Jump to content


I'll be honest, I like Proving Ground


  • Please log in to reply
149 replies to this topic

iAmEbola #41 Posted Jan 11 2016 - 18:48

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 11973 battles
  • 7,166
  • [GURUS] GURUS
  • Member since:
    02-06-2015

View PostIron_Soul_Stealer, on Dec 31 2015 - 16:48, said:

Well everyone...:facepalm:

I've decided to drop out of playing higher/mid tiers until I can get a better handle on the basics of the game. As I stated earlier, I don't want to be a burden to my team, so I certainly hope Wargaming takes this Proving Ground concept to the next level.. and makes it available for all tiers. Because the way I'm playing right now....I certainly need the practice...especially in the mid/upper tiers.

 

Before:

Spoiler

 

After:  .....:facepalm:

Spoiler

 

^..I sincerely hope I don't get into trouble for 'naming and shaming' myself....:facepalm:

Like I said, WG....it's time to take this 'AI training' to the next level...yep, it's time.

 

   

 

No, you don't get into trouble for naming & shaming yourself.  I do it all the time.  The problem here is that WG (AFAIK) will not be making these PVE for the Mid Tiers;  well, at least not anytime soon.  And, quite honestly playing Tier II PG won't help you improve in Tier V game play...especially against bots.

 

I'd really like to see the replay on this battle as I am having an extremely hard time understanding how a KV-1 on Himmelsdorf (top tier no less) walks away with zero damage.  I'm not saying this as a slam or anything; I am truly perplexed and would like to see where you went and etc.

 

How upgraded is your KV-1?



Project100 #42 Posted Jan 11 2016 - 19:03

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 2694 battles
  • 684
  • [DHO3] DHO3
  • Member since:
    01-01-2016

View PostiAmEbola, on Jan 11 2016 - 12:48, said:

how a KV-1 on Himmelsdorf (top tier no less) walks away with zero damage

 

How slow is a KV-1?

 

If he headed up the hill alone and no one from the enemy team came that direction, the game could have been all-but-finished by the time he got over the top with all those enemy tanks hunting him.

 

If the all-too-common YOLO-fest blew up in the central park and he wandered into a crossfire, he might not have had time to get a shot off.

 

Yes, replay, please!



iAmEbola #43 Posted Jan 11 2016 - 19:34

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 11973 battles
  • 7,166
  • [GURUS] GURUS
  • Member since:
    02-06-2015

View PostProject100, on Jan 11 2016 - 12:03, said:

How slow is a KV-1?

 

If he headed up the hill alone and no one from the enemy team came that direction, the game could have been all-but-finished by the time he got over the top with all those enemy tanks hunting him.

 

If the all-too-common YOLO-fest blew up in the central park and he wandered into a crossfire, he might not have had time to get a shot off.

 

Yes, replay, please!

 

Even if he went up to the hill alone and the team decimated everyone else; he should've immediately went back down the hill and could've easily defended cap.  Given the sheer amount of 0 damage allies on his team, it looks like most of them yolo'd and died way too early.

 

I sure hope he didn't go center.

 

Looks like, based on the enemy team composition and how they did do damage; that he possibly went the 3 line, got lit up by a scout (Crusader perhaps) and the TDs in the back just decimated him.  My guess is that the enemy KV-1 went the 7/8 line, met the Churchill III & Type 95; easily dispached them as they may have been too new to know the weak spots to do any damage.  KV-1 with the Skoda helped clean up.



Iron_Soul_Stealer #44 Posted Jan 12 2016 - 01:01

    Major

  • Players
  • 3183 battles
  • 9,777
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostProject100, on Jan 11 2016 - 13:03, said:

 

How slow is a KV-1?

 

If he headed up the hill alone and no one from the enemy team came that direction, the game could have been all-but-finished by the time he got over the top with all those enemy tanks hunting him.

 

If the all-too-common YOLO-fest blew up in the central park and he wandered into a crossfire, he might not have had time to get a shot off.

 

Yes, replay, please!

 

Honestly, I'm not even sure how to create and post replays...yet. But I'm currently working on it. Bear with me.

 

In the meantime, and to make a tragically long story short....yes, you nailed it. A KV-1 is VERY slow, and yes, I did try to take the hill...almost alone. Only one other tank went with me, {a fast light}, but he was waaay to fast for me to keep up with. I wish he would have at least waited for me, but no...he yolo'd alone, and was up and over the hill before I could even reach the top. He was quickly knocked out as a result....and I was left virtually alone...still trying to climb that damn hill. By the time I reassessed our dire situation, and made my way back down to our cap... it was too late. Almost our entire team went middle, and tracks {something I almost never like to do..} and we were subsequently steamrolled. *Btw. I always prefer to take the hill in Himmelsdorf, with the appropriate help and support, but hey...sometimes you don't always get the team you want....you get the team you get... 

 

^..TLDR..? I ended up being the last man standing...completely surrounded. Gun hit, engine hit...tracks hit. Didn't even get a chance to return fire. It was over before you could say 'good night Irene'.

 

View Postgonxau, on Jan 11 2016 - 09:33, said:

 

It doesn't have to simulate that many bots though.  We already see 10v10 or 6v6 games when player base cannot support a full 15v15 game.  SerB has already given numerous comments about how he would not make changes to WoT that would slow down a player from entering battle.

 

In my opinion the answer for why they can't just make all the players bots is, "it's not a priority for Wargaming" and also because it has the potential to introduce a whole stack of battles running on the server with only 1 player each in them; depending on the server's capacity and other economics that are opaque to me (e.g. the cost of spinning up servers on demand, etc.) that might degrade the performance overall for very little payoff.

 

That's exactly what I'm talking about here.

Again, I'm not asking for an exact replication of a pub battle.. with 29 other 'bot' players....just a few higher tier bots would do it. What's wrong with even making a 5v5 Proving Ground...but extending it all the way to tier ten..? I'd be happy with that. At least then I'd get some trigger time with some of my brand new upper tier tanks...because right now they're sitting in my garage with zero mileage collecting dust...and that's a damn shame. Yep, true story. I'd love to play them, but I seriously need some practice first...and I sincerely believe this 'AI' training concept using tank bots is the best way to do it.

 

*So, I guess I'm asking how we can push this concept forward with WG, and make it a reality. Is it possible, or am I asking for a pink unicorn..? Let me know...

 

 

 



stubmw #45 Posted Jan 12 2016 - 01:38

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 24360 battles
  • 350
  • Member since:
    02-27-2012
Computers can now beat or at least hold their own against world champion Chess Masters, so I think a nearly unbeatable tank bot/team could be programmed. Might be interesting if they had PvE with different skill levels that you could select and of course the ability to use any of your tanks. Weather WG has the time/resources/money or inclination to do that, who knows.

Project100 #46 Posted Jan 12 2016 - 03:01

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 2694 battles
  • 684
  • [DHO3] DHO3
  • Member since:
    01-01-2016

View PostIron_Soul_Stealer, on Jan 11 2016 - 19:01, said:

*Btw. I always prefer to take the hill in Himmelsdorf, with the appropriate help and support, but hey...sometimes you don't always get the team you want....you get the team you get... 

 

I have just about given up on attempting to take the hill in Himmelsderp. If I ask in chat, I either get zero response or a couple of 'Affirmative!' replies that invariably come from the fast light tanks that end up YOLOing into an early grave. And then it's still a toss up whether enough power goes to take it against whatever the enemy has sent. I'd rather work the 2/3 lines in a Medium or run the railyard if I'm in a Light. At least out there, I can feel effective in a close fight and I can get away if I'm outmatched. Maybe :)

 

I'm hopeful that higher tier games are better about this as there is a better understanding of the tactical importance of the hill and fewer YOLO rushes across the park into enemy territory looking for a fast cap.

 

View PostIron_Soul_Stealer, on Jan 11 2016 - 19:01, said:

Again, I'm not asking for an exact replication of a pub battle.. with 29 other 'bot' players....just a few higher tier bots would do it. What's wrong with even making a 5v5 Proving Ground...but extending it all the way to tier ten..? I'd be happy with that. At least then I'd get some trigger time with some of my brand new upper tier tanks...because right now they're sitting in my garage with zero mileage collecting dust...and that's a damn shame. Yep, true story. I'd love to play them, but I seriously need some practice first...and I sincerely believe this 'AI' training concept using tank bots is the best way to do it.

 

*So, I guess I'm asking how we can push this concept forward with WG, and make it a reality. Is it possible, or am I asking for a pink unicorn..? Let me know...

 

I would love to see a more expanded use of the Proving Ground model, too. Something with a difficulty slider from Casual to Hardcore, options to set 5v5, 10v10, or 15v15, and an ability to select the map you want to see. 5v5 matches could be set to allow a single player to play, while 10v10 would require 2 and 15v15 would remain as it is now with 3 or more.

 

Maybe if there was an expanded Proving Ground, people would actually learn a bit about the maps before dying on them a gazillion times and blaming MM the whole time.

 

A much as I would like to see Proving Ground matches replicate Random Battles as closely as possible, I really don't see WG putting time and/or money into it. Too busy with other things that the marketing department has decided will make money. We'll see...



iAmEbola #47 Posted Jan 12 2016 - 16:23

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 11973 battles
  • 7,166
  • [GURUS] GURUS
  • Member since:
    02-06-2015

A KV-1 on Himmelsdorf is better suited to take TANK ALLEY  (7/8 line) as it doesn't have any depression to take the hill.  Tank alley has several hull down positions that serve the KV-1 really well.  Once you noticed you were alone, you should've immediately came down off the hill and put that gun to use.  Never go on a flank alone, no good will come of it.

 

I have an extremely hard time believing you were the last man standing, ISS.  You just aren't last man standing with 0 damage.  I could be wrong...but I have my reservations given your penchant for passing on really bad information.

 

As long as you have replays turned on in the game settings, you can upload them to wotreplays.com and then provide the link to the specified replay here on the forum.

 

For example: T1 Heavy Carry Hard - Is a recent game I had where even as a Tier V in a Tier VII match...I carried the team to a victory.



iAmEbola #48 Posted Jan 12 2016 - 16:26

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 11973 battles
  • 7,166
  • [GURUS] GURUS
  • Member since:
    02-06-2015

View PostIron_Soul_Stealer, on Jan 11 2016 - 18:01, said:

*So, I guess I'm asking how we can push this concept forward with WG, and make it a reality. Is it possible, or am I asking for a pink unicorn..? Let me know...

 

If you'd read the replies that were directed at you, you would've noticed several that said it wasn't a reality and gave very good opinions as to why.  I'd wish you would pay half as much attention to what others tell you as you do for spamming the same stupid questions over and over and over and over and over and over and over again.



deadtanksociety #49 Posted Jan 13 2016 - 02:15

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 512 battles
  • 512
  • Member since:
    05-20-2013

View PostiAmEbola, on Jan 12 2016 - 07:26, said:

 

If you'd read the replies that were directed at you, you would've noticed several that said it wasn't a reality and gave very good opinions as to why.  I'd wish you would pay half as much attention to what others tell you as you do for spamming the same stupid questions over and over and over and over and over and over and over again.

lulz i think hes ignoring you bro. he prolly put you on his naughty list for being an [edited]on his other thread. and now i can see why lol



Arkinneas #50 Posted Jan 13 2016 - 04:43

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 8262 battles
  • 28
  • [COPS] COPS
  • Member since:
    03-27-2014
I believe that the Proving Ground was a step in the right direction, but I believe certain things should be changed. First of all, I believe that in Proving Grounds, if an "experienced" (played more than 10 battles=no xp or creds from PG) They shouldn't get a 100% loss. Why not let them have free repairs and ammo? I mean, they aren't GETTING anything out of PG, so why should they lose creds? I think that they should make the same change to training rooms for the same reason. Training rooms are for screwing around (mostly, except some clans who actually TRAIN their members:ohmy:) and, either way, I see no reason for WG to make participants pay for their shells, unless WG wanted people to not spam premium ammo in training rooms, which is just... just...:facepalm: All joking aside, I would really like to know if WG would remove ammo costs for TRs and PGs, and, I'm looking forward to a PVE mode, such as in WoWs. I wonder where Wargaming will go with the whole PvE concept.

Iron_Soul_Stealer #51 Posted Jan 14 2016 - 23:19

    Major

  • Players
  • 3183 battles
  • 9,777
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Postdeadtanksociety, on Jan 12 2016 - 20:15, said:

lulz i think hes ignoring you bro. he prolly put you on his naughty list for being an [edited]on his other thread. and now i can see why lol

^.."Check out the big brain on Brad"..."Correctamundo!"...:coin: And if he hasn't figured it out by now...I don't think he ever will. It's kinda strange too, because I never respond to any of his posts, or even visit any of his threads, but yet.. he repeatedly and relentlessly stalks "follows" me around this forum just looking for ridiculous and arbitrary reasons to insult and pounce on me. 

Spoiler

 

*And on that note, I have started putting all the forum shills, kool-aid-zombies, cowardly-alts, and "large anal openings" on my ignore list. Now their posts and PM's go directly into the trash...where they belong. I suggest you do the same.

 

View Poststubmw, on Jan 11 2016 - 19:38, said:

Computers can now beat or at least hold their own against world champion Chess Masters, so I think a nearly unbeatable tank bot/team could be programmed. Might be interesting if they had PvE with different skill levels that you could select and of course the ability to use any of your tanks. Weather WG has the time/resources/money or inclination to do that, who knows.

 

^..Exactly, and I was just listening to the news today about autonomously driving "smart cars"....that can now park, and even change lanes for you. So I don't think it's "stupid", or "unreasonable", or even a 'stretch of the imagination' to respectfully suggest that WG takes their AI {Artificial Intelligence} Battle Training concept to the next level, and extends our Proving Grounds all the way to tier ten. So, not only do I believe this 'AI tank-bot' concept is possible, but I sincerely believe it's the future. Many players on this thread have already expressed their interest in wanting to see this happen....and the only thing that I can see that's "stupid", around here...is the lame excuses for not doing it.

 

View PostgLiTcH03, on Jan 12 2016 - 22:43, said:

I believe that the Proving Ground was a step in the right direction, but I believe certain things should be changed. First of all, I believe that in Proving Grounds, if an "experienced" (played more than 10 battles=no xp or creds from PG) They shouldn't get a 100% loss. Why not let them have free repairs and ammo? I mean, they aren't GETTING anything out of PG, so why should they lose creds? I think that they should make the same change to training rooms for the same reason. Training rooms are for screwing around (mostly, except some clans who actually TRAIN their members:ohmy:) and, either way, I see no reason for WG to make participants pay for their shells, unless WG wanted people to not spam premium ammo in training rooms, which is just... just...:facepalm: All joking aside, I would really like to know if WG would remove ammo costs for TRs and PGs, and, I'm looking forward to a PVE mode, such as in WoWs. I wonder where Wargaming will go with the whole PvE concept.

 

^..Yep, I agree with your first point. I think this AI training concept is definitely a step in the right direction. Regarding your second point, and to be fair to Wargaming's current system of players having to pay for their ammo in these modes...I disagree with you...and I'll explain why:

 

*First off, I agree that we shouldn't have to pay for tank repairs in team training, or Proving Ground, however, we should at least have to pay for our ammo used in these modes. This keeps a fresh and steady supply of players going back into pub battles to re-stock credits for purchasing ammo etc. and keeps the game functioning smoothly. If we didn't have this 'necessary duty', then we may experience even lower server populations than we currently have...and that would be disastrously unsustainable. 

 

Do you see that now..?

 



Spanktankk #52 Posted Jan 14 2016 - 23:22

    Major

  • Players
  • 34217 battles
  • 11,049
  • [KFB] KFB
  • Member since:
    04-19-2011
so if Proving Grounds is playing against bots... what are Pub Matches then?????

iAmEbola #53 Posted Jan 15 2016 - 18:35

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 11973 battles
  • 7,166
  • [GURUS] GURUS
  • Member since:
    02-06-2015

I don't care who ignores me.  As I've stated before I will continue to correct misinformation no matter how nice of a package it is delivered in.  Hopefully, other new players will be the ones that read and benefit...which is who I'm really interested in helping.

 

Because...

 



capt_jay #54 Posted Jan 17 2016 - 03:28

    Captain

  • Players
  • 19955 battles
  • 1,082
  • Member since:
    08-28-2013

View PostWOT_MyrA, on Dec 22 2015 - 17:53, said:

 

Seriously, though, I think it should be hammered into new players that the Proving Grounds is a good place to get your feet wet with controlling your tank and shooting the gun without the higher level of competition that happens in Randoms.

 

I'd like them to take it a step further, I would like it to be REQUIRED that new players play proving grounds for their first ~ 25-50 games or something, give them the same tech tree choices etc, let them learn the game in a place where it doesn't matter, no one is screaming at them for being a noob etc



Iron_Soul_Stealer #55 Posted Jan 19 2016 - 23:54

    Major

  • Players
  • 3183 battles
  • 9,777
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostProject100, on Jan 11 2016 - 21:01, said:

......

I would love to see a more expanded use of the Proving Ground model, too. Something with a difficulty slider from Casual to Hardcore, options to set 5v5, 10v10, or 15v15, and an ability to select the map you want to see. 5v5 matches could be set to allow a single player to play, while 10v10 would require 2 and 15v15 would remain as it is now with 3 or more.

 

Maybe if there was an expanded Proving Ground, people would actually learn a bit about the maps before dying on them a gazillion times and blaming MM the whole time.

 

A much as I would like to see Proving Ground matches replicate Random Battles as closely as possible, I really don't see WG putting time and/or money into it. Too busy with other things that the marketing department has decided will make money. We'll see...

^...That kinda reminds me of my old Atari 2600 system...:D Didn't it have an option switch at the back where a player could switch from novice to expert..? *Excellent idea, btw....and I would certainly like to see an AI battle training-bot-program with a difficulty option/setting that provides the player with a similar "switch" as my old Atari.

Maybe we could have a setting for:  novice/-intermediate/-expert...  newbie/ average/ "blunicum"...;)

 

View Postcapt_jay, on Jan 16 2016 - 21:28, said:

 

I'd like them to take it a step further, I would like it to be REQUIRED that new players play proving grounds for their first ~ 25-50 games or something, give them the same tech tree choices etc, let them learn the game in a place where it doesn't matter, no one is screaming at them for being a noob etc

 

^..Dude, so do I. And there's an excellent thread that was just posted a few days ago. I was going to start another suggestion thread regarding this same topic {Extending Proving Grounds}, over on the feedback/suggestions section, but another member beat me to it. Have a look when you get a chance, it's a good idea:

 

http://forum.worldoftanks.com/index.php?/topic/480978-extended-proving-ground-mode/page__pid__9789183#entry9789183

Hope to see you there...:rolleyes:

 

 



Badabingg #56 Posted Jan 25 2016 - 17:59

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 6928 battles
  • 313
  • [W-UN2] W-UN2
  • Member since:
    12-07-2015

I'll be a little contrarian here (moi?)

If Proving Grounds/Bots/Solo play  is a WG revenue issue, I would be willing to pay

to have the Proving Grounds as  a game (eg.score against the clock) or for solo training.

I can see it being easy to play with cost/incentive , hey, isn't that what WG's business is anyway?

Giving us incentive to give them money?

IF I am willing to pay 200gold to train an icon, er, crew member, I am sure willing to pony up for training

someone near and dear to me. Uh, me (my favoritest person). Isn't there a model for this in Premium Membership?

 

I am happy to have found work arounds, one of which is Team Training Solo, by having someone with an invite join you and be AFK.

This probably consumes gobs of server resource, for which I would happily pay if I couldn't find someone to play a "dummy" hand.

Really, the actual cost to WG per player minute had to allow them a pretty good available margin, and with 4mil players

an available market.

 



Iron_Soul_Stealer #57 Posted Feb 02 2016 - 16:30

    Major

  • Players
  • 3183 battles
  • 9,777
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Postcapt_jay, on Jan 16 2016 - 21:28, said:

 

I'd like them to take it a step further, I would like it to be REQUIRED that new players play proving grounds for their first ~ 25-50 games or something, give them the same tech tree choices etc, let them learn the game in a place where it doesn't matter, no one is screaming at them for being a noob etc

 

Dude, this 'AI' training concept is not just for "new players"....it's for any player that's still having problems learning the game, and the mechanics.

 

And, on that note...

I'm such a horrible player, I can't even seem to win in a tier 2 battle now....so I guess I'll have to drop down to tier 1....:facepalm: True story...

 

 



TLWiz #58 Posted Feb 02 2016 - 16:35

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 20835 battles
  • 9,372
  • [DSSRT] DSSRT
  • Member since:
    12-26-2014
I do think that if you are disallowed from winning credits in Proving Ground you should not be charged for repairs and ammo.  With AW having their AI mode at all tiers I do suspect that WG has to see that it would be beneficial to do that in WoT and to allow XP and credit earning, maybe at a slower pace than PvP modes.

Iron_Soul_Stealer #59 Posted Feb 02 2016 - 19:04

    Major

  • Players
  • 3183 battles
  • 9,777
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

As I said earlier....

 

I even gave up watching the X-files last night just to play this game again....and give it another chance...

          So, I really don't care if anyone out there calls me a "quitter"....  I won't be making that mistake again any time soon...:facepalm:



NuclearCommando #60 Posted Feb 02 2016 - 20:38

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 2783 battles
  • 55
  • [AJ] AJ
  • Member since:
    11-21-2015
Iron you do realize that many of these people who "stalk" around your threads are visiting every thread, not just your own, and giving advice to everyone, not just you?
Ebola is a good person, helped me when I made my first topic asking for advice on what to do, and then turns around and kills me with his OI when I encounter him in a match XD
The advice that's been given to you is solid, and you choose to ignore it.
Everyone wants to go hill, and I'll admit I run it in my heavies too. But situational awareness is needed as well. There are times I abandon my initial plans because I am needed elsewhere, or if every heavy on my team is going hill (why?), I'll be the sole runner in tank alley.
Since I got a lot of mid-tier tanks I thought about seeing if you'd want to run practice in them, but seeing as how you are adverse to sound advice, I question even doing so.
What are you running your crew training at? If it's 50%, no wonder you're doing bad. 75% is needed to even participate in the mid-tier range.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users