Jump to content

Sub_Octavian

Developers
  • Content Сount

    265
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    4

Community Reputation

1,741 Superb

About Sub_Octavian

  • Rank
    Master Chief Petty Officer
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

6,444 profile views
  1. Sub_Octavian

    Russian bias and the sad state of Italian Cruisers

    (Taken from Reddit - Added by Fem) I can understand why @NoZoupForYou feels that way and share some of the concerns, however, I respectfully disagree with some others. Here are my thoughts on the subject(s). Russian Bias. KOTS lineup is indeed skewed, but it's rather a combination of unfortunate circumstances and meta state at this period of time. Kremlin was indeed stronger than needed, while it was nerfed recently, due to tech stuff, KoTS was conducted on the server where Kremlin was pre-nerf. Of course I am not saying that alpha damage reduction instantly makes Kremlin bad lineup choice - she is still amazing in pushing, and it is needed at this level of play, but so far I see 1% of avg PvP WR drop after the change, for example, which is a step in the right direction at minimum). At the same time we have Grozovoi, which is actually viable in competitive after the buff. At the same time we have Moskva, which is actually viable in competitive because good radar and reliable guns. And of course Smolensk - a new and very hyped ship with a lot of utility and strong in capable hands (as well as Stalingrad). So the state of the current competitive meta in this KoTS WAS shifted to having a lot of Russian ships. And this is fine, as long as this does not become a trend, and meta will evolve in something new next time. Obviously there is no good in having stale meta skewed towards any particular game nation. It's bad for players (becomes boring and less diverse), it's bad for us (we did not spend hundreds of hours making all these ships to make them unneeded). Also to be more specific, here's the lineup stats from this KoTS (ship presence): Kremlin: 40% RU, 49% EU, 69% NA and ASIA (Other fun facts - Republique 31% RU, Bourgogne 21% ASIA, Yamato 20% on EU and NA); As for cruisers - Smol + Stalin + Moskva combined are 34% on RU, 47% on EU, 65% on NA, 46% on ASIA. While Henri, Des Moines, Worcester - 65% RU, 44% EU, 32% NA, 52% ASIA (fun fact, Henri is 39% on RU). Top DD were Somers (RU 44%, EU 49%, NA 31%, ASIA 13%) and Daring (RU 5%, EU 33%, NA 47%, ASIA 45%). Groz was 13-15% everywhere but ASIA - there it was actually 31%. Several more points to it: The brightest "bias moment", IMO, was NA-EU finals, but there, in my humble opinion, the level of play from NA was generally very good. What I mean is that this super skewed situation in finals is not necessarily the best proof (although it looks very skewed, appealing and emotional to make a point). As a whole KOTS is not the benchmark for balancing ships in the game, although, making observation of its meta is important. Not to this video, but to the topic in general: I really wish people stop making this "salty about Tsushima", "salty about Novorossiysk" or "ahahah USSR did not have navy but at least they take revenge in the game" remarks. Honestly, they just decrease the value of the discussion and sometimes they're just silly. I want to use this opportunity and make it very clear: there is zero reason to tune balance in favor of one nation, and game balance teams does not care about ship nation. Sure, we care about the nation when we create plans for content, but people tend to over estimate how important this "I am Russian, so I want Kremlin" or "I am American so I want Montana" is. It absolutely has some impact, but mostly and majorly gameplay is a decisive factor. Especially now when we have all major navies and huge part of the iconic ship represented in the game. Finally, from business PoV, even if this factor is important, our game is played all over the world and Russian segment of players is not even the biggest. In the end favoring one nation does not make any sense from any PoV. Now, I can't make you guys stop silly comments about national pride, and I don't want to, but I hope you will at leat take this into account :-) All in all, we will watch meta closely, including competitive and tournament, and will work hard to make sure it lives and evolves. We believe that over presense of ANY nation/ship/ship type is anyway okay in any short given period, but if it becomes long term trend, than it's time to worry and shake things up. As for IT CA, not enjoying them is a valid opinion, and we support our CC regardless of their opinion on our content :-) However, I disagree with Zoup both personally and from dev PoV. Personally, I love these ships. They require me to think differently, I love their gimmick smoke, I love the need to actually aim with SAP. Honestly, I am struggling to master some of them now on live, but I am having fun time. I can easily see them NOT being the choice of hard core super competitive players, but that I can live with. From dev PoV, all the stats of course are skewed, because they're early access, and because we should actually give people time to settle with how to play these ships. So I am absolutely against drawing any solid conclusions right now. But generally what we have is not indicative of any emergency situation - a lot of players play these ships, and the results are good. We will be monitoring these ships as we always do after we release a line and will apply changes if needed. That's a pretty standard procedure. As for fun factor - I really want to see how the popularity of these ships changes when the event is over. Right now IT CA are all over the place which is good, but does not necessarily mean that they are great - of course we understand that. We will see pretty soon :-) Thanks, and have a good day.
  2. Sub_Octavian

    The hypocrisy of WG and "historical accuracy"

    Thank you for the feedback, I guess. Or was it a pointless rant aimed at us? Historical aspect is quite strong in our game - models, lore and a lot of IRL specs applied to ships, how we work with ballistics and armor, etc, etc, however OF COURSE a lot of things work vastly differently because we're not a sim. That's fine, no need to see it as black & white. Hitsory is a part of this game identity, like it or not, it influences how game feels and plays, but it does not need to be 100%...even 75% accurate. That's fine, we're scared too, and we don't want to ruin the game as well. You know, looks like here devs and players have a lot of same goals, which is good. How do you know that? The above poster just commented on how people adapt (or not) to meta change. This does not prove absolutely anything.
  3. Sub_Octavian

    The hypocrisy of WG and "historical accuracy"

    Your theory, it is. Time will tell
  4. Sub_Octavian

    The hypocrisy of WG and "historical accuracy"

    No, top management people responsible for the game on company level do not interfere with game design. We work on the subs because we (WoWS team) believe they can be good and fun addition to the game. Also, have some faith please. We've made this game which brought all of us together and we've been keeping it hot for 4 years now. We had a lot of bumps and lessons learned hard way, but tons of fun and good updates as well. We (both players and devs) can handle some tiny underwater boats
  5. Sub_Octavian

    The hypocrisy of WG and "historical accuracy"

    I am sorry that our change of plans collided with your infinite hate (or phobia?) of submarines. I really do. But you have to understand that most people don't feel like that. For the most people submarines, even without track record of taking part in big fleet battles, are a part of WWII naval warfare. And our game is..about WWII naval warfare. There is demand for this class. Even the situation where we had to reply to "subs when" over and over again proves that.
  6. Sub_Octavian

    The hypocrisy of WG and "historical accuracy"

    Some details: Stats from test; Surveys; Forum+Reddit+SM impressions; CCT impressions; Our own assessment. Something like that will affect our decision making. How exactly - I don't know until we started. If you, by any chance, have a ready formula which will somehow tell us 100% precisely how to move on or not to move on with the subs, please DM it to me. I will gladly shower you with Missouris, Belfasts and Kamikazes for the rest of your WoWS lifetime :) Hint: there is NO universal solution to such cases. You need to love the game and the players, have vision for it, and have some guts to make a call in the end. And still, you can be wrong, and in this case you need to show ownership and work your aft off to fix stuff. That's tough dev life right here
  7. Sub_Octavian

    The hypocrisy of WG and "historical accuracy"

    Nobody thinks you are. But you definitely like to pick on words. I explained this above. Historical aspect is already selective in the game, and it was like this from the start. It's a game based on history, and we reflect the history when we can, but if needed we're willing to sacrifice it for gameplay. They will go to separate game mode for testing. If it has good results, they WILL be added to the main game mode with time. But a dedicated mode gives us the chance to collect a lot of viable feedback without changing the game experience for everyone overnight.
  8. Sub_Octavian

    The hypocrisy of WG and "historical accuracy"

    Plans change. It you (I don't mean you personally, of course, it is an abstraction) don't update the plans for your game which are several years old, you are either a prophet, or dumb. Our "no subs ever" gently turned in "we don't work on them atm" very long time ago, actually. And still, we had a lot of things to do. Now, a year ago, in terms of our technical and production capabilities, was a good time to start working on them, so we did. The only problem I see here is "never subs" which was our position back then. Because "never say never"
  9. Sub_Octavian

    The hypocrisy of WG and "historical accuracy"

    I am not sure where "trumpeting" is. Yes, we would like to reflect the DD historical role, and ideally, avoid giving depth charges to the ships that did not carry them - ideally, I say, because if absolutely needed for the sake of game balance, we can live with that. As for the speeds - all speeds in the game are scaled, including shell travel time. And the ships sizes are scaled (twice bigger than IRL compared to shooting ranges), so with all due respect, this is not hypocrisy, this is "we want to minimize the historical inaccuracy when possible, but game balance goes first". The OP seems like an attempt to pick on phrasing. P.S. "Scale the speed" does not mean "totally discount historical accuracy". I can give you hundreds of examples where it is totally discounted in the game, but it is not here. Cheers!
  10. Sub_Octavian

    WANNA WIN $10,000? - Recruitment Rumble

    Nothing to be sorry about, it is your opinion we respect. You will not even be detonated more often in the game because of it, I promise Let me just say that most of our budget goes to the playerbase in form of rewards in this case, and close the topic. I have no right to go into details, as there is 3rd party involved here. As for recruitment, if only it was so easy. Unfortunately throwing money at at the screen (or in this case at HR) does not magically give you all professionals you need. We have open positions all the time, but it is hard to fill many of them (or to train a specialist internally). Even for my team, and we are not doing rocket science, I had to look for 3-4 months to fill a slot, and on most occasions so far I ended up with using recommendation from someone I know. Even though we're one of the very best places in the industry in our region. And even if we had to make a choice for some reason, Amazon event budget would have less priority than actual game development, obviously.
  11. Sub_Octavian

    WANNA WIN $10,000? - Recruitment Rumble

    Hello, 1. Obviously the details of this cooperation are not to be disclosed, but this is more of mutual project, which gives us an additional flow of new players, while providing our veterans with some cool stuff, and we're happy that Amazon is on board and helping us to make this happen. We also have similar cooperation with PayPal on EU and with Yandex on CIS. 2. It is not the question of choice. I think it should be explained in more detail. Our main value is our audience. The audience leaves with time, as it happens in absolutely any game, and the audience flows in as new players and returning players. We're very happy that our game has very good core playerbase, a lot of most active players are with us since Beta. Obviously for the game to thrive and evolve for years, there should also be inflow of fresh blood. Thus, if we look from this perspective, we should: 1. Work on retaining current players (so they stay in the game and enjoy it); 2. Work on recruiting new players; 3. Work on returning old players (give them good reason to get back into the game); Retaining current players is basically: 1. Resolving the issues that prevent them from enjoying the game; 2. Introducing new features and content to give them reason to enjoy the game and keep playing it. E.g. Our overall dev roadmap is basically a major patch each month, which supplies players with a lot of various events and content, and we also try to squeeze QoL improvements here and there. Our game design team and the teams that service it work on CV improvements, redoing priority sector, making AA more consistent, etc. Our tech guys are fixing some bugs, digging into the port systems to make it work smoother, or exploring the opportunities to improve visuals, etc, etc. But our business development team cannot do any of the above. We cannot ask the small team of negotiators and project managers to make new priority sector quicker, we cannot ask them to fix bugs or design Italian tech tree. 9 mothers cannot give birth to one child each month, it simply does not work like that. But then, these guys give us different, and yet important results - deals and collaborations. Dunkirk, Ovechkin, Arpeggio, HSF, Twitch Prime and now events like Amazon - this is what they do. And they will keep doing this, looking for new opportunities and collabs around the globe. A lot of players enjoy these, and while some of our experiments certainly are rather specific and not for everyone, generally they bring good value for the game, which makes current players happier. TLDR: making current players happy is extremely important, but it does not cancel the activities aimed at player acquisition and winback, as they are a part of the process, too. Please kindly see above. CV rework did not cause the loss of playerbase. I am sorry, but this is a myth. It is very important to understand that it DOES NOT mean that CV rework is perfect, and this fact does not counter any issues that current CV have. But for the sake of objectivity, it's better not to spread false information about "loss of playerbase" and try to connect the points that in fact are not connected. Apart from very slight spike in uninstalls (like a few % from normal flow) in 0.8.0 and slight drop of play activity after New Year (which happens every year and then bounces back, as NY gives crazy amounts of various stuff) nothing happened. We don't need misinformation to justify the changes to CV - we're doing them anyways, because there are objective reasons to, and we acknowledge our mistakes. AA is getting a lot of love, and then renewed priority sector will follow. When the cumulative effect of these changes is applied, maybe spotting will be tweaked as well. We've already done a lot, and will keep working on the existing issues, until they are resolved. See you soon, guys!
  12. Sub_Octavian

    Can we get a list of Band Topics so we don't get banned

    There are a...anchorholes in any part (port!) of the world. Most times I observe, Russian people are quite friendly actually. The thing here is that we don't really show excessive emotions. For example, here in US people tell me "How are you?" while they mean "Hi". In Russia, if a person says "How are you?", most likely he really wants to know how are you. And if he's smiling, he IS happy - not trying to be friendly There are different nuances here and there. But from my experience from travelling across US, to China, to Europe - most people have same values, same hopes and fears, and don't have real reasons to dislike each other. But there is always bad apple here and there. I'm sorry for your bad experience. Lul. Well take this in return:
  13. Sub_Octavian

    Can we get a list of Band Topics so we don't get banned

    Russian community is great, but has one challenging trait - these guys LOVE to get personal. Although, as for communities as a whole, our experiences seem to differ, but just to be clear: I mostly engaged in EN-language communities throughout my gaming life. Dear friend, what did I just spend 4 minutes of my life on? I find it disturbing and strangely satisfying at the same time....
  14. Sub_Octavian

    Can we get a list of Band Topics so we don't get banned

    Actually, from my long experience with a lot of online and game communities, WoWS is the best, most mature and reasonable. Really. I am not stamping anyone's voice or something. I don't tell you what to think. I don't ask you to change your views or do research or anything. I just ask you to chill out and stop bringing this up here. It is our rules. You accept the rules or you don't use Forums. You break the rules, you get banned. And the rules are not about criticizing the game or discussing navy history. They mostly restrict things that are not related to the game and things that Wargaming as game development studio has nothing to do with. It is done not to shut anyone's voice, but just to get rid of heavily loaded things that we don't have any interest in, as well as most of our players. Some things that are acceptable in a small community or some independent platforms are not necessarily okay for an official Forums, of the game, which is published by a big company worldwide. Unfortunately, as much as I love good discussion on everything personally, it's not the place. Thanks for understanding and I will stop commenting on that now. If you still think it's not fair, you can always stop using the Forums. While we try to accommodate as many players as we can, we realize that the rules can not suit everyone. If they don't suit you, I apologize, but they are in place for too many reasons to ignore them. Cheers!
  15. Sub_Octavian

    Can we get a list of Band Topics so we don't get banned

    I appreciate the American education and input on things happening overseas, but I believe you should still go to some relevant platform or club to discuss political history. There are quite a few of them. As for discussing what politically related things are or not are in the game, this discussion is not happening. We're not in position to engage in this debate, and trying to fuel it will result in ban. The game and forum is about navy, ships (and weeb stuff sometimes). Thank you.
×