Has Wargaming lost control or interest? (arguments by developers)

[Bersigil]

 

 

Yesterday (28.3.2017), MrConway made several Posts in the Questions of the Community thread. One of them is of particular note:

So what will you do regard growing bb population? The people probably swiching cuz WG just keep spoiling them.

1. "We're watching the Situation."

 

 

On the 13th September 2016 - when talking about the (cancelled) bow armour changes for BBs - Sub_Octavian stated

 

"BB population increase is the real problem now. They are balancing on the edge of allowed combat effeciency and their numbers are growing. And they live too long. So we need to find the way to tweak them. The proposed way is actually the most delicate (God, I am happy you didn't see other options)."

 

 

 

 

More than 6 Months ago (!), WG already realised, that BBs are overpopulating the game and had several plans to approach the situation. Those were obviously hard nerfs, considering that the "most delicate" of them was already a pretty severe one.
As we know, they didn't even apply one of them. Since then BBs have increased in strength while their counters got weakend.

Now, 6 Months later, they don't have any plans, they went back to "watching the Situation" - when they already stated that the overpopulation is negatively influencing the game!
 
Conclusions 
1. they knew the Problem existed: Sub_octavian statet this half a year ago.
2. they had solutions they didn't implement
3. they don't work on Solutions anymore, they even don't acknowledge the Problem anymore.
-> for me, that means WG has officially given up on a Problem, they considered to be ruining the game.

I really would love to hear your opinions on the Topic. I love the game and ist potential but that statement by MrConway yesterday really took the hope away.
 

 

[TITANIC_131]

I think that the BB overpopulation is not a very big issue because the matches we get from the current mm are pretty decent. If however you think this is a problem then would it not be smarter to tweak the mm to allow less BB's into one match?

On top of that I think that the lack of CV's is a much bigger issue that should be fixed first, because it also makes BB's easier to play due to the lack of aircraft coming to sink you.

 

---

 

[Pivke]

i think that its the opposite, battleships must be underrepresented.

because they are getting buffed (directly or indirectly) in every single patch!

[Bersigil]

My personal opinion doesn't factor in this. I also thought RPF would totally break the game and I was wrong.
What really troubles me is that WGs specifically stated opinion was that BB overpopulation is a big issue and now (while the number of BBs has statistically not gone down) they don't see it as problem anymore after they didn't go through with their solution.

 

I absolutely think that more CVs would be a godsend, not only because they do counter BBs somewhat but because even their presence takes away one spot in the team, so it reduces the number of possible bbs.

But the increase in BB AA and the removal of Auto drop really worries me.
Auto drop is removed to "avoid seal clubbing". I don't support that playstyle in any way, but: who was the most frequent victim of Manual Drops? DDs? CL/CAs? No. It was BBs, that got one of the best counters against them removed from 2 of the tiers. I don't think that will reduce BB Population at all. It will actually more likely reduce CV-Population. And - as you stated - thats counterproductive...
 

PS: WG has often stated that they will not Limit the number of ships by class (other than CVs) because of Queue times...

[krazypenguin]

The only thing that will really make them fix stuff is if their profit drops.  Sadly, as WoWP has pretty much shown, so long as the golden goose that is WoT continues to lay an endless stream of golden eggs, WG will have so much money that they can safely prop up their other titles.

 

Truth be told, even if they do make changes they'll do it in exactly the same way they fix every other problem in this game - by leaving the original priblem intact but introducing a new element which brings even more problems with it.

[kalamies]

Que times will just be longer. If there is clearly one class that is better than the rest i can wait 5mins to get into match. Situation is pretty much same as it was with DDs. When torps were actually good there was 5-8 DDs on each team. Population on DDs was really high and then they decided to nerf then. It worked and numbers dropped, DDs were harder to play and in balance with other classes. Now BBs are just getting direct or indirect buffs.

 

Before torp concealment was nerfed it was pretty easy to torp people. When 15 torps from shima were spotted 1,5km away coming 70knts speed you were dead.

 

AA buffs have made it disgusting to play CV. Im at tier 8 and its always costly to attack since matcmaking puts you to T8-10 battles.

 

So yeah, i think wg knows the problem but just simply doesent do anything to problem.

[Spellfire40]

WG considered the skilltree revamp as the BB nerf since you now have to chose between survival Buffing tree and damage skills. I personally don't agre since now your do get important performance increasing skills faster compared to the old skilltree.  

[Darloc]

5 BB a side is what I see most game, playing BB or dd, this is fine, however playing CA is a pain in the backside as as soon as your spotted the BB will see you as an xp pinata and target you as a priority, I know that what I am doing in my BB.

With 3 BB that wouldn't be a problem, with 5 it becomes a problem. Restricting BB to 3 a side would be a solution but it would lengthen queue time. I don't think nerfing BB is a good move, I would rather they buff slightly CA to make them more viable, maybe having a detection range that decrease with time after you fire would make it easier for CA to engage BB and not get blown up so easily.

 

[Bersigil]

You see, what really worries me is not "buff class X" (although that might be a solution) or "nerf BBs" (...might be an other solution), I actually dont care how they approach this problem.
 

 

But its sadly depressing that they are not even acknowledging a problem any more that they once addmitted and even tried to fix. It seems they have accepted the problem, given up on solving it.
 

Its not THIS problem or THAT problem. Its giving up on solving a problem and "watching" it while not even admitting its existance any more, instead of acting.
 

[jure_eruj]

5 BB a side is what I see most game, playing BB or dd, this is fine, however playing CA is a pain in the backside as as soon as your spotted the BB will see you as an xp pinata and target you as a priority, I know that what I am doing in my BB.

With 3 BB that wouldn't be a problem, with 5 it becomes a problem. Restricting BB to 3 a side would be a solution but it would lengthen queue time. I don't think nerfing BB is a good move, I would rather they buff slightly CA to make them more viable, maybe having a detection range that decrease with time after you fire would make it easier for CA to engage BB and not get blown up so easily.

 

 

Gosh, I love it when there are 5 BBs on the opposite team and I am HE spamming the crapout of them while comfortably sitting in the smoke in my Kutuzov. The best part of it, yesterday I have a yamato running away like crazy, crying in chat that he will deal will anything but efing Kutuzov :-). HE spamming is your answer. And a little brain so you don't charge in like crazy and find yourself targeted by everybody.

[iJoby]

Do they actually listen to players and ST's ideas or complaints, or do they just look at stats months after something is changed or brought into the game? I presume the latter. 

[Admiral_noodle]

I can fully understand if WG staff are getting frustrated. Just as much as the community.

 

My opinion:

They know there are too many BBs. They are watching the situation. They believe (as I do) that BBs aren't op but just popular (I have my thoughts on why in another thread). They don't want to nerf them into the ground because they aren't actually op... instead lots of BBs put cruisers off playing - which is a feedback loop. If there were fewer BBs there would be no problem. Cruisers would play and it would fix itself.

 

What's the next line? *French cruisers*

 

I wouldn't be surprised if WG actually wanted RNBB next but swapped in more cruisers instead. If lots of players take up French cruiser grinding then the problem might fix itself.

 

Other methods of "BB control" could be looked at. Personally I'd nerf bb economy. Supply and demand. If you make BBs more credit expensive to play and cruisers "money makers" that might encourage the desired distribution.

[Cosseria]

BB overpopulation can't be solved. WG made BBs the easiest class to play as most of the players were heading for it anyway. They now can't nerf BBs, either directly or indirectly, without causing mass outcry and game quitting. "We're watching the situation" only means that they're well aware of this and they have no idea on how to tackle the issue.

[svadilfari]

there are so many questionable desicions all across the board. it´s really sad.

but whenever i´m disappointed in WoWs, i say to myself: "at least it´s not WoT"

lül

[Bunch_Of_OldGuys]

.....

I absolutely think that more CVs would be a godsend, not only because they do counter BBs somewhat but because even their presence takes away one spot in the team, so it reduces the number of possible bbs.

.....

 

With this you'll, again, nerf DDs, especially IJN and some CA - which will probably drive even more players to switch to BBs.

 

 

[Cyclops_]

As a BB player I would like to see a more uniform MM in game, the only way I can see it happening is playing smaller teams as per ranked, but there the problem turned into DD fests, but still would prefer to see smaller teams.

[EsaTuunanen]

My personal opinion doesn't factor in this. I also thought RPF would totally break the game and I was wrong.

Doesn't change the fact it's badly conceived skill.

Imagine if there were 5/6 wallhacking ships in match.

That would seriously break gameplay for stealth relying ships/actions.

 

Just like excessive number of BBs now makes playing hard for cruisers except for those which are super long range spammers or can hide in smoke.

 

 

 

"We're watching the situation" only means that they're well aware of this and they have no idea on how to tackle the issue.

So they'll make BBs even stronger with direct and indirect buffs...

[EmilyFara]

My personal opinion doesn't factor in this. I also thought RPF would totally break the game and I was wrong.

What really troubles me is that WGs specifically stated opinion was that BB overpopulation is a big issue and now (while the number of BBs has statistically not gone down) they don't see it as problem anymore after they didn't go through with their solution.

 

 

I absolutely think that more CVs would be a godsend, not only because they do counter BBs somewhat but because even their presence takes away one spot in the team, so it reduces the number of possible bbs.

But the increase in BB AA and the removal of Auto drop really worries me.

Auto drop is removed to "avoid seal clubbing". I don't support that playstyle in any way, but: who was the most frequent victim of Manual Drops? DDs? CL/CAs? No. It was BBs, that got one of the best counters against them removed from 2 of the tiers. I don't think that will reduce BB Population at all. It will actually more likely reduce CV-Population. And - as you stated - thats counterproductive...

 

 

PS: WG has often stated that they will not Limit the number of ships by class (other than CVs) because of Queue times...

Yesterday I was in a match with 1 carrier and 5 BBs per team. So the capital ships / support ship ratio was 50/50.

 

In my opinion carriers need to be fixed. And not nerfed more. Carriers promoted team play, punish solo play and camping, act as spotters against invisi firing and balance BBs who should be their main food.

Currently carriers aren't really effective to anything but each other and IJN DDs. It's pathetic really.

[G01ngToxicCommand0]

Do they actually listen to players and ST's ideas or complaints, or do they just look at stats months after something is changed or brought into the game? I presume the latter. 

 

Yes,a ctually I do believe WG listens to the players, mostly those that stop playing which is why we will see the removal of manual drop on tier 4/5 and SF. Those features probably made too many players uninstall and as a business Wargaming has to make sure that the largest number of customers enjoys their product enough that they will play and pay and if the removal of said features is benefitial to more players than by retaining them then it is the right decision from WG's part. We have to realise that features such as manual drop and SF is only used by a minority of the player base and that removing those will probably be benefitial to the vast majority of players contrary to retaining them which will only help a select few. Money talks as they say and happy customers = more money.

[Juanx]

 

Yes,a ctually I do believe WG listens to the players, mostly those that stop playing which is why we will see the removal of manual drop on tier 4/5 and SF. Those features probably made too many players uninstall and as a business Wargaming has to make sure that the largest number of customers enjoys their product enough that they will play and pay and if the removal of said features is benefitial to more players than by retaining them then it is the right decision from WG's part. We have to realise that features such as manual drop and SF is only used by a minority of the player base and that removing those will probably be benefitial to the vast majority of players contrary to retaining them which will only help a select few. Money talks as they say and happy customers = more money.

 

 

You have already ousted yourself as a shill, not much more to discuss with you...

 

They do seem to have lost interest, worse is, if whales like me start losing interest, is going to get worse for all. since the cash influx will stop.

[Admiral_H_Nelson]

If lots of players take up French cruiser grinding then the problem might fix itself.

 

 

Other methods of "BB control" could be looked at. Personally I'd nerf bb economy. Supply and demand. If you make BBs more credit expensive to play and cruisers "money makers" that might encourage the desired distribution.

 

 

Your idea about nerfing the BB economy and buffing the Cruiser economy is worth investigating further I believe. Especially if it includes big XP benefits that help speed up the grind.

 

The French cruiser line will only help provided Wargaming don't approach it in the same way as the RN cruiser line.

Yes, I know that I have a huge bee in my bonnet about RN cruisers, but even so I don't think that anyone would deny that:

a) They are very very different to other cruiser line (a new type, even)

Inevitably this means that many cruiser players won't feel comfortable playing them (even some hard core cruiser players such as myself)

b) They are "High Risk High Reward"

Hardly what you want to persuade people out of the "Low Risk High Reward" battleships. (And really, this is aimed at a niche audience.)

c) They designed the line with the the five best ship in the line at tiers 6-10 and the five worst at tiers 1-5.

This is hardly conducive to persuading people to keep grinding. Many will have just had enough and given up.

 

tl;dr  The French cruisers have to be easy to play and attractive to a mainstream audience.

(But from what I've been reading in the dedicated threads on the subject - things are not looking good)

[Shirakami_Kon]

I can fully understand if WG staff are getting frustrated. Just as much as the community.

 

My opinion:

They know there are too many BBs. They are watching the situation. They believe (as I do) that BBs aren't op but just popular (I have my thoughts on why in another thread). They don't want to nerf them into the ground because they aren't actually op... instead lots of BBs put cruisers off playing - which is a feedback loop. If there were fewer BBs there would be no problem. Cruisers would play and it would fix itself.

 

What's the next line? *French cruisers*

 

I wouldn't be surprised if WG actually wanted RNBB next but swapped in more cruisers instead. If lots of players take up French cruiser grinding then the problem might fix itself.

 

Other methods of "BB control" could be looked at. Personally I'd nerf bb economy. Supply and demand. If you make BBs more credit expensive to play and cruisers "money makers" that might encourage the desired distribution.

 

I see your point, but IMO, as you say we need more cruisers than BBs so cruisers are played more, and new cruisers are always a welcomed addition, but... the fact that there's more cruisers on the way does not solve the problem that we need more cruisers than BBs "in battle".

 

As you see already BBs are popular ships, people want to play them because of that, and there's people that will obviously play cruisers whenever a new line comes out, but BBs are so poular anyways that nothing will ever stop BBs having a rather big population regardless. That leads to the problem that new cruiser lines don't reduce the BB population in battles. Look at RN cruisers for example, sure, you could see huge swarms of them the first weeks in low tiers, but in mid and high tiers? Did you notice any change? At least I didn't.

 

So I agree that what we need is a BB cap in battles. And yes, we'll probably have longer queue times, but it's necessary. They did that for CVs anyways and the people that want to play that waits the whole 5 minutes if needed. But WG don't want that because there's less people playing other classes so it won't just affect BB players.

 

But there's one thing that WG has to see. Longer queue times might be a little boring. But WG, do you want to make players wait just a little longer for a battle or do you want to keep ruining the game the way things are going now if you don't do it? As I see it that's one thing WG should think about.

[mtm78]

So I agree, that what we need is a BB cap in battles. And yes, we'll probably have longer queue times, but it's necessary. They did that for CVs anyways and the people that want to play that waits the whole 5 minutes if needed. But WG don't want that because there's less people playing other classes so it won't just affect BB players.

 

That is my opinion as well. 

[Darloc]

 

Gosh, I love it when there are 5 BBs on the opposite team and I am HE spamming the crapout of them while comfortably sitting in the smoke in my Kutuzov. The best part of it, yesterday I have a yamato running away like crazy, crying in chat that he will deal will anything but efing Kutuzov :-). HE spamming is your answer. And a little brain so you don't charge in like crazy and find yourself targeted by everybody.

 

Taking the best tier VIII cruiser as a counter argument doesn't really make a point. Don't have smoke in my ibuki unfortunately, and no I don't rush like crazy, high tier game game are painful because you need to be very careful as when to engage. Last time on hot spot I was hugging island, being very careful with my angling and managed to have a descent game but still got hit once, angled and took 20k dmg, and the ibuki has descent armor. Every time I was spotted, even behind the island I had 2-3 BB waiting for me to push. At the moment the only interesting high level cruiser are probably RN as the smoke allow them to push more easily. 

I don't mind that CA are squishy but it is so easy to play BB in comparison, less and less people are bothering playing them when you can get an easy game in a BB.

[mtm78]

Money talks as they say and happy customers = more money.

 

So that is why they managed WoWp so well, thanks man I totally forgot about that!