Jump to content


Weighted Credit Coefficients for low battle count low win rate players at high tiers


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

Ambulant #1 Posted 15 May 2018 - 01:49 AM

    Sergeant

  • Member
  • 44124 battles
  • 241
  • [FLAME]
  • Member since:
    08-02-2015
There's always been discussion about quality of gameplay, noobs at high tiers, and I have heard arguments for and against limiting inexperienced players. It almost becomes the main topic of discussion on this forum. Inexperienced players do spoil the gaming experience. But it is hard for any game developer, not just wargaming, to put a limit to any player's access to the top tiers. So here's a little proposal. Don't limit access, but make it expensive. Have weighted credit coefficients. Make a very big difference for the credit loss if it's an inexperienced player losing a tier 10 game. Make it really expensive for a player with very low win rate or battle experience to lose a high tier game. Same principle like income tax really. I'm sure the wargaming team can do the maths on this one, implement it and tweak the numbers over time till it becomes effective.

Edited by Ambulant, 15 May 2018 - 01:49 AM.


anthonylei01 #2 Posted 15 May 2018 - 03:06 AM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 15821 battles
  • 1,475
  • [CPVA]
  • Member since:
    09-27-2015

WG need noobs to reach high tiers as fast as possible, and keep playing high tiers to generate profits. 

 

For experienced good players, they are now less inclined to spend money. For example, premium time used to be a must, but no longer necessary.



krad55 #3 Posted 15 May 2018 - 03:18 AM

    First Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 5 battles
  • 556
  • Member since:
    04-23-2015

Please try to understand that it's not noobs that ruin the game. It is developers who ruin the game, and no amount of convincing is going to change their mind. Your only chance is to make your own game that will be better.

 



JalterBestWaifu #4 Posted 15 May 2018 - 04:51 AM

    Sergeant

  • Member
  • 24124 battles
  • 127
  • [A1TER]
  • Member since:
    05-22-2015
This is a good idea, but I don't think WG will ever adopt it. Since it is WG economy and the newbie will complain about this.

Freelancer_Tesla #5 Posted 15 May 2018 - 04:52 AM

    Sergeant

  • Member
  • 17499 battles
  • 201
  • [MAS]
  • Member since:
    10-19-2015
But...but...then that'll discourage those players from buying them Tier IX premiums and WG can't make money. :bajan:

Frequents higher tiers, because I hate tractors armed with high-caliber rifles.

Plays a mix of well, everything.

"The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his."

- General George S. Patton


Ambulant #6 Posted 15 May 2018 - 05:21 AM

    Sergeant

  • Member
  • 44124 battles
  • 241
  • [FLAME]
  • Member since:
    08-02-2015
The casual noobs will play lower down the tiers, since it is not sustainable to lose credits at a fast rate. What you will have left at high tiers that still insist on playing will be the intransigent wallet warriors who need to buy gold and credits. Those are the ones any game developer wants to milk. These become easily identifiable for the hardcore experienced guys at high tiers. And I'm sure a known noob is easier to deal with than a whole train of unknown noobs. That's my hope anyways. I don't think we can actually solve this problem completely, so just looking at ways to make small improvements.

krad55 #7 Posted 15 May 2018 - 05:48 AM

    First Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 5 battles
  • 556
  • Member since:
    04-23-2015

It is easy to push "average" players down to lower tiers. Simply make a WR requirement for tiers IX and X, say 48% for the account. So at the top tiers you would avoid those 38% players and those who are not that good would need to go to lower tiers to "farm" their WR.

Similar could be applied to rating battles too. No 50% WR, no rating battles.

 

But if WG wanted, they would have implemented something already. Obviously, it is ok for them as it is.

 

But looking at even bigger picture, game is just boring for better players, so that's why it is dominated by the noobs who don't even try to improve. If the game development would have gone the right direction, there wouldn't be any need for any restrictive measures.

It's the game that forms target audience, not other way around.



Ambulant #8 Posted 15 May 2018 - 06:33 AM

    Sergeant

  • Member
  • 44124 battles
  • 241
  • [FLAME]
  • Member since:
    08-02-2015
I think my suggestion is not quite a 'push' and more like a 'nudge'. It's an easier pill to swallow.

krad55 #9 Posted 15 May 2018 - 07:51 AM

    First Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 5 battles
  • 556
  • Member since:
    04-23-2015

View PostAmbulant, on 15 May 2018 - 06:33 AM, said:

I think my suggestion is not quite a 'push' and more like a 'nudge'. It's an easier pill to swallow.

 

You are of course correct, but I like my suggestion too.

It's not a restriction, it's a protection of bad players from losing. For their own good . WG if they wanted, could even introduce a new meta - pay to lose (ticket to high tiers for players with below 50% WR).

 

Even better, it could even be a container with 4% chance to get a pass to tier X :trollface: .



Ambulant #10 Posted 15 May 2018 - 08:07 AM

    Sergeant

  • Member
  • 44124 battles
  • 241
  • [FLAME]
  • Member since:
    08-02-2015
Lol. That's just cruel

bigben21 #11 Posted 15 May 2018 - 08:55 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Member
  • 19397 battles
  • 353
  • [ARMYE]
  • Member since:
    09-06-2016

View Postkrad55, on 15 May 2018 - 03:18 AM, said:

Please try to understand that it's not noobs that ruin the game. It is developers who ruin the game, and no amount of convincing is going to change their mind. Your only chance is to make your own game that will be better.

 

 

I would concur with that, its not the noobs that ruin the game. 

 

Its ok there are noobs in games, evenly spread out among the 2 teams. Not all noobs in a team whereas the other has none or much lesser. Especially in those platoon. I believe till now winrate is still not a consideration in mm.....



JalterBestWaifu #12 Posted 15 May 2018 - 03:19 PM

    Sergeant

  • Member
  • 24124 battles
  • 127
  • [A1TER]
  • Member since:
    05-22-2015

View Postbigben21, on 15 May 2018 - 04:55 PM, said:

 

I would concur with that, its not the noobs that ruin the game. 

 

Its ok there are noobs in games, evenly spread out among the 2 teams. Not all noobs in a team whereas the other has none or much lesser. Especially in those platoon. I believe till now winrate is still not a consideration in mm.....

 

As if the noobs are evenly spread out among 2 teams, most of the time I am in a team with avg. 45% WR, some of them are even below 40, most of them are inexperienced (like 4-7k battles), while my enemy consisted of 2-3 60% unicums. You just can't imagine you are the only one with 50+ WR in the team, not anyone are unicum that can carry such team. Anyways, newbies are expected to be in the game, but not at tier 9-10. WG has to do something about it like rising the cost of tier 7+ tanks for those with less than 5k battles. They also have to fix the MM, WR and battle count should be taken into consideration.

krad55 #13 Posted 16 May 2018 - 01:38 AM

    First Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 5 battles
  • 556
  • Member since:
    04-23-2015

View Posttsangpuilung, on 15 May 2018 - 03:19 PM, said:

As if the noobs are evenly spread out among 2 teams, most of the time I am in a team with avg. 45% WR, some of them are even below 40, most of them are inexperienced (like 4-7k battles), while my enemy consisted of 2-3 60% unicums. You just can't imagine you are the only one with 50+ WR in the team, not anyone are unicum that can carry such team. Anyways, newbies are expected to be in the game, but not at tier 9-10. WG has to do something about it like rising the cost of tier 7+ tanks for those with less than 5k battles. They also have to fix the MM, WR and battle count should be taken into consideration.

 

Are you saying that you also have bad luck?

 

Yes, in this WG world, some people are just "unlucky". In IS-6 event, after activating the ticket, I won only 4 (!!!) battles out of 30, what WR is that, 13%? Fun to bounce 6 shots in E100, including 2 on Leopard, isn't it?

But then, the lucky days come and after ticket expired, I won 14 battles in a row! See, it's all "random".

 

But did it have anything to do with noobs?



JalterBestWaifu #14 Posted 16 May 2018 - 12:45 PM

    Sergeant

  • Member
  • 24124 battles
  • 127
  • [A1TER]
  • Member since:
    05-22-2015

View Postkrad55, on 16 May 2018 - 09:38 AM, said:

 

Are you saying that you also have bad luck?

 

Yes, in this WG world, some people are just "unlucky". In IS-6 event, after activating the ticket, I won only 4 (!!!) battles out of 30, what WR is that, 13%? Fun to bounce 6 shots in E100, including 2 on Leopard, isn't it?

But then, the lucky days come and after ticket expired, I won 14 battles in a row! See, it's all "random".

 

But did it have anything to do with noobs?

 

It seems you don't have to the habit of checking team's WR after battle, maybe you rarely see a team play like trash while you are doing well. Bad luck is just another factor, when I am in grille, fired 2 shells on a stationery T-62A, both went to the only red part, turret, and ricochet, while I aimed at the lower plate.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users