Jump to content


I have a good idea


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

Spyder600 #1 Posted 07 October 2017 - 04:06 AM

    Private

  • Players
  • 4522 battles
  • 1
  • [DROP1]
  • Member since:
    04-10-2017
I just thought it would be a really good idea to have a rematch button after your tank is destroyed. Say if there was a battle that was a complete blow out, we can rematch if everyone agrees. Not only would it be fun to battle the same team a few times but I feel like it would be a good way for the players to get to know each other more. In addition, i think with more rematches it would cause the servers to not have to work so hard matchmaking. What do you think, please comment? 

thermodelicious #2 Posted 07 October 2017 - 04:21 AM

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 2589 battles
  • 421
  • [LMFA0]
  • Member since:
    04-07-2016
Ok I'm on a team that sucks so bad that we get blown out and I'm going to want to play with them again? Fat chance!

BluesAllDay #3 Posted 07 October 2017 - 04:42 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 6375 battles
  • 1,076
  • [SRV]
  • Member since:
    10-16-2016
Another battle button next to the other battle button for, best two out of three. Once you push it the decision has been made.

dogs look up to you,

cats look down on you,

pigs look you in the eye

and treat you as equal.

 


j0nn0 #4 Posted 07 October 2017 - 05:15 AM

    F2P Skrub

  • Players
  • 12550 battles
  • 1,646
  • [XREGS]
  • Member since:
    06-27-2014
Yeah, no. I’m not gonna waste my time with a bunch of mooks who I very likely would dislike if I got to know them in game. IRL, maybe we could be buddies depending on circumstance, but it’s unlikely. Having the same battle again is the definition of insanity, doing the exact same thing over while expecting a different outcome.

Sometimes, you just gotta sit back and watch them all burn. Don't forget to bring popcorn. You're going to need a snack.


djhiz #5 Posted 07 October 2017 - 05:27 AM

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 11033 battles
  • 319
  • [T-T-T]
  • Member since:
    12-11-2014
Another concern is the toxicity that follows most matches that warrant a “rematch”. Plus, it would only take one person to say no to the rematch, and nobody could rematch. It’s a novel idea, but just like communism; it doesn’t really work where human nature is involved...

"Common sense is not so common"

- Voltaire Jingles


WipWapJaws #6 Posted 07 October 2017 - 06:16 AM

    Clanless Scrub

  • Players
  • 30659 battles
  • 2,237
  • [WKD]
  • Member since:
    07-24-2014
Yea no.......

Lokeen #7 Posted 07 October 2017 - 11:37 AM

    General P. McDangles

  • Club Wargaming
  • 37170 battles
  • 1,439
  • [STORM]
  • Member since:
    09-12-2014

Nice thought but no.....


 

This feature is already available in game, it's called a training room.  Go set up two teams and play each other all day if you want.


Edited by Lokeen, 07 October 2017 - 11:38 AM.

 


 

Mobcrush Streamer!

YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC2NCcrlCTrZDT4yolOhtZeA


acrisis #8 Posted 07 October 2017 - 12:05 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 18604 battles
  • 8,458
  • [EQ-TR]
  • Member since:
    12-27-2014

Plenty of battles are steamrolls one way or the other, with a significant difference in tank strength and tanker knowledge.

 

Ask yourself: Do I want to get steamrolled again with a team consisting of 35-46% players and / or one or two AFKS, who all combined did the same damage as I did? 

 

Could be a good idea in theory, but practically, how'd you get 14 votes for a rematch, after a battle ended? Plenty  of people play till they're dead, exit to garage and start a new battle in another tank. 

 

So between the steamroll losses, players not wanting to be on the same losing team and players having moved on into another battle; ... it would be a waste of development time.

 


 

   Blitz   Community   Coalition   
 BCC Forum Thread | BCC Discord invite

 Mission Poll  |  Goose Event Poll  | ... 
Looney Tooners  ||  Triarii  ||  Blitz University  ||  Basic Training  ||  Mentor

2.8 Blitz Economy - A visual of the credit coefficients | Got lag? =>  Pingplotter thread


_The_Tactition_ #9 Posted 07 October 2017 - 12:46 PM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 15414 battles
  • 718
  • [FOE]
  • Member since:
    02-06-2015
No way. Just no.

It is always Hammer Time! 

 

 


NateDawg2k16 #10 Posted 07 October 2017 - 01:46 PM

    All Hail Dogface, The Great One

  • Players
  • 8807 battles
  • 2,562
  • [META]
  • Member since:
    01-23-2016
No

"If you're gonna go out, go out with a bang." - Nobody said this. But somebody should have.

"Never hold in your farts.  They travel up your spine into your brain, and that's where all the crappy ideas come from."

- Boris

I BEAT THE NUMBER EIGHT CHAFEE PLAYER WHEN THEY WERENT NUMBER 8


Rev_ianc_bell #11 Posted 07 October 2017 - 02:08 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 22063 battles
  • 3,174
  • [PRD]
  • Member since:
    12-05-2014

View Postdjhiz, on 07 October 2017 - 12:27 AM, said:

It’s a novel idea, but just like communism; it doesn’t really work where human nature is involved...

 

Bad analogy- weasel words. Also makes the mistake or invoking human nature- axiomatically a sign of a bad proposition. I give you 0/10 for logic and critical discourse.

 

Next: this idea will NEVER work. You can't seriously expect to get unanimity on replaying a steamroller. This won't even happen %1 of the time and most serious players would NEVER hit that button. Here's a better idea for more interesting play, which largely died as a result of WGs tinkering: scrap provisions and go back to the 2-tier spread MM and maybe players will start to think more about what they're doing and viable strategies OTHER than "for God's sake stay in a clump" will start to exist again


Edited by Rev_ianc_bell, 07 October 2017 - 02:21 PM.

Commandant of Predator Corps [PRD] (formerly  [PDR-R])

Check out my youtube channel

My profile at wotbstars, wblitz.net  and blitzstars

PRD/PDR-R Website: http://www.predatorswotbclan.org or visit our recruitment thread or our discussion thread RED IN TOOTH AND CLAW 


General_Kingsley #12 Posted 08 October 2017 - 06:06 PM

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 3595 battles
  • 277
  • [U-XP]
  • Member since:
    07-20-2014

View PostSpyder600, on 07 October 2017 - 04:06 AM, said:

I just thought it would be a really good idea to have a rematch button after your tank is destroyed. Say if there was a battle that was a complete blow out, we can rematch if everyone agrees. Not only would it be fun to battle the same team a few times but I feel like it would be a good way for the players to get to know each other more. In addition, i think with more rematches it would cause the servers to not have to work so hard matchmaking. What do you think, please comment? 

 

Play a training battle or tournament battle
LETS GO GUYS!!! ITS ME ---------> GENERAL_KINGLEY -------> ILL ADD SOMETHING MORE INTERESTING LATER. BYE AND THX FOR READING!

General_Kingsley #13 Posted 08 October 2017 - 06:07 PM

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 3595 battles
  • 277
  • [U-XP]
  • Member since:
    07-20-2014

View PostRev_ianc_bell, on 07 October 2017 - 02:08 PM, said:

 

Bad analogy- weasel words. Also makes the mistake or invoking human nature- axiomatically a sign of a bad proposition. I give you 0/10 for logic and critical discourse.

 

Next: this idea will NEVER work. You can't seriously expect to get unanimity on replaying a steamroller. This won't even happen %1 of the time and most serious players would NEVER hit that button. Here's a better idea for more interesting play, which largely died as a result of WGs tinkering: scrap provisions and go back to the 2-tier spread MM and maybe players will start to think more about what they're doing and viable strategies OTHER than "for God's sake stay in a clump" will start to exist again

 

I agree 10/10

 

+1


LETS GO GUYS!!! ITS ME ---------> GENERAL_KINGLEY -------> ILL ADD SOMETHING MORE INTERESTING LATER. BYE AND THX FOR READING!




2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users