Unsportsmanship conduct by DDs en-masse in Brawl due to Dockyard mission requirements... :-(

[Admiral_Karasu]

2 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

If You ask me, stupidity. The primary objective is always to win the Match... All the Dockyard, Campaigns or whatever mission are secondary objectives.   

Granted there is an alternate explanation: inadequacy. I'm so bad that winning matches is beyond My reach and worst of all, I don't Even try. What's left for me to feel acomplishment is to Center on the secondary objectives. But this is really applied stupidity so I classify it under the general stupidity.

Understandable, but they don't necessarily prioritize winning. For whatever reason they don't care about winning, either at that moment or in general. Then again, winning isn't a time gated activity whereas the dockyard missions are.

[Asym]

14 minutes ago, SunkCostFallacy said:

I wasn't doing 'thread' ... I was doing "Hey, that reminds me!"

I'm far too sweet and innocent a player to indulge in a horrid game mode called "Brawl". Perish the thought!

I agree which leads me to this:

Please explain to me ⬆️, in Operations what Ops have Caps?  And yet, there it is.....  Our host simply and truthfully is only cutting and pasting these event tasks with little quality control....

26 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

What's WG's fault here?... Having missions to acomplish specific tasks?

They certainly are not at fault for player stupidity

Really?  The concept of quality gameplay went out the window at the cruiser line split;  Update 8.0;  the Skill Tree change; and, revenue via gimmick and the "utility of increasing throughput" became the mantra we experience to this day....

Our host could stop the gimmicky solutions to some of these event tasks (PD tied to effectivity as an example - for those of you that will demand proof....)

Garbage in equals Garbage out....   Now, I have to go die gloriously in Ranked because there is an event "that requires PVE mains to play Ranked or Randoms for an Achievement !"   Or, lose the rewards......  Yeah, I know it's a choice:  but, when in Rome...........I can be Roman...!  

Avē Imperātor, moritūrī tē salūtant !

Edited May 25 by Asym

[ArIskandir]

7 minutes ago, Asym said:

Avē Imperātor, moritūrī tē salūtant !

Vae victis

[Leo_Apollo11]

Hi all,

OK... now I took Kleber... but I didn't suicide...

I first killed DD and then killed the BB... my partner BB was laughing whole game...

 

Leo "Apollo11"

[Wolfswetpaws]

28 minutes ago, Asym said:

Please explain to me ⬆️, in Operations what Ops have Caps?  And yet, there it is.....  Our host simply and truthfully is only cutting and pasting these event tasks with little quality control....

Interesting that you wrote that. ^^^^

https://www.devstrike.net/topic/3967-great-battles-hunt-for-bismarck-progress-topic/?do=findComment&comment=54439

 

[Wolfswetpaws]

23 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

30 minutes ago, Asym said:

Avē Imperātor, moritūrī tē salūtant !

Vae victis

Hi Emperor, congratulations to you !

Woe to the losers

https://translate.yandex.com/?source_lang=la&target_lang=en&text=Avē Imperātor%2C moritūrī tē salūtant ! Vae victis
 

[ArIskandir]

38 minutes ago, Wolfswetpaws said:

Hi Emperor, congratulations to you !

Woe to the losers

https://translate.yandex.com/?source_lang=la&target_lang=en&text=Avē Imperātor%2C moritūrī tē salūtant ! Vae victis
 

Since you are interested, I'll give you alittle more context...

It was the early days of Rome and they were at war with the Gaul tribes living in norther Italy. The Gauls sieged Rome and demanded a ransom paid in gold, at that point Rome was defenseless so the Romans had no choice but to pay the ransom, they gathered their gold and took it to the Gauls to be weighted (the ransom was a specific weight in gold, can't remember the exact quantity). During the weighting process, the Romans argued the scales were "rigged" and they were being cheated... at that moment Brennus, the Gaul chieftain, steps forward and throws his sword on the scale while saying "Vae victis".

In a way it is the original version of the meme:

 

Edited May 25 by ArIskandir

[ArIskandir]

1 hour ago, Admiral_Karasu said:

Understandable, but they don't necessarily prioritize winning. For whatever reason they don't care about winning, either at that moment or in general. Then again, winning isn't a time gated activity whereas the dockyard missions are.

The reason to play a PvP game is the desire to test yourself against other players and best them. No one in their same mind plays PvP with the explicit objective of losing, you'll lose at some point but the whole idea is trying not to... If you play PvP to accomplish something different, you'll be better served playing a PvE environment where you can achive your whatever objective in a more controlled and reliable way (amen of not disrespecting your fellow PvP players). Not realizing the previous is another example of 'applied stupidity'. 

[Admiral_Karasu]

11 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

The reason to play a PvP game is the desire to test yourself against other players and best them. No one in their same mind plays PvP with the explicit objective of losing, you'll lose at some point but the whole idea is trying not to... If you play PvP to accomplish something different, you'll be better served playing a PvE environment where you can achive your whatever objective in a more controlled and reliable way (amen of not disrespecting your fellow PvP players). Not realizing the previous is another example of 'applied stupidity'. 

I admit that PvE would be a better option in general. It's not necessarily the better option for all types of missions, though. As for capping, that's actually sometimes very hard to do in coop.

[ArIskandir]

19 minutes ago, Admiral_Karasu said:

I admit that PvE would be a better option in general. It's not necessarily the better option for all types of missions, though. As for capping, that's actually sometimes very hard to do in coop.

Yeah I know PvE capping depends a lot on the bot comp, but it is probably more reliable than PvP unless you have the required skill and experience (in which case it could be much more efficient). 

Edited May 25 by ArIskandir

[Andrewbassg]

2 hours ago, Aethervox said:

 

How & where can we do this? Sign me up! 😁

but as the saying goes.....

 

 

 

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

2 hours ago, ArIskandir said:

What's WG's fault here?... Having missions to acomplish specific tasks?

They certainly are not at fault for player stupidity

LOL

Establishing missions that conflict with core gameplay and providing substantial rewards to complete those missions isn't WGs fault?

Absurd logic.

Even with the most charitable view, WG is incentivizing subpar play.

2 hours ago, ArIskandir said:

If You ask me, stupidity. The primary objective is always to win the Match... All the Dockyard, Campaigns or whatever mission are secondary objectives.   

Granted there is an alternate explanation: inadequacy. I'm so bad that winning matches is beyond My reach and worst of all, I don't Even try. What's left for me to feel acomplishment is to Center on the secondary objectives. But this is really applied stupidity so I classify it under the general stupidity.

The primary objective is in the eye of the beholder. The idea that it is always to win the match is merely your own objective.

Do not engage in self delusion...for some, 'winning' is making progress on the event to earn the reward.

This isn't stupidity on the part of the playerbase...this is the efficient way to work the grind that WG laid out to pay for the reward.

The only stupidity is to believe that people won't do the grind in an efficient way.

52 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

The reason to play a PvP game is the desire to test yourself against other players and best them. No one in their same mind plays PvP with the explicit objective of losing, you'll lose at some point but the whole idea is trying not to... If you play PvP to accomplish something different, you'll be better served playing a PvE environment where you can achive your whatever objective in a more controlled and reliable way (amen of not disrespecting your fellow PvP players). Not realizing the previous is another example of 'applied stupidity'. 

Again, your opinion is only relevant to yourself.

Making progress on the grind is victory...in the game that the player and WG are conducting.

Not understanding that there are multiple levels to the game is a great example of 'applied self delusion.'

The behaviors at play to speed up the grind are caused by WGs mission design. Stop trying to blame the playerbase for decisions made by WG leadership.

[Ensign Cthulhu]

7 hours ago, Itwastuesday said:

This is why every mission but "win games" is shit.

But wait until you get trapped in a losing streak due to bad team-mates, and then if you are not the sort to go to co-op, you will be saying the same thing about that.

People's bad play is their own responsibility. Yes, I was spamming Ranked for DD caps, but as soon as I got the first one I'd settle down and actually try to win the match (and possibly get even more caps). That also has the side-effect of earning more Commander and Free XP for those missions.

[Aethervox]

9 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

This isn't stupidity on the part of the playerbase..

Unfortunately, yes, it is. A lot of the playerbase is stupid (by any definition or parameter one chooses to use). &, ofc, Wedgie uses this to its advantage.

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

2 minutes ago, Aethervox said:

Unfortunately, yes, it is. A lot of the playerbase is stupid (by any definition or parameter one chooses to use). &, ofc, Wedgie uses this to its advantage.

Indeed.

WG wants the players to be stupid, apparently.

They fall more easily for bad value propositions.

The population of players reflects the result of WGs business strategy.

Almost everything in game has a root cause in WG leadership decisions.

That's why it's absurd to blame the playerbase for just about anything.

All that tells me is either WG staff refuse to take responsibility for their own decisions...or the person making the claim is listening too much to WG staff refusing to take responsibility.

Edited May 25 by Daniel_Allan_Clark

[Aethervox]

1 hour ago, ArIskandir said:

The reason to play a PvP game is the desire to test yourself against other players and best them. No one in their same mind plays PvP with the explicit objective of losing, you'll lose at some point but the whole idea is trying not to...

Exactly. 100% agree.  I am almost entirely a random battle player. 

[SureBridge]

3 hours ago, Leo_Apollo11 said:

Hi all,

If there is no DD in your team - 100% certain they do.

Just use, for example Kleber... CAP and die in 3 minutes... just rinse and repeat...

Of course those of us who used Kleber to clear the current brawls will take exception to this. With Kleber on at least 2 maps (including "Land of fire") you can get both caps before an enemy cruiser can detect you IF you have the speed flag on and hit engine boost at start of game. Then you play the knife fight with torps game that Kleb excels at because the enemy HAS to retake the cap or kill all ships to win. 

Kleber will even cap if there is another DD in play (example against gearing below). since I finished the brawl missions in three days, and spent a good chunk of yesterday picking "stupidest comp" with a clanmate (who had also finished) to see if we could win anyway, I can attest to the large number of not-good brawl players. We even won the game where we played Kitakami / Borgogne  against Schlieffen / Napoli without losing either of our ships (and I used Kitakami's guns "for funsies" - actually doing ~800 damage with them). We Almost won with Yoshino and Louisiana against Petro and Schliefffen (Yoshi's reload was 1-2 seconds too slow to survive Schlieffens dakka secondaries).

If you are trying to get caps AND win games, my recommended DD is Kleber (not Marceau) because the torps arm faster, and I've killed a lot of DM's, Salems and russian cruisers with speed-boosted AP citadels (and many more with fast reloading torp spreads, although Schlieffen and GK are more frequent victims - launch on broadside at 4 km and they can't avoid the torps even if they detect them with Hydro)

Recommended cruiser is San Martin (zombie boat) although I had a lot of success with Jinan, which I originally picked as a "stupid boat" but it kept capping (and winning). I stopped playing it after I out-brawled a Napoli. There are a lot of folks out there who have no idea how to use Napoli. Hindenberg is also a solid (if seldom taken) choice.

Salem is a poor choice since brawls tend to be about alpha strikes, and German secondaries have more damage per second than Salem, as well as armour that shrugs off Salem HE.

2 hours ago, Admiral_Karasu said:

Ah but is it stupidity or utility?

I think that there are just a lot of folks who don't understand how to play DD's, and the French DD's in particular are very difficult to use well (but are BRUTAL once you get the hang of them). That's not "stupid" it's unpracticed. IMO brawls are an excellent way to get practice (and do stupid stuff) to see if it can be added to your toolkit in competitive modes (like CB's). I expect to be using Yueyang in the 4V4 brawls starting next Monday. It was "not good" for the 2v2 because if the other side had a DD my team would generally lose, and for the first couple of days DD's dominated the brawl boards (perhaps folks finishing up the previous dockyard missions). 

[Aethervox]

1 hour ago, ArIskandir said:

If you play PvP to accomplish something different, you'll be better served playing a PvE environment where you can achive your whatever objective in a more controlled and reliable way (amen of not disrespecting your fellow PvP players).

Agreed. 

[ArIskandir]

54 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

Establishing missions that conflict with core gameplay and providing substantial rewards to complete those missions isn't WGs fault?

The missions don't conflict with core gameplay, they present an extra challenge, an additional conditional to be fulfilled for extra rewards. Missions are designed and act as an add-on for the core gameplay... assuming them as THE core gameplay is again a token of player stu****ty: a reflection on their inability to pursue simultaneously two objectives and evidence of stu****ty by deceiving themselves over the nature of a PvP game. 

54 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

Even with the most charitable view, WG is incentivizing subpar play.

So a hammer incentivizes you hammering your own finger?

A rope incentivizes you hanging yourself?

A love rejection incentivize you to kill yourself and/or your ex-partner?

54 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

The primary objective is in the eye of the beholder. The idea that it is always to win the match is merely your own objective.

It is not. By definition a PvP game is defined by competing against other players... you can use a pot to hammer down a nail, it doesn't mean that's the correct use of a pot or what it was made for. 

54 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

This isn't stupidity on the part of the playerbase...this is the efficient way to work the grind that WG laid out to pay for the reward.

No it is stupidity. There are always numerous concurrent secondary objectives like grinding credits, XP and different overlapping missions, single-minded focus on completing  a singular objective while sacrifying the bulk of other concurring objectives is a sign of abject stu****ty.

54 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

Again, your opinion is only relevant to yourself.

That may be, nonetheless it is based on objective facts

54 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

The behaviors at play to speed up the grind are caused by WGs mission design. Stop trying to blame the playerbase for decisions made by WG leadership.

Playerbase stu****ty is to blame because the behavior descrived is not the most efficient way to 'speed up the grind'. It only may look that way through the lens of stu****ty. 

Edited May 25 by ArIskandir

[SureBridge]

16 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

That's why it's absurd to blame the playerbase for just about anything.

I don't understand the "playerbase" comments in this context. I don't play a lot of randoms because the teams are... random. In the current brawl, you can select your entire team (of 2). In the next brawl you can select half your team (2 of 4, 2 of 8 in the game). Even if the other two players are TERRIBLE you still get to control the skill level of half the players on your team.

The whole point of clans is so that you can be more selective about who you play with. TO had 8-12 players sync-dropping brawls in the hopes of getting to shoot each other last night, and many clans will sync drop 12+ players into Randoms and have fun shooting each other. It's why really top tier clans often have win rates that are in the ~52% range not the 60% range, as they are biasing their stats DOWN because in a successful sync-drop you generally have your friends dropped onto the OTHER side, especially if you are dropping in divisions. 

You can also play clan battles.  If you do you are choosing 100% of your side (50% of the players) and once you are in Storm you generally are playing against very good players, so 100% of the players are "good" players. It's one of the reasons that I like playing tournaments, because I'll get to play against players who are MUCH better than I am, and I can pick up tricks and tactics from them that work against me and my team. 

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

2 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

The missions don't conflict with core gameplay, the present an extra challenge, an additional conditional to be fulfilled for estra rewards. Missions are designed and act as an add-on for the core gameplay... assuming them as THE core gameplay is again a token of player stupidity: a reflection on their inability to pursue simultaneously two objectives and evidence of studity by deceiving themselves over the nature of a PvP game. 

So a hammer incentivizes you hammering your own finger?

A rope incentivizes you hanging yourself?

A love rejection incentivize you to kill yourself and/or your ex-partner?

It is not. By definition a PvP game is defined by competing against other players... you can use a pot to hammer down a nail, it doesn't mean that's the correct use of a pot or what it was made for. 

No it is stupidity. There are always numerous concurrent secondary objectives like grinding credits, XP and different overlapping missions, single-minded focus on completing  a singular objective while sacrifying the bulk of other concurring objectives is a sign of abject stupidity.

That may be, nonetheless it is based on objective facts

Playerbase stupidity is to blame because the behavior descrived is not the most efficient way to 'speed up the grind'. It only may look that way through the lens of stupidity. 

Nope.

You can try to define how the players view winning all you want...but you only speak for yourself.

Calling it 'stupidity' is a self delusion.

Given that players skill level, their actions are speeding up the grind.

The fact that it's not the same for you is interesting, but not relevant to them.

Stop blaming the playerbase for things that can be fixed by WG leadership.

Stop letting WG leadership be lazy about game development by letting them claim everything negative is the players fault...as if WG staff were helpless to design things in any better way.

[SeaQuest]

8 hours ago, Leo_Apollo11 said:

Hi all,

 

Unsportsmanship conduct by DDs en-masse in Brawl due to Dockyard mission requirements... 😞

 

I see a lot of DDs lately in the Brawl.

 

Many of them just rush into CAPs and then suicide without even attempting of doing any damage to enemy.

 

When I asked the why are they doing that - the answered that they are only interested in "Dockyard Mission requirement" and nothing else... they don't care about Brawl as such at all... and they don't give a damn about ruining the battle for their unfortunate Brawl "partner"... 😞

 

 

Leo "Apollo11"

There is a simple way to fix this. All missions require you to be on the winning team for the mission requirement to count. This would affect all modes and battle types. 

[SureBridge]

Just now, SeaQuest said:

There is a simple way to fix this. All missions require you to be on the winning team for the mission requirement to count. This would affect all modes and battle types. 

That would IMO be a great way to get newer players to leave the game. I remember being a new player and seeing some of the missions. As a newer player, I could concentrate on the one thing (take a cap for example). Gotta survive to take a cap. I don't need to be able to aim. and I can run into islands with my terrible steering, but I can take a cap. And now I've contributed to my team winning. Maybe taking that cap is the ONLY thing I managed to do in the game, and our team got steamrolled. I'm feeling accomplished, even if we didn't get the "W" so I'll try again.

I remember how hard I needed to work to finish the old "daily missions" "win battles and earn XX BXP". I'm glad that those are now gone!

Other missions like "finish in the top 3" - being in the top of the team winning OR losing is an accomplishment. 

I agree that this is a simple fix, but the unintended consequences may be worse than the thing we are trying to fix. This would fix Yolo DD brawling, but would further exacerbate the problem with retaining (and training) new players. 

[SeaQuest]

2 minutes ago, SureBridge said:

That would IMO be a great way to get newer players to leave the game. I remember being a new player and seeing some of the missions. As a newer player, I could concentrate on the one thing (take a cap for example). Gotta survive to take a cap. I don't need to be able to aim. and I can run into islands with my terrible steering, but I can take a cap. And now I've contributed to my team winning. Maybe taking that cap is the ONLY thing I managed to do in the game, and our team got steamrolled. I'm feeling accomplished, even if we didn't get the "W" so I'll try again.

I remember how hard I needed to work to finish the old "daily missions" "win battles and earn XX BXP". I'm glad that those are now gone!

Other missions like "finish in the top 3" - being in the top of the team winning OR losing is an accomplishment. 

I agree that this is a simple fix, but the unintended consequences may be worse than the thing we are trying to fix. This would fix Yolo DD brawling, but would further exacerbate the problem with retaining (and training) new players. 

Well, most of the missions require you to be playing tier 5 or higher. So maybe this change would also make players want to learn how to win instead of being potatoes. 

[Wolfswetpaws]

1 minute ago, SeaQuest said:

So maybe this change would also make players want to learn how to win instead of being potatoes. 

Shirley, you jest.  😄