Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'playerbase'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Forum
    • English Speaking Forum
    • Deutschsprachige Community
    • Polska Społeczność
    • Česká a slovenská komunita
    • Communauté francophone
    • Comunità Italiana
    • Comunidad de habla española
    • Türkçe Topluluk
  • Mod Section
    • Rules, Announcements and General Discussion (English)
    • Modding Tutorials, Guides and Tools (English)
    • Interface Mods
    • Visual Mods
    • Sound Mods
    • Modpacks
    • Other Mods and Programs
    • Archive
  • Historical Section


  • Community Calendar
  • This Day in History

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL








Found 4 results

  1. Constructive simple discussion and checklist of the issues wg must / should consider now prioritise to fix, for the good survivability and sustainablility of the game and the good of the playerbase community. Imho following are obvious to consider: i cv re-rework upheaval, ..... i.i Bring back some skill and tactics or go on dumbing down to arcadey pac-man gamestyle. ii balance (ship and now plane classes, ammo types and characteristics eg ifhe, etc.) iii loss of players and lack of new recruits or decline of playerbase population iv ntc aka rb v dockyard vi regional segregation, and separation, bizarre for a modern worldwide MMO. Inability to play with global friends anytime anywhere, unlike most any other game. vii no global server option (nor single global account, as advertised and promised, like any other MMO , eg on steam). viii continually excluding continents, eg especially Africa ix submarines x simplifying so many in game currencies or 'tokens' xi matchmaking ..(?) xii UI improvements and QoL improvements, eg friends list xiii more maps xiv) more modes (?) xv) operations xvi) make great events like hunt for Bismarck, or the Dunkirk campaign permanent, and available to new players xvii) better tutorials xviii) ranked mode(s) xix) clans & clan wars xx) power creep, op / new premiums, modernise tired out dated lines. Please add to the checklist or constructive positive suggestions and comments to encourage improvements and change.
  2. Hi there, Since there have been a lot of threads about bad players and teams. Is there something we can think of and what WG could do to increase the overall skill level of the playerbase? It took me a quite a while to get a grip of the basics. And frankly if I never registered here on the forum I would probably still be at 40% w/r and not improving. I think it could be good for WoWs to guide players better so they don't drop out. Or worse, long time players dropping out because because they get fed up with a part of the player base. It also could increase the competitive scene which is good for WoWs overall. Could lead to more competition > streams > more viewers > publicity > new players. But thats is just a wild assumption. To get this started let me throw some ideas up. And please give your feedback or post your own ideas. But please keep it civil. - Tutorials, most games have them and seems pretty straight forward but WoWs seems to miss them. - Incentives for overall stats (dammage, w/r etc.). Like you are able to compete in some game modes if you hit a certain criteria, you will get a container/signals/flag if you hit [x]. - Incentive for watching the "how it works" serie on the YT page of WG. - Force players to watch or do a tutorial when moving up a tier, introduce them to new game mechanics. For example; how does radar work at entering T7/8. @Crysantos and @MrConway do you guys read along or might even want to throw some ideas in here as well?
  3. I briefly read some of the posts and found a reoccuring issue that ALL! threads about the gameplay have. Essentially there were some issues where we all tried to find solutions, but at the same time you could also fill in another argument aswell. It is debatable, 'That the majority of the playerbase is *Edited doesn't pose a balancing problem.' (cited from another forum as a sarcastic statement) What he meant was, e.g. Stalingrad OP. Well migth be true, but you cannot test its strength based on players, *Edited ones, don't know how to play against it. And we all can agree that to some degree we can mitigate an enemy Stalingrad, but you cannot balance a ship around the guys who cannot play against it. [Well I take it back- BBs with underwater citadels...]. And just the argument that he can punish you at max distances does not mean that it is unfair/unbalanced since it certainly is not skill dependent that you sailed broadside to him, even at 20km range... Aswell as we have BBs that can be sniped off by any CV if they play solo and complain about balance. Or as another example CVs. We all can agree that in randoms the more skilled CV player makes a huge deal. And you all may wonder, how do you 'fix' CVs? Another way of seeing this is, the only reason this is a deal, is because >75% of CV players have no clue how to play them. I see CVs in T10 that are doomed to lose all their planes to a single strafe. If, on the other hand, they would know what to do; let's say I as a unicum player complaining about CVs, who does not how to strike well, would be paried against a good CV player, well then he would have more impact on the game by dealing more damage than me, but other than this, because I know which targets to focus, to spot dds etc. it would be not game decisive. And we all would accept the better CV player just the same as 'they got OMNI BB' but that is it and nothing more, which is exactly how it is intended to be. And as for CVs, I won't blame WG for not rewarding 'correct' play, you play correct because that is how you win the game, not because that gives you fake money. So basicly the question is, when you (let's stay honest, WG, but we might have some influence on it if we all can agree on a note here) balance mechanics, do you go for the objective gameplay (like if 2 good players play against each other, it should be an equal fight), or do you prefer to go for the majority (CVs are OP because I cannot camp at the 10 line alone any more, Stalingrad is OP because I have to be more careful than I am right now). We know WGs reason to tend to the 2nd option, but for us, as a playerbase, and the playerbase that WG gets some money from aswell; how do WE deal with this issue? So the thread of the topic is- all of you know encountered retarded players, like BBs going 9-10 line on Northern lights, when they don't get that they are out of fight for 5+ mins, while the rest of the team has to play without 2 Top Tier BBs. DDs that go off not spotting, because it is 'too dangerous'. Or my favourite is 'B is a trap' and exactly therefore noone of our team going there, meaning they can cap this so called trap with no risk at all. Or the map Trap and all the guys lemming towards A... What I was trying to do, and pls leave the HAMI jokes aside, I was telling my teammates in randoms, always when playing solo, what to do. At least a suggestion, at the start of the game, same as I do in clanwars. If there are questions, I am fast enough in the first 2 minutes to explain why. My experience was quite often they do listen. Also, e.g. if you say 'ALL BC' on Ice of Islands (which is admittedly not the very best, but the best would depend on setups, ship composition, fine tuning, ... then just the easy ALL BC would do the deal most of the times), people having success with it often repeat the statement next time on the map. So giving them general instructions are benefitial. But then there are [edited]. Like guys who sail 9-10 line on Northern lights. Even if there is no D cap. And when I try to explain anything (in Hope we will never do that again, I get reported). I got chatbanned doing non-raging explanation *Edited, after which my solo game (which relied on communicating with teammates) sucked. Not just strategy, but just asking a dd if he can smoke ahead is a huge deal... This is what gets me most- correct a fool and he will hate you. So back to the topic, I think the biggest problem with WOWs is the playerbase. If you could correct it somehow many of the issues we discuss would be solved. And it is less the question of skill. I honestly, do not mind a player to be bad, as long as he is doing his best and thinks reasonably, reacts on arguments and suggestions, I am completely fine. What I am not fine is an ashashio as only dd not going to spot, because 'asashio is bad fighting dds, that is why he goes wide' against a kiev that capped! and radar cruisers using spotter planes (ty yuro) and staying on their opinion even after I explain them calmly the benefits for the team of having a radar. Anyone might have a point of doing something, and it is fine until you are proved otherwise. All I am asking the playerbase in randoms is just to use the brain a bit, listen to me if I have a point and admit it's mistakes to perform better next game. But so far, sadly, the majority of the playerbase is braindead after all. Regarding this, if you agree with me, do you just accept the fact or should we try to change that a bit. I mean if we can change 10% it would be enough already, like making some tutorial videos on youtube about why you don't go a on ice if islands, and (advanced) when it is a good option, but never for a lemmingtrain. If you just accept that statement and do nothing about it, then there is no reason to talk about stalingrad balance, or CVs etc, since the main point are the '[edited]' that cannot play against it and suffer, and we suffer having them on our side. You will never be able to balance a 'braindead' player on your side from the perspective of developers. And if you disagree with mine (or rather the author of the line), why do you think so? Why is the attitude *Edited, team ignorant actions not harmful to randoms? Since all you want to have is a game when you can show your skills. Which most of the times do not happen because your friendly team already threw it away in the first minutes, not by individual mistakes, but by collective force.
  4. Myrmix

    Monthly Q&A

    I know it is difficult for the community-managers to be the link between wargaming and a loyal, but often impatient playerbase. A lot of people on EU feel left behind and the rare official responses look like nobody cares about the EU-server, as long as we buy premium-stuff. My proposal to change this kind of view and better the connection between us and the company would be a monthly Q&A. How would this work? Open a thread for proposed questions by the community and our community-managers could pick 5-10 of them and get the answers during the next month. It could be gameplaybased questions, questions about new contet, or (and we know this would come) questions about pricing policy. Of course a thing like that won't be easy to moderate and I don't know the effort to get answers from Wargaming, but something like this would better the connection from the EU-server to the staff, something that is very much needed. To ease the problem with translation, I would make a proposal: We ask questions in the english forum and us users translate your answers into the different languages (i for my part could do german, i think there would be at least some volunteers for french, italian, spain) and post them in the other forums. So what do you (our community-managers) think? Is it too much effort, or could we establish something like that?