Game balance...

[Asym]

2 hours ago, Wolfswetpaws said:

Since the introductory Halloween event, I've played Submarines.

I've done some training room testing with @Sailor_Moon regarding "shotgunning".  (To be fair, we came to differing conclusions about it.)

I've done training room testing of Deep Water Torpedoes versus Submarines with another player.  (Results published on the old forum.)

I've viewed Yuro's youtube video.
"Comprehensive Submarine Guide (And Fighting them) in World of Warships" https://youtu.be/CvF_4wga0sg?si=K3tC2skj23JhLTDC

And I've followed the forum posts of @ArIskandir and Ahskance (on the old forums and here) and viewed several of their educational youtube videos.
https://www.youtube.com/@ariskandirr.8606
https://www.youtube.com/@ahskance6321

I've sunk every available ship type while sailing every available ship type.
And I'm not the only player to do so.

I'm saying there are ways to counter CV's and Submarines and you "call **".
I'm pointing out there are educational resources available by people who've walked the walk and done the deeds and are sharing what they've learned.

My goal is to enable people with knowledge and a 'can-do' mindset, so that they can use what they have available to them (right-bleeping-here-&-now, not in some wishful fantasy of someday-land) to learn & improve their gameplay performance.

Man, I love you (in a "broly" way).  And hope that my goal may become a lighthouse of hope that helps people navigate the pixel waters.

Do you know how dangerous the "Can DO ! sir..." was in the Army in the 80's???  Think Abilene Paradox.....  

Fact:  there is no counter to spotting.  None.  Carriers can not deploy CAP's with the specific purpose of shooting down flights that spot everything.  I know you really want to believe that isn't a reality...but, consider why KOTS does-NOT-include Carriers for ONE reason:  Spotting.   By advanced distance Spotting, ONE ship controls the engagement: the Carrier.  Now, refute that.  Because, that is the hard reality.  This game is all about "seeing the enemy before the see you..."

My goal is to not uninstall this game.  I am playing 50% less than a year ago.  

I don't need to improve my game>>>???  To what end?  I am not a paid video gamer and this game simply isn't built for competitions...  Sorry, it just isn't.

I do wish you well in your quest to "be all you can be !"  I'll just have fun being, striving and training hard to be underappreciated.

 

[Verytis]

1 hour ago, Asym said:

Fact:  there is no counter to spotting.  None.  Carriers can not deploy CAP's with the specific purpose of shooting down flights that spot everything.  I know you really want to believe that isn't a reality...but, consider why KOTS does-NOT-include Carriers for ONE reason:  Spotting.   By advanced distance Spotting, ONE ship controls the engagement: the Carrier.  Now, refute that.  Because, that is the hard reality.  This game is all about "seeing the enemy before the see you..."

• Smoke.
• Some ships just don't care about being spotted. Eg. Lighthouse builds.
• Both teams would have a CV
• KOTS rules are there to appease the players and audience, logically grounded or not.
  • I don't watch it because I can play CB and get basically the same thing. Which itself has a very stale meta.

That said, it'd probably be something like Petro spam, like a certain player mentioned regarding CV in CB. Because surface ships themselves have their own set of poorly balanced ships.

[Sailor_Moon]

11 hours ago, Asym said:

No, there is no way to Counter the Carrier's primary weapon.  Terrain can't stop them.

Actually funny story, terrain can be used AGAINST you by the CV player, to mask their planes from incoming AA fire. IIRC, AA fire does not actually pass through islands/mountains and such land formations. so really, it's a double-edged sword that can benefit either party.

[Sailor_Moon]

2 hours ago, Asym said:

Fact:  there is no counter to spotting.  None.  Carriers can not deploy CAP's with the specific purpose of shooting down flights that spot everything.  I know you really want to believe that isn't a reality...but, consider why KOTS does-NOT-include Carriers for ONE reason:  Spotting.   By advanced distance Spotting, ONE ship controls the engagement: the Carrier.  Now, refute that.  Because, that is the hard reality.  This game is all about "seeing the enemy before the see you..."

Well, you're kinda right. Concealment is one of THE most powerful mechanics a surface ship possesses in this game. CVs actually eliminate that due to their immense spotting power. They WILL locate you, no matter where you are, eventually. And quickly, due to their plane speeds. The most powerful advantage a CV has is its spotting ( and that's aside from their NUMEROUS other perks which I have listed before, such as auto-consumables, reduced fire/flooding damage, no detonation, battleship-grade damage potential, etc.) 

[Wolfswetpaws]

2 hours ago, Asym said:

Do you know how dangerous the "Can DO ! sir..." was in the Army in the 80's???  Think Abilene Paradox.....  

Fact:  there is no counter to spotting.  None.  Carriers can not deploy CAP's with the specific purpose of shooting down flights that spot everything.  I know you really want to believe that isn't a reality...but, consider why KOTS does-NOT-include Carriers for ONE reason:  Spotting.   By advanced distance Spotting, ONE ship controls the engagement: the Carrier.  Now, refute that.  Because, that is the hard reality.  This game is all about "seeing the enemy before the see you..."

My goal is to not uninstall this game.  I am playing 50% less than a year ago.  

I don't need to improve my game>>>???  To what end?  I am not a paid video gamer and this game simply isn't built for competitions...  Sorry, it just isn't.

I do wish you well in your quest to "be all you can be !"  I'll just have fun being, striving and training hard to be underappreciated.

 

I don't feel that kots is the epitome of WOWs gameplay. 
I feel that kots players are *not* taking the same risks that a player going into a random battle does.
kots is "kings of training scenarios" as far as I am concerned.
There, I wrote it.  🙂 

As for the Abilene Paradox.  Well, I didn't know about that term, until today.  Though the phenomena is common enough.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/machiavellians-gulling-the-rubes/202007/the-abilene-paradox-why-people-go-along-to-get-along
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abilene_paradox
Thanks for helping me learn a new phrase.

As for the "Can do", I was thinking of the SeaBees.

https://www.military.com/history/7-important-things-know-about-first-us-navy-seabees.html

https://www.usni.org/magazines/naval-history-magazine/2023/october/kiwi-and-seabee-can-do-triumph


 

[Andrewbassg]

On 1/14/2024 at 8:48 PM, SeaQuest said:

WG is partly at fault for letting it happen.

No. It is solely and only Wedgie's fault.

[Andrewbassg]

On 1/14/2024 at 10:22 PM, Pugilistic said:

A direct result of the Playerbase Rework^TM

Exactly. WarGambling doesn't want good players, who question and call out their decisions. Those are hard to please and the first who will leave when the BS hits the fan and gets too much.

[Asym]

1 hour ago, Wolfswetpaws said:

I don't feel that kots is the epitome of WOWs gameplay. 
I feel that kots players are *not* taking the same risks that a player going into a random battle does.
kots is "kings of training scenarios" as far as I am concerned.
There, I wrote it.  🙂 

As for the Abilene Paradox.  Well, I didn't know about that term, until today.  Though the phenomena is common enough.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/machiavellians-gulling-the-rubes/202007/the-abilene-paradox-why-people-go-along-to-get-along
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abilene_paradox
Thanks for helping me learn a new phrase.

As for the "Can do", I was thinking of the SeaBees.

https://www.military.com/history/7-important-things-know-about-first-us-navy-seabees.html

https://www.usni.org/magazines/naval-history-magazine/2023/october/kiwi-and-seabee-can-do-triumph

Ronald Regan actually cause an epidemic of "can do !"  He told the Sec Defense to:  "get out in the field and make me a great Army.  Shoot until you're the best in the world.  Teach until we have cohesive teams and that, will insure what we politicians say we can do....." (paraphrased from several speeches).   So, we did and Can Do was the mantra everyone took.  Can Do to the point it got outright dangerous; because, no one wanted to let the Gipper down....  See where the paradox comes in..... 

We simply said "yes" when, we really should have said No......  

KOTS is billed as the quintessential form of WG gameplay....  CB's are for the kiddies.

DId you watch the Actual Video and could you relate to what Jerry B, Harvey's theories lay out?  I still have my Instructional data package from when I taught the Paradox as an Assistant Professor....  It was required reading at C&GSC just like Team Yankee and Killer Angles....  It's relevant today as it was 30 years ago.  I just conducted a lecture at a hospital a month ago on just how pervasive the paradox is......

[Andrewbassg]

19 hours ago, torino2dc said:

In order to have a productive debate, I think it helps to be rigorous when it comes to our terms. 

That's a good point, however it is also a hard one to fulfill, because "things" are interconnected.

 

19 hours ago, torino2dc said:

'Game Balance' generally refers to the relative powers of units within the game that the players control. The numerical characteristics of these units are fully within the developer's control to tweak as they see fit. These go through a lengthy testing process and are by-and-large decently well balanced (argument for a different time).

 

Well...no. First, EVERYTHING is in the developers hands, except player agency, but even that can be inlfuenced and shaped to a not small degree.  That's a KEY aspect, which any dev worth of its salt will unequivocally understand AND embrace . 

Second, balance also includes  mechanics, imechanics interactions, class interactions game economics and yes even player skill distribution. All of that have their own also different and separate, but also interconnected  ways to influence the outcome, ergo an enjoyable game.  

19 hours ago, torino2dc said:

What this post seems to be talking about is player skill as it is distributed on a match-to-match basis as well as how it aggregates over time within a player base. 

• On a match-to-match basis WG has chosen not to use player skill as a balancing metric, most likely because the Matchmaking code is very creaky and they don't see the upside to investing into changing it. We can go into Skill-Based MM at another time, but in general its advocates vastly underestimate its shortcomings.
• The player base in aggregate has a retention problem which manifests itself in a disappearing 'middle' of the skill curve -- the people who stick around are mostly red with a few purples. This part is worth talking about

And both those problems are of Wedgie's own making. Not skill based MM is not a problem, until a skill disparity and a rift emerges within the playerbase. However when that emerges it has a snowball effect, which is hard to counter, but not impossible. It only takes willingness. Still.... not by SBMM.

As for  negative player retention, that without question can be traced back to Wedgie's  abysmal  non existant understanding of its own game in terms of appeal and its inability to balance the "hardness" factor with playability, also "cheapening" decisions vs maintaining various aspects of THE appeal(s) and also its abysmal PR track record.

19 hours ago, torino2dc said:

The Missing Middle

Yep. Now that's a long one and I will adress it a bit later.

Edited January 16 by Andrewbassg

[Wolfswetpaws]

19 minutes ago, Asym said:

DId you watch the Actual Video and could you relate to what Jerry B, Harvey's theories lay out?  I still have my Instructional data package from when I taught the Paradox as an Assistant Professor....  It was required reading at C&GSC just like Team Yankee and Killer Angles....  It's relevant today as it was 30 years ago.  I just conducted a lecture at a hospital a month ago on just how pervasive the paradox is......

Long ago I learned the lesson of "you can't spend next week's paycheck if you're dead in a ditch this week".
I had plenty of "motivation" instilled in me by the USMC.
I've done some "crazy sugar-honeyed-iced-tea" in my lifetime, including jumping off of a perfectly good bridge and falling about 4 stories into a nice river, on my off-duty time.  🙂  (To be fair, other people were doing so as well, at a recreational park in a place we called "Three Falls" (waterfalls) park in Japan.)

Even so, I learned something while ice-skating, too.  If I didn't fall at least once, then it was because I hadn't pushed myself to my limits.  🙂 

[YouSatInGum]

18 hours ago, torino2dc said:

In order to have a productive debate, I think it helps to be rigorous when it comes to our terms. 

'Game Balance' generally refers to the relative powers of units within the game that the players control. The numerical characteristics of these units are fully within the developer's control to tweak as they see fit. These go through a lengthy testing process and are by-and-large decently well balanced (argument for a different time).

What this post seems to be talking about is player skill as it is distributed on a match-to-match basis as well as how it aggregates over time within a player base. 

• On a match-to-match basis WG has chosen not to use player skill as a balancing metric, most likely because the Matchmaking code is very creaky and they don't see the upside to investing into changing it. We can go into Skill-Based MM at another time, but in general its advocates vastly underestimate its shortcomings.
• The player base in aggregate has a retention problem which manifests itself in a disappearing 'middle' of the skill curve -- the people who stick around are mostly red with a few purples. This part is worth talking about.

----

The Missing Middle

The missing middle phenomenon is understood as a "cursed problem" in game design: if you design a game that rewards long-term mastery, the good-but-not-great middle of the player base tends to drop away. In the grand scheme of things, the WoWS player base is no different than that of e.g. Counterstrike. However, there are several things that WoWS has done to aggravate the problem, including but not limited to:

 

Well thought out post.  Although, the Matchmaker part being underestimated all depends on the sort of SBMM you are talking about.  There are many different flavors of SBMM and some have "light touch" that carry less liabilities such as increased queue times.

 

Let me add this.  Let's say we have decent player (let's call him a 50% player or slightly above average), and he tends to play prime time, but isn't so serious that he often bothers to division.  That could be because he's member of less active clan, or maybe his personal time constraints make it a hassle.  So he's a solo player more often than not.  The issue here is that during prime time hours this player often will have the deck stacked against him.  During these hours, it's more likely that he will run into divisions of good players.  The math says that it's more likely that your average unicum division will be against him rather than for due to less slot being available on the divisioned team.  Even if this player doesn't realize the specific math going on here, people are still good at picking up on when a game doesn't seem fair.

[YouSatInGum]

14 hours ago, Ensign Cthulhu said:

The CCs nuked themselves. A whole bunch of them walked out in a "gesture of solidarity" which to me was pointless and achieved nothing, while Flamu was removed for toxicity (IMO deliberately incited so that he could be sacked as a martyr rather than quit), Yuro for racist remarks and Zoup for opinions he posted outside of his remit as a CC. 

Some of the CCs who chose to stay were harassed, and one of them (tcfreer) was driven to tears on his own stream. That showed the playerbase up in a very bad light, and my sympathy for LWM supporters was seriously diminished from that point on. 

It seems like you are trying to insinuate that WG didn't do anything wrong, but they bear more responsibility than any other party.

 

In Mouse's case, the amount of contempt shown to someone who was basically a volunteer doing doing the work of what should be paid staff work is staggering.  Also, many of the CC's also left over other grievances that had bubbled up at the time that WG has since relented on such as drop rates.

It should also be noted that Yuro and Zoup were separate issues not really related to the CC walkout.  Yuro was at a different time and Zoup had already gone semi-inactive when he got into trouble.

Also, I don't remember any Drama surround tcfreer being a significant issue at any point, much less any connection to Mouse. 

[Aethervox]

13 hours ago, Andrewbassg said:

It is solely and only Wedgie's fault.

Correct

13 hours ago, Andrewbassg said:

WarGambling doesn't want good players, who question and call out their decisions. Those are hard to please and the first who will leave when the BS hits the fan and gets too much.

Correct

11 hours ago, YouSatInGum said:

In Mouse's case, the amount of contempt shown to someone who was basically a volunteer doing doing the work of what should be paid staff work is staggering.

Correct & shows the contempt WG has, imo, towards any independent CCs (LWM & others) who were selflessly supporting WG.

As to the title 'Game Balance' ...

Some games have balance, however, this term, imo, is foreign to WG

 

[3LUE]

I would say that the state of high-tier gampley is both WG's and the playbase's fault.

1. True WG has not added tools for players to learn, but there are places players can go to learn, like YouTube. I would say WG and the players are at fault here.

2: Wg has given players a way to turn off battle chat, which I give WG 75% of the issue here and the players who turn it off 25%. The ability to turn off battle chat in a pvp multyplayer game is just removing a main way to work as a team, but sadly, many players want to play the pvp multyplayer part like a solo game.

3: WG of late seems to not have any love for the long-term players or the better players, which has made many players leave. 100% on WG.

4: Over monetization of the game is driving many good and bad players away. The Battle Pass is a joke. 100% on WG

5: There are way too many hidden aspects of the game in terms of how many things work in the game. 100% on WG

I could go on, but I think I have covered the biggest issues.

Edited January 16 by 3LUE

[Andrewbassg]

On 1/15/2024 at 12:53 PM, torino2dc said:

Nuke all the CCs.

Yep. Also not at least it has still lasting effects. But then again, it is related to Wedgie not wanting an actively driving away good players.

On 1/15/2024 at 12:53 PM, torino2dc said:

The "Asymmetrical" classes.

Oh attention were given alright, just not how one would expected it. The thing is over the top sells and  Wedgie knows that full well.  Very much likely that a balanced implementation never was a/the goal. 

On 1/15/2024 at 12:53 PM, torino2dc said:

Tier 11 ships were a mistake.

Pretty much. Btw that's what I was calling appeal.

On 1/15/2024 at 12:53 PM, torino2dc said:

New Gimmicks all the time. 

Umm... no not really. In the end one has to put in the balance the good and the bad and make a decision based on that, however Wedgie is woefully unequipped and completely unprepared to do so. Basically they bumble around from one fiasco  to another with some lulls inbetween, LMAO. They are hampered by their own laziness  (coz that's what laziness does) and their own narcissistic ego ( coz never admit that they could do wrong)

Lemme give you an example: it was asked to implement some form of class based game modes. i called it Jutland Weekend( for babbies) and Tin Can weekend  (for lolibotes) And what Wedgie does? They showel them in brawls, which runs for a week.And that, ofc,  cull the respective  class from all other modes  Never again, they woved   But..... that's why i called for WEEKEND in the first place  . But no, coz they are just a bunch of lazy, clueless "dudes", they just cozplay as devs. They have zero clue about what they are doing  and sometimes, rarely,  they get lucky . LMAO.....

[Andrewbassg]

On 1/15/2024 at 5:27 PM, Ensign Cthulhu said:

The CCs nuked themselves. A whole bunch of them walked out in a "gesture of solidarity" which to me was pointless and achieved nothing,

That's quite a bit..... incorrect. If that had not happened we wouldn't have  returned operations, as gimped as they are. That was the only thing which moved Wedgie's needle to do something in that direction.

On 1/15/2024 at 5:27 PM, Ensign Cthulhu said:

Some of the CCs who chose to stay were harassed, and one of them (tcfreer) was driven to tears on his own stream. That showed the playerbase up in a very bad light, and my sympathy for LWM supporters was seriously diminished from that point on. 

Oh dear....... howz that even resembles  a justification? Its like saying that because in the US legit nazis exist  (coz they do)  ,the whole US is a nazi country....

Come on, I have expectations from you, that's just plain .....yeah that.

 

 

Edited January 16 by Andrewbassg

[Otago_F111]

On 1/16/2024 at 4:01 AM, Wolfswetpaws said:

My quibble is that there is plenty of counter-play available to use against CV's and Submarines. 
It's merely that too many players aren't learning how to do it.

Sure, the counter for a CV firing torps at you is to dodge.

when a Sub has pinged and the homing torps are on their way, just dodge.

Dont go broadside to a BB aiming at you.

Now tell me the cunning plan when this is all happening at the same time?

that lighthouse is shining out of a place where no light should shine.

 

[Wolfswetpaws]

1 minute ago, Otago_F111 said:

Sure, the counter for a CV firing torps at you is to dodge.

when a Sub has pinged and the homing torps are on their way, just dodge.

Dont go broadside to a BB aiming at you.

Now tell me the cunning plan when this is all happening at the same time?

that lighthouse is shining out of a place where no light should shine.

 

  
 

[USMC2145]

On 1/14/2024 at 1:48 PM, SeaQuest said:

I don't see how WG can even try to balance the game. When an overwhelming amount of the player base in random battles now has no clue what they are doing, and a good amount of those don't care, how can WG balance that? I use a matchmaker monitor, and in almost every match, both sides are full of nothing but yellow and red stat players, even in the high tier. Green, blue, and purple stat players in random battles are getting less and less almost every week. Many good players now refuse to even play randoms; it has gotten so bad unless they need to grind something or are streamers.

WG is partly at fault for letting it happen. When the game has no real consequences for being bad. I can't stand playing more than a couple of matches a day now over blowouts and teams who are just plain lost. If your team is not being overrun, the other team is, and many matches don't even go 10 minutes now. I really do not think balance is the top major issue in the game right now; it is the playerbase. I am sure a bunch of people are going to disagree with me, and that is fine, but it won't change my mind.

Let me put my two cents in here. WG is well aware of the problems in the high tier, and I am sure they are not stupid by any means. I would suspect they are running out of ideas for the game, and as far as the bad gameplay at high tier, the cat is out of the bag on that, and there is no putting it back in. I would also suspect that WG is aware that the game is going to start making less money, and that is why they are doing all the monitization they have been doing over the last year. The game is not going to die totally, but the money-making of the game will slowly fade, as it does in all games. So we either decide to stay or go, but I doubt anything will change.

[Otago_F111]

3 hours ago, Wolfswetpaws said:

  
 

and your famous counter play here is?

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Wolfswetpaws said:

  
 

And you find this all the time. Mid Tier, with all the great historic ships is ruined as a place where one can have fun. Took out Renown a few games, 2 CVs AND 2 subs every game. Why even bother, it's not fun. Shoot down 25 planes..no worries they will just vomit out more.