Just Fix It Already, WarGaming . . .

Thingummywut, on Jul 06 2014 - 00:04, said: Having played this game for a while, I have noticed that WarGaming has an odd policy in regard to improving their game. Below is a comparison of their current policy, and a suggested change.     So, here are six seven eight things that need to be fixed, and could have been fixed ten patches ago.   Problem: Troll platoons Solution: Don't allow them. Duh. How has WG yet to put a message into the platooning interface that says “the tiers of your tanks are not compatible. Please try a new combination of tanks”? It's hard to fathom . . .     Problem: The matchmaker No, I'm not talking about the “why do I get all the red platoons, while all the purples are on the other team.” I'm talking about this: Seriously, if you make a matchmaker that allows this, you are a bad programmer, and you should feel bad. As far as I know, the matchmaker currently makes one team, then hopes that there are the right tanks in the queue to make a matching team. That's dumb.   Solution: Instead of the current system, why not do the following:   Take 30 tier ten tanks from the queue. Divide said tanks into two teams, based on whatever parameters work best. Repeat until there are not 30 tier ten tanks in the queue. Make a game with the remaining tier 10 tanks, making sure to divide them equally +/- 1. Repeat this for all the tiers.   This algorithm would have multiple advantages over the current one. First off, there wouldn't be any of the stupid “we got ten tier tens, and you got only two” games. Secondly, tier spread would be minimized. While games with two tier spread would still happen, games with only one or two tiers would become fairly common.     Problem: The reward system rewards afkers, but punishes people who do well on the losing team.   Solution: Raise the rewards of the people on the losing team, and make people who do nothing in a game get nothing. While people on the losing team should get less than people on the winning team as a rule, it's dumb that someone who does 3k damage can get less xp than someone who did none (or almost none). Speaking of which . . .     Problem: AFKers   Solution: Ban them. It can't be hard to figure out who they are. (Just a hint, they're the guys who do an absurd amount of battles in a low amount of time, without actually doing anything in said battles). Ban them all already.     Problem: Module damage is, in certain cases, far too severe. By a lot. For instance, if a tank loses its ammo rack, it immediately becomes about 30% as effective as it was before it lost its ammo rack. The same is true for engine damage. Pretty much anything that gets its engine hit suddenly becomes as slow as a Maus.   Solution: Lower the severity of module damage. Make a damaged ammo rack raise reload time by 40 - 50%, rather than by 100%. Do something similar for engine damage. This way, getting a damaged module would still be an issue, but it wouldn't completely cripple a tank.     Problem: Crews take way too long to level up. By a lot. Guess how much xp it would take to get 7 skills/perks to 100%. Just take a second, and write down your guess. Was it around 26,678,098? Well, that's how much xp it takes to get 7 skills/perks to 100%. To put that into perspective, if a crewman gets an average of 1,500 xp per battle, that's around 17,800 battles. If every battle lasted 6.5 minutes on average, that's around 80 days of playing time. That's enough to grind over 25 tier ten tanks.   For just . . .   One . . .   Crew . . .   Solution: Lower the amount of xp that crewmen need. Obviously, it shouldn't be possible to get a new one every fifty battles, but the amount of xp required at the moment is absurd.   EDIT: Problem: Crew cannot be used on tanks that they were previously trained for after they get trained for the next tank. This is dumb. I know, I know, "WG wants money, they're a business, blah blah blah." However, how often do crew get retrained for previous tanks? Almost never. In fact, WG would probably make more money if they allowed tanks to remain trained on tanks they had been on before.   Solution: Allow crews to remain trained for all the tanks they have already been on of the same class (e.g. if you go up the British heavy line, your crew remains trained for Churchhill VII, Black Prince, Caern, etc). This would greatly improve the game. For an example, I have a Hellcat, and I like it a lot. I also have a pretty nice crew on it. If I were to advance up the line, I would have to either (1) move my Hellcat crew to a new tank, or (2) start a new crew from scratch, without any perks at all for a great while. I don't want to do either of these things, so I probably won't go up the line. This means that I won't spend gold training my crew for the next tank in the line. If WG allowed crews to remain trained for the tanks they already were trained for, I could keep a lot more tanks in my garage. In fact, I might be willing to pay a higher price per crewman for this feature . . .   Problem: A lot of important information is not included in game. This includes a good tutorial, and a lot of tank stats, like camo rating, gun depression, etc.   Solution: Make a good tutorial that explains everything (including penetration, angling, camo, etc), and list all the important stats in game. The ones that come to mind are camo, gun depression, and gun mantlet thickness (seriously, a Tiger I does not have only 100mm on the front of its turret).   Oh, and delete artillery. EDIT: In case it wasn't obvious, this was not entirely serious.   Feel free to post your own ideas for how to fix the game.