What should be future steps of WG?

[Boris_MNE]

Hello guys!

 

I have seen many different feedbacks for all aspects of game in recent time and here is my conclussion: WG STOP EVERYTHING YOU ARE DOING AND SOLVE CURRENT PROBLEMS.

 

BB over population

Promised CV rework

Awful matchmaking

Camping (people do not understand how to play)

AA defences on higher tiers should be rebalanced

Clear differences between classes

Smoke,radar and even special upgrades...

 

And what WG is doing? Exactly oposite.
According to their statistics "IJN DDs are performing good, MM is ok, broken pay to win ships are Ok too,  AAA and CV rework is promised but we get nothing.

 

And what we get?
First, I will say that I have every single premium ship of RN and i really adore  that nation... BUT!

You are going to give BBs concealment, heal, radar... what the heck?

You decided to give Bismarck as gift in event, now we have dozen of BB noobs on tier VIII, IX , X.

Your every premium ship have: "extraodinary AA armament"

Your every CV have sucky drop pattern what you think it is cool. Honestly I think it suck. Give me lower tier planes, I can go over that but you can't give me simple torpedoes in line?

 

Every patch have some kind of nerfs to DDs.

 

Your every patch have some kind of indirect buff to BBs.

 

You say it is fine that T8 CL/CA, CV get in tier X battles. YES it is fine, but it is NOT funny Wargaming, it is NOT funny.

Only time when we get ANY answer from you is when  some topic is burning , dozen of replies with negative feedback and mad people. That is when we  get answers.

Almost to forget, thank you for spoiling daily, EU community.

So, am I only one who feels like this ?
What you think that WG should  do NOW to  make game enjoyable again?

Boris

 

 

[ladautt]

+1

[Zogash85]

What puzzles me the most is that after, what... three years? ... WG still haven't managed to come up with a comprehensive tutorial that takes new players by the hand and shows them step by step how to actually play this game - how to best utilize each class to its full potential, how to make the best use of both ammo types, how to effectively use armor, how to aim properly, how to gauge the right distance to be at, etc.

 

It just feels like they pawn off the responsibility to teach players even the basics of their game to Youtubers like Flamu, iChase, Notser, Aerroon, and heck, even scrubs like Jingles who don't fully understand the mechanics themselves but still try their best to have their viewers learn to improve themselves - with f*ck-all comprehensive ingame assistance from the developers themselves. Hell, the rudimentary Training Room still has to be unlocked using mods! How pathetic is that?!

 

Considering this sad state of affairs for newcomers, it's borderline miraculous that not (even) more people ingame are clueless dead weight!

[WestyII]

Listen to playerbase? 

Not ruin anticipated lines by adding unnecessary fake ships

[Exocet6951]

19 minutes ago, Zogash85 said:

What puzzles me the most is that after, what... three years? ... WG still haven't managed to come up with a comprehensive tutorial that takes new players by the hand and shows them step by step how to actually play this game - how to best utilize each class to its full potential, how to make the best use of both ammo types, how to effectively use armor, how to aim properly, how to gauge the right distance to be at, etc.

 

 

While I agree with the sentiment 100%, I also feel the need to play the devil's advocate by saying that there's a vast amount of variation, making a short comprehensive guide a pipe dream.

You can't have a blanket explanation on how to use DDs when there are massive differences between all of them, or how to use armor when you have intricate details like overmatching limits, all or nothing layouts, traditional dreadnought layouts, different ricochet limits, AP fuzing mechanics...the list goes on.
A random person reading a simple guide saying "Here is a DD, you are made for scouting, capping and using torpedoes" will apply it to his Minsk, get spotted before being in the cap zone and will try using 4km torpedoes in a tier9 battle.
Then he'll read "cruisers are meant to support and screen the fleet with consumables like radar and defensive AA", he'll try using DFAA, notice that BBs are shooting down planes instead of him, then he'll try getting closer to screen the fleet and get nuked back to oblivion for having the overconfidence to push in a cruiser.

Unfortunately, the game is too complex to just have a simple guide.
WG needs to entice people to read in-depth guides.
Have in-game, complex guides with a small quiz at the end that give rewards.

Even if the person just goes on the forum to get the correct answers for an easy reward, he'll at least have to read the answers and memorize them long enough to get it right.

[puxflacet]

whats wrong with matchmaking? you want completely mirrored teams?

[Guillotine]

How to get through the tutorial part.

 

Give CCs that want task to make tutorials for each line, or use the current ones that exists with permission of the maker enbedded to the game.

 

But WG should really look back and take notes what are the issues.

[Fat_Maniac]

19 minutes ago, puxflacet said:

whats wrong with matchmaking? you want completely mirrored teams?

No that's PvE.

 

But T5 is a huge step change, and lots of people struggle to get to grips. Sub_Octavian has admitted in one of his Q&A sessions that T5 MM is challenging, but there are no plans to change it.

[Praxics]

I too am highly critical of the MM.

Because of the start, end and noob bracket it is skewed to disadvantage certain tiers (e.g. T5, T8) while give other tiers a bonus (e.g. T7). Additionally, due to player distribution certain classes get another malus (e.g. CA/L) while other get another bonus (e.g. BB) to their average MM placement.

If that would not be enough the game becomes irritating when a lot of “counter” classes are present: Games with high amount of BBs and DDs are little fun for the very few remaining CA/L for example.

 

But I can also see the problems of giving us +-1MM with better balanced class distribution as well, at least concerning other regions with fewer players: Wait times would increase for certain classes (e.g. BB) and tiers (e.g. T10).

 

In my mind the +-1MM should be no problem at least in the European region. I doubt it is really that detrimental to wait up to 5 mins for a game. Currently my wait times usually never go beyond 30 seconds, I’m mostly matched instantaneously.

 

If WG wants to avoid an increase in queue time all that badly then they probably face a rework of the tier by tier power creep as far as I can tell.

The easiest “improvement” I can think of is abolishing the noob bracket, excluding repair party from the superintendent captain skill and reducing the effect of premium consumable to not give another heal but only reduce the cool down.

Then it would be possible to introduce a gradual increase in healing ability to the cruiser lines without breaking entirely for other tiers. Starting with 1 repair party at T7 and maxing out at 3 repair party at T9.

This would give lower cruisers better survivability while at the same time reducing battleships survivability slightly across the entire spectrum and high tier cruisers (-1 repair party).

 

I would like to see how this would affect the game.

[Zuzia_10]

Boris I will answer your question with a line I did post long time ago just a bit refrazed to accommodate new problems which pop out since.  

     If you would like a change in wg ability to listen the only thing which will make them to do that is IF ONE DAY AGREED BY ALL, SERWER POPULATION WILL BE 0/NULL AND NO ONE PENY/CENT WILL GO TO THEIR COFFERS.

till that happen nothing will change. the problem is in getting all players to do that. how many players of wows are using the forum? fraction only of the total player base. so chances are minimal of that happening. hope that will answer your question. because wg income of above 200 mil per year definetly let them afford not to listen to criticism unless they are boycotted.

 

[Boris_MNE]

4 hours ago, Zuzia_10 said:

Boris I will answer your question with a line I did post long time ago just a bit refrazed to accommodate new problems which pop out since.  

     If you would like a change in wg ability to listen the only thing which will make them to do that is IF ONE DAY AGREED BY ALL, SERWER POPULATION WILL BE 0/NULL AND NO ONE PENY/CENT WILL GO TO THEIR COFFERS.

till that happen nothing will change. the problem is in getting all players to do that. how many players of wows are using the forum? fraction only of the total player base. so chances are minimal of that happening. hope that will answer your question. because wg income of above 200 mil per year definetly let them afford not to listen to criticism unless they are boycotted.

 

 

I still believe in some common sense here.
At least after feedback about smoke , it gave me hope that they CAN listen but only if they are pushed very hard...

[Aragathor]

5 hours ago, Zuzia_10 said:

Boris I will answer your question with a line I did post long time ago just a bit refrazed to accommodate new problems which pop out since.  

     If you would like a change in wg ability to listen the only thing which will make them to do that is IF ONE DAY AGREED BY ALL, SERWER POPULATION WILL BE 0/NULL AND NO ONE PENY/CENT WILL GO TO THEIR COFFERS.

till that happen nothing will change. the problem is in getting all players to do that. how many players of wows are using the forum? fraction only of the total player base. so chances are minimal of that happening. hope that will answer your question. because wg income of above 200 mil per year definetly let them afford not to listen to criticism unless they are boycotted.

 

 

Yeah, the only way to make them listen is to organize a boycott. That's sad but WG has shown that it doesn't really care about its customers if they aren't lighting up torches and grabbing pitchforks.

An event in which a large portion of the playerbase doesn't play might scare them into listening, but I doubt it. A competing game would have an easy job in gatting people to switch the way things are going.

 

Oh and BTW, someone needs to fire Markus Schill and whoever is responsible for shop offers on the EU server. Those people really don't want WG to make money or keep players playing.

[morgoroth]

7 hours ago, Boris_MNE said:

Hello guys!

 

I have seen many different feedbacks for all aspects of game in recent time and here is my conclussion: WG STOP EVERYTHING YOU ARE DOING AND SOLVE CURRENT PROBLEMS.

 

BB over population - for WG numbers are fine, they noticed some increase and will take a look...for another 2 years

Promised CV rework - some say it is already done :D

Awful matchmaking - won't change ever, WoT experience (and I bet WG policy) - sure the +/- 1 MM would be better for game play and balnace...but..WG...

Camping (people do not understand how to play) - nothing to add, at some point it is WG's fault (lack of tutorials, noobies missions)

AA defences on higher tiers should be rebalanced - some say CV rework is already done :D,

Clear differences between classes - we got this already, bbs top of the food chain, the rest food for bbs

Smoke,radar and even special upgrades... - you mean smoke in bbs ;)

 

 

 

 I really like your ideas but...

[Brett50]

I fear even if everyone stopped giving money to WG their response wouldn't be to try and improve the game, it would be to try other means of wringing money out of people via things like 'limited time Imperator Nikolai bundles only 99.99euro' the game is unfortunately run by the finance department, not the development team

[morgoroth]

6 hours ago, puxflacet said:

whats wrong with matchmaking? you want completely mirrored teams?

 

Mostly it is, just go play some t4 and you will get the idea.

[puxflacet]

1 minute ago, morgoroth said:

 

Mostly it is, just go play some t4 and you will get the idea.

what exactly do you mean?

[morgoroth]

2 minutes ago, puxflacet said:

what exactly do you mean?

 

Protective MM for tier 4, they can't be matched against T6, very rarely matched against T5.

 

Srsly go play there, that's where the fun is.

 

Just too clear things up, thx to protective MM, tiers 5 are mostly matched against t7 and T6 against T8... funny as hell

[Aragathor]

7 minutes ago, Brett50 said:

I fear even if everyone stopped giving money to WG their response wouldn't be to try and improve the game, it would be to try other means of wringing money out of people via things like 'limited time Imperator Nikolai bundles only 99.99euro' the game is unfortunately run by the finance department, not the development team

 

No it isn't, if it was, then WGEU would try really hard to get our money. What they do is to make us spend time with the family.

[puxflacet]

30 minutes ago, morgoroth said:

 

Protective MM for tier 4, they can't be matched against T6, very rarely matched against T5.

 

Srsly go play there, that's where the fun is.

 

Just too clear things up, thx to protective MM, tiers 5 are mostly matched against t7 and T6 against T8... funny as hell

 

they have protective matchmaking because tier 2-4 has to cover 20 years of naval development. the difference between each tier is way more drastical there than in high tiers. i remember times when st. louis was meeting fully refitted kongo...at least in this case wg has enough judgment to recognize this issue

[Boris_MNE]

24 minutes ago, puxflacet said:

 

they have protective matchmaking because tier 2-4 has to cover 20 years of naval development. the difference between each tier is way more drastical there than in high tiers. i remember times when st. louis was meeting fully refitted kongo...at least in this case wg has enough judgment to recognize this issue

Tell that to Bayern  who entered in service 1916 and Bismarck who entered in service 1940... whole 24 years of naval development, yet in same battle very often.

 

 

[G01ngToxicCommand0]

Well Wargaming have to stop placing their own bots in PvP and actively remove players with obvious bot stats.

[ApesTogetherStronK]

7 hours ago, Exocet6951 said:

 

While I agree with the sentiment 100%, I also feel the need to play the devil's advocate by saying that there's a vast amount of variation, making a short comprehensive guide a pipe dream.

You can't have a blanket explanation on how to use DDs when there are massive differences between all of them, or how to use armor when you have intricate details like overmatching limits, all or nothing layouts, traditional dreadnought layouts, different ricochet limits, AP fuzing mechanics...the list goes on.
A random person reading a simple guide saying "Here is a DD, you are made for scouting, capping and using torpedoes" will apply it to his Minsk, get spotted before being in the cap zone and will try using 4km torpedoes in a tier9 battle.
Then he'll read "cruisers are meant to support and screen the fleet with consumables like radar and defensive AA", he'll try using DFAA, notice that BBs are shooting down planes instead of him, then he'll try getting closer to screen the fleet and get nuked back to oblivion for having the overconfidence to push in a cruiser.

Unfortunately, the game is too complex to just have a simple guide.
WG needs to entice people to read in-depth guides.
Have in-game, complex guides with a small quiz at the end that give rewards.

Even if the person just goes on the forum to get the correct answers for an easy reward, he'll at least have to read the answers and memorize them long enough to get it right.

 

Thing is, if the game has all these complex issues that require in depth and separate tutorials, which is far from impossible to produce, even recent titles like Steel Division have tutorials that go over each and every class and sub class and can be done within a couple of hours. 

Anyway, if this is the case, and it is, why the flaming buttfudge does WG advertise the game like a browser casual game/facebook game? You can't have complexity yet purposely attract the players who are the most interested in pointing and clicking and ease of use. 

[puxflacet]

38 minutes ago, Boris_MNE said:

Tell that to Bayern  who entered in service 1916 and Bismarck who entered in service 1940... whole 24 years of naval development, yet in same battle very often.

 

 

 

every nation has this gap in bbs because of naval treaties in 1920s and 30s...if youd ask me thats the place where to put paper projects

[Exocet6951]

29 minutes ago, Reaper_JackGBR said:

 

Thing is, if the game has all these complex issues that require in depth and separate tutorials, which is far from impossible to produce, even recent titles like Steel Division have tutorials that go over each and every class and sub class and can be done within a couple of hours. 

Anyway, if this is the case, and it is, why the flaming buttfudge does WG advertise the game like a browser casual game/facebook game? You can't have complexity yet purposely attract the players who are the most interested in pointing and clicking and ease of use. 

 

The answer is in the question. WG are a bunch of flaming buttfudger, making a seeminly casual game but with layers of complexity in order to attract as many people as possible, completely unconscious/uncaring of the rammifications ingame.

[mtm78]

6 minutes ago, Exocet6951 said:

 

The answer is in the question. WG are a bunch of flaming buttfudger, making a seeminly casual game but with layers of complexity in order to attract as many people as possible, completely unconscious/uncaring of the rammifications ingame.

 

I kind of think they DO care about their wallet, and let's be honest if you work at WG these games should be something you 'care' for as they pay your bills. 

 

Let's just hope they are also aware enough of the perception of development so far by at least a small part of their community ( which isn't 100% happy  ).