Would it be Possible to bring more Variation to Randoms ?

[Sunleader]

I have been Toying with this Idea for a while.

But do you think it would be Possible to Greatly Increase the Variation of Random Battles by increasing the Gamemodes included in it ?

 

 

For Example.

We make several Specific Gamemodes.

 

1.

Class Only Mode

Which is a Mode where only the own Class is in the Battle.

So DD only. BB only. CV only etc.

MM limited to a 1 Tier Difference here.

 

2.

Skirmish Mode

Which only Allows for DDs and Cruisers.

And is Played on Small Maps with only 1 Central Capture Point.

 

3.

Artillery Duel Mode

Which only allows Heavy/Supercruisers and BBs.

And is Played on Larger Open Maps.

 

4.

Naval Battle Mode

Current Randoms

 

5.

Search and Destroy Mode

Which only Allows BBs and CVs and has a Large Map where both Fleets Start in a Random Location.

 

6.

Assault Mode

One Team has to Attack and Heavy AI Fort while the other Defends it.

 

7.

Deathmatch Mode

10 Minute Timelimit but no Caps.

Team with more Points from Kills/Survival Wins.

 

8.

Triangle Mode

3 Teams of 8 Players each Fight over a Center Cappoint.

 

9.

Race Mode.

Both Teams Start on the South Side of the Map. Seperated by Islands.

And have to Fight over a Single Capture Point in the North of the Map.

 

 

 

 

 

This would also allow for other adjustments to Players involvment.

I would for example like a Favorite/Disliked System.

 

Every Player can Select one Gamemode as his Favorite. Increasing his Chances to get into this Gamemode when the MM has a Match of that Mode Open because MM will pick him First if he is a Potential Choice for it.

And one Gamemode as Disliked. Decreasing Chances he goes into that. As the MM will pick him last if he is a Potential Choice for it.

 

Divisions are by Default excempt from this System of course. As they already can Favorize and Exclude some Modes by Choice of Ships.

 

 

 

 

This would also give WG a Nice Option to get Data and Test things.

After all.

One Battlemode could be added as a Test.

And WG can gather Numbers on which Mode is selected as Favorite by alot of People.

And which Mode most People try to avoid.

 

 

[1MajorKoenig]

The answer is yes and no.

 

Is it possible to get much more variation in randoms to avoid the highly repetitive gameplay? 
-> YES

 

Are your solutions ideas the correct ones?

-> NO - I wouldn’t want to play any of these 

 

The Problem here is: if variety means to make things worse it is a bad idea and they should abandon it. 
 

If WG would increase variety the only way would be to go for more objective based game modes in my opinion 

[COPlUM]

8 minutes ago, Sunleader said:

Class Only Mode

Which is a Mode where only the own Class is in the Battle.

That would become very boring very fast because there's a few DDs that are very good at dealing with other DDs, not so good at dealing with CAs and BBs. You'd just see those. Same applies to cruisers and battleships. So like, class only mode destroyers, who in their right mind would bring a torpedo focused DD, that's half the ships of that class useless on day 1.

Class only mode for DDs would basically be whoever has the most Smälands and Darings wins ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Whoever brought Shimas and Somers loses, because the ships Shima & somers are supposed to kill are not there.

[Maris_Piper]

Personally I would enjoy some differing options in the game and they could be on a rotating list like Scenario's. There is one down side and that is Wargaming would have to apply effort, so that's dead in the water by the first page of the thread, Sad but True. Please prove me wrong guys.

[ColonelPete]

5 minutes ago, Sunleader said:

I have been Toying with this Idea for a while.

But do you think it would be Possible to Greatly Increase the Variation of Random Battles by increasing the Gamemodes included in it ?

...

1. Class only mode would be toxic for the queue times, except a BB only mode and that is the only one I could imagine to be fun when the maps are not too big, otherwise it becomes a campfest. Tier could stay at +2
2. see 1
3. Sounds like campfest mode, could be fun for some
4.  
5. yeah, funmode for CV..., the search part would be quite short
6. we had that, did not work that well
7. so no reason to move forward and take risks, just wait for the enemy, sounds campy
8. and when two sides attack by the chance the third party, that one party has fun...
9. fast DD could mess this up, there is a good chance that the game could end without much fighting, I prefer Standard Battle

 

[Bindolaf_Werebane]

I like the idea to bring diversity to randoms, even though I wouldn't play most mode you mentioned, OP. That said, I'd totally play a cruisers-and-destroyers-only mode. Sounds pretty exciting.

 

Already I use ranked as an extra random mode (7v7). 

[BareFinsk]

Not strictly randoms, but here goes:

 

How about a change to ranked? Keep it 7v7, but make a pre-game screen where you can choose ships and equipment in response to what the enemy-team does. Like a draft-screen alà LoL or Dota or whatnot.

 

[COPlUM]

CV-only game mode already exists by the way, it's called tier 4

[anonym_FDOLXpxOfXXq]

Yes please, anything to make randoms less of a crapfest.

ANYTHING

(by the way, aren't we supposed to get nonClan brawls next, that are basically randoms in 7vs7 with some ship restrictions ? I think I read something about that somewhere)

[Sunleader]

6 minutes ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

The answer is yes and no.

 

Is it possible to get much more variation in randoms to avoid the highly repetitive gameplay? 
-> YES

 

Are your solutions ideas the correct ones?

-> NO - I wouldn’t want to play any of these 

 

The Problem here is: if variety means to make things worse it is a bad idea and they should abandon it. 
 

If WG would increase variety the only way would be to go for more objective based game modes in my opinion 

 

I just Listed Examples.

And You are Free to Suggest better Modes Yourself.

 

Thing with *more Objective* based Modes.

Is A. You might like that. But many others dont.

And B. There really is limited Options for this aside from Capture Points.

 

Because most People dont want massive Coop Elements like Convoys or NPC Escorts.

Most also dont want to Play Realistic Battles where Ships have a Role like Escort etc.

 

So WG wont Implement any Objectives more Complicated than Drive into this Circle to Capture or Destroy this Fort to Win.

Thats why that is pretty Hard to do.

 

 

4 minutes ago, NikolayKuznetsov said:

That would become very boring very fast because there's a few DDs that are very good at dealing with other DDs, not so good at dealing with CAs and BBs. You'd just see those. Same applies to cruisers and battleships. So like, class only mode destroyers, who in their right mind would bring a torpedo focused DD, that's half the ships of that class useless on day 1.

Class only mode for DDs would basically be whoever has the most Smälands and Darings wins ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Whoever brought Shimas and Somers loses, because the ships Shima & somers are supposed to kill are not there.

 

Thing is.

That is already True anyways.

Halland often lands in Matches with no CV.

Shima often is Thrown in Matches with few enemy BBs but alot of Hydro and Radar.

Every Ship that has a Specific Role is currently always at Risk to land in Games where its either at Advantage or Disadvantage.

 

 

Now. With the above System of Liking/Disliking Modes.

Making them more or less likely.

You can at least Improve Your Chances.

 

If you Play Shima you can Dislike that Class only Mode Mode.

If you Play Daring you can like it.

 

So Shima will still have the Risk to land in a DD Brawl. But it will be much lower than now.

Darring meanwhile can make it more likely to go for a DD Brawl. But then also is less often in other Gamemodes where it can find Easy Prey :)

 

 

16 minutes ago, Maris_Piper said:

Personally I would enjoy some differing options in the game and they could be on a rotating list like Scenario's. There is one down side and that is Wargaming would have to apply effort, so that's dead in the water by the fist page of the thread, Sad but True

See answer below

11 minutes ago, Bindolaf_Werebane said:

I like the idea to bring diversity to randoms, even though I wouldn't play most mode you mentioned, OP. That said, I'd totally play a cruisers-and-destroyers-only mode. Sounds pretty exciting.

 

Already I use ranked as an extra random mode (7v7). 

 

Pls Note.

These Modes are just top of the Head Ideas.

 

The Topic is Primarily about Random Battle being more Varied.

 

 

The Idea is that you can Increase Chances for one Mode and Decrease Chances for Another.

 

BUT you cannot choose what Modes you Play.

Which Mode you get is Random.

Only affected by the extra Chance and Lower Chance from your Favorite/Disliked Choice.

[COPlUM]

4 minutes ago, Sunleader said:

Matches with few enemy BBs

I have literally never been in a match that does not have the maximum amount of BBs, there's always a ton of BBs sitting in queue waiting for other ships to play with.

[Pametrada]

 At the risk of sounding like a cracked record...

 

10.

 

WW1 /Dreadnought/surface gunnery only mode. ( No CVs, no subs, no radars )

[1MajorKoenig]

8 minutes ago, Sunleader said:

So WG wont Implement any Objectives more Complicated than Drive into this Circle to Capture or Destroy this Fort to Win.

Thats why that is pretty Hard to do.

That may be a serious problem - agree. And that is why I am a bit sceptical if more varied game modes would even work at all in this game.
In this game and it’s playerbase. 
 

I think game modes like only one class wouldn’t be fun at all. And they would likely change the complete dynamics and what would stats be worth after all? And honestly I would not want to play these and would either ask for a way to deactivate them or would be annoyed like hell of they would show up regularly. 

 

What I would like to see to get some though would be for example night battles with some immersive lighting, star shells as a new mechanic and lots of huge flash lights following your cursor. Something that feels like some true naval action.

 

I also loved the island capture mode in Battlestations Pacific but I have serious doubts of that would be work within this game. I think it is too limited unfortunately for such modes. 
 

I think convoy modes, flagships modes and such are a possibility but may likewise  suffer from the same issues as any other mode. Remember the Bastion mode? While the general idea may sound funny the implementation was awful and it didn’t work out at all

[Sunleader]

1 hour ago, NikolayKuznetsov said:

I have literally never been in a match that does not have the maximum amount of BBs, there's always a ton of BBs sitting in queue waiting for other ships to play with.

 

I have Plenty of Times.

Especially when having Torp DDs...

 

My last Z44 Game was two Brothers.

2 BBs per Team.

And enemy has Kitakaze and Harugumo on my Flank with a Riga behind them for the lols....

 

Fun Game I can tell you....

 

1 hour ago, Pametrada said:

 At the risk of sounding like a cracked record...

 

10.

 

WW1 /Dreadnought/surface gunnery only mode. ( No CVs, no subs, no radars )

 

Doubt the no Radar will happen.

Cause its a too Specific thing.

 

But a DD-CA-BB Mode where only CVs and Subs are excluded could be possible once Subs are Added.

 

27 minutes ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

That may be a serious problem - agree. And that is why I am a bit sceptical if more varied game modes would even work at all in this game.
In this game and it’s playerbase. 
 

I think game modes like only one class wouldn’t be fun at all. And they would likely change the complete dynamics and what would stats be worth after all? And honestly I would not want to play these and would either ask for a way to deactivate them or would be annoyed like hell of they would show up regularly. 

 

What I would like to see to get some though would be for example night battles with some immersive lighting, star shells as a new mechanic and lots of huge flash lights following your cursor. Something that feels like some true naval action.

 

I also loved the island capture mode in Battlestations Pacific but I have serious doubts of that would be work within this game. I think it is too limited unfortunately for such modes. 
 

I think convoy modes, flagships modes and such are a possibility but may likewise  suffer from the same issues as any other mode. Remember the Bastion mode? While the general idea may sound funny the implementation was awful and it didn’t work out at all

 

Thats the Problem tough.

WG is Scared as Hell of Splitting Modes entirely. Because they fear it might Split the Playerbase.

 

So this Compromise of the Modes being Part of Random Battles.

And Players having a Bit Influence but no Free Choice of which modes they get.

Is likely the only Feasible way to get more Modes.

 

 

This Fear is not Unfounded by the way.

If you add an Independent Gamemode Permanebtly.

And then it Fails (or the older Fails) you have a Semi Dead Gamemode.

 

But as there is always a small percentage still loving it. You also cant just remove it again.

Because these Players then might just Leave.

And a small Percentage can be several thousands of Players in WoWs.

 

So WG adding new Modes will always be a Long Struggle in Babysteps of Years long Testing Waters with Adding the Mode for a few week Sprint or Halloseen Event to firat Rule out as much Risk as Possible.

 

[arquata2019_]

2 ore fa, Sunleader ha scritto:

1.

Class Only Mode

Which is a Mode where only the own Class is in the Battle.

So DD only. BB only. CV only etc.

MM limited to a 1 Tier Difference here.

 

2.

Skirmish Mode

Which only Allows for DDs and Cruisers.

And is Played on Small Maps with only 1 Central Capture Point.

 

3.

Artillery Duel Mode

Which only allows Heavy/Supercruisers and BBs.

And is Played on Larger Open Maps.

 

4.

Naval Battle Mode

Current Randoms

 

5. 

Search and Destroy Mode

Which only Allows BBs and CVs and has a Large Map where both Fleets Start in a Random Location.

 

6.

Assault Mode

One Team has to Attack and Heavy AI Fort while the other Defends it.

 

7.

Deathmatch Mode

10 Minute Timelimit but no Caps.

Team with more Points from Kills/Survival Wins.

 

8.

Triangle Mode

3 Teams of 8 Players each Fight over a Center Cappoint.

 

9.

Race Mode.

Both Teams Start on the South Side of the Map. Seperated by Islands.

And have to Fight over a Single Capture Point in the North of the Map.

i agree on this

like it

[invicta2012]

3 hours ago, Sunleader said:

I have been Toying with this Idea for a while.

But do you think it would be Possible to Greatly Increase the Variation of Random Battles by increasing the Gamemodes included in it ?

I hope so. I'm allergic to Randoms these days but I did play the Sub test and Asymmetric battle modes and enjoyed those, so yes please. 

 

I quite like the idea of allowing Newport / Narai type scenarios with one side defending and the other players controlling bots, RTS CV style.

[Jethro_Grey]

Diversity in randoms?

Hm. I have an idea that will blow minds and shatter beliefs!

 

How about, WG makes some tutorials that are forced upon each sub 50% WR player, essentially educating the player base.

Then adds modifiers to XP depending on the range damage was dealt for BBs for instance, the farther away, the less XP, same for tanking, spotting, capping and sh*t.

Then removes sh*tty camper skills and stuff.

 

As a result, we'd see - admittedly in the long run - some very diverse gameplay without the need to screw around with MM, or wasting DEV times on game modes nobody would want to play anyway.

 

Also, a few new (and some olden ) maps would be nice. Preferably maps that discourage camping.

[Karasu_Browarszky]

Ocean.

[Vbeest]

Short answer from WG: no, it would not be possible.

[Sunleader]

31 minutes ago, Jethro_Grey said:

Diversity in randoms?

Hm. I have an idea that will blow minds and shatter beliefs!

 

How about, WG makes some tutorials that are forced upon each sub 50% WR player, essentially educating the player base.

Then adds modifiers to XP depending on the range damage was dealt for BBs for instance, the farther away, the less XP, same for tanking, spotting, capping and sh*t.

Then removes sh*tty camper skills and stuff.

 

As a result, we'd see - admittedly in the long run - some very diverse gameplay without the need to screw around with MM, or wasting DEV times on game modes nobody would want to play anyway.

 

Also, a few new (and some olden ) maps would be nice. Preferably maps that discourage camping.

 

1.

Forced Tutorials tend to be Ignored.

People either just go click through them.

If the Tutorial cant just be finished that way they Quit.

 

You can say you dont care if all the Noobs Quit and only Good Players willing to Learn Stay.

But WG would care if 80% of their Customers Dissappear....

 

2.

Less Exp for Long Range.

More for Close Range.

No Skills for Camping.

Yeah. Instead of 40% Winrate Campers we get 40% Winrate Yoloers ^^

 

3.

So No.

That would not make the Game Diverse.

It would actually make Games even more similar.

Capture Points and Ships with Good Concealment can break up Longrange Camping.

But they dont Affect Yolo.

So basicly each Game would be like Testserver with half of each Team being Bots.

Where Everyone just Yolos forward to get Damage before its over.

 

 

 

So Yeah.

Thanks. But no Thanks.

I take Camping BBs with Deadeye over your Plan everyday.

 

[SkollUlfr]

any of these replacing epicentre would be an improvement.

though any game mode that is added would still be subject to the same mechanics that drive current gameplay to be what it is.

most notably fire and muzzle velocity.

 

36 minutes ago, Jethro_Grey said:

adds modifiers to XP depending on the range damage was dealt for BBs for instance, the farther away, the less XP, same for tanking, spotting, capping and sh*t.

Then removes sh*tty camper skills and stuff.

this part is good

the rest is grouchy. relatable, but still grouchy.

[Sunleader]

2 hours ago, SkollUlfr said:

any of these replacing epicentre would be an improvement.

though any game mode that is added would still be subject to the same mechanics that drive current gameplay to be what it is.

most notably fire and muzzle velocity.

 

this part is good

the rest is grouchy. relatable, but still grouchy.

 

Problem is.

That Part would basicly Reward People Yoloing.

 

So Basicly People like my Friend who got his Kremlin by just Yoloing his way through the Grind with a 40% Winrate.

 

I dont exactly like People Camping in the Back either. But I rather have guys Camping in the Rear than guys doing Yolo Suicides....

[1MajorKoenig]

2 hours ago, SkollUlfr said:

any of these replacing epicentre would be an improvement.

Epicentre shows the problem of game modes though. 
 

Any variation is either a unacceptable reduction in the game itself, eg. just one class or such, or simply not fitting with the rest of the game such as bastion. 
 

Now with thunderstorms WG tried to bring some variety to the otherwise very repetitive game - I don’t mind them. 
 

Night battles with some additional mechanics such as star shells and flashlights could be done in the same “area of variation”.

 

But to make some good objective based game modes the game is lacking almost everything needed to do that. 
 

So honestly I am not very optimistic on this topic at all 

[bobtherterrible]

I like the idea of choice

Don't want to play against CVs? Fine, pick a mode where they won't be

Fed up with campers? Fine, pick a mode that doesn't have it

Bored with current predictable games? Fine. pick a new mode.

 

I'm sure not every mode would suit everyone but that's rather the point, pick one you like and kwicherbitchen

[SkollUlfr]

32 minutes ago, Sunleader said:

 

Problem is.

That Part would basicly Reward People Yoloing.

 

So Basicly People like my Friend who got his Kremlin by just Yoloing his way through the Grind with a 40% Winrate.

 

I dont exactly like People Camping in the Back either. But I rather have guys Camping in the Rear than guys doing Yolo Suicides....

that would depend on the gradient of the scoring/range equation. and how it applied to different classes.

 the system wouldnt need to be extreme, or only one way.

 

20 minutes ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

Epicentre shows the problem of game modes though. 
 

Any variation is either a unacceptable reduction in the game itself, eg. just one class or such, or simply not fitting with the rest of the game such as bastion. 

yea. no challenge on that point from me.

its a shame that these could be viable if weegee didnt hamstring the game with other... decisions.

 

21 minutes ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

Now with thunderstorms WG tried to bring some variety to the otherwise very repetitive game - I don’t mind them. 
 

Night battles with some additional mechanics such as star shells and flashlights could be done in the same “area of variation”.

 

But to make some good objective based game modes the game is lacking almost everything needed to do that. 

true.

things like storms and other things did add a bit of variation... but they as well where undermined by the binary nature of the spotting mechanic.

for storms to work properly there needs a spotting system that is analoge and allows for flexibility in how long thigs stay spotted, mechanics like quick muzzle flash spotting, silhouette detection modifiers, the decade overdue fix to radar/sonar spotting showing the actual ship instead of a generalised ghost target.

(and they can definitelytaly fix radar/sonar, they fixed aa through islands very quickly)

 

28 minutes ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

So honestly I am not very optimistic on this topic at all 

indeed. unfortunatly.

its the same thing as why people dont want to play operations.

rng deciding you are getting burned to death in 2 minutes or devstruck with negligable counter, is boring and spiteful.

as you have no agency but to play as the aggressively myopic game mechanics demand.