Jump to content


STOP those broken asymmetrical maps

Albion asymetrical

  • Please log in to reply
76 replies to this topic

eekeeboo #61 Posted 05 July 2018 - 01:29 PM

    Community Manager

  • WG Staff
  • 3716 battles
  • 1,185
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostClean, on 05 July 2018 - 01:05 PM, said:

So to clarify are you refusing to release the statistics or is WG refusing?

 

I have repeatedly stated, the decision to release stats is made above my head, there was a decision made to not provide server numbers. As is evidenced by the removal of player number values in-game. 

Horcan #62 Posted 05 July 2018 - 01:40 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 1939 battles
  • 364
  • [_VI_] _VI_
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

They do not want people to see how low population the server is and how broken or untested certain features are.

As for taking insults from stuff you should know it isnt only Clean's case. I felt the same opening various tickets because staff treat every people like they are fraking idiots, when many times the ticket is written in a manner which can prove the one opening the ticket know more about the game anyway, than the one solving it. Dont know if its the case with you eek , didnt felt that agravated by your answers as i was opening tickets to support.



eekeeboo #63 Posted 05 July 2018 - 01:56 PM

    Community Manager

  • WG Staff
  • 3716 battles
  • 1,185
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostHorcan, on 05 July 2018 - 01:40 PM, said:

 

 

I try to be as open and honest and "human" as I possibly can. I know having worked in support previously that you are constrained in your answers. I can assure you tickets will keep on going though and do get dealt with. But I have been where you are with support tickets too. It's why I know it may seem counter to previous experience, but I can assure you that the information is valued and passed on. 

Clean #64 Posted 05 July 2018 - 02:48 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 4407 battles
  • 147
  • [FIFO] FIFO
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

So WG will not release map WR statistics. If you read the thread from the start not everyone is moaning about the one map. We are told that all is okay and that any notion of imbalance is perceived rather than actual or perhaps we are just doing it all wrong.

So the nub is we have to accept what we are told and are not allowed statistical proof. That sounds like customer service imbalance to me.

What happened to "The customer is always right"?

Am I the only one who thinks smells of cover up?

Why hide stats?

 



eekeeboo #65 Posted 05 July 2018 - 03:35 PM

    Community Manager

  • WG Staff
  • 3716 battles
  • 1,185
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostClean, on 05 July 2018 - 02:48 PM, said:

So WG will not release map WR statistics. If you read the thread from the start not everyone is moaning about the one map. We are told that all is okay and that any notion of imbalance is perceived rather than actual or perhaps we are just doing it all wrong.

So the nub is we have to accept what we are told and are not allowed statistical proof. That sounds like customer service imbalance to me.

What happened to "The customer is always right"?

Am I the only one who thinks smells of cover up?

Why hide stats?

 

 

I can offer my opinion on why, but all I know is that few companies release map balance statistics etc. Usually this is calculated by third parties. Again, this is where feedback threads come in and you can propose the request for more information. Cannot promise anything would come of it, I can't promise it will happen. But if enough people request it, then that changes the perception of how important it is. 

zgubny #66 Posted 05 July 2018 - 06:07 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 3066 battles
  • 685
  • [D-302] D-302
  • Member since:
    11-19-2014

View Posteekeeboo, on 05 July 2018 - 04:35 PM, said:

 But if enough people request it, then that changes the perception of how important it is. 

 

it took lot of time to fix the chat issue ..... this topic has been created by deaxter_hero, May 04 2018 04:18 PM

you see that's the problem ...... it takes too much time it's like there is no costumer service ..... it's like there is nobody

that's what people feel ....

 



britinmadrid #67 Posted 05 July 2018 - 07:57 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 3937 battles
  • 111
  • [FIFO] FIFO
  • Member since:
    06-17-2012

View Posteekeeboo, on 04 July 2018 - 11:33 AM, said:

As for "fail flights" If a person pulls their weight, then what's wrong with it? If a person is able to perform better in a tier 5 in a tier 8 game, than the player in a tier 8 plane on the enemy team, at what stage in time does that affect your game-play? 

 

In this thread, eekeeboo, you yourself used the word 'integrity'. This word (as defined by the Oxford English Dictionary which is the guiding corpus of my British English) is defined as the following: the quality of being honest and having sound moral principles.

 

Are you honest? Hell, yes! Time after time after time you stick to your guns and reiterate the same message. I can choose the clear example of releasing win rates for controversial maps without anyone contradicting me, I hope? People may not agree with WG/Persha on this - fair enough. Players might become nettled that you toe the company line and point blank refuse to discuss the possibility of such a thing happening. Quite reasonably you point out that this decision is taken over your head. Again, I cannot argue with that. So far, so good - integrity ahoy!

 

But, what is this? You not condemning fail Flights? Oh, dear! You ask, "...what's wrong with it?" Shall I spell it out for you?

 

#1. The other WG stable games - World of Tanks and World of Warships - have coded it out as quantifiably a fail Platoon/Flight/Division reduces the chances of their side winning as they bring lower DPS/survivability/speed et cetera to the table.

 

#2. The 'good' players with a superior win rate might well be able to 'get away with it' and bring +/- 2MM planes in, but that is because a tiny proportion of players are exceptional. The classic bell curve clearly illustrates that 90%+ of people are incapable of doing this.

 

#3. As the CM it is clearly your duty to set a 'good example' and show new players/younger players how to play, use the Forum and deal with fellow players. In short, you must be 'better' than us and lead by example.

 

#4. Customer satisfaction! Who likes or welcomes fail Flights? If you represent WG/Persha, I assume you wish them to flourish? How does your quote achieve this?

 

So, honest you may be, but moral you have not been in this case. Please note that this is an analysis and criticism of your professional conduct and not a personal attack. Think of this as a bi-annual review - a procedure through which many of us have to go through and can be an opportunity to learn and improve. I am not insulting you, nor am I seeking to lessen your authority as CM. Rather I am inviting you just to put your hands up and say, "Oops - yes. I see your point. Sorry." Nothing more.

 

When I read your above quote my jaw quite literally dropped. In the midst of a large number of long-lasting bugs, a shocking patch which significantly changed the progression system and which was not run by the client base first, and a moderately unstable game platform prone to crashes … you say this? It is my considered opinion that this is a) not acceptable from our only point of contact with WG/Persha and that b) it may very well encourage younger and/or less mature players to lessen my chances of both enjoying and winning the game

 

Please, eekeeboo - be the better man and pour oil on troubled waters. Can you at least state that your words might have unsettled a few people? Could you accept that the point of view of people such as myself might be valid?



eekeeboo #68 Posted 06 July 2018 - 11:22 AM

    Community Manager

  • WG Staff
  • 3716 battles
  • 1,185
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Postbritinmadrid, on 05 July 2018 - 07:57 PM, said:

 

 

Moral principles are that of a person. For instance, "not lying" is a sound morale principle, but "lying to a person to not hurt their feelings" - what is more moral? 

 

I don't lie, and I don't hide things from players if I can provide the information. People calling me a liar and stating that I am purposefully hiding information is hiding a moral principle. 

 

The act of "fail flights" - This is subjective and ambigious, a good player in a tier 5 with a tier 8 player is less fail flight than 2 really bad players in tier 8s who choose to shoot GTs with their MG planes. There are instances where this function and feature is not a damning thing. Fail flights to troll, absolutely are wrong, fail flights to try something out? Have fun? Complete a challenge of achievement? Go for it, there was until recently an epic medal for killing planes 2 tiers higher than you, for instance. 

 

There were in the past, achievements and challenges to kill planes higher tier than you, so you took the 110C6 with explosive ammo and 1 shot 262s due to their vulnerability to red wing crits etc. 

 

I set a good example by proving that it's possible to do the right thing and have an impact in a game, no matter the plane you are in. It's about your approach and how you react to the battle. 

 

People may perceive this as I think that we should all be fail flights for all and that they are the best thing ever. I said they aren't wrong and do not always detrimentally affect the game. They certainly don't have an impact on a game or teams performance than anyone playing intoxicated.

 

For instance "Fail platoons" were the only way you could achieve many campaign missions in World of Tanks, making them necessary, like artillery mission to do 10x your hp and the same with TD mission. Or heavy and medium tanks requiring you to kill vehicles higher tier than you etc. 



Emtod #69 Posted 07 July 2018 - 12:14 PM

    Senior Airman

  • Member
  • 1975 battles
  • 22
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Posteekeeboo, on 06 July 2018 - 11:22 AM, said:

 

....

 

People may perceive this as I think that we should all be fail flights for all and that they are the best thing ever. I said they aren't wrong and do not always detrimentally affect the game. They certainly don't have an impact on a game or teams performance than anyone playing intoxicated.

 

For instance "Fail platoons" were the only way you could achieve many campaign missions in World of Tanks, making them necessary, like artillery mission to do 10x your hp and the same with TD mission. Or heavy and medium tanks requiring you to kill vehicles higher tier than you etc. 

 

 

Is that really your opinion?

Sorry mate, i might not be a WoWP veteran, but I can claim for myself to have enough experience with WoT on a reasonable good level.

One of the most annoying things in WoT beside afk/bot using by players was the use of such "fail platoons" (Which is the reason why WG changed the platoon rules - after years of complaints by the playerbase)

 

This might be the way you rigged get your objekt 260 - but for almost 99% of the cases the "players" using fail platoons were incompetent and had a great negative impact on their team/the victory.

(I dont want to offend you but the use of game mechanics not as intended  - even when possible - is very close to rigging. Where is here the difference between fail platoons and f.e. map/game bugs?) 

 

So please seperate whats good for you personally from whats good for the game per se.

A fail platoon with average or bad players is a complete fail for the own team in 99% of the cases, please dont use the 1% when it might work for argumentation.

 

WoWP suffers from player shortage and trolling fail platoons are a good way to frustate the remaining playerbase. 

 

(Sorry for my bad english but its not may native language)



Horcan #70 Posted 07 July 2018 - 06:05 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 1939 battles
  • 364
  • [_VI_] _VI_
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012
There is a very simple solution to fail platoons. Remove the fraking auto search for flight, nobody really used it ever, and it is very poorly designed. People dont know how to use it ( and i mean newbies) , some of the guys ready with some low tier , the other guy doesnt even see the setup displayed so small and not really visible on left side of the screen, he pick a bigger plane , dont know how to check when and how to start the battle, click battle and there you go, a fail platoon. Whoever want to do a flight no matter what will do it manually, with someone he knows.

Tha_Truth #71 Posted 08 July 2018 - 07:39 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 5405 battles
  • 138
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Posteekeeboo, on 08 June 2018 - 02:37 PM, said:

Other thread deaxter, your answer awaits! 

 

For others, keep the thread civil and follow rules. No grey line walking! 

 

 

 

link to that post you talk about would be a great referal eekeeboo :)
Fix in game flight-wing chat !!!!! 

eekeeboo #72 Posted 09 July 2018 - 08:41 AM

    Community Manager

  • WG Staff
  • 3716 battles
  • 1,185
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostEmtod, on 07 July 2018 - 12:14 PM, said:

 

 

The "fail platoons" were only an issue when the game shifted on maps. I'm sure you will remember tier 5 scouts in tier 10 games for example. That was the reason fail platoons weren't changed. Further to this low tier artillery were in high tier games. Personal missions required you to play in higher tier platoons with people to get the job done. 

 

In WoWP you were required to play in flights where you could achieve goals by shooting down higher tier planes. 

 

In WoT fail platoons weren't always the issue, it's the players who want to troll with them that are. Those players always find a way, from tier 6 atri platoons, to low tier tanks blocking arti and pushing them out the way. I've seen it all unfortunately. As for "rigged"? When the mission states you need to kill a heavy tank 2 tiers higher than yourself, there's only one way to do that consistently, playing with a heavy with pref mm a tier higher than you. Same as doing 10x hp with artillery. I would always carry my weight and do the job. Again the system isn't the problem, it is those who abuse the system, who will always find a way to do so. 

 

The game mechanics were intended that's why you had low tier arti that hit a max of tier 6 and 7. And as mentioned previous scouts that hit tier 5 and 6. "fail platoons" were always there as an intention with tier differences when a player would use their tank how they should. Like planes, using it how you should. 

 

If a person in WoWP says "Low tier planes never stand a chance against high tier planes" and I take a tier 5 into a tier 8 game, win the game, do the best on both teams. How am I trolling and failing? Again it is the player not the system at fault. 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Emtod #73 Posted 10 July 2018 - 04:10 PM

    Senior Airman

  • Member
  • 1975 battles
  • 22
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Posteekeeboo, on 09 July 2018 - 08:41 AM, said:

 

....

 

 

Sure, i remember tier 5 scouts in a tier 10 batte - but i also remember Idiots using tier 1 tanks in T8+ battles and leeching xp/credits by the team-bonus. Fail platoons weren`t changed, because WG was always incompetent reacting on negative developments in time - they need years to change erroneous mechanisms (fail platoons, bot using, afk/xp leeching, TK-system and so on).

And sorry mate, but before rework on arty/scouts (T8 was the highest arty tier) u cant compare the arty-class to other tank-classes (almost same with scouts).

I disagree with you that you have to play with fail-platoons to get the personal missions - you could do that, but you don't have to.

 

Can´t you understand, that the main problem is the "misuse" of fail-platoons, even by mistake?

Again: U may play well as lowtier in a "fail"-platoon but 90% of the playerbase - average player, weak player - will not.

 

Your argumentation is: "dangerous is not the gun - dangerous is the gun-user" --> from a technical point of view u may be right - its not the system, its the player. 

You can see the result of such mindset in the USA - with more gunshot victims per year than most of the other countries worldwide (only toped by failed states and civil war).

 

Same here in WoT/WoWp - 99% of the fail platoons will simply fail.

 

The only solution is to protect the playerbase from themselves by a set of rules to prevent misuse.

 

(Sorry for my bad english but its not my native language)

 

 

 


Edited by Emtod, 10 July 2018 - 04:12 PM.


britinmadrid #74 Posted 10 July 2018 - 05:23 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 3937 battles
  • 111
  • [FIFO] FIFO
  • Member since:
    06-17-2012

View PostEmtod, on 10 July 2018 - 05:10 PM, said:

The only solution is to protect the playerbase from themselves by a set of rules to prevent misuse.

 

(Sorry for my bad english but its not my native language)

 

Your English is good enough that we can understand your comment and appreciate the thought and intelligence behind it! 

 

A rule is a codified custom/standard intended to state what is not acceptable, with the force of sanction behind it. For example, if I constantly attack friendly players in WoWs I turn Pink, the damage starts to kill me instead of my target and, finally, I am banished from human games to Bot battles until I prove I can control myself. Similarly, in WoT I will turn Blue after a certain amount of damage at which point my own team may kill me without sanction.

 

If I use racist terms in chat in either WoT or WoWs, a simple Ticket will see me banned in short order. If I repeat this offense, each chat ban becomes correspondingly longer.

 

And if I Fail Platoon in WOT … oh, I cannot as it has been coded out of the game. Strange that.

 

This thread is curious as a small amount of coding would do away with the problem. Okay, I can see that with the massive quantity of bugs which need fixing in this AAA, €45-per-Premium game that this would be low on the list of priorities. I am not particularly happy with the fact, but can accept the situation and hope that in the mid-term it will be addressed.

 

What I do find odd is the fact that the CM seems incapable of condemning it and, surprisingly, actively defends it.

 

Ho hum.



eekeeboo #75 Posted 11 July 2018 - 07:45 AM

    Community Manager

  • WG Staff
  • 3716 battles
  • 1,185
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostEmtod, on 10 July 2018 - 04:10 PM, said:

 

 

I don't know if you remember but the "magic school bus" Su-14-1 at tier 6 was the original top tier arti. The hummel being the counterpart at tier 5. You could argue a similar thing right now for bombers and GAA that don't need to dogfight but just PvE style class can still have an effect. 

 

A fail platoon with limited mm spread could also include tier 8 bomber or GAA into a tier 10 game. The MM itself and the ability to actually have that freedom isn't the issue, the way people abuse it is. In WoWP you cannot just "leech" xp for wins etc as you gain xp based on performance of your aircraft with your aircraft roles. That's why a loss with rank 5 is better than a win with rank 1. It's not quite the same in tanks where you got a lot more xp for finishing a kill and spotting than you did for damage. 

 

I acknowledge that the way some people abuse the system to troll people is a problem. But as I said previously those same people will always find a system to abuse, the prevalence of "fail flights" and the impact it has on games is rather minor in both effect and frequency vs say.... Game breaking bugs and UI issues. In my thousands of battles I can count on my hands where people "fail flight" without a particular reason or test and I would still have spare fingers. 

 

As soon as you start trying to protect the playerbase from themselves that's how you then get others complaining at limited options and ability to tailor aircraft or simplification of modules like removal of rockets from fighters and the removal of gun pods from the 109G. 

 

Feedback as it may be. You want me to acknowledge your statement. Now I wonder if you are able to acknowledge the above? 

 

View Postbritinmadrid, on 10 July 2018 - 05:23 PM, said:

 

 

And yet I don't ask you to agree with me, but you demand that I agree with yourself. Surprisingly informed opinions different from their own are something some cannot tolerate?

 

 

 



britinmadrid #76 Posted 11 July 2018 - 07:21 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 3937 battles
  • 111
  • [FIFO] FIFO
  • Member since:
    06-17-2012

View Posteekeeboo, on 11 July 2018

And yet I don't ask you to agree with me, but you demand that I agree with yourself. Surprisingly informed opinions different from their own are something some cannot tolerate?

 

Please do not put words in my mouth, eekeeboo - it is neither courteous nor professional.

 

I understand perfectly well that there exist two eekeeboos: the man and the CM. The man quite probably holds differing political, religious and culinary opinions than my good self. More power to you and, as the French say, “Vive le diference!”. I played against zen monk an hour ago which was, as far as I am aware, the first time I have done so. He spoke to Clean, I said hello to him, he greeted me and all was friendly and fun even though we won. You win some and you lose some, but at the end of the day it is a fun game.

 

I do not ‘demand’ that eekee the man agrees with me. However, I do require a certain level of morality/professionalism from any and all  corporate agents who provide me with a service which I pay for. Just as I am evaluated each and every week on the very expensive training I provide for my clients, so do I turn a critical eye on the boiler maintenance technician, plumber or car mechanic to whom I pay large chunks of money.

 

Pop over to visit me and I shall buy you a few cold drinks, stuff you full of tapas and we’ll undoubtedly bond and find we have a great deal in common. Fail to condemn Fail Flights in your role (voluntarily accepted, one would assume) as CM, however, and we will find ourselves on opposite sides of the fence.

 

I fail to see how that is me ‘demanding’ that you agree with me. Rather, I’d argue that you are failing to recognize the universal constraints which arrive when one accepts a corporate role which might well conflict with one’s personal opinions. 

 

As it appears that we will not see eye-to-eye on this issue, I’d suggest we just agree to disagree.


Edited by britinmadrid, 11 July 2018 - 07:23 PM.


eekeeboo #77 Posted 12 July 2018 - 10:22 AM

    Community Manager

  • WG Staff
  • 3716 battles
  • 1,185
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Postbritinmadrid, on 11 July 2018 - 07:21 PM, said:

 

 

 

Pop over to visit me and I shall buy you a few cold drinks, stuff you full of tapas and we’ll undoubtedly bond and find we have a great deal in common. Fail to condemn Fail Flights in your role (voluntarily accepted, one would assume) as CM, however, and we will find ourselves on opposite sides of the fence.

 

I fail to see how that is me ‘demanding’ that you agree with me. Rather, I’d argue that you are failing to recognize the universal constraints which arrive when one accepts a corporate role which might well conflict with one’s personal opinions. 

 

As it appears that we will not see eye-to-eye on this issue, I’d suggest we just agree to disagree.

 

It is a mere statement. You have repeatedly stated on the lines of: What I do find odd is the fact that the CM seems incapable of condemning it and, surprisingly, actively defends it.

 

I am capable of it, I have the opinion I don't think it's a big issue, especially in contrast with other issues in-game.

 

My professional capacity is not to condemn actions because people demand and request I do so, especially if they do not break the rules. My professional behavior is judged on my handling and speaking with people in a professional manner. The moment I say "You are not entitled to an opinion, you are wrong and you are stupid, I can't believe you don't agree with me." That is when my professionalism can be called into question and you can rightly and freely criticize my behaviour for being a plonker. 

 

You may not agree with how the technician fixes your boiler, but as long as your technician fixes the boiler and it's safe and it works. Then that technician has performed the job you have paid him for. Whether you agree with the practices or not. 

 

I don't have ill-feelings towards many of you, and drinks and tapas sound amazing, I'll bring the croissants and pastries! 

 

And that's I agree to agree to disagree! I never expect people to agree with me, not always. But I will always try to help people inform their opinions whether people respect me for that or not. As long as I remain who I am and stick to my morals I can happily say I did what I could. I am aware I can come across as abrupt and sometimes "condescending", that is the nature of British humour and sarcasm at the best of times! 

 

 






2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users