Karasu_Browarszky

It is interesting you say games do not last forever, I wonder... not all games last forever, but there are some strong titles that go on year after year. I'd say it depends on a number of things, but if we think in terms of WoWS, there should always be people, even new generations which share the core interest. This is why I think alienating that core segment, even if they are not the necessarily the biggest whales out there, is what is more likely than anything to kill this game. Admittedly, if they already have a fallback title in the works... it's a whole different ball (or whatever) game. But, I think they will struggle to replace it with anything with the same (wasted) potential as WoWS.

Uhm... methinks you are overthinking this.

Legos are a classic, WoWS still isn't, and looking at the way things are going, it will never be.

Yeah, the perennial problem is strangling the Golden Goose. If they rely on monetizing the part of the potential playerbase that does not really care about ships, naval warfare, or history, while alienating the more loyal segment that actually does, they'll be left with a dead goose and a fistful of feathers in the end.

*Sighs* Then, I think, I'd be happier being a game company CEO blowing this franchise out of the water...

Personally, I only use these tokens to try to grab some of the Italian BB's (which are the most beautiful, gracious and stylish the game has to offer), so I'm offsetting these tokens against potential credits (and grinding time saved). Are they generous then? As far as credits go, can't really say, because premium account brings me all the credits I want, but in terms of my time, I'd say so far so good.

I maybe believing in legends (along with the Tooth Fairy), but I still like to think there was a time when companies, which by definition are interested in staying profitable, still also took pride in the products they made.

You mean they care about money.

MOGA MOGA MOGA ! (No, that's not obscure weebanese...)

One problem here is that different people want and expect different things from this game. Personally, I feel I'm on the losing side here, so if WG is basing their decision on reputable research on which ever game meta will bring them the most money.... I just don't know. Personally, I'm more and more troubled by the concept of 'lost opportunity, wasted potential', because if we still consider WoWS as the Premium Online Naval Warfare Game in the world, it is most definitely not delivering as far as I'm concerned.

Some Pan-Asian ships saw action post WW2. Most notably, probably, the Indian Navy ships. TBH, WW1 and WW2 are where the Big Boys... (or Big Girls perhaps, if you think of the gender conventions of ships...) are to be found.

Back in my day, we had no such things.

With a Sekrit submersible mode, one time use only, Comrades!

Well, they'd be all the more important then, I'd say. This is why I think the game should be structured on the Era principle, this would mean that the 'Tier X ships' would be facing the ships that historically were in service at the time of that Era. Yes, they'd probably be superior in many ways compared to some of the ships they'd be facing, but the MM could be adjusted by assigning each ship an individual 'Battle Weight' stat, meaning, for instance, that if only one team would have the mighty Yamato (!), the other team might be compensated by having an extra ship so that both teams combined 'Battle Weight' stats would be as close as possible.

This one isn't? You ran out of popcorn or sumfin...

Perhaps they should pin this one too.

I'm reading this on the internet...

Not quite yet, but seeing how hard they are working to achieve this goal, I feel we all need to be more appreciative of their efforts, wouldn't you say so too?

Huh?

I get it, it's sikret information!

What's it for? To target the low-skilled players, or to target the higher skilled players first? I assume it has some well thought out function...

"Missed opportunity and wasted potential". That about sums up half the problem.

Which can make things.. interesting.

Verry interesting....

Ah, but the CC status is based on some kind of contractual obligations, I think. So the official reason should be transparent IMO, and if so, the same rules should apply to all the CC's without undue favouritism. Ideally, I'm not as naive as I possibly sound....