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

WG you have 2 audiences. Time to separate RNG from Skill

80 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

837
[-TKS-]
[-TKS-]
Members
987 posts
7,970 battles

**I'm not going to waste time with all the sugar coating**

This game is ruining itself by trying to cater to two different audiences.

  • You have people who try harder; they want to be at the top, they don't think too much about the models, they get absolutely pissed about RNG saving people who make bad decisions, and they could play at 200 APM and multi-task if given the opportunity.
  • On the other, you have players who are more casual; they take it slower, they probably play for historical value, and they just looked up what APM means.

There are continuous references that WG believes players would get confused from multi-tasking. WG, you are talking about the casual players. Let's call a spade a spade right now; you keep the game dumbed down for this group. 

And that is fine! However, there is a place for that, and it's called CO-OP. In PvP, you want to be rewarded for your effort.

"Oh we don't want things to work differently and have a game within a game." What was that halloween thing then? What are these power-up things you clan brawls and such? You have 2 AUDIENCES. 

ABOUT RNG:

Now, I'm a CV player. 

*Wait for the downvote*

I think these things are overpowered. Not by damage, but by capability and influence. I love the MvR. It's opportunistic and hard to torp Destroyers. The AP bombs were too strong and easy-ish to lineup. Instead of making it HARDER to line up the shot, INSTEAD of weakening the outright damage, WHAT DO YOU DO? You make the circle bigger so RNG plays a bigger role. No skill adjustment because we don't want things to be harder for casuals; no, we make it so it is more random. Well Done!

Make bombing more difficult. Make a small reticle, and make it move in a quick circle. Have the reticle dance, anything! But stop with this bigger reticle stuff, it's ridiculous.

Give the ships manual AA already!

 

Again, 2 audiences. Move your RNG fixes to COOP, and give players multitasking and skill challenges in a PvP world.

  • Cool 7
  • Funny 1
  • Thanks 7
  • Haha 1
  • Sad 1
  • Boring 9
  • Meh 19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,338
[SALVO]
Members
6,969 posts
5,521 battles

The problem derives from:

* Most players are of the casual type 

* Apparently PvP players expend more money in the game 

Correlate both conditions and of course we end up with the current model. Be the casual, will save you a lot of disappointment.

 

 

 

Edited by ArIskandir
lack of clarity, confusing statement
  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,206
[KWF]
Members
5,792 posts
7,007 battles

RNG is what keeps a potato from getting trashed every single time by a skilled player. Skilled players are a small minority compared to the potatoes, potatoes with wallets I might add. Besides I'm convinced WoWs is making alot of money by purposefully frustrating you to get to the new premium/broken tech tree ship to live out your power fantasy. This has even more power the lower skilled you are.

14 minutes ago, Merc_R_Us said:

Now, I'm a CV player. 

*Wait for the downvote*

Have an upvote.

Edited by warheart1992

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,121
[PVE]
Members
5,095 posts
22,557 battles

OK, I gave you a down vote as you seemed to expect:  I hate to disappoint you !

Look, this is an Arcade cooperative shooter..........not a first world competitive game.  If it were, and it most assuredly isn't, there would be a "skill progression system" in place; Leader boards for every mode of play; a skill level to buy the meta or OP ships; and, skill gates to play the upper tiers......   Do you see any of that?    Heck, the game is as far away from being a "meritocracy" as any game I have ever played !   Grand Mothers have been buying younger kids tier 10 ships for almost a year now !!!  Those younger kids are playing PVP.......Hello !!!

See this game on the NACE list?  See Universities hiring eSports coaches for WoWs????   :cap_cool:  Nope, I don't think so........   So please, take your Carrier and have whatever fun you can because, this game isn't even remotely "serious...."  :cap_haloween:

Edited by Asym_KS
  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1
  • Boring 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
837
[-TKS-]
[-TKS-]
Members
987 posts
7,970 battles
21 minutes ago, Asym_KS said:

OK, I gave you a down vote as you seemed to expect:  I hate to disappoint you !

Look, this is an Arcade cooperative shooter..........not a first world competitive game.  If it were, and it most assuredly isn't, there would be a "skill progression system" in place; Leader boards for every mode of play; a skill level to buy the meta or OP ships; and, skill gates to play the upper tiers......   Do you see any of that?    Heck, the game is as far away from being a "meritocracy" as any game I have ever played !   Grand Mothers have been buying younger kids tier 10 ships for almost a year now !!!  Those younger kids are playing PVP.......Hello !!!

See this game on the NACE list?  See Universities hiring eSports coaches for WoWs????   :cap_cool:  Nope, I don't think so........   So please, take your Carrier and have whatever fun you can because, this game isn't even remotely "serious...."  :cap_haloween:

I see players having Ranks, I see Clan Battles, I see leagues... But you don't consider those competitive? hm.

I don't think using universities e-sports is valid. How many games are competitive that don't have an esports team... 

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
837
[-TKS-]
[-TKS-]
Members
987 posts
7,970 battles
1 hour ago, ArIskandir said:

The problem is:

* Most players are of the casual type 

* Apparently PvP players expend more money in the game 

Correlate both conditions and of course we end up with the current model. Be the casual, will save you a lot of dissapointment.

 

 

 

I'm really curious how many players left or didn't dive in deep because there's too much rng, it's too casual, etc. It just seems like they promote clan battles and brawls, they adjust ship parameters ever so slightly for balance; all these things that suggest they take it seriously, and yet they think players cant multi task at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,433
[WOLF1]
Beta Testers
12,339 posts
17,511 battles
41 minutes ago, Merc_R_Us said:

I'm really curious how many players left or didn't dive in deep because there's too much rng, it's too casual, etc. It just seems like they promote clan battles and brawls, they adjust ship parameters ever so slightly for balance; all these things that suggest they take it seriously, and yet they think players cant multi task at all.

RNG adds tension and tension keeps things interesting. Those random epic fails and those random dev strikes makes for exciting and memorable game play. This of course is a well known element in game design and why you see it in so many games.

Roll to hit. Some of the best moments in D&D for example are those natural 20's or those epic fumbles. Great stuff.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,121
[PVE]
Members
5,095 posts
22,557 battles
41 minutes ago, Merc_R_Us said:

I see players having Ranks, I see Clan Battles, I see leagues... But you don't consider those competitive? hm.

I don't think using universities e-sports is valid How many games are competitive t.hat don't have an esports team... 

Ah, the ones that have "professional contracts for eSports players...."    This game isn't a meritocracy at all.  Skill isn't a game requirement.  Ranked is all about luck and RNG.....some have demonstrated that with examples in the forum.  Even I have "tried Ranked" and it was all about the team you are placed on.   We don't do Clan Battles.  There's no point...........no real value to do so........ 

I even posted an eSport's job description and salary expectation last year for the doubters.  Every semester, when I was working there, the eSports "club" had 250-300 students actively involved.  We had "angle capitalists" researching investing in regional, State and University teams.   That is what eSports is and what will drive eSports into the Olympics someday.....  A multi-billion dollar business with NFL style contracts..........

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
837
[-TKS-]
[-TKS-]
Members
987 posts
7,970 battles
19 minutes ago, paradat said:

RNG adds tension and tension keeps things interesting. Those random epic fails and those random dev strikes makes for exciting and memorable game play. This of course is a well known element in game design and why you see it in so many games.

Roll to hit. Some of the best moments in D&D for example are those natural 20's or those epic fumbles. Great stuff.

while it does add that, there is a immense, immense issue with the RNG theme. Again, I use the CVs as an example, these reticles are stupid. People complain about how easy CVs are. It's honestly just dumb how rng it really is when it comes to attacking with these AP bombs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,433
[WOLF1]
Beta Testers
12,339 posts
17,511 battles
2 minutes ago, Merc_R_Us said:

while it does add that, there is a immense, immense issue with the RNG theme. Again, I use the CVs as an example, these reticles are stupid. People complain about how easy CVs are. It's honestly just dumb how rng it really is when it comes to attacking with these AP bombs. 

So is the RNG for CV AP bombs increasing or decreasing average damage? That is data WG can chew on. (Hint they probably all ready have)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
523
[KMS]
[KMS]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
3,738 posts
12,618 battles
2 hours ago, warheart1992 said:

RNG is what keeps a potato from getting trashed every single time by a skilled player. Skilled players are a small minority compared to the potatoes, potatoes with wallets I might add. Besides I'm convinced WoWs is making alot of money by purposefully frustrating you to get to the new premium/broken tech tree ship to live out your power fantasy. This has even more power the lower skilled you are.

Have an upvote.

Skill in a game where your shots and dmg is RNG number generated somewhat?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
731
[TIMT]
Members
1,376 posts
4,916 battles
2 hours ago, Merc_R_Us said:

This game is ruining itself by trying to cater to two different audiences.

  • You have people who try harder; they want to be at the top, they don't think too much about the models, they get absolutely pissed about RNG saving people who make bad decisions, and they could play at 200 APM and multi-task if given the opportunity.
  • On the other, you have players who are more casual; they take it slower, they probably play for historical value, and they just looked up what APM means.

There are continuous references that WG believes players would get confused from multi-tasking. WG, you are talking about the casual players. Let's call a spade a spade right now; you keep the game dumbed down for this group. 

And that is fine! However, there is a place for that, and it's called CO-OP. In PvP, you want to be rewarded for your effort.

Pretty much, yes. Another example where you can see this is the design of the ranked game mode:

In most other competitive PvP games ranked and your placement on the ladder is mostly skill-related, with ways to lose ranks and falling down leagues etc. However, in this game you have this weird mix of having a skill-based progression, but at the same time irrevocable ranks almost everywhere and players being able to just spam games to the top. Even more, quite a lot of players expect to be rewarded for the effort/grind of spamming games to get the rewards.

22 minutes ago, paradat said:

RNG adds tension and tension keeps things interesting. Those random epic fails and those random dev strikes makes for exciting and memorable game play. This of course is a well known element in game design and why you see it in so many games.

Roll to hit. Some of the best moments in D&D for example are those natural 20's or those epic fumbles. Great stuff.

RNG can be a crucial ingredient in game design, however it is important how you use it and how large it is. Let's do a quick thought experiment:

Imagine all BBs had perfect accuracy, no dispersion and all your shells hit where you point your mouse. But the shell travel time etc. still exists. Now, it will be incredibly hard to hit anything beyond a certain point as even the smallest deviation of the target from your predicted path will cost you everything. Naturally, most if not all players would hedge their bets and spread the shots out slightly, to account for any maneuvering or miscalculations. Therefore, a bit if RNG on the order of maybe the size of the ship would be good.

Where this breaks down is when you go too far. Currently high-tier BB guns with their overmatch are potentially so devastating against cruisers that a well aimed and consistent volley would devastate you. But it rarely does happen (relatively speaking on how the values look on paper). The dispersion is so large that between overpens and overmatch it becomes very hard to reliably do damage to fast ships at long ranges.

Of coursed, averaged over many salvos you get reasonable damage output of BB against cruisers, and this is what gets balanced in game. But from a players perspective, every fight in a BB against a CL (or vice versa) at long range feels like a slot machine. I don't really care about the avg. outcome, if I only get a single chance, or maybe two, the game feels very inconsistent and frustrating.

9 minutes ago, paradat said:

So is the RNG for CV AP bombs increasing or decreasing average damage? That is data WG can chew on. (Hint they probably all ready have)

The average damage over many games gets decreased, since the average chance for hitting a target is lower now. That is not the point though, because when you hit a target it still is the same insane amount of damage, but now it happens not 3/4 times, but 2/3 times. If you like rolling a dice with all or nothing every drop, then this is fine.

I would have preferred for WG not to use RNG to balance things like damage output, but other parameters. They could have just lowered the damage on the bombs, make it harder to aim the bombs by reducing maneuverability of the planes, etc. Anything that makes the process more player limited, instead making it more random to bring the average down.

Similarly, we have BB guns that are devastating and overmatch all cruiser armor, yet are kept in check by being shotguns compared to all other guns in the game. Imagine there was much less overmatch (only CA/CL noses, maybe part of the belt or deck), but all BB guns were more consistent in their behaviour. Good aim would be rewarded, bad aim would be punished. Instead, we have bad aim getting lucky sometimes (which is okay, I guess) and good aim just giving you a slightly better go at the slot machine.

Personally, I found myself playing more cruisers and DDs because I found that my experience is much more consistent and reflects more my abilities in playing the game, compared to BBs. In essence: a bit of RNG is great, but going too far is just taking away a lot. And relying on RNG to balance your game is never a great idea, imho.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,752
[A-D-F]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
8,763 posts
34 minutes ago, Merc_R_Us said:

while it does add that, there is a immense, immense issue with the RNG theme. Again, I use the CVs as an example, these reticles are stupid. People complain about how easy CVs are. It's honestly just dumb how rng it really is when it comes to attacking with these AP bombs. 

RNG has been a part of this game since the day it launched.  There is no reason to suddenly change it, some 6 years later. WG is not going to remove RNG from WoWs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,454
[SALVO]
Members
26,129 posts
29,108 battles
2 hours ago, Merc_R_Us said:

**I'm not going to waste time with all the sugar coating**

This game is ruining itself by trying to cater to two different audiences.

  • You have people who try harder; they want to be at the top, they don't think too much about the models, they get absolutely pissed about RNG saving people who make bad decisions, and they could play at 200 APM and multi-task if given the opportunity.
  • On the other, you have players who are more casual; they take it slower, they probably play for historical value, and they just looked up what APM means.

There are continuous references that WG believes players would get confused from multi-tasking. WG, you are talking about the casual players. Let's call a spade a spade right now; you keep the game dumbed down for this group. 

And that is fine! However, there is a place for that, and it's called CO-OP. In PvP, you want to be rewarded for your effort.

"Oh we don't want things to work differently and have a game within a game." What was that halloween thing then? What are these power-up things you clan brawls and such? You have 2 AUDIENCES. 

ABOUT RNG:

Now, I'm a CV player. 

*Wait for the downvote*

I think these things are overpowered. Not by damage, but by capability and influence. I love the MvR. It's opportunistic and hard to torp Destroyers. The AP bombs were too strong and easy-ish to lineup. Instead of making it HARDER to line up the shot, INSTEAD of weakening the outright damage, WHAT DO YOU DO? You make the circle bigger so RNG plays a bigger role. No skill adjustment because we don't want things to be harder for casuals; no, we make it so it is more random. Well Done!

Make bombing more difficult. Make a small reticle, and make it move in a quick circle. Have the reticle dance, anything! But stop with this bigger reticle stuff, it's ridiculous.

Give the ships manual AA already!

 

Again, 2 audiences. Move your RNG fixes to COOP, and give players multitasking and skill challenges in a PvP world.

I'm sorry, but this is a  truly foolish post across the board.

WoWS is not chess.  Ditto for WoT.  They're more like backgammon.  It's the player's job to manage RNG, not whine about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
566
[-TKS-]
[-TKS-]
Members
1,321 posts
13,175 battles
2 hours ago, Asym_KS said:

Do you see any of that? 

what I did see, WG buying out KOTS tournament rights. signaling that wows is heading towards esports. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
566
[-TKS-]
[-TKS-]
Members
1,321 posts
13,175 battles
31 minutes ago, Crucis said:

WoWS is not chess.  Ditto for WoT.  They're more like backgammon.  It's the player's job to manage RNG,

I like that analogy . right on. 

its like a game of backgammon where the pieces have movement / engagement rules like chess.

*mind blown*  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,668
[HINON]
Members
8,689 posts
12,682 battles
3 hours ago, Merc_R_Us said:

Give the ships manual AA already!

i second this, i even came up with a way it could be put into a hotkey like the shells and torps are, as we know, 1 and 2 are HE and AP(or SAP for those that have it) respectively, and 3 is for torps, manual control of AA could be put in as 4 or 5 depending on what the ASW hotkeys end up being, as i recall they used the 4 key for depth charges/ASW planes, so then AA could be put down in as the 5 key for manual control

  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
0
[0456]
Members
0 posts
4 hours ago, ArIskandir said:

Be the casual

 

4 hours ago, ArIskandir said:

The problem is:

* Most players are of the casual type 

so be more of the problem?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,338
[SALVO]
Members
6,969 posts
5,521 battles
1 minute ago, y_vonne said:

 

so be more of the problem?  

hahaha, touche.

It would be more clear to state, "the (OP's) problem derives from:" (...)

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,300
[RBMK]
Members
2,203 posts
34,979 battles
4 hours ago, Merc_R_Us said:

Now, I'm a CV player. 

*Wait for the downvote*

I think these things are overpowered. Not by damage, but by capability and influence. I love the MvR. It's opportunistic and hard to torp Destroyers. The AP bombs were too strong and easy-ish to lineup. Instead of making it HARDER to line up the shot, INSTEAD of weakening the outright damage, WHAT DO YOU DO? You make the circle bigger so RNG plays a bigger role. No skill adjustment because we don't want things to be harder for casuals; no, we make it so it is more random. Well Done!

Make bombing more difficult. Make a small reticle, and make it move in a quick circle. Have the reticle dance, anything! But stop with this bigger reticle stuff, it's ridiculous.

Give the ships manual AA already!

I don't play CVs but I agree with your sentiment regarding capability and influence. Based on your assessment, perhaps rockets should be subject as well?

That said, I think spotting could be the more significant an issue than the damage they deal. Information is power, right? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
837
[-TKS-]
[-TKS-]
Members
987 posts
7,970 battles
1 hour ago, Burnsy said:

RNG has been a part of this game since the day it launched.  There is no reason to suddenly change it, some 6 years later. WG is not going to remove RNG from WoWs.

I should be clear, I don't want RNG removed. The scale of the RNG fixes on CVs is getting wild. The rocket reticles, absurd. The AP bomb on MvR, stupid lol. They should have lowered the damage on these weapons, increased the skill requirement (very small, moving reticle, as an example), or something else. Instead, they simply made the reticle bigger, so both casual and try hard can get nerfed. 

Instead of playing a 3 Pt contest on a moving hoop, I'm playing a throw it over your shoulder without looking contest. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
837
[-TKS-]
[-TKS-]
Members
987 posts
7,970 battles
6 minutes ago, Wye_So_Serious said:

I don't play CVs but I agree with your sentiment regarding capability and influence. Based on your assessment, perhaps rockets should be subject as well?

That said, I think spotting could be the more significant an issue than the damage they deal. Information is power, right? 

I'm all for removing spotting from the fighters, or all the planes, w/e. It's clearly an issue with most of the competitive players, and I would like CVs to be in the competitive tourneys. 

I'm also for limiting the CV range, by giving flight groups fuel. When they run out, the the planes fly back. 

I strongly believe in Manual AA to some level. Players can have a choice between targeting these planes down manually while the gun is reloading, or just let it run as is.

Rockets... Oh Rockets... Reticles are too large. I would prefer smaller reticles on everything just to make it more rewarding for timing it up on that DD that you can't see, and less RNG reliant. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,121
[PVE]
Members
5,095 posts
22,557 battles
1 hour ago, skillztowin said:

what I did see, WG buying out KOTS tournament rights. signaling that wows is heading towards esports. 

The real problem is, the game isn't designed to be eSports capable:..... 

1) it's as exciting as watching grass grow; 

2) they are five years behind the industry's efforts to create eSports; and,

3) they are from a source Country not aligned to or with Free Market nations.....  That might limit any ability to host in-Country events....  Not sure, just guessing.

In other words, they would have all sorts of issues pol*#*(##@.  Especially, now...........  There is a growing movement to censure (content), regulate (chance loot box mechanics), and tax gaming...... 

Where they come from separates them; not includes them....

JMO but, I just can see the hurdles..............who knows???

 

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,752
[A-D-F]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
8,763 posts
10 minutes ago, Merc_R_Us said:

I'm all for removing spotting from the fighters, or all the planes, w/e. It's clearly an issue with most of the competitive players, and I would like CVs to be in the competitive tourneys. 

I'm also for limiting the CV range, by giving flight groups fuel. When they run out, the the planes fly back. 

I strongly believe in Manual AA to some level. Players can have a choice between targeting these planes down manually while the gun is reloading, or just let it run as is.

Rockets... Oh Rockets... Reticles are too large. I would prefer smaller reticles on everything just to make it more rewarding for timing it up on that DD that you can't see, and less RNG reliant. 

 

15 minutes ago, Merc_R_Us said:

I should be clear, I don't want RNG removed. The scale of the RNG fixes on CVs is getting wild. The rocket reticles, absurd. The AP bomb on MvR, stupid lol. They should have lowered the damage on these weapons, increased the skill requirement (very small, moving reticle, as an example), or something else. Instead, they simply made the reticle bigger, so both casual and try hard can get nerfed. 

Instead of playing a 3 Pt contest on a moving hoop, I'm playing a throw it over your shoulder without looking contest. 

So this thread isn't really about skill floors/ceilings and RNG in the game as whole.

It's a CV thread, with a mask on.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×