The return and economic nerf of Missouri.

[Karasu_Browarszky]

7 minutes ago, OldschoolGaming_YouTube said:

Its classic WG cloak and dagger BS. Of course, they have the information and of course this will be a nerf to old Missouri, they just don't want to tell the player base that they ... yet again scr33w us over.

 

Uhm.. yes. Technically speaking, no matter what way you look at this, they are changing a previously released ship in a fundamental way.

[_HomTanks_]

28 minutes ago, Verblonde said:

Personally, I agree with the suggestion of making a MO clone (call it MO 1945 or something), and giving that 'standard' credit earnings, whilst leaving existing MOs alone.

But then, they wouldn't hit two birds with a stone

[Hades_warrior]

6 hours ago, gopher31 said:

Missouri is coming back for doubloons and a credit earning nerf in 0.10.7:

 

https://worldofwarships.eu/en/news/general-news/bulletin-0107/

So much about having rare Premiums in game... Now everyone will spend $$$ to get her.... Especially new players.

Only good thing in this disaster is, economic won't change for us who already have Missouri since year 1. Only Missouri version 0.10.7 will be nerfed. Right?

[Verblonde]

5 minutes ago, Hades_warrior said:

Only good thing in this disaster is, economic won't change for us who already have Missouri since year 1.

The proof of the pudding...etc.

 

You'll note that the wording says 'on average'; even if you believe WG, that's not the same thing as no change.

[rage1750]

4 hours ago, YabbaCoe said:

How can you be so sure, that it will be a massive nerf? You have the data how much the base credit income of Missouri is different to other tier IX premium BBs and how much this mission will give?

It will be a massive nerf as WarGaming has a long history of:

1. Either openly lying or speaking with a forked tongue.
2. Screwing over the playerbase openly, "accidentally" or under the guise of listening to player feedback.

No one in there right mind trusts WarGaming, I openly dislike WarGaming; none of this was caused by a single event or happened over night. 

WarGaming earned the contempt it recieves from multiple questionable acts, performed over a number of years.  

[Hugh_Ruka]

I bet the "new" Missouri will have this line in the shop:

 

If deemed necessary, balance changes may be applied to Missouri ....

[__Helmut_Kohl__]

7 minutes ago, Hugh_Ruka said:

I bet the "new" Missouri will have this line in the shop:

 

If deemed necessary, balance changes may be applied to Missouri ....

 

Yep. And they will say that it was never directly sold for money before, even though people were actually tricked into spending massive amounts of money to get it. 

[Karasu_Browarszky]

1 minute ago, __Helmut_Kohl__ said:

 

Yep. And they will say that it was never directly sold for money before, even though people were actually tricked into spending massive amounts of money to get it. 

 

As I mentioned, we get to pay for our very own shaft.

[Redcap375]

55 minutes ago, OldschoolGaming_YouTube said:

Its classic WG cloak and dagger BS. Of course, they have the information and of course this will be a nerf to old Missouri, they just don't want to tell the player base that they ... yet again scr33w us over.

 

This..

 

The level of naivety in this forum is now staggering. 

[GarrusBrutus]

49 minutes ago, Hades_warrior said:

economic won't change for us who already have Missouri since year 1. Only Missouri version 0.10.7 will be nerfed. Right?

Oh, you sweet summer child... 

[Miscommunication_dept]

How long before Musashi is nerfed and brought back with current owners given a legendary module that would effectively unnerf it?

[arquata2019_]

6 minuti fa, gopher31 ha scritto:

How long before Musashi is nerfed and brought back with current owners given a legendary module that woul effectively in nerf it?

I simply want Musashi, just to have her x.x

[Nibenay78]

1 minute ago, arquata2019 said:

I simply want Musashi, just to have her x.x

This is why we can't have anything nice! Must buy! must have!

[radius77]

I don't have Missouri but I always thought like Friesland was the one with "broken" credit coeficient ...

 

Sometimes I feel like "oops, did almost nothing still got 500k for the battle"

 

 

[Warrior_16101991]

Why should Wargaming always favor those who started playing first? Why who buys it after the retreat must have a nerf and whoe bought it before doesn't? What way is this?

[WWDragon]

11 minutes ago, gopher31 said:

How long before Musashi is nerfed and brought back with current owners given a legendary module that woul effectively in nerf it?

What Tier IX ship have a legendary module?

[AraAra_My_Ass_Is_Blasted]

Well anyway my Missouri barely make more money than any other ship lately, i'm sure there has been a nerf somewhere already, i get +-500K credits on a win and it's about the same with my Musashi or Georgia... so it's not gonna change anything for me.

 

Edit: got my missouri in last year's christmas containers, so maybe that's a nerfed version...

[Redcap375]

7 minutes ago, arquata2019 said:

I simply want Musashi, just to have her x.x

 

And that why WG can do whatever they want, whenever they want.

 

[AndyHill]

To be honest this whole debacle is just baffling. Usually when WG do scummy ship you can at least understand their motivations for doing so, but this time the mind boggles on so many levels.

 

If you just name the new ship "Missouri 2", "Missouri '45", "New Jersey" or/and "Wisconsin"

 

1) WG save on costs and efforts of trying to make some stupid eternal mission, that's +€€€

2) Players don't have to deal with confusing ship like weird permanent special missions for one ship

3) Collectors and other whales who already have the MO will buy the new ship(s), that's +€€€

4) Whales will whale shiploads of loot boxes to get the original Missouri, that's +€€€

5) Whales who whaled the Missouri won't be pissed off, that's at least not -€€€

 

The only thing this convoluted system as proposed has is the ability to nerf the income of existing Missouris for people who already have them. I'm one of them. Funny thing is that in addition to a Missouri, I basically have everything else - twice. Something like 4-5M freeXP, can't remember. Closer to 700M credits even though I just spent 200M on 200k coal. I have every single tech tree T10 in the game and most special ships. I don't need a Missouri for anything. I don't care - in fact I don't really know - how much profit ships make, I play what I want. It seems that most of my favorite ships are profitable enough since that credit count seems to be climbing and climbing all the time.

 

I don't care very much what happens to the MO's money making ability, I'm just completely baffled by just how bass ackwards approach WG have chosen. I mean I can't complain if WG decide to make their Satan boxes less enticing, but I can wonder why.

 

edit: Now imagine WG doing this on a moment's notice at a time when there are no last-chance original Missouri loot boxes for sale. What?

[Miscommunication_dept]

32 minutes ago, WWDragon said:

What Tier IX ship have a legendary module?

What tier 9 ship has a permanent combat mission granting increased credit earning?

[AndyHill]

@YabbaCoe & al., if you absolutely have to have the same ship with the same name instead of for example selling New Jerseys and Wisconsins to people who already have Missouri, at least give the current owners a new permacamo with stupid economy bonuses instead of a weird eternal mission cluttering the already cluttered enough UI. Extra bonus if it's pure shiny gold, a bit like the ranked camo but shinier.

[Karasu_Browarszky]

1 minute ago, AndyHill said:

@YabbaCoe & al., if you absolutely have to have the same ship with the same name instead of for example selling New Jerseys and Wisconsins to people who already have Missouri, at least give the current owners a new permacamo with stupid economy bonuses instead of a weird eternal mission cluttering the already cluttered enough UI. Extra bonus if it's pure shiny gold, a bit like the ranked camo but shinier.

 

Would a gold camo yield doubloons, I wonder?

[Miscommunication_dept]

Should we be asking another question?

For years the Missouri has been the holy cow that people would spend hundreds on Satan crates to get.

 

Could this mean a big change to Satan crates?

This would make sense after Makarovgate.

[KillStealBoss]

7 hours ago, MrWastee said:

M I S S O U R I    L I M A    ! ! !

If they will release this one ..... #blameWastee 

[_HomTanks_]

49 minutes ago, gopher31 said:

Should we be asking another question?

For years the Missouri has been the holy cow that people would spend hundreds on Satan crates to get.

 

Could this mean a big change to Satan crates?

This would make sense after Makarovgate.

Much less people than before will grind loot boxes for Missouri because most will buy the nerfed one when it comes out for sale. Meanwhile, WG won't make Missouri rigged like Makarov because they won't want to give away 19-20K dubs away each time and hence, they will lose big potential of customers for loot boxes. They're shooting themselves on the foot but are not aware of it. Someone at WG who comes up with these nerfing in game economics ideas probably came up with this idea too. Their goal is to give the least possible of in game economy to players and to take as much as possible in return. Min cost/max profit like in every other business. Otherwise, they would have just put another ship Missouri B or New Jersey, whatever and keep the original Missouri alone (like others stated previously). But this is not what they want :)

They are the shark, looking for small fish to eat;