Jump to content
Cruiser Abukuma

Beta Summary (Thoughts and Suggestions)

Recommended Posts

Forewarning: Please do not link me the thread on tiers and other things as I have already read them and don't need a rehash, please just read through this with an open mind. Also I will reference the PC version so please don't give me the whole this is it's own game thing, i'll explain in a bit.

Likes: Being a current PC WoWS player but dedicated console gamer, I was excited to see this game coming to consoles, I applied for alpha but certain circumstances made me unable to partake back then, so seeing this game up close in CBT has shown me a few things.

I heavily like that the whole feel of the game coming from the pc experience has been successfully ported over to consoles and quite wonderfully I might add. DD's play like DD's, cruisers play like cruisers, and BB's play like BB's. There were at times moments where I felt that damage was reduced by torps and such but further testing showed that wasn't the case.

Now to the nitty gritty and i'll start from the beginning;

Loading up the game was nice and easy, everything looked clean until I hit the menu screens and the port. The port itself is fairly bright, and combining that with small white text on the bottom of the screen where it tells you if you want to go into battle or not, was extremely hard to see when sitting at a distance from my tv. A simple fix for this would be to A: make the text larger, or B: give the text a black outline of sorts. Another suggestion I will make below in my suggestions section.

Now speaking of large, the UI in the top left, yes the whole thing that tells you what kind of battle mode you're playing, holey heck that thing takes up so much space in comparison to the rest of the UI, preferably a wise move would be to perhaps make it smaller but I ave a suggestion for that later.

Now on to the menu and UI suggestions; 

I suggest to fix these issues I outlined by a simple fix, An overhead bar similar to the likes of WoT and WoWS PC, with a tab structure which has done fairly well on WoT console. This would alleviate the issues I outlined as the type of battle and the start battle button would be in their own dedicated location in the top middle of the screen, with tabs that can take you to the tech trees, stats, eventual clan pages, etc. The main reason for this is that I d find having to go back to a different menu just to change battle type or look at other things takes alot more unnecessary effort than just having everything in front of you.

To add on to this, finding the stats of your ships requires you to go to a whole different menu to look at, so instead I suggest that the stats of each ship you own to be displayed in the top/middle right of the port screen so that no matter what ship you have highlighted you have immediate access to stats.

On to the next; Commanders:

This is a hot topic of controversy for which I had many a conversation. My whole opinion is that the commanders are extremely limiting and force you to play a certain way that the game wants you to play rather than yourself. Each commander comes with their own list of perks and skills the player can choose when leveling up their commander in a tier format, where the skills are built and added based on what kind of ship that commander was built for. The issue with this is that not everyone wants to play by those preset rules and not every commander is going to have those perfect skills that you want. A simple answer I was given is that WG wants to avoid the PC meta and wants players to make hard decisions, I feel that is a simple cop out of a much bigger issue. Let's take the tirpitz for example, the way I play tirpitz on pc is close range, kinfe fight, torp, and get out. With the way these commanders are currently set up, I would have to, with a bb commander, focus on long range skills rather than what I need to help my playstyle out. I'd rather not have to choose between a cruiser commander and battleship commander because one has one skill I need and the other has a different skill I need, meanwhile everything else is useless to me. It just to me seems at this point like the whole let the player play how they want to play is being limited by forcing them to pick mediocre commanders with skills that encourage certain playstyles, even if the player them-self doesnt play like that, thus forcing them to be uncomfortable playing in a way they are not use to, which could cause frustration and ultimately being tired of the game and quitting. 

The fix to this is just by getting rid of commanders and go back to the PC style of perks, but seeing as how this game is built around this feature,  just hope that the devs see this and realize that there needs to be more option. Evn a more simplre fix would to be keep it tier based as it is now, and add EVERY perk to the skill trees and tiers, but make players choose between them then as you can only pick one per tier. All this would require is balancing the perks so you dont have a bunch of really useful perks all in one tier thus only allowing you to pick one.

Anywhos let us move on to the next and last item; The tech trees and more specifically tiers:

Now I have sen a lot of comments as well on this topic, and the understanding partly from the devs is that tiers higher than 7, console players would have a harder time grasping all the different mechanics of ships that make up those tiers. The issue with this is that by tier 5 a player has seen everything this game has to offer in regards to mechanics, and that it also wouldnt be a problem if the players were educated to these mechanics in game, but currently there is no system in game that teaches players about the different mechanics they will see, nor how they should play different kinds of ships. This is why in game tips and tricks are needed, or an updated tutorial system that teaches players correctly. It is pretty ridiculous that the tiers are currently limited to 7, though they did say the ceiling will most likely raise, but if it does raise to 10 eventually that would require an entire rebalance and an entire tech tree shuffle to put ships back in their proper place. The one thing that never should have changed when bringing this game over was the tech trees, but somehow that got messed up and dumbed down to the point where it feels like an insult to console gamers because they think we are too stupid to comprehend "more" mechanics. 

That also includes the linear progression in the tech trees. I get that we as console gamers cannot comprehend PC individual modules and packages, but did it really warrant this game to be simplified to the point where I cant even use equipment on my ship unless it has a slot predetermined by the game? An at that I can still only choose between two pieces of equipment that the game "thinks" I need? It just really seems that alot of player choice is being thrown out the window and I hope i'm wrong. 

Customization; where is it? 

It is nice that ships all have perm camo on as it sits but it would be nice to test out customization in the future such as camo, flags, etc. But that isnt that important.

Anwho's I hope yall could read my wall of text, and I hope that we can have engaging discussions here so that we can see both sides of the coin, thank you for your time.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/25/2018 at 3:46 PM, Cruiser Abukuma said:

edit

Myself and others have addressed these concerns in regards to commanders and tech tree and the answer we essentially got from @T33kanne was the majority favors this set up and that's the way it will be.

Even in my unofficial closed beta poll the results favor the dumbed down version. So if that's what the base at large wants that's what we are stuck with. 

 

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/25/2018 at 10:55 AM, Ruthless4u said:

Myself and others have addressed these concerns in regards to commanders and tech tree and the answer we essentially got from @T33kanne was the majority favors this set up and that's the way it will be.

Even in my unofficial closed beta poll the results favor the dumbed down version. So if that's what the base at large wants that's what we are stuck with. 

 

maybe the devs are right that console players cant comprehend higher tiers then. Because if the players don't understand why the current commander system is heavily preventing player choice and limiting playstyle, then I fully expect nothing but frustrating gameplay from players who do not understand any of the game mechanics and refuse to learn. At least PC WoWS is still a saving grace and doing things the right way

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/25/2018 at 3:46 PM, Cruiser Abukuma said:

It is pretty ridiculous that the tiers are currently limited to 7, though they did say the ceiling will most likely raise, but if it does raise to 10 eventually that would require an entire rebalance and an entire tech tree shuffle to put ships back in their proper place. The one thing that never should have changed when bringing this game over was the tech trees, but somehow that got messed up and dumbed down to the point where it feels like an insult to console gamers because they think we are too stupid to comprehend "more" mechanics. 

 

On 12/29/2018 at 9:18 PM, Cruiser Abukuma said:

maybe the devs are right that console players cant comprehend higher tiers then. Because if the players don't understand why the current commander system is heavily preventing player choice and limiting playstyle, then I fully expect nothing but frustrating gameplay from players who do not understand any of the game mechanics and refuse to learn. At least PC WoWS is still a saving grace and doing things the right way

i really don't understand these statements... yes you are a hardcore player both on PC and on Console. So you are the 1% exception of all the players that are both. 

And you will always have players like this on either console or on PC. So you are one of the lucky guys that knows all the mechanics etc. 

I hate the fact that players always have this kind of statement "all the console players are stupid" - no, thats not what we are doing. Not at all. We are just aiming for the majority of people that are casual players, you know, these kind of people that sit down infront of the console for 30 - 60 min play a few games and then continue doing something else. 

You and me are an exception (and of course a few of other people that are here in the Forum as well).

We see all of your feedback, and we take it into consideration but we always think if changes like this and that would make sense for the majority of people we are aiming for. 

Some changes are good for hardcore players like you and me, and some are not. 

 

  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i want to add one thing. 

j was a dedicated wow PC player … and according to statistics, i am not bad. I played at least one or two hours every evening (longer on weekends). I played high tier a lot until i got sick if it. 

the skill table on PC has 32 skills. Some are mandatory skills, some are blatantly overpowered and others are niche or next to useless

six skills are purely for CVs - as in only CVs can benefit from them. Another skill is basically a skill dedicated to AA. sure, other ships can have planes as well but usually, you don't need a 4 point skill to kill one catapult fighter. seven skills in total dedicated to the least played class in the game.

https://worldofwarships.com/en/content/captains-skills/?skills=&ship=Destroyer

this home page is very interesting, because it shows you wich of the skills are absolutely useless for each and every class.

For CVs, over half of the skills from the table are absolute BS - that does not mean, that the all the other skills are useful though. killing survivability expert is also questionable. Because you usually skill more than five skills (5+1 is the cap on console) you end up killing a lot of the remaining stuff. 

Most experienced DD captains skill almost the same way - only with slight differences based on the nation and overall usefulness and needs. 

light cruisers with HE shells skill IFHE, because its silly too powerful to not skill it. 

32 skills look like a lot but once you subtract the fillers and the useless skills, not much remains. And since you have 19 points to spend, you end up skilling far more than the 5 skills you can have on console. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vor 9 Stunden, T33kanne sagte:

 

i really don't understand these statements... yes you are a hardcore player both on PC and on Console. So you are the 1% exception of all the players that are both. 

And you will always have players like this on either console or on PC. So you are one of the lucky guys that knows all the mechanics etc. 

I hate the fact that players always have this kind of statement "all the console players are stupid" - no, thats not what we are doing. Not at all. We are just aiming for the majority of people that are casual players, you know, these kind of people that sit down infront of the console for 30 - 60 min play a few games and then continue doing something else. 

You and me are an exception (and of course a few of other people that are here in the Forum as well).

We see all of your feedback, and we take it into consideration but we always think if changes like this and that would make sense for the majority of people we are aiming for. 

Some changes are good for hardcore players like you and me, and some are not. 

 

Ok now you are labelling console players as being  just too lazy aka "casual" to handle more complex gameplay mechanics instead of being too stupid.

I dont know if that makes me feel any better...

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was hardcore back when it meant something:Smile_izmena:

Now I'm too old, hands don't work as well as I want and to many responsibilities.

But I still enjoy complex games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vor 15 Minuten, electronaut1976 sagte:

Ok now you are labelling console players as being  just too lazy aka "casual" to handle more complex gameplay mechanics instead of being too stupid.

I dont know if that makes me feel any better...

because it is so innovative and sophisticated to read a skill guide or watch a video on the internet as a PC player. 🙄 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, electronaut1976 said:

Ok now you are labelling console players as being  just too lazy aka "casual" to handle more complex gameplay mechanics instead of being too stupid.

I dont know if that makes me feel any better...

if you compare PC to Console players - yes Console players are more casual! Thats fact - and no i am not saying every console player is to lazy! but i am talking here about the majority. (if you would have actually read my post....)

  • Confused 2
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, T33kanne said:

if you compare PC to Console players - yes Console players are more casual! Thats fact - and no i am not saying every console player is to lazy! but i am talking here about the majority. (if you would have actually read my post....)

Xbox game chat would disagree. I've heard some pretty interesting and colorful language of players getting mad when they're losing...and their stats don't necessarily look hardcore/competitive. People want to be competitive in online multiplayer games. And it's the hardcore gamers who will stick around and want to buy premium time and ships and get use out of them.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, T33kanne said:

if you compare PC to Console players - yes Console players are more casual! Thats fact - and no i am not saying every console player is to lazy! but i am talking here about the majority. (if you would have actually read my post....)

This is a slippery slope to a big arguement guys( @electronaut1976). Choice of platform does not determine if your casual or hardcore. Not to overstep my boundaries of course lol:classic_biggrin:

Edited by Ruthless4u
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/25/2018 at 2:46 PM, Cruiser Abukuma said:

 

. I get that we as console gamers cannot comprehend PC individual modules and packages, 

I'm really at a loss with this comment, and people wonder why we keep getting shafted on console.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

individual modules. The only difference between PC and console progression is, that you can not skip an upgrade and that they are Inna successive order. 

the PC version does not really have more upgrades - a few ships have a third hull upgrade only a very few people use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, janesta5 said:

I'm really at a loss with this comment, and people wonder why we keep getting shafted on console.

He was being sarcastic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The 'console crowd is more casual so we should adjust for it' argument is invalid at this point.  I'm not saying I don't wan't a console friendly UI, button mapping or anything like that, but there is effectively no reason for the games to be different beyond that.

Rainbow Six Siege, Battlefield Series, Call of Duty Series etc. Look at any current competitive multiplayer games on both console and PC and tell me why they shouldn't have the same mechanics. Both versions sell extremely well while still retaining the same formula.

If anything having identical mechanics is better for both the dev team and player base, as it would help streamline updates and the frequency of their release. Don't screw this up like WoT Casual version.

Edited by New Faded Gl0ry
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, RuefulCenturion said:

He was being sarcastic.

If you read all of this thread mate you can see why my sarcasm meter is not functioning, so apologies to the OP

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes their are differences but they are not really that big.

the progression system only matters while you are grinding and it is not that much of a difference from the PC version. 

ok sone upgrades are missing - like the mogamis 155mm gun option but that option actually in not really an  option on PC, because the 155mm simply are better than the 203mm guns. Some "exotic" hull upgrades are not in the game as well … maybe, because they are not used on PC. 

while i am not that happy with the linear progression system, i don't think that it is that big of a deal, because we are not missing any major content.

the Captain system is actually better and some CCs already said that they like it more than the PC version. 

 

this game has some simplifications but they are not bad ones. Other things are simply different and only look more simple than they really are.

while console players are relatively casual, we also have hardcore players and people who really are playing games competitively. But i dare say, that the competitive scene on PC is still stronger. There is a reason rainbow six siege dumbed their big tournaments on console.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, KaLeuWillenbrock said:

yes their are differences but they are not really that big.

the progression system only matters while you are grinding and it is not that much of a difference from the PC version. 

ok sone upgrades are missing - like the mogamis 155mm gun option but that option actually in not really an  option on PC, because the 155mm simply are better than the 203mm guns. Some "exotic" hull upgrades are not in the game as well … maybe, because they are not used on PC. 

while i am not that happy with the linear progression system, i don't think that it is that big of a deal, because we are not missing any major content.

the Captain system is actually better and some CCs already said that they like it more than the PC version. 

 

this game has some simplifications but they are not bad ones. Other things are simply different and only look more simple than they really are.

while console players are relatively casual, we also have hardcore players and people who really are playing games competitively. But i dare say, that the competitive scene on PC is still stronger. There is a reason rainbow six siege dumbed their big tournaments on console.

I'll believe they think its better when I see any of them stop streaming pc version and switch to "casual now" console version full time. Not just a video or two of it. 

I'd rather have the "complicated" version of progression and capt skills and be involved in the community explaining them through videos and guides. Something WG should already be preparing as well. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but the "complicated" versions are not even complicated. The only thing they took out, was the freedom to select the order of the upgrades (or to leave out certain upgrades).

the captains on PC are not more complicated - the table of skills just has all the available skills in one place, while they are distributed over several captains in the console version.

are the captains good to go yet? Definitely not. Do we need more legendary commanders to give the player more options? hell yes!

but the direction is actually pretty good.

then there are people who say, that the game needs all the high tier paper ships, or the game will fail. I strongly disagree. High tier on PC is pretty dull or nerve wrecking stuff (depending on the class) … lots of bow tanking and long range engagements while DDs try to do their job against camping cruisers. all matches are the same. Imho, high tier is not popular because of the gameplay, but because a lot of players misinterpret tier ten as end game content. 

thing with wows is, that you decide what your end game content is.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, KaLeuWillenbrock said:

but the "complicated" versions are not even complicated. The only thing they took out, was the freedom to select the order of the upgrades (or to leave out certain upgrades).

the captains on PC are not more complicated - the table of skills just has all the available skills in one place, while they are distributed over several captains in the console version.

are the captains good to go yet? Definitely not. Do we need more legendary commanders to give the player more options? hell yes!

but the direction is actually pretty good.

then there are people who say, that the game needs all the high tier paper ships, or the game will fail. I strongly disagree. High tier on PC is pretty dull or nerve wrecking stuff (depending on the class) … lots of bow tanking and long range engagements while DDs try to do their job against camping cruisers. all matches are the same. Imho, high tier is not popular because of the gameplay, but because a lot of players misinterpret tier ten as end game content. 

thing with wows is, that you decide what your end game content is.

T10 is end game content both on PC and WoT because that's usually where the guns behave the most. Mostly by design, 8 equipment slots on a t10 ship vs 1 or 2 on a t3 ship. Wot best dispersion values are on the high tier stuff. Both are set up to make you want to be there. The only reason most don't is the economy isn't ideal or they prefer the time period ships/tanks of mid tiers. 

Play more coop, none of the long range crap. It's a race for xp.

 

The main problems I have is they haven't streamlined the upgrade path per ship " hull first, then engine then range if battleship" and then they are completely lengthening the grind to be fully upgraded on every single ship. The reason stated is "so you have something to work towards" the entire time. I'm working for the next ship, I don't want to spend over 60% of that grind partially upgraded. Which goes back to first issue when the upgrade I really want is the last one. 

The commanders just need access to key skills quicker. Destroyers need last stand, battleships need expert marksman. With them spawning closer concealment expert would be a good choice too. Or having them immediately be full speed since destroyers get Torps loaded automatically. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
26 minutes ago, CodenameGunther said:

T10 is end game content both on PC and WoT because that's usually where the guns behave the most. Mostly by design, 8 equipment slots on a t10 ship vs 1 or 2 on a t3 ship. Wot best dispersion values are on the high tier stuff. Both are set up to make you want to be there. The only reason most don't is the economy isn't ideal or they prefer the time period ships/tanks of mid tiers. 

Play more coop, none of the long range crap. It's a race for xp.

 

The main problems I have is they haven't streamlined the upgrade path per ship " hull first, then engine then range if battleship" and then they are completely lengthening the grind to be fully upgraded on every single ship. The reason stated is "so you have something to work towards" the entire time. I'm working for the next ship, I don't want to spend over 60% of that grind partially upgraded. Which goes back to first issue when the upgrade I really want is the last one. 

The commanders just need access to key skills quicker. Destroyers need last stand, battleships need expert marksman. With them spawning closer concealment expert would be a good choice too. Or having them immediately be full speed since destroyers get Torps loaded automatically. 

If you spend 60% or more of a grind partially upgraded, players are more likely to spend money to convert XP to skip part or most of a grind with bad upgrades. I understand why wargaming does it, but really makes it less enjoyable being  stuck with bad upgrades for long grinds.  At least WOTC gave you more options in the form of packages. They were not perfect but a lot better than forced linearity.

Top tier does not matter if it's 10 or 7, the same problems will remain in my opinion. Why some think eliminating 3 tiers will make it perfect is beyond me. But 7 tiers can work.

 

Edited by Ruthless4u
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

in my opinion, tier 10 is not the endgame content. It only looks like it.

The games don't have end game content except ranked battles.

with the economy changes, you can sail tier 10 exclusively and make profit. I brought two premium camos for my favorite tier ten ships (and many more for mid tier ones) and even 💩 games are not a problem to compensate. Add premium account to the equation and credits are piling up like its nothing.

endgame content is what is where you spend time because you like the content. if you like to spend time on your tier ten ships, its your end game content. I have spent enough time in tier 10, to get over it. its not fun to play. Tiers seven and six are.my personal endgame, because the matches there are more dynamic and fun in general.

the only mode that can be seen as endgame content, is ranks 10 to 1, because you need to know what you are doing when playing there. Exceptions are players, who are as stubborn as stone and simply die their way up to rank one.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure which tiers I will hang out at. Tiers 4 and below seen to low, but don't want to spend all my time at 7 and don't want to be perpetually at 5 lol.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/5/2019 at 10:27 AM, Ruthless4u said:

Not sure which tiers I will hang out at. Tiers 4 and below seen to low, but don't want to spend all my time at 7 and don't want to be perpetually at 5 lol.

I'd probably play a bit of everything, just to collect the XP bonuses. That's extra commander XP. They're all pretty fun to play. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many a gentleman here say that "grinding without top upgrades is awful" (I'm paraphrasing), my question would be, when in the game are you able to have fun then? Only on top tier ships or only with perfect builds?

I'm honestly not trying to bait you into anything here, but I can only judge but how it is for me. I see the road to upgrades as a challenge and mounting the final ones as a catharsis of sorts (this is my personal opinion, not WG collective one), and most of the time if the games are more or less even I just enjoy the process, making right decisions or succeeding in shooting/torpedoing/winning the game, or if not wining, giving it my all. Lore also plays a role as I do imagine being on board of the ship I'm controlling, albeit briefly. When I'm not giving it my all, it's just winding down and taking a pause from the world around. Or having a good time with my friends, like we did with @T33kanne on our stream and I was fooling around with the stupidest builds possible (but I guess that's my gimmick).

Again, I don't know what it is to be you, because I just don't and I never will, but how many parameters need to line up for you to be able to enjoy yourself in Legends? Please don't take this question the wrong way 🙂 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×