Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
Ocsimano18

Fun vs Grind

16 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
2,117 posts
8,772 battles

Is the game more grindy than fun because of WG or because of us? WG wants us to play more, and people tend to play till they achieve a goal. The goal of having fun can be achieved in much fewer games than a grind, so we would play much less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[KOKOS]
Players
460 posts
6,789 battles
12 minutes ago, Ocsimano18 said:

Is the game more grindy than fun because of WG or because of us? WG wants us to play more, and people tend to play till they achieve a goal. The goal of having fun can be achieved in much fewer games than a grind, so we would play much less.

For me, grinding actually is part of the fun, and even with no events around, I usually set my own goals like: "bring this captain up to 19 points" and similar.

 

So, grinding and fun aren't mutually exclusive to me.

 

A grind that can only be completed if you live like a hermit for a month straight, skip work, send the kids to the grandparents and divorce your wife - that's another issue entirely, unfortunately.

 

Grinding yes, but at my own tempo, please.

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
3,114 posts
12,189 battles

In terms of my own preferences, I don't play to 'grind' to tier 10 anymore - tier 10 must come naturally and slowly. We rush to get there but it offers nothing tangible for someone like me who seldom does any clan stuff and to be honest, my fun tier is 7 - so in this sense I tend to rely on mission sets, directives, steel and coal (when they have events), etc. when they're not so badly rewarded.

 

Also: Daily missions for a few signals and coal - boring and low value, I never ever worry about these. Not worth mentioning further.

 

Where the grind gets to me is when WG implement time-limited stuff that you either pay for or see slip away. The PR event should have been a long-term mission like they do in WoT. Perhaps, if you want the ship earlier, pay, but if you don't mind the long grind process (with no time cap) then you can still get it for 'free' because you've put in the time, which would be acceptable given we support WG by playing, they reward our commitment and time by offering long term rewards like a PR project.

 

What I find hilarious is how low WG values our time versus the overly high value they place in things like signals, flags, camos - these are far too high, they are not rewards especially when they're so easily blown in a game with bad rng and matchmaking through no fault of your own - your reward gets taken away from you. WG have slipped up badly here, they're trying to argue high prices for low value material and forcing it on us.

 

I also find it incredulous that WG doesn't have a rolling scheme to reward long term supporters of the game - I think they have failed to evolved this part of their strategy toward looking after players like they're a valuable commodity...something they just don't do. WG are one hit wonders, offering a reward or two once a year for their anniversary, etc, but the rest of the year sees players all treated the same, new and veterans alike. In this sense I think WG fail completely.

 

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CHEFT]
Players
12,569 posts
9,841 battles

Ive wrote a topic about that a while ago, and i concluded, that playing for fun is imo not viable. You can have an entire evening of games which are unfun because of bad RNG/bad teammates/losing streak. So why play for fun?

If you play for the grind, you actually have a goal, so you can endure having bad streaks in between. If you have good games, better yet, you have fun achieving your goal.

This entire game is based on grinding - not having too much fun (or barely fun basicly).

 

And i think you can see this throughout the forum too. People complain after a long grind, that they need a break, and are happy, if WG is not offering something shiny to grind (like right now). Sadly, its hard to realize. F.e. from my own pov: I did grind Benham. Have played 10 games in it. Was that worth it? Not really, especially since the grind became tedious at some point, but once i started, it felt stupid to stop because i were "in to deep". I have like a dozen premium T9/10 ships, and i barely play them... gets you thinking :cap_yes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ONE2]
Players
3,144 posts
24,178 battles
2 hours ago, Ocsimano18 said:

Is the game more grindy than fun because of WG or because of us? WG wants us to play more, and people tend to play till they achieve a goal. The goal of having fun can be achieved in much fewer games than a grind, so we would play much less.

NAH! :cap_old: That all up to you yourself lad. I stopped even trying to purposely "grind" anything all together right after reaching my first Tier 4 ship way back when, because I found out it just daft and takes all the fun out. So nowadays I just play for entertainment and that's all - New ships will come in their own good time even if I wouldn't really want them so why get obsessed about it? :Smile_Default:

 

I have now slowly gotten most of the ships I wanted in the first place while having even too many Credits and XP left over to know what to do with and little-by-little I will get the others too but there's no hurry so why should I make it a bother for myself? I mean, it's not like you're gonna die or get your head instantly blown off or be forced to eat gruel or something else horrible if you don't get a certain ship right this minute and in any case you don't really HAVE TO have any of them if we're strictly truthful. People are known to have survived and lived happy lives even without them (I know this may sound unbelievable but it is true, my wife is one of those heretics).:Smile_amazed:

 

My advise is, play for fun and don't push it (why rush it anyways?), the rest will take care of itself on the side. :cap_yes:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester, Players, In AlfaTesters
3,242 posts

Even if you play for fun, you are still matched with other people who play for grinds, and often throw matches (or at least display questionable behaviour) to get some missions done or score some ribbons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
776 posts
7,677 battles

I don't grind anything, I just don't care, I suppose. I knock off snowflakes and might play an extra game for a daily container, but not two extra games.

 

Do I play for fun, then? Lately, I find my interest diminished. I got the Montana after more than a year of playing (my first tier X) and have played her maybe twice? I will play to get the Yamato, but might free xp one or two ships. I enjoy the Ranger, but lose way too much. I have enough xp to get the Hakuryu, but haven't bought her yet.

 

If not for a friend, I think I would have quit. What would keep me playing? Probably some kind of competitive MM, some mode where you can have a team of more than just three people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TS1]
Players
658 posts
8,162 battles
50 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

Ive wrote a topic about that a while ago, and i concluded, that playing for fun is imo not viable. You can have an entire evening of games which are unfun because of bad RNG/bad teammates/losing streak. So why play for fun?

If you play for the grind, you actually have a goal, so you can endure having bad streaks in between. If you have good games, better yet, you have fun achieving your goal.

This entire game is based on grinding - not having too much fun (or barely fun basicly).

I disagree. Playing for fun is entirely viable. If it wasn't I wouldn't have come back to the game. Of course, I'm still advancing in a handful of lines at a pace of at most a win a day. But I'm only playing for as long and often as I feel like at the moment, without caring about extra rewards. Most of the time the game is fun, despite bad teammates or losing streaks, so it's worth playing for fun's sake.

 

That said, I'm an old player with a few tier 10's and a bunch of silver and gold ships to choose from if I want some diversity. I can also easily let go of bad things that happen in the game, which seems like a rare ability. So I'm probably not a good example for how bad the grind is in the game.

 

In the end though, it's up to WG to make the game itself fun to play. They are the ones who're influencing how players approach the game based on how everything is designed. And I think most people on these forums can agree that they aren't exactly perfect to say the least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[P4P]
[P4P]
Players
1,213 posts
5,382 battles

I don't mind a fun gind.

But the fun stops as soon as there is a timer involved.

I cant stand timers that fu** me over close to completing a mission/quest/grind.

 

That's not just in Wows. 

 

If you want me to work hard for my earnings, sure why not? 

 

But let me do it at my own pace and let me choose WHEN and HOW LONG to play.

If it takes more time to achieve my goals that's totally fine with me.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Players
1,527 posts
18,204 battles
2 hours ago, Ocsimano18 said:

Is the game more grindy than fun because of WG or because of us?

The hen and the egg.

 

We grind cause we are incentivized to do so and Wargaming incentivizes us cause we go for it.

 

It's a bit ironic, cause the game is so much about events nowadays, about playing when Wargaming wants us to and not when we have the time to do so, about achieving a certain goal within a very limited time frame. These goals disappear and cannot incentivize players joining the game after that event or missing it due to inactivity. So Wargaming has to come up with ever new events, while the work for past events has been done and paid and could keep players motivated that would do the event later.

We can see how well the Campaigns work. If the Yamamoto campaign was an event, it would be long gone. But since it isn't, even new players at some point try to grind it, investing significant time into the game, maybe even getting premium time to secure a third mission slot. Would Wargaming make more money, if instead of the campaign, Yamamoto was in the Arsenal for 175k coal, like Lütjens. Certainly not. Vice versa, a german campaign with Lütjens as final reward would have motivated lots of players. Can I get more coal through playing more? No, it's pretty limited. But I could do the campaign and invest money into premium ships and premium time supporting my grind.

 

The campaigns work on the principle that the grind can take way longer than an event, as a trade-off for not being limited in duration. So the player invests even more time in reaching the goal. Additionally his grind is customized to his time constraints. So a grind is possible and actually undertaken by a player who would have skipped it otherwise. Wargaming is probably creating more participation in the game through any campaign than through any event. And the best thing, this participation is distributed over the entire year. While the christmas event overloads the servers not used to 40.000 players ingame, a campaign has a smooth and even surplus on player base. It's so sad that Wargaming doesn't see it. They rather like to burn out players with grinds that are too intense to be fun. The players grind a goal and then leave cause they are fed up with the game.

 

Even if e.g. the Puerto Rico grind had been a campaign taking the average player a year or more, they would still have sold the boosters or the ship itself to people that are not willing to grind.

 

So to me, a game either being fun or grindy is not a contradiction, unless you deliberately design it in a poor way, which is unfortunate and folly short-term thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[INTRO]
[INTRO]
Players
1,448 posts
19,487 battles

I've heard about different goals- Long term, mid term and short term.

 

For me.

 

Long term: Buy all the ships. I don't care for the CVs but right now it's about getting credits to re-buy all the ships.

 

Mid term: Unlock and buy the RN CA T10. No hurry. I'll get there.

 

Short term: Get through the current directive.

 

That's it. No hurry. The only deadline is the directives and even that is no problem. I just do a kind of "go-for-a-sunday-drive"-thing in co-op and operations to keep myself sane. No worries. Cool runnings man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
406 posts
9,894 battles
2 hours ago, Shaka_D said:

In terms of my own preferences, I don't play to 'grind' to tier 10 anymore

Bouncing off what he said...

I used to grind to a particular ship or tier.  Now, this isn't my top priority anymore.  With the RB, Tech Tree ships changes, I am no longer keeping a mental target in my mind to get to.  As I know that I will be disappointed one way or another.  Henry IV being one ship that I re-bought (I know, I know. Why would anyone sell ships; I needed credits to buy a ship for CB) after grinding credits for her.  Now I regret choosing to re-buy her than Alsace (for same reason as Henry rebought).

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,560 posts

For me I like my ships to be fully ground up, making a lot of fxp  (sometimes) once done, on  my alt, so wanted the Nelson, got the Audacious instead, which is od as the whole idea was to grind the German BB's all the way up to the top, funny how things can get sidetracked real quick:Smile_veryhappy:

 

Goals for my alt, the Nelson someday,  as I have the Lexington now so it follows I must absolutely have the Midway, and possibly the entire line of Brit light cruisers, oh and to constantly try to get better and have fun on the way:cap_like:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×