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

Low Tier Random Battles infested with Bots

46 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

483
[1IF]
Banned
436 posts
1,430 battles

I thought WG had sunk to as low as they could but, No, WG has sunk lower.

Bots in low tier battles just to speed up random battle starts (shorten queue times)?

If I wanted to play versus Bots I'd play in co-op battles.

Is there some problem with players attention spans that they can't wait 2-3 or, heaven forbid, up to 5 minutes for a battle?

This idea of forcing Bot AI play into low tier random battles is utter garbage.

 I much prefer 1vs1, 2vs2, 3vs3, etc real player mini battles & I will wait up to 5 minutes for same.

 

 

  • Cool 5
  • Haha 2
  • Boring 2
  • Meh 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,558
[TARK]
Members
6,660 posts
2,529 battles
36 minutes ago, BlackAngelCom said:

It loosens up the que and so helps with the CV problem.

Its just a bandaid...nothing is really solved and more problems are created.

  • Cool 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,794
[AXANR]
Members
3,633 posts
22,452 battles
1 hour ago, Antean said:

I thought WG had sunk to as low as they could but, No, WG has sunk lower.

Bots in low tier battles just to speed up random battle starts (shorten queue times)?

If I wanted to play versus Bots I'd play in co-op battles.

Is there some problem with players attention spans that they can't wait 2-3 or, heaven forbid, up to 5 minutes for a battle?

This idea of forcing Bot AI play into low tier random battles is utter garbage.

 I much prefer 1vs1, 2vs2, 3vs3, etc real player mini battles & I will wait up to 5 minutes for same.

It's great for stat padding, though. I've been harvesting achievements and racking up 100K+ games in Clemson. 

  • Cool 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
141
[GOCRY]
Members
413 posts

Hmm, 2v2 and 3v3 with CVs in every game?  That doesn’t really sound better to me.  I mean, I prefer to not have bots in random, but I think I prefer full or at least semi-full battles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
337
[WOLFG]
Members
552 posts
12,673 battles
7 hours ago, poeticmotion said:

It's great for stat padding, though. I've been harvesting achievements and racking up 100K+ games in Clemson. 

Seen your comment, decided to try it.  Took the Tachiama Lima (I know it's spelled incorrectly, that tier 2 Japan DD, lol) into a battle to try it out. Got Kraken Unleashed, Confederate and First Blood, lol. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,740
[INTEL]
Members
13,073 posts
36,080 battles

This is good. Maybe if enough of you go wild on bots like that, they will reconsider this decision. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,558
[TARK]
Members
6,660 posts
2,529 battles
7 hours ago, SeaGladius said:

Hmm, 2v2 and 3v3 with CVs in every game?  That doesn’t really sound better to me.  I mean, I prefer to not have bots in random, but I think I prefer full or at least semi-full battles.

Since I grind all the low tier ships to build captains (I want a 10 point captain by the time I leave tier 5)...
 

...this is not true.

 

WG's assertion that a large number of low tier battles are less than 12 a side is also NOT TRUE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
389
[O40C]
[O40C]
Beta Testers
880 posts
5,907 battles
9 hours ago, BlackAngelCom said:

It loosens up the que and so helps with the CV problem.

But bots are also stupid and I think you farm a lot less xp off of them. At least that's been my experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
141
[GOCRY]
Members
413 posts
44 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

Since I grind all the low tier ships to build captains (I want a 10 point captain by the time I leave tier 5)...
 

...this is not true.

 

WG's assertion that a large number of low tier battles are less than 12 a side is also NOT TRUE.

What isn’t true?  I’m just stated my opinion, so I can assure you, it is true.  That is in fact how I feel about having bots round out teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,558
[TARK]
Members
6,660 posts
2,529 battles
26 minutes ago, SeaGladius said:

What isn’t true?  I’m just stated my opinion, so I can assure you, it is true.  That is in fact how I feel about having bots round out teams.

I meant the assertion that MM takes too long for low tiers. WG is making an excuse of this lie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
141
[GOCRY]
Members
413 posts

I played a Random battle in the Tier 3 Romulus last might, and it took over 2:40 before the battle started.  There were plenty of players available and the game still had bots in it.

You can only put so many constraints on your system before it starts to get jammed  up and you need to compromise something.  In the case of low tier battles, I think its appropriate to prioritize the wants/needs of new players over us veterans.  We have all the high tiers to play in, after all.  When I play low tiers, it’s because I’m grinding a new line, and I’m only going to spend 10-20 games there before I get to Tier 5.  If those games aren’t as high quality for me, but some new player doesn’t get deleted by a veteran and decides to stick around longer than a few games, then it’s hard to argue with WG’s reasoning.

BTW, in that battle last night, we ended up with 2 BBs left alive at the end of the battle. 1 of those was a bot, and rather than do anything useful, it sailed way around the outside of the map to get to the far cap.  If that had been a player, the BBs could have worked together to maybe trap the sole remaining DD on the red team and we would have won.  I still stand by my opinion that having a few bots in game is better than smaller games without them.  But again, that is just my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
386 posts
19,453 battles

Just consider it as a kind of hybrid Co-op mode where you can earn signal flags (and more XP).

This is a much better situation than 6v6 Randoms with 2 CVs each.

It's still 2 CVs each, but at least it's 12v12.

The best thing about having bots in Randoms is that they're predictable... you're already aware up front that they're suicidal YOLOs.

You can get mad at a human team mate for that kind of behavior, whereas the bot just doesn't know any other way, so you can't blame it.

Also, in my experience, recently I've had to wait four to five minutes just to get into a half-bot T4 Random. Not complaining about it, though.

Edited by Ziggy_Sprague
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,929
[WOLF9]
Privateers
13,809 posts
4,631 battles
13 hours ago, Antean said:

Is there some problem with players attention spans that they can't wait 2-3 or, heaven forbid, up to 5 minutes for a battle?

Bots aren't pulled in until the first player in the queue has waited three minutes. 

I too have enjoyed short-team battles, but I'm not going to complain about bots.  Some of my best enemies are bots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
595 posts
15,625 battles

My question is why would anyone want to spend 3 - 5 minutes in queue just to play a battle?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,558
[TARK]
Members
6,660 posts
2,529 battles
43 minutes ago, ol_Cajun said:

My question is why would anyone want to spend 3 - 5 minutes in queue just to play a battle?

I remember when a 20 minute wait for a starcraft battle was short...

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
595 posts
15,625 battles
1 hour ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

I remember when a 20 minute wait for a starcraft battle was short...

May the stars reward you for your patience. Salute.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
398
[DOG]
Members
654 posts
17,148 battles
16 hours ago, Antean said:

I thought WG had sunk to as low as they could but, No, WG has sunk lower.

Bots in low tier battles just to speed up random battle starts (shorten queue times)?

If I wanted to play versus Bots I'd play in co-op battles.

Is there some problem with players attention spans that they can't wait 2-3 or, heaven forbid, up to 5 minutes for a battle?

This idea of forcing Bot AI play into low tier random battles is utter garbage.

 I much prefer 1vs1, 2vs2, 3vs3, etc real player mini battles & I will wait up to 5 minutes for same.

 

 

Yes. People legit complain if they gotta wait more then a minute now. I had a boomer clan mate do it. Society turned into gotta have it right this second 20 years ago. It's a side effect of capitalism and the need for short term profit.

No one plays below tier 5 anymore.

  • Meh 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12,073
[ARGSY]
Members
20,204 posts
14,348 battles
3 minutes ago, MackDye said:

It's a side effect of capitalism and the need for short term profit.

No, and no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,558
[TARK]
Members
6,660 posts
2,529 battles
1 hour ago, ol_Cajun said:

May the stars reward you for your patience. Salute.

Its actually why I stopped playing Starcraft...I got tired of people quitting early and acting like children in game.

Im getting old.

1 hour ago, MackDye said:

 

No one plays below tier 5 anymore.

Guess Im noone.

You think new lines grind themselves?

You think Im stupid enough to spend freexp on skipping the grind?

The grind is the game. Why would you skip the game?

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41
[N2O]
[N2O]
Members
114 posts
4,342 battles

World of Warships is getting less popular. There aren't many new players so they have to fill the battles with bots. The problem is that [edited] is getting all the new players.

Edited by MockingBird94

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
5,263 posts
9,967 battles

Over a year ago I tried to go up a new line and could not because I didn't want to play coop games and random had too few people for a game.  Others have complained over the last year + but somehow fixing that is "bad"....  wow - truly they can't win at any time since the player base can't be remotely consistent.

Edited by CylonRed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,394
[WOLFG]
Members
9,634 posts
8,629 battles
23 minutes ago, MockingBird94 said:

Oof. They censored part of my post.

That word (well, those two words) is auto censored.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41
[N2O]
[N2O]
Members
114 posts
4,342 battles
1 minute ago, DrHolmes52 said:

That word (well, those two words) is auto censored.

I was talking about the other game made by another Russian company.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×