Jump to content


A bots game.

Bots bot prefix

  • Please log in to reply
124 replies to this topic

n0_f4k3 #41 Posted 05 August 2018 - 09:41 AM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Conquest Member
  • 96 battles
  • 545
  • [JFA] JFA
  • Member since:
    06-20-2012
Monk,why you think this version of the game is NO fail? any proves? its not enough that you like it! its so annoying how you defend this dying game. if someone say "no" you want a bla bla prove if you say "yes" its the truth and YOU dont need any proves for it..........your one of the worst discussion partner here so far. i bet iam talking to a new community manager right now,tell me you will get this job,huh?

It's not about
Win or lose
Because we all lose
When they feed on the souls of the innocent
Blood-drenched pavement
Keep on moving though the waters stay raging


 


zen_monk_ #42 Posted 05 August 2018 - 10:21 AM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

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

This version of the game is more successful. Proof is in WG saying so and sticking to it - putting their money where their mouth are, if you please.

 

Maybe I am the worst discussion partner because I use logic and cold facts. You simply can't dispute my sentence above. What's troubling you is an element of Total Perspective Vortex, which gives an unpleasant tone to all of your statements along the lines of "we oldtimers are important, the game will die without us, WG must convince us to come back..." etc.

 

The answer to all of it is "no".



eekeeboo #43 Posted 05 August 2018 - 11:36 AM

    Community Manager

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

View Postjohncarps, on 05 August 2018 - 09:12 AM, said:

 

Community events are organised by the community, that's why they're community events and not in-game events. There are community events organised by various people, but some are actively choosing not to look at them because it's not 1.9 and then saying there's no community event. 

 

It is standard practice to email players throughout the course of time to inform people of changes and adaptations to the game. You will not be shown player numbers for the foreseeable future and repeatedly asking for them and commenting about the lack of them isn't going to change this. 

 

View Postdreambill, on 05 August 2018 - 09:26 AM, said:

 

 

Another game mode is more ideal, but there are things to overcome before this. The important thing is to make sure both modes are sustainable. Conquest has the ability to fly against players, but the player base is lower than what would be able to give you that. You would still get this problem with a more hardcore mode as you would still have lower numbers than what would be needed to populate completely full games all the time. 

 

View Postn0_f4k3, on 05 August 2018 - 09:41 AM, said:

 

 

The evidence of changes to the game, more interaction and feedback to developers and work on increasing information. This does not happen with dying/dead games that people seem to think wowp is about. 


Edited by eekeeboo, 05 August 2018 - 11:38 AM.


Horcan #44 Posted 05 August 2018 - 12:07 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 2073 battles
  • 408
  • [_VI_] _VI_
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Posteekeeboo, on 05 August 2018 - 12:36 PM, said:

The evidence of changes to the game, more interaction and feedback to developers and work on increasing information. This does not happen with dying/dead games that people seem to think wowp is about. 

You're living in a dream mate. The necesity of having bots to fill the games is enough proof that game is nearly dead. Just cause 3 guys still working on it to realease stuff every now and then doesnt mean otherwise.



eekeeboo #45 Posted 05 August 2018 - 12:30 PM

    Community Manager

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

View PostHorcan, on 05 August 2018 - 12:07 PM, said:

You're living in a dream mate. The necesity of having bots to fill the games is enough proof that game is nearly dead. Just cause 3 guys still working on it to realease stuff every now and then doesnt mean otherwise.

 

The fact bots have been filling the game for such a long time is to help with queue times and helping to keep games useful and better for people than 2v2 games. There's more to success than just pure player numbers in a game/business model ;) 

Grumpy_Guts #46 Posted 05 August 2018 - 12:43 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

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

Just had two battles following a bot in a IL-40 and it was impossible to keep up, seemed like it had full boost for ever.

Are they not subject to same restrictions as us ? 



Horcan #47 Posted 05 August 2018 - 01:00 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 2073 battles
  • 408
  • [_VI_] _VI_
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Posteekeeboo, on 05 August 2018 - 01:30 PM, said:

 

The fact bots have been filling the game for such a long time is to help with queue times and helping to keep games useful and better for people than 2v2 games. There's more to success than just pure player numbers in a game/business model ;) 

 

You just agreed with me. The game was originally designed and intended to be 15v15. The fact that bots are needed not to be 2v2 proves my point.

dreambill #48 Posted 05 August 2018 - 02:20 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

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

View Posteekeeboo, on 05 August 2018 - 11:36 AM, said:

Another game mode is more ideal, but there are things to overcome before this. The important thing is to make sure both modes are sustainable. Conquest has the ability to fly against players, but the player base is lower than what would be able to give you that. You would still get this problem with a more hardcore mode as you would still have lower numbers than what would be needed to populate completely full games all the time.

low numbers of players, wasn't solved so far neither with V1.9 nor V2.0 as you just said.

I'm not asking a hardcore mode without bots, I know their presence is nessessary cause of low population.

But my observation so far is that conqouest can attract new players easier than old mode, but lucks (after some time) the essence to keep them. (thus low population so far)

Some ofcource they'll stay forever, but throw away a player base of 2-3k loyal players to end up with a same amount of (different) loyal players doesn't sound so succesfull to me.

WG gets its feedback (I hope) There are people that like concuest, but there are also people who like the old mode.

Success lies somewere in between (If possible to design somehow this), or 2 separate modes to please all INMHO

For me would sound logical to use conquest to start, learn, have fun, get some middle - hi tier planes without much worries, and when someone reach a level that needed some more serious challenge switch to old mode. (Or whatever everyone likes ofc)


Edited by dreambill, 05 August 2018 - 02:25 PM.


johncarps #49 Posted 05 August 2018 - 04:08 PM

    Second Lieutenant

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

View Postzen_monk_, on 05 August 2018 - 11:21 AM, said:

This version of the game is more successful. Proof is in WG saying so and sticking to it - putting their money where their mouth are, if you please.

 

Maybe I am the worst discussion partner because I use logic and cold facts. You simply can't dispute my sentence above. What's troubling you is an element of Total Perspective Vortex, which gives an unpleasant tone to all of your statements along the lines of "we oldtimers are important, the game will die without us, WG must convince us to come back..." etc.

 

The answer to all of it is "no".

 

you use your logic, but have no facts and no numbers, like you say you repeat what THEY say because THEY know

you are not the best discussion partner because you don't want to discuss, you use the same system as the 1.9 player use, say something and dont listen the others. no pb for me

i don't want to be important, i dont want wg ask me to come back, i want to play a plane game, with cooperate and team playing, i dont like warthunder and 2.0 don't give me that, so i wait

 

View Posteekeeboo, on 05 August 2018 - 12:36 PM, said:

Community events are organised by the community, that's why they're community events and not in-game events. There are community events organised by various people, but some are actively choosing not to look at them because it's not 1.9 and then saying there's no community event. 

 

It is standard practice to email players throughout the course of time to inform people of changes and adaptations to the game. You will not be shown player numbers for the foreseeable future and repeatedly asking for them and commenting about the lack of them isn't going to change this. 

 

 

Another game mode is more ideal, but there are things to overcome before this. The important thing is to make sure both modes are sustainable. Conquest has the ability to fly against players, but the player base is lower than what would be able to give you that. You would still get this problem with a more hardcore mode as you would still have lower numbers than what would be needed to populate completely full games all the time. 

 

 

The evidence of changes to the game, more interaction and feedback to developers and work on increasing information. This does not happen with dying/dead games that people seem to think wowp is about. 

 

tanatoy, askolek and raya made community event, so official wg create community event that's what i say (if you want i can give the links, we need a cold speak with facts and numbers ^^ one exemple :http://forum.worldof...u-18-septembre/

last try after 2.0 rising : http://forum.worldof...__fromsearch__1 and : NOTHING ?

 

you say there was community event on 2.0 : how many ppl take place in them ? (and don't hide behind the ppl dont want to come because they love 1.9, you say the number of new player is better than before=

http://forum.worldof...sts-and-events/ : where are they i see 0 since 2016 ?

http://forum.worldof...-et-evenements/ : 0 since 2017 (last one was cancelled by the outcoming of 2.0)

 

ok lets wait your new game mode and see, but you say, from what THEY say, the player base is lower ... (and where does it was written the new hardcore mode must be without bot ?)

 

i don 't say wowp is dead, i say flying mode (i love, i was a normal player and have fun with my joystick) is dead, is not the same

 

i never have mail for wowp before 2.0, we often ask tanatoy for the possibility of mailing on 1.9 (in particulary for events) and the answer was no (ask him he works for the same boss)


Edited by johncarps, 05 August 2018 - 04:29 PM.

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

balancing definition: either agree or clear from there


zen_monk_ #50 Posted 05 August 2018 - 04:39 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

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

View Postjohncarps, on 05 August 2018 - 04:08 PM, said:

 

you use your logic, but have no facts and no numbers, like you say you repeat what THEY say because THEY know

 

Of course I don't have the exact numbers, I'm not the company. But the company has it. And that's where logic (and quite a bit of rl business experience) comes into play.

 

If they say now is better than before and place all their resources and finances into this, then they know - they who have all the data. Bear in mind, the number of players is not the main interest of the company. It's something else. And they are very pleased now. As opposed to before.

 

View Postjohncarps, on 05 August 2018 - 04:08 PM, said:

you are not the best discussion partner because you don't want to discuss, you use the same system as the 1.9 player use, say something and dont listen the others. no pb for me

i don't want to be important, i dont want wg ask me to come back, i want to play a plane game, with cooperate and team playing, i dont like warthunder and 2.0 don't give me that, so i wait

 

Quite the contrary. I discuss, explain why we have 2.x for almost a year now, explain why you won't be getting it back, explain why the old player base is not important, why you should take a company's word if it's backed with financial commitment... now if you don't like it and it messes with your plans to wait - that's a different thing.



johncarps #51 Posted 05 August 2018 - 04:55 PM

    Second Lieutenant

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

View Postzen_monk_, on 05 August 2018 - 05:39 PM, said:

 

 now if you don't like it and it messes with your plans to wait - that's a different thing.

 

read what i write ; it's not a pb for me, i don't have to like or not what you think and it won't change what i make with the actual game 

I understand you love the actual game and i m happy for you with that, but don't say you have fact because you have any and what i see when i play with my t10 one year after the dev is 2 vs 2 battles (like old version) without the flying feeling

 

you want ppl stop saying roll back 1.9

make it too and stop say i just want a roll back when you are out of arg, i don't want a roll back, i m stupid but i understand (i try) that it's not impossible (technicaly) but for wg is unlogic (with the force v2.0 ) and they don't want. i just want a game where the fighting is important, where squadron play is important and where plane fly (and to be full with fun on joystick ^^), and training and understand are important (no insert an other coin and go again)

you name it 3.0 or 2.05.2580 or what you want it's not important for me(i know 1.9 is the evil so use the name you want)

 

and say wg is happy because they make money with the new multigrinding evolution of their game ok, but i think if in past they made e sport and other country or type of plane they make the same, but they prefer touch the player who don't want or have time to develop skill and play, it's their choice not mine.

with your cold facts in one post you say MUCH MORE PLAYERS so don't say after the number of players is not the main interest ;-) i prefer much new players (but i m not sure more and as you say we don't have the numbers) and who wants quicks develop so give money (for the moment)

 

for the end for me, you are totaly right and i 'm totaly agree ; you explain not exchange (and that s the base of a discuss)

 


Edited by johncarps, 05 August 2018 - 05:32 PM.

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

balancing definition: either agree or clear from there


eekeeboo #52 Posted 05 August 2018 - 09:28 PM

    Community Manager

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

View PostGrumpy_Guts, on 05 August 2018 - 12:43 PM, said:

 

 

What plane were you in by any chance? They generally just use full power until it's gone, but it doesn't mean the IL40 isn't a fast machine as it is. 

 

View Postdreambill, on 05 August 2018 - 02:20 PM, said:

 

 

My answer was directed specifically at the comment by Horcan with "success". The case of player numbers is finding a way to not only recruit them but retain them. I am giving as much feedback as I can and working with who I can to help try and improve communication both ways. We all know the players aren't as high as some of us would like, but I also have people complain when there's too many players in the game because of special moments :D Success isn't just measured by how many people log in to the game, it's one of many things to measure, sure. But like a store, it's not how many people visit, it's how many people visit and spend money. 

 

View PostHorcan, on 05 August 2018 - 01:00 PM, said:

 

 

Please refer above, there's more ways to measure success than "more players". 

 

View Postjohncarps, on 05 August 2018 - 04:08 PM, said:

 

 

If you look at those "events", they are contests, not events. You maybe forget I was here for all of it. The closest to a WG created, monitored and run event was the original creation of clans, though great led to many issues. And the wot/wowp cross event that was complained about, by just about every single wowp player. 

 

Events have been run and organised by community members in clan-wars, tournaments. Only competitions like the hyper x was run by WG. Even tournaments like the Czech e-sports one, was run by 2 players with sponsorship from WG through the website, not by WG. There are events happening such as currently work on NA/EU where Roussos has been doing training room battles with just players with various activities and give-aways. 

 

There have been other events made by Timewarp etc. Ask any people who have come to me asking for help for events, including Chillistreamz during his 24 hour event, I have given my whole-hearted support. This includes streams and organised more events coming up and discussing tournaments with players. 

 

The main difference between all of that and what you're saying is this is done by people who want to make the game better and work with conquest and attrition. You yourself in other threads have said you want 1.9 back and you would like a move towards hard-core mode. This is a reasonable desire, but it's not a top priority when players like yourself can't agree on exactly what you want, other than what was before. Simply put, why would you invest in developing a game mode like before that didn't work and wasn't sustainable to work along side a game mode that works better now, just to divide your player-base further. When you have other things to work on and prioritise. Once the basics are sorted and other changes come into effect like Progression 2.0 finished and other changes to the game. Then you still prioritise on main issues with the game.

 

The top 5 community desires are there for all to see and 4/5 of them were already having a plan, one way or another to be worked on. But plans can change, they can be delayed, things can go wrong. With this you have to prioritise every time..... fix something for a mode that works, or invest time and resources into creating a mode that may not even work. I love full competitive play, this is why I joined DFA and took part in every grind event and tournament I could.

 

There is NOTHING stopping any person wanting to try and organise a tournament. The main reason don't is because of the sheer amount of work, I know this through talking with Extince and also working on fixing the aftermath of the last large tournament where I spent 3 days doing spreadsheets for results, that was run by Degged, if you remember. If you want a competitive game mode and such things, then find a way to get it going? If there are so many people wanting it, I'm sure you can all get together and come up with a plan?

 

I feel you also forget the last event that was attempted by the community ended up in a 40 person Teamspeak discussion for a few hours on the DFA server. I was there for that remember, I remember everything said and by whom. 

 

Every WG title has a "newsletter" to inform players of changes to the game to make sure people who simply forget about a game or too busy with something else have a chance to see what's going on. In fact nearly every game I know of that has large updates and changes does this. It's a way to bring back players, even if it's just short term to see what's going on. 

 

 

Wall of text complete but hopefully it answers as many of your replies as possible. Just because I'm an experienced player and I liked 1.9, does not mean when I became CM that I wanted to "fight the system" to bring 1.9 back. I wanted to work with the community and use as much knowledge and information and resources as I can to bring to the game and the community what I felt and knew it needed and could work with. I can understand a persons point of view and empathise with a persons stand-point, but that does not require me to share your opinion and have the same one. That's where informed opinions come from. (This is in response to your other threads and topics) 

 



Grumpy_Guts #53 Posted 05 August 2018 - 09:41 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

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

eekeeboo, I was also flying an IL-40 the same as them, and had in mind to change tactics by flying with them to maximise target hits.

Am not complaining just seemed as if they only had fast forward speed the whole time I was with them both battles. Battle time quite long in both but could not keep up. 

 



eekeeboo #54 Posted 05 August 2018 - 09:50 PM

    Community Manager

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

View PostGrumpy_Guts, on 05 August 2018 - 09:41 PM, said:

 

 

I'm not sure then without a replay if you hnave one for me to look at? It could very well have been one of the expert bots, they can be pretty effective, but I can't say much without seeing what was happening sorry :( 

chief_de_wrecker #55 Posted 06 August 2018 - 12:30 PM

    Master Sergeant

  • Conquest Member
  • 1578 battles
  • 52
  • [A_D_C] A_D_C
  • Member since:
    04-30-2016

View Postn0_f4k3, on 05 August 2018 - 09:41 AM, said:

Monk,why you think this version of the game is NO fail? any proves? its not enough that you like it! its so annoying how you defend this dying game. if someone say "no" you want a bla bla prove if you say "yes" its the truth and YOU dont need any proves for it..........your one of the worst discussion partner here so far. i bet iam talking to a new community manager right now,tell me you will get this job,huh?

Probably, he is running for the chair of new CM:D..... And he does think that since he likes the game is it ultra-popular....atleast for him, lets be happy..but eekeeboo, BEWARE:hiding:

 

View Postzen_monk_, on 05 August 2018 - 10:21 AM, said:

This version of the game is more successful. Proof is in WG saying so and sticking to it - putting their money where their mouth are, if you please.

 

Maybe I am the worst discussion partner because I use logic and cold facts. You simply can't dispute my sentence above. What's troubling you is an element of Total Perspective Vortex, which gives an unpleasant tone to all of your statements along the lines of "we oldtimers are important, the game will die without us, WG must convince us to come back..." etc.

 

The answer to all of it is "no".

View Postzen_monk_, on 05 August 2018 - 04:39 PM, said:

 

Of course I don't have the exact numbers, I'm not the company. But the company has it. And that's where logic (and quite a bit of rl business experience) comes into play.

 

If they say now is better than before and place all their resources and finances into this, then they know - they who have all the data. Bear in mind, the number of players is not the main interest of the company. It's something else. And they are very pleased now. As opposed to before.

 

 

Quite the contrary. I discuss, explain why we have 2.x for almost a year now, explain why you won't be getting it back, explain why the old player base is not important, why you should take a company's word if it's backed with financial commitment... now if you don't like it and it messes with your plans to wait - that's a different thing.

Some companies do stick to a product for long time, just in the hope that it breaks even after certain period of time..it is novice to think that this reflects success of a product...

There is no logic & fact in your counter responses(period)

Dont believe words, believe actions...and since WOWP has hidden online player data, it is very common sense what they are trying to hide...

Even in t6, I rarely fight more that 4v4 matches...

T9/10, it is mostly a single noob (hence my WIN RATE :izmena:)...

 

I have said this before, but it is very clear from various polls, what players want...removing topics , censoring players from posting their desire has never worked & will never work....

Enough has been said by various players about lack of various elements in v2.0....so i dont want to repeat that again..

 

and just a PARTING THOUGHT

if old version was not financially feasible, as they claim, can WG not check the possibility of charging monthly subscription money from players, just like other stuff bills are paid??..



R0I #56 Posted 06 August 2018 - 12:47 PM

    Master Sergeant

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

it's sad to see how people can be deaf and blind to requests..

history showed us a lot that imposing one vision to others never went so far ...

call it what you want legacy mode community - private server - test server ... 

what really count in a succeeding marketing strategy is to keep people trying.. 

in one year max will be forced to mass ADS on internet again to bring new people

strategy in fact is not about loyalty ... it's about to bring new people that will may try to spend some than get bored and uninstall game

then bring new ppl again this is all

the game will not die till wg is making ads on the net .... but the great old community IS already died


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 #57 Posted 06 August 2018 - 12:53 PM

    Community Manager

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

View PostR0I, on 06 August 2018 - 12:47 PM, said:

 

 

It has already been stated advertising for the game will not take place in a traditional sense until the game is in a state where developers are happy to do so. There's plenty more work to be done before it's in a state where advertising is a good idea. 

 

There are ways to advertise other than plastering ads on the internet, for instance collaborations and working with movies, social media etc. The problem the game currently has is a poor reputation (for various reasons) from before 2.0 and those who liked the game before 2.0 complaining about a game that wasn't successful so now spreading the sort of information and opinion they hated others spreading at the release of wowp. 

 

The "old community" wasn't the most vibrant and full of life for a long time. Many clans were reduced to shadows of their former glory and the player base was dwindling for a long time, only rejuvenated with tournaments and other events to bring competitive people in. In the year before 2.0 I don't remember very much of the DAFT lot who were plentiful, GWDYS, D303, DFA and JFF etc. New clans were born and clans merged because the player base was already dropping. Something was made to bring in new players for the dwindling "old" player base who were not sustainable as it was. 



GonerNL #58 Posted 06 August 2018 - 12:55 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 3450 battles
  • 313
  • Member since:
    09-02-2017

View Posteekeeboo, on 05 August 2018 - 09:50 PM, said:

 It could very well have been one of the expert bots, they can be pretty effective,

 

So 'expert bots' can fly the same plane much faster (more effective?) than we can ??

And they can also read our minds ... (other thread). Anything else ?

 



chief_de_wrecker #59 Posted 06 August 2018 - 12:58 PM

    Master Sergeant

  • Conquest Member
  • 1578 battles
  • 52
  • [A_D_C] A_D_C
  • Member since:
    04-30-2016

View PostGonerNL, on 06 August 2018 - 12:55 PM, said:

 

So 'expert bots' can fly the same plane much faster (more effective?) than we can ??

And they can also read our minds ... (other thread). Anything else ?

 

 

& they like V2.0.....:trollface:

 

Are you sure it was a BOT??



eekeeboo #60 Posted 06 August 2018 - 01:06 PM

    Community Manager

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

View PostGonerNL, on 06 August 2018 - 12:55 PM, said:

 

 

Expert bots have been known to be able to have certain skills that will help the plane go faster. A lot will come down to the way you have specialised your plane, the way you have put equipment on and what pilot skills you have used. 

 

For anything else, the use of F7 does actually work right now in game as long as the bot is not currently engaged. 







Also tagged with Bots, bot, prefix

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users