Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Nergy

A better gaming experience needed

28 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

266
Beta Testers
237 posts
12,285 battles

What do you think will happen when all employees of a car manufacturer do what they think is best? Or what will happen if all soldiers do what they think is best?

Exactly, chaos! So why do you War Gaming think that this will work in a teamwork game?

I think this, doing what players think is best, is the most annoying (game breaking) part of the game. Watching certain player behaviors repeat et nauseum is sometimes quite a challenge (you have no f clue how long I had to work to say it this way). How to solve this?

What this game needs is a commander that directs the battle, an absolute authority that has that right to kick and report players that disobey orders. (Maybe even directly control other players ships)

Some ideas how that might work.

After the match has finished loading, players have 30 sec to vote for the commander before the match starts. (Players that want to be a commander can flag themselves.) Commanders have a small set of attributes, like offensive, defensive, aggressive, passive and a win rating. Players use those to make their voting decision.

The commander has a special command screen, I am not sure whether he should also pilot a ship, that lets him see the battle and direct the forces. He can pull up views from the different ships.

He can order:

Ships going to specific locations.

Planes scout certain areas.

Fire on a specific target.

etc.

If players disobey orders he can kick them from the match and they have to wait in port till the match is over. Players kicked will not receive any reward for that match. Kicking will auto report the event.

We all know penalties don't work. So as a reward for not getting reported for disobedience, players are permitted to move to higher tier play. Players that get too many disobedience reports getting that privilege removed and might end up staying in tier 1 play until they start to behave or even have a special tier 1 league just for them.

Players will have an option to rate the commander. A simple screen  with a few check boxes should do. If there are too many complains about a commander, a GM should be able to silently watch some of the matches and then either warn that commander or remove the commander status from that player or go after the players that file false reports.

 

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1
  • Boring 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,264
[PSP]
[PSP]
Members
15,697 posts
 
 
 
 
7 minutes ago, Nergy said:

If players disobey orders he can kick them from the match and they have to wait in port till the match is over. Players kicked will not receive any reward for that match. Kicking will auto report the event.

Can you see how this would not work? Even a "potato" might still benefit the team by at least drawing fire. All you would do by kicking a player would be to weaken your own them.

And can you perhaps see how this would only create a bunch of petty dictators in the game? A lot of people are "bossy' enough as it is.

If you want to be the "boss" of your team then create a game in the Training Room and see if you can get everyone on your side to agree that you are their leader. Or, you could just play Clan Battles and threaten your underlings with expulsion from the clan if they do not bow to your will.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
25 posts
9,591 battles
18 minutes ago, Nergy said:

What do you think will happen when all employees of a car manufacturer do what they think is best? Or what will happen if all soldiers do what they think is best?

Exactly, chaos! So why do you War Gaming think that this will work in a teamwork game?

I think this, doing what players think is best, is the most annoying (game breaking) part of the game. Watching certain player behaviors repeat et nauseum is sometimes quite a challenge (you have no f clue how long I had to work to say it this way). How to solve this?

What this game needs is a commander that directs the battle, an absolute authority that has that right to kick and report players that disobey orders. (Maybe even directly control other players ships)

Some ideas how that might work.

After the match has finished loading, players have 30 sec to vote for the commander before the match starts. (Players that want to be a commander can flag themselves.) Commanders have a small set of attributes, like offensive, defensive, aggressive, passive and a win rating. Players use those to make their voting decision.

The commander has a special command screen, I am not sure whether he should also pilot a ship, that lets him see the battle and direct the forces. He can pull up views from the different ships.

He can order:

Ships going to specific locations.

Planes scout certain areas.

Fire on a specific target.

etc.

 

That would take a lot of organizing in a game that seems at times to be void of any organization!

it would almost be advantageous to have the commander not actually play but bark orders from the sideline. You can imagine the letdown of seeing your commander being one of the first casualties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
355
[WOLFA]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
1,360 posts

a bit delusional to think people would listen to them   :Smile_veryhappy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,264
[PSP]
[PSP]
Members
15,697 posts
Just now, Ozium said:

a bit delusional to think people would listen to them anyway  :Smile_veryhappy:

WOWS is organized more like many Amerindian tribes where the "chief" led more by reputation than anything else. If a warrior was charismatic and had proven himself in battle then he would get to be the boss as long his leadership got results and others wanted to follow him.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,251 posts
9,941 battles
43 minutes ago, Nergy said:

Or what will happen if all soldiers do what they think is best?

"For neither King nor Kaiser" is what.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
355
[WOLFA]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
1,360 posts
14 minutes ago, Snargfargle said:

WOWS is organized more like many Amerindian tribes where the "chief" led more by reputation than anything else. If a warrior was charismatic and had proven himself in battle then he would get to be the boss as long his leadership got results and others wanted to follow him.

but really doesn't apply here even in context of op's suggestion does it?    there is no "proven" commanders, nor are they followed or respected by reputation, just some random player who raised their hand and said pick me i can do it ... LOL

and that is completely ignoring even how would they convey these strategy's idea's or plans for others to follow out, surely don't need or want more map pingers and using chat problematic in heat of battle and you can forget voice all together :Smile-_tongue:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,367
[DRFTR]
Beta Testers
4,637 posts

we have hundreds if not thousands of commander in chiefs now we don't need any more

 

we need a better balanced gaming experience

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,264
[PSP]
[PSP]
Members
15,697 posts
4 minutes ago, Ozium said:

but really doesn't apply here even in context of op's suggestion does it?    there is no "proven" commanders, nor are they followed or respected by reputation, just some random player who raised their hand and said pick me i can do it ... LOL

In most other games I've played, as well in the army in which I served, people have visible ranks. A "commander" in the game might not actually be better than a "midshipman" but at least he has played long enough and gained enough PR to attain that rank. In an RTS game that I played you could pretty much be sure that if you were a lance corporal that a field marshal was probably going to stomp you. Therefore, you chose to join matches with sergeants and below.

Edited by Snargfargle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12
[SOSV]
Members
21 posts
2,572 battles
36 minutes ago, Nergy said:

What do you think will happen when all employees of a car manufacturer do what they think is best? Or what will happen if all soldiers do what they think is best?

Exactly, chaos! So why do you War Gaming think that this will work in a teamwork game?

I think this, doing what players think is best, is the most annoying (game breaking) part of the game. Watching certain player behaviors repeat et nauseum is sometimes quite a challenge (you have no f clue how long I had to work to say it this way). How to solve this?

What this game needs is a commander that directs the battle, an absolute authority that has that right to kick and report players that disobey orders. (Maybe even directly control other players ships)

Some ideas how that might work.......

Battle Field 2, Modern combat had a "commander mode" for one of the players. 

Basically it was "carrot" not "stick". The players would get extra exp/coin for taking objectives designated by the commander. The commander could also drop "supplies" ammo and heals for that game or even light vehicles like jeeps. They could also see, satellite like vision. 

The commander would get the ability to mark one capture zone at a time, other players that contest or take that zone with in a time period would get extra "exp and coin points" maybe a "good boy" ribbon.  

For WoW, the extra viewing could be used for spotting of enemy ships. Instead of every ship on the team being able to spot an enemy ship out of range or the rest of the team, the commander would have to mark the ship he wants to be spotted for the rest of the team to see and shoot at, other wise it's only visible to the spotting ship. 

He could drop buffs, the equivalent of upgraded mods, like; dropping a smoke or sonar  "mod" for destroyers, this encourages the destroyer to go to that spot with in a short time period.  Repair parties for Battle ships, speed or radar mods for cruisers, etc...

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
355
[WOLFA]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
1,360 posts

@Snargfargle 

what i'm really trying to say bringing in such a system to a pickup game is a nogo for many many reasons

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,869
[PVE]
Members
8,997 posts
25,340 battles
1 hour ago, Nergy said:

What do you think will happen when all employees of a car manufacturer do what they think is best? Or what will happen if all soldiers do what they think is best?

Exactly, chaos! So why do you War Gaming think that this will work in a teamwork game?

I think this, doing what players think is best, is the most annoying (game breaking) part of the game. Watching certain player behaviors repeat et nauseum is sometimes quite a challenge (you have no f clue how long I had to work to say it this way). How to solve this?

What this game needs is a commander that directs the battle, an absolute authority that has that right to kick and report players that disobey orders. (Maybe even directly control other players ships)

Some ideas how that might work.

After the match has finished loading, players have 30 sec to vote for the commander before the match starts. (Players that want to be a commander can flag themselves.) Commanders have a small set of attributes, like offensive, defensive, aggressive, passive and a win rating. Players use those to make their voting decision.

The commander has a special command screen, I am not sure whether he should also pilot a ship, that lets him see the battle and direct the forces. He can pull up views from the different ships.

He can order:

Ships going to specific locations.

Planes scout certain areas.

Fire on a specific target.

etc.

If players disobey orders he can kick them from the match and they have to wait in port till the match is over. Players kicked will not receive any reward for that match. Kicking will auto report the event.

We all know penalties don't work. So as a reward for not getting reported for disobedience, players are permitted to move to higher tier play. Players that get too many disobedience reports getting that privilege removed and might end up staying in tier 1 play until they start to behave or even have a special tier 1 league just for them.

Players will have an option to rate the commander. A simple screen  with a few check boxes should do. If there are too many complains about a commander, a GM should be able to silently watch some of the matches and then either warn that commander or remove the commander status from that player or go after the players that file false reports.

 

Maybe you can post a few of those replays (that obviously prompted this thread) where you commanded others to do what you demanded to be done & they refused & let us decide if those players (that obviously lost karma due to you "showing them") deserved that karma loss or if you were actually the 1 that was out of line.

Based on the desire to be able to "control their ship" (w/out any clarification of who the hell will be controlling your ship...or the "commander's" as you obviously seem to be referring to yourself in this thread...while you're controlling theirs) I'm guessing it won't be hard to figure out what the general consensus on that 1 will be.

Go on now...attack my stats... can't figure out anywhere else you can go from there w/this subject.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,364
[WPORT]
Members
11,541 posts
15,861 battles
1 hour ago, Nergy said:

What do you think will happen when all employees of a car manufacturer do what they think is best? Or what will happen if all soldiers do what they think is best?

Exactly, chaos! So why do you War Gaming think that this will work in a teamwork game?

I think this, doing what players think is best, is the most annoying (game breaking) part of the game. Watching certain player behaviors repeat et nauseum is sometimes quite a challenge (you have no f clue how long I had to work to say it this way). How to solve this?

What this game needs is a commander that directs the battle, an absolute authority that has that right to kick and report players that disobey orders. (Maybe even directly control other players ships)

Some ideas how that might work.

After the match has finished loading, players have 30 sec to vote for the commander before the match starts. (Players that want to be a commander can flag themselves.) Commanders have a small set of attributes, like offensive, defensive, aggressive, passive and a win rating. Players use those to make their voting decision.

The commander has a special command screen, I am not sure whether he should also pilot a ship, that lets him see the battle and direct the forces. He can pull up views from the different ships.

He can order:

Ships going to specific locations.

Planes scout certain areas.

Fire on a specific target.

etc.

If players disobey orders he can kick them from the match and they have to wait in port till the match is over. Players kicked will not receive any reward for that match. Kicking will auto report the event.

We all know penalties don't work. So as a reward for not getting reported for disobedience, players are permitted to move to higher tier play. Players that get too many disobedience reports getting that privilege removed and might end up staying in tier 1 play until they start to behave or even have a special tier 1 league just for them.

Players will have an option to rate the commander. A simple screen  with a few check boxes should do. If there are too many complains about a commander, a GM should be able to silently watch some of the matches and then either warn that commander or remove the commander status from that player or go after the players that file false reports.

 

Another wannabe "armchair admiral"?

:::: yawn :::

Play your ship.  Just play *your* ship, please.  :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,151
[A-I-M]
Members
4,093 posts
15,348 battles
1 hour ago, Nergy said:

I think this, doing what players think is best, is the most annoying (game breaking) part of the game. Watching certain player behaviors repeat et nauseum is sometimes quite a challenge (you have no f clue how long I had to work to say it this way). 

However long it was, it wasn’t quite long enough, bub.

It’s “ad nauseum.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,059
[WOLFG]
Members
13,388 posts
12,784 battles

I can think of a faster way to kill the game, but it would require a fire (and not the HE kind).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,660 posts
2 hours ago, Nergy said:

What do you think will happen when all employees of a car manufacturer do what they think is best? Or what will happen if all soldiers do what they think is best?

Exactly, chaos! So why do you War Gaming think that this will work in a teamwork game?

I think this, doing what players think is best, is the most annoying (game breaking) part of the game. Watching certain player behaviors repeat et nauseum is sometimes quite a challenge (you have no f clue how long I had to work to say it this way). How to solve this?

What this game needs is a commander that directs the battle, an absolute authority that has that right to kick and report players that disobey orders. (Maybe even directly control other players ships)

Some ideas how that might work.

After the match has finished loading, players have 30 sec to vote for the commander before the match starts. (Players that want to be a commander can flag themselves.) Commanders have a small set of attributes, like offensive, defensive, aggressive, passive and a win rating. Players use those to make their voting decision.

The commander has a special command screen, I am not sure whether he should also pilot a ship, that lets him see the battle and direct the forces. He can pull up views from the different ships.

He can order:

Ships going to specific locations.

Planes scout certain areas.

Fire on a specific target.

etc.

If players disobey orders he can kick them from the match and they have to wait in port till the match is over. Players kicked will not receive any reward for that match. Kicking will auto report the event.

We all know penalties don't work. So as a reward for not getting reported for disobedience, players are permitted to move to higher tier play. Players that get too many disobedience reports getting that privilege removed and might end up staying in tier 1 play until they start to behave or even have a special tier 1 league just for them.

Players will have an option to rate the commander. A simple screen  with a few check boxes should do. If there are too many complains about a commander, a GM should be able to silently watch some of the matches and then either warn that commander or remove the commander status from that player or go after the players that file false reports.

 

Soooo.  You want to maybe spend your money on and play a game where someone else tells you what do and how you have to play or you get kicked out?  Seriously?

 

EDIT:  Reminds me of a battle today where a BB Captain got into all chat and asked everyone to report a DD for "Refusing to smoke."

Edited by Gunga_Dinner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,807
[CYNIC]
Members
3,090 posts
8,742 battles
1 hour ago, Wolfswetpaws said:

Another wannabe "armchair admiral"?

:::: yawn :::

Play your ship.  Just play *your* ship, please.  :-)

Quite a few players are in clear need of direction.  There's CV players with average damage of 1 drop --- as in 1 solid release capable of being completed in the first 60 seconds.  There's battleships with the same.  Those who can already perform well, don't need direction, but coordination helps.  Unfortunately they're getting fewer and further between.  The quaranteams of late have been performing very poorly.  Stupid mistakes being made -- mistakes nobody should make because it's not a winning move.    For instance, I was capping a base and this fool in a cruiser comes running into the cap firing his guns causing himself to get reset repeatedly and wouldn't stop.  Had he not ran into my torps, we would have lost. Luck would have it he sunk himself turning me pink in the process, but I finished the cap before they were able to get back and hit me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,264
[PSP]
[PSP]
Members
15,697 posts
57 minutes ago, Gunga_Dinner said:

Soooo.  You want to maybe spend your money on and play a game where someone else tells you what do and how you have to play or you get kicked out?  Seriously?

Well, some people just swing that way.

Actually, I'm only being half facetious there. Some people thrive in hierarchical institutions but have a hard time making decisions for themselves. They work hard and are oftentimes competent if you give them clear instructions but sometimes have a hard time seeing a problem that needs to be addressed.

New players probably could benefit from having a commander. Unfortunately, history has shown us that incompetent allied commanders probably have gotten more of their own soldiers killed than brilliant enemy commanders have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
443 posts
451 battles

Thirty years in the military, over ten years consulting with defense contractors, married forty this coming June...Yeah, I don’t think I need to spend my free time playing a game where someone gives me orders. Thanks anyway, Shippy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
398
[NWOC]
Members
1,072 posts
15,889 battles
3 hours ago, Snargfargle said:

WOWS is organized more like many Amerindian tribes where the "chief" led more by reputation than anything else. If a warrior was charismatic and had proven himself in battle then he would get to be the boss as long his leadership got results and others wanted to follow him.

Well stated on both posts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,261
[TMS]
Members
3,878 posts
38,304 battles
3 hours ago, xriz00 said:

Battle Field 2, Modern combat had a "commander mode" for one of the players. 

Basically it was "carrot" not "stick". The players would get extra exp/coin for taking objectives designated by the commander. The commander could also drop "supplies" ammo and heals for that game or even light vehicles like jeeps. They could also see, satellite like vision. 

The commander would get the ability to mark one capture zone at a time, other players that contest or take that zone with in a time period would get extra "exp and coin points" maybe a "good boy" ribbon.  

For WoW, the extra viewing could be used for spotting of enemy ships. Instead of every ship on the team being able to spot an enemy ship out of range or the rest of the team, the commander would have to mark the ship he wants to be spotted for the rest of the team to see and shoot at, other wise it's only visible to the spotting ship. 

He could drop buffs, the equivalent of upgraded mods, like; dropping a smoke or sonar  "mod" for destroyers, this encourages the destroyer to go to that spot with in a short time period.  Repair parties for Battle ships, speed or radar mods for cruisers, etc...

 

+1

Good times.

Edited by Final8ty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,364
[WPORT]
Members
11,541 posts
15,861 battles
1 hour ago, CV_Jeebies said:

Quite a few players are in clear need of direction.  There's CV players with average damage of 1 drop --- as in 1 solid release capable of being completed in the first 60 seconds.  There's battleships with the same.  Those who can already perform well, don't need direction, but coordination helps.  Unfortunately they're getting fewer and further between.  The quaranteams of late have been performing very poorly.  Stupid mistakes being made -- mistakes nobody should make because it's not a winning move.    For instance, I was capping a base and this fool in a cruiser comes running into the cap firing his guns causing himself to get reset repeatedly and wouldn't stop.  Had he not ran into my torps, we would have lost. Luck would have it he sunk himself turning me pink in the process, but I finished the cap before they were able to get back and hit me.

A player is only in command of the ships from their own port.

No player is entitled to command another player.

Asking for help is very different from attempting to command without consent.  

Each player is a sovereign.

Welcome to World of Warships.  :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,264
[PSP]
[PSP]
Members
15,697 posts
2 minutes ago, Wolfswetpaws said:

Each player is a sovereign.

This applies even to "organized" divisions. For instance, Flambass appears to be the tacit leader of his divisions but his minions are rather mutinous too and tend to do their own thing. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,807
[CYNIC]
Members
3,090 posts
8,742 battles
2 hours ago, Wolfswetpaws said:

A player is only in command of the ships from their own port.

No player is entitled to command another player.

Asking for help is very different from attempting to command without consent.  

Each player is a sovereign.

Welcome to World of Warships.  :-)

So long as you're affecting other's matches, you're going to get feedback some of the time it's required.  It comes with random battles.  If you cannot accept that, there's a mode with NPCs in it that you can't really screw up.

Edited by CV_Jeebies

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,864
[WOLF1]
Beta Testers
13,216 posts
18,753 battles

Battlefield tried this. 

It did not last.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×