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

WG actively working against a mode it introduced.

23 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[AE]
Member
202 posts
9,515 battles

And the February missions are out, and.....Nothing for coop. Excellent.

I can't remember last reasonable coop mission or campaign set. Current Yamato mission for the other paint gets me another paint job with same stats as current job (So very good for people unwilling to spend the 5k gold on the normal paint job, of no use to those who purchased it. Indeed, a bit rude to offer it given that others paid real money to make their tier X profitable. Without the money spent the Yammi and most other Xs lose money).

Was a time where discussion of "New things on horizon" for coop was being discussed. A LOT of plays simply don't like the random meta (campy/boring etc.).

WG states new MM for coop is more interesting with bot carriers being added. So when I play my carriers in coop, and now when I don't, I will see carriers. Given that randoms see lot less carrier games, and that coop see far more, and that we know a LOAD of people don't like carrier games, all that can be concluded is that the carriers were put in coop to DISSUADE people from playing coop.

All of this is interesting because WG introduced coop to this game.

Seriously, the coop is a fantastic addition to this game, and is a mode that a lot of people play. Many will not play randoms. Ditch coop, or keep insulting the ccop players and you will simply lose players. And that doesn't make sense, because many coop players use premiums. ie they spend money too.

Coop needs some love. These are my suggestions:

1) More campaigns and missions featuring coop.

2) Operations for ALL tiers, seriously, you could use exactly same set up - just change the ships. How hard could it be?

3) Fix coop AI. Its great in some ways, namely in its aggression. No boring camp fests in coop. But it stinks in other ways. Namely it tended to fill unused slots with DDs (Luckily less of this with new MM), and worse, the ridiculous habit of AI ships, especially DDs, ramming each other at start. Often that means available targets shrinks from 8 to 5 in first 2 mins of game.

3) More ships in coop. 10 would be ideal.

4) Get rid of the 1000 point end to battle. All too often you are racing for that last carrier or ship, and bam, end of match.

Come on WG. You provided this mode. Do right by its fans, because honestly, if you start being punitive to the coop players, they are just as likely to walk away rather than switch to randoms.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
7,578 posts
8,005 battles

I am also a fan of co-op, but I disagree strongly with some of the points you have mentioned here:

15 minutes ago, Flemboy said:

WG states new MM for coop is more interesting with bot carriers being added. So when I play my carriers in coop, and now when I don't, I will see carriers. Given that randoms see lot less carrier games, and that coop see far more, and that we know a LOAD of people don't like carrier games, all that can be concluded is that the carriers were put in coop to DISSUADE people from playing coop.

I know a LOAD of people too who played thousands of co-op games experimenting with ships and targets and previously we had no way to test AA setups in coop games, now we have. "DISSAUADE" people from playing co-op? LOL. If you cannot handle a BOT carrier, this is a wrong game for you. Besides, co-op is a place where many players learn and they should learn how to play against carriers too, the basics like turning into or away from torps, avoiding plane detection etc. Did it make playing co-op any harder or easier than before? Absolutely NOT. I don't see any point in this argument. Totally rage induced and lame.

19 minutes ago, Flemboy said:

Ditch coop, or keep insulting the ccop players and you will simply lose players. And that doesn't make sense, because many coop players use premiums. ie they spend money too.

Since when anyone insulted co-op players. @LtDan_IceCream, did anyone insult you for sticking to co-op only? Why would the company that made the game will even try to insult a co-op player. I don't know where you are getting this form.

The suggestions are somewhat nice, but you know things like PvE require time to implement, so we may have to wait and see what comes next. I agree that permanent campaigns should include co-op tasks so that these are doable in coop too. These are permanent campaigns after all, as long as people are putting time into them should have been fine. For AI, I think instead of making them same, a mix would always be nicer. And WG is tweaking bot AI to see what works and what does not. Well they are still SHIT, not denying that.

I guess this is an example of "needs of many outweigh needs of few". You just have to be patient, or change your mindset / expectation about co-op. You are not facing other human players, you cannot expect equal rewards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[AE]
Member
202 posts
9,515 battles

Jeeze lousie, where to start?

I said WG was insulting coop players by making no campaigns or missions. Did not say players were insulting co-opers.

See almost every game in coop with carriers. According to those playing random, see them rarely at high tiers yes?

Rather not see them in almost every game is all. Not raging or lame. My carrier play, and anti carrier play in coop is fine thanks. And more than happy to state that I cannot compete with experienced carrier players in random.

Nice that players can practice their skills in coop, but two things, firstly don't think the majority of coop players are practicing in coop. They probably prefer it. No proof for that, but no proof for practicing their either. Practicing for what though? If carriers are rarely seen in randoms (and I only have other forum posts to go on with that), what are people practicing their AA stuff in coop for?

As far as dissuading, I am sorry, but I have read countless players arguing that carriers should be removed from randoms, and cant remember many saying they were a great addition. So if large numbers feel they would rather not see carriers, and the number of carriers in bot games is significantly more, then it stands to reason that a lot of people may be dissuaded from coop, and return to randoms? Hence the dissuade.

As far as people leaving (not one  of your points, but covering it), I personally know of at least a dozen players who joined at the time I did from tanks, and all but one are gone.

Without exception they hated random. One still plays coops with me. Without exception the reasons they hated randoms were the same reason they decided to move from tanks in the first place. All of them hated the PVP aspect. They considered the fellow players unreliable, untrustworthy, or just plain stupid. Of course, I am more than sure that the other players considered my mates in the same way. Coop in this game is a blessing. It means you don't have to deal with people, other than close friends. WG introduced it, but has done virtually nothing with it in the last year. Operations are nice, but with same tier all time, limited.

That's all I was saying. Not attacking a superb game.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
7,578 posts
8,005 battles

Well if you say so. However the wording on the title of the thread makes it clear that you are quite in a rage induced mood:

WG actively working against a mode it introduced.

You can slap WG all you want, that is fine by me, I am not defending WG by any means. But, I am very regular in forum, reddit and discord and yet, I failed to see these "countless" people raging about co op changes. And needless to say, I am failing to see how "WG is actively working against a mode".

By what? not allowing co-op to complete achievements? I agreed that it would have been nice, but I don't see that as working against coop. They were probably never meant for co-op, who knows. I think we are lucky that WG didn't make co-op like a training room, where you lose nothing, gain nothing. Or, the inclusion of CVs... who told you that you don't see CVs in random? You need to play randoms before making comments on it. I see carriers every 3-4 battles in randoms these days, specially in mid tiers. High tier carrier population is limited by time windows. If you login at proper hours, you will see a lot of them, other times not at all. You can keep your eyes closed, that won't magically vanish them.

Now to answer your questions: You are just one player in coop, like I am. Hence, there is no reason you are more correct than I am about this. I chase bot planes with AA cruisers in co-op. Because I can. And I don't feel like I have to explain "what for". And when I am in coop, I don't really deal with people, it's a race against teammates, I don't want to, by most fav lineup consists of all bots in my team too. I know for a fact that a vast amount of people bring their stock ships to coop first to either unstock them or get a feel about that ships before they dive into randoms. That's practice my friend. because there is no question about preferring a stock ship in random battle or co-op.

If you can make WG change how co-op is right now, that's great, cause I'll keep playing regardless of what they do to coop, most people will be. Players come players go, but I doubt co-op is the reason for that at all. Although the statistics shows an increase in player base size, but that's another story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
392 posts
4 hours ago, Flemboy said:

snip

Cheer up. Think of the lack of PvE missions as a way to encourage you to take a break. Do something else or play another game. The groundhog day mission was nice, but once that was over it's back to Witcher 3 for me. :Smile_Default:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LBAS]
Super Tester
1,290 posts
On 2/4/2018 at 2:26 PM, icy_phoenix said:

Since when anyone insulted co-op players. @LtDan_IceCream, did anyone insult you for sticking to co-op only? Why would the company that made the game will even try to insult a co-op player. I don't know where you are getting this form.

 

Nobody has.

Yet......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
274 posts
23,690 battles

Bot CVs in coop make the mode more profitable cause plane kills earn quite a bit of credits and xp. I don't play much coop but I'd imagine grinding and farming credits in coop is benefited.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SGC]
Member
197 posts
10,285 battles

Co-op would probably be damn fun if WarGaming utilizes the Operations AI for the bots 

Even a Kolberg would be very hard to kill :Smile_teethhappy:

Edited by seiji09

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SGC]
Member
197 posts
10,285 battles
Just now, MatterCore said:

:cap_wander:..............:cap_wander_2:

Referring to "Operation Killer Whale"

Noticed how the Kolberg early in the game shellbeats more skillfully than the average player? XD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LBAS]
Member
4,501 posts
25,682 battles
1 minute ago, seiji09 said:

Referring to "Operation Killer Whale"

Noticed how the Kolberg early in the game shellbeats more skillfully than the average player? XD

~970 battles in Scenarios, its not hard at all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,039 posts
7,503 battles

 

On 2/4/2018 at 6:58 PM, Flemboy said:

And the February missions are out, and.....Nothing for coop. Excellent

I think I remember from one of their videos, they said they created co-op for people to test new ships. The success of co-op surprised them.

I believe a lot of players are frustrated with Random and prefer Scenarios or Co-op. The frustration is driving them, so WG does not need to give them any rewards.

Also, frankly, co-op is too easy to justify rewards. If a mission is “win 4 games”, that takes 4 battles. May take two battles to hit citadels 10 times, sink three ships is achievable in one battle. And the individual battle may take 5 minutes.

When there are now missions or rewards for Random battles with ships T5 and up, I guess that is where WG want to pull people. And you would think WG hopes these people buy flags, premium ships or premium consumables to increase their chances, when they play Random.

People who play low-tier ships in co-op for free cost WG processing power and bandwidth. You cannot really expect those players will see preferential treatment, or rewards for what they do anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,070 posts
3,847 battles
16 hours ago, seiji09 said:

Co-op would probably be damn fun if WarGaming utilizes the Operations AI for the bots 

Even a Kolberg would be very hard to kill :Smile_teethhappy:

Every survey they send I tell them to put the Scenario AI in Co-Op...WHY THEY NO LISTEN?!?!?!??!   :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,498 posts
17 hours ago, BanditSE1977 said:

Every survey they send I tell them to put the Scenario AI in Co-Op...WHY THEY NO LISTEN?!?!?!??!   :D

Possibly because they want new players to have fun & stay with the game, because they can actually sink something & learn the basics,  without getting splattered by people like us :fish_aqua:

Ordrazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,039 posts
7,503 battles
18 hours ago, BanditSE1977 said:

Every survey they send I tell them to put the Scenario AI in Co-Op...WHY THEY NO LISTEN?!?!?!??!   :D

Is there really a noticeable difference?

 

I didn’t play that much co-op recently, but a fair few scenarios. The bots behave in a very similar fashion if you ask me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SGC]
Member
197 posts
10,285 battles
6 hours ago, PeterMoe1963 said:

Is there really a noticeable difference?

 

There is a difference, actually...

For example, scenario bots are more aware when they are being locked on, their gunnery is more accurate and are much more responsive to torp salvos.

You will notice this most on "Defense of Newport Station" (the old one, not the watered-down version currently in-game) and some particular ships in "Killer Whale"

 

"Defense of Newport Station" was watered down not just because of the massive tier difference in the enemy fleet you face late-game, but also because their AI was more responsive.

Whereas in "Killer Whale", the two low tier German cruisers you need to destroy early and late game seem to express the movements of an average/above average player.

I can say this because I "test" their reactions by firing in various manners (salvo/ripple firing/prediction firing), engage in different ranges (long-range, then slowly closing in to brawling range) among other things, and position my ship in different angles to assess how well they can inflict damage.

I know it's highly subjective, but what I noticed, esp. w the low tier bot KM cruisers in Killer Whale is that they actually respond quickly and try to minimize the dmg they take by going bow-in, kite, subtly change their acceleration/course to throw off your aim. Their gunnery is accurate, and they respond well even in CQB. They will evade torps as best they can unless in very close range.

You do get to kill them, of course, but they legitimately try to engage you properly and respond to your actions.

Very, very different from the average low-tier player.

 

The rest of the operations feel to have been dumbed down, unfortunately...

Edited by seiji09

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,070 posts
3,847 battles
6 hours ago, PeterMoe1963 said:

Is there really a noticeable difference?

 

I didn’t play that much co-op recently, but a fair few scenarios. The bots behave in a very similar fashion if you ask me.

In scenarios they do act differently.They are very good at dodging torps and will target damaged ships over healthy ones to finish them off faster.Also a lot less likely to all focus down a DD over everything else and also don't go kamikaze on the nearest ship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,070 posts
3,847 battles
6 hours ago, Ordrazz said:

Possibly because they want new players to have fun & stay with the game, because they can actually sink something & learn the basics,  without getting splattered by people like us :fish_aqua:

Ordrazz

Mmm,good point,maybe they could scale the AI depending on tier,and throw some hard AI in occasionally.Might add this next time I get a survey!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,039 posts
7,503 battles
On 2/9/2018 at 7:03 PM, seiji09 said:

There is a difference, actually...

For example, scenario bots are more aware when they are being locked on, their gunnery is more accurate and are much more responsive to torp salvos.

You will notice this most on "Defense of Newport Station" (the old one, not the watered-down version currently in-game) and some particular ships in "Killer Whale"

Well, the ability to avoid torps in scenarios is quite noticeable. It’s pretty much a technique to make them turn, so they show broadside. Torpedo hits are not easy to score, unless your target is close, at broadside.

For me there is no significant difference noticeable, but I probably don’t play enough co-op to notice the difference.

I am also not too sure if the scenarios are watered down, or if people have just figured them out.

Share this post


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

×