Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Admiral_Thrawn_1

New Clan Battle Idea

11 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
12,612 posts
14,320 battles

With the popularity of 1 vs 1 Ranked, and with the Complaints about seeing so many of the same type of ships grouped together. Why not try having Clan battle matches that have the same earnings ratio, but the players engage 1 vs 1 and the Clan’s ranking is determined my overall score compilation of of it’s player’s battles? And since it would not seem right to only have 1 player at a time be able to play CB, have infinite number of players be able to by creating a sort of system that allows players to get into Clan battles at will much like that Ranked Sprint was. So let’s say you had 7 million players that would play CB on a given day, instead of 500,000 battles being played at a time you could have 3.5 million battles in progress which may or may not put too much strain on the server, but could be fun idea as even the very small clans would be able to try playing CB.

This idea would also remove the force multiplier effect some ships have and it would come down to just the skill of the players and how their ships can do solo.

( And yes I realize we don’t likely have 7 million players playing CB at once, but it was fastest way to create the math ratio off the top of my head. And it still gives you the general idea in easy to understand numbers as opposed to having to go digging for CB player participation numbers that may or may not be posted in easy to find place. And yes while WG servers would get overloaded by millions of players there are some notable gaming companies that have their games with millions of players in a unified server so technically it is possible for the numbers in my example to exist.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,179
[PISD]
Members
1,921 posts
6,308 battles

Such idea is neat, but I would Change it a little bit: make it like individual team sport. 
both clan have 5 players, and there is 5 1vs1 in order to get a 3 of 5 and declare one clan winner. Either the 5 players play at the same time, or one after the other with the mon playing one spectating. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
329
[LANCE]
Members
897 posts
6,834 battles

I’m not sure this would change much of what the complaint is about I.e. seeing the same ships over and over again. In 1v1 sprint the meta ships seemed to be Tirpitz/ Massachusetts, Hipper/Eugen or Le Terrible/Le Fantastque so no real change to what some are complaining about in the current CB.

Clans will mostly field the meta ships so they can win. At the beginning of this season it was 3x PR, 3x Stalingrad and a Hak.

I personally prefer the 7v7 no matter what the ship types I play against as it’s still possible to pull out a win even if not fielding the meta lineup. One the best things about playing CB is the co-ordination of teamplay with your clan mates. I’m a better team player than 1v1 player so for me the current 7v7 is a better option.

Just my $0.02

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
12,612 posts
14,320 battles
1 hour ago, Bravo4zero said:

I’m not sure this would change much of what the complaint is about I.e. seeing the same ships over and over again. In 1v1 sprint the meta ships seemed to be Tirpitz/ Massachusetts, Hipper/Eugen or Le Terrible/Le Fantastque so no real change to what some are complaining about in the current CB.

Clans will mostly field the meta ships so they can win. At the beginning of this season it was 3x PR, 3x Stalingrad and a Hak.

I personally prefer the 7v7 no matter what the ship types I play against as it’s still possible to pull out a win even if not fielding the meta lineup. One the best things about playing CB is the co-ordination of teamplay with your clan mates. I’m a better team player than 1v1 player so for me the current 7v7 is a better option.

Just my $0.02

Except that while some ships can be extremely overpowered in team support role of your team is good, they can suddenly be totally different if they have to fight 1 vs 1. Smolensk is an excellent example of this since you take a a Smolensk or 2, smoke them up in good position, and have decent team support and they can murderously hold a flank seemingly indefinitely. But put a Smolensk in 1 vs 1 and suddenly it’s quite a bit weaker.

Stalingrads working together can alternate radar and hydro to have constant defensive and offensive line of sight on the enemy. But alone they have good sized gaps in their coverage.

And the list goes on.

Add in what I learned from 1 vs 1 MM and you could have your Kléber having to face a CL or some other interesting match up like that. And these days the surprise factor of the French DD’s speed has worn off so they can be targeted and sunk.

CV’s might seem OP vs DDs, but what about if I make it to a cap zone in just enough time to smoke up a nice sized smoke screen? It then becomes a game of not even having to seek out the CV as even some nice evasive work for a few minutes will suffice unless the CV wishes to reveal themselves to your DD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,307
[WDS]
[WDS]
Members
4,412 posts
12,646 battles
1 hour ago, Bravo4zero said:

I personally prefer the 7v7 no matter what the ship types I play against as it’s still possible to pull out a win even if not fielding the meta lineup. One the best things about playing CB is the co-ordination of teamplay with your clan mates. I’m a better team player than 1v1 player so for me the current 7v7 is a better option.

Right I understand what your saying . I am different I don't play 7vs7 clan battles much and I am better at 1vs1 so that is a better option for me . I guess you need to rotate the modes because different people like different things .

I can do 7vs 7 CB but I like to see it get changed up different tier different ships allowed different number of ships . This may sound funny but I tend play tight in 7vs7 CB I feel pressure to not let down the team down I know these guys 

It's kind of like golf it's an individual sport so when players play in the Ryder cup they feel immense pressure to preform because there team mates are counting on them . This is why some of the best in the world cant play well in the Ryder cup but you have guys that barley ever win playing great and leading the team to victory .

Edited by clammboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
329
[LANCE]
Members
897 posts
6,834 battles
18 minutes ago, Admiral_Thrawn_1 said:

Except that while some ships can be extremely overpowered in team support role of your team is good, they can suddenly be totally different if they have to fight 1 vs 1. Smolensk is an excellent example of this since you take a a Smolensk or 2, smoke them up in good position, and have decent team support and they can murderously hold a flank seemingly indefinitely. But put a Smolensk in 1 vs 1 and suddenly it’s quite a bit weaker.

Stalingrads working together can alternate radar and hydro to have constant defensive and offensive line of sight on the enemy. But alone they have good sized gaps in their coverage.

And the list goes on.

Add in what I learned from 1 vs 1 MM and you could have your Kléber having to face a CL or some other interesting match up like that. And these days the surprise factor of the French DD’s speed has worn off so they can be targeted and sunk.

CV’s might seem OP vs DDs, but what about if I make it to a cap zone in just enough time to smoke up a nice sized smoke screen? It then becomes a game of not even having to seek out the CV as even some nice evasive work for a few minutes will suffice unless the CV wishes to reveal themselves to your DD.

 

18 minutes ago, clammboy said:

Right I understand what your saying . I am different I don't play 7vs7 clan battles much and I am better at 1vs1 so that is a better option for me . I guess you need to rotate the modes because different people like different things .

I can do 7vs 7 CB but I like to see it get changed up different tier different ships allowed different number of ships . This may sound funny but I tend play tight in 7vs7 CB I feel pressure to not let down the team down I know these guys 

It's kind of like golf it's an individual sport so when players play in the Ryder cup they feel immense pressure to preform because there team mates are counting on them . This is why some of the best in the world cant play well in the Ryder cup but you have guys that barley ever win playing great and leading the team to victory .

You both bring up valid points. I think it would be great to see many different options/modes for CB (and not just the “sprint” CBS) to make it more interesting. A 1v1 “team” event would make a difference. As would different tier CB. Different tier CB would allow smaller clans to take part as some perhaps can’t field a full team of tier 10’s .. the rentals are ok but definitely put the team with rentals at a disadvantage but would still have a “meta” of some sort.

For me, I feel the pressure of playing in a 7v7 team but always put in best effort. If I’m playing particularly badly I’ll step down if someone else is available to fill my spot. In 1v1 I’d feel immense pressure as there’s no one to pick up the slack if I make a mistake BUT I’m all for giving it or any other option a go! It’s all about diversity. I’m not keen on CVs in CB but others enjoy playing CVs so why exclude them? Same as others not having tier 10’s.

Different options/modes can make for some fun games and I’m all for that! I doubt there’ll ever be an “everybody happy” mode but we all have the choice to take part or not. I’ll give any option/mode a go and if it doesn’t suit I’ll try for my clan and just do my best.

Good luck all and stay safe!

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,935
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester
28,325 posts
14,923 battles

The small, 3 vs 3(?) CB was fun and made CB accessible even for clans that have trouble getting the needed players for regular CB.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
12,612 posts
14,320 battles
Just now, BrushWolf said:

The small, 3 vs 3(?) CB was fun and made CB accessible even for clans that have trouble getting the needed players for regular CB.

And that is a good thing to do. But at the same time you run into only being able to field 2 teams hurts larger clans if the teams are smaller. Hence the idea of fielding as many players as you want into Clan Battles is part of my idea. So it helps both small and large clans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,935
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester
28,325 posts
14,923 battles
1 minute ago, Admiral_Thrawn_1 said:

And that is a good thing to do. But at the same time you run into only being able to field 2 teams hurts larger clans if the teams are smaller. Hence the idea of fielding as many players as you want into Clan Battles is part of my idea. So it helps both small and large clans.

They need to do CB like they do ranked with regular interspaced with "sprint". That way the more people have access to CB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Guest
0 posts
1 hour ago, Admiral_Thrawn_1 said:

Except that while some ships can be extremely overpowered in team support role of your team is good, they can suddenly be totally different if they have to fight 1 vs 1. Smolensk is an excellent example of this since you take a a Smolensk or 2, smoke them up in good position, and have decent team support and they can murderously hold a flank seemingly indefinitely. But put a Smolensk in 1 vs 1 and suddenly it’s quite a bit weaker.

Stalingrads working together can alternate radar and hydro to have constant defensive and offensive line of sight on the enemy. But alone they have good sized gaps in their coverage.

And the list goes on.

Add in what I learned from 1 vs 1 MM and you could have your Kléber having to face a CL or some other interesting match up like that. And these days the surprise factor of the French DD’s speed has worn off so they can be targeted and sunk.

CV’s might seem OP vs DDs, but what about if I make it to a cap zone in just enough time to smoke up a nice sized smoke screen? It then becomes a game of not even having to seek out the CV as even some nice evasive work for a few minutes will suffice unless the CV wishes to reveal themselves to your DD.

1.There's pretty much no Smolensk in current CB meta

2. Stalingrad doesn't have hydro

3. Can you really call 1vs1 Clan Battle?

4. Clans are here to promote team play, nuffsaid

 

p.s. on the side note 1v1 was fun, (just for some, just as any mode). I think it should be regular thing, but it should not be considered CB

Edited by SlartiBartFastE2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,307
[WDS]
[WDS]
Members
4,412 posts
12,646 battles
1 hour ago, SlartiBartFastE2 said:

p.s. on the side note 1v1 was fun, (just for some, just as any mode). I think it should be regular thing, but it should not be considered CB

I agree !!!! But 4 vs 4 clan battels or 5 vs 5 even at different tiers would be cool just something to mix it up . It would help a clan like mine that's very relaxed a lot of guys on the east and west coast .

It can be hard to get 7 guys on any given night between the time zones and the fact that most of them don't even want to play CB  . But we do have at least 5 or 6 guys that are always in but we can never get that last one.

Edited by clammboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×