Rollover meta - WG can this be fixed please?

[bigbramble]

The new meta. Games that are over super fast, resulting in pathetic rewards for winners and losers alike.

 

Look at this game. There are still 5 ships left, yet game over. 1 player over 1000 base xp just getting into position ready to farm some damage and then... over.  Game time 8:24 seconds. You spend 3-5 minutes sailing to a location and then the game is over. It is just not fun at all.

 

 

 

WG, please can you look at this problem and investigate a solution? Reducing points per kill on domination or reducing cap points speed? This has been ever since stealth fire nerf hit

[AgarwaenME]

How would reducing the points for or caps reduce the chance for one team to dominate the other?

 

All that would do is award rear campers and make already decided games last a pointless amount of extra time.

[RUSSIANBlAS]

Sometimes you get face rolls, not much you can do as an individual whether you're on either team...

 

Happens in pretty much all team games. Virtual or sport.

 

This one we can't blame on WG.

[bigbramble]

How would reducing the points for or caps reduce the chance for one team to dominate the other?

 

All that would do is award rear campers and make already decided games last a pointless amount of extra time.

 

I admit I am not certain on a solution, the designers at WG will have a much better idea than me but something needs to be done about it. You don't tend to get these issues in WOT's

[eliastion]

No.

 

You see, the objectives need to be meaningful if they are to influence the match. And they NEED to influence the match - otherwise you'd have every match being a boring campfest like can be sometimes seen on Standard (when it doesn't devolve to two lemmingtrains chasing each other around the map that can produce one of the most ridiculous fast game endings possible: where BOTH teams suffered hardly any losses and the match ends. I find it as hilarious as it is rare so I don't mind but that's a really funny one. Hope to one day win by capping with both teams still having all their ships, now that would be a screenshot to save  ).

But, back to the point. Objectives need to be meaningful but the inevitable side effect of that is that if one team screws up completely or isn't interested in the objectives in the first place, you end up with a victory/defeat that happens pretty instantly. That's just inevitable effect of well designed objectives: if you don't play for them, you lose right away. Any changes to prevent that would also prevent objectives from working as they should in battles where both teams care about securing them.

 

So, to sum this up: no, we don't need any changes to how points are accumulated. What we DO need is some economy changes so that fast victories are rewarded appropriately - increase in rewards for fast victories, making winning the game quickly preferable, or at least equal in efficiency, to farming damage for 20 minutes. So that people are HAPPY to have beaten the opposing team so decisively.

[bigbramble]

Sometimes you get face rolls, not much you can do as an individual whether you're on either team...

 

Happens in pretty much all team games. Virtual or sport.

 

This one we can't blame on WG.

 

I'm seeing it in about 80% of games.

[bigbramble]

So, to sum this up: no, we don't need any changes to how points are accumulated. What we DO need is some economy changes so that fast victories are rewarded appropriately - increase in rewards for fast victories, making winning the game quickly preferable, or at least equal in efficiency, to farming damage for 20 minutes. So that people are HAPPY to have beaten the opposing team so decisively.

 

I would completely agree with you but to spend so long getting going in a game to have the fun bit last 5 mins max is pretty annoying. Yes, we do need the economy/xp changes though.

[G01ngToxicCommand0]

The new meta. Games that are over super fast, resulting in pathetic rewards for winners and losers alike.

 

Look at this game. There are still 5 ships left, yet game over. 1 player over 1000 base xp just getting into position ready to farm some damage and then... over.  Game time 8:24 seconds. You spend 3-5 minutes sailing to a location and then the game is over. It is just not fun at all.

 

 

 

WG, please can you look at this problem and investigate a solution? Reducing points per kill on domination or reducing cap points speed? This has been ever since stealth fire nerf hit

 

It is working as intended, I don't like it but that is how Wargaming wants the game to be played: Quantity over quality which is also why they don't have skille based matchmaking in any of their titles.

[eliastion]

 

I'm seeing it in about 80% of games.

 

I'm forced to call BS on this one. Unless for you every match that doesn't end in either total annihilation or timer cutoff to be a case of rollover...

[RUSSIANBlAS]

 

I'm seeing it in about 80% of games.

 

 If you study each game carefully, especially Domination games. You'll see that there are critical points in the game such as contesting caps.

 

If all or at least most of your team doesn't push for caps then you'll lose fast. The face roll only comes after you've already lost anyway. 

 

What I'm saying is every game is competitive up to a certain point. It looks like you're only seeing things once they're a forgone conclusion.

[El2aZeR]

How about this:

 

If the game "ends" before the 10 minute mark is passed the enemy team is encircled and has 10 minutes to break out via the border of the enemy spawn (so basically the winning team has an extra 10 minutes to kill them). During this time all exp and credits income for the winning team is increased by 10%, while for losing players repair costs are cut by 20% if they manage to escape.

 

This may however lead to more camping, but then again you'd need to break through the enemy lines in the first place if you wanna reach their spawn.

[bigbramble]

 

I'm forced to call BS on this one. Unless for you every match that doesn't end in either total annihilation or timer cutoff to be a case of rollover...

 

It's not BS just a guesstimate. 5/6 games roll over this evening.

[shamelesscreature]

How would reducing the points for or caps reduce the chance for one team to dominate the other?

 

All that would do is award rear campers and make already decided games last a pointless amount of extra time.

 

Well in these extremely short games, everyone loses in terms of credits and XP, winning team and losing campers alike. Of course one-sided battles are bound to happen in random, non-skill-based matchmaking, but that's not really what OP was alluding to even though the thread title suggests otherwise. 

[ColonelPete]

That is not new and no meta.

Happened in the past too and results like that are rare.

[Gnomus]

bigbramble, was battle finished because your team got 1000 points, or as I assume, because enemy team drop below 0?

 

Biggest roll overs happen when one team is unable to secure even one cap (so they don't get points) and then sinking of ships is one sided eating away their starting points. Such battles happen, but they are rare. Most of all it is failure of players, not WG. 

[Pivke]

just getting into position ready to farm some damage and then... over.  Game time 8:24 seconds. You spend 3-5 minutes sailing to a location and then the game is over. It is just not fun at all.

its a fail on your part im afraid if you had any contribution to that win, you would be happy about the game and pleased with your performance...

but noooo! you spent all of your time in that match trying to get in position to "farm damage" so dont complain.

should have played for objective... more concerned about damage dealing than winning, shame on you.

not to be rude, but its Edited campers like you that are ruining this game.

[Namolis]

its a fail on your part im afraid if you had any contribution to that win, you would be happy about the game and pleased with your performance...

but noooo! you spent all of your time in that match trying to get in position to "farm damage" so dont complain.

should have played for objective... more concerned about damage dealing than winning, shame on you.

not to be rude, but its cancers campers like you that are ruining this game.

 

Just... no. Playing "correctly" does not always a fun and pleasing game make. Quite often the correct move is the more conservative one (sitting still and guarding the two cap advantage). "Farming" damage (or, as I would call it: actual fighting) is what makes this game fun. It just sucks beyond measure when your team does everything right - captures all three caps and also trades favorably with the enemy - and then the game punish you by "winning" because the enemy lost 5 BBs without killing any of yours.

[Aotearas]

Wargaming can't buff stupid.

Then again I'm not sure if Wargaming were the correct one to handle it if they could ...

 

There's always going to be roflstomps when one team is just a cavalcade of bad players and/or poor decisions (a bit of RNG can also go a long way). Only thing you can do is process what you just witnessed, laugh it up (or suck it up if you were on the recieving end), then queue for the next match and hope there's more of a fight to be had.

[AgarwaenME]

Wargaming can't buff stupid.

Then again I'm not sure if Wargaming were the correct one to handle it if they could ...

 

There's always going to be roflstomps when one team is just a cavalcade of bad players and/or poor decisions (a bit of RNG can also go a long way). Only thing you can do is process what you just witnessed, laugh it up (or suck it up if you were on the recieving end), then queue for the next match and hope there's more of a fight to be had.

 

Random factors (as in, not the server applied RNG) has a pretty large influence on results too. The direction players take before any enemy have been spotted(not even including the pit traps of taking ships to caps that are too far away from the battle) can result in (un)favourable matchups that can put one team at a decisive advantage. On top of this are semi random things like what exact ships are matched together and what sort of map (ie, brawling maps vs open maps) and the spawn position of those ships (which again influences my "where do we go" point).

 

And as you say, some games are just going to be extremely hard to win. But the difference between those who rise above the WR that can just be attributed to overal ship use (ie, doing damage, and avoiding damage) is understanding how to look at an impossible situation and go "ok, how can we win? do I need to be lucky, and where? do I need to suicide my ship to give someone else a chance to cap?". Turning just one game in a hundred is still another full % on your WR. Or conversely, "how can we still throw this game away? can I grab a bit of extra xp/credits WITHOUT risking a loss?" Because just the same, throwing one game in a hundred is a % WR less.

[Skurfa]

 

Just... no. Playing "correctly" does not always a fun and pleasing game make. Quite often the correct move is the more conservative one (sitting still and guarding the two cap advantage). "Farming" damage (or, as I would call it: actual fighting) is what makes this game fun. It just sucks beyond measure when your team does everything right - captures all three caps and also trades favorably with the enemy - and then the game punish you by "winning" because the enemy lost 5 BBs without killing any of yours.

 

Punish you by winning?

[bigbramble]

its a fail on your part im afraid if you had any contribution to that win, you would be happy about the game and pleased with your performance...

but noooo! you spent all of your time in that match trying to get in position to "farm damage" so dont complain.

should have played for objective... more concerned about damage dealing than winning, shame on you.

not to be rude, but its cancers campers like you that are ruining this game.

 

Would you care to take that back please troll? I was in Des Moines, my friends gearing and minotaur. We all pushed a cap together at the start (straight in no camping). Gearing smokes us in, I used radar and destroyed the Shima in the cap. We then pushed the next cap but our Shima already had the 2nd secured before moving to 3rd which we were too far from. We got to shoot at some other ships but the game ended while it felt like we had just started. We pushed the caps hard (yes pushed the objectives) and get punished with under 1000 base xp because we were too good NOT because we were camping. Ironically if we had camped the game may have been closer!

[Ferry_25]

The ROFL stomp meta has begun before the stealthfire change. As I remember it creeped in rather quickly as well. Frankly it's boring the heck out of me. Like I stated elsewhere I've stopped using signals/ prem cons because they don't matter anymore. Either my side is recieving and I'm being pummeled to the bottom, that 10 seconds faster DCP won't save me or I'm on the delevering side and I don't need it anyway. Same goes for signals. Whether I get 500 or 550 XP is not significant for me. (all a bit exaggerated just to make my point). I've been around since the end of open B. And yes the steamrollers have always been here. But overnight-ish they've grown exponentially. What I've done is look at the matches and to be honost I can't give the absolute solution. I do have some proposals though.

 

Tweak the importance of capping.

IMO this game should primary function around shooting each other and outwitting the other side. Now it seems it is mainly about who has the quickest DD to lie in the imaginary circle the first. My suggestion would be to slightly increase the needed captime per tier up. IIRC it's 60 seconds now. Increase that time by 10 seconds per tier from T6+

 

Team balance. I've seen tons of matches where 1 of the side only had very good and the other side very bad players. There must be some way to sort of balance that out? And no I'm not suggesting to kick out the weaker players and make a "royal league" or something like that.

 

Slow starters. Especially DD and CV players who have a longer loading time and wake up in the 3rd minute are a disaster. I'd rather wait some longer so everybody is awake than this.

 

Tier difference. Though I haven't got any problem with being undertiered, there are a lot of people who are. It seems the bottom tier players give up from the start, thinking they won't be of a difference anyway. Either make more clear that damaging higher tier ships is giving better revenue or consider a tolerance of +/- 1 in the lineup. Again I wouldn't mind waiting some longer for that.

 

Make a "teambattle mode" kind of matches for the clans. Often the steamrolls are happening when the more competitive and yes better playing clans are present in div's in matches. I can't stress enough: I'm NOT saying they're rigging the matches when facing each other. I refuse to believe that. And I've seen them shooting each other in those cases like they're the worst enemies ever. I'm only saying give them a platform, other than the training room, to have competitive matches.

 

These are my proposals. I am really looking forward to the new coop missions. Maybe I'll switch to that more often. The PvE as it is now I find it reaaly too simple/ simplistic.

 

 

[Skurfa]

 

Would you care to take that back please troll? I was in Des Moines, my friends gearing and minotaur. We all pushed a cap together at the start (straight in no camping). Gearing smokes us in, I used radar and destroyed the Shima in the cap. We then pushed the next cap but our Shima already had the 2nd secured before moving to 3rd which we were too far from. We got to shoot at some other ships but the game ended while it felt like we had just started. We pushed the caps hard (yes pushed the objectives) and get punished with under 1000 base xp because we were too good NOT because we were camping. Ironically if we had camped the game may have been closer!

 

Punished?? You've won the battle AND you get to start another faster, thereby gaining you more XP over time I believe....

 

What is the problem really?

[rvfharrier]

 

Punished?? You've won the battle AND you get to start another faster, thereby gaining you more XP over time I believe....

 

What is the problem really?

 

Playing solely to win as quickly and convincingly as possible isn't much fun, people want to actually fight too. Three to four minutes of sailing into position only for the game to end after a minute or two of actual combat is pretty unsatisfying for a lot of people, and the XP rewards are simply terrible for those games. Nothing worse than getting one of those landslides as your first win of the day where you finish top of the winning team with barely 1000 XP.

[Skurfa]

 

Playing solely to win as quickly and convincingly as possible isn't much fun, people want to actually fight too. Three to four minutes of sailing into position only for the game to end after a minute or two of actual combat is pretty unsatisfying for a lot of people, and the XP rewards are simply terrible for those games. Nothing worse than getting one of those landslides as your first win of the day where you finish top of the winning team with barely 1000 XP.

 

Though I understand your argument, I'd counter it with the "proper positioning"-card.

 

Go for the middle of the battlefield, then you can always turn towards enemies, and you're more inclined to get the damage you seek. Going off to one side from the beginning may win you the battle, as they did, but may also give no gain damagewise, as they got.

 

Now try going the wrong way in a Colorado