Important message for the community

[Arctic_enchilada]

This is very interesting, like many I do not believe one word of this, its PR Speak saying nothing and means even less. Like many I have little time or enthusiasm for WG titles any more.

 

On one point though - WG most definitely do not follow local laws, 'Sales' being one example 'mistakes' with wording of offers being another (Others which at absolutely best case are very sharp practice include; Kong, the recent summer skins, the way the christmas lootboxes have been handled TWICE and those are the ones I can recall, I'm sure others could create a list as long as this thread) Given that and what I clearly recall of the last two years this statement is genuinely rubbish. Oh and WG please do not insult our intelligence by saying you don't market this game at children.

 

What I want to know is what changed? WG have never done anything like this before despite equally egregious behaviour in the past. Something happened to WG in the last two weeks, something that is actually worrying them. I would like to think its people not spending money, but I doubt it. I wonder has the call to have the game re-rated at 18 had an impact.? Whatever it is WG is genuinely worried. How do I know? That statement in the OP, that's completely un-WG behaviour, companies never get all concilliatory unless they HAVE too.

[TheBudgieAdmiral]

Huh, this message is a large but not unwelcome surprise. Good stuff!

 

Monetization changes: This is the part that leaves me most doubtful of its effectiveness long-term. I focus here on the promise made that every ship released via an RNG-based method of distribution will also be available through other means, as it is easily one of the biggest actual commitments we've seen come out of House WG thus far and also because I'm not in the mood to read every single bit of it. It's a good attempt, but it's also easy to read between the lines: There are many loop holes. I suspect these "alternative ways" will take the shape of Puerto Rico-esque grind fests either immediately or once a tiny amount of good will has been established. I remain to be proven wrong, though, and would surely welcome it if I was!

 

Feedback: A few factual commitments here as well, which is a welcome change of pace. I appreciate that modelling ships takes a while and blueprints are present in varying qualities. Hunting down certain designs even for historical ships can be hard. I tried drawing a shipbucket version of a Momi-class DD a while back and struggled finding (freely available) photographs of a class of roughly a dozen ships which were actually built and served from 1920 to 1945. And even if one managed to source together pictures, they often are of pityful quality, and figuring out minor details, like placement of vents or ammo boxes or details hidden behind the ship's boats is burdensome. I suspect it gets exponentially harder if it's done in 3D and to a higher grade of detail. Imagine trying to piece together how the map tables were arranged inside the bridge of a WWI destroyer by trying to identify individual pixels in a grainy photograph...

 

I saw some people complain about the promised buffs/nerfs and I don't quite understand why personally (without calling anyone out of course!). For me, it's a positive that the devs are looking into it at least. Yes, they said a while back that Zao was FIIINE, no really, and that we shouldn't worry our little heads, and already went back on their word. But this time, that's actually good for me. Zao was my first T10 and so I'm quite attached to her, even if my stats are in the shitter. But what counts even more to me is that WG listened.

 

Of course, this is Wargaming, and given their track record I expect a miniscule buff to Zao at best, such as increasing her sigma value by a couple points or making her reload half a second shorter. In my personal opinion, here is how I'd balance the ships mentioned:

 

Zao: Stealth changes from 12.2km to 11km. This will restore her to the stealthiest cruiser at T10 and will make stealth-torping easier, emphasizing her remaining strength as one of the heaviest torpedo armaments of any cruiser and allow her to once more be effective as the stealthy assassin she is touted to be.

 

Petropavlovsk: Deck armour reduction or fire duration increase. Currently, I can deal more damage with my Montana to a bow-in Yamato with AP than a Petropavlovsk. Same goes for HE, farming BBs is much easier than Petro, and Petro even has arguably more effective guns and a radar to boot. These changes will make her more vulnerable if emplaced without rendering the ship obsolete like Moskva.

 

FDR: Nerfing the HE bomb pen and damage or fire chance. Currently, FDR will reliably take away a quarter or a third of a Moskva's battleship-sized HP pool in a single drop. This compares favourably to AP bomb alpha, is reliable and spawns fires to boot. Lowering the pen to below 50mm, significantly reducing the fire chance or damage will partially remedy this. FDR is just not a fun concept to fight against, but not much can be done without making the ship a terrible pick; A truly precarious balance situation!

 

Communication: Moving on, the dates given. Not sure what to think about this. On one hand, this seems like a long time for us players, but I suspect that there is more at play here, given WG is, according to former devs, rather prone to underestimating deadlines and promising too much too quickly. Whether WG will deliver on these promises remains to be seen, and that is my main gripe with this post: Do I dare trust what is said here? In the years, WG has made a ton of promises and most have been walked back or disregarded.Grand words are good, and this seems honest and heartfelt, but ultimately all we can do as a community is wait for a few years to see if they'll truly live up to the promises this time and have improved for real.

 

There are a number of other good things here that, dare I say, give me hope, such as the promise of a more transparent development (which reminds me of the indie titles I am so fond of) or the release of a roadmap. To me, this seems like an actual and (mostly) honest effort and finally treats us players and customers with the seriousness and respect that I personally appreciate. I am hesitant to open up my wallet again just yet, but my birthday is tomorrow, and, maybe, in a year from now, WG will see me reward myself with a present from their product line again.

 

This could be the start of a true and glorious redemtion arc and solidify WG as a company I will speak highly off for recognizing its mistakes and adopting a pro-consumer stance - or just more empty promises, "translation errors" and communication mishaps that leave my hopes in tatters and my wallet forever closed. Good start - now you guys just have to go out there and do it!

[CV_SUB_Report_Blacklist]

TL;DR

[piet11111]

5 minutes ago, Arctic_enchilada said:

This is very interesting, like many I do not believe one word of this, its PR Speak saying nothing and means even less. Like many I have little time or enthusiasm for WG titles any more.

 

On one point though - WG most definitely do not follow local laws, 'Sales' being one example 'mistakes' with wording of offers being another (Others which at absolutely best case are very sharp practice include; Kong, the recent summer skins, the way the christmas lootboxes have been handled TWICE and those are the ones I can recall, I'm sure others could create a list as long as this thread) Given that and what I clearly recall of the last two years this statement is genuinely rubbish. Oh and WG please do not insult our intelligence by saying you don't market this game at children.

 

What I want to know is what changed? WG have never done anything like this before despite equally egregious behaviour in the past. Something happened to WG in the last two weeks, something that is actually worrying them. I would like to think its people not spending money, but I doubt it. I wonder has the call to have the game re-rated at 18 had an impact.? Whatever it is WG is genuinely worried. How do I know? That statement in the OP, that's completely un-WG behaviour, companies never get all concilliatory unless they HAVE too.

 

Getting a bit more media attention then usual but this time its based on their predatory marketing practices hitting them right in the wallet and potentially getting government attention and a concerted effort to nuke their age rating by us i guess.

Also notice that once you remove the PR babble they hardly commit to anything measurable.

[Majkeeni]

Well, you can start fullfilling your promises by letting the community and players to decide the fate of:

 

A. submarines,

B. CVs.

 

I guess it is very simple to start things moving.

[quickr]

1 hour ago, Crysantos said:

but we do care a lot about this game.

You, as in WG, have some twisted way of showing it

 

1 hour ago, Crysantos said:

We created it, we built it

You created it, community built it. CCs, testers, reviewers, wiki team, moderators, all the volunteers, all the players that spent countless hours and €€€ on WOWS...

[UnterSeeBot]

4 hours ago, Crysantos said:

Drop rates. We plan to publish all drop rates for all Containers and Random Bundles and are already working on it. It will take some time, but our hard commitment is that it will happen over the course of next year.

https://blog.worldofwarships.com/blog/198

clumsy timing. 

 

[piet11111]

Be nice to Crysantos MrConway and Yabbacoe anyone here to talk to us is not someone that is responsible for this mess WarGambling has us wading through.

[Ocrooch]

4 hours ago, Crysantos said:

One of the main topics we want to address is how your feedback influences the game.

Right, so if you want us to believe any word from this wall of text, you need to scrap Russian CVs and Subs. Majority of community is against them. CVs - fix them first or remove them altogether. Subs - just get rid of them.

[Chaoskraehe]

Vor 1 Stunde, Crysantos sagte:

Thanks! Submarines are a complex topic and they're still in development and testing. More information submarines will follow once we've decided the next steps for them after reviewing the results of this test

How high are the chances for submarine changes as long as this test is running? Will they stay the same until the end or will there be changes? 

[quickr]

7 minutes ago, BlueMerry said:

TL;DR

 

Dear players,

 

Lately a lot of you have been upset.

 

Yours sincerely, 

World of Warships Team

[Arctic_enchilada]

9 minutes ago, piet11111 said:

 

 

Also notice that once you remove the PR babble they hardly commit to anything measurable.

Yep, Now that is WG

[Rearend]

•  
•  
• 3,534 posts
• 15,645 battles
• 

• Report post
• #44
•  

Posted 3 hours ago

 

3 hours ago, Ghesthar said:

All of this sounds really positive to me.

 

My biggest complaint with how WG handles things - whether boxes, balance, game direction, and just about anything else - has been the complete lack of transparency, especially around droprates. Lots of the community outrages, including the christmas crate 'shortlist' issue, could have been resolved by simply being open and honest about the contents and probabilities.

 

So, please follow through. When you make a new lootbox or event, just publish the stats alongside. I know I would be more comfortable spending money if I knew what I was likely to get, and I doubt I am the only one.

We'll do our best to follow through with everything listed here but we also know it will take time since it's a complex set of actions needed from very different teams and departments.

 

 

 

And you answer this with a lie.....the drop rate % is an e-mail away. If you wanted to be transparent then you should have published it because it is known, and it would have been part of the PowerPoint Presentation when the higher up's thought this is a really way to scam our customers....so PROVIDE IT 

[Pikkozoikum]

4 hours ago, ScreenHD said:

wait wasnt that something the community wanted from Wargaming? talk more?

 

If you ask me, I want 20k Dubloons

[guttersn1pe]

Please don't forget that this is company which did Pay to Rico, Satan crates, Non-existing King Kong and puts every damn premium in gambling boxes.

These are not mistakes. These are calculated though through decisions.

This decision to use such "business model" indicates only one thing - every "apology" and "promise" is nothing but a smoke screen which hides their will to scam you out of every single penny even it is on border of morale or law.

 

I understand that company isn't charity and has to make money but don't understand why it has to be in such ugly and repulsive way.

 

Edited*

[saneloc]

- Do not change the attributes of ships. Instead, make sure that ships are public and that there are a limited number of exclusive and premium ships in the game.

 

- Edit the matchmaking system. Players whose win rate value is in the same slice should be equally distributed to the teams. Players with a win rate of 60% and above should always form a team by matching with players of their own level. Others should be set up similarly.

 

- You set the prices of premium content too high. Lower the price of these in Euros so that the prices do not rise due to the exchange rate difference.

 

- There is a belief that it is predetermined who will get the super boxes. I hope there is no such thing. You can also be a little more generous with in-game rewards and boxes as WG.

 

Thanks for opening this topic.

[Misago]

And how many times has WG promised that things will totes improve now, no backsies?  How many times that there was an outrage over crummy business practices, lack of features, massive balance issues, and WG promising that they would listen to the community this time, promised changes, then things got worse? Are we in the double digits?

 

This is like a abusive relationship, where our abuser keeps saying how THIS time things will be different...

[tankzalott]

maybe 2 new maps in one year? wow that is spoiling us!  i wonder how many premium ships will be added in that time??? more than 2 no doubt! the gravy train is hard to come off when you are on it .... more loot boxes more cv's ( did the playerbase ask for more cv's?? i think not .. only a few people )   

subs again.. not asked for or needed... the option to untick them in any game mode would be great!! then you can see how unpopular they truly are!  yes thsi will mean cv players wait a long time for a game. but that is a good thing and will address the balance a bit more and people will enjoy playing with no cv's in every mode that we did not want need or ask for!!!!! 2 cv's per team in clan wars ? cvs and a subs in ranked?? that sucks the joy out of those modes!!!!

 

[Aragathor]

I will sum my opinion thusly:

 

Spoiler

Matthew 7:15-20

 

15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?

17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.

18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.

20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

 

[Zen71_sniper]

14 hours ago, Peffers said:

2 The "vocal minority"  is bigger than WOWS original implied, and is impacting the company.

I think this is the reason for this forced semi-apology.

 

The rest is a fine example of PR corporate doubletalk. 

 

While I would like to believe WG, I somehow doubt that suddenly WG decided to listen to the player base, after YEARS of business practice of "apologising" if the sh..storm is greater than expected, while KNOWINGLY making decisions based on arrogance and greed. 

 

You had all the feedback before you made your decisions and yet, every time you chose to do it - regardless of the feedback. Followed by a sort of an apology to try to calm things down until everyone forgets. Then rinse and repeat. Who can forget Santa Convoy, Commander Skill Rework, CV Rework, PayToRico, Missouri, Lootboxes, Removing Operations etc? All of these were followed by explanations such as "We wanted you to spend time with family during Xmas", "CV Rework will bring balance", "Puertorico is a Freemium ship - just a tiny little grind", "Commander skills will allow for diverse builds". Each of these statements is worthy of the Baghdad Ali. 

 

Trick me once, shame on you. Trick me twice, shame on me.

 

I can not speak for the rest of the playerbase, but for me - once trust is gone (and it is...) it will take years of ACTION, not some PR hack exercise to rebuild it.

 

 

[mtm78]

@Crysantos

 

I read @Sub_Octavian making a statement declaring WoWs was going to ask for reclassification for Pegi12 instead of Pegi7, and also some statements about the general age of players, indicating WoWs was never targeted at a preadolescent age group. 

 

As you can gather from the dedicated thread about new games which have the exact same mechanics as WoWs has, getting a Pegi18 rating, people are not entirely satisfied with this. I'm a parent, I got two two kids both of which so far have been dealing with online gaming in a responsible manner, but I am still worried about the industry as a whole and the lack of regulation. 

 

To that regard I have some questions and statements I would like to ask you, if you could answer them directly that would be great and otherwise I would love for you to relay them and get back to us. 

 

1. If the target demographic is really so old, and yes I remember the polls from CBT on all server and I remember the in game surveys and results which were posted but that was years back so I don't know anything about the actual current demographic, there are a lot of people who wonder why Pegi12 is going to be helpful to lower our fears of young children being exposed to addictive gambling elements in online games. There is a reason psychologists are stating that the purposefully repetitive and addictive elements can lead to severe development issues, the fact that current classification systems are not set up to deal with this is is mostly because of reluctance to self regulate in the industry and a lack of action of regulatory bodies who point to legislators to put forward new laws. My first question would be, is WG complete aware with this statement, and do they agree with the notion that these elements are harmful? 
2. The fact that Pegi12 was proposed was because WG would have less advertisement options and less collab options. I find this a disturbing reason because I wonder which specific advertisement opportunity or collab would WG feel they miss out on, and mostly, why would it be that these collabs or opportunities don't overlap in target demographics? If WoWs is not targeted towards children, why do we need to worry that much about advertising on platforms which apparently do have children as their target audience? 
3. Is it possible to get some official numbers about the current player demographics from WG ( according to your latest in game survey samples? ). Also, I am assuming your advertisement/marketing departments which are involved with these surveys also couple this with generic purchase behavior, if so you should be able to answer the following questions: how do collabs like HSF / ARP influence age distribution according to WG, and how does the spending habit off players attracted due to these collabs differ from other/older existing players, if at all? 
4. Personally, if WG would remove payment options by phone or sms I would already feel a bit more secure about children spending money on ingame items. I think these options combine bad with the addictive gambling elements in the game and the free access to young children. Would it be possible for WG to look into removing this payment option as a measure to reduce the risk of young children getting sucked into spending money on ingame items? 

 

[Bad_Players_Are_Toxic]

''please don't treat this as a final plan and the ultimate solution to everything''

 

I'll be waiting for the ''miscommunication'' excuse when you don't follow through with anything.

 

Also, Subs are trash and the final nail in this games coffin...

[Quazie]

While I am sure you guys mean to follow your plan, in fact you have too because the more times you say your going to do something and then don't.

The more you destroy any lingering trust in the community, we have seen platitudes and well meaning words time and time again. Suggestions fall on deaf ears, nobody expects them all to be used but you don't give feedback on them adopted or not.

 

Maybe this is the time for change, in the past when you screwed up you doubled down and try to change something else to compensate for your mistake.

Most players probably would have thought more of you if you had posted what you were trying to achieve and that it didn't quite work so you will return to the previous state and be tweaking it to try again down the road.

 

Whether run from a tab in game or in the forums why don't you have a formal suggestions database with search facilities, even players voting on the suggestions, incorporate proper feedback not just yes or no, especially the no option because people will accept no more readily if they are given a reason why it can't or will not be used. I was making a dbase and entering all the suggestions you would be surprised at how many duplicate their are in you suggestion thread. 

 

You have upset many players I lost half my clan, they didn't switch they had just had enough of the same old antics and went in search of new games even though they had invested a lot of time and money in this game. The player base won't grow all the time you are losing players because they are not happy.

 

You have some bridges to mend, I hope this is the beginning of that process, time will tell. 

[ColorsOfRainbows]

This is just sad ...

you say "We plan to publish all drop rates for all Containers and Random Bundles " and that it by some reason take you a year to just write some numbers you already know next to it ...

and then you say you "follow the law" ... news for you, you dont.

Its illegal in the EU to sell this bundles or containers without saying the EXACT chances to get something ... its a wonder beyond imagination for me you not got sued yet ...

[piet11111]

Just now, ColorsOfRainbows said:

This is just sad ...

you say "We plan to publish all drop rates for all Containers and Random Bundles " and that it by some reason take you a year to just write some numbers you already know next to it ...

and then you say you "follow the law" ... news for you, you dont.

Its illegal in the EU to sell this bundles or containers without saying the EXACT chances to get something ... its a wonder beyond imagination for me you not got sued yet ...

 

A cynic might say its because they want to do another round of satan crates.

 

Hold up i am a cynic on this matter Hmmm indeed.