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

Naval Training Center - Ideas & suggestions

227 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
34 posts
12,818 battles

An idea, my understanding was that the buffs were silly as originally envisaged and there was no down side like legendary modules. Would a module that had a negative as well as a positive be allowed?

 

If so how about allow further customisation, when the conditions are met (whatever that is) the player gets a module, however they get to pick the 2 bonuses and the drawback from a list for the line/nation being worked on. The game could give 3 or 4 positives and 2 or 3 downsides and the player would pick one from each. it would then be fixed forever with those stats. and only available to ships on that line (for example American light cruisers)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
234 posts
3,230 battles

If they want people to spread out, 

Do a flat economy, so that you get more or less the same credit and xp no matter tier! 

And on top of that do some sort of skill based MM system, so that the new don't get "smurfed" 

Edited by SmokyButtons
Error in txt, butter fingers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,109 posts
14,347 battles

This game has so much potential.

 

All I'm saying is CLAN CAMPAIGNS.

 

Basically, Turn-based strategy game (TBS, like Panzer General, Final Fantasy etc) meets WoWs Clan Battles.

 

Imagine a real "war gaming" format, where the clan acts as an actual fleet. Where disposition and maybe logistics and possibly even actual resources come in, which are not just in-game currencies any more but are actually needed to conduct the campaign.

 

To hell with balance - where you try to create battles as unbalanced as you can while still needing to cover your aaa.... base.

 

Trying to squeeze RTS carriers into an MMO went wrong but it was innovative and courageous. TBS might be just the ticket. It would work along the lines of Naval Battles, only better: Disposition, Logistics etc is handled all through the week in the run-up, then at the Weekend it's crunch time for the different flotillas.

 

There could conceivably even be carriers in there playing a meaningful role.

 

Or <gasp> Tanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SONLY]
Beta Tester
35 posts
6,876 battles

So the focus on suggestions is to come up with different rewards. But I have to mention it again, the NTC idea in general is pretty bad IMO. I have a few ships still in port from pretty much all lines. Sure I don't play them as often as I should, given that I kept them because I enjoyed playing them. But I do enjoy them once in a while. When you reset a whole line, these ships then get sold I assume? Which IMO is something I don't want to happen. I have already played through the whole line and kept the ships I enjoyed. No reward is going to push me into selling them and having to do it all again. 

 

I would much rather see features that give a bit more incentive to play the fun ships in the lines that were worth keeping. 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BULL]
Players
642 posts
6,264 battles
On ‎7‎/‎5‎/‎2019 at 3:41 PM, Crysantos said:

In context with the recent update on the Naval Training Center plan I wanted to create a thread where you guys can drop your ideas and suggestions for the future rewards and other aspects you might be creative about.

 

A Positive step Crysantos

 

But in light of WG history you have a lot to put right, I do however applaud you for making the attempt.

 

The perception is that suggestions are pretty much ignored, never any proper feedback. 
Much of the time there is not even an indication that it has even been seen, no good idea, or like the idea but can't make it work with our game, or impractical, or we will look into it, or to much work for little gain. There doesn't seem to be a proper record of the suggestions or a place for players to easily see if somebody already suggested it before and what the outcome was. 

 

You could see it in the NTC thread, how many people said they never listen, they don't care? 
 

This is the perception you need to change to properly engage the community WG could feed of their ideas for years and gain a reputation for a game that cares for its players and listens to them.

 

A simple database could prove you with that tool used properly record the ideas, categorise them, link them back to the original post for reference and more detail, list them somewhere for players to look at and even vote on, provide a status. The database could even be paraded out to prove that you did listen and you have considered it.

 

Perhaps if WG were a bit more transparent with what they have and haven't seen or considered, people might be more inclined to change their perception. 

 

Players (People) will feel more engaged if they can see their idea was looked at, and if it is rejected say why, they may not like it but they at least have an answer or a chance to rethink it and propose a reworked solution that might just work. If an idea is developed and introduced give credit for the suggestion in the release note, "Based on an idea from Player X", Based on an idea from Several Players". "Adopted by popular demand".

 

An example of what you could do, or perhaps you do but it is not transparent.

818467207_SuggestionDB.thumb.png.586787d64f7e03e62ca19cd231704cc0.png

 

Just think of all those ideas, a brainstorm of thousands, and the PR that can be gained by showing you are listening and considering suggestions.

 

If you don't understand a players perspective or reasoning behind a suggestion or complaint then ask them to clarify.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BULL]
Players
642 posts
6,264 battles

The mid Tier issue. 
If you want people to play mid tier then give them something to do there, PVE for one, missions specifically aimed at mid tier only, campaigns aimed at mid tier only. 
I have made suggestions in the past that would achieve this regarding both ranked and clan battles being based on an escalating system. 
At the lower end T6 progressing up to T10 these were ignored but they would engage more players and bring in the mid tiers. 
  
The splits in Ranked are easy just pick the points at which the tier goes up. 
The splits in Clan battles could be done by league starting low and working up, this would also allow less experienced players to play a suitable tiers and there would be no need for rentals, when you reach your top level you stop, that would encourage the grind for the lower tier players to allow them to go further in the new season, or it might encourage some to buy premium ships to carry on longer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BULL]
Players
642 posts
6,264 battles

Resource Sink

 

How about a Veterans league or game mode, where you can buy these previously suggested modules or module variations for any ship from T6 up for large amounts of credits and XP, it would sink much of the resource of these players and give prestige because they can afford to play in the league in the first place. Weekend warriors don't have the resource to blow, and wallet warriors wouldn't stay because the guys in there would wipe the floor with them. For them it would be a bit like an elite or officers club and the best part is it won't affect the rest of us at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BULL]
Players
642 posts
6,264 battles

Problem with ships balancing.

 

Two of the data analysis sets use WR% for the ships, WR% for both players and ships it is flawed, it should not be used. 
The problem with WR is that it is a team result with a mix of good and bad players and a defective matchmaker, this does not only affect the players WR but the ship WR as well. 
The third data set they look at is the combat effectiveness, again this should be analysed without the inclusion of WR, you will never balance anything using a flawed model. 
  
The balance should be performed on how well the ship performs not if it is on the winning side more. For example take a Cruiser he score 150K damage in two consecutive games, one was a win and the other a loss. 
The ship performed at the same sort of level in both games so the win/lose is irrelevant. You should be more focused on how much damage, how many kills, how many planes shot down, how effective at spotting, what is its survival rate in games win or lose, how effective are its torpedoes, what is its capping rate. Basically stuff that actually means something when you want to balance a ship, not if it wins or not, it is 1 ship out of 24.

 

One thing that has potential in all that was discussed was the idea of testing stuff in a new separate game mode on the main servers. This could be better than test servers giving the whole player base access to play ships in a separate game mode would increase the data set. But it won't do any good until WR is removed from ship balancing and the matchmaker is sorted out. 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
234 posts
3,230 battles
32 minutes ago, Quazie said:

An example of what you could do, or perhaps you do but it is not transparent.

818467207_SuggestionDB.thumb.png.586787d64f7e03e62ca19cd231704cc0.png

 

Just think of all those ideas, a brainstorm of thousands, and the PR that can be gained by showing you are listening and considering suggestions.

 

If you don't understand a players perspective or reasoning behind a suggestion or complaint then ask them to clarify.

I know i migth be focusing on the wrong thing here, but how did the radar line of sight fail testing?

I can't avoid thinking there some flaw in that test 🤔

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BULL]
Players
642 posts
6,264 battles
On ‎7‎/‎5‎/‎2019 at 3:41 PM, Crysantos said:

and other aspects you might be creative about.

We have an ear didn't want to waste it!

 

The biggest take from this is the perception the players have that nobody cares or listens, that is a bad position to be in NTC has shown that is the case. They need to address this perception seriously.

 

They already said they tested it and it doesn't work, those are just examples.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
234 posts
3,230 battles
30 minutes ago, Quazie said:

Problem with ships balancing.

 

Two of the data analysis sets use WR% for the ships, WR% for both players and ships it is flawed, it should not be used. 
The problem with WR is that it is a team result with a mix of good and bad players and a defective matchmaker, this does not only affect the players WR but the ship WR as well. 
The third data set they look at is the combat effectiveness, again this should be analysed without the inclusion of WR, you will never balance anything using a flawed model. 
  
The balance should be performed on how well the ship performs not if it is on the winning side more. For example take a Cruiser he score 150K damage in two consecutive games, one was a win and the other a loss. 
The ship performed at the same sort of level in both games so the win/lose is irrelevant. You should be more focused on how much damage, how many kills, how many planes shot down, how effective at spotting, what is its survival rate in games win or lose, how effective are its torpedoes, what is its capping rate. Basically stuff that actually means something when you want to balance a ship, not if it wins or not, it is 1 ship out of 24.

 

One thing that has potential in all that was discussed was the idea of testing stuff in a new separate game mode on the main servers. This could be better than test servers giving the whole player base access to play ships in a separate game mode would increase the data set. But it won't do any good until WR is removed from ship balancing and the matchmaker is sorted out. 

As i have been, arguing for years now, the small patches they do on MM they do, like the now planned sorting by uptiering on T8, is simply not enough,  it needs a complete rework,  it is flawed! 

There are tons of suggestion out there,  but in my mind,  one tier spread, skilled rank Matchmaker is the way to go, and have an suggestion haw to do that with current numbers,  look class call thread 🙂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BULL]
Players
642 posts
6,264 battles
12 minutes ago, SmokyButtons said:

As i have been, arguing for years now, the small patches they do on MM they do, like the now planned sorting by uptiering on T8, is simply not enough,  it needs a complete rework,  it is flawed! 

There are tons of suggestion out there,  but in my mind,  one tier spread, skilled rank Matchmaker is the way to go, and have an suggestion haw to do that with current numbers,  look class call thread 🙂

And there is the problem, me you and others have been on about stuff like this for an age, and where has it got us.

Nobody believes they do anything with those ideas and the player base that cares get disheartened.

 

That is why it is in here, they have demonstrated that they heard us, and we need more of that, more transparency.

 

I agree on a 1 Tier spread, it has to be based on the tier you have selected, but there are issues to deal with on that.

If you are +/- 1 then someone is going to be +2 and others -2.

There are solutions though.

 

Matchmaking is complex, it depends on how big the player base is and how many are on at a given time against waiting times, there is always a trade off somewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CR33D]
Players
3,207 posts
16,619 battles
On 7/5/2019 at 4:41 PM, Crysantos said:

Hey guys,

 

In context with the recent update on the Naval Training Center plan I wanted to create a thread where you guys can drop your ideas and suggestions for the future rewards and other aspects you might be creative about.

 

Greetings, Crysantos

Like you said people didnt like the idea of buffing the ships as reward. It was one of the WGs most terrible ideas. 

 

But you are missing something. Not only the rewards were a bad idea. This whole regrind concept is just stupid. And if i remember it right, playerbase also made it clear that they dont like the regrind concept. 

 

So, new ideas? Forget about this NTC thing completely.  Who the hell does come with all those tarded ideas anyway...:Smile_facepalm:

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
234 posts
3,230 battles
8 minutes ago, Quazie said:

And there is the problem, me you and others have been on about stuff like this for an age, and where has it got us.

Nobody believes they do anything with those ideas and the player base that cares get disheartened.

 

That is why it is in here, they have demonstrated that they heard us, and we need more of that, more transparency.

 

I agree on a 1 Tier spread, it has to be based on the tier you have selected, but there are issues to deal with on that.

If you are +/- 1 then someone is going to be +2 and others -2.

There are solutions though.

 

I agree on everything said!

What i found debating th MM issue, is that among players, especially the elite ones, we don't want the bad players on teams!

But any suggestion of sorting by skill is preserved as "punishing"  players for doing good, 

To be honest the challenge level is going to go up for the best players,  no matter how you do a skill based MM, it's is kinda the point,  once you master beating up "potatoes" in lower tier ships than you, it is time to move to new challenges 😉

 

The way i would to it, with restrictions of current player population, 

First of do system where players can cue up in up to 5 ships, the catch is that they non of the can be same tier or class,  so if all slots are filled, you have 5 different tiers and 5 different class! 

This will immensely help the MM do match ups

Secondly do a system where your ships tier is ajusted up or down bassed of you performance, the better you do the tougher you next opponent's are going to be,  to keep the challenge up for good players,  and give the kess skilled players a fighting chance 😉

Practical effect of this would be that high skill players in match would be in the least powerful ships and low skill in the better ships, creating a balance! 

 

And do robust reward system, and way the skilled players can easily flash the fact doing good to others! 

 

I think we have a  solution 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BULL]
Players
642 posts
6,264 battles

Where there is a big topic that is an integral part of the system WG should do as they have with NTC, start a thread dedicated to that topic.

Get all the feedback on that, find out what player do or don't like about it, what is working and what isn't, exactly what is it that is pissing player off.

 

You can't fix a problem if you don't know exactly what the problem is.

 

My issues are

Up tiered to many times and yes T8 is the worst area.

An imbalance of Radar ships between 1 team and the other (1 on team A and 4 on team B)

Two carriers per side (Not cool if you are a dd)

 

But do they even understand that these are issue for players, the T8 issue they do.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BULL]
Players
642 posts
6,264 battles
1 minute ago, SmokyButtons said:

What i found debating th MM issue, is that among players, especially the elite ones, we don't want the bad players on teams!

But any suggestion of sorting by skill is preserved as "punishing"  players for doing good, 

Ha Ha Ha, been there done that got big response from top end players on that one, big post on how it could have work, but got trashed with a big negative from good players that just want to club ..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BULL]
Players
642 posts
6,264 battles
7 minutes ago, Quazie said:

What I found debating the MM issue, is that among players, especially the elite ones, we don't want the bad players on teams!

The level of players is something else I made suggests about, quite in depth on indoctrination of new players and PVE training regimes that would insure players at least understood the basic of game play.

How to navigate, shoot, torpedo, angle the ship etc.

It got ignored.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
234 posts
3,230 battles
3 minutes ago, Quazie said:

The level of players is something else I made suggests about, quite in depth on indoctrination of new players and PVE training regimes that would insure players at least understood the basic of game play.

How to navigate, shoot, torpedo, angle the ship etc.

It got ignored.

Again I agree,  but that learned, there are still going to be huge spread in player skill, and there need to be a system in place for that! 

Since not everyone has the inclination or time, or both to reach anywhere close to unicum level

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MS--B]
Alpha Tester
950 posts
20,479 battles

Grinding line once again it's not a totally bad idea, but with already owned ships of same line, and at the end we should received decent ship with econominal bonuses for example Ohio or Hayate. 

 

No for grinding six :etc_swear: times same line !!  

TOO MUCH VODKA WILL KILL WOWs !!

WG DEVS STOP DRINKING START THINKING !!

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BULL]
Players
642 posts
6,264 battles
12 minutes ago, SmokyButtons said:

Again I agree,  but that learned, there are still going to be huge spread in player skill, and there need to be a system in place for that! 

Since not everyone has the inclination or time, or both to reach anywhere close to unicum level

 

No, I will never be unicum lol.

No but at least it would raise the standard at the lower end and make the matches a bit more entertaining in the process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
234 posts
3,230 battles
2 minutes ago, Quazie said:

 

No, I will never be unicum lol.

No but at least it would raise the standard at the lower end and make the matches a bit more entertaining in the process.

it would, but just not enugh, to make a difference, has to be done through a good MM!

that said, there sould still most defenly be made som good touturials, place before tier 1, 2, 5 and 8, and players should not be able to advace beore pasing them! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BULL]
Players
642 posts
6,264 battles
10 minutes ago, SmokyButtons said:

that said, there sould still most defenly be made som good touturials, place before tier 1, 2, 5 and 8, and players should not be able to advace beore pasing them! 

That was pretty much the gist of how I proposed it, a gated system to ensure coverage of training, starting low and working up.

Example 1 when you get your 1st Battleship it triggers a PVE so you can learn the role of a battleship

Example 2 when you get your first torpedo boat CL or DD it triggers the PVE for learning how to torpedo.

That kind of thing.

 

It would be a lot of work for WG, but so worth it in the long run.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
234 posts
3,230 battles

MY order of t doing thing if had chose! :)

 

1. finish up balecing the CV rework

2. Rework the MM

3. do turials 

4... lets see ... ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BULL]
Players
642 posts
6,264 battles

My Order

 

1 Fix MM (Work in progress) so start a thread to gather player insight into what the problems really are to ensure you capture/consider them all.

2 Rework the ship balancing system. (It is obviously not working 100%)

3 Use the new system to address existing balancing on all classes.

4 Fix the Port UI, so many little bugs / annoyances. (Again use a thread to gather problems/information)

5 Initiate training tutorials using PVE to ensure a basic understanding of the various aspect of play. (Again use a thread to gather information and gather ideas)

 

I have ideas on many things I would be willing to share in a thread started on that topic, MM, PVE Training, Ship Balancing.

They may or may not work, but they could be the spark in a dev's mind that gives him/her that eureka moment..

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TC_DK]
Players
30 posts
3,106 battles

How about this. When you reach TX. Put a Premium ship afterwards. 

For Example. After taking Yamato. You grind for Musashi with Yamato. Grind 5m or 7m Exp + 30m Credits and buy Musashi.

If you do something like that. I am damn sure people will grind with everything they got.  

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×