127 [BINGO] Platnumsniper Beta Testers 254 posts 9,367 battles Report post #1 Posted January 12, 2017 I decided to look back at the and compare the video to what we really got. No Submarines (Check, What? He said they weren't coming) Better Team gameplay and interaction (Check: Ranked Battles, Team Battles, Clan beta, Dynamic Divisions, and Voice chat in divisions) Armour Viewer (Check: Not much else to add here) 4 new ship branches including Soviet/Russian Cruisers, and German Battleships (Check: Große Deutschland had a name change, plus we also had RN Cruisers, German Destroyers and the IJN DD sub branch) New Tech Tree. Candidates ranging from Great Britain to Australia (Check: sorry Australia although technically you showed up in the form of Perth and the combined Commonwealth "nation" and the French showed up with Dunkerque) New skills for Commanders (Check: Torpedo acceleration, Manual control for AA, Manual control for secondaries, and survivability expert) New consumables (Check: Torpedo Reload Booster, and Radar which was first introduced with Russian cruisers) New options for upgrades (Check: New combined upgrade, Aiming systems mod 0, and Artillery plotting room mod 2) Aircraft carrier improvements (Other then aircraft changes and defensive fire added to high tier CVs.... They didn't get simpler to play and the UI hasn't changed since alpha. I think this one missed the mark, hopefully next year) Weather (Check: Cyclones and the startup weather on some maps) Additional features that weren't included in the video: Containers (Big plus) Campaigns (Great addition) New modes like Bastion and Epicenter (Pretty fun wish I could play more of Bastion honestly) A plethora of new premium ships (Texas, Arizona, Molotov, Prinz Eugen, Graf Spee, Scharnhorst, Dunkerque, Perth, Belfast, Cambeltown, and Saipan just to name a few) Significant high tier economy changes and rewards for actions like spotting Implementation of the shorter dev cycle with major patches every three weeks and a new ship line or premium ships every second patch Final Grade: A The WoWs team did an excellent job. Yes the CV players didn't get the love they needed but we were aware that wasn't happening around mid 2016 and no one is perfect or a robot. We had our bumps in the road but all in all the game has improved significantly. The WoWs team delivered on their promises and then some. Here's to a great 2017 This is of course my own personal opinion. Being an Alpha tester of WoWs I am proud to have been supporting the game from the start Credits: Thanks to the WoWs Wiki team for doing such a great job and stockpiling all the changelogs for every patch since open beta. You guys did a great job with the wiki, last time I looked at it was way back in one of the betas and it was in rough shape. Also thanks to the STRS podcast and Warships Podcast. Without their interviews of the Wiki editors, I would have never given the Wiki a second chance. 33 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
44 [USNDD] AutismsRevenge Banned 66 posts 3,751 battles Report post #2 Posted January 12, 2017 Excellent post! Would +1 but I gave them all away already. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
2,596 [-KIA-] TenguBlade Banned 9,382 posts 28,311 battles Report post #3 Posted January 12, 2017 I can't give this enough +1s. Not enough people, myself almost at the forefront of that crowd, give credit to what WG did do on here. It's all about what they did wrong, because nobody notices when things go right. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
3,855 RedSeaBear Members 5,450 posts 21,054 battles Report post #4 Posted January 12, 2017 My only problem with WG in 2016 was the Nerf to skills needed to make the Marblehead viable against tier 6 ships. Than they changed the Match Maker and now all Tier 5 ships have to fight Tier 7s. Make The Marblehead Great Again. Other wise its been a good year And I'm happy to play WoWs on the NA server. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1,466 [KTKM] IKU19 Beta Testers 4,633 posts 4,076 battles Report post #5 Posted January 12, 2017 No Submarines (Check, What? He said they weren't coming) That reminds me that they didn't say they weren't coming in 2017. Depth charges = special new armament, anyone? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1,753 goldeagle1123 Members 5,424 posts 3,448 battles Report post #6 Posted January 12, 2017 Since all the positives have been pointed out, let's talk about those "big changes to CVs" that were allegedly coming... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
127 [BINGO] Platnumsniper Beta Testers 254 posts 9,367 battles Report post #7 Posted January 12, 2017 Since all the positives have been pointed out, let's talk about those "big changes to CVs" that were allegedly coming... I did mention that. They should still come this year Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
19 SquiglyHasATorpedo Members 104 posts 2,032 battles Report post #8 Posted January 12, 2017 No Submarines (Check, What? He said they weren't coming) Did the devs say that submarines would never be in the game or just that they're really far on the back burner? I've been getting mixed messages with this. I'd rather see battlecruisers or a CA/CL split before them, but maybe they could work. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1,753 goldeagle1123 Members 5,424 posts 3,448 battles Report post #9 Posted January 12, 2017 I did mention that. They should still come this year Fair enough you did, didn't read the bottom part. My bad. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1,466 [KTKM] IKU19 Beta Testers 4,633 posts 4,076 battles Report post #10 Posted January 12, 2017 Did the devs say that submarines would never be in the game or just that they're really far on the back burner? I've been getting mixed messages with this. They've switched positions on "never" a bunch of times, lately it has been "not in the foreseeable future." The devs probably realize that at the rate at which they're releasing new ships, they'll run out of normal ships in three years. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1,753 goldeagle1123 Members 5,424 posts 3,448 battles Report post #11 Posted January 12, 2017 Did the devs say that submarines would never be in the game or just that they're really far on the back burner? I've been getting mixed messages with this. I'd rather see battlecruisers or a CA/CL split before them, but maybe they could work. They definitively stated that there will be no submarines in video over a year ago. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1,719 Eisennagel Beta Testers 11,669 posts Report post #12 Posted January 12, 2017 (edited) I would give A+ on 3D modeling A+ on quality of coding, solid, almost bugfree client A+ for revenue collection, sound business model A+ for music, sound effects A+ for graphical special effects A+ for IT management, very solid servers C- for map design (lack of imagination, creativity and balance) F for developer communication with community, community managers and community contributors D for balancing (cruisers and carriers having an existential crisis; WTH feeling on British cruisers, IJN destroyers and German destroyers, not to mention existing issues on USN cruisers) C for executive and creative direction (should have RN first before Russian, lack of different game modes) C+ on user interface design Edited January 12, 2017 by Eisennagel Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1,116 [BOSS] TurboT Beta Testers 2,762 posts 16,848 battles Report post #13 Posted January 12, 2017 Excellent post! Would +1 but I gave them all away already. More importantly, we have people re rolling accounts in Warships already????? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
127 [BINGO] Platnumsniper Beta Testers 254 posts 9,367 battles Report post #14 Posted January 12, 2017 More importantly, we have people re rolling accounts in Warships already????? Wow. I would never consider re-rolling my account. Too much progress Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1,363 [HYD] Aduial Members 7,105 posts 5,289 battles Report post #15 Posted January 12, 2017 F for developer communication with community, community managers and community contributors I would give them at least a C+ for communication. I guess our standards differ. Anyways, things I look forward to in 2017: -Improved graphics: We will now see walls of flames whenever we fire battleship guns, like this: -Legendary commanders: It sounds very interesting, we'll have to see what exactly they do. -New modes for co-op: I enjoyed the Halloween mode, so I'm definitely excited for this. -Earnable upgrades: We don't have any details yet, but it sounds interesting. And........ -New ships! New ships are always good. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
2,596 [-KIA-] TenguBlade Banned 9,382 posts 28,311 battles Report post #16 Posted January 12, 2017 I would give them at least a C+ for communication. I guess our standards differ. Anyways, things I look forward to in 2017: -Improved graphics: We will now see walls of flames whenever we fire battleship guns, like this: -Legendary commanders: It sounds very interesting, we'll have to see what exactly they do. -New modes for co-op: I enjoyed the Halloween mode, so I'm definitely excited for this. -Earnable upgrades: We don't have any details yet, but it sounds interesting. And........ -New ships! New ships are always good. I'm more worried about what the larger smoke clouds will do to player vision. People already complain that burning superstructures obscure their vision, but when you see how shipboard fires look in the Developer Diaries video, they stretch to the top of the screen and beyond. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1,363 [HYD] Aduial Members 7,105 posts 5,289 battles Report post #17 Posted January 12, 2017 I'm more worried about what the larger smoke clouds will do to player vision. People already complain that burning superstructures obscure their vision, but when you see how shipboard fires look in the Developer Diaries video, they stretch to the top of the screen and beyond. Fair point, but they still look cool. I guess you could have a setting to make them smaller and less obscuring to your vision? We'll have to see about that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
440 [BLKHS] 11thACRColdsteel Beta Testers 1,612 posts 8,174 battles Report post #18 Posted January 12, 2017 The fact that after a full year of 2016, we have no ingame team play feature and CV play is totally disfunctional as of the end of the year means to me their highest overall grade must be no better than a C. Lot of good stuff otherwise but these are two "must have" areas for the game to be up to par, in my view. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1,478 [HINON] renegadestatuz Members 7,656 posts 9,539 battles Report post #19 Posted January 12, 2017 They've switched positions on "never" a bunch of times, lately it has been "not in the foreseeable future." The devs probably realize that at the rate at which they're releasing new ships, they'll run out of normal ships in three years. It they stick to their 4 lines a year plan, there's enough ships/lines they could do to last 4 1/2-5 years. And that's not counting lines they could come up with that would be majority paper. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1,414 yUPPatriots Members 3,929 posts 20,995 battles Report post #20 Posted January 12, 2017 Let us not forget that in 2016 pVe received a massive update of new and improved bot names: Batch #1 Batch #2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
915 [--V--] SeaborneSumo Members 1,602 posts 14,841 battles Report post #21 Posted January 12, 2017 A - for addition of new IJN DDs F - for NERF to IJN DDs. Ruined the Fubuki. F - for NERF to Mogami (pretty sure that was early 2016) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1,593 [CRMSN] Cobraclutch Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters 6,021 posts 4,739 battles Report post #22 Posted January 12, 2017 No Submarines (Check, What? He said they weren't coming) Just going to leave this here. [–]Sub_Octavian[S] 1 point 6 minutes ago I know "never say never". Even to submarines :@ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1,137 Raven114 Members 2,335 posts 6,897 battles Report post #23 Posted January 12, 2017 I think they deserve an A-minus grade for this years improvements. My only criticism is the slow and continuing movement to strictly arcade type of game. They should change there advertisements which lures the Historians and the Navy types. so the disappointment is not so harsh. I know all the arguments and agree with some of them. Just an Observation from an historian and a navy type. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
440 [BLKHS] 11thACRColdsteel Beta Testers 1,612 posts 8,174 battles Report post #24 Posted January 12, 2017 (edited) I think they deserve an A-minus grade for this years improvements. My only criticism is the slow and continuing movement to strictly arcade type of game. They should change there advertisements which lures the Historians and the Navy types. so the disappointment is not so harsh. I know all the arguments and agree with some of them. Just an Observation from an historian and a navy type. Totally agree....there isn't anything historical here in the ship builds.....no ship is constructed with historical specs and capabilities....and it is and continues to be a disappointment to the historical nerds (of which there are many in this genre of game). +1 to Raven. Edited January 12, 2017 by 11thACRColdsteel Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
410 [PLPTR] Cpt_RickSchwifty [PLPTR] Beta Testers 1,252 posts 6,360 battles Report post #25 Posted January 12, 2017 I did mention that. They should still come this year I think sometime right before Ranked Season month 5 , they stated the carrier stuff was not coming in 2016, so they at least clarified the situation. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
