AXELGREASE

And I remember Friday night prime gaming time being between 15 and 20K. I would say total player count is down.

seriously, most the time the page takes multiple attempts to load, and some times it never does. The high light never goes away even if you read the article(s). It is the same reason I stopped going to the armory for the free give away, it is just not wroth the effort with failed attempt to load one after the other. It is more of a head ache than a help.

But I disagree. Higher engagement is is not measured by how many players play in a given set of Tiers. Whether it is 11 tiers or 7 tiers, the same number of players are still playing. Engagement is not as simple as more players in high tiers. Monetization is not about how much you get for each ship but for how many ship you can sell at a given price. With a roughly flat development cost to put a new T1 or T10 ship in the game the more you sell of a given premium the more you stand to make. Right now WG has opted for the high price, lower number model of selling ships. The other model is much better for player engagement, which is lower price, high sales volume. More players buy a good ship, the more happy players there are, the more engaged they become with the game. Ultimately player engagement comes down to how much players enjoy the game and return to play more matches. Doing things to impact this positively will increase player engagement. If you want players in low tiers, 1-4, WG will have to make it rewarding to play those tiers. They have not and that is why players quit running those ships. That is why players race to high tiers and why some new players never make it past T5. Not enough players to make the tiers where you should be learning, engaging. When you launch at T1 as a new player, how many ships run by players vs run by bots do you think are in the average game? How would you take a game where there does appear to be enough players to fill out a match without all the bots?

I think your wrong. I have been a 50%+ win rate player since I started. Basic skill in the game is not that big of a learning curve. Some ships are harder to do well in, some are easier. I have seen experience players 1000+ games with low 40% win rates and some new players with 50%+ win rates. Time invested and games played is not a guaranteed indication of skill.

They need to fix low tiers to better encourage player participation so new players do not end up in 1V1 matches. Yes it has happened to a friend who started playing not that long ago. They need to figure out how to re-balance older tech tree ships that significantly under perform new ships. I mean deal with the power creep. They need to figure how to fix MM for T5 ships so they are not bottom tier 70% of the time. Every time they protect a new tier the next tier up becomes the worst tier to play in MM. They need to offer the ability to opt out of Sub and/or CV matches. (this one thing would get me back playing again) They need to add more new maps instead of focusing on improving the water, terrain, towns, and the sky, etc on existing maps. Two brothers is two brothers once you've seen it a thousand times, you just stop looking at it. They need to stop limiting missions to T5 and up ships. Who really cares if a player wants to get kills in a T4 or T3 ships? Should it really matter if your BB kills come from a Wyoming or a Colorado; no it should not! BB kills are BB kills. XP is XP no mater what ship it is earned in. Forcing players to play specific tiers limits new player participation and is a discouragement to players who happen to like a T4 ship and want to play it, but feel they can't for missing out on mission goal completion. This is all stuff that has been on the forums for a LONG time, and WG just ignores it all and does what they want. You keep wanting to make it a complaint, and ignore the point in the e-mail. It is not about the stuff they offered, they could offer every T11 ship in the game with a 21 point commander, and I still would not come back. The point is that they are not trying to solve why players are leaving the game and dealing with that. A short term solution to a long term problem is never going to work. Under valuing the e-mail? HOW? A form letter is a form letter no mater how it arrives. They know they need more players and they are making an offer/bribe to get old players back in the game. A bribe that is mailed to thousands of players all on the same day. The e-mail is a meaningless thing and so would be an e-mail with no bribe attached. If it were personal, from a person in the company, who wants my opinion and to have a dialog about WHY I left and what it would take to get me back in the game, now that would mean something. I know that will never happen. WG knows they need MORE players for the long term health of the game. The temporary boost with gimmicky e-mails is only a short term solution to a long term problem. More players = more revenue =shorter queue times = more variety in matches = more fun = win/win for all imvolved

Good to see you also. Hope you are having a ton of fun. Maybe, I did state I do occasionally get on only when some friends are on. Otherwise I do not log in and play solo the way i always used to. In the end, if WG wants players to return, they need to fix things not just offer some tiny amount of stuff that will have zero impact on the players game or gaming experience.

Funny, but you missed the point entirely. If you left your job because your boss sucks, and the HR manager called you and said please come back, we will give you a free coffee mug and t-shift with the company logo. What would you say? Yea, I get free stuff? My point is that WG should be asking why we left, not giving away a paltry amount of meaningless pixels.

So, I have basically quit Wows. Every once in a great while I get on for a game. Mostly if a friend is on and playing. Otherwise I do not play anymore. Today in my e-mail i get something from WG. Claim your free gift. For logging into the game you get: 1) 5 containers of some crappy low level container I do not even know what it is. 2) 3 days of premium 3) 15 of the lowest level economic bonuses; of which I have hundreds from the conversion. If I am not playing the game, no amount of this stuff is going to make me come play, especially the tiny amount they offered. What WG should be doing is asking why I quit the game in the first place. All the surveys they've sent out over the years, not a single suggestion, recommendation or answer seems to have been heard or implemented. So I know without a doubt that, no matter whatIi answered to question about why I left, the answers would be ignored. If WG wants to grow this game, because more players directly correlates to more revenue, they should maybe take a different approach. I know that no one approach is going to keep all players happy, but the direction they are taking is not a good one for the overall long term health of the game; this is my opinion. I hope they figure it out but I no longer believe they will.

NO, it is you, MM is working as intended. Totally random grab of players in queue and with appropriate tier ships. Totally wrong of you to look at average win rates of players and make any absurd predictions about imbalanced MM. /sarcasm off Yup looks normal. MM has been this way for a LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG time! Edit, nothing to see here folks, move along.

While you may be right, I did not play ranked when this was an issue. But COOP and Random is NOT ranked! The system is set for ranked, which is a very different game type. Tuning it to ranked is doing a disservice to coop and random players.

Easy there biog fella, I resemble that remark. I am 55%er, solidly. My engineering brain to found a way to put laser beams on sharks and sneak them in game to damage enemy ships when I shoot at them.

Replay??? Really? Obviously he was not inactive. You need a replay to confirm that he was active with 2 enemy ships sank and 33K damage, he was certainly active.

HA, that is funny. Numbers that given the right twist will tell both sides of the story. I would not believe any numbers that WG puts out about subs; they want them to be a success. WG will tell you anything they think will make people believe subs are in a good spot. Give me all the raw data and I bet I could make it say subs suck, and you would just blame that on my proclivity to say sucks suck. But you want me to trust WG who says that the same data set claims subs are OK, when they have the exact opposite proclivity as me. WG thinks subs are ok, for the obvious reason they can hardly justify throwing all the development money away at this point. Stats mean nothing, right? And in the case of one of the most hated classes in the game, all of a sudden the stats mean everything?

While what you say may in fact be truth. If it actually happened, it would be good for the overall health of the game and community. It would also reinforce that WG should have left them out of the game instead of caving to the players that wanted them.