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

Can WG and the people defending WG on GC answer one simple question?

186 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

68
[NSFW]
[NSFW]
Members
100 posts
6,771 battles

In the months leading up to the Christmas event, WG was holding so many con events, Q&A sessions, live streams, etc to promote and discuss the plans for the game in the coming months. And, not at a single one of these did the mere possibility of re-balancing 'OP' premiums even come up-which you would think would be a BIG discussion point. Heck, one would think during the Christmas event WG would have put out a disclaimer on the ships they were so heavily advertising with 'oh, by the way, we are looking into re-balancing these ships soon. Bear this in mind before you gamble.' But, no. They suddenly bring it up, almost out of nowhere, a mere couple weeks after the event ends.

Can anyone give any sort of logical explanation for that? Because I don't think 'they forgot/it didn't come up' or 'they just now decided to deal with it' is really gonna fly here....

  • Cool 12
  • Boring 3
  • Bad 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
631
[SYJ]
[SYJ]
Members
1,576 posts
2,611 battles

Changing a premium has always been in the fine print, people just haven't accepted the fact that premiums are subject to change. Sure, it should have been mentioned for clarity of people buying Xmas crates, but they also should know it themselves. 

 

They got what they paid for at the time, then it is subject to balancs like every other ship. Sure I cant blame you for being upset, but its Wargamings right and duty to make the game better and balanced. If that means GC has to advance a tier, so goes.

 

Can I go pay doubloons for free xp and credits, then complain when they nerf Alsace? Sure, but it was WGs right to do so. No different 

  • Cool 14
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
847 posts
5,193 battles
1 minute ago, redneck1776 said:

Because if they did...would you have spent money on the santa crates?

Caveat emptor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
68
[NSFW]
[NSFW]
Members
100 posts
6,771 battles
2 minutes ago, redneck1776 said:

Because if they did...would you have spent money on the santa crates?

Hence the bait and switch.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,344 posts
8,689 battles
1 minute ago, redneck1776 said:

Because if they did...would you have spent money on the santa crates?

Depends on which way the rebalance of the ship goes. Buffs or nerfs. 

To the OPs question. I could probably think of about 10 answers but theyd all be speculation, and this forum doesnt need anymore of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13
[KSC]
Beta Testers
20 posts
5,071 battles

Simple they dont have to if they dont want to, in the User agreement states:

You agree that you do not “own” the Virtual Goods and that Wargaming has the absolute right to manage, regulate, control, modify and/or eliminate such Virtual Goods in its sole discretion, in any general or specific case, and that Wargaming will have no liability to you based on its exercise of such right.

we do not make any promises about how or when Virtual Goods may be available and can update or change Virtual Goods at any time;

 

  • Cool 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
101
[SPTR]
Members
2,239 posts
2,294 battles
1 minute ago, kalman81 said:

Simple they dont have to if they dont want to, in the User agreement states:

You agree that you do not “own” the Virtual Goods and that Wargaming has the absolute right to manage, regulate, control, modify and/or eliminate such Virtual Goods in its sole discretion, in any general or specific case, and that Wargaming will have no liability to you based on its exercise of such right.

we do not make any promises about how or when Virtual Goods may be available and can update or change Virtual Goods at any time;

 

This

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
396
[DDM_]
Members
1,368 posts
4,265 battles

How many people complaining about the changing of a premium ship would have complained if it had been made better instead of worse? 

People aren't mad because a change was made, they are mad because the change did not benefit them. C'est la vie.

  • Cool 7
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13
[KSC]
Beta Testers
20 posts
5,071 battles

also, why go pissed about something YOU or anyone here knows how is going to turn up? what if the ship ends up being OP at tier 6? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
537
[WOLF2]
Members
2,353 posts
14,133 battles
15 minutes ago, Perriwen said:

In the months leading up to the Christmas event, WG was holding so many con events, Q&A sessions, live streams, etc to promote and discuss the plans for the game in the coming months. And, not at a single one of these did the mere possibility of re-balancing 'OP' premiums even come up-which you would think would be a BIG discussion point. Heck, one would think during the Christmas event WG would have put out a disclaimer on the ships they were so heavily advertising with 'oh, by the way, we are looking into re-balancing these ships soon. Bear this in mind before you gamble.' But, no. They suddenly bring it up, almost out of nowhere, a mere couple weeks after the event ends.

Can anyone give any sort of logical explanation for that? Because I don't think 'they forgot/it didn't come up' or 'they just now decided to deal with it' is really gonna fly here....

Ummmm "Money"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
285
[PQUOD]
Members
1,033 posts
7,628 battles
26 minutes ago, Perriwen said:

In the months leading up to the Christmas event, WG was holding so many con events, Q&A sessions, live streams, etc to promote and discuss the plans for the game in the coming months. And, not at a single one of these did the mere possibility of re-balancing 'OP' premiums even come up-which you would think would be a BIG discussion point. Heck, one would think during the Christmas event WG would have put out a disclaimer on the ships they were so heavily advertising with 'oh, by the way, we are looking into re-balancing these ships soon. Bear this in mind before you gamble.' But, no. They suddenly bring it up, almost out of nowhere, a mere couple weeks after the event ends.

Can anyone give any sort of logical explanation for that? Because I don't think 'they forgot/it didn't come up' or 'they just now decided to deal with it' is really gonna fly here....

Three letters

N.D.A.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
123 posts

There is an old adage and legal principle.......buyer beware......all that small print that no one, including me, ever reads in the EULA for software like the WG games actually means something!  But, in fairness to WG, I am not sure there would be any other way to do it with regards to ownership of the "ship pixels".  And it is my understanding that most, if not all, computer games have similar verbiage in their EULAs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
847 posts
5,193 battles
18 minutes ago, kalman81 said:

also, why go pissed about something YOU or anyone here knows how is going to turn up? what if the ship ends up being OP at tier 6? 

Not if I'm playing it lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13
[KSC]
Beta Testers
20 posts
5,071 battles
5 minutes ago, khorender_1 said:

Not if I'm playing it lol

get good then lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
28 posts
3,286 battles
25 minutes ago, _1204_ said:

Changing a premium has always been in the fine print, people just haven't accepted the fact that premiums are subject to change. Sure, it should have been mentioned for clarity of people buying Xmas crates, but they also should know it themselves. 

 

They got what they paid for at the time, then it is subject to balancs like every other ship. Sure I cant blame you for being upset, but its Wargamings right and duty to make the game better and balanced. If that means GC has to advance a tier, so goes.

 

Can I go pay doubloons for free xp and credits, then complain when they nerf Alsace? Sure, but it was WGs right to do so. No different 

WG can change premiums at any time for any reason. If they want, they can push GC up to t10 with no compensation. That's never been in doubt. The problem is WG completely tearing apart their precedent and promise of not nerfing premium ships. This guarantee has helped facilitate consumer confidence when buying premium ships for years. People have spent thousands on these ships with that guarantee in mind. 

https://forum.worldofwarships.asia/topic/24531-asia-qa-round-1-answers/

"We are very loyal in this aspect - we buff premium ships when they have problems with performance, and avoid nerfing them at all costs."

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
336
[SEOP]
Members
1,474 posts
8,233 battles
26 minutes ago, khorender_1 said:

Caveat emptor

see what he did there.  GC is Italian -- named after Julio Teaser.  Oh come on...you know...that Roman dude that spoke a lot of Latin right before getting STABBED IN THE BACK.   

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,865
[WGA]
Administrator
902 posts
382 battles

Thanks for asking about this!  Generally the holidays are a pretty busy time and with most focus on the rework, that was the focal point of our efforts.  Balance is an ongoing discussion every single day of the year and of course we did anticipate some unhappiness regarding the changes.  These are currently in testing and we do welcome feedback on the changes. 

  • Cool 2
  • Bad 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,344 posts
8,689 battles
3 minutes ago, Dr_Dirt said:

see what he did there.  GC is Italian -- named after Julio Teaser.  Oh come on...you know...that Roman dude that spoke a lot of Latin right before getting STABBED IN THE BACK.   

The people who stabbed him had no plan afterwards and ended up all killed. 

They believed the masses would rise up and support them, but they were so disconnected with the plebian masses; they seemed to fail to realize how much the masses loved him.

I like roman history.

Edited by Octavian_of_Roma
  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
164
Beta Testers
565 posts
9,075 battles
30 minutes ago, Perriwen said:

Hence the bait and switch.

Lol. The internet always reminds me just how dumb peopke are.

WG: here is a prem ship. We can change it at any time. Its $40. Do you accept those terms.

Dumb internet person with money: yes i agree, shutup and take my money!

How is that agreement so difficult to understand?

 

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
174
[LRM3]
[LRM3]
Members
507 posts
6,222 battles

My question is, if this is happening to the Giulio Cesare, when does it happen to Nikolai? I think it would be the proper way to do things if we are setting up a precedent for uptiering premiums. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
28 posts
3,286 battles
1 minute ago, Radar_X said:

Thanks for asking about this!  Generally the holidays are a pretty busy time and with most focus on the rework, that was the focal point of our efforts.  Balance is an ongoing discussion every single day of the year and of course we did anticipate some unhappiness regarding the changes.  These are currently in testing and we do welcome feedback on the changes. 

I'd like to ask you to please consider this beyond the realm of merely balancing the ship. Giulio Cesare is overpowered. It is. It and all the other powerful premiums are also something that countless loyal customers have spent hundreds, if not thousands of dollars on, under the precedent of premium ships being safe from nerfs. Going through with the plan to directly nerf "overperforming" premiums will severely erode consumer trust in Premium ships. 

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,478 posts
10 battles
2 minutes ago, Radar_X said:

Thanks for asking about this!  Generally the holidays are a pretty busy time and with most focus on the rework, that was the focal point of our efforts.  Balance is an ongoing discussion every single day of the year and of course we did anticipate some unhappiness regarding the changes.  These are currently in testing and we do welcome feedback on the changes. 

@Radar_X Can I make one suggestion please. With the nerf to concealment and the CV rework can you hold of on ANY decisions on the GC until you see how it is effected by the new meta. The GC was only over performing because there were no CV's to exploit its weaknesses. Now having to face T6 CV's with NO AA the GC is going to get wrecked early and often. Imagine if it has to face T-8 CV's. Balancing it for how it performed in the old meta does not make any sense at all.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
598
[NOBS]
Members
1,014 posts
7,516 battles

My worry now, a new boat goes on sale, lots of money is spent on it, days later they Nerf it to garbage

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×