Jump to content


Future fun mode idea

Amx40 customization

  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

durandal78 #1 Posted Nov 04 2018 - 17:08

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 33252 battles
  • 417
  • Member since:
    07-25-2013

We all loved the Chaffee races, and want WG to bring them back. But fun modes haven't been repeated (other than the soccer mode).

So what about a new race mode? With an unlikely vehicle?

 

I'm talking about a soapbox race, with AMX40s!

Make an all downslope map (a modified El Halluf could work), put some jumps and obstacles in the way. Make multiple individual lanes, similar to the chaffee mode, but with a single tank on each. Adjacent lanes have tanks of opposite teams.

Winner could be decided by averaging finish times, with some measures taken to take into account stuck tanks and afk players ofc.

 

This mode could also be a testing ground for further tank customization, in several Q&A the devs have mentioned that more customization options will come, including 3D customizations.

Give racers the ability to create the wackiest amx40 with paints, and attachments.



Slone #2 Posted Nov 04 2018 - 17:50

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 18912 battles
  • 917
  • [DD-S] DD-S
  • Member since:
    05-30-2011

View Postdurandal78, on Nov 04 2018 - 11:08, said:

We all loved the Chaffee races, ...

 

So what about a new race mode?

 

Oh, we ALL did? Why wasn't my vote counted?

 

If I wanted to play Mario Cart, I'd go play Mario Cart. This is World of Tanks, let's keep it to tank battles.



Wirbelfeld #3 Posted Nov 04 2018 - 18:27

    Captain

  • Players
  • 20445 battles
  • 1,113
  • [R-7] R-7
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011

View PostSlone, on Nov 04 2018 - 16:50, said:

 

Oh, we ALL did? Why wasn't my vote counted?

 

If I wanted to play Mario Cart, I'd go play Mario Cart. This is World of Tanks, let's keep it to tank battles.

 

Nobody forced you to play the fun modes. If you dont like it go pub; nothing is stopping you

dunniteowl #4 Posted Nov 04 2018 - 19:15

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 22680 battles
  • 4,971
  • Member since:
    09-01-2014

The Chaffee Races were an AWESOME diversion from regular play.  If they do that (or your Soapbox Derby idea) I would hope that we get to play on several courses.  Maybe the old Port Map, only with two or three different track layouts?

 

I like the El Halluf map for YOUR idea, though maybe Empire's Border, with all those steep hills could be used?  I know it's unusable terrain for the most part, but a few tweaks here and there on the map and we could start off along the Great Wall?

 

Interesting idea.  Wing Up on this one!

 


OvO



Slone #5 Posted Nov 04 2018 - 23:43

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 18912 battles
  • 917
  • [DD-S] DD-S
  • Member since:
    05-30-2011

View PostWirbelfeld, on Nov 04 2018 - 12:27, said:

 

Nobody forced you to play the fun modes.

 

The problem is, all these BS 'fun' game modes take resources away from WG fixing the obvious flaws in the game. Fix the fundamentals of the game and quit trying to distract us by putting lipstick on a pig.



durandal78 #6 Posted Nov 05 2018 - 01:23

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 33252 battles
  • 417
  • Member since:
    07-25-2013

1. Most of the fun modes are used to test new mechanics or improved existing mechanics in the game, as such I cannot agree that working on these modes is waste of resources.

 

2. What you, me and others see as a problem in the game varies greatly, some want more corridors, others want flat open maps, some want buffs to new old tank lines others want nerfs to new ones. Some want new maps, others want the existing ones to be fixed. Some complain that the battles never last more than 5 minutes, other complain that 5 minutes is too long and battles are too campy. "Everybody" hates arty, but also everybody plays it, some want it removed, others want more lines and premium arties.

 

With that in mind you have to understand this: the game will NEVER be fixed to yours, mine, or anybody elses satisfaction.

 

3. A new game mode will take resources from the map, UI and art departments, and little more, if your problem with the game is MM and or tank balancing, well you have not much to complain about.

 

As a free to play player, I gladly take whatever new mode, map or mechanic WG gives us, if it is something that sucks badly enough I'll stop playing for a while or eventually I'll abandon the game altogether. But I have no right to complain.

 

If youre a paying player I suggest you make WG aware of your discontent by closing your wallet and/or leaving the game while these "fun" modes are running.

There'snt much more you can do about it, but you have more power by withdrawing from purchasing tanks or premium time than my silly suggestion will ever have a chance of becoming reality.



Wirbelfeld #7 Posted Nov 06 2018 - 02:27

    Captain

  • Players
  • 20445 battles
  • 1,113
  • [R-7] R-7
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011

View PostSlone, on Nov 04 2018 - 22:43, said:

 

The problem is, all these BS 'fun' game modes take resources away from WG fixing the obvious flaws in the game. Fix the fundamentals of the game and quit trying to distract us by putting lipstick on a pig.

 

Yes because Wargaming needs a team of fifty developers to figure out that their game is broken as garbage

Nunya_000 #8 Posted Nov 06 2018 - 02:37

    Major

  • Players
  • 21063 battles
  • 13,071
  • [PACNW] PACNW
  • Member since:
    09-20-2013

View PostSlone, on Nov 04 2018 - 14:43, said:

 

The problem is, all these BS 'fun' game modes take resources away from WG fixing the obvious flaws in the game. Fix the fundamentals of the game and quit trying to distract us by putting lipstick on a pig.

 

How do you know that resources are being pulled away?

How do you know more resources are needed on the core game?

The game is far from being broken.  It might not designed exactly like you would like it, but it is very fun to play. 



Slone #9 Posted Nov 06 2018 - 03:09

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 18912 battles
  • 917
  • [DD-S] DD-S
  • Member since:
    05-30-2011

View PostNunya_000, on Nov 05 2018 - 20:37, said:

How do you know that resources are being pulled away?

How do you know more resources are needed on the core game?

 

The 'fun games' don't design themselves. Somebody has to do the work. And even if it's subcontracted, those finances could be spent for the subs to work on the fundamentals.

 

Frontline was a huge hit, yet the 'tweaks' to it are taking 8 months until it can be played again. If they had more resources working on it, the job would be done sooner. MM is screwed up by Wargaming's own admission, yet it's taking them the better part of a year to fix it. More resources devoted to the project could speed up the process. I could go on ...



Nunya_000 #10 Posted Nov 06 2018 - 15:59

    Major

  • Players
  • 21063 battles
  • 13,071
  • [PACNW] PACNW
  • Member since:
    09-20-2013

View PostSlone, on Nov 05 2018 - 18:09, said:

 

The 'fun games' don't design themselves. Somebody has to do the work. And even if it's subcontracted, those finances could be spent for the subs to work on the fundamentals.

 

Frontline was a huge hit, yet the 'tweaks' to it are taking 8 months until it can be played again. If they had more resources working on it, the job would be done sooner. MM is screwed up by Wargaming's own admission, yet it's taking them the better part of a year to fix it. More resources devoted to the project could speed up the process. I could go on ...

 

Yes....I'm sure you could go on.  Most clueless people can.

 

Quantity does not equate to quality in the programming business.  More resources (programmers) does not make programming better or its release necessarily any faster. 



Slone #11 Posted Nov 07 2018 - 02:10

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 18912 battles
  • 917
  • [DD-S] DD-S
  • Member since:
    05-30-2011

View PostNunya_000, on Nov 06 2018 - 09:59, said:

Quantity does not equate to quality in the programming business.  

 

I appreciate that you feel threatened by my opinions and your insults are a reflection of that insecurity, so I will do my best to ignore them.

 

The issues I have listed are NOT a matter of programing, they are design issues. Wargaming's failures are all tied to the fact that they are poor at game design. The work needed on Frontline is to analyze the data from the first run, identify what worked and what needs improvement, and then change the design to accentuate the positives and eliminate or mitigate the negatives. The implementation of those design changes is a small part of the effort. Similar to the MM issues I raised, it's primarily a design issue. Once they design a proper system, implementing is the lesser component.

 

And that is where the 'fun games' distract from the core game. They are busy designing silly side games that appeal to a (small) segment of the customer base instead of using those design assets to improve the core game.



Nunya_000 #12 Posted Nov 07 2018 - 02:25

    Major

  • Players
  • 21063 battles
  • 13,071
  • [PACNW] PACNW
  • Member since:
    09-20-2013

View PostSlone, on Nov 06 2018 - 17:10, said:

 

I appreciate that you feel threatened by my opinions and your insults are a reflection of that insecurity, so I will do my best to ignore them.

 

The issues I have listed are NOT a matter of programing, they are design issues. Wargaming's failures are all tied to the fact that they are poor at game design. The work needed on Frontline is to analyze the data from the first run, identify what worked and what needs improvement, and then change the design to accentuate the positives and eliminate or mitigate the negatives. The implementation of those design changes is a small part of the effort. Similar to the MM issues I raised, it's primarily a design issue. Once they design a proper system, implementing is the lesser component.

 

And that is where the 'fun games' distract from the core game. They are busy designing silly side games that appeal to a (small) segment of the customer base instead of using those design assets to improve the core game.

 

Sorry, I was a bit snarky.  It was early in the morning, pre-coffee.  My apologies.

 

Just because the game is not designed as you feel it should be, that does not mean there are "design issues".  I believe this game is played by over 1.000.000 people world-wide at any one time.  It has lasted about 8 years. You, yourself, have play this game almost 19k times for over 7 years......7 freaking years.  There are very few computer games that I have played for 7 years and are still playing.

 

There may be things that could be improved on, but it seems to have done exactly what it was made to do.....provide entertainment.  And, of course, money....lots and lots of money.



dunniteowl #13 Posted Nov 07 2018 - 03:45

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 22680 battles
  • 4,971
  • Member since:
    09-01-2014

View PostSlone, on Nov 06 2018 - 19:10, said:

 

I appreciate that you feel threatened by my opinions and your insults are a reflection of that insecurity, so I will do my best to ignore them.

 

The issues I have listed are NOT a matter of programing, they are design issues. Wargaming's failures are all tied to the fact that they are poor at game design. The work needed on Frontline is to analyze the data from the first run, identify what worked and what needs improvement, and then change the design to accentuate the positives and eliminate or mitigate the negatives. The implementation of those design changes is a small part of the effort. Similar to the MM issues I raised, it's primarily a design issue. Once they design a proper system, implementing is the lesser component.

 

And that is where the 'fun games' distract from the core game. They are busy designing silly side games that appeal to a (small) segment of the customer base instead of using those design assets to improve the core game.

 

Could you possibly not recognize that your own words give the answer?  While the FL troops are ANALYZING the metrics, maybe the Design Crew has enough available time to Design Event Modes?  Maybe those Event Modes are a Testing Ground for New Ideas, you know, while the Analytics Guys do their thing?


Maybe it's NOT sucking away from other things, maybe it is.  However, the potential for one part of a team to do something completely unrelated to what someone else is doing is not a real imaginative stretch, is it?

 

Just to place a different point of view out there, using your own concepts and ideas.

 

 

OvO



Slone #14 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 03:19

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 18912 battles
  • 917
  • [DD-S] DD-S
  • Member since:
    05-30-2011

View PostNunya_000, on Nov 06 2018 - 20:25, said:

There may be things that could be improved on, ...

 

It's a good game, no argument there. But it could be better. And Wargaming has admitted to some of those shortcomings. As a loyal customer, I want the game to be fixed NOW. And when I see them wasting time on what I feel are BS events, it just adds to the frustration.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users