Jump to content

Burnsy

Beta Testers
  • Content Сount

    10,339
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan

    [SLI]

Community Reputation

5,863 Superb

4 Followers

About Burnsy

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Burnsy

    1583 PTS containers opened...

    The containers, rewards and drops on the PTS are always just placeholders. They do not reflect what will happen in the live patch.
  2. The changes and patch should go live in about 12 days. I finished all the missions on the round 1 of PTS. I just disconnected from finishing all the missions on the round 2 of PTS. Based on that experince, it is my opinion that some players are making the economy math changes a much bigger deal than they really are. It is my opinion that credit earning will be fine for us overall, for both new and old players. The only thing for me which is left unanswered, is will the drop rate of free boosters be different than the free camos we get now. I don't think we are going to find that out until it's live. At the end of the day though, this change doesn't really matter in terms of free stuff drop rates. WG could always adjust that up or down whenever they want for better or worse, even in the current system. You don't have to take my or anyone's word for it though. The PTS is open for all players for the next few days. Go check it out for yourself. Then you can form your own opinion, based on your actual experience and share actual results that concern you. Sharing actual results, numbers and screen shots of possible issues, is worth a lot more than walls of posts talking about "what if". Especially when everyone can go see for themselves, first hand.
  3. It's what I read from your post.
  4. Burnsy

    players say one more time...

    I can only speak for myself too. I have no doubt that what you said is true. You get to decide what you spend your money on. I am all about that. Speaking for myself though, I have probably read people say that...hundreds if not thousands of times over the years here on this forum. Yet, here we are, so people are certainly buying stuff. I plan on buying a few premium subs. They aren't my favorite so I don't have plans on buying a lot of them, but who knows. See where it goes. WG is putting a lot of time and money into subs though. Maybe they are wrong, who knows, but they sure seem to think enough people are going to play and/or buy them. I think at this point, if only one thing is for sure, it's that we are all going to find out.
  5. Burnsy

    players say one more time...

    I have seen threads about CVs since I joined the game 7 years ago in Beta. This certainly isn't new lol. Next up to bat is subs are going to kill WoWs. It's hard to tell with WG but I think the batter is on deck and the pitcher is warmed up. I think that that ball is gonna fly soon. Two years from now there will be threads about the next horrible thing that's going to run players off. Who knows, alien lasers or whatever.
  6. Burnsy

    players say one more time...

    Players are always in various states of "unhappy". The absolute outrage when radar was introduced or when open water invisifire was removed was....pretty much the same as every other change that's made to the game. Exactly the same as when captains went to 21 points or every skill rework that has happened since launch. Here we are years later and I haven't seen a thread about Asashio being super OP and going to make all the BB players in the game quit and the game is going to die over it, in years. Nothing has been changed about Asashio though...or invisifire being removed...or really radar, captains are still 21 points and not 19 etc etc. Players are all still here...still complaining. Game will be fine.
  7. Burnsy

    players say one more time...

    I don't think it is irrelevant and I think the word you choose has relevance. For some reason people are often under the impression that CVs were...added later or as some sort of add on to the game, that they are not part of it's core design. This is wrong and they have always been present and part of it, since the beginning. Asking for a mode without CVs, is not different than asking for a mode without destroyers or whatever. If you are going to do that for one, the flood gates are going to open. What's to stop BB mains from now demanding a mode without DDs? See the problem? This game launched with 4 classes of ships in 2015. CVs are not "special". Asking for a mode without one specific class doesn't make sense. It's simply a dislike of that class. Well....when I play cruiser I sure don't like seeing a Musashi in my face but....it's just a part of the game.
  8. Burnsy

    players say one more time...

    The rumple thing is, but classic isn't. It was the wrong word, but you choose it for a reason. It did have a meaning. That reason is incorrect.
  9. Burnsy

    players say one more time...

    I am not unhappy, but no. Using the word Rumpelstiltskin in place of classic, would not make any more sense.
  10. Burnsy

    players say one more time...

    The way in which you used the word infers a harkening back to basics. A return to a more simple or "original" iteration. That use in this case is incorrect. There never was a time without CVs. Your suggestion is the opposite of classic. It is to create a new version of random mode without CVs, which has never previously existed.
  11. Burnsy

    players say one more time...

    The why in which you are using the word infers a hearkening back to basics. A return to the more simple or past rimes. There is nothing "classic" about your suggestion. CVs were in the game in Alpha. They have never not been a class of ship in this game.
  12. If you think they might be changed before it goes live, fair enough. I wouldn't be surprised if adjustments are made, that's what tests are for after all. In this thread though, we are talking about the video in the OP, which is about the current version of the game on the PTS.
  13. Before having access to the PTS, we had to take WG's word on the math and how they said it should work. That is always a little debatable, if you don't trust WG's word. You can always say "yeah well I will believe it when I see it". That has now changed, we (and you) can see it. You are stating some things as if they are facts, but based on the players now being able to actually play the patch and test out the math, those things are not true. Despite this, you keep stating them anyway.
  14. Unless there is a change to the way it works on the PTS in the next 16 days, you don't need time to tell. If you want to see what your situation will look like, log onto the PTS and spend an hour playing a few of your favorite ships. If changes are made, we (the players, not WG) can easily adjust the math. You can certainly respond with "I don't want to" and that's perfectly fine, but you are actively avoiding finding out your answer, on purpose. We have solid results from the test server. It's no longer "we will see" and kick the can down the road, we are seeing right now.
  15. I don't think it's a bug, it's intended. The service cost was reduced on "researchable" ships. IE: Tech tree ships. https://blog.worldofwarships.com/blog/318
×