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

Before you consider buying Flandre ....

161 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[-RNR-]
Beta Tester
1,351 posts
16,338 battles

Well WG will nerf and chang premium ships in near future. Good to know. 

  • Cool 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[JRM]
[JRM]
Players
7,764 posts

Not considering it so I am safe ^^

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,204 posts
57 minutes ago, Tanaka_15 said:

Well WG will nerf and chang premium ships in near future. Good to know. 

they did it already in the recent past ...

almost thought to buy it but ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-RNR-]
Beta Tester
1,351 posts
16,338 battles
Just now, hellhound666 said:

they did it already in the recent past ...

almost thought to buy it but ...

I honstly dont rember nerfing of a prem ship, with out a big rework, you mean smoke changes and kutuzov? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,204 posts
1 minute ago, Tanaka_15 said:

I honstly dont rember nerfing of a prem ship, with out a big rework, you mean smoke changes and kutuzov? 

flint, massa, georgia, supercruisers were nerfed without compensation offer

with smoke changes, compensations were offered but this was a long time ago

  • Cool 5
  • Bad 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-RNR-]
Beta Tester
1,351 posts
16,338 battles

Yech but this was wg "global" chagne [edited]. I think the flandre show us they can dircetly nerf a prem ship, lets say we remove radar from wichita cos reasons. Or somthing like that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
3,653 posts
18,027 battles
9 minutes ago, hellhound666 said:

flint, massa, georgia, supercruisers were nerfed without compensation offer

with smoke changes, compensations were offered but this was a long time ago

You confuse a global change in mechanics with what is posted here. @fumtu is hinting that this sentence could imply direct, targetted changes to Flandre as opposed to global changes only.

 

@YabbaCoe care to shed some light on this?

  • Cool 5
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,204 posts
1 minute ago, 159Hunter said:

You confuse a global change in mechanics with what is posted here. @fumtu is hinting that this sentence could imply direct, targetted changes to Flandre as opposed to global changes only.

 

@YabbaCoe care to shed some light on this?

i dont confuse anything, you do! massa's secondaries before rework were far better than now = nerf. fine, if needed then ok but offer compensation to those who wish it. ffs - it is a pretty simple concept ...

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,292 posts
20,558 battles

They have started doing that little note fairly recently, I first noticed it on the 30th January this year here:

0D572619-2526-49FE-A236-AF65E235D3DD.jpeg

  • Cool 6
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
[THESO]
Players
3,226 posts
26,667 battles

rofl....

so, from "we dont nerf prems", via "global changes", to split into "speshuuls and true prems" after gc debacle, which translates into "we dont nerf prems but speshuuls", we now are one step further to "we dont nerf prems, but we nerf speshuuls and new released prems for which we dropped a sentence into description"...................

 

lmao so hard! idc if it annoys anyone, so gotta say it again: while gc debacle was happening this playerbase failed to fight for proper testing cycles! and now, this is what we get for...... loosening the "we dont nerf prems" policy step by step until it will vanish totally.

while some say "guuuud, balance ftw", still there's the point of cash payed and things alternated afterwards. proper testing cycles and this thread, just as quite some others as well, would not exist. we'd have peace on that front, but i guess some like the thrill lol :Smile_facepalm:....

 

so yeah, come all out and cry. i just gonna lmao... aKa #lemmingslost lol

 

:Smile_popcorn:

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DREAD]
Players
10,840 posts
7,470 battles

One of the main reasons for me to buy premium ships was already that they would not change. 
 

I am ok with changing reward, coal and steel ships but for premiums I am very much against this as it opens the door to idiotic changes which will completely ruin what you initially were willing to spend real money on 

  • Cool 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-RNR-]
Beta Tester
1,351 posts
16,338 battles
5 minutes ago, hellhound666 said:

i dont confuse anything, you do! massa's secondaries before rework were far better than now = nerf. fine, if needed then ok but offer compensation to those who wish it. ffs - it is a pretty simple concept ...

You dont get it. All sec in game were nerfed. Not Only Massa, all were. If WG woul lets say we cut range of Massa sec by half, but dont touch others it would be direct nerf to Massa, and i quess it is WG plan for coming months :D

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[POP]
Beta Tester
234 posts
9,793 battles

I for one am completely and 100% for treating all ships, including premiums and speshuls, similarly. As in "no ship is untouchable".

  • Cool 5
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
3,653 posts
18,027 battles
4 minutes ago, hellhound666 said:

i dont confuse anything, you do! massa's secondaries before rework were far better than now = nerf. fine, if needed then ok but offer compensation to those who wish it. ffs - it is a pretty simple concept ...

Yes you do.

General gameplay changes vs ship targetted changes. The former generally don't warrant compensation, the last time was years ago with kutuzov iirc. The latter just don't happen to premiums up to now. This one sentence could however change this policy.

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[JRM]
[JRM]
Players
7,764 posts
10 minutes ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

One of the main reasons for me to buy premium ships was already that they would not change. 
 

I am ok with changing reward, coal and steel ships but for premiums I am very much against this as it opens the door to idiotic changes which will completely ruin what you initially were willing to spend real money on 

There is a simple solution - we stop spending on the premiums, unless one really really likes them for some specific reason other then the stats - dont buy them...

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,204 posts
3 minutes ago, 159Hunter said:

Yes you do.

General gameplay changes vs ship targetted changes. The former generally don't warrant compensation, the last time was years ago with kutuzov iirc. The latter just don't happen to premiums up to now. This one sentence could however change this policy.

 

this is their sick reasoning to which you abide and I don't. the deal I made when I bought massa was because of secondaries. this was changed and it is only reasonable to get an offer of compensation. for some reason with smoke changes this was ok but not for now ... i would not even take the compensation (as didn't with smoke change) but the way it is blatantly done leaves me no choice really - to bring it up so that people will remember and your opinion really does not mean much to me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,193 posts
12,822 battles

I pretty much count on the fact that WG will screw me over and change/nerf anything I buy from them in the future Premium, Special or silver so that's the reason I haven't bought anything from them in the last 3 years except for ships I have gotten for free with Free XP, coal or Steele. 

  • Cool 11
  • Boring 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
167 posts
10,082 battles

I would prefer if WG did their work and balance before they release a premium ship to the public. This is a dangerous precedent, and I hope they will not go for "Release OP ship - nerf 3 months later - release new OP ship" cycle.

 

...Who am I kidding, if this little experiment of theirs is successful that is exactly what they will do.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SHAD]
Players
3,732 posts
15,093 battles
48 minutes ago, lovelacebeer said:

They have started doing that little note fairly recently, I first noticed it on the 30th January this year here:

0D572619-2526-49FE-A236-AF65E235D3DD.jpeg

This has been the case with all techtree clones released as premiums such as Wujing and ARP Yamato. Bajie is slightly altered and did not have this disclaimer.

 

This the first time a unique premium or special ship has had this  disclaimer applied and it looks like it reflects WG's intended direction.

 

I have said before, if WG struggles to balance ships than they should release the ships with a 3 month period of testing. In this period, WG should refund anyone who requests if they nerf the ship at all. After the 3 months the ships should be immune from direct nerfs. Of course, it took them 3 years to decide Stalingrad was overpowered even though it has been made weaker several times with global nerfs. 

 

WG gets their live server testing, Buyers get some form of protection from bait and switch.

 

My Wallet is starting to feel tighter, this is good, it will get bigger!!

  • Cool 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[EVA]
[EVA]
Beta Tester, In AlfaTesters
259 posts
10,016 battles

That's the whole point.
If WG makes a clear statement ("If ship X is subsequently changed, the buyer can claim his MONEY back.), Then it is okay.
And this is about the word MONEY ... no compensation in doubloons ...
WG has always been very hesitant when it comes to giving a buyer his money back.

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
3,653 posts
18,027 battles
21 minutes ago, hellhound666 said:

this is their sick reasoning to which you abide and I don't.

And this was always crystal clear. The fact that you bought ships implies that you agreed with it. 

21 minutes ago, hellhound666 said:

the deal I made when I bought massa was because of secondaries. this was changed and it is only reasonable to get an offer of compensation.

If you bought massa only for secondaries you did it wrong. This ship had and still has a great healing power that is far less situational than secondaries.

21 minutes ago, hellhound666 said:

your opinion really does not mean much to me

Don't worry, nor does your opinion to me  After claiming you want compensation for Alaska, it is clear your are not interested in game balance and only 'think' about yourself.

  • Bad 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×