Ineptitude

[TheJezna]

Just have to whine a bit. Not about the game, balance or any mechanic, but about how somehow teams often end up consisting of lots of shitty players and how inept some players really are. Just had this game in my recently unlocked Fuso (lovely ship BTW), on fault line, domination. Wenhad two Riuyo (spelling?) they had one, none of them had any fighters. So naturally I expected our CV's to take out theirs right away. Didn't happen, and couldn't yet determine what they where doing instead. Now me, a Kongo, an Atlanta and a Cleveland went for A, a Mutsuki joined us en route. Getting there it became obvious 80% of the enemy team did to. Alot of them where cruisers, which on the ranges in question are not that hard to deal with. Of course I expected not to be able to hold forever. Now I realised however that our CV's where getting their planes right into that bunch of Clevelands, Pensacolas, Myokos and some BB's and where made short work of. The Atlanta and Cleveland by my side however seemed to have forgot how to use the defensive AA skill, since wave after wave of TB's got through and, me being the highest tier BB around, dropped at me. 

 

Now, any moment I was certain the rest of my team would swing round our way and fall on the enemies back and flank, relieveing the preassure on us, bit now I realise three of them was already dead from a DD and the rest where just hanging back, chiling with our CV's around the baseline. The outcome was pretty obvious, the two last ships alive where the CV's who where still trying to sink a Cleveland who was now bearing down on them. The only kill our team got was a Pensacola I managed to pick off before burning to a crisp. Was so frustrated I had to check, and sure enough, almost everyone on my team had like 40% WR and 600 avg XP, including the CV players.

 

Sorry for the whine, feels much better now. So, what kind of really silly plays,  crappy teams etc have you encountered lately?

[Nechrom]

This is why I honestly believe that you have two options while making a game like this with "random battles".

 

Either:

• Balance teams based on skill to the best of your ability (look at overall stats, ship specific stats etc). Making sure that both teams are equally matched so the battle could go either way based on individual performance and tactics used.

or:

• Make the difference in rewards between winning and losing completely non existent. So that personal battle performance is the only factor influencing rewards.

 

I've had such horrible losing streaks lately in my Myoko that I'm at 45% win rate with it while at the same time maintaining over 45k average damage and 1572 average XP.

[kiteohatto]

Well, from my very limited experience playing the game i've come across more cv players who don't want to fight each other at the start of the battle but rather get kills/damage on every other ship, i guess thats how they farm cash/xp ?

 

People are selfish, but sadly there isn't much incentive to work as a team, so everyone just tries to get as much damage done, doing their own thing so they get xp/silver. Then again, then they whine in chat about losing or crying on the forums about something being OP.

[AgarwaenME]

Well, from my very limited experience playing the game i've come across more cv players who don't want to fight each other at the start of the battle but rather get kills/damage on every other ship, i guess thats how they farm cash/xp ?

 

People are selfish, but sadly there isn't much incentive to work as a team, so everyone just tries to get as much damage done, doing their own thing so they get xp/silver. Then again, then they whine in chat about losing or crying on the forums about something being OP.

 

Why would you throw your planes away at a CV surrounded by AAA specced CAs, or straight into a fighter specced CVs fighters? That's not being selfish, that's not being .. to stay on the theme of the thread.. inept.

[Nagine]

This is why I honestly believe that you have two options while making a game like this with "random battles".

 

Either:

• Balance teams based on skill to the best of your ability (look at overall stats, ship specific stats etc). Making sure that both teams are equally matched so the battle could go either way based on individual performance and tactics used.

or:

• Make the difference in rewards between winning and losing completely non existent. So that personal battle performance is the only factor influencing rewards.

 

I've had such horrible losing streaks lately in my Myoko that I'm at 45% win rate with it while at the same time maintaining over 45k average damage and 1572 average XP.

 

I see the logic behind your suggestions, but at the same time I see some big problems in them.

1. Skill based MM would be indeed fun for experienced players. However there will always be new players who will immediately buy Atagos. Imagine the wait time in queue for them. Since they are paying customers Wargaming cannot allow that. Nevertheless, ranked battles should solve that.

2. That is the worst possible solution, because winning will be even less important. Just one word - statpadders. They will make sure to ruin game experience even more than some occasional newbie or "fun players".

[Nechrom]

 

I see the logic behind your suggestions, but at the same time I see some big problems in them.

1. Skill based MM would be indeed fun for experienced players. However there will always be new players who will immediately buy Atagos. Imagine the wait time in queue for them. Since they are paying customers Wargaming cannot allow that. Nevertheless, ranked battles should solve that.

2. That is the worst possible solution, because winning will be even less important. Just one word - statpadders. They will make sure to ruin game experience even more than some occasional newbie or "fun players".

 

1. I didn't mean that everyone in the battle should be on the same skill level, just that both teams should have the same average skill level. The composition could still be any combination of newbie and veteran.
2. But as long as rewards are given for the right actions in the battle, it should still push players to go for the win. If rewards are given only for damage and kills, then you have a point. 

[TheJezna]

 

1. I didn't mean that everyone in the battle should be on the same skill level, just that both teams should have the same average skill level. The composition could still be any combination of newbie and veteran.
2. But as long as rewards are given for the right actions in the battle, it should still push players to go for the win. If rewards are given only for damage and kills, then you have a point. 

 

The problem with number one is that a game with one or a couple of good or just decent players together with a bunch of mediocre ones can be extremely frustrating for those better players. It's almost impossible to carry a team in this game, I've had games where I killed five ships downed numerous planes and damaged alot of other ships and still lost. Even seen a game on youtube where the guy got 8 kills and still lost. So for skill based MM to reduce frustration it must make sure most players on both teams are about the same skill. The second one might work if rewards are very finely tuned, not sure WG would get that right though.

[69thBuLLeT]

Can't wait for Ranked battles. They really, REALLY can't get here quick enough.

[OVanBruce]

Can't wait for Ranked battles. They really, REALLY can't get here quick enough.

 

I too, but man, I'm afraid of then becoming an even BIGGER drama fest than normal matches.

[Scilya]

that awkward moment when they instagate ranked battles and the users crying on the fourum find them selvs in the lowest rank bracket XD

[Nechrom]

 

The problem with number one is that a game with one or a couple of good or just decent players together with a bunch of mediocre ones can be extremely frustrating for those better players. It's almost impossible to carry a team in this game, I've had games where I killed five ships downed numerous planes and damaged alot of other ships and still lost. Even seen a game on youtube where the guy got 8 kills and still lost. So for skill based MM to reduce frustration it must make sure most players on both teams are about the same skill. The second one might work if rewards are very finely tuned, not sure WG would get that right though.

 

But that's exactly what a system like that is designed to prevent. The main reason why it's so hard to carry is that if your team has more 40% players than the enemy team then it's almost impossible to make up for that with just one great player. Instead if both teams have the same average skill level just a tiny bit of extra effort can decide the battle.

The aim is for battles to be a 50/50 probability of a win before you start fighting.

[Admiral_noodle]

Problem I find is what stat truly indicates skill?

[ttchip]

Problem I find is what stat truly indicates skill?

 

Winrate over an infinitely large samplesize.

[Admiral_noodle]

 

Winrate over an infinitely large samplesize.

 

That will take a while. Maybe even a whole week of gaming...

[ttchip]

That will take a while. Maybe even a whole week of gaming...

 

That's what you have statistics as a science for. You'll find that, while an infinite samplesize is the most accurate one, it's highly impractical to achieve such a samplesize. Instead, you have mathematical models to cope with smaller ones.

[mmmbeer]

Problem I find is what stat truly indicates skill?

 

A combination of several. Looking at just one will not do as there are many factors to consider. Average XP relative to ship type and tier + damage dealt is a good start. Win ratio is the most inaccurate as it is easy to buff by playing only in division with good players or playing only OP ships.

 

Had the same problem in WOT before WN7 and WN8 came along. Although not perfect theyre pretty good to quickly determine skill level without having to manually analyze stats..

[ttchip]

A combination of several. Looking at just one will not do as there are many factors to consider. Average XP relative to ship type and tier + damage dealt is a good start. Win ratio is the most inaccurate as it is easy to buff by playing only in division with good players or playing only OP ships.

 

Not really, no. Over a large enough samplesize, the effects of those influences average out.

 

Had the same problem in WOT before WN7 and WN8 came along. Although not perfect theyre pretty good to quickly determine skill level without having to manually analyze stats..

 

WN8 in particular is an extremely mediocre value as it doesn't accurately represent your impact in some games due to the fact that it doesn't account for spotting/tracking damage.

[torytrae]

If you have skilled MM (will be added with next patch as a special battle mode for t6-8 i believe) it also eleminates bad players on the opposing team. People always complain about losing cause of bad players on their team but never complain about winning cause they sunk 4 bad players on the enemy team and get a huge load of XP and credits for it.

 

You will either have both or nothing. There is no only good players on my team and bad players on enemy team option. And honestly, i like to sink bad players. Its fun to do so. If everyone would constantly play good, evade, dodge torps, group up, focus you etc ... it will be a LOT more stressful to play the game.

[Nechrom]

If you have skilled MM (will be added with next patch as a special battle mode for t6-8 i believe) it also eleminates bad players on the opposing team. People always complain about losing cause of bad players on their team but never complain about winning cause they sunk 4 bad players on the enemy team and get a huge load of XP and credits for it.

 

You will either have both or nothing. There is no only good players on my team and bad players on enemy team option. And honestly, i like to sink bad players. Its fun to do so. If everyone would constantly play good, evade, dodge torps, group up, focus you etc ... it will be a LOT more stressful to play the game.

 

But random battles doesn't have to mean completely random teams. It can mean that the individual team compositions are random, but that they both add up to the same "skill value". So you can still sink bad players, but you also have to deal with those on the same enemy team who are on your skill level.

I don't want ranked battles per say, even if that would be nice as an option, I just want even teams.

[mmmbeer]

The problems are the streaks of having all the baddies on your team, or the opposite when having them all on the other team is equally bad (but not complained about). It would be nice to be able to grind along without having to take a break because the next 10 battles WILL be losses or draws due to the mm and crappy RNG. 

 

So far it seems to alternate for me, one good day where I win most even if I fail completely. And then the next day i am lucky to win 1 or 2 battles even if I play like a god. It seems to me that both in battle RNG and the mm is affecting this. If I play in a division and we win 15 battles out of 20 then I KNOW the next day will be torture, with bad RNG and battles lost no matter how hard I try to carry them.

 

Ofcourse one can recognize when this is happening and then stop playing, but that sucks when I had planned to spend many hours grinding and I have to stop because the RNG and mm is stuck at bad. Some stability or true radomness would be nice. Not these long streaks of consistently good OR bad.

[Khul]

It has been kinda mental out there recently, I'm grinding Mutsuki ATM (hello, 40-something per cent winrate!) so I expected a drop but I've lost 3% overall in a week. Some of that must be due to me being frustrated at loss after loss in my grind-y ship & then carrying this frustration over to all other ships I play.

 

But the last game I had had two Hoshos, versus one Langley.

 

"We can't do anything versus a Langley" both CVs whined ALL GAME in chat. "It's so unfair," they kept saying to the enemy, "I hope they nerf US planes soon!"

 

That's TWO Hoshos versus ONE Langley, remember.

I couldn't quite believe it. I mean, I could, but it was a stark & glaring explication of the player-base. Ranked battles or some sort of team battle cannot come soon enough, it's wearing to know that (if you're a horrifically average player, like myself) unless one plays an absolute blinder of a match with zero mistakes made & a razor-sharp allowance to the possibility of failure of every single element of your team--from stuff that shouldn't concern you to your immediate tactical concerns--you're booked for a loss.

 

It's stressful & tiring & makes WOWS at the moment seem like a device to increase one's misanthropy rather than a game. Break time ahoy, I think.

PS: Sorry to talk out loud like this & indulge myself in a whine, but I'm with you OP mate.

PPS: & obviously, I need to division more. Back to skulking around the forumites chat channel...

[mmmbeer]

I have found a system where I stop to play after 3 losses in a row that were obviously meant to be losses, not even close games where your team are steamrolled. If I get 3 of those in a row I know it will last for the rest of the day.

 

The problem is I cant always stop myself, I say OK one more battle too many times and then I end up with 35% WR on a new ship even though I have adequate damage and XP on it. And no you can not say improve your skills because even the tard with no kills or damage get more WR than that just by showing up for the battle.

 

Then on good days I can sail along and play like crap and still win battle after battle. Go figure.

 

This will get boring in not so long i fear. Hoping the ranked battle mode will save my interest.

 

To sum it up; i wish for the game to be more about my performance in battle, not the mood of the RNG and the matchmaker. If i feel there is nothing I can do, why should i keep playing?

[Sub_Eleven]

Ranked battles are still with random people. The only salvation will be team / clan battles.

[mmmbeer]

I was hoping ranked battles will not have those extreme streaks and maybe also pray rng-gods; reduced rng-spread. No need to have that huge rng spread if it is to be a competitive game mode.

 

Yeah clans and fleet battles needs to be introduced quite soon. When people have reached 1 or 2 tier X ships they will need some of that end-game content to play for.

 

That is one of the reasons I stopped playing wowp, no end game content after reaching tier X, please don't make the same mistake here. PS; im at tier 9, 7 and 7 on my main lines now, so you better hurry it up ;)

[Kenliero]

I like the idea of ranked battles. It seems fair. To balance teams by putting bad players with good players, is horrible method, because you basicly punish people for being good.