How to improve the XP system

[SkybuckFlying]

Hello,

 

I shall take the time to write up this post after having played lots and lots and lots of ranked battles in season 4. This post will be about how to improve the XP system ! If you have any ideas too how to improve the XP system that are not yet include below, then please add your own as well !

 

Some of these "improvements" should be obvious to the developers but I will write them down anyway. Perhaps there are counter arguments to the list below.

 

XP Improvements (if they don't already exist):

 

Cruisers:

 

1. Cruisers should get a small XP bonus for shooting down aircraft.

2. Cruisers should get an extra XP bonus if they shoot down aircraft in the area of a battleship. Within 0 to 7 KM of Battleship.

3. Cruisers should get an extra extra XP bonus if they shoot down aircraft in the area of a carrier. Within 0 to 10 KM of Carrier.

4. Cruisers should get a mild XP modifier for placing the cruiser between enemy carrier and friendly carrier. However it will function as a multiplier in case they do shoot down planes as describe in 3.

5. Cruisers should get a small XP modifier for placing the cruiser between enemy planes and friendly carrier.

6. Cruisers should get extra XP for destroying a destroyer that was near friendly carrier.

7. Cruisers should get an additional XP bonus for destroying a destroyer that was near friendly carrier near the end of the match (most friendly ships destroyed, 70% or so) (Hang back bonus).

8. Cruisers should get a double hang back bonus in case it's a US strike carrier.

9. Cruisers should get an XP penalty for dieing against enemy Battleships. Total XP should never go negative though. (Too easy for cruisers to drive away, hide at safe distance and support (strike) carriers with AA! or take out weak/low cannon destroyers)

10. Cruisers should get a tiny XP bonus for spotting torpedoes.

11. Cruisers should get a double tiny XP bonus for spotting torpedoes with hydro.

12. Cruisers should get a tiny XP bonus for setting enemy battleships on fire.

13. Cruisers should get a small XP bonus for setting destroyers on fire.

14. Cruisers should get a small XP bonus for setting carriers on fire.

15. Cruisers should get a medium XP bonus for moving passed border and successfully attacking an enemy carrier.

16. Cruisers should get a large XP bonus for taking out enemy battleships with torpedoes.

17. Weakly armored cruisers should get an XP penalty for attacking a Pensacola cruiser with powerfull AP/HE cannons.

18. Cruisers forcing enemy ship to show their broadside by firing torpedoes at them get a tiny XP bonus.

19. Cruisers shooting at ships causing enemy ships to turn their turrets on them and then disappearing/hiding then enemy turns back at other friendly ship get an tiny XP bonus. (Wasting enemy time ! ;))

 

Battleships:

 

1. Battleships should get a tiny XP bonus by staying in the back/away from enemy destroyers during the start of the match (first 5 minutes or so). (For example stay away from all destroyers for at least 10 KM).

This bonus is no longer given once all enemy destroyers are dead.

2. Battleships should get a small XP bonus for staying away from cruisers with torpedoes. (Keep distance 6 KM or more from enemy cruisers).

3. Battleships should get a tiny XP bonus for taking damage from cruisers and battleships.

4. Battleships should get a very tiny XP bonus for using repair and heals on time/properly. (Some players notice it to late, so reward the better players, hopefully the lesser player will start to notice an improvement in XP score if he/she uses this feature better).

5. Battleships should get a very tiny XP bonus for dodging torpedoes and not take too much damage from it. (Somewhat harder to do in a battleship and also reduces it's armor loss).

6. Battleships should get a large XP bonus for taking out an enemy carrier with a large range shot. (Skill shot XP bonus).

7. Battleships should get a small XP bonus for damaging any kind of ship for 3K or more of damage. (This gives an attack adventage for other attacking ships).

8. Battleships forcing enemy ships to show their broadside by firing torpedoes at them get a tiny XP bonus.

9. Battleships placing their battleship in the middle of a flag after 10 minutes/near the end of the match get a small XP bonus for defending the flag. If battleship dies and the match is lost the bonus is removed.

 

Destroyers:

 

1. Destroyers should get a tiny XP bonus for every 10 seconds that an enemy plane hovers/hangs/circles/moves above it. ("Lure planes away bonus", this allows carrier to strike/bomb better.)

2. Destroyers should get a tiny XP bonus for spotting ships that were not spotted in the last 1 minute or so.

3. Destroyers should get a reduced XP bonus for capturing flags, current XP bonus is a bit too high.

4. Destroyers should get a tiny XP bonus for attacking an enemy carrier. It's very risky for them to do so, so bonus should be tiny.

5. Destroyers should receive an XP penalty for leaving friendly battleships unprotected and under attack from hard to detect destroyers (Mutsuki, hatshu and so forth). (For example 15 KM away from BB or more).

6. Destroyers should get a large XP bonus for defending friendly battleships against enemy destroyers. (Friendly destroyer within 15 KM range of battleship).

7. Destroyers should get a medium XP bonus for destroying battleships.

8. Destroyers should get a tiny XP bonus for setting enemy ships on fire.

9. Destroyers forcing enemy ships to show their broadside get a tiny XP bonus for doing so.

10. Destroyers shooting at ships causing enemy ships to turn their turrets on them and then disappearing/hiding then enemy turns back at other friendly ship get a very tiny XP bonus. (Wasting enemy time ! ;))

 

*Update, Random Game though 12 vs 12 might not apply to ranked... still very annoying behaviour from a fubuki player*

11. Attracting badly unwanted attention like this total idiot should be severly punished with -200 XP skill:

 

http://www.skybuck.org/Games/WorldOfWarships/Replays/version%200.5.8.1/20160727_004016_PJSD007-Fubuki-1944_14_AtlanticDidDumbassSailorLeadThemTowardsMeYesHeDidDumbass.wowsreplay

 

The game was bad enough as it was/started, my tier 8 fubuki and his tier 8 fubuki totally out classed by russian and us tier 10 destroyers, from all the stupid things this guy could do he did both:

11.1 Drive in front of my fubuki from the start this immediately started to annoy me, but at least he captured the flag, I would have definetly blasted him away with my torps if he stayed in front of me like that to teach him lesson.

11.2 Then he starts firing at some fort like some stupid dumbass noob, while I was trying to sneak up on enemy fort, this guy has 0 battlefield awareness or 0 sense of danger with those dangerous tier X destroyers around the last thing he should do is BE FIRING CANNONS AT ANYTHING in as fricking fubuki. I watch the replay carefully he definetly attracts MUCH UNWANTED ATTENTION.

This pissed me off CONSIDERABLY. Had a 50k loss from this. I survived many games before this one and had positive income so this pretty clear proof the game is trying to get me killed badly. I want not be surprised if this guy has a win rate of 30% or less. At start I thought this guy must be good, but once I saw him play and the replay I have my suspicions ! LOL. Anybody wanna place a bet on this guy ?! Not taking any bets though, might inspect his stats later on ! Just to confirm my suspicion ! He even got hit by forts ?! WTF ?! Is this his first bastion game or what ?! He seems to be curious about forts. Does shooting forts give anything ?!

 

Carriers:

 

1. Carriers should get a small XP bonus for luring away enemy fighters with their bombers. ("Lure away bonus", This allows destroyers to fire their torpedoes unseen and also capture flags better).

2. Carriers should get a small XP bonus for driving enemy ships away. For example: enemy battleship moves towards flags/friendly team, then turns around because of bombers.

3. Carriers planes should get a tiny XP bonus for spotting enemy ships.

4. Carriers planes or other friendly ships should get a new tiny XP bonus for respotting the same enemy ship after 1 minute if it being hidden.

5. Carriers should get a large XP bonus for sinking the enemy carrier. Especially if strike carrier has plenty of planes left. Also friendly ships should get an additional XP bonus for defending a strike carrier with plenty of reserve planes left. This is most likely to be a winning move, not always, but many times it can win the game. So any ship defending a strike carrier should get a medium XP bonus.

6. Carriers strafing down torpedo bombers should get a small XP bonus.

7. Carriers keeping the enemy carrier player busy with many commands on his side because of constant moving around of bombers, planes or strikes and so forth should get a small XP bonus. (Occupation bonus, this will disrupt the concentration and bombing aiming accuracy of enemy carrier player).

8. Carrier players exploring the flanks of the map (with planes) should get a tiny XP bonus. This will make battleship players feel more comfortable that they will not be flanked because there is nothing there. If something was there same XP bonus applies.

9. Carrier players should get a medium XP bonus for destroying battleships.

10. Carrier players should get an medium XP bonus for "balancing or unbalancing" the enemy team. For example if they have an extra cruiser, then carrier gets extra bonus for taking it out, also an extra bonus for unbalancing the enemy team in such a way when it makes sense. For example friendly team has more destroyers, then taking out cruisers is a good choice and should be rewarded especially since this will cost more planes, but eventually friendly destroyers can proceed better. Same applies to many cruisers in team vs many battleships in enemy team.

11. Carriers luring any fighters/planes above friendly ships to use their AA fire should get a tiny XP bonus for helping to shoot down those planes.

12. Carriers forcing enemy ships to turn by dive or torpedo bomber near it so that friendly ships can broadside them should get a tiny XP bonus.

13. Carriers bombing destroyers, cruisers, battleships while under heavy attack from fighters get a tiny XP bonus for doing so. (This still does some damage and helps keep those ships spotted).

 

All these small little XP bonusses will lead to a better/more fair system that better describes peoples/players true contribution to the battle and their experience.

 

What stands out from this list is that cruisers have more items on this list then other classes. Don't be alarmed by this I think. It's very important for cruisers to play better. I see many games are lost by cruisers, so these extra items seem more than fair and will hopefully lead to better cruiser players.

 

To me it's obvious how to implement most of these ideas, if developers struggle with this, let me know I can give some pointers/hints to implement most of these.

 

XP points terminology:

Very tiny is probably 5 xp points

Tiny is probably 10 xp points

Small is probably 25 xp points

Medium is probably 50 xp points

Large is probably 100 xp points.

Very large is probably 150 xp points.

Huge is probably 200 xp points

 

XP Modifiers:

Tiny = x 1.1

Small = x 1.2

Double = x 2

 

Additional note:

 

I hope to see some of these suggestions implemented in next season !

Would be nice to know which of these are implemented and which are not implemented...

Perhaps via score screen or so.

 

*Update 1 Clearification *:

Clearified the carrier exploring the borders to be done with planes.

 

*Update 2 Dynamic System Idea *:

 

This XP "improvement" system might indeed be tailored for "strike carrier" play. So conclusion:

The XP system itself could be dynamic.

This would mean the XP system is adjusted based on the setup of the team.

Players will have to adept their play style to fit the team setup !

(I do remain a bit skeptical if this would indeed be better than a general system)

 

*Update 3 Artificial Intelligence to replace dynamic system for XP allocation *

While adding some simple rules to create such a dynamic system is a possibility there might be another approach possible.

It's possible to create an artificial intelligence that learns to recgonized winning tactics/strategies based on wins/losses and ofcourse team setups and dynamic information.

WG would need to allocate one of it's programmer or hire a programmer to do some research into AI and then experiment with it to see the results.

The AI would need lots of training but this game is ideal for that since it's massive online and plenty of training data available on a daily basis !

The best thing about this is the AI can be kept training every day and based on it's experience it can allocate experience to those players who play similiary to those other players that won battles.

Or players that lost battle but still played similiary award them as well, players that according to the AI didn't play along properly could receive much lesser awards, kinda interesting idea really.

 

Bye,

  Skybuck.

[Mayv]

Why dont CVs not get an xp penalty for not shooting down planes?

[Egoleter]

Good thread or bad thread. Good idea or bad idea. Doesn't really matter. I don't want to defend Skybuck.

 

But the behavior of the users writing responses here is disgusting.

 

No longer applies. Thread has been cleaned up by a moderator.

[159Hunter]

 

 

Carriers:

 

1. Carriers should get a small XP bonus for luring away enemy fighters with their bombers. ("Lure away bonus", This allows destroyers to fire their torpedoes unseen and also capture flags better).

2. Carriers should get a small XP bonus for driving enemy ships away. For example: enemy battleship moves towards flags/friendly team, then turns around because of bombers.

3. Carriers planes should get a tiny XP bonus for spotting enemy ships.

4. Carriers planes or other friendly ships should get a new tiny XP bonus for respotting the same enemy ship after 1 minute if it being hidden.

5. Carriers should get a large XP bonus for sinking the enemy carrier. Especially if strike carrier has plenty of planes left. Also friendly ships should get an additional XP bonus for defending a strike carrier with plenty of reserve planes left. This is most likely to be a winning move, not always, but many times it can win the game. So any ship defending a strike carrier should get a medium XP bonus.

6. Carriers strafing down torpedo bombers should get a small XP bonus.

7. Carriers keeping the enemy carrier player busy with many commands on his side because of constant moving around of bombers, planes or strikes and so forth should get a small XP bonus. (Occupation bonus, this will disrupt the concentration and bombing aiming accuracy of enemy carrier player).

8. Carrier players exploring the flanks of the map should get a tiny XP bonus. This will make battleship players feel more comfortable that they will not be flanked because there is nothing there. If something was there same XP bonus applies.

9. Carrier players should get a medium XP bonus for destroying battleships.

10. Carrier players should get an medium XP bonus for "balancing or unbalancing" the enemy team. For example if they have an extra cruiser, then carrier gets extra bonus for taking it out, also an extra bonus for unbalancing the enemy team in such a way when it makes sense. For example friendly team has more destroyers, then taking out cruisers is a good choice and should be rewarded especially since this will cost more planes, but eventually friendly destroyers can proceed better. Same applies to many cruisers in team vs many battleships in enemy team.

11. Carriers luring any fighters/planes above friendly ships to use their AA fire should get a tiny XP bonus for helping to shoot down those planes.

12. Carriers forcing enemy ships to turn by dive or torpedo bomber near it so that friendly ships can broadside them should get a tiny XP bonus.

13. Carriers bombing destroyers, cruisers, battleships while under heavy attack from fighters get a tiny XP bonus for doing so. (This still does some damage and helps keep those ships spotted).

.

So, let's talk this through, what I absolutley miss in this list is:

- Carriers should get a decent xp reward for shooting down enemy planes,

- This reward should be increased if the planes are spotting friendly ships,

- Spotting enemy ships should get a bigger reward than "tiny"

- No extra rewards needed for killing enemy ships, the xp you get from that is sufficient,

 

Also, "carriers exploring flanks" should get a bonus? Really, borderhugging ( aka terrible carrier positioning ) should be rewarded?

 

Long story short, your "reward system" is tailored to the USELESS strike Ranger ( in ranked ). The fact that you still fail to see this, just shows how terrible you are...

 

[loppantorkel]

Impressive list. How is the average player going to know how to gain these xp bonuses, ie play better?

[Egoleter]

Not really. Considering what Skybuck normally writes or try to make up when his meds run out the responses to his threads are fairly harmless.

 

That's not an excuse at all.

 

"I don't like this guy lets trash his thread intentionally instead of simply ignoring it"

That is the behavior shown here. It's called bullying. No matter how much you try to make light of it, such trolling behavior, in real life and on the internet, led to very real suicides and similar bad things. So I stand by what I said. What you do here is disgusting.

 

You don't like Skybucks threads? Ignore them. Use the forum ignore function. Do not be a bully.

 

No longer applies. Thread has been cleaned up by a moderator.

[kingduckling]

people farming likes on skybucks threads by insulting him for ages now.

could get used to it.

 

Edit nr1:

But now on a serious note, skybuck most threads are pure liquid garbage and look sometimes he cracks a good thread but nobody gives 2 moist turds because nobody takes him seriously.

 

If you are reading this skybuck, you know what the first thing before posting something like "How to improve the XP system" is to find how the current xp system works.

 

Im sure its quite the formula, hell it might not be available to the public, get in touch with people who could lets say datamine the information like Vaexa from reddit. Or maybe you might find the information on the RU server, most definitely on EU.

 

So what im trying to say here ClownBucks is that you first need to prove the current xp system is horrid and since looking at your stats makes sad, its hard to determine if the XP system sucks or you do.

 

So go find out how the current xp system works and link the source.

 

So until we get some formula for the XP, the original post you made is as valuable as your other threads. meaning you wasted your time to come up with those ideas.

And me well im just writing this because you could possibly make good threads if properly guided and because i get hard by mocking idiots.

 

[duoinvasion]

Will say, I like the idea for cruisers getting xp for actively protecting BB and CV from strikes.

CA- Yo BB if you want aircover you better move up closer to the fight.

BB- but muh snipes.

CA- have fun dying

CV- I feel the same, BB move up or no fighter support

BB- *cries after dying to focused CV strike*

Team- should've just moved up, you [edited].

[Zed_Von_Toza]

OK serious reply.

 

Skybuck, you idea is simply unworkable.

 

Computer software works by comparing numbers or alphanumeric data. Just think of the thousands of lines of code that would be required to test every little action every player made in a battle, and the number of comparisons and tests required to see which of your rules is applicable. You could come up with something but we are talking serious amounts of processing time for a computer program to do what is relatively easy for a human to work out very quickly, WG simply don't have the server resources to do that kind of work in a short time period.

 

Talking as a professional application developer with over 20 years experience, the best solutions to problems, or the best way to implement a feature, is to keep it simple and elegant. What you are suggesting, is neither of these things.

Also, there has to be a finite amount of XP available in a battle, if there wasn't the economy would be screwed.

 

The developers are thinking about changes to the XP earned to factor in spotting and tanking, but the post I saw said that overall they wre happy with the amount of XP and credits per battle, but are happy to redistribute it a little to take spotting and tanking into account.

[SkybuckFlying]

OK serious reply.

 

Skybuck, you idea is simply unworkable.

 

Computer software works by comparing numbers or alphanumeric data. Just think of the thousands of lines of code that would be required to test every little action every player made in a battle, and the number of comparisons and tests required to see which of your rules is applicable. You could come up with something but we are talking serious amounts of processing time for a computer program to do what is relatively easy for a human to work out very quickly, WG simply don't have the server resources to do that kind of work in a short time period.

 

Talking as a professional application developer with over 20 years experience, the best solutions to problems, or the best way to implement a feature, is to keep it simple and elegant. What you are suggesting, is neither of these things.

Also, there has to be a finite amount of XP available in a battle, if there wasn't the economy would be screwed.

 

The developers are thinking about changes to the XP earned to factor in spotting and tanking, but the post I saw said that overall they wre happy with the amount of XP and credits per battle, but are happy to redistribute it a little to take spotting and tanking into account.

 

Valid point. However most of what I wrote probably involves coordinates and other very small data processing items. For this reasons I would recommend a "server system" with as many cores as possible and as much cache as possible to keep as much "player data" as possible in the caches. So the caches combined with the additional cores should make it more possible to process all of this data.

[RogDodgeUK]

off-topic posts removed. Just because a user may not be liked, does not give anyone the right to harass or bully them. If you don't like them, ignore them and don't post in threads they make. As long as everyone sticks to the forum rules, there is nothing to worry about.

[Admiral_noodle]

Skybuck... Thing is you post too much in one go. Not all these ideas are bad. Perhaps you could select one or two "top" ideas for XP improvements and "float" a general idea before trying to overhaul the entire system in one go!

 

Most of the ideas are already in game - because XP is calculated on %hp dealt. Cruisers are already "bonus" rewarded for killing DDs in terms of XP per hit. Similarly BBs are rewarded for nuking cruisers and DDs get a bonus from torping BBs/gunning down other DDs etc.

 

The escorting duties performed by cruisers are interesting however. Also you've got hidden in their "spotting" XP, which I think should be a thing...

 

Anyway. I still suggest taking ONE idea at a time and giving it some thought/offering it for discussion - and getting feedback on that before starting any other ideas off - otherwise it's too much to analyse all at once.

[Echelon2k]

Battleships:

 

1. Battleships should get a tiny XP bonus by staying in the back/away from enemy destroyers during the start of the match (first 5 minutes or so). (For example stay away from all destroyers for at least 10 KM).

This bonus is no longer given once all enemy destroyers are dead.

2. Battleships should get a small XP bonus for staying away from cruisers with torpedoes. (Keep distance 6 KM or more from enemy cruisers).

3. Battleships should get a tiny XP bonus for taking damage from cruisers and battleships.

4. Battleships should get a very tiny XP bonus for using repair and heals on time/properly. (Some players notice it to late, so reward the better players, hopefully the lesser player will start to notice an improvement in XP score if he/she uses this feature better).

5. Battleships should get a very tiny XP bonus for dodging torpedoes and not take too much damage from it. (Somewhat harder to do in a battleship and also reduces it's armor loss).

6. Battleships should get a large XP bonus for taking out an enemy carrier with a large range shot. (Skill shot XP bonus).

7. Battleships should get a small XP bonus for damaging any kind of ship for 3K or more of damage. (This gives an attack adventage for other attacking ships).

8. Battleships forcing enemy ships to show their broadside by firing torpedoes at them get a tiny XP bonus.

9. Battleships placing their battleship in the middle of a flag after 10 minutes/near the end of the match get a small XP bonus for defending the flag. If battleship dies and the match is lost the bonus is removed.

 

Rewarding ships for staying back would slow down the game to T10 levels on any tier. 

 

Imo only a few changes need to be made:

1. Scouting (aka keeping LoS on the enemy) should reward a part of the XP and credits people earn for shooting the target. Maybe not the 50% as in WoT because of the high number of spots a single ship can maintain but 5% seem reasonable.
2. The reward for shooting down enemy planes has already been increased but its still not enough. Something in the range of 3-5% of the xp/credits you would receive when destoying a cruiser of the planes tier for every destroyed plane would be nice.
3. Tanking damage could be rewarded as 25% worth of damage dealt. This would both incentivise BBs to take to the frontlines (or at least try to tank some damage) as well as soften the blow to players that get early detonations. 

[RamirezKurita]

Firstly, I don't think that adding so many class specific XP boosts would be workable as it really screws with ships that don't follow their standard class archetype (such as the Moskva, Scharnhorst and Kitakami). It would be better if the XP modifiers were altered to simply provide bonuses for all classes equally, although obviously some ships would benefit from particular boosts more than others.

 

Secondly, most of those would involve some very detailed locational calculations to be made. It might be easy for a human observer to note if something is a good move, but a machine would very much struggle to get to the same conclusion.

[AnotherDuck]

Imo only a few changes need to be made:

1. Scouting (aka keeping LoS on the enemy) should reward a part of the XP and credits people earn for shooting the target. Maybe not the 50% as in WoT because of the high number of spots a single ship can maintain but 5% seem reasonable.
2. The reward for shooting down enemy planes has already been increased but its still not enough. Something in the range of 3-5% of the xp/credits you would receive when destoying a cruiser of the planes tier for every destroyed plane would be nice.
3. Tanking damage could be rewarded as 25% worth of damage dealt. This would both incentivise BBs to take to the frontlines (or at least try to tank some damage) as well as soften the blow to players that get early detonations. 

 

I basically agree with these. Scouting is often a thankless task for CVs and DDs. It's definitely beneficial to the team, but for the actual ship scouting, there's no real reward for it, other than a somewhat higher likelihood of winning the match.

 

Shooting down enemy planes is at least on occasion recognised by other players, but doesn't really give much of a post-battle benefit that encourages players to do so more than it's convenient for them at the time. Would also make air superiority carriers more viable (or at least more popular).

 

Experience for taking damage would probably help a little with the problem people see with constant sniping, since it wouldn't be a total loss. If you want to encourage people even more to play offensively, you can make the percentage vary depending on the number of ships left in your team, so if you're the first to die, you get more, and if you're the last ship, you don't get any experience for tanking. That would mean that snipers who don't contribute much during the match but get killed last when it's already too late won't benefit from it much, but those who go in and actually tank in place of others would benefit from it much more.

[Vogel]

17. Weakly armored cruisers should get an XP penalty for attacking a Pensacola cruiser with powerfull AP/HE cannons. 

 

Why? Why should anyone be penalised for attacking a specific ship? What's next, BB should be penalised for shooting at Destroyers?

 

Other than that, BB changes will promote more camping at the back, DDs are the only class that gets penalised for not protecting BBs, CAs get lesser XP bonus from shooting at BBs than all other classes, etc. These bonuses are catering quite heavily towards a certain class, a class that statistically is doing very well in all categories. SO I don't think it is necessary to reward them any more for deleting CAs from the game.

[anonym_yHbO7kUt9ZH4]

That is one big list of ideas Lets hope the developers see the value of such posts and take the ideas that improve the game.

 

One thing i hope they don't pick up though, I copy paste the following:

 

"

1. Battleships should get a tiny XP bonus by staying in the back/away from enemy destroyers during the start of the match (first 5 minutes or so). (For example stay away from all destroyers for at least 10 KM).

This bonus is no longer given once all enemy destroyers are dead.

"

End quote.

 

At higher tiers the battleships already hang back way to much, there should be a penalty on staying at the back to much when highest tier. The lower tiers don't need that because most of the time they have to get closer because of range. The idea behind my logic is that, top tier ships are more dangerous than bottom tier ships, the lowest tiers should support the highest tiers and not the other way around. You will run out of ships really fast that way. Most of the time when people 'camp' the lowest tier ships get focused down while the top tier ships only can fire at 1 or 2 ships while all the other ships on the enemy team have all the freedom to turn broadside and use their full firepower on the low tier ships that have to be close due to range. And someone HAS to cap those bases (it's the new standard battle i think). How well will that work out if your team can support you against 1 or 2 ships instead the entire enemy fleet on that part of the map. I know it's about destroyers, but that's where the cruisers are for, they have to be in front of the Battleships anyway, but you covered that already ;)

Alright, that was a long explanation and i hope it makes at least some sense as to why i think this particular point shouldn't be in the game  Thanks for reading, and @ OP, thanks for the effort en insight you put in your post

[AnotherDuck]

17. Weakly armored cruisers should get an XP penalty for attacking a Pensacola cruiser with powerfull AP/HE cannons. 

 

Why? Why should anyone be penalised for attacking a specific ship? What's next, BB should be penalised for shooting at Destroyers?

 

Especially since weakly armoured cruisers with powerful cannons should shoot at other cruisers, especially those you can citadel somewhat reliably. Since I started shooting almost exclusively (available targets allowing) with AP at cruisers in Kirov, I've begun doing rather well with her. Saying I should get a penalty for doing what the ship excels at is stupid. (Although to be fair, Kirov isn't a weakly armoured cruiser with powerful AP. She's an unarmoured cruiser with powerful AP.)

[Kartoffelmos]

Why? Why should anyone be penalised for attacking a specific ship? What's next, BB should be penalised for shooting at Destroyers?

 

My guess is due to rather subjective reasons. Same with the rewards to ships that defend carriers (specifically strike Ranger) from self-imposed harm.

[Mayv]

 

Other than that, BB changes will promote more camping at the back, DDs are the only class that gets penalised for not protecting BBs, CAs get lesser XP bonus from shooting at BBs than all other classes, etc. These bonuses are catering quite heavily towards a certain class, a class that statistically is doing very well in all categories. SO I don't think it is necessary to reward them any more for deleting CAs from the game.

 

Guess you missed the part where CVs get a bonus for every possible thing they could be doing.

[SkybuckFlying]

17. Weakly armored cruisers should get an XP penalty for attacking a Pensacola cruiser with powerfull AP/HE cannons. 

 

Why? Why should anyone be penalised for attacking a specific ship? What's next, BB should be penalised for shooting at Destroyers?

 

Other than that, BB changes will promote more camping at the back, DDs are the only class that gets penalised for not protecting BBs, CAs get lesser XP bonus from shooting at BBs than all other classes, etc. These bonuses are catering quite heavily towards a certain class, a class that statistically is doing very well in all categories. SO I don't think it is necessary to reward them any more for deleting CAs from the game.

 

I have seen nernburg/german cruisers full health die against a half-health pensacola, perhaps it was the same player making the same mistake but it kinda sucks when players die like that.

 

Keep an eye out for this one ! ;)

[SkybuckFlying]

Why dont CVs not get an xp penalty for not shooting down planes?

 

Simple example: what if other ships/cvs shoot down all planes ?!

[SkybuckFlying]

people farming likes on skybucks threads by insulting him for ages now.

could get used to it.

 

Edit nr1:

But now on a serious note, skybuck most threads are pure liquid garbage and look sometimes he cracks a good thread but nobody gives 2 moist turds because nobody takes him seriously.

 

If you are reading this skybuck, you know what the first thing before posting something like "How to improve the XP system" is to find how the current xp system works.

 

Im sure its quite the formula, hell it might not be available to the public, get in touch with people who could lets say datamine the information like Vaexa from reddit. Or maybe you might find the information on the RU server, most definitely on EU.

 

So what im trying to say here ClownBucks is that you first need to prove the current xp system is horrid and since looking at your stats makes sad, its hard to determine if the XP system sucks or you do.

 

So go find out how the current xp system works and link the source.

 

So until we get some formula for the XP, the original post you made is as valuable as your other threads. meaning you wasted your time to come up with those ideas.

And me well im just writing this because you could possibly make good threads if properly guided and because i get hard by mocking idiots.

 

 

From playing the game a lot I do notice how sometimes the XP system doesn't reward certain behaviours.

 

One clear example is using bombers to wear out Saipan fighters so they return home making the enemy basically blind/no spotting.

 

Plus no spotting bonus from remaining bombers that remain.

 

Plus scaring off enemy destroyesr/ships, etc.

[159Hunter]

 

Simple example: what if other ships/cvs shoot down all planes ?!

 

That's not an answer to the question.

Firstly, this is a topic based on ranked, so there is only one cv per team. So how does the other cv shoot down planes ( guess the enemy cv could strafe down his own plans... ).

Secondly, it's based upon your playstyle with strike ranger, the most useless setup in ranked. Maybe the fact that you didn't get a lot of xp with the Ranger has nothing to do with the XP system, but rather with it being the wrong ship for the job, ever considered that?

[SkybuckFlying]

Also you've got hidden in their "spotting" XP, which I think should be a thing...

 

This is not clear to me, which one did you mean ? The one where the enemy has no spotting ? For example planes of enemy return home or lured away ?