HotFix: Game Balance

[CosMoe]

Regarding the "Rock, Paper, Scissors" principle

 

BB = Rock

DD = Paper

CA = Scissors

CV = ?? 

Sub = ???

 

 

With the recent addition of the 5th ship class you had the big chance to actually create a self-balancing system (Rock-Paper-Scissors-Spock-Lizard).

But for that to work you would have had to make submarines counter CVs.

Instead you chose again that CVs with their oppressive spotting (and 60 seconds DCP sonar ping immunity) counter subs in addition to almost any other ship.

 

You broke the RPS-system with CVs, and instead of fixing it with subs you broke it even harder.

[Illumifant]

Zitat

MYTH: The developers give preference to particular nations when creating and balancing ships.

Just based on the development objectives, it is not beneficial for us to create a bias toward any nation—this would violate the principle of variability in the game and ultimately lead to ship imbalance and deterioration of the game experience. From the perspective of simple logic, for us—the development team—there is simply no reason to give preference to any nation because the whole game is our brainchild and all the ships in it are valuable and loved by us. We do our best to develop the game in a balanced and even way, and any particular preferences contradict this task.

 

Most of this article is BS, but this is the purest of them all... unbelievable.
Just look at the new announced Russian cruiser Sevastopol, which is a straight up empowered Siegfried. It was planned with German 305mm guns, and gets 380 guns - so Siegfried guns. But wait! The Russian version of Siegfried guns have improved penetration angles, and shortened fuse times. What a non Russian biased fact! Same guns, better performance isn't biased at all... LOL.
Sevastopol - even though it is pretty much the same height as Siegfried, and nearly the same hull - gets way less detection range, better AA (just no Russian bias AA range up to 7km), secondaries that are on-par with Siegfried, and then we get to the consumables:
It gets Hydro, 20% engine boost ???, and a heal, which is healing exactly the amount of fire damage you'll get while burning. You tell us the trade off is that it burns for 60 seconds like a large cruiser, but then give it a heal, that heals for 60 seconds, and for exactly the amount of HP you loose when burning. On top of the super fast recharging repair parties. 
I mean, do you really believe the crap you tell us? Do you really don't care, that you're so fu*ing obviously biased, but tell us you aren't? This is so absurdly pathetic and unfucking believable, seriously. 

 

Edit: Ah and yes, of course we get the 10th paper ship cruiser of the never existing Russian Navy, but still don't have a German T10 Premium... fu*ing LAUGHABLE. 

[Hyzedan]

Quote

MYTH: The developers give preference to particular nations when creating and balancing ships.

Just based on the development objectives, it is not beneficial for us to create a bias toward any nation—this would violate the principle of variability in the game and ultimately lead to ship imbalance and deterioration of the game experience. From the perspective of simple logic, for us—the development team—there is simply no reason to give preference to any nation because the whole game is our brainchild and all the ships in it are valuable and loved by us. We do our best to develop the game in a balanced and even way, and any particular preferences contradict this task.

Third battlecruisers for Soviet coming and still none for UK and you are telling us no preference on particular nation?

P.S. Yes I know some UK historical battlecruisers are in game, but they are all classified as BBs

 

Quote

For example, recent statistics showed that old-timers in our game, such as  X Zaō and  IX Buffalo, needed their battle performance to be increased a little, so balance changes have been applied to them in Update 0.10.10.

2000hp buff to Zao after all these years...let's hope there will be further buff in the (near) future

 

Lot's of "How to do", not much "What to do": Can see WG is trying to explain something, but didn't see corresponding amount of solutions (yet <- hopefully) esp. zero addressing on match-making mechanics.

Suggest in this type of announcements to put a list of what you are fixing, along with expected completion dates - Exact date would be good but in case it can't, at least something like Soon / Near future / Undecided.

 

 

 

[CV_SUB_Report_Blacklist]

i see WG trying their best to satisfy you guys ... at lease do not say some harsh things to them , you can send your feedback to them ,,,

 

there is thousands of players here , so satisfy them all is an impossible thing whatever you say ...

 

thanks for you efforts WG ,,,,

 

wait ,,, do something with the OP cvs around first ... 

[Fatal_Ramses]

[Fotynyakos]

You say it's balance, but you're just lying. You try, but you have to try the toilet, but it doesn't work for you!

[arquata2019_]

2 ore fa, Capt_Marvel ha scritto:

Edit: Ah and yes, of course we get the 10th paper ship cruiser of the never existing Russian Navy, but still don't have a German T10 Premium... fu*ing LAUGHABLE. 

We do have one, the Immelmann, but as a non-CV ship, well... nope.

[Hugh_Ruka]

The best part of the article was the Z-52 graph ... we'd need this published regularly for each ship. Also relative amount of damage by ship class for each ship ... should not be hard to do WG or ? I mean it could be part of each ships WIKI entry ...

[Wedontneedmoregrippen]

I wonder if those stat can enligthen some developers?

 

Zao and Henry current state.

Zao: missing aprox 5-8k HP compared to other same type of ships. Armor is not good anymore as most new BBs have 30mm hammer guns. Cita not small too.

No good utility.

Balanced...

 

Henry:

After slowed accelation the ship very clumsy, aka like a BB with 30mm "bargain" armor. If not use skill very bad to manover. No good utility too.

Balanced...

 

This 2 are in current state from ages. Nobody cares in dev team.

 

Then 2 purple elephant:

Petro and Kremlin. They simply too many "gimics". All in one:

Half submarine cloacked and armoured, and wont have bad manoverabiliy this stage.

Excess armor, best hp, good concealment ( for Petro), no slownes and clumsines from deep water... Utility and AA too.

In Kremlin current state (tonnage and overburden deep in water)  with no enigne room the ship have to be poor speed and turn not and nimble as it now. 

Balanced...

 

Dont want say too mutch from NEW CV line becasue they are in BALANCING state. Gimics incoming.

By design they are full alpha stike, and this cause AA useless.

Balanced...

[telxinos]

And how many players must be in the server for this to work ???

[WascallyWabbit]

Total rubbish, You balance the game based on popularity...so if 2% of players play CV you buff the holy hell out of them till 6-8% of the players play them, regardless of what an absolute toxic, and frustrating mess the game is to actually play...so long as the figures tell you CV is now popular then you believe the game is balanced. When as the players know that's not in the slightest true and the game is a mess. 

 

Then you tell us that the Dev's play a lot...more rubbish, you people have short memories it's only a few months ago that you fired that russian CC for highlighting that over a period of 6 months all the devs combined had played a total of around 200 games. Do you really believe our memories are so bad that just a few months later you can again start telling a blatant lie like the "Dev's play a lot". They don't and never have.

[Tuomas_Bergersen]

You say you don't "give preference to particular nations when creating and balancing ships" exactly when news of Sevastopol are taking off.

Speaking of new ships, please don't make such a bad joke of Dido and make her a proper AA cruiser.

[JeTBarionIV]

Citing (word by word):

 

"To achieve this, it's important for each player to have an equal opportunity to affect the battle outcome, regardless of the ship they choose to helm into battle. For example, if a ship is too strong, playing against her will be unpleasant and commanding the ship will also get boring pretty quickly. Moreover, a strong ship will likely become very popular by virtue of its effectiveness and thus reduce the diversity in battles."

 

And yet when I complained with CS about the imbalance in the MM formula, I was told plain and simple that players' performance is not taken into account by the MM system.

So, on one side, WG claims no one has the "ultimate killing machine", but it does base its MM on ships; on the other side I see on MM Monitor and/or PotatoAlert plenty of battles not worth to be fought because one side is waaaaaaaaaaay too strong compared to the other based on players' experience, the most important factor IMHO.

 

Sometimes I 'm tempted to exit directly to port, because one thing is 100% sure : it gets unpleasant and boring to either be butchered without a chance, but also to take part into a turkey shooting.

Maybe if enough people starts to do it, WG will come out of its surreal beliefs...

Since friendly fire has turned off and there is no more other possible explanations, let's say I'm gonna be Pink and proud of be it.

[Blackeon]

Balance - the elephant in the room is ..... you don't balance teams by player skill.

 

Thus each player is randomly added to a team, so much if not most of the time these teams will be unbalanced by player ability. Thus one team starts the battle with an advantage. So winning is just about whether you are randomly placed in the stronger or weaker team. Or put it another way, before the first shot is fired the outcome is predetermined at about a 75% confidence level. How well you play is quite unlikely to affect who wins.

 

This is a key reason why I play less, and never now in PvP.

 

[tom_kat]

6 minutes ago, JeTBarionIV said:

Citing (word by word):

 

"To achieve this, it's important for each player to have an equal opportunity to affect the battle outcome, regardless of the ship they choose to helm into battle. For example, if a ship is too strong, playing against her will be unpleasant and commanding the ship will also get boring pretty quickly. Moreover, a strong ship will likely become very popular by virtue of its effectiveness and thus reduce the diversity in battles."

 

And yet when I complained with CS about the imbalance in the MM formula, I was told plain and simple that players' performance is not taken into account by the MM system.

So, on one side, WG claims no one has the "ultimate killing machine", but it does base its MM on ships; on the other side I see on MM Monitor and/or PotatoAlert plenty of battles not worth to be fought because one side is waaaaaaaaaaay too strong compared to the other based on players' experience, the most important factor IMHO.

 

Sometimes I 'm tempted to exit directly to port, because one thing is 100% sure : it gets unpleasant and boring to either be butchered without a chance, but also to take part into a turkey shooting.

Maybe if enough people starts to do it, WG will come out of its surreal beliefs...

Since friendly fire has turned off and there is no more other possible explanations, let's say I'm gonna be Pink and proud of be it.

I talked the same this afternoon with my clanmates. One division got almost all their games with competents teams against people that clearly don't care about game knowledge and mechanics while my division had almost every team with people that reach a mere 46% WR and less than 900PR, the highest. None of us had fun just because almost every game ended 12-0(1-2-3) or (1-2--3)0-12 in 5-8 minutes. Neither to have a team full of people on tier X where only 2-3 players have more than 1k battles, wich is very common on the last months.

A strong ship, a strong class, are submarines. And the higher percentage of TX subs are players that does not know game basics,  (just my clanmates, friends and my own experience tells about this) simply because somebody though that is a good idea to give TVI, TVIII and TX bundles to newcomers, how about fixing this? Obviously that won't be done, simply because the spreadsheet tells that subs are more played than expected and a new bunch of premium submarines and  spanish subs branch, are coming... The milking must go on, right?

 

[ColonelPete]

25 minutes ago, Blackeon said:

How well you play is quite unlikely to affect who wins.

That is quite easy to test out. Be afk for the whole match for around 300 battles. When you win as much as before, you are right.

[AngryDragon70]

Quote

To achieve this, it's important for each player to have an equal opportunity to affect the battle outcome, regardless of the ship they choose to helm into battle. For example, if a ship is too strong, playing against her will be unpleasant and commanding the ship will also get boring pretty quickly.

very nice you name it, as we all feel it.

to bad you really do not anything about it. probably incapable staff as this goes on for over 4 years (since 2017)

 

Quote

The first is the opinion of players that we obtain from various surveys and the feedback that we collect via different platforms

Quote

Feedback from players is extremely important to us, and we are infinitely grateful for your involvement and for helping us improve the game

no you dont. stop lieing. maybe you READ it. but you dont use it.

 

Quote

MYTH The developers don't play their game.
In fact, the developers play their game all the time. 

I don't hope so.....

either it means your workdays are 3 days a year, or that is incapable if seeing what is going on.

 

Quote

SHIP TYPE BALANCE AND THE "ROCK, PAPER, SCISSORS"

and so you still prefer to put same shiptypes in 1 team.

2 petro's or 2 worcesters in 1 team, no radar or single in 1 team

or 4 radars and 5 hydro's in 1 team etc etc.

 

well, i dont know why this is posted as news?

you make yourself a joke.

 

maybe thats it anyway. this game has become a joke since 2017 and as it looks will stay this way for a long time.

 

 

[Zemeritt]

Well, A for effort I'd say. F for content

 

Unfortunatly, your actions the past few weeks don't show what you're trying to tell us in this video/article.

 

Rock-Paper-Scissor? In a game with soon to be 5 classes? And eve you admit that some break the rules as in the new german DDs, who are anti cruiser oriented?

Most cruisers are doomed to max range farming these days anyways, due to overpopularity of this 420mm+ BBs, which can lolpen every cruiser. Why did you buff cruiser armour back then again?

 

No nation gets preference? Sure your excuse for the massive influx of soviet dream ships is your vicinity to the russian archives.

Nothing against adding them, but why does every russian ship have such stupid gimmicks, that make (most of) them broken?

 

As other stated: The new "cruiser" is imbalanced as it can be and invested players can already tell just by looking at the stats.

How can the balance team even give such a monster a go in the first place, besides national bias?

[fR_ara]

I have 2 questions which remained unclear to me after checking this video/news

1. how do you map CVs and Subs into rock/paers/scisors system ?

2. who are the stakeholders who decide how balance will look like ?

[Nibenay78]

9 hours ago, Shaka_D said:

It feels like there's currently a highly destructive mob toxicity on the forums which overshadows all common sense.

And did you consider why this has happened, or maybe we missed our bonuscodes? (FkUshaka and fkUnibby)

[Pukovnik7]

11 hours ago, The_EURL_Guy said:

A look at some of the most interesting things about balance in World of Warships—how we work with statistics, why feedback is extremely important, how we test ship concepts, and much more.

Read it on the portal

7 hours ago, CosMoe said:

Regarding the "Rock, Paper, Scissors" principle

 

BB = Rock

DD = Paper

CA = Scissors

CV = ?? 

Sub = ???

 

 

With the recent addition of the 5th ship class you had the big chance to actually create a self-balancing system (Rock-Paper-Scissors-Spock-Lizard).

But for that to work you would have had to make submarines counter CVs.

Instead you chose again that CVs with their oppressive spotting (and 60 seconds DCP sonar ping immunity) counter subs in addition to almost any other ship.

 

You broke the RPS-system with CVs, and instead of fixing it with subs you broke it even harder.

7 hours ago, mihaitha said:

I wonder where CVs fit in the "rock, paper, scissors" balance philosophy.

BB = Rock

DD = Paper

CL = Scissors

CV = Thermonuclear Bomb

S = Lava Flow

[Catslave]

9 hours ago, Capt_Marvel said:

 

Just look at the new announced Russian cruiser Sevastopol, which is a straight up empowered Siegfried. It was planned with German 305mm guns, and gets 380 guns - so Siegfried guns. But wait! The Russian version of Siegfried guns have improved penetration angles, and shortened fuse times. What a non Russian biased fact! Same guns, better performance isn't biased at all... LOL.

 

even older and better example: USN Omaha and soblyat Murmansk. Same ship, same guns...but:

Kinda interesting how the exact same gun magically gets +50% penetration by just hoisting the soviet flag instead of the US one...

 

Why does Hindenburg have to pay the price of having 15.5km detection to balance out its incredible 32mm armor and 6km hydro when Petro has 15.3km concealment, 50mm armor, 12km magical radar, shortfused AP with improved pen angles and armor penetration similar to the 380mm found on T8 Bismarck ? Don't let me get started on Kremlin compared to virtually any other T10 tech tree BB...

How there is no bias at all can be seen in higher ranked CB and tournaments like Kots. Kremlin + 6 Petro on each team is a statement. For the past god knows how many years comp is defined by soviet fantasy ships. First it was Moskva with it's magical 12km radar and super stalinium fantasy shells (+ 50mm icebreaker, better then almost all BB), Moskva got replaced by the magical everything Stalingrad and that one got replaced by Petropavlovsk. What other cruisers have been used in that time ? Exclusively cruisers that can actually damage the soviet fantasy ships...IFHE Hindenburg - until it got nerf hammered, then IFHE Henry - until it got nerf-hammered, then Venezia, later Goliath ... only other Cruiser is Des Moines / Salem which can beat the soblyat fantasy in medium range nose in fights.

Kinda strange how the meta exclusively evolves around the soviet fantasy cruisers when there is no bias, everything is tested for balance and the devs actually do play the game....

 

" What is balance ? "

a question that wg is incapable of answering, thats for sure......

 

On a funny side note:

WG starts talking about how they gather all the important spreadsheet data to determine balance ....then shows multiple charts showing the popularity of certain ships. Surely the by far most important factor when deciding if a ship needs buffs or nerfs...

[CV_SUB_Report_Blacklist]

if PETTRO And KREMLIN are TOO OP ... then why i you guys do not play them ?

 

all ships has their characterized performance ...

 

you cannot just compare two ships and say this ship has good armour abd this one bad armour and you forgot other things ...

 

if you cannot deal with a petro or any other ship just blame your self and go and learn how to deal with it ...

 

not to blame WG for everything you see ...

 

you dont play petro because you do not like it .. you do not prefer it on other ships ...

 

you didnt say anything about petro rudder ... petros size ... petros AA ... petros radar duration .. petros reloading ...

 

cut it please ... WG trying to satisfy you as much as possible , and it is already an impossible mission ...

[Shaka_D]

9 hours ago, Nibenay78 said:

And did you consider why this has happened, or maybe we missed our bonuscodes? (FkUshaka and fkUnibby)

Learn to forgive and forget. The people on the other side of the argument are also human and make mistakes and bad judgement calls just as you do. 'Let he who is without sin cast the first stone'... They have homes, families, good days and bad days. This doesn't mean everyone should be condemned for eternity because of a mistake they made in the past. Get over it.

[SilentEnimLegesInterArma]

31 minutes ago, Shaka_D said:

Learn to forgive and forget. The people on the other side of the argument are also human and make mistakes and bad judgement calls just as you do. 'Let he who is without sin cast the first stone'... They have homes, families, good days and bad days. This doesn't mean everyone should be condemned for eternity because of a mistake they made in the past. Get over it.

Thats bad business advice....

 

and this is a business relationship.

 

WG has to prove change. those half measures won't cut it. thats why people are so tickt off. Many feel with their time (and money) invested WG is just piling on... and with a lot of "Misscommunication" and focus on selling (partly without testing) and other issues people are fed up (understandably) and WG has to endure this and prove change then this sentiment will change.

 

but letting WG do whatever they will without push back... They are lucky to have an enganged community. I've seen games die cause ppl just did not care and some did change for the better but people already have resignated and did not want to bother again.

 

and i feel this change happening here with some players.