Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
Blixies

Time to balans!

34 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[ITR]
Beta Tester, Players
1,342 posts
4,206 battles

Does anyone share my feeling that WG is getting very close to collecting all the needed cash data  on the performance of certain premium ships to proceed with the rebalanstm ?
The precedent is being set as we speak.
Once the GC fiasco goes live, the other premiums are soon to follow.

Which one it's gonna be in your opinion?
My money is on the Belfast, after all WG stated "how big of a shame it is that such a legendary ship can not be bought played by a larger playerbase."

Or perhaps you think that the Cesare is a one time matter and all the other ships are safe?
Share what's on your mind.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OGHF]
Players
673 posts
11,802 battles

Why the Belfast, it is now far from op, infact with all the latest ships, radar etc it has been nerfed because of power creep.

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ITR]
Beta Tester, Players
1,342 posts
4,206 battles
1 minute ago, Cyclops_ said:

Why the Belfast, it is now far from op, infact with all the latest ships, radar etc it has been nerfed because of power creep.

It's just my feeling and the quote I've heard on one of the streams. It is still the strongest tier VII cruiser for solo random games by far (IMHO).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OGHF]
Players
673 posts
11,802 battles
1 minute ago, Blixies said:

It's just my feeling and the quote I've heard on one of the streams. It is still the strongest tier VII cruiser for solo random games by far (IMHO).

Only if it is top tier, if it gets to be bottom tier it gets hammered, what ever the MM, it suffers if you do not work with other team members.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PUPSI]
Players
6,594 posts
Vor 6 Minuten, Blixies sagte:

Or perhaps you think that the Cesare is a one time matter and all the other ships are safe?

hopefully not. Imho one of WG biggest mistakes in the past was the "not-nerfing" of obvious OP premium ships, and only stopping to sell them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
15,931 posts
11,179 battles

Balancing GC makes only sense when they continue with other ships.

Otherwise they get into a lot of trouble for nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
849 posts
8,520 battles
10 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

Balancing GC makes only sense when they continue with other ships.

Otherwise they get into a lot of trouble for nothing.

A lot of trouble you say? WG be like:

7e7.jpg.bbd586119f93ce9ed29694582329e560.jpg

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TTT]
Players
4,110 posts
7,848 battles

Gremy, KamiCloneze, Belfast, Nikolai, maybe remove that idiotic Misery Radar... T-61 while they're at it... not sure where Kutuzov sits at the moment to be honest, almost feels like it's been powercreeped into "very good but not completely outlandish" by now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
15,931 posts
11,179 battles
1 minute ago, GarrusBrutus said:

A lot of trouble you say? WG be like:

7e7.jpg.bbd586119f93ce9ed29694582329e560.jpg

Well, they can.

They could close down the game tomorrow, if they wanted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
5,446 posts
9,317 battles
3 minutes ago, GarrusBrutus said:

A lot of trouble you say? WG be like:

7e7.jpg.bbd586119f93ce9ed29694582329e560.jpg

Yeh, but they want us to stay ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BAZI]
Beta Tester
2,744 posts
9,037 battles
22 minutes ago, Cyclops_ said:

Only if it is top tier, if it gets to be bottom tier it gets hammered, what ever the MM, it suffers if you do not work with other team members.

 

If you get hammered in a ship with lolconcealment, Kutuzov-firepower on the guns and a full toolbag including smoke, the problem is on your end entirely. Sorry. :(

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
777 posts
4,778 battles

Ofcourse there is 2 sides of this......on one side the players that have limited ( removed ) OP premium ships, on the other side players that want those ships ( even if not OP anymore ) and WG want to be able to sell them.

 

If you see how many ships are being used on all servers, you get the idea how much cash WG could look foreward to if they do this. So yes, they will do this to all limited OP ships.

 

Personally i am i favor of this too....i would like to own a Graf Zeppelin for example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[QUCA]
Weekend Tester
942 posts
4,298 battles
10 minutes ago, Beastofwar said:

Ofcourse there is 2 sides of this......on one side the players that have limited ( removed ) OP premium ships, on the other side players that want those ships ( even if not OP anymore ) and WG want to be able to sell them.

There's also a third side of consumer rights.

GC might not annoy enough people, but if they nerf more and more premiums, it's more and more likely the consumer protection agencies will do something WG will dislike very much (like telling them they have to cash compensate premiums that were bought by cash).

It's also generally bad press and a self-defeating strategy. Who will buy premiums if they can be changed any time in the future?

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[FABER]
[FABER]
Players
216 posts
3,800 battles
26 minuti fa, Tyrendian89 ha scritto:

Gremy, KamiCloneze, Belfast, Nikolai, maybe remove that idiotic Misery Radar... T-61 while they're at it... not sure where Kutuzov sits at the moment to be honest, almost feels like it's been powercreeped into "very good but not completely outlandish" by now?

 

If I remember correctly the average damage and WR of the Kutuzov are not far from the Charles Martel’s ones, the reload booster consumable has really bumped the fire stacking capabilities of the French cruiser, also the smoke rework reduced the effectiveness of the Kutuzov. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,085 posts
6,251 battles
59 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

Balancing GC makes only sense when they continue with other ships.

 

No. Balancing would have made sense within the first weeks after the release. You know. When people posted why this ship is too strong, attached hard evidence, with stats etc and shared good opinions, how this ship actually should look like. But WG needed more data money.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
15,931 posts
11,179 battles
1 minute ago, ForlornSailor said:

 

No. Balancing would have made sense within the first weeks after the release. You know. When people posted why this ship is too strong, attached hard evidence, with stats etc and shared good opinions, how this ship actually should look like. But WG needed more data money.

Probably. But player reactions would not have been much different back then. For some reason WG thought it was not worth the trouble back then.

If players viewed changes of premium ships more positive, I am sure WG would have proposed changes sooner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
[TOXIC]
Players
4,358 posts
11,268 battles
26 minutes ago, Lord_WC said:

There's also a third side of consumer rights.

GC might not annoy enough people, but if they nerf more and more premiums, it's more and more likely the consumer protection agencies will do something WG will dislike very much (like telling them they have to cash compensate premiums that were bought by cash).

It's also generally bad press and a self-defeating strategy. Who will buy premiums if they can be changed any time in the future?

Frankly? A lot of people. The reason for the outrage is that for too long have WG pursued the (unwritten) rule that premiums are not subject to direct balancing down. Changing that rule now might therefore anger some people, but there really is no objective reason for that to be targeted by consumer protection agencies or even seen as a problem by the community - other, that is, than them not doing it before.

There are a couple rules they should keep, of course - selling a ship and then immediately nerfing her would be a good reason for people to get quite angry, but as long as we're talking ships that are

 - not sold for considerable time already (say, 6 months as the bare minimum, better 12)

 - clearly OP (therefore hurting the game by their presence)

 - give you the option to get a doublon refund and/or a chance to swap for another similar value premium ship from the shop (and it seems like they do have plans like these)

then it's a perfectly reasonable business practice. The only problem being that people didn't expect that, too confident in their belief that no matter how OP something is, if it's a premium, then it can only be buffed or powercreeped but never directly nerfed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
15,931 posts
11,179 battles
6 minutes ago, ForlornSailor said:

tenor.gif?itemid=10436407

Removing a ship from the shop is not good for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PMI]
Players
2,564 posts
6,009 battles
8 minutes ago, ForlornSailor said:

tenor.gif?itemid=10436407

 

How did you manage to get the sikrit camera feed from WG HQ?

  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,085 posts
6,251 battles
2 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

Removing a ship from the shop is not good for that.

 

Did you miss Santas Crates? You think people bought hundreds of them because... they were short of camos or detonation flags? Come on man.

 

 

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
[TOXIC]
Players
4,358 posts
11,268 battles
25 minutes ago, ForlornSailor said:

 

No. Balancing would have made sense within the first weeks after the release. You know. When people posted why this ship is too strong, attached hard evidence, with stats etc and shared good opinions, how this ship actually should look like. But WG needed more data money.

You're mental if you think nerfing the ship in opening weeks would cause LESS outrage. People would be going out of their minds over "bait & switch scam" if that happened, claiming that WG purposefully released a blatantly OP ship to get high sales fast and then nerfed the thing people already paid for to the ground. And, in fact, I bet you'd be one of the super-outraged as well, seeing your general attitude towards WG polices in general and the considered balancing of GC in particular :Smile-_tongue:

 

And, in fact, I might've even actually joined you in that outrage had that been the case. Had WG actually decided to nerf GC within the first weeks after the release, THEN the demand for cash refunds would be actually very, VERY strongly justified. Because getting people to spend money on something and then promptly altering its qualities in a way that make it less desirable WOULD actually feel like tricking people into parting with their money without giving them what they were led to believe they were getting.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,085 posts
6,251 battles
2 minutes ago, eliastion said:

You're mental if you think nerfing the ship in opening weeks would cause LESS outrage. People would be going out of their minds over "bait & switch scam" if that happened, claiming that WG purposefully released a blatantly OP ship to get high sales fast and then nerfed thee thing people already paid for to the ground. And, in fact, I bet you'd be one of the super-outraged as well, seeing your general attitude towards WG polices in general and the considered balancing of GC in particular :Smile-_tongue:

 

And, in fact, I might've even actually joined you in that outrage had that been the case. Had WG actually decided to nerf GC within the first weeks after the release, THEN the demand for cash refunds would be actually very, VERY strongly justified. Because getting people to spend money on something and then promptly altering its qualities in a way that make it less desirable WOULD actually feel like tricking people into parting with their money without giving them what they were led to believe they were getting.

 

Well ok, ill change my position "should have never been released in that state". :Smile-_tongue: It was obvious anyway, that GC was going to overperform.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
15,931 posts
11,179 battles
5 minutes ago, ForlornSailor said:

 

Did you miss Santas Crates? You think people bought hundreds of them because... they were short of camos or detonation flags? Come on man.

 

 

If that is a better business model,  why change it?

Either the crates bring not as much money or WG is not as money motivated as you think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×