WG OP ships strategy only punishes new players

[RenfieldSyndrome]

WG Office :

 

A : I think we created an OP ship, what shall we do ?

B : Lets remove it from sale but announce it 3 month before so everybody can buy. It won't be OP anymore

A : Makes sense

B : Okay

[ColonelPete]

6 minutes ago, hocamdomdom said:

WG Office :

 

A : I think we created an OP ship, what shall we do ?

B : Lets remove it from sale but announce it 3 month before so everybody can buy. It won't be OP anymore

A : Makes sense

B : Okay

Nobody from WG claimed that...

[Lootboxer]

39 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

Nobody from WG claimed that...

Of course. They claim it's combat effectiveness and/or popularity is too high and after a few months of selling it to everyone who wants to play OP toy they will pull it off from sales ... straight into Satan lootboxes so all new players can dream and try and make WG rich in the process. 

[Prophecy82]

8 hours ago, DariusJacek said:

Of course. They claim it's combat effectiveness and/or popularity is too high and after a few months of selling it to everyone who wants to play OP toy they will pull it off from sales ... straight into Satan lootboxes so all new players can dream and try and make WG rich in the process. 

 

You mean like Graf Spee? 

[invicta2012]

9 hours ago, hocamdomdom said:

WG Office :

 

A : I think we created an OP ship, what shall we do ?

B : Lets remove it from sale but announce it 3 month before so everybody can buy. It won't be OP anymore

A : Makes sense

B : Okay

Implying that a ship is being withdrawn from sale because it is too powerful is a sales technique. As is a short term availability window. There are very few really OP ships, and those that do exist are usually permanently withdrawn (and often end up being quite heavily powercrept, like Flint). 

[YabbaCoe]

Před 9 hodinami hocamdomdom řekl/a:

WG Office :

 

A : I think we created an OP ship, what shall we do ?

B : Lets remove it from sale but announce it 3 month before so everybody can buy. It won't be OP anymore

A : Makes sense

B : Okay

Well, obviously if some ship appears to be overperforming others stats-wise, it would be good to make her more in line with other ships, in terms of statistics.

As the game is involving all the time, there are plenty changes in game mechanics made, which always have an impact on characteristics of some ships. That is how some ships can become OP overtime.

Also some ships themselves can be understood as "balanced". But in certain circumstances those ships can benefit a lot from f.e. consumables of others, which makes her much more effective in that particular battle.

Also it would be good to have some variety in all battles, different setups etc. So when a particular ship become too much popular, that you have several of those in each battle, than restricting her sales (in case it is premium or special ship) can over time lower her numbers in battles. Just remember Missouri when she was obtainable... she was in every single battle several times. 

[Profilus]

1 hour ago, YabbaCoe said:

Also it would be good to have some variety in all battles, different setups etc.

Any setup suggestion for upcoming clan battles with CV-s? Maybe 3 setups for 1 night that have some variety and won't be underdogs every battle?

[YabbaCoe]

Před 3 minutami Profilus řekl/a:

Any setup suggestion for upcoming clan battles with CV-s? Maybe 3 setups for 1 night that have some variety and won't be underdogs every battle?

Those strategies and tactics are solely up to you and your clan, what you will decide to train, to do, which ships to use etc.

[DFens_666]

1 hour ago, YabbaCoe said:

Also it would be good to have some variety in all battles, different setups etc.

 

You (ofc not you personaly, but you as in WG) made that problem by yourself, by making T9-10 premiums/special ships which require basicly no skill whatsoever but can still achieve high damage numbers. Thunderer is the best example for that. Sit at maxrange, spam HE and get 100k damage. And then you wonder, why the average player is playing that ship around the clock, when they dont even lose credits while doing that.

 

T9-10 Premium/special ships are one of the worst things to happen for this game

- grinding is basicly obsolete, you can play midtiers, farm coal and get a T10 ship. Or just buy a T9 ship, heck, we could even buy 2 T10 ships by now.

- Playing techtree ships doesnt make sense if they are a) weaker and b) you lose credits while playing them compared to Premiums. You can only get the same by buying a permacamo, which basicly means spending money. Coal ships one can get 4 free, but for the most part of this game, you couldnt get a T10 permacamo for free. You can now through steel or by playing enough ranked to get doubloons over time (still easier to get a coal/RB/whatever T10 ship).

- What incentive is there to play something like Soyuz/Alsace/Iowa/FDG when ships like Musashi/Missouri/Georgia/JB/Pommern exist? Naturally, this will cause certain ships to be played more often.

 

And then there are ships like Halland, which can actually defend itself from being attacked by most CV players. No wonder that ship is more popular than others, when it also combines longrange, extremely fast torps. Why play a DD, which has less range on its torps and cant even defend itself whatsoever against a CV?

 

Ontop of that, you have people tell you all the time "ship x is broken/OP" when they test it, but you guys simply do not care whatsoever. Then you dont need to wonder, why that ship is too popular...

[Karasu_Browarszky]

1 hour ago, YabbaCoe said:

Well, obviously if some ship appears to be overperforming others stats-wise, it would be good to make her more in line with other ships, in terms of statistics.

 

 

Easiest done if enough of us below average players are 'purseuded'  to buy said ship and play it en masse.

[Profilus]

8 minutes ago, YabbaCoe said:

Those strategies and tactics are solely up to you and your clan, what you will decide to train, to do, which ships to use etc.

And yet people can't decide what ships and when to buy to play in randoms. Must be WG logic.

[Wulf_Ace]

2 hours ago, YabbaCoe said:

Well, obviously if some ship appears to be overperforming others stats-wise, it would be good to make her more in line with other ships, in terms of statistics.

As the game is involving all the time, there are plenty changes in game mechanics made, which always have an impact on characteristics of some ships. That is how some ships can become OP overtime.

Also some ships themselves can be understood as "balanced". But in certain circumstances those ships can benefit a lot from f.e. consumables of others, which makes her much more effective in that particular battle.

Also it would be good to have some variety in all battles, different setups etc. So when a particular ship become too much popular, that you have several of those in each battle, than restricting her sales (in case it is premium or special ship) can over time lower her numbers in battles. Just remember Missouri when she was obtainable... she was in every single battle several times. 

One word:

Stalingrad

[tocqueville8]

1 hour ago, DFens_666 said:

T9-10 Premium/special ships are one of the worst things to happen for this game

- grinding is basicly obsolete, you can play midtiers, farm coal and get a T10 ship. Or just buy a T9 ship, heck, we could even buy 2 T10 ships by now. 

Upvote for the post, but I disagree there.

 

I've grinded many lines to T10, and regrinded some more.

Sometimes I've grinded for the T10 (Minotaur, though the Neptune was pleasant enough), sometimes because the T9 was so nice (FdG, Soyuz, Kitakaze, Brindisi, Ibuki...) that it just felt natural.

 

Mid tiers often feel more relaxing...until I get bottom-tiered four times in a row and dunked on by worse players who simply entered the match with a much stronger ship. The bulk of my games is still around T6-8, but recently I've been going back less and less, as I feel I have less control over the outcome of my games: at T10 I'm at least 1/12th of my team's capabilities, at T6 I'm often closer to 1/15, 1/20 or so. I'm not talking skill, just hp, firepower and such.

[OldschoolGaming_YouTube]

Not to mention the 2 Carriers per side new players has to enjoy in all mid tiers in ships with non-existent AA. How this game ever get any new players is baffeling to me. I hardly play T8 any more because of carriers. Mostly T10 and then mostly:

Halland - Half decent AA and a heal

Thunderer - OP A-F and heal

Smolensk - OP A-F, half decent AA and heal

Petro - OP A-F, half decent AA and heal

 

Rest of my 80-90% ships sits and collects dust in port. If you want to get any enjoyment out of this game these days you need to either play a broken OP ships, which most has been taken out by now ..... or play carriers!

 

Remember how this game was 2015-2018? Actually quite fun!

[DFens_666]

1 minute ago, OldschoolGaming_YouTube said:

Remember how this game was 2015-2018? Actually quite fun!

 

 

8 minutes ago, tocqueville8 said:

Upvote for the post, but I disagree there.

 

I've grinded many lines to T10, and regrinded some more.

Sometimes I've grinded for the T10 (Minotaur, though the Neptune was pleasant enough), sometimes because the T9 was so nice (FdG, Soyuz, Kitakaze, Brindisi, Ibuki...) that it just felt natural.

 

Mid tiers often feel more relaxing...until I get bottom-tiered four times in a row and dunked on by worse players who simply entered the match with a much stronger ship. The bulk of my games is still around T6-8, but recently I've been going back less and less, as I feel I have less control over the outcome of my games: at T10 I'm at least 1/12th of my team's capabilities, at T6 I'm often closer to 1/15, 1/20 or so. I'm not talking skill, just hp, firepower and such.

 

well ofc, maybe i was a bit too simplistic with that. The more you are invested with the game, the more likely it is to actually grind/play different ships. But for newer players, its quite easy. Too often ive seen players with <10 games on lowtiers, running around with half a dozen T7+ premium ships, or others with a couple of hundred games playing nonstop Thunderer.

Not only is it bad for the game, it also adds to less variety. If there is one T10 coal BBs and some other DDs/Cruisers/CVs, guess which ship people will most likely get first? Shouldnt be a surprise that its a BB, especially if they spend 2 minutes googleing "coal ship wows" and it just says "get thunderer, its OP" basicly everywhere.

 

Its even hard to blame any individual person doing that, because i basicly did the same thing back in the days with Missouri. Before i had a T9 techtree BB, i had enough FreeXP to get Missouri and play that instead. At some point i had FDG, which i just freeXPed. Why play something which is less fun, when i can enjoy playing Missouri?

[PaP_Mentoles]

8 minutes ago, OldschoolGaming_YouTube said:

Remember how this game was 2015-2018? Actually quite fun!

But no rubles for Weegreedy on fun tovarish...

[tocqueville8]

Just now, DFens_666 said:

At some point i had FDG, which i just freeXPed. Why play something which is less fun, when i can enjoy playing Missouri?

I can't really say: I don't have the Missouri, but I had a lot of fun with the FdG. I imagine it was after she'd received some buffs, much like the Izumo.

 

The Thunderer problem seems to have largely gone away since a couple of months ago: there are still some, but not 3 or 4 per team as back then.
Same with Smolensk, really. I consider them both pretty toxic, but they've largely subsided.

 

Imho some tech tree T10 ships are either irreplaceable (Minotaur, maybe Halland) or only replaceable with very expensive ones (Shiki for Yamato, let's say), so some grinds are totally still worth it.

Overall, it's pretty natural that out of 30 lines or so some are going to be out of meta. Imho they should make Legendary Upgrades better and cheaper, to increase their appeal.

[Gorenor]

29 minutes ago, tocqueville8 said:

[...........................................] Imho they should make Legendary Upgrades better and cheaper.

Some of LU were better than the normal ship upgrades. Unfotunate WG decides that those were too much impactful on the game  (ZAO player used moe than 60% _OLD_ Legendary Upgrade; so WG decide to -BALANCE- it)

[tocqueville8]

Just now, Gorenor said:

Unfotunate WG decides that those were too much impactful on the game  (ZAO player used moe than 60% _OLD_ Legendary Upgrade; so WG decide to -BALANCE- it)

Which is silly: for that price of course they should be better than the regular module.

Either that, or they should change the playstyle significantly, like with the Kleber or possibly the YY (I have the Smaland, so I guess I'll never know...).

[Cippalippus]

Yeah, WG killed its own game with these decisions and it's very likely that the game will never recover. Adding subs will probably be the next step that will burn large swathes of the old population.

It's ok, I had my own fun and some day another game like this will show up. 

[DFens_666]

27 minutes ago, Gorenor said:

Some of LU were better than the normal ship upgrades. Unfotunate WG decides that those were too much impactful on the game  (ZAO player used moe than 60% _OLD_ Legendary Upgrade; so WG decide to -BALANCE- it)

6 minutes ago, tocqueville8 said:

Which is silly: for that price of course they should be better than the regular module.

Either that, or they should change the playstyle significantly, like with the Kleber or possibly the YY (I have the Smaland, so I guess I'll never know...).

 

They should have made a seperate slot where you can add the LU. That way, balancing is much easier, because you dont lose anything else, but can instead attempt to change the ships playstyle and add debuffs to the LU if necessary. That we have LUs for slot and 5 and 6 is just stupid. Before they reworked them, most of the 5th slot LUs were just bad because they had to compete with the concealment module... and then look at the LUs for Repu, GK and Kremlin, which are basicly identical to MBM3, only the downside is much more severe. I dont really know how that really promotes a different playstyle? Its not like, having -12% or -18% MBRB will make much of a difference, especially when looking at kremlin that you will lose a consumable. What kinda different playstyle is that supposed to be? Suiciding? Because you have less heal/DCP so i guess you should just yolo in....

[Gwynbleidd11]

I dont understand these statements about OP ships. Some ships indeed are slighly better, but not by much. Maybe 5%. And they still have some clear weakness which have to overcome to actually feel better in many situations. And sinking these so called OP ships with "bad ships" is much sweeter than opposite situation. 

[Lootboxer]

31 minutes ago, Gwynbleidd11 said:

I dont understand these statements about OP ships. Some ships indeed are slighly better, but not by much. Maybe 5%. And they still have some clear weakness which have to overcome to actually feel better in many situations. And sinking these so called OP ships with "bad ships" is much sweeter than opposite situation. 

When both players have similarly skills then this "5%" can make a difference and it's often more then 5.

[Gwynbleidd11]

32 minutes ago, DariusJacek said:

When both players have similarly skills then this "5%" can make a difference and it's often more then 5.

 

But its impossible to avoid this 5% in game with hundreds of various ships and even different tiers. You get the point?

[Verblonde]

1 hour ago, Gwynbleidd11 said:

I dont understand these statements about OP ships.

There are a couple of monsters out there, although the only one that seems to be 'idiot proof' (or close) OP is GC.

 

The more thorny issue is perhaps the ships with a high effectiveness ceiling that's gated (for want of a better word) behind some sort of skill barrier. For instance, the original Belfast is notorious, but if you looked at me playing her, you might well conclude she needs a buff. Gremy is another one that has a fearsome reputation, but I struggle to make her work; conversely, I can sometimes do horrible things with a Kami, and so on...

 

Personally, I think the real concern comes from WG's recent decision to start tagging premium ships with 'may be nerfed' labels; although they haven't so far, there is nothing to stop them releasing flat-out OP premiums, selling the hell out of them, and then nerfing them when they 'discover' that they're OP. And repeat.