Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
BIGCOREMKP0I

What if they screw all the premium ships and uptiered it with massive nerfs?

54 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Member
2,089 posts
9,692 battles

Going on the Caesar issue, what if Belfast was nerfed as well, except changes are she got torpedoes, or Missouri getting Sigma Nerf by 1.7?

Kamikaze Tier 6?, USS Black into Tier X?, etc.

To be honest WG Developers never adjust the game right such as the carriers of Tier X (and Midway) are mostly unplayable by now, but this is only my opinion, 

there are also worst cases such as Scharnhorst uptiered to 8 or even Tirpitz Uptiered to 9.

 

Upgrades are unecessary, but im concered some ships will get an uptiered and nerf it with a hammer somehow, i don't like it at all.

Edited by BIGCOREMKP0I

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,114 posts
4,359 battles

There is a similar thread going on the NA forums about this,which community manager Radar_X is replying in:

https://forum.worldofwarships.com/topic/182524-wg-expects-the-player-base-to-accept-premium-ship-nerfs-because-players-never-raged-about-premium-ship-buffs/

Its still coming across with the typical WG attitude of 'why are you uspet,everything is ok' they trot out when the poo hits the fan.

This one especially shows how out of touch they are.From what I have read testers and CC told WG that the GC was OP,and were ignored.And Radar_X is pulling the ' we didn't realise it at the time excuse':

https://forum.worldofwarships.com/topic/182524-wg-expects-the-player-base-to-accept-premium-ship-nerfs-because-players-never-raged-about-premium-ship-buffs/?page=3&tab=comments#comment-4284388

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HMASW]
Member
1,669 posts
55 minutes ago, BanditSE1977 said:

There is a similar thread going on the NA forums about this,which community manager Radar_X is replying in:

https://forum.worldofwarships.com/topic/182524-wg-expects-the-player-base-to-accept-premium-ship-nerfs-because-players-never-raged-about-premium-ship-buffs/

Its still coming across with the typical WG attitude of 'why are you uspet,everything is ok' they trot out when the poo hits the fan.

This one especially shows how out of touch they are.From what I have read testers and CC told WG that the GC was OP,and were ignored.And Radar_X is pulling the ' we didn't realise it at the time excuse':

https://forum.worldofwarships.com/topic/182524-wg-expects-the-player-base-to-accept-premium-ship-nerfs-because-players-never-raged-about-premium-ship-buffs/?page=3&tab=comments#comment-4284388

 

I know this doing the rounds at the moment, but its so VERY apt....

 

imageproxy.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
834 posts
3,155 battles

WEIRD, the tinfoil hat distributor brigade on WoT have had the rebuttal for 8 YEARS now, that "oh WG can't adjust premium vehicle characteristics because when they tried it on the type 59 in NA, one guy sued them and they aren't allowed to by USA consumer law, at least, in the USA".

 

UHOH, time for tin foil hat brigade to come up with a new phrase.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,248 posts
10,707 battles
9 hours ago, BIGCOREMKP0I said:

Going on the Caesar issue, what if Belfast was nerfed as well, except changes are she got torpedoes, or Missouri getting Sigma Nerf by 1.7?

Kamikaze Tier 6?, USS Black into Tier X?, etc.

To be honest WG Developers never adjust the game right such as the carriers of Tier X (and Midway) are mostly unplayable by now, but this is only my opinion, 

there are also worst cases such as Scharnhorst uptiered to 8 or even Tirpitz Uptiered to 9.

 

Upgrades are unecessary, but im concered some ships will get an uptiered and nerf it with a hammer somehow, i don't like it at all.

Flint and black they aren't OP but they were given to players who are extremely competitive.. hence the higher WR and Avg damages..

Belfast? Lol A lot of people got belfast.. unlike ships like Giulio Cesare WG removed it from premium shop faster than belfast.
 
With Missouri the AP damage towards DDs has been nerfed so I don't think it needs any nerfs also when it broadsides it will get destroyed with even cruiser's 203 AP shells so it is okay unless you're talking about credits earning. other than that it is not really that much of an issue.

Where as Kamikaze... I'd totally blame WG for nerfing Minekaze to the ground before that Kamikaze was just a replica of Minekaze with premium tag on it. When they worked on the IJN DD line they nerfed minekaze down to ground and later changed the line added Mutsuki to it's tier from T6. Also if you need to nerf it you gotta nerf Kamikaze R makes it 2 ships. Also a ship which a lot of player base has right now.

Uh Scharnhorst? Tirpitz? Well they can face T5 and T6s so... It is more to blame the +2 MM than anything.. while doing that ships like emerald mutsuki T-22 need buffs. (not much for mutsuki tho) but they're all underperforming.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
370 posts
15,335 battles

It has come across to me for a whilethat wg is not properly listening to the community and then making the appropriate decisions. Instead they are just rushing forwards with their timeline regardless of what will happen and then correcting their mistakes 6 months later. Then they attempt to do damage control. Somewhere along this entire chain in the company either i) someone is not doing their job highlighting the concerns or ii) people are ignoring that someone that is doing their job.

Take your pick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
557 posts
7,128 battles

Btw Sub_Octavian in RU forums has clearly stated that GC adjustment is just the beginning...a lot of other ships will be facing the same issue in near future. So it is not impossible to see broken ships like Belfast and Kamikaze moved up a tier with slight adjustment. What bugs me though is that these are premiums that people bought with money. WG themselves said that they will not touch premiums after they are released. It seems WG's loyalty to their customers is what's at stake now. Hopefully WG will realise that before shit hits the fan...

Edit : Here is the link, please use google translate

https://forum.worldofwarships.ru/topic/123372-закрытое-тестирование-премиум-корабли-и-советские-линкоры/?page=3&tab=comments#comment-5355954

Edited by _TAMAL_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
370 posts
15,335 battles

Skimmed though forum NA's thoughts. As per my previous comment, wg is trying to deflect blame. It is not as if the community didn't make noises about issues, rather that this is the dog that is wg is believing:

imageproxy.png

Also, if it hasn't been suggested in the NA forums by anyone, there is the hardball option that the USA is famed for: Class action lawsuit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,215 posts
8,572 battles

I'm all for balancing things - and continually balancing as the game evolves. Whether a ship was acquired through cash or through time and effort (grinding), I'm fine with my personal fleet being adjusted as necessary. A drastic change that alters the playstyle of a ship (eg. CV rework) is another matter and should be compensated fairly (and Wargaming has always been good about this in the past). But adjustments that bring a ship's "potency" into balance without changing its playstyle or general tactics are fine with me and are necessary for the health of the game.

So many Premium ships are unavailable to new players now because existing owners don't want a level playing field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
88
[ANZAC]
Member
366 posts
12,256 battles
13 hours ago, Unraveler said:

I'm all for balancing things - and continually balancing as the game evolves. Whether a ship was acquired through cash or through time and effort (grinding), I'm fine with my personal fleet being adjusted as necessary. A drastic change that alters the playstyle of a ship (eg. CV rework) is another matter and should be compensated fairly (and Wargaming has always been good about this in the past). But adjustments that bring a ship's "potency" into balance without changing its playstyle or general tactics are fine with me and are necessary for the health of the game.

So many Premium ships are unavailable to new players now because existing owners don't want a level playing field.

Out of interest, how many premiums do you own?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CLAY]
Member
589 posts
6,675 battles

WoWS is a continually evolving game. New content is always being added. Game mechanics are constantly getting tweaked. All to ensure a fair and balanced game which people will want to play and spend money on.

Premium ships do not exist in a vacuum, there will be time when is ship is deemed “OP”. My attitude for a while has been “WG should not realease OP ships”. With everything that’s happening, this is a rather close minded view. WG is not one entity, they can not always judge a ship’s exact performance before it is realeased, they cannot predict how some players will exploit it, and decisions made by marketing may not always be approved by development.

All tech tree ships get continually nerfed, buffed, tweaked, in order to (attempt to) make the game balanced and fun. If a premium ship is causing issues, maybe it should not be completely immune.

That said, If a change is made to a Pemium ship, one that you have spent money on, a change that significantly affects performance, WG should offer a full refund. In actual money, not doubloons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
834 posts
3,155 battles

And this is where opinions are made and read and absorbed by both players who pay for the game and players who don't.

Whose opinion should matter?.

The player who has 10 or more premium ships and premium account always active would ask for premium ships to be kept as the are sold when purchased, and only buffed from that moment onwards to match power creep of the typical WG evolutionary cycles.

Perhaps each poster should declare, before their opinion is absorbed.

I know from years of experience that the potential market of patrons is more valuable to WG than their current paying players (this includes the current players who play for free).

The value they place on goodwill of the business model is 0.

In the west, the goodwill of a business IS valued.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CLAY]
Member
589 posts
6,675 battles
5 minutes ago, Muds_Revenge said:

And this is where opinions are made and read and absorbed by both players who pay for the game and players who don't.

Whose opinion should matter?.

The player who has 10 or more premium ships and premium account always active would ask for premium ships to be kept as the are sold when purchased, and only buffed from that moment onwards to match power creep of the typical WG evolutionary cycles.

Perhaps each poster should declare, before their opinion is absorbed.

I know from years of experience that the potential market of patrons is more valuable to WG than their current paying players (this includes the current players who play for free).

The value they place on goodwill of the business model is 0.

In the west, the goodwill of a business IS valued.

 

 

Ok, here is my response.

I recently purchased a year of premium, before then I bough premium time haphazardly.

Premiums I have paid real money for;

HSF Harekaze; HSF Graf Spee; Atago; Atlanta; Missouri (specifically paid for doubloons to convert to Free XP); Scharnhorst (Actually bough a Saipan years ago, but recently took the doubloon refund and got Scharnhorst with it); Belfast (not especially OP while in my hands); Cossack (approx. $3.00 worth of whatever in game currency we used to buy it); Dunkerque; & Perth.

And many more which I have not purchased but which I earned through in game events, though countless hours of playing. Including but not limited to P.E.F, Aigle, Indianapolis; Duke of York, Dreadnought etc etc… And while I did not pay for these, I did invest a large amount of time.

So, in the interest of full disclosure, for me, its more about having the ship in my collection, not necessarily playing her to her full potential. I don't necessarily obtain a ship because of its performance, but rather because it looks cool and fun, or has some History to it.

That said, I never would have obtained P.E.F, Aigle, Indianapolis or Duke of York if I had to pay real money for them. I got them purely because the time it took to grind their missions was less valuable to me than their monetary cost. But they were essentially 'Free', so I still wanted them.

The ships I have actually purchased, I would likely still keep, even if they were nerfed, they would still be fun, even if they were no longer competitive.

Do my opinions matter? They matter to me, but everyone else can read and form their own opinions, but the above is where I'm coming from.

 

In closing, here are four opinions I currently have. These opinions may change over time, but I feel quite strongly about them now.

1. WG should make every effort to balance a ship before it is released for sale.

2. WG are not all knowing, they will not always be able to balance a ship before release, or subsequent changes on the live server may cause it to become unbalanced.

3. Any ship in the game, tech tree or premium may require changes in order to maintain game balance.

4. If WG make any changes which significantly affects the performance of a ship someone has spent money on, they should offer a full refund.

 

Share this post


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

Premium ships have been rebalanced many times, and there many others means rather than uptiering. 

What I notice is that uptiering requires no effort to implement, the most cost effective.

Sure WG can do many things, but they have to be simple and easy, and always end up with many rough edges.

I strongly believed this the real reason WG chosed to implement Radar/Hydro without terrain LoS, and universal penalty for Afk users. Then porting WOWP into WOWS to become the so called CV rework, which just became a Epic task for WG to produced this 0.8.xx release with so many bleeding edges.

And then conveniently, slot in a uptier premium with the fix. Everything follow their same style. Simple and very rough.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,215 posts
8,572 battles
3 hours ago, j0e90 said:

Out of interest, how many premiums do you own?

 

1 hour ago, Muds_Revenge said:

And this is where opinions are made and read and absorbed by both players who pay for the game and players who don't.

Whose opinion should matter?.

The player who has 10 or more premium ships and premium account always active would ask for premium ships to be kept as the are sold when purchased, and only buffed from that moment onwards to match power creep of the typical WG evolutionary cycles.

Not at all true. I currently have 56 Premium ships - 4 of which are considered overpowered and have been removed from sale - and would be happy to see them adjusted as necessary. There's two main reasons for this: firstly, I don't like feeling like I'm cheating. This tends to negatively affect my opinion of a ship and makes it less fun to play; secondly, I don't enjoy facing the overpowered ships of other players, regardless of whether I also have that particular ship. It's frustrating to see a potentially good match go down the drain because a Belfast or GC single-handedly destroyed an entire flank. Are people really proud to win such battles?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
186 posts
1,474 battles
1 hour ago, Unraveler said:

 

Not at all true. I currently have 56 Premium ships - 4 of which are considered overpowered and have been removed from sale - and would be happy to see them adjusted as necessary. There's two main reasons for this: firstly, I don't like feeling like I'm cheating. This tends to negatively affect my opinion of a ship and makes it less fun to play; secondly, I don't enjoy facing the overpowered ships of other players, regardless of whether I also have that particular ship. It's frustrating to see a potentially good match go down the drain because a Belfast or GC single-handedly destroyed an entire flank. Are people really proud to win such battles?

It was WG who designed and release the ships, and they sold them for real cash.

Please understand players and community tester are not the one responsible to find out what is OP and what is unbalanced. It is part of the game development job.

I accept all OP ships can be recalled, if and Only if WG buy them back with real cash. They can do whatever they like to the ship as long as they don't keeping people's money.

It is not how bad OP the ships are? It is the business practice and their credibility.

Edited by tsuenwan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CLAY]
Member
589 posts
6,675 battles
1 hour ago, Unraveler said:

 

Not at all true. I currently have 56 Premium ships - 4 of which are considered overpowered and have been removed from sale - and would be happy to see them adjusted as necessary. There's two main reasons for this: firstly, I don't like feeling like I'm cheating. This tends to negatively affect my opinion of a ship and makes it less fun to play; secondly, I don't enjoy facing the overpowered ships of other players, regardless of whether I also have that particular ship. It's frustrating to see a potentially good match go down the drain because a Belfast or GC single-handedly destroyed an entire flank. Are people really proud to win such battles?

Well said.

Another thing to consider. I have Belfast, many people don't have Belfast. Many people want Belfast, not because she is an OP ship but because she is unique with a lot of history.

WG will not sell Belfast because she is OP. If she was not OP, they could sell her again and people would be able to buy a unique ship with history.

Share this post


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

I have GC, I had never played one battle with it as I do not like the play style of BB.

There is always the arguement of the common good, but there are also ethics to follow when implementing them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,215 posts
8,572 battles
12 minutes ago, tsuenwan said:

It was WG who designed and release the ships, and they sold them for real cash.

I accept all OP ships can be recalled, if and Only if WG buy them back with real cash. They can do whatever they like to the ship as long as they don't keeping people's money.

It is not how bad OP the ships are? It is the business practice and their credibility.

If you've never played a single battle in the ship, then sure. Full refund is appropriate if it's no longer to your liking. However, if you've used the ship then you've already derived entertainment value and game progress (xp, credits, mission completions, etc) from the purchase. A full cash refund seems a bit unreasonable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,215 posts
8,572 battles
7 minutes ago, tsuenwan said:

I have GC, I had never played one battle with it as I do not like the play style of BB.

There is always the arguement of the common good, but there are also ethics to follow when implementing them. 

It can be very simple, though. Buy a ship with the expectation that it will be buffed or nerfed if it's performance isn't in line. Just like when you grind for a tech tree ship. It's only when a player buys a ship because it's overpowered (and they want it to remain that way) that any of this causes problems. And really, I have very little sympathy for those players.

Share this post


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

×