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

Things I think WG should do to encourage more people to stay.

106 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

157
[BOMBL]
[BOMBL]
Beta Testers
165 posts
10,380 battles

Just watched a video by NoZoupForYou, where he was talking about reason people might leave the game. Why are people so obsessed with blaming Russian Bias for everything that wrong with this game?

Here' my list, I would be interested in hearing people's feedback:
 

Things I think WG should do (bear in mind this is just MY opinion)...
 
1. Reduction in MM spread to +/- 1 tier of MM... This would do A LOT to balance out CVs and also revivalise lower tier ships (especially Tier 6/7).
 
2. Skill based MM... Not in the traditional sense, but allocate the 24 players to a team as usual, but then divide those players up into the two team by skill. That way you don't have one team stacked with unicums and another stacked with the potatoes.
 
3. Rework the CV planes... My idea would be to remove the rocket planes... they are just too stupid. Replace them with recon planes, but remove the ability for Torp or DB planes to spot ships (unless they are already spotted by something else, or their AA is on. So that way you remove the ability for CVs to spot AND do damage with the same planes. Obviously CVs would get handsomely rewarded for any spotting damage they acquire through their recon planes. Also it gives players of NON-CVs an incentive to turn off their AA. You have to make the decision if you want to remain unspotted, or shoot down planes. Same for DDs in smoke... I think if the DD should be spotted in smoke if their AA is blasting away!
 
4. Either entirely rework subs, or don't put them in at all... They had a perfectly good sub gameplay back in 2018 Halloween... Why are you messing with something that was good WG?
 
5. Change the way EXP and Credits are given, based on more than just damage farming... BBs should be getting points for TANKING damage. Cruisers are the main damage dealers, and DDs should be rewarded for spotting and playing objectives.
 
6. Encourage MORE teamwork and skill in newer players... Refer previous point. Also encourage more clan participation.
 
7. DO NOT ALLOW PLAYERS TO MUTE CHAT! Newer players sometimes need to hear what they are doing wrong, and also since in game chat is part of the way to facilitate some form of teamwork. Also remove the karma system, it's stupid an broken and does nothing for the game.

Show less

 
  • Cool 8
  • Funny 5
  • Confused 4
  • Boring 14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,177
[HINON]
[HINON]
Members
7,911 posts
11,586 battles
2 minutes ago, Billy_The_Dog said:

2. Skill based MM... Not in the traditional sense, but allocate the 24 players to a team as usual, but then divide those players up into the two team by skill. That way you don't have one team stacked with unicums and another stacked with the potatoes.

youre never getting skill based MM, in any way, shape or form, its just not going to happen

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
26 posts
2,631 battles
22 minutes ago, Billy_The_Dog said:

1. Reduction in MM spread to +/- 1 tier of MM... This would do A LOT to balance out CVs and also revivalise lower tier ships (especially Tier 6/7).

 

22 minutes ago, Billy_The_Dog said:

2. Skill based MM... Not in the traditional sense, but allocate the 24 players to a team as usual, but then divide those players up into the two team by skill. That way you don't have one team stacked with unicums and another stacked with the potatoes.

I think the only issue with these two ideas is a lack of players. Does WoWs have enough players to accomplish a compartmentalized matchmaking system like you propose? What about the super unicums who represent roughly 1% of the community, how will they ever have enough players for a game? Decreasing the MM spread will inevitably increase the number of games overall, as will skill based MM. As for your other ideas, they all seem reasonable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35
[TF_HQ]
[TF_HQ]
Members
86 posts
4,012 battles

How would you work the "Tanking Damage" for BB's? There is a difference between tanking and getting wrecked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
157
[BOMBL]
[BOMBL]
Beta Testers
165 posts
10,380 battles
3 minutes ago, Nemo_Veritas said:

 

What about the super unicums who represent roughly 1% of the community, how will they ever have enough players for a game?

As I said, it's not about completely separating unicums from potatoes, but ensuring that the spread between the two teams in a given match is more even. That way your not increasing the time to get matches, but just preventing the mass of one sided ROFL stomps we've been seeing lately.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
157
[BOMBL]
[BOMBL]
Beta Testers
165 posts
10,380 battles
1 minute ago, Admiral_Ballsey said:

How would you work the "Tanking Damage" for BB's? There is a difference between tanking and getting wrecked.

It's about angling armour and potential damage. If you get wrecked, chances are you've done something wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,707
[WDS]
[WDS]
Members
3,566 posts
11,157 battles
7 minutes ago, Admiral_Ballsey said:

How would you work the "Tanking Damage" for BB's? There is a difference between tanking and getting wrecked.

When you get wrecked you don't tank much damage you get focused and killed quick . You tank lots of damage when you can use heals well and manage to stay alive most of the game . Something I'm still trying to learn to do . 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,439
[WOLFG]
Members
28,979 posts
8,218 battles
28 minutes ago, Billy_The_Dog said:

Change the way EXP and Credits are given, based on more than just damage farming... BBs should be getting points for TANKING damage. Cruisers are the main damage dealers...

I disagree. Not with the idea of redoing XP, but with the idea of BBs being rewarded for tanking damage.

BBs should stay with XP solely based on damage, because that's their shtick, and it's all they do. Being rewarded for tanking is silly IMO, because it takes matters almost completely out of the BB player's hands. Whether or not a BB can tank damage is wholly dependent on the enemy deciding that it's better to spend several minutes trying to sink a ship that only fires once every 30 seconds, or spend much less time sinking a more fragile high DPM ship that may have radar or hydro.

Not only that, but many BBs are designed to fight from range, and specifically positioning yourself to take damage is suicidal, so basically would make those BBs worthless.

In most cases, it regulates itself anyway, as a BB who insists on long-range sniping isn't going to score the damage they would by getting closer.

 

28 minutes ago, Billy_The_Dog said:
 
Encourage MORE teamwork and skill in newer players... Refer previous point. Also encourage more clan participation.
 
It's a nice idea, but the problem with teamwork in this game isn't that nobody wants to do it, but that you get several players who each have their own idea of what should be done, and the other players will typically attempt teamwork on an individual basis with whichever one whose idea they prefer. So you end up with 3 or 4 "teams", all trying to do what they think best. (not sure why it wouldn't let me split the quote here lol)
 
7. DO NOT ALLOW PLAYERS TO MUTE CHAT! Newer players sometimes need to hear what they are doing wrong.

I agree, but as with the previous point, he's going to hear from people that don't know any better themselves, and people that are just plain wrong, as well as people that are correct. How to tell which is which?

Also, not everybody has super typing skills, and is able to type an explanation while fighting their ship.

The place to get advice is not in the middle of battle, it's here, or by PM in port, or divisioning with someone, you can ask for/receive advice over voice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
26 posts
2,631 battles
31 minutes ago, Billy_The_Dog said:

As I said, it's not about completely separating unicums from potatoes, but ensuring that the spread between the two teams in a given match is more even. That way your not increasing the time to get matches, but just preventing the mass of one sided ROFL stomps we've been seeing lately.

I don't work for WG, but I would assume that their primary reason for keeping a wide MM spread is a lack of players. Otherwise, they would implement it to satisfy the community. There may be some sadistic reason behind it to make you spend more money by grinding up the tiers faster, but it's most likely just a lack of players. NA only reaches like 12k players during the day, which may not be enough for such a small matchmaking spread. You would basically be doubling the amount of games compared to the current ratio.

Edited by Nemo_Veritas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
534
[DRFTR]
Beta Testers
2,138 posts

I like #5, hate #7 if wg would at least give me the option to disable global chat I'd be happier.  Even then there is more toxicity in team chat than global, but when global is used more often than not it is for sh#% talk.

Like to see more exp for tanking... and at the same time figure out how to change the damage farming mentality...  too many do not play the objectives...

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
157
[BOMBL]
[BOMBL]
Beta Testers
165 posts
10,380 battles
7 minutes ago, ITZ_ACE_BABY said:

skill based matchmaking will never happen, there are just too many negatives that outweigh the benefits.

So what is a good way to stop the team being constantly stacked? As I said I have NO issue with having 75% WR players and 35% WR players being in the same match, but can WG at least try and not stick all the 75% WR players on the same team and all the 35% WR players on the other? All they are doing is making this gap EVEN LARGER. Bad players are NEVER going to get better f they constantly lose, because they lose the motivation to play well...

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,318
[SIM]
Members
4,928 posts
8,006 battles

I disagree with almost every single suggestion that you make, short of the one where tanking, spotting, and capping should be incentivized with greater rewards. 

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,493 posts
10,830 battles
Just now, Billy_The_Dog said:

So what is a good way to stop the team being constantly stacked? As I said I have NO issue with having 75% WR players and 35% WR players being in the same match, but can WG at least try and not stick all the 75% WR players on the same team and all the 35% WR players on the other? All they are doing is making this gap EVEN LARGER. Bad players are NEVER going to get better f they constantly lose, because they lose the motivation to play well...

its not really achievable without promoting toxicity and even finding a reliable source to get the stats as to who is a good player and to evenly distribute them.

balancing teams as per win rate can be worse because win rate is easily manipulated by playing in a division for all your games therefore your 80% win rate player could be rubbish creating more frustration and toxicity.

wargaming needs to do more towards educating the playerbase, i would very highly recommend a media bar maybe scrolling along the top of the ingame port screen advertising recent youtube videos/livestreams, news and information.This would encourage players to watch and learn but then again ALOT of players in this game already think they know everything. maybe @Hapa_Fodder could pass this idea on or have any feedback to help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
157
[BOMBL]
[BOMBL]
Beta Testers
165 posts
10,380 battles
29 minutes ago, ITZ_ACE_BABY said:

its not really achievable without promoting toxicity and even finding a reliable source to get the stats as to who is a good player and to evenly distribute them.

balancing teams as per win rate can be worse because win rate is easily manipulated by playing in a division for all your games therefore your 80% win rate player could be rubbish creating more frustration and toxicity.

wargaming needs to do more towards educating the playerbase, i would very highly recommend a media bar maybe scrolling along the top of the ingame port screen advertising recent youtube videos/livestreams, news and information.This would encourage players to watch and learn but then again ALOT of players in this game already think they know everything. maybe @Hapa_Fodder could pass this idea on or have any feedback to help.

That makes sense. It's just a shame there are far too many of the new players coming in, who seem to have NO interest in actually learning and getting better. I always wonder at what point does someone 'having fun' become someone trolling everyone else on their team?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,493 posts
10,830 battles
Just now, Billy_The_Dog said:

That makes sense. It's just a shame there are far too many of the new players coming in, who seem to have NO interest in actually learning and getting better. I always wonder at what point does someone 'having fun' become someone trolling everyone else on their team?

if you look at profiles of the worst performing players on your team after a match you will find more then likely they have 5k+ battles, they are just playing to have fun or dont want to improve, it is just random battles just 2 teams of random players with random game intent no rules set to be competitive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
157
[BOMBL]
[BOMBL]
Beta Testers
165 posts
10,380 battles
Just now, ITZ_ACE_BABY said:

if you look at profiles of the worst performing players on your team after a match you will find more then likely they have 5k+ battles, they are just playing to have fun or dont want to improve, it is just random battles just 2 teams of random players with random game intent no rules set to be competitive.

Then it kinda sucks that WG doesn't have Clan Battles and Operations for all tiers active ALL of the time. Honestly if that was the case, I'd NEVER play randoms. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,704
[WG]
Administrator, Developers, Community Department, WG Staff, In AlfaTesters
3,524 posts
13,893 battles
55 minutes ago, ITZ_ACE_BABY said:

its not really achievable without promoting toxicity and even finding a reliable source to get the stats as to who is a good player and to evenly distribute them.

balancing teams as per win rate can be worse because win rate is easily manipulated by playing in a division for all your games therefore your 80% win rate player could be rubbish creating more frustration and toxicity.

wargaming needs to do more towards educating the playerbase, i would very highly recommend a media bar maybe scrolling along the top of the ingame port screen advertising recent youtube videos/livestreams, news and information.This would encourage players to watch and learn but then again ALOT of players in this game already think they know everything. maybe @Hapa_Fodder could pass this idea on or have any feedback to help.

So, the new player experience is COMPLETELY different then back in the day when I started....

Now if you create a new account, there are a bunch of tutorial videos and "how it works" videos in the game that you can click off to.

The problem you run into is people are only going to do research they want to do...

This is why it is important AS A COMMUNITY to discuss mechanics and how to counter them and be open to feedback. And I don't mean, "you're a horrible player go play something else" kind of feedback.

-Hapa

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
534
[DRFTR]
Beta Testers
2,138 posts
21 minutes ago, Hapa_Fodder said:

This is why it is important AS A COMMUNITY to discuss mechanics and how to counter them and be open to feedback. And I don't mean, "you're a horrible player go play something else" kind of feedback.

-Hapa

this community has made it pretty clear of what they think...  there are 2 camps... the leet and the baddies...  and it sure isn't the baddies insulting anyone.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,201
[HEROS]
Members
1,990 posts
17,612 battles

I know you mean well but your going about trying to fix what is not the broken bits.. annoying yes, broken... that is subject to interpretation.

 

The real issue is were doing the same old same old we were doing 4 years ago.  There's more ships and more ship lines, and more gimmicks.  That's all well and good if your looking at a computer 3d combat version of a CCG (Collectable Card Game) which generate sales due to perceived rarity.  If you know about YuGiOh and Magic the Gathering you know about CCG's.   What we do not have is something to do with all the shineys we have collected.  Yes there are ladder competitions, including ranked battle which is actually more "Anti Ladder" play.  Ladder like but keep at it and you will eventually either rank out or give up.

We have clan battles.. but this is not Clan WARS.   it's just battles. only with CLANS... right.. and if your not in a clan, or your clan doesn't have the numbers then you will not be taking part.  Toss in that some clans insist that only players of a certain "skill level" are actually allowed to take part in clan battles and they rapidly become non-inclusive... and that is a problem.. because in gaming that what does not include, chases away. 

The limiting factor in a lack of imagination, and a bit of greed.

If I could wave the magic wand and go back in time 8 to 10 years when world of warships was just getting started in development I would make the following changes.

1. Start in the early pre dreadnought era circa spanish american war... Victorian era!  More Navies, more ships, more room for player national pride.  This creates involvement.  As tiers advance through time you advance to more modern ships.  Keep paper ships to an absolute minimum.  ONLY where need to fill a hole.  Premium/pay ships/special resource ships should never EVER be more powerful than their main tech tree counterparts. 

OP ships are bad for the game.  The ONLY reason we have them is to generate revenue.  They imbalance the game and make for BAD game... in case no one has noticed.  Which if you haven't it's because you won't let your self notice.

2. Create a world map and have wars for possession of resources...  Players do not get to choose their side.  Allow player to form clans and trade resources they win through victory.  Clans do not get to join a factions as a whole.  Trading can only happen IN CLAN.  The reason for this is to keep players from always only picking the perceived "winning" side, or creating the winning side through raw numbers.  They will do this.  I've been gaming for 51 years and I HAVE seen it before. But hey, go ahead, tell me I don't know what I'm talking about.  Feel free to deal with the frustration of learning these lessons yourself.  Have fun!

2a.  Each space/region player do combat in is tier limited...    Ship mixes in these battle follow all current normal rules with the acception being those for battle space that are NOT tier limited.  These zones have an additional requirement and that is specific ship type and tier.   Back once upon a time I used to torture tier X players by purposely fail divisioning to bring a IJN tier II Umikaze with it's 4.8 Km detection range, 8 Km torpedo's and 24 second torp reloads.   Honestly that is THE most fun I have ever had in this game.   There is a word for this type of warfare and it is by far THE most popular type of fighting in traditional table top game play.  Are you good nuff to kick the super powers butt?  Lets find out. 

We need something to actually do with all our shineys.  It is a serious lack in this game.   Collecting for collectings sake gets stale after a few years.  I've all ready hit that point and more and more of you are hitting that point also.   It's not the mechanics that are THE issue though they are or can be issues.

The issue is We Are Boored.   4 years of the same old same old.  That's why I'm playing a whole lot less now.  Some days I don't even log in.  Why bother?  Whats the point?  I am NOT entertained any more and that's what I really log in for.

Edited by TL_Warlord_Roff
  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,715
[SOFOP]
Members
2,439 posts
14,361 battles
3 hours ago, Nemo_Veritas said:

I don't work for WG, but I would assume that their primary reason for keeping a wide MM spread is a lack of players. Otherwise, they would implement it to satisfy the community. There may be some sadistic reason behind it to make you spend more money by grinding up the tiers faster, but it's most likely just a lack of players. NA only reaches like 12k players during the day, which may not be enough for such a small matchmaking spread. You would basically be doubling the amount of games compared to the current ratio.

4 hours ago, Billy_The_Dog said:

2. Skill based MM... Not in the traditional sense, but allocate the 24 players to a team as usual, but then divide those players up into the two team by skill. That way you don't have one team stacked with unicums and another stacked with the potatoes.

You guys are completely and entirely missing the point of #2.  It would have absolutely NOTHING to do with the player population.  It wouldn't matter if it was day or night, and would have a minuscule impact on server times, even when measured over thousands of games.

The idea is, the server picks the 24 players, just as it does now.  Once those players are picked, it attempts to balance them on SOMETHING (win rate, PR, games played, whatever your drink of choice is), and then you divide those 24 players as fairly as possible.

Would it fix all the problems?  No.  Would it take long to program? No.  Would it impact queue times?  No (it would take less than a tenth of a second to balance teams at MOST) Would it at some level help balance games at least a little?  Yes.

Super Basic Example:

24 players selected for a random match, 12 are 60% WR, 12 are 40% (8 BBs, 8 CAs, 8 DDs, all the same tier).  Instead of just randomly throwing them at a team and hoping for the best, you put 6 40's and 6 60's on each team.

Edited by Old_Baldy_One
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,860
[PSP]
[PSP]
Members
12,625 posts
4 hours ago, Billy_The_Dog said:

 reason people might leave the game

Individuals may be leaving WOWS but the player-base as a whole is stable. People usually pick up a game either on a whim, research into something they might like, recommendation, or advertizing. Leaving a game is a lot like getting out of a monthly rental agreement or firing someone who is not working under a contract -- you can do it for any or no reason whatever. The only people who need to be concerned about people leaving a game are the accountants and managers of the gaming company. The individual needs only be concerned if the game is fun.

Edited by Snargfargle
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
157
[BOMBL]
[BOMBL]
Beta Testers
165 posts
10,380 battles
19 minutes ago, Old_Baldy_One said:

You guys are completely and entirely missing the point of #2.  It would have absolutely NOTHING to do with the player population.  It wouldn't matter if it was day or night, and would have a minuscule impact on server times, even when measured over thousands of games.

The idea is, the server picks the 24 players, just as it does now.  Once those players are picked, it attempts to balance them on SOMETHING (win rate, PR, games played, whatever your drink of choice is), and then you divide those 24 players as fairly as possible.

Would it fix all the problems?  No.  Would it take long to program? No.  Would it impact queue times?  No (it would take less than a tenth of a second to balance teams at MOST) Would it at some level help balance games at least a little?  Yes.

Super Basic Example:

24 players selected for a random match, 12 are 60% WR, 12 are 40% (8 BBs, 8 CAs, 8 DDs, all the same tier).  Instead of just randomly throwing them at a team and hoping for the best, you put 6 40's and 6 60's on each team.

I'm glad that SOMEBODY understands me... lol

 

9 minutes ago, Snargfargle said:

Individuals may be leaving WOWS but the player-base as a whole is stable. People usually pick up a game either on a whim, research into something they might like, recommendation, or advertizing. Leaving a game is a lot like getting out of a monthly rental agreement or firing someone who is not working under a contract -- you can do it for any or no reason whatever. The only people who need to be concerned about people leaving a game are the accountants and managers of the gaming company. The individual needs only be concerned if the game is fun.

It's less about overall player numbers and more the fact that the QUALITY of players has diminished. Most newer players have no interest in learning the game or getting better. This overall decline in player skill is putting alot of the older, more experienced players off and driving them away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,847 posts
36,590 battles

We must build a..round table..add a couple of vending machines and microwave ovens for food. Add a huge refrigerator, a massage chair, a Pusheen ball pit, a room that is sound proof so we can scream about bad games, and freaking fast internet.

We must build a Hall to hold all this stuff in. And build a castle above the hall. And we will have.. balance...

"Beg pardon mate?  * Slips a twenty to announcer. 

Okay, balance sort of, but with less intense salty commentary. Yes, Chief Brody, you have a question?

Chief Brody: "We're going to need a bigger boat."

WG: Soon.

Joking aside, MM is all about timing and a good division. Don't have either, then it's going to be a struggle bus.

If there are just 1% super unicums and they are not paying customers, then why is WG catering to them?

Because they are paying customers.

There is an old American saying and oddly it's being used by any foreign business these days.

Money talks and bull crap (added this so it doesn't get censored) walks.

Having said that, I don't think the very few can sustain a business that also caters to everyone else that pays little or nothing.

So I am guessing that the MM disparity is either intended to preset an outcome or players themselves found a way to game the system ( pun intended).

If it is controlled one way or the other and no perceived randomness exists, then it should be looked at immediately.

If it's a program flaw, then fix it. But if all MM battles are truly randomly picked then one side has some really terrible luck. The kind of luck that requires sacrificing a bucket of chicken, maybe Justin Bieber, or appeasing some really twisted, and misunderstood Norse diety.

Maybe bribe a Dev with a mint, still in box, shrink wrapped, model kit of an Imperial Star Destroyer from Star Wars.

If somehow I get a super Yammy in my port, I am sure that the Star Destroyer can be delivered. LOL

And they say Loki is clever...

 

 

Edited by SteelRain_Rifleman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,860
[PSP]
[PSP]
Members
12,625 posts
1 minute ago, Billy_The_Dog said:

It's less about overall player numbers and more the fact that the QUALITY of players has diminished. Most newer players have no interest in learning the game or getting better. This overall decline in player skill is putting a lot of the older, more experienced players off and driving them away.

You perceive the quality of players to diminish as you get better at a game. When you first stated, you might have seen a player as being a really good who you now would perceive as being only so-so in quality. Also, when a video game is new, and most of the playerbase inexperienced, even a halfway-decent player can dominate. Take that same level of player and put him into a mature game and he might be just a mediocre player.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×