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

[raventhefuhrer]

It's perfectly fine for multiplayer games. You get your "balance" and argue endlessly for your 1v1 min-max ranked things where apparently 5 points difference for a super heavy matters, and you let the other have fun.

Balance should have been done for 10v10 game, then we wouldn't have stupidities like 30 x30 point tanks = 2x170 point tanks.

And let the players play the game they want, not what you think is right.

You know, I've never even played a single ranked match. I think ranked is stupid too, so dismount your high horse. In any case you've missed the point.

A) It is impossible to balance 10v10. There are too many variables, too many things to consider. They're also inherently unreliable because it's common for at least a third of the players to leave the match. Furthermore, many people with slower internet/computers have trouble with 10v10s and are forcibly disconnected from the game. How can you balance around that? You can't, it's impossible. And therefore if it's impossible then it's in the interest of the developer to curb 10v10's and promote more balanced game modes and settings for the health of their competitive multiplayer game.

B) It's not what I think is right. I'm merely putting forward that Eugen and the community at large needs to decide how to go forward, and what settings should be supported. Right now it's simply too many, and the community health suffers as a result. Obviously I have my opinions and I'll advocate them, but it's important to see this issue as a community-wide one, and it needs developer-level consideration before the next Wargame is released.

[karsayor]

A) It is impossible to balance 10v10. There are too many variables, too many things to consider.

It could be. If the balance job was done by the game and not by the players, as I suggested.

[raventhefuhrer]

Dear OP,

Yes you're right. 10v10 can be a plague, too many options too, and so are the stats.
But all the people in this thread contradicting you on those points are also right. 10v10 can be a lifesaver, it's super awesome to have a game fine-tuned to what I want and stats allow people to avoid pubstomb.

How can all that be true at the same time?
Simply because we're all different players with different aspirations, doing and wanting different things at different times. Which by the way also means we're almost naturally end up being the asshat of someone else at one moment down the line.

The most interesting question is why this happens. How come we're living in this kind of anarchic self-contradicting kingdom.

Thanks for the thoughtful post. I understand what you're saying though, and I've never denied that 10v10's can be fun, or that it isn't interesting to host your own settings. I also concede that view profile does make it easier to avoid pubstomps. However, all of these benefits have a cost associated with them that by and large people aren't aware of, and that's what I want to bring attention to. The community needs to be better informed about what their choices mean for the long-term health of the game. Here is an example of someone the View Profile button hurts: https://www.reddit.com/r/wargame/commen ... community/

Eugen also needs to be better informed. I'm not sure how aware they are of the issue with the game's multiplayer health, or how difficult it is to find a good lobby, and I doubt they understand the root causes. But it is absolutely vital that these things be addressed for the next Wargame.

More than adding units, more than deciding what era, or what geographic location the game should take place in, the developers need to figure out the multiplayer settings and match-finding experience as their absolute first priority.

[Grosnours]

Indeed.
It's one of the (many in my opinions) points in need of fixing.
I would nonetheless doubt Eugen suffers from a deficit of information concerning the general state of multiplayer, I'd think it's more about having a different point of view (and sense of priority) on the issues at hand.

[serg123]

Here is an example of someone the View Profile button hurts: https://www.reddit.com/r/wargame/commen ... community/
[/i]

In the first place it is his own problem. Only learning from own mistakes & failure of other players makes you better in any game. Instead of crying for someone who must teach him why not start learning? There are plenty of tutorials on the youtube from players who are good to pro level. For example https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7mrSHxFNtZs

I bet, he never became a good player with such opinion. IIRC I had a 30% win rate after first 50 games, about 50% after 150 and about 75+ after 1000 matches. Impossible to get a 75% after 50 games for new players (excluding some cheaters status resets, second accounts etc). Has he understood that he have a long way to go?

[delor]

"Learning" like that only does you so much good. You can't generally hero mode out of having a bad partner if both of your opponents are good in a 2v2, much less in a larger stacked game, and it's very hard to get good at something when your only in-game practice consists of being on the receiving end of a one-sided stomp.

I had hundreds of hours of WG experience going into the RD beta, and when I started playing RD my win rate was still terrible because I just joined lobbies and played, which meant I generally ended up on the wrong side of a team stack. Even worse, if I did end up on a decent team I'd frequently get kicked because of my win rate- creating a death spiral where even when I looked for good games I wasn't allowed into anything but losing fights.

Eventually, I started using View Profile to detect and avoid stacks and started climbing my win rate up a bit, and the situation got a lot better. I still lost more often than not and was usually on the weaker team, but at least I was getting into games that were enjoyable and pushing my win rate up to something that wouldn't be an automatic kick.

So, View Profile was a two-edged sword there but one that ultimately was a positive that let me get at least off the ground in terms of occasionally getting a not-completely-one-sided game in.

Still, it took forever to find an unstacked game and I was pretty close to giving up on Wargame until my 2v2 buddy from ALB bought the game too.

Trying to play non-10v10s in Wargame solo is a terrible experience. You either play any game that comes at you, lose a lot without a chance to learn much, and earn a profile that other players won't touch with a 10' pole, or you be very picky about what games you participate in and don't get to play much. 1v1 lobbies can help some, but there's not many of them and newer players tend to shy away from them because they want to have partners to help carry them.

These days, I suspect it's even worse for new players than it was at launch due to the age of the community.

[thenosh]

If you want to balance 10v10, you first need to clarify what the "normal" 10v10 looks like. And there is the problem.

[Nomoregoodusernames]

Both ranked and 10v10 are broken clownish game modes. The only real way to play is 2v>4v .

Do the balancing yourself

[Rabidnid]

If you want to balance 10v10, you first need to clarify what the "normal" 10v10 looks like. And there is the problem.

~1,000 points per player (no naval)

~2 support decks
~3 air decks
The rest is just about anything.

~2,000 points per player (includes naval)

~1 support deck
~2 air decks
~2 marine decks
The rest can be anything.

Off you go, start balancing.

There are also 300 and 200 point per player tacticals and 1,000,000 point navals but balancing the most common forms will work for the rest too, at least partially.

And I just checked the number of lobbies at the moment, and there was more than 100 10v10s out of the 200ish games running.

[LoneRifle]

Indeed.
It's one of the (many in my opinions) points in need of fixing.
I would nonetheless doubt Eugen suffers from a deficit of information concerning the general state of multiplayer, I'd think it's more about having a different point of view (and sense of priority) on the issues at hand.

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