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

Maybe an idea....

37 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[GW_KR]
Players
8 posts
3,890 battles

Hi all maybe it is an idea for wargaming to reward teamplay? i'm not sure if that is possible but it would be nice.

 

Let me explain why the last few weeks i can't keep on noticing that when you play in a random battle there is hardly no teamplay anymore ships go after there own damage and kills and not thinking in a team matter.

 

I am refering to for instance DD's they do not cap anymore they do not spot and when they see a ship they smoke up expecting someone else will spot for them.

 

So basicly the ships that rely on there spotting are left alone.

 

I am not a pro player in fact my stats are quite poor even bad but i always think in a team matter that's why i think it's nice if teamplay would be rewarded.

 

Just my 2 cents

 

Johan

  • Cool 8
  • Funny 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
250 posts
1,481 battles

I agree especially on the DD part. I don't play them a lot, but nobody contests cap anymore, only expert players do it. I just lost a ranked match were all of our three DDs got sunked, while for the enemy, only one was sunked. 

Also, yes, there is not a lot of teamplay, unless, again, you are not playing with expert players. I think they should introduce "Assist" ribbons

This old video from Flamu explains the situation perfectly.

 

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
541 posts
1,924 battles
1 hour ago, wot_2016_gunner said:

I don't play them a lot, but nobody contests cap anymore, only expert players do it.

this must be the first time anyone has (indirectly) called me an expert player :Smile_teethhappy: 

 

but yeah achievements for spotting, capping, decapping and tanking are still a good idea that should happen.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[I-J-N]
Players
1,365 posts

It would make the game a lot more enjoyable if they actually did reward the team members for team effort and pulling together, now it's just individual performance and input that matter.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[GW_KR]
Players
8 posts
3,890 battles

It's good to see that people agree with this and i can only hope that Wargaming will make something like that so that players know they will be rewarded for it making it more interresing.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-GOD-]
Players
980 posts
15,382 battles
14 minutes ago, CaptJohan said:

It's good to see that people agree with this and i can only hope that Wargaming will make something like that so that players know they will be rewarded for it making it more interresing.

They won't but I commend you for your optimism and effort. :cap_like:

  • Cool 4
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OGHF]
Players
231 posts
6,550 battles
2 hours ago, CaptJohan said:

Hi all maybe it is an idea for wargaming to reward teamplay? i'm not sure if that is possible but it would be nice.

 

Let me explain why the last few weeks i can't keep on noticing that when you play in a random battle there is hardly no teamplay anymore ships go after there own damage and kills and not thinking in a team matter.

 

I am refering to for instance DD's they do not cap anymore they do not spot and when they see a ship they smoke up expecting someone else will spot for them.

 

So basicly the ships that rely on there spotting are left alone.

 

I am not a pro player in fact my stats are quite poor even bad but i always think in a team matter that's why i think it's nice if teamplay would be rewarded.

 

Just my 2 cents

 

Johan

 

+1 Agreed!

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ANV]
Players
279 posts
6,478 battles
2 hours ago, wot_2016_gunner said:

I agree especially on the DD part. I don't play them a lot, but nobody contests cap anymore, only expert players do it. I just lost a ranked match were all of our three DDs got sunked, while for the enemy, only one was sunked. 

Also, yes, there is not a lot of teamplay, unless, again, you are not playing with expert players. I think they should introduce "Assist" ribbons

This old video from Flamu explains the situation perfectly.

 

Sadly the answer is probably server processor cycles... it would take up more... therefore need more 'servers' (processor cycles) = more cost for same number of games = "no, we'll just live with no positive reinforcement for good gameplay during a game and keep costs down."

An awful lot of good ideas die this way.  :-(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DAVY]
Players
2,579 posts
11 hours ago, CaptJohan said:

Hi all maybe it is an idea for wargaming to reward teamplay? i'm not sure if that is possible but it would be nice.

 

Let me explain why the last few weeks i can't keep on noticing that when you play in a random battle there is hardly no teamplay anymore ships go after there own damage and kills and not thinking in a team matter.

 

I am refering to for instance DD's they do not cap anymore they do not spot and when they see a ship they smoke up expecting someone else will spot for them.

 

So basicly the ships that rely on there spotting are left alone.

 

I am not a pro player in fact my stats are quite poor even bad but i always think in a team matter that's why i think it's nice if teamplay would be rewarded.

 

Just my 2 cents

 

Johan

Abysmal stats (you said it yourself) 22 tier 10 ships, less than 2k random battles ?  There is no way you think about your team or you would be learning at low tiers instead of rushing to T10 and putting your team at a disadvantage. :Smile_sceptic:

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Alpha Tester
18,082 posts
5,890 battles
1 minute ago, bushwacker001 said:

Abysmal stats (you said it yourself) 22 tier 10 ships, less than 2k random battles ?  There is no way you think about your team or you would be learning at low tiers instead of rushing to T10. :Smile_sceptic:

 

22 tier X... WG's favorite kind of player with 2k random battles ( I'm assuming he grinded a lot of coop to get the free xp or just grinded entire lines there ).

 

Sorry OP, you don't learn to think in a team matter in PVE, and if you got terrible stats it's hard to see how that translates to thinking in a team manner either. If you thought in a team manner you would get better performance.

 

Maybe he THINKS he is thinking in a team matter, but he is probably not ( I could analyze his profile, since he openend this up by mentioning he is a bad player, but I can't be bothered ). 

 

Which btw brings us to the crux of the matter, if players are incapable of properly judging how to play in a team effort, how the heck do you expect WG to program something which encourages people to not be like the incredibly stupid people we tend to meet in pvp? 

 

Thinking in team effort is dynamic, depends on the potato's on both team, the non potata's, the positions those non potato's are in, cap/point pressure and the list goes on and on. And people really trust WG to be able to program something which actually tracks the impact actions have on the team effort?

 

The problem this also showcases is that terrible players still think they even know what team interest is, or can identity things they should do in order to contribute to a victory. That is what causes bad players to suicide in bad pushes, or bad players to leave entire flanks open, well that and them being 'mad' they aren't on the flank with the majority of ships. And then they claim 'bad teams'/'no support'. 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,296 posts
9,566 battles
12 hours ago, CaptJohan said:

I am refering to for instance DD's they do not cap anymore they do not spot and when they see a ship they smoke up expecting someone else will spot for them.

How much experience have you had as a DD?

 

As a DD main:

 

1. I WILL NOT cap if there is an enemy Radar Cruiser lurking nearby.. Start the cap, enemy flicks the radar, DD's dies... then what use am I?

1a. I will not cap if my RDF puts any enemy at close range and I cannot see it...

1b. I will not cap if the people in my team suddenly abandon me unless I am absolutely sure no enemy is near.

1c. I will not cap just to satisfy other team members if I think it is unsafe to make the attempt. (After all I want to stay alive too.)

2. I have had too many games where I spot and the bigger guns refuse to kill priority targets. Now for a DD the priority targets are the ships that carry radar....

Have you bothered to research the radar capabilities of your opponents so that you can help your DD allies?

3. My DD is NOT a capital ship and has a poor Health Pool compared to others...

4. If as a DD main I smoke it is to either camouflage a team member being targeted or if I have been ambushed and need to escape...

4a. I will also smoke to give my team the chance to fire from cover whilst I continue to spot for them... Ships like Worcester, Mino, Smolensk love the extra cover to fire on the enemy...

5. If there are CV's in game DD game play has to be cautious... the CV can keep a DD perma spotted long enough for a DD to die either from bombs or shells....

 

Perhaps you should play DD's a little more before you criticise because looking at your stats you hardly play them...

 

Just so you understand that I know what I am talking about...my recent stats.

 

 

 

 

 

Screenshot (468).png

Screenshot (469).png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DAVY]
Players
2,579 posts
18 minutes ago, mtm78 said:

 

22 tier X... WG's favorite kind of player with 2k random battles ( I'm assuming he grinded a lot of coop to get the free xp or just grinded entire lines there ).

 

Sorry OP, you don't learn to think in a team matter in PVE, and if you got terrible stats it's hard to see how that translates to thinking in a team manner either. If you thought in a team manner you would get better performance.

 

Maybe he THINKS he is thinking in a team matter, but he is probably not ( I could analyze his profile, since he openend this up by mentioning he is a bad player, but I can't be bothered ). 

 

Which btw brings us to the crux of the matter, if players are incapable of properly judging how to play in a team effort, how the heck do you expect WG to program something which encourages people to not be like the incredibly stupid people we tend to meet in pvp? 

 

Thinking in team effort is dynamic, depends on the potato's on both team, the non potata's, the positions those non potato's are in, cap/point pressure and the list goes on and on. And people really trust WG to be able to program something which actually tracks the impact actions have on the team effort?

 

The problem this also showcases is that terrible players still think they even know what team interest is, or can identity things they should do in order to contribute to a victory. That is what causes bad players to suicide in bad pushes, or bad players to leave entire flanks open, well that and them being 'mad' they aren't on the flank with the majority of ships. And then they claim 'bad teams'/'no support'. 

Yep.....Whenever there is a post/suggestion/whine about lack of teamplay, it always seems to be by a player who buggers the high tier teams up and seems incapable of learning the game first. IMO, teamplay is rewarded with a win at the end of the battle as usually the team that plays the best together, even by chance, tends to win. especially if there is a few OP types on the other team. 

 

edit....fully expecting noobyskooby or whatever his name is to come in soon with his 'expert' knowledge on this one. :Smile_sceptic:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,296 posts
9,566 battles
2 minutes ago, bushwacker001 said:

Yep.....Whenever there is a post/suggestion/whine about lack of teamplay, it always seems to be by a player who buggers the high tier teams up and seems incapable of learning the game first. IMO, teamplay is rewarded with a win at the end of the battle as usually the team that plays the best together, even by chance, tends to win. especially if there is a few OP types on the other team. 

Plenty of players want to be a marathon runner before learning to walk...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Alpha Tester
18,082 posts
5,890 battles

Ow I got plenty of salt for teams, OP has a point that playerbase compared to old is absolute garbage and not reallyj interested in team effort. Rather cross the entire map to that one spot I know I can farm behind that OP island with my cruiser.... leave flank open -> loss -> but I farmed dmg so I'm not last in team and well that means it's not my fault we lost right...

 

Damn XP list even rewards babies who are useless entire game till late game where they suddenly can do some cleanup before also dying because their baddies. Then they also claim: I'm not last in team, why you telling me I'm a useless sack of .... obviously those others guys were less useful as me ( not understanding those guys probably died trying to gain mapcontrol while he was having a wank in the back ). 

 

:Smile_ohmy:

 

Or a full hp Sojuz failing to shoot a broadside JB going full speed to ram me after I perm took out his guns with Sinop.... 980 points... and they still throw. Not only fails to shoot JB before he rams me to death, he then RAMS an enemy Sinop with his full hp battleship and dies 2 seconds after getting his die-hard by shells from an Alaska. 980 points, and still ONE loser like that ruined ~20 minutes of my time. 

 

And you know what, the guy ended up halfway up the team, because he did some ramming damage.... 

 

And he was typing in chat like he was having fun. That is the kind of stuff which not only makes me throw up a little bit in my mouth, it also makes me wonder if we shouldn't give parents of those children some birth protection. 

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-LA-]
Players
184 posts
1,879 battles
12 hours ago, CaptJohan said:

Hi all maybe it is an idea for wargaming to reward teamplay? i'm not sure if that is possible but it would be nice.

 

Let me explain why the last few weeks i can't keep on noticing that when you play in a random battle there is hardly no teamplay anymore ships go after there own damage and kills and not thinking in a team matter.

 

I am refering to for instance DD's they do not cap anymore they do not spot and when they see a ship they smoke up expecting someone else will spot for them.

 

So basicly the ships that rely on there spotting are left alone.

 

I am not a pro player in fact my stats are quite poor even bad but i always think in a team matter that's why i think it's nice if teamplay would be rewarded.

 

Just my 2 cents

 

Johan

yep we have a reward system lifted from a deathmatch game strapped onto what i supposed to be a team game , player behaviour is real easy to control , like rats in a maze we always want to find the cheese . and the cheese in this case is all about whoring damage. the win bonus just isnt worth going for far better to keep whoring damage and just let the win rest on a coin flip.

 

If they changed the rewards they would change the behaviour. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Alpha Tester
18,082 posts
5,890 battles
5 minutes ago, Padds01 said:

If they changed the rewards they would change the behaviour. 

 

Problem: how do you change it?

 

The only way would be making economy harsher in losses, and they will not do this because it will cost them a big part of their paying playerbase. It would mean existing good players will division exclusively so they can get the good economy since divisions will boost your win rate, and new players will get punished relatively hard in comparison since they probably don't know many other ( decent ) players they can division with to make sure their win rate is high enough to make the economy self sustainable.

 

You can not program logic to award in game actions based on the influence on the probability of success, there are way to many variables. The only indicator is what we get automatically afterwards, and preferably in a large enough data set, namely your win rate. 

 

You can't reward all battleships for tanking in the same manner, or being at brawling ranges to enemy, since some BB's are excellent at that, and others are not. You can not say: you're a DD, you should cap and be within x km of enemy all times, and then you put a Shimakaze and a Khabarovsk in the DD slots and suddenly those value measurements can go out of the window. Each ship has strengths, you would need to program this awarding system in a way which makes using strong sides of ships more attractive, while discouraging getting into situations where they are at a disadvantage. And this is just not possible, imho. 

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,296 posts
9,566 battles
33 minutes ago, mtm78 said:

Ow I got plenty of salt for teams, OP has a point that playerbase compared to old is absolute garbage and not reallyj interested in team effort. Rather cross the entire map to that one spot I know I can farm behind that OP island with my cruiser.... leave flank open -> loss -> but I farmed dmg so I'm not last in team and well that means it's not my fault we lost right...

 

Damn XP list even rewards babies who are useless entire game till late game where they suddenly can do some cleanup before also dying because their baddies. Then they also claim: I'm not last in team, why you telling me I'm a useless sack of .... obviously those others guys were less useful as me ( not understanding those guys probably died trying to gain mapcontrol while he was having a wank in the back ). 

 

:Smile_ohmy:

 

Or a full hp Sojuz failing to shoot a broadside JB going full speed to ram me after I perm took out his guns with Sinop.... 980 points... and they still throw. Not only fails to shoot JB before he rams me to death, he then RAMS an enemy Sinop with his full hp battleship and dies 2 seconds after getting his die-hard by shells from an Alaska. 980 points, and still ONE loser like that ruined ~20 minutes of my time. 

 

And you know what, the guy ended up halfway up the team, because he did some ramming damage.... 

 

And he was typing in chat like he was having fun. That is the kind of stuff which not only makes me throw up a little bit in my mouth, it also makes me wonder if we shouldn't give parents of those children some birth protection. 

Wow, you have been hurt, want a hug...?

 

But, yes cannot fault your statement at all...

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Alpha Tester
18,082 posts
5,890 battles
1 minute ago, Migantium_Mashum said:

Wow, you have been hurt, want a hug...?

download-2.png

 

But yeah people will be people, even in online games :Smile_coin:

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-LA-]
Players
184 posts
1,879 battles
36 minutes ago, mtm78 said:

 

Problem: how do you change it?

 

The only way would be making economy harsher in losses, and they will not do this because it will cost them a big part of their paying playerbase. It would mean existing good players will division exclusively so they can get the good economy since divisions will boost your win rate, and new players will get punished relatively hard in comparison since they probably don't know many other ( decent ) players they can division with to make sure their win rate is high enough to make the economy self sustainable.

 

You can not program logic to award in game actions based on the influence on the probability of success, there are way to many variables. The only indicator is what we get automatically afterwards, and preferably in a large enough data set, namely your win rate. 

 

You can't reward all battleships for tanking in the same manner, or being at brawling ranges to enemy, since some BB's are excellent at that, and others are not. You can not say: you're a DD, you should cap and be within x km of enemy all times, and then you put a Shimakaze and a Khabarovsk in the DD slots and suddenly those value measurements can go out of the window. Each ship has strengths, you would need to program this awarding system in a way which makes using strong sides of ships more attractive, while discouraging getting into situations where they are at a disadvantage. And this is just not possible, imho. 

 

 

 

no reason why the total handed out per game would need to be changed at all , just shift the focus away from damage and towards team work / objective play, 

 

Divisions clubbing is a matchmaking fail , they should be in clan / ranked and if they are allowed in random they should be matched against like. personally i dont think divisions should be allowed in random. back in the Quake days we used to divide clans up so they were on both sides. quality of the game for all > 

 

 

Theres a video from flamu higher in the thread covers a lot of possible ways to do all that. and frankly id leave it to more experienced players than me to pick the best waya but theres lots of instant feedback loops you can use to reinforce good team play, ribbons /shoutouts for spotting damage , points tanked, cv's deploying fighters that intercept etc etc. if a ship has no team play at all and is purely selfish damage dealer, well perhaps its use needs to be discouraged? 

 

i suspect you would need to test several setups see what works . start off one with the focus on the win giving the winning team a higher share, but i suspect the most productive route would be to add a lot more ribbons/ heroics/ for team oriented behaviour, remove the survive requirement from dreadnaught fireprrof etc as flamu suggest would be a good start for tankers, 

strongly doubt v1.0 will solve it and further iterations will be required.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[I-J-N]
Players
1,365 posts

This issue cropped up in another thread, can't remember which one TBH. There's basically three types of actions you can take:

 

1. Actions that only or mostly benefit you.

2. Actions that benefit you and the team effort.

3. Actions that mostly or only benefit the team.

 

(There is also inaction but that benefits only the enemy so that should not be rewarded...)

 

The way I see it, only 1. and 2. are really rewarded currently, so the game reward system actively discourages the players from taking certain actions that would help their team to win. Instead there is a huge emphasis on sinking,  damage farming and capping. Sadly, however, IMO the depth of the tactical component is largely connected with the 3rd type of action.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Alpha Tester
18,082 posts
5,890 battles
3 hours ago, Padds01 said:

no reason why the total handed out per game would need to be changed at all , just shift the focus away from damage and towards team work / objective play, 

 

Yeah...

 

3 hours ago, Padds01 said:

Divisions clubbing is a matchmaking fail , they should be in clan / ranked and if they are allowed in random they should be matched against like. personally i dont think divisions should be allowed in random. back in the Quake days we used to divide clans up so they were on both sides. quality of the game for all > 

WG will never remove divisions from randoms, lots of people would only play in divisions for various reasons ( social, sanity... ). Is it fair? Well just as random MM, divisions are also random, and as long as that is true it's not creating an imbalance overal for any player. 

 

3 hours ago, Padds01 said:

Theres a video from flamu higher in the thread covers a lot of possible ways to do all that. and frankly id leave it to more experienced players than me to pick the best waya but theres lots of instant feedback loops you can use to reinforce good team play, ribbons /shoutouts for spotting damage , points tanked, cv's deploying fighters that intercept etc etc. if a ship has no team play at all and is purely selfish damage dealer, well perhaps its use needs to be discouraged? 

Mhm, you really think shipJesus would be the first to discuss this or to bring up aspects related to it? 

 

If you remove survival requirement for say fireproof, it doesn't mean anything. It's like I already explained, sometimes a push even at the risk of your own ship is good, sometimes it is not. And the game can not be taught to differentiate between it. If you get burned down, it doesn't always mean you did something for the victory. So 'points tanked' can not be rewarded more. 

 

Imagine the famous full hp bb at the end of the game with all his allies death, he might 'tank' a couple off millions because now all remaining enemies have nothing else to shoot at ( let's imagine they don't all die really quick giving broadside to 'fire all the guns' ). Damage tanked is a crap measurement of actually doing something useful.

 

A CV which deploys a fighter to protect an ally which might die anyway, and doesn't use his strike capability to kill the enemy might not be working towards a victory at all. Yes, sounds crap for the ally not getting support, but sometimes in order to win a game, sacrifices have to be made just as in real battles. 

 

Purely selfish damage dealer? Do they exist? Even a Khaba has utility, applying dmg on enemy team. A battleship is in essence nothing but area denial for cruisers, destroyers are area denial for battleships and cruisers should be area denial for destroyer, the application of dmg is important but not more important as where it is applied. 

 

And this is why it's not possible. You can not reward actions because reason X, since reason X doesn't always apply. And if would always apply, you're forcing people to play in ways which will make other ships from the same class but vastly different role ( Des Moines vs HIV/Zao ) who contribute in different ways, to get different rewards for the exact same part in securing a victory. A flanking cruiser applying dpm and denying pushes/providing vision, and a more static area denial cruiser against destroyers. In order for the game to reward actual contributing actions, it would need to take into account each possible ship role. 

 

And playerbase. The system would need to account for the playerbase. Because if you care for the victory, there is a big difference in 'team oriented actions' which endanger yourself, when the one you're endangering yourself for might be eating to much from the glue jar and not going to be worth the risk to yourself. Or when people think I need their help, like a destroyer dropping a smoke screen... yeah if I need one great, but usually they just block my own vision of the enemy and I could really do without those.. but sometimes a smoke is just what I needed to make a turn without being seen broadside. How is the game supposed to know what I need? Imagine being at 980 points and your top tier full hp BB just needs to survive but decides to ram the low hp enemy low tier battleship.... ramming for the low tier was great, for my top tier Soyuz it was ... :etc_swear: But sometimes it can be the other way around. 

 

It is therefore not possible. The only way to actually encourage good play is to make losing actually a bad experience in comparison to what it is now. Since that is what all those actions actually boil down to, winning or losing more. Not thinking you're 'playing for the victory' when you got no idea what that would mean. 

 

Yes that also means it's hard for new people to learn to play the game, as they have limited feedback and sadly you keep seeing people claiming their WR is because WG rigged the game just against them, in favor or others, because they seemingly don't like him/her which is a direct result of them lacking feedback that it IS their own actions in game leading to their statistical performance. 

 

But no, this isn't a problem which can be solved by giving XP for smokescreens, or for dropping a fighter, or for a battleship to tank damage. All of those scenarios are not directly tied to doing something useful, you need much stricter descriptions: like, if BB is in position Y in relation to ally Y and enemy is at bearing Z AND BB tanks damage from ship which has line of sight to both him and ally Y, then BB get's 'insert amount' of experience awarded. Realizing this, it might be an easy conclusion to think it's easier to just lower the rewards for situations which don't indicate team play. 

 

Which is the next falacy because even that rule isn't always true. I can be a battleship and the last one alive with almost full hp and it CAN be because my team just folded before I got into position to attract fire ( slow mid tier BB's ), so if I am then still able to win the game because I have so much HP to play and trade with against an enemy team which is severely weakened, why do I still need to get punished? Or do you exempt slow battleships from this 'rule'? 

 

You see that this doesn't lead anywhere now? Ships / situations / players all affect what actions are actually going to secure a victory. What if the DD player smokes up the wrong ally, should he still be rewarded for 'team play'? 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-LA-]
Players
184 posts
1,879 battles
11 minutes ago, mtm78 said:

 

Yeah...

 

i doubt he is , no idea really, i mentioned it because i needed examples and it was the closest source.

 

doesnt matter if it was good or succesful its about encourging a type of play, 

 

fine at the worst if we go with v1.0 of forum ideas being the one implemented with no iteration , weve simply ended up in a situation where the right choice in the wrong situation occasionally gets rewarded. lot better than where we are now 

 

And im not suggesting damage be unrewarded just altering the balance to encourage better play. right now if im spotting a DD on my CV and my team can shoot at it , im better off attacking him for damage , the team would be better off if i circled over it kept it revealed and they killed it but for me takng half its HP and stopping my team killing it is what is rewarded. that is objectively bad design. and i think you should look to improve 

 

Purely selfish Damage , dunno you brought it up i just suggested how they be handled. 

 

Of course its possible , were not talking about eating 4 whole dolphins on toast for breakfast here, were not even talking putting a man on the moon with less computing power than your phone has. all were talking about is making a better system. ok perfection wont happen never does, i can live with that , but there is still a lot of room to improve.

 

again it really doesnt matter , just encourage intent and behaviour will follow, so a DD drops teh occasional hindering smokecreen , who cares he was stll trying , maybe you have to have a word and explain in chat , maybe that interaction is good to. 

 

34 minutes ago, mtm78 said:

And this is why it's not possible.

A lot of people have said that about a lot of things in the course of history , from what i read they are very rarely right. i really dont think improving a bad system that doesnt appear to be designed for its current job really shouldnt be all that hard. Makes a change to some one so sure of WG's infallibility

 

im not sure who or what is being punished here im simply suggesting offering rewards for positive intent. 

 

and in the last example id say yes. if we suffer a pandemic of DD players smoking people and it causes widespread problems we can always drop it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Alpha Tester
18,082 posts
5,890 battles

Come up with something concrete please, specifics. 

2 minutes ago, Padds01 said:

doesnt matter if it was good or succesful its about encourging a type of play, 

 

What?

 

You think people should be rewarded for a type of play even if it's not helping in winning the game? How the HECK are people supposed to actually LEARN TO PLAY THEN? You don't do actions because 'they are encouraged' you do actions because you WANT TO WIN THE GAME. And read my previous text for why it doesn't work. 

 

Actions in game are WORTHLESS if they do not lead to winning. And sometimes an action can help in securing that victory, and sometimes they are not. I really can't see how you can get this explained any better as above, yet you still don't seem to get the point :Smile_facepalm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
434 posts
2,624 battles
8 hours ago, Migantium_Mashum said:

As a DD main:

 

1. I WILL NOT cap if there is an enemy Radar Cruiser lurking nearby.. Start the cap, enemy flicks the radar, DD's dies... then what use am I?

1a. I will not cap if my RDF puts any enemy at close range and I cannot see it...

1b. I will not cap if the people in my team suddenly abandon me unless I am absolutely sure no enemy is near.

1c. I will not cap just to satisfy other team members if I think it is unsafe to make the attempt. (After all I want to stay alive too.)

2. I have had too many games where I spot and the bigger guns refuse to kill priority targets. Now for a DD the priority targets are the ships that carry radar....

Have you bothered to research the radar capabilities of your opponents so that you can help your DD allies?

3. My DD is NOT a capital ship and has a poor Health Pool compared to others...

4. If as a DD main I smoke it is to either camouflage a team member being targeted or if I have been ambushed and need to escape...

4a. I will also smoke to give my team the chance to fire from cover whilst I continue to spot for them... Ships like Worcester, Mino, Smolensk love the extra cover to fire on the enemy...

5. If there are CV's in game DD game play has to be cautious... the CV can keep a DD perma spotted long enough for a DD to die either from bombs or shells....

This. Amen.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×