Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
Tungstonid

WG's attempt to counter camping BBs? New game modes in ST.

36 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[HABIT]
Beta Tester
1,568 posts

Sorry for the clickbait-y title but I couldn't resist. :Smile_hiding::Smile_teethhappy:

 

According to the Dev Blog, WG is currently testing four new game modes. Cap zones/Control areas with special effects, maps with a "safe" area of decreasing size, blowing up forts and domination battles with delayed activation of cap zones. For details see spoiler below.

 

Spoiler

ST. New game modes.

Several prototypes of new modes are coming to the test.

 

Alternate mode 1

Special control areas spawn across the map. Once they're capped, they produce particular effects. If there's a same number of ships from the different teams in the area, they're not activated until the number becomes uneven.

 

Possible control area effects:

Bonus points for the capping team and same amount of points lost for the rivals
Repair of allied ships in an area
Damage to enemy ships in an area

 

Alternate mode 2

From the beginning of the battle a zone that becomes progressively smaller spawns on the map. Inside this zone ships are constantly repaired, outside of it - constantly damaged. By the end of the battle the radius of repair zone is no more than 3 kilometers.

 

Alternate mode 3

Each team has a fort. Players need to cap the areas, which spawn ships equipped with explosives. Those ships move towards the enemy forts where they are supposed to detonate. These ships have a countdown timer, and they can only continue moving when there is an ally next to them. Once the ship explodes it damages every ship and fort caught within the blast radius. Amount of damage depends on the distance to the target. Direct damage to the fort does decrease the amount of points for the rival team but is less advantageous.

 

Alternate mode 4

This mode is close to Domination, but the control areas activate only after several minutes have passed.

 

IMO they all sound interesting and especially number 2 looks like something a lot of players proposed to counter the camping behaviour of a certain player group. I mean, it is not submarines patroling the map borders but it comes pretty close. :Smile_teethhappy:

 

1) Seems interesting because of the effects, I think. But it will be harder for the team with less caps to make a comeback. The first and third effect might decide the battle pretty quickly.

 

2) This is, as I said, interesting in so far that it might counter camping behaviour. For it to work, the damage obviously has to be percentage-based. But there is the downside that flanking maneuvres will be hard to do after a while, depending on the damage taken by sitting outside the zone. It should also be considered that not all ships (not necessarily only BBs) are made to brawl which will happen sooner or later.

 

3) This one somehow sounds like WoWS and tower defense/plants vs zombies/etc had a baby. It might be a nice change, even though I imagine it to be a bit silly. Would probably be better as an event game mode?

 

4) I am not sure if this mode will play a lot different than the normal domination mode. You still have to fight for the cap zones even though they are not active right from the start. It might have the negative effect of players "procrastinating" getting to the zones because "we have time before the caps are active. No need to hurry."

  • Funny 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[POMF]
Beta Tester
1,987 posts
4,242 battles

I am not that thrilled about 2 tbh.

I know that this is not a simulator but the healing/damage thing feels really arbitrary and weird for a game about WW2 ships. It just feels like chasing what is popular at the moment, and I don't care for Battle Royale games either.

 

Also being forced into close range is really bad for some cruisers and DDs. (RIP Shchors for example)

Not to mention CVs. I guess they need some way to promote Graf Zep :Smile_trollface:

I hope that at least we can opt out of modes (I'lll opt out of standard battles immediatly as well given the chance)

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,022 posts
5,416 battles
5 minutes ago, Verdius said:

I am not that thrilled about 2 tbh.

I know that this is not a simulator but the healing/damage thing feels really arbitrary and weird for a game about WW2 ships. It just feels like chasing what is popular at the moment, and I don't care for Battle Royale games either.

 

Also being forced into close range is really bad for some cruisers and DDs.

I hope that at least we can opt out of modes (I'lll opt out of standard battles immediatly as well given the chance)

This. Guess which ships will benefit the most from shrinking maps and which won't. 

 

1. Looks okay. 3: Oh hell no, please God not. 4. Would at least prevent games being over too fast.

 

Good effort, but please make those optional. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Weekend Tester
997 posts
5,708 battles

It would be so much easier to double xp/credit gains from objective play and spot and halve it from damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
9,887 posts
11,612 battles
6 minutes ago, Lord_WC said:

It would be so much easier to double xp/credit gains from objective play and spot and halve it from damage.

We already had high cap exp rewards in the past:Smile_smile:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-TPF-]
Players
3,839 posts
15,844 battles

Oh dear, no. Instead of trying to come up with new game modes to add to the general unbalanceable muddle, WG should be concentrating on having more operations and scenarios running, where specific ships have to do specific tasks. This is good fun for the players, encourages people to grind or buy certain ships in time for the scenario, and is easier to develop.

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HABIT]
Beta Tester
1,568 posts
1 hour ago, dCK_Ad_Hominem said:

This. Guess which ships will benefit the most from shrinking maps and which won't. 

 

BBs are allowed to camp --> This is not right because they don't support their team at the objectives, don't tank etc.

BBs are forced into middle to close engagement ranges --> This is not right either because now they can inflict much/more damage to cruisers and DDs

 

So what is it now?

Sometimes it feels like people are looking for a reason (which in this case is justified, I give you that) to complain about others, while at the same time they don't want anything to change because this will make it harder for them to play. :fish_aqua:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
659 posts
9,964 battles
12 minutes ago, Tungstonid said:

 

BBs are allowed to camp --> This is not right because they don't support their team at the objectives, don't tank etc.

BBs are forced into middle to close engagement ranges --> This is not right either because now they can inflict much/more damage to cruisers and DDs

 

So what is it now?

Sometimes it feels like people are looking for a reason (which in this case is justified, I give you that) to complain about others, while at the same time they don't want anything to change because this will make it harder for them to play. :fish_aqua:

Games do not tend to be *fixed* with any single initiative - but a gradual change of many initiatives.

A lot of people just don't seem able to see beyond the latest one and prefer to *diss* them before they even have a chance to be implemented/ trialled... and to *diss* them taken individually... because it is easy to do that.

 

A lot of this forum consists of little more than negativity and vitriol, warranted or not... making it a perfectly average, normal game forum on the internet.

YMMV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,022 posts
5,416 battles
45 minutes ago, Tungstonid said:

 

BBs are allowed to camp --> This is not right because they don't support their team at the objectives, don't tank etc.

BBs are forced into middle to close engagement ranges --> This is not right either because now they can inflict much/more damage to cruisers and DDs

 

So what is it now?

Sometimes it feels like people are looking for a reason (which in this case is justified, I give you that) to complain about others, while at the same time they don't want anything to change because this will make it harder for them to play. :fish_aqua:

Dds flourish in space, the narrower a map the easier it is to predict its movements. Forcing cruisers and dds to fight up close is a bad idea. See german bbs running hydro. 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HABIT]
Beta Tester
1,568 posts
1 minute ago, dCK_Ad_Hominem said:

Dds flourish in space, the narrower a map the easier it is to predict its movements. Forcing cruisers and dds to fight up close is a bad idea. See german bbs running hydro. 

Which would happen either way, no matter how you force BBs to get in close and personal. Or BBs and DDs switch places, i.e. DDs "flanking" all around the map "because they need space" while BBs are near the objectives.

 

Do you at least see my point? You either keep it as it is and complain about BBs (or more precisely, a certain group of BB players) and their campy playstyle or you change it and suddenly it is not right either for one of the before mentioned reasons.

 

Btw, I agree with your concern in general. Not every ship, let alone every ship class, is meant to work in narrow spaces or at close (or middle or long) distances. Most of the BBs will shine in at middle to close range (but as someone mentioned on FB, it will also be easier to hit BBs with, say, torpedoes, the more their space is limited).

The mechanic of a decreasing safe map size, however, opens up another strategic layer and might motivate players to rather attack BBs than cruisers or DDs because the former will become important in the late game (which means you weaken the enemy's potential to win later in the battle and make it easier for your cruisers and DDs in the late game) while the latter can be "easily" dealt with as soon as they have nowhere to run (which, if BBs are focused more often, takes some of the heat off of them in the beginning).

Yeah I know, nobody will shoot at a BB which sits at 20 km and might come close 10 minutes later... But maybe border camping won't even start in this mode.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,022 posts
5,416 battles
23 minutes ago, Tungstonid said:

Which would happen either way, no matter how you force BBs to get in close and personal. Or BBs and DDs switch places, i.e. DDs "flanking" all around the map "because they need space" while BBs are near the objectives.

 

Do you at least see my point? You either keep it as it is and complain about BBs (or more precisely, a certain group of BB players) and their campy playstyle or you change it and suddenly it is not right either for one of the before mentioned reasons.

 

Btw, I agree with your concern in general. Not every ship, let alone every ship class, is meant to work in narrow spaces or at close (or middle or long) distances. Most of the BBs will shine in at middle to close range (but as someone mentioned on FB, it will also be easier to hit BBs with, say, torpedoes, the more their space is limited).

The mechanic of a decreasing safe map size, however, opens up another strategic layer and might motivate players to rather attack BBs than cruisers or DDs because the former will become important in the late game (which means you weaken the enemy's potential to win later in the battle and make it easier for your cruisers and DDs in the late game) while the latter can be "easily" dealt with as soon as they have nowhere to run (which, if BBs are focused more often, takes some of the heat off of them in the beginning).

Yeah I know, nobody will shoot at a BB which sits at 20 km and might come close 10 minutes later... But maybe border camping won't even start in this mode.

I see your point, but the closer engagement ranges become the more likely stupid yolo play, without coordination, is to occur. This is what I fear most about this. Because it negates skill a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ELCH]
Players
66 posts
8,547 battles

Alternative 2 is just a blatant copy of Battle Royale (PUBG, Fortnite), Alternative 3 is push da cart from TF2 and Overwatch. Neither I consider suitable for WoWS.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
[ADRIA]
Players
5,061 posts
8,562 battles

Ignoring the fact that I couldn't give a f**k about some battle royale thing (and I'd prefer not to have that in WoWS)...

 

All of that is far too complicated. The average potato already can't figure out what to do when the rules are as simple as "See that big circle on the water? Go there and sit in it for a bit. Also shoot the red ships". All those players who make teaspoons look intelligent will never have even the slightest grasp for what to do there

  • Funny 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
5,638 posts
4 hours ago, Verdius said:

I am not that thrilled about 2 tbh.

I know that this is not a simulator but the healing/damage thing feels really arbitrary and weird for a game about WW2 ships. It just feels like chasing what is popular at the moment, and I don't care for Battle Royale games either.

 

Also being forced into close range is really bad for some cruisers and DDs. (RIP Shchors for example)

Not to mention CVs. I guess they need some way to promote Graf Zep :Smile_trollface:

I hope that at least we can opt out of modes (I'lll opt out of standard battles immediatly as well given the chance)

 

And here comes the Atlanta:

 

giphy.gif

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[WONLY]
Players
422 posts
14,670 battles

I appreciate the effort to change something. I would like to test version 2, maybe with some adjustments in the testing phase. Most cruisers will get rekt if the final area is too small.

 

Version 4 sounds nice too. Games won't be over in a few minutes because potato DDs refuse to contest any cap.

 

But forum likes to complain about everything, please no changes, RPF THE DEATH OF DDs, new ships are always OP, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
5,638 posts
2 minutes ago, Marble_Eyes said:

But forum likes to complain about everything, please no changes...

 

Do you like the Epicenter Mode?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
5,760 posts
14,436 battles
28 minutes ago, darky_fighter said:

 

And here comes the Atlanta:

 

giphy.gif

 

 

Here comes any CV except full secondary Graf Zeppelin

9W0MRKW.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
659 posts
9,964 battles

Rather depends on the severity of the Heal/Damage areas in terms of DoT - it doesn't need to be "Fortnite" style where you're dead in a minute - just enough to persuade you inwards under certain circumstances.

I wouldn't be vehemently against the concept and it deserves testing to see how it is implemented.

One thing I will predict/comment on now though is that the "damage zone" will need to be variable by ship - as a percentile of its available Heal ability - otherwise super-heal ships such as the Conqueror could sit in the zone happily (still) and just heal-away - effectively ignoring it and still camping the map borders.

- On that point - that in itself indicates a problem with the ship, not necessarily the game-mode.

(I do actually like epicentre and standard battles - but I would like more variety)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TTT]
Players
2,098 posts
21,172 battles
22 minutes ago, Marble_Eyes said:

RPF THE DEATH OF DDs

RPF isn't death of DDs (unless they get RPF-torped without ever being detected). RPF makes DDs more boring to play and it is extremely overpowered against uninformed players (= the majority). Not every change is good. Remember Bastion?

 

Battle Royale mode would be exclusively BBs. Or would you like to play Pensacola or any soviet DD at max. 6 km range? It might work as a class-specific mode but it would get old quickly imo. Maybe for April fools or Halloween.

 

And no, nothing will stop campy players from camping, that's just who they are. I'd say let's wait and see, there is nothing to really talk about. Just some information about some ideas in a very early stage of planning.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
6,826 posts
245 battles

Because we need more free for all battle royal copy and paste games.

 

the other game modes seem alright.

 

too bad wargaming cant be arsed to implement the replay function that has been on wot's for centuries into wow, but i guess using brain is too hard comrade nyet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,367 posts
16,858 battles

1 bastion on steroids 

2 epicenter on steroids

3 yet another bastion

4 like domination just more campy

 

So much fun bois

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
3,793 posts
17,354 battles

New game modes sound like a good idea, but I'm not sure I'm a fan of these proposals ..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,384 posts
15,336 battles

Sigh... How about reworking xp / credit system instead? Or reworking Ranked Battles? Or even fix the chat?

 

Only suitable proposal is point 4. Rest has no place in Random Battles...

 

" Bonus points for the capping team and same amount of points lost for the rivals "

Yeah... Let's make battles even shorter... Especially ROFLstomps. Anythings that shortens time in pain is appreciated...

 

:Smile_facepalm:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SICK]
Weekend Tester
5,053 posts
10,848 battles
13 hours ago, Tungstonid said:

Alternate mode 1

Special control areas spawn across the map. Once they're capped, they produce particular effects. If there's a same number of ships from the different teams in the area, they're not activated until the number becomes uneven.

 

Sweet, we can have zones with a sort of vision based bonus, like a surveillance station of sorts, defended by bunkers and th-

 

Ah crap, we just made Bastion 2.0

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×