Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
Orcinus1

Will you Reset in The Research Bureau

Design bureau?  

306 members have voted

  1. 1. Will you be resetting tech branches with the design bureau?

  2. 2. What rewards are you after?

  3. 3. Do you think the design bureau is a good idea? (keeping in mind it does not affect ship statistics)


163 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[P-W-C]
Players
4,731 posts
26,556 battles
On 8/19/2019 at 2:09 PM, SmashUrr said:

So you do not mind My ship having a Level 2 bonus making it around 20% better than yours via the Paragon System ( NTC ) ?

 

 

No paragon system. You get only the Research points. You can after that exchange them for ships. Not for better "upgrades" for silver T10s. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ED_O7]
Players
65 posts
4,273 battles

I just don't get these extreme time sinks. Like the Japanese-Allied task, I'd need to win 10 matches a day on average for three months with IJN ships - how's that realistic?

 

I don't mind going through a tech tree again, in fact I am often playing older and lower tier ships just because of fun (yes, I kept most of the ships), but no way I am giving up my fully kitted T8-T10 ships... perhaps in the very distant future, when I have researched all the interesting lines already.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SINT]
Players
385 posts
15,882 battles
On 8/18/2019 at 3:21 PM, MacArthur92 said:

He’s talking about the Poltava, that crap on T8. Poltava maybe could be a free exp T8 for 650k free exp. Cause I don’t see it sold by cash having a much better Lenin which is pretty cheap T8 BB. 

Well it would be nice if WG released some free premiums ( coal, fxp) in the mid tier bracket instead of this massive influx of ( mostly paper) tier 9+. I love my Nelson for the mere 375fxp but there is only Aigle at tier6. And Flint is steel.

 

So more semi free T7 and 8 premium would be warmly welcome but not if they are made bad on purpose so that they can be give aways without hurting sales of good premiums.

 

Would be interested in the California t7 us BB because of historical real ship status though for 375k fxp or coal equivelent. ( although small buff could be applied if i see the initial stats)But probally this ship will be a real money sell since our US friends are already waving their creditcard en masse for this ship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator, Supertester, Sailing Hamster
406 posts

Nope, not going to happen. I won't reset a single branch, since I hate grinding low-tier ships.

 

Also, 4 line resets for one T10 is not interesting for me. I just keep on collecting coal, steel and free XP to get Premium ships. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[P-W-C]
Players
4,731 posts
26,556 battles
2 hours ago, Jvd2000 said:

Would be interested in the California t7 us BB because of historical real ship status

Idk maybe it can be for free exp. W.Virginia 44 would be a great secondary T7 BB and that one would be for money cause the name...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
406 posts
6,395 battles
On 8/19/2019 at 7:18 PM, Admiral_H_Nelson said:

No, I will not be resetting. For two reasons:

1) I am not interested in all these high-tier reward ships,

2) There is not a single line that I would want to go through the pain of grinding again -even with the help of my Free XP War Chest.

 

Heck, thanks to WG's method of releasing new lines I only started some grinds at tier 6, 7 or 8! And they were bad enough.

 

This pretty much sums it up.

Also it doesnt make sense to trade hundreds of hours for a single ship that mostly won't be played.

 

It's an option for players with sufficient time to spend, but I can't and don't want to.

 

Since there's no buff anymore it doesn't have an impact on me therefore I frankly don't care about NTC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[P-W-C]
Players
4,731 posts
26,556 battles
24 minutes ago, General_Kunde said:

Also it doesnt make sense to trade hundreds of hours for a single ship that mostly won't be played

Colbert is T10 Atlanta, and Atlanta is really fun to play (spam :Smile_trollface:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
[THESO]
Moderator
1,992 posts
6,883 battles

I was one of the ones who were actually completely opposed the "Upgrades" idea.

Now.. I don't think regrinding a complete line would be fun.. at least for me.. Some people may like it (Yeah I'M looking at you @Allied_Winter)

Frankly I would prefer a campaing mode.. like play with this line, this tier for this XP.. or just let us keep our purchased silver ships..

but grind a special kind of XP (research XP for example) to get Research points.

Yes I think It would be implemented better.. yes.. I really don't like and want to regrind.. but...
but I want colbert.. I'm inlove with her.. So, I'm thinking about starting with lines that I play less.. US CL line.. after tier 7.. I practically didn't touch them much..

 

But I'm thinking one more thing.

Why are people making a great fuss about it now? acting like the world is gonna end!?

 

You are not forced to do anything, you are not forced to participate.

There won't be OP rewards in the end.. and yes, colbert is not OP, and Ohio nerf already announced. That ship is in testing and balancing phase still.

And they clearly stated that, reward ships for RB will/can be subjected to balancing..

And anyway, Stalingrad behind steel wall? Bourgogne same.. Benham? Somers coming for fxp? black? flint?
these are very strong ships.. very very strong ships.. which are all behind a some kind of grindwall..

 

I really would like to ask people who are upset..

why are you still upset?

We've won the battle.. we made WG to scrap the "paragon" idea..

now, you don't lose anything by not participating..

People who will will not gain an advantage over you?

 

so why the sprouting hate? why act like it is dooms day..

It is a new aspect of the game.. new permanent event.. you pick either you participate or not..

Why the hate.. why the doomsday cult.. I really don't understand..

Yes.. they may have been aiming for more money with this feature.. may be they aiming to get more time for devs.. I don't know.

The point is.. why are you angry? yes.. there will be rich players who will pay obscene amount of money for freeXP conversion and getting the rewards on the first day..

why this is bothering you? it is not your money, you are not forced to buy anything,

and frankly those whales are the big part of the support this game getting, so we low spenders.. or freebies can keep playing..

 

Bottom line,

Why are you still this much angry about it.. I really wonder?

  • Cool 3
  • Funny 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[KAKE]
Players
1,701 posts
3,984 battles

Poll is a bit flawed given that there's no "not interested in the rewards" option for question 2.

 

With that said: I don't have the kind of spare time to regrind lines I've already played through. So for me the answer is a big, fat no.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
4,677 posts
9,183 battles
8 minutes ago, Excavatus said:

Frankly I would prefer a campaing mode.. like play with this line, this tier for this XP.. or just let us keep our purchased silver ships..

 

Personally I'd be happy with ANY form of long term entertainment offered via a campaign, a mission chain, a marathon, or even the current solution in the game. As long as the final rewards are appealing, I'm in.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,236 posts
14,863 battles
47 minutes ago, Excavatus said:

I was one of the ones who were actually completely opposed the "Upgrades" idea.

Now.. I don't think regrinding a complete line would be fun.. at least for me.. Some people may like it (Yeah I'M looking at you @Allied_Winter)

Frankly I would prefer a campaing mode.. like play with this line, this tier for this XP.. or just let us keep our purchased silver ships..

but grind a special kind of XP (research XP for example) to get Research points.

Yes I think It would be implemented better.. yes.. I really don't like and want to regrind.. but...
but I want colbert.. I'm inlove with her.. So, I'm thinking about starting with lines that I play less.. US CL line.. after tier 7.. I practically didn't touch them much..

 

But I'm thinking one more thing.

Why are people making a great fuss about it now? acting like the world is gonna end!?

 

You are not forced to do anything, you are not forced to participate.

There won't be OP rewards in the end.. and yes, colbert is not OP, and Ohio nerf already announced. That ship is in testing and balancing phase still.

And they clearly stated that, reward ships for RB will/can be subjected to balancing..

And anyway, Stalingrad behind steel wall? Bourgogne same.. Benham? Somers coming for fxp? black? flint?
these are very strong ships.. very very strong ships.. which are all behind a some kind of grindwall..

 

I really would like to ask people who are upset..

why are you still upset?

We've won the battle.. we made WG to scrap the "paragon" idea..

now, you don't lose anything by not participating..

People who will will not gain an advantage over you?

 

so why the sprouting hate? why act like it is dooms day..

It is a new aspect of the game.. new permanent event.. you pick either you participate or not..

Why the hate.. why the doomsday cult.. I really don't understand..

Yes.. they may have been aiming for more money with this feature.. may be they aiming to get more time for devs.. I don't know.

The point is.. why are you angry? yes.. there will be rich players who will pay obscene amount of money for freeXP conversion and getting the rewards on the first day..

why this is bothering you? it is not your money, you are not forced to buy anything,

and frankly those whales are the big part of the support this game getting, so we low spenders.. or freebies can keep playing..

 

Bottom line,

Why are you still this much angry about it.. I really wonder?

I cannot speak for everyone else, but I can state why I personally am angry.

 

I am angry because it seems to me (very very strongly) that Wargaming are simply doing what they want rather than what the players  - CUSTOMERS - want to see.

 

Much valuable effort by Wargaming has been devoted to the idea of forcing a re-grind system into the game - that no-one asked for - which could have been spent on other projects that people want (such as favoured ships and more operations) and fixing matchmaking and carriers (another pet project rammed down people's throats).

 

And, please, nobody suggest some rubbish along the lines of "Oh! These are different people on the Research Bureau, so they wouldn't be able to help on these other things".

Bollocks! That is what training is for. In my career I've often been deployed on projects where I had to master new skills in double quick time.  If a Mr Average can do it such as me then I am sure that the Russians can do it. Russians are very smart people, so it would be a lot easier for them.

 

And all this is going on while we have "Wild Guess at fixing the Carrier ****-up number 7" in the latest patch.

 

Anyone care to take bets on whether Wargaming fix carriers before the World's Governments meet their stated goals on Climate Change in 2050?

Like the Battle of Waterloo, I reckon it will be a "Close run thing"

 

EDIT: And don't get me started on the subject of how much time is gonna be invested in Submarines that could be better spent elsewhere fixing all the stuff still broken.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
42 posts
49 minutes ago, Excavatus said:

But I'm thinking one more thing.

Why are people making a great fuss about it now? acting like the world is gonna end!?

The players are upset or angry because of exactly what you have said: there can be better ways to implement the research bureau, but WG decides to rush it. Their attitude upsets the players.

 

52 minutes ago, Excavatus said:

I really would like to ask people who are upset..

why are you still upset?

We've won the battle.. we made WG to scrap the "paragon" idea..

now, you don't lose anything by not participating..

People who will will not gain an advantage over you?

I respectfully disagree with you that we have won the battle. Look at the like to dislike ratio of the Research Bureau video on Youtube and you will know why.

The argument that the players can step away if they dislike the idea is flawed because such customer behaviour damages the gameplay experience of the players and the profit of WG at the same time. The players want a better game for themselves and WG wants to earn more money. It is a common interest to let the players play (and pay) as much as possible.

 

1 hour ago, Excavatus said:

so why the sprouting hate? why act like it is dooms day..

Haters are going to hate, we can leave them alone. But let us agree that (1) WG didn't refine the research bureau enough before release, and did it in a rush, and (2) the implementation has its problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
4,677 posts
9,183 battles
7 minutes ago, divinity_123 said:

WG didn't refine the research bureau enough before release

May I propose a counter question: What should've been refined more? It's a system that allows you to regrind stuff, serves as a credit/FXP/time sink and gives you access to special, nerfable ships. Or would you refer to the point that Excavatus adressed as well (e.g. keeping ships while resetting).

 

17 minutes ago, divinity_123 said:

the implementation has its problems.

How so? Any bugs you have in mind?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
42 posts
11 minutes ago, Allied_Winter said:

May I propose a counter question: What should've been refined more? It's a system that allows you to regrind stuff, serves as a credit/FXP/time sink and gives you access to special, nerfable ships. Or would you refer to the point that Excavatus adressed as well (e.g. keeping ships while resetting).

How so? Any bugs you have in mind?

 To be clear, Excavatus' suggestion is something I refer to as a refinement. The reason why I say that the system has not been refined enough because the Research Bureau in its current state is majorly unpopular amongst the players. You can check the official Youtube video or the poll in the forum for some evidence of that claim.

The problems I am referring to are not technical bugs. I am talking about problems such as its unpopularity amongst the players and how should WG fix it. After all, there is no point in creating a new system that no one uses. WG said during the CC summit that they have learnt their mistakes from the CV rework but at least I am not seeing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
4,677 posts
9,183 battles

Thanks for clearing that up.

 

Ever thought that the unpopularity might (among other reasons of course) also stem from the fact that the Reasearc Bureau is just endgame content for a very specific type of player? The player that has multiple (at least 5) T10's in his harbour and doesn't know where to put his/her time and money next.

 

6 minutes ago, divinity_123 said:

WG said during the CC summit that they have learnt their mistakes from the CV rework but at least I am not seeing it.

Really? I thought this 'learnt from mistakes' referred to the overall implementation/balancing process. And that we can see with the subs. At least that's the way I see.

 

On the other hand: I'm probably right the target group for the RB so I may be biased here. As Excavatus hinted: I rarley play my T10s once I finished a line. I much rather start with a new one. Hence I have now the chance with the RB to regrind stuff while getting a reward for doing so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
42 posts
21 minutes ago, Allied_Winter said:

Ever thought that the unpopularity might (among other reasons of course) also stem from the fact that the Reasearc Bureau is just endgame content for a very specific type of player? The player that has multiple (at least 5) T10's in his harbour and doesn't know where to put his/her time and money next.

The reasons to the unpopularity of the Research Bureau is mixed, I am not denying that. But can we agree that there can be better implementations of the idea?

 

21 minutes ago, Allied_Winter said:

Really? I thought this 'learnt from mistakes' referred to the overall implementation/balancing process. And that we can see with the subs. At least that's the way I see.

 

On the other hand: I'm probably right the target group for the RB so I may be biased here. As Excavatus hinted: I rarley play my T10s once I finished a line. I much rather start with a new one. Hence I have now the chance with the RB to regrind stuff while getting a reward for doing so.

The 'learning from mistakes' thing is much broader. Check out their presentation (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0PPtIIPIso) at around 30:00.

In particular, one can argue that the last point they have (introduce the test content at slower pace) applies to all of their contents. Especially when the initial NTC idea was so badly received by the players, they should take their time on the Research Bureau to make it a welcoming feature of the game.

 

I respect the way you play the game because it is your enjoyment after all, but I cannot resist to question WG why they cannot make every tier enjoyable so that people will play the ship they like at any tier instead of grinding all day long.

There are other war games I can play at medium tiers for days because of (1) better match-making, (2) better balancing, and (3) ability to research high tiers by playing anything (with a penalty for playing low tiers and a buff for playing the 'predecessor').

So if you ask me what is the root cause for the conundrum of the Research Bureau, I would say that it is because WG puts too much emphasis on grinding.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
4,677 posts
9,183 battles
3 minutes ago, divinity_123 said:

But can we agree that there can be better implementations of the idea?

That might be only semantics, but: Better? No. Other? Yes.

 

4 minutes ago, divinity_123 said:

but I cannot resist to question WG why they cannot make very tier enjoyable so that people will play the ship they like at any tier instead of grinding all day long.

Fair enough. I have my assumptions for that, but that would dive too much off topic. I can understand your reasoning though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
42 posts
13 minutes ago, Allied_Winter said:

That might be only semantics, but: Better? No. Other? Yes.

We agree on this. By 'better', I mean an alternative solution with the same core idea of giving people reason to play.

On a side note, I really think WG needs to hire a psychologist to advertise their updates, because their sales team or whoever that is publishing the updates, do not know how to appeal to the players. The moment I saw someone called the Research Bureau the 'NTC v2', I know something is wrong.

 

13 minutes ago, Allied_Winter said:

Fair enough. I have my assumptions for that, but that would dive too much off topic. I can understand your reasoning though.

Do not get me wrong, I understand why WG wants a grinding-based game. It makes money for them. All I am saying is that their decision has caused the inevitable problem of people reaching the end-game and do not have motivation to play any more. It is a core problem WG needs to solve.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
[THESO]
Moderator
1,992 posts
6,883 battles
1 hour ago, divinity_123 said:

I understand why WG wants a grinding-based game.

one of the main idea behind the RB is,

every online multiplayer game has replayability. WOWs does not.

You need replayability for 2 reasons, 1 income ofcourse, and second,

people consume new content at slowest the 4x times faster you create it. It is a general estimation.

You need to keep players entertained and occupied in between new contents..

Otherwise, you either will have a player base which comes and goes with the new content times.. or you try to create content faster than the content will be shittier.

We have both versions in this game in its history.

 

So, it is their first attempt to create replayability.

1st version was bad.. they decided it is bad after 3 days they announced it.

Because the rewards were unfair.

That is the battle we've won... now the rewards are unimportant about the game play.

It does not matter you get them or not..

I believe WG really wants almost everyone goes for RB... but they won't.

 

If you think too less people will take this into action, that means a fail for the WG..

but why all the negative reactions I wonder.. this their first try to create replayability.

This is our first in this game too..

 

Let them fail... If its gonna be like that. .

then they can create a better one.. in a different version.

May be they tweak it.. may be they create a different thing.. but let them try..

lets don't judge without seing the result now..

 

Thats all I'm saying..

If it's shite.. trust me I'll be the first one to say it is..

Do I have high hopes? frankly I don't.. but I just want to give benefit of the doubt..

because it does not affect me as a player If it fails..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
42 posts
1 hour ago, Excavatus said:

one of the main idea behind the RB is,

every online multiplayer game has replayability. WOWs does not.

You need replayability for 2 reasons, 1 income ofcourse, and second,

people consume new content at slowest the 4x times faster you create it. It is a general estimation.

You need to keep players entertained and occupied in between new contents..

Otherwise, you either will have a player base which comes and goes with the new content times.. or you try to create content faster than the content will be shittier.

We have both versions in this game in its history.

We can all agree on this, replayability is beneficial for the players and WG at the same time.

 

1 hour ago, Excavatus said:

So, it is their first attempt to create replayability.

1st version was bad.. they decided it is bad after 3 days they announced it.

Because the rewards were unfair.

That is the battle we've won... now the rewards are unimportant about the game play.

It does not matter you get them or not..

I believe WG really wants almost everyone goes for RB... but they won't.

The problem I see with the current version of RB is that the community dislike the idea just like the first version, but WG decides to release it without much discussion with the community. The lack of communication is the main problem I see in the whole drama.

Regarding your comment 'I believe WG really wants almost everyone goes for RB... but they won't.', that is very true. Though we have to talk about the size of the target audience here. If the idea is too unpopular, it is going to be CV rework 2.0. It is going to be a waste of development resources and creates more distrust between WG and the players.

 

1 hour ago, Excavatus said:

If you think too less people will take this into action, that means a fail for the WG..

but why all the negative reactions I wonder.. this their first try to create replayability.

This is our first in this game too..

Just to be absolutely clear, I am not a supporter for the haters. I advocate rational discussions and healthy communication between the developers and the players. Sadly we have very little of both.

I am not trying to justify all the hatred. What I am saying is that there are reasons why someone would oppose the RB, and we should understand that their opinions are important.

 

1 hour ago, Excavatus said:

Let them fail... If its gonna be like that. .

then they can create a better one.. in a different version.

May be they tweak it.. may be they create a different thing.. but let them try..

lets don't judge without seing the result now..

 

Thats all I'm saying..

If it's shite.. trust me I'll be the first one to say it is..

Do I have high hopes? frankly I don't.. but I just want to give benefit of the doubt..

because it does not affect me as a player If it fails..

Again, the point is that there are already better suggestions than their RB. The version you suggested for example, is strictly better than their system. So why should they rush the whole thing as if the doomsday is tomorrow?

If I am a developer, the first thing I would do before introducing the RB is to post a survey to the players to have an estimation of its popularity. Design of the RB is not like balancing of ships where you have to rely on massive data from the live server. The way WG worked on the RB is just illogical to me. After all, this can be seen as a communication problem because the first reaction the developers have when they have the RB idea in mind is not to reach out to the players but to pursue the idea on their own.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
34 posts
12,887 battles

No, I have lots of free xp and enjoy the game I have so don't need that, grinding ad nauseum to get more ships, bugger that.  Not only is it a silly way to incentivise the player...

 

All ships available in the Research Bureau, if necessary, will be subject to individual balance changes, as applies to researchable ships in the Tech Tree. (from the .8.7 notes)

 

So if they do turn out to be *too* good WG will nerf them into the ground, which will mean all that effort for a garage sparkly that is never used, seriously?.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,050 posts
8,903 battles
On 8/19/2019 at 11:47 AM, Von_Pruss said:

You can trade in these resource tokens to free xp, flags and these new ships in the armory as I understand it.

Yes, just saw it in the armory as well.

I guess I had missed the memo somehow :Smile-_tongue:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
719 posts
8,470 battles

I thought not but I ended up resetting the US DD line. Free XPed up to Farragut for a few games and then on to Mahan. I have to say the post buff Mahan is an amazingly good DD for the tier. Quite looking forward to the grind to Benson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SNUBS]
Beta Tester, Players
485 posts
5,118 battles

i reset a line, the US heavy cruiser line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
443 posts
14,725 battles
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
6
On 8/21/2019 at 8:57 PM, Excavatus said:

one of the main idea behind the RB is,

every online multiplay....

blahblahblah

...... but I just want to give benefit of the doubt..

because it does not affect me as a player If it fails..

 

it is not replayability what wg looks, it is your (well, probably not your, our) money. the fact it can be done within 20 mins plus how long it takes to have 5 wins shows that replayability is not what they look. just buy enough gold to get enough free xp and off you go. no person in his clear mind would regrind 5 ship lines to get one ship (which could be nerfed at any point).

seeing as some part of moderators so eagerly promote this crap just tells that in someway it is profitable to you and with that, you have lost all trust and respect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×