Not very happy with COOP BXP sometimes

[SunkCostFallacy]

I just played a COOP game and here are the results:

 

Now don't get me wrong ... the amount of damage that I did and the kills I got are NOT why I think I really should have gotten more BXP.

No ... it's the fact that I tanked over a million potential damage

Yes ... I was in my Salem and yes, it has great heals ... but I still had a heal left at the end of the game so you can't put it down to just that

 

I rarely complain about the BXP in COOP ... but I worked pretty hard to stay alive with a lot of bots throwing a lot of nastiness at me, and I think WG's math could use a bit of adjustment.

 

Just sayin'

 

[majmac]

From the survey done after the first iteration of the Public Test, I think that they may be looking at changing the way they score when you are the first to sight an opposition ship. I think they are going to increase the calculations for that.

[Zaydin]

That's on purpose. WG wants players in PvP, not co-op.

[SunkCostFallacy]

3 hours ago, majmac said:

From the survey done after the first iteration of the Public Test, I think that they may be looking at changing the way they score when you are the first to sight an opposition ship. I think they are going to increase the calculations for that.

That will be interesting. My initial reaction is that it will encourage more CVs into a match ... which might not be universally popular.

2 hours ago, Zaydin said:

That's on purpose. WG wants players in PvP, not co-op.

Yes ... very true. And yet they run wall to wall events which push people into COOP which is kind of ironic.

 

Ah well ... it is what it is.

 

[Grantwhy]

Base XP per co-op game is low, but:

 

we get a win rate of about 99% and games tend to be quick.

 

If WG was to increase the rewards from co-op they would have to increase game time/decrease the win rate to balance the game mode vs other game modes.

[Efros]

BXP has decreased in the last year, high scoring games are not as common as they were and the BXP reported usually falls short of what I expect. Some things seem to affect BXP a lot, most noticeably plane kills which is really inappropriate as that is pretty much out of the hands of the player.

[SunkCostFallacy]

25 minutes ago, Grantwhy said:

Base XP per co-op game is low, but:

 

we get a win rate of about 99% and games tend to be quick.

 

If WG was to increase the rewards from co-op they would have to increase game time/decrease the win rate to balance the game mode vs other game modes.

I acknowledge all of that ...

But I submit that getting more than a million Potential Damage and surviving isn't that common in a cruiser ... certainly not a cruiser with 42700 hit points ... so it's not unreasonable to look at those results and think "I earned more than that in that match".

Mind you ... I don't think WG will ever change it ... hence thread to vent mildly. :D

[SunkCostFallacy]

1 hour ago, Efros said:

BXP has decreased in the last year, high scoring games are not as common as they were and the BXP reported usually falls short of what I expect. Some things seem to affect BXP a lot, most noticeably plane kills which is really inappropriate as that is pretty much out of the hands of the player.

Sorry Efros, I missed your post ... hence the late response.

I agree that BXP has decreased in the past year. So much so that it can't be an "unintended side effect" of some change they made.

The irony is that even doing that hasn't reduced the popularity of COOP.

 

[Wolfswetpaws]

2 hours ago, SunkCostFallacy said:

The irony is that even doing that hasn't reduced the popularity of COOP.

👍

[Taylor3006]

3 hours ago, SunkCostFallacy said:

I acknowledge all of that ...

But I submit that getting more than a million Potential Damage and surviving isn't that common in a cruiser ... certainly not a cruiser with 42700 hit points ... so it's not unreasonable to look at those results and think "I earned more than that in that match".

Mind you ... I don't think WG will ever change it ... hence thread to vent mildly. :D

They put no value in potential damage. I had a Domination match in my Atlanta. I spawned mid and as soon as I was spotted by the bots, they fired at me. They kept firing at me the entire match even when I got behind the rest of the team. They got right in the bots faces and blasted them. I was spending all my time maneuvering and getting very few shots back at them. I was about halfway between where I spawned and the cap so I wasn't close to the action at all. The bots at A and C came over to shoot at me. My team got all the kills, I racked up less than 10k damage. I had over 1.5 potential damage, all gunfire, no torps. I scored dead last.  I was not a happy camper. 

[SunkCostFallacy]

8 minutes ago, Taylor3006 said:

They put no value in potential damage. I had a Domination match in my Atlanta. I spawned mid and as soon as I was spotted by the bots, they fired at me. They kept firing at me the entire match even when I got behind the rest of the team. They got right in the bots faces and blasted them. I was spending all my time maneuvering and getting very few shots back at them. I was about halfway between where I spawned and the cap so I wasn't close to the action at all. The bots at A and C came over to shoot at me. My team got all the kills, I racked up less than 10k damage. I had over 1.5 potential damage, all gunfire, no torps. I scored dead last.  I was not a happy camper. 

Ah - that wonderful focus fire mechanism the devs have implemented.

For a while I thought it was because the developers were too lazy to try to implement an AI which is a little less blatantly stupid (because a BB which ignores a DD steaming up and unloading a full rack of torps into it is hardly a smart AI), but then we saw the improved AI in Asymmetrical Battles and I came to the conclusion that the focus fire mechanism is working fully as intended ... catering to the Random players who go to COOP to do their event missions.

It is what it is and I'm still having fun

[Asym]

4 hours ago, SunkCostFallacy said:

Sorry Efros, I missed your post ... hence the late response.

I agree that BXP has decreased in the past year. So much so that it can't be an "unintended side effect" of some change they made.

The irony is that even doing that hasn't reduced the popularity of COOP.

Oh my, it seems to be intentional of so many levels that have been popping up for years...  The concept many allude to is "let them eat cake" in COOP.....   And yet, what they saw in the Asymmetrical Battles fiasco is that PVE modes are extremely popular when there are events.....  Look at how quick our WG host neutered Asym Battles and how they completely destroyed COOP at the release of subs.....  Now, we have 1/2 price Random Operations for events....

It's my opinion they are "rushing" to earn as much as they can BEFORE the game legislation's that are being worked on right now, take effect....  Cause, the party will be over completely if Gambling and Loot Box mechanics are banned from major markets.   So, they are cramming in as much as they can cause........the end is very close.

Their "free lunch" is about to go away.   What will they do then?

[Ensign Cthulhu]

32 minutes ago, Asym said:

Now, we have 1/2 price Random Operations for events....

Context: Operations were INELIGIBLE for combat-related tasks prior to this change. Now you are getting something, and giving at first only a proportion of other modes is quite appropriate given how easy it is to select and farm operations with a full voice-comms division.

32 minutes ago, Asym said:

how they completely destroyed COOP at the release of subs

Red bot subs are food in co-op.

I don't know about you, but I found Asymmetric battles awful. I played a few and that was it. I got tired of it very quickly; it was easier and less stressful to get the same base XP in much the same elapsed time in co-op, and the stress level I felt in Asymmetric was WORSE THAN RANKED. Maybe it was the team-mates I got, but it all boiled down to one thing: I never want to play Asymmetric battles again. 

Edited August 30, 2023 by Ensign Cthulhu

[Asym]

1 hour ago, Ensign Cthulhu said:

Context: Operations were INELIGIBLE for combat-related tasks prior to this change. Now you are getting something, and giving at first only a proportion of other modes is quite appropriate given how easy it is to select and farm operations with a full voice-comms division.

Red bot subs are food in co-op.

I don't know about you, but I found Asymmetric battles awful. I played a few and that was it. I got tired of it very quickly; it was easier and less stressful to get the same base XP in much the same elapsed time in co-op, and the stress level I felt in Asymmetric was WORSE THAN RANKED. Maybe it was the team-mates I got, but it all boiled down to one thing: I never want to play Asymmetric battles again. 

You and I are polar opposites on this....  I get it you "love the game" and all that. 

Let's get a few things straight:  the crew I play operations with, some of those players I've known for decades....    BTW, we farmed in Randoms in Divisions till Randoms became too toxic to continue playing....

Asymmetrical Battles were a serious relief and should have gone further !!!   It was so aggressively popular, Random players stopped playing Random battles and invaded ASB's.  So much so, our host's head almost exploded !  And, in what,  4 days they had to neuter ASB's......t

Like you:  I never want to ever play a PVP mode again,  until our host starts to level the playing field for event tasks & earnings

[Darlith]

3 hours ago, Asym said:

Oh my, it seems to be intentional of so many levels that have been popping up for years...  The concept many allude to is "let them eat cake" in COOP.....   And yet, what they saw in the Asymmetrical Battles fiasco is that PVE modes are extremely popular when there are events.....  Look at how quick our WG host neutered Asym Battles and how they completely destroyed COOP at the release of subs.....  Now, we have 1/2 price Random Operations for events....

It's my opinion they are "rushing" to earn as much as they can BEFORE the game legislation's that are being worked on right now, take effect....  Cause, the party will be over completely if Gambling and Loot Box mechanics are banned from major markets.   So, they are cramming in as much as they can cause........the end is very close.

Their "free lunch" is about to go away.   What will they do then?

Likely they will double down on dockyards and battlepasses. I play a game off and on that makes its money off premium time, premium ships (Massive grind to build the ships so might as well toss $40 at the game for the one you want), and FOMO filled battlepasses. It is older and limited playerbase due to early missteps in development but it limps along anyway. 

[Ensign Cthulhu]

48 minutes ago, Darlith said:

I play a game off and on

Can I ask which one? There's no need for circumspection here; you can even do the forum equivalent of dancing around naked screaming WAR THUNDER all day long if you like.

[SunkCostFallacy]

5 hours ago, Asym said:

Oh my, it seems to be intentional of so many levels that have been popping up for years...  The concept many allude to is "let them eat cake" in COOP.....   And yet, what they saw in the Asymmetrical Battles fiasco is that PVE modes are extremely popular when there are events.....  Look at how quick our WG host neutered Asym Battles and how they completely destroyed COOP at the release of subs.....  Now, we have 1/2 price Random Operations for events....

It's my opinion they are "rushing" to earn as much as they can BEFORE the game legislation's that are being worked on right now, take effect....  Cause, the party will be over completely if Gambling and Loot Box mechanics are banned from major markets.   So, they are cramming in as much as they can cause........the end is very close.

Their "free lunch" is about to go away.   What will they do then?

Always the most thought provoking posts Asym ...

To be honest I can't see that the major markets will ban Loot Boxes. I may well be wrong but I think the, shall we say, 'influence in the background' will prevent that. Not so much from a minor player like WG, but from the much larger players.

I will watch events unfold with interest.

 

4 hours ago, Ensign Cthulhu said:

Red bot subs are food in co-op.

I don't know about you, but I found Asymmetric battles awful. I played a few and that was it. I got tired of it very quickly; it was easier and less stressful to get the same base XP in much the same elapsed time in co-op, and the stress level I felt in Asymmetric was WORSE THAN RANKED. Maybe it was the team-mates I got, but it all boiled down to one thing: I never want to play Asymmetric battles again. 

I can't comment on the part about Ops ... I don't play them for a number of reasons so I've snipped that.

You are correct that Red sub bots are, mostly, a minor irritant in COOP and generally just an XP source. But let's not forget that prior to the introduction of submarines COOP was changed profoundly by the removal of Friendly Fire. I arrived a couple of months before that particular change and even I was shocked at how quickly the torpedo fire went completely indiscriminate as a result. That change, in and of itself, had an enormous impact on WOWS no matter how you look at it.

As for Asymmetric battles ... to each their own. We may be looking at a paradigm difference between our play styles ... every match I enter I do so allowing for the possibility that my team mates may prove to be of zero value and therefore I might find myself having to (try to) kill the entire red team. I can't say that I ever had a match in Asymmetrical Battles that was quite that bad, but I had matches that were close. The thing is ... I greatly enjoyed those matches.

Ironic as it is, given that I posted this thread, I generally don't care how much XP I get from a match. For me the value is in the actual play itself. (Which is why I posted this thread, because I think I earned more reward for that particular match).  I get the sense that, for you, progress is your goal ... earning new ships, leveling up your Captains, etc?

[Darlith]

5 hours ago, Ensign Cthulhu said:

Can I ask which one? There's no need for circumspection here; you can even do the forum equivalent of dancing around naked screaming WAR THUNDER all day long if you like.

Different Gaijin game, Star Conflict. Usual Gaijin crappy economy, but can't think of much in the way of loot boxes and such. The grind to build any ship that isn't a standard tech tree one is painful. And they have possibly the worst ever battlepasses, free rewards every five levels, mostly junk cosmetics, normally have to run two consecutive premium battle passes to get enough parts to get the right to spend forever grinding materials for the newest and shiniest of special ships. Or pay like $30 for the ship with some extras. It has a lot of flaws but I still have a soft spot for it.

Edited August 31, 2023 by Darlith

[SunkCostFallacy]

I try to avoid necro-ing threads ... especially my own, but this one isn't that old that I feel particularly naughty 😄

I've just had another match, and it really confirms what I was saying in my OP:

I did over two hundred thousand damage:

I tanked over 1.4 million potential damage:

And I got 595 BXP:

I'm sorry, but I think that's just wrong.

As always, the disclaimer ... I'm still having fun, so I'll keep playing ... but I've got to wonder if that kind of result isn't putting people off playing altogether.

[Kynami]

Welcome to the reality that is lack of planes shot down, control point flips, defended ribbons, needing to shoot enemy DDs far more than anything else to secure larger XP shares. You can absolutely deal gigantic damage with torpedoes to a pair of very beefy battleships and walk out with less BXP than the guy that half healthed a pair of destroyers and fully sunk a cruiser while dealing a third as much total damage.