Personal Challenges - What a difference!

[SunkCostFallacy]

Today I noticed that the Personal Challenges had switched from BXP to Damage ... and so I fired up the boilers on two ships, my Salem and my Moskva and went to achieve what I could achieve.

And what a difference it made.

I was able to knock off 25000 through 100000 on both of them with minimal drama. Well ... I admit I did curse quite loquaciously when, in one match, I spawned in on my Moskva to discover that I was joined on the flank by a Kleber AND a Marceau! Frankly I think WG were just taking the urine with that!

Tomorrow I'll do the Germans. I just bought the Hindenberg (about 2 minutes ago) so we'll see how she and I get along.

It's a lot easier to get enthusiastic about an event when the goal is one that doesn't penalise one for playing COOP.

[NMA101]

Thankfully, the anti-PVE sentiment at WG seems to be receding, for the past two years. They re-introduced 3 operations, offered asymmetric battles twice, and apparently are considering T9-10 operations. "More and better PVE options" is the one genuinely good trend taking place in the game. Contrast that with competitive modes which suffer from horribly imbalanced matchmaking, rampant power creep, and the plagues of CVs and submarines creating stale, passive gameplay that drains the fun and enjoyment out of everything.

I think some of it is due to the departure of Sub_Octavian, who was one of the execs most adamant about forcing people to play PVP modes. 

I wonder if sales of T8 premiums increased after operations tiers were expanded. If so, that may be an encouraging sign of change. Imagine how many people will fork out cash for Agirs, Pommerns, Kurfursts etc. if T9-10 ops ever materialize. A "win-win" scenario, if such exists. 

[Asym]

2 hours ago, SunkCostFallacy said:

Today I noticed that the Personal Challenges had switched from BXP to Damage ... and so I fired up the boilers on two ships, my Salem and my Moskva and went to achieve what I could achieve.

And what a difference it made.

I was able to knock off 25000 through 100000 on both of them with minimal drama. Well ... I admit I did curse quite loquaciously when, in one match, I spawned in on my Moskva to discover that I was joined on the flank by a Kleber AND a Marceau! Frankly I think WG were just taking the urine with that!

Tomorrow I'll do the Germans. I just bought the Hindenberg (about 2 minutes ago) so we'll see how she and I get along.

It's a lot easier to get enthusiastic about an event when the goal is one that doesn't penalise one for playing COOP.

Now, the reward for all of that playing is what?  It's easy to be charitable when you are increasing the number of game played for..........so very little...  Now, if it were for a ship, say in the PR Dockyard #1, want to have this conversation again? 

And, let's talk about everything we do, save BXP, in Random Operations is 1/2 price - even though, the PVP crowd spending the same amount of time don't have that issue.

38 minutes ago, NMA101 said:

Thankfully, the anti-PVE sentiment at WG seems to be receding, for the past two years. They re-introduced 3 operations, offered asymmetric battles twice, and apparently are considering T9-10 operations. "More and better PVE options" is the one genuinely good trend taking place in the game. Contrast that with competitive modes which suffer from horribly imbalanced matchmaking, rampant power creep, and the plagues of CVs and submarines creating stale, passive gameplay that drains the fun and enjoyment out of everything.

I think some of it is due to the departure of Sub_Octavian, who was one of the execs most adamant about forcing people to play PVP modes. 

I wonder if sales of T8 premiums increased after operations tiers were expanded. If so, that may be an encouraging sign of change. Imagine how many people will fork out cash for Agirs, Pommerns, Kurfursts etc. if T9-10 ops ever materialize. A "win-win" scenario, if such exists. 

To be honest, it's not that the Anti-PVE sentiment is waning.........If I were to guess, it's because fewer and fewer players are playing PVP !  The PVP game is imploding (maybe): it can't carry the bills alone.  Funny how that works.

And, it took our host what, four days to NERF Asymmetrical Battles....  What we get next will be a shell of what we had several weeks ago......  Again, if I were to guess, it is because the PVP crowd has had it and Asym Battles earned as much as Random Battles and the fled PVP....

I love PVE a lot but, we are not home free and treated as "equal customers" yet.

[Frostbow]

1 hour ago, NMA101 said:

I think some of it is due to the departure of Sub_Octavian, who was one of the execs most adamant about forcing people to play PVP modes. 

He left World of Warships already? Nice. I hope he never comes back.

I really couldn't understand why there were people like him who would adamantly force people to play PVP modes, when PVE has always been a valid and legitimate source of fun in the game. 

[Nevermore135]

3 minutes ago, Frostbow said:

He left World of Warships already? Nice. I hope he never comes back.

Since early 2022, so about a year and half back. He moved on to another project at WG, but is apparently no longer associated with WoWs.

[Ensign Cthulhu]

1 hour ago, Asym said:

And, let's talk about everything we do, save BXP, in Random Operations is 1/2 price

As opposed to the previous system, where it counted for nothing at all. 

IIRC all economic activities are equal for operations; it's just the combat tasks which are halved, because Operations are so scripted that farming them is easy. But you never bring that up, do you?

4 hours ago, SunkCostFallacy said:

I was able to knock off 25000 through 100000

Is 100,000 the top? Or did you just decide to stop there for the night?

4 hours ago, SunkCostFallacy said:

Tomorrow I'll do the Germans. I just bought the Hindenberg (about 2 minutes ago) so we'll see how she and I get along.

I think you'll like her. She's got all the tools she needs to wreck face, and she's pretty tough too. The immediate doubling of the torpedo armament and a second forward-firing main turret over what the Roon has are going to be the highlights.

[Type_93]

4 hours ago, SunkCostFallacy said:

Tomorrow I'll do the Germans. I just bought the Hindenberg (about 2 minutes ago) so we'll see how she and I get along

She is an excellent flanker. Good to push the flank. Once you start getting focused, go dark, turn out and kite away. Rinse repeat.  

[Frostbow]

7 minutes ago, Ensign Cthulhu said:

Operations are so scripted that farming them is easy.

It can be easy for many, yet a victory in Operations is never guaranteed. 

Part 2 of Personal Challenges is about dealing as much damage as we can, and the 50% reduction to damage made in Operations does not make any sense now compared to Co-op.

A DD in Co-op can do 100,000 damage in less than 8 minutes, whereas a DD in Operations needs a longer amount of time to reliably do the same amount of damage. The same can hold true for battleships. 

[SunkCostFallacy]

16 minutes ago, Ensign Cthulhu said:

Is 100,000 the top? Or did you just decide to stop there for the night?

You can go higher than 100,000 ... I just decided to get everything I can up to that, and then I'll play my favorites to get higher.

[Ensign Cthulhu]

7 minutes ago, SunkCostFallacy said:

You can go higher than 100,000

What was the highest rung that you saw?

 

9 minutes ago, Frostbow said:

It can be easy for many, yet a victory in Operations is never guaranteed. 

It pretty-much is if you run a voice-comms div, and you should know this.

Operations damage-farming with careful rotation of the up-front farming player(s) is also quite possible, and you should know that to be a thing also.

Those are the conditions against which WG is balancing the amount of combat achievement that can be earned from operations.

[Frostbow]

4 minutes ago, Ensign Cthulhu said:

Operations damage-farming with careful rotation of the up-front farming player(s) is also quite possible, and you should know that to be a thing also.

You still fail to consider the amount of time it will take to achieve the same amount of damage. 

Moreover, not all play in Divisions, and you know that.

6 minutes ago, Ensign Cthulhu said:

Those are the conditions against which WG is balancing the amount of combat achievement that can be earned from operations.

My point remains. The time required to inflict damage in Operations is significantly longer compared to Co-op, therefore the 50% reduction in Personal Challenges is highly unreasonable.

If you truly believe those conditions you cited are correct, why don't you try doing your Personal Challenges in Operations? Show us how you can do a 200,000 damage in Operations in less than 8 minutes. Let's see if you can do it.

[Asym]

8 minutes ago, Ensign Cthulhu said:

As opposed to the previous system, where it counted for nothing at all. 

IIRC all economic activities are equal for operations; it's just the combat tasks which are halved, because Operations are so scripted that farming them is easy. But you never bring that up, do you?

Can we just have a civil conversation.... 

OK, let's talk about Farming is easy.  That doesn't happen in PVP?  Really?  Let's see:  I and hundreds of other withdrew from PVP (after thousands of matches I might add)  because of...........toxic farming and those terrible things called "stomps...."  We withdrew from Clan Battles, that almost destroyed our clan I might add, because of:  toxic farming and a MM that simply so poorly created for that mode it made playing toxic.....

We are average players and since this game never considers "skill" -  well, why would we participate in modes of play not designed for our skill level??  To be fodder for you to farm?  For others to farm?    This game isn't a meritocracy at all.......it encourages farming and doesn't very little to prevent it:  even in COOP......!!!

On why:   I believe all customers should be treated equally......  

Have a good day !

 

[Type_93]

4 minutes ago, Asym said:

OK, let's talk about Farming is easy.  That doesn't happen in PVP?  Really?  Let's see:  I and hundreds of other withdrew from PVP (after thousands of matches I might add)  because of...........toxic farming and those terrible things called "stomps...."  We withdrew from Clan Battles, that almost destroyed our clan I might add, because of:  toxic farming and a MM that simply so poorly created for that mode it made playing toxic.....

Farming in randoms happens a lot. The players who get farmed have made a mistake. Players with Poor positioning and who push early are the main targets. It’s not toxic to punish a player for a mistake. Farming in pve modes happens the same. In clan battles it’s the same. You get farmed for making a mistake. Nothing toxic about it. 

[Asym]

27 minutes ago, Ensign Cthulhu said:

It pretty-much is if you run a voice-comms div, and you should know this.

Operations damage-farming with careful rotation of the up-front farming player(s) is also quite possible, and you should know that to be a thing also.

Those are the conditions against which WG is balancing the amount of combat achievement that can be earned from operations.

Oh my goodness mate....  Listen to yourself.  We are that Division; on our discord channel; and we know a lot of things !  Farming damage?  We don't even think that way for heavens sake when we play ops....  We play for the fun of it.  We all try "different ships" most nights.  I must admit I have had days where I played one ship over and over again because.............I like that ship and challenge myself to do better....  I am a DD main and my Akisuki has seen a lot of RO's.......  We all, have a go to ship but, the one rule we live by is that "you take whatever ship you like...."  We even have a Carrier driver whom takes a lot of crap from us......but, when he/she/they want to play a carrier, it's zer gudt...no worries mate, have at it (sigh....here he goes again we mutter.)

If we were all purple players like you, whom plan how to overcome the game's nuances and trials, I guess we'd have to have a strategy meeting and discuss roles and responsibilities.  Since I out rank everyone IRL, I'd have to work at playing and that, is something I am NOT going to do.  I come to have fun with friends and I, as a paying customer, expect equal treatment.  

BTW, our host isn't "balancing the amount of combat achievement"  -  they are "limiting the amount of achievement" to compel PVE players into PVP modes where..........drum roll please.........they get farmed or stomped.  [face splat emoji] 

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

Max Immelmann is played SPECIFICALLY for farming. That's its basic design role.

The idea that somehow random PVP doesn't feature farming is laughable.

[SunkCostFallacy]

29 minutes ago, Ensign Cthulhu said:

What was the highest rung that you saw?

150,000 is the highest ... it only shows that and 125,000 at the moment.

No idea how high it goes :)

[Ensign Cthulhu]

15 minutes ago, Frostbow said:

Moreover, not all play in Divisions, and you know that.

No, but a farming ops division is the outlier case that WG is balancing against. You can call it as unfair as you want, but this is what WG is doing. You can blame the people who took Weimars into Narai and farmed 300K or 400K damage in them and bragged about it on the old forums, just as you can blame the original econ nerfs on the people who got 40-50,000 XP and FXP per battle in the good old days and bragged incessantly about that.

1 minute ago, SunkCostFallacy said:

150,000 is the highest ... it only shows that and 125,000 at the moment.

Okay, I've got quite a bit to be going on with then. 

5 minutes ago, Asym said:

If we were all purple 

LOL. My stats are public. I'm barely 50% in randoms. 

5 minutes ago, Asym said:

players like you, who plan how to overcome the game's nuances and trials

And you're not? Nothing's stopping you from planning in just the same manner. NOTHING.

As part of a regular operations division, you should be planning this out with your team. What op you're going to run, what ships you're going to take, who's going to do what tasks... you've got it all.

I don't div because as often as not I'm on call and I don't want to (a) have to walk away from the team or (b) let the team down due to my incompetence.

11 minutes ago, Asym said:

BTW, our host isn't "balancing the amount of combat achievement"  -  they are "limiting the amount of achievement" to compel PVE players into PVP modes where..........drum roll please.........they get farmed or stomped.  [face splat emoji] 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEnJbjBuxnw

 

[Asym]

11 minutes ago, Type_93 said:

Farming in randoms happens a lot. The players who get farmed have made a mistake. Players with Poor positioning and who push early are the main targets. It’s not toxic to punish a player for a mistake. Farming in pve modes happens the same. In clan battles it’s the same. You get farmed for making a mistake. Nothing toxic about it. 

And, that is because:  we are not a game designed with skill gates or level of access based on skill...  It's an arcade shooter and you are correct:  you make a mistake and.......ZAP, game over man. 

But, there is a dark side to farming in most games.  A "niche" within a small Niche game.  And, it's cannibalistic and many games, this one included, eats their young...

Remember the Cruiser Line Split?  Where Radar because "the farming tool"??  I played at tier 5 just to see how bad it was.........oh my, all we saw were Tier 7 radar ships being run by purple level players.....  We lost a whole generation of new players that year....

You making a mistake is not toxic.  What is toxic is the game design because it facilitates those whom relish farming, take great joy and call that skill........ 

That's my experience in this game.  And, just my opinion.

[Asym]

1 minute ago, Ensign Cthulhu said:

No, but a farming ops division is the outlier case that WG is balancing against. You can call it as unfair as you want, but this is what WG is doing. You can blame the people who took Weimars into Narai and farmed 300K or 400K damage in them and bragged about it on the old forums, just as you can blame the original econ nerfs on the people who got 40-50,000 XP and FXP per battle in the good old days and bragged incessantly about that.

Okay, I've got quite a bit to be going on with then. 

LOL. My stats are public. I'm barely 50% in randoms. 

And you're not? Nothing's stopping you from planning in just the same manner. NOTHING.

As part of a regular operations division, you should be planning this out with your team. What op you're going to run, what ships you're going to take, who's going to do what tasks... you've got it all.

I don't div because as often as not I'm on call and I don't want to (a) have to walk away from the team or (b) let the team down due to my incompetence.

Come division with us.  See how we play for the fun of it.....  Many of us simply want to have fun.  But, that doesn't mean we like to be discriminated against because we don't wish the stress of PVP.  

We simply don't think the same way.  Come join us one night and join the "Circus of Hoofties...."  Cheers.

[Frostbow]

11 minutes ago, Ensign Cthulhu said:

No, but a farming ops division is the outlier case that WG is balancing against. You can call it as unfair as you want, but this is what WG is doing. You can blame the people who took Weimars into Narai and farmed 300K or 400K damage in them and bragged about it on the old forums, just as you can blame the original econ nerfs on the people who got 40-50,000 XP and FXP per battle in the good old days and bragged incessantly about that.

You keep on citing immaterial facts which does not address the issue I raised.

Again, the time required to inflict damage in Operations is significantly longer compared to Co-op, therefore the 50% reduction in Personal Challenges is highly unreasonable.

If you truly believe those conditions you cited are correct, why don't you try doing your Personal Challenges in Operations?

Show us how you can do a 200,000 damage in Operations in less than 8 minutes. Let's see if you can do it.

[Wolfswetpaws]

41 minutes ago, Asym said:

And, just my opinion.

Which you're entitled to.  🙂
Personally, I consider "farming" to be similar to a "target of opportunity", but there are times I deliberately alter my play to achieve certain missions/tasks/goals.

Example:
I am playing a Cruiser or a DD with fast-firing guns and have targeted a Battleship and am also near enough to point-blank torpedo the target.
Yet, I continue to fire my guns to score more main-gun-hits to get the ribbons that I'm seeking to fulfill a mission.
*That* is an example of *me* doing some *farming*.

Other players *farm* damage yet don't sink the target as-soon-as-possible.  
The degree or level of farming may vary from player to player and even within a given player's own behavior as they adjust their play to suit the criteria they're trying to meet or exceed.

But, yeah, in my opinion, farming happens.  🙂 

[Kruzenstern]

I can do pretty much any grind faster in Coop than in operations even if both got 100% awarded. Even large Divisions in Ops don't change that, as you still have to take the time and share the results (and if you have friends that leave all the damage for you, more power to you but those friends get zilch). The only difference is that Operations are fun most of the time, while Coop is not fun most of the time.

So the only valid reason that I can see WG having for reducing gains in Operations as opposed to coop is that they don't want their players to have fun grinding.

[Wolfswetpaws]

39 minutes ago, Frostbow said:

Again, the time required to inflict damage in Operations is significantly longer compared to Co-op, therefore the 50% reduction in Personal Challenges is highly unreasonable.

If you truly believe those conditions you cited are correct, why don't you try doing your Personal Challenges in Operations?

Show us how you can do a 200,000 damage in Operations in less than 8 minutes. Let's see if you can do it.

So far, this is the best and most well-phrased argument (I've seen) against the practice of only providing partial-credit for activities in Scenario Operations.

Even so, I have to grant that the other side of a spectrum exists, in which a full division of seasoned players can function like a well-oiled machine to wreak havok upon the 'bots in scenario operations and achieve some impressive scores.
That said, changing the game rules in order to thwart the adventures of "special teams" does seem like punishing "Abner" for the deeds of "Bruce", eh?  🙂 

Edited October 26, 2023 by Wolfswetpaws

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

5 minutes ago, Kruzenstern said:

So the only valid reason that I can see WG having for reducing gains in Operations as opposed to coop is that they don't want their players to have fun grinding.

Technically, grinding can't be fun...

😉

But yes, it is not in WGs business interest for us to enjoy the process for earning rewards with gameplay.

WG much prefers us to pay for those rewards with actual money.

Why are we surprised that WG runs this way? It's the very nature of the games business model...

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

6 minutes ago, Wolfswetpaws said:

So far, this is the best and most well-phrased argument (I've seen) against the practice of only providing partial-credit for activities in Scenario Operations.

Even so, I have to grant that the other side of a spectrum exists, in which a full division of seasoned players can function like a well-oiled machine to wreak havok upon the 'bots in scenario operations and achieve some impressive scores.
That said, changing the game rules in order to thwart the adventures of "special teams" does seem like punishing "Abner" for the deeds of "Bruce", eh?  🙂 

I'd argue that WGs use of missions that only award loot to those who top leaderboards means they logically can't complain about farming and exploit divisions.

That's trying to have your cake and eat it too.

The root cause of 'farming' is WGs mission design setup...so blaming the playerbase for 'farming' is WG, yet again, refusing to take responsibility for the logical outcomes of their own actions.

It is especially silly for other players to be blaming the customers for WGs own decisions.