Important message for the community

[WWDragon]

6 minutes ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

 How long do you think this apology and these promises will be good for?

None?

 

I mean, if they were actually serious they would make it so people could get Missouri for 750,000 FXP after the end of the campaign, same as the original price for a rather outdated premium that would still require going over hoops to get it. The entire event was created for a sole purpose and Missouri is the bait.

 

The fact they stuck to their plan of monetization shows that money comes before community good will and this was during a public storm that I dont think they ever faced before and since that means they will rather burn the community that take a potential loss all they do is going to apologize because that doesnt cost then a thing and they been doing that since 2019 dockyard, they simply dont care.

 

The whole thing about Operations? I am not buying it either ... in a sense its logical that developers dont like to create content to be orphaned, its wasteful but then again, none of the dockyard ships returned ... they could easily put then up for Coal, at least some of then yet almost 2 years later, nothing.

 

As you said they could made changes and what changes been promised? Nerfing a CV (that isnt even that good), promises of nerfing a tech tree ship (that may or may not happen) and buffing another tech tree ship (that also may or may not happen), this isnt listening ... this is just going over common complains that doesnt affect then directly, pretty sure nobody will get a refund over FDR either so all I am seeing so far is *I* being burned over attempt of appeasement to the community with a empty gesture that cost then nothing.

[Sunleader]

3 minutes ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

I received a private apology from the Wargaming employee who belittled me the week of August 13th, but then they had already apologised the night of the incident, so extra apologies don't mean anything.  I got the impression they were being thrown under the bus and I hope they weren't dealt with too harshly given that the issue is symptomatic of the toxic culture within Wargaming itself. Sub_Octavian extended an apology in private as well, though his was an empty one as he did not (and does not) understand where he and his company went wrong. Mademoisail, one of the WGNA Community Managers, has been in regular contact with me and she's been nothing but kind.  Shonai has also been patient and kind and I reached out to him to publicly apologizing for being a snarky little whiner to Wargaming's first non-apology.

 

This said, the amount of contact I have had with Wargaming is the exception rather than the rule.

 

Few of the ex-CCs have been approached by Wargaming in any capacity, let alone been issued an apology in private from what I've been told (I may be mistaken, we have our own Discord channel but it's not like we're updating each other minute by minute, act by act).  What's more, there's been no public moves by Wargaming to correct matters.  Frankly, we're not expecting Wargaming to talk to us anymore or do anything positive to correct matters.  The bar to correct this issue in its infancy was so low, Wargaming could have tripped over it.  It's been three weeks.  If they were going to make any positive changes, they would have by now.  Their apathy in correcting course says everything.  For those of us who have been around as long as many of us have, this message by Wargaming is more of the same.

 

The last apology and promise to do better that Wargaming gave me lasted a mere six weeks and had holes in it from day one.  How long do you think this apology and these promises will be good for?

 

Oh. Its rare to see You in the EU Forums.

 

I dont think this Apology will be Difficult to keep up for them.

Because Frankly they did not really Promise anything.

 

Publishing Drop Rates may very well become Mandatory in a few Years anyways. As it seems the Governments have noticed some thing sthere

Alternatives to Gambling will likely be Unattractive by Timegating and other stuff they already Admitted.

 

Basicly everything they Promise is either Moved so far in the Future that we may never actually see it as by then some of the Laws Regulating Online Gambling and Trading etc are in effect already changing the field anyways.

Or is so Vague that they could just as well not change anything because there is nothing the community can nail them on except them saying it would be better.

 

 

 

So effectively. For WG to hold true to it wont be a Problem. And even if they Break it. In 2 Years when the Promise becomes due there will barely anyone be left to care from those that the Promise was made to.

[LittleWhiteMouse]

1 minute ago, Sunleader said:

 

Oh. Its rare to see You in the EU Forums.

They changed the number of games needed to post here a couple of years back.  I have enough to post on my private EU-account, but not this one.  I'd rather keep my private account private (it's so nice not being constantly focus-fired) so I still need to do a bunch more games to have full access to the forums.

[Pikkozoikum]

17 minutes ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

I still need to do a bunch more games to have full access to the forums. 

So I have to prepare my Hashidate

[Andrewbassg]

52 minutes ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

I received a private apology from the Wargaming employee who belittled me the week of August 13th, but then they had already apologised the night of the incident, so extra apologies don't mean anything.  I got the impression they were being thrown under the bus and I hope they weren't dealt with too harshly given that the issue is symptomatic of the toxic culture within Wargaming itself. Sub_Octavian extended an apology in private as well, though his was an empty one as he did not (and does not) understand where he and his company went wrong. Mademoisail, one of the WGNA Community Managers, has been in regular contact with me and she's been nothing but kind.  Shonai has also been patient and kind and I reached out to him to publicly apologizing for being a snarky little whiner to Wargaming's first non-apology.

 

This said, the amount of contact I have had with Wargaming is the exception rather than the rule.

 

Few of the ex-CCs have been approached by Wargaming in any capacity, let alone been issued an apology in private from what I've been told (I may be mistaken, we have our own Discord channel but it's not like we're updating each other minute by minute, act by act).  What's more, there's been no public moves by Wargaming to correct matters.  Frankly, we're not expecting Wargaming to talk to us anymore or do anything positive to correct matters.  The bar to correct this issue in its infancy was so low, Wargaming could have tripped over it.  It's been three weeks.  If they were going to make any positive changes, they would have by now.  Their apathy in correcting course says everything.  For those of us who have been around as long as many of us have, this message by Wargaming is more of the same.

 

The last apology and promise to do better that Wargaming gave me lasted a mere six weeks and had holes in it from day one.  How long do you think this apology and these promises will be good for?

Hello miss Mouse:). I'm glad to see you here. Bandi73 on NA :)

[LittleWhiteMouse]

1 hour ago, WWDragon said:

None?

 

I mean, if they were actually serious they would make it so people could get Missouri for 750,000 FXP after the end of the campaign, same as the original price for a rather outdated premium that would still require going over hoops to get it. The entire event was created for a sole purpose and Missouri is the bait.

 

The fact they stuck to their plan of monetization shows that money comes before community good will and this was during a public storm that I dont think they ever faced before and since that means they will rather burn the community that take a potential loss all they do is going to apologize because that doesnt cost then a thing and they been doing that since 2019 dockyard, they simply dont care.

 

The whole thing about Operations? I am not buying it either ... in a sense its logical that developers dont like to create content to be orphaned, its wasteful but then again, none of the dockyard ships returned ... they could easily put then up for Coal, at least some of then yet almost 2 years later, nothing.

 

As you said they could made changes and what changes been promised? Nerfing a CV (that isnt even that good), promises of nerfing a tech tree ship (that may or may not happen) and buffing another tech tree ship (that also may or may not happen), this isnt listening ... this is just going over common complains that doesnt affect then directly, pretty sure nobody will get a refund over FDR either so all I am seeing so far is *I* being burned over attempt of appeasement to the community with a empty gesture that cost then nothing.

Bingo.

 

When I look at an apology like this, I look at what it costs them; what are they risking?  Let's go through the points, shall we?

• Loot Box Gambling & Drop Rates:  Wargaming promises to offer an alternative method to acquiring new ships that would otherwise only appear in loot boxes.  Also, they will disclose loot box odds no later than by the end of 2022 (probably sooner).
  
  Kay, let's start with how scummy loot boxes are in the first place.  Gambling mechanics are addictive.  Ironically, Wargaming seems unaware that they themselves have become addicted to them and will go to great lengths to justify their continued inclusion.  Bragging about how they, as a company, are following the laws here is stupid.  It's the bare minimum of what's acceptable.  It's like bragging that you don't murder orphans.  You don't deserve congratulations for that.  A lot of us long-time players liked World of Warships because they used to be better than other companies when it came to their monetization.  Now they don't have the courage to lead the way and they've been eyeballing the orphans lately with a crazy look in their eyes.
  
  But let's look at this further.  Specifically this promise only deals with new ships.  By extension, this means that when Agincourt goes back on sale in the new year (according to @Ev1n on the WGNA forums), this promise doesn't preclude them from selling it only in loot boxes for a second time.  It's no longer new, after all.  But let's give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they're not going to be that evil.  Again, nothing stops them from putting Puerto Rico or Benham levels of time gating and grind ahead of you being able to buy the ship you want instead of being forced to gamble through their loot box system.  Time gating and putting obstacles in front of direct purchases in lieu of loot-box gambling is so bloody anti-consumer, it's disgusting.
  
  Finally, let's touch base on disclosing odds.  I don't buy this for a second.  Regionally, the necessary laws could be crowd sourced and looked up over the course of a week; MAX two weeks.  Then filling out the forms to conform for said region takes a couple of days.  Give it another week for legal to rubber stamp it and another week to insert it comfortably into the publication schedule.  All of this could be done before the next big Loot Box Gamblathon, which will be Hallowe'en.  But Wargaming doesn't want to have to do that.  The Hallowe'en loot boxes will already be programmed (probably not with odds that are easy to disclose as there will be short-lists aplenty).  Similarly, the next major release will be rolling out by November at the latest and you can bet there's early access loot-box gambling built into that promotion too.  And let's not forget the Black Friday loot-box gambling which also comes out at the tail end of November.  And finally there's the Christmas and New Year's loot box gambles to look forward to (what will this year's Makarov be, I wonder?  Oklahoma perhaps?).  That's four loot-box events in the next four months.  If they're not trying to protect their projected earnings here, they're at least dodging the work load needed to properly communicate the odds on the short term.
  
  I mean, I could get this done, compliant to Canadian law in week (and probably less!).  A few phone calls, some dollaridoos to pay for a lawyer's time and bam, quick forum post and we're done.  They have 500 employees worldwide, as they so boasted.  You're telling me they can't get it done in a month?  It's a non-priority.  And before they say "we have other commitments" that's entirely my point -- Wargaming isn't making this apology the priority it should be.  And because they're not, it says volumes about how little any of it matters.
   
• Missouri's Credit Earning:  Wargaming promises to address her credit earning discrepancy for owners that her before patch 10.7.
  
  Tweaking a value form 20% to 30% is dirt simple.  Refunding lost credits?  That's a bit more involved.  I will give Wargaming credit (get it?) for this.  This will be mildly annoying if it's not fully automated.
  
  Of course, I'm still kinda boggled that they didn't just plug the old credit formula and the new credit formula into a program, run a few million iterations of previous battle results and look at the possible discrepancies.  That's what I would have done.  Sometimes I wonder what they do with all of the data and spreadsheets they revere so much.  This kinda points towards neglect; like of trying to pull a fast one on the community and being caught in the lie.  Lord knows they couldn't give the Community Contributors a straight answer about this before the patch went live.  I did try and squeeze one out of them.  Now look at where we are.
  
  This is probably the most annoying thing WG has to deal with out of everything in this apology-letter.  That's a pretty low bar.
   
• Summer Sale:  When Wargaming breaks consumer protection laws, they promise to provide refunds when asked.
  
  Yeah, this just circles back to "not murdering orphans".  Please stop asking for congratulations for not murdering orphans.  This is really the bare minimum of what we expect of you and you've already got blood on your hands.  You didn't mistranslate, you metaphorically stabbed a small child to death. It was in violation of consumer protection laws in different parts of the world.  It might have been in Canada too, but I'm not a lawyer.
   
• PEGI Rating:  Wargaming promises to voluntarily increase their PEGI rating from 7 to 12.
  
  This is a win.  Of course, it's also a distraction.  Ask yourself why players were insisting on this.  It wasn't "for the children"; it was because loot box gambling is abhorrent for all ages (particularly Veterans) and this is one of the few methods the community had to get Wargaming to address it on the short term.  A higher PEGI rating makes it more difficult for Wargaming to advertise their game, which in term hurts their bottom line.  Am I glad they upped their rating?  Sure.  Does it address the core issue?  Hells to the no.  Similarly, it doesn't significantly hurt Wargaming so it's hard to see much value here.
   
• Providing Reactions to Feedback: Wargaming promises to be more prompt in updating previously released ships or explaining why they're not being adjusted.
  
  We've heard this before.  Nothing is actually being promised here as it can't be measured.  I'm going to skip the aircraft carrier and new game mode sections as they similarly do not promise anything.  There's nothing risked here by Wargaming.
   
• Maps, Huron, West Virginia '44: Wargaming promises to add these sometime within 2022 and/or 2023."
  
  Cool.  We can measure these promises and judge if they are broken or not.
  
  I'll speak to Huron specifically because I can.  This is a low-effort C&P job of HMCS Haida, for those who are not aware.  Haida's 3D geometry and camouflage can be literally cloned, that's how low the bar is here.  I admit this was a bit of a trap I laid for Wargaming just to see how far their commitment to improving matters between us was.  I gave them the chose between Huron and Athabaskan II and of course, they went for the low hanging fruit as I thought they would.  Had they actually bothered to talk with us about the whys of each ship, we would have told them why Athabaskan II was the preferred choice but they were in such a bloody hurry to settle things, they didn't care how we felt or what we wanted.  Their priority was to make us pick a submarine or an aircraft carrier, after all.  We'll see if they try and impress us by going with Huron's post-war refit and swap her 120mm/45 guns for 102/45s (HMS Black Swan's guns) instead.  That would at least show some effort on their part.  So they picked the lowest-risk option here.  It's not valuable at all.  Chobittsu and I have washed our hands of it in light of Wargaming's mishandling of West Virginia '44, their continued toxic behaviour and their refusal to address our Yukon concerns.
  
  Given what I saw of Yukon's development, Huron could be in game as early as February 2022 if they made her an immediate priority, but I suspect that like Yukon, they will release her for Canada Day 2022 (on or around July 1st).
  
  On the whole, these are just business-as-usual for Wargaming.  Zero risk.  Changing course on the development order of premium ships in the pipeline isn't that big of a deal.  If it were a tech-tree line?  That's moving mountains.  But premium ship releases get reshuffled all of the time (Oh, the things I know and have seen, Wargaming).  I find it funny that they're pointing to a new map as a big deal.  I mean, I know their map-makers have been busy greasing the wheels to shoe-horn submarines into the game.  They've literally remade most (if not all) of the maps in the game to accommodate them.  If any of you are under any illusions that submarines aren't going to be forced on us regardless of feedback, abandon that illusion now.  But with that work done, they can go back to what they normally do; adding a map or three a year.
   
• Operations:  Some of the old operations will be re-added to the game in 2022.
  
  I'm not optimistic here.  They don't tell us how many operations, just 'some'.  Is one "some"?  I suspect that Wargaming is looking for a way to discreetly sabotage their return to get out of having to restore more operations.  They have always been disdainful not only of operations but those who enjoy them.  What's more, they've been actively lying to the community and the Community Contributors (maybe both) about restoring operations for at least a year.  This is so low-risk for Wargaming and it could easily be used to further sabotage future operation development.
   
• Communications:  ???
  
  They don't actually promise anything deliverable here.  Like, they could present anything -- anything at all -- and claim that they're living up to their word.  This isn't measurable.  It certainly doesn't have them risk anything.  It's not worth the digital ink used to write it.

 

What's funny to me about all of this is what low-risk stuff they're not willing to do.  THAT to me speaks volumes.  Famously, adding Sackville's camo was very low risk and they said no to that repeatedly even though that (mostly) solves the Yukon-question.  Wargaming doesn't appear sorry to me.

 

Yukon's "HMCS Sackville" camouflage, by Chobittsu.

[Atorpad]

Meanwhile we have 3000 new Missouri player !!!! Imagine how many loot boxes have been sold ......

[LittleWhiteMouse]

Just now, Atorpad said:

Meanwhile we have 3000 new Missouri player !!!! Imagine how many loot boxes have been sold ......

If the odds are fair (and they're probably not), then 63,000 loot boxes at 1,500 doubloons a pop.  In Canadian dollaridoos, that's $476,280.  Had people been able to buy her directly, they would have only made $294,840 -- a difference of $181,440 in Canuckistani money.

[Ghesthar]

8 minutes ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

If the odds are fair (and they're probably not)

WG does lots of shitty things, but in the case of Missouri and the Dutch cruisers, there isn't any shred of evidence that the odds are anything but what is stated. Someone did a forum poll here (self selection bias, etc) that showed first-box Missouris at twice the expected rate over a sample of ~250. While we can't 'know', these ones actually seem to do what they say on the box. How about we stick to some shred of evidence instead of calling EVERYTHING a scam.

 

As much as I think lots of the criticisms levelled at WG are entirely fair, and that you in particular have been badly treated by them, I can't help but feel like CCs going around making extra accusations, pouring more gas on the fire, and being generally negative at every opportunity does nothing constructive. Honestly, leave or don't. At this point, you're just living with someone who you've stopped loving, telling everyone how bad they are loudly and at every opportunity. They aren't kicking you out, you aren't leaving, you're just making a scene.

[Sunleader]

@LittleWhiteMouse

Frankly. I dont think they will give Credits Individually.

They said they will give an appropriate amount to all affected Players.

 

So the more Likely Scenario is that they will give a Preset amount to each Player.

That amount may be coming from an Average of the Missouri Games played by all Players combined before the Event. Or just could be a flat Sum of a few Million Credits.

 

Even if they add an Individual Factor I dont think they will Invest any Big Work there.

At most they will give a Flat Bonus based on the Number of Games each Player with Missouri Played.

 

 

What worries me however is that they "will announce details later"

this somehow suggest to me. That it could end up instead of a direct payment it could end up being a Time Limited Mission which gives a Bigger Credit Boost instead.

That would fit Wargamings current behavior quite well unfortunately....

[IJN_Yamete_Kudasai]

There's one thing about Missouri that actually bothers me:

 

WG could just clone the ship as Missouri VD or '45 - and leave the original Missouri (with original earnings multiplier) as a bait for christmas lootboxes.

I'm quite certain that many players - including myself - would heavily bash them for that.

 

The whole credit earning mess might be an unfortunate mix of good intention (which sounds rather silly) and WG style execution.

 

 

Oh, and welcome on EU forum, LWM. Both You and Your work is much appreciated.

 

I want to give WG a chance to fulfill their promises (at least they're better worded now), but until You and majority of ex-CCs are not properly apologised to and compensated - they will not receive a penny from me.

o7

[LittleWhiteMouse]

9 minutes ago, Ghesthar said:

 

As much as I think lots of the criticisms levelled at WG are entirely fair, and that you in particular have been badly treated by them, I can't help but feel like CCs going around making extra accusations, pouring more gas on the fire, and being generally negative at every opportunity does nothing constructive. Honestly, leave or don't. At this point, you're just living with someone who you've stopped loving, telling everyone how bad they are loudly and at every opportunity. They aren't kicking you out, you aren't leaving, you're just making a scene.

I appreciate that you don't like the discord this is causing.  There's nothing pleasant about it.  However, what Wargaming did (and is still doing) isn't something that should be swept under the rug.  They have hurt people.  They are continuing to hurt people.  Making other players aware of this is important, unpleasant though it is.  If it prompts someone to caution who might have otherwise stumbled into a bad situation, then it's worthwhile.

 

I ask for your patience.  Please be patient with us and don't blame the victims for speaking out.

[Ghesthar]

2 minutes ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

I appreciate that you don't like the discord this is causing.  There's nothing pleasant about it.  However, what Wargaming did (and is still doing) isn't something that should be swept under the rug.  They have hurt people.  They are continuing to hurt people.  Making other players aware of this is important, unpleasant though it is.  If it prompts someone to caution who might have otherwise stumbled into a bad situation, then it's worthwhile.

 

I ask for your patience.  Please be patient with us and don't blame the victims for speaking out.

I would agree and understand completely if it were just you. However, it isn't. Other ccs, to whom nothing has been done (are not victims) use the drama to drive their own incomes, blow everything out of proportion at every opportunity, and every single forum, discord channel, etc. ends up filled with bile and self-promotion. 

 

You are not all victims. You have all made it abundantly clear that nothing wg could possibly do will be good enough. I have sympathy for you and those you work with, but that is dwindling incredibly rapidly, mostly due to the actions of others who would associate themselves with you for their own gain. You bringing up not entirely reasonable complaints, but baseless 'scam' accusation only adds to that for me.

[LittleWhiteMouse]

2 minutes ago, Ghesthar said:

I would agree and understand completely if it were just you. However, it isn't. Other ccs, to whom nothing has been done (are not victims) use the drama to drive their own incomes, blow everything out of proportion at every opportunity, and every single forum, discord channel, etc. ends up filled with bile and self-promotion. 

 

You are not all victims. You have all made it abundantly clear that nothing wg could possibly do will be good enough. I have sympathy for you and those you work with, but that is dwindling incredibly rapidly, mostly due to the actions of others who would associate themselves with you for their own gain. You bringing up not entirely reasonable complaints, but baseless 'scam' accusation only adds to that for me.

There's always going to be opportunists and self-promoters who are good at taking advantage of a calamity.  When no drama is present, the really good ones will invent some.  I have no influence on said people, however, and attempting to engage them to make them stop will only exacerbate the issue. 

 

As for fixing matters, there's a lot Wargaming could do.  Some people are already lost -- Wargaming can do nothing to win them back.  That relationship is poisoned and irreparable.  Some of us are not.  I'm not hopeful that Wargaming will reconcile.  Frankly, given the amount of time they've faffed about it's increasingly foolish to hope they will.  However, I promised Mademoisail to be patient, so patient I am being.  Until then, I will answer questions when prompted and correct matters when I see my position misrepresented.

[Anarchy___]

@LittleWhiteMouse

I'm surprised you are not against that 30% mission for the Mo. Holding on to that failure is a sign that nothing within WG changed and I have the feeling that the mission might at some point go away because of "technical difficulties".

 

Cloning the Ship would have fixed all the complaints and they could have avoided all that work needed to "calculate" the correct percentage - if that happened at all (much doubt here)

 

 

[LittleWhiteMouse]

1 minute ago, Anarchy___ said:

@LittleWhiteMouse

I'm surprised you are not against that 30% mission for the Mo. Holding on to that failure is a sign that nothing within WG changed and I have the feeling that the mission might at some point go away because of "technical difficulties".

 

Cloning the Ship would have fixed all the complaints and they could have avoided all that work needed to "calculate" the correct percentage - if that happened at all (much doubt here)

Based on the data I collected, the 30% mission will mean that the 10.7 Missouri will earn more stock and will usually earn more for those that go all out with all signals, camos and flags than she did back in 10.6.  That addresses existing users.
 

Am I happy that they nerfed Mo?  Of course not.  That was a stupid decision and Wargaming was told as much when it was first announced.  They had plenty of other options, better options than the course they took.  Those suggestions were thrown at Wargaming and all rebuffed.  Wargaming wanted their sweet-sweet loot-box gambling money and was willing to stack deceit upon deceit upon deceit in order to make it happen.

[Ghesthar]

1 minute ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

There's always going to be opportunists and self-promoters who are good at taking advantage of a calamity.  When no drama is present, the really good ones will invent some.  I have no influence on said people, however, and attempting to engage them to make them stop will only exacerbate the issue. 

 

As for fixing matters, there's a lot Wargaming could do.  Some people are already lost -- Wargaming can do nothing to win them back.  That relationship is poisoned and irreparable.  Some of us are not.  I'm not hopeful that Wargaming will reconcile.  Frankly, given the amount of time they've faffed about it's increasingly foolish to hope they will.  However, I promised Mademoisail to be patient, so patient I am being.  Until then, I will answer questions when prompted and correct matters when I see my position misrepresented.

But you do have influence: everything they do now, and this whole calamity, is purportedly in your name, even if some of it was a long time coming. 

 

But, you know what? Here you are, in the middle of it all, claiming even more deceits and scams. Seriously, you can dislike lootbox mechanics all you like, but this one wasn't actually dishonest or deceitful - these are your embellishments, and nothing but fuel for your fire. 

[Sunleader]

26 minutes ago, Ghesthar said:

WG does lots of shitty things, but in the case of Missouri and the Dutch cruisers, there isn't any shred of evidence that the odds are anything but what is stated. Someone did a forum poll here (self selection bias, etc) that showed first-box Missouris at twice the expected rate over a sample of ~250. While we can't 'know', these ones actually seem to do what they say on the box. How about we stick to some shred of evidence instead of calling EVERYTHING a scam.

 

As much as I think lots of the criticisms levelled at WG are entirely fair, and that you in particular have been badly treated by them, I can't help but feel like CCs going around making extra accusations, pouring more gas on the fire, and being generally negative at every opportunity does nothing constructive. Honestly, leave or don't. At this point, you're just living with someone who you've stopped loving, telling everyone how bad they are loudly and at every opportunity. They aren't kicking you out, you aren't leaving, you're just making a scene.

 

I made a quick analysis of the Event here.

 

 

So frankly. There is more than just a few Problems with this Event.

The Odds of the Lootboxes being a rather small part of it really.

 

And in total it remains a Casino Style Tactic that Aims to promote Gambling habits.

Which means the mere Fact that Wargaming refuses to call it Gambling is actually already making it a Scam in a sense.

 

 

That Issue aside.

They dont need to Lie or Scam with the Lootboxes.

 

Their Statement was that the Chances are not Weighted.

What they did not say is if that is the case on a per type basis or on an individual box basis.

 

Because there is 5 Types of non Winner Boxes and 1 Winner Box.

But there is 40 non Winner Boxes and 1 Winner Box.

Which means if each Package Type has the same Chance to Appear the Missouri has a 1 out of 6 Chances. While for each Individual Box the Missouri drops to a 1 out of 41 Chance.

 

I think we all Agree that its the 1 to 41 Chance really.

 

 

 

 

As for your Accusation against LittleWhiteMouse and the other CCs that Left.

Sorry. But on that Front I have to Harshly Shoot you down.

WG right now is behaving really really bad. And they are right now Showing very little in terms of Sincere intention to Change their Ways.

Effectively hiding behind the Fact that what they are doing is in a Grey Area of the Law and thus Technically not Illegal.

But that doesnt mean it should not be called out.

And right now it seems that Wargaming is absolutely Intent on not Listening to a Word the Community Says unless its Said in a massive Outrage.

Which of course also means that if we want Wargaming to even consider Changing. We need to make sure that we Shout Loudly enough for them to hear it.

 

And let me give you a hint there Mate.

LittleWhiteMouse has in the past again and again been on the receiving end of Wargamings behavior.

Yet she Grumbled and kept Working away.

I was told she Dislikes the Anime from which her Character Originates. But in terms of her behavior She actually matched that Character quite well in the Past. ^^

 

So putting it Bluntly. If I trust anyone in this Community to not just be making a Scene. Then its Her.

 

Greetz

[LittleWhiteMouse]

7 minutes ago, Ghesthar said:

 

But, you know what? Here you are, in the middle of it all, claiming even more deceits and scams. Seriously, you can dislike lootbox mechanics all you like, but this one wasn't actually dishonest or deceitful - these are your embellishments, and nothing but fuel for your fire. 

• Deceit #1:  Wargaming told us Missouri was removed because of her in-battle performance.  The truth was it was because of her credit earning.
• Deceit #2:  Wargaming told us that for her return, Missouri would be sold directly for doubloons.   The truth was that it was loot box gambling only.
• Deceit #3:  Wargaming told us that for existing users, her 10.6 economy would be preserved with the 10.7 mission.  The truth was that it was not.
• Deceit #4:  Wargaming told us that it would be "too complicated" to add her to Armory for direct purchase.  They add ships to the Armory all of the time; that's what it was specifically designed to do was facilitate and accelerate the adding and removal of ships -- they simply didn't want to undermine their loot box sales.

I'm not embellishing.  I'm also not interested in entertaining someone who wants to be confrontational.

[LeopardXI]

I have been watching from the sidelines as well ever since I quit Warships a few years ago, I also pointed out the biggest problems Wargaming currently have and the disinterest of them in actually fixing this in posts I made earlier this week.

 

From the answers I have been given from my comments,, it is unlikely that Wargaming is going to commit.

The treatment of Wargaming towards others, in particular LittleWhiteMouse lately, is in my opinion the worst offense they have done. This illustrated that they have done NOTHING to fix things. The apology from a few days ago is too little and FAR too late for me.

Wargaming's business as usual.

[II_Daemon_II]

25 minutes ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

There's always going to be opportunists and self-promoters who are good at taking advantage of a calamity.  When no drama is present, the really good ones will invent some.  I have no influence on said people, however, and attempting to engage them to make them stop will only exacerbate the issue. 

 

As for fixing matters, there's a lot Wargaming could do.  Some people are already lost -- Wargaming can do nothing to win them back.  That relationship is poisoned and irreparable.  Some of us are not.  I'm not hopeful that Wargaming will reconcile.  Frankly, given the amount of time they've faffed about it's increasingly foolish to hope they will.  However, I promised Mademoisail to be patient, so patient I am being.  Until then, I will answer questions when prompted and correct matters when I see my position misrepresented.

As a relatively new player of warships there does seem to be a whole lot they've promised and not done or at bare minimum not been honest/open on how things are/work. something does need doing and it's a shame it's took this much of a statement from a lot of  now ex-CC's (such as yourself) to even get the response they've brought forward and it be what seems like hardly any better a response than in the past. One can hope i guess but only time will tell, until then, i hope people dont take things too far and use what's gone on with yourself with WG or other CC's experiences to fuel something silly. 

 

Welcome to the EU side of things and thank you for being far more honest than it seems WG are being. 

[anonym_cwVecOS6ecVy]

22 minutes ago, Ghesthar said:

Here you are, in the middle of it all, claiming even more deceits and scams. Seriously, you can dislike lootbox mechanics all you like, but this one wasn't actually dishonest or deceitful - these are your embellishments, and nothing but fuel for your fire.

Everything has been explained here and also in several videos in extensive detail. You should do some actual research. You only prove yourself to be uninformed about the topic, nothing else. At least you do not even try to hide it.

[Qreczek]

54 minutes ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

They have hurt people

...
I
...
Go outside sometimes

[Wannna]

8 hours ago, Crysantos said:

Yes, there are many players of World of Warships around the globe. Actually millions of players who all have different opinions and expectations of the game. We try to cater to as many players as possible, this includes also all the people who're not on the forums, our streams or other Community platforms. We pay close attention to what is happening in our game and subs is a good example of hpw much feedback has been incorporated over the many iterations of tests we've conducted over the past months, being very careful with the introduction. Statements like "nobody asked for subs" are simply not true, it's a popular demand but we understand that it's a polarizing topic, not everybody is going to be a fan of them. We're working hard to make sure that they'd be a good addition to the game.

Good addition to your $$$ and crap for the game.

For the past 3 years every decision done by WG was for the money, not for players, it's exausting to see you try to justify that with "we try to cater to as many players" if they really want subs, create a PVE mode for them.

You can find ressources in your over 500 employes and kill 2 bird with one stone. please the subs guys and PvE players but you wont because you don't try to please players, you want money.

You are bringing a new unbalanced class to an unbalanced state of the game and you know really well what you are doing. stop lying.

and you bring them directly to ranked, so "carefull" of you. it really show how much you care about the state of the game. 

We've seen you do those things in the past, we have rework over rework of things you pushed when the community was trying to tell you not to.

[Ghesthar]

7 minutes ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

• Deceit #1:  Wargaming told us Missouri was removed because of her in-battle performance.  The truth was it was because of her credit earning.
• Deceit #2:  Wargaming told us that for her return, Missouri would be sold directly for doubloons.   The truth was that it was loot box gambling only.
• Deceit #3:  Wargaming told us that for existing users, her 10.6 economy would be preserved with the 10.7 mission.  The truth was that it was not.
• Deceit #4:  Wargaming told us that it would be "too complicated" to add her to Armory for direct purchase.  They add ships to the Armory all of the time; that's what it was specifically designed to do was facilitate and accelerate the adding and removal of ships -- they simply didn't want to undermine their loot box sales.

I'm not embellishing.  I'm also not interested in entertaining someone who wants to be confrontational.

1 is embellishing - results are performance.

 

2 may be, but when - I didn't follow this perfectly, but a lot of criticisms around premiums seem to end up boiling down to plans changing. If this was recent, then you are right, and I can only apologise. If this is a statement from some aged stream, I'm not so sure. 

 

3 - your own analysis showed them being even except in extreme cases. It has been increased to be more. I guess the claim is that it was intentionally worse, but then why only in extreme cases? Kind of seems like a Hanlon's case. 

 

4 - I thought their justification was based on the mission chain not being directly addable, not the ship? 

 

I'm not trying to be confrontational. I think they do enough badly that nobody needs to massage the definition of 'scam' or dredge up multiple year old comments to win points. I think when people do so, it gives justification for them ignoring real issues and feedback, because it makes community members seem unreasonable.