Jump to content

Klebs

Beta Testers
  • Content Сount

    13
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    10097
  • Clan

    [AK]

Community Reputation

26 Neutral

About Klebs

  • Rank
    Seaman
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

143 profile views
  1. Klebs

    Tips on Legendary modules?

    My FAVORITE Legendary module is the MIDWAY Legendary Module. It is so good and smooth that I do not even notice I am using it. Perhaps this is because you can NOT load it into its slot. The WIKI makes no mention that it is not permitted use as of yet. Nor in forums when I looked awhile back. Found this out a day before I finished the grind, when a clan mate was grousing that he just got the MIDWAY legendary module but cannot equip it. Nice to have a legendary but not be permitted use. Can not recall how long ago I finished the grind. Months? A lot of "work" and perhaps it will never be permitted use. WG is somewhat lacking in organization.
  2. Klebs

    Soviet BB drop chances

    I have invested all my tokens on the common soviet era crates. substantial number of crates obtained, with zero soviet BB dropped. Clan has similar experience, one person mentioned a T5 Soviet BB dropped as only report so far from clan members who have opted for the common soviet era crate strategy. I would guestimate the aggregate drop rate for common Soviet era containers is easily below 2%. The better play would be the premium soviet cruiser or the permanent soviet ship camoflages offered - IF you had a desire for those products. Since I had no desire for those products, I took my chances with the crates. Obviously in the end, everyone who wants a Soviet BB will get one, so the lack of rewards will change nothing - but the incredibly low drop rate is somewhat silly considering the value of the item being dropped is not high and otherwise easily obtained. Not a big deal though, and definitely not worth holding breath while having a fit over it. I am still seething over the first cross server testing fiasco where NA members were "boxed out" of promised steel rewards though, even if technically WG was entitled to withhold the rewards for failure of NA testers to achieve the 5 cross server tests on other servers. That I will remember for a long time. - Klebs
  3. Well, as predicted, Wargaming released following announcement a day or so after the first carrier hotfix: Again, this raises the issue of how such a severely unbalanced, flawed carrier rollout could have passed Wargaming testing and quality control. Some of the answers were reflected in the responses above. But the most important question to be raised from this fiasco is: What will Wargaming do to prevent the introduction of such obviously flawed product into mainstream game IN THE FUTURE ????? Wargaming, please pay attention.
  4. To: Wargaming I am certain this issue has been raised already. I am not going to search it out. I wish to belabor this point, because it is important and at the root of much of the current carrier related dissatisfaction. Probably this issue has occurred before on previous ships, as Wargaming ship testing and evaluation process is likely similar to past rollouts. Question: How did such an incredibly overpowered T10 Japanese carrier utilizing newly revised carrier play rules enter into mainstream game play? I have a tier 4 carrier which I have played since carrier revision, never played beyond tier 4 in past either. I have been listening to clan mates and watching some videos from those more knowledgeable than I shall ever become. That being said, Wargaming is producing a product that apparently has a terrible testing mechanism which can permit a severely overpowered ship concept into mainstream game, which then requires a hotfix nerf to attempt to calm the roiling waters of the WoWS gaming community. The rapidly rolled out hotfix nerf will undoutedly cause new issues. WHY IS THE SHIP TESTING MECHANISM SUCH A FAILURE??? Is it lack of a salaried testing staff? Is it insufficient quality control when testing out the potential product? Clan mates have mentioned there are a lot of bots on other side of PTR testing (I have never participated in PTR testing). Can you adequately test game prior to mainstream introduction by using bots???????? Whatever the reason, it is obvious that severely flawed carrier play was introduced by Wargaming. Wargaming can not deny this with any credibility. It has caused the WoWS player base much needless consternation - which can affect Wargaming's bottom line. So I ask again ............ What will Wargaming do to prevent the introduction of such obviously flawed product into mainstream game IN THE FUTURE ????? Thank you for any attention you may have paid to this concern.
  5. Have you not ever heard of the Klondike gold rush in the late 1800s? Well, Alaska was one of the main entryways to get to the northwest territory of Canada where Klondike was. So this is kinda the same hype thing ...... Alaska. Does that make sense? BTW - yes it is supposed to be a superior ship like its tier 9 russian premium cruiser counterpart and Stalingrad. But you know that if you have read any discussion on Alaska already.
  6. Klebs

    Clan Battles: No 500 Steel for you!

    If u need a writer, who ya gonna call???? Alabamastan
  7. Klebs

    Clan Battles: No 500 Steel for you!

    WG - thank you for an official response. First of all, I wish to offer my congratulations to LoveBote, whose wisdom and understanding of this matter apparently exceeded my own. Epilogue: It is a direct slap in the face of all NA players who participated in this event. Unfortunately, geographic reality did not grant us a non-NA server whose time difference from our own NA server was a matter of hour(s), as was with the European and Russian servers. Those people were easily able to complete the requirements on the weekdays when clan battles were available. Holiday season approaches. I shall remember this come time for holiday spending. Regards, Klebs (AK) (proud member of NA Server)
  8. Klebs

    Clan Battles: No 500 Steel for you!

    Lovebote, It will be interesting to see what WG ultimately does. Because that will prove one of us wrong. I cannot ultimately disprove your arguments that WG is not obligated to provide any "reward" to any NA player with regards to this issue. You are correct. Atleast in an abstract and theoretical manner. However, the NA players posting here are not referring to abstract principles, and WG as a business entity also understands this. And so, in the same breath, I say you are also incorrect. I do believe in the adage regarding the business world ...... "in analyzing any corporate business decision, follow the money". I believe WG has less wiggle room in this particular instance at this particular time of year in their decision making with regards what if any NA player "reward" is dispensed. I say this purely from a practical business perspective. Sometimes as a corporation you actually do have to do something even if it is not a legally enforceable mandate. And best of all for WG, as a corporation, is that any NA player "reward" in this matter will not cost them a single cent. The cost of no reward? I do not know for sure ............ Regards, Klebs
  9. Klebs

    Clan Battles: No 500 Steel for you!

    LoveBote, Your conclusions miss the forest for the trees. Not sure if you are trolling, but I will respond in any event. (1) You are absolutely correct in a very narrow and technically contractual version. I am not certain your conclusion would hold up to more aggressive scrutiny - the "contract" you quote also stated Wargaming would offer 2 weekday sessions and 2 weekend sessions in which members must play 5 games on native server and 5 games on a different server for a specified reward of coal and steel. Wargaming has failed to live up to its committment to date. No weekend sessions. Broken "contract" by Wargaming. Members deserve reward promised. (2) Wargaming has also rigged the system so that the contractual reward was realistically unobtainable, without providing forewarning that such reward would be unobtainable by any reasonable person. I do not imply this was an intentional scam, it is just the way things worked out due to technical issues on Wargaming's end that have yet to be resolved by Wargaming. (a) No forewarning at start of "contract" that all weekend sessions would be cancelled. Reasonable NA clans saved either all their games or the cross server European time zone games for the weekend hours. The rationale for this has been stated many times over in prior posts, I will not repeat it. (b) Requiring clan sign up for ONLY one gaming time zone session per day. NA clans for most part selected NA evening prime time hours to allow their members to complete the NA server requirement of 5 games. Additionally, their members as a large group would have difficulty playing during the morning and early afternoon hours of European prime time servers. However some still could have IF full access to all prime time server hours had been granted by Wargaming. Regards, Klebs (AK) (NA Server)
  10. Klebs

    Clan Battles: No 500 Steel for you!

    Wargaming is pursuing a worthwhile addition to WoWS game. HOWEVER, they are going about it in somewhat of poor manner. 1. Is there not a test server which this concept could be tested on prior to main server testing? Or is there not the load on test servers available for true testing? 2. As to how this has been rolled out ...... I wish to make note of the following: Wargaming posted this revision: [14/11] Due to technical issues from the test clan season, we decided to reduce requirements for rewards. Therefore, players who completed at least 5 battles during the prime time of another region will earn 500 Steel and 15,000 Coal. Wargaming has only had this up and working during the week, when most people in NA can not play during European and Russian server times (which translate to morning and early afternoon in NA time zone). Most NA players played during NA server hours during the week. Especially since NA clans were FORCED to select ONE time period per day for testing, and obviously they would pick NA server times during week to accommodate their members availability (NA evening hours during NA server prime time period). We will see what happens during this coming weekend, but Wargaming's change in requirements does nothing for many (most?) NA players. Perhaps Wargaming should rethink their somewhat insulting revision. Why not make players who play 10 or 15 games prime time only on their native servers eligible for the steel and coal bonus as an option, in addition to the option of playing 5 games prime time on another regions server. Many NA players have showed up to assist in testing cross server capacity on weeknights for weeks now. Many NA players planned for availability on weekends during the other regional servers prime time - only to have it cancelled on short notice. My clan has certainly done this. Wargaming needs to work on its common sense public relations. Making your paying community irritated/angry for no reason does not further your product's reputation. Think through what you do in the future. Regards, Klebs (AK) (NA server) EDIT: I would also suggest NOT forcing clans to select ONE regional server prime time period for Clan Battles testing. Permit clan members who can muster a full team complement to play at any prime time region server that is available. The current rules effectively force clans during the week to select their own native servers prime time server so as to accommodate the majority of their members availability.
×