Min 500 experience points or....

[RamboCras]

Suggestion:

For levels 8 and up: If you are in a game and are dead before you can make 500 experience points, the next 2 games you have to play 1 tier lower.

 

What could be the benefits:

- people play more seriously

- people play to actually make some effort (spot, damage, etc.)

- type of play that we don't like to see get discouraged

 

Suugestions?

[_HomTanks_]

Probably more than half the player base would end up in Tier 1 quick.

[USS_Billy_Herrington]

I don't know chief, I believe in rewarding good gameplay instead of punishing bad gameplay, I mean everyone has a bad day/game every once in a while, no need to get punished for that, right? Besides you'd be surprised at how easy it is to get less than 500 exp before you die when LOSING

[MementoMori_6030]

Just demote the bottom 2 of each team by one tier until server reset... repeatedly, cumulatively.

[GarrusBrutus]

Punishing players for bad performance?

WG: We dont do that here.

[MementoMori_6030]

Vor 2 Minuten, GarrusBrutus sagte:

Punishing players for bad performance?

WG: We dont do that here.

That's no punishment; it's saying: "Hey, down here you will find it much easier to not screw up."

[Hugh_Ruka]

27 minutes ago, RamboCras said:

Suggestion:

For levels 8 and up: If you are in a game and are dead before you can make 500 experience points, the next 2 games you have to play 1 tier lower.

 

What could be the benefits:

- people play more seriously

- people play to actually make some effort (spot, damage, etc.)

- type of play that we don't like to see get discouraged

 

Suugestions?

Now imagine people that DON'T have a ship at that tier anymore ... f.e. I usually sell all ships tier 7 and lower ... not always but usually ... what happens then ? Will you pay me for a new ship ?

[ColonelPete]

21 minutes ago, MementoMori_6030 said:

Just demote the bottom 2 of each team by one tier until server reset... repeatedly, cumulatively.

And now imagine everyone plays a good game and your team wins with between 1500 and 2000 Base XP. You really want to punish the guys who got slightly over 1500 Base XP?

[bobtherterrible]

43 minutes ago, RamboCras said:

Suggestion:

For levels 8 and up: If you are in a game and are dead before you can make 500 experience points, the next 2 games you have to play 1 tier lower.

 

What could be the benefits:

- people play more seriously

- people play to actually make some effort (spot, damage, etc.)

- type of play that we don't like to see get discouraged

 

Suugestions?

I think you're

a) confusing tier level with skill level, actually it's just a way of matching comparable ships

b) taking this game way too seriously

 

i know the "we" of the last point will object to these points and will be furiously mashing the "bad" reaction but i'm just saying it how it is.

 

[Capra76]

9 hours ago, RamboCras said:

Suggestion:

For levels 8 and up: If you are in a game and are dead before you can make 500 experience points, the next 2 games you have to play 1 tier lower.

 

In a game where you can do everything right and still get nuked in the first 2 minutes, no thanks.

 

In fact what this will do is push players even more towards safer classes (BB/CV) and more passive play and amplify the problems the game has (BB overpopulation, passive campy gameplay, CV existance) even more.

[ThePurpleSmurf]

There is absolutely nothing, reward or punishment, that can improve the gameplay of this playerbase. It's the worst (skill/game competence-wise) i have ever seen and my gaming experience goes way back to even before Diablo I (which was probably before some of you peeps were born). This playerbase is learn-resistance and this has probably to do with the genre itself and that it's attracting a way older audience than any other MMO out there.

I'm almost certain that the new "skill your damn commander before you enter a battle" message was introduced, because a huge portion of the players don't have figured out, after thousands of games, that they have a commander and a skill tree exist.

 

One of my personal worst players i have ever met in this game played a North Cal and had almost 2000 battles played and he couldn't hit a barn from the inside, which lost us a game. During a post-battle chat with him it turned out that he was aiming with the circle in the center of the screen - he had no idea that he could zoom in to aim. Cases like this just make one speechless and they are not rare in this game, sadly.

 

Look at this game result that i had a few days ago …

Spoiler

 

[viceadmiral123]

1 hour ago, RamboCras said:

Suggestion:

For levels 8 and up: If you are in a game and are dead before you can make 500 experience points, the next 2 games you have to play 1 tier lower.

 

What could be the benefits:

- people play more seriously

 - people play to actually make some effort (spot, damage, etc.)

- type of play that we don't like to see get discouraged

 

Suugestions?

That's why you have clan battles.

The rest is a circus.

[hellhound666]

could it also be that when you start stupid topics you will get read-only for a week ...

[NoirLotus]

1 hour ago, RamboCras said:

 

Suugestions?

So you mean that if I'm unlucky and get detonated on the first shell that hit me, I'm not punished enough for a miserable game and must also play at a lower tier, for something I have no control over it (I know flags exist but not everyone can afford using 1 at each game) ?

[RamboCras]

3 hours ago, a_steaming_pile_of_ship said:

I don't know chief, I believe in rewarding good gameplay instead of punishing bad gameplay, I mean everyone has a bad day/game every once in a while, no need to get punished for that, right? Besides you'd be surprised at how easy it is to get less than 500 exp before you die when LOSING

yeah I agree, but if you are a 'serious' player, whatever that is, you be back in 2 games in no time.

[RamboCras]

2 hours ago, ThePurpleSmurf said:

There is absolutely nothing, reward or punishment, that can improve the gameplay of this playerbase. It's the worst (skill/game competence-wise) i have ever seen and my gaming experience goes way back to even before Diablo I (which was probably before some of you peeps were born). This playerbase is learn-resistance and this has probably to do with the genre itself and that it's attracting a way older audience than any other MMO out there.

I'm almost certain that the new "skill your damn commander before you enter a battle" message was introduced, because a huge portion of the players don't have figured out, after thousands of games, that they have a commander and a skill tree exist.

 

One of my personal worst players i have ever met in this game played a North Cal and had almost 2000 battles played and he couldn't hit a barn from the inside, which lost us a game. During a post-battle chat with him it turned out that he was aiming with the circle in the center of the screen - he had no idea that he could zoom in to aim. Cases like this just make one speechless and they are not rare in this game, sadly.

 

Look at this game result that i had a few days ago …

  Reveal hidden contents

 

wow, that was amazingly bad.....

[RamboCras]

1 hour ago, NoirLotus said:

So you mean that if I'm unlucky and get detonated on the first shell that hit me, I'm not punished enough for a miserable game and must also play at a lower tier, for something I have no control over it (I know flags exist but not everyone can afford using 1 at each game) ?

Yes!

 

that is 1 game ina 1000, on the other hand, it might improve the quality of play of the other 999 perhaps?

[RamboCras]

1 hour ago, hellhound666 said:

could it also be that when you start stupid topics you will get read-only for a week ...

You have to respond a lot, drag it out....

 

 

[RamboCras]

2 hours ago, viceadmiral123 said:

That's why you have clan battles.

The rest is a circus.

Very true

 

but do you want to play with your clan every time? If clan battles was there 24/7 was that the only thing you would do? I would not...

[XDukenukemX]

33 minutes ago, RamboCras said:

Very true

 

but do you want to play with your clan every time? If clan battles was there 24/7 was that the only thing you would do? I would not...

I would, but that would require much more WG attention on CB and not only "here is mode where you can play TX for lols" yes there are rewards but CB is the only mode resembling "teamwork" from afar.

[Deckeru_Maiku]

6 hours ago, ThePurpleSmurf said:

This playerbase is learn-resistance and this has probably to do with the genre itself and that it's attracting a way older audience than any other MMO out there.

This must be the worst case of unjustified age shaming I've had to witness ever!

And it is obviously ox feces, as being older offers the advantage of experience... with computers... with other computer games... with tactical/strategic games of different types... of basic game mechanics...

Im rather of the opposite opinion: it's the "let my smartphone do the thinking, as it is smarter than me anyway" generation that proves as way more learn resistent then the baby boomers playing here.

60 years old and computer gamer since the early '80s...

[Birkebein]

No one would scout in a DD, probably no one would play light cruisers (err, why do we play light cruisers anyhow?) and everyone would hang back... no need for any change, this actually sounds like a lot of the games we have and love already

[_DeathWing_]

18 hours ago, GarrusBrutus said:

Punishing players for bad performance?

WG: We dont do that here.

[JohnMac79]

21 hours ago, RamboCras said:

Suggestion:

For levels 8 and up: If you are in a game and are dead before you can make 500 experience points, the next 2 games you have to play 1 tier lower.

 

What could be the benefits:

- people play more seriously

- people play to actually make some effort (spot, damage, etc.)

- type of play that we don't like to see get discouraged

 

Suugestions?

WG have made the game such as it is now often over before the 10 minute mark, so this wouldnt work. When after 5 minutes you are down 6 ships for no enemy kills its very difficult to do anything meaningful. DD are almost always the first to die, so there wouldnt be any at T10.

 

If WG changed their XP gains away from focusing almost entirely on damage and better rewarded for close combat, spotting etc, then they may be able to improve things significantly, but apparently that would make people ‘exploit the XP system’ (really?), but yeah, im sure those BB in ranked that sit at max range farming damage and saving their star are NOT exploiting current XP systems right?

 

In fact they were so sure they were not exploiting it, that they decided to introduce deadeye... just to help those poor suffering BB glued to the J line...

 

Makes for a great gaming experience.

[Ronchabale]

22 hours ago, RamboCras said:

Suggestion:

For levels 8 and up: If you are in a game and are dead before you can make 500 experience points, the next 2 games you have to play 1 tier lower.

 

What could be the benefits:

- people play more seriously

- people play to actually make some effort (spot, damage, etc.)

- type of play that we don't like to see get discouraged

 

Suugestions?

Ok, so lets say you are in a tier 8 cruiser and a tier 10 carrier focuses you right from the start

You will be sunk in 5 minutes

Lets also say you dont have any tier 1-7 ships..

How would that work ?