Well I'll be d.....!!

[Andrewbassg]

36 minutes ago, Sub_Octavian said:

Hello,

I can clear it up for you. We do not have a single person who decides everything in the game. We have instead different roles and areas of responsibility, so there is always one person who makes the final call, but we always have a process where we sit down and discuss the decisions before they are made. There is also a role - Game Director, who is accountable for the whole game and sometimes when other folks can't agree on something it's his duty to decide what to do and carry the ultimate responsibility for it.

Regarding monetization events - they are designed by the monetization team based on our roadmap and financial goals. Far in advance (a couple of months typically) their drafts are reviewed and discussed, including by me and my guys (shonai, Vessery) and regional offices too. 

So, answering your question directly, I did not decide to put Missouri in random bundles, but as executive producer, here I carry responsibility for approving this design and not raising any significant concerns. It is one of my duties to provide the information and context for my colleagues to make calls in advance, and in this particular case I clearly failed, and it created the need to change the plans on the go. That said, when something like this happens, it's also one of my responsibility to make sure we sit down (now in emergency mode) and decide what to do and how to address the situation. 

I'm currently working with my colleagues on several things to address the current situation on many levels - from our communications and CC program to the game content and future plans. I'm not hiding - just trying to make impact where I should. We're a team and have many layers of work. The fact I'm not here but Ev1n is does not mean I care less than him about the situation. We just work on the situation from different angles. Respectfully 

I can address it. 

1. Regional teams primary responsibility is what happening on their respective regions. Activities, direct community interaction (answers, streams, etc), quality of CS, driving regional activities, collecting feedback etc. When a decision is too important to be  just local, regional teams sync between each other and devs. I.e. if for some reason there is need to offer a big bonus to players in one region (a week for free PA), we always try to match it globally to make sure there is no regional disparity. 

Regarding decisions on the game itself, they are made with inputs from everyone. Both on planning stage (for example, when we compile our ship roadmap for next years regions would bring their opinion and ship requests) and on daily basis (when we have a plan for a next update). Still, there ARE areas of responsibility. A balance Game Designer makes a call on ship balancing, and a EU Community Manager makes a call on how to handle a  EU stream. If there is some disagreement or even red light (i.e. someone believes that the job has to be done differently), there is a process where we can sit down and facilitate the conversation. 

We don't talk about our internal structure too much, because we mostly don't believe it makes any difference to the players. What we do, how we do is what matters more than "what people were involved in this or that decision directly". I know it very well from my past experience as a CM - you don't talk for yourself, you talk for the whole team and represent it. It's a part of the job.

2. The level of commitment depends on what's involved. A Community Manager can't promise you to buff a ship before talking to colleagues in balance team, for example. But this CM certainly can promise to look into it and ask the said team to do so and come back with a reply. 

One of the interesting myths about WG Management Structure is a concept of  a "Marketing Department". I heard players put a lot of blame for any controversial decision on the guys, even though in reality they literally work on pretty innocent things like game trailers, ad campaigns and some business development activities. They have nothing to do with most of the in-game decisions. 

 

 

14 minutes ago, Sub_Octavian said:

Random mechanics like lootboxes or random bundles constitute only a part of monetization of the game. Not insignificant, but also not in any way determinative. World of Warships monetization is still largely based on direct ship sales and Premium Account sales. Everything else is complementary. 

If you look at our random-based stuff objectively, you will notice that in the majority of cases it does not contain anything that can't be obtained otherwise or that is gameplay-critical (i.e. early access random bundles allow you to play a ship a couple of months in advance, and that's it). Overwhelming majority of content is not locked this way. 

That said, in now way I claim we're doing everything correct. On the contrary, the Missouri case clearly shows we should be more considerate. And, of course, we follow all industry regulations, and looking at how it goes and how the world changes, it does not make sense to rely on such mechanics too much. 

That's not true, and I'm not sure why you got such impression. We do not look at popularity only when making calls on balance, and we do not take inactive audience into account, too, it makes no sense. 

If you have a quote or source of that, please kindly provide it so I can look into it, what you say now looks like a simple misinformation. 

Reddit mods act independently and they decide what to do with the sub on their own. They decided to ban all lootbox related posts because of all the hate towards them, probably, and because of their personal position. It's their right to do so, and Wargaming has nothing to do with it. 

 

 

 

 

 

[mtm78]

I've never read a bigger pile of...

9 minutes ago, Andrewbassg said:

One of the interesting myths about WG Management Structure is a concept of  a "Marketing Department". I heard players put a lot of blame for any controversial decision on the guys, even though in reality they literally work on pretty innocent things like game trailers, ad campaigns and some business development activities. They have nothing to do with most of the in-game decisions. 

 

Yeah that's why Lesta didn't want to add submarines until they got taken over fully by WeGreedy right? 

[Figment]

9 hours ago, mtm78 said:

I've never read a bigger pile of...

[...]

Yeah that's why Lesta didn't want to add submarines until they got taken over fully by WeGreedy right? 

Seems pretty legit though. He did say:

 

Quote

Regarding monetization events - they are designed by the monetization team based on our roadmap and financial goals. Far in advance (a couple of months typically) their drafts are reviewed and discussed, including by me and my guys (shonai, Vessery) and regional offices too.

 

Which to most people sounds like sales/marketing department, but might indeed be part of a financial group under sales. If their only goal is "monetize the game" and Lesta doesn't care, or stimulates it then it could be most people, including Lesta wern't quite aware of the design or just didn't feel it was a big deal.

 

But admitting he made a mistake is at least something starting of an apology.

[Andrewbassg]

37 minutes ago, Sub_Octavian said:

We will release WV44 in 2023.

I personally apologize for taking so long, I understand we should have closed this case much earlier. We specifically did not give any date when talking about her before (as we were not sure about when and how), and it actually worked against us - unfortunately,  this project was backlogged several times. 

It's not the case anymore, we've added the ship to the roadmap officially. It actually happened a bit earlier, but in the steam of all stuff that's happening I think we did not actually mention it.

P.S. There are chances for late 2022, too, 2023 is hard deadline. Not later. 

 

[mtm78]

Just now, Figment said:

Seems pretty legit though. He did say:

 

 

 

 

Which to most people sounds like sales/marketing department, but might indeed be part of a financial group under sales. If their only goal is "monetize the game" and Lesta doesn't care, or stimulates it then it could be most people, including Lesta they wern't quite aware of the design or just didn't feel it was a big deal.

 

But admitting he made a mistake is at least something starting of an apology.

 

You're to gullible. Also, why are you thinking 'marketing department' is only to blame for gambling, the issue is that the whole game balance is done by the same marketing team. 

 

Stealt fire -> Sub_Octavian -> you're abusing a TOXIC mechanic, where you deal damage without being able to be damaged back.. on this forum non the less, and people have forgotten? Guess it helps when you're the one arguing with him about 'you can counter it with teamwork'.

 

And now submarines, guess what, SAME MECHANICS but it's fine to have to rely on team since they can sell you more pixel submarines and don't worry the pixel premium top ASW ships are not far behind I'm 100% sure. 

 

The only difference is that stealth fire isn't marketable, since WG can't sell you better teams. 

 

 

[Gvozdika]

Wow - self-awareness hasn't really caught on in Za Rodina yet has it? My points in bold....

 

 

Hello,

I can clear it up for you. We do not have a single person who decides everything in the game. We have instead different roles and areas of responsibility, so there is always one person who makes the final call, but we always have a process where we sit down and discuss the decisions before they are made. There is also a role - Game Director, who is accountable for the whole game and sometimes when other folks can't agree on something it's his duty to decide what to do and carry the ultimate responsibility for it.

 

Erm....which is it? Is it ONE person or does WG Lesta sort of operate as a single hive mind entity nowadays? Make your minds up?

 

Regarding monetization events - they are designed by the monetization team based on our roadmap and financial goals. Far in advance (a couple of months typically) their drafts are reviewed and discussed, including by me and my guys (shonai, Vessery) and regional offices too. 

 

So, answering your question directly, I did not decide to put Missouri in random bundles, but as executive producer, here I carry responsibility for approving this design and not raising any significant concerns. It is one of my duties to provide the information and context for my colleagues to make calls in advance, and in this particular case I clearly failed, and it created the need to change the plans on the go. That said, when something like this happens, it's also one of my responsibility to make sure we sit down (now in emergency mode) and decide what to do and how to address the situation.

 

Translation - I didn't do it - I just signed off on it and didn't see anything wrong with it.

 

I'm currently working with my colleagues on several things to address the current situation on many levels - from our communications and CC program to the game content and future plans. I'm not hiding - just trying to make impact where I should. We're a team and have many layers of work. The fact I'm not here but Ev1n is does not mean I care less than him about the situation. We just work on the situation from different angles. Respectfully 

RIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHT.....

 

I can address it. 

1. Regional teams primary responsibility is what happening on their respective regions. Activities, direct community interaction (answers, streams, etc), quality of CS, driving regional activities, collecting feedback etc. When a decision is too important to be  just local, regional teams sync between each other and devs. I.e. if for some reason there is need to offer a big bonus to players in one region (a week for free PA), we always try to match it globally to make sure there is no regional disparity. 

Unless you aren't on the RU server. 

 

Regarding decisions on the game itself, they are made with inputs from everyone. Both on planning stage (for example, when we compile our ship roadmap for next years regions would bring their opinion and ship requests) and on daily basis (when we have a plan for a next update). Still, there ARE areas of responsibility. A balance Game Designer makes a call on ship balancing, Gvozdika Edit 'Can I ask - is his first name Stevie and his second name Wonder?' and a EU Community Manager makes a call on how to handle a  EU stream. If there is some disagreement or even red light (i.e. someone believes that the job has to be done differently), there is a process where we can sit down and facilitate the conversation. 

 

We don't talk about our internal structure too much, because we mostly don't believe it makes any difference to the players. Gvozdika Edit - 'yes it bloody well does.....' What we do, how we do is what matters more than "what people were involved in this or that decision directly". I know it very well from my past experience as a CM - you don't talk for yourself, you talk for the whole team and represent it. It's a part of the job.

 

2. The level of commitment depends on what's involved. A Community Manager can't promise you to buff a ship before talking to colleagues in balance team, for example. But this CM certainly can promise to look into it and ask the said team to do so and come back with a reply. 

 

One of the interesting myths about WG Management Structure is a concept of  a "Marketing Department". I heard players put a lot of blame for any controversial decision on the guys, even though in reality they literally work on pretty innocent things like game trailers, ad campaigns and some business development activities. They have nothing to do with most of the in-game decisions. 

 

So the innocent stuff is done by the Marketing Department and the not-so-innocent stuff is done by......do tell.....

 

Random mechanics like lootboxes or random bundles constitute only a part of monetization of the game. Not insignificant, but also not in any way determinative. World of Warships monetization is still largely based on direct ship sales and Premium Account sales. Everything else is complementary. Much like sickness and nausea - both very complementary to each other then.

 

If you look at our random-based stuff objectively, you will notice that in the majority of cases it does not contain anything that can't be obtained otherwise or that is gameplay-critical (i.e. early access random bundles allow you to play a ship a couple of months in advance, and that's it). Overwhelming majority of content is not locked this way. 

 

That said, in now way I claim we're doing everything correct. On the contrary, the Missouri case clearly shows we should be more considerate. And, of course, we follow all industry regulations, and looking at how it goes and how the world changes, it does not make sense to rely on such mechanics too much. Read 'Considerate' as 'Try better not to get caught next time'. 

 

That's not true, and I'm not sure why you got such impression. We do not look at popularity only when making calls on balance, and we do not take inactive audience into account, too, it makes no sense. 

If you have a quote or source of that, please kindly provide it so I can look into it, what you say now looks like a simple misinformation. QUOTE OF THE MONTH - Official WG Q and A Discord is now 'Misinformation'. 

 

Reddit mods act independently and they decide what to do with the sub on their own. They decided to ban all lootbox related posts because of all the hate towards them, probably, and because of their personal position. It's their right to do so, and Wargaming has nothing to do with it. Ever wondered WHY people hate them?

[Andrewbassg]

3 minutes ago, Figment said:

Seems pretty legit though. He did say:

 

 

 

 

Which to most people sounds like sales/marketing department, but might indeed be part of a financial group under sales. If their only goal is "monetize the game" and Lesta doesn't care, or stimulates it then it could be most people, including Lesta they wern't quite aware of the design or just didn't feel it was a big deal.

 

But admitting he made a mistake is at least something starting of an apology.

 I just made a comment about dat.

5 minutes ago, Bandi73 said:

Well, they are doing what they being told to do., But just replace "Marketing 'Department"  with "Sales Decisions" and you will have a much clearer and accurate picture about what  he meant

 

 

Lets see if he responds...

[mtm78]

Even worse is the fact that he's able to hide from moderator actions by claiming reddit isn't owned by them.... so no, nothing to blame us for, nothing to see move on....

 

How about you do your Q&A's on your own platforms since that is what they are for. This whole hiding in reddit is pathetic. 

 

[Andrewbassg]

17 minutes ago, Sub_Octavian said:

Our business model, and in general, our game has near zero relation to children.

For example, on NA, since 2018 the share of players under 16 was never higher than 4%. Paying audience % is obviously much lower. It's as low that I actually had hard time finding any data - our Research team simply does not include this group into paying audience reports, as the numbers there are on the level of statistical fluctuations.

I understand that there are many things we should do better or more considerate with the game and community. And the initial idea of locking Missouri behind random bundles was one of such things. There is no arguing we should implement changes to earn back some good faith. This does not, however, mean, we're also guilty of all mortal sins and profiting by selling lootboxes to children. With all due respect, if you are concerned about children and lootboxes in videogames, World of Warships - a game with one of the highest audience age in the market - is definitely not the game where it's a problem. Especially if you look at the industry and other titles objectively.

With all that in mind, it does not mean we're going to keep things as they are because "working as intended". I've seen a lot of comments about our age ratings, and mostly, about PEGI-7. I'd like to share some info about this, too.

We always act according to the law and industry regulations. Ratings, including PEGI, are given after the respective organization reviews the game. Recently we've added a new disclaimer to our PEGI rating ("In-game purchases", including Random items"). We're in the process of proactively adding such disclaimer to ESRB rating (it cannot be done just by us, we need a review and it takes some time, so we started working on it). Also as I said, minors are not, and never were, our target audience, so to make it even clearer in the near future we ourselves will apply for re-evaluation to PEGI and I think we will become PEGI-12. We don't market our game to children, and we don't need PEGI-7 in any way. It just was the rating we received back in the day. Is that all? Probably not. We will see if there are other ways we can address minors in our game, even though there are practically none.

 

Erm.....these are not statements. He "responds" to various questions ....

 

https://forum.worldofwarships.com/topic/243545-community-time-with-ev1n-and-mademoisail-825/?page=17

 

this is the thread....

 

 

[mtm78]

Wow he actually CHOOSE to do Q&A on the LEAST ACTIVE SERVER they have. Wow, surprised I am not. Doesn't want EU feedback right ....

[Andrewbassg]

42 minutes ago, mtm78 said:

I've never read a bigger pile of...

 

Yeah that's why Lesta didn't want to add submarines until they got taken over fully by WeGreedy right? 

Seems legit to me. 

 

 

 

 

Of course i mean the....  picture

[mtm78]

It's just hiding responsibility.

 

Nooooo, 'marketing' has nothing to do with balance.

 

Right...... so we don't have screenshots of them complaining of running out of CONTENT and thus looking at submarines? Tell me again how marketing does not [edited]over balance, since marketing get's higher priority. 

[Andrewbassg]

it seems that he is running away now, as more serious stuff being asked....

[Figment]

1 hour ago, Gvozdika said:

Erm....which is it? Is it ONE person or does WG Lesta sort of operate as a single hive mind entity nowadays? Make your minds up?

Different people could be responsible for making final calls.

 

At my job I make a lot of design decisions that are rubber stamped unless someone else feels a strong need to have a say over it (my boss, or the CEO).

 

In various stages of the design someone else might have the authority to make calls autonomously. The business case is decided on by my boss, CEO and product manager, who then assign the job of designing it to me. During the R&D phase I as product developer make calls mostly independently, but get corrected now and then by my manager or in response to engineering, production or assembly. Those people can have a sort of “can’t be done” veto powers and may make suggestions for alternatives, but I, the product manager and boss may call how to change it. Then it is passed on to engineering and a product engineer gets to make calls for what to change and how, though if it impacts aesthetics the product manager and other managers may have a final say in it. Most the time changes are rubber stamped however. Too much micro management otherwise.

 

Same for marketing, our marketing department does no market research, just takes care of website, folders, convention stand design and promotional stuff. Oh and stupid xmas packs which they (full women staff in mostly male company) have a full autonomy over… Which possibly explains why we got a giant reindeer dual-foot slipper two years ago, along with all the kitchen equipment…

 

So if they have significant autonomy in that monetization group and little feeling with or for the community’s needs (probably are quite detached), it is not impossible that they decided what to do. Who was aware when of critique on such a call by players and whether they could intervene rather than rubberstamp is a second thing and I think Sub_Octavian is trying to say he  and/or others should have intervened there based on community/CC feedback. But failed to do so.

 

He should realize he/WG owes a sincere apology for the handling of the fall-out too and that perhaps they should look into whether this monetization group is such a good idea and he may not have the authority to intervene, just advise even, but a mea culpa is to me at least a start.

[Figment]

14 minutes ago, mtm78 said:

It's just hiding responsibility.

 

Nooooo, 'marketing' has nothing to do with balance.

 

Right...... so we don't have screenshots of them complaining of running out of CONTENT and thus looking at submarines? Tell me again how marketing does not [edited]over balance, since marketing get's higher priority. 

Was that marketing or people conflated with marketing? Nobody is saying it wasn’t pushed, but was it the marketing people or others? A commercial / sales department sounds like a more logical culprit there. Marketing is often purely a promotional department (renders, folders, website).

 

Our sales department is also very good at selling stuff we don’t have (yet) or variations on what we developed, rather than what we developed.

[Andrewbassg]

I asked ....

 

31 minutes ago, Bandi73 said:

Hi.

Well, they are doing what they being told to do., But just replace "Marketing 'Department"  with "Sales Decisions" and you will have a much clearer and accurate picture about what  he meant

 I think that's what you meant.

We know for fact that popularity plays a big part in WG decisions. Regarding..... balance decisions.

Otherwise not so much because nobody asked for subs, but many people ask for the return of old operations/scenarios, new ones,  and the majority of players ask for new maps, new battle modes, new events ( I didn't mean like lootbox selling events) 

For example why don't we have  a 'Jutland weekend" a Bb only battle mode or a "Tin Can weekend' a  Dd only battle mode n a regular basis. Maps exists, ship exists no fuss no muss only  a slight adjustment of the Mm is needed. Players happy., So  why not.

You do know that happy players will be inclined to spend more on the game, right?  I'm asking this because, to be frank none of last two years or so decisions make any sense, whatsoever. from that pov. I mean ...fun. Its not that much of a "hidden concept" I hope.

.

And he answered....

 

5 minutes ago, Sub_Octavian said:

In every job, there is "I need to do X" factor, right? I think it's perfectly relatable.

What I mean is there is no department which controls everything that happens in the game for a sole purpose of doing something, even if it's something as important (we need to pay our bills) as earning money. While (a rough example) 10 people are directly working on fulfilling our financial goals by planning sales, 490 people are directly working on everything else like new gameplay experience, bug fixing, visuals, sound, tech, and other ways to improve the game in different ways, and most of it is not connected to sales. 

Thank you, good catch. 

It does, of course. We look at popularity often. I.e. when we balance commander skills, popularity is a huge factor to see what skills should be changed and how. It does not mean we use it as a silver bullet to solve every question. 

Wait, no, let me stop you right here. A LOT of people asked for subs. I mean when I joined the team like 7 years ago or something my first drill was how to answer the question about the subs. Of course it does not mean it's the only thing we need to do. And we learned a lot from CV rework: subs process is much slower, more incremental and careful. We did a lot of tests and changes and still working on it. 

But your other points are perfectly valid. Let me briefly comment on them:

• Soon (planned in 0.10.8) there will be a new Convoy game mode, inspired by historical events, and it's not the only game mode we're working on right now.
• There will be at least one new map next year, and maybe one more. While the setting for the first one is decided on and it's important for its gameplay (wink wink), we will most likely involve the community into choosing the setting for the second one. More news will follow later.
• We do plan to return the old ops. We've been working on our AI (working and reworking), should be over soon, and hopefully old ops will return somewhere in 2022. 

We do know that. I'm sorry that our decisions have put you and some other players including WOWS veterans off. We will try to change that, more news, commitments and changes will follow.

We're still not decided if we should share the whole current course of action, including further plans that are more subject to change and delays, or should announce things as they come. In any case, please expect to hear from us more.

 

 

[mtm78]

13 minutes ago, Figment said:

Was that marketing or people conflated with marketing? Nobody is saying it wasn’t pushed, but was it the marketing people or others? A commercial / sales department sounds like a more logical culprit there. Marketing is often purely a promotional department (renders, folders, website).

 

Our sales department is also very good at selling stuff we don’t have (yet) or variations on what we developed, rather than what we developed.

 

It doesn't matter at all, the important aspect is only that marketing takes precedence over the rest.  We had devs look at submarines, in conjunction with players, and they decided they were not going to implement them because they wouldn't work in the game. Now that WG is afraid they might run out of new content, suddenly they started looking into submarines again.... after WG took over Lesta.

 

13 minutes ago, Andrewbassg said:

Wait, no, let me stop you right here. A LOT of people asked for subs.

 

Strange, didn't see that in any public poll, guess it's the same as the 'overwhelmingly positive support' they get right? Wat does the forum poll say about ranked sub, 90% or 80% wants them gone? 

 

But WeGreedy claims overwhelming support. 

 

edit: btw I'm quoting sub ofc, you just can't double quote anymore 

 

 

 

[mtm78]

14 minutes ago, Andrewbassg said:

more news, commitments and changes

 No @Sub_Octavian we don't want NEW commitments we want you to keep your old one's .......

 

 

[Karasu_Browarszky]

WG is using the 'Presidium' model of decision making...

[Andrewbassg]

 

42 minutes ago, mtm78 said:

Wow he actually CHOOSE to do Q&A on the LEAST ACTIVE SERVER they have. Wow, surprised I am not. Doesn't want EU feedback right ....

You can ask questions I will relay them. But please... keep in mind that i'm at my final... "NDA" over there  So....

[ImperialAdmiral]

7 minutes ago, Karasu_Hidesuke said:

WG is using the 'Presidium' model of decision making...

The official position of the state is that the global PR catastrophy is impossible in Wargaming.

[mtm78]

26 minutes ago, Andrewbassg said:

You can ask questions I will relay them. But please... keep in mind that i'm at my final... "NDA" over there  So....

 

I don't think you should ask him the questions I would like to ask, as they pertain to prior conversations I've had with @Sub_Octavian and I would like to include quotations from those in order to point out my 'grievances'. 

 

Also, judging from the answers given I don't think I would put value into anything given as 'answer' anyway, all I hear is more PR and nothing actually concerning them lying through their teeth about certain additions they want to make to this game. Instead we get this 'overwhelming support' nonsense which you can't counter by external polls since they historically dismiss anything not from their PRIVATE internal polls. 

 

edit: btw if I change my mind don't worry I'm well capable of asking things in a polite manner, it's when the answer coming back is nothing but a pile of crap that there is a risk I might say something 'inappropriate'. 

 

 

[Andrewbassg]

20 minutes ago, mtm78 said:

 

I don't think you should ask him the questions I would like to ask, as they pertain to prior conversations I've had with @Sub_Octavian and I would like to include quotations from those in order to point out my 'grievances'. 

 

Also, judging from the answers given I don't think I would put value into anything given as 'answer' anyway, all I hear is more PR and nothing actually concerning them lying through their teeth about certain additions they want to make to this game. Instead we get this 'overwhelming support' nonsense which you can't counter by external polls since they historically dismiss anything not from their PRIVATE internal polls. 

 

edit: btw if I change my mind don't worry I'm well capable of asking things in a polite manner, it's when the answer coming back is nothing but a pile of crap that there is a risk I might say something 'inappropriate'. 

 

 

Tbh.....in a way I'm afraid that my questions will help them more than I would like.....but.......oh my, this is sad. So sad....

[King_Of_The_Potatoes]

Would be nice if @Sub_Octavian would talk to us as well but hey I guess it is just the same old same old the EU side of the game is seen ans the cash cow and nothing more.

[Prophecy82]

Boring. 

 

Dont get me wrong, I dont like Lootboxes and that stuff.... 

But on the other hand I think the game has bigger problems than lootboxes... but thats me, not paying WG a cent since Moskva Gate.