Ranked Battles Rentals

[ArchJuan]

Played ranked before and have read several posts on the forum. I'd like to propose adding rentals to Ranked Battles. In Wot(tanks) they do missions to rent tanks, Even premium tanks. Why not do the same here in WoWs(warships). Do a mission and rent a premium ship. This way it puts those that say it is a pay to play battle to rest and gives those that don't have it a chance to try it.

[Destroyer_Zeka]

I honestly doubt it. WG is a company, and companies need to make money. Thats the point of selling premium ships. Giving them out as rentals can discourage people from paying for it. Why pay for a ship that you want when you can just get it and play it through a mission? Try before you buy is not a good idea for the health and future of WoWs. if you're going to buy a premium, then buy it. In other words: Most likely never gonna happen

[ArchJuan]

Rentals only last for 48 hours and up to 72 hours. Not free and not to keep either. Just take it for a spin. The glass of water is always half full or half empty. Always. Just depends on your point of view.

[Sharkbait_416]

3 minutes ago, FireAndHEspam said:

I honestly doubt it. WG is a company, and companies need to make money. Thats the point of selling premium ships. Giving them out as rentals can discourage people from paying for it. Why pay for a ship that you want when you can just get it and play it through a mission? Try before you buy is not a good idea for the health and future of WoWs. if you're going to buy a premium, then buy it. In other words: Most likely never gonna happen

If you go to the car dealership, wouldn't you want to test drive a car before you buy it? 

I think providing players with the opportunity to "test drive" a premium ship is a good idea. It may turn away some players who have bad games with whatever ship they are testing, but in general, I think it will help people make a decision on the purchase, who were otherwise on the fence.  

[Destroyer_Zeka]

Just now, Sharkbait_416 said:

If you go to the car dealership, wouldn't you want to test drive a car before you buy it? 

I think providing players with the opportunity to "test drive" a premium ship is a good idea. It may turn away some players who have bad games with whatever ship they are testing, but in general, I think it will help people make a decision on the purchase, who were otherwise on the fence.  

not really such a hot idea IMO. While it seems like a good idea on paper, I go back to my statement that WG is a company, and companies need to make money. Why would handing a potato a Kutuzov or Tirpitz to "test" and they suck with them, so they don't buy it? When you buy any premium you run the risk of disappointment by your purchase. When you added that fancy new ship to your port you did it (hopefully) understanding that you may not be particularly impressed by her. When I bought Kutuzov and read all the positive reviews of her, I was disappointed by how she treated me. I bought that ship knowing that I may not be impressed with her, and that if I want to be good in her, i need to actually play her and try to learn how she works best, not playing a few test runs.

[a_trout_bum_2]

i think having a very limited trial period, for example two games, would be a good thing,it would give the players a taste of how the ship does, but it isnt enough to do a mission in a freebie ship

[Sharkbait_416]

12 minutes ago, FireAndHEspam said:

not really such a hot idea IMO. While it seems like a good idea on paper, I go back to my statement that WG is a company, and companies need to make money. Why would handing a potato a Kutuzov or Tirpitz to "test" and they suck with them, so they don't buy it? When you buy any premium you run the risk of disappointment by your purchase. When you added that fancy new ship to your port you did it (hopefully) understanding that you may not be particularly impressed by her. When I bought Kutuzov and read all the positive reviews of her, I was disappointed by how she treated me. I bought that ship knowing that I may not be impressed with her, and that if I want to be good in her, i need to actually play her and try to learn how she works best, not playing a few test runs.

1. I don't think it's fair to label people who are interested in purchasing a premium ship or supporting the game "potatoes." The fact that they are even considering a purchase means that they care a lot about this game. 

2. Why do you think car dealerships take the risk of allowing people to test drive brand new cars worth tens of thousands of dollars? It's because they know you can tell someone all about the car, but it doesn't equate to the experience of driving it. That's what truly sells it.

3. It's impossible for every single person to be happy with a ship. However, by allowing people to test it for a day or two, they can avoid making a bad purchase. By guiding these players away from ships they don't like to ships they will enjoy playing, they will be able to make purchases without regret. As you said, companies need to make money, there's no denying that. However, a customer with a bad experience is much more likely to shop elsewhere than someone who has had good shopping experience.

4. By allowing players to test ships, even if they don't buy it, they can tell other players about their experience with the ship. Word of mouth is capable of generating interest and sales.

[MaliceA4Thought]

I am not sure about this..  renting a ship and being able to lets say  only use it in Co-op for 5 or 10 games for an appropriate fee may be a money maker for WG...  

I have no idea what the outcome was in WoT but they have the marketing data if they need it, and I am sure that will resolve the issue internally.

I would object, though, to allowing rentals in Random or Ranked.

M

[Kapitan_Wuff]

Those who make claims of P2P are just salty and looking for excuses, and this wouldn't slow them down at all.

I am down for the idea of rentals/test drives. I can see it increasing sales too. I didn't get several of the recent premiums because they looked lack luster.. but if I had played them I might have fallen in love. 

 But in ranked, no, I don't want people unfamiliar with a ship and most likely a low pt captain coming into ranked. No rentals in Ranked.

[CaptGodzillaPig]

I don't like this idea at all about putting rentals in Ranked games...or any games on the live server.   I have in the past mentioned that making premiums available to play around with during the public test times might be a good way to get people interested in buying a premium ship for their own fleet.   Pub test already gives you a ton of everything to start, signals, dubloons, a bazillion credits, 15 point captains, a fleet of ships and a super cheap cost to upgrade up a line.  You can easily run a line to T10 in just a few games and in one good session of play have pretty much maxed out every line available.  Why not toss in premiums?  Once the test ends everything goes *poof* anyway and all you end up with is whatever rewards you earned for completing whatever criteria they set out.   Additionally adding the premium line ups to the test server might get some more people playing test, which it sorely needs.  Nothing like 2 on 2 random battles.  lol.   I even had one once where it was 1:1 with 2 carriers.

[Destroyer_Zeka]

13 minutes ago, Sharkbait_416 said:

1. I don't think it's fair to label people who are interested in purchasing a premium ship or supporting the game "potatoes." The fact that they are even considering a purchase means that they care a lot about this game. 

2. Why do you think car dealerships take the risk of allowing people to test drive brand new cars worth tens of thousands of dollars? It's because they know you can tell someone all about the car, but it doesn't equate to the experience of driving it. That's what truly sells it.

3. It's impossible for every single person to be happy with a ship. However, by allowing people to test it for a day or two, they can avoid making a bad purchase. By guiding these players away from ships they don't like to ships they will enjoy playing, they will be able to make purchases without regret. As you said, companies need to make money, there's no denying that. However, a customer with a bad experience is much more likely to shop elsewhere than someone who has had good shopping experience.

1.) Imagine what a German BB main would think of a Kutuzov or Molotov, both nice and squishy ships. They may not be potatoes and they may understand game mechanics, but anyone in any ship they don't know how to use is a potato, at least for that ship. Flashback to me and the Kutuzov

2.) Current sales on premiums are just fine. Kutuzov, Atago, and Tirpitz seem to be popular picks for people looking to buy a new premium ship. Unless sales take a swan dive WG has no incentive to switch away from from a system that is already working just fine as is

3.) You missed the entire point of what i said. It takes more then one or two days to learn how to use a ship. My Kutuzov took me near 3 weeks to learn, and even now I still don't play her much because I'm still not really good with her. Again, buying premium content is something that you can and sometimes will regret. And again, the current system works just fine as is

[Wulfgarn]

Interesting idea.

[TheKrimzonDemon]

No. I promise you, if I'd known in advance, personally known from experience, how bad 6 of the premiums I bought were, I'd never have gotten them. Ergo; WG would have lost that cash, a couple hundred total, iirc. A great many players are just like me, and doing what you suggest would utterly ruin the game, simply because WG wouldn't have the cash to keep it going.

[Destroyer_Zeka]

4 minutes ago, TheKrimzonDemon said:

No. I promise you, if I'd known in advance, personally known from experience, how bad 6 of the premiums I bought were, I'd never have gotten them. Ergo; WG would have lost that cash, a couple hundred total, iirc. A great many players are just like me, and doing what you suggest would utterly ruin the game, simply because WG wouldn't have the cash to keep it going.

[dionkraft]

While were on the subject how about if WOW were to LEASE SHIPs for approx one year?  AHa..didn't think of that huh?  Yeah..lets say the ship costs $48 so the lease is $12 for the whole year or $1 per month. All payable in doubloon up front full price and refundable at the end of the year when lease expires. Thats in case you pull the plug and have no doubloon in the account. 

This may INCREASE revenue as more people will jump to the smaller price compared to the fewer who pay full price. 

 

[ArchJuan]

I bought ships and have had the same regret on some. However, I would have bought something else instead, As in another ship. Wg still would have had their sale. Wg would not shut down warships. The tanks alone more than likely sustain all the rest. 

[AphelionMarauder]

1 hour ago, CaptGodzillaPig said:

I don't like this idea at all about putting rentals in Ranked games...or any games on the live server.   I have in the past mentioned that making premiums available to play around with during the public test times might be a good way to get people interested in buying a premium ship for their own fleet.   Pub test already gives you a ton of everything to start, signals, dubloons, a bazillion credits, 15 point captains, a fleet of ships and a super cheap cost to upgrade up a line.  You can easily run a line to T10 in just a few games and in one good session of play have pretty much maxed out every line available.  Why not toss in premiums?  Once the test ends everything goes *poof* anyway and all you end up with is whatever rewards you earned for completing whatever criteria they set out.   Additionally adding the premium line ups to the test server might get some more people playing test, which it sorely needs.  Nothing like 2 on 2 random battles.  lol.   I even had one once where it was 1:1 with 2 carriers.

Not everyone has the hard drive space for this. 

Explain to my why I should sacrifice another 35+ GB for a test client just to test drive different ships.

[Sharkbait_416]

40 minutes ago, TheKrimzonDemon said:

No. I promise you, if I'd known in advance, personally known from experience, how bad 6 of the premiums I bought were, I'd never have gotten them. Ergo; WG would have lost that cash, a couple hundred total, iirc. A great many players are just like me, and doing what you suggest would utterly ruin the game, simply because WG wouldn't have the cash to keep it going.

On the flip side, what if you test drove a ship you didn't think you would like, and found that it was great?

[Devils_Poltergeist]

It is certainly an interesting idea, but I doubt having it for ranked battles specifically is a good idea. I can just imagine the outrage towards a person who didn't do their part in a "rented" ship. Of course, the test server has helped me decide which trees I will grind first, I can see this helping the indecisive choose whether or not they actually want to buy a premium. The only thing is like other have said, if a ship doesn't live up to the expectations of the player (wheter the fault of the player or not), it could cost wargaming money from potential purchases.

[CaptGodzillaPig]

2 hours ago, Battleship_MaineMk1 said:

Not everyone has the hard drive space for this. 

Explain to my why I should sacrifice another 35+ GB for a test client just to test drive different ships.

Don't.  I am not trying to make everyone happy, because obviously that will never work.  I am proposing an idea that might actually be considered by WG to release premium ships to the general public for a trial basis.  It won't happen in game, and I would prefer it that way...as would most I would imagine.  Why do you sacrifice your hard drive space for anything?  Because you want to and think it is important to you. 

[Freddie_Creamer]

Just do it they way they do it on WoT. When an event is going on and they are selling a premium for that event they sometimes let people earn a one day rental. Just don't let people bring them into ranked. Besides it'll be free xp killing them until the rental period is done.