AndyHill

At least I got to feel like a winner for a few short, but beautiful moments and I will forever cherish that precious time even if my soul is now completely shattered for all eternity.

Wow this might be the best day ever in the last couple of days, I haven't felt this happy playing a video game in minutes. I can't imagine how heart broken I would be if I lost my shiny new camo now.

The main thing to understand about diversity in gameplay is that diversity does not arise from the number of different classes or units in the game, but rather from the interactions between the said units. In the case of units with little counterplay and ability to punish aggressive plays (such as CVs and subs), gameplay diversity will actually decrease when they are present in the game.

There's an inherent problem with submarines that makes the implementation incredibly hard. They are (or should be) slow, extremely fragile, they have literally no guns and 0 AA. To make them relevant, the rest of the attributes need to be hilariously strong to compensate. Torpedoes are a situational weapon and to make them the only weapon will create problems one way or the other. The "funny" thing is that we knew this years ago, we told you as much, and - incredibly surprisingly - the problem then manifested in the tests, coops, rankeds and now randoms. More importantly, this is not about balance. The point is that regardless of how powerful they are or are not, submarines are destructive for fun and toxic for the meta.

How do you measure exaggeration and at what point does it become too much?

Just by the way, if WG are so interested in our opinions, how come the latest survey for the new patch doesn't have anything about subs in it? https://checkbox.wargaming.net/update_0109.survey

What am I missing, I can't see anything inherently horrible in this blog post? The guaranteed drop even exceeded my expectations.

All that spotting is a major if not the major factor in the matches becoming a campfest in the first place. That graph is a Smokensk farming everything from his smoke. That graph is the backline Thunderer saving his star. That graph is an interesting and exciting plan foiled before the match starts, that graph is a clever game winning maneuver messed up and punished, that graph is a pushing ship caught and farmed to death. That graph is overextending that starts with the first 'w' and that graph is the difference between a master and a potato squashed into minimum and that graph is a beautiful tactical game stripped down to a mindless clickfest. That graph is just about everything wrong with this game in a one neat bar of blue misery.

This is nothing short of utter insanity.

In principle I'm potentially kind of ok with T11, but I really don't like the gimmicky nature of the super ships. I'm also completely fine without T11, but it's not necessarily game breaking like certain other things in the game. Why don't WG just make T10 economy more punishing if they see that as a problem, though? It would probably make the game better if people who play worse than bots had to bleed credits if they wanted to play high tier ships so why not just go for it? They've already squeezed a lot of juice out of the economy in many ways anyway.

Whatever you are on right now, I want it. No, I need it. Immediately. Lots of.

First of all note that I understand your (unenviable) role in all of this as a professional and none of this is personal nor intended to you directly, but rather the company you represent as a whole. Yes, that would make sense, but that means nothing. Unfortunately, when people are involved the result is often something completely different and in my years of involvement in gaming (and software business in general) I've seen things that defy common sense disturbingly regularly. Just look back at the recent couple of months or years and tell me with a straight face that WG (St. Pete's?) isn't a fundamentally dysfunctional organization that produces self destructive failures like clockwork. Also I frankly don't give a ship one way or the other if you say you care about the health of the game, I'm 100% concentrated on following your actions. Here's a tip: years ago one of your dudes stated in that famous video that subs do not fit the game so they will never be introduced. Go ask your developers what was the exact game design factor that changed things and made subs viable. If it's a good one, this answer will change people's minds. Another tip: if the answer is evasive bullship, don't publish it. Now this is the main point. The problem with CV rework was never time and time is not going to solve anything. The problem is that the development process has no mechanism for aborting a doomed development line when it's obvious that it's never going to work and if you just go about the same process just slower it's like watching a car crash in slow motion and the end result will inevitably be the same. The hard fact here referring to postponing release when final testing reveals the need for major changes and no, that's nothing to disagree with, that's simply basics of software engineering. Release simply can not happen if there are major changes made (which there were) at the end of final testing. Unless of course people involved just assume that it's going to be a shipshow regardless so it doesn't really matter.

"Everyone who knows how the game works hates the new feature for what it does to the game, but people licking their keyboards still like the taste so it should be ok."

Yes I recognize that changes were made, that's not the problem in itself. The problem is that instead of catering to the health of the game, the whole process was intended to produce the least bad result and the release was a predetermined fact regardless of anything that happened during the testing. In fact one of the most telling aspects of the whole debacle was the massive changes made to torpedoes between final testing and (limited) release. Torpedoes had their damage increased a lot simultaneously with a huge buff in speed, which changed the whole way subs fight by giving them a lot more range performance. This level of change was a clear indicator that subs were not ready for release and they needed to not just restart final testing but go back a few steps to re-evaluate their role and whole concept with the new parameters. And this is a cold hard fact and your developers know it. Unless nobody actually believed that subs could be made to work in the first place and thus nobody really cared. I honestly don't know if not having ASW on every ship to begin with was just sheer stupidity or something omitted on purpose so that it can be readded later so that the playerbase that predictably hates subs can now be thrown a bone. Making changes means nothing if the end result is still a fail - but gets released anyway.

DCP against damage by fires and floods is already calculated in and balanced in the DPM of units relying on fires and floods for damage. Pings and the need to mitigate those is just a byproduct of the (hilariously dumb) aiming mechanism subs have, which makes its ability to force repairs disproportionately high compared to anything else.

Of course we knew they were going to be a part of the game for years now, ever since the first hint of them appeared in the game and you stated that you were running out of ideas to monetize so had to add subs despite not knowing how to make them work properly. Usually with normal gaming companies the discussion between players and devs goes "Please stop making changes we think are bad for the game" whereas with WG it's "Please stop making changes you know are bad for the game". Which is frankly mind boggling.

It's not a test if there's no plan or intent on how to change things when results come back negative.

At least they created a new meme. I for one am going to redistribute myself to other games when that patch hits.

That statement is a record load of bullship even for WG. I can feel the desperation in how some poor person had to come up with all those lies to polish a gigantic stinking, rotten turd.

WG development teams: Test server stage 1: FAIL Test server stage 2: FAIL Test server stage 3: FAIL Test server stage 4: FAIL Coop / ranked stage: FAIL "Ok, this looks very promising for randoms."

On the recent torpedo issues (https://blog.worldofwarships.com/blog/208?fbclid=IwAR361AMwp5pYXTecoZNK5ory6HPqjTrI0LJoM3S_ZIYGMrG5D9Nmi9ejLp8): Currently, we found one possible solution to the current issue. However, it's not been fully tested yet, and applying it now brings risks of creating other issues within the game. Therefore, we've developed the following plan regarding this fix: Today, 14 of September, we are testing a fix internally within our studio. On Wednesday, 15 of September, we are adding the fix on the Public Test server to test it together with our ST volunteers. On Thursday, 16 of September, we will check the results of all the test stages and, if everything is OK, apply the fix on the live server on 16-17 of September.

On the recent torpedo issues (https://blog.worldofwarships.com/blog/208?fbclid=IwAR361AMwp5pYXTecoZNK5ory6HPqjTrI0LJoM3S_ZIYGMrG5D9Nmi9ejLp8): Currently, we found one possible solution to the current issue. However, it's not been fully tested yet, and applying it now brings risks of creating other issues within the game. Therefore, we've developed the following plan regarding this fix: Today, 14 of September, we are testing a fix internally within our studio. On Wednesday, 15 of September, we are adding the fix on the Public Test server to test it together with our ST volunteers. On Thursday, 16 of September, we will check the results of all the test stages and, if everything is OK, apply the fix on the live server on 16-17 of September.

Some forms of ASW are actually rather effective in hurting your enemies, AA does nuffin. Thus being left without ASW makes a bigger difference.

That match has 8 DDs in it.

This is a somewhat interesting question. On the EU server (according to proships.ru) the modern carriers are somewhat behind RTS carriers in spotting damage with one exception, but on the RU server last month's spotting statistics for the modern CVs are a little higher than RTS all time ones except for Midway. Roosevelt is the spottingest CV of all time on both servers. In "flashed ships" (the first spot ribbon) RTS carriers are behind the modern ones on both servers.