Jump to content


The future of the game


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

crispris #1 Posted 11 February 2019 - 06:40 PM

    Airman Basic

  • Member
  • 623 battles
  • 1
  • Member since:
    05-02-2013
I want to open this topic with the desire to find out how many of those who play wowp would like the game to return to a number of decent players and want this game to have a future. From my point of view, the game is good in terms of the idea, but it needs some news to attract the players. What do you think, will it have a future or not?

m249jim #2 Posted 11 February 2019 - 07:27 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 3396 battles
  • 165
  • Member since:
    09-27-2015

Feeding stopped :)


Edited by m249jim, 11 February 2019 - 08:07 PM.


zen_monk_ #3 Posted 11 February 2019 - 07:45 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Alpha Tester
  • 5871 battles
  • 1,663
  • [__] __
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012
Don't feed him.
stats were invented by Satan himself to suck the carefree fun out of gaming

Ykazumi #4 Posted 11 February 2019 - 08:32 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 3927 battles
  • 197
  • Member since:
    08-08-2014

 IMHO the 2.0 version got very much improved. It got back the same flight performances as in the old version. Guns got  longer firing ranges for some aircrafts as well as possibility to calibrating them ,engines and aiming. The WG has done quite a good job.

Like some others I have been patient enough for one year.

If I keep on playing this game for the next 25 years at all, i will become 100 years old.lol

cheers,

 

 


Edited by megace4, 11 February 2019 - 08:33 PM.


Ensign_Steel #5 Posted 11 February 2019 - 09:32 PM

    Master Sergeant

  • Alpha Tester
  • 1432 battles
  • 81
  • [-TPS-] -TPS-
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

Here's three I'll throw in from the top of my head.

 

- A bit more physics into the flight model and a lot less of the current physics smyshics.

 

- Remove that stupid auto-banner for "ooooh forbidden words!!11".

 

- Redesign the equipment system. The current lottery for the calibration part is just bogus.


Franco_Scala, on 15 June 2018 - 12:25 PM, said:

You can't have your cake and have sex with it

 


Piq_Mastika #6 Posted 12 February 2019 - 06:37 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 4731 battles
  • 371
  • [BBMM] BBMM
  • Member since:
    07-31-2017

View PostEnsign_Steel, on 11 February 2019 - 11:32 PM, said:

Here's three I'll throw in from the top of my head.

 

- A bit more physics into the flight model and a lot less of the current physics smyshics.

 

- Remove that stupid auto-banner for "ooooh forbidden words!!11".

 

I strongly agree with this. Especially for the second part. Ignoring people should be easier and the verbal abuse reports should sent a message like "you can ignore the annoying people, they not always deserve a ban"

 

View PostEnsign_Steel, on 11 February 2019 - 11:32 PM, said:

- Redesign the equipment system. The current lottery for the calibration part is just bogus.

 

This is the interesting part. If you want the perfect plane, you should put your sacrifices. It wouldn't be interesting if you know how much money and resources you need for the perfect plane... It will be boring.



atlasapl #7 Posted 12 February 2019 - 04:08 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 1913 battles
  • 108
  • Member since:
    07-01-2015
As far as calibration goes. I used my Ki-88 as a guinea pig to see how far I could push it. I would enhance, then calibrate fully. Then repeat until ultimate. I shaved  a whole second from the turn time, added a significant percentage to the roll rate, and increased its cruise speed (together with appropriate pilot skills).

It was an interesting experiment, but I dont bother with calibration anymore. I doubt the credit and material cost was worth it. But thats ok, as it was just an experiment.

I stick to enhancing now as its good enough. So I am not sure I would change calibration at all. Either enhance (with knows results), or roll the dice and calibrate. Players have a choice.

Edited by atlasapl, 12 February 2019 - 04:12 PM.


Horcan #8 Posted 29 March 2019 - 03:18 AM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 4510 battles
  • 923
  • [FEED] FEED
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

For what i care this game is irreversibly compromised. Let me quickly explain. I was one of the few supporters of 2.0 right at the start. I was happy the too long dead times of 1.9 were removed by introduction of respawn. I was happy that the battles were kind of brought to a closer level. Heavy fighter were forced to come down and TnB more often, because staying high was just a waste of time. BnZ, even if still usable, was not bringing that much points as just dogfighting at lower altitudes. I was ok to readjust the slighly different plane response to control for that, because in a matter of weeks i got used to it. 

But then, they started screwing thing up. Bombers were introduced, which i dont see fit into this game, as they play their own game. Other 4 classes fight each other , they go sky high fighting buildings. All they do is every now and then dragging some clueless people into chasing them, ruining exactly the thing i liked about 2.0 , the fact that it brought all planes together.

And soon after, the thing that completely broken the very thin balance the game had. Specialisation and new equipment system. I mean it doesnt require to be a genius to figure out why it completely broken the game. The matchmaker is not developed enough to handle it. And often it puts 5 vs 1 or other completely unfair combination of specialised planes into battles. While at tanks its not that big deal to have different number of skilled players in the teams because its one life only and bad things happen, here it simply wont work because of the respawn system. Even if initially the weaker team may seem to prevail it wont last. Simply because 5 better planes versus 2 ( or skilled players ) will eventually come back and overwhelm the weaker team until the end. It will happen 1 million attempts of 1 million. And people who gets a little experience in the game will start to leave already lost games early.
I dont even see the point of the whole calibration/enhancing thing at all. I may be wrong, but it seems to me that everyone reach the same piece in the end ( like 38% Pro -14% con ) , its just the credits and wasted time that differ from people to people. So why bother ? Whats the difference from everyone not having it? Or everyone have it without the useless annoying process to upgrade it to maximum ?

And then its the stupid win condition requirement. They gotta understand people play for goals. They tend to restart the process when they fail, just like old arcade games. You try a jump, it doesnt work you load save. SInce here its not possible, people are leaving games that are obviously lost at some point. To give an example , take the 5 wins mission for each type of plane on this event. 5 win may take up to one hour of play, depending on game mode . A player with 50% win ratio will have to play another hour of lost games. Which is wasted time, since they wont acomplish their goal in those wasted games, its zero progress. So they tend to limit that wasted time, by leaving games that appear sure losses. You cant tempt people with 5 missions and give only 30 hours to complete them. because you get this. Most people will quit battles that doesnt have favourable odds, because they want to complete as many of those missions as possible. They wont play 5 hours of wasted time for the sake of sportsmanship and not ruining others gaming experience. because everyone plays for their own goals or entertainment, not for others.

So overall, i dont think this game is salveageble. It went too far on the wrong path to get it back on track. For me, bots aint a solution. Maybe a temporary one, but bots are learnable ( so repetitive and boring after a little while ) , frustrating, give the impression of rigged games and so on. While i know there are people here on forum who are ok with it, it aint me. Im not interested in bots presence into a multiplayer game at all. And probably many people think the same, because we have what we have . A deserted game.
How i would save this game? Make it single player offline game, with multiplayer cooperative scenarios like wows, with a heavy backgroud, and recreation of battles or battles with at least some fictional stories. PvP should be only room created by host type who set variables ( number of players, bots no bots , map, plane types and so on ).
 


Edited by Horcan, 29 March 2019 - 03:25 AM.


Piq_Mastika #9 Posted 29 March 2019 - 06:50 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 4731 battles
  • 371
  • [BBMM] BBMM
  • Member since:
    07-31-2017

View Postatlasapl, on 12 February 2019 - 06:08 PM, said:

As far as calibration goes. I used my Ki-88 as a guinea pig to see how far I could push it. I would enhance, then calibrate fully. Then repeat until ultimate. I shaved  a whole second from the turn time, added a significant percentage to the roll rate, and increased its cruise speed (together with appropriate pilot skills).

It was an interesting experiment, but I dont bother with calibration anymore. I doubt the credit and material cost was worth it. But thats ok, as it was just an experiment.

I stick to enhancing now as its good enough. So I am not sure I would change calibration at all. Either enhance (with knows results), or roll the dice and calibrate. Players have a choice.

 

Do not ever calibrate before enhance, its a waste of resources and money. Calibrating ultimate modules from 400 to 478 gives about 1/3 more bonus.

klbergmen #10 Posted 29 March 2019 - 07:37 AM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 4877 battles
  • 861
  • [JV44] JV44
  • Member since:
    08-13-2014

View PostPiq_Mastika, on 29 March 2019 - 08:50 AM, said:

 

Do not ever calibrate before enhance, its a waste of resources and money. Calibrating ultimate modules from 400 to 478 gives about 1/3 more bonus.

 

With every enhancement calibration becomes more expensive. Calibration can improve the relation bonus/penalty up to a limit and this limit doesn't change with enhancement. So I prefer to calibrate first.

But yes, if you plan to calibrate up to 478 then its probably better to calibrate in the end.



Piq_Mastika #11 Posted 29 March 2019 - 08:37 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 4731 battles
  • 371
  • [BBMM] BBMM
  • Member since:
    07-31-2017

View Postklbergmen, on 29 March 2019 - 09:37 AM, said:

 

With every enhancement calibration becomes more expensive. Calibration can improve the relation bonus/penalty up to a limit and this limit doesn't change with enhancement. So I prefer to calibrate first.

But yes, if you plan to calibrate up to 478 then its probably better to calibrate in the end.

 

Yes, it becomes more expensive, but enhancing after calibration reduces the technological level. For example if you have maxed basic (white) and you enhance it, it will be at like 30% calibrated at the improved (green) tech level. In my opinion, calibrating before enhancing is waste of money and a bit spare parts. In the 95% of the cases you need a high-end (478). The only 2 exceptions are: 1. If you don't want to put so much penalty, so you use the 400 module and you have the 3 bonuses. 2. If your plane is not specialist and you use basic or improved module, which you don't want to enhance.

You know calibrating in the last few points to max calibration only reduces the penalty, so maxing the target tech level is fine.



bombuhr #12 Posted 29 March 2019 - 09:22 AM

    Senior Airman

  • Beta Tester
  • 1830 battles
  • 49
  • [BBMM] BBMM
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

@Piq_Mastika and @klbergmen

 

Cheers for the conversation about calibration and enhancement.

Didn't know. Haven't really looked into much of that yet.



GonerNL #13 Posted 01 April 2019 - 07:49 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Advanced Member
  • 7335 battles
  • 1,328
  • Member since:
    09-02-2017

View Postcrispris, on 11 February 2019 - 07:40 PM, said:

but it needs some news 

 

No more 'news' please ... first fix matchmaking and disconnect bugs.

VaRaderO_14 #14 Posted 04 April 2019 - 04:03 PM

    Senior Airman

  • Member
  • 2284 battles
  • 27
  • [GR-12] GR-12
  • Member since:
    08-12-2013

This is the "future" of the game... https://www.google.com/search?q=world+of+warplanes+steam+charts&oq=w&aqs=chrome.0.69i59l2j69i60l4.1194j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 

98 players PEAK. 

They didn't like the 1.x version and now this beutiful game 

was destroyed.

 



Piq_Mastika #15 Posted 05 April 2019 - 03:45 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 4731 battles
  • 371
  • [BBMM] BBMM
  • Member since:
    07-31-2017

View PostVaRaderO_14, on 04 April 2019 - 06:03 PM, said:

This is the "future" of the game... https://www.google.com/search?q=world+of+warplanes+steam+charts&oq=w&aqs=chrome.0.69i59l2j69i60l4.1194j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

98 players PEAK.

They didn't like the 1.x version and now this beutiful game

was destroyed.

 

 

This is the steam client only. Pls, stop launching fake news.

MBCLK320 #16 Posted 05 April 2019 - 07:50 AM

    Senior Airman

  • Conquest Member
  • 30 battles
  • 34
  • [A_D_C] A_D_C
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostPiq_Mastika, on 05 April 2019 - 03:45 AM, said:

 

This is the steam client only. Pls, stop launching fake news.

 

Don't You think WG would have shown player numbers if they where not miserable... 

Piq_Mastika #17 Posted 05 April 2019 - 08:14 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 4731 battles
  • 371
  • [BBMM] BBMM
  • Member since:
    07-31-2017

View PostMBCLK320, on 05 April 2019 - 09:50 AM, said:

 

Don't You think WG would have shown player numbers if they where not miserable...

 

The info, provided by WG is very poor, except maybe the patch notes last half year. They said nothing about the client language cuts for example or the info about the planes in the site / wiki / in game is calculated in 3 different ways and they still don't synchronize it. So I suspect the lack of info about the players online is not hiding the info but a chronic gap.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users