Allied_Winter

Wenn man die Infos aus dem RU Forum zugrunde legt (und da S_O selbst geantwortet hat, gehe ich mal davon aus, dass da was dran ist), ist es nicht mehr eine Frage des OB sondern nur noch des WANN bis 'imbalanced Ships' dran sind. Quelle:

No

Just checked ingame: Already back at 12k something steel after buying the Black pre patch. Pre Black I had about ...23k Steel? But I went all in on the PEF + Steel campaign so that is no wonder. The coupon I spent on the Musashi (since I save my FXP for the Alaska). Did you want me to count the low tier coal ships as well? I might've used a coupon on the Yubari a few patches ago...

Ranked was advertised as a game mode to measure your skill with others. And the concensus on skillfull play is: Playing for the win. But by playing for the star you're assuming your team will lose and you try your best to be the best loser instead of trying to go for the win even if that means that - if your team fails - you won't save your star.

While that is a valuable thought ... - who says that it wouldn't be an improved game with OP ships properly shelfed (that means no more OP ships in lootboxes) - and if WG DOES go this route, they have quite a long distance to go, to SHOW everybody that the game improves before a majority of the paying players will start spending money again.

Absolut. Und WG müsste noch nicht mal eine Kompensation anbieten. Allerdings würgen sie (selbst mit der angekündigten Kompensation) vielen Spielern einen damit rein (um es mal drastisch zu formulieren). Nicht nur denen die die GC gekauft haben, sondern auch den Spielern denen man immer wieder vor Augen gehalten hat, dass es ganz besondere Schiffe in den Weihnachtscontainern gibt. Ebenso die Spieler die darüber nachdenken sich etwas zu kaufen und dabei jedes mal bedenken müssen: Verflixt, dass wird ja vielleicht generft und dann hab ich nix mehr davon. Klar, bei einem MMO ist die Gefahr immer gegeben - und bei Silberschiffen hält sich die Aufregung mehr oder weniger in Grenzen - aber ... warum jetzt? Warum war die GC 1.5 Jahre KEIN Problem? Persönlich sehe ich einfach nicht, dass ein T5 Schiff, dass mir jetzt Spaß macht (ja auch durch den OP Status), auf T6 noch genauso viel Spaß machen wird. Das ist halt Müll.

Womit wir aber immer noch nicht das Kernproblem behoben haben: WG will Geld von den Spielern. Nicht den Spielern Geld geben (in Form von Stahl, Premiumzeit, Währungen, abschließen von Kampagnen). Vergiss nicht, das wichtigste ist, dass kein Spieler lange auf Gefechte warten muss, wenn plötzlich 10k Spieler aufm PTS sind, wird es aufm Liveserver eng. Ebenso kommt dazu dass manchen Spielern egal ist ob es beim PTS was abzugreifen ist oder nicht. Die wollen einfach ihre Schiffe spielen. Somit vermute ich, dass WG auch weiterhin Spieler auf den PTS einladen wird. Aber eben nicht mehr als bisher dafür tun wird Spieler dort hin zu bekommen. Natürlich nicht! Aber wie schon öfters jetzt geschildert: Der PTS ist dazu nur bedingt in der Lage. Da WG den CV Rework wie lange ... 1.5 Jahre versprochen hatte, mussten sie irgendwann handeln. Wenn man versteht, dass der PTS zum balancen nicht funktioniert, dann hätte einen Monat warten vielleicht nicht geschadet, aber gebracht hätte es auch nix. Dann sind wir doch mal froh, das Lesta eigenständig handeln darf Als Club Fan habe ich gelernt, dass man nach 3 Niederlagen / Mist bauen mit einem neuen Trainer nicht besser fährt. Manchmal mag das stimmen, aber es ist kein Allheilmittel. Nein. Denn der PTS kann nicht die Balancing Leistung des Liveservers übernehmen. Ich würde den Fehler mit den unsichtbaren Torps jetzt nicht unbedingt als "Kriegsentscheidend" definieren. Aber wie schon öfters jetzt angesprochen: Das ist subjektiv. Naja ... subjektiv und so. Ich gehe primär davon aus, dass sobald eine Firma mein Geld hat, sie mich hinterrücks überfällt und ihre Güter zurück holt. Von dem her empfinde ich die Angebote durchaus als Entschädigung. WG profitiert ja nicht direkt davon, dass sie mir Tonnen von FXP gutschreiben.

Yeah... just look at this discussion here Difficult quesiton. Why and how much more is my fun more important (reality check: It isn't)? Only WG though has the numbers and if they're betting that in the long run they make more money by alienating one group of players but gain more from another group of players it's their decision. In the end: I just want a ship that minimzes the influence my team has on a possible loss. If that turns out to be an OP ship? Fine. If that turns out to be a difficult to play ship that simply only very few players understand? Equally fine. In most cases though that requires an OP ship. Sure, sometims it's just a gimmicky one trick pony (looking at you Asashio). True. And we only play minor roles in that. In the end it's not whales vs. F2P players, just different forms of fan WG has to balance out. The history shows that WG doesn't mind SOME OP premiums in the game. Apparently the numbers (over christmas and the lootboxes) got TOO big, thuse calling for action. Which in turn calls players to action that want their money (not dubloons) back. Because they were promised A, got A and after a while A got exchanged to B. Delicate, delicate.

So just by choosing a certain class a player becomes a bad person? I'm at a loss of words here ..

Here's the catch: I don't even play CVs. Haven't really played the old ones (go ahead check my stats ... maybe ... 300 games of my 8000+ are CVs), nor do I plan to play the new ones anytime soon. Mabye sometime in the future when they're balanced. But nice to see that you start insulting players when running out of arguments.

I just want to keep a ship I have fun in. Just look around the web: How many people were happy they got an OP ship from the santa containers. People WANT OP premiums. Not all want to admit it though and sure there are those reasonable that see that a balancing process one way or the other should take place. But overall? The examples I've witnessed, I think it's save to conlcude that WG made the most money from players that either bought OP premiums or spend (a ton of) money on Lootboxes to get OP premiums. And you want to alienate those players? Leave her alone OR offer a cash refund. That's the only two solutions I'd accept. Honestly: Yes. The only viable solution in terms of not alienating the paying playerbase while at the same time raking in more cash.

Am I? All I'm asking is to have a seperate queue for battles without BBs (which is about as nonsense as asking for a queue without CVs). I'm not: - CVs kill your fun as a DD --> Conclusion: You want CVs removed from YOUR queue (instead of waiting for the game to be balanced out and doing your part in balancing it) - BBs kill my fun as Cruiser --> Conclusion I want BBs removed from MY queue + While that is true, you're both forgetting that WG wants the ideal CV population at 10%. 75% of all random games should have 1 CV per team in the game post 0.8.0 (with the remaining games being aimed at TWO CVs per team). And given WG's attempts so far, they're going for it. Yes even if it means losing some players. I mean ... getting from a 3:97 distribution to a 10:90 is possible in so many different ways.... According to your opinion (and quite a few others here in the forums). I see it differently (again as quite a few others her in the forums). And as long as any poll over all servers produces a similar outcome/result as the spotting debuff penalty from last week, I hardly doubt WG will listen to the few players that might or might not leave the game due to not getting their CVless queue.

I never wanted that ... so please, speak only for yourself!

Hmmm that I could live with: - Keep GC as is (at T5) - Remove GC from all buyable and winnable containers - Introduce 'GC' at T6 (Conte di Cavour) - Introduce Conte into all buyable and winnable containers. Result: - GC owners happy - Players that want the GC happy can now buy her sister.

They are one of the four classes in the game. Do they play differently than let's say a DD? Sure. But to me: That doesn't matter. I see enough reasons to have CVs IN the queue and once they're balanced, then I see no issue playing a DD with CVs present. You think they don't fit. I do. And that leads to us having the view points we're presenting. In the end, we're just debating about fun, I don't have much fun playing against radar botes in a DD, but you don't see me running around asking for radar botes to be excluded from MY DD queue (or can I do that now?). Apart from that: - Server poplulation doesn't hold up with multiple divided queues for the same match type - Why just stop with CVs. Heck, have a queue that every body can customize. - Coding a different match type (like RB's) is different than having the same match type but different classes in queue. There's a difference between allowing nobody to play CV (and thus reducing MM sorting issues down to three classes from previously four) and having the same match type but different classes in queue. I don't know how the CV rework plays out, but WG bets on having a) more players after the rework and b) more players playing CV after the rework. And that at the very real risk of losing quite a few old timers. Will it work out? Again: I don't know. But excluding one class from the queue of some players certainly won't solve the issue.

Yeah ... about that. I do believe WG is able to balance things out. You don't ... that's ok. We agree to disagree here. But excluding one class simply because you don't like it won't solve any problems. Especially since - and I repeat myself - WG is keen on keeping CVs in game.

A ship class is a ship class is a ship class. Why allow for one ship class to be excluded while others are 'forced' to stay in the queue? Riddle me this? Saying that ship class X is allowed to be opted out while ship class Y isn't .... yeah no, not going to work.

Imagine there wouldn't be an ongoing balancing process... oh wait: There is. WG want CVs as part of the game. Some players don't while others do and again others don't care. But no matter what: The population is far to small to sport a seperated queue on any tier, class or skill level. We're all in the same random MM queue.

CVs arent the only ships that can't be sunk easily (and if the CV player misplay's he'll sink as quickly as some other ships too). Because it was never intended to be 'same ground'. A CV has one set of means to influence a game, a DD another. Sometimes they collide. Sometimes they don't. The 'glory' of a RANDOM MM. Because WG said so ... that's practically the bottom line. And they try a lot of stuff to make it work.

CV is a ship... a ship with special attacking capabilities, sure ... but a ship. Sink the ship, special attacks end. And why just stop there. If one can ask for the exclusion of ONE class - and thus give some ships an easier time - why not give other ships an easier time too?

Can I have a battle mode then too that allows me to have no BBs in queue when driving a cruiser? And no radar cruisers in queue when driving a DD? And no torpedoboats when I'm in a BB? ... The possibilities are endless...

Exactly. Why should I spend money on entertainment, when the very entertaining part gets 'taken away'. That's like switching the high res version of a movie 3/4 through with a low res version. @wilkatis_LV Yes .... because the forum/reddit has only ONE state of mind. It can't be possible, that there are multiple state of minds here.

Wobei man dann da immer argumentieren kann: Leute es gab eine Abstimmung und ihr habt FÜR verschieben/Unterforum gestimmt. Jup. Deswegen bin ich dafür im Zweifel einfach nur zu verschieben.

Depends... why spend money on something that gets (heavily) nerfed later on?

Jein. Wenn hier dutzende 'CV Rework dies und das' Threads aufgemacht werden und im Unterforum - so es denn kommt - ein Sammelthread oder ähnliche Diskussionen bereits laufen, dann schon. Ansonsten, klar: Verschieben ist zu prüfen.