HassenderZerhacker

some things are not worth paying for. I think WoWS isn't worth playing (anymore), even for free. I'm happy that I haven't spent more money on it.

I don't even login for that... lol

seems like they are losing their nerves. good.

here's your feedback: - I haven't played for months. I say months because I did a short stint some months back, otherwise it would have been years - I don't want OP CV in the game or much of other attack airplanes - I don't want submarines in the game - The game has been unenjoyable for years, it became unbearable after roughly since the RN cruisers event

for my part, I hope they just uninstall...

wow, good for you! do you play for free, or were most of these rewards only accessible to premium players?

best answer so far, can we please mark this as recommended solution ?

no, it would not mean that. you talked about rewards. premium ships and other valuable rewards have practically disappeared, event tokens only buy very little stuff not worth changing one's gaming habits because of an event - that is, if I was still playing, which I'm not, until WG fixes the game. or not. whatever.

if only there had been a way to test it before, right ?

I quit even before! You gotta admit that ;-)

he means less valuable rewards valuable rewards stopped with the RN cruisers event, but they had begun declining before that already.

do you know what WG does in that case? the same as with CV: they will make subs more and more OP until the popularity target is met. brace yourselves.

of course, for all CV and sub fanboys who dislike that idea, it would still be possible to join CV and subs battles on a voluntary basis when you are not playing a CV or sub yourselves.

sounds a lot like CV tic-tac-toe play

it's old news and this type of investigations typically takes years and as with older articles on the same subject, it's unclear about what Wargaming or the persons involved have allegedly done wrong. they say which doesn't mean anything. also the "journalists" give names of persons at Wargaming who used the mobile payments provider and then saying "it's possible" that they are involved in money laundering but without explaining how or even what the mechanism for laundering money is. I consider naming the persons pretty irresponsible on the journalists' part.

are we still talking about WoWS ?

shocking! maybe WG marketing department mandated psychologists to make a study, and the result was that people who like CV and sub gameplay style also like clicking at helpless targets and think that it's normal to pay if they want to win. that would explain why I don't enjoy WoWs anymore.

lol I didn't know that! must have been another of these "popularity balance" decisions

as I see it, WG could solve two problems at the same time: they should put subs and CV in a separate matchmaking and let them play against themselves. problem solved. WoWS is great again.

the most reliable way to fight subs in WoWS is to not press the "Battle!" button

and that's exactly why classic software engineers fail at banking or financial trading software. because it's not even remotely acceptable when accounts are 80% exact, trades 80% accurate or 80% on time. every time one of those clowns pronounces the words "business requirement" you can feel it's meant as an insult. that's why ALL successful trading businesses took on IT people as an integral part of front office business units. because the 9 to 5ers don't deliver. in the game world, a game with many veteran players is a game that will last and attract new players, maybe not as much as a marketing driven vaporware game, but steadily and long-term because veterans will recommend the game. what is needed to keep veteran players? balance, strategical depth, continuity, and PAY2WIN that stays moderate. this means that the game is run by people who understand and play the game themselves, not marketers, consultants, managers or software architects. they have their logic the wrong way around - they think about building something neat and efficient and to then monetize it, while a successful approach is to design the business model/process first and then to build the software. because when the 9 to 5 lamers are done thinking, the business has moved on already.

yup.

so you mean it's only a lie to the people that cannot read?

a game that necessitates the use of costly consumables is uninteresting.

I think they are caught in the classic managerial loop of doom Every new manager needs to show that he does better than the previous one. So instead of concentrating on preserving a stable revenue, each manager wants to outdo the previous one, show "growth", show revenue increase, etc. all while riding the business into the ground. it's how all executives work in the modern business world, they want to maximize short term profits in about 2 to 3 years, cash in and move on, and they will sacrifice everything to achieve that, even if it means gutting the long term outlook. casinomics and businesses evaluated as an option: higher risk increases value for who exits quickly. a stable revenue stream with happy customers is for losers.