84 replies to this topic

[Nunya_000]

mjmdiver, on May 16 2018 - 14:22, said:

 

You have been playing for about 5 years, and are at 62,000 matches. You'll be at 100,000 in another three, and there will be a lot of other people like you as well.  What do you think the viability of the game will be when there is a cadre of hugely experienced people and a steady stream of beginners and nothing between because the beginners get stomped all the time?

 

I think that is a game model that is doomed to failure.

 

I'm actually not suggesting this because I feel that "this game isn't fair!" or anything like that. I enjoy myself and am improving and will probably continue to play as long as I have fun. I never feel that I was beaten by anything but my lack  of skills, but my perception is that a lot of beginners understand the game mechanic so little that there is a perception about "unfair this, unfair that".  The game is complex, and the player skills are already a large learning curve for a beginner.  It just seems that it would be advantageous to the game to not stack the deck with 7+ skill crews that we all know a bunch the high match players have and will be adding onto in the future.

 

Sorry, but this has got to be one of the stupidest suggestions I have ever seen on this forum....and that is saying a lot.

 

Some players will always have some improvement advantages over other players because they have been playing longer.  If you truly want a level playing field, then there should only be one tank....everybody's crews have the same exact skills....and all tanks have the same equipment and modules.  Now THAT is a game model that is doomed to failure.

 

You claim that you did not make this suggestion because you feel the "game isn't fair", but that is your whole argument for this suggestion.

 

Training and advancing crews is one of the incentives to play many many battles.  Players will not bother if they know that all of their hard work will be thrown in the garbage once their crews reach a certain level of experience.

[Skott]

I'm not liking the OP's suggestion. I work hard to get my tanks crew skills up and I'm not wanting them to lose them skills either or having to leave the tank. If he wants to do that with his crew then that's fine but leave mine alone please.

[xtc4]

This may be the worst sincerely and respectfully presented idea that I have seen on the forum. Thanks to the poster anyway.

Edited by xtc4, May 17 2018 - 16:44.

[Anublister]

NeatoMan, on May 17 2018 - 15:22, said:

Couldn't mixing up the skilled players also be considered "dumbing" down the game?   It would be telling the skilled players that they will not be able to take advantage of their organizational skills because any players that can organize with them are most likely going to be shipped off to the other team.   You are forcing them to play a less organized game (i.e. a "dumbed" down game).

 

I am encouraging a balanced start. Every battle has a skill match up. Not hard to do and makes it more challenging/rewarding for players of all skill types. I am not saying this needs to be done in clan wars, strongholds, or limiting platoons, tournaments, or any battle mode outside of random (maybe will need this in Frontline, but I don't have a strong opinion on that yet). What I advocate will make the percentage chance of winning a random battle approximate 50%. It will greatly reduce the chance of rofl stomps and in no way dumb down the game. If you are a skilled chess player you don't need to be playing nor should you get any enjoyment out of being matched against a neophyte. In actuality skilled players should find my solution more enjoyable and desirable knowing they won't be able to rest on their laurels as soon as the battle loads up.
 

The specific players who will hate my idea are those who judge their success or ability based on their win rate or wr. These unfortunate souls would have to find another meta to boast about that doesn't entail seal clubbing or playing op tanks that naturally give an advantage.

[Anublister]

mjmdiver, on May 16 2018 - 22:22, said:

 

You have been playing for about 5 years, and are at 62,000 matches. You'll be at 100,000 in another three, and there will be a lot of other people like you as well.  What do you think the viability of the game will be when there is a cadre of hugely experienced people and a steady stream of beginners and nothing between because the beginners get stomped all the time?

 

I think that is a game model that is doomed to failure.

 

I'm actually not suggesting this because I feel that "this game isn't fair!" or anything like that. I enjoy myself and am improving and will probably continue to play as long as I have fun. I never feel that I was beaten by anything but my lack  of skills, but my perception is that a lot of beginners understand the game mechanic so little that there is a perception about "unfair this, unfair that".  The game is complex, and the player skills are already a large learning curve for a beginner.  It just seems that it would be advantageous to the game to not stack the deck with 7+ skill crews that we all know a bunch the high match players have and will be adding onto in the future.

 

As the other posters have weighed in, and as I have said, crew skills aren't super critical after 2 or 3. Just look at them. You should be able to prioritize them and if you think about it realize that other skills you learn in battle such as how to use cover, angling your tank, hp management and target choice along with fire support (e.g. a friend) are more important than having that 4th-7th crew skill.

I play and have had the opportunity to have played a ton of battles. Although I'm somewhat flattered you suggest I'll be around for that 100K battle, I wouldn't bet on it. This game has done exceptionally well to offer the sugar that keeps me hanging around, the novelty of new tank types and country lines. But it's the rare game that can keep that up indefinitely. Also I'm an outlier, so to expect there will be many like me is not good deductive thinking on your part. 

[leon_phelps]

mjmdiver, on May 16 2018 - 21:50, said:

Hey Tsavo, I used to be in the BOT clan before it disbanded...

 

I know that the skilled people won't like a proposal like this at all, but really, do you feel you need a 7-skill crew to take advantage of a newer player with a few thousand matches under their belt?

 

I think not, and I would hope that by the time I have 20,000 or more matches, I am good enough that you could put me in almost any tank with a basic crew and once I know how the tank works, I would be able to match up with just about anyone reasonably, and certainly with a new player...

Dumbest thing ive read today this is a game not real life. You build up crews over time. Your basicly whining you dont have crews others have and want the playing field leveled to suit your casual play Feel entitled much.

[Says]

mjmdiver, on May 16 2018 - 22:50, said:

Hey Tsavo, I used to be in the BOT clan before it disbanded...

 

I know that the skilled people won't like a proposal like this at all, but really, do you feel you need a 7-skill crew to take advantage of a newer player with a few thousand matches under their belt?

 

I think not, and I would hope that by the time I have 20,000 or more matches, I am good enough that you could put me in almost any tank with a basic crew and once I know how the tank works, I would be able to match up with just about anyone reasonably, and certainly with a new player...

 

One of the things we do in this game are grind tanks.  Another is grind skills on crew members.  Would you be cool with WG taking away a tank after a campaign and having you start over?  That is essentially the same thing as retiring our crews.

I don't think it is a fun idea but further I don't see any reason that it would be implemented.  It adds nothing to the enjoyment of the game.

[Kenshin2kx]

... to be fair, I think the intent is fine (who likes a bully) ... but, the method IMHO would do more harm than good ... it would be as bad if not worse than WG choosing a class of vehicle and eliminating it completely "for the good of the player population".    I say possibly worse because it would badly alienate many of those who represent a consistent long term commitment to the game (with the result of possibly leaving) ... while leaving the more fickle and unproven newer players to either stay for the flavor of the month ... or leave for another game.

[RingoMcLennison]

OP, I'm sorry I've been playing this game longer than you, but it's not my fault. So no, don't take my crews away.

[Boxhawk]

Shibadogdog, on May 16 2018 - 17:08, said:

On the other hand I often refrain from getting new tanks when I think about how long it will take to grind out a new crew... You realize every skill you add takes longer then the one before? I have several crews with well over a thousand battles.. I Earned any tiny advantage that gives me!

 

Free XP is your friend.  I used a bunch to train up the Progetto crews on the first two skills.

[Rimrender]

Enough crying over equity, go blow stuff up. 

[BillT]

I'll give the OP credit for out-of-the-box thinking.  But the idea of losing such a big investment is just too demotivating.   You could just as easily say, "Tanks wear out over time, so after 100 games you should lose the tank and have to buy a new one."  That would certainly solve the problem of people who have too many credits, but it's just too burdensome.  

[DPJoseyWales0331]

When the battles end, they can all go home.

[Shaddow_Ghost]

All this will do is "force" people with skilled crew members to not play their tanks in order to keep the skills they do have so they can have an advantage in clan wars and other competitive modes..

[Jryder]

"do you feel you need a 7-skill crew to take advantage of a newer player"

 

Having an experienced crew is in no way 'taking advantage' of anyone. That experienced crew was EARNED, and every single new player has the same opportunity. New players know this-it is part what what drives one to keep playing, ie., grinding crew.

 

And where did this idea come from that more experienced players need to be hamstrung in order to make life easier for less experienced players?

 

Maybe we should start new players with 7 skill crews and the more experienced you get, your crew gets worse? Ya know, to 'balance' things out?

 

Screwing over longer term players to make it easier for new players is a non starter. The game would die in a day.

[Dougy_Fresh]

Entitlement, equality regardless of contribution or accomplishment, trophy for everyone, safe spaces.....all that stuff............is going away.  Thank God.

 

Get used to it and earn it!!!! 

[mrmojo]

Well the developers have spoken about considering a change to crew skills primarily because the current iteration is "difficult" for new players to understand.

They are indeed contemplating a change to the Warships style of captain only probably to be called commander in WoT.

One of the biggest impediments they see is (suprise, suprise) the resistance to the concept by long term players and how to re-imburse all the xp spent training our current crews.

[Captain_Rownd]

Jryder, on May 17 2018 - 21:40, said:

 

And where did this idea come from that more experienced players need to be hamstrung in order to make life easier for less experienced players?

 

Why do "more experienced" players need additional magic crutches that give them perpetual advantages? 

 

 

 

[Worland]

Funny thing, back when I started this game, I thought your crew was killed every time your tank was destroyed. Aww, memories.

[FrozenKemp]

Captain_Rownd, on May 17 2018 - 19:06, said:

 

Why do "more experienced" players need additional magic crutches that give them perpetual advantages? 

 

 

 

 

What makes it so hard for you to understand other people's perspectives and to make blanket incorrect aspersions?