Important Message for the World of Warships Community

[SilentEnimLegesInterArma]

3 minutes ago, YabbaCoe said:

1) 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. 

2)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.

3) 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. 

1) maybe it would help to reference this when changes get applied (or like the Thunderer monsternerf what the metrics were on why the 4 changes were made

2) I feel ya! truly. but also: welcome to the internet, let me be your guide :D(semiserious: the issue here is the last two years of all the issues) nowadays your users/customers are deeply distrustful and with the articles currently on the mainpage do not help when they do not hold up to scrutiny (you knew would come))

3) same as 1) but maybe explain the roadmap more. not everyone know that the Subs cost around 2k/3k? billing hours. design, maps, metrics, physics etc etc. also if they are set in stone but you pi** of your customerbase (that already shrunk compared to a year ago) maybe some give and go would help

 

 

[hellhound666]

12 minutes ago, YabbaCoe said:

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.

so, it will end as with cv's - rather op to get enough players playing them so that the cost is justified ...

i certainly hope that this time you will burn your greasy hairy fingers

[YabbaCoe]

46 minutes ago, arquata2019 said:

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.

Of course with everything, there is a question of the effectiveness. As I mentioned, some ships are much better at countering others, some are rather ineffective at countering certain ship. Of course the interaction of CVs against other ships is very different to any other interaction in our game, but still there are options how to deal with that. 

 

40 minutes ago, hellhound666 said:

so, it will end as with cv's - rather op to get enough players playing them so that the cost is justified ...

i certainly hope that this time you will burn your greasy hairy fingers

Well, I don't think Submarines are OP, as their influence in the entire battle is kinda limited. Like with every single ship, Submarine can play very well to be first in the table, but how many times have you seen that? Submarines can add value towards a victory in the battle, but they are not the main decisive factor that contributes to the victory. They can be strong in certain situations, but also there are plenty of ways how to counter them. We are trying to achieve the situation when the interaction with other classes would be good enough, Sub would be able to do something at least in the battle, but still can be punished for mistakes and the vast majority of ships can damage it quite effectively. 

[hellhound666]

17 minutes ago, YabbaCoe said:

Well, I don't think Submarines are OP, as their influence in the entire battle is kinda limited.

i dont care what anybody getting paid by wargambling thinks of this matter - its like asking some hardcore republican in us if biden stole the election ....

 

17 minutes ago, YabbaCoe said:

but how many times have you seen that?

none, haven't played for some time no

 

17 minutes ago, YabbaCoe said:

We are trying to achieve the situation when the interaction with other classes would be good enough,

we've seen this with cv's, so ...

 

btw. im still waiting for good commander skill set for supercrusiers i asked from you in some other thread

or explanation why im supposed to pay for testing of premium ships you sell

[YabbaCoe]

5 minutes ago, hellhound666 said:

i dont care what anybody getting paid by wargambling thinks of anything - its like asking some hardcore republican in us if biden stole the election ....

 

none, haven't played for some time no

 

we've seen this with cv's, so ...

 

btw. im still waiting for good commander skill set for supercrusiers i asked from you in some other thread

or explanation why im supposed to pay for testing of premium ships you sell

You are not testing premium ships, so you are definitely not supposed to pay for anything. Our testers and volunteers are also not paying for testing premium ships.

Let me ask you a question: are you playing the game, or not? As you are asking why you are supposed to pay for testing etc.

[Prophecy82]

1 hour ago, YabbaCoe said:

Also 500 people who voted in this poll is not 90% of the playerbase.

You are right and wrong. 

500 PPL would suffice as a sample size for about 10k PPL with a 5% variance. 

Yet these 500 could be the "vocal minority". 

 

So in fairness: Could you release some data of your own survey? Especially the result of the "Do you think, subs are ready for Random?"  question.

[hellhound666]

12 minutes ago, YabbaCoe said:

Let me ask you a question: are you playing the game, or not? As you are asking why you are supposed to pay for testing etc.

we've gone through this multiple times ... one extra wouldn't help you any further

so, what about commander skill set for supercruiser?

[Hanse77SWE]

1 hour ago, YabbaCoe said:

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. 

So basically "We didn't do a propper check before we started this ( a thing that we said that we wouldn't do) and now we're to deep into it to admit that we were wrong."

If you'd listened to the playerbase (and the CCs) back then you would've known where this was heading and that would've prevented you from wasting all that time and money.

 

What you are saying here is "We don't care what our customers want. They get what we give them." Just look at "New Coke" and how well that worked out. 

 

Don't say that we didn't warn you.

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

27 minutes ago, YabbaCoe said:

Let me ask you a question: are you playing the game, or not? As you are asking why you are supposed to pay for testing etc.

Oeh oeh. Question time: Why does WG keep broken subs as rentals in the game for 'testing' when there was a blog post announcing changes to that specific iteration of the subs weeks ago? That blog indicates Lesta has enough testing data to asses they are not suitable for random atmo and should discontinue rental subs until they are changed. Why are these broken versions of the subs still available for rental?

 

I reinstalled around the introduction only to find them horribly broken. So i don't play again. Premium time is ticking away because WG doesn't allow to pause premium for longer periods of absence for whatever reason. This time the reason is Lesta using the main game mode as a test bed for unfinished and broken features. Why can't I pause premium time for that test period?

[YabbaCoe]

30 minutes ago, Prophecy82 said:

You are right and wrong. 

500 PPL would suffice as a sample size for about 10k PPL with a 5% variance. 

Yet these 500 could be the "vocal minority". 

 

So in fairness: Could you release some data of your own survey? Especially the result of the "Do you think, subs are ready for Random?"  question.

Yes, those 500 are vocal minority and we always listen to you ideas and gather feedback and sometimes we do changes based on your relevant feedback.

Unfortunately, I can't share you any data from our surveys. If we would decide to share any data, it would be done globally, either on DevBlog, or in the article like this particular one. 

 

18 minutes ago, hellhound666 said:

we've gone through this multiple times ... one extra wouldn't help you any further

so, what about commander skill set for supercruiser?

Maybe in future. 

 

14 minutes ago, Hanse77SWE said:

So basically "We didn't do a propper check before we started this ( a thing that we said that we wouldn't do) and now we're to deep into it to admit that we were wrong."

If you'd listened to the playerbase (and the CCs) back then you would've known where this was heading and that would've prevented you from wasting all that time and money.

 

What you are saying here is "We don't care what our customers want. They get what we give them." Just look at "New Coke" and how well that worked out. 

 

Don't say that we didn't warn you.

We do care what our customers want. We know, that some part of our customers doesn't want Submarines, but at the same time we have data, that some part of our customers want submarines and also are playing them.

 

7 minutes ago, Europizza said:

Oeh oeh. Question time: Why does WG keep broken subs as rentals in the game for 'testing' when there was a blog post announcing changes to that specific iteration of the subs weeks ago? That blog indicates Lesta has enough testing data to asses they are not suitable for random atmo and should discontinue rental subs until they are changed. Why are these broken versions of the subs still available for rental?

 

I reinstalled around the introduction only to find them horribly broken. So i don't play again. Premium time is ticking away because WG doesn't allow to pause premium for longer periods of absence for whatever reason. This time the reason is Lesta using the main game mode as a test bed for unfinished and broken features. Why can't I pause premium time for that test period?

Subs are not broken. DevBlog about Subs changes explained what exactly we just implemented to the live server. We had plenty data and implemented changes based on them. Subs are for rental, because they are still being in testing.

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

4 hours ago, YabbaCoe said:

Subs are not broken. DevBlog about Subs changes explained what exactly we just implemented to the live server. We had plenty data and implemented changes based on them. Subs are for rental, because they are still being in testing.

Dude seriously, I love the subs, but the rental subs in random were broken. They are going to be changed rather extensively to what they are were last few weeks which I applaud. What metrics were you still 'testing' in random after the announcement?

 

EDIT:

----------------------

QUOTE from the news blurp: But even though the data suggests that submarine torpedoes are not over-powered, we have heard our players say that submarine torpedoes are currently both effective and easy to master at the same time, while countering them poses quite a challenge. <- the defenition of a broken feature.

[Pukovnik7]

2 hours ago, YabbaCoe said:

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. 

So basically, "We are set on a path and we are going down it, reality be damned".

 

Majority of the playerbase? Maybe, maybe not. But do you guys even know how statistics work? Either get the data from playerbase as a whole, or use the sample you have access to. Which is the playerbase that is on the forums. And if feedback in the game questionaries is so positive, why don't you release results on responses to your surveys? It is not like there is anything there that can harm anyone, so no reason to keep them secret. Also, players that are active - on the blogs, on the forums - are more likely to actually write about the game, to recommend it to others, and also more likely to spend on the game in the long term.

 

You guys are behaving like the generals and politicians of World War I. It was obvious after a year that the war will go nowhere, achieve nothing, yet will cause terrible casualties. But the politicians used the exact sunk cost fallacy logic you are using here - "After all those years, time, money and blood invested, we cannot just cancel the entire war, because portion of the population is negative about it.". That is exactly the kind of thinking that the leaders on both sides had in the World War I. And where did it get them? Germany nearly collapsed, and its surrender as well as peace terms allowed Hitler to rise to power. Russian Empire did collapse, which produced Communism and hundreds of millions of dead. Austria-Hungary did collapse, which meant that there was literally nothing in the entire Central Europe that had any chance of stopping Nazi advance. Britain and France had casualties which made them unwilling to stop Hitler later. SUNK COST FALLACY IS WHAT CAUSED NAZISM, FASCISM, COMMUNISM AND EVERYTHING THAT THEY PRODUCED - INCLUDING WORLD WAR 2 AND VARIOUS GENOCIDES. So why are you repeating that same mistake - granted, it will not cause any deaths, but you have responsibility towards the playerbase. So why is Wargaming so irresponsible?

[TheComedian1983]

Perfectly written.

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

QUOTE: But even though the data suggests that submarine torpedoes are not over-powered, we have heard our players say that submarine torpedoes are currently both effective and easy to master at the same time, while countering them poses quite a challenge. 

 

I seriously do not understand how this was not predictable for Lesta. Seriously.... Does this gamecompany itself not understand the difference between OP and broken? It was there for anyone to see how ridiculous subs single launch torps and ping vs. DCP was. 

[arquata2019_]

2 ore fa, YabbaCoe ha scritto:

Of course with everything, there is a question of the effectiveness. As I mentioned, some ships are much better at countering others, some are rather ineffective at countering certain ship.

This basically. If, again, i have to be constructive and to hope that it somehow happens to get considered in balancing decisions, i'd say you gotta buff AA a little bit, like "AA" ships like Des Moines, they have mediocre AA when alone. That's what i think of course, and many others would, IMO.

[guy_incognito79]

2 hours ago, YabbaCoe said:

We do care what our customers want. We know, that some part of our customers doesn't want Submarines, but at the same time we have data, that some part of our customers want submarines and also are playing them.

So the paying punters that like griefing can have all the CVs and subs they want eh? Nice to know.

 

How about other paying punters like me (I know I'm not alone here) who want the Ops you broke during the CV rework fixed and brought back, plus new Ops made for tiers 5, 8 and 9 ships (perhaps even a couple for tier 3 and 4 ships) so we have somewhere to relax and enjoy the ships we like away from the toxic twins classes. Or would you prefer we just shut up and go stand in a darkened corner and just shove rocks up our arses?

[Nibenay78]

2 hours ago, YabbaCoe said:

Yes, those 500 are vocal minority and we always listen to you ideas and gather feedback and sometimes we do changes based on your relevant feedback.

Unfortunately, I can't share you any data from our surveys. If we would decide to share any data, it would be done globally, either on DevBlog, or in the article like this particular one. 

Then again the 50 000 non-vocal majority also doesn't make many suggestions do they? Or do you magically read their opinions? 

Quote

We do care what our customers want. We know, that some part of our customers doesn't want Submarines, but at the same time we have data, that some part of our customers want submarines and also are playing them.

I'm sure you could find players who would enjoy supersonic space ships in wows and would play them.

Quote

Subs are not broken. DevBlog about Subs changes explained what exactly we just implemented to the live server. We had plenty data and implemented changes based on them. Subs are for rental, because they are still being in testing.

Broken as in "as fun as pulling teeth" type of broken. I still haven't had a single enjoyable engagement against a sub. The only reason to play them is to attempt to learn how they work, so we can better kill and/or ignore them.

[Camperdown]

7 hours ago, YabbaCoe said:

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. 

Thank you for something approaching an honest answer on a very difficult topic.

 

You are still playing down the opposition to subs, though. I have the impression that 75% of the player base really dislikes subs, and about 25% likes or accepts them.

 

All this could have been avoided if WG on some of the 'huge stuff' would do their market research better. WG comes across as a company that acts erratically and then obstinately clings to preset convictions. And then is patently dishonest in its communication and obfuscates the issues. 

 

Tell your bosses to git gud on this 

 

Take care!

[Smegger213]

Wargaming, you continue to push for the garbage submarines into the game.

 

WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO WAKE UP TO THE FACT THAT 80% OF THE PLAYERS DO NOT WANT SUBS IN THE GAME.

 

You continue to tweak the un-tweakable.

I will say it yet again, NO MATTER HOW MUCH YOU MESS ABOUT WITH SUBS, YOU WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO BALANCE THEM FAIRLY FOR THE SURFACE SHIP PLAYER.

 

Because of this World of Warships stays un-installed as far as I am concerned.

I WILL NOT PLAY YOUR GAME WITH SUBS STILL IN RANDOM BATTLES.

YOUR LOSS WARGAMING, NOT MINE.

 

[Hanse77SWE]

7 hours ago, YabbaCoe said:

but at the same time we have data, that some part of our customers want submarines and also are playing them

So 5-10% of the players are going to dictate what kind of game the other 90-95% will get?

This isn't like a amusement park where you can put in a new teacup-carousel because it will bring more kids to your park. The adults will still ride the rollercoster. It's fine. Everyone pick the ride they like.

It's more like putting a polka band at a rap-concert because "Some people like polka.". "You're gonna listen to this and you're gonna like it!"

 

Or lets put it this way. I don't like mushrooms. Really, I can't stand them. They give me nausea. So if you take my favorite dish in the whole world and put some mushrooms in it, I will not eat it. No matter what.

 

By putting subs into the game you ruin the parts that used to be good. All the talk about balance goes out the window.

[Nibenay78]

8 minutes ago, Hanse77SWE said:

Or lets put it this way. I don't like mushrooms. Really, I can't stand them. They give me nausea. So if you take my favorite dish in the whole world and put some mushrooms in it, I will not eat it. No matter what.

You won't see these musrooms,.. until they ping you 

[Cammo1962]

15 hours ago, YabbaCoe said:

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. 

Leta see @YabbaCoe was it not according to WeeGee 8% played subs right is that a big majority of the playerbase ?? You write years does that mean that after what WeeGee said years ago said that there would not be subs in the game because they did not fit into the game actually a lie ?? And last but not least WeeGee has time after time shown that they dont care about us no matter what they say and yes i do care about the game and i am passionate @YabbaCoe

[tumppu75]

9 hours ago, Hanse77SWE said:

It's more like putting a polka band at a rap-concert because "Some people like polka.". "You're gonna listen to this and you're gonna like it!"

 

Or lets put it this way. I don't like mushrooms. Really, I can't stand them. They give me nausea. So if you take my favorite dish in the whole world and put some mushrooms in it, I will not eat it. No matter what.

 

By putting subs into the game you ruin the parts that used to be good. All the talk about balance goes out the window.

 

This is so far the best TL;DR of subs in the game, as far as representing the view of the MAJORITY of the people vocal about the subject goes. WG still keeps pretending it's only a small number of players, but they probably also think we believe they would never lie to their players, even though they have been caught in them repeatedly through the years.

 

As a paying customer, subs are actively degrading my playing experience. Remove them from play for a month and see if player numbers increase. I dare you.

[Prophecy82]

17 hours ago, YabbaCoe said:

Yes, those 500 are vocal minority and we always listen to you ideas and gather feedback and sometimes we do changes based on your relevant feedback.

Unfortunately, I can't share you any data from our surveys. If we would decide to share any data, it would be done globally, either on DevBlog, or in the article like this particular one. 

 

17 hours ago, Pukovnik7 said:

So basically, "We are set on a path and we are going down it, reality be damned".

 

Majority of the playerbase? Maybe, maybe not. But do you guys even know how statistics work? Either get the data from playerbase as a whole, or use the sample you have access to. Which is the playerbase that is on the forums. And if feedback in the game questionaries is so positive, why don't you release results on responses to your surveys? It is not like there is anything there that can harm anyone, so no reason to keep them secret.

This. 

 

@YabbaCoe Please forward to your comrades at WG that they should share the data. 

Please proof "us" the "vocal minority" wrong. Show us the Data that subs are wanted in the game. 

I would scratch my head (hard) but accept it. 

 

But given your answers it doesnt matter anyway, right? Since subs will stay if liked or not by the "silent majority". 

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

18 hours ago, YabbaCoe said:

We are trying to achieve the situation when the interaction with other classes would be good enough, Sub would be able to do something at least in the battle, but still can be punished for mistakes and the vast majority of ships can damage it quite effectively. 

It's funny you keep saying this with confidence as if Lesta's producers and designers can be trusted with a task like that when at the same time you have been trying to convince people here the interaction between carriers and everything else is all fine and dandy. Because everything can counter a carrier except it needs very specific conditions to be effective at it but still a counter doh ^^

 

Good enough = meh whatever according to spreadsheet.