Ranked Play Is Not Fun

[ChickenNugget]

I know ranked play is supposed to be competitive, fine, but damn is it just the same loss over and over. I'm not saying I'm a great player or anything but damn I want to at least get to play and have some fun. People are already try harding this game SO HARD its like playing at the local tournament constantly. Also the complete lack of information during deployment is bad, the constant spam of pay to win races, damn.

Good game, ♥♥♥♥♥♥ multiplayer. Give me the chance to play with some one and have some fun at it. Add a mode for that, develop some limitations so that someone who is non competitive can enjoy it as well. I like playing the dead and I shouldn't have to just get stomped and stomped and stomped. I won't be doing anymore online until they update it some.

In an actual competitive tt setting you know what you're up against. This constant surprise is just boring b/c you know you can't fight back.

[Lord Holland of Wessex]

which races are pay to win?

[Tubers]

The discord is pretty friendly and people can help you get better

[erandomone]

What do you mean people are Try Harding? Multiplayer is only pvp, right? Shouldn't you be playing to win?

[Peter B]

Originally posted by erandomone:

What do you mean people are Try Harding? Multiplayer is only pvp, right? Shouldn't you be playing to win?

I think there are two kinds of players when it comes to tactics and miniature warfare. People who play to win and people who play to have fun. The don't mix well. I totally gets OP tournament comment. LOL.

[76561199100143607]

Yeah in the Discord lots of Ranked talk and helping each other build better armies. But I think that also makes it hard to play Ranked if you are not in there, as people help each other play better and build better armies. It is very tough to meet that if you have not played a lot of ranked yourself.

[ChickenNugget]

Originally posted by Lord Holland of Wessex:

which races are pay to win?

All of the paid dlc is objectively better than the unpaid ones. I get that it is to drive sales, but it makes match making ♥♥♥♥♥♥.

[ChickenNugget]

Originally posted by erandomone:

What do you mean people are Try Harding? Multiplayer is only pvp, right? Shouldn't you be playing to win?

There is difference between playing to win and meta listing what will win 90% of the time in the current build. There isn't a non ranked pvp so dealing spam dinosaurs, spam cheap ranged troops, and spam ogres is tiresome if you just wanna play some dwarfs. I don't mind losing, I mind not really getting a chance.

[ChickenNugget]

Originally posted by Bilstone:

Yeah in the Discord lots of Ranked talk and helping each other build better armies. But I think that also makes it hard to play Ranked if you are not in there, as people help each other play better and build better armies. It is very tough to meet that if you have not played a lot of ranked yourself.

Yeah, my point is kind of make a pvp where you can set some standards of fun. Its in development that is why i'm commenting on it here. Its great there is a competitive scene, wonderful, fully support that. But as a fun player I shouldn't have to deal with it exclusively.

[Carnwulf]

I am up for a friendly PvP 500 Points game! Also not interested in Ranked games and Hyper Competetive Meta Builds. I do play though a Ratkin List. don´t know if that counts as pay to win DLC Race. Add me if you wanna try out the MP Private Game.

Edit: Haven´t done a private game before. I hope this functions properly even in Early Access...

[SpiralRazor]

the lack of set up info is destructive....it really cheapens units with advanced deployment among other things.

Players should always take turns placing units.

[ChickenNugget]

Originally posted by SpiralRazor:

the lack of set up info is destructive....it really cheapens units with advanced deployment among other things.

Players should always take turns placing units.

I agree with this! It is such a good game with just a few BLARING oversights like that. Blind setup doesn't really serve well.

[sperril]

That's why I simply don't play ranked. If there was a ranked with randomized lists, or some other way to break meta builds, I would be interested.

I want to use creative thinking to solve surprise tactical problems.

When I play the campaign, I literally roll dice to determine which units I get.

"Chariots? Dammit! I hate chariots. But I need to figure out how to use them effectively now..."

[soup_alex]

Originally posted by ChickenNugget:

Originally posted by SpiralRazor:

the lack of set up info is destructive....it really cheapens units with advanced deployment among other things.

Players should always take turns placing units.

I agree with this! It is such a good game with just a few BLARING oversights like that. Blind setup doesn't really serve well.

if not outright IGYG (i do kind of like completely secret deployment, but maybe in the future it could be an option, or associated with certain mission/scenario types), a good way to make ambushers/scouts more useful would be if you could choose to drop such units into a box after deployment, and *then* deploy ambushers etc. in a second deployment phase after all non-ambushing units have been revealed (i'm pretty sure this is how "infiltrators" always worked in whfb—i appreciate that SOVL doesn't necessarily want to be an exact recreation of warhammer's ruleset, and that e.g. coding the cpu opponent to properly use special deployment units might be easier said than done… but i think it could be an elegant solution if the devs want to keep secret/simultaneous deployment in some form)

[ChickenNugget]

And on top of all the other things the charge phase is complete trash and makes no sense anymore. I literally just ran into a situation where a foot unit could stop a cavalry unit with a flank charge with my own foot unit closer. But the declaration system is trash and the intercept system is trash. God have mercy i'm done, deleting it. So much potential so little thought.

[parapoto]

It's a very emotional thing to loose a ranked game, indeed. I made similar expereiences in other warhammer games aswell. Loosing, in the end, seems not fun to a lot of people playing ranked, figure that.
But i'd agree to anybody saying that playing such overtuned lists is a sign of some kind of depravity.
At least there is the objective mode, i don't want to think about all the corner camping douches before that was implemented.
Anyway, i don't even wanna know which malign adaption the player base would come up with to gamify, or min max, so to speak, the mechanics of "i go you go" deployment. Not even interested.
In my opinion it would make the game slower and less attractive. Fog of war really adds to the tension at the start of the game in my opinion.
Make other things more transparent i'd say. Individual LoS, permanent wound counter to see at a glance. Make it clear when Heroes fight in a Challenge and when not. How are wounds distributed amongst mount and rider, and so on ... the charge system could be a little more polished but seems to work fine. Show when Units might intercept even from an unexpected angle if you hover over them in the correct overlay, things like that.. QoL, UI.
Mechanic wise there should be a focus on balancing spells. There should be test rolls for backfire, overcast, fumbled spells and so on. To get rid of the rather uninvolving mechanic of klicking a button and then ruining the opponents tactics riskfree.