HMS_Kilinowski

You have hardly spent any money in the past 5 years and you are arguing that you MIGHT start now. That's quite a gamble for a developer, given there are people leaving who have proven to generally spend a lot of money by doing so for the past 5 years. I fail to see how that has anything to do with the topic. The simple fact is you are not playing the game much and you are not spending much, maybe even nothing. This is your choice and that's fine. Yet you are implying that a person who (a) doesn't pay for something, (b) hardly ever uses it and (c) knows very little about its qualities, has the same expertise and participation than others who fulfil all three conditions. So if there was 300 CVs in the game, we would all become CV mains? That is a funny argument. CVs, as they are, are overrepresented. They are designed to be one out of 12 ships per battle. On T10 there are ~60 ships, including premium ships. Six of these, so roughly 10% are CVs. Following your logic, 10% of all ships played at T10 should be CVs, but they are maybe 5% and driven a lot by CV mains. The 5% battles played in CVs account for less than 5% of the players. So the ships to choose from are there, and still they are not chosen. Guess why, professor.

You're not getting the point. This is not a binary thing. Every player can play multiple classes. Those players that quit have done that for years. Many have regularly spent money to get new ships, which up to now were 0% submarines. Nobody will jump ship entirely. Even if subs are here to stay, players will still buy 90% other classes. And here we're talking regular players, not people who have ignored the existence of this game for the first six years and suddenly become a fan, when submarines are in the game. This game has digested 90% of its potential customers. Most of them have installed the game 2015-2016, found it uninteresting and left, never to return. The idea that out of this pool, people will return, cause all they have been waiting for the last 5-6 years was submarines, is naive, to put it mildly. All that is left are children coming of age and discovering this game now. If we go by the numbers of dead accounts, not even 5% of the people, who showed initial interest, have stayed with the game. And maybe 1% has played the game significantly and spent some money. This is the core player base. Even if 95% of the player base are not leaving the game, they still will buy 90% non-submarine premium ships. They would not have left the game had submarines never come. So these 90% spendings are given, with or without submarines. Trying to generate 10% more revenue by introducing submarines, you lose a couple of players, maybe 5%. It's already a trade-off now. On top of that WG loses part of the spendings on other classes, cause the remaining players are irritated. Tbh, it's not just cause of submarines. The disclaimers on nerfing new ships and other worsening conditions also harm sales. And that's the other thing. Every other class has classics that have stood the test of time. I have all those nice ships in port, which, legally correctly, are not to be worsened by nerfs. Why should I, an existing old player, put my money on submarines, that will be released OP to create interest and nerfed after sales have died down? Players have always wanted a Missouri, a Belfast, a Kutuzov, a Kamikaze and spent big money on loot boxes. What submarine that can be nerfed just one update later will ever be such a bestseller? So, WGs revenue is also spendings on premium time, lootboxes and in-game ressources, all of which has nothing to do with submarines. But the players who are leaving and players who have become cautious also affect these areas. They stop buying, even if they are not leaving. The revenue actually gained is on the percentage of income generated by premium ship times the percentage of people actually willing to buy submarines times the percentage of future releases that are submarines. I don't want to bore the reader with math, but a percentage of a percentage of a percentage tends to give you a rather small percentage to end up with. if you have to subtract another number from that small percentage, the number of players leaving and decreasing your sales flat for all products, that small percentage gets even smaller, might even turn negative. For that small gain, WG has to rebalance the entire game for years and had to design the underwater world, which will be a significant part of their cost. The underwater world takes up space on players hard drives and memory, ressources that can't be used to improve the graphics experience for 95% of the players, who will not see it cause they play on the surface. But how good the graphics of a game are, using given restrictions on hardware, also affects the popularity of a game. WoWs might start looking a bit dusty on the surface, if an underwater world is taking up space.

Wow, you have replied so quickly to my post, you really must have given it a thorough reading. Just as quickly you have fallen in love with subs, giving it a lot of thought. You are such a deep person.

These people present the majority of Wargamings income. They don't dictate anything, but Wargaming likes their money, which is why they occasionally listen. You may pad yourself on the back for not spending money and playing without signals or upgrades, which btw has nothing to do with economics, cause you just get that stuff by playing the game. Simple truth is: You are not playing the game. You have written more posts about submarines in this forum than you have played battles this week. And that is not even a lot. You are not a forumite. You have been in the game for 5 years and never written anything or contributed anything. Just now that you find you like submarines you come here and start a huge argument, your first posts ever, backed by thin air and anecdotes. Maybe, if you like subs so much, play them. Or just play whatever. But don't not play the game and try to tell people here about what you think is balanced. You lack the experience and the knowledge of the game to do so. These people, that you think paid their way into the game, have played the game for years, and consistently I might add. They have played thousands of battles. They have played well, most of them. They have seen all the metas come and go. They have seen how things impacted the game, things that were much less significant than the introduction of a new ship type against better judgement. And they have played the game through all those storms and bad times. Now you think you can argue with them, cause you finally found a class where you have the upper hand for once. And over your vanity and the wish to succeed in this class, you ignore the impact that this class has as it is designed right now. That doesn't make your points valid, it actually sabotages your effort. Cause nobody will believe you argue for anything else but yourself. We have played the submarines in their various test stages. We have given WG feedback. But WG has dismissed all those ideas, cause they spent too much money on submarines and the underwater environment to ever think about subs critically. They can't just walk away from submarines, much like a gambler can't leave the table after spending his entire fortune. They are in too deep. And that is why we have submarines, even if it may kill the game.

BBs staying 10km behind the cap when there is only a single sub in the game is not a one sided story, it's a game changer ... and for the worse. Just cause you - once in your WoWs career - experienced some success playing a ship, doesn't mean you can put your interest over the health of the game. I can understand the feeling. If a player is successful with a new ship type, where he failed in the old ones, he wants that class in the game, cause it spares him the trouble of finally learning the old classes. But it's not the job of a game developer to dump any number of roles into a game until even the last person unwilling to do his/her/* home work has found an easy way to succeed. You only succeed in a new class cause WG likes to release new content in an initially broken state. It's like we saw those Clemson mains jump into Hoshos after the CV rework. Why? Cause the reworked CV class was such an enrichment to the game? Stop trolling cause nobody buys that you are serious anyway. And btw, talking economics. WG, here is your new sub main. He asks to be renamed for free and has all his premium ships from the armory for coal and FXP. For that you lost players with 100+ premiums in port, paying for premium time for 5 years and dumping their money into every loot box event you offered. Good luck paying your bills with that.

... and your own speed, which prevents you from getting out of said range. The Damage Control Party is intended for countering fires and flooding. It has been tweaked over a period of 6 years to strike a balance between tolerating a reasonable amount of damage from fires or flooding and being able to prevent serious DoT. It was never intended and is not balanced to block pings coming every couple of seconds. Also you are not dodging torpedoes unless you create a lot of angular speed towards the torp, much like dodging missiles in a flight sim. In this game however the torps usually come from the angle of the enemy fleet. A player creating angular speed is a player going sideways to the enemy fleet, giving BROADSIDE. The argument provided is invalid, to stay polite. Again you are either not creating enough angular speed or exposing your broadside. Same flawed logic. Maybe there is other reasons for zero damage, not hidden in the properties of the ships. I need far less than 2 min to see, this is the expertise of 200 battles played this year, with subpar success I might add. Please stop spamming this topic with your nonsense posts, you are only making my point that sub players are trolls. Ofc now we also know they are incompetent. So thx for that, I guess.

People are just playing submarines out of curiosity and because they know WG is going to design them OP at release to bribe the player into playing them, just as it happened with the CV rework. In the end subs are going to be played mostly by trolls to nurture their anti-social joy over spoiling other peoples fun. So by design they will need to be OP. Otherwise the trolls will not touch them, cause they will not be the right tool to grief anybody. And normal players will hardly ever play it. There will be the occasional player who thinks he can master this class to compensate his failure with other classes. So expect lots of noobs in subs. But in the end, subs will be just another mistake that WG will go out of its way to not having to admit to. It's funny, how a company, trying to make rational economic choices, can again and again fall into such stubborn childish patterns.

Dear @YabbaCoe, here is what I don't understand and maybe you can enlighten me. The idea of classifying warships into different tiers, representing levels of power is arbitrary, right? There has never been tiers in real naval history. How you define a tier and what ships go into each tier, is only relative. It depends on how long you want players to take to finish a line and how many steps you think they need in between to stay motivated. The game might well only have 4 different tier levels. With CVs, currently, it is like that. There are 4 tiers. There is no general rule that requires a game to have 9 or 10 or 11 tiers. So why does Wargaming exceed the range of historic shipbuilding to extend the grind from lowest to highest tier? Why don't you just lengthen the grind by increasing the XP - maybe even the credits - required for all tiers by a certain percentage? After all, Wargaming has done exactly that with commander skills. Yes, on paper they are now 21pt commanders, where they have been 19 pt commanders before. But the skill costs were also increased. A 21pt commander today is not more powerful than a 19 pt commander was in the old system. You have just stretched the grind and increased the cost to max a commander. I know this might not have been popular, but it was straightforward and somewhat successful. I mean the pitchfork party was minor compared to other incidents. So why not do the same with the regular existing tech tree from T1 to T10? On top of that make playing lower tiers more attractive, make it more costly, make it take longer. Nobody can tell me that he got bored having to grind through low tiers. It is rather too fast as it is. People can play through the five lowest tiers in one day. Think about all the work that went into designing the ships of T1 - T5. The work put into the models is the same as for T6 - T10. Cash in on that. Make low tiers great again. And forget this megalomaniac T11 idea. It's for BB noobs who need bigger ships to satisfy their inferiority complex and the small caliber they have been dealt by nature.

And how do they do that? Do they interview people on the streets of St. Petersburg, asking them "Would you start playing WoWs, if there was submarines in the game?" "Da, da." The game has been out for 6 years. The bulk of gamers have tested it. If the amount of abandoned accounts is any evidence, then 98% of the people testing the game during these 6 years have moved on. If I am interested in a submarine game, there is a brand new one on steam right now. And can you imagine, that game seems to attract players even without homing torpedoes. You can't flood the game with premium submarines, pretty much like WG didn't flood the game with premium CVs after the rework. So you sell a couple of premium subs, but most sales will still be from surface ships. Only that you "laid off" certified whales to gamble for new customers buying submarines. It's ironic, now even WG falls victim to gambling addiction. "Exchange your old whale container for a new player container. The container may contain: a brand new whale spending 5000 Euros on the game (probability undisclosed) or a new player buying a premium ship and then leaving or cheap F2P player." Please make a container opening, WG. We'd like to see your disappointed faces when you get the human Makarov. If they are the same people who said that the Legendary Mod made Zao too powerful and the Kremlin needed an AA nerf to be on par, I wouldn't get my hopes up.

So, what I feared would happen, starts happening: The first friend who announced leaving the game, when submarines are put into the game, left the game. He had 120 premium ships, spent a couple thousand Euros over the years. Now he's gone. WG will not only not sell 100 ships in the next 5 years to him, that he certainly would have purchased. No, he'll likely sell his account and WG will also not sell these 120 premium ships he had to the new owner. WG has cheated itself out of several thousands of Euros. I hope for WG, the new submarine sales can make up for that. You only need to sell 100 submarines for every such player who leaves, to break even. By that I mean sell 100 submarines to people who would not have bought some surface ship instead anyway. So this friend will likely invest the revenu of selling the account to get a start into another game and be lost as a customer for even any future title Wargaming will release. So on top of sacrificing customers of WoWs in order to cream excess willingness to pay from the remaining players, WG has also harmed the potential player base of future projects. To me that doesn't seem an economically smart choice. But hey, it's WG's business. Make sure to start a whining thread here, when you get laid off over decreasing returns.

I will miss quite a couple of people who I used to div up with and who will leave the game for sure now. I'd rather have these people in the game than subs. Unfortunately people can't be sold in the premium shop. So them leaving is nothing Wargaming seems to care about. They rather sell premium submarines. Well, the people I know will leave all had ports full of premium ships. One of them has bought every premium ship released and would continue do so. WG loses these customers permanently for dumping a submarine on some newbs who will leave the game soon after, cause the meta will be utterly broken. And if I think about how long it takes regularly to find the last bot in a co-op, if it's a submarine, I don't want to imagine the utter lack of excitement once this last sub is controlled by a [edit] not so bright person [/edit] caring about his/her/* survival rate.

I hate to repeat myself, as there have been other threads about FXP ships recently and basically all that is to be said, I have said there. But I gotta assume people, especially the ones making decisions are too lazy to read through all the forum. So again: FXP-ships are a FXP sink. They prevent players from using FXP to a) skip stock modules, b) skip single ships that perform poorly relative to others, c) skip entire lines and d) promote their commanders. This keeps competition more balanced. New players who have little FXP have to play stock ships, play underpowered ships and use commanders with less skill points. The FXP ships bribe seasoned players to level the playing field. WG will mostly see incexperienced players in bad ships and new lines and that will give them biased data for their spreadsheet, leading to wrong balancing decisions. Skipping lines will lead to old players being bored by the game, instead of experiencing the new lines. They will eventually move on to other games. If the Research Bureau is supposed to take over that role of a FXP sink, that idea is flawed. Many noobs already fail to abstract the economy of the game. Simple people reach simple conclusions. The idea to save one ressource to convert it into another ressouce to work around one's way to a RB-ship is quite complicated. I doubt many players share our deep interest in the game. The other issue is the extreme price of RB-ships. If a T9-ship costs an equivalent of 1.5M - 3M FXP (see explanation), using FXP to gain one of the aforementioned advantages, is more attractive. Many players will do so. Is that is the best interest of the game, the players and WG?

Thx for the info. Ignoring FXP-ships is a foolish idea. Coal and RB are drowning in options. There is ships worth nearly 3.5M Coal and another 800k+ Coal in special commanders in the armory. New players must be intimidated just by the volume of ressources they will never have.

Italian BBs are ... okay. They get the job done. Other lines are worse, the USN-BB2 for example. The Italian BBs are just not very exciting or fun. Essentially they are for noobs who are unable to grasp the concept of overmatching armor. On the other hand, ITA BBs are notoriously among the worst players you can have in your team.

The Research Bureaus addresses a totally different player stratum than FXP-ships. RB-ships are intended as a long term incentive to play the game for veteran players who have unlocked most if not all the lines and start getting bored by the repetitiveness of high tier games. They are intended to reset their favorite old lines and relive the experience of their early years. Sometimes it is quite astonishing to see how a ship line has changed through the years. Some have been powercrept, some just can't be played as one used to play them years ago. Some have proven surprisingly stable throughout so many meta changes. The regrinds keep veteran players in touch with the experience of newer players. They create a common ground, since no veteran can give advice to new players on old lines based on old metas. New players are not supposed to regrind lines and use FXP to unlock these unreasonably expensive RB-ships. The FXP is, or at least should be a ressource of its own. FXP is supposed to be a ressource that rewards continuity and curiosity. A player who is willing to play his way through the lines, willing to accept the ups and downs and not just skip inconvenient ships, deserves some reward. i.e. FXP. This game is about winning and some ships are about losing. Players who play them, sometimes even in stock configuration, accept an uphill struggle. Doing so they also give WG data to base balancing adjustments on. If there is no motivation to do that, bad ships will disappear from the queue, no more data will be generated. The FXP ships are a necessary drainage, a lever to control the amount of line skipping. WG will soon see how the missing of FXP ships will bias their data. Even more so, since old players farm more FXP, while inexperienced players have lots of FXP ships to still choose from. Data on new underpowered ships will appear more dramatic, cause the data will be driven by less skilled players.

Es ist schon bezeichnend, dass das Ende dieses bei mir sehr beliebten Themas einen guten Monat an mir vorüber gegangen ist. Ich wollte dann was schreiben, hab aber zunächst nicht die Zeit und Muse gefunden. Für mich als Nutzer ist es tatsächlich so, dass die Motivation hier zu lesen stetig gesunken ist. Mit der hervorragenden Arbeit und Präsentation von @Sergeant_Hulka hat das nichts zu tun. Es war vielmehr das Gefühl eines ewigen Déjà-vu, zu dem dieses Thema verkommen ist. Der arme Hulka kann nichts dafür. Ihm standen ja seit Jahren nur noch schlechte Angebote von Wargaming zur Besprechung zur Verfügung. Wenn der Sinn eines Themas darin besteht, gute Angebote von schlechten zu unterscheiden, aber nur noch schlechte Angebote existieren, kann auch der beste und motivierteste Community Contributor das nicht retten. Ganz recht, ich habe "CC" geschrieben, weil Hulka das aus meiner Sicht immer war. Er hat hier über Jahre eine Institution geschaffen, eine zuverlässige Anlaufstelle für alle, die verstehen wollten, aber denen die offiziellen Ressourcen keine Hilfe waren. Hulka hat viele von uns gelehrt, genau hinzusehen und nicht jedes olle %-Zeichen mit echtem Rabatt zu verwechseln. Er hat, vorallem als dies noch möglich war, die guten Angebote identifiziert und war uns allen eine wichtige Entscheidungshilfe. Häufig wurden die hier besprochenen Analysen über Mundpropaganda selbst der englischsprachigen Spielerschaft zugänglich. Aus meiner Sicht waren Hulka und LittleWhiteMouse immer zwei Seiten einer Medaille. Während LWM für uns akribisch getestet hat, ob ein Schiff überhaupt wert war, in unseren Häfen zu stehen, hat Hulka uns vorgerechnet, ob der Preis dafür auch angemessen ist. Man kann ohne Übertreibung sagen, dass der Community hier ein wertvoller Dienst verloren geht. Das ist sehr schade. Menschlich ist es absolut nachvollziehbar. Ich habe mich oft gefragt, woher Hulka die Energie nimmt, die ewig gleichen Pseudo-Angebote überhaupt noch zu besprechen und warum er nicht gleich abkürzt und sagt "Abzocke. Finger weg. Den Rest spar ich mir." Selbst für Wargaming war dieses Thema hilfreich. All zu oft möchte man sich schließlich selbst darüber belügen, dass ein Angebot kundenfreundlich sei und nicht nur eine Masche um real Spielsüchtige zu locken. Für den einen oder anderen internen Kritiker hat also Hulka auch das Material geliefert, um intern argumentieren zu können. Wie ich mal geschrieben habe: Die Wows-Spieler sind Gamer, keine Golfer. Sie schwimmen seltenst in Geld und geben wahrscheinlich mehr aus, als zu kassieren sich moralisch rechtfertigen lässt. An dieser Stelle muss man auch Wargaming ein Stück weit verantwortlich machen. Dem deutschsprachigen WG-Team dürfte dieser Thread kaum entgangen sein. Es hat sich über Jahre abgezeichnet, dass Hulkas Arbeit irgendwann angesichts steigender Frustration krachend implodieren könnte. Man hat die deutlichen Zeichen ignoriert und wer bei WG was zu sagen hat, hat entschieden, dass selbst Angebote, die laufend kritisiert werden und die Bezeichnung "Angebot" so nicht mehr verdienen, nicht geändert werden müssen. Dabei war Hulka anzumerken, dass er sich förmlich danach sehnte, endlich mal wieder eine Kaufempfehlung verkünden zu dürfen. Stattdessen wurde ihm der Nährboden entzogen. Hulka hat seine Kritik dabei stets sehr wohlwollend und diplomatisch verpackt. Empfehlungen wie "Finger weg" waren die Ausnahme. In der Regel "muss jeder selbst entscheiden, ob es ihm das wert ist", so war seine neutrale, nicht verkaufshinderliche Formulierung. So viel Neutralität sollte man imo auch bei WG positiv anerkennen. Ein offizielles "Schade. Vielen Dank für die tolle Arbeit." für dessen weit über hundert Angebotsanalysen wäre nett und angemessen gewesen. Aber das soll uns nicht den Tag vermiesen. Für mich und für die deutschsprachige Community ist wichtig, dass Hulka uns durch Rechenbeispiele auch zum selbständigen Denken erzogen hat. In jedem von uns steckt nun ein kleiner Hulka. Wir wissen wo die Reise hingeht, dass objektive Kaufempfehlungen der Vergangenheit angehören. Wir durchdringen das Blendwerk. Das ist sein nachhaltiges Verdienst. Dafür sage ich an dieser Stelle ausdrücklich: Danke, Sergeant_Hulka. Du hast uns viele Kopfschmerzen erspart und manchen Euro gespart. Dein Name wird untrennbar mit der Erinnerung an die "Goldene Zeit" von WoWs verbunden sein. Schade, dass es vorbei ist. Schön, dass es mal war. Viel Glück für die Zukunft und wir hoffen, wir lesen mal wieder Informatives von dir, gerne auch an anderer Stelle für ein anderes Spiel.

Sorry, I can't be bothered to write extensive posts for every incarnation of the same topic.

Ich kann dieser Argumentation nicht zustimmen. Es mag durchaus sein, dass nun vermehrt Spieler in freundliche Torpedos fahren. Der Grund ist simpel und aus meiner Sicht teamdienlich. Es macht jetzt keinen Sinn mehr, sich dem Gegner in verwundbarer Position auszuliefern, nur um freundlichen Torpedos auszuweichen. Der freundliche Torpedotreffer hat keine Auswirkungen mehr auf den Ausgang des Gefechts. Selbst der freundliche Spieler hat kaum etwas zu fürchten, weil er ja erst 40 Treffer am selben Freund landen muss, um überhaupt Schaden zu nehmen. Und wenn er mal eben pink wird, geht ihm damit auch kein Spielfortschritt oder Erfolg verloren. Es ist fast nur noch eine optische Strafe. Vor 4 Jahren erkannte man zuverlässig den Griefer an seiner pinken Farbe. Heute sind das zu 95% Spieler mit Verbindungsproblemen, die Wargaming für ihre eigenen schnarchigen Server abstraft. Freundlichen Torpedos auszuweichen ist nun eine reine Frage der Höflichkeit und nicht mehr spielentscheidend. Das finde ich höchst erfreulich, weil Trolling nun kaum noch möglich ist. Wer jetzt das Gefühl hat, Spieler würden vermehrt in Torpedos fahren, der muss sich überlegen, dass diese Ereignisse sich früher auf zwei Ereignisse aufgespaltet hätten: 1. Spieler, die trollen wollen, wären auch früher in freundliche Torpedos gefahren, umso mehr, weil sie über den reflektierten Schaden noch mehr Verärgerung beim Opfer und noch mehr Lustgewinn für sich selber erzeugt hätten. Dieser Lustgewinn ist nun verringert und das schreckt etwas mehr ab. 2. Spieler, die früher in feindliches Feuer gefahren sind, um freundlichen Torps auszuweichen, wurden vom Gegner kaputt geschossen und der schlechte Torpedoschütze hat das teilweise nicht mal gemerkt. Oft ist hierauf heftiger Streit im Chat entstanden und nicht selten hat das freundliche Team konsequent das Spiel verloren. Die Opfer solcher riskanter Torpedoangriffe können jetzt den für sich sichersten Kurs beibehalten, überleben länger und erhöhen damit auch die Siegrate und die Ressourcengewinne für das "Opfer" - den riskant torpedierenden Spieler. Auch dem pinken Spieler sollte das lieber sein, als das Gefecht zu verlieren, mit weniger XP nach hause zu gehen und evtl. noch von seinem Team beschimpft zu werden. Dazu kommt jetzt ein drittes Ereignis, das es so vorher nicht gab und das die Häufigkeit solcher Eigentreffer erhöht: Ich torpe beispielsweise jetzt häufiger auch wenn Freunde getroffen werden könnten. Die hohe Wahrscheinlichkeit, einen Gegner zu zerstören hat für mich nunmehr einen höheren Wert als das geringe Risiko, mal eben pink zu werden. Sieg oder Niederlage sind die Kategorien, nach denen ich handle und ob ich pink bin oder ein Spieler aus meinem Team es wird, darf aus meiner Sicht das Hauptziel nicht gefährden. Man kriegt ja auch keine Torpedowarnungen mehr, weil das nur ablenken würde. Ich für meinen Teil stelle fest, dass jetzt im Chat deutlich weniger über Eigenbeschuss gestritten wird. Den getroffenen Spielern ist es egal und die treffenden Spieler werden nun deutlich später bestraft. Aus meiner Perspektive ist der Wegfall des Teamschadens ein voller Erfolg. Etwas so weitreichend Allgemeines wie die Verdummung der Spielerschaft auf ein singuläres Ereignis - den Wegfall des Teamschadens - zurückzuführen, ist für mich nicht schlüssig, umso weniger als die Verblödung bereits Jahre vor dieser Änderung kontinuierlich zu beobachten war.

Did we happen to meet on Two Brother? Cause we had the funniest battle going through the channel there, running into stiff resistance. Sorry, I did not realize the encounter. I would have saluted you as was appropriate. Lately I am so blind to any names. I even ran into @Aethervoxx yesterday and did not notice until back in port.

I'd love to see a new FXP-ship. We've been waiting for almost 17 months now. There are more ships for any other ressource than even an active player can ever buy. The only ressouce that is neglected is FXP. This is a bad thing for Wargaming as well as the game. Once the players assume there will not be any FXP-ships coming, FXP will be depreciated. While CXP has remained a ressource that people farm, cause now they can get ahead of new players with 21pt commanders, FXP had become less attractive. Why should that bother players? FXP-ships encourage players to save FXP rather than speed up their grinds through the tech-tree. They also encourage players to play through stock modules. I did that a lot, cause there always was some shiny FXP ship to get. Now for the first time, I don't know what to do with my FXP. I will massively skip inferior tech-trees. This allows players to get into high tiers even faster, gaining even less experience through playing new ships. Many will vividly remember the players who in 2018 skipped the Pan-Asian DD line and then torped DDs with deepwater torps, cause the revealation that they can't hit DDs did not come along the way, but at the destination, at T10-Yue Yang. Grinds in this game are too fast, taking too few battles and resulting in too little learning experience. So we get more potatoes into high tiers, which again triggers good players to leave the game and initiate a vicious circle. Why should that bother Wargaming? Wargaming might have the idea that the Research Bureau takes over the FXP-ships, since FXP can be used to skip regrinds. This idea is flawed. Players don't skip lines that they enjoy playing, they play them. They regrind lines that they like to play. Consequently they mostly play through their regrinds and instead use the FXP to skip lines that are deemed powercrept or whose ships underperform. This leads to more cherry picking. Better ships are played, while bad ships are skipped. This is bad for the game design. New lines will need to compete in an environment that sees cherry-picked ships. A ship that actually is well balanced, will appear as underperforming on spreadsheet, since it is tested and released under harder conditions than older lines. A new line by definition will either be average in design and consequently look weak or it will be overperforming. If it's average, it will be skipped, cause people got FXP lying around. Why should they use it on the Research Bureau, as long as there are unplayed bad lines to skip instead? That's only the balancing side. In terms of the game economy, if FXP is not valued anymore, all products related to FXP are depreciated as well. Why should the players care about special signals and camos that focus on FXP? To have FXP lying around? The exchange rate of 1 Doubloon : 25 FXP, even the discounted exchange rate of 1 : 35, is not valid anymore. Why should anybody be interested in spending money on containers giving special signals or doubloons, to gain FXP, if there is no prospect of getting a ship? One might argue again that players can still get ships from the Research Bureau. But think about this: Even with all discounts, a T9 RB-ship still costs at least 1.5M FXP and takes 9 months (assume a RB ship to cost ~45k RP, requiring 2.25 resets at double bonus of 20k RP per reset every 3 months; 2.25 times regrinding IJN-gunboats at ~670k FXP = 1.5M FXP). Even with an exchange rate of 1:35, a T9-RB-ship costs 42k doubloons (1.5M /35), which can be bought in the premium shop for a minimum of 135€. This is a conservative calculation, a T9-RB-ship for 135€. If a player doesn't want to wait 9 months and for a discounted exchange rate, the price can easily be as high as 300€ ... for a T9-ship. T9-ships sold directly in the premium shop "only" cost 62€. This whole calculation highlights the utter depreciation and worthlessness of FXP at this point. Every container is only as valuable as the amount of CXP/FXP you can expect to farm with the signals and camos contained. If a ship gained through FXP is between 2 times and up to 5 times as expensive as it used to be, a container priced at 5€ only has a value of 1€ - 2.5€. Take all that into account: Why should players spend money to gain signals they have to play - risking a bad battle - to get FXP that they can exchange for RP to get a ship at best at double the price and after a lenghty waiting period instead of just buying a ship right away in the premium shop? If anything, a ship gained through a long and risky process would need to be cheaper than the one sold in the premium shop. At least that is what WG defined as "WoWs is not pay to win, but pay for the shortcut". tl;dr Without FXP-ships, FXP is dead. Every CV is a FXP CV. I love this reply. There is so much actual information in it. It might well be the most honest and revealing info we ever got.

I can't share the sarcasm in the context of Mademoisail leaving. CM is probably one of the most difficult jobs inside WG. Having to represent a company and its product, living a corporate identity and values against a mass of critical if not unhappy customers, is not a fun experience. The CMs are a firewall, keeping away negative energy from the people making the product. Ofc their job description reads more like marketing. But in the end they break the waves of criticism and prevent it from interfering with the production. It's utterly frustrating if you have to be the smile of a company no matter how bad you might feel about what is going on. At some point you understand you cannot represent the product anymore, cause you have been exposed to so much negativity and you cannot pass it on into the firm to the colleagues in charge. The colleagues just don't care, they don't want to hear. It's easy to imagine that what makes a CM quit his/her/* job, would also make people in the core quit their jobs, if they became aware. So the whole company as an organism only survives if there are some people forming a leather skin to protect it. How many employees of Volkswagen left their company after VW had been caught cheating on tests? Right, not that many, cause too many houses needed to be paid off. So, the CMs are imo not the people to whom anybody can feel morally superior enough to throw stones at them.

WG is working hard on telling you the drop rates. The problem is that it will take months to extract a parameter from a file that some employee has written and then given some meaningless name like drop_rates.cfg or something. And even if they ever find those drop rates, it will take a loooong time to present them in a nice shiny video. I mean, they are drop rates of containers. You can't just post them here. Inb4, WG is working on the concept of a Diamond Account, which will cost twice as much as premium time, but grant better drop rates. Moby [edited] approves. edit: Really, WG? Moby [edited], one of the greatest pieces of literature, is an obscenity that shalt not be named?

That's the upside of no more FXP ship. At least now I can skip the CVs and have my T10-CV port queens to bloat my collection. No longer will I have to bother with these annoying attempts of WG to force me into making the rework a success on paper. Keep em coming, russian fantasy CVs, even paraguayan CVs, I don't care. I'll just dump my FXP into these "ideas from the assembly line" and be done with it.

That's the reason why I don't post much anymore. I'm bored. The high quality moaning actually is the best part about the forum. At least some people still think about what is best for the game. The people here usually have some decent ideas about how to make the game better and endure the test of time. They can probably give some good answers why they are playing the game and what would make them stop. The average WG-employee doesn't play the game unless he/she/* is paid and couldn't even tell their employer where the game is lacking or going the wrong way. So we have sticklers who will make topics over a life raft missing on some ship that seems to be their life and WG-staff happily making that a topic cause it allows them to distract the community from the bigger issues, avoiding questions like "What takes so long making drop rates of loot boxes public?" This is imo a significant part of why the forum drops in quality. Many good members have (a) given up on arguing in the forum, cause they feel nobody reads, understands and considers the valid points they made for years or they have even (b) given up on playing the game altogether and moved on to other titles. What's left is strange people who hardly think about what they write but compete over being the first to troll any new topic and then continue discussing only for the sake of never admitting they might be wrong. That's pretty boring and keeps me away from the forum lately.

The perma camos are slightly disappointing. The missing bonus however can somewhat be mitigated. If you mount a +50% XP signal you get the same earnings as if you mounted a CXP and FXP signal. Usually this is not an issue as players run out of XP signals rather than signals for CXP or FXP. All in all the anniversary camos - as the ones from the 3-years anniversary - are designed for keepers, that you play for the sake of playing them and not for lines that you intend to (re-)grind. They are especially useful for the funny people who still play their ships without any camo. The Distant Voyages containers are somewhat useful. You will get either 14 camos or special signals for 10 tokens, which is better value than the Gift containers (1 token per signal) or anniversary camos (1 token per camo). The downside is that the perma camo you can possibly get - the probability for that is low and kept secret - might well be for a ship you don't like or - worse - don't even have. I don't see a way around getting some of the camos. Especially veterans will get many tokens. The containers are limited in number. Even if you buy the Distant Voyages (3*10=30)containers and all Gift containers (25*5=125), you will have spent 155 tokens. I got ~200 tokens sitting on my ships. So there are another 45 tokens to be spent on 3 perma camos. Don't buy the 6-years containers ... yet. Just use the codes from the anniversary stream and the containers from the Aircraft Bureau Rivalry. Be patient and wait until the event ends and you know exactly how many pieces of the collection you are definitely missing. If you buy these containers now, the containers you get for free after you finished the collection, will be wasted. Don't buy the anniversary consumable camos. You get so many consumable camos from supercontainers, you will be drowning in camos. What's even the point of playing a port queen, using one of your camos, just to get a camo back? Whatever you do, don't wait for the tokens to be exchanged into credits. Any exchange into credits in this game is a steal I'd rate the drops as follows (best ones first): For new players: - 6-Years Container (only as many as absolutely needed to finish the collection) - Perma Camos - Distant Voyages container - Gift Containers - consumable anniversary camos For veteran players: - 6-Years Container (only as many as absolutely needed to finish the collection) - Distant Voyages container - Gift Containers - Perma Camos - consumable anniversary camos