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

WG let us kill all the bots please

13 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

249
[NZAUS]
Beta Tester
361 posts
8,565 battles

Co-op is well known as a next to no reward option in game but it could be a little better if it did not end till all the bots are dead. If for some reason its a potato night and you end up all alone vs all the bots you have to kill all of them alone. Easy if you are in a decent ship, not so much if you are playing a bottom tier piece of crap and the teammates that died were all in top tier BBs.

When you get a normal-good group its hard to get any reward as the bots die in the first couple minutes and the game ends with more enemy still alive that you need to farm just to break even. I've lost count of how many games i'm in a slow ship and I just get into gun range, eyeing up a couple enemy BBs and the game ends due to points. I'm lucky to get off a couple salvos before it ends. 

NO reward for you !!

If co-op just let you break even, let the bots fight to the death so we could all farm some damage I think more people would play ... that's more profit for WG.   

With the CV disaster (yes, CCs have commented on people telling them they started to play but got to tier 4 and were farmed by CVs, did not enjoy it and left the game), the unmentionable xmas debacle and Random being the least toxic option for earning xp and credits Weegee are bleeding players. Maybe, just maybe, making co-op a viable option (senario changes never gonna happen folks) might keep a few people in the game and spending money.

My spreadsheet says better money if you have more players. Sekrit equations found in ancient text agree. Happy player also recruits friends.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,005
[TLS]
Member
4,371 posts
20,673 battles

I am sorry to break it to you but wg's priorities are 1) being lazy and just concentrating on PvP instead of 2) putting more work to code bots in co-op and make general improvements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
249
[NZAUS]
Beta Tester
361 posts
8,565 battles

I'm sure they will read this and take action to help make the game a better experience, they have said repeatedly they value our feedback.  

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
334
[-ISO-]
Member
1,063 posts
6,286 battles
1 hour ago, Tagnbag said:

they have said repeatedly they value our feedback.  

Only from the RU forum that is. :Smile_trollface:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
566
[KAMI]
Member
1,564 posts
12,980 battles
1 hour ago, Tagnbag said:

I'm sure they will read this and take action to help make the game a better experience, they have said repeatedly they value our feedback.  

they did say no gun bigger than 460.

-YASHIMA-

 

they did say no t10 premium

-Salem,Stalin,PR-

 

 

 

Morale of the story: You cannot trust wargaming words wholeheartedly 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
267
Member
553 posts
6,735 battles
9 minutes ago, Gummilicious said:

they did say no gun bigger than 460.

-YASHIMA-

 

they did say no t10 premium

-Salem,Stalin,PR-

 

 

 

Morale of the story: You cannot trust wargaming words wholeheartedly 

Technically the second batch of ships aren't premiums since they have no innate (i.e camouflage-less) economy bonuses and therefore are not considered premiums. For further proof, if you own any of these T10 "premium" ships, try selecting "premium ships" in the filter. You'll be surprised. 

As for the first one, jury's out, but I think Yashima is overrated. It gives up quite a lot for those 510mm guns that more often than not are temperamental against thin-skin-cruisers (here's glaring at you, Smolensk) and are only of value against other battleships.

 

In conclusion, them breaking the 1st promise isn't as big of a deal as its made out to be, and they technically didn't break the second promise.

 

However, you are correct. Instead of trusting them like that, wait until they inevitably go back on their word:Smile_trollface:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,358
[CLAY]
Member
3,010 posts
13,351 battles

Those bots are cowards!

If the only ships left alive on your team are bots, and you exit the match, the surrender and the match is s draw!

They should get punished like we do!

And if WG run out of bot because they all get banned, they should get the marketing and executives of WG to fill their spots so they can see the current state of the game outside of spreadsheets!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
293 posts
6,534 battles
2 minutes ago, Grygus_Triss said:

Those bots are cowards!

If the only ships left alive on your team are bots, and you exit the match, the surrender and the match is s draw!

They should get punished like we do!

And if WG run out of bot because they all get banned, they should get the marketing and executives of WG to fill their spots so they can see the current state of the game outside of spreadsheets!

Actually the bots are now becoming psychotic. More than once I'll see then drop torps directly in front of a friendly bot. It's funny when the enemy does it, not so much when it forces myself or an ally human to broadside.

That said, some of the bots are far better players than real humans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50
[HIT]
Member
148 posts
5,108 battles
52 minutes ago, TD1 said:

However, you are correct. Instead of trusting them like that, wait until they inevitably go back on their word:Smile_trollface:.

 

wows.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,407
[-CAT-]
Member
2,788 posts
12,360 battles
2 hours ago, Tagnbag said:

they have said repeatedly they value our feedback.  

They value their false god (the spreadsheet) more than our feedback.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,788
Member
5,169 posts
9,121 battles
1 hour ago, TD1 said:

Technically the second batch of ships aren't premiums since they have no innate (i.e camouflage-less) economy bonuses and therefore are not considered premiums. For further proof, if you own any of these T10 "premium" ships, try selecting "premium ships" in the filter. You'll be surprised. 

Not selling T9/10 prem for Doubloon/Real money is how I interpret that statement.

No gun larger than 460 is a real promise that has been broken, shattered and has had its pieces scattered into the winds.

The no sub thing is just The Chieftain's own thought and shouldn't be understood as WG's promise. And to be fair, CVs are far LESS fitting in this game than subs could EVER be. That's why CV rework happened. Remember when he said "no sub"? 2016.

 

Don't listen to WG's promises. Only Patch Notes and Dev Blog posts are the real deal. Yet that may not even be truly trustworthy.

Also, reading forums is not the devs' jobs. But whether the higher ups want to listen to the suggestions collected by the forum mods AND the feedback from CCs/STs is another universe apart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
255
[KAMI]
Member
491 posts
6,189 battles

I honestly wonder whats the gain from making some of these promises that people keep calling out on. They can always keep the options open by making less restrictive statements like "we don't have any plans to add X to the game"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
267
Member
553 posts
6,735 battles
5 hours ago, Verytis said:

I honestly wonder whats the gain from making some of these promises that people keep calling out on. They can always keep the options open by making less restrictive statements like "we don't have any plans to add X to the game"

I'm chalking it down to bad wording or lack of future forecasting when saying those things.

Share this post


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

×