1st 3 of losing team get counted as winner, last 3 of winning team vice versa

[Trinitaet]

Hi together,
wouldn´t it be much more satisfying and less team dependent with this rule to play games?
And the last 3 in team of the winner were more obstacles than helpful, so they get direct feedback.

What do you think, won´t that raise fun and motivates more to get to the top/away from the bottom of the list?

[SkipperCH]

Moved to the english forum section.

[SolanumTuberosumRex]

No. It's bad enough that people in ranked play to keep their star more than win the game. This would be worse.

[Woof_for_Me]

Hello.

 

I don't think that games should be actively punishing players for playing.

Many games in the past months have been ending onesided and quickly meaning most players on a winning team don't even get to shine or contribute much. The players will be punished for winning to fast. 

[arttuperkunas]

Nnnnnno.

 

Sometimes as a DD player, you spend your game spotting and enabling other ships to win the match. You change the system like this, and those team players would get punished (even more). It's bad enough you don't really get XP or credits for that kind of contribution.

[Bear__Necessities]

No. 

[Miscommunication_dept]

Ever played ranked?

 

That range mod Thunderer that spammed HE from spawn and had full health while the rest of his team died?

 

You are talking about a reward system for that guy!

[Ymustihaveaname]

I would put some sort of anybody who gets 80% of best losing player's exp saves a star as well or something?

 

I just get somewhat annoyed by AFK/bots/learning to play subs/CVs team members throwing a ranked game for the rest by doing nothing, if you get more than a couple of them in your team it is normally over before it starts and a bit unfair for the few ok players to have to fight over one star.

 

In last sprint I both lost and kept my star by <50 exp with 2 at 1400ish and the rest at 2-400 a couple of times....not very fun for the 2nd player.

28 minutes ago, arttuperkunas said:

Sometimes as a DD player, you spend your game spotting and enabling other ships to win the match. You change the system like this, and those team players would get punished (even more). It's bad enough you don't really get XP or credits for that kind of contribution. 

Is this not an argument for changing what counts for base exp?

[Camperdown]

Too many people are already not playing for the win but to farm damage. They may very well be high in the xp ranking. So your proposal would give another incentive to camp and farm damage.

So no, thank you very much.

[arttuperkunas]

33 minutes ago, Ymustihaveaname said:

I would put some sort of anybody who gets 80% of best losing player's exp saves a star as well or something?

 

I just get somewhat annoyed by AFK/bots/learning to play subs/CVs team members throwing a ranked game for the rest by doing nothing, if you get more than a couple of them in your team it is normally over before it starts and a bit unfair for the few ok players to have to fight over one star.

 

In last sprint I both lost and kept my star by <50 exp with 2 at 1400ish and the rest at 2-400 a couple of times....not very fun for the 2nd player.

Is this not an argument for changing what counts for base exp?

Im pretty sure most of us would agree that that formula is not exactly satisfactory, and favours damage farming over other things.

[Wulf_Ace]

1 hour ago, Trinitaet said:

Hi together,
wouldn´t it be much more satisfying and less team dependent with this rule to play games?
And the last 3 in team of the winner were more obstacles than helpful, so they get direct feedback.

What do you think, won´t that raise fun and motivates more to get to the top/away from the bottom of the list?

How about we all win , all exp and credits to everybody, yeeeey.

 

On the topic, NO.

[Ymustihaveaname]

15 minutes ago, Wulf_Ace said:

How about we all win , all exp and credits to everybody, yeeeey.

My only issue is people ready up and then not playing and just farming rewards from just winning (ie get 3-6-12..etc wins) without actually then doing anything in each game....

 

I dont really mind the ships that get detonated or the bad players (I do both at times), it's the suicided run ships (press W and then tab out...) or sit surface ships behind the island all game AFK and still get a win off the other team members without 1 player....

 

How can that be stopped maybe dont get a win/star if you dont make 33% of top exp?

[Pukovnik7]

2 hours ago, Trinitaet said:

Hi together,
wouldn´t it be much more satisfying and less team dependent with this rule to play games?
And the last 3 in team of the winner were more obstacles than helpful, so they get direct feedback.

What do you think, won´t that raise fun and motivates more to get to the top/away from the bottom of the list?

Nope. This is just stupid. It would mean that an HE damage farming battleship that actively contributed towards his team's defeat is counted as a winner simply because he received muchos XP for his useless fire farming.

[lup3s]

No. It's Randoms. Even why ?

[Deckeru_Maiku]

How about:

 

Get away from the dumb rewarding of damage done and give more exp for stuff like "play for the objectives"?

[doerhoff_damian]

Vor 7 Minuten, Deckeru_Maiku sagte:

How about:

 

Get away from the dumb rewarding of damage done and give more exp for stuff like "play for the objectives"?

great idea.

Also make sure that players get rewarded for potential damage directed on their ships.

Damage done by secondaries should also be rewarded in the same way as the damage done by main batterie or fires

[Trinitaet]

So it looks like HE spammers shouldn't get the same XP as other types of damage (I guess because it's all curable).

Overall, it seems for you the amount of damage is overrated, there is a lack of incentive in the XP reward for conquering mission objectives and tanking dmg.
 

Anyway, thanks for all the feedback and suggestions for improvements.

And no, I don't play ranked, very little PvP anyway - that's mainly because it bugs me so much that I lose in so many games as a mid-range player, but am still in the top three. Hence my suggestion and my request for feedback to find out if others feel the same way.

[tocqueville8]

I'd be okay with something like that, though I think it should depend a bit on the xp margins.

I mean, if it's something like this:

 

LOSING TEAM

1432 xp

921

798

743

...

 

then the top player should be rewarded. But if there's no 1432 xp player, and it starts at 921, then no, it' doesn't warrant a special treatment.

 

Likewise, if it is

 

WINNING TEAM

2478

...

...

1032

987

223

 

the last guy shouldn't get the bonus, but if the list ends at 987 instead, then sure.

 

This is all assuming that xp is a fair representation of the contribution to the team, which it mostly is, except I think for spotting damage and potential damage.

I suspect that players who stay at the back and farm meaningless fire damage typically don't do very well at all in terms of xp: they don't cap, they rarely de-cap, they rarely hit DDs, they rarely get plane kills, they can hardly punish broadsides...

In my experience, the top xp earners are almost always people who worked for it

[Jethro_Grey]

No.

[BLUB__BLUB]

7 minutes ago, tocqueville8 said:

I suspect that players who stay at the back and farm meaningless fire damage typically don't do very well at all in terms of xp

That is where you are wrong though, if you burn down half a BB, you get a "half kill" XP.

Doesn;t matter if he heals it all back. And how I know? I tried farming Conquerors with an Implacable.

That is all I did athe whole game. They were in a div and probably decided to go and kill the CV. They got zilch... 

Didn't even kill one of the three, they kept coming at me, and all 3 of them must have used all their heals... 

[tocqueville8]

Just now, BLUB__BLUB said:

That is where you are wrong though, if you burn down half a BB, you get a "half kill" XP.

Sure, but you can do that even if you come in closer.

And coming closer means more chances to cap, decap, blap a DD, blap a cruiser, shoot down planes, and simply land more shells because it's easier to hit targets at 16 km than at 20.

 

I'd rather have a BB that camps at the back doing decent damage than a DD who goes for the cap, smokes up for no reason, takes 2 torps and sinks.

[BLUB__BLUB]

4 minutes ago, tocqueville8 said:

Sure, but you can do that even if you come in closer.

That's not the point. You can do it from 20KM+ without any risk. 

And as such you farm the damage and the XP. 

 

4 minutes ago, tocqueville8 said:

And coming closer means more chances to cap, decap, blap a DD, blap a cruiser, shoot down planes, and simply land more shells because it's easier to hit targets at 16 km than at 20.

...coming closer also means you risk getting shot at, blapped, torped et cetera... 

And a fire is a fire. It doesn't reall matter how many shells you land, if you can get perma-fires. 

Just keep an eye out, and once you see they used DCP you set three perma fires. And yes you might get the actual kill. 

 

IF your team is sort of halfway win/lose you can ALWAYS come in (being full HP) and kill all the low reds off and get a win. 

And if not, you can just hang back, farm some more, and let them come to you... 

 

NOTE: that is not how I like to play, but I see it happen a lot. 

[MadBadDave]

On 11/7/2021 at 1:29 PM, arttuperkunas said:

Nnnnnno.

 

Sometimes as a DD player, you spend your game spotting and enabling other ships to win the match. You change the system like this, and those team players would get punished (even more). It's bad enough you don't really get XP or credits for that kind of contribution.

Agreed, like the karma system xp and the final scoreboard is badly in need of an overhaul, in light that so many dead heads play and ruin games wouldn’t it be very un WG if good players actually got what they deserved and the idiots likewise, providing class was also considered, DDs are the hardest class with the biggest responsibility, it’s possible for a dd to keep  red fleet spotted all game and not fire a shot, is their contribution less than someone who smoked up in a cap ?.   How many of us start looking when we get pinged, isn’t the spotted ribbon just as bad ?.

[BLUB__BLUB]

31 minutes ago, tocqueville8 said:

I'd rather have a BB that camps at the back doing decent damage than a DD who goes for the cap, smokes up for no reason, takes 2 torps and sinks

That's the thing though, what is "decent damage"? 

 

As for DDs... yes you have a lot of those. 

I suck at DDs, but even I can do better than that. First thing I know, do not smoke up unless you really really have to. 

Because not only will you not see anything, neither will anybody else, as you were the one spotting stuff. 

But, as it usually still happens - and I am in a BB or a cruiser - then I'll juist go in, and put in chat "I am a really fat DD". 

And when they deny that I have now identieifed as a DD, then usually (Pommern) I put "but I have torps".

And if I am in an Italian CA/BB I go "but I have smoke"... (and torps...)

 

Here's how a Venezia is transformed in a DD: 

20211107_205317_PISC110-Venezia_47_Sleeping_Giant.wowsreplay

[tocqueville8]

1 hour ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

That's the thing though, what is "decent damage"? 

100% of the hp of a combination of ships, even if some of it is fire damage, is decent. It won't win the game, but you can do a lot worse.

 

Losing ships is bad for the strategic outlook of a team, but it's also bad for points, so I'd rather a BB camping, maybe using only 3 heals in the entire match, than a BB rushing and dying having used only 1.

 

My point is simply that backline snipers tend to do poorly in terms of xp: top of the team will usually be people who did their job.