PvE games are likely included, so theoretically, they can easily be double dipping, and matches not being the same size, also likely play a part…
At this point it’s all PvE battles. No double-dipping here. Also four players versus four thousand bots and eliminating all of them is nothing to sneeze at.
My arguments hold up quite well against yours. Armored Warfare is still going stronger than War Thunder.
My points were valid to the thread but unrelated to what you stated.
Meanwhile you insist that I was wrong about boosters and the thread.
WE WERE BOTH WRONG.
What in the actual heck lol…
16vs16, vs 4 person battles makes a BIG difference…
You’re beyond reasoning and thus wasting time and trying to be an argumentative fool for the sake of it.
With those sorts of ‘stats’ I can see how easily you misunderstand anything and everything.
No, just you… You were wrong to tell me I was wrong for my opinion… But you’re also wrong for comparing match volume, based on pitiful player match numbers…
A 4 man match being counted as a match, makes the match number go up, but it doesn’t mean there’s more playing… In fact, it can easily mean that no-one is playing.
4x3000 is 12000 players…
32x2000 is 64000…
See the issue? No? Then you’re deluded, as well as wrong.
Oh, and they also don’t do post match activation… So again, you’re wrong.
Seeing your proposal (and after reading the whole thread) i am not sure that we (meaning the participants of this discussion) have the same understanding why boosters exist, why you can get some for free (and others for war bonds or GE) and why they are implemented with their current “features”.
My view:
The generic idea of a booster in wt is to maximise a potential outcome of a match. It is basically a wager on unknown circumstances - you gamble.
The sole purpose of “free” boosters in wt (like for login or as a crate after a match) is to encourage players to play. The more a player plays, the more increases his commitment and usually also his willingness to invest real money - the ultimate goal of gaijin.
The purpose of time limits on most of the boosters is to encourage them to play now - and not to “waste” a booster, because you haven’t utilized them.
Your ideas contradict the whole idea behind these boosters and the underlying business concept / strategy of gaijin. A short reminder: There is no free lunch.
I see it as highly unlikely that gaijin would even look at such a proposal - even if 500 people would say “yes! -Fantastic ideas”.
Have a good one!
@Kerry_Freeman & @FlyingDoctor - it looks like that you are wasting time and energy - and some of your posts are way off topic…
Just his… Look at where it all started and how they DEMANDED that I was wrong…
4x3000 is 12000 players…
And 4x4000 (what I actually said) is 16,000.
Also, that’s four players against four thousand bots. That’s worse odds than the men at the Battle of the Alamo faced.
If I’m being honest, the current boosters are better off just wasted and not utilized because they provide so little actual boost, unless you get an uncommon or rare one like a 300% or higher.
And even then, those boosters are just as wasted by Gaijin’s own misplaced sense of sportsmanship - allowing spawn camping, spawnkilling, and other such things instead of insisting on fair play.
It’s better to just not use the boosters at all, whether you earn them or not. There’s too much of a losing chance to make them worth using.
Gaijin is never going to implement this.
You said there were 3000 battles, compared to 2000 in warthunder… Stop moving goalposts, it makes it clear you aren’t actually genuine.
I think this should settle how deceptive and bad faith you genuinely are.
You said there were 3000 battles, compared to 2000 in warthunder… Stop moving goalposts, it makes it clear you aren’t actually genuine.
Except I am genuine, I’m not moving goalposts, and it’s 4 players versus four thousand bots (your math.)
I think this should settle how deceptive and bad faith you genuinely are.
If telling the truth is lying, then sure, I’m deceptive and arguing in bad faith. If it isn’t, then I’m being completely genuine.
War Thunder is more dead than Armored Warfare based on current player counts and current simultaneous battles.
Then, again, you are misinterpreting the actual ‘math’, because we’re talking of player count, and how the number of battles, has no relevance to how many players are on when your inferior game has less players per battles.
See above, as that’s absolutely hogwash.
See this ‘gymnast’ at work? This is olympic level junk here…
Fair enough.
Gambling in videogames is generally frowned upon, even if indirectly. Players are already left to the whims of matchmaker and packet loss, why is an additional reward also up in the air?
Plus, we already have gambling for matches. Wagers are there for you, with clear concise objectives laid out.
And this would not change if boosters were post-match instead of pre-match. Pre-match boosters are more arguably detrimental to this objective. A player discouraged by a 500% boost match being “wasted” due to circumstances outside their control (or anxiety due to activating the booster itself) is likely going to be upset enough to play something else until the “war thunder itch” returns.
Non-expiring boosters can still be gotten, so this is more or less a moot point. Plus, the time limits on boosters for post-match activation will still generate the same urge to play in order to not “waste” them. In an ideal world, post match boosters would actually generate the most incentive to play, as a player would be able to try their absolute hardest in order to gain a maximum boost on their reward. They could just play once and throw their 500% at an average match, or play until the time limit is almost up to boost an exceptional match.
Players are still putting the time investment in for the booster to actually matter, it’s not completely free. I reiterate, ideally post-match boosters would actually get players to play more in order to play an amazing match and get a huge single boost, rather than gamble on one, and potentially get nothing; then close the game and play something else for a week.
Tbh, they should just have the current timer on the boosters, but instead of having it apply to a match, it should boost a certain amount of base XP/SL (say 10k or some other amount) with the percentile figure provided.
Sure it removes the maximizing of 500% boosters, but it makes them more friendly to bad matchesmatches and a better tool for players doing progression.
Essentially how some of the XP boosters work in Runescape
Imho you might consider to invest some time researching game design & game psychology - the idea of “fair play” is not a goal of game design; especially if your business relies on fully intended drawbacks and obstacles which are solely implemented to encourage players to spend money with in-game purchases.
I picked this quote out of your whole reply to clarify some things:
So i would be happy to see any improvement which would be a benefit for players - but i took the “red pill” some years ago…
If any of that were true, they wouldn’t have implemented many of the fixes from the Roadmap they first came out with a couple of years ago. They’d have stayed with the same excuses and not fixed anything.
There have been changes. Positive changes - such as the roadmap - may have been forced, but they are evidence of positive changes, many of which we all wanted.
I know we can make Gaijin change the way we want to. The boycott was proof of that.
I know one fairly easy way to do it: Gambling in video games is illegal in the European Union and in some Far Eastern countries. If the players there banded together and complained to the EU government, they could force Gaijin to capitulate: Either remove all gambling aspects - such as reward boxes and boosters - and find a new way to grant them - or shut down all operations and shutter all game servers in the largest sector of players they have.
Thing is, it ain’t broke…
It kinda is. I mean, the boycott happened…
