Jump to content


New Idea for how to save the game.

Idea suggestion discussion

  • Please log in to reply
29 replies to this topic

BorisBaddenov #21 Posted 09 November 2019 - 02:11 PM

    3.8 Made me quit

  • Players
  • 24608 battles
  • 8,446
  • [NOGUD]
  • Member since:
    12-11-2015

View PostAbsolute_Sniper, on 08 November 2019 - 07:52 PM, said:

With the warm welcome we’ve all given, are you surprised?

But, but... He PROMISED! 

 

 

Peace-

Boris 


I’ve noticed a strong lack of Spare Parts. Is that intended?

No, it is not. This problem will solve itself with time. Many players have several dozens of vehicles in their Garages, so they don’t have enough Spare Parts for the entire vehicle fleet. But you will gradually collect enough Spare Parts to unlock new slots for purchased tanks in time.


EL_Din_46 #22 Posted 09 November 2019 - 10:10 PM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 5148 battles
  • 590
  • Member since:
    05-13-2019

View PostBorisBaddenov, on 09 November 2019 - 06:11 AM, said:

But, but... He PROMISED! 

 

 

Peace-

Boris 


Yes, but keeping a promise to go swimming is difficult when the piranha are hungry. Since they’ve digested that meal and still look hungry, how about this morsel:

 

A permanent obstacle course for players with <500 battles. It would be limited to T1 - T3  and would be scored based on a combination of speed and damage ratio. Portions of the course would have pop-up block houses or moving bots that respawn. Players could choose paths that are fast but dangerous, safe but slow or high scoring that requires moving from cover to cover while firing. Boosters would be given for course masteries and a seven day hall of fame would be the intro screen. New players would see an ad for the mini-game in their garage. Stats would not apply to the main game.

 

The idea is take parts of the op’s proposal and turn it into an educational mini-game. Some might learn the basics and others might be kept away from higher tiers for a while. 

 

I make no promises. Bon appetit!

 


Edited by EL_Din_46, 09 November 2019 - 10:20 PM.

 

This is what you get for letting rednecks play with antimatter, boss.

 

John Ringo, Hell’s Faire


NMH1701 #23 Posted 10 November 2019 - 08:23 AM

    Private

  • Players
  • 4654 battles
  • 6
  • [MAXX]
  • Member since:
    12-06-2018

I apologize for my lack of response - currently have been in and out of wifi. But yes, reading comments, there is really not overly much I can say - people dislike the idea. 
my goal with this was to allow newer players to try out tanks, understand game mechanics, and get rewards for it

pay a subscription, show some minor ability to play the game, and unlock premiums tanks at a discounted rate, and at the same time allowing Wargaming to decently up the price of normal tanks

a lot of older players do NOT need help to learn angles, learn what their gun can and can’t pen, but at the same time, it would possibly be a cool feature To implement

that, and they could make it offline enabled as well, which would be legit.

it could be annoying, and some tanks just wouldn’t work for armor profile - Leopards - but at the same time, it should be ENOUGH to tell a player “I like this” or “I hate this”

I want comments here. How many less newbies in Death Stars do you think we will see after they play through this mode through the entire line?

 

That was the goal of this mode. To help players decide, and to enable players to progress, with a minor subscription cost.

I am sure most of you have paid for a tank. What if you paid 20 dollars a month, and you get a 25% discount on premiums

Is it a good trade? Would you do it? That’s the sort of questions I want to ask, and, now my WiFi is mostly returned, that will be the questions I will be responding to. 



NMH1701 #24 Posted 10 November 2019 - 08:24 AM

    Private

  • Players
  • 4654 battles
  • 6
  • [MAXX]
  • Member since:
    12-06-2018

My idea has flaws, but having a more comprehensive training system is what I am trying to get at, and seeing as Wargaming’s love language is money, I have to bring forth some sort of way to make people pay for it as well as, at the same time, solve some issues with the game - having trash players buying tier 10 tanks and doing absolutely horrid, slightly solved by UPPING general store prices, and putting onto DISCOUNT with the semi-cheap subscription - that is my “compromise” with this - because clearly Wargaming will not hear if it means that they won’t be making money off of it.

but yes, I do like the Idea off a more obstacle course themed, where enemies shoot back - could have a larger map, modified to fit the tiers better, and the rewards at the end of it with a difficult challenge afterwards.

and yes, I was a little bit salty in the title - I should have also added “idea to save the game from the noobs”


Edited by NMH1701, 10 November 2019 - 08:30 AM.


NMH1701 #25 Posted 10 November 2019 - 08:32 AM

    Private

  • Players
  • 4654 battles
  • 6
  • [MAXX]
  • Member since:
    12-06-2018

View Postj_rod, on 08 November 2019 - 01:30 AM, said:

Honestly, nothing about these modes sound remotely enjoyable, not to mention the fact that I’m not going to pay more just to play a game mode that will likely have no players in queue. Hell, I loved realistic mode but even those queues were long and they didn’t cost anything.

I’m curious what players are actually supporting this idea.


this would be a fully single player operation, possibly with non-wifi applications to it 



Absolute_Sniper #26 Posted 10 November 2019 - 08:41 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 38146 battles
  • 3,005
  • [CRU2L]
  • Member since:
    11-05-2015

View PostNMH1701, on 10 November 2019 - 08:23 AM, said:

I apologize for my lack of response - currently have been in and out of wifi. But yes, reading comments, there is really not overly much I can say - people dislike the idea. 
my goal with this was to allow newer players to try out tanks, understand game mechanics, and get rewards for it

pay a subscription, show some minor ability to play the game, and unlock premiums tanks at a discounted rate, and at the same time allowing Wargaming to decently up the price of normal tanks

a lot of older players do NOT need help to learn angles, learn what their gun can and can’t pen, but at the same time, it would possibly be a cool feature To implement

that, and they could make it offline enabled as well, which would be legit.

it could be annoying, and some tanks just wouldn’t work for armor profile - Leopards - but at the same time, it should be ENOUGH to tell a player “I like this” or “I hate this”

I want comments here. How many less newbies in Death Stars do you think we will see after they play through this mode through the entire line?

 

That was the goal of this mode. To help players decide, and to enable players to progress, with a minor subscription cost.

I am sure most of you have paid for a tank. What if you paid 20 dollars a month, and you get a 25% discount on premiums

Is it a good trade? Would you do it? That’s the sort of questions I want to ask, and, now my WiFi is mostly returned, that will be the questions I will be responding to. 

No thanks. I don’t spend enough on premiums to justify a monthly subscription at that price. I don’t think I’m in the minority in that either. I have zero problems spending money for things I want but that’s 240$ per year. You’d only break even with the discounts if you spent almost a grand annually. 
 

A better tutorial system would be a big help and a step in the right direction to better the playerbase. The thing you have to remember is that only those who wish to improve, will improve. The best tutorial in the world won’t help someone that doesn’t care if they get better. Figure out how to teach players as they advance up the tiers when they can buy a tier X at anytime. That’s the situation the game and playerbase is in. Solve that conundrum and you can “Save the Game”. 


I used to have a picture here but tiny pic took an arrow to the knee....

 

https://discord.gg/twdc4Dq

 


j_rod #27 Posted 10 November 2019 - 03:12 PM

    719-266-2837

  • Players
  • 23616 battles
  • 641
  • [H0B0S]
  • Member since:
    05-04-2011
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again - mechanics are only part of the problem with the player base. I’d even go so far as to say they’re a minor part of the problem. Even if you fix that, you still have problems with players just being selfish and with team balance.

 

If running my mouth determined my winrate, I'd be a Super Unicum


__V_O_P__ #28 Posted 11 November 2019 - 12:23 PM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 33988 battles
  • 730
  • [CURSD]
  • Member since:
    09-06-2016

View Postj_rod, on 10 November 2019 - 03:12 PM, said:

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again - mechanics are only part of the problem with the player base. I’d even go so far as to say they’re a minor part of the problem. Even if you fix that, you still have problems with players just being selfish and with team balance.


You raised this in other threads so sorry for detailing this one and calling you out over it, but why should teams be balanced? It’s not going to help players get better, make them less selfish, or improve your playing experience in the long term. 



Ronin_23 #29 Posted 11 November 2019 - 04:31 PM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 17123 battles
  • 558
  • [-RGN-]
  • Member since:
    05-21-2011

View PostAbsolute_Sniper, on 10 November 2019 - 08:41 AM, said:

No thanks. I don’t spend enough on premiums to justify a monthly subscription at that price. I don’t think I’m in the minority in that either. I have zero problems spending money for things I want but that’s 240$ per year. You’d only break even with the discounts if you spent almost a grand annually. 
 

A better tutorial system would be a big help and a step in the right direction to better the playerbase. The thing you have to remember is that only those who wish to improve, will improve. The best tutorial in the world won’t help someone that doesn’t care if they get better. Figure out how to teach players as they advance up the tiers when they can buy a tier X at anytime. That’s the situation the game and playerbase is in. Solve that conundrum and you can “Save the Game”. 

 

The other thing when you look at spending over time is once you have a lot of the premiums you want (and gradually finish more lines) you have fewer things to spend money on. Every whale reaches a point where they don't want or need much of the things that come into shop and at that point, their wallets dry up. I have a lot of premiums now because I'm a fool. The only one I really want at this point is the Chieftain Mk 6. Once I get that at Blitz Fair I'll only occasionally spend for some premium time or gold to free xp.



j_rod #30 Posted 11 November 2019 - 08:08 PM

    719-266-2837

  • Players
  • 23616 battles
  • 641
  • [H0B0S]
  • Member since:
    05-04-2011

View Post__V_O_P__, on 11 November 2019 - 06:23 AM, said:


You raised this in other threads so sorry for detailing this one and calling you out over it, but why should teams be balanced? It’s not going to help players get better, make them less selfish, or improve your playing experience in the long term. 

 

No offense taken. If I can't back up my statements, I probably shouldn't be making them.

 

To clarify, I'm not asking for perfect balance with the makeup of the team; I'd just like to see better balance. I already defined what I think that looks like in a different thread, but in short, it's a matter of taking the aggregate winrates of both teams (normalizing Unicums to a max of 60% and VLWs to a minimum of 40% so they aren't more adversely affected than necessary) and making sure the teams within a range of each other. I say winrate because it's the easiest metric to pull and in general is a fair measure of ability, but if there is a better metric to easily show ability, that would work as well (30 day winrate, WN8, etc). Whatever the KPI used to determine the team's aggregate value, it has to be easy to pull for the MM algorithm. 

 

To answer you actual question as to the "why" I think this would be beneficial - to maintain the perception (note: not reality) for any individual player to have a chance to win. If the stats found here are generally correct, the bell curve for winrate is skewed toward the left, meaning that by far the largest number of players fall within a winrate of 44% and 56%. These are the types of players, myself included, that can't carry a team and have far more exposure to the chance of MM. Because of this, I would argue anecdotally that the vast majority of the people that complain on here (using that as the litmus for MM frustration) are players within this winrate range. The whole goal of what I am proposing is not to actually make the teams balanced or improve average players' winrates, but would be to eliminate the frustration that comes when you get a team that is totally unbalanced on paper. Conversely, it would also have the effect of eliminating the super easy games that get when you're on the good side of MM. I'd argue that this is also good bc those types of games have the effect of making the wins seem easier than they should be. 

 

 

I'm no sage and I'm sure there are better suggestions than what I'm presenting.That said, the whole premise of my argument is that by offering the perception of better balance, it might reduce some of the frustration that occurs due to the playerbase. 


 

If running my mouth determined my winrate, I'd be a Super Unicum






Also tagged with Idea, suggestion, discussion

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users