Jump to content


Play for Fun

play for fun

  • Please log in to reply
147 replies to this topic

Nunya_000 #41 Posted May 15 2018 - 17:50

    Major

  • Players
  • 20993 battles
  • 12,352
  • [PACNW] PACNW
  • Member since:
    09-20-2013

View PostKenshin2kx, on May 15 2018 - 08:45, said:

 

I guess, for me it boils down to this ... I I truly wanted to play in an individualistic manner devoid of the potential for consideration for the desires of others ... I'd honestly play a single player game.  

 

While I always try to do my best in a battle, I really could not care less on whether it is a win or a loss.  Some of my most-fun battles were losses.  I enjoy the individual battles that take place in certain spots on the map.  The "I can kill him before he can kill me" aspect.  And, of course, the blowing up of tanks.

Cognitive_Dissonance #42 Posted May 15 2018 - 17:53

    Major

  • Players
  • 38363 battles
  • 5,927
  • [ANASS] ANASS
  • Member since:
    01-31-2013

View Poststalkervision, on May 15 2018 - 10:45, said:

You actually proved my point in a very round about way. Btw all the convoluted rationalizations  about games just about winning and losing shows how little you uunderstand  games in general

 

We will have to agree to disagree then.

 

But please, make a list of games whose central tenant is NOT to pit opponents against each other resulting in a winner(s) or loser(s). The terms winning and losing in themselves are defining nomenclature and in use for most games around. I would be interested in seeing a comparison of the number of games that do not operate on that tenant vs. those that do. Hell even card games based on drilling for math questions have two possible outcomes, right or wrong, and wrong is not the object of the "game".



Kenshin2kx #43 Posted May 15 2018 - 18:00

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 18111 battles
  • 6,138
  • Member since:
    07-20-2014

View PostNunya_000, on May 15 2018 - 06:50, said:

 

While I always try to do my best in a battle, I really could not care less on whether it is a win or a loss.  Some of my most-fun battles were losses.  I enjoy the individual battles that take place in certain spots on the map.  The "I can kill him before he can kill me" aspect.  And, of course, the blowing up of tanks.

 

Well, your first statement nails it for me ... within the context of doing your best ... win or lose, I see nothing wrong.  It's advice I've given often enough in the game ( particularly in rolfstomps :D ;)  "Do your best ... not one can expect more.  :great:



Nunya_000 #44 Posted May 15 2018 - 18:32

    Major

  • Players
  • 20993 battles
  • 12,352
  • [PACNW] PACNW
  • Member since:
    09-20-2013

View PostKenshin2kx, on May 15 2018 - 09:00, said:

 

Well, your first statement nails it for me ... within the context of doing your best ... win or lose, I see nothing wrong.  It's advice I've given often enough in the game ( particularly in rolfstomps :D ;)  "Do your best ... not one can expect more.  :great:

 

Unfortunately, some players expect others to play at a level of their own "best" and do not consider that 45% WR player with a 200 WN8 may actually be playing THEIR best.

GenPanzer #45 Posted May 15 2018 - 18:46

    Major

  • Players
  • 38851 battles
  • 2,511
  • Member since:
    08-15-2011

View PostApe_Drape, on May 15 2018 - 11:40, said:

 

There is no credit or exp penalty for losing in FL. This is why "play for fun" works in FL. You want to drag the match out for as long as possible in order to farm more credits and exp. Don't get me wrong, I'd still like to win the match, but I'm not having salt rubbed into the wound of losing.

 

Now in RB, you are penalized for losing. I don't want penalized. Losing is not fun. Winning is fun. This is a concept that the Playforfuns don't seem to understand. 

 

So what I have to say to the Playforfuns is this... When you log into the game and join a match, you are on OUR time. If being a loser is "fun", go have your fun on your own time.

 

I think FL has it's own bonuses, but I do think you earn less of both XP and credits if you lose. I have not tested this, but I would not think they rewrote the economic algorithms for this mode. They did add bonuses for reaching higher ranks during the battle. And the earnings are also added up between 2-5 tanks, most of which are probably premium tanks.



Kenshin2kx #46 Posted May 15 2018 - 18:49

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 18111 battles
  • 6,138
  • Member since:
    07-20-2014

View PostGenPanzer, on May 15 2018 - 07:46, said:

 

I think FL has it's own bonuses, but I do think you earn less of both XP and credits if you lose. I have not tested this, but I would not think they rewrote the economic algorithms for this mode. They did add bonuses for reaching higher ranks during the battle. And the earnings are also added up between 2-5 tanks, most of which are probably premium tanks.

 

Actually you are right ... there still is a bonus for the winning team ... it's just a bit harder to see at first because the game totals are higher for FL ... 

Ded_man #47 Posted May 15 2018 - 19:03

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 24745 battles
  • 5,575
  • [-OGR-] -OGR-
  • Member since:
    09-23-2010

View PostGenPanzer, on May 15 2018 - 06:43, said:

So, with Frontline, can everyone, even the most hardened stat lover out there, see how it is possible to play this game JUST for fun?

 

I have read many posters about the new FL say it's great fun and they don't care if they win or lose because it doesn't show up on their records.

 

This is the mentality of about 80% of the player base in pubs, except they don't care if it shows up on their record. I really hope this overall FUN mentality carries over to pubs when this FL mode is over.

 

I can't speak for anyone or everyone, but I have fun win or lose in FL because I simply don't like being penalized for the teams failures. I get it, their failure is my failure, team game, I'm in the team, yadda yadda. The fact that FL rewards me by the effort I put in, win or lose is satisfactory to me.

 

This would be a different story if FL was set up like randoms and the income was based on winning consistently in order to profit or offset the cost of shells and repair bills, like randoms. I've gravitated to playing premiums all the time in random pub matches to maintain my fun, rarely will one ever see me in anything but (until I've gained enough credits to buy a new tank, play a match or two, wash/repeat). When I'm in the red, I'm not having fun. So it's not so much about winning for me to have fun, than it is xp and monetary pixels. I would gladly lose every time as a team if I'm rewarded accordingly as an individual (but of course, I would like to win..competitively).

 

The introduction to Courageous Resistance/Hero Medals introduced was a nice try, but not enough. Random matches are about individual play, reward me based on my individual play. Not simply because I played like a super star, will you throw me a bone.



Mikosah #48 Posted May 15 2018 - 19:04

    Major

  • Players
  • 17582 battles
  • 3,824
  • Member since:
    01-24-2013

I don't think I can have this 'play4fun' attitude in the randoms. I have quotas to meet, mouths to feed, marks to earn, bills to pay.... 

And every time a match ends in a loss, it usually means that my time and energy have been completely wasted even if I played just as well as in a winning game. 



GenPanzer #49 Posted May 15 2018 - 19:12

    Major

  • Players
  • 38851 battles
  • 2,511
  • Member since:
    08-15-2011

View PostDed_man, on May 15 2018 - 13:03, said:

 

I can't speak for anyone or everyone, but I have fun win or lose in FL because I simply don't like being penalized for the teams failures. I get it, their failure is my failure, team game, I'm in the team, yadda yadda. The fact that FL rewards me by the effort I put in, win or lose is satisfactory to me.

 

This would be a different story if FL was set up like randoms and the income was based on winning consistently in order to profit or offset the cost of shells and repair bills, like randoms. I've gravitated to playing premiums all the time in random pub matches to maintain my fun, rarely will one ever see me in anything but (until I've gained enough credits to buy a new tank, play a match or two, wash/repeat). When I'm in the red, I'm not having fun. So it's not so much about winning for me to have fun, than it is xp and monetary pixels. I would gladly lose every time as a team if I'm rewarded accordingly as an individual (but of course, I would like to win..competitively).

 

The introduction to Courageous Resistance/Hero Medals introduced was a nice try, but not enough. Random matches are about individual play, reward me based on my individual play. Not simply because I played like a super star, will you throw me a bone.

 

So you like the ingame ranking system that grants a nice XP bonus that gets larger as you rank up? I think the base xp gains and credits gained is dependent on winning or losing. The ranking system grants a bonus on XP and I'm guessing you are running mostly premiums in battle and are running anywhere from 2-5 tanks in essentially what works out to be about 3 battles, so you see a large spike of credits.

 

As for Courageous Resistance, that rewards you the same as if you won, in both xp and credits, just fyi.



Nunya_000 #50 Posted May 15 2018 - 19:20

    Major

  • Players
  • 20993 battles
  • 12,352
  • [PACNW] PACNW
  • Member since:
    09-20-2013

View PostMikosah, on May 15 2018 - 10:04, said:

I don't think I can have this 'play4fun' attitude in the randoms. I have quotas to meet, mouths to feed, marks to earn, bills to pay.... 

And every time a match ends in a loss, it usually means that my time and energy have been completely wasted even if I played just as well as in a winning game. 

 

A win or a loss is not going to make a difference in your ability to feed those mouths or pay those bills.  Your "time and energy" is already lost the minute you decided to play a game.  The outcome of battles have no relevance.

Ded_man #51 Posted May 15 2018 - 19:21

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 24745 battles
  • 5,575
  • [-OGR-] -OGR-
  • Member since:
    09-23-2010

View PostGenPanzer, on May 15 2018 - 13:12, said:

 

So you like the ingame ranking system that grants a nice XP bonus that gets larger as you rank up? I think the base xp gains and credits gained is dependent on winning or losing. The ranking system grants a bonus on XP and I'm guessing you are running mostly premiums in battle and are running anywhere from 2-5 tanks in essentially what works out to be about 3 battles, so you see a large spike of credits.

 

As for Courageous Resistance, that rewards you the same as if you won, in both xp and credits, just fyi.

This was a defeat, I don't care about the ranking up and XP that much (while nice) and have actually ignored it until a couple days ago when I finally prestiged. I like the damage potential and earning the credits from it, win or lose. 

Spoiler

 


Edited by Ded_man, May 15 2018 - 19:42.


GenPanzer #52 Posted May 15 2018 - 19:39

    Major

  • Players
  • 38851 battles
  • 2,511
  • Member since:
    08-15-2011

View PostDed_man, on May 15 2018 - 13:21, said:

This was a defeat, I don't care about the ranking up and XP that much (while nice) and have actually ignored it until a couple days ago when I finally prestiged. I like the damage potential and earning the credits from it, win or lose. 

Spoiler

 

 

So what would you say is the total number of random battles you would need to run to get the same payout? All wins.

Ded_man #53 Posted May 15 2018 - 19:46

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 24745 battles
  • 5,575
  • [-OGR-] -OGR-
  • Member since:
    09-23-2010

View PostGenPanzer, on May 15 2018 - 13:39, said:

 

So what would you say is the total number of random battles you would need to run to get the same payout? All wins.

 

Excluding the booster, I would need two exceptional games back to back as a victory and those usually are games that run the clock nearing 15 min matches. Realistically, avg play with all vic's to reach 257k, I might gross 50/60k per match if I'm not bottom tier facing hard targets. So 4 to 5 matches.

 

There is no way I've been able to generate this amount of credits in such a short period of time. I started 2 days after FL was released with 1.9mil. You'll see in the pic prior posted I was at a little over 7 mil a few days ago. I know what you're driving at, but it's not happening in Randoms.

Spoiler

 


Edited by Ded_man, May 15 2018 - 19:51.


FrozenKemp #54 Posted May 15 2018 - 20:09

    Major

  • Players
  • 46616 battles
  • 7,187
  • Member since:
    04-24-2011

View PostDeputy276, on May 15 2018 - 10:24, said:

Probably. Certainly not a unanimous reason. Many folks get a great deal of enjoyment out of the game, even if they lose. Games that are "close" and lost often get a "GG". Players can do exceptionally well and still lose a game. So personal satisfaction can trump winning in that case. And of course, somebody has to LOSE a game. So being able to accept losses is part of growing up. Unfortunately, schools nowadays are teaching that bullcrap about "everyone is a winner". Only in real life everyone ISN'T a winner and you have to be able to mentally accept losing. Part of growing up. You lose, brush the dust off, and move on. Try again maybe.

 

Yes, you try to win. But in WOT it often isn't a priority. Especially if someone is trying to do a Personal Mission. I have seen way too many folks just stop any more effort at anything once they complete a Personal Mission.    

 

I wasn't trying to say it was a universal reason :)  WarChild listed a number of possible reasons someone might play and I wanted to add one more to the list. 

 

It's more like - that is my default objective when I launch a game of WoT.  I want to try to do at least well.  I am not launching the game to see what happens if I do random stuff.  

 

And I didn't mean to say that I stomp my feet and sulk when I lose, either.  Part of it is the enjoyment of winning and part if it is the enjoyment of doing something well.  So like you said, you might have a game which comes out to be a loss but you did really well and hopefully get enjoyment out of that.  And sometimes a game is so close - maybe even a 1v1 - and you lose to better play but you can see how the other player outsmarted you and maybe after the game you want to say "gg" to them. 



GenPanzer #55 Posted May 15 2018 - 20:35

    Major

  • Players
  • 38851 battles
  • 2,511
  • Member since:
    08-15-2011

View PostDed_man, on May 15 2018 - 13:46, said:

 

Excluding the booster, I would need two exceptional games back to back as a victory and those usually are games that run the clock nearing 15 min matches. Realistically, avg play with all vic's to reach 257k, I might gross 50/60k per match if I'm not bottom tier facing hard targets. So 4 to 5 matches.

 

There is no way I've been able to generate this amount of credits in such a short period of time. I started 2 days after FL was released with 1.9mil. You'll see in the pic prior posted I was at a little over 7 mil a few days ago. I know what you're driving at, but it's not happening in Randoms.

Spoiler

 

 

I bet it is happening, but it just seems like it's not because you are earning these in 1 FL battle. Maybe you don't run this many premium tanks over the same amount of time. Maybe you don't win 4-5 battles in a row while running boosters. But, again, I've never tested this.

Ded_man #56 Posted May 15 2018 - 20:53

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 24745 battles
  • 5,575
  • [-OGR-] -OGR-
  • Member since:
    09-23-2010

View PostGenPanzer, on May 15 2018 - 14:35, said:

 

I bet it is happening, but it just seems like it's not because you are earning these in 1 FL battle. Maybe you don't run this many premium tanks over the same amount of time. Maybe you don't win 4-5 battles in a row while running boosters. But, again, I've never tested this.

 

It’s like, you’re glossing over facts here. I said I play almost nothing but premiums in randoms. Wins, they don’t matter outside of exp. Image I posted, one premium tank and a loss, no hero medals needed. Test it out, or miss out. 

Flarvin #57 Posted May 15 2018 - 21:05

    Major

  • Players
  • 50968 battles
  • 12,618
  • Member since:
    03-29-2013

View PostCognitive_Dissonance, on May 15 2018 - 11:53, said:

 

We will have to agree to disagree then.

 

But please, make a list of games whose central tenant is NOT to pit opponents against each other resulting in a winner(s) or loser(s). The terms winning and losing in themselves are defining nomenclature and in use for most games around. I would be interested in seeing a comparison of the number of games that do not operate on that tenant vs. those that do. Hell even card games based on drilling for math questions have two possible outcomes, right or wrong, and wrong is not the object of the "game".

 

The object of math card games is to learn. If the math was learned, a right or wrong answer does not matter. 

 

Games like WoT were created to entertain players, not for winning. The entertainment comes during the match, not when the results are shown. 



shinglefoot #58 Posted May 15 2018 - 21:06

    Major

  • Players
  • 22474 battles
  • 2,992
  • [LONER] LONER
  • Member since:
    02-07-2013
     I play for fun...haven't played much lately. I guess I'm not having much fun anymore. My tier 8's have been gathering dust since 3 5 7 MM. I read lots of good things about front line, but I can't be bothered playing. Thank God for spring, outside trumps tanks for the next four or five months.

Kenshin2kx #59 Posted May 15 2018 - 21:15

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 18111 battles
  • 6,138
  • Member since:
    07-20-2014

View Postshinglefoot, on May 15 2018 - 10:06, said:

     I play for fun...haven't played much lately. I guess I'm not having much fun anymore. My tier 8's have been gathering dust since 3 5 7 MM. I read lots of good things about front line, but I can't be bothered playing. Thank God for spring, outside trumps tanks for the next four or five months.

 

My suggestion ... try Front Line at least once ... now don't get me wrong, I totally agree, summers are for outdoor activities so concentrate on that ... but at least try FL ... IMHO, I'd all but given up on my tier 8's ... but now, I'll play FL for as long as they have it up (2 more weeks).  :great:  

GenPanzer #60 Posted May 15 2018 - 21:20

    Major

  • Players
  • 38851 battles
  • 2,511
  • Member since:
    08-15-2011

View PostDed_man, on May 15 2018 - 14:53, said:

 

It’s like, you’re glossing over facts here. I said I play almost nothing but premiums in randoms. Wins, they don’t matter outside of exp. Image I posted, one premium tank and a loss, no hero medals needed. Test it out, or miss out. 

 

Sorry, I forgot about you stating the premium run only.

 

And I have played about a dozen FL battles. I am rank 15. I see the income, if I play premiums, and don't shoot gold rounds. I have played arty too in that mode and I don't see the XP or credits as greatly. That's why I think the algorithm is the same, but everyone, including you are saying it's so awesome and it's fun, win or lose, because you make so much credits/xp. I am saying that I think the earnings are the same in credits and xp, but you get in all in one battle, which is like playing 3-4 pub battles. But FL does have bonuses in XP for ranking, so technically, it is more in FL.

 

Anyway, this discussion was more about the play for fun mentality and how it's ok in FL but not in pubs, yet I think the two modes are pretty damn close (minus the XP bonuses for ranking up).







Also tagged with play for fun

2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users