WOWs - Motivation for New Players

[Afghanicus]

I've been thinking a bit... and I'll try to reflect those thoughts...

 

Is WG too focused on the veteran players owning most of the ships? Seeing the updates, competitions and rewards seems like that's exactly the case.

 

The 'Research Bureau' for example is focused only on those players, who own most of the ships and can afford to reset a few lines while still keeping a good amount of ships of various tiers for certain events such as 'Ranked', 'Clan Battles' etc.

 

There are many more besides the RB but that's like the most recent and the 'big one'.

 

How many changes/events/competitions/rewards are focused on new players? None, huh?

 

While I understand that WG is looking at their spreadsheets which say that those veteran players are the ones spending most real money on the game... if you don't give the new players motivation and reason to stay and like the game, you'll never get any 'fresh blood' into the game (you can read that as 'fresh money' as well).

 

And just to be clear... I don't expect an update to WOW introducing "Ranked season, Tier 2". Those 'events' would not be something to brag about in news articles, YT videos etc. They would be just an additional motivation and fun for new players. Rewards would be simply credits/freeXP/whatever which means a lot to those new players. Or camos/flags that brings a bit more of those things after each battle and makes obtaining next ships in the branch faster and less frustrating. I'm sure those new players would be excited about it, definitely much more than seeing all those grinds and events they cannot be a part of.

 

I don't see why those things cannot coexist in WOWs. Hell, you could even limit those events for players who are either not older than XX days in the game or have no more than XX ships or have no more than X vessels of Y tier. You get the point.

 

Then the veterans wouldn't care about those events at all, the prizes would be silly and not worth the time as far as they are concerned. But the new players would have some fun and 'tasks' other than pure grind for the next vessels in the 'Tech Tree' and just reading about all the events, competitions, directives etc. they cannot participate at all.

 

By all this, I don't mean to switch focus from 'bigger events' to the 'smaller ones' but again - bringing something fresh and fun for new players while keeping all planned updates for the 'big guys'...

 

What are your thoughts?

[Panocek]

If WG went as far as bribing players to bring new ones with live cash, then "new players" must be few and far between. Hence all out focus on existing playerbase and milk them as much as possible before entire thing collapses.

[Salentine]

and how do you know if someone's a reroll and clubbing in all the comps for newbies?

[Immoxb]

Moved thread to Game discussion (Gameplay) 

[El2aZeR]

Woah, I don't think I have ever seen a thread being moved TO the gameplay section before. :D

 

On topic:

Reason why there are few to no events for new players is quite simple I believe. WoWs has saturated its target audience as can be seen in the playernumbers being very stable for years.

Therefore the number of new players is way smaller compared to the number of veterans, so it doesn't make economic sense to create events targeted at new players.

[Starchy_Tuber]

2 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

Woah, I don't think I have ever seen a thread being moved TO the gameplay section before. :D

 

On topic:

Reason why there are few to no events for new players is quite simple I believe. WoWs has saturated its target audience as can be seen in the playernumbers being very stable for years.

Therefore the number of new players is way smaller compared to the number of veterans, so it doesn't make economic sense to create events targeted at new players.

Kind of...

What you will probably find is that the "veteran" playerbase is very stable, a combination of sunk-cost (no pun intended) and direct interest (meaning people who love boates love boats and will stay because they love boats)

The number of new players will be high, with an equally high churn-rate and low transfer from "new" into "veteran".

When your playerbase is "Veteran" they form an ever-decreasing revenue stream unless you keep creating new content (they have everything else, and no need to spend more, unless you make more)

When your "new" playerbase is transient there is little point in focusing resources on them as most wont be there for you to reap the benefits of expenditure (time/money/staff) on them... especially if any of those 'resources' are tight.

Typically GamesDevs would develop a Community structure that allows parts of the stable playerbase to "promote" new into veteran, however whilst there does exist out-game resources for this in WoWs, there is little to nothing in-game to support it (which isnt about "clans" it is about rewarding players within an individual game for doing certain things that promote good gameplay and/or interaction within the game).

Everything Ive seen about thsi game suggests a constant fire-fighting approach by WG, without enough time, or perhaps will, to actually create a stable community and less elitist attitude toward "what makes a player a good player".

[Profilus]

3 hours ago, Palubarac said:

They would be just an additional motivation and fun for new players. Rewards would be simply credits/freeXP/whatever which means a lot to those new players.

Aren't campaigns enough for new players? Plenty of credits and (free)XP as rewards there if you really are a NEW player.

[DanSilverwing]

Look at the Recruitment Station: the rewards are basically aimed at existing players recruiting new victims customers into the game.

 

The referral system then excludes customers that arrive without a referral link, so that they don't get any of the new player  benefits on offer.

 

If the new player takes a long enough break the referral can 'lapse' and they won't receive the final reward.

 

New customers are important because you can sell your back catalogue of existing products to them, and then you have more people subject to the 'sunk cost' fallacy, and they're more prone to boredom than burnout. So why Lesta dedicated so much energy to the Research Bureau than to improving the new player experience I could not say.

[invicta2012]

5 hours ago, Palubarac said:

And just to be clear... I don't expect an update to WOW introducing "Ranked season, Tier 2". Those 'events' would not be something to brag about in news articles, YT videos etc.

The game doesn't provide anything decent for experienced players to do and therefore any normal event, wherever it is set, becomes a farm for them. 

 

1 hour ago, DanSilverwing said:

So why Lesta dedicated so much energy to the Research Bureau than to improving the new player experience I could not say.

As I just said.... It's fundamental to the survival of the game that they come up with something extra for experienced players to do which stops them farming the lower tiers, and protects players looking to learn high Tier play.

 

The Research Bureau should have been a way of unlocking new ships, new game modes and new content that would keep these people occupied. The problem is that it's not a beta any more and that experienced players such have a voracious appetite for content that WG would have to deliver almost an entire new game's worth of maps and modes in a year. And that's not economically viable.

[xxNihilanxx]

8 minutes ago, invicta2012 said:

The problem is that it's not a beta any more and that experienced players such have a voracious appetite for content that WG would have to deliver almost an entire new game's worth of maps and modes in a year. And that's not economically viable.

 

Is this true, though? It's a genuine question. We have a lot of vets on the forum, I'd like their input. Do we really have a voracious appetite for new content?

 

I know that I, for one, think that the rate at which new lines are added could be slowed considerably and I would not be disheartened or disillusioned. In fact, personally, I feel that all new lines actually do is increase the rate at which powercreep becomes an issue and thus makes the ships that I currently enjoy playing less enjoyable over time. That is not even taking into consideration the fact that a lot of the recent additions, CV rework and the soon-to-arrive subs, for example, take the game further away from being the product that I have enjoyed for so long.

 

I would be happy if WG were to slow down the addition of new lines and instead focus on introducing new content in the form of more campaigns and missions etc. that actually give me additional reasons to play my existing ships instead of being put into a state of constant "grind". The "Honorable Service" campaign that rewards the Shinonome was a great addition, in my opinion, and I would like to see more things like this. Maybe add the new "Premium Ships containers" as a reward, offering the chance to own a premium ship at a specific tier that a player doesn't already have. Something like that. Give us a reason to play existing ships that doesn't involve regrinding entire lines.

 

If I were to speculate I would say that it is not the players demanding new content that drives the constant additions but rather WG's constant thirst for our cash - with each new line to grind there is increased reason to buy gold to use to convert XP in order to skip the grind. I think it is WG driving this, not the players. Of course, other people's opinions may vary - I would be interested to hear them.

[mtm78]

2 hours ago, Starchy_Tuber said:

Everything Ive seen about thsi game suggests a constant fire-fighting approach by WG, without enough time, or perhaps will, to actually create a stable community and less elitist attitude toward "what makes a player a good player".

 

Look I know I'm not always supportive of WG development choices/directions but EU community team I know are always interested in supporting community content aimed at education of the playerbase. They have sponsored contest for guides in the past, and I know they will entertain this for new guides for the CV section ( since REEwork seems to be finished ). 

 

I also don't see this elitist attitude you seem to see, it's pretty clear what makes players good players and what makes others not as good. 

 

2 hours ago, Starchy_Tuber said:

it is about rewarding players within an individual game for doing certain things that promote good gameplay and/or interaction within the game

 

What?

 

The objective of the game is to win, not to be kind to allies. This is a war simulation, be it arcade, it's not an rpg about chivalry. I've talked about this extensively in the past few days coincidentally, and my opinion is that promoting good gameplay can only be done by making the economy harsher. That way, good play -> you know, which results in winning more games, get's actually rewarded in comparison with the performance of bad players which are now still not feeling any enticement because of economy strain to actually learn how to play.

 

You can not deem any in game action as 'good', because it's to situational. A DD smoking you, is that good? Well if you asked for it.... not if he is blocking vision on the target you want to shoot. A BB which 'tanks' a lot of damage, good thing? Yes, if it's in support of his team trying to secure an objective, no if it's him alone going to a flank and spending five minutes getting shot by half enemy team complaining why you're alone. The rules needed to actually really figure out which actions in the game would need 'recommendation' are to complicated.  

[Starchy_Tuber]

1 hour ago, mtm78 said:

 

Look I know I'm not always supportive of WG development choices/directions but EU community team I know are always interested in supporting community content aimed at education of the playerbase. They have sponsored contest for guides in the past, and I know they will entertain this for new guides for the CV section ( since REEwork seems to be finished ). 

 

I also don't see this elitist attitude you seem to see, it's pretty clear what makes players good players and what makes others not as good.

Perhaps you missed the specfic point in the text - or I didnt present it well enough! ;-)  -  "community within the game", not outside of the game code, such as forums or competitions etc... they're fine at that, but thats easy.

However, look how horridly clunky the chat system is, no game-lobbies and no in-game rewards for pretty much anything other than raw damage.  In-game community-building is where you reward players for actions within the game itself, and thereby encourage intergration and cooperation inside the game.

The "elitism" is in-built in the way player statistics are presented - its very much part of the system and doesn't mean that the gamers are elitist.

Look at the presentation of game stats and how they get linked into the forums.... all to often a point in the forum is ignored or chastised because the poster has a bad WR. "What od you knwo aobut it, you are crap in that ship".... well, being crap at soemthing is a very useful point of view if you are a dev trying to improve your game. (I know from long experience) yet, in the forusm, the point of view is often derided, regardless of the point of the post (but lets be clear, many times the point may just be garbage, i do not deny that, but often the point ic overlooked because  the stats making them are poor)

So, take the same stats and present them differently - show improvement this week, offer in-game rewards (flags such as those given for battle damage) for attaining X percent increase in "stat Y" this week, month, whatever. Start showing Seasonal stats as well as overall stats....  introduce persistent game lobbies and a proper chat system. Start rewarding in-battle objectives that are not damage based.

Your "war simulation" analogy is weak imo, as you are not at war with your team mates and enforcing economic penalties are negative reinforcement, which is always worse than positive reinforcement - if you want to restrict Tier 8,9,10 players from playing those tiers with a DD, dont hit them in their pocket, give them a challenge of "not available until you have succesfully capped XXX caps in total betweeen tiers 5-6" and/or "not available until 500 defence flags achieved at tier 6"  .....   those offer you an eventually reward of access to higher tiers but they also "force" you to do certain things that are an important part of the game. It also makes players look up how they get "defended", which means they have to learn what a cap actually is and what it does... ..... etc etc

And for ALL of those, you also offer the carrot of in-gamerewards, BOTH in-battle when you acheive it, and in the port afterwards.

Why dont we see "Most improved stat player of the week/month" articles and awards..that by their very nature are les likly to be achieveable by veteran players with already good stats??? Why dont we really see any positive reinforcement for any new players that is actually represented and presented within the game?

On the other hand, negative reinforcement (such as economci peanlties) is bad for community building, positive is good.... and all that is really lacking or good, game improving, community improving elements to the game is a bit of lateral thinking ( or WG talking to other developers, or games journalists even) who have already done these sorts of things in their games.

Like so much of WG "things", there are good ideas, started and now lying in ruins - operations, campaigns....both largely abandoned or shelved with the occaisional change, which shows some thinking was done at some point... but its all pretty much old, decrepit or lying in ruins... and the alck of iamgiantion in "rewwardS" is jsut that - a lack of imagination in finding better ways to positively reinforce good gameplay... you don't need everybody to throw a Woodstock and start hugging trees every game... but their are  other objectives than raw damage that can be utilised to motivate people.


You can not deem any in game action as 'good', because it's to situational

[ForlornSailor]

1 hour ago, xxNihilanxx said:

Is this true, though? It's a genuine question. We have a lot of vets on the forum, I'd like their input. Do we really have a voracious appetite for new content?

 

I dont. The pace of jumping from one event to the next and have ranked/CB at the same time is too much for me. I could live with half the events. As in: have a 4 week event, then 4 weeks without anything so that you dont have to play to fforfil quests etc but instead "just play the game".

 

Same about the new lines of ships. I think we are fine with max. 2 lines per year. And we certainly dont need to get up to T8 ships unlocked right away. So im basically with you on your observation/opinion.

[Starchy_Tuber]

1 hour ago, mtm78 said:

You can not deem any in game action as 'good', because it's to situational.

Well, i would suggest that taking a cap is always good, and defending a cap is generally good also...and both are in-game actions.

I refer you to my above point that "perceived" limitations are with imagination more than anything else - msotly because the majority of players have known nothing other than "How stuff is rewarded atm" and so the systme looks as though it is closed and "as good as it can get".

(Usually the more pertinent point for "Why cant XYZ be done" is not a "its situational" issue, but that it would increase server cycles/ processor time ... taking a cap and defended are already done though, so no server penalties... whereas many "teamplay" awards would require an increase in processor time monitoring multiple variables in positioning etc...etc.. which is never going to popular with devs)

[Afghanicus]

Well, based on what is said basically the consensus is that WG doesn't care about new players and who 'missed the train' shouldn't even try catching it.

 

I can see that but I cannot see it as a good strategy.

 

Keep in mind that most of the ideas I've mentioned wouldn't require any additional work. Adding a new branch into the game requires A TON of work for multiple teams. Adding some missions/events/whatever which already existed so many times, just adjusting the tiers and requirements doesn't require any significant time and effort so I would never say it's not "economically viable".

 

Just trying to get in the shoes of a new players and seeing all those events and stuff which you simply cannot be a part of. Not for a long time.

 

 

P.S. The recruiting new players for cash was a big fail if you ask me. It brought a terrible bot infestation in all types of battles and I don't think it brought anything positive. WG advertises enough for players to come and try the game. The challenge is not bringing new players in, the challenge is to keep them long enough so it's worthwhile for them instead of giving up after a week or a month. 

[ForlornSailor]

9 minutes ago, Palubarac said:

Well, based on what is said basically the consensus is that WG doesn't care about new players and who 'missed the train' shouldn't even try catching it.

 

I can see that but I cannot see it as a good strategy.

 

Keep in mind that most of the ideas I've mentioned wouldn't require any additional work. Adding a new branch into the game requires A TON of work for multiple teams. Adding some missions/events/whatever which already existed so many times, just adjusting the tiers and requirements doesn't require any significant time and effort so I would never say it's not "economically viable".

 

Just trying to get in the shoes of a new players and seeing all those events and stuff which you simply cannot be a part of. Not for a long time.

 

Its not that people really disagree with you, its more like a realistic view on what WG will do and not. (atleast thats my 5$).

 

Ive said on several occasions, that new players have a horrible time these days and it sucks hard to get into the game. Also, a few events will not change the core problem. And that is the huge advantage, older players have in terms of captains, experiance, clans, divisions, premium ships or even removed premium ships. New player dont even have captains. They cant throw on signals to their liking. So what chance has a new player f.e. in a Nicolas against an experianced Kamikaze, who has LS, RPF, SE, CE, premium consumables and maybe 2 divi mates that back him up? And the naval research bureau brings experainced player back to the lower tiers.

 

What we need is to lower the effect of captain skills for lower tier ships, quite frankly. That will even the playing field at least a little bit. I will start lobbying for this. I think its redicolous that I can throw Yamamoto on my ARP Kongo and enjoy all the nice things. If I want to club low tiers, my experiance is enough, I shouldnt be rewarded even more.

[LoveYouTooBuddy]

Reading comments like this one and thinking...

5 hours ago, El2aZeR said:

...

Therefore the number of new players is way smaller compared to the number of veterans, so it doesn't make economic sense to create events targeted at new players.

Wait a second... I've been extensively reading the forum for the past few weeks. And a lot of people complain about the team being full of new potato players.

New players unable to play well, because of their inexperience...

How can the number of new players playing be small compared to the veterans and in the same time majority of the teams be comprised of new players? 

 

Edit: My response to the people below me:

Spoiler

 

[Afghanicus]

Yeah, there is no denying that new players have a very hard time and as the time goes, it gets even worse. But that's not uncommon for many online games. Even though I believe the gap is just too big and gets bigger every day.

 

I know most ppl would disagree with me but I believe there is just too many things going on every single update. It's always a grind after a grind, events happening at the same time (like 'Ranked' and 'Clan Battles') etc. Even the veterans don't have a break unless they want to skip an event. New ships and lines coming almost every update. Again... I know this is to keep the veterans from getting bored (since they already have almost everything you can have) but it's just too much.

 

And I'm talking in general, as objective as I can be since I'm just a casual player with 20 ships in my port which doesn't allow himself to be addicted to the game and luckily my job (on a real ship) helps me in that regard. 

[El2aZeR]

6 minutes ago, LoveYouTooBuddy said:

How can the number of new players playing be small compared to the veterans and in the same time majority of the teams be comprised of new players? 

 

Being a veteran does not necessarily mean being skilled as this game proves.

There are players who don't learn a single thing even after 10k battles played.

[ForlornSailor]

8 minutes ago, LoveYouTooBuddy said:

Wait a second... I've been extensively reading the forum for the past few weeks. And a lot of people complain about the team being full of new potato players.

New players unable to play well, because of their inexperience...

How can the number of new players playing be small compared to the veterans and in the same time majority of the teams be comprised of new players? 

 

Its easy actually... First, what @El2aZeR said above. Second, number of players =/= games played. New players tend to be very active, since they want to explore the game. I know I play way less these days then in my first months, if we look at games per day. So new players can fill games and be the majority quite easily. But they might leave the game within a few weeks, having played like 200 games just to never return.

[Starchy_Tuber]

10 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

 

Being a veteran does not necessarily mean being skilled as this game proves.

There are players who don't learn a single thing even after 10k battles played.

no names, obviously, but - perfect example from Wednesday.

Tir 5 game re-grinding US DDs.... this player has 2500 random battles and more tier 10s than i do (with about 8k coop games and, judging by acheivements some Ops)

He starts in Gallisionaire, powers stright ahead to middle cap, through cap and dies to torpedoes and AP... he gets his torps off before he dies and kills a dd in the cap.

"Worth it" he says to the team, instantly.

2500 games, 37% WR, Average Damage 4000 (no missing digits) KD ratio 0.07

Now, as mtm78 says, sometimes stats do tell a story... but i decided to chat to this guy after the game was over...and this is what he told me:

He plays every game like that, because thats how he learaed to play in coop, and if you dont rush the cap, "the other players will steal all the kills"

"But" says I "Its random, not coop: You need to play differently against players."

"I like playing like this, and I do alright this way... anyway, I killed a DD so how was it a bad play?"

Now that is somebody that the game has pretty much totally failed - he is that far into the game and the game has taught him nothing... one might say "the problem is him" and they might not be entirely wrong,  but the game has certainly failed him along, by letting him get lines up to multipel tier 10s without LEARNING fundamental stuff.
It is not a new concept that to teach people through "tutorials" they have to be forced..and not calling them "tutorials" is also a bonus...and the game fails on all counts (within the game - I know the external sources are good, if not great, videos, CCs, forum posts, repalys, twitch etc etc - but the majority of people never, ever see those things - they have to be taught inside the game if you want the larger playerbase to learn them)

[Johnny_Moneto]

Vor 9 Stunden, Palubarac sagte:

What are your thoughts?

 

I think the game itself is already the "thing" for new players.

A new player has a lot to discover and learn when playing this game. That should keep him challenged, busy and maybe even happy.

Once you become somewhat of veterean and things are repeating over and over again, you need some new excitemens. Thus WG aims most of its specials at the veteran players.

 

[CptBarney]

8 hours ago, ForlornSailor said:

 

I dont. The pace of jumping from one event to the next and have ranked/CB at the same time is too much for me. I could live with half the events. As in: have a 4 week event, then 4 weeks without anything so that you dont have to play to fforfil quests etc but instead "just play the game".

 

Same about the new lines of ships. I think we are fine with max. 2 lines per year. And we certainly dont need to get up to T8 ships unlocked right away. So im basically with you on your observation/opinion.

They could just have weekly, monthly, 3 month, 6 month and yearly events that last that long that ggive very decent prices and i guess certain ships could also be used to get those prizes.

 

im not sure why the events are so quick anyways, im not going to sit at my pc for 2 weeks straight trying to go mental get some bloody captain i could careless about or even a ship. Operations, historical battles, maybe alternate game modes like capture the flag, dodgems (lol) volleyball but on water, anything even if it's silly would be nice and if it lasts for a decent amount of time 1 month+ then that would be cool as well.

 

The prizes could be a mixture of a few prems, unique camos (perma) with unique attributes, flags, coal, steel and other stuff and this can be done by completing some, most and/or all of the tasks and maybe a few decent bonuses for completeing smaller but not required tasks.

 

Too be honest im not interested in playing new ships atm, since i end up playing a few select ships now, lexington (starting to hate), georgia, jean bart, texas, martel (sometimes) ryujo, la galissonaire, leander. Even sold my normandie and ranger because i can't justify keeping them nevermind playing them.

 

and instead of removing the events they just lock them while another is in place and rotate (maybe even having double event time for really popular events).

 

dat and smoll skill and secondary reeeeeeeeeework as well.

[Sir_Grzegorz]

8 minutes ago, CptBarney said:

The prizes could be a mixture of a few prems, unique camos (perma) with unique attributes, flags, coal, steel and other stuff and this can be done by completing some, most and/or all of the tasks and maybe a few decent bonuses for completeing smaller but not required tasks.

I think they should just throw real money in the face of players to add to your list of nonsense.

 

Some people are just greedy as .

[CptBarney]

11 minutes ago, Sir_Grzegorz said:

I think they should just throw real money in the face of players to add to your list of nonsense.

 

Some people are just greedy as .

And some people seem to fail to understand half the time.

 

Either way it's a suggestion, i don't see the point in doing the events mainly due to time restraints more so than the rewards that are offered, sometimes even if the rewards are generous they might not be the rewards i want hense why being able to preview the events in advance allows you to decide whether its worth your time or not.

 

Regardless, reducing rewards and chances of rewards by also decreasing time to complete the events while adding in ways of completing the events via fiat currency, Is an obvious way of getting people to spend more to do less and players get less for it unless they spend.

 

But god forbid that people give a decent insentive to get things or even the time to do so. Im not even asking for georgia for free (nor would i want to as that defeats the purpose), its more less wanting to actually play more than 3 ships at a time besides wanting to play that ship in general which i struggle to do so half the time.

 

Jesus christ no wonder games like NB2k come out.

 

And never had this sort of thing to begin with. Do you know why? Greed.

 

Either way i mainly play this game for my stats and to improve my gameplay, sound design was vaguely one and also seeing the ships as well is another. Theres nothing wrong with wanting more if you are willing to put the work in for it and that being the only to get rewards.

 

I understand what you mean however.