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

Philosophy of Co-op

49 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

314
[ICOP]
Members
454 posts
18,302 battles

I have thought, experimented, and discussed co-op play for over a year, and over 12,000 games in co-op - with just under 1000 in randoms (for perspective), and have developed these concepts:

1.  Even if originally intended as a "training mode" for randoms, co-op really isn't that currently.  It fails.  I am very high in PR in co-op, unicum PR in DDs and well above average in all respects except CVs, which I seldom play.  I am slightly below average in Randoms in WR and not great PR there in any ship type.  So this shows me that co-op fails as a training mode, and has to be something else, and therefore is a "different mode" of battle in its own right.  Other people, including posters in this "PVE" sub-forum, seem to substantiate this.

2.  The object of co-op battles is not to win, even a potato is going to win over 90 percent of the time.  So what IS the object?  To me, it seems abundantly clear that the object of the game is to get more damage, more caps, more aircraft kills, more ship kills, than the other green players, bot or human.  It's a race for XP against your allies.  The red bots are just your targets, the other green ships are your competitors.

3.  Despite this competing for the XP, co-op has much less toxicity in the chats than randoms.  It is because we don't depend on each other to win, the win is provided by red bot potato-ness.  No pressure to win means no blame for loss, and much less salt.

4.  Some skills are common to PvE and PvP, but tactics are completely different.  It's not just that being good in co-op doesn't necessarily mean you're good in randoms, it also means that random players are equally likely to not be good in co-op.  We can see that when there is a "directive grind" that sends random players over to co-op and they skew the meta by camping on the border in their full heath BB and create a higher incidence of lost battles.

5.  Green bots are stupider than red bots.  They are as good at seeking and being hit by friendly torps as red bots are at dodging torps.  Green bots are as often as not griefers.

I'm sure I can come up with more, but this is the core of what I've been thinking.  I'm perfectly willing, given good evidence, to change my mind, but these are the conclusions brought about by the evidence I've seen, both personally and by what others say or show in clips.  I hope there can be thoughtful discussion, amplification, etc. without this becoming acrimonious.

 

  • Cool 9
  • Thanks 1
  • Boring 1
  • Meh 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35,664
[HINON]
Alpha Tester
25,766 posts
21,666 battles
4 minutes ago, Thunder_Feet said:

 So what IS the object?

Visiting wholesale violent murder upon the bots as a catharsis of the stress of everyday life.

Edited by Lert
  • Cool 7
  • Funny 3
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
314
[ICOP]
Members
454 posts
18,302 battles
Just now, Lert said:

Vsiting wholesale violent murder upon the bots as a catharsis of the stress of everyday life.

In other words, fun.  Agreed, but doing a good job of what you say leads to better stats, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35,664
[HINON]
Alpha Tester
25,766 posts
21,666 battles
Just now, Thunder_Feet said:

In other words, fun.  Agreed, but doing a good job of what you say leads to better stats, right?

Who cares about those? No, seriously, what do they matter? Good stats won't make the price of gas go down, won't affect the price of bread, won't cure cancer, won't bring bad your dead dog, won't get you laid any more, won't ease traffic on the commute home after a hard day's work ... Why care?

  • Cool 3
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
314
[ICOP]
Members
454 posts
18,302 battles
1 minute ago, Lert said:

Who cares about those? No, seriously, what do they matter? Good stats won't make the price of gas go down, won't affect the price of bread, won't cure cancer, won't bring bad your dead dog, won't get you laid any more, won't ease traffic on the commute home after a hard day's work ... Why care?

Because we're competitive creatures by nature?  I get satisfaction when I'm top dawg on my "team".  It isn't the main part of the fun, but 'tis icing on the cake.  Actually, one of the reasons I like co-op is that my fun killing bots is NOT directly causing another human to have "un-fun".

BTW:  I have a black kitty looks just like your avatar.  I have a black kitty Hawaiian shirt on right now!

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
448 posts
16,540 battles
11 minutes ago, Lert said:

Visiting wholesale violent murder upon the bots as a catharsis of the stress of everyday life.

^^ This!! :cap_rambo::fish_viking::Smile_izmena::Smile_trollface:

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35,664
[HINON]
Alpha Tester
25,766 posts
21,666 battles
6 minutes ago, Thunder_Feet said:

Because we're competitive creatures by nature?  I get satisfaction when I'm top dawg on my "team".

A very shallow and fleeting feeling though, barely worth registering. Maybe it's different for you - probably is, but personally I don't really care about where I end up on the team. I have nothing to prove to others or myself and no need to be 'better' than someone else at something that ultimately doesn't matter.

I'm here to visit wholesale violent murder and enjoy the catharsis that brings. That's what I want out of this game, and anything else doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things. I don't seek greater meaning in a silly online pixel game. This philosophy has kept the game enjoyable for me for 5+ years now, while others whine, complain, throw tantrums and leave.

  • Cool 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,125 posts
7,630 battles
35 minutes ago, Lert said:

Who cares about those? No, seriously, what do they matter? Good stats won't make the price of gas go down, won't affect the price of bread, won't cure cancer, won't bring bad your dead dog, won't get you laid any more EVER!  NOT EVER!  NOT EVEN IN YOUR BEST FANTASY!  DID I MENTION NOT EVER?  NOPE, NOT HAPENNING!  EVER!, won't ease traffic on the commute home after a hard day's work ... Why care?

There.  I fixed it for you.  :Smile_trollface:

  • Funny 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,454
[PVE]
Members
11,069 posts
19,170 battles
49 minutes ago, Thunder_Feet said:

I get satisfaction when I'm top dawg on my "team"

I am the "Sovereigndawg" on my team every time. I watch my stats to see if I am improving or static. The Pommern has surprisingly been doing a great job at improving my stats. I generally find BBs are sometimes hard to score high, with good consistency. The Pommern is definitely the exception.

Edited by Sovereigndawg
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
181
[WOLFO]
[WOLFO]
Members
606 posts
6,254 battles

Co-Op is just straight-up fun. The two realms are COMPLETELY different. Op's is just the beautiful extension of the dynamic in Co-Op, for me. To be able to attack ground targets, move as a group, the wolf-pack 'feel' of missions. It embodies the best in this game, imho. The only real part of the game worth spending money on(again, imho). I like stats. I'll admit. I don't place any real emphasis on them. I do however pay attention to my accuracy.

 

OP, you make excellent points. @Thunder_Feet

Edited by iamSamoth
  • Cool 2
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,637
[WPORT]
Members
9,779 posts
14,310 battles
1 hour ago, Thunder_Feet said:

Because we're competitive creatures by nature?

The name of the battle mode is "Co-op", as in cooperation.

Let that sink in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,637
[WPORT]
Members
9,779 posts
14,310 battles
42 minutes ago, Captain_Slattery said:

Also, Co-op rocks!

:cap_look::cap_like:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
314
[ICOP]
Members
454 posts
18,302 battles
Just now, Wolfswetpaws said:

The name of the battle mode is "Co-op", as in cooperation.

Let that sink in.

It has.  And the irony of it being named that isn't lost on me.  There is no cooperation, none.  Zip.  Bupkus.  Doesn't exist.  Especially with green bots.  It's strictly a competition to hit the most targets more effectively than the other greens.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,637
[WPORT]
Members
9,779 posts
14,310 battles
3 minutes ago, Thunder_Feet said:

It has.  And the irony of it being named that isn't lost on me.  There is no cooperation, none.  Zip.  Bupkus.  Doesn't exist.  Especially with green bots.  It's strictly a competition to hit the most targets more effectively than the other greens.

I feel that says more about you than about Co-op or any other player.

  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
314
[ICOP]
Members
454 posts
18,302 battles

Let me clarify that I enjoy co-op immensely, but I enjoy it based on my understanding of what it IS.  Not what it was intended to be or what it is named.  The fact that it fails as a trainer for randoms and that the cooperation quotient approaches zero, doesn't make me enjoy it less.  Also, just because cooperation isn't there to be found doesn't mean I do any dirty tricks to beat my competitors on the green team.  I just try my best to compete fairly, and do it better than them.  Often I don't, frequently I do.

4 minutes ago, Wolfswetpaws said:

I feel that says more about you than about Co-op or any other player.

You're entitled to your feelings, but nobody is there to help you, that I have ever seen.  They are there to entertain themselves, in whatever way they find their entertainment.  Extending courtesy yes, but I courteously will shoot anything red to get points.  I won't intentionally block your shot or do anything underhanded to get more points, but I'm there to be the best bot basher I can be.  What you think of me because I have a "realpolitik" outlook on the game means very little to me.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,672
[SALVO]
Members
26,304 posts
30,247 battles
1 hour ago, Thunder_Feet said:

I have thought, experimented, and discussed co-op play for over a year, and over 12,000 games in co-op - with just under 1000 in randoms (for perspective), and have developed these concepts:

1.  Even if originally intended as a "training mode" for randoms, co-op really isn't that currently.  It fails.  I am very high in PR in co-op, unicum PR in DDs and well above average in all respects except CVs, which I seldom play.  I am slightly below average in Randoms in WR and not great PR there in any ship type.  So this shows me that co-op fails as a training mode, and has to be something else, and therefore is a "different mode" of battle in its own right.  Other people, including posters in this "PVE" sub-forum, seem to substantiate this.

2.  The object of co-op battles is not to win, even a potato is going to win over 90 percent of the time.  So what IS the object?  To me, it seems abundantly clear that the object of the game is to get more damage, more caps, more aircraft kills, more ship kills, than the other green players, bot or human.  It's a race for XP against your allies.  The red bots are just your targets, the other green ships are your competitors.

3.  Despite this competing for the XP, co-op has much less toxicity in the chats than randoms.  It is because we don't depend on each other to win, the win is provided by red bot potato-ness.  No pressure to win means no blame for loss, and much less salt.

4.  Some skills are common to PvE and PvP, but tactics are completely different.  It's not just that being good in co-op doesn't necessarily mean you're good in randoms, it also means that random players are equally likely to not be good in co-op.  We can see that when there is a "directive grind" that sends random players over to co-op and they skew the meta by camping on the border in their full heath BB and create a higher incidence of lost battles.

5.  Green bots are stupider than red bots.  They are as good at seeking and being hit by friendly torps as red bots are at dodging torps.  Green bots are as often as not griefers.

I'm sure I can come up with more, but this is the core of what I've been thinking.  I'm perfectly willing, given good evidence, to change my mind, but these are the conclusions brought about by the evidence I've seen, both personally and by what others say or show in clips.  I hope there can be thoughtful discussion, amplification, etc. without this becoming acrimonious.

 

1. It depends on what amount of training is intended.  If the intent is to provide you with enemies that (sorta) fight back and allow you to learn to aim your  guns and use torpedoes, then coop succeeds as a training tool, for the most part.  OTOH, if you're looking for it to teach you more advanced stuff like positioning, coop doesn't provide that sort of training.

2. Sorry, I still think that the object is to win.  But in the process of seeking to win, yes, it's also a bit of a contest to see which player can farm the most damage, kills, XP, etc.

3. Coop isn't particularly competitive.  Thus, it doesn't usually attract the more competitive players.  And more competitive players have a stronger desire to win, which makes them much more likely to get salty when it appears to them that some of their team members are pulling their weight to help their team win.

4. I haven't seen all that many PvP players who play in PvE do this sort of stuff.  I play both PvP and PvE.  And I know that playing PVE using PvP tactics is a terrible idea.  IMO, if one is a halfway decent player, you should take your BB straight into brawls against bot BBs, because that's how you rack up the most damage and kills, etc.  Generally speaking, the best way to play coop is to learn how the bots play and then shape your decisions to use the  bots' AI against them.

5.  I don't think that this is true.  I think that it only seems true.  Also, you have to remember that the bot AI is highly limited, and they don't hold their fire just because a friendly might intercept the bots' torpedoes.  The smartest thing you can do to avoid getting hit by friendly bot torps, is to never get between friendly and enemy bots.

 

A point that I often make in battle chat in coop is to protect your friendly bots.  Try to not let them die uselessly.  Bot vs bot engagements often tend to be coin flips.  So IMO it's best to not let any friendly bots go off on their own to 1v1 enemy bots.  Try to give them supporting fire, and perhaps you'll sink the red bot before it sinks your green bot.

And a related point is to look at friendly bots as your screening vessels.  Let them  be your meat shields.  But also try to support them as I said above, since the longer your meat shield stays alive, the longer it can do its job for you.

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,672
[SALVO]
Members
26,304 posts
30,247 battles
31 minutes ago, Thunder_Feet said:

It has.  And the irony of it being named that isn't lost on me.  There is no cooperation, none.  Zip.  Bupkus.  Doesn't exist.  Especially with green bots.  It's strictly a competition to hit the most targets more effectively than the other greens.

For what it's worth, I don't "cooperate" with green bots.  I try to use them to my advantage.  But at the same time, I don't like to see them go off by themselves to  1v1 some red bot.  I try to support my local green bots so that they stay alive longer and can act as my meat shield longer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
314
[ICOP]
Members
454 posts
18,302 battles
12 minutes ago, Crucis said:

1. It depends on what amount of training is intended.  If the intent is to provide you with enemies that (sorta) fight back and allow you to learn to aim your  guns and use torpedoes, then coop succeeds as a training tool, for the most part.  OTOH, if you're looking for it to teach you more advanced stuff like positioning, coop doesn't provide that sort of training.

2. Sorry, I still think that the object is to win.  But in the process of seeking to win, yes, it's also a bit of a contest to see which player can farm the most damage, kills, XP, etc.

3. Coop isn't particularly competitive.  Thus, it doesn't usually attract the more competitive players.  And more competitive players have a stronger desire to win, which makes them much more likely to get salty when it appears to them that some of their team members are pulling their weight to help their team win.

4. I haven't seen all that many PvP players who play in PvE do this sort of stuff.  I play both PvP and PvE.  And I know that playing PVE using PvP tactics is a terrible idea.  IMO, if one is a halfway decent player, you should take your BB straight into brawls against bot BBs, because that's how you rack up the most damage and kills, etc.  Generally speaking, the best way to play coop is to learn how the bots play and then shape your decisions to use the  bots' AI against them.

5.  I don't think that this is true.  I think that it only seems true.  Also, you have to remember that the bot AI is highly limited, and they don't hold their fire just because a friendly might intercept the bots' torpedoes.  The smartest thing you can do to avoid getting hit by friendly bot torps, is to never get between friendly and enemy bots.

 

A point that I often make in battle chat in coop is to protect your friendly bots.  Try to not let them die uselessly.  Bot vs bot engagements often tend to be coin flips.  So IMO it's best to not let any friendly bots go off on their own to 1v1 enemy bots.  Try to give them supporting fire, and perhaps you'll sink the red bot before it sinks your green bot.

And a related point is to look at friendly bots as your screening vessels.  Let them  be your meat shields.  But also try to support them as I said above, since the longer your meat shield stays alive, the longer it can do its job for you.

 

 

Good points made, but I still think the fun is in being the best on the team as often as possible.

Yes, sometimes supporting another player, even a green bot, is a good idea, but in your development of that idea, it's still based on what you get out of it (a longer lasting meat shield) so is it really co-operation or simply using the other player (bot) as a tool?  I don't do anything intentional to other players because of an ethos I have, not because there is anything in the meta itself to reward being a cooperative player.

And, I might add, I have mostly been treated with courtesy by other co-op players.  Not so much in randoms.  But again, I don't see courtesy or even basic "fair play" as cooperation.  Divisions with a voice chat is cooperation, sure - but I see one division in about every 40 games of co-op.

EDIT:  As to your point 4, I seem to see the BBs do that a lot, particularly on weekends, and if you look at the stats of the players who do camp in the rear, typically they play more randoms than co-op.  I may be making a fallacious "post hoc proper hoc" conclusion here, but it seems to me co-op "mains" know you can't do much in co-op if you're in the rear with the gear.

Edited by Thunder_Feet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,286
[GWG]
Members
7,580 posts
14,440 battles

There are the two major personality types.

-One type avoids personal drama..  They are your Co-Op mains.  They enjoy collecting and playing with these toys without making enemies out of people. 

-Another type wants to compete with other real people, which is far more emotional as the risk of losing is a dreadful and obvious thing.  Instead of losing in front of 8 other people, you are losing in front of 24.  Eleven of those 24 might be blaming YOU for that loss.
Emotional drama is such great fun.  So they might go into denial and lash back at others, claim they are cheating, call them cowards.

In Co-Op, on the rare occasions there is a loss, there are only 8 others (max) that are looking, and they are just as much at fault as you.  They might be at fault like I was once when I killed 3 bots and rammed a forth..  then realized there was only one other low health green ship left against 3 red... 
Guess I should have looked at the score board before going in for that ram.  But I was in a Varyag !!   lol
But since all 8 of us are equally at fault, we'd be more inclined to forget the loss and move on.

 

  • Cool 5
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
314
[ICOP]
Members
454 posts
18,302 battles
4 minutes ago, AVR_Project said:

There are the two major personality types.

-One type avoids personal drama..  They are your Co-Op mains.  They enjoy collecting and playing with these toys without making enemies out of people. 

-Another type wants to compete with other real people, which is far more emotional as the risk of losing is a dreadful and obvious thing.  Instead of losing in front of 8 other people, you are losing in front of 24.  Eleven of those 24 might be blaming YOU for that loss.
Emotional drama is such great fun.  So they might go into denial and lash back at others, claim they are cheating, call them cowards.

In Co-Op, on the rare occasions there is a loss, there are only 8 others (max) that are looking, and they are just as much at fault as you.  They might be at fault like I was once when I killed 3 bots and rammed a forth..  then realized there was only one other low health green ship left against 3 red... 
Guess I should have looked at the score board before going in for that ram.  But I was in a Varyag !!   lol
But since all 8 of us are equally at fault, we'd be more inclined to forget the loss and move on.

 

I think this is pretty well said.  I'm sort of a combination of the two types.  I don't care for the drama, but I do care about improving, and that requires stats.  Also, I have done what you describe exactly - rammed for that 4th or 5th kill only to notice I was the last human green ship alive.  And I felt like the resultant loss was my fault, too.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,307
[WOLF9]
Wiki Lead
16,286 posts
4,773 battles
2 hours ago, Thunder_Feet said:

 I get satisfaction when I'm top dawg on my "team".  It isn't the main part of the fun, but 'tis icing on the cake. 

2 hours ago, Lert said:

A very shallow and fleeting feeling though, barely worth registering. Maybe it's different for you - probably is, but personally I don't really care about where I end up on the team. I have nothing to prove to others or myself and no need to be 'better' than someone else at something that ultimately doesn't matter.

An interesting counterpoint.

I, like Thunder_Feet, work in Co-op to be top dawg.  But in the other PVE mode, Scenarios, while that is nice, I get more satisfaction from the team 5-starring the Op.  As described, Co-op is a form of PvP; Scenarios is T(eam)vE. 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,439
[PVE]
[PVE]
Members
9,762 posts
25,516 battles

Co-op players are literally competing against one another for points. I think people have understood that for a long while. The only time you really see cooperation between players is if someone is needing help completing a mission or those rare occasions when the red bots get the upper hand. The mode really shines in those moments and the people are usually just so helpful and nice. Over the years have had players who were killed by the bots, cheering me on, giving me information about the surviving bots, and offering helpful advice. I have seen a few buttheads in PvE, but it is so rare that when it does occur, it can be shocking. 

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
889
[CO-OP]
Members
2,306 posts
28,644 battles

We are the warriors wiping the planet clean of the bot scourge. We will never rest until they are all dead... especially that absolute swine :Feldt  

 

That and it's darn good fun!

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×