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

Conflicting objectives

16 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Member
13 posts

Does anyone else find it strange that WG are running two events with conflicting requirements? 

 

I would like to participate in both the Arpeggio missions and in ranked battles. However, in order to complete the Arpeggio missions I have to play in random battles.

 

Given I have limited time to play, I have to make a choice whether to play random or ranked.

 

I think ranked games should also count towards the Arpeggio missions. Alternatively WG should stagger the events so players can participate in both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
168 posts
5,685 battles

I know what you mean, there's no shortage of missions for those of us who actually have lives.

 

I decided just to focus on the ARP missions for now, haven't even had time to run my spanking new kamikaze cos I still need destroyer kills.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SIF]
Senior Moderator
2,563 posts

There is no conflict here. The missions require you to play in random mode to complete, Ranked Battles is an entirely seperate mode, so should have seperate missions/requirements.

 

It was noted during the last session of RB just how quick players were completing the Project R missions.

 

If you want Rank to be able to complete these missions, then Co-Op also needs to be counted, after all, fair is fair

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
70 posts
4,674 battles

Your first line is the conflict if you have limited time it is a choice between one or the other that is what a conflict is.

There is no conflict here. The missions require you to play in random mode to complete, Ranked Battles is an entirely seperate mode, so should have seperate missions/requirements.
 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
168 posts
5,685 battles

There is no conflict here. The missions require you to play in random mode to complete, Ranked Battles is an entirely seperate mode, so should have seperate missions/requirements.

 

It was noted during the last session of RB just how quick players were completing the Project R missions.

 

If you want Rank to be able to complete these missions, then Co-Op also needs to be counted, after all, fair is fair

 

I disagree.  There is a conflict over how you spend your (limited) available playing time if you cannot do ranked battles and ARP missions in the same game.

Previous missions have been open to both ranked and Random, but not these.

You seem to be suggesting that WG sees ranked, random and coop as distinct groups of players, whereas mostly I suspect they are the same players.

In order to complete the ARP missions comfortably I am choosing to ignore

- ranked battles

- emden co-op mission (not a big deal I guess)

- the tier I missions

 

Maybe it's a good thing that there's a range of missions, but in the past many players have been in the habit of completing everything available.  This is a bit different.

 

[edit]

Project R missions turned out to be quite easy.

 

How many players are queuing up for Ranked Battles now I wonder?

Edited by Thingol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
13 posts

There is no conflict here. The missions require you to play in random mode to complete, Ranked Battles is an entirely seperate mode, so should have seperate missions/requirements.

 

It was noted during the last session of RB just how quick players were completing the Project R missions.

 

If you want Rank to be able to complete these missions, then Co-Op also needs to be counted, after all, fair is fair

 

I think you missed the point. In my opinion the game should be structured so that the average player should be able to participate and complete missions. That is players who actually have lives and cannot devote 10 hours a day to playing a game.

 

If the missions are structured in such a way that the average player cannot participate, it is going to alienate the player base.

 

Would it not make more sense to stagger the events? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
168 posts
5,685 battles

 

I think you missed the point. In my opinion the game should be structured so that the average player should be able to participate and complete missions. That is players who actually have lives and cannot devote 10 hours a day to playing a game.

 

If the missions are structured in such a way that the average player cannot participate, it is going to alienate the player base.

 

Would it not make more sense to stagger the events? 

 

Maybe we're seeing a change of policy, and us average players are only expected to complete some missions, not all of them, so that the hardcore minority always have something to do...

But I do wonder whether this is sucking some life out of the current Ranked Battles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Already in Alpha Testers
300 posts
938 battles

 

I think you missed the point. In my opinion the game should be structured so that the average player should be able to participate and complete missions. That is players who actually have lives and cannot devote 10 hours a day to playing a game.

 

If the missions are structured in such a way that the average player cannot participate, it is going to alienate the player base.

 

Would it not make more sense to stagger the events? 

 

Equally there are players who love playing WoWS who can and will spend many hours per day playing. The game needs to cater to these players as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
683 posts
7,358 battles

I agree. Personally its difficult for me to compete for both ranked battle and ARP mission. Project R was quite ok, as long as I played enough matches I could complete its weekly missions. However for ARP, requirements such as killing 30 destroyers really slowed down my progression. Don't have time to go for rank battle for now (played 3 RB matches, I think I fair above average, but it is a losing streak)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
683 posts
7,358 battles

 

Equally there are players who love playing WoWS who can and will spend many hours per day playing. The game needs to cater to these players as well.

 

But sir, with all due respect, logically thinking most of us players will not have as much time as we want to play WoWs. Students, employers, running own-business... unable to complete ARP mission in RB, will cause some players to turn away from RB, as they are already half way through ARP to get the rewards.

 

I never joined RB in 1st and 2nd season, but I heard rumours that the waiting time for each match is fairly longer than random battles. Why not try to let players to do both ranked battles and ARP mission together to promote more people to join in ranked battle? (Thinking of that, hmmm... players might end up trying to complete ARP instead of focusing on objectives of ranked battles :( )

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
892 posts
7,853 battles

Considering the ARP missions were launched before the 3rd season for ranked started, hopefully they will update "Random Battle only" to "PVP Battles only"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Already in Alpha Testers
300 posts
938 battles

 

But sir, with all due respect, logically thinking most of us players will not have as much time as we want to play WoWs. Students, employers, running own-business... unable to complete ARP mission in RB, will cause some players to turn away from RB, as they are already half way through ARP to get the rewards.

 

I never joined RB in 1st and 2nd season, but I heard rumours that the waiting time for each match is fairly longer than random battles. Why not try to let players to do both ranked battles and ARP mission together to promote more people to join in ranked battle? (Thinking of that, hmmm... players might end up trying to complete ARP instead of focusing on objectives of ranked battles :( )

 

 

 

I don't think anyone has enough time to do the things that they want to do, so it becomes a decision to do the things you most want to do. But my desire to do the things I want to do should not affect anyone else's ability to do the things they want to do. If I am understanding your argument correctly you are saying that given the choice you will do the ARP missions and avoid RB, which means players who want to do RB may be disadvantaged as there will be insufficient numbers queuing for them to get a game. So your choice of doing the ARP missions could adversely affect those who want to do the RB missions. Certainly this a valid argument.

 

However, the argument that a casual gamer who has limited time to devote to the game should be able to complete missions equally as well as a dedicated gamer does not sit well with me. Reward and effort should be proportional.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SIF]
Senior Moderator
2,563 posts

So what I get from all this is, you want to play Rank Battles and get the rewards for that, but you also want the rewards from Randoms (missions etc) due to you not having enough time to play both modes.

 

As I said before, they are two entirely different modes, and should have different mission, requirements and rewards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
682 posts
4,757 battles

Agree with OP ... they suppose to make us be able to compete in both event .... with event like this .. it like they make us to pick one 

and now I feel like to abandon the APR missions

Edited by WindCruiser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
168 posts
5,685 battles

So what I get from all this is, you want to play Rank Battles and get the rewards for that, but you also want the rewards from Randoms (missions etc) due to you not having enough time to play both modes.

 

As I said before, they are two entirely different modes, and should have different mission, requirements and rewards.

 

And you'd stick to that view even if that means RB dies off due to lack of players?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×