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

Missouri Ship peculiarities change...is WG removing it entirely?

93 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

388
[PROJX]
Members
1,009 posts
18,286 battles
13 minutes ago, Helstrem said:

They have things like +50% credits tied to camos.  I don't see why they couldn't do something like -20% credits on a camo.  Might leave a bad taste in the buyer's mouth though.

Yes, you hit the nail on the head - current custom cammos give things like servicing discounts and general bonuses.  Users may find pause if a Missouri cammo had a -20% Silver modifier to compensate for the hull - with the player being asked to “trust us, this just makes it the same earnings as Musashi”.  WG may also need to address “what if the player wants to buy another perma cammo w/o the negative modifier?”.

Currently, Cammos are "carrots" to add positive bonuses to the core attributes of a ship.   If you use a Cammo to compensate for a hull parameter issue - to make this work, you have to essentially restrict the player to only use the one special cammo w/ the negative earnings modifier.  Many players today use non-default cammo on their Missouri for instance if they wanted to farm more Free XP.   Restricting the player from doing this is probably not very player friendly.  This also violates the current characteristic behavior of one aspect of revenue generation for WG (e.g. the ability to buy special cammos) for one specific ship so this is not a ideal solution.

 It can get messy when you start making exceptions to what is their current attribute/bonus model in special cases.

Edited by hangglide42

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,186
[BASIN]
[BASIN]
Members
2,638 posts
1 minute ago, Lert said:

I'm a supertester, I've tested well over a hundred ships so far. Every single one of them had this text. See the Z-39:

A6Acg1F.jpg

(Modules censored because of NDA, 'no statistics counted for ship' counts for ST ships and isn't represented on Missouri)

The rest is just placeholder text. No idea why Missouri still has it.

KK  TYVM  Whew  :Smile_coin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,028
[ARS]
Beta Testers
2,888 posts
2,810 battles
5 minutes ago, hangglide42 said:

Yes, you hit the nail on the head - current custom cammos give things like servicing discounts and general bonuses.  Users may find pause if a Missouri cammo had a -20% Silver modifier to compensate for the hull - with the player being asked to “trust us, this just makes it the same earnings as Musashi”.  WG may also need to address “what if the player wants to buy another perma cammo w/o the negative modifier?”.  It can get messy when you start making exceptions to what is their current attribute/bonus model in special cases.

True that.

Not even another permanent camo, just using the readily available camos would be an issue.

Well, reissue it as New Jersey or Wisconsin it is then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
388
[PROJX]
Members
1,009 posts
18,286 battles
3 minutes ago, Helstrem said:

True that.

Not even another permanent camo, just using the readily available camos would be an issue.

Well, reissue it as New Jersey or Wisconsin it is then.

Personally, there are other ships I'd rather see as a Premium rather than another Iowa clone - but of the 2, arguably New Jersey is probably a more likely candidate since it has a longer service history thru multiple wars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
388
[PROJX]
Members
1,009 posts
18,286 battles
13 minutes ago, Lert said:

I'm a supertester, I've tested well over a hundred ships so far. Every single one of them had this text. See the Z-39:

A6Acg1F.jpg

(Modules censored because of NDA, 'no statistics counted for ship' counts for ST ships and isn't represented on Missouri)

The rest is just placeholder text. No idea why Missouri still has it.

I'm wondering if the text is still there for Missouri in case someone sells her - it tells the player what happens to the XP & Commander's XP perhaps?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25,060
[HINON]
Supertester
20,458 posts
13,904 battles
1 minute ago, hangglide42 said:

I'm wondering if the text is still there for Missouri in case someone sells her - it tells the player what happens to the XP & Commander's XP perhaps?

Same thing happens to Missouri XP and commander when you sell it that happens to every other ship's XP and commander when you sell it. The XP remains where it is and you get an option to dismiss the commander or put it in your reserve. Missouri is nothing different in that respect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,116
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
10,582 posts
15,896 battles
1 hour ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

a player must accept that they need to save up for Missouri or they're playing the game wrong.

Well ... not any more I guess!

I'm certainly not arguing that Missouri ISN'T a ship worth saving for; it most certainly is, without a doubt. It's just kind of raw to be told "She'll be here forever", then find out WoW considers her a problem, and now she's leaving for an unknown period of time, because she's too popular? That's rough.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,186
[BASIN]
[BASIN]
Members
2,638 posts
3 minutes ago, Umikami said:

Well ... not any more I guess!

I'm certainly not arguing that Missouri ISN'T a ship worth saving for; it most certainly is, without a doubt. It's just kind of raw to be told "She'll be here forever", then find out WoW considers her a problem, and now she's leaving for an unknown period of time, because she's too popular? That's rough.

 

:Smile_great:Yup Sure is:Smile_ohmy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,376
[CNO]
[CNO]
Members
4,495 posts
14,611 battles

Why does MO print credits?  I'm looking for the technical answer, not the tactical answer.

 

Edit:  My question is not rhetorical.  Anybody have an answer?

Edited by Soshi_Sone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,376
[CNO]
[CNO]
Members
4,495 posts
14,611 battles
5 hours ago, Soshi_Sone said:

Why does MO print credits?  I'm looking for the technical answer, not the tactical answer.

 

Edit:  My question is not rhetorical.  Anybody have an answer?

I guess I'll answer it myself.  Based on wiki WOWS, the mighty MO prints double what a tech tree would produce.  To get the infamous "million" credit game in the MO, the equivalent tech tree ship would garner 500K.  I find it hard to fathom that this "breaks" the bank so to speak as anyone talented enough to turn 500K in a tech tree ship will likely have plenty of credits whether they play MO or not.  Anyone of lesser talent will have base games in the 200K base range, which (if they were playing MO) would be 400K.  Again, I can't see how this breaks the bank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
296 posts
3,814 battles
8 hours ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

It's either that or accept that to play World of Warships, a player must accept that they need to save up for Missouri or they're playing the game wrong.  Given the options between that or removing the ship, I think Wargaming made the correct choice.

Perhaps so.  But given the reception that Missouri received and the fact that War Gaming is, in fact a business serving a select clientele my suspicions are that we may see Missouri offered again at some point in the future OR, more likely War Gaming may offer New Jersey or Wisconsin in her place, a clone of Iowa with different module choices perhaps.  My thinking is it would be New Jersey as she is nearly as famous as Missouri.

My intention is still to grind out the XP and credits necessary for Iowa as I have a couple of personal links to this ship.  I helped get her Intelligence Center organized after she recommissioned and later one of her youngsters came to work for me just before she suffered the explosion in #2 Turret (or "B" for you Europeans and traditionalists.)  He lost 30 or so shipmates in that blast, many who were friends because until he left the ship to go to school and end up serving with me he had served one of the guns in that turret.  Jim and I met the ship at the pier when she returned to Norfolk. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,068
[LEGIO]
Members
3,243 posts
5,999 battles
8 hours ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

It's either that or accept that to play World of Warships, a player must accept that they need to save up for Missouri or they're playing the game wrong.  Given the options between that or removing the ship, I think Wargaming made the correct choice.

Umm what? Since when is a Missouri needed to play the game right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27,798
[WG-CC]
WoWS Community Contributors
9,923 posts
8,379 battles
2 hours ago, Lampshade_M1A2 said:

Umm what? Since when is a Missouri needed to play the game right?

Since it drop kicked the high tier economy, stepped on its neck and then peed on the corpse.  Missouri absolutely trivialized credit earning which was always the designed bottleneck in World of Warship's economy.   Credits are scarce unless you fork over money.  That's by design.  Missouri went contrary to this design and proved far too popular as a result.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
606 posts
3,577 battles
2 hours ago, Lampshade_M1A2 said:

Umm what? Since when is a Missouri needed to play the game right?

WG stance on credit earnings has been the same For normal ship/tank line for years. low tier - tier 7 would make more money and T8 and above less money. EXP gains would be normal to a degree while credit gains would be easier. Less HP pool means less cost of repair.

At T8 -T10 however credits would be harder to gain (aside from premium ships/tanks) and exp would be easier. In WoTs T9-10 premiums follow the same rules as the line tanks. Less credits more focus on exp. The MO however broke this rule, well more like shattered it.

Best way to explain this is WG forced you the player to either A. drop back down to low tier line ships to maintain high tier game play costs or B. buy premium ships/tanks to do so. the MO can keep you playing the high tier game play without having to leave it to regain credits hence braking the economy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
791
[WOLFB]
Members
2,535 posts
10,343 battles

No WG will never remove a ship from the game. They will just remove it from the store, for a certain time / forever.

There are plenty of ship removed from the store you can still face :

Imperator Nikolai

Konig Albert

Kutuzov

Belfast

...

 

However if they plan to re introduce the ship ingame expect them to sell this ship at a higher price. Some rumor were spread about Musashi costing 920k free XP because WG thought 750k was "cheap". They decided to sell Musashi at 750k but expect Missouri to be more expensive in the future

Edited by AlcatrazNC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,991
[-K-]
Supertester
3,131 posts
7,010 battles

I'm glad Missouri is out of the rotation.  Battleships shouldn't have radar.  I would still love and enjoy my Missouri if they took radar away...which they should.

  • Bad 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
606 posts
3,577 battles
9 minutes ago, Pope_Shizzle said:

I'm glad Missouri is out of the rotation.  Battleships shouldn't have radar.  I would still love and enjoy my Missouri if they took radar away...which they should.

Nitch and well they not get over it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,201
[SALT]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
3,660 posts
2,989 battles
3 hours ago, Soshi_Sone said:

I guess I'll answer it myself.  Based on wiki WOWS, the mighty MO prints double what a tech tree would produce.  To get the infamous "million" credit game in the MO, the equivalent tech tree ship would garner 500K.  I find it hard to fathom that this "breaks" the bank so to speak as anyone talented enough to turn 500K in a tech tree ship will likely have plenty of credits whether they play MO or not.  Anyone of lesser talent will have base games in the 200K base range, which (if they were playing MO) would be 400K.  Again, I can't see how this breaks the bank.

I can actually answer this one a bit better.

What "Broke" the bank is that MO gave an average to bad player the ability to make 20-30% more credits without a premium account than playing a tier 9 BB, with premium camo, premium account, and reduced hull repair cost at once. Now, people could argue that you can still make good credits in a tier 8 premium BB like Tirpitz without a premium account, but even vs it's tech tree brothers/sisters it wasn't that large of a margin in difference like the MO. Many players were getting the MO and not buying premium since it was making them enough credits to afford new ships and poor losses at tier 10 without it.

So, the broke the bank, was that they saw a massive correlation of players who had the MO in their shipyards and were playing them had stopped purchasing premium account time and it set off red flags.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
635
[VW]
Members
2,420 posts
14,222 battles

To further expand on the breaking of the economy, it is literally impossible to lose money with the MO. Read that again. One can literally do no damage and come away without a loss in credits. Conversely a great game can earn you 500k without premium time, and the infamous million + credits with premium time. This clearly became unacceptable to the devs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,910
[WOLF2]
Beta Testers
4,468 posts
6,065 battles

 

11 hours ago, Pope_Shizzle said:

I'm glad Missouri is out of the rotation.  Battleships shouldn't have radar.  I would still love and enjoy my Missouri if they took radar away...which they should.

Not needing credits, I actually rarely play my Missouri anymore.  Montana is getting more use lately.  Removing radar from Missouri would actually kill any reason to play it over Montana.  I just love that 4th turret and better armor a lot!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,096
[NLIST]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
2,936 posts
10,622 battles

There would be a riot the likes of which have never been seen before if they actually removed Missouri from the game. It'll never happen though 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,953
[NMKJT]
Beta Testers
22,367 posts
3,895 battles
On 3/4/2018 at 9:07 AM, h9k_a said:

Belfast, Kutuzov, Nikolai, Kamakazi variants. It's not like they haven't done it before. 

11 hours ago, AlcatrazNC said:

No WG will never remove a ship from the game. They will just remove it from the store, for a certain time / forever.

There are plenty of ship removed from the store you can still face :

Imperator Nikolai

Konig Albert

Kutuzov

Belfast

Difference is those aren't absurdly famous, historically significant ships that have fought in 4 wars and starred in multiple popular films.

Edited by KiyoSenkan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
3,483 posts
1,556 battles
On 3/4/2018 at 10:28 AM, Lert said:

Don't know. They're not going to remove it from the game. I don't know if they're planning to ever sell it again. Two completely different things.

My gut feeling? It's not gonna get sold again. The credit income is 'problematic'. How do I know that? Well, if they were happy with the credit income, they'd have given Musashi the same multiplier.

Completely in line with my feeling Lert.  If there wasn't a credit issue with the ship, Musashi would have had the same earning potential especially since I am sure that they are losing revenue from Musashi sales due to its drastic reduction in earning potential.  They wouldn't throw away that revenue unless they thought they were losing more revenue from another ship with the Missouri's earning potential. 

That being the case, I absolutely do not expect the Missouri to make a comeback.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25,060
[HINON]
Supertester
20,458 posts
13,904 battles
12 minutes ago, KiyoSenkan said:

Difference is those aren't absurdly famous, historically significant ships that have fought in 4 wars and starred in multiple popular films.

Yeah, you keep telling yourself that WG cares about that over their bottom line. It's a very nice fantasy, very pleasant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
526
[NATO]
Beta Testers
2,064 posts
6,203 battles

I highly doubt the MO will ever be back, as LWM has said, its done too much damage to the economy. Im a classic example of why that ship is problematic, because of it (and my Tirpitz) I will never NEED to pay for prem once my current time runs out. After a hated experience in the Iowa, Ive finally figured out how to play that damn ship and Im doing fine in MO, after a pretty rough start in it too lol!

However, WG has put time into the model so I wouldnt be surprised one bit to see New Jersey make an entrance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×