|
Lmao that they did this just as it had started to calm down and now the shitshow begins anew.
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2021 21:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 10:07 |
|
|
Best part is that scapegoat guy hadn't been part of the WoWS team since april. Soo.. yeah. Flamu posted up a vid on it of course. Pretty glad I'm moving on to other games at this point. The game play itself is just getting bad anyway, but that culture is just.. wow.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2021 21:53
|
|
|
Whenever I check in on this game I'm glad of the Christmas box situation last year. Putting it down then was for the best.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2021 22:22
|
|
|
Yeah, WG needs to do some serious soulsearching or I'm just not going to log back in again. Wake me up if something changes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 02:45
|
|
|
Again, I am just going to be honest—I will continue to play the game, but withholding any premium/doubloon purchases until Wargaming demonstrates an honest effort to improve; however, if I am being perfectly honest with you as someone who used to work in this industry, almost every video game company has out of touch and gross corporate culture at some level of leadership. I mean just look at what’s happening at Activison, or more recently John Gibson at Tripwire. Though that story contains a bit of a bright side as Shipwright tried to do the right thing, precisely because Shipwright is run by self-aware people who realize what it’s like for the average employee of a video game developer or publisher to work for shitheads.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 14:29
|
|
|
Tbh I'm still playing for the foreseeable - for one thing I have over 100 days of Premium left from a 6-month purchase this time last year which keeps getting ticked up by various things so I will probably be playing well into 2022. I buy the dockyard starter packs and use my -25% ship doubloon twice a year so I am definitely not F2P, but I long stopped making impulsive buys. I do regret for example not buying any of the Lenin, T61 or Asashio before they got removed.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 16:18
|
|
|
So I just randomly started playing again after a year or so off. Having fun screwing around with subs in co-op. I only ever play co-op and operation of the week. And holy poo poo WG is even worse than it used to be. Or maybe its always been this bad and I just never noticed. Until they show a clear pattern of not being shitbags I am not spending a single penny on the game. I've got a pile of premiums, a total distain for post-rts carriers, and no desire to gamble for crap.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 17:53
|
|
|
Trillhouse posted:https://twitter.com/cabmech/status/1435670282988052486?s=21 I live in Minsk and a lot of people complain how it sucks working for them. Good to see how WG americas keeps with tradition.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 18:23
|
|
|
Antillie posted:So I just randomly started playing again after a year or so off. Having fun screwing around with subs in co-op. I only ever play co-op and operation of the week. And holy poo poo WG is even worse than it used to be. Or maybe its always been this bad and I just never noticed. Until they show a clear pattern of not being shitbags I am not spending a single penny on the game. I've got a pile of premiums, a total distain for post-rts carriers, and no desire to gamble for crap. They've been shitbags for a while. A couple years ago they had the English community manager quit for reasons that were ambiguous sexist comments and a CC quit over sexist comments on the CC discord that got official approval from the lead RU producer.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 20:00
|
|
|
I also just got back in during the last couple weeks after not playing since COVID started. What particular fiasco did they do or which video to I need to watch to summarize what new horror they have committed?
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 22:04
|
|
|
Toxic Fart Syndrome posted:I also just got back in during the last couple weeks after not playing since COVID started. What particular fiasco did they do or which video to I need to watch to summarize what new horror they have committed? They were really lovely to another CC, who is (surprised Pikachu meme) also a woman. I don't think the shittiness was sexist comments this time though, they offered the opportunity to design a premium ship and it turned out to be a lie. A bunch of people took the opportunity to complain about loot boxes instead of Wargaming being lovely to people who do thousands of hours of free work for them, and on the one hand loot boxes suck but on the other hand it's weird that they only started complaining now.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 23:12
|
|
|
James Garfield posted:They were really lovely to another CC, who is (surprised Pikachu meme) also a woman. I don't think the shittiness was sexist comments this time though, they offered the opportunity to design a premium ship and it turned out to be a lie. Mainly because of how they handled the missouri as a whole. 1) She was a fxp ship and instead of offering her up for cash to celebrate v-j day, wargaming couldn't help themselves and made you roll dice for it. Potentially costing you more than the value of the ship if sold directly 2) She was removed originally because they viewed her credit modifier to be too high. So after years and years of the ship being in players hands, they nerfed it. And then claimed a permanent mission would add back the modifier difference for the old owners. Offering up two problems. For one, the devs obviously never played their game because missions are modified on the base, not the total earnings so even still, she still ended up with a lower earnings. And for another, the last time the devs promised lifetime mission, they stopped working the following year because the devs have to manually enter the mission in at the beginning of each year. That mission would be.. the legendary modules. This is because as said, their mission system doesn't take input of infinite or permanent. And we all know wargaming isn't going to effort that entry forever. Note this happened now, not in the years since she was pulled. In fact, xmas boxes were offering her up as a possible grab. Yet wargaming never touched her credit modifier that entire time. But suddenly now they decided they can modify it. So yeah, it is the shittiness of their handling with lwm. But as them quitting isn't really going to change that, you see jingles for example trying to get it moved to a M rating due to the heavy use of gambling in an attempt to stymie wargaming's income by reducing the number of new players coming to the game. Sadly, the flaw there is that most of the people that play either tanks or boats are over 18. Similar to how eve online is mostly people in their 30s or older. So it might give pause to some people, but in reality the flow of new players to sucker in isn't changing with a ratings change.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2021 03:29
|
|
|
They always had the option of creating an identical hull with a different XP modifier the same way that they have black versions of several ships in the game. That's the easiest way to have avoided this problem. You keep the original Missouri and you add a copy that doesn't have the XP modifier. You can call it Missouri 45 or whatever and they didn't. That is proof enough that no one cared, or that they intentionally were trying to nerf it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2021 19:01
|
|
|
Blindeye posted:They always had the option of creating an identical hull with a different XP modifier the same way that they have black versions of several ships in the game. That's the easiest way to have avoided this problem. You keep the original Missouri and you add a copy that doesn't have the XP modifier. You can call it Missouri 45 or whatever and they didn't. Both that and they were trying to con people into spending megabucks on lootboxes expecting the same ridiculous economy rewards.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2021 19:28
|
|
|
I mean, even if it doesn't change in game performance Wargaming finally nerfing a removed premium ship is good (the Thunderer getting nerfed is better though). I wish they would do more of that. The loot boxes are annoying but they've been doing that for years, at least on the off chance that the Missouri is your first box you can buy a premium ship that isn't massively overpriced.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2021 19:40
|
|
|
Jesus christ I'm glad I don't play this game anymore. Because just.. lmfao. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9tCeQzB3nI tldr: The fix for torps skewing when fired while turning instead just has them skewing on view point making them completely unreliable in 3rd person.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2021 01:14
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2021 03:23
|
|
|
Thats atrocious and shows 100% that theres not even any basic testing there. Anyone playing 5 games would have seen that happen.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2021 07:15
|
|
|
Ah, the Mark 14 bug!
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2021 07:28
|
|
|
Good news everyone, carrier torpedos aren't affected. I'm not sure what they've done to this. Some people think they've locked the torpedo launchers to the closest gun which means when you 'aim' closer to your ship they're not actually going to line up with where you think they will. I'm just thinking about that massive press release they put up saying that it took so long to fix the torp bug due to the extensive Q&A process as opposed to the AA change that was fixed in 12 hours. They appear to be deleting threads about this on the NA forum lol.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2021 12:28
|
|
|
JuffoWup posted:Jesus christ I'm glad I don't play this game anymore. Because just.. lmfao. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1d4BewyhlI
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2021 12:49
|
|
|
I have to say, it is amazing how much of the game they are openly willing to break to make submarines work. Between this and people getting stuck on absolutely nothing when near island shore.. amazing really. Wonder what the next submarine related bug will appear on regular ships. Kind of interesting that the cv rework didn't break things to this level.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2021 16:41
|
|
|
JuffoWup posted:the cv rework didn't break things to this level. lol https://twitch.tv/videos/375190716
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2021 16:44
|
|
|
JuffoWup posted:Kind of interesting that the cv rework didn't break things to this level. I suppose you're technically right in that the CV rework broke the game much worse than submarines.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2021 18:43
|
|
|
I missed the first few instances of the CV rework but couldnt you do some gank poo poo like do a drop outside of the range of enemy aa and then your other planes would have shot 5km forward without taking any damage?
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2021 18:52
|
|
|
serious gaylord posted:I missed the first few instances of the CV rework but couldnt you do some gank poo poo like do a drop outside of the range of enemy aa and then your other planes would have shot 5km forward without taking any damage? Yes, but if you watch the vid I posted you see why that wasn't actually a good idea. AA was even more terrible than it is today, pressing F instantly recalled planes so they never died ever, and torps hit so well with old style floods you wanted to be sure to be as accurate as possible. When I say not a good idea I mean the people who just spammed sky Shima torps from max range averaged 350k while people who dropped well averaged like 450k. Gaishu had multiple 500k games, he just only was streaming the 550k game he saved out there.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2021 18:55
|
|
|
serious gaylord posted:I missed the first few instances of the CV rework but couldnt you do some gank poo poo like do a drop outside of the range of enemy aa and then your other planes would have shot 5km forward without taking any damage? For like the first six months of the CV rework it was basically impossible to get plane kills against a competent CV. In practice the CVs would lose some planes because they'd spend their reserves going for additional drops, but if you recalled when the hp bar turned yellow you almost never lost planes. Still an improvement from the CV rework tests, where competent CVs never even lost plane hp because all of the AA used the flak mechanic.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2021 19:02
|
|
|
Yes, those are specific to the cv itself. I meant that the cv rework didn't also break surface ship to surface ship engagement. A 12v12 battle without cvs had no bugs that could be linked to the cv them self. I remember the cv immune to aa that still exists to a degree thing. Just talking of knock on effects. Like this with torpedoes and also the maps. Submarine implementation is so bad it is breaking the rest of the game while trying to be implemented. That is a legit issue considering qa should have spotted both of those. When checking changes. Instead, it appears qa is checking if it works with subs and then never regression testing to make sure nothing else that touches it did break.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2021 19:03
|
|
|
The CV rework did break ship only games though. It ruined plane consumables on ships by removing torpedo spotting, reducing the spotting range, and making catapult fighters instantly die to anything with AA guns. Also it ruined most ship only games by putting a CV in them.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2021 19:26
|
|
|
James Garfield posted:The CV rework did break ship only games though. It ruined plane consumables on ships by removing torpedo spotting, reducing the spotting range, and making catapult fighters instantly die to anything with AA guns. Also it ruined most ship only games by putting a CV in them. Again, you are confusing the word bug. What you listed were preannounced balance passes. Whether you agree to those balance passes is a different topic. I'm talking actual literal bugs. Just because we could now fly our planes in 3rd person didn't suddenly have everyone's guns adopt a curveball. Or your ship getting stuck when a cloud flew overhead. No bugs actually happened that were not previously announced as balance pass features. Even the loss of double spotted planes was an announced change. I know a lot of that is because the game launched preinstalled with carrier combat in it. Compared to them trying to hammer a submarine warfare system into a game that wasn't designed for it. But still, your lists are announced balance passes by the devs. The only bug I can think of is when they implemented the stacking aa penalty but later removed it and no one noticed. Such minimal was the penalty that the devs were the ones to announce it and go "well, no one noticed, so it'll stay gone".
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2021 21:27
|
|
|
It does sound like there is a 'fix' in that if you mouse wheel in and shoot your torps through the scope, they work correctly. Guess you gotta do that now, or die! Or I guess get so close it won't matter.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2021 22:33
|
|
|
Some adults are having a real problem distinguishing deliberate balance changes from ridiculous bugs. This torp situation has absolutely nothing in common with the CV rework at all. You might as well compare it to the original Khaba (which to my mind was the most OP surface-ship in the history of this game).
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 08:05
|
|
|
What did the original Khaba do?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 13:30
|
|
|
It was 45 knots, agile, long range, with armor that let it shrug off destroyer shells, and it could set all the fires. It was a pretty hated ship for a while, although saying it’s more broken than CVs is ludicrous. Basically it was a Kleber with armor and a heal.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 14:01
|
|
|
kaesarsosei posted:This torp situation has absolutely nothing in common with the CV rework at all. True, it doesn't really affect the game and the CV rework did. I haven't even noticed any of the torpedo bugs. I don't know why anyone compared the torpedo bugs to the CV rework in the first place. General Battuta posted:What did the original Khaba do? It was the current Khabarovsk but with better rudder shift, better concealment, the same 13 km base range as other Russian DDs, and 10 km torpedoes. I'm not sure which of those is supposed to make it the most OP ship ever.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 14:39
|
|
|
Velius posted:It was 45 knots, agile, long range, with armor that let it shrug off destroyer shells, and it could set all the fires. It was a pretty hated ship for a while, although saying it’s more broken than CVs is ludicrous. Basically it was a Kleber with armor and a heal. kaesarsosei posted:the most OP surface-ship . Just to elaborate - if the original Khaba was in the game now, it would be pretty competitive but not OP. However when it was at its height, there was nothing to counter it. You could zip around at 15km setting a lot, a LOT, of fires and nothing could hit you. These days there are plenty of railguns equipped ships that could deal with that. But back in 2016 or whenever, it was incredibly overpowered. Edit: I just checked my stats which is useful since I've barely played Khaba in 4 years. I average 91k dmg in it across over 100 games, my next best TX DD is 67k in Shima in almost exactly the same amount of games. I'm not a DD main or particularly good DD player either. kaesarsosei fucked around with this message at 17:25 on Sep 14, 2021 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 17:08
|
|
|
Khaba is okay even today, but it’s a very high skill floor ship. If they re released the old one it would be a solid tier 10, but the counters of cvs, rail guns, and other fast dds means it would be only a solid ship.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 18:56
|
|
|
Having more fast gunboat DD's in the game has muted the Khaba effect too. As bad as the playerbase is, people have gotten used to leading faster ships. Back when it came out there was really nothing like it. It's still a very good DD. Looking forward to playing a couple of hundred games of Co-op over the next week to get all these crates and tokens.... 
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2021 04:23
|
|
|
masterpine posted:Looking forward to playing a couple of hundred games of Co-op over the next week to get all these crates and tokens.... Don't forget, they changed the requirement to a win OR 300BXP (ie any loss in random) so co-op is no longer necessary (thankfully).
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2021 09:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 10:07 |
|
|
The GK is getting replaced in the new year. I guess it will go the way of the Moskva and turn into a reward ship.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2021 18:50
|
|