Jump to content

Combined_Fleet_HQ

Members
  • Content Сount

    1,173
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    4351
  • Clan

    [O7]

Community Reputation

409 Excellent

About Combined_Fleet_HQ

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    A Concrete Jungle where dreams are made
  • Interests
    WW II, Dark Souls Lore, touhou music, FPS, MMOs, Grand Strategy, Halo

Recent Profile Visitors

2,632 profile views
  1. Combined_Fleet_HQ

    Can we get this back?

    So can we get the USS Smith back in the premium shop for $0.99? I used to threaten clanmates in TS with buying them a smith; I just like smithing people. It's for the memes man.
  2. Combined_Fleet_HQ

    Chicken Little, the sky is falling

    Come on, even you know that's grossly inaccurate.
  3. Combined_Fleet_HQ

    Wichita is finally on sale

    To be fair, while other, larger or more mainstream, games may be able to accomplish this changing of the guard between veteran payers and fresh faces, it is not so feasible with WoWs right now. WoT after its port to game consoles and the marketing campaign behind can rely on the uninformed newer players to buy whatever is sold and make up for the loss of disgruntled players as it continues to tap into new demographics. As far as I can tell, WoWs isn't growing at exponential rates or actively reaching out (active does not equate to planned/testing) and relies more on its retention rate rather than sheer growth (which is essentially stagnation and is ultimately, imo, a net negative notion but that's another argument entirely). As such, the presumed content that garners the greatest margin of profit that is also the least risky is content that the established player base has bought previously and is presumed to buy in the future. And that price point of VIIIs and IXs can still give even the most spendthrift collectors a moment of pause. But collectors have shown to spend money on anything if their granddaddy served on X or "muh state/city" so its debatable. Now I don't know if you have an inherent bias against premiums or you're referring to a specific instance (i.e. the GC) but you said it yourself that veterans will buy anything whether it be the Belfast (OP), the Kii (meh), or the Krispy w/e (bad) so its apparent they're not looking solely for advantages. They want trust, not this backpedaling of promises. Yes I'm aware of the EULA stating that WG has the right to change things to which the player base agreed to when they continued to play the game post this EULA change; doesn't make it any less sh*t when it happens, but when it does, ingame monetary refunds isn't enough to placate the consumers; so, people can't just start throwing shade on those whose "wallets are welded shut" and call them naysayers; but these consumers can be at fault for enabling such [edited] by continuing to buy from WG. Hopefully after the recent series of actions by WG, those who say their wallets are such actually follow through indefinitely, otherwise they then are the fools. Is the GC ridiculously strong for its tier? Yes What did WG do? Take it off sale. Cool Then WG puts it in Santa Crates. Well we know why. Then nerf it 2 months later. Yeah.... ...then people wonder why there are so many whining on the forums. Personally I'm never really annoyed at the nerf or change itself, its the principle or contradiction of said principle that irks me the most
  4. Combined_Fleet_HQ

    I'm Done. Going To Play Stellaris...

    no problems on my end but, you know, "to each his own"
  5. Combined_Fleet_HQ

    I'm Done. Going To Play Stellaris...

    there is a specific mod that has them as their own endgame threat, some mods convert other crisis factions into them (i.e. the contingency) but you should be able to find them as a standalone workshop mod. if you're asking how do they trigger, its more rng than anything but check the workshop page to see if there are conditions.
  6. Combined_Fleet_HQ

    I'm Done. Going To Play Stellaris...

    And very religious; they certainly not above conversion of your systems via spreading the word of god
  7. Combined_Fleet_HQ

    I'm Done. Going To Play Stellaris...

    Nothing like turtling with space stations that could go toe to toe with titans... ...while building galaxy guns to instantly wipe out a planet...
  8. Combined_Fleet_HQ

    I'm Done. Going To Play Stellaris...

    Stellaris, good choice mein freund. Currently in the middle of end game crisis with Reapers from ME. Not a good time for my empire
  9. Combined_Fleet_HQ

    Giulio - why should I EVER buy a premium again, Wargaming?

    Lets be honest, if WG cared about balance first and foremost, they wouldn't keep putting OP ships in santa crates and enticing players to spend more money than the ship initially cost just to get their hands on it.... ...it seems like WG can't balance anything anymore through PTS and supertesters at this rate...
  10. Combined_Fleet_HQ

    Battlestations:Pacific 2.0

    For a minute I thought the Battlestations series was getting revived or a new IP was announced that was basically Battlestations... ...man am I disappointed
  11. I'm sure this doesn't need to be said but ignore the edgelord over there. He's Stratego 2.0 minus the charm and stubbornly dismissive of opposing viewpoints. Even if you do have skill he'll just say you're in bed with WG Absolutely beautiful. Outside of CBs, the few of us who still play randoms are just having fun rolling matches in our CVs. Its a new kind of cancer.
  12. I get the "help them, help you" notion but no; I PTS'd, I gave my criticism and while I understand the logic of how the PTS was insufficient, I do not understand the need for it to come out without any form of "stopgap" Then provide better incentives then "the greater good" and appealing to morality: Daily missions asking to play 10 matches in each class and be top 4 earners so that people don't just play haphazardly and invalidate the data. Give steel and credits or something of the sort Provide premium time till WG feels they have achieved balance. That was the same reasoning they argued with for RN CVs. This is not a test on a test server where test accounts are given and wiped with no issue, this is the live client with people's actual accounts. If the rework is here to stay then help ease the transition for the playerbase Not something I care about but I see other's concern in it: server-wide privatization of stats. They will still be tracked but are only view-able to the player themselves. This is to be lifted when WG feels the "live test" is over or until significant time has passed My frustration stems less from the rework itself but more from the manner in which WG conducted the rework and its execution. From what little support or precautions were taken, it seems as if WG thought the rework would go off without a hitch which we know is not the case given the reason why they pushed it to the live client in the first place. If so then why did they not accommodate/compensate players for putting them in a spot like this?
  13. Combined_Fleet_HQ

    0.8.0 is here, but still no alaska?

    Why dont we just adopt WG's logic on why the CV rework needed to be pushed into the Live Client. If the Alaska needs more testing, then just drop it into the Live and get some "real" data... ...should be simple no?
  14. Combined_Fleet_HQ

    I know I'm farming for downvotes but I don't are

    The idea to let the customers - who already bought the GZ and now have money invested in the ship - balance it, how could anyone think it would end well ethically?
  15. Combined_Fleet_HQ

    US Cruisers after 8.0

    I wouldn't say its "already made up" in the way you impose it. The negativity stems from a series of negative experiences with this game. Now that's not to say everything has been negative as some melodramatics would often say but the majority of my experience has been either lukewarm or negative: The UK BBs The GZ (both its initial launch and its relaunch) Fochgate 2.0 all over again for a minute The gimmicky vibe some ships exude The whole grey area that was CB season 1 Not to mention the exclusion of CVs from CBs. I am well aware of the reason why, I am more "upset" at the principle but that ties into what the forums has been spouting about for the past 2 months The idea of selling ships from the same class (i.e. Massachusetts and the Alabama) as separate, full priced, ships I believed there was a more consumer friendly but equally profitable solution. Buffs/Nerfs that were either not necessary or unfair And, of course, these disgruntlement all have their varying severity of "hate" as mentioned previously As for changes/implementations I was for: The whole French Cruiser line is a solid line of ships that are designed well The change to smoke detection as well as the removal of OWSF The backpedal on the bow armor nerf for high tier BBs that made it to PTS The concept of FXP premiums The tweaks to to VMF destroyers I do not hate WG and WoWs, I would not have put my money in this game otherwise. It just a matter that the development path that WoWs is going has lead me to no longer feel that the game is worth my money or time (as [edited] as it sounds). But I appreciate the label; being as what you describe I am would put me in the same ballpark as Stratego and that's a hard no. Naysayers will always cry its the end of the world, but I wouldn't put the sole blame on the playerbase alone. WG has some partial blame but the playerbase is shouldering more of it yes. Something like killing a game is rarely instantaneous, although they are exceptions. Given the niche game that WoWs is, it would never die suddenly. Again, I would see it more like WoW (world of warcraft) where it is a long decline or like WT where it's stagnation. Of course, just as much as we'll see decline, we will also see growth. The question becomes whether it'll be a net positive or net negative. I appreciate the sentiment. Currently just dove into RE 2 remake and AC 7. Enjoying both so far. Was thinking about jumping back into EVE online but that's more of a commitment than WoWs supertest.
×