Things that could kill this game opinions

[GravyDave1]

Ok guys I started thread for a debate on the issues that could kill this game. Not in anyway am I advocating this game is going to die out from these ideas.

1) TEAM KILLS  I find this subject on the rise for sure.

                          1) See people teaming up in divisions and killing their team. I have seen this myself. I was on the other side of the map when I saw it started out.

                          2) Poor game play by DD's and Cruiser launching torpedoes from a distance behind teammates.

                          3) Poor reporting issues for this action. This make people even madder when they can not even report this.

                          4) Poor actions taken by WoWs on these action. Turning them pink is good. Lets us know when they team killed. But the bad part is this. Players turn pink when they are defending themself                                      too. So this does need work. Next Myself and others have seen the same player that team kill over and over still in game. Why have they not at least get a day ban? This is a issue.

2) Economics The game does need to improve the economics of the game. The higher mid tiers and up does need a boost for sure. This will turn people off to the game over time. One of some of the unbalance economics. If you play a ship get no damage you have to pay for damages. When none was received. This is a big turn off. I can understand consumables. Ammo etc. 

3) Unbalance issues with CV's.

                         1) Unbalance CV loadouts for the US and IJN lines. In Alpha US CV lines were a lot more balance compared on how they are now. WoWs has forced people to play a role on this. Depending on                           which nation you choose.

                         2) MM issues with these actions. People drop the US line CV's when they can not have strike packages. Only fighters and dive bombers. They also drop the US CV line once they get to the                                   Bogue. They should put the Independence back into this position. Bring back the Sapian. These actions are part of the problems with the MM. Low CV players. To many getting frustrated and                             quitting them. 

                         3) Poor Fighter XP payout. When The US CV are set up for fighters and dive bombers. Fighters get poor XP when they have done their job.

                         4) Poor Dive Bomber play. Dive bombers have very poor performance (both nations). This leads very XP from ship damage. That would go toward research on the ship. This make people that                            are using the US for one thing. Not helping the team win the match. This a major issue.

                         5) Bias some do feel their is a bias toward the US CV line. This force proved itself in life. WoWs claims to be historic based but does not show this.

4) Toxic behavior of others. This is one of the things that has started me to turn off chat in WOT. It is starting to get bad over here to. It has affected me a few times. When in forums I was to tough on some because of what I just went through in game. To them guys I am sorry. I try my best to keep a open mind and should not let others like them affect me like that. A better set up needs to be added to the game to stop this. A better punishment system for sure.

5) Unbalance issues with Battleship ranges. I see some cruisers with better gun ranges then some battleships. This does make some people mad. Then they put them down as garbage. This can lead to other issues and bad feelings for the game.

Well guys this is my top 5 issue for now. Please post your thoughts and idea's. Please be positive not negative or mean toward others. That think different. Look forward to your thoughts guys. GD1 

[PhoinexFire]

Too true.

[Night60700]

You really really really need to proof read anything you post. This is disjointed and hard to read. I will read it, and comment on its content in a little while later. But You would do good to read what you write out-loud to make sure it flows right and is readable by the general public.

[Strike_Witch_Tomoko]

eh....mostly true

 

but not so much for cruisers.

there is the Murmansk true.....

 

but most cruisers have worse range. the only way they get better range is through a lv 4 captain skill.   and thats for low caliber guns.    add to that the flight time for cruisers firing at this range is EXTREME compared to BBs at similar ranges.

[Cobraclutch]

For me it boils down to one thing. 

Until they make supporting roles much more beneficial, there will be no reason to bring anything other than a CV or BB into high tier games. 

 

They need to throw CA's and DD's a bone to get them performing up to the rest of the classes, if they don't then they need to seriously get some supporting roles a benefit in this game. 

 

As it currently stands, this game is slowly sliding into World of battleships with Carriers! 

 

Just my opinion though.. take it with a grain.

[Me1dor]

Most of it is very true, 

 

I paid for a month of premium and bought some doublons on my first month playing this game but it turned me off when i realized from tier 7 colorado and upward I have to pay if I don't have a good game.

 

- Match Making is really the worse frustation for me atm. I don't mind waiting 2 more mins for a decent MM. Seriously get it straight WG.

- I started playing USN carrier but what is said above is very true. I want torpedo and still have fighters. the Bogue / Ranger setup need some changes.

 

[GravyDave1]

eh....mostly true

 

but not so much for cruisers.

there is the Murmansk true.....

 

but most cruisers have worse range. the only way they get better range is through a lv 4 captain skill.   and thats for low caliber guns.    add to that the flight time for cruisers firing at this range is EXTREME compared to BBs at similar ranges.

The cruiser part is when they launch torpedos from a distance behind their team. 

[Strike_Witch_Tomoko]

The cruiser part is when they launch torpedos from a distance behind their team. 

 

no i ment part 5. 

only cruisers who do this is the Murmansk(russian bias. big surprise....)

and ships with 155mm or lower guns.   which tend to have horrible shell speed comapred to BBs.  and as a result horrible penetration/dmg mechanics

 

 

5) Unbalance issues with Battleship ranges. I see cruisers with gun range then some battleships. This does make people mad. Then they put them down as garbage. This can lead to other issues and bad feelings for the game.

 

[GravyDave1]

For me it boils down to one thing. 

Until they make supporting roles much more beneficial, there will be no reason to bring anything other than a CV or BB into high tier games. 

 

They need to throw CA's and DD's a bone to get them performing up to the rest of the classes, if they don't then they need to seriously get some supporting roles a benefit in this game. 

 

As it currently stands, this game is slowly sliding into World of battleships with Carriers! 

 

Just my opinion though.. take it with a grain.

 

Can define a bit more. Want to make I understand you right. Thanks

[GravyDave1]

 

no i ment part 5.

 

 

 

OOo ok yup yup. For some reason i keep getting some words skip out.

[Strike_Witch_Tomoko]

 

OOo ok yup yup. For some reason i keep getting some words skip out.

 

no worries =)

[TurboT]

Honestly I don't see TKs and Fail PLatoons enough for me to think it would 'kill the game'  I have over 1000 OBT battles and have not once been TK'd on purpose, might not have even been TK'd that I can remember. 

 

For me, the issue with this game that will be the most frustrating for many is the lack of variety in the ship lines.   There really isn't much to look forward to beyond tier 6/7.  The IJN CA line and USN CA line have the same size guns through most of the tree.   BB's for USN change at NC but look virtually the same to Montana (after looking the same from Wyoming to Colorado).   Add to that the amount of XP and Credits needed to upgrade and I think people will just get bored grinding that out.

 

For me, that is the biggest issue. Boredom and grind length via credits and XP.  Not enough difference from boat A to boat B.

 

[Nachoo31]

If you are not in front of me or in a range where I think it is reasonable you can see my DD torpedoes, the fish are flying.  And if you drive into it (yes you Cleveland) I won't lose sleep over it.  Since the OB release I have friendly torpedoed 3 people, 2 randoms and 1 division mate.

 

I must be doing it right since 3 in over 600 battles.   

 

Most of the time I'm screaming in my headset, why did that f and f do that.  I can't shoot torps.

[GravyDave1]

You really really really need to proof read anything you post. This is disjointed and hard to read. I will read it, and comment on its content in a little while later. But You would do good to read what you write out-loud to make sure it flows right and is readable by the general public.

 

Man dude I am trying to have a honest debate. I see you on other threads and you never have anything nice to say about anybody or the subject at hand. You sir are a troll. Please post something constructive. Try not to put people down. As you have down many a time.

[GravyDave1]

 

no worries =)

 

Thanks for that. 

[GravyDave1]

Honestly I don't see TKs and Fail PLatoons enough for me to think it would 'kill the game'  I have over 1000 OBT battles and have not once been TK'd on purpose, might not have even been TK'd that I can remember. 

 

For me, the issue with this game that will be the most frustrating for many is the lack of variety in the ship lines.   There really isn't much to look forward to beyond tier 6/7.  The IJN CA line and USN CA line have the same size guns through most of the tree.   BB's for USN change at NC but look virtually the same to Montana (after looking the same from Wyoming to Colorado).   Add to that the amount of XP and Credits needed to upgrade and I think people will just get bored grinding that out.

 

For me, that is the biggest issue. Boredom and grind length via credits and XP.  Not enough difference from boat A to boat B.

 

Had 5 in row last night. Was bad. A very ouch moment lol

[GravyDave1]

If you are not in front of me or in a range where I think it is reasonable you can see my DD torpedoes, the fish are flying.  And if you drive into it (yes you Cleveland) I won't lose sleep over it.  Since the OB release I have friendly torpedoed 3 people, 2 randoms and 1 division mate.

 

I must be doing it right since 3 in over 600 battles.   

 

Most of the time I'm screaming in my headset, why did that f and f do that.  I can't shoot torps.

Accidents do happen I do understand that; Good record you posted too.  But i have seen many that are not trying at all and doing it on purpose.

[1nv4d3rZ1m]

Should add Devs not communicating changes to the game or time frames with reasonable warning (think removing high tier premiums from shop) or at all...

[Cobraclutch]

 

Can define a bit more. Want to make I understand you right. Thanks

 

I guess what I mean is that, currently we only have certain metrics to really determine who is performing and who is not. 

 

Damage & win rate. 

 

There is no incentive for players to play any ships that perform well in other facets ie: AA, area denial, scouting, escorting, protecting ships with SS/AA, Capping, defending cap.

 

So basically it boils down to this..

 

CV's do the highest damage and highest winrate out of all classes = progresses through tiers much faster than BB/CA/DD because they gain more experience due to their metrics being the ones that actually provide the most progression in XP and money. 

 

BB's do the best surface damage out of all the surface ships in the game. They do the most damage and most experience outside of CV's . So once again this means that its probably going to be 2x faster to progress down a BB line then it would a CA line. And 3-4x faster to progress down the BB line compared to a DD line. 

 

Mainly because on average, these 2 classes are performing much stronger in terms of damage and experience, which oddly enough is the major way of progressing through the game.

 

Now don't get me wrong, I am not saying CA's and DD's are useless or super underpowered. That is still a major question because the stats we have are still very limited.

 

What I am saying is you currently have  50% of the classes progressing at a much faster rate throughout the tech tree's, because wargaming has decided to prioritize the stats in which those 2 classes excel in. 

 

So effectively, if I hold out a flank in a tier 8 destroyer and disrupt the team more than a BB or CV who does 50-60k dmg that match. I should technically be rewarded accordingly right? 

 

Wrong..

 

The way the game is currently designed punishes the more support orientated roles heavily via income and experience, because a majorite of their "roles" are greatly undervalued in terms of actual contribution in a stat sheet. 

 

So effectively a BB or CV could kill off 1 cruiser or BB in the game and pick his nose the rest of the time, being a dud for his team. Were as a CA could provide insane AA coverage for his CV or BB, or a DD can provide very good flank coverage that actually allows his team to win, and at the end of the game, guess who is on top of the CA and DD? Thats right, the BB or CV who focused purely on damage...

 

That is my issue, it is 2x harder for a CA captain to progress in this game and 3-4x harder for a DD captain to progress up a tech tree compared to a BB or CV, just because they way the game measures success is insanely skewed towards damage and kills. And not objectives, team play or any other thing that doesn't fall under damaging or killing another ship.

 

 

[GravyDave1]

 

I guess what I mean is that, currently we only have certain metrics to really determine who is performing and who is not. 

 

Damage & win rate. 

 

There is no incentive for players to play any ships that perform well in other facets ie: AA, area denial, scouting, escorting, protecting ships with SS/AA, Capping, defending cap.

 

So basically it boils down to this..

 

CV's do the highest damage and highest winrate out of all classes = progresses through tiers much faster than BB/CA/DD because they gain more experience due to their metrics being the ones that actually provide the most progression in XP and money. 

 

BB's do the best surface damage out of all the surface ships in the game. They do the most damage and most experience outside of CV's . So once again this means that its probably going to be 2x faster to progress down a BB line then it would a CA line. And 3-4x faster to progress down the BB line compared to a DD line. 

 

Mainly because on average, these 2 classes are performing much stronger in terms of damage and experience, which oddly enough is the major way of progressing through the game.

 

Now don't get me wrong, I am not saying CA's and DD's are useless or super underpowered. That is still a major question because the stats we have are still very limited.

 

What I am saying is you currently have  50% of the classes progressing at a much faster rate throughout the tech tree's, because wargaming has decided to prioritize the stats in which those 2 classes excel in. 

 

So effectively, if I hold out a flank in a tier 8 destroyer and disrupt the team more than a BB or CV who does 50-60k dmg that match. I should technically be rewarded accordingly right? 

 

Wrong..

 

The way the game is currently designed punishes the more support orientated roles heavily via income and experience, because a majorite of their "roles" are greatly undervalued in terms of actual contribution in a stat sheet. 

 

So effectively a BB or CV could kill off 1 cruiser or BB in the game and pick his nose the rest of the time, being a dud for his team. Were as a CA could provide insane AA coverage for his CV or BB, or a DD can provide very good flank coverage that actually allows his team to win, and at the end of the game, guess who is on top of the CA and DD? Thats right, the BB or CV who focused purely on damage...

 

That is my issue, it is 2x harder for a CA captain to progress in this game and 3-4x harder for a DD captain to progress up a tech tree compared to a BB or CV, just because they way the game measures success is insanely skewed towards damage and kills. And not objectives, team play or any other thing that doesn't fall under damaging or killing another ship.

 

 

Check CV numbers out. That is based on how many are played. Then check which nation. That has caused that damage. CV numbers are low. IJN CV's are the number 1 on damage caused. So the over all number is misleading. 

Second section mark I do agree with you on.

On the rest you do have point.

[DayoftheGreek]

Taking too long to roll out more nations.

 

I think some of the perceived  balance issues will sort themselves out when we have Russian, German, and UK ships all in the same game.  With only two nations, any slight imbalance between the two feels game breaking. because there might literally just be a ship out there that counters you and you can't do anything about it.  Its a helpless feeling that drives people away.  There are less options for teamwork as well if you are only combining strengths from two nations.  Everyone complains about low level AA.  Low level CV would be no fun if everyone had it.  But what if the German line introduces some low level AA.  Obviously the whole team won't be full of them, but players will feel less helpless and perceived CV imbalance will fade some.  What remains will be actual balance issues.

 

If this takes too long, I think we might see knee-jerk balancing or people will leave the game.  New trees will draw some people back, but not everyone.  Get them out sooner rather than later, the variety will keep people playing and help ease the grind, and you can balance the game as it will be, not as it is right now.

 

Oh and premium consumables and ammunition, etc.  Get real money out of gameplay unless it can be earned like flags.  I hate that.  Skins, cosmetics, fine.  Ships, eh, I'm not happy about but I can live with it.  Ammo/consumable, I hate it.

 

[Skpstr]

I don't think the TKs will be an issue if the penalties are tightened. My theory is at this point, WG is collecting data on blue-on-blue damage to see how much punishment is needed. I know I've accidentally torped a couple friendlies, (it's amazing how the brain makes them just "appear" even when you know they were there the whole time ) and the penalties are pretty light at the moment.

 

Economics might do it. IMO, the dynamic should be very similar to WoT. With the game being so new though, it's hard to tell where it is currently, because stats haven't stabilised enough to get a feel for where the skill line is between those who complain and those who feel it's ok.

[Night60700]

Man dude I am trying to have a honest debate. I see you on other threads and you never have anything nice to say about anybody or the subject at hand. You sir are a troll. Please post something constructive. Try not to put people down. As you have down many a time.

No. I'm not a troll I just gave you actual advise on how to properly write anything. This is a skill I learned when I was first learning how to write. So take your bitterness else where. Everyone's writing will always suck if they don't proof read what they write.

Don't take my advise, see how little I care. But don't call me a troll for telling you to do something you clearly didn't do.

[crzyhawk]

I completely agree with the economy/ grind.  I find myself losing interest mostly due to the grind.  In CBT, I got through Des Moines, Ibuki, Benson, hatsuharu, and New Mexico.  Here I am grinding out the same ships I've already done.  I hate the Germans but I am excited for them just so I can play new boats.  It just needs more content and less tedium.

[Cobraclutch]

Check CV numbers out. That is based on how many are played. Then check which nation. That has caused that damage. CV numbers are low. IJN CV's are the number 1 on damage caused. So the over all number is misleading. 

Second section mark I do agree with you on.

On the rest you do have point.

 

Well here is the thing, according to warship stats  (which is pulling NA stats now so we can stop relying on SEA) . outside of the Yamato which is the no 1 played ship in the game at tier 10 and the Montana at no 2. 3& 4 are the Hakuryu and Midway. The sample sizes for both tier 10 CV's in NA is over 1500 gp's for midway and over 2000 gp for Hauryu. 

 

That is a large enough sample size to start drawing conclusions.

 

win rate for midway 67.7% and avg damage at 124k with 1,664 games played.

 

win rate for Hakuryu is at 62.5 % with 104k avg dmg with 2,354 games played.

These 2 are the top of the leader boards for NA, followed by the Essex.

 

Its actually really scary to see that in terms of raw damage being done, 6 out of the top 10 damage dealers in NA are CVs... 

 

A Hiryu at tier 7 is actually beating out Tier 10's DDs / CA's in damage and win rate, which is mind blowing.

 

A Zuiho at Tier 5, is actually performing better in NA than a Shimakaze... Doing more avg damage per game, and winning 12 % more game than the Shimakaze, Gearing is in the same boat only doing 1k avg more damage than a tier 5 IJN CV. And having a 49.6% win rate compared to the Zuiho's 59% win rate..

 

Let us not even go near the Des Moines, which also gets beat out by a tier 5 CV...