more or less freebies, and then you started getting into tough stars only earnable by good games, almost always in wins.

Now...

Missions to do 10k, 20k, 40k, 60k, 70k, 80k, 90k, 100k damage?  The amount of trivial stars has gone up enormously.  I put the number of stars that can be earned with a minimally good game now at somewhere like 100.  The smaller clans are going to run out of attempts to use before they ever hit a mission that provides much challenge.

 

Huh.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
412
[SOFOP]
Members
769 posts
6,881 battles
9 minutes ago, ALROCHA said:

It's just that Wargaming is forcing the idea that "DAMAGE = GOOD" and removing the rewards for being a good teammate and scouting/offering AA protection, it's aiming for people to be even more selfish about their damage and this will generate scenarios where a ship will be left with 100 HP but the teammate won't shoot him because he won't get enough damage to fill his quota, whereas with EXP everyone would grab the free kill immediately and would also have to either damage or offer more support to fill his EXP quota.

Everyone likes kills and will take someone out for that alone.  Not to mention, that 100hp guy could kill you.

I agree damage isn't the best metric, but it is a nice balance between random and coop battles (damage is damage), and is a better metric than they had been using (which was almost totally reliant on winning after the 900 mark, and was totally unobtainable by those in Coop). 

Giving people credit for playing as a team has always been a sticking point, because everyone has a different view of what that means. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
412
[SOFOP]
Members
769 posts
6,881 battles
5 minutes ago, Brhinosaurus said:

In the previous version with xp-based bars, the first couple bars per class/nation were almost trivial to get.  300 xp?  You have to be afk to not get that.  900 xp?  Almost impossible not to get in a win, and can be gotten with respectable effort in a loss.

So that was 40 stars that were more or less freebies, and then you started getting into tough stars only earnable by good games, almost always in wins.

Now...

Missions to do 10k, 20k, 40k, 60k, 70k, 80k, 90k, 100k damage?  The amount of trivial stars has gone up enormously.  I put the number of stars that can be earned with a minimally good game now at somewhere like 100.  The smaller clans are going to run out of attempts to use before they ever hit a mission that provides much challenge.

 

Huh.

I agree, the numbers do seem a bit low, which is why I originally questioned whether it was meant to be that you had to do damage AGAINST that type of ship for credit, not with it.  10k/20k etc damage against a specific type of ship could possibly give multiple stars per run, but it would also be a lot harder to do.

Being damage based also means that there is a lot of benefit to be gained by doing well in a losing effort, cause there are more targets.  We could have the ranked issue of people farming in the back to "keep their stars", only now its to "earn their stars".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4 posts
3 hours ago, Karandar said:

Supply lines was always "WITH that ship" so  get 60,000 damage with any IJN BB for example  - and this is the way i read the rules for this event also.

 

Another awesome part of the damage targets is we should see more of a variety of ships played for this event now rather than mostly t10  to try maximizing the XP in the old format - more options/variety = more enjoyable game play. 

I hope Wargaming edits the page to make it clear if it is "cause to" or "cause with".  Just because Supply Lines did it one way doesn't mean this will. Many missions have required causing damage to particular nations/classes of ships. 

However, "cause to" is more consistent with their stated goal to "enable players to participate in the competition with a variety of ships". It is just a lot harder to count on... what if you never get a chance to target a ship of that type in the entire attempt...

Edited by one_eyed_potato
Fixed typo and clarified

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,099 posts
5,766 battles

Ok soooooo ... 

This is an "everyone flock to co-op mode for Naval Battles" thingee.  Really, it makes zero sense to fight Naval Battles in any other mode.  Damage is damage and in Co-op, you're chances or staying alive long enough to deal out some impressive numbers is a lot higher than in other modes.  No wonder PVE players are so excited about this.  

I echo the concerns of other posters to this thread about how moving to a "damage farming specific" mode devalues things like scouting, taking caps, being a good team mate and all the other things that go into team play.  You no longer have to fight for the "win", you are instead exclusively fighting for yourself and your damage total.

This also works well for Coop mode I guess.  Stat padders can be as selfish as they want there, after all, who goes around looking at how amazing a player was in Co-op mode so they can just do what they want in Coop, earn their stars and not have their stats impacted in a negative way by not being "team players".  Yet another reason to do Naval Battles exclusively in Co-op I guess. 

It may take a bit for most PVP players to fully consider this, but when they do, look out PVE's, look for the PVP's  to be flooding an electronic sea near you . :cap_horn:

Edited by BB3_Oregon_Steel
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
0
[-CHL-]
Members
4 posts
5,423 battles

thanks for the modification, a lot of players of my clan are frustrated coz the highiest stars only can be done in a win battle and those days always u have a crapteams with batlles ended before 10 minutes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
412
[SOFOP]
Members
769 posts
6,881 battles

This definetley weakens the challenge aspect.  No clan has enough people to get all the goals to 100k+....so it will end up being a challenge that comes down to how many clan members take part and pick the right ship type.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
208
[KAPPA]
Members
715 posts
5,649 battles

This seems easier to do, but I wonder if it's something that will just encourage attacking nothing but BBs while ignoring everything else. I'd honestly say that it should be based on base xp before win modifier is taken into account, and thus lowered. I also think that now it ramps up way too quickly.

That said, I am still of the mind that it needs a "multiple stars in a single battle" sort of system, as it's frustrating to get a 2k base xp game for the first requirement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
584
[PVE]
Members
2,903 posts
21,541 battles

I hate to burst everybody's bubble but the title of this article say "Missions"...

This damage requirement is only for 2 weeks...then some other variant is to be tried...& at least 1 other after that...or so this comment suggests:

"The competition doesn't stop here, and we'll definitely share further missions with you in future".

 

This will definitely boost the amount of oil each clan receives the next 2 weeks by a huge margin...(TY for that WG) but it sounds like they are going to experiment w/at least a couple different options also (based on "further missions").

That doesn't mean they intend to change the base XP option as a standard...just that there is presently a set of "missions" going on (the 1st based on damage).

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27
[SIX]
[SIX]
Members
44 posts
12,363 battles

100k with my SHIMA + F3 torps in Co-Op, where:

- the enemy DD pop smoke and doesn't even sit there, but keeps pushing towards you in an almost straight line and constant speed?

- no one on the enemy team uses sonar or radar (although on rare occasions I've seen some ships using sonar)?

- no one torps you in the smoke and you can sit there until your clock runs out, waiting for those juice BBs to come close to you?

The biggest threat I see here is to have stupid BOTs on your own team, that will torp you from behind when you least expect it (yes Sir, looking at you stupid Mogami :cap_viking:).

In Co-Op the BOTS tend to target the closest ship, so if ya want to be selfish (and since win or lose doesn't matter, not even affecting your main stats), just sit behind everyone and farm your DMG from afar, while keeping all your HP pool intact. Once everyone else in your team died, you still can farm some more DMG with your full HP pool at your disposal. I foresee a race to see who can hide further back 1st. in Co-Op :Smile_veryhappy:

 

The only problem I see in Co-Op is for slow BBs.

Since the matches are usually very fast and with fewer ships (smaller overall HP pool to farm), if they choose the wrong side to push at the start, the battle might be over before they can even fire their 1st salvo. 

Also, just reminding everyone that it is easier to do 100k DMG in a Montana, than it is in a TEXAS, so tier X will still be a thing.

Oh well, let's wait and see how this will work out.

Edited by Porthos__

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
232
[DPG]
Members
308 posts
10,598 battles

Something else to consider all...

I have spoken with several PvE clan captains that do coop exclusively recently.  I thought this number of players and clans was ALOT smaller than it is. 

The Basexp requirement meant that a significant section of warships players could only hit the 300 xp base levels as 900 basexp in a coop needs a miraculous failure by your team mates for you to achieve. 

Very high levels of damage targets are achievable with even tier ships, so should see more diverse play. 

WG has effectively doubled the amount of stars we can earn with these targets, meaning even more oil for our clans every week.. 

As to concerns that players en masse are going to stop shooting at a target to secure a kill and shoot at another for more potential damage are not going to materialize and any half decent player will not be doing that, so for the most part, a non issue. 

 

So nothing WG does in anything in this game will satisfy everyone, or be perfect for all situations, but the damage targets, especially this low to begin with, are far better for the largest part of the player base than basexp in nearly every metric. 

Again, I give WG two thumbs up for this change. 

Karandar

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
179
[WAG]
Members
580 posts
9,382 battles

When Naval Battles was an experiment a few months ago it was in this damage done format. Except for the DD players, who can have great games without doing much damage (cap, spot, etc.) it was a decent format. You were not penalized for a loss, but at that same time, you are heavily rewarded for farming battleships, rather than killing destroyers. You also don't get rewarded for a good game at bottom tier, the way you do if XP is the measurement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,718
[PVE]
Members
14,935 posts
9,477 battles

Yes! Thank you so much for the test and I hope and pray that it is permanent. Right now in our casual Clan, after the 300 base XPs are knocked out, there's not much for the co-op mains to do.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×