People not understanding the basics of the game

[Wolfswetpaws]

17 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

27 minutes ago, torino2dc said:

When you exclude the bad players, what you get is matches that are essentially 'over' because one cap flipped and you're never going to recapture it from the overlapping babysitter radars. You get matches where one good battleship salvo decides a damage race in the enemy's favor, and the rest is a formality due to Lanchester's Square Law. You have matches that are decided by the opening DD damage trades, by one poorly timed radar, one ship slightly mispositioned against an island. As the player skill increases, the error margins get thinner and thinner. 

This is true regardless of skill level. It is a fundamental flaw in the game design...and one for which there are plenty of known ways to address it...but WG insists on only using internal ideas.

It's not a "flaw" it's a "feature".  🙂 
I think of it as "tipping the see-saw".
One team gains an advantage and is able to use that advantage to systematically whittle-down the opposing team.
 

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

2 minutes ago, torino2dc said:

Rather than just saying "nuh-uh" it might be helpful to support your position with some examples. 

The thread has some examples already.

Some people want to have a game experience with fellow team mates not doing exceedingly foolish things.

The customer has his own view of the game...and it may not be WGs view. This is not some new or controversial idea.

3 minutes ago, torino2dc said:

Please explain how the margins for error getting thinner with increasing player skill is a fundamental flaw in the game design. 

Also please list some of these ideas that supposedly exist to address it that WG has been ignoring.

There is no mechanism to slow down a team that is winning based on Lanchesters Law except the skill of the losing team.

Go start with the Blue Shell in Mario Kart and educate WG developers on that kind of game design...and then have a think about what might work or be palatable within this game.

Obviously blue shell is too powerful of a thing for this game...but something in that vein might help.

Or, you can just ridicule any idea that isn't from WG internal like WG staff have done for years...and suffer the continuing drain of players.

6 minutes ago, torino2dc said:

Please explain why my experience is not relevant to the discussion at hand.

Your experience is relevant to you, and how you view the game.

Someone who doesn't share your view isn't going to be swayed by your experience.

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

4 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

The option exist for those who crave 'better' gameplay.

If every player were 'good and competent', every match would be a very sweaty affair, it would lead to 'exhaustion' very quickly... many times what you want from the game is just chill and relax after a long, hard day. Tryharding is fun, but sometimes you are not in the mood or disposition, the game understands that.

Indeed.

I'm only trying to help Torino see that other people view the game differently.

Tryhards want random to be more tryhard.

Meme people like me are ok with arcade and skill differences.

The customer is not a monolith.

[Jakeshuffle]

5 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

 

Meme people like me are ok with arcade and skill differences.

 

What does this even mean?

[ArIskandir]

6 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

Tryhards want random to be more tryhard.

Meme people like me are ok with arcade and skill differences.

The customer is not a monolith.

Indeed, what's important is to have options to accomodate everyone... the game kinda does, there are spaces for tryharding (high level CB, Gold Ranked) and spaces for 'fooling around' (anywhere else honestly). The problem is the spaces to 'fool around' are not understood as that and shared with some 'tryhard' folks, conflict of expectations ensues.

11 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

I'm only trying to help Torino see that other people view the game differently.

I'm sure he can 'see' the point. He was telling the old cautionary tale of 'beware what you wish for becoming true' to all the folks wanting a more competitive environment for Randoms.

[torino2dc]

5 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

Tryhards want random to be more tryhard.

Meme people like me are ok with arcade and skill differences.

The whole point of my first post was to say that people think better player base = better experience, but this would not be the case. I definitely don't want the player base to become more tryhard, that would be really stressful. 

[Andrewbassg]

40 minutes ago, torino2dc said:

Folks talk about wanting a more educated player base as if that will make their play experience better. Spoiler alert: it won't. 

 

Oh yeah it would

41 minutes ago, torino2dc said:

When you exclude the bad players,

That's not the issue. The issue is that wows "middle class" is to thin, to sustain a good play experience. And that's Wedgie's fault and his making.

[Ensign Cthulhu]

51 minutes ago, Aethervox said:

Are you referring to co-op play? Not really much to learn there, it's so easy, imho.

No, I wasn't.

I was trying to refer to the fact that everyone comes into this game an ignorant amateur. 

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

1 hour ago, Jakeshuffle said:

What does this even mean?

I view the game as a meme arcade of naval warfare.

It's not a simulation.

It's not a competitive shooter. The ships and game are not balanced with an eye for game equity and competitive performance...but more from an eye to giving the players cool / fun memes to enjoy while playing.

I play the game to enjoy the memes (German BCs full secondary silliness, for example) and the arcade nature of the gameplay (gimmicks galore) can be amusing.

I'm not overly worried about game imbalance because the game has never been balanced and I'm not expecting it to be so.

[Jakeshuffle]

12 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

I view the game as a meme arcade of naval warfare.

It's not a simulation.

It's not a competitive shooter. The ships and game are not balanced with an eye for game equity and competitive performance...but more from an eye to giving the players cool / fun memes to enjoy while playing.

I play the game to enjoy the memes (German BCs full secondary silliness, for example) and the arcade nature of the gameplay (gimmicks galore) can be amusing.

I'm not overly worried about game imbalance because the game has never been balanced and I'm not expecting it to be so.

Ahhh okay I wasn't using both my braincells earlier, now I see your point. I think we share a similar view on the game.

[derf]

2 hours ago, Frostbow said:

In fairness to Wargaming, they launched yesterday a new dedicated section that feature a 'definitive' guide.

https://worldofwarships.com/en/news/general-news/the-definitive-wows-guide/

 

 

 

[thornzero]

1 minute ago, Jakeshuffle said:

Ahhh okay I wasn't using both my braincells earlier, now I see your point. I think we share a similar view on the game.

You have two?

[GandalfTehGray]

1 hour ago, Ensign Cthulhu said:

No, I wasn't.

I was trying to refer to the fact that everyone comes into this game an ignorant amateur. 

Not everyone, I certainly had watched a lot of videos before hand and I never dive into any multiplayer game. 

[Frostbow]

7 minutes ago, derf said:

 

 

Yup. That IS the definitive guide. LOL!

 

[Admiral_Karasu]

31 minutes ago, derf said:

 

 

Lol. WG didn't launch anything. I checked this out yesterday and it's the exact same pages that they called the 'Basics of WoWS'. You can see the direct links on this DevStrike page here.

 

[Aethervox]

37 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

I view the game as a meme arcade of naval warfare.

Agreed. A 'Golden Goose' (twin of WoT) that WG has/is squeezing for every golden egg it can until both of these Geese (WoT & WoWS) expire (just like in the fable). 😒

38 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

It's not a simulation.

Agreed, not even close.

39 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

It's not a competitive shooter.

Not often (the close battles might be).

39 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

because the game has never been balanced

One of Wedgie's 'secrets' (it's in their patent somewhere, I suspect).

[ArIskandir]

35 minutes ago, derf said:

 

 

IMI GA WAKARIMASEN...

[Andrewbassg]

2 hours ago, ArIskandir said:

the game understands that.

 Good one! Or should I say.... Well Done!!?

[Aethervox]

2 minutes ago, Admiral_Karasu said:

it's the exact same pages that they called the 'Basics of WoWS'.

Wedgie 💩 is getting lazier & lazier, isn't it? 😒

[Utt_Bugglier]

38 minutes ago, GandalfTehGray said:

Not everyone, I certainly had watched a lot of videos before hand and I never dive into any multiplayer game. 

Well of course you would: you’re Gandalf The Gray. The Wizard. Mithrandia. Fireworks in the Shire & all that.

A great many folks, though, approach the game at the Hobbit level.

Edited Wednesday at 05:37 PM by Utt_Bugglier

[Admiral_Karasu]

10 minutes ago, Aethervox said:

Wedgie 💩 is getting lazier & lazier, isn't it? 😒

Quite definitively, shall we say.

[Gillhunter]

3 hours ago, Aethervox said:

Are you referring to co-op play? Not really much to learn there, it's so easy, imho.

Nah, he was referring to randoms.

[Aethervox]

It's not just the players not understanding the basics of the game. It's also Wedgie.

I play a T5 - T7 random in EU. What happens? A T5 player shows up divisioned with a T4 player. Ofc, no T4 player on their team. 

We had a KGV who talked chat crap &, ofc, camped the border. This wasn't all. A Scharnhorst on my team decided to be AFK the whole battle.

We got lousy targeting/damage the enemy results (ofc, that had to be coming). You guessed it - a one sided Roflstomp.😒

Edited Wednesday at 06:20 PM by Aethervox

[Ensign Cthulhu]

1 hour ago, GandalfTehGray said:

Not everyone, I certainly had watched a lot of videos before hand and I never dive into any multiplayer game. 

Oh, I watched Jingles for many weeks before installing. But having seen what to do and actually trying to do it when you're brand new to the game did not always work out to be the same thing. (Insert old forums baby pushing toy boat icon here.)

[Aethervox]

7 hours ago, Ferdinand_Max said:

Anyway, by the end there were three players left - me, friendly battleship and enemy battleship. We were leading in points, had three caps to his one.

What I saw was they were leading on points. I saw something else, you played like a coward. You didn't even try to torp when you could have & your team mate was asking you to. You would have lost if it wasn't that your Kongo rammed their Kongo (which he had to do as he was losing the BB vs BB battle). The real mistake was the enemy Kongo allowing itself to get rammed, otherwise, their team would have won.  You did absolutely nothing to assist your Kongo. Your play was not OK, it was abysmal. As a DD (with smoke) you kept firing long range volleys - you deserved the criticism you got from the player on your team.

Edited Wednesday at 06:51 PM by Aethervox