Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
Leo_Apollo11

Very interesting comments by WG's "SubOctavian" regarding "Russian BIAS"...

396 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[SCRUB]
Quality Poster
3,720 posts
11,486 battles

Hi all,

 

Very interesting comments by WG's "SubOctavian" regarding "Russian BIAS"...

 

 

This was in reaction to "NoZoupForYou" YouTube video:

 

 

 

@Sub_Octavian wrote some very interesting statistics:

 

Quote

I can understand why "NoZoupForYou" feels that way and share some of the concerns, however, I respectfully disagree with some others. Here are my thoughts on the subject(s).

 

Russian Bias.

 

KOTS lineup is indeed skewed, but it's rather a combination of unfortunate circumstances and meta state at this period of time. Kremlin was indeed stronger than needed, while it was nerfed recently, due to tech stuff, KoTS was conducted on the server where Kremlin was pre-nerf. Of course I am not saying that alpha damage reduction instantly makes Kremlin bad lineup choice - she is still amazing in pushing, and it is needed at this level of play, but so far I see 1% of avg PvP WR drop after the change, for example, which is a step in the right direction at minimum).

 

At the same time we have Grozovoi, which is actually viable in competitive after the buff. At the same time we have Moskva, which is actually viable in competitive because good radar and reliable guns. And of course Smolensk - a new and very hyped ship with a lot of utility and strong in capable hands (as well as Stalingrad). So the state of the current competitive meta in this KoTS WAS shifted to having a lot of Russian ships. And this is fine, as long as this does not become a trend, and meta will evolve in something new next time. Obviously there is no good in having stale meta skewed towards any particular game nation. It's bad for players (becomes boring and less diverse), it's bad for us (we did not spend hundreds of hours making all these ships to make them unneeded).

 

Also to be more specific, here's the lineup stats from this KoTS (ship presence):

Kremlin: 40% RU, 49% EU, 69% NA and ASIA (Other fun facts - Republique 31% RU, Bourgogne 21% ASIA, Yamato 20% on EU and NA);

 

As for cruisers - Smol + Stalin + Moskva combined are 34% on RU, 47% on EU, 65% on NA, 46% on ASIA. While Henri, Des Moines, Worcester - 65% RU, 44% EU, 32% NA, 52% ASIA (fun fact, Henri is 39% on RU).

 

Top DD were Somers (RU 44%, EU 49%, NA 31%, ASIA 13%) and Daring (RU 5%, EU 33%, NA 47%, ASIA 45%). Groz was 13-15% everywhere but ASIA - there it was actually 31%.

 

Several more points to it:

  1. The brightest "bias moment", IMO, was NA-EU finals, but there, in my humble opinion, the level of play from NA was generally very good. What I mean is that this super skewed situation in finals is not necessarily the best proof (although it looks very skewed, appealing and emotional to make a point).

  2. As a whole KOTS is not the benchmark for balancing ships in the game, although, making observation of its meta is important.

  3. Not to this video, but to the topic in general: I really wish people stop making this "salty about Tsushima", "salty about Novorossiysk" or "ahahah USSR did not have navy but at least they take revenge in the game" remarks. Honestly, they just decrease the value of the discussion and sometimes they're just silly. I want to use this opportunity and make it very clear: there is zero reason to tune balance in favor of one nation, and game balance teams does not care about ship nation. Sure, we care about the nation when we create plans for content, but people tend to over estimate how important this "I am Russian, so I want Kremlin" or "I am American so I want Montana" is. It absolutely has some impact, but mostly and majorly gameplay is a decisive factor. Especially now when we have all major navies and huge part of the iconic ship represented in the game. Finally, from business PoV, even if this factor is important, our game is played all over the world and Russian segment of players is not even the biggest. In the end favoring one nation does not make any sense from any PoV. Now, I can't make you guys stop silly comments about national pride, and I don't want to, but I hope you will at leat take this into account :-)

 

All in all, we will watch meta closely, including competitive and tournament, and will work hard to make sure it lives and evolves. We believe that over presense of ANY nation/ship/ship type is anyway okay in any short given period, but if it becomes long term trend, than it's time to worry and shake things up.

 

As for IT CA, not enjoying them is a valid opinion, and we support our CC regardless of their opinion on our content :-) However, I disagree with Zoup both personally and from dev PoV. Personally, I love these ships. They require me to think differently, I love their gimmick smoke, I love the need to actually aim with SAP. Honestly, I am struggling to master some of them now on live, but I am having fun time. I can easily see them NOT being the choice of hard core super competitive players, but that I can live with.

 

From dev PoV, all the stats of course are skewed, because they're early access, and because we should actually give people time to settle with how to play these ships. So I am absolutely against drawing any solid conclusions right now. But generally what we have is not indicative of any emergency situation - a lot of players play these ships, and the results are good. We will be monitoring these ships as we always do after we release a line and will apply changes if needed. That's a pretty standard procedure. As for fun factor - I really want to see how the popularity of these ships changes when the event is over. Right now IT CA are all over the place which is good, but does not necessarily mean that they are great - of course we understand that. We will see pretty soon :-)

 

Thanks, and have a good day.

 

Source Reddit: Russian Bias and the Sad State of Italian Cruisers

 

 

Leo "Apollo11"

  • Cool 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[KAKE]
Players
1,865 posts
4,292 battles

Fixed for dark background readability.

 

Spoiler

I can understand why "NoZoupForYou" feels that way and share some of the concerns, however, I respectfully disagree with some others. Here are my thoughts on the subject(s).

 

Russian Bias.

 

KOTS lineup is indeed skewed, but it's rather a combination of unfortunate circumstances and meta state at this period of time. Kremlin was indeed stronger than needed, while it was nerfed recently, due to tech stuff, KoTS was conducted on the server where Kremlin was pre-nerf. Of course I am not saying that alpha damage reduction instantly makes Kremlin bad lineup choice - she is still amazing in pushing, and it is needed at this level of play, but so far I see 1% of avg PvP WR drop after the change, for example, which is a step in the right direction at minimum).

 

At the same time we have Grozovoi, which is actually viable in competitive after the buff. At the same time we have Moskva, which is actually viable in competitive because good radar and reliable guns. And of course Smolensk - a new and very hyped ship with a lot of utility and strong in capable hands (as well as Stalingrad). So the state of the current competitive meta in this KoTS WAS shifted to having a lot of Russian ships. And this is fine, as long as this does not become a trend, and meta will evolve in something new next time. Obviously there is no good in having stale meta skewed towards any particular game nation. It's bad for players (becomes boring and less diverse), it's bad for us (we did not spend hundreds of hours making all these ships to make them unneeded).

 

Also to be more specific, here's the lineup stats from this KoTS (ship presence):

Kremlin: 40% RU, 49% EU, 69% NA and ASIA (Other fun facts - Republique 31% RU, Bourgogne 21% ASIA, Yamato 20% on EU and NA);

 

As for cruisers - Smol + Stalin + Moskva combined are 34% on RU, 47% on EU, 65% on NA, 46% on ASIA. While Henri, Des Moines, Worcester - 65% RU, 44% EU, 32% NA, 52% ASIA (fun fact, Henri is 39% on RU).

 

Top DD were Somers (RU 44%, EU 49%, NA 31%, ASIA 13%) and Daring (RU 5%, EU 33%, NA 47%, ASIA 45%). Groz was 13-15% everywhere but ASIA - there it was actually 31%.

 

Several more points to it:

The brightest "bias moment", IMO, was NA-EU finals, but there, in my humble opinion, the level of play from NA was generally very good. What I mean is that this super skewed situation in finals is not necessarily the best proof (although it looks very skewed, appealing and emotional to make a point).

As a whole KOTS is not the benchmark for balancing ships in the game, although, making observation of its meta is important.

Not to this video, but to the topic in general: I really wish people stop making this "salty about Tsushima", "salty about Novorossiysk" or "ahahah USSR did not have navy but at least they take revenge in the game" remarks. Honestly, they just decrease the value of the discussion and sometimes they're just silly. I want to use this opportunity and make it very clear: there is zero reason to tune balance in favor of one nation, and game balance teams does not care about ship nation. Sure, we care about the nation when we create plans for content, but people tend to over estimate how important this "I am Russian, so I want Kremlin" or "I am American so I want Montana" is. It absolutely has some impact, but mostly and majorly gameplay is a decisive factor. Especially now when we have all major navies and huge part of the iconic ship represented in the game. Finally, from business PoV, even if this factor is important, our game is played all over the world and Russian segment of players is not even the biggest. In the end favoring one nation does not make any sense from any PoV. Now, I can't make you guys stop silly comments about national pride, and I don't want to, but I hope you will at leat take this into account :-)

 

All in all, we will watch meta closely, including competitive and tournament, and will work hard to make sure it lives and evolves. We believe that over presense of ANY nation/ship/ship type is anyway okay in any short given period, but if it becomes long term trend, than it's time to worry and shake things up.

 

As for IT CA, not enjoying them is a valid opinion, and we support our CC regardless of their opinion on our content :-) However, I disagree with Zoup both personally and from dev PoV. Personally, I love these ships. They require me to think differently, I love their gimmick smoke, I love the need to actually aim with SAP. Honestly, I am struggling to master some of them now on live, but I am having fun time. I can easily see them NOT being the choice of hard core super competitive players, but that I can live with.

 

From dev PoV, all the stats of course are skewed, because they're early access, and because we should actually give people time to settle with how to play these ships. So I am absolutely against drawing any solid conclusions right now. But generally what we have is not indicative of any emergency situation - a lot of players play these ships, and the results are good. We will be monitoring these ships as we always do after we release a line and will apply changes if needed. That's a pretty standard procedure. As for fun factor - I really want to see how the popularity of these ships changes when the event is over. Right now IT CA are all over the place which is good, but does not necessarily mean that they are great - of course we understand that. We will see pretty soon :-)

 

Thanks, and have a good day.

 

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
113 posts
2,490 battles
24 minutes ago, Leo_Apollo11 said:

Not to this video, but to the topic in general: I really wish people stop making this "salty about Tsushima", "salty about Novorossiysk" or "ahahah USSR did not have navy but at least they take revenge in the game" remarks. Honestly, they just decrease the value of the discussion and sometimes they're just silly.

2 minutes ago, quickr said:

I really wish WG should stop making up this "best navy in the world if only we built our ships" fantasy, but hey, not everyone can get what they want.

 

I'm amazed by SubO responses. A lot of words but saying nothing in the end. Most of his replies come down to: " i see the proof but my excel says differently so we at WG need more time to analyze the data"

 

pretty much this

 

  • Cool 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[JRM]
Players
3,276 posts
18,651 battles
10 minutes ago, quickr said:

I'm amazed by SubO responses. A lot of words but saying nothing in the end. Most of his replies come down to: " i see the proof but my excel says differently so we at WG need more time to analyze the data"

Nope its not even that, the correct statement in a big organisation is something in the line: "No, I hear your arguments, but my statistics analysis manager sais everything is ok and he has the speeadsheets!"

You dont encrouch on another mans turf, thats a big no no...

  • Cool 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
6,766 posts
7,580 battles
36 minutes ago, Leo_Apollo11 said:

but so far I see 1% of avg PvP WR drop after the change, for example, which is a step in the right direction at minimum).

 

I love this one.

Yep, probably nothing to do with the fact, that more players (especially more average players) are unlocking Kremlin, which would automatically lower the WR of every ship.

Id not be surprised, if they would time "nerfs" accordingly, when a lot of people are advancing from Soyuz to Kremlin. Certainly they can see, how many people are currently grinding Soyuz.

  • Cool 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
53 posts
824 battles

I earn my bread and premium ships working as a data engineer, and I promise you all that with some numbers (real ones will do as well) I can conjure up statistics to back up any claim the guy holding the wallet wants ;)

 

There's a saying attributed to the British parliament - "there are lies, outrageous lies and statistics"... And while I do agree there is no simple metric on how "enjoyable" a ship is, there are indicators - one of them is it's over-representation in competitive modes. My gut feeling is that we are in the later territory already.

 

Side note - I'd love to get my hands on the complete data pool on which WG works :cap_money:

  • Cool 22

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HOO]
Beta Tester, Players, In AlfaTesters
2,757 posts
4 minutes ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

A couple of thoughts here:

It gets even funnier when you pick apart/contradict his arguments with facts. The panties then get tied firmly in a twist, and all of the toys are thrown clear out of the pram. It's kind of funny to see, but also somewhat sad.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SM0KE]
Players
3,502 posts
9,121 battles

I would have more (any?) respect for WG if they just flat-out admitted the obvious (which is true for WOT too) - they're a commercial entity, *of course* there's Russian bias, for the simple reason that this is what a significant proportion of their customers require.

 

It makes sense: Europeans and Americans don't need to feel inadequate because we all know we had (on the whole) large and highly effective navies during the era in question, so we're probably going to buy stuff even if it's a bit flaky; this means that two of the major markets are squared away more or less regardless. The Russians on the other hand seem prone to having epic sulks (and not spending money as a result) if 'their' stuff isn't superior...

 

To be fair to WG, most Russian stuff does have significant weaknesses, it's just that said weaknesses tend not to matter as much as other nations' weaknesses do in whatever meta there is at that time. For example, WOT's notorious Defender/252U would struggle to hit anything much smaller than a country at long range (yay, a weakness), but this in an environment where almost all maps suit brawlers.

 

The key exception to the 'Russian bias' narrative, I would suggest, is their cruisers (and I recall reading that the Russian market had a major epi on that subject)...

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LADA]
Players
327 posts
6,091 battles

It's just the usual PR waffle. Lots of noises, many words but nothing really concrete - WG knows better than you. They're honestly not all that bothered about the Russian Navy's actual historical performance but STOP MENTIONING TSUSHIMA! 

 

Kremlin overperforms every other silver BB - DESPITE the fact that more players are getting it now. DESPITE the laughable and pathetic 'nerf' that didn't actually solve the issues behind it. Smolensk remains an incredibly powerful ship that WILL make it's presence felt in the next T10 Ranked, along with the usual suspects of Kremlin and Balansgrad. 

 

Statistics (as mentioned above by various posters) work both ways and can easily be skewed by presenting them in a certain way. False equivalency works wonders when the truth is inconvenient...

 

Consider also the WG way of doing things. The customer ISN'T RIGHT. They can't possibly know more about their own game enjoyment than we do.... Recall that with the Naval Training Centre we had them telling us all how brilliant it was and how wrong all the player base was. Right up until a few hours prior to pulling the plug on that crapshoot - we had PR BS spouting from all levels about how the idea wasn't going anywhere. 

 

If they just got their heads out of MS Excel and used a bit of common-sense for a change everyone would be a lot happier.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Cool 22

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,508 posts
245 battles

Right now IT CA are all over the place which is good, but does not necessarily mean that they are great - of course we understand that. We will see pretty soon :-)

 

Can i have whatever hes smoking? The italian cruisers are trash and require an insane amount of work just to deal the same level damage as every other line.

 

I mean why play trento when i can take out a la galissonaire, dallas, leander, perth etc?

 

1 hour ago, DFens_666 said:

 

I love this one.

Yep, probably nothing to do with the fact, that more players (especially more average players) are unlocking Kremlin, which would automatically lower the WR of every ship.

Id not be surprised, if they would time "nerfs" accordingly, when a lot of people are advancing from Soyuz to Kremlin. Certainly they can see, how many people are currently grinding Soyuz.

Wouldn't suprise me if they buff when they get too low lol.

  • Cool 6
  • Funny 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SWTP]
Players
1,167 posts
9,520 battles
2 hours ago, Leo_Apollo11 said:

As for cruisers - Smol + Stalin + Moskva combined are 34% on RU, 47% on EU, 65% on NA, 46% on ASIA. While Henri, Des Moines, Worcester - 65% RU, 44% EU, 32% NA, 52% ASIA (fun fact, Henri is 39% on RU).

Interesting is that he had to take 3 most popular and strongest non Russian non premium picks to match against one nation only cruisers.

Conveniently forgetting about Mino, Zao and Hindy - all exept Mino, powercrept (Zao) and/or nerfed (Hindy) into the oblivion.

  • Cool 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[N0RSE]
Players
1,763 posts

This is all funny to me. Stopped caring about this game a long time ago. Which is why i haven't spent a single dime in a long time. Glad people catch up with the Russian bias tho. :cap_like:

  • Cool 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OMPG]
Beta Tester
241 posts
5,190 battles
1 minute ago, MortenTardo said:

This is all funny to me. Stopped caring about this game a long time ago. Which is why i haven't spent a single dime in a long time. Glad people catch up with the Russian bias tho. :cap_like:

Out of curiosity what do you play instead of this now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[N0RSE]
Players
1,763 posts
12 minutes ago, TohtoriP said:

Out of curiosity what do you play instead of this now?

I run a few servers for other games. Rust, DayZ and Ark. :) So that takes up most of the gaming time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[S-O-M]
Players
336 posts
5,460 battles

No Russian Bias, MM, CV’s and AA all fine.

 

Exactly the “one thing” Russians are good at; denial.

 

Btw -  I live near Salisbury 😗.

 

I’m wondering when WG are gonna release WOC (world of cars) - Naturally the best ones are Russian.  Op Lada anyone 😂.

 

 

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 17

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
[THESO]
Players
2,201 posts
7,604 battles
Vor 1 Stunde, Gvozdika sagte:

It's just the usual PR waffle. Lots of noises, many words but nothing really concrete - WG knows better than you. They're honestly not all that bothered about the Russian Navy's actual historical performance but STOP MENTIONING TSUSHIMA! 

 

Kremlin overperforms every other silver BB - DESPITE the fact that more players are getting it now. DESPITE the laughable and pathetic 'nerf' that didn't actually solve the issues behind it. Smolensk remains an incredibly powerful ship that WILL make it's presence felt in the next T10 Ranked, along with the usual suspects of Kremlin and Balansgrad. 

 

Statistics (as mentioned above by various posters) work both ways and can easily be skewed by presenting them in a certain way. False equivalency works wonders when the truth is inconvenient...

 

Consider also the WG way of doing things. The customer ISN'T RIGHT. They can't possibly know more about their own game enjoyment than we do.... Recall that with the Naval Training Centre we had them telling us all how brilliant it was and how wrong all the player base was. Right up until a few hours prior to pulling the plug on that crapshoot - we had PR BS spouting from all levels about how the idea wasn't going anywhere. 

 

If they just got their heads out of MS Excel and used a bit of common-sense for a change everyone would be a lot happier.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So "common sense" translates into "Do what we tell you to do or you do it wrong."? 

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,508 posts
245 battles
50 minutes ago, Yoshanai said:

So "common sense" translates into "Do what we tell you to do or you do it wrong."? 

shush or no biscuits for you.

  • Funny 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
[THESO]
Players
2,201 posts
7,604 battles
Vor 1 Minute, DeviousDave02 sagte:

So to sum WeeGee's stance on this up (as pictures say a thousand words)

 

1rigss.jpg

 

If I were WG I wouldn't have responded at all to the RUS Bias screeching. 

Most of it is insulting anyway. Nothing to take seriously there. 

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
784 posts
14,746 battles
51 minutes ago, Yoshanai said:

So "common sense" translates into "Do what we tell you to do or you do it wrong."? 

Well, I'm of an opinion that you build a game around a community and not a community around the game.

 

Developers that have an open ear for what players are telling them usually create fun and healthy environment. And when you got healthy environment and satisfied players, your community can only grow. And for most part that community will be salt free. Frontier's Elite Dangerous or Respawn's Titanfall come to mind.

 

WG in other hand has a firm approach: "this is our game, we build it we control it so you take it or leave it" That's why you need "recruitment station" when your numbers start dwindling or you start recruiting more and more CCs which will (hopefully ) attract more players. Only to ignore those same CCs (and testers and players) when they tell you something is not healthy for the game. When they tell your actions are hurting the game.

 

 

  • Cool 17

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[KAKE]
Players
1,865 posts
4,292 battles
3 minutes ago, quickr said:

Well, I'm of an opinion that you build a game around a community

Well, that's what they are doing...

 

Specifically, the Russian one :Smile_trollface:

  • Funny 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
[THESO]
Players
2,201 posts
7,604 battles
Vor 3 Minuten, quickr sagte:

Well, I'm of an opinion that you build a game around a community and not a community around the game.

 

Developers that have an open ear for what players are telling them usually create fun and healthy environment. And when you got healthy environment and satisfied players, your community can only grow. And for most part that community will be salt free. Frontier's Elite Dangerous or Respawn's Titanfall come to mind.

 

WG in other hand has a firm approach: "this is our game, we build it we control it so you take it or leave it" That's why you need "recruitment station" when your numbers start dwindling or you start recruiting more and more CCs which will (hopefully ) attract more players. Only to ignore those same CCs (and testers and players) when they tell you something is not healthy for the game. When they tell your actions are hurting the game.

 

 

Tell me about a dev that builds its game around a community (not a community created by their games). 

Tell me about a company that has an open ear and listens to their community and talks to them more than WG does and who are still successful and going. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×