Jump to content
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
INU_157

Does premium give you a better teammate as well?

32 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Member
6 posts
1,107 battles

I got 1 premium day from Premium Account Bonus, I was able to earn a lot of exp and credits to unlock Fubuki with in a few hours.

 

But after my premium period expired, match-making goddess suddenly hate me. Every game I play I always end up with a bunch of careless players who care noting about team play or objective play.

 

it's been 2 days and I still can't get a decent match where my teammate care about objective. Maybe I am just suck and can't play with high-tier ships or maybe it was not my day, nevertheless 2/3 times I lost because half of my team didn't care to play objective.

 

SHAME SHAME SHAME.jpg

SHAME SHAME SHAME.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
2,500 posts
1,535 battles

You're actually quite close to the truth.

Wargaming has been using a program called "Forseti" ever since World of Tanks came out of beta.

 

What Forseti does?

Well, it basically records your in-game behaviour and stores the data until you reach a certain number of battles.

Once you've reached that point Forseti starts it's second phase and will continue to match you with players that have a similiar mindset.

 

It's really quite a horrible function, but of course WG would utilise it.

Rumor also has it that buying premium time resets the timer for Forseti, so whenever you buy premium time you get better battles.

Note though that it only resets the moment you buy premium time, it doesn't keep it at zero for however long you run it.

 

Hence I suggest buying short premium packages instead of the long ones even if you can afford them.

Sure, they have a better price, but even if you buy a 1 year long subscription it won't reset Forseti.

 

Anyway, this post will most likely be deleted soon, but never forget Forseti!

 

 Never forget!

Spoiler

 

 

Edited by Retia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
724 posts
2,215 battles

You're actually quite close to the truth.

Wargaming has been using a program called "Forseti" ever since World of Tanks came out of beta.

 

What Forseti does?

Well, it basically records your in-game behaviour and stores the data until you reach a certain number of battles.

Once you've reached that point Forseti starts it's second phase and will continue to match you with players that have a similiar mindset.

 

It's really quite a horrible function, but of course WG would utilise it.

Rumor also has it that buying premium time resets the timer for Forseti, so whenever you buy premium time you get better battles.

Note though that it only resets the moment you buy premium time, it doesn't keep it at zero for however long you run it.

 

Hence I suggest buying short premium packages instead of the long ones even if you can afford them.

Sure, they have a better price, but even if you buy a 1 year long subscription it won't reset Forseti.

 

Anyway, this post will most likely be deleted soon, but never forget Forseti!

 

 Never forget!

Spoiler

 

 

I suddenly had an urge to kill someone... I wonder why

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
1,677 posts

But seriously, you got bad teammates is all. Its not really that common here as there are some who roll losing streaks and start breathing deep breaths after a while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
2,725 posts

8 battles of defeat and draw.

Really, play different tier if you're getting 3 losses coz you're gonna get the very same bad team if continue down that line.

 

Premium account doesn't give you good team or better matchmaking. It just grants you +50% battle exp. & credits every battle.

If you're being suspicious of Illuminati involved and you think that way, why not? :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
129 posts
3,249 battles

It's just a game, play for fun.

Nobody cares about how good or bad another player is.

It is just having a bit of fun, enjoy your game; if you feel annoyed go play something else or do something else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
406 posts
6,287 battles

It's just a game, play for fun.

Nobody cares about how good or bad another player is.

It is just having a bit of fun, enjoy your game; if you feel annoyed go play something else or do something else.

 

I like to Win, I like to have good team mates - I don't mind loosing when both sides played well, but I hate loosing when half of my team Derps and suddenly the enemy have a 2-1 advantage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
129 posts
3,249 battles

 

I like to Win, I like to have good team mates - I don't mind loosing when both sides played well, but I hate loosing when half of my team Derps and suddenly the enemy have a 2-1 advantage.

 

That's the game unfortunately.

Unlike other games, the individual is far less likely to be able to overly influence the battle outcome. The game seems designed this way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
406 posts
6,287 battles

 

That's the game unfortunately.

Unlike other games, the individual is far less likely to be able to overly influence the battle outcome. The game seems designed this way.

 

Well - that is the case in any multiplayer game - however my experience in other Multiplayer games is that with one good squad in a team can turn the tide of a match. I don't mind loosing when I play well, the team plays well, but the enemy just played better - it does get irritating when you play well, but your team doesn't and you end up getting steam rolled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
129 posts
3,249 battles

I know you don't like it, most don't.

Competitive people don't like losing at all.

However, some games the individual can have some scope to be able to "carry" a game to victory.

WG seem to find this unpalatable.

WoT, for instance, produces "carries" by very good players occasionally. 

WoWS, seems designed to further reduce the occurrence of this.

The idea is to promote team play.

The team being a whole range of people from different socio-economic backgrounds spread across the region, playing at home and playing in netcafe's. Those same people having differing views based on their culture and upbringing.

In short, it doesn't work very well, especially with a region as diverse as this one is.

Imagine try to herd a flock of cats and you get my picture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
406 posts
6,287 battles

I know you don't like it, most don't.

Competitive people don't like losing at all.

However, some games the individual can have some scope to be able to "carry" a game to victory.

WG seem to find this unpalatable.

WoT, for instance, produces "carries" by very good players occasionally. 

WoWS, seems designed to further reduce the occurrence of this.

The idea is to promote team play.

The team being a whole range of people from different socio-economic backgrounds spread across the region, playing at home and playing in netcafe's. Those same people having differing views based on their culture and upbringing.

In short, it doesn't work very well, especially with a region as diverse as this one is.

Imagine try to herd a flock of cats and you get my picture.

 

I must respectively disagree:

 

By the nature of the Gameplay - any Ship based combat system is almost NEVER going to favor the individual:

 

TTK, DPS, Time to engage/disengage - these are all long - this means that once you start a fight, you can't quickly disengage if it goes tits up - the Time-To-Kill (excluding Citadels. Fires and Flooding) for a 1v1 battle between 2 ships can be upwards of 5 minutes, and the DPS is very low.

 

Compare this to a game like CoD - where an individual CAN turn the tide - the TTK is very low, DPS is very high and the time to engage/disengage is very short - this means that a skilled player can Ambush, use the map to their advantage, position themselves so that they can disengage and retreat to safety very quickly, thus increasing their chances of effecting the outcome of a match (not to mention re-spawn)

 

The issue with Team Play ATM (IMHO) is that there isn't enough reward for playing as a team - assume you play a Cleveland and all match you just screen your BBs - keeping them alive, you don't get the same rewards you would if you go YOLOing up the team and sink a couple of ships before dieing in a fiery death.

 

The current reward system encourages selfish play - If you change the reward system to place a much greater emphasis on team and class actions (ie bonuses for DDs that spot and scout targets, Bonuses for CAs that act as fleet escorts, BBs that target ships that other players have marked, CVs that keep DDs spotted etc.) then you will start to notice a change in player actions (well at the higher tiers anyway, as pubs are gonna pub)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
129 posts
3,249 battles

 

I must respectively disagree:

 

By the nature of the Gameplay - any Ship based combat system is almost NEVER going to favor the individual:

 

TTK, DPS, Time to engage/disengage - these are all long - this means that once you start a fight, you can't quickly disengage if it goes tits up - the Time-To-Kill (excluding Citadels. Fires and Flooding) for a 1v1 battle between 2 ships can be upwards of 5 minutes, and the DPS is very low.

 

Compare this to a game like CoD - where an individual CAN turn the tide - the TTK is very low, DPS is very high and the time to engage/disengage is very short - this means that a skilled player can Ambush, use the map to their advantage, position themselves so that they can disengage and retreat to safety very quickly, thus increasing their chances of effecting the outcome of a match (not to mention re-spawn)

 

The issue with Team Play ATM (IMHO) is that there isn't enough reward for playing as a team - assume you play a Cleveland and all match you just screen your BBs - keeping them alive, you don't get the same rewards you would if you go YOLOing up the team and sink a couple of ships before dieing in a fiery death.

 

The current reward system encourages selfish play - If you change the reward system to place a much greater emphasis on team and class actions (ie bonuses for DDs that spot and scout targets, Bonuses for CAs that act as fleet escorts, BBs that target ships that other players have marked, CVs that keep DDs spotted etc.) then you will start to notice a change in player actions (well at the higher tiers anyway, as pubs are gonna pub)

 

I know you don't like it, most don't.

Competitive people don't like losing at all.

However, some games the individual can have some scope to be able to "carry" a game to victory.

WG seem to find this unpalatable.

WoT, for instance, produces "carries" by very good players occasionally. 

WoWS, seems designed to further reduce the occurrence of this.

The idea is to promote team play.

The team being a whole range of people from different socio-economic backgrounds spread across the region, playing at home and playing in netcafe's. Those same people having differing views based on their culture and upbringing.

In short, it doesn't work very well, especially with a region as diverse as this one is.

Imagine try to herd a flock of cats and you get my picture.

 

.So agree or disagree?

The whole point is, yes a team game works best played as a team.

The other 14 people in the game with you, don't know you, probably don't live in the same country as you and probably don't even speak the same language.

They have had a different upbringing than you, so view things differently.

They will not think like you do.

So you have a team of 14 other individuals; all who will do what they want, when they want and sometimes might even do something that you imagine they ought to do.

In this game, designed the way it is, a single person can not hope to be able to turn the tide alone. Some games you can be lucky and steal the win through guile and skill.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Senior Moderator
4,798 posts
1,924 battles

hate to say it this way but YOU are a part of that team.

If you are not adjusting for what your team is doing, but rather, expecting them to adjust to you then.....

(granted you can't cover everything all the time)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
2,150 posts
486 battles

WG can't get normal MM to operate reliably in all cases (had a few recently where enemy had 6 tier 6 and we had 3, for example, and it was a tier 6 battle; GG WG).

 

Yet people seem to think that same MM can operate at a far greater level of complexity.

 

Those two do not add up.

 

If you stop to think for a second how much more work is required to add 'competence' as a MM parameter it becomes immediately apparent why those two statements don't add up, so I can only assume people don't bother to think even for a moment.

 

Which probably explains why these threads pop up over and over and over.

 

 

Edited by Steeltrap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
210 posts
4,306 battles

Well, honestly one person CAN have a big impact on a match, but if that one person gets 6 kills while everyone else hasnt gotten a single one, and half have died, its not looking like a very bright outcome. One person can do a lot, but in a team based game, you need to be able to rely on your team to at least be competent enough to pull their own weight.

 

Hell, even kill stealers have a purpose. While yes, i dont like having my kills stolen, especially when ive done 95% of the damage (thats my kill, whether the kill counter likes it or not!), if one person does massive damage to one ship then decides hes going to start shooting someone else and leave the first one alive, that kill stealer at least does right by removing those guns from the game. Having 1 gun shooting at you is better than having 2 guns shooting at you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
129 posts
3,249 battles

^ Exactly one person can not win a game alone.

But you also can't make the other 14 players in your team do what you think they ought to do.

My original point stands that it is very hard to effectively carry in this game. It's just the nature of the game.

Working as a team is really the only way.

But that doesn't happen.

Do your best, and hope that others also do their best; work with them, if you don't think they'll work with you and good luck.

Edited by _Sabre_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[WOWMY]
Member
166 posts
12,895 battles

Damnit retia...as someone who is new to this game I almost believe that for a second, luckily I clicked the spoiler or I will be forever trolled haha...

 

I strongly agree the team wins the game...After playing some games now...I do realized that communication is somewhat crucial...previously on daily basis game you will realize that most people are less chatty and engaged in the battle in their own mind...mostly by looking at the tide of the battle and sometime response to the minimap clicking...BUT NOW with the introduction of hotkey command...its really helpful to request for support and to reply to someone in need...and also to plan for the next course of action like who should cap who should cover fire and who should do what...kudos I must say with the hotkey function (I replied positively on the survey)...

 

Now most of the team is more engage in the teamplay...say you are at crtitical moment to in need of points and the only way is to seize enemy cap with 1 enemy BB and 1 CA near it and you are a BB with sucky AA but you also has cleveland behind you and a DD that is 50% of its HP...signalling that we are going to "Capture area A" and getting an "Affirmative" response from that DD and Cleveland means that you can go ahead tank the damage and handle that BB and uses the "Concenctrate fire on that BB" while the DD will try to cap and cleveland will cover you from enemy planes and also raining support fire on the enemy will make the chances for that plan higher than just assuming that all 3 will go for the cap but then they just turned away and leave you ending up dying for nothing...

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
406 posts
6,287 battles

 

 

.So agree or disagree?

The whole point is, yes a team game works best played as a team.

The other 14 people in the game with you, don't know you, probably don't live in the same country as you and probably don't even speak the same language.

They have had a different upbringing than you, so view things differently.

They will not think like you do.

So you have a team of 14 other individuals; all who will do what they want, when they want and sometimes might even do something that you imagine they ought to do.

In this game, designed the way it is, a single person can not hope to be able to turn the tide alone. Some games you can be lucky and steal the win through guile and skill.

 

 

 

 

My apologies - I should have clarified - I was refuting this statement:

 

"However, some games the individual can have some scope to be able to "carry" a game to victory.

WG seem to find this unpalatable.

WoT, for instance, produces "carries" by very good players occasionally. 

WoWS, seems designed to further reduce the occurrence of this."

 

The nature of ship based combat means that the game is going to be less reliant on the individual and more reliant on the team, as opposed to a conscious decision by WG to make it that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
2,500 posts
1,535 battles

Damnit retia...as someone who is new to this game I almost believe that for a second, luckily I clicked the spoiler or I will be forever trolled haha...

 

You may choose not to believe in Forseti, but sooner or later Forseti gets us all.

 

gTJY1q2.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
129 posts
3,249 battles

 

My apologies - I should have clarified - I was refuting this statement:

 

"However, some games the individual can have some scope to be able to "carry" a game to victory.

WG seem to find this unpalatable.

WoT, for instance, produces "carries" by very good players occasionally. 

WoWS, seems designed to further reduce the occurrence of this."

 

The nature of ship based combat means that the game is going to be less reliant on the individual and more reliant on the team, as opposed to a conscious decision by WG to make it that way.

 

WoWS is very hard to carry.

WoT is hard too, but you can with skill and luck.

Other games you can with skill.

FPS's are a great example of this. I've seen "team downs" before. A single player taking out the entire enemy team. That virtually never happens in WoT and certainly will almost never happen in WoWS.

So again, team work is the key.

If the other players don't look like they support your move then go and support theirs.

Got to be better than dying alone for nothing.

Sadly most of players seem to do just that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
2,500 posts
1,535 battles

FPS's are a great example of this. I've seen "team downs" before. A single player taking out the entire enemy team. That virtually never happens in WoT and certainly will almost never happen in WoWS.

So again, team work is the key.

 

Hurr durr, in Connection String 1.6 or Unrevealing Competition 2k4 you can solo carry all day every day, go try that in Bottlefold 1942 or Blue Ensemble...

 

Surprise, games can be different.

Not surprising, a single player's actions can still change the flow of battle in favour of their team.

 

Hence if you tell me that a single player can't influence a battle in WoWS, then I'll tell ya, sure... you believe that.

Who am I to try to change your opinion, after all I am a banana, and the only influence I have is over one's potassium intake.

 

b0iIHqH.png

Edited by Retia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×