Jump to content

LOL did i JUST miss Asym?


Recommended Posts

I've got two theories on that:

The first one is that Asymmetric mode is more resource intensive than standard coop on a per-player basis. In Asymmetric you have 5 players against 12 bots ... which is  2.4 bots per player whereas in COOP it's 1 bot per player.

We had confirmation from multiple CMs back on the old forums that WG prefer Randoms over PVE game modes because it requires fewer resources per player.

The second, and this is just a feeling rather than based on any concrete evidence ... I think that a significant percentage of players were leaving Randoms for Asymmetric and WG didn't like that. Remember that the first incarnation of Asymmetric had the rewards much higher than the last one, and people flooded to it. So much so that WG nerfed the rewards during the event. That's a pretty good indication that it was eroding the Randoms player numbers.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, SunkCostFallacy said:

I've got two theories on that:

The first one is that Asymmetric mode is more resource intensive than standard coop on a per-player basis. In Asymmetric you have 5 players against 12 bots ... which is  2.4 bots per player whereas in COOP it's 1 bot per player.

We had confirmation from multiple CMs back on the old forums that WG prefer Randoms over PVE game modes because it requires fewer resources per player.

The second, and this is just a feeling rather than based on any concrete evidence ... I think that a significant percentage of players were leaving Randoms for Asymmetric and WG didn't like that. Remember that the first incarnation of Asymmetric had the rewards much higher than the last one, and people flooded to it. So much so that WG nerfed the rewards during the event. That's a pretty good indication that it was eroding the Randoms player numbers.

 

i get WG is bad, but EA bad? yikes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, GoGo_Gadget_Secondaries said:

i get WG is bad, but EA bad? yikes

Heh - well that's a judgement call I can't make. I haven't played an EA game in a loooong time.

I understand, to a certain extent, that WG as a money making company wants to minimise costs and maximise profit ... but it's also clear by the continued existence of PVE modes that there are sufficient players who refuse to engage in PVP that it's worth while keeping PVE modes available. And of course the fact that whenever there is an event that brings us missions like 'get X set on whatever ribbons' (set on fire, defend, etc) or 'do X flooding damage'  ... Random players tend to flock to COOP to achieve those things.

I would purely love to see the real statistics on player engagement during the Asymmetric events and see exactly where the players were going during those times when Asym was available.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, GoGo_Gadget_Secondaries said:

why did they take the most popular PVE game mode away again????

There was a comment from WG/WOWs on a youtube video that I saw today which indicated that Asymmetric Battle mode is planned to return, but the timing cannot be announced, yet.
 

Quote

@ninobixio6156  15 hours ago
It's all getting a little stale now WG. Bring back the old BP and make Asymmetric a permanent mode and I might start spending again.

2 replies

@WorldofWarshipsOfficialChannel  11 hours ago
Asymmetric Battles will be coming to WoWs again definitely, but sadly we can't share the exact date yet.

@Strobel09  10 hours ago
It's their secret economy nerf. Pay more 3000 dubloons compared to the old 2500 dubloons for the premium section. Whilst they took away 20.000 COAL, 1500 Steel and the RED ecomomic boosters from the premium line. And obviously it has NEVER been communicated.

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

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SunkCostFallacy said:

Heh - well that's a judgement call I can't make. I haven't played an EA game in a loooong time.

I understand, to a certain extent, that WG as a money making company wants to minimise costs and maximise profit ... but it's also clear by the continued existence of PVE modes that there are sufficient players who refuse to engage in PVP that it's worth while keeping PVE modes available. And of course the fact that whenever there is an event that brings us missions like 'get X set on whatever ribbons' (set on fire, defend, etc) or 'do X flooding damage'  ... Random players tend to flock to COOP to achieve those things.

I would purely love to see the real statistics on player engagement during the Asymmetric events and see exactly where the players were going during those times when Asym was available.

fair i guess but pulling a EVE online and only foucing on PVP is bad in my opinion

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, SunkCostFallacy said:

I think that a significant percentage of players were leaving Randoms for Asymmetric and WG didn't like that. Remember that the first incarnation of Asymmetric had the rewards much higher than the last one, and people flooded to it. So much so that WG nerfed the rewards during the event. That's a pretty good indication that it was eroding the Randoms player numbers.

Oh yes, that is a most  correct observation and without any hard data, a hard and fair assessment.  Let me speculate:

Our Host Panicked...   They saw the numbers, blinked twice, clicked their heals three times and nerf'd ASB as fast as they could....  And, I seriously doubt they will be back anytime soon.  I'd bet, when they come back, they will so "nerfed" they won't be worth playing...  Screw PVE.....ACK-PHFTTT  as a PVE fur ball comes up...

Yes, they panicked.  Because, the hard truth is that Randoms are so Toxic (and, toxic is not s single thing either !) a lot of "average Random players" simply bailed and were not coming back anytime soon....  IOW, the PVP spreadsheet player "return rate" simply tilted and the spreadsheet alarms started glaring and screaming "DANGER Will Robinson, DANGER !"   and, they hit the "EMERGENCY NERF Protocol..." to stop the bleeding.

Oh Ray, they will Nerf, they most assuredly will nerf.....

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/10/2024 at 5:56 AM, Asym said:

Yes, they panicked.  Because, the hard truth is that Randoms are so Toxic (and, toxic is not s single thing either !) a lot of "average Random players" simply bailed and were not coming back anytime soon....  IOW, the PVP spreadsheet player "return rate" simply tilted and the spreadsheet alarms started glaring and screaming "DANGER Will Robinson, DANGER !"   and, they hit the "EMERGENCY NERF Protocol..." to stop the bleeding.

I don't doubt that WG might not be exactly rejoicing about asymmetrics dragging players out of random, but I doubt that toxicity is the problem. Many players don't even read the chat, and a large number doesn't understand english, and the largest number probably just doesn't care. Personally I don't give a flying fart, if someone goes toxic on me, I take it as praise that I must have done something right. On occasion I go toxic myself because that is relaxing when I am despairing again about how stupid humans can be.

The real problem that I have with randoms, and that I suspect most other leavers have as well, is that they are not fun. They are stale, slow, boring, static staring contests full of smoke, radar, invisible subs, permaspotting planes, torp soup and bad game design/-play, tier imbalance and questionable matchmaking. Some times less is more. Back when I still played PvP it was actually fun, and there were so many less 'features' than there are now. And of course it doesn't help that the average competence level of the playerbase seems to have dropped by 30% or more since then.

PvE (as in Ops and Asym, coop is really just for grinding and testing) might be very predictable, but there is some variation, and for me it is fun. Because the bots don't use smoke very well, radar is rare, and aircraft while sometimes devastating (like Hermes AP bombs) are relatively few and easy to counter if you pay attention. And of course there are no subs, no huge tier imbalances, few matchmaker fkups, and the best way to play them is controlled aggression rather than sitting back. And the smaller teams make it a lot easier to carry the dead weight of the ubiquitous terrible players.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kruzenstern said:

I don't doubt that WG might not be exactly rejoicing about asymmetrics dragging players out of random, but I doubt that toxicity is the problem. Many players don't even read the chat, and a large number doesn't understand english, and the largest number probably just doesn't care. Personally I don't give a flying fart, if someone goes toxic on me, I take it as praise that I must have done something right. On occasion I go toxic myself because that is relaxing when I am despairing again about how stupid humans can be.

The real problem that I have with randoms, and that I suspect most other leavers have as well, is that they are not fun. They are stale, slow, boring, static staring contests full of smoke, radar, invisible subs, permaspotting planes, torp soup and bad game design/-play, tier imbalance and questionable matchmaking. Some times less is more. Back when I still played PvP it was actually fun, and there were so many less 'features' than there are now. And of course it doesn't help that the average competence level of the playerbase seems to have dropped by 30% or more since then.

PvE (as in Ops and Asym, coop is really just for grinding and testing) might be very predictable, but there is some variation, and for me it is fun. Because the bots don't use smoke very well, radar is rare, and aircraft while sometimes devastating (like Hermes AP bombs) are relatively few and easy to counter if you pay attention. And of course there are no subs, no huge tier imbalances, few matchmaker fkups, and the best way to play them is controlled aggression rather than sitting back. And the smaller teams make it a lot easier to carry the dead weight of the ubiquitous terrible players.

As I have said many times, Toxic to me isn't one thing.  People can be Toxic.  Gameplay can be Toxic.  The lack of a First World, skill sensitive MM is toxic.  Stomps are part of the MM issue;  but, the real issue is a huge skill disparity that cause a lot of Stomps.  Small maps that have Over-the-Horizon weapons (dissimilar weapons systems) creates a toxic battlespace because it is all 'so close' there is no time to change plans....  And, there are several other toxic situations that create a lack of fun.

But, ASB were nerfed sooooooo fast, it is obivious that the Random return desity alarm went off and it was an all hands to action stations to massively neuter ASB as humanly fast as possible....   As I said, if the do come back, ASB's will have less than 1/2 the reward value per player the last one was issued with.  Of course, there is a side story many have missed:  our host is totally unaware of how NA feels about this game.  They missed our reaction to ASB's having "equilivent rewards" as a Random matchs and the Mass Exodus of PVP mains into ASB's:  1) because they were a lot of fun !   and, 2)  they paid the same as Randoms and a very large segment of players abandoned Randoms for some solid FUN with equlivent rewards.... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.