2,000+ people online and I can't find a game - the State of Wargame: Red Lobbysim

thenosh
Lieutenant
Posts: 1456
Joined: Wed 11 Sep 2013 19:32
Contact:

Re: 2,000+ people online and I can't find a game - the State of Wargame: Red Lobbysim

Postby thenosh » Thu 26 May 2016 12:57

raventhefuhrer wrote:Yeah I didn't say it in the OP, but basically this thread isn't meant to affect Red Dragon much - Wargame 4 is the battle that needs to be fought.


That's a big "if".
"Where is my T-80UK CV with top mounted BUK-M1?"

-Wargame global chat, somewhen somewhere-

User avatar
raventhefuhrer
Colonel
Posts: 2949
Joined: Wed 15 May 2013 08:47
Contact:

Re: 2,000+ people online and I can't find a game - the State of Wargame: Red Lobbysim

Postby raventhefuhrer » Thu 26 May 2016 19:35

No it's not.

Act of Aggression didn't pan out and doesn't have the makings of a successful new franchise. There are supposedly other games in development so we'll see how those are, but I can't imagine them not making another Wargame. There's too much demand from the fanbase not to make another one, in lieu of few better options. It won't come this year, it may not even come next year, but I think eventually.

What they do need to do is take some time to rethink the re-evaluate the series before making the new one. Addressing the issues brought up in this thread is just one aspect that needs to be looked at. They also need to look at what role, if any, naval combat/assets will play in the development of the next game. They need to put a lot more thought and effort into map design. They need to assess how stretched out they want the time period to be - I think having units from the 50's balanced with units from the 90's hurts and complicates overall balance.

These are the sort of issues we should be discussing, and that Eugen needs to be aware of going forward. At this point, US Riflemen getting M60E3's or East Bloc getting 90's line infantry is far down the list of importance, but those things tend to be talked about a lot more.
My YouTube Channel is Raven Wargaming. Message me to request videos on certain topics.

User avatar
PzAz04Maus
Lieutenant
Posts: 1368
Joined: Sat 22 Mar 2014 01:42
Contact:

Re: 2,000+ people online and I can't find a game - the State of Wargame: Red Lobbysim

Postby PzAz04Maus » Thu 26 May 2016 19:49

Grosnours wrote:
LoneRifle wrote:I have to ask though. You are a Marshall. IS there a realistic chance Eugen actually listens and tries to implement matchmaking?


Xeno426 wrote:For RD? No. It would require a lot of new coding.


Couldn't have phrased it better.
It's been always been made quite clear that anything requiring non trivial coding was off limit, especially for a fundamental change like matchmaking.


Keep this in mind. Eugen does not whip up a batch of cupcake coding batter and deliver publishable good game design in a week. Though that would be delicious.

User avatar
nrader
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 687
Joined: Tue 8 Jul 2014 14:27
Location: Donbass.
Contact:

Re: 2,000+ people online and I can't find a game - the State of Wargame: Red Lobbysim

Postby nrader » Sat 4 Jun 2016 13:40

raventhefuhrer wrote:...

10vs10s are truly THE problem that act like black hole for newbies. But since the ones plaing 10v10s paid for the game just like any other players, Eugens cannot just delete this gamemode or do something similar.
What can be done , though, to get more player actually play non-10vs10s is to make all small decent games(and it's settings, too) more.... habitual?
What i exactly mean:
Even many of smaller games favors players to try 10vs10. How? Because we have Destruction as a default gamemode. Just exactly like in most of 10vs10. But if newbie tries, for example, Ranked, he will suddenly discover that there are other victory rules(which itself is little wrong). Same with non-ranked non-10vs10 decent lobbies which are most Conquest mode. Most new players is unfamiliar with it, and that often stays this way forever.
Basically, default settings determine what newcomers will try first, and what to they likely became accustomed.

That's why we need Conquest as default gamemode (I honestly don't know why Eugens didn't do that when they changed default ranked gamemode to conquest back in ALB). It will make all small games(ranked and common 1x1\2x2\3x3\4x4) ecosystem more holistic and self-sufficient.

P.S. sorry for little necro-posting, though
Image

User avatar
Desty
Warrant Officer
Posts: 452
Joined: Wed 23 Jul 2014 16:22
Location: Austria
Contact:

Re: 2,000+ people online and I can't find a game - the State of Wargame: Red Lobbysim

Postby Desty » Sat 4 Jun 2016 14:37

Take away 10v10 without matchmaking and/or the "View Stats" Button and everyone who is a little better in the game will only play one gamemode: Lobbysimulator...

Teams can´t play together and the only other teamlobbies (like 95%) will just kick/ban you out because you have 5% higher WR as them.
In 10v10 people will stack up on one side...but the game at least starts after some minutes.
Try to play 3v3 with 3 people over 80% WR (even 60%) on one side without resetting your stats every 10 games. You can wait for hours!
Image

Nerdfish
Major
Posts: 1902
Joined: Thu 26 Jan 2012 22:12
Contact:

Re: 2,000+ people online and I can't find a game - the State of Wargame: Red Lobbysim

Postby Nerdfish » Sun 5 Jun 2016 01:36

nrader wrote:
raventhefuhrer wrote:...

10vs10s are truly THE problem that act like black hole for newbies. But since the ones plaing 10v10s paid for the game just like any other players, Eugens cannot just delete this gamemode or do something similar.
What can be done , though, to get more player actually play non-10vs10s is to make all small decent games(and it's settings, too) more.... habitual?
What i exactly mean:
Even many of smaller games favors players to try 10vs10. How? Because we have Destruction as a default gamemode. Just exactly like in most of 10vs10. But if newbie tries, for example, Ranked, he will suddenly discover that there are other victory rules(which itself is little wrong). Same with non-ranked non-10vs10 decent lobbies which are most Conquest mode. Most new players is unfamiliar with it, and that often stays this way forever.
Basically, default settings determine what newcomers will try first, and what to they likely became accustomed.

That's why we need Conquest as default gamemode (I honestly don't know why Eugens didn't do that when they changed default ranked gamemode to conquest back in ALB). It will make all small games(ranked and common 1x1\2x2\3x3\4x4) ecosystem more holistic and self-sufficient.

P.S. sorry for little necro-posting, though


Please continue pushing for conquest. Perhaps people need more time to convert :lol: Perhaps it needs to be the ranked mode :D ?
Nobody plays conquest because conquest is terrible. :lol:

The game doesn't need conquyest. The biggest reason of lobby sim is simply NOT ENOUGH RED PLAYERS. It needs more accessable redfor factions. PACT coalitions that get new player hooked.

Here are the avaiable red coalitions and why they are not fun for new players:
USSR: Expensive stuff. losing one tank / plane and that's half of your army. Micro intensive, especially for AA.
RD: Gimmicky and reliant on B5 and ninja tanks. Terrible artillery, not as good at spamming as previously thought.
USSR/NK: It's like a combo meal where you get the delux burger and tap water.
EB: That's actually pretty fun to play. but still take longer to learn than bluefor coalitions.

captaincarnage
Major
Posts: 1915
Joined: Sat 29 Mar 2014 23:50
Contact:

Re: 2,000+ people online and I can't find a game - the State of Wargame: Red Lobbysim

Postby captaincarnage » Sun 5 Jun 2016 02:22

Destruction is a terrible game mode, played by bad players.

10v10's take that to a whole new level of incompetence.
I hope your buratino's die screaming.

Nerdfish
Major
Posts: 1902
Joined: Thu 26 Jan 2012 22:12
Contact:

Re: 2,000+ people online and I can't find a game - the State of Wargame: Red Lobbysim

Postby Nerdfish » Sun 5 Jun 2016 02:27

captaincarnage wrote:Destruction is a terrible game mode, played by bad players.

10v10's take that to a whole new level of incompetence.


People don't join "elite" lobbies to get stomped, thank you very much.
Conquest was basically fabricated by people good at it. It's one thing to win a game by writing the rlues, another to complain about people not playing by your rules. Really good player does not WANT to play against newbies anyway, so the view stats option and the 10 v 10 lobbies actually help them.

There is a very simple solution to the OP's issue. If there are more blue v blue 10 v 10s, the excess blue players will go there. And everyone is happy, except conquest pros complaining there is a lack of newbies to stomp.

captaincarnage
Major
Posts: 1915
Joined: Sat 29 Mar 2014 23:50
Contact:

Re: 2,000+ people online and I can't find a game - the State of Wargame: Red Lobbysim

Postby captaincarnage » Sun 5 Jun 2016 03:00

Nerdfish wrote:
People don't join "elite" lobbies to get stomped, thank you very much.
Conquest was basically fabricated by people good at it. It's one thing to win a game by writing the rlues, another to complain about people not playing by your rules. Really good player does not WANT to play against newbies anyway, so the view stats option and the 10 v 10 lobbies actually help them.

There is a very simple solution to the OP's issue. If there are more blue v blue 10 v 10s, the excess blue players will go there. And everyone is happy, except conquest pros complaining there is a lack of newbies to stomp.


I fail to see how the reddit, irish rage, project awesome are newbie friendly, but ok whatever dude. If you really think your proposal will make a hapeth of difference i'm not going to argue with you, your signature says it all :lol:
I hope your buratino's die screaming.

User avatar
Mike
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 12409
Joined: Thu 20 Feb 2014 01:09
Location: Virginia, United States of America
Contact:

Re: 2,000+ people online and I can't find a game - the State of Wargame: Red Lobbysim

Postby Mike » Sun 5 Jun 2016 03:53

The 10v10 games on the official Eugen servers aren't bad games. I enjoy them but there are so many other servers out there with bullshit settings that can be a pain to play.

I wonder how much time it would take the implement deeper matchmaking though. The base is already there with ranked.
Image
Courtesy of KattiValk

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 20 guests