LWM Needs Help: Crowd-Sourced Missouri Data

[Andrewbassg]

7 hours ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

Hi, everyone.  I'm asking the community for help.  With the Mighty Mo making a return soon, I thought it prudent to expand the number of credit earning results I presently have with more up-to-date data.  Rather than making my eyes bleed with a Missouri marathon, I am turning to you all to ask you to play a few games if you have access to the ship.  I need these Missouri combat results -- specifically the detailed breakdown of credit earning on page 4 of the results screens for winning matches.  It should look something like this:

Here's specifically what I need:

• WINNING MATCHES ONLY.  You know what?  I'll take both.  Just tell me if you won or lost.
• Tell me what game mode you played -- Ranked, Random Battles, Co-Op, etc.
• Base experience values should be visible.
• All credit earning modifiers should be visible.  Make sure this section is fully expanded.

Please upload those results into this thread.  These can then be compared to the new earning values when Mo gets updated.

As per the title. Here's the link for NA forum thread.

 

https://forum.worldofwarships.com/topic/241856-lwm-needs-help-crowd-sourced-missouri-data/

 

 

[Chaoskraehe]

[rage1750]

LWM needs to pull her head out of her ar*e for the best part.

Though I am all for pointing out WG BS and bringing it out to the open for all to see and mock...

 

 

Help LWM guys; she may be a naive idealist but we face the same enemy.  

 

Our battle cry "Unkie WeeGee how could you" 

[lovelacebeer]

Seems a very good idea, but as I don’t have a NA account I cannot assist but totally worth anyone who can assist doing so. 

[Ubertron_X]

14 minutes ago, lovelacebeer said:

Seems a very good idea, but as I don’t have a NA account I cannot assist but totally worth anyone who can assist doing so. 

Well, we could still make our own thread with blackjack and ..... , and then have someone with a NA account do a copy and paste job.

[Andrewbassg]

1 minute ago, rage1750 said:

LWM needs

Erm.....I think you need that. LWm has done more for this community than you ever did. Even in your wet dreams.

 

[Andrewbassg]

21 minutes ago, lovelacebeer said:

Seems a very good idea, but as I don’t have a NA account I cannot assist but totally worth anyone who can assist doing so. 

i posted the link to this thread  Post it here, she will see it.

[StoneRhino]

All CoOp, all wins

Spoiler

 

[The_Pillager]

Never would have imagined they bring Mighty Mo back ...

 

Now where is my Steven Segal ? 

[The_Pillager]

No joking, i really miss his lazy voice and these small animations of him, practising knifethrowing on deck 

 

[Onsterfelijke]

Wait is this not done in the past and was the multiplyer like this:

 

Missouri  x5

Musashi  x4

Jean Bart x3

And there more ships with x3 multiplier?

 

Oh this was his animation:

 

[Andrewbassg]

I don't have her so I cant contribute. but..... don't be shy people :)

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

6 hours ago, Andrewbassg said:

I don't have her so I cant contribute. but..... don't be shy people :)

I have her but uninstalled the game so I can't contribute. I don't understand LWM is still working on this game. 

[Chaoskraehe]

Gerade eben, Europizza sagte:

I have her but uninstalled the game so I can't contribute. I don't understand LWM is still working on this game. 

I think part of it is that she doesn't want that others suffer from what WG does

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

Just now, Chaoskraehe said:

I think part of it is that she doesn't want that others suffer from what WG does

I'm guessing she's invested so much that it must be really hard to turn her back on it. Her reviews and writing were a body of work.

[Andrewbassg]

4 minutes ago, Europizza said:

I have her but uninstalled the game so I can't contribute. 

Yes, sadly I know.....

4 minutes ago, Europizza said:

I don't understand LWM is still working on this game. 

NA is very different from EU, community wise. They take themselves much more seriously and the sense of belonging is much more present Also i think she feels responsibility in a sense. She knows much of the game facts wise and tries to help

[Verblonde]

I've got to play a bleedin' BB? Ew! Cooties!

Oh well, if it's LWM that's asking...

I will return anon.

 

(Edit: naturally, my first game, the server throws me out a few seconds before the end, so I can't get the results...)

 

Of course, I was utter rubbish the next game:

 

 

The next one too:

 

 

That's quite enough BB cooties for one evening (BTW they were both Randoms and victories, I think)...

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

1 hour ago, Andrewbassg said:

Yes, sadly I know.....

NA is very different from EU, community wise. They take themselves much more seriously and the sense of belonging is much more present Also i think she feels responsibility in a sense. She knows much of the game facts wise and tries to help

Sadly I dont think WG and their russian developer dont want to be helped. 

[Andrewbassg]

5 hours ago, Europizza said:

Sadly I dont think WG and their russian developer dont want to be helped. 

Oh I wasn't talking about Weegee. She feels responsibility for the players, not them. 

 

Edit:

 

14 hours ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

If you have any related questions to the upcoming Missouri changes you want me to forward to the devs, please let me know.

  Hide contents

Text version in case Imgur poops itself in the future:

AprilWhiteMouse on 2021.07.22 asked over the WG-CC Discord:

Let's do an example and get a clear answer with no ambiguity.  Here's the hypothetical scenario:  Missouri is being used to farm credits for a "Earn 50M credits" mission for a dockyard event.

Missouri plays very well in a Random Battle.  Said player has premium time and earns a cool 1,000,000 base credits (big round number!).  They were using the Ocean Soul camouflage (+20% credit earning) along with the following signals:

• Zulu (+20% credit earning)
• Wyvern (+50% credit earning)
• Scylla (+25% credit earning)
• Basilisk (+30% credit earning)
• Leviathan (+20% credit earning)

Under the current system, this would yield 2,650,000 credits (before expenses) for that one match and their progress on their "earn 50M credits" mission would read:  2,650,000 / 50,000,000.

Under the new system, the base earning value drops.  Instead of 1M base credits, we're looking at something closer to 800,000 credits for the same battle (the same as any other tier IX premium).  With all of the bonuses from signals and camouflage, our total is now 2,120,000 credits.  A difference of 530,000 credits.

BASED ON WHAT WE'RE BEING TOLD:

(a)  The difference in the base credit earning is 200,000 credits (in this example).  However, the mission will ALSO take into account all bonuses that would have been received by signals and camouflage, meaning the mission (in this example) would provide the full 530,000 credits at a minimum.  IS THIS CORRECT?
(b)  The mission bonus will also apply to our Dockyard task, meaning that under the new system the player will also have a minimum of 2,650,000 / 50,000,000 progress listed.  IS THIS CORRECT?

shonai on 2021.07.23 answered over the WG-CC Discord:

If player earns 2 650 000 credits with “old” Missouri, with mission we expect that number to be around 2 750 000 +- several thousands (but still at least 2 650 000)

So, directly answering your questions:
1.  Yes, player will earn not less than with the old built-in coefficient
2.  Yes, the progress of missions will also incorporate every credit earned. So, in such case it would be 2 750 000 / 50M

However, as the economics are quite complicated, we will carefully watch the outcome, and if there will be issues with these income, we'll take care of it

 

 You see what I mean ?

 

Edit2 : Also

 

2 hours ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

Only what you can read between the lines.

• Cloning her and renaming her to one of her sister-ships is a no go.  Wargaming learned their lesson with Alabama-gate.  People want Missouri.  Furthermore, some of these ships would require modelling changes.  So that's out.
• People want Missouri.  Adding a ship like "Missouri '45" or what-have you will not earn them as many sales as if they just resold Missouri herself.  The ship has a reputation in this game.  As closely as we here on social media platforms are keeping an eye on this development, there are easily ten times as many players not fully plugged in.  Some will simply see "Missouri is available" and pull the trigger, not knowing that the economy has shifted.  Yet others, aware the economy has shifted, will get her simply because it's Missouri.  Surveillance Radar, yo.
• It's one fewer premium in the game.  There's a LOT of premium ships out there.  This reduces bloat.

 

[MrWastee]

4 hours ago, Andrewbassg said:

Oh I wasn't talking about Weegee. She feels responsibility for the players, not them. 

 

Edit:

 

 You see what I mean ?

 

Edit2 : Also

 

 

what makes no sense to me, they could've cloned it regardless?! i mean, just rename existing one to missiX while leaving her as she is, bring in eco nerfed missi "org" to sell and grant it to all missiX owners for free.... it's not like there's danger these ever gonna play her. and if so, even better for weegee....

 

this way no one would've had a reason to raise an eyebrow(* @YabbaCoe). but yeah..... let's build a backdoor in i guess....

[_HomTanks_]

LWM, i like your work, but your reasoning doesn't make sense and rather sounds like finding excuses.

 

"Cloning her and renaming her to one of her sister-ships is a no go.  Wargaming learned their lesson with Alabama-gate.  People want Missouri.  Furthermore, some of these ships would require modelling changes.  So that's out."

 

^^Alabama gate was different. I mean it has no relevance to this situation. ST was out already for testers. WG never promised Alabama will be released for community and when they released it, many people didn't know the existence of ST version which has all the stats same and only with a different camo. Then NA forum overreacted to the whole situation of how can there be another Alabama with a special camo for testers. But still WG didn't promise an Alabama to community in the first place and when they released it, it was identical to ST version. No modeling or stats changes needed. So, no LWM, this is not a comparable case.

 

"People want Missouri.  Adding a ship like "Missouri '45" or what-have you will not earn them as many sales as if they just resold Missouri herself."

 

^^Again, is she saying just because WG wants to make more money they have to screw up the original Missouri's economy with a complicated perma bonus thing? Sorry but this is 'cough' 'cough', BS. First of all, it is not the original Missouri owners' problem. Second of all, yes WG would still make lots of money as she states in her next sentence. She needs a clear set of mind to stop contradicting herself.

 

 "The ship has a reputation in this game.  As closely as we here on social media platforms are keeping an eye on this development, there are easily ten times as many players not fully plugged in.  Some will simply see "Missouri is available" and pull the trigger, not knowing that the economy has shifted.  Yet others, aware the economy has shifted, will get her simply because it's Missouri.  Surveillance Radar, yo."

 

^^See? Now she says some will blindly buy the ship anyway and some others because of the radar. So, cloning is not the problem, hello? Selling it is not a problem either. WG just wants to screw with old Missouri's economy. That's it. We don't need to create excuses for their intention.

 

"It's one fewer premium in the game.  There's a LOT of premium ships out there.  This reduces bloat."

 

^^Really? Because increasing the premium ship number from 300 to 301* is a bloat? This is an invalid argument. If we were talking about total of 30, 40 premium ships in the game, it could have made sense somehow, but come on. We have hundreds already....

 

*Hypothetical numbers although they shouldn't be far off with armory ships and the incoming ships that are in testing now.

[Andrewbassg]

59 minutes ago, WgPlsNerfColorado said:

LWM, i like your work, but

Erm.......you are making a major confusion. That's not her reasoning..... That's not her giving "justification", "approval", "rubber stamping" or whatnot. None of that. 

 

She is telling "you" why Weegee  is doing what they are doing. If you still don't get it......no worries i will explain. 

 

Edit: Just to make sure: She is telling us what what Weegee told her. Otherwise the whole reason for this thread is to have a before/after "database".  Capisci?

[_HomTanks_]

20 minutes ago, Andrewbassg said:

Erm.......you are making a major confusion. That's not her reasoning..... That's not her giving "justification", "approval", "rubber stamping" or whatnot. None of that. 

 

She is telling you why Weegee  is doing what they are doing. If you still don't get it......no worries i will explain.  

pfff. serious now? She is telling why she thinks what WG are doing by saying why she thinks so, she is making a reasoning. I didn't write anywhere she gives approval to anything wg said or wrote and i wouldn't care tbh.

 

" Only what you can read between the lines. " <--This is her reasoning, explanation of what she thinks of what WG is doing and i disagreed with the way she interpreted between the lines.

 

If these are (see below) WG's words, then you are right. If they are what LWM thinks why WG is doing what they are doing, then i am right. I hope i made it more clear for you....

 

"Cloning her and renaming her to one of her sister-ships is a no go.  Wargaming learned their lesson with Alabama-gate.  People want Missouri.  Furthermore, some of these ships would require modelling changes.  So that's out.

People want Missouri.  Adding a ship like "Missouri '45" or what-have you will not earn them as many sales as if they just resold Missouri herself.  The ship has a reputation in this game.  As closely as we here on social media platforms are keeping an eye on this development, there are easily ten times as many players not fully plugged in.  Some will simply see "Missouri is available" and pull the trigger, not knowing that the economy has shifted.  Yet others, aware the economy has shifted, will get her simply because it's Missouri.  Surveillance Radar, yo.

It's one fewer premium in the game.  There's a LOT of premium ships out there.  This reduces bloat."

 

Edit: OR maybe you didn't copy paste the whole story. Was there anything else written by WG before she wrote her opinions of "only what you can read between the lines"?

 

[Andrewbassg]

26 minutes ago, WgPlsNerfColorado said:

pfff. serious now? She is telling why she thinks what WG are doing by saying why she thinks so, she is making a reasoning. I didn't write anywhere she gives approval to anything wg said or wrote and i wouldn't care tbh.

 

Mate...... I'm not Weegee. I know communication.  You basically said that she is guilty of "something" For what you think that she is guilty of?.

26 minutes ago, WgPlsNerfColorado said:

" Only what you can read between the lines. " <--This is her reasoning, explanation of what she thinks of what WG is doing and i disagreed with the way she interpreted between the lines.

 

If these are (see below) WG's words, then you are right. If they are what LWM thinks why WG is doing what they are doing, then i am right. I hope i made it more clear for you....

 

"Cloning her and renaming her to one of her sister-ships is a no go.  Wargaming learned their lesson with Alabama-gate.  People want Missouri.  Furthermore, some of these ships would require modelling changes.  So that's out.

People want Missouri.  Adding a ship like "Missouri '45" or what-have you will not earn them as many sales as if they just resold Missouri herself.  The ship has a reputation in this game.  As closely as we here on social media platforms are keeping an eye on this development, there are easily ten times as many players not fully plugged in.  Some will simply see "Missouri is available" and pull the trigger, not knowing that the economy has shifted.  Yet others, aware the economy has shifted, will get her simply because it's Missouri.  Surveillance Radar, yo.

It's one fewer premium in the game.  There's a LOT of premium ships out there.  This reduces bloat."

 

When was Weegee completely transparent about the reasons behind their  decisions?? Give me one instance in the last two years.

What she says is the most likely reason why and how they did what they did.

But, in this thread I also quoted communication between her and "Weegee"

 

You do understand that she is not the deciding agency, right? If you don't like the decisions, you know that she have no saying in this matter. right?

Soo....what is her fault exactly? 

 

Edit: I mean other than she wanting to help. You know.... not "help' but help. Like the difference between balans and balance.

 

[_HomTanks_]

18 minutes ago, Andrewbassg said:

Mate...... I'm not Weegee. I know communication. 

+1

 

18 minutes ago, Andrewbassg said:

You basically said that she is guilty of "something" For what you think that she is guilty of?

Where did i say she is guilty of anything?

 

18 minutes ago, Andrewbassg said:

When was Weegee completely transparent about the reasons behind their  decisions?? Give me one instance in the last two years.

How is this relevant to the discussion? We were not talking about whether WG was transparent or not in the first place. And ofc, they are not.

Quote

What she says is the most likely reason why and how they did what they did.

Exactly. And what i say in return is, what she thinks as the reasons don't make any sense, she contradicts her reasons she presented in her following sentence and some are irrelevant.

Quote

But, in this thread I also quoted communication between her and "Weegee"

 

You do understand that she is not the deciding agency, right? If you don't like the decisions, you know that she have no saying in this matter. right?

Soo....what is her fault exactly? 

 

I do know she is not the deciding agency and did you read and understand all my comments? If you read between the lines, you understand what someone really means, or what is really happening in a situation, even though it is not said openly. In our case, if LWM thinks what is really happening is as she described in 3 bullets, i disagree with the way she reads the lines and say that that's not what's happening between the lines. She is misinterpreting, misreading between the lines. These can not be the causes of why WG is doing what they are doing. <--This is what i'm saying.