Asashio - Just want to address the elephant in the room.

[OldschoolGaming_YouTube]

1 hour ago, Xevious_Red said:

Basically what the OP wanted was a description on the sale page that had something like "it has deep water torpedoes - these are deadly to battleahips and CV, but will pass harmlessly under cruisers and DD!" Instead of a link at the bottom to a wiki page that only if you read through it do you notice the part about what the torps hit.

 

However, for the OP: WG has a habit of making the sales page as vague as possible. This is due to if they need/want to make changes then they cant have people trying for a refund due to the product matching the description

Yes i do get that. The thing is its cleary stated on the salespage that for additional information visit the wiki page and that page clearly says....

 

 

So i feel that the OPs argument is a bit weak, its like wanting to sue a snack producer because you only read the front of the snacks bag and not the back where the ingredient summary clearly states it has peanuts in the snacks.

 

And im also a bit baffled about a player that just goes out and chooses to buy a pretty expensive Premium without reading any of the forum threads and massive amounts of CC videos about this ship (which pretty much has created a shitstorm in the size of Smokenerfs, RPF´s, Belfasts, Conquerors, you name it).

I mean what draw his attention to buy this ship? Or do he buy all his premiums on a whim? Thats why i posted my"Is he a new player to the game that just bought himself a new T8 premium" comment (which some took offense to) was all about, because in my world (and i dont spend much time on either YT or forums but ive seen a ton of videos and threads about the torps of this ship.

 

[Boris_MNE]

wanna bump this so we have 3 topics about asashio on top.

[Bellegar]

8 hours ago, Oldschool_Gaming_YT said:

So by youre rules one cant reply to a OP in a thread without reading trhu the entire thread then? And you do this every time of course?

Yes I do. Precisely because I don't want to come across as an idiot.

 

8 hours ago, Oldschool_Gaming_YT said:

But of course, im just arrogant....... 

Yes you are. This post (and the other ones after this) confirms that again.

(see how I was able to also comment on your other posts? And see how I was able to quote another post below that I wanted to comment on? That's what happens when you read a thread before posting. It's all very strange abilities I know, but really you should try it. You could also have this power you know. )

 

8 hours ago, dCK_Ad_Hominem said:

To be fair, the limit can be exceeded at will, but then taxes come into play and German burocracy is just plain horrid and inefficient. 

Ugh tell me about it. I'm in Germany temporarily for work at the moment, but damn the things I have to arrange....

Somehow they don't even understand international banking accounts. And for a German bank account I need telephone or water bills to prove that I live where I'm saying I live, but I don't have those since it's just for a few months. And it doesn't help I'm working in aviation.... Aviation burocracy makes it all even worse

Oh well, at least I'm having a good time

[pzkpfwv1d]

I have no complaints about the Asasshio even though I did not read the bumpf about it.  I purchased her because I needed another T8 DD for the current ranked battle season and she has performed quite well for me (in fact with the long range hitting power she is performing better than other DD's as I generally suck with them), I also speed bumped three other destroyers to T8 using the free XP but could only afford to buy the one currently so went for the second line Japanese with torpedo reload - that gives me 3 premium's and 2 standard T8 DD's of which the only one not to have won today has been Ognevoi

However I did state in the thread about 9th season that I would play all types of ships for this season

[OldschoolGaming_YouTube]

1 hour ago, Bellegar said:

Yes I do. Precisely because I don't want to come across as an idiot.

 

Yes you are. This post (and the other ones after this) confirms that again.

(see how I was able to also comment on your other posts? And see how I was able to quote another post below that I wanted to comment on? That's what happens when you read a thread before posting. It's all very strange abilities I know, but really you should try it. You could also have this power you know. )

 

Ugh tell me about it. I'm in Germany temporarily for work at the moment, but damn the things I have to arrange....

Somehow they don't even understand international banking accounts. And for a German bank account I need telephone or water bills to prove that I live where I'm saying I live, but I don't have those since it's just for a few months. And it doesn't help I'm working in aviation.... Aviation burocracy makes it all even worse

Oh well, at least I'm having a good time

Do you seriously think anyone on this forum will believe you that you read thru every post an every page i every thread before you post? Seriosly?

 

I believe that statment just as much as OP going out to buy this ship without ever seeing a video or thread about this.

 

Is it ok if i call [edited] on you guys right about now?

 

Maybe its because posters like you people dont read the entire threads....

[HaachamaShipping]

7 hours ago, Rowboat_Cop said:

The question then is.

Would everyone actively look in the wiki for that limitation or would they expect these AP bullets to be like normal AP bullets?

Given it is provided for the exact data, they should, or they should not complain. If this was a case of false advertising or misleading statements, sure, it'd be on WG. But this is the responsibility of the buyer to make an informed decision on what they buy, when the information is readily accessible, even provided by the selling party.

 

Like, while most people were going on about Asashio, I, being very saddened that this ship existed now in this form that I wouldn't ever buy, bought a Hood with a coupon. Before I did that though, I looked up the wiki, read LWMs review on the ship, watched commentaries of CCs and bought the ship fully knowing what I'd get and as a result, I pretty much got what I expected, am content and don't moan and whine about how my expectations were betrayed. And I can only recommend people to learn to make responsible purchases, for their own sake. Not throw money at a ship they know next to nothing about.

[Flaming_Bunny]

4 hours ago, Riselotte said:

Given it is provided for the exact data, they should, or they should not complain. If this was a case of false advertising or misleading statements, sure, it'd be on WG. But this is the responsibility of the buyer to make an informed decision on what they buy, when the information is readily accessible, even provided by the selling party.

 

Like, while most people were going on about Asashio, I, being very saddened that this ship existed now in this form that I wouldn't ever buy, bought a Hood with a coupon. Before I did that though, I looked up the wiki, read LWMs review on the ship, watched commentaries of CCs and bought the ship fully knowing what I'd get and as a result, I pretty much got what I expected, am content and don't moan and whine about how my expectations were betrayed. And I can only recommend people to learn to make responsible purchases, for their own sake. Not throw money at a ship they know next to nothing about.

 

I thank you for your polite way of expressing your point of view :)

 

I want to defend my honor a little by saying I did look up info on the ship.

I did read about it on the wiki and missed the part about the torpedoes because I did not actively look for that particular "information-type".

No I did not "Youtube" it.

And I still stand by my opinion about lack of crucial information on the sales page.

 

Anyway, once again.

I am in no way complaining about the ship.

Not saying it is bad because it is not.

 

My current stats with it are:

winrate : 100%

Average Damage: 105 451

Average Frags: 1.67

 

And I will no longer post in this thread because I have expressed my opinion enough times now :)

Best Regards 

Me

 

 

[Shaka_D]

On 29/04/2018 at 11:08 AM, Bellegar said:

 

Hey I want in on this too!

I'm actually in Germany at the moment, so it should be a bit easier to arrange than Sout Africa

(no offence Shaka)

Haha. I've been in the UK a long time already so drinking beer in Germany sounds like a good plan ;). I remember going to good old German beer festivals in Walvis Bay in Namibia where the smallest draft you could buy was literally in a 2 litre glass jug. 5 blokes sitting around a table each with a 2 litre jug of draft.....That my friend was drinking beer!

[Bellegar]

19 hours ago, Oldschool_Gaming_YT said:

Do you seriously think anyone on this forum will believe you that you read thru every post an every page i every thread before you post? Seriosly?

 

I believe that statment just as much as OP going out to buy this ship without ever seeing a video or thread about this.

 

Is it ok if i call [edited] on you guys right about now?

 

Maybe its because posters like you people dont read the entire threads....

I tell you that I do, and I don't see a reason why I would lie about that. In fact, in my line of work people tend to get lynched for lying. Either by colleagues or by the authorities

 

But believe what you want. I think the fact that you make posts completely unrelated to the thread and I don't proves my point enough.

Like I already said, if you don't know what's going on in a thread, it's better not to post at all. It saves you from embarressing yourself.

[Verblonde]

I do feel the OP has a valid point: whilst most of us on here are fully used to researching (almost?) every new ship that hoves into view, forum users are probably a minority of WOWS players.

 

One would think it would be sensible to highlight the key important elements of a ship on its shop page somewhere, to avoid potentially annoying customers who don't visit the forum etc.

 

This goes double when something that is a break from the 'norm' is introduced (in this case the BB/CV only torps).

[HaachamaShipping]

2 minutes ago, Verblonde said:

I do feel the OP has a valid point: whilst most of us on here are fully used to researching (almost?) every new ship that hoves into view, forum users are probably a minority of WOWS players.

 

One would think it would be sensible to highlight the key important elements of a ship on its shop page somewhere, to avoid potentially annoying customers who don't visit the forum etc.

 

This goes double when something that is a break from the 'norm' is introduced (in this case the BB/CV only torps).

There's a link to the wiki on the shop page, where it tells one everything. This isn't some in-depth research. It says to go there for the specifications and performance details. If this much is not enough for certain people to get the memo, then it's on them and maybe they'll learn the lesson, for it is in general a valuable one in life. If they don't, well, some people cannot be helped. This does not require to be a forum user, it only requires the willingness to actually follow a link and read up before going through with the purchase.

 

There may be many things where WG could handle dissemination of information better, but this one I see as handled adequately and transparently. If a 5 minute read is not worth it before a 35 Euro purchase, well...

[Verblonde]

11 minutes ago, Riselotte said:

There's a link to the wiki on the shop page, where it tells one everything. This isn't some in-depth research. It says to go there for the specifications and performance details. If this much is not enough for certain people to get the memo, then it's on them and maybe they'll learn the lesson, for it is in general a valuable one in life. If they don't, well, some people cannot be helped. This does not require to be a forum user, it only requires the willingness to actually follow a link and read up before going through with the purchase.

 

There may be many things where WG could handle dissemination of information better, but this one I see as handled adequately and transparently. If a 5 minute read is not worth it before a 35 Euro purchase, well...

In my professional experience, people are lazy and, frankly, a bit dense a lot of the time.

 

For the average punter, a company needs to make important stuff like this blatantly obvious, or people *will* mess up; also, regardless of how dense they've been, they will also blame you (the company).

 

If it were me launching the Asashio, the shop page for the ship would need to have the following: the key fact about what the torps will hit (everything else about the ship is fairly normal), written very clearly, and somewhere near the top of the first page, as people are notorious for only reading the first page of product blurb (at most). I would also require bullet points further down, repeating the key points of interest.

So: "Two-three short paragraphs of blurb, the first one or two sentences including the stuff about the torps - bullet points, the first (or maybe last) of which recapitulates the point about the torps. After that, you link to the wiki/LWM".

 

Whilst a lot of us subscribe to the 'remove the warning labels from everything and let natural selection do its work' school of thought, a sensible company that wants to maximise its revenue can't... 

[HappyFella]

Apologies if this has been explained, but is there a way of visually differentiating between the types of incoming torps? Asashio DWT, Pan Asian DWT, and normal torps?

[lafeel]

1 minute ago, DiggerPH said:

Apologies if this has been explained, but is there a way of visually differentiating between the types of incoming torps? Asashio DWT, Pan Asian DWT, and normal torps?

The marker is different between DWT's and normal ones.

[HaachamaShipping]

13 minutes ago, Verblonde said:

In my professional experience, people are lazy and, frankly, a bit dense a lot of the time.

 

For the average punter, a company needs to make important stuff like this blatantly obvious, or people *will* mess up; also, regardless of how dense they've been, they will also blame you (the company).

 

If it were me launching the Asashio, the shop page for the ship would need to have the following: the key fact about what the torps will hit (everything else about the ship is fairly normal), written very clearly, and somewhere near the top of the first page, as people are notorious for only reading the first page of product blurb (at most). I would also require bullet points further down, repeating the key points of interest.

So: "Two-three short paragraphs of blurb, the first one or two sentences including the stuff about the torps - bullet points, the first (or maybe last) of which recapitulates the point about the torps. After that, you link to the wiki/LWM".

 

Whilst a lot of us subscribe to the 'remove the warning labels from everything and let natural selection do its work' school of thought, a sensible company that wants to maximise its revenue can't... 

It would be "consumer-friendly" and might keep those with less attention span more content. But too quickly that goes from it being economically sound to it somehow being WGs responsibility. And without trying to come off as some WG apologist here (the Asashio alone is a mess in so many other ways), there just is no legal or even moral responsibility to go further than they went and even if people feel like WG could approach this better, it should not absolve the individual from acting smarter. Not all businesses rely on long-term customers and not making blind purchases goes a long way to not end up with some sort of trouble.

[lafeel]

2 minutes ago, Riselotte said:

It would be "consumer-friendly" and might keep those with less attention span more content. But too quickly that goes from it being economically sound to it somehow being WGs responsibility. And without trying to come off as some WG apologist here (the Asashio alone is a mess in so many other ways), there just is no legal or even moral responsibility to go further than they went and even if people feel like WG could approach this better, it should not absolve the individual from acting smarter. Not all businesses rely on long-term customers and not making blind purchases goes a long way to not end up with some sort of trouble.

Can lead a horse to water but you can't force him to drink it, basically.

[Verblonde]

13 minutes ago, Riselotte said:

It would be "consumer-friendly" and might keep those with less attention span more content. But too quickly that goes from it being economically sound to it somehow being WGs responsibility. And without trying to come off as some WG apologist here (the Asashio alone is a mess in so many other ways), there just is no legal or even moral responsibility to go further than they went and even if people feel like WG could approach this better, it should not absolve the individual from acting smarter. Not all businesses rely on long-term customers and not making blind purchases goes a long way to not end up with some sort of trouble.

 

10 minutes ago, lafeel said:

Can lead a horse to water but you can't force him to drink it, basically.

 

You're both right, of course. However, this isn't about what's moral or legal; it's simply about what is the most cost-effective thing to do.

 

Generally-speaking, the most cost-effective thing to do is to assume at least a proportion of your customers would be outsmarted by their own underpants, and write accordingly. You don't have to be patronising; you just need to make everything *really* clear, especially where experience tells you that there could be a problem.

 

Every annoyed customer that can be avoided saves you (the company) a lot of time/money sorting them out.

 

Basically, a sensible company should act according to how the world/people is/are, not how they would like them to be...

[HaachamaShipping]

1 minute ago, Verblonde said:

 

 

You're both right, of course. However, this isn't about what's moral or legal; it's simply about what is the most cost-effective thing to do.

 

Generally-speaking, the most cost-effective thing to do is to assume at least a proportion of your customers would be outsmarted by their own underpants, and write accordingly. You don't have to be patronising; you just need to make everything *really* clear, especially where experience tells you that there could be a problem.

 

Every annoyed customer that can be avoided saves you (the company) a lot of time/money sorting them out.

 

Basically, a sensible company should act according to how the world/people is/are, not how they would like them to be...

As long as they don't need to refund, it is less about saving time/money and more about preserving a potential source of income.

 

Though, I wouldn't have expectations that high when it comes to a company that decided to bring out the Asashio in its current form and the only indication that was there that they listened to feedback was that they buffed the guns a bit instead of fixing the utterly retarded torpedoes.

[lafeel]

6 minutes ago, Verblonde said:

 

 

You're both right, of course. However, this isn't about what's moral or legal; it's simply about what is the most cost-effective thing to do.

 

Generally-speaking, the most cost-effective thing to do is to assume at least a proportion of your customers would be outsmarted by their own underpants, and write accordingly. You don't have to be patronising; you just need to make everything *really* clear, especially where experience tells you that there could be a problem.

 

Every annoyed customer that can be avoided saves you (the company) a lot of time/money sorting them out.

 

Basically, a sensible company should act according to how the world/people is/are, not how they would like them to be...

My point, sir, is that even if they did (which would be a achievement in of itself) manage to write it up a absolutely idiot proof explanation of the ins and outs of how this sort of thing works, without making them sounding like considering the reader a idiot, then there is no guarantee that people would actually READ it.

 

Unfortunately until people do just that there isn't much point really. <.<

[Bellegar]

1 hour ago, DiggerPH said:

Apologies if this has been explained, but is there a way of visually differentiating between the types of incoming torps? Asashio DWT, Pan Asian DWT, and normal torps?

Exept for cruisers, no, there is no difference between Asashio torps and Pan Asian torps.

For battleships, both will have the triangle with a line above it. For destroyers, both will be indicated by a dot (and sometimes the bugged torp alarm sound). Only cruisers will see a difference. They'll see Asashio torps as a dot (they can't hit cruisers), but they will see regular Pan Asia torps as the triangle with line (as they can hit cruisers).

 

And of course normal torps are indicated as triangles for everybody.

 

 

Edit: and of course just after writing that I remembered Wilkatis made a schematic for this. So here's the quote:

On ‎29‎-‎4‎-‎2018 at 4:04 AM, wilkatis_LV said:

Left is what all regular torps look like to everybody.

Middle is what Pan Asia deep water torps look like for battleships and cruisers, and what Asashio torps look like for battleships and carriers only.

Richt is what Pan Asia deep water torps look like for destroyers only, and what Asashio torps look like for cruisers and destroyers.

[P2Win]

You guys think the current situation is bad? Wait until they release ships with guided torps..

 

None of us wanted conq and wg release it anyway

 

same with this useless run and torp DD, no team support..

[HappyFella]

11 minutes ago, Bellegar said:

Exept for cruisers, no, there is no difference between Asashio torps and Pan Asian torps.

For battleships, both will have the triangle with a line above it. For destroyers, both will be indicated by a dot (and sometimes the bugged torp alarm sound). Only cruisers will see a difference. They'll see Asashio torps as a dot (they can't hit cruisers), but they will see regular Pan Asia torps as the triangle with line (as they can hit cruisers).

 

And of course normal torps are indicated as triangles for everybody.

 

 

Edit: and of course just after writing that I remembered Wilkatis made a schematic for this. So here's the quote:

Left is what all regular torps look like to everybody.

Middle is what Pan Asia deep water torps look like for battleships and cruisers, and what Asashio torps look like for battleships and carriers only.

Richt is what Pan Asia deep water torps look like for destroyers only, and what Asashio torps look like for cruisers and destroyers.

That's very helpful. Thanks Bellegar. 

[EdiJo]

On 29.04.2018 at 10:17 AM, Skyllon said:

You should put more effort in understanding what OP wrote...

 

He is pointing out the fact that crucial information is not present in the ship description in the store...

It is. In exactly the same way as for any other premium. In a linked wiki article. And in the article you have the important thing stated using bold font. I even checked the edit history, it was that way already on Saturday.

On 29.04.2018 at 2:09 PM, Rowboat_Cop said:

Sorry oldschool

Already covered all that.

 

And once again you prove my point.

The "Sale page" does not contain the information,

Not true. You may as well notice that ANY sale page does not contain ANY information regarding ship specs, apart from some marketing stuff. 

On 29.04.2018 at 2:09 PM, Rowboat_Cop said:

It refers to a wiki page that contains the ONE detail that this is all about.

The page contains much more than "the ONE detail". But the detail is in bold font there, quite visible. Even if you buy a boat before reading or watching anything.

On 29.04.2018 at 2:09 PM, Rowboat_Cop said:

[...] (Maybe you were not aware of that part, considering how you keep on ranting.)

[...] You also seem to have gotten stuck on the initial text in the first post without having the abilty to take in new information.

[...]I have responded to your replies several times and have fed you with information that you failed to acquire on your own.

 

[...] It feels like you would rather take a piss on me than try to understand my point.

If that is arrogant or not, Ill let you decide.

Well. From those few quotations it seems the arrogant one is you. In OldSchool's post I found no ranting nor being unable to process the information, nor failing to acquire it. He just noticed that the info WAS in the specification on the sales page, because ALL premiums have specifications available ONLY in the wiki. Nothing was obscured, nor hidden. No marketing ploy. Just you, who did not bother to read the description.

On 29.04.2018 at 6:05 PM, Rowboat_Cop said:

I guess the best comparison would be to imagine this.

 

Fictional new ship at the Shop Pages:

Sales Pitch: 
 

Here is the awesome new Premium Battleship HMS Ape

It has awesome AP Bullets.

It is awesome at killing battlerships and Carriers.

 

To read the specifications, go to the wiki (some link)

Then in the wiki you find that the AP Bullets can not hit Detroyers or Cruisers and it has no HE (no biggy on the HE part)

 

The question then is.

Would everyone actively look in the wiki for that limitation or would they expect these AP bullets to be like normal AP bullets?

You are manipulating the wording. The wiki page is completely different from your "comparison". Information about peculiarity of Asashio torps is clearly visible, in a few places. Even if you can't grasp "walls of text" nor don't want to click the reviews, you have it pointed out as a bullet-point in "Cons" section.

On 29.04.2018 at 6:05 PM, Rowboat_Cop said:

 

Because I expected the deep water torpedoes to be just that, deep water torpedoes.

Asashio torpedo armament is described as "unique" and word "unique" is used 3 times there in a few sentences. Quite clear, in my opinion.

There is nothing "unique" in Pan-Asian deep water torps, they are standard, we have them for quite a while in a whole DD line.

On 29.04.2018 at 10:33 PM, Bellegar said:

Yes I do. Precisely because I don't want to come across as an idiot.

 

Yes you are. This post (and the other ones after this) confirms that again.

(see how I was able to also comment on your other posts? And see how I was able to quote another post below that I wanted to comment on? That's what happens when you read a thread before posting. It's all very strange abilities I know, but really you should try it. You could also have this power you know. )

 

The whole part about "is the boat OK" is not the thread subject, and later OP suddenly changing his mind from "I'm selling" to "I love it" has nothing to do with fact, that there was enough information, and in the usual place. 

So basically it is complaining about nothing. 

 

[__Helmut_Kohl__]

On 29.4.2018 at 4:04 AM, wilkatis_LV said:

Clanmate posted this in Discord yesterday:

 

 

I'm sure that Asashio was extremely useful

 

Haha, I have been in that match:

 

 

Asashio actually tried to torpedo me. 

[lup3s]

On 29-4-2018 at 11:32 AM, RAHJAILARI said:

Oh that - I am in Dublin. So we principally consider only Guinness to actually be a beer (and some other local stuff) the rest can only be considered as imitations. Though I have to admit I personally kinda like some of those (I have always been a heathen, don't tell anyone or I might end being burned at a stake or something - Bring out the torched & pitchforks kinda thingy). Well, Germans and the Czech have occasionally been accused of beer-making too I guess,

 

On 29-4-2018 at 11:39 AM, dCK_Ad_Hominem said:

Well, being a beer making German myself I think I'll take you up on that then, although I'm not the biggest fan of stout ^^.

 

On 29-4-2018 at 11:57 AM, Shaka_D said:

I'm a beer drinking south african, can we meet up some time. You make, I'll drink!

 

On 29-4-2018 at 12:08 PM, Bellegar said:

 

Hey I want in on this too!

I'm actually in Germany at the moment, so it should be a bit easier to arrange than Sout Africa

(no offence Shaka)

 

I raise with Trappists and Abbey beers