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

No longer the red headed step child?

48 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

3,254
[WOLF7]
Members
10,746 posts

Haven't really been playing much or paying attention, but just noticed that RU server has dropped so far, that we may soon no longer be the bottom population server.

What is it about Clan wars that has seemingly turned them off?

Spoiler

image.thumb.png.4f09ec77965ede3523ed6f72050c2619.png

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
631
[SYJ]
[SYJ]
Members
1,576 posts
2,611 battles
6 minutes ago, awiggin said:

Haven't really been playing much or paying attention, but just noticed that RU server has dropped so far, that we may soon no longer be the bottom population server.

What is it about Clan wars that has seemingly turned them off?

  Reveal hidden contents

image.thumb.png.4f09ec77965ede3523ed6f72050c2619.png

 

*insert a tier 10 ranter here*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
625
[-BRS-]
[-BRS-]
Members
2,045 posts
14,749 battles

Or maybe They're just sick of WG change in the game every update

 I'm starting to get kind of sick of that myself

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
366
[WOLF5]
Members
1,330 posts
7,444 battles

- Subjective, bias, illogical and anti-truth balancing.

- Competitive mode, Clan Wars, with restricted times and dates.  If your pop isn't high enough to support this as an all time thing, you are clearly doing something very wrong elsewhere (see first)

- Pissing off the whales. Making completely unique ships gated, like Stalingrad, will only piss off your highest source of revenue. F2P games do not survive without their whales.

Each one are recipes for death for a game. Notice how WoWs, a VERY arcade game as a population that is even smaller than a lot of hardcore mil-sim games?

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 3
  • Bad 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,737
[-K-]
Members
5,751 posts
9,793 battles

Maybe its just summer time in Russia?  You know, nicer weather and stuff?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
625
[-BRS-]
[-BRS-]
Members
2,045 posts
14,749 battles
15 minutes ago, zarth12 said:

- Subjective, bias, illogical and anti-truth balancing.

- Competitive mode, Clan Wars, with restricted times and dates.  If your pop isn't high enough to support this as an all time thing, you are clearly doing something very wrong elsewhere (see first)

- Pissing off the whales. Making completely unique ships gated, like Stalingrad, will only piss off your highest source of revenue. F2P games do not survive without their whales.

Each one are recipes for death for a game. Notice how WoWs, a VERY arcade game as a population that is even smaller than a lot of hardcore mil-sim games?

 Yeah I really enjoyed this game and I thought it Would get better with time but I think it's not and maybe others see this too

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
625
[-BRS-]
[-BRS-]
Members
2,045 posts
14,749 battles
3 minutes ago, Ace_04 said:

Maybe its just summer time in Russia?  You know, nicer weather and stuff?

 You might be right but the dip also look right around the radar ship update

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,326
[CUTE]
Members
5,202 posts
3,461 battles
13 minutes ago, Ace_04 said:

Maybe its just summer time in Russia?  You know, nicer weather and stuff?

Is this the first summer they have had in 3 years?

Besides, does Putin even allow summer?

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Supertester
3,005 posts
10,086 battles
2 minutes ago, zarth12 said:

1) - Subjective, bias, illogical and anti-truth balancing.

2) - Competitive mode, Clan Wars, with restricted times and dates.  If your pop isn't high enough to support this as an all time thing, you are clearly doing something very wrong elsewhere (see first)

3) - Pissing off the whales. Making completely unique ships gated, like Stalingrad, will only piss off your highest source of revenue. F2P games do not survive without their whales.

Each one are recipes for death for a game. Notice how WoWs, a VERY arcade game as a population that is even smaller than a lot of hardcore mil-sim games?

1) Subjective yes, but that's it. Unless you have their development outlook and timeline, you don't know what's illogical. As far as "bias" and "anti-truth balancing", I'm sorry, but that screams conspiracy theory.

Show me bias and I'll debunk it with data. Yes, even the all mighty Belfast, which stands at 4th and 5th place in every category except one and even at that, it isn't in first, but second place. So please, do tell me of bias and explain this "anti-truth balancing"...

2) So, picture clan wars and ranked battles 24/7/365. When does a season begin? When does a season end? Well, a season begins, but never ends therefore, those that are ahead stay ahead and keep getting a lead. On the opposing side, those behind stay behind, thus creating a HUGE gap in the MM que, even with brackets.

Look at games that had active populations just in the NA, with 100 times more than WoWs, had not only competitive PvP, but an actual e-sport. Even they have seasons with breaks between them.

While you're entitled to your opinion and I respect that, heck I like ranked myself. I don't think you are actually thinking about all the aspects here.

3) Whales... lol Sorry, but this misconception always makes me laugh. Now what is going to yield more money, a fraction of a percent of the population that spends a decent amount of money on the game OR an actual percentage of the population that spends a little here and there?

Last night I saw the server population at 12k and change, but for the sake of this example let's use 10k and let's call that the average active population. So, you have 1% of the active population that spends an average of $50 a month. That's $5,000 a month total. Now to just equate that, 10% of the population needs to spend only $5 a month. The numbers are 100 "Whales" to 1,000 non-whales.

Sorry, but even though I have spent my fair share on this game, "Whales" do not carry it. Need further proof? Look at one "Candy" game or any mobile game that's been successful for that matter. That's the first point.

Second, you are only speculating as to what they are going to do with regards to the Stalingrad. So the sky isn't falling yet, but you're in your fallout shelter already.

Finally, you try to compare Apples to Oranges. World of Warships has never claimed to be a simulator. Not in the three years I've played it (since OBT) and from what I've heard, even in Closed Beta and Alpha, no claims. Yet people, with the same viewpoint as yourself, try to force that upon the game as if the game is something "lesser" than other games that have ships or "tanks"..

I agree, for a simulator this game has issues. I mean, have you seen the size of some of the houses? Thankfully, they've never made such a claim. So why even try to look at this game like one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
142
[SRPH]
[SRPH]
Members
586 posts
1,216 battles
55 minutes ago, silverdahc said:

Or maybe They're just sick of WG change in the game every update

 I'm starting to get kind of sick of that myself

Anymore, this is common among other MMOs as well.  Yes, I kind of miss the old days where you bought a boxed game off the shelf, installed it from a CD/DVD, and it never changed.  However, there were sometimes odd bugs that never got fixed and there wasn't anything you could do about it.  Now it seems like almost every software company puts out a real-time release and lets the public find the errors/issues and then fixes them with updates...even Microsoft and Intuit do this with what should be professional grade software.  Most game platforms are ever-changing...with the introduction of new content, they have to be altered to keep balance between the new and old content.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Supertester
3,005 posts
10,086 battles
4 minutes ago, Bonfor said:

Anymore, this is common among other MMOs as well.  Yes, I kind of miss the old days where you bought a boxed game off the shelf, installed it from a CD/DVD, and it never changed.  However, there were sometimes odd bugs that never got fixed and there wasn't anything you could do about it.  Now it seems like almost every software company puts out a real-time release and lets the public find the errors/issues and then fixes them with updates...even Microsoft and Intuit do this with what should be professional grade software.  Most game platforms are ever-changing...with the introduction of new content, they have to be altered to keep balance between the new and old content.

You would be correct, but it isn't restricted to a genre of games, nor just games, but "software" in general. It's called the System Development Life Cycle (SDLC). 

The maintenance portion of the cycle is where this is at. The disposal part of the cycle is where the old launcher is at, etc.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
721
[NEUTR]
Members
2,207 posts
6,966 battles

With the recent arsenal update, lower tier clans finally realized they are just in the queue to be farmed. 

"Hardcore" players in this game is very very few, just look at the eagle/sharks daily top 1000 point limit. It's around 1200-1400 points, that's like about 15 - 20 matches played. Less than 1000 people daily actually play more than a dozen matches. That's pathetically low number for a "free to play" game.

If game design forces less dedicated players to go up against more dedicated players to earn resources. The "casuals" will quickly quit. This happend in World of Warcraft and Blizzard back then immediately made the change to make competition more casual friendly. 

Without casuals in multiplayer game, you won't have a game to play.

Edited by NeutralState
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,171
[O7]
Supertester, Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
11,030 posts
8,002 battles

Did they also get CB in summer of 2016?

 

Good to see awiggin here complaining. Always gotta have that one guy to drag everyone down constantly.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
579 posts
8 minutes ago, 1nv4d3rZ1m said:

Did they also get CB in summer of 2016?

 

Good to see awiggin here complaining. Always gotta have that one guy to drag everyone down constantly.

Vn92LPb.jpg

you mean this type of guy?

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,171
[O7]
Supertester, Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
11,030 posts
8,002 battles
1 minute ago, _Lord_Scott_ said:

Vn92LPb.jpg

you mean this type of guy?

Find a post from awiggin where he said something positive about WG. It might take a while.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
366
[WOLF5]
Members
1,330 posts
7,444 battles
1 hour ago, BURN_Miner said:

1) Subjective yes, but that's it. Unless you have their development outlook and timeline, you don't know what's illogical. As far as "bias" and "anti-truth balancing", I'm sorry, but that screams conspiracy theory.

Show me bias and I'll debunk it with data. Yes, even the all mighty Belfast, which stands at 4th and 5th place in every category except one and even at that, it isn't in first, but second place. So please, do tell me of bias and explain this "anti-truth balancing"...

2) So, picture clan wars and ranked battles 24/7/365. When does a season begin? When does a season end? Well, a season begins, but never ends therefore, those that are ahead stay ahead and keep getting a lead. On the opposing side, those behind stay behind, thus creating a HUGE gap in the MM que, even with brackets.

Look at games that had active populations just in the NA, with 100 times more than WoWs, had not only competitive PvP, but an actual e-sport. Even they have seasons with breaks between them.

While you're entitled to your opinion and I respect that, heck I like ranked myself. I don't think you are actually thinking about all the aspects here.

3) Whales... lol Sorry, but this misconception always makes me laugh. Now what is going to yield more money, a fraction of a percent of the population that spends a decent amount of money on the game OR an actual percentage of the population that spends a little here and there?

Last night I saw the server population at 12k and change, but for the sake of this example let's use 10k and let's call that the average active population. So, you have 1% of the active population that spends an average of $50 a month. That's $5,000 a month total. Now to just equate that, 10% of the population needs to spend only $5 a month. The numbers are 100 "Whales" to 1,000 non-whales.

Sorry, but even though I have spent my fair share on this game, "Whales" do not carry it. Need further proof? Look at one "Candy" game or any mobile game that's been successful for that matter. That's the first point.

Second, you are only speculating as to what they are going to do with regards to the Stalingrad. So the sky isn't falling yet, but you're in your fallout shelter already.

Finally, you try to compare Apples to Oranges. World of Warships has never claimed to be a simulator. Not in the three years I've played it (since OBT) and from what I've heard, even in Closed Beta and Alpha, no claims. Yet people, with the same viewpoint as yourself, try to force that upon the game as if the game is something "lesser" than other games that have ships or "tanks"..

I agree, for a simulator this game has issues. I mean, have you seen the size of some of the houses? Thankfully, they've never made such a claim. So why even try to look at this game like one?

A.) You can most certainly see that it is illogical. When the evidence is available and irrefutable and they make a balance change opposite from any conclusion one could get from said evidence, they are being illogical and anti-truth. There is no conspiracy theory. It has been proven that BBs have had overpowered accuracy since 2015. An accuracy buff was added to the game that just so happen to scale for BBs MUCH better than any other ship types, and with the recording of not only performance metrics but population metrics as they unfolded this correlates. Before that buff? WG admits BB players are their highest spenders.... that would be enough motive for the justice system.  What has consistently been neutered (nerfed directly and indirectly) for years since then? The same ship type meant to counter BBs. The only hard counter in the game was introduced to primarily counter the ship meant to counter BBs, even though it is the lowest performing. Even a BB that was released and NOT showing overpowered, but simply was better at hurting BBs than other ship types, was nerfed. 

B.) I never said seasons that did not end. Nice Straw Man.

C.) Thank you for further admitting ignorance to the F2P model and games that use it. The  majority of the population of F2P games are free players, completely free. Another chunk is players that spend some money (like just keeping prem active). The whales are the ones that spend a lot, a single one completely eclipses the spending compared to that of dozens of the prior group.. Their size in the population is small but their monetary contribution is more than the vast majority of the population.

D.) another Straw Man. I never claimed WoWs was a sim. Nor did I have any viewpoint to try and make it a sim.

Edited by zarth12
  • Boring 2
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
356
[4HIM]
[4HIM]
Beta Testers
1,355 posts
9,970 battles
13 minutes ago, zarth12 said:

A.) You can most certainly see that it is illogical. When the evidence is available and irrefutable and they make a balance change opposite from any conclusion one could get from said evidence, they are being illogical and anti-truth. There is no conspiracy theory. It has been proven that BBs have had overpowered accuracy since 2015. An accuracy buff was added to the game that just so happen to scale for BBs MUCH better than any other ship types, and with the recording of not only performance metrics but population metrics as they unfolded this correlates. Before that buff? WG admits BB players are their highest spenders.... that would be enough motive for the justice system.  What has consistently been neutered (nerfed directly and indirectly) for years since then? The same ship type meant to counter BBs. The only hard counter in the game was introduced to primarily counter the ship meant to counter BBs, even though it is the lowest performing. Even a BB that was released and NOT showing overpowered, but simply was better at hurting BBs than other ship types, was nerfed. 

B.) I never said seasons that did not end. Nice Straw Man.

C.) Thank you for further admitting ignorance to the F2P model and games that use it. The  majority of the population of F2P games are free players, completely free. Another chunk is players that spend some money (like just keeping prem active). The whales are the ones that spend a lot, a single one completely eclipses the spending compared to that of dozens of the prior group.. Their size in the population is small but their monetary contribution is more than the vast majority of the population.

D.) another Straw Man. I never claimed WoWs was a sim. Nor did I have any viewpoint to try and make it a sim.

Not sure BB players are the biggest spenders since BBs cost the most!  And being a historical type fellow as most of my posts revolve around I will say historically speaking, which ships are the most well known?  Hood, Bismark, Arizona, Warspite, Roma, Shiny Horse, Tirpitz.....or Aigle, Saipan, Duca, Belfast, Z whatever DD.....and the list could go on... So wallets open up for the BBs, more naturally, so of course its WGs biggest sellers.  (btw all those ships I own plus others, but probably won't be buying too many more as WoWS has run its course.... IF Alaska is premium then probably get that, but that may be it unless they get some very cool WWI battlecruisers!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
366
[WOLF5]
Members
1,330 posts
7,444 battles
6 minutes ago, Morpheous said:

Not sure BB players are the biggest spenders since BBs cost the most!  And being a historical type fellow as most of my posts revolve around I will say historically speaking, which ships are the most well known?  Hood, Bismark, Arizona, Warspite, Roma, Shiny Horse, Tirpitz.....or Aigle, Saipan, Duca, Belfast, Z whatever DD.....and the list could go on... So wallets open up for the BBs, more naturally, so of course its WGs biggest sellers.  (btw all those ships I own plus others, but probably won't be buying too many more as WoWS has run its course.... IF Alaska is premium then probably get that, but that may be it unless they get some very cool WWI battlecruisers!

Wargaming claimed BB players were their biggest spenders right after launch. Obviously it could have changes since then, but it is motive none-the-less. As you said, all of the premiums mainly being BBs... is a good indication. However, making balance changes and showing complete disregard for logical and objective balance in an way to appease these spenders (instead of simple appeasing them cosmetically like THE MOST successful games do)...............
is how you kill your own game.

Which is why the pop is soo abysmally low for an arcade game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Supertester
3,005 posts
10,086 battles
27 minutes ago, zarth12 said:

A.) You can most certainly see that it is illogical. When the evidence is available and irrefutable and they make a balance change opposite from any conclusion one could get from said evidence, they are being illogical and anti-truth. There is no conspiracy theory. It has been proven that BBs have had overpowered accuracy since 2015. An accuracy buff was added to the game that just so happen to scale for BBs MUCH better than any other ship types, and with the recording of not only performance metrics but population metrics as they unfolded this correlates. Before that buff? WG admits BB players are their highest spenders.... that would be enough motive for the justice system.  What has consistently been neutered (nerfed directly and indirectly) for years since then? The same ship type meant to counter BBs. The only hard counter in the game was introduced to primarily counter the ship meant to counter BBs, even though it is the lowest performing. Even a BB that was released and NOT showing overpowered, but simply was better at hurting BBs than other ship types, was nerfed. 

B.) I never said seasons that did not end. Nice Straw Man.

C.) Thank you for further admitting ignorance to the F2P model and games that use it. The  majority of the population of F2P games are free players, completely free. Another chunk is players that spend some money (like just keeping prem active). The whales are the ones that spend a lot, a single one completely eclipses the spending compared to that of dozens of the prior group.. Their size in the population is small but their monetary contribution is more than the vast majority of the population.

D.) another Straw Man. I never claimed WoWs was a sim. Nor did I have any viewpoint to try and make it a sim.

Thank you for the chuckle.

Now, let's get serious here and break your statements down because I don't think you know the definition of a strawman argument, let alone have good memory retention. I mean, I have horrible memory retention due to chemo and a car accident, but your other post is still up there in its original form. So yes, you said those things.

A) You keep saying the word "evidence", please source any and all evidence to support your claim. Yes, this falls on you as you are the one "claiming" to have "evidence" that Battleships benefited the most from an accuracy buff 

Sourcing sigma values for one or two Battleships will not be enough to back up your claim. Also, what "evidence" do you have that Battleships are "over powered"? Sure, their Alpha damage is huge and they have large health pools/armor. Do you truly think they can turn on a dime and have the concealment of a Destroyer, provide the AA of a Cruiser or set as many fires, let alone provide the utility of both of the aforementioned? 

The answer to all but one is no with the possible exception being the ability to set fires. The long reload times, slow rudder shifts and even larger detection make them a larger and easier target to hit.

B) You never said seasons shouldn't end? Then please explain this a bit more for me. Especially the bold and italic.

"Competitive mode, Clan Wars, with restricted times and dates.  If your pop isn't high enough to support this as an all time thing, you are clearly doing something very wrong elsewhere (see first)"

C) Math must be a bit of a stretch huh? Thankfully it is one of those aspects that can't be skewed nor does it have feelings, etc. It's just data. 

So how is it that you came to the conclusion that Whales "still" carry the game? lol 

First off and I thought this would have been obvious, but you have zero access to WarGaming's books. Your whole ramble is based on assumption, but claimed by evidence. Honestly, source it.. 

However, based on the hypothetical I put forth, you obviously missed the point where the fact that people can throw away $5 a month (which is nothing) and still equate to what your "Whales" put forth. What happens if that 10% is 25%? Sure, it wouldn't be fair not to recognize the other side either, but the percentage of Whales aren't that high.

That is the point that you missed, spare change by a small percentage of the population nullifies what you percieve as "carrying the game". 

D) You never claimed that WoWs was a sim? Well, what else is anyone to think about your exiting statement here:

"Each one are recipes for death for a game. Notice how WoWs, a VERY arcade game as a population that is even smaller than a lot of hardcore mil-sim games?"

I read it as WoWs was not/is not as successful as it can be due to the lack of simulation. Referring back to the original posters post as to why the RU server was declining in numbers.

Care to elaborate?

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Supertester
3,005 posts
10,086 battles
37 minutes ago, zarth12 said:

Wargaming claimed BB players were their biggest spenders right after launch. Obviously it could have changes since then, but it is motive none-the-less. As you said, all of the premiums mainly being BBs... is a good indication. However, making balance changes and showing complete disregard for logical and objective balance in an way to appease these spenders (instead of simple appeasing them cosmetically like THE MOST successful games do)...............
is how you kill your own game.

Which is why the pop is soo abysmally low for an arcade game.

Hhmm, curious here. You do know launch happened about three years ago right? How can you assert that any ship type is over powered/under powered, biggest spender, who admits what, etc. when it's just now that you are coming out with the timeline you are referrencing? I mean seriously...

By the way, there are more Cruiser premiums than there are Battleship premiums. Go check out the wiki and in fact, the only ARP ship I counted was the Takao. I also counted the free xp BB's and those that are no longer sold...

Still, more Cruisers and Destroyers weren't that far behind BB's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
229
[STW]
Members
696 posts
4,983 battles

Dips in the summer, peaks in late fall and winter.  It's a typical MMO population curve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,500
[WOLF9]
Members
7,587 posts
3,228 battles
1 hour ago, zarth12 said:

C.) Thank you for further admitting ignorance to the F2P model and games that use it. The  majority of the population of F2P games are free players, completely free. Another chunk is players that spend some money (like just keeping prem active). The whales are the ones that spend a lot, a single one completely eclipses the spending compared to that of dozens of the prior group.. Their size in the population is small but their monetary contribution is more than the vast majority of the population.

You're trying your best to address a question that isn't before us because a) it was never mentioned and b) there is ZERO data on it. 

The question the OP posed regards the RU population over time.  The very concept of whales (or any expenditure classification) is orthogonal to it.

Why not address the actual question rather than just dump your chest of woes on us?

 

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
625
[-BRS-]
[-BRS-]
Members
2,045 posts
14,749 battles
21 minutes ago, Deviathan said:

Dips in the summer, peaks in late fall and winter.  It's a typical MMO population curve.

 But it's not growing it's getting smaller

 Each high isnt as high as the one before it

  It is showing its in a downward trend

 It's not a good sign not worth my investment

 And that's probly why WG seems to be doing a lot of cash grabs right now trying to get it while they can

Edited by silverdahc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
625
[-BRS-]
[-BRS-]
Members
2,045 posts
14,749 battles
3 hours ago, awiggin said:

 

  Hide contents

image.thumb.png.4f09ec77965ede3523ed6f72050c2619.png

 

 It's Sinking  Maybe slowly But it is going down

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×