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

@WG: Fair Fights Are More Fun

63 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
14 posts
982 battles

I'm a casual player; I have a job and a life.  What I want is a game where I can log in a few hours a day, several days a week, and have some good PvP games where the outcome is determined by the skill of the players.  I actually want to pay real money to support games I like (having a job does come with perks), but I can't justify paying to support the game in its current state, and the original NTC proposal would have taken it in absolutely the wrong direction.  I see WG taking features that would be great for any PvE game, and putting them into what is, at its core, a PvP game.  In PvE games, the more you play, the more advantages you get/the more powerful you become, and it's not a problem because you're not fighting other players.  Putting that crap into a PvP game is a great way to make sure new players can never catch up to a competitive level, and quit as soon as they realize it.  The reason everyone had their hair on fire about the original NTC proposal is that it would have taken what is already an overly-tilted playing field and made the problem even worse.  I'm absolutely fine with other players being better at the game, but it should only be skill.  Being a veteran player is already enough of an advantage

Things WG could do to actually improve the game:

  • Balance premium ships to the point where they don't need special matchmaking to get a 50/50 win/lose rate.
  • Always put players top-tier in their highest-tier ship, or don't put players against ships higher-tier than their highest-tier ship (new matchmaker rule).  This way, new players would never face T10s until they have their first T10.
  • Disable 3-tier matchmaking; fighting ships 2 tiers higher is no fun.  I'd rather wait longer for a match where I can have some impact.
  • Remove premium consumables; WG already plans to do this, and this is a good change.
  • Remove stock hulls and modules that are purely improvements; nobody wants to play a nerfed version of the same ship.
  • Let rental ships for ranked/clan battles equip camo; why wouldn't you?

Overall, design the game around the philosophy that fair fights are more fun.  Sure, some veteran players might run out of things to grind and go do something else for a while, and that's OK, because the game will actually be able to recruit and keep new players.

Edited by Lokistics
Updated based on new NTC proposal, edited for clarity, added suggestion
  • Cool 3
  • Confused 2
  • Boring 9
  • Angry 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,822
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
3,547 posts
12,260 battles

I agree, fair fights are more fun.

 

 

I think the problem is that fair fights aren't good for WG's bottom line...

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
14 posts
982 battles
3 hours ago, pikohan said:

I think the problem is that fair fights aren't good for WG's bottom line...

In the game's current state, that's probably true.  Perhaps we as a community need to figure out a way to move the game away from pay-to-win, while still being economically viable for WG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
177
[CUTE]
Beta Testers
475 posts
5,224 battles

It's a shift from easy, simple mm to something more demanding and complicated, and it'd also mean win rate stick a lot closer to 50%, meaning there'd need to be some kind of mmr... Which will result in a system people will still complain about. Because nobody in any game is ever happy with matchmaking, if we're going to be honest here. 

Also it'd ruin all the stat collecting and metrics used for clan recruitment.

  • Confused 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
14 posts
982 battles
2 hours ago, DouglasMacAwful said:

They've cancelled the buffs of NTC and the rewards are now ships and cosmetics. 

Yeah, I saw that shortly after I posted xD  Updated the original post accordingly.

 

10 minutes ago, PG908 said:

It's a shift from easy, simple mm to something more demanding and complicated, and it'd also mean win rate stick a lot closer to 50%, meaning there'd need to be some kind of mmr... Which will result in a system people will still complain about. Because nobody in any game is ever happy with matchmaking, if we're going to be honest here. 

Also it'd ruin all the stat collecting and metrics used for clan recruitment.

The only changes to the matchmaker I suggested were:

  1. Balance premium ships so they don't need special matchmaking (simpler matchmaker).  The current matchmaker tries to match a premium ship on Team A against another (preferably identical) premium ship on Team B.
  2. Limit the matchmaker to 2 tiers (simpler matchmaker).

I like the idea of a matchmaker ranking, so you'd get matched against similarly-skilled players, but I don't think the game has enough of a player base to support that currently.  To make that possible without glacial wait times, the game would need to actually be able to recruit and keep more (new) players... which would require un-tilting the playing field so new players don't face the double-whammy of playing against better opponents in objectively better ships.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
392
[_RNG_]
Members
777 posts
6,921 battles
16 hours ago, Lokistics said:

I'm a casual player; I have a job and a life.  What I want is a game where I can log in a few hours a day, several days a week, and have some good PvP games where the outcome is determined by the skill of the players.  I actually want to pay real money to support games I like...

Overall, design the game around the philosophy that fair fights are more fun.

This is a great post @Lokistics. After a couple of days of soul searching about the game, I think you summed it up pretty good.

I play this game because it's a fun PvP game that feels fair and is accessible to older folks liked me that can't hack it in Fortnite or Overwatch or PUBG. I'll spend money to play a game like this. But if it ceases to be fair or balanced or accessible to a more casual gamer a then I'll do something else.

Edited by Jester_of_War
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,148
[WG-CC]
Privateers, Members
8,946 posts
7,885 battles
2 hours ago, Lokistics said:

Balance premium ships so they don't need special matchmaking (simpler matchmaker).  The current matchmaker tries to match a premium ship on Team A against another (preferably identical) premium ship on Team B.

MM doesn‘t do that. It‘s as random as it can be.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,454
[ARS]
Beta Testers
3,617 posts
3,743 battles
Just now, Lokistics said:

Disable 3-tier matchmaking; fighting ships 2 tiers higher is no fun.  I'd rather wait longer for a match where I can have some impact.

If you can't have an impact as a bottom tier ship, that is on you, not the ship or on being bottom tiered.  Topping the team in a bottom tier ship is a great feeling and I'd hate to see that lost.

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
14 posts
982 battles
1 hour ago, SireneRacker said:

MM doesn‘t do that. It‘s as random as it can be.

Every time I've played the Yubari in a random battle, there's been exactly 1 other Yubari, and it's been on the other team.  I'm not saying the matchmaker won't create a match for a premium ship without one of the same class & tier on the other team, just that it prefers to, when possible.  If you don't believe me, track your matchmaking for a week and then come tell me I'm right.  Ignore divisions though, I don't have enough data to know how the matchmaker handles that.

 

1 hour ago, Helstrem said:

If you can't have an impact as a bottom tier ship, that is on you, not the ship or on being bottom tiered.  Topping the team in a bottom tier ship is a great feeling and I'd hate to see that lost.

Says the Beta Tester.  If some people want to do that kind of thing for an extra reward or something, fine, make it optional, but don't force it on everyone.  For people trying to grind to their first few tech trees, it's not fun.  Designing the game based primarily on what your most skilled/oldest players want is the exact problem I'm talking about.

Edited by Lokistics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,148
[WG-CC]
Privateers, Members
8,946 posts
7,885 battles
8 minutes ago, Lokistics said:

Every time I've played the Yubari in a random battle, there's been exactly 1 other Yubari, and it's been on the other team.  I'm not saying the matchmaker won't create a match for a premium ship without one of the same class & tier on the other team, just that it prefers to, when possible.  If you don't believe me, track your matchmaking for a week and then come tell me I'm right.  Ignore divisions though, I don't have enough data to know how the matchmaker handles that.

I have played plenty of Belfast and Irian lately, and a Cesare match as a cherry on top. I tell you you are wrong. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,803
[WORX]
Members
7,264 posts
16,493 battles

In order to be fair, the game has to be balance..... RIght now, WG is going though an identity crisis.I ask my self what does WG want ? The same as WG ask what the players want?

"having fun" was not the theme out of the summit this year... THAT is the issue

  • Does WG want balance?
  • Does WG want power or poweful?
  • Does WG want a grindy game over fun game ?

IMO, I am confused.... No direction, No firm leadership, nothing fun is being produced.... 

^^^^ This is the summery of the game so far for 2019

 

Edited by Navalpride33

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,454
[ARS]
Beta Testers
3,617 posts
3,743 battles
Just now, Lokistics said:

Says the Beta Tester.  If some people want to do that kind of thing for an extra reward or something, fine, make it optional, but don't force it on everyone.  For people trying to grind to their first few tech trees, it's not fun.  Designing the game based primarily on what your most skilled/oldest players want is the exact problem I'm talking about.

I am an average player.  All the "Beta Testers" tag means is I bought a Yubari (because it was the cheapest way in) so that I could play sooner.  I didn't get in because of any other reason.

If I can sometimes top the scoreboard as bottom tier then so can you.

In addition, making it optional wouldn't work reliably as you'd need somebody else trying to find a match at your tier, and not in a CV unless you were in a CV,  for the matchmaker to actually do anything other than put you, like everybody else, in a +1/-1 setting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
14 posts
982 battles
53 minutes ago, SireneRacker said:

I have played plenty of Belfast and Irian lately, and a Cesare match as a cherry on top. I tell you you are wrong. 

And when you played those ships, what percent of the matches had 2+ division-less premiums of the same class & tier on your team and none on the other team?

 

50 minutes ago, Helstrem said:

... If I can sometimes top the scoreboard as bottom tier then so can you.

In addition, making it optional wouldn't work reliably as you'd need somebody else trying to find a match at your tier, and not in a CV unless you were in a CV,  for the matchmaker to actually do anything other than put you, like everybody else, in a +1/-1 setting.

I can and I have, and I still don't want to play matches where I'm T8 against a bunch of T10s.  The fact that you're worried enough people would pick that option tells me that you know most players don't like it.  You sound like a thoughtful person, so please think about this.  Player retention can never be 100%.  In order for the game to stay viable, we need to constantly recruit new players to replace the ones who leave.  This game has a pretty steep learning curve; the skill gap between new players and veterans is massive (which is OK).  Why compound that by putting veterans in ships 2 tiers higher?  The newer you are, the more likely you are to be bottom tier, which is the opposite of how it should be.  I'd be completely fine with it if the matchmaker up-tiered the veterans and down-tiered the newer players, but that's the opposite of what usually happens.  New players also have the least time/etc invested in the game; if it's not fun for them, they aren't gonna stick around.

Edited by Lokistics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,148
[WG-CC]
Privateers, Members
8,946 posts
7,885 battles
1 minute ago, Lokistics said:

And when you played those ships, what percent of the matches had 2+ division-less premiums on your team and none on the other team?

I didn't track in detail, but there were a few.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
14 posts
982 battles
1 minute ago, SireneRacker said:

I didn't track in detail, but there were a few.

If you can screenshot a match with 2+ division-less premium ships of the same class & tier on the same team, and none on the other team, I'll agree that I'm seeing patterns in the noise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,177
[WOLFB]
Members
3,108 posts
12,926 battles
13 hours ago, Lokistics said:

 

  • Balance premium ships to the point where they don't need special matchmaking to get a 50/50 win/lose rate.

Premium doesn't have special MM. I agree some premium would need rebalancing tho.

13 hours ago, Lokistics said:
  • Disable 3-tier matchmaking; fighting ships 2 tiers higher is no fun.  I'd rather wait longer for a match where I can have some impact.

WG is working on that.

13 hours ago, Lokistics said:
  • Remove stock ships; nobody wants to play a nerfed version of the same ship.

Then grind. If you don't have time buy premium time to make it faster.

13 hours ago, Lokistics said:
  • Let rental ships for ranked/clan battles equip camo; why wouldn't you?

OR...grind your own ship. WG is already kind enough to provide ship for FREE to let you have access to those gamemode. 

13 hours ago, Lokistics said:

Overall, design the game around the philosophy that fair fights are more fun

 

Or you can suck it up and actually try to play the game like everyone before you did. Vet didn't get their T10 and lvl 19 commander just by opening a surprise box. Even casual CAN unlock ship and high level captain. Yes it takes time but at some point you need to decide whether you wanna invest a bit of your time in the game or somewhere else.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,896
[ARGSY]
Members
15,769 posts
10,628 battles
14 hours ago, Lokistics said:

Remove stock ships; nobody wants to play a nerfed version of the same ship.

Hell, no. People need something to work towards.

 

14 hours ago, Lokistics said:

Balance premium ships to the point where they don't need special matchmaking to get a 50/50 win/lose rate.

Why is a 50/50 win-lose rate so important to you? Neither life nor war is fair, and you can't force "fairness" on people. The whole point of war is to use your tactics and weapons to make it as unfair as possible, so that theirs die horrifically in vast numbers and most of yours come home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,004
[CNO]
Members
5,238 posts
16,461 battles

Fair fights is the antithesis of WOWS.  This game is built around asymmetric engagements.  Engaging the enemy where the enemy is weak and you are strong.  No such thing as "fair" when "fair" means an equal chance of winning an engagement.  I try to find the most unfair situation I can find for the reds and the most advantaged situation for me, and then drive that advantage to a successful conclusion.  Fair?  Bah!  I also realize good players are trying to do the same to me.  This is the game within the game, and PART OF THE GAME.  The mind game.  Human vs Human.  

This goes for being down tier. I run T8 vs T10 all the time.  I have no problems finding my asymmetric niche even facing ships that are much bigger and badder than me.  I carry my tier weight most of the time when bottom tier...and even (on occasion) really kick. 

Don't look for fair fights.  Look for UNFAIR fights where you've got the advantage.  That's how you play WOWS!

Here's an example.  T8 in a T10.  Just find a place to be a PITA to the reds...and execute.  Oh...and I wasn't in the back...I was up front...point. 

shot-19_07.04_23_17.45-0864.thumb.jpg.6cd9f5970f955974844bb61488a3f695.jpg   

 

Never (NEVER!) get that mindset that you are bottom tier and worthless.  Because that mindset will fulfill itself.  You will be worthless.  You can be so much more. If MM throws you a bottom tier game, look at the ships.  Look at the map.  Look at the deployment.  Figure out where you can maximize you're capabilities while limiting the enemy's.  And when the game starts....get yourself in the right frame of mind...along the lines of this:

  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,387
[HINON]
[HINON]
Members
6,770 posts
10,157 battles
12 hours ago, Helstrem said:

If you can't have an impact as a bottom tier ship, that is on you, not the ship or on being bottom tiered.  Topping the team in a bottom tier ship is a great feeling and I'd hate to see that lost.

unless your in a CV and get uptiered by 2, then thats just MM screwing you over

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,684 posts
7,879 battles
On 7/6/2019 at 3:12 AM, Lokistics said:

 

 

Says the Beta Tester.  If some people want to do that kind of thing for an extra reward or something, fine, make it optional, but don't force it on everyone.  For people trying to grind to their first few tech trees, it's not fun.  Designing the game based primarily on what your most skilled/oldest players want is the exact problem I'm talking about.

I’m not a beta tester and I’ve been away from the game for a year, but the three tier MM is still mostly fine. There are a few specific ships that don’t uptier well, but generally there isn’t that big a difference. A NC’s 16” guns still hurt tier 10 ships — heck, an Arizona would sink tier 10 BBs if you aim at the upper belt. After tier 6, most ship lines are fairly consistent. 

Thats not saying that higher tier isn’t better, but how you play matters a lot more than tier. Whether a Pensacola goes broadside to a Yamato, or a Des Moines goes broadside to a Nagato, the result is going to be the same. The Nagato might even be more effective at fighting tier 10 cruisers, since it turns so much faster, rotates it’s turrets faster, and reloads faster — The lower tier ship has some big advantages which could be used to compensate for its disadvantages. 

It’s been a while since I played a lot, but IIRC you get more rewards for punching up than punching down.

Ther are a few ships which don’t uptier well, but those are really specific problems  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
14 posts
982 battles
21 hours ago, AlcatrazNC said:

Or you can suck it up and actually try to play the game like everyone before you did. Vet didn't get their T10 and lvl 19 commander just by opening a surprise box. Even casual CAN unlock ship and high level captain. Yes it takes time but at some point you need to decide whether you wanna invest a bit of your time in the game or somewhere else.

I'm aware the game has a progression model; this thread is about how to improve it.

 

20 hours ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

Hell, no. People need something to work towards.

How about the next tier?  T10 doesn't have stock hulls.  Some T10 ships do have module options, but they aren't pure upgrades the way the B/C hulls, etc are for T2-T9 ships; they're trade-offs.

20 hours ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

Why is a 50/50 win-lose rate so important to you? Neither life nor war is fair, and you can't force "fairness" on people. The whole point of war is to use your tactics and weapons to make it as unfair as possible, so that theirs die horrifically in vast numbers and most of yours come home.

You know what are supposed to be fair?  Games.

 

16 hours ago, Soshi_Sone said:

Fair fights is the antithesis of WOWS.  This game is built around asymmetric engagements.  Engaging the enemy where the enemy is weak and you are strong.  No such thing as "fair" when "fair" means an equal chance of winning an engagement.  I try to find the most unfair situation I can find for the reds and the most advantaged situation for me, and then drive that advantage to a successful conclusion.  Fair?  Bah!  I also realize good players are trying to do the same to me.  This is the game within the game, and PART OF THE GAME.  The mind game.  Human vs Human. 

I'm not talking about strategy within a match; I'm talking about matchmaking.

Edited by Lokistics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
724
[TMS]
Members
2,991 posts
28,875 battles
On 7/6/2019 at 8:21 AM, SireneRacker said:

I have played plenty of Belfast and Irian lately, and a Cesare match as a cherry on top. I tell you you are wrong. 

Most of the time when i have played my Imperator Nikolai there has been one on the other side more often than not and this ship is more rare than both your examples.

If i  don't play it i hardly ever see it in battle period.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,148
[WG-CC]
Privateers, Members
8,946 posts
7,885 battles
1 hour ago, Final8ty said:

Most of the time when i have played my Imperator Nikolai there has been one on the other side more often than not and this ship is more rare than both your examples.

If i  don't play it i hardly ever see it in battle period.

Actually Irian is a rather rare ship to face, she wasn‘t really a popular ship at release because "poorman‘s Kutuzow", and also doesn‘t serve any captain training.

Though I have started playing Nikolai recently, and I don‘t recall ever facing one. Then again I also didn‘t really dig through the opponent‘s team listing too much because it doesn‘t matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
724
[TMS]
Members
2,991 posts
28,875 battles
13 minutes ago, SireneRacker said:

Actually Irian is a rather rare ship to face, she wasn‘t really a popular ship at release because "poorman‘s Kutuzow", and also doesn‘t serve any captain training.

Though I have started playing Nikolai recently, and I don‘t recall ever facing one. Then again I also didn‘t really dig through the opponent‘s team listing too much because it doesn‘t matter.

 

You will face one even less now because there's so few playing them now, MM will not wait around for one now, but it would when i was playing it.

Edited by Final8ty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×