Competitive play in WoWS - how it can be done

[Nephilimer]

Hello fellow Admirals,

 

After the long break from WoWS (right after Season 2 rankied start) I decided to look closer what Wargaming changed (and hopefully improved) in competitive side of World of Warships. As a Season 1 "winner" I was really interesed in any kind of competitive scene around WoWS. 

 

3 seasons later and nothing changed for better. I decided to share some of my thoughts in polish forum section, now I want to make some discussion here. I split it to some points to gain a bit of transparency.

1. WoWS game rules

 

1.1 Damage system and RNG

 

All we know about RNG influence in the game. Making WoWS an competitive game (I don't want to use term "e-sport", because it's not about making this game an AAA title with 1 million dollar prize pool in every tournament), it's easier and less complicated than many of you think - eliminating RNG factor can be done in some particular ways, with key goal: making damage dealing as much skill based as possible. Here's some points:

 

- smaller salvo circles with regular dispersion within (I know its not 100% RNG eliminator, but its way more skill based than current model)

- making damage values not so different (kind of normalization the "1 0" system)

- elimination of various 0 hits (due to hitting destroyed module)

- elimination of dmg reduction after recieving dmg to specific compartments, every compmartnent should have own dmg modifier 

- no detonations and switching detonations to citadel hit zone with bonus damage to eliminate RNGJesus

 

As you can see, these changes affect mostly gunnery in WoWS. For now torpedo mechanics looks fine, as well as manouvering and other things. CV should be less effective on autodrops (famous Saipan bomb autodrop). 

 

Of course these changes needs a lot of in-game balance adjustment between ships, but it's possible to achieve without fundamental changes in game core.

 

1.2 Maps

 

To be honest, maps are not a serious problem right now. Domination mode proved to be fast and reliable as competitive mode. If Wargaming learn to make good looking symmetric maps and spawnpoints, there will be no problem here.

 

1.3 Mods

 

I'm not a huge fan of banning mods in WoWS, but as long cheats will be provided in the same way as mods, there will be no room for this - n00bs will use cheats as long as possible. There is a small problem related with mod-banning - WG refuse to implement Training Battle button to lobby

 

2. Ranked battles rules and rating

 

2.1 Number of players and class distribution

 

Few years ago (im also reired WoT ESL player) someone in WG invented a glorious 7v7 competitive format for World of Tanks. Everyone was suprisred and there were no reason behind this decision. Some of players adapt from 15v15 to 7v7, some not. Years later, same idea landed in World of Warships. In my opinion is not the perfect way to fir ranked battles.

 

Instead of 7v7 I suggest a 8v8 format. Why? For the better ship distribution. With 8 slots available team can be build as:

 

CV: 1 (min, value) to 1 (max value)

BB: 1-3

CA: 2-3

DD: 2-3

 

Explanation:

 

This game is about ship diversity. We got CV in game, so we should use CV. More than 1 CV in this format is bad IMO, as well as absence of this class, so there is no other way than putting 1 CV per team. Competitive mode must be equal to both teams - thats why squads have to be mirrored. Many may ask - why 1-3 BB per team, bot CAs or DDs? Domination mode is about taking advantage by map pressure and securing kills. Stacking BBs in teams can affect game in two ways: epic close range cluch (which is awesome) or campfest with 20km sniping (with only one death possibility: bored). Distribution around numbers mentioned above should make only good (in sense of gameplay) setups - without 7v7 DD fests aka "Smoke on the Water".

 

Main problem with mirror setup is difference between ship within same class - especially with cross-tier rankeds. Thats why i opt for "1-tier" rankeds to make it simple.

 

2.2 Rating calculation

 

Currently WoWS ranked system is based on Hearthstone-like star system. Bringing system from 1v1 game to team game can't be flawless. 4 season showed a lot of flaws:

 

- 1 Rank is about number of battles, not skill

- Irrevocable ranks aka "1-way noob pumps"

- tendency to play as "top-exp" player with no effort to win as a team

 

This kinda sucks in team game. I play some other multiplayer games with competitive mode and all of them use systems based on the elo. If someone does'nt know what elo system is - here's the link.

 

Individual player ranking based on elo system can fit perfectly for World of Warships. With individual rating every game can be descibed in numbers (team 1 avg. elo vs team 2 avg. elo). Matchmaking based on grouping similar skilled players guarantees fair matches and win-based progression system.

 

Without stars and ranks, there will be no room for 1-way noob pumps. You have individual rating and you will face players with similar. I'm aware there should be a some kind of reward for the best player from losing side. Current system (best player in exp) is bad - XP system can't list a lot of things and some players will exploit (as many DD players rush caps to earn points and die). Alongside XP tweaks I propose other system - based on being better than avg. team experience, not being the best in any way. 

 

For example - if 2 players from losers team were significantly better than rest of the team - they will lose a bit less points after losing match (for example, with 0.8 midifier instead of 1). Same for worst players in losing team (1,2 instead of 1).

 

 And of course, special awards for afkers.

 

This system is used in CS:GO, for example. In CS:GO there are no room for weak players being a elite only because they are patient enought to grind x amount of battles. There is no fun when we have to face a way weaker (or stronger) players - this is negative in both ways - pros are irritiated because win is a lottery based on "who's got more newbs", newbs are mad because pros keep outplaying them easily.

 

Sorry for my engrish. I forget (for sure) about a lot of things which I want to put here, but I hope we will discuss about it and we deliver to WG players voice about competitive modes in WoWS (and later be put in trashbin :>).

 

Nephilimer

 

 

 

[Ev1n]

I don't necessarily agree with the proposals to limit RNG (not because we don't want to do that) - they have their own issues. However, the rest sounds good and is pretty close to our thoughts on the subject at hand. We will bring back training rooms eventually, but they require a UI rework, while at the same time they're not a high priority for us at the moment. We're also thinking of experimenting with larger team size for the next ranked season.

As for the elo suggestion - i like it personally and the mechanics are there (Team Battles use them), but there are other factors we have to consider as well. We'll see what the future brings to Ranked Battles.

[Nephilimer]

I don't necessarily agree with the proposals to limit RNG (not because we don't want to do that) - they have their own issues. However, the rest sounds good and is pretty close to our thoughts on the subject at hand. We will bring back training rooms eventually, but they require a UI rework, while at the same time they're not a high priority for us at the moment. We're also thinking of experimenting with larger team size for the next ranked season.

As for the elo suggestion - i like it personally and the mechanics are there (Team Battles use them), but there are other factors we have to consider as well. We'll see what the future brings to Ranked Battles.

 

Preety good to hear it from you, Ev1n.

 

About RNG - in my opinion any moves to making shooting more skill based than RNG is a good direction. I don't have big problem with shell dispersion - biggest issue right now is big dmg difference between specific kind of shots, especially on BB (0 - 1000 - 10000) and bugs related to destroyed modules (infamous DDs taking few torps for zero dmg).

 

I think WG and players can manage a proper way to implement more skill shooting and balance mechanics.

 

 

[Ev1n]

We're anyway working on making artillery mechanics more skill-based, just not necessarily the way you proposed. There were more than 50 ideas brainstormed by the dev team and some are being prototyped at the moment. You won't see any results in the immediate future, but i'm hopeful some of them will be good enough to get to a production environment.

[Nephilimer]

We're anyway working on making artillery mechanics more skill-based, just not necessarily the way you proposed. There were more than 50 ideas brainstormed by the dev team and some are being prototyped at the moment. You won't see any results in the immediate future, but i'm hopeful some of them will be good enough to get to a production environment.

 

Leaks appreciated

[Userext]

We're anyway working on making artillery mechanics more skill-based, just not necessarily the way you proposed. There were more than 50 ideas brainstormed by the dev team and some are being prototyped at the moment. You won't see any results in the immediate future, but i'm hopeful some of them will be good enough to get to a production environment.

 

Are you sure SerB isnt going to fire you for speaking to us and listening to us?

[Yoshi_EU]

Well good to see you back, here are some things that will prob annoy you:

• Higher Leagues of Team Battles and Ranked will require at least 1 Premium ship (TB: Tirpitz, Atago, Kutuzov, Lo Yang; Ranked: Saipain or Bylsca) if you want to properly compete there. (less important in ranked)
• AA of many ships were improved that in some cases, you can do nothing but Spot (Watch)
• DD capture bonus is still to high (many dds in ranked (3-5 per side))
• Accuracy buff to US Tier 8+ bbs, they are sniping from 23km+ now
• High Tier is still mostly stealth build (all crusiers and dds, except the russian)
• No rewards at all for Team Battles (not even achievement flags, no clue why the current season is still running )

 

What you prob like:

• Nerv of Japanese long range torpedoes (Shima is the worst dds by far now, even fletcher or kagero beat it)
• Radar works quite well
• improvement of UI and minimap
• Better rewards for Ranked

btw: Feld and MacieoVietnam are fine and are doing mostly TB right now 

[T0byJug]

Good post! And welcome back! Some good idea's here! I think however the RNG of shell damage/detonation is all part of naval warfare and should be there! Should could it be turned of in team matches maybe. Let's face it Naval warfare is full of these instance's of ship suddenly blowing up! As for size of teams in team battles. I think the issue is in order to make them accessible to player base the number has to be kept smaller. I'm a Dinger. (T-D-U/WJDE Clannes) We are very active in tanks but even we struggle at time to get players together for team battles.

[T0byJug]

Well good to see you back, here are some things that will prob annoy you:

• Higher Leagues of Team Battles and Ranked will require at least 1 Premium ship (TB: Tirpitz, Atago, Kutuzov, Lo Yang; Ranked: Saipain or Bylsca) if you want to properly compete there. (less important in ranked)
• AA of many ships were improved that in some cases, you can do nothing but Spot (Watch)
• DD capture bonus is still to high (many dds in ranked (3-5 per side))
• Accuracy buff to US Tier 8+ bbs, they are sniping from 23km+ now
• High Tier is still mostly stealth build (all crusiers and dds, except the russian)
• No rewards at all for Team Battles (not even achievement flags, no clue why the current season is still running )

 

What you prob like:

• Nerv of Japanese long range torpedoes (Shima is the worst dds by far now, even fletcher or kagero beat it)
• Radar works quite well
• improvement of UI and minimap
• Better rewards for Ranked

btw: Feld and MacieoVietnam are fine and are doing mostly TB right now 

 

ok I am a DD player. But I kind of agree capping. I think all classes should be given a capping weight/modifier! What do I mean. If CA has capping rate x1 DD should be let's say x.5 BB x2 and CV x3. Numbers can change but what I mean is SD for example should take longer to cap than a BB. If you want realism justification. Well a port/island is more likely to surrender with a BB of there coast than a little DD. As for premium ship needed for team battles. Not sure I agree.  Current ranked blys is the best DD but that's because the tier 7 DDs are rather weak and the Polish DD is a good all rounder. However at tier 8 the non premium BBs and DDs are easily as good or better than the premium! CA not so much!

[Nephilimer]

Well good to see you back, here are some things that will prob annoy you:

• Higher Leagues of Team Battles and Ranked will require at least 1 Premium ship (TB: Tirpitz, Atago, Kutuzov, Lo Yang; Ranked: Saipain or Bylsca) if you want to properly compete there. (less important in ranked)
• AA of many ships were improved that in some cases, you can do nothing but Spot (Watch)
• DD capture bonus is still to high (many dds in ranked (3-5 per side))
• Accuracy buff to US Tier 8+ bbs, they are sniping from 23km+ now
• High Tier is still mostly stealth build (all crusiers and dds, except the russian)
• No rewards at all for Team Battles (not even achievement flags, no clue why the current season is still running )

 

What you prob like:

• Nerv of Japanese long range torpedoes (Shima is the worst dds by far now, even fletcher or kagero beat it)
• Radar works quite well
• improvement of UI and minimap
• Better rewards for Ranked

btw: Feld and MacieoVietnam are fine and are doing mostly TB right now 

 

Good to see you in good shape, Yoshi.

 

As I mentioned earlier, I don't want to speak about balance between classes and ships. First of all, I know nothing about this (my knowledge is outdated). But to be honest in every competeitive game with a lot of balance factors (for example League of Legends) every patch changes balance between units. I expect the same in WoWS if game will turn into more competitive thing.

 

The most important thing for us should be pushing WG as hard as we can (ofc we barely can do anything :>) and wait for first real competitive ranked or team rankeds.

 

As Ev1n wrote - elo system in in the Team Battles right now. But due to small smounts of players and nothing to gain - is no sense to play it at all (except some fun, but there is no fun when you have to wait 40 mins for game). Introducing competitive team battles will be very easy - elo system for team and tournament with prizes at the end of the season for top 16 teams at EU.

 

Good post! And welcome back! Some good idea's here! I think however the RNG of shell damage/detonation is all part of naval warfare and should be there! Should could it be turned of in team matches maybe. Let's face it Naval warfare is full of these instance's of ship suddenly blowing up! As for size of teams in team battles. I think the issue is in order to make them accessible to player base the number has to be kept smaller. I'm a Dinger. (T-D-U/WJDE Clannes) We are very active in tanks but even we struggle at time to get players together for team battles.

 

I agree about "historical" reasons behind detonation, but from competitive point of wiev it's unacceptable - I'd like too se "headshot mechanics" instead with citadel part of the ship with bonus dmg modifier. Detonation is a bit too random for me. But if possible, I can agree this mechanics can stay on the random battles, when this part of RNG doesnt have any impact in overall performance.

 

WoWS struggle to keep players in game. In my opinion bringing competitive modes with prizes to game will help build "core population" focused on gaining individual and team achievements.

[kingduckling]

agreeing with most of what nephilimir said.

 

Spawn locations in ranked should be reworked, too weird/random. You have cases in tears of the dessert where you get 2 battleships spawning together in one team and on the enemy team the two BB's are on the edges.

 

Matches can have 8v8 why not, can have some implications in the game. You can also restrict number of ships types per battle/team but id think thats bad and players should just adapt to the meta. Currently cruisers with hydro can do very very well on maps like new dawn, fault line, shatter and north it just requires cruiser players playing near islands similar to an atlanta.

And this doesnt happen because people do their usual stuff like in random battles, this mindless, jaded, plastic gameplay.

 

Regarding the no star loss on top XP, god what a failure, i thought it would be good at first..... indeed if the game starts to look bad, people scramble and for some reason that jaded, plastic gameplay disappears and everyone wants to milk the game for maximum xp, too bad they dont have the same mentality from the start.

Also premiums having better base XP modifiers makes it a Pay to Win system in Ranked.

 

Elo system? got no issue with that, im just curious how its gonna get implemented since WG is one of those companies that treat their player base like they are 12 years old sensitive princesses and dont want to get into stats that much since they dont want to bother/offend anyone.

 

 

Anyway WoWs is doing a lot better development wise compared to WoT were devs were sleeping for years. At least the patches here happen often and they have good quality of life content, so im really hopeful for the future of ranked battles.

[CollingwoodDK]

Hello fellow Admirals,

 

After the long break from WoWS (right after Season 2 rankied start) I decided to look closer what Wargaming changed (and hopefully improved) in competitive side of World of Warships. As a Season 1 "winner" I was really interesed in any kind of competitive scene around WoWS. 

 

3 seasons later and nothing changed for better. I decided to share some of my thoughts in polish forum section, now I want to make some discussion here. I split it to some points to gain a bit of transparency.

 

1. WoWS game rules

 

1.1 Damage system and RNG

 

All we know about RNG influence in the game. Making WoWS an competitive game (I don't want to use term "e-sport", because it's not about making this game an AAA title with 1 million dollar prize pool in every tournament), it's easier and less complicated than many of you think - eliminating RNG factor can be done in some particular ways, with key goal: making damage dealing as much skill based as possible. Here's some points:

 

- smaller salvo circles with regular dispersion within (I know its not 100% RNG eliminator, but its way more skill based than current model)

- making damage values not so different (kind of normalization the "1 0" system)

- elimination of various 0 hits (due to hitting destroyed module)

- elimination of dmg reduction after recieving dmg to specific compartments, every compmartnent should have own dmg modifier 

- no detonations and switching detonations to citadel hit zone with bonus damage to eliminate RNGJesus

 

As you can see, these changes affect mostly gunnery in WoWS. For now torpedo mechanics looks fine, as well as manouvering and other things. CV should be less effective on autodrops (famous Saipan bomb autodrop). 

 

Of course these changes needs a lot of in-game balance adjustment between ships, but it's possible to achieve without fundamental changes in game core.

 

1.2 Maps

 

To be honest, maps are not a serious problem right now. Domination mode proved to be fast and reliable as competitive mode. If Wargaming learn to make good looking symmetric maps and spawnpoints, there will be no problem here.

 

1.3 Mods

 

I'm not a huge fan of banning mods in WoWS, but as long cheats will be provided in the same way as mods, there will be no room for this - n00bs will use cheats as long as possible. There is a small problem related with mod-banning - WG refuse to implement Training Battle button to lobby

 

2. Ranked battles rules and rating

 

2.1 Number of players and class distribution

 

Few years ago (im also reired WoT ESL player) someone in WG invented a glorious 7v7 competitive format for World of Tanks. Everyone was suprisred and there were no reason behind this decision. Some of players adapt from 15v15 to 7v7, some not. Years later, same idea landed in World of Warships. In my opinion is not the perfect way to fir ranked battles.

 

Instead of 7v7 I suggest a 8v8 format. Why? For the better ship distribution. With 8 slots available team can be build as:

 

CV: 1 (min, value) to 1 (max value)

BB: 1-3

CA: 2-3

DD: 2-3

 

Explanation:

 

This game is about ship diversity. We got CV in game, so we should use CV. More than 1 CV in this format is bad IMO, as well as absence of this class, so there is no other way than putting 1 CV per team. Competitive mode must be equal to both teams - thats why squads have to be mirrored. Many may ask - why 1-3 BB per team, bot CAs or DDs? Domination mode is about taking advantage by map pressure and securing kills. Stacking BBs in teams can affect game in two ways: epic close range cluch (which is awesome) or campfest with 20km sniping (with only one death possibility: bored). Distribution around numbers mentioned above should make only good (in sense of gameplay) setups - without 7v7 DD fests aka "Smoke on the Water".

 

Main problem with mirror setup is difference between ship within same class - especially with cross-tier rankeds. Thats why i opt for "1-tier" rankeds to make it simple.

 

2.2 Rating calculation

 

Currently WoWS ranked system is based on Hearthstone-like star system. Bringing system from 1v1 game to team game can't be flawless. 4 season showed a lot of flaws:

 

- 1 Rank is about number of battles, not skill

- Irrevocable ranks aka "1-way noob pumps"

- tendency to play as "top-exp" player with no effort to win as a team

 

This kinda sucks in team game. I play some other multiplayer games with competitive mode and all of them use systems based on the elo. If someone does'nt know what elo system is - here's the link.

 

Individual player ranking based on elo system can fit perfectly for World of Warships. With individual rating every game can be descibed in numbers (team 1 avg. elo vs team 2 avg. elo). Matchmaking based on grouping similar skilled players guarantees fair matches and win-based progression system.

 

Without stars and ranks, there will be no room for 1-way noob pumps. You have individual rating and you will face players with similar. I'm aware there should be a some kind of reward for the best player from losing side. Current system (best player in exp) is bad - XP system can't list a lot of things and some players will exploit (as many DD players rush caps to earn points and die). Alongside XP tweaks I propose other system - based on being better than avg. team experience, not being the best in any way. 

 

For example - if 2 players from losers team were significantly better than rest of the team - they will lose a bit less points after losing match (for example, with 0.8 midifier instead of 1). Same for worst players in losing team (1,2 instead of 1).

 

 And of course, special awards for afkers.

 

This system is used in CS:GO, for example. In CS:GO there are no room for weak players being a elite only because they are patient enought to grind x amount of battles. There is no fun when we have to face a way weaker (or stronger) players - this is negative in both ways - pros are irritiated because win is a lottery based on "who's got more newbs", newbs are mad because pros keep outplaying them easily.

 

Sorry for my engrish. I forget (for sure) about a lot of things which I want to put here, but I hope we will discuss about it and we deliver to WG players voice about competitive modes in WoWS (and later be put in trashbin :>).

 

Nephilimer

 

 

 

 

Congratulations - for your opinion - but I guess a lot of players have different thoughts,

at least to ranked battles.

2.1 Number of players and class distribution ...

What will you do when noone likes to play cv, or some other classes?

2.2 Rating calculation

Your "intelligent" suggestion leads only to more senseless grinding. It is a game - so it should bring fun and not frustration.

First of all - I can not chose at least Division to play, that's why I disagree with this suggestion.

Irrevocable ranks should be at least at special stages at least second and first league too ... every thing else is just stealing time.

One could think you work for them :-), do you ?

 

Special rewards for afk playes?  Well as long as this game keeps throwing me out sometimes, right in the beginning, middle or end of a battle, I say no.

 

But there is really one thing I would love to change about ranked battles. Reduce either repair costs - or put all fights to T 5.  Or much better in an arena one vs one ?

I think Indianapolis is also a bad thing in ranked.But that is just my humble opinion -  however it might change.

[Szatanshow]

While i mostly agree with you post Nephilimer i personaly thnik CVs shoudl be removed from ranked. Its just not fair someone can sit safely on the edge of map clicling his way to victory while they team accualy fight. Lost/win countles of games do to CV murderning last ships on our/enemy team to death without them being able to even chase it or find it. While we or enemy team deserwed win after good game often close ones. 

Its unbalanced as hell since other ships can accualy fight even BB vs DD have more chances than any ship vs CV.

i dont mind CV in randoms. In ranked its as anoying and unbalanced as arty is in WoT.

Not to mention that most CV players i see in ranked are only interested in making themselfs safe so basicaly useles to team.

 

Lowering Rng part on shots is something i would like to see too, seriously bb failing to hit more than 1-2 shels  (or just 1000dmg) on brodside enemy from short range is just not funny and annoying

Detonations - not mind them but they need to be related to what was hit not to RNG lucky roll

Best keeps a star -- this has to go or make every class equaly xp gain or just remove cap xp entirely or... make top on team to gain a star and second not lose a star

 

- Irrevocable ranks dont mind them at all at least you got safe harbor after streek of terrible teams removing them wont make amount of as you called noobs any lesser in ranked

[Pajosaurus]

Also premiums having better base XP modifiers makes it a Pay to Win system in Ranked.

 

I didn't know this since I don't own any premium ships. Do premiums really have such an unfair advantage in Ranked? My mind: blown.

[EsaTuunanen]

Current system (best player in exp) is bad - XP system can't list a lot of things and some players will exploit (as many DD players rush caps to earn points and die).

On the other hand if destroyer which suicide rushed sinking first (excluding that higher first hit chance to detonate RNGesus) without even taking someone with him by point blank range torping got highest XP it doesn't exactly flatter skill of rest of the players.

Though I guess some kind coefficient basing to did destroyer also do damage/or spot enemies could be applied to capping reward.

 

Would be hard to balance.

Good battleship or cruiser player can still do notable damage in otherwise bad team, but if enemy got all the other competent players destroyer is easily screwed.

If enemy declines to sail into torps and team runs to have group humping at map edge while showing their broadside for enemy to citadel, destroyer can't do much anything than keep out of enemy's way.

 

That balancing XP rewards would work lot better with better ranking system for more balanced skill teams, instead of bad players getting so easily out from first bottom tiers.

That would make it also more easy for other classes to count that team mates have at least some basic intelligence to help them in jobs their ship is not so good at.

 

 

I didn't know this since I don't own any premium ships. Do premiums really have such an unfair advantage in Ranked? My mind: blown.

XP and credits coefficients vary ship by ship.

Some ships get good XP/credits easily without doing especially heavy work, some need sweating blood to get high XP/credits.

[creamgravy]

Random competitive mode ≠ WOWS

 

Anyway I'll add..

 

No aircraft carriers. (They too powerful. i.e. someone grinding a strike Ranger is an auto loss)

No 18 point captains vs 1 point captains. (the concealment mechanic is too powerful, see above)

No premium ships.

 

 

I didn't know this since I don't own any premium ships. Do premiums really have such an unfair advantage in Ranked? My mind: blown.

 

Sims and Saipan get base XP coefficients that push them above tier 9. 

 

[Nephilimer]

Guys, balance things (OP this, OP that) its just numbers. Numbers are easily adjustable. Alongside with new ships and game adjustments game will need balancing in every patch (just like, for example, in LoL).

 

In season 1 (when CV were described as even more powerful as now) I play as a BB, class often decribed as a garbage in rankeds and easy to outplay by CV. CV werent OP at all. Maybe reducing anti DD power will be ok (but to be honest, I have no idea because my game knowledge is outdated).

 

CVs in rankeds are not bad - I know many players like to make concealment build aka "I still standing (behind a rock)" but if we remove CV - DD will be superior to other class. What next - remove DD? After that BB will crush poor CAs. So remove BBs and make it CA only. Oh, some CA doesnt have torps and so on.

 

Removing things from balance pool is not the solution. WG just need to adjust game balance (and we can help with proper feedback and testing participation).

[TheBigLanowski]

(...)

 

I agree about "historical" reasons behind detonation, but from competitive point of wiev it's unacceptable - I'd like too se "headshot mechanics" instead with citadel part of the ship with bonus dmg modifier. Detonation is a bit too random for me. But if possible, I can agree this mechanics can stay on the random battles, when this part of RNG doesnt have any impact in overall performance.

 

WoWS struggle to keep players in game. In my opinion bringing competitive modes with prizes to game will help build "core population" focused on gaining individual and team achievements.

 

I totally agree with you! You don't even gain flags from a detonation in Teambattles. Get rid of this randomness!

I really struggle at very close range to get AP in my cruisers to work reliably on other cruisers. Hitting citadels is not that easy any more, would be nice to know if others have this problem too?

I want to understand the game mechanics but I can't find anything about armour penetration. I only can try and learn by trial and error but even in the trainingsroom at still standing targets the game often feels so random! At long distance okay, I get this, you need RNG and dispersion but at close range? A cruisers should be a sharp knife, precise and unforgiving against other cruisers giving you broadside. Maybe it's just me and I forgot how to aim properly, I don't really know. What I know, even with such good patches like the last ones, the game is loosing its fun factor game after game because of not comprehensible situations...

[Nephilimer]

Main problem with small amount of damage is about overpenetration - especially when you try to hit CA as BB in close range. How it wil be fixed/balanced? Don't know. Ev1n leaks please!

 

[TheBigLanowski]

Man problem with small amount of damage is about overpenetration - especially when you try to hit CA as BB in close range. How it wil be fixed/balanced? Don't know. Ev1n leaks please!

 

Yeah, the overpenetration mechanic... it is somehow comprehensible in BB vs CA fights at close range, you really pack a punch there in your AP shells, there was a picture from N. Carolina and her penetration at 5,10 and 15km.

But it is frustrating if the enemy shows you a perfect broadside and you can't give him a paddlin for this. And in CA vs CA I don't understand it at all. At least you should get normal penetrations but not overpenetrations.

[Nephilimer]

Balance reasons. They simply cant allow BB to oneshot every cruiser in game with 1 salvo ;)

[Nekrodamus]

The game mechanics of WoWs and WoT disallow for any competitive gaming outside true team modes like CW, team battles and the like. RNG can only be compensated / neutralized with non-random teams with non-random vehicles and with voice chat. Changing game mechanics to 'skill based' in general would please a handfull of pro players, but would frustrate the masses so that they won't pay any longer or even leave directly. No doubt the games would be dead within a few months.

 

Ranked battles are in no way meant to be high end content for a small group of elite players. It's a mass event to please and engage the customers, to motivate them to spend more time with the game and perhaps even spend some extra money. Of course it is not planned that every player reaches top ranks and earns all the prices, but they should at least have the feeling that it might be possible.

 

I completely disagree, that reaching rank 1 is possible by playing a lot! It should be like this (to a degree, see below) but it definately isn't. In fact the ranked battles start at the last save point which is rank 12.0 and collecting the last 57 stars can only be achieved by high skill players who can easily dominate every single round and don't need a team at all. Replacing the stars by any other rating system (f.i. ELO) wouldn't change this at all, the situation would be 100% the same.

 

For any competition with limited prices skill is the only way to get them and that's perfectly fine. But with events WG usually allows their customers to replace some the skill requirements with 'playing more often' (and we all now that playing a lot is nearly as valuable for WG as paying money). This usually is tweaked according to the number and value of the prices. Some events don't require any skill and if you have it, you won't get more, but you get is faster (f.i. ARP), and other events require at least some level of skill to reach the top goal (think of the XP missions for 1000 diamonds).

 

What all those events have in common is, that most or even all requirements are personal tasks and usually don't rely on your random teams. When you don't reach those XX kills or YY dmg, no one else is to blame but you. Now ranked battles differ completely since your personal reward is completely about the quality of your random team - at least this is the impression for the average (yellow or green) Joe.

 

Loosing because of afk players, low tier stock or other UP ships and not being able to compensate that or at least being the best looser for sure is just frustrating. And this often allready begins when the matchmaking pops up. The most frustrating part is the loss of stars and ranks. You get taken away something which you allready had and you had no chance at all to avoid this. For the non-purple players the ranked battles are not about having fun but about their personal level of pain resistance. I know even good players who stoped playing ranked because they couldn't stand this stress.

 

My approach in no way intends that more people reach top prices, but to take away the frustration or at least most of it:

 

- Keep brackets, ranks and stars, they make sense in every way. (perhaps a few brackets more would be helpfull)

 

- Loosing stars and ranks is no longer possible.

 

- Instead of recieving a star for being in the winning team you only earn stars for reaching a given number of base XP according to your actual bracket. (f.i. 1500, 2000, 2500, 3000)

 

Expected / intended results:

 

- Quite easy early success will please again the 'underperforming' customers which is important for WG.

 

- Players keep what they have and don't have fear their teams or a loosing streak any longer, so the 'middleperformers' are happy too.

 

- Later brackets are in fact just for the pros like before. But the 'slightly above average' players at least can believe in a chance to compensate their lack of top skill with a lot of engagement (read: really huge number of games).

 

- No more diskussions, if a best but low performing looser really should keep his star or if an afk winner should get one since you only get stars for performance.

 

- Players have the impression that they only rely on their skill / performance but the required base XP are high enough to force the players to win as a team. Only extremly good loosers can earn a star - but deserve it without doubt.

 

- This system should solve problems with 'underperforming' ships too. Since the chances for higher XP with f.i. a stock Nürnberg in a tier 7 battle are quite low, people will stop joining ranked battles with such stuff.

[Nephilimer]

I dont want to answer you point by point - just try to read first post with understanding.

 

 

[Nekrodamus]

I complety understood your post mate.

 

What I say is: WG games are F2P and therefore they have to make the masses of bobs happy, otherwise they won't spend money. A skill based game would not work as WG needs all those RNG factors to allow the masses some motivating succes too from time to time.

 

Numbers of pro players are extremly small and most of them pay nothing at all since they earn their gold at CW or ESL. Cybersport and a few well known unicums may be helpfull for some advertising, but changing the game to their favour will kill the game - It's that easy.

[EsaTuunanen]

Balance reasons. They simply cant allow BB to oneshot every cruiser in game with 1 salvo ;)

Even if that cruiser shows side to non-distracted BB with guns pointed at it from sub 5 km range...