Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
drakon233

serverwide CB deathmatch. or, how to improve CB

20 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[MEGA]
Member
4,560 posts
17,542 battles

 

OI, SUP MATES, missed me?

so for once im actually  not making a troll thread, surprise suprise

 

 

 

sooooo, my clan was recently interviewed about stuff(full version coming out soon, i swear) and two of the questions caught my eye, so i'll put it here for people to discuss cuz im still refining the final versions of these 2 questions and i think with the recent (FFS i was writing this literally as new CB was announced, couldnt you have waited a few hours WG?) CB announcement i think i really ought to put these 2 topics out and get the ball rolling for us to make a petition for changes (dosnt have to be the one i proposed, but generally improvment over the watered down bullshit that's actually somehow worse the last season)

 

14. Your feelings about the first CW season, its format and gameplay ?

MEH, over-hyped event generating salt from every server, it was poorly though out and executed, they removed the player-base of a entire ship class(2017/year of CVs), removed the majority of the player base of Australia/NZ  and other time zones from even having a chance and what should have been THE epic end game content and the  turned out to be a glorified team battle, the clan features are massively underused, under-exploited and underwhelming. The upper limit for extending clan member is bullshit, both in the amount of max members as well as how much oil is needed to get there. Both the clan system and CB at this point in time is a worse train wreck then if you were to shoot a bullet train through another 2 towers (tower W & tower G). and during the season even despite the protests against the format WG refused t budge a inch about their stance. Which is frankly the dumbest thing IMHO they could have done on the first season, the point of having a season is to see feedback from the player-base and see what you can do better, something WG seems to have not done at all

The format could have been better(COUGH*WGWONTLETCVSPLAYLUL2017YEAROFCVS*COUGH)  but with the meta was just as still just as static and campy as high tier gameplay in randoms usually is, we had VOR/EU showmatch prove to us that, yes you can play against the meta by using more clever and diverse maneuvers then “lemmie hug muh smoke generator/islands like my waifu”, but people simply either don’t want to change or cant change because the meta simply rewards this play style too much, I was hopeing that CB would be a game changer for the meta but apart from tip top tier clans even trying out this kind of this and actually succeeding, yeah… no changes there, and that's a damn crying shame, we need modes and incentives that will shake up the meta and encourage actual change  from the ded and dieing path i think WOWS is on, pandering to the "special", "less skilled" and "self entitled" playerbase

15. How would you have organized the first CW season, if you were accordingly commissioned by WG?

First, I’d change the top level clan ranking system by a large margin,

Top tier league (nebula or something along the lines of that) would have 5 slots, and only five, these 5 positions would give very generous rewards to whoever was occupying the slot at the end of the season, with a stash of dragon flags/camo/dubblons/FXP/ oil/or a prem ship, and on top of that when your clan is in this league, every battle you play in CB will come with income multipliers, and every after 5 battles in CB you will get this multiplyer for 3 matches in any other mode, kind of like a grindable premium account with better benefits, like more XP/FXP/capt XP/credits

The way you would be able to make it into nebula league at first is quite simple, the first 5 clans to rank out on typhoon (above 400 victory points) will enter this ranking by default as it’s first come first serve. But it’s defnding that title that hurts. After their ascension to nebula, these clans would solely would be playing against tyhoon I/II clans and not against other nebula clans. The 1-5 ranking of the nebula clans will not be dependent on VPs, but rather amount of victories they have in total (winning amount WA),  each victory will +1 to their nebula ranking and each defeat will -1 from their overall WAs, each starting nebula clan is given 5 WAs, the larger your WA is, the more your nebula ranking will rise,  if a nebula clan drops to 0 WP then they will automatically be removed from nebula league and dropped at typhoon league with 200VP

To compensate for fighting nebula clans as a typhoon clan, defeating a nebula clan would give 50% more VP then beating a regular typhoon clan

in order to actually challenge the position of nebula clan, typhoon clans would first have to be in typhoon I and have 400+victory points, at which point the MM would increase their chances of meeting a nebula clan by 50% and mark them as a “eliminator clan”

 if the typhoon clan loses then their VP would drop by 100 and their “eliminator” status would be removed, so they would need to grind back up to 400+ before challenging nebula clans again, however if the typhoon “eliminator” clan wins against the nebula, MM will call a mandatory match between these 2 clans within 10 minutes, with a forfeiting (through not having 7 members in the CB division) typhoon team losing 300 points and the forfeiting nebula clan losing their position on the nebula ranking  to the “eliminator”

if the battle commences and the typhoon clan loses, they will lose 200 VP, if they win then the nebula clan’s clan ranking will automatically drop to (1 WA below the highest ranking nebula clan behind them) and the lowest ranking nebula clan will be eliminated.

Note how being the higher you are as a nebula clan, the safer you are to challengers, because if you rank top as a nebula clan, then you have 4 clans who would bite the bullet aimed at you, and if you are the lowest and 2nd lowest ranking nebula clan, then your position is extremely un secure and you are essentially the scapegoats for the top 3 clans, the encourages nebula clans to both to bring their A-game to each battle and to grind the hell out in CB to both enjoy the benefits that they bring and to keep their benefits secure.

So just like that the entire server and competitive clans would have something to aim for once they grinded through to the Stalingrad flags, since this server many clans simply stopped playing after getting the flags, allowing pubbies to blunder their way up the ranks and rank high up during the final days of the event  the ranking of these top positions would be designed to be fought fiercely for and would be hopefully be a encouragement for server wide improvement in new tactics and better skills

 

@mods i know you hate me and is biased and all but for the bloody love of WG dont lock this thread if you aint happy with what i said, just censor the words that triggers you and ban me and get on with it cuz i actually want to start a discussion here

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

p.s, fulll version of the MEGA interview(after i pull my head out of my lazy arse and is done with my finals) and from top clans from NA/EU/RU can be found here

https://www.yellowsub.info/interviews-first-clan-battles

Edited by drakon233

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
224
[151ST]
Member
1,008 posts
4,494 battles

Good read...

You addressed every issue my clan had around CB, being the timezone and clan size issues.

Questions I would have to you -

How would MM balance CB queues for those clans running a CV and those not?

Is T10 for CB the right tier choice and why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
590 posts
2,995 battles

@drakon233 I don't hate you, and what you've said makes a butt load of sense - 

SIF competed on one night and one night alone, and even then it was only if we had the numbers. The time zone placement was way out of alignment with Australia / NZ. Sure our perth players were in a good position, but that was only two out of 40 players. 

Saying that, we did well all things considered and at the end we were winning more than we were loosing. 

But I do agree with your statement that the clan battles and clan system is heavily under utilized. So much more could be done with it, whilst i don't overly want to see clan battles go the way of tanks with a map and all that, i would love to see a much greater and improved battle experience, I'm not convinced on the ship tier level at this stage... maybe lower tiers for lower battle leagues moving to tier 10's as your reach the upper levels. 

But certainly something greater needs to be done to improve clan battles.... or maybe cut the cb entirely and get clan wars in to place with something actually useful on the line and provision for all the time zones to play.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MEGA]
Member
4,560 posts
17,542 battles
6 hours ago, S4pp3R said:

Good read...

You addressed every issue my clan had around CB, being the timezone and clan size issues.

Questions I would have to you -

How would MM balance CB queues for those clans running a CV and those not?

Is T10 for CB the right tier choice and why?

humm, perhapes i should have made myself more clear, as it is right now i DO NOT WANT CVS IN CB, the issue with CV isnt how to balance the  MM, but the fact that CVs are poorly implimented into the game and is already a almost assured victory for a team in 12v12 randoms where everyone has less influence, never mind 7v7 where each ship affect the game more then ever

Edited by drakon233

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
224
[151ST]
Member
1,008 posts
4,494 battles
2 hours ago, tc1259 said:

@drakon233 I don't hate you, and what you've said makes a butt load of sense - 

SIF competed on one night and one night alone, and even then it was only if we had the numbers. The time zone placement was way out of alignment with Australia / NZ. Sure our perth players were in a good position, but that was only two out of 40 players. 

Saying that, we did well all things considered and at the end we were winning more than we were loosing. 

But I do agree with your statement that the clan battles and clan system is heavily under utilized. So much more could be done with it, whilst i don't overly want to see clan battles go the way of tanks with a map and all that, i would love to see a much greater and improved battle experience, I'm not convinced on the ship tier level at this stage... maybe lower tiers for lower battle leagues moving to tier 10's as your reach the upper levels. 

But certainly something greater needs to be done to improve clan battles.... or maybe cut the cb entirely and get clan wars in to place with something actually useful on the line and provision for all the time zones to play.  

I honestly just think they approached it in the wrong way.

They seem to have approached it from the perspective of the top 10%, the 'we need end game content'. The issue with this is that something so collaborative needs numbers to function.

If they had approached it as 'we need to include as many players as possible' they would have been starting from a position of strength.

It's far easier to upscale something for the top 10% than to downscale to the remaining 90%.

IMO the best way to approach CB would have been at least a 6 hour window and at T8, keeping leagues as is. With the top league and an extra league above with T10.

CVs should be allowed but only matched against other CV playing clans. CVs would end up distinguishing the top clans but many more clans would end up making the mid-ranks.

I say all this because I know my clan had the skills to go up 1 league but we couldn't play enough to get our teamwork working well enough. Essentially we couldn't get the same people and enough time to get to that level. While individually we have some good - very good players, it's another thing entirely getting the teamwork to mesh. Due to the times, we simply took a casual approach and tried to get everyone involved as opposed to taking it seriously.

Edit: with CVs, I wouldn't want them in but removing an entire ship class from something 'competitive' is an issue - yes they should fix them first but what about the CV mains?

Edited by S4pp3R

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
590 posts
2,995 battles
1 hour ago, S4pp3R said:

I honestly just think they approached it in the wrong way.

They seem to have approached it from the perspective of the top 10%, the 'we need end game content'. The issue with this is that something so collaborative needs numbers to function.

If they had approached it as 'we need to include as many players as possible' they would have been starting from a position of strength.

It's far easier to upscale something for the top 10% than to downscale to the remaining 90%.

IMO the best way to approach CB would have been at least a 6 hour window and at T8, keeping leagues as is. With the top league and an extra league above with T10.

CVs should be allowed but only matched against other CV playing clans. CVs would end up distinguishing the top clans but many more clans would end up making the mid-ranks.

I say all this because I know my clan had the skills to go up 1 league but we couldn't play enough to get our teamwork working well enough. Essentially we couldn't get the same people and enough time to get to that level. While individually we have some good - very good players, it's another thing entirely getting the teamwork to mesh. Due to the times, we simply took a casual approach and tried to get everyone involved as opposed to taking it seriously.

Edit: with CVs, I wouldn't want them in but removing an entire ship class from something 'competitive' is an issue - yes they should fix them first but what about the CV mains?

Fair enough point's - 

And agree completely - there is somewhat balanced ships at T8, a much larger pool of ships so more combinations and more accessible to players - Again better inclusion with the top league being tier 10's. 

Cv's do present a problem, and maybe 8v8 with one cv - problem there is you'll get the situation where the cv's would 100% control the game play..... And whilst that might be historical, I don't think it would be fun. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
224
[151ST]
Member
1,008 posts
4,494 battles
24 minutes ago, tc1259 said:

Fair enough point's - 

And agree completely - there is somewhat balanced ships at T8, a much larger pool of ships so more combinations and more accessible to players - Again better inclusion with the top league being tier 10's. 

Cv's do present a problem, and maybe 8v8 with one cv - problem there is you'll get the situation where the cv's would 100% control the game play..... And whilst that might be historical, I don't think it would be fun. 

 

Totally agree with it not being fun, just trying to think of CV mains.

One hopes they fix many of these issues for next season, if they don't take a policy of inclusion, it's going to backfire further...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MEGA]
Member
4,560 posts
17,542 battles
6 minutes ago, S4pp3R said:

Totally agree with it not being fun, just trying to think of CV mains.

One hopes they fix many of these issues for next season, if they don't take a policy of inclusion, it's going to backfire further...

announcement for next season is already out, literally watered down worse CB then last point, no point in playing apart from farming rewards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
224
[151ST]
Member
1,008 posts
4,494 battles
35 minutes ago, drakon233 said:

announcement for next season is already out, literally watered down worse CB then last point, no point in playing apart from farming rewards

I haven't seen it and couldn't find it on Google, can you link it please?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,329 posts
8,812 battles
2 hours ago, S4pp3R said:

They seem to have approached it from the perspective of the top 10%, the 'we need end game content'. The issue with this is that something so collaborative needs numbers to function.

Yeah I think WG didn't have a concrete vision for what they wanted CB to be.

On one hand they wanted it to be the end-game content that a lot of elite, competitive players were asking for. Hence putting it at tier 10.

On the other hand it seems WG also wanted CB to be something even casual players and clans could participate in. Hence those rental ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
224
[151ST]
Member
1,008 posts
4,494 battles
32 minutes ago, drakon233 said:

Thanks, didn't bother reading 071, my bad.

Right so just a small blurb with no mention of times and new top league...

Seriously hope they don't screw us again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
163 posts
7,901 battles

The idea that you just choose  a ship and play is so under whelming.

Competitive games like the original DOTA mod had better competitive modes, in the late 90's.  And it was a mod back then, not even it's own games.  Looking at competitive games over the last 10 years even, I am sure some ideas could be borrowed or adapted.

A good competitive game has layers, or a game within a game before the game even starts!  Take sailing, look at the tussle that goes on before you get to cross the start line!

The game should start in a lobby.  They could do a points buy system where certain ships cost points and the team has a pool.  Maybe one team could buy two battle ships, but they could be stuck with less ships.  Would allow for uneven team sizes or quantity vs quality.

Pools of ships could change week to week, another allotment or draft method is to allow each team member to get a choice, one player at a time.

The hardest league could be a random draft, which suited generalist who could play any hero , or in this case ship.  They could allow this as an optional mode for a team, maybe if you win you get 1.5x or 2x points. 

Other mechanisms include a timer counting down as each team adjusts their forces against the enemy team.  i.e. they add a second Des Moine  after your team added an extra DD.  This could go on for a minute or so :-)  Various veto options, teams could get veto points in different leagues to stop certain choices or ship choices while under the picking phase.

Some of these are little bit harder to adapt, especially if players need time to quickly spec up a ship with modules and flags. 

Wish they would expand the draft mechanism, its just so basic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
224
[151ST]
Member
1,008 posts
4,494 battles
52 minutes ago, Bitrot said:

The idea that you just choose  a ship and play is so under whelming.

Competitive games like the original DOTA mod had better competitive modes, in the late 90's.  And it was a mod back then, not even it's own games.  Looking at competitive games over the last 10 years even, I am sure some ideas could be borrowed or adapted.

A good competitive game has layers, or a game within a game before the game even starts!  Take sailing, look at the tussle that goes on before you get to cross the start line!

The game should start in a lobby.  They could do a points buy system where certain ships cost points and the team has a pool.  Maybe one team could buy two battle ships, but they could be stuck with less ships.  Would allow for uneven team sizes or quantity vs quality.

Pools of ships could change week to week, another allotment or draft method is to allow each team member to get a choice, one player at a time.

The hardest league could be a random draft, which suited generalist who could play any hero , or in this case ship.  They could allow this as an optional mode for a team, maybe if you win you get 1.5x or 2x points. 

Other mechanisms include a timer counting down as each team adjusts their forces against the enemy team.  i.e. they add a second Des Moine  after your team added an extra DD.  This could go on for a minute or so :-)  Various veto options, teams could get veto points in different leagues to stop certain choices or ship choices while under the picking phase.

Some of these are little bit harder to adapt, especially if players need time to quickly spec up a ship with modules and flags. 

Wish they would expand the draft mechanism, its just so basic.

With respect, I completely disagree. This is not a MOBA.

The current pick system is fine, if anything the issue could be argued to be balance. WG games have a tendency to be very skewed towards one or two optimum setups, in tanks Russian meds/Chinese heavies, in ships it's radar so DM/Moskva.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
163 posts
7,901 battles

It's not just moba though, anything from fps games, strategy games, squad based, battle Royale clones, list goes on that have a much more rich draft/ team pick options and mechanisms.

I just used the moba ones since they are the most popular, and the largest commercial ines, i.e. the USD 20 million + price pools.

It's ok for version 0.1. surely evolve it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HMAS]
Member
78 posts
5,390 battles

Never thought I would say this but.... Outstanding work drakon233.  I believe you have accurately expressed the opinion of the majority of players with regards to the structure of CB.

Great read, couldn't fault it. Let us hope it does not fall on deaf ears. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MEGA]
Member
4,560 posts
17,542 battles

update, MEGA raised to 50 members slot, and now has little incentive to even keep grinding in CWs, apart from the stalingrad flags

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
203
[1NATN]
[1NATN]
Member
385 posts
14,934 battles

This reminds me of my short ST stint.

WG: Please provide feedback.

-provides feedback-

WG: Totally ignores it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×