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

Is WoWs is a powercreep game?

45 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
80 posts
5,215 battles

The title says it all. After 4 years the game hasnt done anything big for at least 2 years. There is no free team battle game mode in a game that calls itself a team game. CBs are restricted, have an ELO system and reward you a special  ressource to get some stuff.

 

Everything is designed for players to sink their time and money intp the game. There is no heart anymore.

 

The game is entirely designed for grinding and therefore powercreep.

 

MfG Boom

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
19,953 posts
12,415 battles

Grinding is not powercreep.

Powercreep is when new stuff is better than old stuff.

We have that in a way. But it does not apply to all new stuff and WG reworks old stuff from time to time.

  • Cool 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
218 posts
10,046 battles

Many f2p MMOs are. I feel this game has it reasonably well under control and could be even better if the 'community' had not thrown a hissy fit when the Giulio was about to be balanced.

  • Cool 9
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
84 posts
5,096 battles

i think every game which is structured the way WoWs (and WoT for that matter) is, is susceptible to some sort of powercreep. you kinda have to keep the players interested in new lines (and new premiums). if the new lines are worse than the old ones, many ppl would say "why bother"?

that being said, i don't think WoWs is a habitual offender concerning powercreep.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BAD-F]
Players
301 posts
7,312 battles

Yes powercreep is real.  Mostly because WG is inept at balancing things properly.  See RU BBs, reeee-worked CVs etc.  Also because they want people to by the newest shiniest thing - so it needs to be "better" than the stuff that's already out there.

  • Cool 2
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,206 posts
245 battles
13 minutes ago, thisismalacoda said:

Many f2p MMOs are. I feel this game has it reasonably well under control and could be even better if the 'community' had not thrown a hissy fit when the Giulio was about to be balanced.

True, i actually didn't mind as long as the thing was balanced (i want to belfast to lose its radar permeantly regardless), but some people like their op toys i guess irrespective to others.

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OILUP]
Players
185 posts
2 hours ago, Colonel_Boom said:

The title says it all. After 4 years the game hasnt done anything big for at least 2 years. There is no free team battle game mode in a game that calls itself a team game. CBs are restricted, have an ELO system and reward you a special  ressource to get some stuff.

 

Everything is designed for players to sink their time and money intp the game. There is no heart anymore.

 

The game is entirely designed for grinding and therefore powercreep.

 

MfG Boom

Because unicums will shriek at losing number dominance without adapting a tiny bit.

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BONI]
Players
1,255 posts
11,340 battles

Not so much imo. No one's saying USN or IJN navies are rubbish, and they were the first ones in the game. Some concepts, however, have not aged well with mechanic changes. Germans used to have good AA when they had combined auras. Now, planes often spend much more time in mid-range than long-range, which really sucks for many German ships, e.g. PEF, Bayern. USN DD smoke used to be way, way more useful before the heavy radar spam and smoke bloom we have now. Smoke bloom really bent over and had its way with RN CLs in particular.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
8,460 posts
11,807 battles

Considering we just barely survived getting powercreep institutionalized as a game mechanic that answer seems obvious.

  • Cool 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-YR-]
Players
388 posts
9 hours ago, CptBarney said:

some people like their op toys i guess irrespective to others.

nope. simply people who paid real money for those "toys" don't want them to be trashed. On the other hand nothing prohibit WG from making ranked open only to silver ships. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
19,953 posts
12,415 battles

Nobody talked about thrashing. And I would not mind changes for the sake of balance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,206 posts
245 battles
5 hours ago, Alfa_Tau said:

nope. simply people who paid real money for those "toys" don't want them to be trashed. On the other hand nothing prohibit WG from making ranked open only to silver ships. 

It's called balance, and frankly paying real money, doesn't give you the excuse to have better ships than anyone else in this game nor keep them out of balance. Nothing prohibits wargaming from berfing these ships to bring them into line more either.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-YR-]
Players
388 posts
49 minutes ago, CptBarney said:

Nothing prohibits wargaming from berfing these ships to bring them into line more either.

The Whole discussion has been already ended by WG itself when they came out with the re tiering of Giulio Cesare. 

to summarize: yes WG can do it but this will reflect negatively on their sales, because CUSTOMERS will be less prone to spend money for something that can be changed. And honestly to change the parameters of a ship after selling is not fair. to sell Loot boxes for xmas advertising them as the ONLY opportunity to get a unique ship and then to change that ship is not fair, 

 

Belfast is strong? Yes it is. What WG should do is longer test before releasing a ship. and I believe that now they are doing a great job in this. the time of Belfast and Giulo are gone and WG has learned from previous mistake (at least for WoWs because on WoT is another story). 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,206 posts
245 battles
1 hour ago, Alfa_Tau said:

The Whole discussion has been already ended by WG itself when they came out with the re tiering of Giulio Cesare. 

to summarize: yes WG can do it but this will reflect negatively on their sales, because CUSTOMERS will be less prone to spend money for something that can be changed. And honestly to change the parameters of a ship after selling is not fair. to sell Loot boxes for xmas advertising them as the ONLY opportunity to get a unique ship and then to change that ship is not fair, 

 

Belfast is strong? Yes it is. What WG should do is longer test before releasing a ship. and I believe that now they are doing a great job in this. the time of Belfast and Giulo are gone and WG has learned from previous mistake (at least for WoWs because on WoT is another story). 

I agree with world of tanks being skewered, but wargaming still does a poor job of testing (recent events plus numerious events through out all of its games prove this). And they hardly ever listen to CC's (unless a huge sh*tstorm starts like for ntc for example). Considering wargaming was going to go ahead with ntc in its first iteration and didn't care shows they either 1. dont care about the games future that much. 2. dont play their own game at all and have no clue how it works on any fudimental level.

 

i lost faith in this company years ago, sod knows why anyone still defends wargaming at all, they are basically the russian version of EA and Activision at this point (yes they have done good but most of the bad could of been avoided had they just you know listen to people who knew what the hell they were talking about in the first place).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,204 posts
16,211 battles

Absolutely and rightfully so. I wouldn't keep buying new stuff if it weren't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BABBY]
Beta Tester
1,589 posts
On 7/6/2019 at 6:10 PM, Aotearas said:

Considering we just barely survived getting powercreep institutionalized as a game mechanic that answer seems obvious.

What are you referring to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
7,651 posts
9,377 battles
12 hours ago, Alfa_Tau said:

The Whole discussion has been already ended by WG itself when they came out with the re tiering of Giulio Cesare. 

to summarize: yes WG can do it but this will reflect negatively on their sales, because CUSTOMERS will be less prone to spend money for something that can be changed. And honestly to change the parameters of a ship after selling is not fair. to sell Loot boxes for xmas advertising them as the ONLY opportunity to get a unique ship and then to change that ship is not fair, 

 

Belfast is strong? Yes it is. What WG should do is longer test before releasing a ship. and I believe that now they are doing a great job in this. the time of Belfast and Giulo are gone and WG has learned from previous mistake (at least for WoWs because on WoT is another story). 

And it opens dangerous precedent of releasing deliberately overpowered ships and then "adjusting" them few months later.

 

19 minutes ago, StringWitch said:

What are you referring to?

Naval Training Center. Look up on dev part of the forums. And have popcorn handy. Lots of it

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TEC]
Beta Tester
175 posts

WOWS has recently entered the stage in its lifespan, where the developers more or less stopped putting resources towards attracting new players.

 

The focus from now on will be towards monetizing as many aspects as the game as possible.

How do you convince the existing playerbase to spend real money on WOWS game content? Easy - you introduce new mush-have OP ships at an increasing rate, high tier ships behind a wall of grinding, money, steel, coal, whatever.

 

World Of Tanks is probably 2-3 years ahead of WOWS in this regard. WG completely let the veil drop when the OP IS3-A was released behind a paywall, but that's only the most recent and aggravating example of their business philosophy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
19,953 posts
12,415 battles
13 minutes ago, thoso1973 said:

WOWS has recently entered the stage in its lifespan, where the developers more or less stopped putting resources towards attracting new players.

The money people get for inviting new players is no ressource?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-YR-]
Players
388 posts
11 hours ago, CptBarney said:

I agree with world of tanks being skewered, but wargaming still does a poor job of testing (recent events plus numerious events through out all of its games prove this). And they hardly ever listen to CC's (unless a huge sh*tstorm starts like for ntc for example). Considering wargaming was going to go ahead with ntc in its first iteration and didn't care shows they either 1. dont care about the games future that much. 2. dont play their own game at all and have no clue how it works on any fudimental level.

 

i lost faith in this company years ago, sod knows why anyone still defends wargaming at all, they are basically the russian version of EA and Activision at this point (yes they have done good but most of the bad could of been avoided had they just you know listen to people who knew what the hell they were talking about in the first place).

My dear friend 

I don't think there is a big bad guy in the company that want to ruin the game. 

simply WG is a private enterprise and the ultimate goal is to make money. Developers, programmers, engineers need to be paid. They are not doing it for fun (altough I think there are far less entertaining job).

that said trust me when I say sometime inside a big company is not that easy to look at thing from the same perspective of the customers/users.  that's why they invest money in forum and CCs. It's a way to get the real grasp of what customers (that are thousands ) think. And it's not easy. 

just as an example: look at the forum on the CV rework and imagine you are the one that have to assess if players like it or not. It's a everyday battle of words and opinions; many in total contrast. 

On top of that you have to consider that marketing strategies follow different trends according to customer. For example world of Tanks. On the Chinese Server people do not consider "bad" that if you have money you can buy OP tanks. while in europe we don't appreciate it. (at least in theory). 

Therefore to summarize and going back to NTC, I believe some dude really thought "hey this is a great idea" and if you look at the reactions of WG staff in Ichase video, you see they were really surprised to see such a strong opposition. 

Last what I believe is a good news especially for those who do not have premium account. If WoWs is going to abolish the difference between normal consumable and premium one I think it's a very nice step forward.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TEC]
Beta Tester
175 posts
36 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

The money people get for inviting new players is no ressource?

 

WG gives real life money to existing players for inviting new players into the circus?

 

When did this happen?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
8,460 posts
11,807 battles
2 hours ago, StringWitch said:

What are you referring to?

The NTC.

 

First iteration of the concept was meant to provide ships with additional performance boost for re-grinding tech-three lines. You could have say an improved Stalingrad with more HP, better dispersion, etc. compared to a regular, unupgraded Stalingrad.

That idea got thankfully shot down by the community and the NTC has been repurposed to reward players with other bonus content that doesn't entail combat bonuses (such as premium ships, Colbert was confirmed to be a reward for NTC regrind).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[4_0_4]
Players
6,026 posts
12,326 battles
On 7/6/2019 at 3:46 PM, MyopicHedgehog said:

See RU BBs,

 

Strong, yes, but OP?

Imo they're how BB should be: accurate at close range and weak while broadside.

 

OT:

 

Yes, new line tend to be stronger, but thats how these games work: Who'd want a new line if the existing is better?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
19,953 posts
12,415 battles
12 minutes ago, thoso1973 said:

 

WG gives real life money to existing players for inviting new players into the circus?

 

When did this happen?

That is what I thought.

 

Read the news sometime...

There is even a banner at the top of the forum page...

https://worldofwarships.eu/en/news/sales-and-events/paypal-cash-rewards/

 

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.

×