Waterline: Development Plan Updates – Fall 2022

[Verblonde]

2 minutes ago, Varian_Dorn said:

Name those "lots of cruisers", please.

Off the top of my head, the entire Dutch line, and Tone; there may be others, but cruisers aren't really my thing in PvP.

 

11 minutes ago, Varian_Dorn said:

Recommend you just leave then.

This is the gamble WG are making: they're hoping that the griefers will spend sufficient money to make up for those who are driven away or who (like me) will drastically reduce their spending as a result of forcing submarines on us.

[Hakssor]

Quote

For two weeks following the arrival of submarines in Early Access, players will have the possibility to reset skills and demount upgrades for free. Also, there will be a button on the website for resetting skills for all Commanders.

Thank you for this, it's really appreciated.

 

Quote

It will bring in representatives of several European countries, such as Poland, Norway, Turkey, and Greece. These will be Tier V–X destroyers with powerful artillery armament having a caliber of up to 140 mm.

Really disappointing to see this branch does not contain a ship from Romania, it was the best chance to get a ship. With 5x1 120mm Regele Ferdinand would've fit at T5-T6 quite nicely. Kinda pointless to make a visit here but no content in the game. 

[Varian_Dorn]

3 minutes ago, Verblonde said:

Off the top of my head, the entire Dutch line, and Tone; there may be others, but cruisers aren't really my thing in PvP.

 

This is the gamble WG are making: they're hoping that the griefers will spend sufficient money to make up for those who are driven away or who (like me) will drastically reduce their spending as a result of forcing submarines on us.

There are somwhere around 210 cruisers currently in the game, across all tiers. So a (comparably spoken) few ships have the negative trait of being less able or unable to fight subs. Boy, where have I heard this one before?

A, yes, with battleships vs carriers.

Matter of fact is most ships can defend themselves against subs. Recommend picking one of them or improving your teamplay if you are glued to one of the few "defenseless" vessels.

 

Games rise, games fall. No king rules forever. Play if you enjoy it, leave if you don´t. It´s always been like this, simple. If you like what you see, good; if you don´t like it, you may voice your grievance, but if you get denied you can either accept it or move on. Staying and still kicking up a fuss seems childish at best. The world does not revolve around you, or me, or anyone here. People don´t have to always bend over backwards to keep YOU satisfied. Who are you, anyway?

 

I know who I am: a person who, for the most part, enjoys World of Warships. And as long as I like it I play it. If I don´t like it I stop, if I ever find myself completely losing interest I will uninstall and leave. No grand speaches, no big ruckus. I fail to see whats so difficult about this concept.

[Varian_Dorn]

11 minutes ago, Hakssor said:

Thank you for this, it's really appreciated.

 

Really disappointing to see this branch does not contain a ship from Romania, it was the best chance to get a ship. With 5x1 120mm Regele Ferdinand would've fit at T5-T6 quite nicely. Kinda pointless to make a visit here but no content in the game. 

Ah, yes, the upcoming free captain reset is indeed greatly appreciated. Some of my skippers are due for a slight change.

 

Maybe there will be Romanian ships; the fact they aren´t there yet doesn´t mean there won´t be one or several in the future.

[MixuS]

2 hours ago, USNavy_12 said:

In short: Nothing to look forward to.

Not true. Looking forward to quit this game for good.

[Smegger213]

29 minutes ago, Varian_Dorn said:

According to the latest forum poll, at least 14%. Which roughly corresponds with their overall presence in battles.

Forum polls are meaningless.

Its Wargamings official figures that count.

I believe Wargaming showed some player sub percentages in a dev blog a few months ago.

It showed that  a small percentage of players were playing subs.

I cannot find the article at the moment to quote the exact figures.

But it sure wasn't as high as 14%.

 

Plus you quote a forum poll without even linking it.

How do I know the figure of 14% is correct?

[Verblonde]

8 minutes ago, Varian_Dorn said:

Who are you, anyway?

Just one paying customer; a single data point. To judge by the forum, there are multiple others, but I have no idea how many across the entire customer base; the immediate financial future of the game is not going to be helped by people like me any more. WG need to hope that more griefers (who else would play submarines?) open their wallets than people like me close them.

 

WG have clearly decided to ignore the bulk of the experienced players (as is their right); I merely view this as them making a business decision. No drama; this decision simply makes me disinclined to continue spending money on their product (as is my right).

[Hakssor]

1 minute ago, Varian_Dorn said:

Maybe there will be Romanian ships; the fact they aren´t there yet doesn´t mean there won´t be one or several in the future.

If they aren't adding a ship when they literally just promoted the game in Romania last month or when a new branch with destroyers from neighboring countries is happening, there is almost no way it's gonna happen. There aren't a lot of options, these destroyers were basically the only real chance.

[MixuS]

Honestly, if this is how much WG listens to feedback, we should stop giving them any feedback. If they don't give us any respect, why should we give them any back? At least they should have the backbone to admit that the reason they are pushing the subs into game is to milk money out of newbie griefers.

[Verblonde]

5 minutes ago, Smegger213 said:

How do I know the figure of 14% is correct?

You don't - self-selecting sample and all that stuff. I think the poll being referenced may be this one:

At time of writing, 14.23% of respondents think that submarines are basically okay.

 

[_Caesar_Imperator_]

Vor 1 Stunde, Varian_Dorn sagte:

Hi, I´m Mr. "NOBODY".... and my is family larger than you think, kid.

....and you're too stupid to perform properly in silent hunter?

[Smegger213]

2 minutes ago, Verblonde said:

You don't - self-selecting sample and all that stuff. I think the poll being referenced may be this one:

At time of writing, 14.23% of respondents think that submarines are basically okay.

 

Nice poll example.

Only 14% think subs are OK as they are.

But 46% want them to be in a separate battle mode, and 39% want them removed from the game entirely.

 

So, yes, this poll clearly shows that the majority of players do not want subs.

 

Oh and I found the dev blog article with player numbers: https://blog.worldofwarships.com/blog/261.

Its a bit old now for accurate current data, but its a good yardstick to judge on.

The average number of sub players back then was hovering between 10% & 12%.

But there were some significant drops in those graphs too.

It depends on the tier, but in some tiers more players play subs than CV's lol.

[Varian_Dorn]

5 minutes ago, _Caesar_Imperator_ said:

....and you're too stupid to perform properly in silent hunter?

Never played any of those games. Not interested enough to go full sub-sim; rarely ever played full sims, most of them were flight based. The more casual implementation of subs in WoWs suits me fine though.

[Misago]

1 hour ago, Varian_Dorn said:

Hi, I´m Mr. "NOBODY".... and my is family larger than you think, kid.

Sweet home alabama playing in the background.

 

That cross-region matchmaker thing seems somewhat suspicious... WoWs is not one of those games where there is no difference between having a ~50 ping and a ~250 ping. Has the player count gone down that much?

[Verblonde]

1 minute ago, Smegger213 said:

So, yes, this poll clearly shows that the majority of players do not want subs.

The majority of players on the forum; this has always been WG's argument - the silent majority like them. Apparently.

 

Even if we believe the forum poll (I think it's likely to be broadly representative, although probably more 'anti' than the general customer base - the forumites tend to be more invested in the game, so are likely to be disproportionately against anything that spoils it), WG are gambling that whilst they'll pi$$ off the majority, enough won't leave that the increased income from the griefers will result in a net improvement on the bottom line.

[Varian_Dorn]

9 minutes ago, Smegger213 said:

Nice poll example.

Only 14% think subs are OK as they are.

But 46% want them to be in a separate battle mode, and 39% want them removed from the game entirely.

 

So, yes, this poll clearly shows that the majority of players do not want subs.

 

Oh and I found the dev blog article with player numbers: https://blog.worldofwarships.com/blog/261.

Its a bit old now for accurate current data, but its a good yardstick to judge on.

The average number of sub players back then was hovering between 10% & 12%.

But there were some significant drops in those graphs too.

It depends on the tier, but in some tiers more players play subs than CV's lol.

So we got some numbers. Riddle me this now: if, on average, there is one sub per team in a random battle... what percentage does that make considering that a full team consists of 12 players?

 

TA-DAAAAA!

 

But I guess bashing a minority is something some people here are clearly ok with.

[Smegger213]

3 minutes ago, Verblonde said:

The majority of players on the forum; this has always been WG's argument - the silent majority like them. Apparently.

 

Even if we believe the forum poll (I think it's likely to be broadly representative, although probably more 'anti' than the general customer base - the forumites tend to be more invested in the game, so are likely to be disproportionately against anything that spoils it), WG are gambling that whilst they'll pi$$ off the majority, enough won't leave that the increased income from the griefers will result in a net improvement on the bottom line.

Every forum poll that has been posted has yielded similar results.

I agree that the forums are not a fully true example of the full player base.

But you could take the forum polls as a representative percentage example.

That example would clearly show that more players want to see them either removed or in a separate game mode.

[Smegger213]

2 minutes ago, Varian_Dorn said:

So we got some numbers. Riddle me this now: if, on average, there is one sub per team in a random battle... what percentage does that make considering that a full team consists of 12 players?

 

TA-DAAAAA!

 

But I guess bashing a minority is something some people here are clearly ok with.

One sub on a team means nothing.

Its the total percentage of players actually bothering to play subs that I am interested in.

 

If you like subs in the game, then that is fine by me.

But I can assure you that you are in the minority here.

 

Every forum topic I have seen that discusses submarines, has more players stating that they hate subs, than players that say they love them.

[Verblonde]

5 minutes ago, Smegger213 said:

That example would clearly show that more players want to see them either removed or in a separate game mode.

Absolutely, but WG don't care about that; they're interested in the bottom line. So, for them, the question is: how many of that (overwhelming) majority who don't like submarines will actually leave/stop spending?

 

I'm not in games design as a job (I do Ecommerce), but I recall reading somewhere that frustration can be used to motivate people to spend money on games; it wouldn't surprise me to learn that WG already have a plan in place to leverage the majority's frustration into spending money on something that's marketed as being particularly good at ASW (they did the same - dishonestly - with CVs and AA ships). Of course, they'll take the griefers' money for submarines first, so don't expect to see anything with supposedly good ASW any time soon.

 

WG aren't hugely interested in what will make people happy; they're interested in what will result in the highest spend; those two - although related - aren't necessarily the same thing.

[Smegger213]

13 minutes ago, Verblonde said:

Absolutely, but WG don't care about that; they're interested in the bottom line. So, for them, the question is: how many of that (overwhelming) majority who don't like submarines will actually leave/stop spending?

 

I'm not in games design as a job (I do Ecommerce), but I recall reading somewhere that frustration can be used to motivate people to spend money on games; it wouldn't surprise me to learn that WG already have a plan in place to leverage the majority's frustration into spending money on something that's marketed as being particularly good at ASW (they did the same - dishonestly - with CVs and AA ships). Of course, they'll take the griefers' money for submarines first, so don't expect to see anything with supposedly good ASW any time soon.

 

WG aren't hugely interested in what will make people happy; they're interested in what will result in the highest spend; those two - although related - aren't necessarily the same thing.

Yes mate.

 

I predict that within 3 months of submarines being officially released, we will see premium subs in loot boxed and the premium shop.

No doubt they will have gimmicks that the tech tree subs don't have, and they will be OP to please the minority.

[Verblonde]

1 minute ago, Smegger213 said:

I predict that within 3 months of submarines being officially released, we will see premium subs in loot boxed and the premium shop.

For the neutral bystander, the interesting question will be: will there be submarines in Satan Boxes?

 

I have a suspicion that Xmas may be one of WG's biggest earning periods (not surprisingly - it is for most sellers of stuff). In that context, will they avoid putting submarines in Satan Boxes, with a view to wringing the last few dollars from the 'old guard' (many of whom may not have realised yet that submarines are really here to stay), or will they go all-in and try and rinse the griefers for all their Xmas present money from grandma...?

[Smegger213]

13 minutes ago, Verblonde said:

For the neutral bystander, the interesting question will be: will there be submarines in Satan Boxes?

 

I have a suspicion that Xmas may be one of WG's biggest earning periods (not surprisingly - it is for most sellers of stuff). In that context, will they avoid putting submarines in Satan Boxes, with a view to wringing the last few dollars from the 'old guard' (many of whom may not have realised yet that submarines are really here to stay), or will they go all-in and try and rinse the griefers for all their Xmas present money from grandma...?

I used to buy at least £100 of Xmas WoT boxes.

Never bought WoWS Xmas boxes.

I haven't played WoT in a couple of months, and I ain't playing that much of WoWS.

I certainly won't be buying Xmas boxes from either game this year.

[deathsadow]

3 hours ago, ColonelPete said:

Subs and more superships....

 

... and US BB Carriers 

 

 

The spreadsheet says this is exactly what you asked for...

[lafeel]

This game does not need more BB's that think they're CV's thank you. @The_EURL_Guy

[Nauseica]

Im so glad for your information you giving to us on what we can expect for the future of our sea life.

Im so glad that with each update you introduce or change something positive and then in the same time you throw a dozen bricks to our head to dislike you more

 

Atleast in this pace we coming closer and closer to one of my favorite anime on my youth kid life - Please make a collaboration for this anime

Spoiler