Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
ThinBluLine

Why is ship cost so high in this game even when you received zero damage at the end of the battle

29 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

18
[TDR]
Beta Testers
17 posts
8,107 battles

Just curious, why is ship cost so high at the end of the game no mater if you were not damaged or were able to repair before the end of the game?  I can see cost for shells/consumables  that were used during the battle but a ship that has nothing wrong with it gets slammed with a 60K (tier 9's) or more credit reduction at the end of the game.. To me if there isn't damage  then why the replacement cost and let me keep my credits?  Wging logic????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,118
[NDA]
Supertester
3,896 posts
1,469 battles
1 minute ago, ThinBluLine said:

Just curious, why is ship cost so high at the end of the game no mater if you were not damaged or were able to repair before the end of the game?  I can see cost for shells/consumables  that were used during the battle but a ship that has nothing wrong with it gets slammed with a 60K (tier 9's) or more credit reduction at the end of the game.. To me if there isn't damage  then why the replacement cost and let me keep my credits?  Wging logic????

To encourage you to play and not just sit at the back and snipe.  You pay the same whether you get sunk or survive without a scratch.

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
399
[NGA-R]
Supertester
1,038 posts
5,888 battles

Well if you'd look through the forums you would see this was addressed like last year.  It is a standard cost for all ships regardless of damage received.  You pay the same if you get blasted or if you don't even get a scratch.  The higher the tier the higher the cost.

Welcome to the forums, the Search feature is a fantastic feature......learn it.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30
[DNTZ]
Members
196 posts
11,162 battles

Flat rate for cost.  Ammo I think is a different story.

Repairs used to be based on damage taken, but it was removed to try and reduce camping.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,923
[SYN]
Members
14,345 posts
10,204 battles

because, too many people were camping in the back.

now there's no excuse to camp in the back. Your running costs are the same so you are expected to go out front.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,671
Supertester, Alpha Tester
6,023 posts

You think the only thing that costs on a ship is repair and ammunition?

Fuel

Red lead, paint, soogee, brasso

Provisions

Salaries

Consumables

Etc.

 

Pixels require an awful lot of upkeep.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,708
[HINON]
WoWS Wiki Editor, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
6,498 posts
3,751 battles

You receive a flat service cost for taking the ship out to battle. It remains the same for the ship regardless of damage taken or not taken.

 

That said, it does ramp up over the tiers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,671
Supertester, Alpha Tester
6,023 posts
11 minutes ago, Doomlock said:

That said, it does ramp up over the tiers.

So do the ships. Bigger ships, more crew, more pixels.

Just think of it as inflation. The pfennig of 1912 bought a lot more than the pfennig of 1942.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
276
[LHG]
Members
1,189 posts
4,924 battles

You are expected to make up the service costs by playing the objectives and risking your ship, both of which you are paid for now (supposedly).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
609
[HEROS]
Members
1,391 posts
11,803 battles

Once up on a time it was worse.. and not a little bit worse but way way way worse.  Players were out raged, incensed. frustrated, and really really unhappy!... if you were in a tier 7 or better fight the costs at the end of the mission tended to cost you more then you made even if you did.. ok.. and that might even be if you won!  If you were on the loosing side you hemorrhaged silver!

 

So.. ship repair costs were lowered, and standardized so you paid exactly the same if your ship got sunk or it survived.  Ammunition costs are the only variable.. and premium consumables are a fixed cost as is cammo.   And suddenly even a not so good player could at least hope to break even.  some players got a little more cautious in their play because they knew that didn't have to take outrageous risks just to break even. and the super cautious were encouraged to take a few more risks if they wanted to make more.  Payouts were shifted about and tweaked under the hood and basically improved and the emphasis moved from mostly just causing damage and sinking ships to winning the match..  surviving the match is immaterial from anything other then a "statistics" standpoint..ship repair is a fixed cost for the ship and tier.

 

SO while it seems high, it lower then it was, significantly to.  Just remember that being on the winning side still makes you more then being on the loosing side.  Getting base capture and base defense ribbons are the greatest payout of all and normal consumables are half the cost of premium consumables.. and try to get yourself at least one mid to high tier premium ships if you can swing it.  ANd of course if you have premium time on your account your earnings do go up significantly.

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,430 posts
12,163 battles
26 minutes ago, ThinBluLine said:

Just curious, why is ship cost so high at the end of the game no mater if you were not damaged or were able to repair before the end of the game?  I can see cost for shells/consumables  that were used during the battle but a ship that has nothing wrong with it gets slammed with a 60K (tier 9's) or more credit reduction at the end of the game.. To me if there isn't damage  then why the replacement cost and let me keep my credits?  Wging logic????

The reason is that you end up stagnating on whatever progression you are working towards. You enjoy the game so you eventually open your wallet and purchase flags, premium time, camo.....to help speed or bump the process along. All these other reasons stated are just fluff.

Edited by Sweetsie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
178
[TSG4B]
[TSG4B]
Members
972 posts
5,062 battles
34 minutes ago, kerensky914 said:

To encourage you to play and not just sit at the back and snipe.  You pay the same whether you get sunk or survive without a scratch.

 

This.  Originally, post-battle maintenance/repair varied depending how much damage you took and whether or not your ship were sunk.  But this was perceived as encouraging passive, conservative gameplay.  Especially if your side was clearly losing, the variable repair cost was an incentive to run away and hide in a corner in order to keep your damage (and therfore repair costs) down.  They changed this a while ago (6-9 months?).

Now, since repair cost is constant, from an game economics viewpoint, especially if your side is clearly losing, your best play is to find a way to "death blossom" and cause as much damage to the enemy side as possible, even if you eventually die as a result.

Some players haven't figured this out -- I still sometimes see players running away and hiding when they're clearly on the losing side.  In so doing, all they're really doing is losing the opportunity to cause a little more damage (and therefore earn more credits & XP) before the battle is over.

Edited by ForgMaxtor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
277
[-B-Z-]
Alpha Tester
703 posts
2,588 battles
32 minutes ago, MrDeaf said:

because, too many people were camping in the back.

now there's no excuse to camp in the back. Your running costs are the same so you are expected to go out front.

 

And yet so many players still camp in the back and are afraid to scratch the paint on their hulls. :D 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,259
[WOLF2]
Members
2,992 posts
5,204 battles

The reason is that people have become so salty in the game that the ocean is now super corrosive. So ships will basically have to be scrapped after one engagement.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52
[-AIM-]
Members
187 posts
12,128 battles
5 minutes ago, cometguy said:

The reason is that people have become so salty in the game that the ocean is now super corrosive. So ships will basically have to be scrapped after one engagement.

^:trollface: nice one.

Edited by Teske

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,653
[TBW]
Members
6,293 posts
11,849 battles

Trust me, it's a good thing. People would go and hide so they didn't have to pay for a scratch on their precious ship. Some people still think that way, but it's better than it used to be. Now you can fight til you die and earn more points and it costs you the same in credits as if you did nothing at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
206
[RIPQP]
Members
1,019 posts
8,386 battles

if you had 0 damage taken at the end of the match, you played it WRONG.  (most likely)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,923
[SYN]
Members
14,345 posts
10,204 battles
54 minutes ago, Bravo_Zulu_000 said:

 

And yet so many players still camp in the back and are afraid to scratch the paint on their hulls. :D 

They didn't get the note (it's been more than a year since this change was implemented)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
617
[WOLF1]
[WOLF1]
Members
2,765 posts
1,320 battles
2 hours ago, ForgMaxtor said:

 

This.  Originally, post-battle maintenance/repair varied depending how much damage you took and whether or not your ship were sunk.  But this was perceived as encouraging passive, conservative gameplay.  Especially if your side was clearly losing, the variable repair cost was an incentive to run away and hide in a corner in order to keep your damage (and therfore repair costs) down.  They changed this a while ago (6-9 months?).

Now, since repair cost is constant, from an game economics viewpoint, especially if your side is clearly losing, your best play is to find a way to "death blossom" and cause as much damage to the enemy side as possible, even if you eventually die as a result.

Some players haven't figured this out -- I still sometimes see players running away and hiding when they're clearly on the losing side.  In so doing, all they're really doing is losing the opportunity to cause a little more damage (and therefore earn more credits & XP) before the battle is over.

Yeah, about the only time I run away is when staying alive to run out the clock, as we are up on points, but if we engage and lose a ship, that will make us lose.  If we're losing anyway, I'll try to do something to someone.  More XP/credits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
108
[TURDS]
Members
552 posts
3,572 battles
3 hours ago, Sovereigndawg said:

Trust me, it's a good thing. People would go and hide so they didn't have to pay for a scratch on their precious ship. Some people still think that way, but it's better than it used to be. Now you can fight til you die and earn more points and it costs you the same in credits as if you did nothing at all.

 An evil thought just occurred to me. The camping problem could be cured with an automated anti-camp submarine bot. Five minutes & your (insert class of precious shiny ship here_____) is still dominating the I line?  It (the sub bot) becomes active and fires a spread of tier appropriate torps with suitable (in)accuracy at anything not a CV in the back two rows or a designated area on a given map.  Said evil underwater torp bote could be relatively easily killed/driven into inactivity by mere CA/DD or squadron proximity(or just getting the hell out of the base:), thus simulating the hassle of dealing with a sub without requiring a ship to fire guns at it. Truly evil? Yes. Guaranteed to make camping diminish? Yup. Also guaranteed to crank up the volume of a certain vocal population of players? :trollface:

Edited by Curly__san

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,553
[E-E]
[E-E]
Members
15,538 posts
13,977 battles
4 hours ago, kerensky914 said:

To encourage you to play and not just sit at the back and snipe.  You pay the same whether you get sunk or survive without a scratch.

 

Most definitely, I highly prefer the current system than how it originally was.  Cowards hiding in the back doing nothing got markedly lower servicing costs compared to the ones that actually were engaged and trying to win, who often suffered much higher damage or outright being sunk, and taking a massive hit in servicing costs.

 

F--k that old system to hell and back, the change was one of the best things to happen for the game.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
454 posts

Actually the whole idea of costs are obsolete with the current economic model where it really doesn't matter what you play or what consumables you use. They need to just remove the cost assessment and simply adjust the rewards by baking any values they need into them. Really, it adds absolutely zero to the game because it doesn't reflect what you did in game, only that your entered a match. 

 

yawn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,553
[E-E]
[E-E]
Members
15,538 posts
13,977 battles

I still remember that after the service cost changes, someone made a thread around here complaining he wasn't making credits despite "taking 200k potential damage with my Yamato."

 

Much laughter ensued.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×