Afghanicus

Since when something needs to be removed in order to be fixed? Why is only Narai being removed when the same issue affects all operations? They are removing it temporarily but I've learned not to trust WG at all. They broke A LOT of promises lately so nothing is telling me they won't break this one and postpone bringing back Narai for as long as they can, possibly not bringing it back at all.

Btw. where is the dev blog post announcing that Narai will be (temporary... or not?) removed from operations!?

WG rewarding operations with steel or coal? That will never happen, I can assure you. Don't you see they are killing the whole PvE slowly? Crippling co-ops to last 4-5 minutes only... breaking operations... removing them... etc. It's pretty clear where WG is heading and improving operations for the player-base is definitely not their goal.

Well, WG officially wants to kill the whole PvE game-play. Unfukingbelievable.

Since when something needs to be removed in order to be fixed? And since the same problem affects ALL operations... are all operations going to be removed? No logic can justify this decision. Not in a million years.

Damn, I'm late... started writing a new thread but got a phone call and when I finished, this one was already up... Can moderators merge them, pls? @CptMinia

Seems like this will go through pretty much unnoticed. The way WG likes it, huh? So... we all know that all operations are bugged now and that happened while WG was trying to fix the autopilot for the CVs. AI ships often struggle to find the proper path and we've seen examples when all bots would reverse the whole battle without being able to go ahead at all. But for some reason WG decided to (temporary) remove Narai completely. Is there any logic in such decision? Like seriously... we all know that bugs are being fixed offline and once they are fixed, the patch is released to fix the bug. So removing Narai just to fix it is a nonsense and a pile of BS that nobody can swallow. Narai's problem is the same as any other operation - the autopilot. So removing one operation and leaving the others again makes no sense at all. Does WG have any logical explanation for that? Narai is the only T7 operation we have and WG wants to remove it. Just like that. It's not like "we're planning to remove it" or "we're discussing what's best to do with Narai" but pain "we will remove it in 2 days". How professional is that? Is WG really losing compass when it comes to decision making and valuing the player-base? Is it me or most decisions they make are the ones that nobody asks for and nobody wants?

The RB is a scam of high proportions. WG tried to push the NTC which backfired badly. Then they tweaked the strategy a bit, wrapped it in RB and release it as if the players would like it more. It was never meant for lower tiers to be played. It's designed for players to use freeXP (obtained by expensive conversion using doubloons) in order to get OP ships such as Ohio, Colbert (possibly Benham, Puerto Rico and other specials later) etc. as well as Legendary Modules and other things which were available the 'normal way' until now.

@MrConway I know you make decisions unrelated to what players want (usually exactly the opposite from it) but did it occur to you that removing Narai doesn't make any sense and there won't be a single player to approve such decision? If you want to cripple all PvE game-play, why aren't you honest and straight forward about it and say it the the proper way? Why do you always use such sneaky and unethical techniques to execute anything in this game? Narai is the ONLY T7 operation we have right now and NOBODY wants it removed. Yes, we want WG to fix it but nobody is rushing it "FIX IT NOW!!!!" and definitely nobody wants it removed while it's fixed. And you never even announced that Narai is being planned for removal. You just said in one post that you will be removing Narai in few days and the removal will be for 1-2 updates (that's 1-2 months or more). I believe that's definitely NOT the way of doing things, NOT the way of announcing changes and NOT the way of treating your players you make your game possible.

Being crap in a DD is irrelevant when it comes to missions like that. You take the highest tier DD you have, get in the co-op and YOLO to the first battleship. You're guaranteed to have more torp hits that way than playing the best you can in a BB with few torps of limited range.

That man is alive? Hasn't visited the forums since September.

Hopefully it will be gone in few days, once 0.9.1 kicks in. If they keep it for another update then that would be hilarious and a reason to worry about WOWs future.

Yeah, seems like WG's stand on operations (after they broke them) is... "No operations = no problem". I guess they forgot our "No fun = no money" stand but I'm sure they get reminded by many players nowadays.

Not sure I understand the question but pretty sure it's a NO. :) In few days you won't be able to unlock LMs the "normal way" no matter what. That's why I'd say NO even though I'm not sure I understood the question. Since Moskva will be moved from the Tech Tree, the new ship's LM won't be available at all and later on they will add it locked behind the bloody RB. Yes. Once 0.9.1 hits the live server, the ability to obtain LM's missions is GONE.

@Verblonde @DFens_666 Well, the problem with Narai is the autpilot that WG broke when trying to fix the CVs. And guess what... the SAME problem is with all other operations. So removing one doesn't make sense at all. I don't think there will be anyone so naive (not to say stupid) to believe such pile of horseshit. And removing all? Yeah, that will be the day I'll uninstall the game without looking back. And I bet I won't be the only one. Not because the ops are essential part of the game but because it clearly shows in which direction WG is going, what are their priorities and how they don't give a F about their player-base.

Forgive me but your English cannot be forgiven.

Very dim indeed. Seems like they plan to remove Narai for few months even though it doesn't make much sense in my book.

Could I get a quick YES/NO reply from WG staff? @MrConway @Crysantos @YabbaCoe @Sehales If we have Moskva already... we will keep her. If we have the LM for Moskva... we will keep it. That's all understood. However... if we have Moskva and the LM mission is on-going, will it stay even though the ship will be moved to the Armory to be sold by coal as a premium/special ship? I assume YES but just want to have an official confirmation.

Where are the mission/directives requirements? WG wants to surprise us in few days? WOOO HOOO!

So because you're unable to fix Narai, you'll remove it completely for 1-2 updates? Why? Nobody asked for that. If you cannot fix it now leave it as it is and fix it when you can. It's better to have it bugged as it is than not having it at all. Every player can choose not to play it if they don't want to.

Nope, nothing of the sort in my port.

Suggestion: stop the gambling and loot boxes insanity! There are so many creative way to wrap events in which players are enjoying and yet you choose the worst possible way which ALL players hate. I don't remember when was the last time we had an event without any loot boxes. Just disgusting.

Well, maybe there will be ONE event without gambling and loot boxes. Maybe. One day.

As I said previously... I don't own Moskva but I should get it before it goes away from a tech tree and becomes a coal ship. From me it's not worth 500k freeXP, especially with it's uncertain future. That's all I've said. Resetting a line to get will probably be even worse so I'm just gonna live without that LM and all the others I guess.

I'm seriously missing your whole point which to me doesn't make much sense (at all actually). They could update/upgrade/improve any of the existing modules and it will be a better "prime RP material". There are many T10 ships missing the LMs, including all CVs which have disabled ones at the moment which could be better options than Moskva's LM. I mean we don't know what will happen, in what way and when but saying something like "why would they nerf a module many people want to buy" doesn't sound like a logical explanation, at all.