Jump to content


Please ADD a mode close to old WoWp


  • Please log in to reply
142 replies to this topic

Poll: Please support the addition of second mode (55 members have cast votes)

You have to complete 10 battles in order to participate this poll.

Please support the permanent addition of a second mode close to old WoWp

  1. I want/have no problem with a second additional mode close to old WoWp (44 votes [80.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 80.00%

  2. No a second additional mode like this must NEVER be implemented (11 votes [20.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 20.00%

Vote Hide poll

Grumpy_Guts #21 Posted 21 July 2018 - 07:35 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Conquest Member
  • 4435 battles
  • 900
  • [BBMM] BBMM
  • Member since:
    08-08-2012

O Contreras, it would allow more people to both play and dabble in more formats thus contributing to the game.

Variety being the spice of life plus the more human players in any battles " The Less Friggin Bots ".  



eekeeboo #22 Posted 21 July 2018 - 11:24 PM

    Community Manager

  • WG Staff
  • 3780 battles
  • 1,566
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

Thank-you for keeping things on topic. I promise you as long as this doesn't devolve into another troll den, there is nothing to worry about. The best way for this to happen is to avoid provocative (insulting) responses. We all share a desire for this game to be good, popular and engaging. That might mean something slightly different to each of us, but that doesn't mean it can't help put information and ideas to hopefully get there. 

 

:honoring:



R0I #23 Posted 22 July 2018 - 12:54 AM

    Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 25 battles
  • 68
  • Member since:
    08-12-2015

hello all.

 

View PostBiBaBummsebiene, on 21 July 2018 - 06:13 PM, said:

 

So plz give the spammers a time-ban for the forums. Don’t make the girls and guys who really care write everything over and over again.

 

So what is your point? Why you don’t want a second mode? Any real reasons behind this vote? And plz stay respectful.

 

greetings,

BiBa

 

edit: I don’t know whose twink R0I is, but again he tries to ruin the threat. Stop it.

View Postzen_monk_, on 21 July 2018 - 06:38 PM, said:

 

Yep.

 

Whoever he is, he is seriously undermining dreambill's thread and your suggestions. Too bad to be mined by "one of yours", guys. He started to post his wisecracks in other threads too today.

 

Damn. I was glad I caught the the thread the moment it was posted to be the first of 2.x proponents to give you a positive boost, but the treachery came from the opposite side - opposite from anything creative or productive.

 

 

 

By the way, the guy already broke a multiple of forum rules:

 

Be constructive

  • When posting, please make sure you do so with good intentions. Refrain from posting when you don't have anything positive or constructive to say on the topic.
  • Your post should contribute to the discussion or the solution of the issue being discussed.
  • If the only purpose of your post is to be negative, it is not worth posting.

4. Don’t spam!

Avoid:

  • Posting irrelevant content

edit

ninjad by eek

 

 

i reported those 2 comments. i voted in favour of the initiative and all what i have commented was in favour of people who wants this.

i tried the new version and i liked it.

so i reported those 2 persons who was asking who am i for naming and shaming.

i like the new game better than older one but i voted Yes to keep all people ok. so please some respect to others people.

my comments did not violated any of the Eula (End-user license agreement ).

PS: i commented with positive Quotes about peace  when posting here is another one all then are Yoda Proverbs just google for all i have wrote you will see peace...jedi  ...

if I'm breaking something, please let me now. i am thinking about the wellcome i had ...
i hope it was a misunderstanding from some users ...
 peace to all

“You will know when you are calm, at peace. Passive. A Jedi uses the Force for knowledge and defense, never for attack.”

thank you all and good night.

_________

 

PLEASE NOTE: You can still post names and pictures with names, what you cannot do is post a thread that can be seen as naming and shaming!

 

Recently we have been reviewing the issue of naming and shaming on the forums, as it can lead to threads where hostility can thrive. We would like to provide you, our amazing players, a fun, safe, and positive environment to discuss and share your experience!

 

We have come to the decision that we will be  tightening the reins on the naming and shaming issue to help us work towards this goal.

 

What this means for the Tankers is that we would like you to avoid calling out individuals in forum topics and posts.

 

Here are some guidelines to help everyone see exactly where the line is:

 

  • Don’t let names be visible. If you want to completely block out a name to protect the identity on the battle results screen or a screenshot, that is fine.
  • Posting about an unfavorable situation or even teammate is okay. Just nothing that would be able to reliably identify them can be visible.
    • “I had a game where this this Covenanter just sat at spawn and fired at a rock…”

*Screenshot of target with the vehicle name visible*

This is OK.

 

  • “I had a game where this this Covenanter just sat at spawn and fired at a rock…” 

   *Screenshot of target with the vehicle name visible* 

             *Screenshot of battle results where CC_Sly is one of 2 Covenanters that played* 

              This is not OK

 

If anyone has any questions regarding this announcement or our interpretations of the Forum Rules regarding naming and shaming, please feel free to contact me and I will be happy to answer any of your questions!

 

Thank you!

 

 


Edited by R0I, 22 July 2018 - 01:58 AM.

I really would rather not rain on someone's parade, or kill the fantasy of "let's all just go back to the way it was."  But reality is harsh, sometimes.  I think Wargaming would generate a lot of good will by adding a Deathmatch mode using the current flight models and UI, and call it "King of the HIll" mode.  No respawns, no GAA or bombers, just you, your airplane, and your wits against whatever comes.  Make it super-simple and maybe folks would not only be attracted to it, but also to the Conquest mode.  And Attrition.  Heck, I still want to see the "Bomber Flight" mode where you defend or attack the bombers headed for your base.  When your base (or the other guy's base) is destroyed, the survivors win.  

Horcan #24 Posted 22 July 2018 - 01:01 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 2073 battles
  • 408
  • [_VI_] _VI_
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012
While i voted yes, since i dont care if hardcore mode is implemented because i wont play it , i strongly believe it would do more harm than good. Because the very low population will split into two modes and new players will not see any increase that it might bring, but two modes with less population that conquest actually have right now.

R0I #25 Posted 22 July 2018 - 01:06 AM

    Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 25 battles
  • 68
  • Member since:
    08-12-2015

View PostHorcan, on 22 July 2018 - 01:01 AM, said:

While i voted yes, since i dont care if hardcore mode is implemented because i wont play it , i strongly believe it would do more harm than good. Because the very low population will split into two modes and new players will not see any increase that it might bring, but two modes with less population that conquest actually have right now.

 

i am with you i never really liked old mode but when i come back to play it was lot of bots i voted yes for seeing more people not for being asked about. i tried the game 2 years ago and i did not like it (i am permitted to say that ?) i come back and really liking the new game mode i saw the poll and voted YES just because:found a lot of botts and i just want to see MORE HUMANS in the Game  ....

who am i... i dont know how thing are  happening here .. 

i was named and shamed but i am sorry next time i will represent my personnal identitiy to users :For security reasons, please do not provide your personal data or the personal data of a third party here because we might be unable to protect such data in accordance with the Wargaming Privacy Policy.

i will stop posting here anymore. if you have questions to me please PM  me or in the game i will answer you with pleasure.

peace with all .

David.

 

 


Edited by R0I, 22 July 2018 - 01:13 AM.

I really would rather not rain on someone's parade, or kill the fantasy of "let's all just go back to the way it was."  But reality is harsh, sometimes.  I think Wargaming would generate a lot of good will by adding a Deathmatch mode using the current flight models and UI, and call it "King of the HIll" mode.  No respawns, no GAA or bombers, just you, your airplane, and your wits against whatever comes.  Make it super-simple and maybe folks would not only be attracted to it, but also to the Conquest mode.  And Attrition.  Heck, I still want to see the "Bomber Flight" mode where you defend or attack the bombers headed for your base.  When your base (or the other guy's base) is destroyed, the survivors win.  

Grumpy_Guts #26 Posted 22 July 2018 - 01:13 AM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Conquest Member
  • 4435 battles
  • 900
  • [BBMM] BBMM
  • Member since:
    08-08-2012

It could be a gamble yes but is not the game as is ? if another mode attracts some back to the game others will follow and some playing now have the chance to experience both.

The game should be able to keep all who like to fly interested and keep coming back to play not just for a few who like only one way to play.

More options foster more interest hence more players, win win.



Horcan #27 Posted 22 July 2018 - 01:26 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 2073 battles
  • 408
  • [_VI_] _VI_
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012
No new players will go to hardcore mode, as will most likely be some old veterans ground, full of OP planes and sealclubbing fiesta of anyone who dares to enter and mindless bots. So it wont attract new players, but like you said some old ones that refuse to play 2.0. At the same time all actual players going to that mode will leave the conquest mode even more deserted so no new players will come there either if all the games will be 1v1 or 2v2 PLus bots. So i dont see the win win , rather loss loss and unplug.New modes are needed when MM is saturated, like WoT was at tier X ( and they made grand battles ) or tier 8 ( and they made frontline). You dont make new modes until you have enough population to risk splitting  it between modes and have two deserted ones.

Edited by Horcan, 22 July 2018 - 01:28 AM.


R0I #28 Posted 22 July 2018 - 01:30 AM

    Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 25 battles
  • 68
  • Member since:
    08-12-2015

View PostHorcan, on 22 July 2018 - 01:26 AM, said:

No new players will go to hardcore mode, as will most likely be some old veterans ground, full of OP planes and sealclubbing fiesta of anyone who dares to enter and mindless bots. So it wont attract new players, but like you said some old ones that refuse to play 2.0. At the same time all actual players going to that mode will leave the conquest mode even more deserted so no new players will come there either if all the games will be 1v1 or 2v2 PLus bots. So i dont see the win win , rather loss loss and unplug.New modes are needed when MM is saturated, like WoT was at tier X ( and they made grand battles ) or tier 8 ( and they made frontline). You dont make new modes until you have enough population to risk splitting  it between modes and have two deserted ones.

 

the important is not to win or loose.. i really had fun and liked the updated game.

if they want other mode i am not against if it will bring more players in game.

“To be Jedi is to face the truth, and choose. Give off light, or darkness, Padawan. Be a candle or the night.” Jedi Master Yoda


Edited by R0I, 22 July 2018 - 01:33 AM.

I really would rather not rain on someone's parade, or kill the fantasy of "let's all just go back to the way it was."  But reality is harsh, sometimes.  I think Wargaming would generate a lot of good will by adding a Deathmatch mode using the current flight models and UI, and call it "King of the HIll" mode.  No respawns, no GAA or bombers, just you, your airplane, and your wits against whatever comes.  Make it super-simple and maybe folks would not only be attracted to it, but also to the Conquest mode.  And Attrition.  Heck, I still want to see the "Bomber Flight" mode where you defend or attack the bombers headed for your base.  When your base (or the other guy's base) is destroyed, the survivors win.  

houghtonbee #29 Posted 22 July 2018 - 03:08 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 1026 battles
  • 148
  • Member since:
    06-23-2013
Much as I would love to see the option of the old game mode (or even invasion and attrition available as well) with such a small player base there is realistically little chance of WG diluting it further between 2 or more game modes. 

dreambill #30 Posted 22 July 2018 - 10:05 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Conquest Member
  • 1194 battles
  • 476
  • [GR-12] GR-12
  • Member since:
    07-25-2013

WG is trying with attrition to have something "different" from time to time, there is place to at least try an "old mode"

BUT since this implementation lets say in weekends as attrition is now days, will make Conquest players sad, it is better to try it alongside conquest.

I never said that this mode will save WoWp (it didn't for 4 years), but has the potential to add players (back?) to the game and as others said maybe an alternative for them for a game or two.

The only player reduction in conquest may be from old players who play 2-3 battles a week in conquest, so no big deal for its population. (old players playing full time probably like it better - so no switch for them)

WG depending on results can always withdraw it - stop it - or as said during conquest launch - keep it for special use (tournaments?) but is essential to all who want this, to "see" something happening towards this soon.

It will easy a lot the bitterness of killing V1.9 - I believe - and the unnecessary division between players.


Edited by dreambill, 22 July 2018 - 10:09 AM.


serbsproud_4c #31 Posted 22 July 2018 - 10:06 AM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Squadron Leader
  • 186 battles
  • 861
  • [4CAF] 4CAF
  • Member since:
    05-12-2012

View Posteekeeboo, on 22 July 2018 - 12:24 AM, said:

Thank-you for keeping things on topic. I promise you as long as this doesn't devolve into another troll den, there is nothing to worry about. The best way for this to happen is to avoid provocative (insulting) responses. We all share a desire for this game to be good, popular and engaging. That might mean something slightly different to each of us, but that doesn't mean it can't help put information and ideas to hopefully get there. 

 

:honoring:

 


Edited by serbsproud_4c, 22 July 2018 - 10:08 AM.


johncarps #32 Posted 22 July 2018 - 08:15 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Conquest Member
  • 665 battles
  • 1,852
  • Member since:
    11-21-2013

Ok you say the same things we say since one year

​but in constructive way

if it come back to us a great plane game i m ok

 

​let see what

will happen


définition d'équilibrage : soit d'accord ou dégage de là

balancing definition: either agree or clear from there


serbsproud_4c #33 Posted 22 July 2018 - 08:51 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Squadron Leader
  • 186 battles
  • 861
  • [4CAF] 4CAF
  • Member since:
    05-12-2012
 

View Postjohncarps, on 22 July 2018 - 09:15 PM, said:

​let see what

will happen

 

Well as Monty Python said: you come from nothing, you will go into nothing, so what will you loose?? nothing! 

 

 

its easy: this is the Game as it should be:

 

 

 

But should be is something you could wish, but they try it on there own way,...the result?

 

so the truth is, the Game is like this:

 

 

 

 



R0I #34 Posted 23 July 2018 - 01:31 PM

    Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 25 battles
  • 68
  • Member since:
    08-12-2015

Forwarded from soshootmenow (US FORUM)

 

Block Quote

 

OK....Got a hold of Radmo and this was the exact response posted by the developers regarding his complaint....

 

 

Hello MAJ_Radmo,


We are sorry that a game doesn't impress you and cause negative emotions.
Unfortunately, at this time we don't plan to return on version 1.9.
However, we are constantly working on improving the game, so it is possible that in the future, we will add opportunity (or make some kind of mode), where you can choose between 2.0 or 1.9 mechanics.
So it is possible, that in future updates, something will please you.


If you have any more questions please don't hesitate to ask. ........ POSTED TO ME FROM WORLD OF WAR PLANES .....

 

 

 

     So.....In a way they may have said something to 'shut him up'......BUT.....what is interesting (and what you cannot see because he did not have room to post) was that Radmo DID NOT MENTION A TWO MODE GAME TO THEM.....at all. This was WG's response. On their own. THEY mentioned a two mode game as a possibility. It gives me reason to hope that someone over there is taking notice of this thread and our efforts and information that we have been working on.

 

So what do you think ? this is a positive news that future will confirm.

 


Edited by R0I, 23 July 2018 - 01:35 PM.

I really would rather not rain on someone's parade, or kill the fantasy of "let's all just go back to the way it was."  But reality is harsh, sometimes.  I think Wargaming would generate a lot of good will by adding a Deathmatch mode using the current flight models and UI, and call it "King of the HIll" mode.  No respawns, no GAA or bombers, just you, your airplane, and your wits against whatever comes.  Make it super-simple and maybe folks would not only be attracted to it, but also to the Conquest mode.  And Attrition.  Heck, I still want to see the "Bomber Flight" mode where you defend or attack the bombers headed for your base.  When your base (or the other guy's base) is destroyed, the survivors win.  

no_wing #35 Posted 23 July 2018 - 02:41 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Conquest Member
  • 23 battles
  • 107
  • [DITO] DITO
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014

this ist what the majority of players wanted just a 2nd mode just a f... 2nd mode

is this so difficult for WG?

 

well i try to speak WG language...

"this means more money for you WG"

 

and please if u did

add the rear gunner control to old mechanics mode

 

 


Edited by no_wing, 23 July 2018 - 02:42 PM.


R0I #36 Posted 23 July 2018 - 03:16 PM

    Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 25 battles
  • 68
  • Member since:
    08-12-2015

View Postno_wing, on 23 July 2018 - 02:41 PM, said:

this ist what the majority of players wanted just a 2nd mode just a f... 2nd mode

is this so difficult for WG?

 

well i try to speak WG language...

"this means more money for you WG"

 

and please if u did

add the rear gunner control to old mechanics mode

 

 

 

I expect a beginning of change with the next october update release.

lot of Player base exist and not flying.. conquest is ok but boring when repetitive...dog fighting is more challenging humans vs humans. clans vs clans.

i will like to see minimap and hud reintegrated. fov to downsize the plane in the screen etc lot of controls were not bad. lead  indicator can help new players in shooting. camera view on loked target....

a question : conquest mode could not be made with the old settings ?

 

 


I really would rather not rain on someone's parade, or kill the fantasy of "let's all just go back to the way it was."  But reality is harsh, sometimes.  I think Wargaming would generate a lot of good will by adding a Deathmatch mode using the current flight models and UI, and call it "King of the HIll" mode.  No respawns, no GAA or bombers, just you, your airplane, and your wits against whatever comes.  Make it super-simple and maybe folks would not only be attracted to it, but also to the Conquest mode.  And Attrition.  Heck, I still want to see the "Bomber Flight" mode where you defend or attack the bombers headed for your base.  When your base (or the other guy's base) is destroyed, the survivors win.  

R0I #37 Posted 23 July 2018 - 08:13 PM

    Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 25 battles
  • 68
  • Member since:
    08-12-2015

View Postjohncarps, on 22 July 2018 - 08:15 PM, said:

Ok you say the same things we say since one year

​but in constructive way

if it come back to us a great plane game i m ok

 

​let see what

will happen

 

fully agree with you. good luck to all
I really would rather not rain on someone's parade, or kill the fantasy of "let's all just go back to the way it was."  But reality is harsh, sometimes.  I think Wargaming would generate a lot of good will by adding a Deathmatch mode using the current flight models and UI, and call it "King of the HIll" mode.  No respawns, no GAA or bombers, just you, your airplane, and your wits against whatever comes.  Make it super-simple and maybe folks would not only be attracted to it, but also to the Conquest mode.  And Attrition.  Heck, I still want to see the "Bomber Flight" mode where you defend or attack the bombers headed for your base.  When your base (or the other guy's base) is destroyed, the survivors win.  

eekeeboo #38 Posted 24 July 2018 - 07:14 AM

    Community Manager

  • WG Staff
  • 3780 battles
  • 1,566
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

The thing some people forget, bringing back 1.9 is not an option. Even running it along side. For various reasons, but look at it this way. Yes it would increase the amount of money some may spend. Would it cover the cost of itself being run simultaneously alongside 2.0 and conquest? Well it didn't before, I imagine it would not do so in the future either. 

 

Game modes can possibly looked at and as mentioned previously a "hardcore" mode was being looked in to. But it would be nonsensical to just copy the old format into the new one when it is so fundamentally different to what we have now. It needs a balance and it needs to fit. 



Rusty_9 #39 Posted 24 July 2018 - 10:14 AM

    Airman Basic

  • Member
  • 66 battles
  • 5
  • Member since:
    08-07-2017

FWIW, and I don't have much flying time in WoWp so i may have missed something here, but...

 

in flying games, what attracts a lot of people (well, me anyway) is the dogfights. The real, messy chaos that was over mid-end of WW1 and various 'phases' of WW2... and even N. Korea in the 50's. So, a 'second' game mode that focuses on this would be a real +++ for me - like, 7v7/12v12/15v15 (depending on server population) with no re-spawn and no capping - just a duel to the death in the skies (maybe a time-limit and points based on HP pool and planes surviving at the end?). Or maybe include a 'raiding party escort' mode (so all plane types can play) - again, no bots, just PvP, with a balanced number of GAA/Bombers and fighters. GAA/Bombers get points by attacking enemy spawn/base. Return to own spawn to 'reload'. Fighters need to protect their bombers AND protect their base. Again, no respawn, with a timer, points also given for damage to enemy base, and points lost for damage to own base.

 

Just ideas... maybe I'm showing my ignorance in the current game mode here... but to not have bots will be much more interesting!



zen_monk_ #40 Posted 24 July 2018 - 10:27 AM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Alpha Tester
  • 2971 battles
  • 610
  • [__] __
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostRusty_9, on 24 July 2018 - 10:14 AM, said:

7v7/12v12/15v15 (depending on server population) with no re-spawn and no capping ... - no bots, just PvP

 

And here is the greatest obstacle for such a mode.

 

7v7 just might be possible in the afternoons, but 12v12 or even 15v15? Not unless you're willing to wait at least half an hour for the battle.

 

3v3 is more realistic.

 

View Postno_wing, on 24 July 2018 - 10:23 AM, said:

 

im fed up with this negative way of thinking

 

JUST DO IT

 

That's exactly what they said in Minsk when reviewing the entire 1.x performance.
 




3 user(s) are reading this topic

1 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users


    zen_monk_