Jump to content


Thoughts for future Clan Wars


  • Please log in to reply
34 replies to this topic

sidewinderwill #21 Posted Dec 10 2017 - 00:33

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 47001 battles
  • 112
  • [SIDE] SIDE
  • Member since:
    04-28-2013
So I guess we forget about SIDE that held 30 provinces on T6 and moved up to 8's....Also earned 92k gold at T10....The T10 map needs improvement. This event sucks and a very small number of clans hold land at T10 and they do NOT fight each other and it is simply BS....

dominator_98 #22 Posted Dec 10 2017 - 20:10

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 15968 battles
  • 1,475
  • [SCRAM] SCRAM
  • Member since:
    12-08-2014

View Postsidewinderwill, on Dec 09 2017 - 17:33, said:

So I guess we forget about SIDE that held 30 provinces on T6 and moved up to 8's....Also earned 92k gold at T10....The T10 map needs improvement. This event sucks and a very small number of clans hold land at T10 and they do NOT fight each other and it is simply BS....

 

The fact that one clan held 30 provinces at tier 6 shows exactly what is wrong with the t6 map.

 

I agree that the t10 map needs work since it is practically just as stagnant as when there were 6s and 8s.



Otter_von_Bismarck #23 Posted Dec 10 2017 - 20:26

    Captain

  • Players
  • 17369 battles
  • 1,433
  • [OTTER] OTTER
  • Member since:
    02-18-2011
The future of CW should be the past. Give us 1.0 on the European map as it was in circa 2012. Just add more territory in North Africa if a bigger sand box for bad clans is necessary.

scharnhorst310 #24 Posted Dec 10 2017 - 20:31

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 24440 battles
  • 5,815
  • Member since:
    05-04-2011

We just don't have the population to warrant tier 6, 8, and 10 arenas. LZs should have a minimum of 8 clans a night in each one; instead you would see 1, maybe 2 in tier 10; sometimes less in the lower tiers. Competition is what ends stagnation. 

 

I'd keep it tier 10, but i'd great different regions of the map where you got zones for matches with 7, 10, and 15. The whole tier 6 and 8 thing doesn't matter much. Way overblown how much you can learn fro tier 6 vs tier 10, the meta is completely different. If you can't field 7 tier 10s, 6+ years after the game has come out... with all the things wg has done to make the grind easier; than you have no hope anyway in the competitive arena. 



sidewinderwill #25 Posted Dec 11 2017 - 05:53

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 47001 battles
  • 112
  • [SIDE] SIDE
  • Member since:
    04-28-2013
We did 1400 battles on the t6 map, I would not want to do it again it was a grind 13 battles a night. I don't mind the T10 map only but the top clans don't fight each other T6 we did. It is a bunch of garbage.

Hardcorpse #26 Posted Dec 11 2017 - 07:22

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 23938 battles
  • 33
  • [D-DAY] D-DAY
  • Member since:
    12-30-2013

View Post164thLeichteAfrikaDiv, on Dec 05 2017 - 16:20, said:

 

Perhaps WG needs to bring back weekly tournaments cause as of right now there is no reason to own any tank that isn't Tier 6, 8 (for SH's) or 10. Lot's of tanks in our garage's are begging for competitive play at their respective tiers. 

 

I agree with bringing back the tournaments for the 'off-tier' tanks. As explained above, this gives incentive to keep them, which not only adds fun to the game, but also keeps money flowing to WG because players will want to buy more garage slots, crew retraining, permanent camo, etc., rather than just quickly and cheaply playing-through the off-tiers.

 

The regular CW season sucks now, so my clan is only playing in the campaigns where we can earn camo, premium tanks, or other unique rewards. Sorry, but it is just not worth my time to work hard for 3 weeks to earn 50 cents worth of gold. We have found the Tier X Advances to be much more fun than CW.


Edited by Hardcorpse, Dec 11 2017 - 07:23.


dominator_98 #27 Posted Dec 11 2017 - 17:23

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 15968 battles
  • 1,475
  • [SCRAM] SCRAM
  • Member since:
    12-08-2014

View Postscharnhorst310, on Dec 10 2017 - 13:31, said:

 

 

I'd keep it tier 10, but i'd great different regions of the map where you got zones for matches with 7, 10, and 15. The whole tier 6 and 8 thing doesn't matter much. Way overblown how much you can learn fro tier 6 vs tier 10, the meta is completely different. If you can't field 7 tier 10s, 6+ years after the game has come out... with all the things wg has done to make the grind easier; than you have no hope anyway in the competitive arena. 

 

^^ This guy knows what's up. Well said.



dominator_98 #28 Posted Dec 11 2017 - 17:28

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 15968 battles
  • 1,475
  • [SCRAM] SCRAM
  • Member since:
    12-08-2014

View PostHardcorpse, on Dec 11 2017 - 00:22, said:

 

 

The regular CW season sucks now, so my clan is only playing in the campaigns where we can earn camo, premium tanks, or other unique rewards. Sorry, but it is just not worth my time to work hard for 3 weeks to earn 50 cents worth of gold. We have found the Tier X Advances to be much more fun than CW.

 

This is exactly why I'm not even doing the current campaign. D-DAY, a clan full of decently skilled, highly active players, probably isn't going to make jack for gold because of how it is set up. If it wasn't for the reward camo, a lot of mid-level clans wouldn't even be doing the campaign and the map would stagnate with a handful of uni clans holding all the provinces again.



Comrade_XAM #29 Posted Dec 11 2017 - 23:23

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 18449 battles
  • 88
  • Member since:
    06-28-2013

View Postscharnhorst310, on Dec 10 2017 - 14:31, said:

We just don't have the population to warrant tier 6, 8, and 10 arenas. LZs should have a minimum of 8 clans a night in each one; instead you would see 1, maybe 2 in tier 10; sometimes less in the lower tiers. Competition is what ends stagnation. 

 

I'd keep it tier 10, but i'd great different regions of the map where you got zones for matches with 7, 10, and 15. The whole tier 6 and 8 thing doesn't matter much. Way overblown how much you can learn fro tier 6 vs tier 10, the meta is completely different. If you can't field 7 tier 10s, 6+ years after the game has come out... with all the things wg has done to make the grind easier; than you have no hope anyway in the competitive arena. 

 

^This

StainlessRat #30 Posted Dec 12 2017 - 18:24

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 31204 battles
  • 28
  • [D-DAY] D-DAY
  • Member since:
    07-18-2013
Seems there’s agreement from most here the map has issues.  I’d have liked to see the earlier times we’ve had before. Doesn’t start until 2000 Eastern now so not sure why east coasters with jobs have to miss out.  Also not sure why there’s so few land in first and last hours compared to middle hours.

We have fun with it but it’s a time sink which is why normal global map isn’t worth the effort. Detachments are just as fun and 1 hour.

07 to all those we’ve fought so far this campaign and those we are yet to fight.  

Vanatee #31 Posted Dec 12 2017 - 18:48

    Captain

  • Players
  • 26063 battles
  • 1,378
  • [CLAWS] CLAWS
  • Member since:
    03-08-2013
I like some of your ideas.  I feel like tier 6/tier 8 CW reduced overall ambitions to reach tier 10 CW capability for many people.  What should have been a system that allowed people to get into CW and then gradually move up the chain to tier 10 really just stagnated in many cases.  The idea of the smaller field sizes but still at tier 10 seems like a good one.  This too would hit the goal of providing a reduced barrier to entry, but not screwing with the incentives to obtain and gain proficiency in tier 10s.  Stronks being the variable tiers works fairly well, but it never felt good on the CW scene imo. 

Mashirasou #32 Posted Dec 19 2017 - 01:35

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 12993 battles
  • 102
  • [MAHOU] MAHOU
  • Member since:
    12-25-2012
If you wanted to implement the 6 8 10 format of clan wars, you'd have to scale the rewards much greater than what was scaled last time.  Tier 10 needs to pay out way more, as does tier 8, tier 6 may see a slight increase as well depending.  The incentives have to be there for clans to leave the pond that they dominate in and go to a larger one where they won't win as much or do as well in.  If that isn't there, then you will see stagnation of the tiering system, where clans like EMPRR stomped tier 6 and  RS stomped tier 8.

dominator_98 #33 Posted Dec 20 2017 - 03:17

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 15968 battles
  • 1,475
  • [SCRAM] SCRAM
  • Member since:
    12-08-2014

View PostMashi__Wow, on Dec 18 2017 - 18:35, said:

If you wanted to implement the 6 8 10 format of clan wars, you'd have to scale the rewards much greater than what was scaled last time.  Tier 10 needs to pay out way more, as does tier 8, tier 6 may see a slight increase as well depending.  The incentives have to be there for clans to leave the pond that they dominate in and go to a larger one where they won't win as much or do as well in.  If that isn't there, then you will see stagnation of the tiering system, where clans like EMPRR stomped tier 6 and  RS stomped tier 8.

 

Agreed. Being mediocre in tier 10 needs to be more rewarding than kicking butt at tier 8. Also, no reward tanks or camos for tier 6-8.

specialk300 #34 Posted Dec 20 2017 - 15:49

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 28136 battles
  • 149
  • [RAIDM] RAIDM
  • Member since:
    03-06-2011
They just need to go back to the old global map tier 10 system with a few tweaks and get rid of all outside mods. Even the playing field and make this game great.

steelrain97 #35 Posted Dec 20 2017 - 23:15

    Captain

  • Players
  • 41136 battles
  • 1,107
  • Member since:
    11-11-2012

Yeah, we brought all this up when they changed to CW2.0 and for a long time after all the changes and adjustments took place. WG refuses to abandon bad ideas. A few of the old suggestions rehashed.

 

1. Tier 6 7v7 has no place in any competitive format. Really tier 6 has no place in any competitive format but especially not 7v7.

2. Area on the GM needs to invert with tier 10 being the largest area and tier 6 (since WG is adamant about keeping it) being the smallest. That would make those areas true "training grounds".

3. Smaller team sizes place more of a premium on skill, not less. The smaller the team size, the greater the premium placed on individual skill. So making teams smaller at the lower tiers of CW is not really helping anyone. Larger teams can cover individual skill gaps between teams through teamwork and coordination.

6. It has to be worth it. Having CW be a handout system for everyone is bad for the community. There needs to be real incentives for success.

 

Also...

 

 

View Postspecialk300, on Dec 20 2017 - 08:49, said:

They just need to go back to the old global map tier 10 system with a few tweaks and get rid of all outside mods. Even the playing field and make this game great.

 

Glad to see we got our first mod user post in this thread, no discussion of CW is complete without a tinfoil hat mod guy.

 






2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users