Important Message for the World of Warships Community

[Strothy]

We are listening to feedback HUR DUIRRR... still pushing subs and superships into ranked, GJ again!

[Redcap375]

5 hours ago, Kubelo said:

So, you're talking a lot about rock-paper-scissors, please tell me what counters CVs then?

 

@YabbaCoe?

 

You fancy answering that person's question? 

 

Because the game is so screwed up with classes within classes within classes that people havnt got a clue what counters what nowadays. And by the sounds of it, neither do WG. 

 

Then you throw subs in. 

 

So what counters CVs again? I seem to have forgot over the years, must be getting old. Oh well, I'll carry on killing BBs with light crusiers 

[Bad_Mojo_incoming]

7 hours ago, Hanse77SWE said:

Why push the subs when so many clearly don't want them?

Cz contrary to what WG PR is saying....they do NOT listen to what the players are telling them. They listen to what the WG economic bureau is saying whether or not player base and player purchases have gone up or down.

 

Dear WG, top tier cruisers (that I own) Zao, Des Moines, Salem, Wooster and Petro have an ASW airstrike range of 6, that is SIX kilometers, others like the Hindi and the Venezia have depth charges....that fall into the water behind the ship....Meanwhile, Balao has 14 km range torps, Salmon has 11 km range torps, U190 has 12.5 km range torpedos and U2501 has 14 km range torpedos....

 

HOW IN ALMIGHTY GOD'S name are we supposed to defend ourselves in tier 10 cruisers with 6km range airstrikes against subs with  nearly DOUBLE the torp and sonar range?

And that's not even mentioning the slow AF airstrikes that give PLENTY of time for subs to get out of harms way.

 

I'm not sure it is possible to explain this  elephant in the room in a simpler form.

 

 

[416taylor]

5 hours ago, 416taylor said:

Look this will happen to your game          

Whiskey on the rocks., moahahaha

[PaP_Mentoles]

14 hours ago, YabbaCoe said:

I don't agree with you here.

We addressed the majority of the stuff mentioned in the first message: https://worldofwarships.eu/en/news/general-news/wows-team-shout-out-to-game-community/ as on some parts we are still working (CC program, new maps, operations etc., simply stuff announced for 2022).

Oh give us a break... 

The majority of the issues and the more important issues swept under the carpet. Your arrogant stance is still here. You keep ignoring feedback. You think implementing the drop chances is a huge accomplishment? Of course you think that cause you learned to "operate" in shadows. It shouldn't take you that long to "reveal" the drop chances cause the numbers where already known (implemented in the game/server code) so an immediate release shouldn't be an issue. I guess the chances values were outrageous and you needed to "cook" them.

Another issue that you didn't touch... Us, the players, turned to your beta testers in the main live server. That's ridiculous. Where did you find that plan? We payed you (once upon a time when it was worth to support the game) to get premium time and with this stupid idea this premium time is wasted. I don't wanna be your tester, I just wanna play the game. Are you gonna pay us for being your testers?

CVs? Another matter that burns. You know there is a problem but you do absolutely shite about it. Instead you are giving a huge bonus to them when you changed the AA mechanism to stop shooting at the attacking planes. Really? There is something attacking you and you just ignore it to shot the bypassing bird a little further so you have something to cook after the battle end. In what sick mind is this a reality? In what world the planes have over 60% accuracy on their drops? Have you ever checked the plane drops accuracy during WW2? And don't give me the "is not history based" card. Old and not catchy.

MM? You also know that there are issues here. Maybe 3 years ago the algorithm worked, but now is obselete. You need to do something about it, yesterday.

 

Wanna continue???

[tsounts]

You know this MM sucks, 4 dds and 2 subs per side to say the least.... Yet, we don't see anyone addressing the issue.

Submarines' introduction has ruined brawling, even more following the introduction of HE spamming cruisers and battleships, making matches snipe fests because noone wants to die fast.

You remember once upon a time when battleships used to fire AP mostly? Well, following conqueror's introduction there are quite many using HE too.

Russian ships seem to be the best, very brawly, one Petro or Kremlin stays bow on, there goes half the match with half the team spamming his bow.  Insane aa on Petro while Des Moines struggles.  What sort of balance are you talking about?
 

 

[MoveZig]

I won't even complain about subs per se, but give Leone a reasonable airstrike please. No reason it shouldn't be able to fight subs, it's not like the ship is more than mediocre to begin with. Or bring it down to t5, which is where it feels like it belongs.

[admiraldelorin]

What is WG doing to prevent a couple of thousand, loud mouthed players that relentlessy take over the narrative, from chasing away the silent majority.. ?

Where will the CV players go..?  Where will all the tacticians go after you turn every battle into a lottery because there is no feasible way to recon the opposition?   2 CV are too many? When i play the DD and both sides have 3 CV's how is that ging to influence the outcome for me..how do i make my sides 3 cv's better then the opppositins 3 cv's? ..  since when is World of Warhships not a zero sum game?  

What is it with game ballance where you try to force a square peg in a round hole.?   There is no law in nature where you can have unequal forces apply the same force..
If BB were not what they are the Nazi's and Japan would rule the world today.. they lost.. BB's should be the least efficient ships too expensive and too vulnerable.. you could also rename the game (back) to "Battleship" ?

I'll just watch the numbers..    

PS: did you alo notice that NOBODY reads the EULA .. where it clearly says that under 18's must be supervised by adults..   maybe applly that to the forum and social media too?

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

1 hour ago, admiraldelorin said:

What is WG doing to prevent a couple of thousand, loud mouthed players that relentlessy take over the narrative, from chasing away the silent majority.. ?

Not to worry. The silent majority doesn't read forums or Reddit ^^

[YabbaCoe]

18 hours ago, VenividiviciNL said:

@YabbaCoe

 

With the upcoming "snowflakes" event involving Tier X (the so-called "certificates") Clans will be missing additional oil in comparison with last year. Last year the clans obtained 10 oil PER container, but now the players have to choose whether they want the cheapest crate or the 2 more expensive versions in the ratio 1-3-5, which lead to the current situation of only 10 oil per container, despite the type of crate elected.

 

It would be fair if WeeGee decides to give the clans also oil (multiplied by the exchange ratio for each crate) in order to keep up with previous year!

 

That way clans will NOT loose on their maximum obtainable oil reserves.

 

Maybe something to consider.......... 

Well, you are correct there, that is will significantly lower the amount of oil. Still we needed to make these changes, to give everybody the option to choose which containers they would like to have. Still you can have one Santa container for 1 certificate. So if your only consideration is the oil, then you should aim for this conversion.

 

18 hours ago, Pukovnik7 said:

What about submarines?

And mind you, even this would not address fundamental issues with the class, but at least it would make submarines into somewhat-bearable trip-mines.

What about them? In the previous Important message for the community we didn't make any promises regarding submarines. Maybe we shared our interest to have them properly balanced before they will reach the game as tech tree ships. 

 

18 hours ago, Camperdown said:

Two cheers.

Some good steps on monetisation and communication.

Still some beating around the bush and ignoring the real issues.

 

Some of the business decisions that WG makes clash fundamentally with what the player base wants. Gambling with loot boxes, the game dynamics around the CV rework, subs and some of their gimmicks. The gimmickifation of the game in general. WG is still poor at avoiding deeply impopular directions for the game and communications around such impopular decisions. 

 

My sincere advice to WG is to focus hard on these areas and find a way to either avoid decisions that go against the grain or find a more convincingly honest way to communicate with the player base about them.

 

For example: why are subs being forced into the game when even WG itself knew they would be impossible to fit in? WG has never provided a sincere explanation. I expect that WG thought they were needed as a new revenue stream. Instead we get obfuscations about exiting new gameplay to that noone believes.

 

@YabbaCoe that is what is needed to really establish trust.

Addition of Submarines to the game is a long term project and it is one of the most important changes in the game. In my opinion it is long known, that they will be added to the game. Which is also a reason, why we are making sure to balance them as well as we can, also concerning your addition to the balance decisions (as explained in HotFix article). I know, that this class is unpopular among plenty players (as well as CVs for example), but all of us have our favourites and those we hate to play against. For example I am BB main and I am fine to play against CVs, but I absolutely hate HE spammers like Smolensk etc. Therefore I pay attention to minimap to guess where approximately those ships are, not to face their HE rain. And there can be plenty similar exaples like this. 

But I am sure, that you know the game well, so you already know that. 

 

18 hours ago, Kubelo said:

So, you're talking a lot about rock-paper-scissors, please tell me what counters CVs then?

MM is based on the principle of rock-paper-scissors, while it is basically rock-paper-scissors-lizard-spock (if you know the reference). This principle also improves gameplay variability—each ship type will be in demand in battle because each can be effective against ships of another type, and, at the same time, each has its own counter-class.

12 hours ago, Redcap375 said:

 

@YabbaCoe?

 

You fancy answering that person's question? 

 

Because the game is so screwed up with classes within classes within classes that people havnt got a clue what counters what nowadays. And by the sounds of it, neither do WG. 

 

Then you throw subs in. 

 

So what counters CVs again? I seem to have forgot over the years, must be getting old. Oh well, I'll carry on killing BBs with light crusiers 

Every ship (apart from subs and special cases like Agincourt etc.) can counter CVs. Also every single ship have basically the option to destroy enemy CV with various means of armament. This doesn't mean, that every single ship is very effective against that. Also CV can be strong against some ships, but can suffer trying to damage certain ships. 

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

1 hour ago, YabbaCoe said:

For example I am BB main and I am fine to play against CVs, but I absolutely hate HE spammers like Smolensk etc. Therefore I pay attention to minimap to guess where approximately those ships are, not to face their HE rain. And there can be plenty similar exaples like this. 

But I am sure, that you know the game well, so you already know that. 

And apparantly you don't know your game because good luck avoiding carriers once they decided to focus you for whatever reason. 

1 hour ago, YabbaCoe said:

Every ship (apart from subs and special cases like Agincourt etc.) can counter CVs. Also every single ship have basically the option to destroy enemy CV with various means of armament. This doesn't mean, that every single ship is very effective against that. Also CV can be strong against some ships, but can suffer trying to damage certain ships. 

A paragraph of nonsense. Every ship can kill every other ship within certain circumstances is what you are saying here, right? A new defenition of counters. BB's are the counters of destroyers. Cruisers are the counters to subs. Lol? Noice. 

 

[Pukovnik7]

3 hours ago, YabbaCoe said:

What about them? In the previous Important message for the community we didn't make any promises regarding submarines. Maybe we shared our interest to have them properly balanced before they will reach the game as tech tree ships. 

 

I was referring to this:

Important Message for the World of Warships Community | World of Warships

 

"After the test of submarines in Ranked Battles, we made some major changes, many of them based on your feedback—the biggest one was the addition of anti-submarine weaponry to almost all ships in the game. As our next step, we added submarines as rentals to Random Battles to be able to assess which additional changes we have to make in the future. In our announcement we tried to tell you as thoroughly and as openly as possible about the changes and the reasons behind them. After publishing that message, we decided to prepare another post with additional statistics to answer your frequently asked questions.

 

While we continue testing submarines in Random Battles, we do our best to respond to your feedback as quickly as possible. We would like to thank everyone who leaves their feedback. Based on your feedback we‘ve been working on changes for the next update. Many of you highlighted that the Sonar Ping mechanic provides too many advantages, so we decided to divide the benefits into two types of torpedoes. Players will have to choose in the future between homing torpedoes or unguided torpedoes with higher damage output. We also doubled the distance at which the guidance for homing torpedoes is disabled for both cruisers and destroyers."

 

Submarines are not ready for Randoms, much less for being Tech Tree ships. It is questionable whether they ever will be, due to how different their mechanics are. I will quote myself again:

23 hours ago, Pukovnik7 said:

• • Submarines: Good changes, but none address the fundamental issues with the class. First of which is, admittedly, is the class' very existence. The only way to make it somewhat balanced would be to make submarines into worse, submersible destroyers: destroyer speed on surface, 10 knot speed underwater, unguided torpedoes with no pings, with low health; all of this compensated by lower detectability than destroyers, and ability to submerge as a de-facto replacement for destroyer smoke screen.

Best option would be to divide Randoms into two game modes, one for surface ships only, and another that includes carriers and submarines as well.

 

*edit*

[SilentEnimLegesInterArma]

1 minute ago, Pukovnik7 said:

Best option would be to divide Randoms into two game modes, one for surface ships only, and another that includes carriers and submarines as well.

they can use my template gladly

 

 

[YabbaCoe]

2 hours ago, Europizza said:

And apparantly you don't know you game because good luck avoiding carriers once they decided to focus you for whatever reason. 

A paragraph of nonsense. Every ship can kill every other ship within certain circumstances is what you are saying here, right? A new defenition of counters. BB's are the counters of destroyers. Cruisers are the counters to subs. Lol? Noice. 

 

Have you read the second sentence of what I wrote there? Technically every single ship can counter any other ship, but here is the question of effectiveness. For example german BBs with hydro can effectively coutner DD close quarters, or let's say they have a good option to do that. Other BBs can do that, but definitely, they don't have that many options to counter them. Cruisers can counter Sub in certain circumstances. Also it can happen, that Cruisers would have issues countering DDs, while theoretically they should be more effective there. 

 

2 hours ago, Pukovnik7 said:

1 hour ago, Pukovnik7 said:

11 minutes ago, Pukovnik7 said:

I was referring to this:

Important Message for the World of Warships Community | World of Warships

 

"After the test of submarines in Ranked Battles, we made some major changes, many of them based on your feedback—the biggest one was the addition of anti-submarine weaponry to almost all ships in the game. As our next step, we added submarines as rentals to Random Battles to be able to assess which additional changes we have to make in the future. In our announcement we tried to tell you as thoroughly and as openly as possible about the changes and the reasons behind them. After publishing that message, we decided to prepare another post with additional statistics to answer your frequently asked questions.

 

While we continue testing submarines in Random Battles, we do our best to respond to your feedback as quickly as possible. We would like to thank everyone who leaves their feedback. Based on your feedback we‘ve been working on changes for the next update. Many of you highlighted that the Sonar Ping mechanic provides too many advantages, so we decided to divide the benefits into two types of torpedoes. Players will have to choose in the future between homing torpedoes or unguided torpedoes with higher damage output. We also doubled the distance at which the guidance for homing torpedoes is disabled for both cruisers and destroyers."

 

Submarines are not ready for Randoms, much less for being Tech Tree ships. It is questionable whether they ever will be, due to how different their mechanics are. I will quote myself again:

Best option would be to divide Randoms into two game modes, one for surface ships only, and another that includes carriers and submarines as well.

 

*edit*

I see, so you reacted for the current message.

Yes, Submarines are still in testing, which is clearly showing, they are not yet ready to be fully released in tech tree. Plenty changes have been made also in this update. I agree, that it is questionable if they will be ready now or not, but current changes should make them different, hopefully more balanced. Still plenty things can change, but atleast we addressed several issues, which were often reported by players. 

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

1 hour ago, YabbaCoe said:

Have you read the second sentence of what I wrote there? Technically every single ship can counter any other ship, but here is the question of effectiveness. For example german BBs with hydro can effectively coutner DD close quarters, or let's say they have a good option to do that. Other BBs can do that, but definitely, they don't have that many options to counter them. Cruisers can counter Sub in certain circumstances. Also it can happen, that Cruisers would have issues countering DDs, while theoretically they should be more effective there. 

Yes I did read, and it is what I adressed specifically, technically and unequivocally as a redefenition. Effectiveness is a main condition. If a class isn't effective against another class it can not be considered a counter to that class. The fact that in some circumstances BB's can play a succesfull counter to a BB doesn't make the BB class a counter, it acknowledges that in some circumstances a counter play can be made by the BB. As the game evolves these lines can get blurry somewhat in specific individual ships within a class, but the redesigned carrier concept failed to incorporate the very essence of pvp RPS class design.

 

Saying everything can counter carriers if just given the right circumstances in a discussion about rock paper siccors game design mentioned in the article is quite odd. It's like saying water is wet.

[Lootboxer]

21 hours ago, SPIDERBAIT said:

I think this new change will make a big difference in how they feel to play against and make them more interesting for the players that are using them giving them more options and things to think about

There is hardly any change. At least to those playing against them. Still broken homing torps, and still stupid ping mechanics countered with already overworked DCP.

[SilentEnimLegesInterArma]

51 minutes ago, YabbaCoe said:

 

 

I see, so you reacted for the current message.

Yes, Submarines are still in testing, which is clearly showing, they are not yet ready to be fully released in tech tree. Plenty changes have been made also in this update. I agree, that it is questionable if they will be ready now or not, but current changes should make them different, hopefully more balanced. Still plenty things can change, but atleast we addressed several issues, which were often reported by players. 

 why then announce already a Russian premium sub?

[AraAra_My_Ass_Is_Blasted]

Il y a 56 minutes, YabbaCoe a dit :

Have you read the second sentence of what I wrote there? Technically every single ship can counter any other ship, but here is the question of effectiveness. For example german BBs with hydro can effectively coutner DD close quarters, or let's say they have a good option to do that. Other BBs can do that, but definitely, they don't have that many options to counter them. Cruisers can counter Sub in certain circumstances. Also it can happen, that Cruisers would have issues countering DDs, while theoretically they should be more effective there.  

 

I am reassured to see that all my ships struggling to shoot down a single plane (and i mean, ALL my ships, from Yamato to Duguay Trouin) are in fact counters. I now understand why WG thinks CVs are "balanced": they loose 1 plane every 5 minutes, that should be balanced then!

 

Meanwhile i get destroyed with 10K damages (or more) with every drops, perma spotted, perma fires etc... just because one dude on the opposite team can just dumpster me with no risks at all.

 

Balanced!

[Camperdown]

1 hour ago, YabbaCoe said:

 

Every ship (apart from subs and special cases like Agincourt etc.) can counter CVs. Also every single ship have basically the option to destroy enemy CV with various means of armament. This doesn't mean, that every single ship is very effective against that. Also CV can be strong against some ships, but can suffer trying to damage certain ships. 

Please don't write this kind of BS. It is an instant devstrike to your credibility.

 

CVs are the protected class with ten sets of trainer wheels. They only get sunk at the end of a game or when a flank collapses and the CV simply sit in spawn.

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

23 hours ago, Shaka_D said:

+1 WG. There's always room to improve, but then there's room to improve in our community too. We all have to be a little more patient me thinks. I, for one, am appreciating the more open approach toward communicating with your gamers. I can also see that there is great effort being made toward taking feedback on board. Many might not be happy subs are here to stay, but I think youre showing brilliant effort to meet people in the middle. Numerous positives in other areas too. The future looks bright.

 

And.....because I'm feeling more positive about the game lately, I was actually talking quite positively about the game to a friend a few days back and invited him to join. See? I need no fancy gifts to be a good ambassador for you. Now...... finally open up a few positions in the UK. Do you have an office on the Belfast? If not, why the hell not?

Look what the cat dragged in :D Might be interesting no?

[Hanse77SWE]

2 hours ago, YabbaCoe said:

Addition of Submarines to the game is a long term project and it is one of the most important changes in the game. In my opinion it is long known, that they will be added to the game.

And from the very start I, and many with me, said "Please don't do this!". But WG just put it's fingers in the ears going "La la la I can't hear you!" and now we have a situation were 90% of the playerbase says "We don't like this!"

 

Learn to read the room.

 

I'm off for a couple of hours but if you want I can give som detailed feedback when I get back home.

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

17 minutes ago, Hanse77SWE said:

And from the very start I, and many with me, said "Please don't do this!". But WG just put it's fingers in the ears going "La la la I can't hear you!" and now we have a situation were 90% of the playerbase says "We don't like this!"

 

Learn to read the room.

 

I'm off for a couple of hours but if you want I can give som detailed feedback when I get back home.

Didn't you get the subtle 'arent ready to be released as a silver techtree' as opposed to 'aren't ready to be released in the random'? Because that's the new thing now ^^

Which is why the broken versions are still available as rentals in random, because apparantly subs were totally ready to be released in random weeks ago to never be removed ever again.

[SilentEnimLegesInterArma]

to be honest, i dont mind CV and Subs in game - IF they are balanced. Naval Warfare we are engaging in had both.

 

But for the love of Thor - balance is the Key. FDR does not care about AA. period. no need to argue here. He can fly at *insert aa ship here* and not loose a plane.... chill gameplay for the cv.

same for subs. spotting is one of their mechanic but then dmg or diving needs balancing. if they are a glaskanon - make them glaskanon by less diving orless concealment.

 

but WG heard this from the start - where the scepticism comes from that ppl do not belive you anymore

[YabbaCoe]

45 minutes ago, Hanse77SWE said:

And from the very start I, and many with me, said "Please don't do this!". But WG just put it's fingers in the ears going "La la la I can't hear you!" and now we have a situation were 90% of the playerbase says "We don't like this!"

 

Learn to read the room.

 

I'm off for a couple of hours but if you want I can give som detailed feedback when I get back home.

I understand those results and it is clearly showing how many forum users don't like that at all. That is also why we are trying to apply changes based on notes gathered from you. 

Honestly we have those "don't do this" in every single update, with every single addition. Also 500 people who voted in this poll is not 90% of the playerbase.

With your feedback you can influence some changes in game, especially balance changes, addition of some cosmetics, or particular ships and details. But as every single company, we have our own development roadmap si some huge stuff in game are set in stone, that they will eventually happen. This is the case with submarines. After all those years, time and money invested, we can't just cancel the entire project, because part of the playerbase is negative about that. We are definitely trying to meet somewhere in the middle with your requirements and also our plans, while it is not always easy. 

[arquata2019_]

3 ore fa, YabbaCoe ha scritto:

Every ship (apart from subs and special cases like Agincourt etc.) can counter CVs. Also every single ship have basically the option to destroy enemy CV with various means of armament. This doesn't mean, that every single ship is very effective against that. Also CV can be strong against some ships, but can suffer trying to damage certain ships. 

I'll be constructive and honest here: No. Cvs can attack everything, and everything (surface ships-wise) can't, yeah, you can fight CVs back with AA blobs with a couple of hallands, but a ship alone, cannot. If, we, ofcourse, get a nice buff on AA (which its power is really low) things can change. Are you gonna implement some new DFAA ships? Because, at least DFAA is decent. Against bad players/people that didn't dodge flak, DFAA is very, very scary. That's my opinion. :)

EDIT: Oh, and i just read further one of your posts regarding CV counters. Yeah, everything can counter a CV (if counter means what i think, which i might be wrong on that), but the question is HOW effective is that counter.