Jump to content
Server restart - 20/06/2019 Read more... ×
  • 1
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
InfinityIncarnate

Could you please provide some statistics on how many players are actually satisfied with the rework in comparison to how many who're dissatisfied with the rework?

13 comments in this topic

Question

Players
103 posts
1,651 battles

Could you please provide some statistics on how many players are actually satisfied with the rework in comparison to how many who're dissatisfied with the rework?

To add bit of context to why the question above has been, which is not necessary to read, but will provide context as to why, and to anyone who feel they might have anything to add to the question.

Because from what I've read so far it seems the vast majority of the players in the community are very dissatisfied with the rework, dislike or even outright hate it, sure there are a lot of people who like it, but it seems more people dislike it. I really don't understand why it's been decided to force this rework onto the players, when it seems the majority are actually against it and are very dissatisfied with the rework, even before it was implemented so many players were against it and clearly expressed it. So it doesn't make sense that when you're knowing this, why you move forward with it instead of going back to the drawing board? Why ruin the game for so many? You may feel that it's a step in the right direction, but what you've made isn't carrier gameplay, it's just a very simplified version of world of warplanes with bad controls, which by the way can get boring quite quickly and especially in the longer run because it's the same things one keeps doing, and it doesn't really achieve what it was made to, it has just made it much worse. I understand that it's been made clear on one the recent devstreams that it will not be possible to revert to the pre-rework carrier gameplay. So I would also like to know, why it would not be possible to revert to the previous carrier gameplay, whether it's technical issues or simply a decision from above.

Also, when reading through all of the posts regarding the CV rework, it's it's quite evendent that many people are NOT satisfied with it, and you've actually managed to make things worse, make a lot of players angry and drive players away from the game in the process, because of the rework, and do consider that a lot of these players have been loyal and financially supporting the game for years, in my opinion that says a lot. Obviously alot of people will be angry with such a drastic and radical change, but it's not just the change, but moreso what it was changed into, so it's to be expected, but even when it's to be expected, is/was it really worth it? Because it's not like it has just ruined it for the CV mains, but also for many other players because this rework has negatively impacted all of the warship classes, and it's not something you can balance or tweak your way out of, because it has to with the fundamental gameplay. I know, understand and even agree that it was necessary to rework the carrier gameplay because of the issues there were with the RTS carrier gameplay, was it necessary to completely scrape the RTS gameplay, not in my opinion, because I think the RTS gameplay just really needed some very important tweaks - like removing manual dropping and strafing all together, improvements to the UI, including making it more controller/console-friendly. You could also have reworked the class abit so that it would offer other roles to fit into, roles that could both be defensive as well as offensive and even be utility, and as it inherently would be great at air reconnaissance you could have made something around that, furthermore, there are bunch of mechanics that you could've added to provide more depth and diversity to the gameplay, like for instance fuel, pilots and more. The reworked carrier gameplay, doesn't feel like carrier gameplay at all, and it's because you're not playing a carrier, but playing warplanes under the name of a carrier, and you can't even properly control the carrier. As it is now we can't actually control the carrier directly when we NEED to, why? Because we have a squadron out, and the only way to gain control of the carrier is to call back the squadron, and furthermore it gets real crazy when the carrier is under attack by an incoming warship or several warships, especially since the carrier can't be controlled with a squadron out - you can't even repair it. What does this do? It makes it exceptionally difficult to actually defend against the attacks, because your ability relies heavily on the warplanes, which you have to call back if you want to have control of the ship!? It's quite bad and exceptionally stressful and frustrating.

From what I understand from your development blogs and diary, you basically identified the issues to be fixed and then decided reuse the third person control system, instead of going with something different or at least try and discuss suggestions and potential solutions with the players in the community, which very well could've let to something even better, and more importantly something that would have been more accepted by the players. Which would've been the best course of action, as it's the players who's going to be playing it the most, and they most likely would have a better idea of what they would like, than someone else. The result you have now is essentially and basically flying ships in the form of warplane squadrons that has a gameplay that basically is a simplified version of the world of warplanes game, just with bad controls. Did you fix the issues with the rework? Not really, and you made things much worse, I already mentioned a few of those things.

So you may be looking at the bottomline in numbers of concurrent players and see you might have more than before the rework and CVs being played more than before or that there are currently more playing the CVs than before, but that doesn't mean that it's a good thing. Because the increase in CV players, doesn't necessarily indicate that it's good or that people like it - it's really just like when a new game is released, people want to try it, but will go back to what they were playing before if it's not good enough to keep them interested, furthermore, there are also those who could be trying to like it, but really have issues with that. Consider for how many you've ruined the game for with this rework, a game they loved, and now they don't even want to play it, ask yourselves why and if that was worth it!? This rework has nothing to do with carrier gameplay, and thus it makes it feel very disconnected, especially when you consider it supposed to be - carrier gameplay, but it's also very different from what the players in the community have expressed they wanted.

So there are quite many reasons why I'm asking for some statistics on how many players who're actually satisfied or dissatisfied with the rework, especially because it will shed some light on how well received this is/was and if this really was the right direction to take. Personally, I don't like the rework, but there some bits here and there I think are good, but overall, no I'm not satisfied. It's also my impression that the majority of the players in the community are dissatisfied with it and actually would prefer a different rework.


 Thank you for reading, I hope you will provide what has been asked for.

//Inc.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
Players
103 posts
1,651 battles
20 hours ago, ColonelPete said:

Is there a summary?

Thats the question, perhaps vote up the question and we might get to see it if there is one :)

 

20 hours ago, xXx_Blogis_xXx said:

i m sure even cv players leave , still there is more  new players 

But even with new players coming in, the players who left are still part of those statistics, which tells us something in regards to the raised question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
[CATS]
Players
17,270 posts
11,677 battles
3 hours ago, InfinityIncarnate said:

Thats the question, perhaps vote up the question and we might get to see it if there is one :)

.... of your text....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
[UNICS]
Players
3,322 posts
13,289 battles
On 2/28/2019 at 6:26 AM, InfinityIncarnate said:

Could you please provide some statistics on how many players are actually satisfied with the rework in comparison to how many who're dissatisfied with the rework?

I doubt they will do this because why would they? The rework isn't done yet. Lots of balancing remains. People are generally dissatisfied with change, regardless of what change. They knew there would be a shitstorm following the rework. They don't know if the rework will improve the game by the end. Maybe it will, maybe it won't, it was a gamble they were willing to take it seems. They could've just scrapped cvs altogether or moved them to purely co-op/missions. Instead they poured a lot of effort and money into trying to incorporate cvs into Randoms in a new way.

 

Come back in a year and see if the game is played as much as before or more, and if cvs still are playable as a class. If so, the rework should be regarded a success.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Players
103 posts
1,651 battles
18 hours ago, loppantorkel said:

I doubt they will do this because why would they? The rework isn't done yet. Lots of balancing remains. People are generally dissatisfied with change, regardless of what change. They knew there would be a shitstorm following the rework. They don't know if the rework will improve the game by the end. Maybe it will, maybe it won't, it was a gamble they were willing to take it seems. They could've just scrapped cvs altogether or moved them to purely co-op/missions. Instead they poured a lot of effort and money into trying to incorporate cvs into Randoms in a new way.

 

Come back in a year and see if the game is played as much as before or more, and if cvs still are playable as a class. If so, the rework should be regarded a success.

It's not a matter of balancing, no amount of adjustments and tweaks to balance will change the gameplay, which players are dissatisfied, unhappy and angry about, it's not even carrier gameplay, it's just a class with the name of carrier, but it's not remotely close to carrier gameplay.

Instead of just going with the first first idea and prototyping it, they should've been discussing it with the community, at least that way it would've been much more likely to have been well received. Furthermore, it's a pretty bad decision to go ahead with something that seems to be against what the majority of the players in the community were and are against, especially when considering the amount of resources and efforts put into the rework. So even if the rework isn't done terms of balancing, they should be sharing those details to be transparent about it, especially when considering there are a lot of players in the community who've quit the game due to this rework, even loyal veteran players, and that says alot - sharing those details would be called a form of damage control. Besides, if they don't, then the only statistics we can rely on are first off all third party, second they don't state anything about what people think about the rework, whether they're satisfied with it or not.

According to this article: https://www.mmowg.net/world-of-warships-cv-rework-after-two-weeks-data/?cn-reloaded=1 there are a lot less CV players than just early february to mid february, both low tier and high tier, and the higher tiers have lost even more players - this tells me that the players must be dissatisfied, unhappy and/or angry about the rework overall. I don't blame them, because I really don't like it either, even though I did try.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
[CATS]
Players
17,270 posts
11,677 battles

Your conclusion is wrong.

It happens to EVERY class that the player numbers go down after the initial hype after a bigger change.

One could argue about the speed it happened this time.

Fact is, we have still more CV player than before the rework.

 

Sidenote: MMOWG.net used my diagram without giving a source.

 

That is the current diagram (Class percentages of battles in higher Tier).

image.thumb.png.1a4b3c0d43369b8a605e99b5d63f9d05.png

 

In absolute numbers we have now more than double the amount of CV battles in higher Tier than we had on average the past year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
[THSLD]
Players
26 posts
5,314 battles
On 2/28/2019 at 5:26 AM, InfinityIncarnate said:

Could you please provide some statistics on how many players are actually satisfied with the rework in comparison to how many who're dissatisfied with the rework?

To add bit of context to why the question above has been, which is not necessary to read, but will provide context as to why, and to anyone who feel they might have anything to add to the question.

Because from what I've read so far it seems the vast majority of the players in the community are very dissatisfied with the rework, dislike or even outright hate it, sure there are a lot of people who like it, but it seems more people dislike it. I really don't understand why it's been decided to force this rework onto the players, when it seems the majority are actually against it and are very dissatisfied with the rework, even before it was implemented so many players were against it and clearly expressed it. So it doesn't make sense that when you're knowing this, why you move forward with it instead of going back to the drawing board? Why ruin the game for so many? You may feel that it's a step in the right direction, but what you've made isn't carrier gameplay, it's just a very simplified version of world of warplanes with bad controls, which by the way can get boring quite quickly and especially in the longer run because it's the same things one keeps doing, and it doesn't really achieve what it was made to, it has just made it much worse. I understand that it's been made clear on one the recent devstreams that it will not be possible to revert to the pre-rework carrier gameplay. So I would also like to know, why it would not be possible to revert to the previous carrier gameplay, whether it's technical issues or simply a decision from above.

Also, when reading through all of the posts regarding the CV rework, it's it's quite evendent that many people are NOT satisfied with it, and you've actually managed to make things worse, make a lot of players angry and drive players away from the game in the process, because of the rework, and do consider that a lot of these players have been loyal and financially supporting the game for years, in my opinion that says a lot. Obviously alot of people will be angry with such a drastic and radical change, but it's not just the change, but moreso what it was changed into, so it's to be expected, but even when it's to be expected, is/was it really worth it? Because it's not like it has just ruined it for the CV mains, but also for many other players because this rework has negatively impacted all of the warship classes, and it's not something you can balance or tweak your way out of, because it has to with the fundamental gameplay. I know, understand and even agree that it was necessary to rework the carrier gameplay because of the issues there were with the RTS carrier gameplay, was it necessary to completely scrape the RTS gameplay, not in my opinion, because I think the RTS gameplay just really needed some very important tweaks - like removing manual dropping and strafing all together, improvements to the UI, including making it more controller/console-friendly. You could also have reworked the class abit so that it would offer other roles to fit into, roles that could both be defensive as well as offensive and even be utility, and as it inherently would be great at air reconnaissance you could have made something around that, furthermore, there are bunch of mechanics that you could've added to provide more depth and diversity to the gameplay, like for instance fuel, pilots and more. The reworked carrier gameplay, doesn't feel like carrier gameplay at all, and it's because you're not playing a carrier, but playing warplanes under the name of a carrier, and you can't even properly control the carrier. As it is now we can't actually control the carrier directly when we NEED to, why? Because we have a squadron out, and the only way to gain control of the carrier is to call back the squadron, and furthermore it gets real crazy when the carrier is under attack by an incoming warship or several warships, especially since the carrier can't be controlled with a squadron out - you can't even repair it. What does this do? It makes it exceptionally difficult to actually defend against the attacks, because your ability relies heavily on the warplanes, which you have to call back if you want to have control of the ship!? It's quite bad and exceptionally stressful and frustrating.

From what I understand from your development blogs and diary, you basically identified the issues to be fixed and then decided reuse the third person control system, instead of going with something different or at least try and discuss suggestions and potential solutions with the players in the community, which very well could've let to something even better, and more importantly something that would have been more accepted by the players. Which would've been the best course of action, as it's the players who's going to be playing it the most, and they most likely would have a better idea of what they would like, than someone else. The result you have now is essentially and basically flying ships in the form of warplane squadrons that has a gameplay that basically is a simplified version of the world of warplanes game, just with bad controls. Did you fix the issues with the rework? Not really, and you made things much worse, I already mentioned a few of those things.

So you may be looking at the bottomline in numbers of concurrent players and see you might have more than before the rework and CVs being played more than before or that there are currently more playing the CVs than before, but that doesn't mean that it's a good thing. Because the increase in CV players, doesn't necessarily indicate that it's good or that people like it - it's really just like when a new game is released, people want to try it, but will go back to what they were playing before if it's not good enough to keep them interested, furthermore, there are also those who could be trying to like it, but really have issues with that. Consider for how many you've ruined the game for with this rework, a game they loved, and now they don't even want to play it, ask yourselves why and if that was worth it!? This rework has nothing to do with carrier gameplay, and thus it makes it feel very disconnected, especially when you consider it supposed to be - carrier gameplay, but it's also very different from what the players in the community have expressed they wanted.

So there are quite many reasons why I'm asking for some statistics on how many players who're actually satisfied or dissatisfied with the rework, especially because it will shed some light on how well received this is/was and if this really was the right direction to take. Personally, I don't like the rework, but there some bits here and there I think are good, but overall, no I'm not satisfied. It's also my impression that the majority of the players in the community are dissatisfied with it and actually would prefer a different rework.


 Thank you for reading, I hope you will provide what has been asked for.

//Inc.

 

When I attempt to Vote Up your question the counter doesn't react. Intriguing that...

 

My opinion on the CV rework is thus: Even a chimpanzee could play carriers under the new system, whereas you needed a modicum of intelligence and excellent multi-tasking abilities to be able to play a carrier before. It's very much Point & Shoot now...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Players
103 posts
1,651 battles
On 3/8/2019 at 9:15 PM, Pavel_Mirsky said:

When I attempt to Vote Up your question the counter doesn't react. Intriguing that...

 

My opinion on the CV rework is thus: Even a chimpanzee could play carriers under the new system, whereas you needed a modicum of intelligence and excellent multi-tasking abilities to be able to play a carrier before. It's very much Point & Shoot now...

Thats actually quite weird, and given the title and context of the question, it does become quite intriguing why you can't up vote it.

I agree it's been dumbed down, which I think is a really bad thing, but moreso that this gameplay has nothing to do with actual carrier gameplay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
[IRON7]
Players
853 posts
718 battles

All you need to do, InfintyIncarnate, is read the various CV threads over the last 5 months.

This is a small forum population, however, the vast majority of forum respondents detests the new CV rework and the Forum Administrators know it.

Will this alter the actions of the WG CV rework bulldozer? You make your own conclusion.

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.

×