TheCinC, I commend your efforts. But just scrolling through the thread people are ignoring the suggested method of operation and replying, the thread has become too big, it is however popular and leads me back to a suggestion I made ages ago.
The forum needs a dedicated section to open suggestions as threads, the same goes for feedback.
I have a few suggestions but first let’s assess the scene.
The state of the game is alarming today there are a number of issues that are switching off long term players. The player base seems to be relying on a steady input of new players and the team play aspect has all but disappeared in everything but clan battles. Many of these new players won’t stay because the same problems are going to drive them away to other games.
WG insist they listen to player feedback, the evidence in game evolution appears to show the opposite and the developers seem to be more interested in coding and money rather than game play. This is a general player perception and it may be wrong in which case WG need to do better at replying to people to correct that perception. WG should maybe think more along the lines of long term players with new players joining which will equate to a bigger player base and thus more revenue. Players will only continue playing a game if it engages them, when they disengage, they move on to a new game and there is a loss of potential revenue. How far does that need to go, before the plug is pulled and everyone loses out.
1) Listening to feedback and let people know you have heard them.
2) Install a specific Suggestion section in the forum. WG could take your main category titles and have a thread for each one this would allow for players and developers alike to focus on specific subjects.
3) Install a specific feedback section in the forum with topics on major changes. WG could focus this the same way as suggestions. If you were giving feedback on a specific item say ship appearance (Skins) then you would put it in the Feedback>Skins thread.
4) Be proactive before writing huge amounts of code (CV ref) ask for solution ideas in the forum. Even just the players that bother with the forums will make a big brainstorming team.
5) If WG don’t like an idea don’t just ignore it, say why as this a least shows you looked.
Categories for Suggestions and feedback forums.
Suggestion> Sub Sections: Server, Game Client, Graphics, Game Modes, Scenarios, Port, Destroyers, Battleships, Cruisers, Carriers, Camouflage, Signals, Ship skins, Captain Skills, Modules, Inventory, Premium Shop, Maps, HUD, Settings, Miscellaneous.
Twenty one sub sections that cover most things and organise it so it can be found by those that want to use it and those that really need to see it.
Most likely the biggest single problem is the lack of team play and the general level of player skill (don’t get me wrong I am only an average player).
1) When a player joins initialise a basic training PVE protocol.
PVE 1 This could start with how to use the ships, starting with a static ship and a request to press W to move forward, S to move backwards etc to move through a series of buoys including steering while reversing the ship.
PVE 2 Moving gun turrets and aiming starting with shooting static targets, say one ship of each class with indicators on where to target on those ships, importance of shell type.
PVE 3 Aiming and lead same as PVE2 with moving targets.
PVE 4 Indicating targets where you select the target and it gets smashed by your fleet.
PVE 5 Dodging shells and angling, dodging torpedoes, navigate from A to B while under fire. This could be combined with the importance of modules such as Hydro and intensive AA.
Follow this with a minimum of 5 or 10 Coop Battle to qualify for PvP.
Additional PVE Training could be added to show ship class roles and specific training orientated around the class, these could be optional or invoked when the class is 1st played.
Over powered CV Class.
I know the rework does not seem to be going down to well with a lot of the player community and that WG realise that it does need fixing. But there are thing that could be done to the existing mechanics.
1) Before writing huge amount of code on a new style of play, discuss it with the community refer to Problem 1.
2) Limit CV’s to 1 per team per battle.
3) Tone down the damage done by drops.
4) Limit the number of squadrons that can be taken out at the same time and give larger supply of spare squadrons, to many CV’s run out to early.
5) Limit aircraft range, aircraft operating distances were determined by fuel against payload. Give the squadrons a fuel gauge and an option for auto return for refuel, if the option is not selected and a squadron can’t reach the CV it runs out of fuel and ditches.
6) Permanent spotting of DD’s could be limited by fuel and the need to return to CV.
7) Cross torpedoes, allow second AA focus on other half off ships, not all AA was on one side of a Ship.
8) Increase the effectiveness of AA a little.
Pay to Win and Free XP.
This does happen to some extent as with a large wallet you have two options. The first is to buy premiums and the second convert XP with gold. This promotes lower skilled players into tiers where they have no experience. The grind provides some of this experience.
1) Put a restriction/qualifier on using free XP to research up an entire line without actually having to play any of them. There are ways to do this, for example part of the requirement could be a percentage of the XP must come from a ship in the same class of the same tier or one tier lower. Let’s assume Johnny has a tier 8 battleship (Bismark) and he wants to free XP the American line of battleships, he is allowed to convert XP from Bismark (or any higher tier battleship) because it is a Battleship higher than his current American battleships, however once he reaches tier eight he will no longer be able to continue use free XP. If he wanted to XP the American cruiser line the XP from the Bismark could not be used because it is not a cruiser. In essence you could only free XP up to the highest tier ship in that class.
2) Premium ships, place a qualifier on purchase, the player must have played ‘n’ number of games in a ship within two tiers in the same class.
As I see this there is too much RNG on lateral dispersion from the same turret, the biggest part of lateral dispersion should come from shells from separate turrets. For example if I fire from three barrels on the same turret all at the same time these spread on those shell will be pretty consistent but may be slightly different to the shells from a second turret, that turret will have its own dispersion based on its original alignment of barrels, and the accuracy of the calibration on the aiming system. Movement of the ship on the water will cause aiming issues but not dispersion from a single turret to the extent we see in game, all three shells would hit or be close, or they would miss completely. The dispersion is more likely to be affected vertically because of the moving parts and recoil.
1) Lower lateral dispersion RNG a little and leave vertical dispersion alone.
Radar as WG are aware has become a problem because too many ships sit behind rocks and radar the poor destroyers to death. Radar was far more widespread than it is in the game, so many ships had radar however radar assisted aiming was not that good as radar only gave a blip on a screen giving an idea of where the ship is/was. Modern radar and GPS systems are a different matter. But in the game the moment radar is deployed everyone can see the ship, exactly who and what it is along with the EXACT position. That kind of information only came when combining it with intelligence reports or a visual confirmation. Ships would report a radar contact and then proceed to that area or avoid that area and report back the contact.
1) Show the contact position on the minimap with the ship not visible on the main viewer until spotting confirms it (air or sea).
2) Give radar ships an actual radar scanner and let them determine what they see and report it back via coms, this would require to actively USE the radar.
3) Reduce all Radar to 9Km max, and give all radar the same fixed duration.
Turning Pink from collisions
This change is useless, the Pink colour was useful to determine which team members to be wary of and now it serves no function. I guess this change was made to stop team members ramming other team members deliberately.
1) If you want to stop people ramming team members to death remove collision damage from friendly ships and stop turning them Pink.
Cap and Island Camping
This is becoming annoying, when players can be achieving damage of 200k with their 1 ship and still end up on the losing team because 2/3 of the team were camping. There must be a way to promote better more interesting game play or at least reduce the losing teams loses. Give them a reason to come out or reduce some threats that make them play that way.
1) Improve the capping rewards.
2) Improve Spotting rewards.
3) Improve short range dispersion and aiming and penalise long range dispersion and aiming.
4) Neuter the radar ships.
5) Limit Maximum Torpedo range to 12K.
6) Don’t penalise the losing team quite so much. (Full XP both teams, 25% win bonus)
There is more than one issue here sadly. Players can go AFK for a number on reasons, server connection and power cuts to name just two. The ones that are most annoying are those that don’t like the matchmaking and just leave. There is no way to differentiate between them unless the server detects a connection drop on a player. The system should detect if a player has left the game.
I will put to you a scenario that just happened to a clan member. He was playing a DD and there was a member of his team from Unicum Clan (no names), there was a member of the same clan on the opposing team. The player in his team went AFK, further into the game he had work his way past the enemy and was behind them working his way into position for torpedoing. He never went into a cap, fired his guns, launched any torpedoes or got detected in any way. The Unicum player on the other team inexplicably turned his ship and drove directly at his position, not close but exactly. It may have been pure chance but there seemed to be no reason for him to head that way (make your own mind up).
1) If a player goes AFK put a limit on it. Anyone can reboot or reconnect within 3 minutes, after 3 minutes kick AFK player from the game.
2) Penalise players that leave the game before they are dead. Minus XP or credits anything.
This would not destroy a ship instantly it would cause damage that could lead to destruction or sinking. The ships speed would also affect how much and what kind of damage.
Make ramming more realistic
1) It would cause damage that could affect ship speed which would not be repairable at sea.
2) Damaged modules or armament.
3) Heavy Flooding.