0.5.12 The Grand PVE high tier Shaft

[SerPurr]

Latest patch has introduced massive credit loss for high tier (IX/X) PVE matches.
Even with -20% repair (flag+camo) and free consumables you're looking at -40K/-80K at the very least and that's if you had a good game.

If you fancy a premium repair or heal or smoke (not all, just pick one) and play without credit gain, repair reduction flags...ow boy.

Doesn't seem to matter much what ship class you play because of the smaller team (less HP available) and shorter matches.

 

I have no issue with PVE having reduced credit income. It's always been like that and for good reasons.
I have no issue with the philosophy behind the last patch reworked economy.
From what I read it works (more or less) fine in Randoms.

 

However, before the patch a good game in high tier PVE was at least 'rewarded'.

You had to pull your weight but providing you did, you could at least manage to break even.

(Couple kills, around 100-140K damage, capped or reset capped some, spotting when in DD, tanking along the way when in BB etc.)

 

Oversight? (PVE up to Tier VIII seems to work OK.)

Just not that important I guess?

Bit too harsh imo. No credits for a good Tier IX/X match? Ok, fine by me.

Just getting axed for maximum efforts takes the fun away though.

 

Preemptive info for the smartass division:

 

-Yes I'm aware PVE is for noobs, muppets, players who are scared of real fights and all that.

-Yes you are not supposed to play PVE beyond the first training missions

-Yes to any negative knee jerks on playing PVE. You are all absolutely right.

 

The above said, a lot of us play PVE on high tiers anyways.

If we're supposed to just shaft our high tier ships to the mothball fleet because of WG official policy, I'd even accept that.

Given the fact WG (even recently) has stated they are aware of PVE popularity and take development of new PVE content seriously though,

I can't help but feel a bit weird about this?

[Aerroon]

 

Oversight? 

Probably.

 

Just not that important I guess?

Yup.

 

Bit too harsh imo. No credits for a good Tier IX/X match? Ok, fine by me.

Just getting axed for maximum efforts takes the fun away though.

They probably just forgot. PvE is probably even less popular than CV play, and if they forgot about CVs...

 

I would imagine they'll fix the PvE part too.

[warsinger2]

The problem is, in PVE 100-120k damage in tier  IX - X is not that much, people do that in a NM, Fuso, Warspite, Shorst, Gneisenau, Nagato and even Lolorado in T VI-VII (destroyers have it even easier to rack up high damage numbers) and there are much more HP floating around in T IX -X also keep in mind that the same rules for randoms also apply to co-op so if you play passively/less aggressive you get less reward. So on top of 100k damage, cap, spot, tank and see what that earns you. If you are still in the red, well then some things are indeed in the need of tweaking in terms of game mechanics.  

[SerPurr]

The problem is, in PVE 100-120k damage in tier  IX - X is not that much, people do that in a NM, Fuso, Warspite, Shorst, Gneisenau, Nagato and even Lolorado in T VI-VII (destroyers have it even easier to rack up high damage numbers) and there are much more HP floating around in T IX -X also keep in mind that the same rules for randoms also apply to co-op so if you play passively/less aggressive you get less reward. So on top of 100k damage, cap, spot, tank and see what that earns you. If you are still in the red, well then some things are indeed in the need of tweaking in terms of game mechanics.  

 

Typical smartass reply from someone who doesn't play PVE and has hidden stats?

Feel free to check mine. Make sure you are on the Co-Op battles tab.

 

PVE is 8 vs 8, not 12 vs 12. I'm not sure where your HP logic comes from.

I'm not talking about maximum scores. Sure, 200K+ is doable.

One out of a 100 matches. Show me someone who manages to do above 100K in a Fuso in PVE as an average score and I'll show you where Santaclaus lives.

 

Let me enlighten you in case you have missed some points though:

 

 

Scenario A

 

1) If you play a tier X BB, and you happen to be lucky enough not to be drawn into a Tier VIII match (which happens every time even a SINGLE Tier VIII player is available..so lets just say A LOT) you will be the ONLY tier X BB. The rest of your team (lets say all bots) is CA's and DD's. 

 

2) Out of that initial HP poule, the DD's will typically yolo eachother and die quickly. Maybe if you're lucky a one or two will cross your path and you might land some potshots on them.

 

3) The CA's with torps typically do the same mutual annihilation. Again, rinse and repeat. Help if possible. 

 

4) After 2 minutes you will find yourself facing your Bot mirror opponent. Again, if you are the lucky sole survivor because the bots on your team sucked, you indeed will have some HP to harvest, some tanking to do and some kills to score. However, if you are not lucky, you will fight for scraps. Trust me, the latter happens way more often than the first. 

 

5) The above is scenario Number1. In this scenario a score of 100-140K damage is actually pretty good.

 

There are other scenarios.

 

Scenario B

 

1) You play a Tier X DD and the rest of your team is comprised of bots

 

2) PVE MM NEVER throws in Bot BB's when there are no human BB players. Same for CV so your red team has CA's and DD's only

 

3) Your bots suck. You end up fighting 4 full health Tier X Bot CA's with radar and hydro.

 

4) Oh what? Sorry, you're dead. Repair bill? 160K if you didn't use premium consumables or flags.

 

Again, just examples. Many shades of grey in between.

I bet it's possible to make a profit, even at high tier PVE but I'm willing to state that you have to get pretty darn lucky to make that happen.

 

[OldGrandad]

@Architekton - Firstly well done on a very lucid OP. But, you have probably answered yourself, the ultimate failing of high tier PvE play is human population. As you well know, the standard bot fill of matches with the absence of few human players available for a battle, are just CA's and DD's they never use CV's or BB's. With the lack of high value targets I am surprised you ever did make any sort of profit at all taking into consideration it is only 8v8.

 

My suggestions for high(er) tier PvE battles.

 

1. Increase the battle wait time for tiers 7 upwards to 1 and a half minutes (to allow more human players the opportunity to join one battle and not spread over a couple).
2. Increase team count to 10.
3. Include high value targets (CV & BB) as standard even if no human equivalent is present.
4. Decrease the standard service cost in PvE to 80% of PvP.

 

Not exactly taxing requests but may offer your concerns a ray of hope. I really do believe there has to be more equality between the modes, not in rewards but in delivering a degree of satisfaction from playing that would please the player (modes etc). I will have to say, I do not believe you should make any significant amount of money at tiers 9 & 10 in PvE as that would take away any sort of benefit in playing PvP at those tiers. What I believe SHOULD happen is as long as you have proven to have done well enough to have a minimal negative credit impact and not an extreme one.

 

I partly agree with your concerns with PvE (I personally have only played as high as tier 8 when testing) as it definitely needs to have an injection of interest to ensure it is a viable option to PvP. But it has to be balanced, and the current punitive financial penalties at very high tier PvE battles does indeed appear to be the point to where no one at all will want to play at those tiers.

 

To sum it up for very high tier PvE - More content (ships and modes) and less punitive financial penalties.

 

I hope I have answered as well as I can at this hour (need more coffee!). 

[Smeggo]

They probably just forgot. PvE is probably even less popular than CV play, and if they forgot about CVs...

 

They often stated that 1/3 of the playerbase plays PvE exclusive (maybe not on Hightier ) - WG even has a department only for PvE.

I hope we can see something from them soon...

[SerPurr]

To sum it up for very high tier PvE - More content (ships and modes) and less punitive financial penalties.

 

I hope I have answered as well as I can at this hour (need more coffee!). 

 

Cheers m8. Lets hope someone who can make something happen reads along 

 

..- WG even has a department only for PvE.

I hope we can see something from them soon...

 

I read that too and I'm still not sure whether it should make me laugh out loud or cry even harder 

Given the fact their last attempt to inject some fresh air into PVE was kind of fiasco, things can only go uphill I guess even if it seems to be at a snails pace.

 

[Babykim]

According to the RU forum, the developers know about this problem and plan correcting it soon.

[havaduck]

 

 WG even has a department only for PvE.

 

 

They do? Well I know their door sign then:

 

 

..... because honestly thats the only explanation for the state of co-op nearly 1 1/4 year after obt start!    (Lets see who gets it )

[Admiral_H_Nelson]

 

They do? Well I know their door sign then:

 

 

..... because honestly thats the only explanation for the state of co-op nearly 1 1/4 year after obt start!    (Lets see who gets it )

 

Closed until further notice

[xeransa]

There just isn't enough ships in the PVE mode to give you a chance to have a really good game, I played on the new game mode on the test server where it was 8 players v 16 AIs and that was fun and allowed you to do very well. I know this wasn't introduced as when it was quiet and you had a lot of bots on the players team they tended to lose and I haven't heard any news on it's reintroduction.

[aboomination]

 

The plot thickens!

It reads as follows *grabs glasses*

Keep out!

 

Also some stuff about getting gut and playing lower tiers for credits and a paragraph about the "curse of the premium shop" which I can't fully translate but it smells like mummy's armpits. 

[krautjaeger]

I have a question to the PvE'rs, and others in general. The reason it's like it is now is so people can't easily grind in PvE and then go to PvP with little to no pvp experience, thus good reason. What if there were two separate grinds, one for PvE with the same amount of xp and credits but those ships could only be used in PvE and vice versa, would that be interesting? If they were to introduce this now, they probably would have to make what ever you had researched available for both modes but from there on out it would be separate.

 

Or those playing PvP had both grinds done at he same time, while PvE'rs would have to do the PvP line grinds if they were to change modes.

 

Then those only in to PvE could enjoy that mode to the full extent, not being bothered by pvp at all. WG has said that about 40% plays PvE only, and that is a lot of people. I would have no qualms with this. Just a thought.

[IanH755]

Until the Training room gets properly integrated I use co-op as a training room for new ships before taking them out into Random.

 

Plus I use them a massive stress relief after playing Random

 

I have a question to the PvE'rs, and others in general. The reason it's like it is now is so people can't easily grind in PvE and then go to PvP with little to no pvp experience, thus good reason. What if there were two separate grinds, one for PvE with the same amount of xp and credits but those ships could only be used in PvE and vice versa, would that be interesting?

 

Just saw this after my post - What a fantastic idea. I would be extremely happy with that because that is how I currently use the Public Test Server

[SerPurr]

I have a question to the PvE'rs, and others in general. The reason it's like it is now is so people can't easily grind in PvE and then go to PvP with little to no pvp experience, thus good reason. What if there were two separate grinds, one for PvE with the same amount of xp and credits but those ships could only be used in PvE and vice versa, would that be interesting? If they were to introduce this now, they probably would have to make what ever you had researched available for both modes but from there on out it would be separate.

 

Or those playing PvP had both grinds done at he same time, while PvE'rs would have to do the PvP line grinds if they were to change modes.

 

Then those only in to PvE could enjoy that mode to the full extent, not being bothered by pvp at all. WG has said that about 40% plays PvE only, and that is a lot of people. I would have no qualms with this. Just a thought.

 

Sounds like a task so complicated they would probably first have to quadruple the size of the PvE team in order to make that a reality before the next century.

Keep in mind we're talking about a company that failed to implement a very simple 2 bots versus 1 human ratio. That's not exactly the stuff you can proudly add to your curriculum vitae.

 

Tbh I'm not opposed to just about anything regarding PvE. Sceptic? Yeah, very much so.

Experiment away! Make a total mess (one that doesn't cost us a fortune preferably...pun intended),

use us a guinea pigs, try 20 different ideas all at once or a single one upside down.

Just do SOMETHING ffs.

 

It's probably me. It must be. I just don't get why it takes eons for PvE to get even the least amount of attention.

Promises. They are aware. This is coming, that is coming...soon. Blablablabla.

Well..I can't wait. Here's to hope!

 

 

 

 

 

[havaduck]

Both are wrong so far (although I like them ^^), although the "right solution" is also right inside Aboos post (that should make it easy;)).

 

 

Remember who you are dealing with: My spelling and writing is bad as it is in english, .... or french ..... imagine what I could do in hieroglyphs! So dont be too disappointed if its not some very deep poetry ....

 

 

So its something simple ..... one word ... or concept.

 

 

For the impatient:

 

 Its Mummy, or rather embalmed/mummyfied person. The last Symbol to the right is not necessary ..... I think, as embalming-the-body should be enough.

 

 

-> WG co-op section is dead, embalmed and without any sign of live for the ordinary player for so long, you gotta put them into a museum.

 

I really think "petrified" would be a generous description to the development of the pve content so far.

 

 

Unlike the curse of the Mummies if they are disturbed (actually there was only one such threat, and it was in the tomb of a mayor-type-of-ranked-grave) WG can definately expect a backlash from the players if they dont light a fire under the behinds of their alleged PVE-Section. I am sure everyone that played a high tier co-op match after the patch uttered a "curse" in their direction.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tbh I'm not opposed to just about anything regarding PvE. Sceptic? Yeah, very much so.
Experiment away! Make a total mess (one that doesn't cost us a fortune preferably...pun intended),

use us a guinea pigs, try 20 different ideas all at once or a single one upside down.

Just do SOMETHING ffs.

 

 

 

 

This. Expect of for the making-a-mess-part. Its not like WG needs any encouragement on that part.

 

 

 

 

It's probably me. It must be. I just don't get why it takes eons for PvE to get even the least amount of attention.

Promises. They are aware. This is coming, that is coming...soon. Blablablabla.

Well..I can't wait. Here's to hope!

 

 

Thats the thing I dont get. 40 % of the games are in co-op. Lots of premium time, ships, consumables and flags are burnt in co-op, yet WG is treating the players like they are leprous.

 

I get my handy list out there, of things co-op specific:

 

Last year (starting with obt): "Men of Emden". End.

 

This year, so far: "Rise of the Machines" as a co-op exclusive and the rest at least doable in co-op.

 

 

And now we have this economy change thats not so bad in theory, but completely screwed over co-op players. They could have easily avoided that by imposing a upper limit to the repair-cost in co-op that is more in line with the also very hard upper limit you can possibly earn in co-op.

[SerPurr]

Thats the thing I dont get. 40 % of the games are in co-op. Lots of premium time, ships, consumables and flags are burnt in co-op, yet WG is treating the players like they are leprous.

 

And now we have this economy change thats not so bad in theory, but completely screwed over co-op players. They could have easily avoided that by imposing a upper limit to the repair-cost in co-op that is more in line with the also very hard upper limit you can possibly earn in co-op.

 

You also notice these percentages get higher and higher? It's just funny. 30 to 40% plays PvE exclusively. How can that even be? Sounds a bit far fetched to me.

This 'PvE exclusive' team I also find hard to accept on Sub_Octavians' blue eyes. I guess a team is any number greater than one but still..with what to show for exactly?

It just boggles the mind. The last attempt of introducing a new mode was so badly implemented, I can't help but wonder just how much man-hours went into it.

A boring Friday afternoon? Couple of days? A week tops?  Why on earth didn't it have spawn zones where a next wave is simply dropped into at random.

 

-Human players versus wave one 8 vs 8

-Wave one its ships can spawn in x zones distributed around the players zone.

-If wave one gets destroyed up to a certain percentage, spawn wave 2

-There, done. No predictable approaches from Bots. Pretty hardcore.

-Icing on the cake: Implement an option to not have to play this mode if it's too difficult for your taste like Assault in WoT.

 

Rewards: Nothing needs to change. Fact that there's double the amount of bot HP to go around should already yield higher reward enough.

 

*Headache*

[IanH755]

Now there's a "flat fee" for playing a battle, and therefore it doesn't matter so much to the money if you die, how about a "last man standing" mode where the bots just keep coming wave after wave (2-3 new Bots spawn every minute) until all the humans are dead or 20mins is up. Imagine how many ship kills you could rack up, how much credits you could earn after waves of Bots have been killed.

 

Thats just a quick 30 second thought with zero "indepth" thinking done. Imagine what would happen with a whole team to come up with ideas!!!!!!

 

 

[Smeggo]

Then everyone would just play BBs there. Like in PvP.

[Admiral_H_Nelson]

Now there's a "flat fee" for playing a battle, and therefore it doesn't matter so much to the money if you die, how about a "last man standing" mode where the bots just keep coming wave after wave (2-3 new Bots spawn every minute) until all the humans are dead or 20mins is up. Imagine how many ship kills you could rack up, how much credits you could earn after waves of Bots have been killed.

 

Thats just a quick 30 second thought with zero "indepth" thinking done. Imagine what would happen with a whole team to come up with ideas!!!!!!

 

 

 

It would be a naval equivalent of the scene from the film "Zulu" where the Zulus attack relentlessly.  Respect to the Zulus! Extremely brave and great warriors. Remember that in real life, just before this battle the Zulus had won an overwhelming victory against British forces at the Battle of Isandlwana.

 

[SerPurr]

how about a "last man standing" mode where the bots just keep coming wave after wave

Thats just a quick 30 second thought with zero "indepth" thinking done. Imagine what would happen with a whole team to come up with ideas!!!!!!

 

 

 

Yes excellent idea! (seriously) Why not indeed? Reasons. Serious reasons. Reasons that must prevent anything from happening.

Reasons that might give the oblivious player the impression zero f***s are given but that can't be it cause they are singing a different song.

 

Then everyone would just play BBs there. Like in PvP.

 

PvE is quite saturated with BB's already. Up to Tier V it's more or less a throw of the dice but higher and you will start to see the obligatory Tirpz, Scharns and US BB's by the masses.

Can't blame anyone for preferring BB's since Bots prioritize in DD/CA/BB (last) order and are exceptional long range shots at higher tiers. Playing my beloved Pepsi, Indi, Atlanta or Molotov is only for days when I feel I'm in need of some extra pain. German CA's are great cause you're basically just a fat DD with potent AP (bots don't angle and always go bow on towards you so it's very easy to approach BB's on yolo runs and just torp the crap out of them with the 90s reload torps with excellent angles on the German CA line.)  

 

 

[havaduck]

You also notice these percentages get higher and higher? It's just funny. 30 to 40% plays PvE exclusively. How can that even be? Sounds a bit far fetched to me.

 

Nono I think there is a misunderstanding. I read that not 40 % of the players are exclusive, but 40 % of the games are played in co-op. I mean look at me, I play both worlds ...... so in WGs eyes I would count for neither since I am not exclusive player.

 

 

 

I really would like to know what WG Vision for PVE not just co-op, is.

[SerPurr]

 

Nono I think there is a misunderstanding. I read that not 40 % of the players are exclusive, but 40 % of the games are played in co-op. I mean look at me, I play both worlds ...... so in WGs eyes I would count for neither since I am not exclusive player.

 

 

 

I really would like to know what WG Vision for PVE not just co-op, is.

 

Ah right. That makes a bit more sense. Though wasn't there a official comment on PvE/Co-op taking a 30% exclusive share too? 30%, 40%...still pretty big percentages either way 

 

[mtm78]

40% liking to play against the AI instead of people sounds about right considering the display of tactical concepts even in random PvP games

 

[SerPurr]

40% liking to play against the AI instead of people sounds about right considering the display of tactical concepts even in random PvP games

 

Oo but you have to try it to believe it. Just humor yourself and jump in something tanky for a couple of Tier VIII PvE games and you'll gain a whole new perspective on the sheer amounts of stupidity a single game can envelop!