Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
Soloun

0.8 Roll Back Date

58 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

88
[AMPOL]
Beta Tester
281 posts
7,251 battles

Does anyone have the date for this yet?

I'm checking now and then but as I no longer log into the game I may miss it, is there a form I can fill out or a box I can tick so I get a message? 

Just thought I'd ask :) No need for hate posts, I'm an optimist on many levels I know :)  

 

  • Cool 4
  • Funny 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
198 posts
4,775 battles
1 hour ago, Soloun said:

Does anyone have the date for this yet?

I'm checking now and then but as I no longer log into the game I may miss it, is there a form I can fill out or a box I can tick so I get a message? 

Just thought I'd ask 🙂 No need for hate posts, I'm an optimist on many levels I know 🙂 

 

While I admire your optimism, I'm afraid that the community has quite happily shot itself in the foot on this one. :fish_haloween:

If you weren't one of the ones that kept demanding change then keep spreading that optimism so when the inevitable happens you'll be prepared to absorb the shock and despair.

On the other hand if you were one of those that kept demanding change then your optimism is as false as the original community ideal for this patch. And I seem to remember you were one of the ones that was demanding change, specifically for the total removal of CV's in game. Ironic that with the change so many like you desired came even more CV's.

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
88
[AMPOL]
Beta Tester
281 posts
7,251 battles

So its my own fault that I wanted change, got no say in how that change would occur and am to blame because the change implemented without any input from me has ruined the game, therefore it's my fault.... hmm you work for WGing don't you :) I know that thought process type anywhere :)

Yes I wanted the ability to chose if I played with CV's or not.

Yes I wanted a Ship V Ship game only.

Yes I don't see ANY way you can balance an Aircraft Carrier against surface Ships, but maybe talking to the people who play CV's would have been a good start? 

All so true, I guess you need to blame someone so whatever :) Blame away, typical need to blame.

This patch is not ANYONE'S fault except for WGing, end of story, either that or there are a HUGE amount of emails in my junk email from WGing that I missed :) 

Also I haven't demanded anything, I've asked and complained about things that I don't like in the game. 

Not even a nice try :)

  

Edited by Soloun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
768
[MRI]
Member
1,872 posts
10,833 battles
6 minutes ago, Soloun said:

Yes I wanted the ability to chose if I played with CV's or not. 

Honestly this is not going to happen. If WG wanted to remove CVs, they should have done so in alpha/beta before the game went live. But it is too late now so we have to make do with the situation.

And yeah I see plenty of people asking for a "no CV" game mode. But the idea of excluding a whole class of players just because you don't like to play against them is just plain silly though. What's next? A no DD game mode? No radar ship game mode? No potato game mode? No better-player-than-me game mode?

I am not sure why people keep asking for CV removal when it is extremely unrealistic for it to happen. Wishing thinking I guess. Insisting on removing CVs instead of fixing them is not helping anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
198 posts
4,775 battles
3 minutes ago, Soloun said:

So its my own fault that I wanted change, got no say in how that change would occur and am to blame because the change implemented without any input from me has ruined the game, therefore it's my fault.... hmm you work for WGing don't you 🙂 I know that thought process type anywhere 🙂

Yes I wanted the ability to chose if I played with CV's or not.

Yes I wanted a Ship V Ship game only.

Yes I don't see ANY way you can balance an Aircraft Carrier against surface Ships, but maybe talking to the people who play CV's would have been a good start? 

All so true, I guess you need to blame someone so whatever 🙂 Blame away, typical need to blame.

This patch is not ANYONE'S fault except for WGing, end of story, either that or there are a HUGE amount of emails in my junk email from WGing that I missed 🙂

Not even a nice try 🙂

  

You demanded a change to how WG implemented CV's, WG went away and tested how best they could make it work. While admittedly it was a poor effort and far more testing should have been done, they had been told time and time again that things had to change. And so that change happened. It's not your singular fault that this happened no, the blame can be collectively placed on everyone who demanded some form of change. And removing CV's from the game was never going to be on the table. WG is trying to run a business, if they suddenly told several thousand loyal CV players that they weren't allowed to play their game anymore they could be facing an exodus of hundreds of players who are willing to buy things from the Premium Shop.

Also I am not nor have I ever been employed by Wargaming, or any of its subsidiaries, the fact that you would believe that just to focus the attention back onto me is actually pretty ridiculous.  I am a pragmatist, I've seen how F2P game developers respond to demands of change and one thing is always clear, no game developer in the history of Free to Play online games has every solely relied on what the players want, especially in a game like this where the different players are so loyal to each individual class. If they did rely solely on what the players want then by now there would be the following:

Kitakami would be still in the game, Kitakami was not something that should have ever been allowed to stay in the game.

Submarines would have already been added, you think CV's are bad, imagine not even knowing where the stream of torps is coming from without a DD to spot for you.

Tone, Ise and Hyuga would be playable.

A-150 would have been playable.

If they listened to BB players, Shima, Kharba, and most of the USN DD line wouldn't be in the game.

If they listened to DD players, there would be no radar and the IJN gunboat line would have DFAA

If they listened to Australian and New Zealand players they would have changed the timeframe for clan battles.

But none of the things listed above have happened and they most likely never will.

WG is a business, they rely on their games to make money, while this patch was not well implemented, it is still the first of three that will fine tune and modify how the CV's are implemented. New players to the game, who had never touched the old model will learn and those that were used to the old system will adapt, as will the rest of the player base. The meta will change and figuring out how to use that to your advantage will drive even further changes and modifications as playstyles become more flexible.

If you want a game mode where you only play as Non-Aircraft carriers then play War Thunder. There are presently no CV's implemented in that game and it is a fair assumption that they never will be, at least not as playable ships.

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
249
[ULAG]
Member
899 posts
8,291 battles
38 minutes ago, Thyaliad said:

No potato game mode

I don't think anybody will disagree on having this one as an option...:Smile_trollface::etc_red_button:

Edited by _TAMAL_
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
100 posts
1,342 battles
1 hour ago, darkflame88 said:

You demanded a change to how WG implemented CV's, WG went away and tested how best they could make it work. While admittedly it was a poor effort and far more testing should have been done, they had been told time and time again that things had to change. And so that change happened. It's not your singular fault that this happened no, the blame can be collectively placed on everyone who demanded some form of change. And removing CV's from the game was never going to be on the table. WG is trying to run a business, if they suddenly told several thousand loyal CV players that they weren't allowed to play their game anymore they could be facing an exodus of hundreds of players who are willing to buy things from the Premium Shop.

Also I am not nor have I ever been employed by Wargaming, or any of its subsidiaries, the fact that you would believe that just to focus the attention back onto me is actually pretty ridiculous.  I am a pragmatist, I've seen how F2P game developers respond to demands of change and one thing is always clear, no game developer in the history of Free to Play online games has every solely relied on what the players want, especially in a game like this where the different players are so loyal to each individual class. If they did rely solely on what the players want then by now there would be the following:

Kitakami would be still in the game, Kitakami was not something that should have ever been allowed to stay in the game.

Submarines would have already been added, you think CV's are bad, imagine not even knowing where the stream of torps is coming from without a DD to spot for you.

Tone, Ise and Hyuga would be playable.

A-150 would have been playable.

If they listened to BB players, Shima, Kharba, and most of the USN DD line wouldn't be in the game.

If they listened to DD players, there would be no radar and the IJN gunboat line would have DFAA

If they listened to Australian and New Zealand players they would have changed the timeframe for clan battles.

But none of the things listed above have happened and they most likely never will.

WG is a business, they rely on their games to make money, while this patch was not well implemented, it is still the first of three that will fine tune and modify how the CV's are implemented. New players to the game, who had never touched the old model will learn and those that were used to the old system will adapt, as will the rest of the player base. The meta will change and figuring out how to use that to your advantage will drive even further changes and modifications as playstyles become more flexible.

If you want a game mode where you only play as Non-Aircraft carriers then play War Thunder. There are presently no CV's implemented in that game and it is a fair assumption that they never will be, at least not as playable ships.

First you say that WG changed the CVs because players wanted change...

Then you say that WG never listens to players, and never will..

 

No wonder i'm confused. :cap_book:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,163
[CLAY]
Beta Tester
2,300 posts
12,508 battles
1 hour ago, _TAMAL_ said:

I don't think anybody will disagree on having this one as an option...:Smile_trollface::etc_red_button:

Over 50% W/L and under 50% W/L...

But it won't happen because potatoes hate only one thing more than unicums - other potatoes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
198 posts
4,775 battles
21 minutes ago, Mr_Good_Citizen said:

First you say that WG changed the CVs because players wanted change...

Then you say that WG never listens to players, and never will..

 

No wonder i'm confused. :cap_book:

You're confused because you clearly didn't read my post. You just took what you wanted to fit your own personal belief and then shifted the focus back onto me.

Because I'm pretty certain I said they never solely listen to players, not that they don't listen to players at all. They look at what can make the game work and then implement what they believe would work best.

2 hours ago, darkflame88 said:

no game developer in the history of Free to Play online games has ever solely relied on what the players want

They don't however simply take the advice that all CV players should be banned and the entire class permanently removed from the game and then proceed to do exactly that just because players berate the devs over the head with their own personal wants.

The players screamed for over a year that a change had to occur, WG listened to that torrent of shrieking and crying and then created a change that they thought would work. They asked for player feedback but did not SOLELY rely on that information, they tested internally as well as externally to find the formula that they thought would work best for the game. And while it clearly hasn't worked that doesn't mean that they won't ask for player feedback in the future, it just means that the information that players provide them won't be the ONLY information they use.

Edited by darkflame88

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
198 posts
4,775 battles
18 minutes ago, Max_Battle said:

Over 50% W/L and under 50% W/L...

But it won't happen because potatoes hate only one thing more than unicums - other potatoes.

I thought the one thing potatoes hated more than Unicums were Bots..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
249
[ULAG]
Member
899 posts
8,291 battles
1 hour ago, Max_Battle said:

But it won't happen because potatoes hate only one thing more than unicums - other potatoes.

Why would potatoes hate Unicums tho? Unicums carry potatoes and provide them with free wins...don't potatoes like to win?:Smile_unsure:

Edit : it's not about W/L, it is about using your brain vs not using your brain :Smile-_tongue:

2 hours ago, darkflame88 said:

You demanded a change to how WG implemented CV's, WG went away and tested how best they could make it work. While admittedly it was a poor effort and far more testing should have been done, they had been told time and time again that things had to change. And so that change happened. It's not your singular fault that this happened no, the blame can be collectively placed on everyone who demanded some form of change

Afaik nobody asked for a change, what everybody asked for was a "Fix". There was no issue having CV gameplay in RTS format, it was just unbalanced and broken(which is WG's fault in inability to create a reasonable gameplay experience in the first place). There were hundreds if not thousands of posts is all forums suggesting how it could potentially be "Fixed"....If WG really listened to its playerbase, then we would have the old RTS system but modified in a way that benefits the game and its players. But we all know that :

2 hours ago, darkflame88 said:

WG is trying to run a business

So, they prioritized changing the CV gameplay so that it is "playable" in Console and instead of admitting it, we are greeted with a big fat mess:Smile_facepalm: I am not saying that the change is bad... over time, it will become reasonable to say the least. But the fact that WG as a company cares little about its customers is what bugs me the most. 

Edited by _TAMAL_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10
[HMAS_]
Member
24 posts
13,708 battles
2 hours ago, Thyaliad said:

Honestly this is not going to happen. If WG wanted to remove CVs, they should have done so in alpha/beta before the game went live. But it is too late now so we have to make do with the situation.

And yeah I see plenty of people asking for a "no CV" game mode. But the idea of excluding a whole class of players just because you don't like to play against them is just plain silly though. What's next? A no DD game mode? No radar ship game mode? No potato game mode? No better-player-than-me game mode?

I am not sure why people keep asking for CV removal when it is extremely unrealistic for it to happen. Wishing thinking I guess. Insisting on removing CVs instead of fixing them is not helping anyone.

I'm inclined to agree with you however, "these people" make up 95% of the players and "these people" have invested a lot of time & money to play in balanced battle environment. Trivial matters like matching and OP ships that have trouble management and players, pail in comparison to what's happening in this game with the introduction of 0.8.0 CV rework. I realize that the evolutionary aspect of the game is major consideration for its economic ability to maintain market share, but I also realize that die hard fans/players of any game don't like change; so a happy medium between management & players is paramount to the game's survival.  The implementation of this last patch carries with it a blatant disregard for the battle scenario of every ship, CV included. The WOWs play style and ability of each individual ship to influence the outcome of the battle, is based on the modules and consumables of each ship. In order to accomplish good stats and win battles, players must hone their skills and play style according to the tools assigned to each ship. The game in it's current state makes a mockery of concealment and has altered the role of ships in general. As far as solution goes I don't think CV eradication is the answer either, but I do believe they have seriously fucked with the fundamentals that have made this game what it is today. I believe that every player that loves this game as I do, cannot just stop playing, but are most likely playing ranked and scenario battles to keep away from the OP/CV invasion. If wargaming wants to keep the money rolling in, I'm pretty sure that a solution to this debacle is in wings, because when it's all boiled down, its all about the money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
748
[HMASW]
Member
1,853 posts
43 minutes ago, _TAMAL_ said:

Why would potatoes hate Unicums tho? Unicums carry potatoes and provide them with free wins...don't potatoes like to win?:Smile_unsure:

 

You DO know what they do to us potatoes, don't you?

We are constantly subjected to getting diced, mashed, fried, immersed in deep water, cut in half, & forever being accused of being too salty...

:Smile_trollface:

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
479 posts
1,474 battles

WG could have parallel run 0.8.0 with 0.7.12 for some time. side by side,  even better for data collection and statistics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
198 posts
4,775 battles
22 minutes ago, _TAMAL_ said:

Afaik nobody asked for a change, what everybody asked for was a "Fix". There was no issue having CV gameplay in RTS format, it was just unbalanced and broken(which is WG's fault in inability to create a reasonable gameplay experience in the first place). There were hundreds if not thousands of posts is all forums suggesting how it could potentially be "Fixed"....If WG really listened to its playerbase, then we would have the old RTS system but modified in a way that benefits the game and its players.

Iirc what the OP and others like them were asking for was not a fix, it was the permanent removal of all CV lines. That is not a fix, that's the exodus of a chunk of the playerbase. Players wanted to change how CV's interacted with other ships on the battlefield, and some who asked for a fix wanted the removal of the core mechanics of the RTS system, things like the removal of strafe and manual drop. Players wanted the carriers to be so heavily nerfed that they would be impossible to play in high tiers and completely pointless to obtain. These were not fixes. that is changing how the whole class performs.

Some players wanted certain CV's to be removed from the game, Saipan being the main example and while I agree that it was OP, WG wasn't about to permanently remove a premium ship from the game, not just the store but the whole game.

The issue that players had was that there was always a chance that a unicum went up against a potato, and when the unicum demolished the potato, there was nothing to really stop them. Completely removing the whole mechanics of the class has fixed this issue as everyone now starts from scratch. 

I'm not saying I agree with how WG has implemented this, personally I believe they should have left the CV issue for a later date after a lot more rounds of testing. It would have meant more salt being poured down the devs throats by those in the forums but at least it might have worked out better.

And to be fair, many of the CV players asked for fixes to the way the AA mechanics and flight height worked. That some ships AA batteries could fire through their own ship, or that in reality most aircraft would normally fly to high for the smaller calibre weapons to inflict damage unless the planes were right on top of the ship. Yet when players asked for these to be fixed they were often drowned out by those that stated that the best fix is to remove CV's.

Afaik the current game engine is not capable of delivering what many players wanted. WG could have solved everything by completely rebuilding the game in a entirely new engine, but how many fixes would be needed then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
249
[ULAG]
Member
899 posts
8,291 battles
35 minutes ago, tsuenwan said:

WG could have parallel run 0.8.0 with 0.7.12 for some time. side by side,  even better for data collection and statistics

That's never gonna work, reallistically speaking...considering that 90% of the playerbase doesnt want CVs to be in their matches, nobody would play 0.8 when there's 0.7.12 around. What WG CAN do however is increase the reward for participating in PTS to something that actually matters to players like free xp, doubloons or the resources like coal and steel. Even if it is small amount, it'll work towards bringing more people in the testing. I never even bothered playing in PTS simply because the reward just isn't right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,910 posts
6,036 battles

@_TAMAL_ They MUST get more people to play PTS. I play nearly every round of PTS since before 0.7.0 (could be much earlier, I don't remember) and there are A LOT to know and learn about in PTs.

I got to try Lion, Saint-Louis and many changes and know a lot about the incoming changes. I don't feel like being taken by storm when 0.8.0 hit and I play my Ryujo in Live. Because I learned in PTS. And because of that, I have the first-hand experience to give feedback reliably.

The highest number of players in PTS I've seen is around 1.200, I've never seen 1.500, ever. A shame, really. More people giving feedback the better.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
249
[ULAG]
Member
899 posts
8,291 battles
11 minutes ago, Paladinum said:

@_TAMAL_ They MUST get more people to play PTS. I play nearly every round of PTS since before 0.7.0 (could be much earlier, I don't remember) and there are A LOT to know and learn about in PTs.

I got to try Lion, Saint-Louis and many changes and know a lot about the incoming changes. I don't feel like being taken by storm when 0.8.0 hit and I play my Ryujo in Live. Because I learned in PTS. And because of that, I have the first-hand experience to give feedback reliably.

The highest number of players in PTS I've seen is around 1.200, I've never seen 1.500, ever. A shame, really. More people giving feedback the better.

I agree and that is why I was proposing a reward buff. People need to have incentive to participate in PTS otherwise they just wont bother. I personally dont care much about trying out ships because there are plenty of videos out there about what a ship exactly is. In fact, I completed grinding both Ryujo and Ranger with 76% and 59% WR in 0.8.0 without having any prior gameplay experiences. What I did though is watch a lot of videos of PTS. YMMV

Edited by _TAMAL_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34
[FFD]
Member
173 posts
3,009 battles

I seeing a huge chance of rollback, the devs never know whats right to do and whats wrong to do, its pretty a fun show. Lets sit back and eat popcorn for now :D 

image.png.3f035aa5c1b1871daafee8bf83ca1dce.png 

 

image.png.8dc92daf0b52613f4b7e4feed083a953.png

 

Pretty nice collection of dislikes there XD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
479 posts
1,474 battles
25 minutes ago, darkflame88 said:

Afaik the current game engine is not capable of delivering what many players wanted. WG could have solved everything by completely rebuilding the game in a entirely new engine, but how many fixes would be needed then?

It is not the limit of the game engine, The oldest big world engine can handle far complex scenarios, the problem is the WG's game play design. 

Wows game play was initially design based on surface naval combat model, neither RTS nor 0.8.0 air power model are compatible with this.surface.model without breaking the game flow. it would require making air power equal power to gun power. then even if they many to balance the two. then on CV onside, anyone knew a bit of naval air power would not feel fun to play such weak CVs, on the non CV side, surface action still being badly constrained by air power that no one would feel fun to play. 

if WG really want CV to be the prime factor in the game play, then remove all the gun battle element from the game and make a full CV game, instead of a half hearted air surface combat hybrid that pleases no one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32
[HKENL]
Member
161 posts
8,080 battles
7 hours ago, Soloun said:

Yes I wanted the ability to chose if I played with CV's or not.

 

if you play with CV, it may  have12CV Vs 12CV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
479 posts
1,474 battles
3 hours ago, _TAMAL_ said:

That's never gonna work, reallistically speaking...considering that 90% of the playerbase doesnt want CVs to be in their matches, nobody would play 0.8 when there's 0.7.12 around. What WG CAN do however is increase the reward for participating in PTS to something that actually matters to players like free xp, doubloons or the resources like coal and steel. Even if it is small amount, it'll work towards bringing more people in the testing. I never even bothered playing in PTS simply because the reward just isn't right.

NO, Parallel run worked, and it had long proven good record by many major softwares, and it does not exclude option for giving user incentive to upgrade. 

If WG got something good to prove, why cann't poeple being given time to try and the freedom to choose? in padticular if you care about their player base, at the end of the day, WOWS is just a game, People don't need it to sustain their life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
249
[ULAG]
Member
899 posts
8,291 battles
1 hour ago, tsuenwan said:

NO, Parallel run worked, and it had long proven good record by many major softwares, and it does not exclude option for giving user incentive to upgrade. 

If WG got something good to prove, why cann't poeple being given time to try and the freedom to choose? in padticular if you care about their player base, at the end of the day, WOWS is just a game, People don't need it to sustain their life.

What I am trying to say is instead of running parallel clients why not incentivise players to participate in PTS more. It IS a parallel client. Just increase rewards in PTS and make the session long enough to get enough data.

but it's too late to do anything like that now because the new patch has already been released

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
479 posts
1,474 battles
7 hours ago, _TAMAL_ said:

What I am trying to say is instead of running parallel clients why not incentivise players to participate in PTS more. It IS a parallel client. Just increase rewards in PTS and make the session long enough to get enough data.

but it's too late to do anything like that now because the new patch has already been released

Again, when talking about rollback, there is no early nor late to parallel run.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×