Jump to content


This is the quality of the playerbase now...

WoT Players

  • Please log in to reply
30 replies to this topic

WIZD #21 Posted Apr 03 2020 - 04:24

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 14318 battles
  • 917
  • [ASP] ASP
  • Member since:
    08-16-2015

View PostJolly33, on Apr 03 2020 - 03:58, said:


While this makes sense at first glance, I fail to see how getting continually stopped is fun.  At first I was just in wide-eyed amazement at the "ooh factor" of this game.  After a while, I wanted to do well in a game.  I don't find it fun when I play poorly.  Not sure how anyone can continue to suck and still find that fun.  Just my perspective...

Here's my take on the suck4fun if one doesn't care if they win or lose or if they suck at the game and have no desire to even try then the outcome of battle doesn't matter. How well they do doesn't matter. It's easy to have fun when you don't have to try. I for one hate losing and I hate getting stuck on muppet teams. I'm not great but I'm getting better.


Edited by WIZD, Apr 03 2020 - 04:26.


alf2499 #22 Posted Apr 03 2020 - 04:25

    Major

  • Players
  • 23512 battles
  • 4,376
  • [BOND] BOND
  • Member since:
    08-16-2011

View PostJolly33, on Apr 03 2020 - 03:58, said:


While this makes sense at first glance, I fail to see how getting continually stopped is fun.  At first I was just in wide-eyed amazement at the "ooh factor" of this game.  After a while, I wanted to do well in a game.  I don't find it fun when I play poorly.  Not sure how anyone can continue to suck and still find that fun.  Just my perspective...

 

^

I mean, there was a point where I was so clueless I didn't know there was a sniper view, but I was too taken in by the maps and tank models to notice, eventually, I got tired of being a credit / XP pinata. 

I'm curious how many of the play4funTM crowd would stick around if WG altered MM so it was no longer possible for really bad players to be teamed up with good or even average players, only matched as opponents. And instead of being farmed 55% of the time, and carried the other 45%, it became 90%+ being farmed, how many would stick around.

 

@OP, the majority of the player-base has never been that great, there's a WR distribution curve that's nearly as old as the game that shows how heavily it leans towards the lower end of the skill spectrum. 

What stands out to me, especially as a player who took a 4 year break from the game, is the increased level of salty butthurt and tinfoil hattery.

I will never forget a game 7 odd years ago where a Tiger 2 hiding behind a building on Malinovka south spawn was ammo racked from full HP by an ISU who sniped a shot through the window across the field, his response was a "wow nice shot man" to the ISU.

I can't imagine a similar response from today's player-base getting ammo racked sniped by such a shot, he'd rush to the forums and spam threads and posts about how game is rigged, the sniper was hacking, WG is out to get him, etc. etc.


Edited by alf2499, Apr 03 2020 - 04:39.


choSenfroZen_1 #23 Posted Apr 03 2020 - 04:52

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 6347 battles
  • 694
  • [GITS] GITS
  • Member since:
    12-26-2015

View PostGenPanzer, on Apr 02 2020 - 15:30, said:

This is an interesting take on the situation.

I am genuinely curious how you would approach a game of cards, or checkers, chess, or any other type of game, ever. Or how you used to approach those games, as you may not really play them now, I don't know.

I'm curious if you ever approached any of those leisure games with any kind of competitive nature. Like, if, you were ever disappointed/upset/annoyed that your brother/sister/friend beat you at any of those games.


Chess.

Disappointment losing , sure. Did I throw throw the chess pieces across the room, no.

 

I love the game, and genuinely try to beat my brother, it just is not a big deal to lose, the loser resets the board, and we play more.

 

Did I spend a pile of time in the library learning more about chess, no.

I find that

playing is entertaining enough. I still try to beat my brother at chess, we play online as he lives far south.

There are enough things that require serious competition, such as work, that I just do not see the need.

Chess is a distraction, a pleasure, and making it something serious seems contrary.

View PostJolly33, on Apr 02 2020 - 18:58, said:


While this makes sense at first glance, I fail to see how getting continually stopped is fun.  At first I was just in wide-eyed amazement at the "ooh factor" of this game.  After a while, I wanted to do well in a game.  I don't find it fun when I play poorly.  Not sure how anyone can continue to suck and still find that fun.  Just my perspective...

 

Trying to do well, and playing for fun are not mutually exclusive.

Saying I play for fun and do not care about win or lose, does not mean I do not try.

I use the example method, I use XVM to decide who to follow , watch and apprentice for that game.

When I die, I know why usually, and then try to not repeat that mistake. I just will not spend time worrying about it.

 

continue to suck and still find that fun

Well this is the essence.

I do not know, nor do I care what my stats are. I do not look, I never look at anyone else's.

I do not know whether or not I suck, and I am not desperate to find out. It makes no difference, I play til destroyed or end game, then pick another tank and enter another battle.

 

If I get destroyed, I am usually in another game, when that ends. Unless there was something interesting, I dont look at the game results. Frequently do not even know if it was a win or loss.

 

 



GenPanzer #24 Posted Apr 03 2020 - 05:42

    Major

  • Players
  • 46865 battles
  • 4,191
  • [EFFIT] EFFIT
  • Member since:
    08-15-2011

View PostchoSenfroZen_1, on Apr 02 2020 - 22:52, said:


Chess.

Disappointment losing , sure. Did I throw throw the chess pieces across the room, no.

 

I love the game, and genuinely try to beat my brother, it just is not a big deal to lose, the loser resets the board, and we play more.

 

Did I spend a pile of time in the library learning more about chess, no.

I find that

playing is entertaining enough. I still try to beat my brother at chess, we play online as he lives far south.

There are enough things that require serious competition, such as work, that I just do not see the need.

Chess is a distraction, a pleasure, and making it something serious seems contrary.

 

Trying to do well, and playing for fun are not mutually exclusive.

Saying I play for fun and do not care about win or lose, does not mean I do not try.

I use the example method, I use XVM to decide who to follow , watch and apprentice for that game.

When I die, I know why usually, and then try to not repeat that mistake. I just will not spend time worrying about it.

 

continue to suck and still find that fun

Well this is the essence.

I do not know, nor do I care what my stats are. I do not look, I never look at anyone else's.

I do not know whether or not I suck, and I am not desperate to find out. It makes no difference, I play til destroyed or end game, then pick another tank and enter another battle.

 

If I get destroyed, I am usually in another game, when that ends. Unless there was something interesting, I dont look at the game results. Frequently do not even know if it was a win or loss.

 

 

 

So, would you say your interest in the game is very low then. I mean most ppl when they find something they like, they do try to get better at it, by watching videos, or going to the library.

 

It's ok that you don't really care, but I guess that's really the difference - levels of caring.

 

I get a little annoyed and maybe even angry once in a while if I lose a battle (well, it's usually fueled by a losing streak that I'm tired of being in). I do get over it very quickly - like in a min or 2, unless it's prolonged due to texting back and forth with someone about what made me angry ;).

 

I don't consider the higher competitive modes this game offers a worthwhile alternative to pubs. Usually all the other modes require you to drive certain tanks. And then there is the power creep that destroys any hope of your favorite tank being useful in those modes. Or, they are coupled with rewards that players will do anything to get them.

 

I think this is where a lot of the requests for skill based MM comes from. Those ppl want the competition without the limitations of tank selection and/or the mentality of "I have to earn the rewards so screw everyone else on the team". Those that play to have fun and don't care about winning will stay at the lower tiers of skill in pubs and have their fun, while those that look for just a little more competition will get placed with more players that also want that competition, all the way up to the super diehards playing together.

 

I guess as long as everyone with different outlooks and expectations are placed in the same battles, there will always be this argument of caring or playing for fun. Unfortunately, the ones that care less will always have to hear and deal with the voices of the ones that care more.



choSenfroZen_1 #25 Posted Apr 03 2020 - 06:31

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 6347 battles
  • 694
  • [GITS] GITS
  • Member since:
    12-26-2015

View PostGenPanzer, on Apr 02 2020 - 20:42, said:

So, would you say your interest in the game is very low then. I mean most ppl when they find something they like, they do try to get better at it, by watching videos, or going to the library.

It's ok that you don't really care, but I guess that's really the difference - levels of caring.

I get a little annoyed and maybe even angry once in a while if I lose a battle (well, it's usually fueled by a losing streak that I'm tired of being in). I do get over it very quickly - like in a min or 2, unless it's prolonged due to texting back and forth with someone about what made me angry I don't consider the higher competitive modes this game offers a worthwhile alternative to pubs. Usually all the other modes require you to drive certain tanks. And then there is the power creep that destroys any hope of your favorite tank being useful in those modes. Or, they are coupled with rewards that players will do anything to get them.

I think this is where a lot of the requests for skill based MM comes from. Those ppl want the competition without the limitations of tank selection and/or the mentality of "I have to earn the rewards so screw everyone else on the team". Those that play to have fun and don't care about winning will stay at the lower tiers of skill in pubs and have their fun, while those that look for just a little more competition will get placed with more players that also want that competition, all the way up to the super diehards playing together.

I guess as long as everyone with different outlooks and expectations are placed in the same battles, there will always be this argument of caring or playing for fun. Unfortunately, the ones that care less will always have to hear and deal with the voices of the ones that care more.

On the contrary, as I am sitting in a village well above the arctic circle, with a lot of time.

I play 20-30 games a day. I am very interested and entertained.

 

 Since my desire to win is less than, say yours, at chess, that does not mean there is no learning.

I watch when he plays, and try to learn from mistakes. It took over 50 years, but I do beat him a bit now.

 

When I skied as a kid, I was serious. I really wanted to be Jean Claude  Killy, a winning racer from France. I practiced, and practiced.  I was coached, and I watched movies and TV of races. It is all I talked about. I continued into high school and realized that I was a good racer (locally, if that), but I was never going to be selected for the Provincial team let alone Olympic.

The ski hills a made for everyone, anyone can, and does ski. When I competed, I cursed the slow amateur skiers, told them to go back to the bunny hill til, they got gud.

 

My coach hauled me aside. I had the training and inclination to ski faster than them, but I was given a outlet. We had portions of the hill to ourselves, with ever changing slalom runs. Races and replays.

If I wanted to ski fast, there was a place and time. The public runs are, public.  I had to learn to just live with the other skiers.

 

Each run , these , lets say tomatoes, got better , just with their fun skiing. None wanted to crash all the time, but had fun despite it.

 

I realized that I wanted all the skiers to have that same level of dedication and desire, I had. This is what I see with this game.

 

Ah, skilled based MM.

Well, I think there are some huge drawbacks.

First, those high rated players would have to wait a real long time to get into games. Basically the top 5% would be a lonely section of the MM. Then, all of a sudden, half of you, would get kicked out, to a lower server, because not everyone can win.

 

Who would I get to follow. There would be no good examples, and I think the higher MM would be upset at who was rising to join them.

Edited by choSenfroZen_1, Apr 03 2020 - 06:41.


Jryder #26 Posted Apr 03 2020 - 06:37

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 14117 battles
  • 3,325
  • Member since:
    11-01-2010

If playing the game with Untermensch is a bridge too far, quit.

In any case, quit whining about the 'player base'. It is what it is and no amount of panty clutching will change it. The teenage girl whine-fest got old 5 years ago.



Krupp_Sabot #27 Posted Apr 03 2020 - 07:32

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 12595 battles
  • 622
  • Member since:
    07-03-2015
Well with the increase of grindy stuff like BP and the last 2 months of TR it will only get worse.

Cupujoe #28 Posted Apr 03 2020 - 17:25

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 11 battles
  • 348
  • Member since:
    12-25-2019

View PostchoSenfroZen_1, on Apr 03 2020 - 04:52, said:

 

I use the example method, I use XVM to decide who to follow , watch and apprentice for that game.

 

 

I do not know, nor do I care what my stats are. I do not look, I never look at anyone else's.

 

 

 

Comment #1 contradicts comment #2.

 

If you use XVM you know exactly what your stats are. 



Oldpinetree #29 Posted Apr 03 2020 - 17:51

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 10018 battles
  • 44
  • Member since:
    05-22-2013
Nobody ever complains about the less skilled players on the other team. Noooooo, then its always "My amazing skill allowed me to dominate!"

TomatoMagnet #30 Posted Apr 03 2020 - 18:20

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 58129 battles
  • 83
  • [ONION] ONION
  • Member since:
    03-07-2016

View Post24_inch_pythons, on Apr 02 2020 - 20:52, said:


 To be fair I didn't say specifically what I was referring to in the video, but... I think it should be pretty obvious that when 15 people on the red team allow a VK to "scout", unspotted, from the red team's scouting position... there's something wrong. That should never, ever, ever be allowed to happen, ever, period. The sheer muppetry required of the red team for a VK to be allowed get to that spot undetected and, once there, to out-spot the enemy light tanks is beyond mind blowing.


Maybe take another look at the game.  Two scouts die early and there is an LTG left who most likely has less view range than the vk100.. The vk100 is top tier in this game and can pretty much do whatever he wants. The only tank that can really contest him is the rhm.  The lower tiered tanks for the hill are obviously scared to try to take it with 2 arty and a possible vk up there so as a result they don't have higher ground to shoot and hope to pen him.  Watch the video as he 1 shot almost deletes most of the tanks that were in his game.  Its not so much the enemy "allowing" it to happen as it is a top tier vk100 taking what is rightfully his.



GenPanzer #31 Posted Apr 03 2020 - 19:06

    Major

  • Players
  • 46865 battles
  • 4,191
  • [EFFIT] EFFIT
  • Member since:
    08-15-2011

View PostchoSenfroZen_1, on Apr 03 2020 - 00:31, said:

On the contrary, as I am sitting in a village well above the arctic circle, with a lot of time.

I play 20-30 games a day. I am very interested and entertained.

 

 Since my desire to win is less than, say yours, at chess, that does not mean there is no learning.

I watch when he plays, and try to learn from mistakes. It took over 50 years, but I do beat him a bit now.

 

When I skied as a kid, I was serious. I really wanted to be Jean Claude  Killy, a winning racer from France. I practiced, and practiced.  I was coached, and I watched movies and TV of races. It is all I talked about. I continued into high school and realized that I was a good racer (locally, if that), but I was never going to be selected for the Provincial team let alone Olympic.

The ski hills a made for everyone, anyone can, and does ski. When I competed, I cursed the slow amateur skiers, told them to go back to the bunny hill til, they got gud.

 

My coach hauled me aside. I had the training and inclination to ski faster than them, but I was given a outlet. We had portions of the hill to ourselves, with ever changing slalom runs. Races and replays.

If I wanted to ski fast, there was a place and time. The public runs are, public.  I had to learn to just live with the other skiers.

 

Each run , these , lets say tomatoes, got better , just with their fun skiing. None wanted to crash all the time, but had fun despite it.

 

I realized that I wanted all the skiers to have that same level of dedication and desire, I had. This is what I see with this game.

 

Ah, skilled based MM.

Well, I think there are some huge drawbacks.

First, those high rated players would have to wait a real long time to get into games. Basically the top 5% would be a lonely section of the MM. Then, all of a sudden, half of you, would get kicked out, to a lower server, because not everyone can win.

 

Who would I get to follow. There would be no good examples, and I think the higher MM would be upset at who was rising to join them.

 

That is a very good analogy. And this has given me some tidbits to ponder. Thank you for your kind responses.

 

I don't think SBMM is a thing that would truly work in WoT, no matter the population as there is too many variables to consider.

 

Off our topic: Just spit-balling here....

Perhaps instead of SBMM, WG could come up with some sort of league system, where you have to prove yourself in lower leagues based on some performance metric.

 

Each ladder of the league would require more and harder requirements. And, the player would have a choice to play in whatever league they have available to them, but they would have to maintain some metric of performance in any league in order to keep the higher leagues open to them.

 

I do not now what that metric should or would be, or the requirements to open up higher leagues, but this would allow those that are learning or just aren't good, or just don't care about being good to stay in whatever league they can make it up to and playing with other of that same skill(care) level, while those that can reach higher leagues have the option to be more competitive/serious in the higher leagues or just blow off some steam in a lower league.

 

I don't even know how many leagues there should be. Maybe just 3. The first league would be for new/bad/less caring play. League 2 would be where almost everyone else falls. And the top league, league 3, would be for the diehards. Maybe 4 would be a good amount of leagues, putting 2 mid-tier leagues in might be better.

 

WG would have to ignore a player's performance for the next league's requirements for playing in lower leagues than what you have unlocked, and even make is so nobody can go down leagues and be an a-hole without some repercussions of losing access to higher leagues.

 

There should be no prize for going higher in a league. There is no higher cost to play there, or higher credit earning. The prize is being paired with players of the same level of skill(care). Call it Care Based MM. Where the player gets to pick the level of how much they care in whatever tank they want to run.

 

And, the stats would be separated by league.







Also tagged with WoT, Players

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users