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

A suggestion for improving the game experince for everyone

40 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[HAMI]
Players
46 posts
14,936 battles

Good day fellows.

 

As you can see I am a veteran, having 15k games behind my back, I have 65% Winrate, and on top I was leading HAMI in the Hurricane League for 2 Seasons. You can say I did put a lot of effort into the game and the 2 years I spent with it were worthwhile. Still I was inactive for a few months, and when I came back the game still did interest me less and less. I lost all interest in WOWs, and although I noticed that the numbers are doing good, I still saw a lot of veterans, high skilled players, do the same. I have an idea that might fix a lot of issues in the game and the community and I wish to share it with you. In it I would also refer to the issues I see to bring them up at least.

Suggestion to improve WOWs altogether:
1.Change ranked Seasons to a ranked ladder

Like in chess, or Dota2, give each player a Rating. Every single player, beginner or not, gets the same initial rating. By playing ranked (which still might switch tiers from season to season) you gain rating depending on success. That is, players of similar rating pool gets to play on each team. Depending on the team average rating 'Elo' you get an expectation of your winning chance. If your opponents are stronger than you, then you will gain more XP for winning and you lose less for losing. Like in CWs. Initially there will be chaos, but after few runs you will have a fair calibration for the players. That is, each active player playing ranked will get a rating representing his actual skill. There will be no other awards, no 'best loser', nor anything else. Though you can still inofficially tag along the secondary stats (e.g. tanking, average damage, kills,...)

This ladder will be permanent. You don't need to restart it every season. Your rating will represent your skill. There is ofc the issue about a player getting a certain rating, and never playing again, so that his rating will depict a wrong rating. Or how to deal with inactive players etc. These issues can be fixed by various ways, my suggestion would be just to say 'each new season you lose a bit of rating', so if you want to get your old real rating back you need to prove it in battles. And inactive players don't lose everything by not playing. So by this you want to guarantee that every active ranked/ambitioned player get an approximation of his skills as a comparable number.

2.Make fair random MM!

Every player has a rating now depicting his skills at the moment of his play. Every non rated player up to this point will get a basic initial rating; we simply assume him to be a beginner until he proves otherwise. 
We use this rating to make fair teams. Just switch the players so the rating gap between the teams becomes the smallest possible. There are still no guarantee to be completely 'fair' teams, but it is almost certain that in this case there won't be any stompruns and the game will be close and interesting all the time. Also you have to regard that (Noob in Montana + Pro in Bismark) < (Pro in Montana + Noob in Bismark), so you have to calibrate some numbers. Like Carriers are twice as important, so the gap weight counts twice, T8 in a T10 match has less impact, or even Cruisers are less influential,... But im sure you don't need anything else to make it work
Yes, I am aware that I set the win probability of each player to 50%, independent of his skills. I simply throw the category 'Winrate' out and replace it with 'Rating'. By allowing this I try to bring something into the game, which seems to be forgotten: FUN!!

 

Goals:

*The first goal is to have fun.
Right now you see unhappy players in both teams. In case of a stomprun the losing team is punished for beeing weak. The winning team is punished by having no gameplay. The top players are often not even trying to win in the first place, but win with certain amount of damage,... For super unicum players, in randoms, the win itself is too common ["I win because I am that good, or I lose sicne my team is utter crap and I cannot do anything about it; but it any case I focus only on my gameplay and my stats"]. But as you all remember, the most exiting games are the close matches. The ones where it did pay off to cooperate with a teammate. The adrenaline of fighting to the last second. I want to get that. And that you get if you have fair teams. Let the super unicums fight for their win. Every mistake counts, and every small achievement pays off. It does not matter how good you are as a player, your achievement will help your team to get ahead. EVERY EFFORT COUNTS. And even the worst player in the team plays his part. He is a part of the team (compared to right now where you can play 11v12 aswell most of the times, where the big noob does not matter and is ignored)

*The second goal is to reduce toxicity.
The toxicity I see is discontent between players who do understand the game and the the ones who do not care. Where it is as often the case that the guy complaining is the one who thinks he understands, while in fact he is the one who does not care... By the same logic above, since everyone is integrated in the success, the weaker players, seeing as their mistakes do cost the game (if there are a lot more close ones) will tend more to improve. Which means more cooperation and understanding rather than ignoring (advices, orders,...). And the better players will have a harder fight, where you have to give your best each and every game to win. In close games you often stay to the end, watch them, feel with your team (instead of hating it). That you will get only with fair teams. It won't solve it completely, but I am sure it will cut it down. Having fun and not beeing toxic goes hand in hand ;)
*Improvement of the playerbase
Right now you will hear a lot of comments (ranked or randoms) like 'who are you to tell me', 'WR does not matter (by 48% guys)', 'You are such a noob NOT to lemmingtrain with us',... Ignorant players I would like to call them. Winning is random, for them either you win without their impact, or you lose anyway. So they don't enjoy and don't care right now. And as everyone can get to Rank 1 it is also random. Yeah well, with a permanent ladder, without any 'best loser' bonus you play only good if you play good. Recent example from ranked (T9). Sniping Lion, living with full HP at the end of the game, letting me in Donskoi tank for ages for him; Jutland sitting with his ships, smoking and shooting, farming fire damage while his teammates get torped. Sadly, logically there is no mistake. If their team wins, it is not because of them anyway. And if the team loses, they have high chances to keep their star. Which annoys the skilled players, up to the point that they do the same. With a real rating you will get skilled ranked top battles. Players might watch the best of the best battle it out and learn from them (since in that case ranked ladder is representing skill). They know who to listen to, from whom to learn. You won't be able to say Rating is not skill. And as for the Lion camper, imagine he gets the same team of campers. Noone spots, noone tanks, noone contests buff caps. Then he might get the idea that it is indeed useful to get to the front. And if he learns that he gets up in rating. Until he learns something new etc. 
*Value of skill
Finally your skill, your progress itself will be valueable, for you, for your team, for your success. And it is much harder to ignore the top ranked player advice, not to go 10 line as BB, since not everyone will get as high to the ladder. Only your skill will get rewarded, not your effort or time.

 

Issues/Changes:

-There might be players who intentionally will lose ranked to be undervalued. E.g. I lose every ranked on purpose, beeing a unicum player otherwise. In that case my team will be always advantageous to the enemy one. So though my hypothetical Winrate should be around 50% I will still have 60%+. But that is not the issue for WOWs altogether. If there are a few of them, then it does not matter. If there are many, then the chances both teams to have them are equal, which sorts each other out. In fact, only your own winrate will be 60%+, you will neither break the logic nor do WOWs harm. And in the end, winrate does not matter, so if you enjoy winning yourself a bit more you can do that. It does not change anything other than that. Also how many players would enjoy to lose on purpose, have a (displayed?) rating of 0 to feel a bit better that way? 
-WG can still decide how to reward players for ranked. They can say you ahve to be good (high end rewards), or you have to have certain amount of wins, or games, or XP gained in ranked. As long as everyone has a rating to begin with it is fine.
-There are players that don't play for the win, or the objective. Usually they might ruin the fun for the objective players, but with this system they just get a low rating and the MM does not expect too much from them to begin with. So they don'T let you down that way.
-There is only one fun fact I saw in it. E.g. I am a cruiser main, unicum in cruiser, decent in BBs, utter crap in CV. My rating represents my highest skill, in a cruiser that is. So whenever I play my very best crusier, I will get good winrate. But switching to a CV the MM still expects amazing results from my side. Even playing my average cruiser I will get slighlty worse results. Is this an issue? On one hand it sucks to lose more often. On the other hand winrate won't matter as such, and it is more than fair to see you success in your best ship more than in your worst. That holds also for your opponents. The goal was to get approximately even teams, not exactly even. And in any case, independent of the outcome of the game, you still get your contrubution (like pro and noob together win, and win is what counts, still pro did 200k damage, while noob did 40k). So in any case you will always be rewarded for your skills.
-2nd fun fact. You are noob have 50% WR, improve yourself, play ranked, and you still have 50%WR... Lol right :) Nevertheless before you did 40k average damge, now you do 80k. So you still see your results, while your best each and every game is still valuable


Motivation:
My motivation for bringing it up is that I do enjoy chess (as a semi-pro player) far more than WOWs and I wondered why. The answer was pretty simple. Whenever I play chess I have a rating with my name. I don't get idiots telling me they know it better if their skill is not comparable to mine. (here you get stats don't matter and if I argue with stats than im a sore loser; so in the end they neitehr listen to reason nor to statistics...). Also everyone himself put a lot of effort into chess, everyone is proud of his own rating, and therefore they do respect everyone who did the same or is even better. Your respect better players rather than to hate on them. You listen and learn from them. I wished WOWs, and the people altogether would be more like that.
I am not sure if I will reply to comments due to my inactive state, I just wanted to share my opinion and hope someone can make use of it. 

See you and have a nice day

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[RONIN]
Beta Tester
2,911 posts
5,798 battles

The problem with 2, is its fine if you are average. You wont see much difference. Its also fine if you're a complete potato, because you'll get given better teammates to compensate.

Its terrible as any kind of good player as you will literally get given worse team mates. The better you are, the worse your team mates will be.

 

This is what killed off armoured warfare, as theres no incentive to get better (the better you get the more you get rewarded with worse and worse team mates), while there's every incentive to do as badly as possible - spend a weekend botting or AFK to tank your rating, and get rewarded with great teammates and an easy to farm enemy team.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[1DSF]
Beta Tester
1,469 posts
4,545 battles

Number 1: no, thanks

Number 2: no, thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OP-B]
Beta Tester
91 posts
3,156 battles

Number 1: Yay! 

Number 2: Nope. The drawbacks of skill based MM for randoms were discussed multiple times already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-CIA-]
Players
155 posts
16,632 battles

Number 1: ranked could use a rework Kappa

Number 2: a skilled based MM might make the game more stressful and the goal is to have fun, but it might have a place in the game, let's say a new game mode who knows 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
779 posts
4,780 battles

Those with "unicum" stats rarely play alone but play in coordinated devisions/clan setting that have the (enormous) advantage of communication between group members right ? They never use "mediocre" ships right ?

 

Those with "bad" stats play on their own, being entirely depended of what other players -complete strangers - in your team do.  They have very little influence how a match will end as it depends also on 23 others. They use all ships, some with better abilities then other...

 

These ways of playing the game have nothing in common with each other. That is all there is to say about it. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Funny 2
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TTT]
Players
4,110 posts
7,848 battles
7 minutes ago, Beastofwar said:

Those with "unicum" stats rarely play alone but play in coordinated devisions/clan setting that have the (enormous) advantage of communication between group members right ? They never use "mediocre" ships right ?

yeah because solo stats clearly are not a thing that exists right? And comparing stats for any individual ship is of course also impossible right? Let alone a combination of the two...

 

Two options here... either that was irony on your part, in which case I apologize for not really sensing it, or you're so dense I'm surprised you dont have an event horizon...

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OP-B]
Beta Tester
510 posts
3,090 battles
29 minutes ago, Beastofwar said:

Those with "unicum" stats rarely play alone but play in coordinated devisions/clan setting that have the (enormous) advantage of communication between group members right ? They never use "mediocre" ships right ?

 

Those with "bad" stats play on their own, being entirely depended of what other players -complete strangers - in your team do.  They have very little influence how a match will end as it depends also on 23 others. They use all ships, some with better abilities then other...

 

These ways of playing the game have nothing in common with each other. That is all there is to say about it. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thinking like this will make you struggle forever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
779 posts
4,780 battles
18 minutes ago, LemonadeWarrior said:

Thinking like this will make you struggle forever.

 

Only with fools that drag my single player, random match, random ship stats in a comparison to their communications coordinated clan/division teamplay, with select strong abilty ships,  and compare it.....

 

Communication and coordination is what made the Germans initially obliterate all opponents in pretty crap tanks......that is how much of an advantage that is. Those crap tanks would have been wasted  without coordinated help of infantry, artillery and flying artillery units.

 

Nothing wrong with communications coordinated play, but don't use those stats on players that do not play that way.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OP-B]
Beta Tester
510 posts
3,090 battles
6 minutes ago, Beastofwar said:

 

Only with fools that drag my single player, random match, random ship stats in a comparison to their communications coordinated clan/division teamplay and compare it.....

 

Communication and coordination is what made the Germans initially obliterate all opponents in pretty crap tanks......that is how much of an advantage that is. Those crap tanks would have been wasted  without coordinated help of flying artillery and artillery units.

 

Nothing wrong with that, but don't use it on players that do not play that way.

 

 

You mean you just sail around to do pew pew? Yes, your stats reflect that. 

I have played some solo games were I wanted to win. My stats reflect it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,477 posts
14,599 battles
51 minutes ago, Beastofwar said:

Those with "bad" stats play on their own, being entirely depended of what other players -complete strangers - in your team do. 

While it is true, winning while playing solo is much harder that in divisions, there is no reason a solo player can not have a respectable win rate if they put forth the effort.  It is all on the individual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
4,363 posts
6,236 battles
1 hour ago, Beastofwar said:

Those with "unicum" stats rarely play alone but play in coordinated devisions/clan setting that have the (enormous) advantage of communication between group members right ? They never use "mediocre" ships right ?

 

Those with "bad" stats play on their own, being entirely depended of what other players -complete strangers - in your team do.  They have very little influence how a match will end as it depends also on 23 others. They use all ships, some with better abilities then other..

 

What if both teams get a 3x Super unicum Division? Wouldnt it matter, what the other 9 non-division players do?

Ofc 3x division CAN have a better WR than solo players - if 3x bad players join in one division, their result will be the opposite however, dragging their teams down.

Its impossible to have 100% WR, even with 3x super unicum division. And their impact is so high precisely because random players mostly DONT play as a team :cap_fainting:DD sits in smoke dakka-dakka, BB humping the border, CV sniping the enemy CV, Cruiser yoloing or whatever... You cant count on random teammates because they choose to play the way they do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UNICS]
Players
3,191 posts
12,596 battles
1 hour ago, Beastofwar said:

 

Only with fools that drag my single player, random match, random ship stats in a comparison to their communications coordinated clan/division teamplay and compare it.....

 

Communication and coordination is what made the Germans obliterate all opponets in pretty crap tanks......that is how much of an advantage that is.

 

Nothing wrong with that, but don't use it on players that do not play that way.

It's possible to compare solo, random ship stats though.

 

@OP, I still prefer the option to choose Casual or Competitive Random. Easier to compare too.

 

Not sure I'd be up for permanent Ranked either. I like jumping into a new season when I feel I'm up for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
779 posts
4,780 battles
2 hours ago, Culiacan_Mexico said:

While it is true, winning while playing solo is much harder that in divisions, there is no reason a solo player can not have a respectable win rate if they put forth the effort.  It is all on the individual.

 

No player can control his Random Match teammates losing ships thereby losing the match. No player skill can prevent that as it is all individual controlled, and without communications there is no control over other players.  Also no player can go up 12 opponents all by himself. Not even if they are bots....And there ofcourse are skilled players on the other side as well, negating the actions of a skilled player on the other side as to winning the match/ticket count.  It is as it is named "RANDOM" and it's results are that too.

 

Unless playing in a division with communications.....

 

So "unicum" stats cannot be achieved playing alone in Random Match, nor can Random Match stats in Random played ships be compared with division/clan play stats in select ships.

 

I also begin to understand much of the complaining....those that show off stats are facing falling stats because of the changes.....and want to ruin the game's improvements/roll it back to what they were used to for all players because of this stat bragging lunacy !!!

 

I hope WG sees it for what it is...and completely ignores it.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
657 posts
9,594 battles
3 hours ago, Beastofwar said:

Those with "unicum" stats rarely play alone but play in coordinated devisions/clan setting that have the (enormous) advantage of communication between group members right ? They never use "mediocre" ships right ?

 

Not even close to being true....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[W-C]
Beta Tester, Players, In AlfaTesters
2,442 posts
6,517 battles
12 minutes ago, Beastofwar said:

So "unicum" stats cannot be achieved playing alone in Random Match, nor can Random Match stats in Random played ships be compared with division/clan play stats in select ships.

Well, my solo stats are still unicum so that's false.

14 minutes ago, Beastofwar said:

those that show off stats are facing falling stats because of the changes.....and want to ruin the game's improvements for all players because of this stat bragging lunacy !!!

The only ones facing failing stats are RTS CV mains.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,477 posts
14,599 battles
15 minutes ago, Beastofwar said:

 

1.  No player can control his Random Match teammates losing ships thereby losing the match. No player skill can prevent that as it is all individual controlled, and without communications there is no control over other players.  Also no player can go up 12 opponents all by himself. Not even if they are bots....And there ofcourse are skilled players on the other side as well, negating the actions of a skilled player on the other side as to winning the match/ticket count.  It is as it is named "RANDOM" and it's results are that too.

 

2. Unless playing in a division with communications.....

 

3. So "unicum" stats cannot be achieved playing alone in Random Match, nor can Random Match stats in Random played ships be compared with division/clan play stats in select ships.

 

4. I also begin to understand much of the complaining....those that show off stats are facing falling stats because of the changes.....and want to ruin the game's improvements/roll it back to what they were used to for all players because of this stat bragging lunacy !!!

 

5. I hope WG sees it for what it is...and completely ignores it.

 

 

Items 4 and 5... no comment.

 

Item 3.  Why are "unicum" stats so important to you?  If you know your ship, and get results you can be generally happy with... that should be whats important.  Solo vs division stats can not be directly compared.

 

Item 2.  Divisions can enhance teamwork dramatically, which can have a major impact on stats, especially win rate.

 

Item 1.  I disagree.

 

Team work is the most OP thing in the game; and in random games (not in divisions) you should never expect you team mate to give you "teamwork": but that doesn't mean you can not give it to them.  In general, the average BB player has a fear of DDs, especially those that have stealth and torpedoes; now if you supply spotting, scouting, and screening to you BBs, they will very often be able to perform at a higher than normal rate  (They will have a good game) ; and this will improve their chance of making a difference and winning... improve yours as well.

 

Team work begin with learning what your teammates need, and then supplying it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
15,933 posts
11,179 battles
30 minutes ago, Beastofwar said:

So "unicum" stats cannot be achieved playing alone in Random Match, nor can Random Match stats in Random played ships be compared with division/clan play stats in select ships.

Solo:

https://wows-numbers.com/player/500701135,RNGsama/?type=solo

 

Destroyer 2 013 69.4% 3 186 1.76 82 959 1.08 8
Harugumo
350 865
Yueyang
35
Grozovoi
Aircraft Carrier 1 092 73.44% 3 125 2.34 125 586 24.57 7
Taiho (<30.01.2019)
398 373
Hakuryu (<30.01.2019)
94
Midway (<30.01.2019)
Cruiser 3 645 70.23% 3 110 1.81 106 871 3.97 8
Atlanta
376 471
Minotaur
73
Des Moines
Battleship 1 793 68.21% 2 572 1.71 116 758 3.92 8
Wyoming
350 092
Conqueror
52
Montana

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
[TOXIC]
Players
4,358 posts
11,268 battles
8 hours ago, DataDemon said:

2.Make fair random MM!

Every player has a rating now depicting his skills at the moment of his play. Every non rated player up to this point will get a basic initial rating; we simply assume him to be a beginner until he proves otherwise. 
We use this rating to make fair teams. Just switch the players so the rating gap between the teams becomes the smallest possible. There are still no guarantee to be completely 'fair' teams, but it is almost certain that in this case there won't be any stompruns and the game will be close and interesting all the time. Also you have to regard that (Noob in Montana + Pro in Bismark) < (Pro in Montana + Noob in Bismark), so you have to calibrate some numbers. Like Carriers are twice as important, so the gap weight counts twice, T8 in a T10 match has less impact, or even Cruisers are less influential,... But im sure you don't need anything else to make it work
Yes, I am aware that I set the win probability of each player to 50%, independent of his skills. I simply throw the category 'Winrate' out and replace it with 'Rating'. By allowing this I try to bring something into the game, which seems to be forgotten: FUN!!

The idea of rating MIGHT work for Ranked where you have small teams (so your contribution has more impact) and people explicitly play chasing the rating - picking whatever ships they are most comfortable with/have best commanders on/consider best suited for the meta.

 

It would be disastrous for Randoms where people grind new lines, play ships they don't know well, train new captains. For Ranked it doesn't matter what ships someone is better at and what he's worse with: the idea is that he is incentivized to pick his best options. The same won't be true for Randoms - you don't want people only playing their best ships and WG has all the reasons to avoid this even for the very pragmatic reasons of making money: people grinding new lines use up resources and are in need premium time etc. They are also finding new ships they like and might want to buy a perma camo for, or they want to experiment with new premiums... People who prefer to stick with the ships they're best with don't make WG that much money.

 

What it all means is that you would need a separate ranking for each class. Most likely - for each line or even a ship - but the more detailed you get, the less information you're going to have. And we're talking a 12-player mode. You can win (or lose) ten matches in a row by sheer dumb luck while being a perfectly average player, so it takes many matches before you can have a rating of any value for the player-ship configuration in question...

 

And finally, the last problem. "there won't be any stompruns" you say - and you're completely wrong. You see, WoWs is a game that has a lot of snowballing. When two equally good teams meet in a football (soccer if we have any Americans here :Smile-_tongue:) match, it's relatively rare to see the encounter become completely one-sided. The reason for that is because football isn't a snowballing game. When you lose the first goal, the disadvantage you are in is merely of tactical nature - the enemy just needs to defend the score to win, you don't become less powerful. And yet, even in high-level professional football we have the disposition of the day, a bit of luck and the like and end up with pretty high results. To the point where two teams can meet two times within weeks from one match to another and the matches can end up in high victories for one and then the other. Even in that kind of game, between teams on pretty similar level, we occasionally see "stompruns". But WoWs is different. To keep our football analogy - imagine if every time a team loses a goal, the coach has to take one player off the field. You lose one goal? You play 10 against 11. You happen to lose two goals in a row? Good luck recovering from that while also being two players short! I mean, sure, in WoWs the surviving ships also suffer damage, but there's usually a big difference between sinking a ship and ALMOST sinking a ship. When there is a 4 vs 4 flank and one side loses a ship, holding that flank becomes really problematic. Losing two with no kills means usually that the flank crumbles - the enemy can push and set themselves in a position allowing them to get the falling team's middle into crossfire, nullifying their angling and quickly inflicting significant damage. The whole formation is likely to crumble quickly and decisively - all because two ships died too fast on one flank. Stompruns are a natural, unavoidable occurrence, you're going to see plenty of them no matter what. Even if you managed to clone a team, give each a mirrored ship lineup and pitch the exact same players against themselves - there will still be matches ending in "stompruns" and they wouldn't be very rare.

 

I mean, sure, having the level of players be closer to each other (and closer between the teams) would make "stompruns" rarer. But not by nearly as much as you seem to believe. And, what's worse, there's a price for that to pay that you didn't think about, that price being: reversals. In WoWs it's very hard to achieve a reversal, when it does happen, it's often caused by the fact that the losing team has more of their good players surviving while the good ones on the other side met with misfortune. This means that even when you're losing, there's still hope. If enemy team has worse remaining players in somewhat battered ships - you can still hope that maybe you can turn things around. Admittedly, on the winning team this translates to "these muppets can still throw the game", but the point is: it's more worth it to play until the end. If everyone was of similar skill level, however, you're less likely to be able to do something. They aren't that much worse than you to make the mistakes that would let you turn tables on them (unless you're all really bad and it's mostly about luck). And games with the result clear by the mid-time aren't very exciting. So, you're getting less "stompruns"... but in turn you also have less battles that seem to be going badly but then turn out well. And frankly, these matches are the most satisfying ones. What does it really matter if you avoid a stomprun if instead you get a dragged-out match where one team is clearly winning but the whole thing drags out for the entire 20 minutes or close to that? No stomprun as the losers are putting up resistance. Yet no excitement because it doesn't seem like there's going to be a reversal at any point. Just a long process of making the victory (and defeat) official and farming damage in the process. Frankly, these matches don't really seem that much better than "stompruns" to me...

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
4,363 posts
6,236 battles
42 minutes ago, Beastofwar said:

So "unicum" stats cannot be achieved playing alone in Random Match, nor can Random Match stats in Random played ships be compared with division/clan play stats in select ships.

 

I also begin to understand much of the complaining....those that show off stats are facing falling stats because of the changes.....and want to ruin the game's improvements/roll it back to what they were used to for all players because of this stat bragging lunacy !!!

 

Whatever floats your boat to somehow talk your own stats good (or someone elses stats bad) :cap_like:

Doesnt change facts tho...

I also wonder about the logic how 3x non-unicum players suddenly get Unicum when they play together :cap_hmm:  They still arent unicum then? And what are unicum stats? Damage farming? Its actually quite hard to get very high damage numbers in a 3x division, because the damage is distributed between those guys. If a ship is showing broadside, everyone might get a piece of that cake. If you play alone, you might get the whole cake for yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,085 posts
6,251 battles
3 minutes ago, Beastofwar said:

Be sure if you see me on the enemy team to let me know......i will enjoy the game even more then. 

 

Buahah. Gonna be a short game - for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
779 posts
4,780 battles
17 minutes ago, ForlornSailor said:

 

Buahah. Gonna be a short game - for you.

 

I meant as to learn from players wich such renowned reputation. Surely they could not lose that match :-))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×