Jump to content
Jr_Jr

What do you think about a Social Difficulty Curve?

Recommended Posts

 

He even references WOT. How much do you think this really applies to WOT.

Do you think the average player skill level would increase if they completely revamped low tiers to make it an easier learning curve?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably.

Even at tier 1-5 I would get camo sniped/arty one shot which really drove down my enjoyment of the game. The only enjoyment I got was yolo arty rushing in Pz1c and the like(So all my low tiers are 4x%, 0.5 damage ratio horrible)

Also at Tier 5 onwards you really get shit on by tanks/arty with decent crew and consumables. You can imagine me in my KV1 being frustrated at higher tier tanks (especially FV304s) if you are at a 75% crew.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There was about one minute of that video that actually talked about anything as applying to WoT or in comparison to it.  Not only was it not fleshed out, but they got it wrong.  To reiterate, their claim is that players in games like WoT begin by treating other players as NPCs, just do whatever they think is best, and begin on maps where team play is not important, whereas games like LoL and MtG (I don't even understand why that game would be lumped in here) don't have this "step" and are harder to get into because of it.  I don't see any difference.  New players acting selfishly and stupid is a given.  The idea that players just think of others as robots in one multiplayer game and not the other is ridiculous.

Perhaps they meant to convey the difference in team sizes as a difference in social difficulty and that playing with more players is more socially difficult, as they talk about before in their MMO example, except they then say that a primarily 15v15 game has a lower starting point than games that are primarily 5v5 (or 1v1).  I suppose that means that once teams or the available social pool get too big, other people around are ignored until the player can grasp enough of the world around them to interact with it together with others, but that would mean that there's no point in designing around such a thing because people would self-regulate their social interactions anyways.

The last point on maps is completely off too.  I can't think of a single map in the low tiers, let alone all of WoT, where team play was not important (Province steered in that direction, but team play still mattered much of the time).  If team play really isn't as important in the low tiers as it is in the high tiers (it's not, btw), it's not because of the maps.

I'm not even sure where this claim came from since it had little to nothing to do with everything before it in the video.  If they wanted to talk about social difficulty, they could go where I thought they would and talk about it going from pubs to platoons to team battles/tourneys to strongholds/clans, though only at one stage of that do you experience the game with a different number of players at once.  As I understand it, LoL has had a vs. bots mode for a long time, some MtG products pit you against AIs with premade decks, and WoT now has its proving grounds mode that new players are encouraged to use, each of which lines up with the single-player or offline experience for other games, so they all have their introductory phases in terms of social difficulty.

I don't know what standard you are using to gauge player skill or what its average would be, but it probably doesn't matter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no need for the avg pubbie to learn anything usefull, as long as WoT is using that "broken" reward system with the huge bot-bonus. What I mean by that?

You play a tier t9 game make 2-3K damage, 2 kills, loose and get 400-500 XP when loosing. At the end of the team list you ll find the base camping E75 with 0-500 damage who still gets 200-300XP.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Folterknecht said:

There is no need for the avg pubbie to learn anything usefull, as long as WoT is using that "broken" reward system with the huge bot-bonus. What I mean by that?

You play a tier t9 game make 2-3K damage, 2 kills, loose and get 400-500 XP when loosing. At the end of the team list you ll find the base camping E75 with 0-500 damage who still gets 200-300XP.

This also manifests itself with their base camping ST-I doing 400 dmg and gett 700xp for being on the winning side.

But WoT's problem is more complex, not including the playerbase there is very little information when a new player starts the game. Little to nothing about, equipment, consumables, or camo paint. Let alone the wonders of crew design or modules. Sure there a basic how to drive a tank, but once players get a few tiers up or even a few matches in their is nothing to teach them how the game works for them to stay competitive. Till I got to tier 5 I had no idea how crew skills worked or why the short barrel 75mm was worse/better than the 5cm on the Pz IV A. How HE works VS AP when and how pen mattered vs Alpha. Nothing was taught it was a simple drive here, look at that, left click and see what happens.

 

The low tiers only feel like they have safe zones cause the tanks/crews are not very good. The game does a poor job of telling new players how stuff works.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jr_Jr said:

He even references WOT. How much do you think this really applies to WOT.

Do you think the average player skill level would increase if they completely revamped low tiers to make it an easier learning curve?

Huh?

The vid is about social interaction... The skill conversation is a sideline, the actual topic is enabling players involvement in the community through a gradual ramping up of social interaction requirements.

The point about newbies treating other players as NPCs in the early tiers is entirely valid, the maps are (mostly) designed to get newbies shooting other tanks as fast as possible, without having to overly worry what their team or the other team will do, and the sheltered MM should in theory promote this by preventing players running into stuff they cant compete with. Once you hit tier 3, the sheltered MM goes out the window, youre forced to start paying attention to what your team is doing if you dont want to get rolled by something you dont have a hope in hell of competing with. The idea is to promote a sense of engagement with the other players, which hopefully will get them involved with the community and lead to the promotion of tactics and skills (and let WG hold on to them longer so theyre more likely to drop their coin on the game).

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Curo said:

 

But WoT's problem is more complex, not including the playerbase there is very little information when a new player starts the game. Little to nothing about, equipment, consumables, or camo paint. Let alone the wonders of crew design or modules. Sure there a basic how to drive a tank, but once players get a few tiers up or even a few matches in their is nothing to teach them how the game works for them to stay competitive. Till I got to tier 5 I had no idea how crew skills worked or why the short barrel 75mm was worse/better than the 5cm on the Pz IV A. How HE works VS AP when and how pen mattered vs Alpha. Nothing was taught it was a simple drive here, look at that, left click and see what happens.

 

The low tiers only feel like they have safe zones cause the tanks/crews are not very good. The game does a poor job of telling new players how stuff works.

 

When I started playing (end 2010) there was really very little available when it comes to mechanics and stats. Nowdays everything can be found on the web, if you re able to use a search engine. Sure WG does a piss poor job of making it availble through the client, but there are dozens of usefull resources to be found with just a few clicks. The problem is WG target audience - morons.

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Folterknecht said:

 

When I started playing (end 2010) there was really very little available when it comes to mechanics and stats. Nowdays everything can be found on the web, if you re able to use a search engine. Sure WG does a piss poor job of making it availble through the client, but there are dozens of usefull resources to be found with just a few clicks. The problem is WG target audience - morons.

But that only applies if you truly want to get good at the game, or any game, which most people don't set out to do at first. The difference between something like WoT and Battlefield, CoD, CS, Rocket League or even RL games like Chess or MTG is that the objective in those games is extremely clear, they play the same way every time in terms of basics and the rules of the games are painfully obvious.

I mean, try playing 10 battles starting in a tier I and ending in a tier X and tell me how similar the playing experience is. Or how about Arty vs TD vs Medium vs Heavy? The game doesn't even tell you how the spotting or camo system works and the values for most vehicles don't add up because the game doesn't tell you what soft stats are or how they work either. It's a complete clusterfuck and that's before we start adding the real skill killers like RNG in its various forms from uneven tank types to mismatches tiers and module damage. I also cannot possibly overstate how much not being able to respawn in a battle does to destroy your sense of progression in a video game. Imagine if Counter Strike was a single round and that's it. No round 2, 3 or 4 to figure out who's really better, back to the server browser after 1 death. I think a lot of people who have played the game long term also severely underestimate the effect of the map pool on performance. WoT has a shitload of maps now, so think about how many times you need to play one to fully understand it and then realise what it would be like as a new player today. I started in the beta, so I only had to learn something like 8 maps and then I've been able to learn everything new as it comes. EZ PZ, I have 3 months to learn the two new maps or whatever before the next map or two comes out. Someone starting today probably has to memorize over 40 maps that appear randomly. He can play all day for a week and still miss out on some maps because they aren't in rotation.

All the other games have bad players too but the reason why WoT has such extreme tomatoes is that there's no help at all and the only way you can realistically improve is by going outside the game. I mean, most people on Wotlabs itself will tell you that they spent up to 20k games being complete shitlords before going the route of realising that WG doesn't do shit to help them improve and went to Google/wiki/Wotlabs/Youtube/Twitch for real answers. But try loading up just about any other PvP game and you will learn everything you need to know within the first 2 hours of play, it's even one of the main reasons the singleplayer campaign exists today. It's only if you want to get really good that you might want to go outside the game and look at the hidden stats like recoil multipliers and damage drop-off.

TL;DR: WoT is carefully crafted to keep people bad for as long as possible, unlike any other PvP game in the world. The only reason people even play it is because losers get something like 50-66% of what the winners get if the team isn't completely destroyed. Really good performers on a losing team can even out-score the top guys on the winning team. In other words, it's okay to stay bad because you're failing upwards at a slightly slower pace than a good player. A decent player might have a tier 10 tank in 1k battles but that's okay because the 45% player will have their first in 1500 :doge:

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Folterknecht said:

 

When I started playing (end 2010) there was really very little available when it comes to mechanics and stats. Nowdays everything can be found on the web, if you re able to use a search engine. Sure WG does a piss poor job of making it availble through the client, but there are dozens of usefull resources to be found with just a few clicks. The problem is WG target audience - morons.

Having tried to use web resources for other mature games, I can say it's a lot harder than it appears.  As games get more mature the sheer volume of information grows rapidly and there isn't any sort of organization of the data.  If you are lucky there is one site that has most of the relevant data, but it can take a while to figure out which one that is.  Even the shitter can look good to a novice.

 

I don't want to spend a month researching a brand new game; I want to spend maybe 30 minutes a day to pick up a few new hints and answer a few questions that came up, and merge that with gameplay.  It's just really hard to do that with no background to help pick through all the information on the web.  With experience you can quickly tell which articles are useless or out-of-date, but with no reference you have to read through so much.  Even here on wotlabs there are plenty of articles and forum posts that are no longer relevant, but will show up in searches.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For an example of a similar situation, Path of Exile has much the same issue as WoT. Detailed mechanics and vast amounts of data hidden with very little to explain any of them. Just a virtually useless tutorial. Community driven resource hubs are the norm, and the path of exile wiki is seen as the go-to whenever you aren't sure about something.

However, this is where things diverge - success PoE is data driven. If you know the numbers, understand the systems, and know how things fit together, you've got everything you need to be successful. The game demands very little of you, mechanically - it's a diablo clone, after all. This makes a wiki extremely useful. On the other hand, success in WoT is driven by how you execute what you know - you can know exactly how vision works, the armor scheme of every tank, etc. but still flounder in the execution and not be successful.

Now you can apply this on a broader scale - no amount of writing and explaining in or outside of a wiki will ever help you be nearly as successful in WoT as it would help in another game. You need to know how to mentally conjure and physically execute the information that you've learned before you can move forward. This is why videos, replays, and hands-on training are so incredibly powerful as teaching tools compared to anything something like the WoTLabs forums could do.

Wargaming needs to embrace this. Uploading some guide videos to your official youtube channel is one thing, but integrating it with the client and allowing users to learn first hand is another. Adding a real, detailed tutorial would be infinitely more useful to WoT than the vast majority of other games. You can get by with saying "just wiki it" in a diablo clone or even most games in general because the execution is so damn straightfoward. You can't do the same things in a third/first person tank game, there's just so little out there that compares to WoT. It's not like the tidal wave of twisted metal-esque vehicle arena games ever made it far past the PS1.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I m not saying that you ll get blue or even purple stats by just reading wotlabs, visiting vehiclestat sites or watching good streamers. But the thing is that it takes very little effort to rise above the red tide in WoT. You re still not a "good" player with that, but at least no dead weight either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Warning : text wall

I feel wot is a game that rewards players who do their homework , and have a drive to become a good player at any cost. When I first started I felt pretty clueless and just enjoyably flopped about getting the hang of driving ,aiming ect. But after about 500 or so games I decided it was time to either dump it or actively search for resources to help me understand how to play better or at least what not to do. I have always been a min -max type of gamer , strive to be the best and willing to put in the time and effort to do so. Games that allow me to do this are why I play them in the first place. Wot for me has such a high skill cap that it keeps me coming back for more. I do wish it had a better tutorial and easy to access resources (in game) that explain all the mechanics that are so important to know @ T3+ . But at the same time there's not really any excuse for people that want to get better or at least understand what's going on. There's so much easily accessible information out there. In the end some people are just shitty at video games and can have all the knowledge in the world and remain red forever. As long as they aren't toxic pieces of shit that intentionaly throw games, or bother other people I'm fine with them.

Edited by Dangalang_time
Clarification
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Folterknecht said:

I m not saying that you ll get blue or even purple stats by just reading wotlabs, visiting vehiclestat sites or watching good streamers. But the thing is that it takes very little effort to rise above the red tide in WoT. You re still not a "good" player with that, but at least no dead weight either.

This is true but the problem is again that WoT does not encourage you to become better like other games do. All the other games are filled to the brim with Play4Fun casuals and baddies as well but because the game itself enforces the mantra of getting good, the average baddie can still contribute valuable things in-game. I mean, I'm a pretty shitty shooter that maintains a 1.0 K/D in Battlefield, yet my PPG are pretty decent for my skill level because I can make up for it in other ways, like spamming med packs, ammo packs, capping flags, assisting in kills, spotting, reviving etc. In WoT, this would be akin to spotting, tracking, taking hits for the team, enforcing map control through positioning and so on that may not be direct damage dealing.

But whereas Battlefield has the borderline official mantra of PTFO (Play The Fucking Objective) and does everything it can to enforce it, WoT goes in the opposite direction entirely. First off, low tiers are manic pew pew spam fights on tiny maps, then mid tiers become more organised but are still far too weak in general to actually use all the game mechanics (not enough HP to really tank, not enough armor to bounce unless super heavy, bad gun stats, bad soft stats, shit spotting, shit camo and so on) and so you still have tomatoes entering the higher tiers. You can also buy your way into high tiers via prem tanks, further shitting up the player pool. On top of that, one of the most important aspects of the game is crew skills but it takes a thousand fucking years to get a decent one and even then you get heavily penalised for moving up tanks unless you spend gold. I've played 10000 god damn battles and most of my crews are still in the 1-3 skill range because I'd rather switch up the game pace than grind 500 battles in one tank.

As I've mentioned before, shit in WoT is very time intensive, even for great players and much more so for tomatoes. First you have to earn 95k experience to get a crew from 50-100%, then you have to earn 210k for finishing the first skill, followed by 420k for skill #2 while skill #3 requires 840k. So, if you started from a basic 50% crew until you have Repairs, BiA and 1 other perk, you will have ground out well over 1,5 million experience in total per crew member. And yes, let's not forget that tanks also mismatch the number of crew, leading to extremely stupid shit. If you maintain a uni/super uni 1000 exp/game, it will still take you over 1500 battles to get a 3 skill crew under those circumstances. That's why WG introduced all this bonus experience shit and why there are crew exp bonuses almost all the time: They totally fucked up the experience needed but instead of fixing it, they just spam meaningless events :doge:

If there weren't constant crew exp events, it would take you 125 hours of non-stop battles at 1000 exp/game to achieve a 3 skill crew from the basic starting point, under the 5 minutes per battle assumption. WoT could literally be your full time job and it would still take you almost 16 days, with no days off, to get a "basic" tier 10 crew :eww:

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Zinn said:

 

report for wall of text

;-)

 

Nothing I disagree with and basically explains in finer detail WG approach/execution of how "to keep the masses unwashed" or at least part of it. It's a big part of why WoT and esports will never take off in a big way.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Disclaimer, i have not watched the video (i can't now) but still a couple of points.

It is true that at low tiers people see the team as NPCs. Just watch a couple of flags:

  • how many people write anything in chat
  • how many people just mindlessly smash into each other to the tipping point when all they had to do was turn slightly
  • how many people ram/block Others as if they were objects on the map
  • how people just rush somewhere like headless chickens disregarding anything that's happening around them

On top of that, we have some other issues. For example, low-tiers are an entirely different game. Seriously. There are barely any tanks with armour, a shit ton of spamguns, everything is terribly slow, has no HPs, absolutely no chance of hitting anything when firing and moving.

Compare that to the later game.

On top of that, WoT information delivery system is basically shit - it tells you nothing unless you go look for it yourself, but the worst part is that:

  • the game itself doesn't even make it clear that there are other things it doesn't show (ie bloom values, armour groups etc)
  • most mechanics are not even hinted at - wtf
  • most mechanics that are abusable are, for the new/bad player, basically indistinguishable from hacking in other games, ie: invisibility being camo/draw line sniping, wallhacks being autoaim peeking, invincibility being sidescraping etc
  • the RNG factor is so huge that unless you already know how the game works you will have a really hard time isolating that from your mistakes, particularly at lower tiers where for example accuracy is universally crap

Also, the sheltered MM lasts way too little. Most T3 tanks are ridiculously bad, in that they have absolutely no hope of doing anything to a T5 tank. It's a really bad design decision, that (luckilly) doesn't stay for later tiers, where most tanks at T6+ can deal directly with T8+ in at least some ways barring exceptions (ie, M4A3 series VS KV-4, good luck penning), and have at least the speed/viewrange/accuracy/soft stats to be a nuisance and deal with them in some other way (spotting/tracking/baiting). While a T3 has absolutely no way to deal even inderectly with most T5 tanks, and even with some T4s... On top of that, generally speaking the crews of a player at T6+ are way better than what they had at T3, only compounding the problem.

Do you remember when T1 tanks started with 50% crews? I do. I played one week before going "fuck this shit, i'm out". Came back months later. But having 100% crews is not solving the problem - at all. For a number of reasons:

  • all but one T1 tanks are lights
  • all but one (iirc) T1 tanks have 2-3 crew members whereas most tanks later will have 4-6
  • T1 tanks are elited so fucking fast (and T2 as well) that we're basically looking at 2 retrains (maybe free ones) in the span of maybe 50 games, at a really shitty xp/game average, which means that the 100% you had at T1 is gonna be maybe 70% once you hit T3, and that only on the common crewmembers...

 

Basically, WoT new player experience is a shit all over the place. I would now, i lost the access data of this account and wanted to play again so i tried to start anew - holy fuck it was so bad, and i'm not (or better, i was not) exactly a newbie/shitlord...

 

EDIT: also, i agree with a lot of what people said before me, ie the low/non-existant drive to get better, the completely screwed performance/reward ratio being the first and foremost.

Let's not forget this game is catering to idiots most of all - quantity of customers over quality of the experience, and it's a model that works since the fastest way you can get yourself a decent experience is by dumping cash every other day.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/7/2016 at 4:24 AM, SWG112 said:

Do you remember when T1 tanks started with 50% crews?

What? When did this change?! I thought t1's still started with 50%!

Now that that's out of the way... WoT's biggest fault is clearly that it teaches nothing to new players. Basically unless you're the kind of person that's inclined to research the game mechanics outside of the game, you're gonna have a bad time.

When I started out I came to this game as a history enthusiast looking to drive some legendary tanks from WWII. I nearly quit at tier IV when I got to the T-28, but that's when I first researched the forums and the tech trees and realized that the next tank in the line was supposed to be better. So I stuck with it, and got hooked to the game with the pre-nerf KV. What a magnificent machine that was... One shotting lower tiers in one game, and facing IS-4's in the next one. The point wasn't to wake that nostalgia, but rather to illustrate that the game before tier 5 was shit. And though I don't really play below tier 6 anymore, I suspect it's still shit.

Another (lesser) fault is that they made the German icons of WWII kinda bad. I'm pretty sure a lot of the people getting into the game are excited to drive these things. At least I was. And I know you can all make them work as this is Wotlabs, but put your top player knowledge aside for a moment and drive a stock Tiger or Panther for the first time... I'm sure thoughts of "what the fuck, no armor" and "shit tank" are not very far.

As for the "seeing opponents as bots" thing... I don't remember seeing opponents as bots when I was starting out. I'm pretty sure I saw them as intimidating enemies. I actually think the reverse may be true in WoT, in that as a player gains more experience he will at some point install XVM and begin to freak the fuck out every time there's a purple on the enemy team. Now at this point he is obviously not seeing them as bots. But then as he gains more and more experience, he learns to mechanically outplay opponents in 1v1's, and begins to recognize familiar plays in his opponents. He starts reacting to these plays instead of the players behind them. And by then he has come full circle, has become a good player, no longer needs XVM to assess situations, and considers his opponents to be predictable bots.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, the_bolshevik said:

What? When did this change?! I thought t1's still started with 50%!

Patch 8.6. Coincidentally when I started playing.

I don't think it worked well. A lot of players don't even retrain their crew from T1->T2 because they enjoyed their tier 1, or haven't figured the crew mechanics. They get a 50% crew for their tier 2 (gotta save money for important things) and are then puzzled about why their tier 2 tank is so shitty.

The WoWS crew system is far nicer to newbies.

I suspect there's a similar issue with the current newbie protection. They effectively extended newbie protection to tier 2, but tiers 3 and 4 are still horrific in a bad tank. They're just delaying the difficulty jump.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/4/2016 at 0:07 PM, Folterknecht said:

I m not saying that you ll get blue or even purple stats by just reading wotlabs, visiting vehiclestat sites or watching good streamers. But the thing is that it takes very little effort to rise above the red tide in WoT. You re still not a "good" player with that, but at least no dead weight either.


This is me right now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4.4.2016 at 9:22 AM, Curo said:

This also manifests itself with their base camping ST-I doing 400 dmg and gett 700xp for being on the winning side.

But WoT's problem is more complex, not including the playerbase there is very little information when a new player starts the game. Little to nothing about, equipment, consumables, or camo paint. Let alone the wonders of crew design or modules. Sure there a basic how to drive a tank, but once players get a few tiers up or even a few matches in their is nothing to teach them how the game works for them to stay competitive. Till I got to tier 5 I had no idea how crew skills worked or why the short barrel 75mm was worse/better than the 5cm on the Pz IV A. How HE works VS AP when and how pen mattered vs Alpha. Nothing was taught it was a simple drive here, look at that, left click and see what happens.

 

The low tiers only feel like they have safe zones cause the tanks/crews are not very good. The game does a poor job of telling new players how stuff works.

We can add a lot of subtler observations and quite slicky/dirty ones too to some of your main arguments
Example:
#1 Why is default mode of prem ammo always gold and not silver if this was a user friendly game?
Stats will show that adding up a couple of 10^6 players the profit of this setup adds up.
Misclicks will happen and how many of us havent done variants of this while taken a beer or 2 when gaming etc

#2 When in default mode with no mods- why in after battle window wont net income profit appear?
Anyone heard of a corporation with gross income as the main median for how business is judged?

Variants of #1 and #2 appear in a lot of submenus of the game and to me only illustrates what the average user
represents to WG and how his general IQ level is considered

Link to post
Share on other sites

The video is about social challenges yet except for one or two persons you all discuss the mechanical side of things.

But the more I think about it, I feel as if WG failure to design the social part of its game well may be just as big of a problem as mechanical problems (like balancing or the MM). Some thoughts:

  • WG doesn't guide players towards the social part of its game as well as it should. Granted they have made some progress (better functionality for finding and managing clans, the sh mode providing for additional group activities).
  • On the other hand, there are parts where WG is actively punishing social behavior. Giving platoons worse MM? Wtf?!
  • A lot of group based endgame content is just terrible: CW suffers from boredom, campaigns are often managed in a lackluster way.
  • A few sentences to strongholds in particular: The format is good at its core 7-7 at tier VI, 10-10 at tier VIII, 15-15 at tier X. But beyond that it suffers from a long list of flaws: Clans being able to hide in the middle of the night, the best clans raping any clan that doesn't. The terrible tank balance at tier VI (O-I camps, dominance of lights on open maps), the imbalance between lights and meds at tier VIII, ... In general there is an increasing tendency to use try-hard setups. Weaker clans experience little but frustration since they will lose the vast majority of their games and even lose credits while doing so. This has led most of them to abandon tier X completely. And increasingly they seem to be increasing from tier VIII as well. If this trend continues, it could imply the death of skirmishes.
  • A huge problem is that the mutual harassment of good and bad players is left unchecked. Arty focus on good players, retards suiciding on purples, the general and constant insults in chat and PMs, the pure frustration good players experience when a team filled with bots screws them. But the better players are anything but innocent, they retaliate with insults of their own or dirty tricks. The game community is toxic. And in my opinion the key to salvaging it involves rewarding social behavior:
    • A "thank you" button in addition to the report system. Most good players occasionally meet a pubbie who congratulates us for carrying hard. Make it easier for them. AND reward it: get a certain amount of commendations from your fellow players and you get some extra credit, etc. But seeing that our community is rotten, you would have to counter abuse (no "thank you" from fellow clanmembers or friends).
    • Slightly better credit/xp from playing in a platoon. Why? People who platoonmight come to form social bonds, join a clan, etc. In other words become involved in the community and stay in the game longer.
    • Punish anti-social behavior harder: Botting repeatedly = permaban. The tk system is fairly solid by now. The unsportsmanlike conduct reports used to be terrible now they have become irrelevant. The true issue here is that you would need a people involving actual human beings rather than an automated system (at least as an appeal body).
    • ...
  • Short version: the game should be called World of Antisocial Cunts - and instead of "let's roll out" the slogan should be "let's be assholes".

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Gharirey said:
  • On the other hand, there are parts where WG is actively punishing social behavior. Giving platoons worse MM? Wtf?!

That's barely measurable, so I suspect it's accidental. Probably a result of platoons being matched against each other, and platooned players having a higher average tier (along with higher average skill).

What's odd about the platoon system in context is that there's a strong incentive for good players to platoon together (well, assuming that you enjoy winning), but a strong disincentive for bad players. A higher platoon count also leads to more one-sided games.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, RichardNixon said:

What's odd about the platoon system in context is that there's a strong incentive for good players to platoon together (well, assuming that you enjoy winning), but a strong disincentive for bad players. 

Of course that assumes informed rational actors (ermagerd neocons), while in reality the bads are not likely to have the mechanics and stats understanding required to realise that platooning together will actually damage their odds of winning. Minor positive outcome for the social side of things I guess. Pity thats about the beginning and end of any graduated social development.

For mine the strangest thing about the platoon system in context is the lack of explicit positive incentive. Its just presented as a "btw, you can also play with 2 of your mates" deal. The only explicit incentive ever given is the platoon/personal missions in the campaign missions, which themselves are poorly advertised to the player, hidden behind a layer of menus and not automatically enabled once they hit tier 4.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, RichardNixon said:

What's odd about the platoon system in context is that there's a strong incentive for good players to platoon together (well, assuming that you enjoy winning), but a strong disincentive for bad players. A higher platoon count also leads to more one-sided games.

Very true. But that wouldn't be a problem if good players were incentivized to take newbies/baddies under their wings rather than just berate them. The T95 E2 recruitment program went into that direction but it had a very limited scope.

For me, the big progress happened when I joined my first clan (after 6-7k of horrendously bad games). TWC is/was a social clan for fans of the Total War games series. The fantastic thing about that clan was that it had everything from yellow bobs to super-unicums. I started out playing with the yellow/green crowd, but soon got to platoon with our very best players regularly. They didn't complain about mistakes, neither were they the school-teacher type. They just wanted to have fun and enjoyed the company. I think I entered TWC as a orange bob and left as a green player with purple recents 1.5 years later in order to try out CW.

The thing is that I got incredibly lucky in my WoT socialization. Clans like TWC are incredibly rare. Most newbies just stumble into some shithole that mass-recruits in chat. This kind of clans shouldn't even allowed to exist! Clans led by baddies are contract-productive. Beginner clans should be in the hands of people who have acquired some level of competence at the game (green stats at the very least). People who struggle with the mechanical side of the game are not ready to lead clans.  

This may sound harsh but in my opinion, you cannot surrender the socialization of new players into the hands of those who still haven't understood the game themselves (and quite possibly never really will).

 

I think that is the main issue with WoT: it lacks incentives to be kind to your fellow players. Why should I spend my time teaching newbies the game if I can just platoon with other purple players and kick their asses or play on my own without having to babysit some baddie? Why should I found a clan for new players and teach them basic teamplay skills like listening to orders, focus-fire and how to form a fireline, when I can simply join some elite clan and raid baddie clan strongholds, kick them of the world map and rape their ugly faces in skirmishes?

On the contrary, WoT only provides incentives for elitism and abuse! Tripple unicum platoons provide the highest winrate. Raiding the strongholds of weaker clan gives me boxes much quicker than any skirmish. Assembling a force of unicums with elite FCs will let you win the most skirmishes and CWs and thus provide you with the highest amount of boxes and gold.

 

 

Damn I really should reconsider that preacher thing. I barely avoided quoting the golden rule in this sermon. Time to log into WoT, have some booze :drunk: and abuse some of those f***ing baddies! :frenchy:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...