#GrandNavalBattles Grand Naval Battles event thread (post your stuff here! instead of openening multiple threads)

[Sebsen]

 

So before reading the forum you go to a 3rd party site, write them an email and complain about stuff before you either read the official forum or the support...

 

that sounds more like a cheap excuse to me...

 

Since he wrote the email on the 1st, according to the site, how would you know what time he wrote it? The event page was bugged out half of the day. And the first reply from WG came in the afternoon.

[MadnerKami]

 

So before reading the forum you go to a 3rd party site, write them an email and complain about stuff before you either read the official forum or the support...

 

that sounds more like a cheap excuse to me...

 

You know you can just stop being a complete [edited]and infer intentions that weren't there to begin with. The mail was written on the day of the bug and I wasn't aware that there's no fifth week set of missions, simply because the event was set to go on till next week and no info is otherwise given on the event-page. RM nicely fits with "Recurring Missions" and this "mission" only popped up later after the bug happened and with the fish facepalming, I jumped to conclusions. Also, I'm not in the slightest trying to bad-mouth WG and I have absolutely zero understanding of where the flying [edited]you get that vibe from.

[Nechrom]

And how was he supposed to know that there would not be another set of missions?

That was stated nowhere on the Homepage as far as I know. Sure, you could do the math with the 1000 diamonds personal goal. But there is a difference between "You can earn 1000 diamonds" and "You can earn 1000 diamonds"

- Mission total is 1000 diamonds. (Which I was expecting, just like you)

- You cap out at 1000 diamonds.

Ending the event exactly one week after the 4th set of weeklys got removed also added to the confusion, dontcha think?

Again, not everyone actively reads the forum, so how would they know?

I don't agree on what he says, but I understands why he thinks that way.

Also, there is a difference between lying and not knowing better because of the lack of information.

 

I mostly agree with what you say. I also assumed at the start that we would have 5 weeks of mission sets and 4 weeks of 100k XP missions. But that was only an assumption based on the length of the total duration and a lack of information saying otherwise. As soon as the 4th week rolled around I immediately figured out that it was the last week of missions.

Also the maximum of 1000 diamonds from missions was confirmed very early on.

 

I can totally understand that someone could assume things because they didn't seek out the information in a 2600 post topic.

But when you decide to e-mail a news outlet, no matter how unofficial it is, you can't just fill your e-mail with assumptions and guesswork.

And the site should definitely not post it without checking with other sources.

[CasualSlav]

First: show me the person that noticed there will be only four weekly missions to conclude. Beforehand, at the start of the event itself.

 

Second: the big ending of the major event is secret. So secret it reveals to be 10 camos. Chests aside - 10 camos.

 

I will repeat myself: whole GNB was a very good effort, for sure. I can stand usually mistakes and misfortunes on WG side. But giving out 10 camos as a reward is... pathetic. I would gladly welcome a week of premium time, five hundreds of dubloons, a special mission. Something that would truely reward the players and the community. Something to assure all the people here: play this game, it's worth of this. But no...

[Sebsen]

 

Also the maximum of 1000 diamonds from missions was confirmed very early on.

 

I can totally understand that someone could assume things because they didn't seek out the information in a 2600 post topic.

 

Correct. I had to activate pages, cause my notebook couldn't keep up.

 

 

But when you decide to e-mail a news outlet, no matter how unofficial it is, you can't just fill your e-mail with assumptions and guesswork.

And the site should definitely not post it without checking with other sources.

 

He already wrote that he jumped to conclusions. I agree, but I don't think there was any real hate involved. Just a touch of laziness.

[Elo_Naj]

If you go back in the thread you see that on Week 4 it was already discussed that by counting Diamonds this had to be the last weekly Missions.

[Sebsen]

If you go back in the thread you see that on Week 4 it was already discussed that by counting Diamonds this had to be the last weekly Missions.

 

We know. Everyone that did not read this thread does not. There is no information regarding that on the homepage or the event page. Well, lack of weeklys now confirms on the event page.

[CasualSlav]

If you go back in the thread you see that on Week 4 it was already discussed that by counting Diamonds this had to be the last weekly Missions.

 

Nice. Did anyone notice that on week one?

[Nechrom]

He already wrote that he jumped to conclusions. I agree, but I don't think there was any real hate involved. Just a touch of laziness.

 

I didn't read any hate from the e-mail. Maybe you're referring to one of the other posters.

 

Jumping to conclusions is fine if it's only affecting yourself. It can even be fine to post assumptions to a news site if you're very clear about it being guesswork.

But for now the e-mail is there, posted in it's original form as fact.

 

 

Nice. Did anyone notice that on week one?

 

Why is that relevant?

[Sebsen]

I didn't read any hate from the e-mail. Maybe you're referring to one of the other posters.

 

Jumping to conclusions is fine if it's only affecting yourself. It can even be fine to post assumptions to a news site if you're very clear about it being guesswork.

But for now the e-mail is there, posted in it's original form as fact.

 

Yeah, just tired right now.

 

The title says "From our readers". That is enough for me to not take it serious to begin with.

But yeah, they should probably clarify or take it down.

[CasualSlav]

 

Why is that relevant?

 

Because it looks to me like everyone was perfectly safe with knowledge about 4 weekly missions and nobody bats an eye.

[MadnerKami]

 

Yeah, just tired right now.

 

The title says "From our readers". That is enough for me to not take it serious to begin with.

But yeah, they should probably clarify or take it down.

 

Already asked them for it.

[Nechrom]

Because it looks to me like everyone was perfectly safe with knowledge about 4 weekly missions and nobody bats an eye.

 

I had the knowledge at the start of week 4, so more than enough time to make use of that information.

The knowledge that the limit was 1000 diamonds from missions I had a lot earlier than that, so I knew how many diamonds I could afford to miss.

[MadnerKami]

 

The knowledge that the limit was 1000 diamonds from missions I had a lot earlier than that, so I knew how many diamonds I could afford to miss.

Not aimed at you, but since you mentioned the 1k-limit I'll pick it up in answer to an earlier post from someone else (I'm sure all you guys saw that post on page... somewhere... ). I'd like to remind about the Kamikaze R event. It was possible to gain more pearls than your personal goalposts offered prizes for. In fact, that was the exact reason I got my Kamikaze R, as well as some other people, because we collected more pearls than were implied as a maximum. As such, I didn't see any reason to take what is written in the personal rewards as any kind of pointer.

[CasualSlav]

 

I had the knowledge at the start of week 4, so more than enough time to make use of that information.

The knowledge that the limit was 1000 diamonds from missions I had a lot earlier than that, so I knew how many diamonds I could afford to miss.

 

Good for you. How about the majority?

[Nechrom]

Not aimed at you, but since you mentioned the 1k-limit I'll pick it up in answer to an earlier post from someone else (I'm sure all you guys saw that post on page... somewhere... ). I'd like to remind about the Kamikaze R event. It was possible to gain more pearls than your personal goalposts offered prizes for. In fact, that was the exact reason I got my Kamikaze R, as well as some other people, because we collected more pearls than were implied as a maximum. As such, I didn't see any reason to take what is written in the personal rewards as any kind of pointer.

 

But in this case it was confirmed that 1000 was the max from missions. Not just assumed from the personal goal.

 

Exactly, the max. you can get from missions is 1,000 diamonds. Regarding the 100k XP mission, it will be also week-long - but will have to run Monday to Monday.

the only way how to go above 1,000 is by participating in Community and Contributor events.

[Nechrom]

Good for you. How about the majority?

 

If you feel that the information would benefit you, it behoves you to seek out that information.

 

You can argue that WG-EU should make that information more easily accessible and not require people to ask for it.

But if you make assumptions and don't attempt to find out something for certain, there's a limit to how much you can complain afterwards.

[Xerkics]

Surely the 10 camo thing must be a placeholder it cant be a real prize  there is no way we can reach 15 mil without week 5 missions its dubious that we even reached 12 mil in the first place that soon without some shenanigans on their part.

[Nechrom]

Surely the 10 camo thing must be a placeholder it cant be a real prize  there is no way we can reach 15 mil without week 5 missions its dubious that we even reached 12 mil in the first place that soon without some shenanigans on their part.

 

The 10 camos is the reward for the 12 mil milestone. The 15 mil milestone isn't meant to be reached, just a placeholder.

[ajb13]

'10 camo just for me, you really shouldn't have'

 

'NO, really you shouldn't have'

 

Remind anyone of the socks your granny knit you for Christmas?

[MadnerKami]

 

But in this case it was confirmed that 1000 was the max from missions. Not just assumed from the personal goal.

 

On page 44 of a (by now) 131 pages long thread in a subforum where I wouldn't even look first for information regarding that event...

 

 

You can argue that WG-EU should make that information more easily accessible and not require people to ask for it.

Bingo.

 

 

But if you make assumptions and don't attempt to find out something for certain, there's a limit to how much you can complain afterwards.

I find it pretty unreasonable to expect someone, to grind through god knows how many pages, to find a specific information that you need to know exists in the first place, to gain it. That's like writing "Source: The Internet" under a paper.

[Mayv]

On page 44 of a (by now) 131 pages long thread in a subforum where I wouldn't even look first for information regarding that event...

 

Bingo.

 

I find it pretty unreasonable to expect someone, to grind through god knows how many pages, to find a specific information that you need to know exists in the first place, to gain it. That's like writing "Source: The Internet" under a paper.

 

If you looked at the front page, first post, you would find a link to this post by MasaruKondera where all of the info we had gotten is shown in one post.

[MadnerKami]

 

If you looked at the front page, first post, you would find a link to this post by MasaruKondera where all of the info we had gotten is shown in one post.

 

Neither the opening post nor the linked post are official announcements. And still: It's obscure.

[Nechrom]

On page 44 of a (by now) 131 pages long thread in a subforum where I wouldn't even look first for information regarding that event...

 

Bingo.

 

I find it pretty unreasonable to expect someone, to grind through god knows how many pages, to find a specific information that you need to know exists in the first place, to gain it. That's like writing "Source: The Internet" under a paper.

 

It took me a few minutes to find it by searching (not manually scrolling through the entire topic) for staff posts with the relevant information.

 

If you need the information then you should find it. If you don't need it then don't bother.

There's no question that the information should have been made more available. But in the end it's you that gets affected negatively by not having this information, so is it not worth looking for?

[CasualSlav]

 

If you feel that the information would benefit you, it behoves you to seek out that information.

 

You can argue that WG-EU should make that information more easily accessible and not require people to ask for it.

But if you make assumptions and don't attempt to find out something for certain, there's a limit to how much you can complain afterwards.

 

To clarify that: I'm not against lack of the 5th mission. I don't care. I just do understand people's grief about it. WG really needs to work on their communications. And hiding such an important thing below the decks is miserable. Lack of disclaimer may be very painful.

 

One thing I can't cope with, though, is the twelve millions' reward. It's simply mediocre.