What makes Tier 10 gameplay bad here?

[A_FIELD_MARSHAL]

I see alot of people mentioning that the gameplay at the Tier X is bad why is that? I havent gotten there yet as I am only up to Tier VII

[Terrible_Turtle]

The high repair bill discourages people from playing aggressively. 

[FratStar4Life]

People are afraid to get their paint scratched, so no one pushes the caps and one team generally losses by negative points or is 3 capped out. 

Even when they reduced repair costs, nothing changed in regards to gameplay...

[A_FIELD_MARSHAL]

People are afraid to get their paint scratched, so no one pushes the caps and one team generally losses by negative points or is 3 capped out. 

Even when they reduced repair costs, nothing changed in regards to gameplay...

 

A team can lose by going into negative points?

Never had that happen to me yet.

[Francois424]

Battleships have super long, accurate range less reliant on RNG, their captains are no joke

Destroyers have long range torpedoes and ppl playing them are no joke

SOME cruisers are insane flamethrowers, burning all the fun that's left away.  And man do these guys know how to play.

CV's.... what CV's ?

Sheesh the battle's over, 5k exp, 100k damage, not bad!  Too bad I was sunk tho....  Umm still loss 100k with a premium account.

 

High repair costs + Camping + Unforgiving environment = annoying and unrewarding.

 

[Chobittsu]

And everyone tells you how to use your ship as though they wrote the handbook on naval warfare. And, of course, "STATS ARE ALL THAT MATTERS!!!!"

For me, game advancement ends at Tier 5

[sbcptnitro]

More salt than the Dead Sea.

[Cuesta_Rey]

I just wonder why WG has not figured out how important end-game content is to the players who have topped out. Why isn't there some type of competitive environment for the tier 10 owners to encourage game play at that level?

Same thing happened in WoWP for end game. Clan wars were promised but never materialized. Will history repeat itself here. What will keep it from repeating itself?

[aether_tech]

Potato players can't make credits because they don't deal enough damage to offset repair costs. Thus most of the high tier meta is a bunch of battleships and cruisers sitting in the back sniping eachother with dispersion circles the size of a small planet. Meanwhile, the DD players - who want to enjoy a fun-filled action-packed matchup are doing most of the work and reaping most of the rewards.

[Crucias]

My opinions as to the aspects contributing to T10 gameplay:

 

• Lack of T10 players = more uptiering
• Lack of T10 maps = repeatability
• High repair costs = sustainability
• Yamato = Eats pretty much everything, big issue with uptiered ships not countering her adequately
• Lack of options tactics wise - sit at range and be deleted by BBs, close in and drown in walls of torpedos = has led to a fear of engaging

 

My proposed solutions:

 

• Prevent T8 from being pulled into T10 games
• Make more maps available at T10
• Focus on more technical maps for T10 - provide a variety of cover and open space, but not dense cover which would let DDs reign supreme (Islands at A and C on Shatter work well)
• Increase the silver earnings for contribution (damage, caps, plane shoot downs but NOT kills) at high tiers - good players can then play sustainably

[DerKrampus]

Passivity, in a nutshell.  DDs get long-range torps and lots of them, or fast-firing flamethrowers and lots of them.

 

That leads to BBs not wanting to push.  Some actively engage reverse and back away immediately upon the start of the match.  

 

That leaves the cruisers useless.  If they stick with their tanks, they can't shoot.  If they try to close the range to where they can actually engage, enemy BBs will rip them apart.  Cruiser maneuverability decreases, battleship accuracy and damage increase, and the end result is a far more massive disparity in capability when compared to the lower tiers.  This wouldn't be a problem if everyone and their brother didn't have beastly anti-air, which has all but written CVs out of the equation, making the AA-support role completely useless.

 

Shimakazes have largely vanished, since their torpedoes have been nerfed and BBs never come into their kill-zones.  Resulting in an overwhelming gunboat meta.

 

In the end, you have BBs sniping at max range, DDs trying to duel and cap, CVs completely absent, and cruisers being largely just repair-bill fodder for the only 2 relevant classes left.

[Xannari]

Why isn't there some type of competitive environment for the tier 10 owners to encourage game play at that level?

 

Because World of Warships does not have a competitive setup, and wont for a long time. No one would play anything but destroyers or Zaos because both abuse stealth to the point of complete unfairness. Carriers as well, but for the reason of instantly deleting anything they come across. Tier V is a much better tier for competition with the current setup

[FratStar4Life]

I just wonder why WG has not figured out how important end-game content is to the players who have topped out. Why isn't there some type of competitive environment for the tier 10 owners to encourage game play at that level?

Same thing happened in WoWP for end game. Clan wars were promised but never materialized. Will history repeat itself here. What will keep it from repeating itself?

 

From how WG has addressed clans and clan wars, they have no intention of implementing them right now in ships. A great many of the top tier players have already left the game because there is simply nothing there for them once they reach T10. Its a shame but I do not see this game lasting more than a couple of years based on new content alone... 

 

*I am just trying to get my opinions out before WG censorship begins in 7 days 

[Chobittsu]

Passivity, in a nutshell.  DDs get long-range torps and lots of them, or fast-firing flamethrowers and lots of them.

 

That leads to BBs not wanting to push.  Some actively engage reverse and back away immediately upon the start of the match.  

 

That leaves the cruisers useless.  If they stick with their tanks, they can't shoot.  If they try to close the range to where they can actually engage, enemy BBs will rip them apart.  Cruiser maneuverability decreases, battleship accuracy and damage increase, and the end result is a far more massive disparity in capability when compared to the lower tiers.  This wouldn't be a problem if everyone and their brother didn't have beastly anti-air, which has all but written CVs out of the equation, making the AA-support role completely useless.

 

Shimakazes have largely vanished, since their torpedoes have been nerfed and BBs never come into their kill-zones.  Resulting in an overwhelming gunboat meta.

 

In the end, you have BBs sniping at max range, DDs trying to duel and cap, CVs completely absent, and cruisers being largely just repair-bill fodder for the only 2 relevant classes left.

 

Aye, the key problem is that at the end of the game, it's all late/post-war ships, which were obsolete due to air power. A realistic Tier X match would be 5-6 carriers escorted by AA destroyers while a couple BBs shelled Bastion mode targets.

 

Is there a problem, dear?

 

[mr_flappypants]

How about implement an alternative feature for people wanting to play Tier Xs. Offer a toggle button that allows someone to play a Tier X match that will result in 0 credits and XP earned and 0 repair/resupply costs.  I can't imagine a feature like this would completely suck the mid-tiers dry because no earnings is not a very satisfying way to play BUT it would alleviate the "stay back and hide" mentality.  I'm sure many of you will come up with simple, effective counterarguments to this very short-lived idea.

[gurudennis]

How about implement an alternative feature for people wanting to play Tier Xs. Offer a toggle button that allows someone to play a Tier X match that will result in 0 credits and XP earned and 0 repair/resupply costs.  I can't imagine a feature like this would completely suck the mid-tiers dry because no earnings is not a very satisfying way to play BUT it would alleviate the "stay back and hide" mentality.  I'm sure many of you will come up with simple, effective counterarguments to this very short-lived idea.

 

It might just work if all T10 games were like this. It's certainly an interesting idea and one that has been voiced before by some respected members here.

 

The issue with giving players a choice is that it either a) fragments the playerbase provided you only match people together if they made the same choice, or b) makes some people salty because their teammates YOLO'd for free but they have to pick up a bill.

[Morpheus29]

 

A team can lose by going into negative points?

Never had that happen to me yet.

Yeah, if the team loses a lot of ships quickly at the start of the match.. 300 pts isn't much if a team doesn't control any caps.

[DerKrampus]

 

Aye, the key problem is that at the end of the game, it's all late/post-war ships, which were obsolete due to air power. A realistic Tier X match would be 5-6 carriers escorted by AA destroyers while a couple BBs shelled Bastion mode targets.

This is sad, but true.  The question then seems to be, "How do we bring the same exciting gameplay that can be found in low-mid tiers, into the all-too-passive high tiers?  If we can answer that, we could (in theory) breathe some energy into what has become an almost-boring endgame.

 

If I had to just throw some things at the wall and make them stick?  

 

-Give all Tier VIII ships preferential MM, to keep them out of tier-ten games.  The capability curve from tiers 8-10 means that a tier 8 in a tier 10 match can do little more than play... passively.  Because anything that looks at it wrong is going to put it in a world of hurt.  

 

-Bring repair bills down to a more reasonable level for tier IX and X ships, to make losing one's ship a not-so-painful proposition.  Right now, aggression is being punished post-game, when it's dynamic, game-winning aggression that makes this game exciting and fun.  It's something we should be encouraging.

 

-In short, the German BBs should be balanced in such a way as to encourage a tirpitz-like "charge-and-brawl" playstyle.  We need some sort of big-guns in the upper tiers that NEED to get in close to be effective, and have the tools available to do so.

 

These next ones are going to get me...  SO much hate.  Please don't hit me.

 

-Reduce anti-aircraft defenses of battleships across the board.  I know, I know.  The goal here is twofold.  At present, we have two classes that are largely ineffective at the higher tiers; carriers and cruisers.  This is largely due to the fact that the "rock paper scissors" method of balance has fallen by the wayside.  If BB anti-air capability were reduced, CVs would become a viable option once again.  And with CVs back in the game, the more fleet-support-oriented cruisers would at least be able to make themselves useful, while escorting sniping battleships.

 

Which brings me to even more incoming hatred...

-Slightly reduce the range of all battleship primary batteries.

Please don't hit me.  The fact is, as good as it feels to wipe people out from the opposite map border, the campy, snipey battleship meta has been largely detrimental to the game as a whole.  If all other attempts to encourage more aggressive play fail, then as a last resort, we may need to force the battle-lines into slightly closer proximity to the battle.  Cruisers are capable of fighting in the "beaten zone" between the two BB formations if necessary, but the current state of the game places them much too far forward of their more-armored teammates if they wish to get within effective range.  This makes them little more than targets of opportunity.  

 

Obviously, this is just my opinion.  And you know what they say about opinions...

[Combined_Fleet_HQ]

And everyone tells you how to use your ship as though they wrote the handbook on naval warfare. And, of course, "STATS ARE ALL THAT MATTERS!!!!"

For me, game advancement ends at Tier 5

 

Tier V? Damn I would at least VII but thats just me

[tanky_the_tank]

 

A team can lose by going into negative points?

Never had that happen to me yet.

 

If team isn't scoring a few dead ships pushes it below 0 pts and match ends

[KaptainKaybe]

Repair costs are so high that players only break even if they do decent damage on a *win*. Players are *terrified* of losing their ships as they risk losing a lot of credits, so they sit at max range, hide behind island ... basically being useless and letting the timer run out. This makes it so that ships that specialize in long range fighting, like all IJN and RU ships, as well as german cruisers, have a significant advantage over ships that specialize in close to medium range fighting like all USN ships and the upcoming german battleships.

 

I have no problems with repair costs being high ...  but ONLY if you can never be reduced to a negative credit count at the end of a match. The worse that should happen is that you make 0 credits. That should encourage players to play more aggressively while still forcing players to spend some time in the mid tiers to make consistent high credit profits to buy new ships and upgrade modules.

[Chobittsu]

 

Tier V? Damn I would at least VII but thats just me

 

At Tier V you're guarenteed a profit, and everyone is too busy having fun to care~

 

This is sad, but true.  The question then seems to be, "How do we bring the same exciting gameplay that can be found in low-mid tiers, into the all-too-passive high tiers?  If we can answer that, we could (in theory) breathe some energy into what has become an almost-boring endgame.

 

If I had to just throw some things at the wall and make them stick?  

 

-Give all Tier VIII ships preferential MM, to keep them out of tier-ten games.  The capability curve from tiers 8-10 means that a tier 8 in a tier 10 match can do little more than play... passively.  Because anything that looks at it wrong is going to put it in a world of hurt.  

 

-Bring repair bills down to a more reasonable level for tier IX and X ships, to make losing one's ship a not-so-painful proposition.  Right now, aggression is being punished post-game, when it's dynamic, game-winning aggression that makes this game exciting and fun.  It's something we should be encouraging.

 

-In short, the German BBs should be balanced in such a way as to encourage a tirpitz-like "charge-and-brawl" playstyle.  We need some sort of big-guns in the upper tiers that NEED to get in close to be effective, and have the tools available to do so.

 

These next ones are going to get me...  SO much hate.  Please don't hit me.

 

-Reduce anti-aircraft defenses of battleships across the board.  I know, I know.  The goal here is twofold.  At present, we have two classes that are largely ineffective at the higher tiers; carriers and cruisers.  This is largely due to the fact that the "rock paper scissors" method of balance has fallen by the wayside.  If BB anti-air capability were reduced, CVs would become a viable option once again.  And with CVs back in the game, the more fleet-support-oriented cruisers would at least be able to make themselves useful, while escorting sniping battleships.

 

Which brings me to even more incoming hatred...

-Slightly reduce the range of all battleship primary batteries.

Please don't hit me.  The fact is, as good as it feels to wipe people out from the opposite map border, the campy, snipey battleship meta has been largely detrimental to the game as a whole.  If all other attempts to encourage more aggressive play fail, then as a last resort, we may need to force the battle-lines into slightly closer proximity to the battle.  Cruisers are capable of fighting in the "beaten zone" between the two BB formations if necessary, but the current state of the game places them much too far forward of their more-armored teammates if they wish to get within effective range.  This makes them little more than targets of opportunity.  

 

Obviously, this is just my opinion.  And you know what they say about opinions...

 

I can barely kill a scout plane with Yamato's massive AAA suite as it is, but I can see your point. Same with the ranges of guns. Sure I can hit something on Pluto but it doesn't do me any good when the shell spread is wider than the enemy ship

[Crucias]

Is there a problem, dear?

 

I have an issue with Heretics - nothing I can't deal with however ^^

 

 

 

 

Which brings me to even more incoming hatred...

-Slightly reduce the range of all battleship primary batteries.

Please don't hit me.  The fact is, as good as it feels to wipe people out from the opposite map border, the campy, snipey battleship meta has been largely detrimental to the game as a whole.  If all other attempts to encourage more aggressive play fail, then as a last resort, we may need to force the battle-lines into slightly closer proximity to the battle.  Cruisers are capable of fighting in the "beaten zone" between the two BB formations if necessary, but the current state of the game places them much too far forward of their more-armored teammates if they wish to get within effective range.  This makes them little more than targets of opportunity.  

 

Obviously, this is just my opinion.  And you know what they say about opinions...

As a captain specializing in BBs this displeases me upon first glance; however I can see where you're coming from and I grudgingly agree, reducing Monty and Yammy's ranges would bring them closer, thereby providing alternative targets to CA's at that sort of engagement range. Perhaps they can have the spotting plane increase their range from CA range to current BB max range? That way they only get to snipe from the other side of the map for a minute or two each game.

[Chobittsu]

I have an issue with Heretics - nothing I can't deal with however ^^

 

That's adorable, you think you're a space marine~<3

You're like Buzz Lightyear at the beginning of Toy Story!!! 

[Estimated_Prophet]

Battleships have super long, accurate range less reliant on RNG, their captains are no joke

Destroyers have long range torpedoes and ppl playing them are no joke

SOME cruisers are insane flamethrowers, burning all the fun that's left away.  And man do these guys know how to play.

CV's.... what CV's ?

Sheesh the battle's over, 5k exp, 100k damage, not bad!  Too bad I was sunk tho....  Umm still loss 100k with a premium account.

 

High repair costs + Camping + Unforgiving environment = annoying and unrewarding.

 

Passivity, in a nutshell.  DDs get long-range torps and lots of them, or fast-firing flamethrowers and lots of them.

 

That leads to BBs not wanting to push.  Some actively engage reverse and back away immediately upon the start of the match.  

 

That leaves the cruisers useless.  If they stick with their tanks, they can't shoot.  If they try to close the range to where they can actually engage, enemy BBs will rip them apart.  Cruiser maneuverability decreases, battleship accuracy and damage increase, and the end result is a far more massive disparity in capability when compared to the lower tiers.  This wouldn't be a problem if everyone and their brother didn't have beastly anti-air, which has all but written CVs out of the equation, making the AA-support role completely useless.

 

Shimakazes have largely vanished, since their torpedoes have been nerfed and BBs never come into their kill-zones.  Resulting in an overwhelming gunboat meta.

 

In the end, you have BBs sniping at max range, DDs trying to duel and cap, CVs completely absent, and cruisers being largely just repair-bill fodder for the only 2 relevant classes left.

 

Sounds kind of like ranked last season...

 

Even taking into account the few great games I've had in my T8, 9, and 10 ships and a premium account; when I also consider my perceived lack of skill; there's just no fun and no point in playing high-tiered games.