Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
enderland07

What do you think was the single worst decision WG made for WoWS?

167 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

2,359
[NGAGE]
Members
3,594 posts
8,662 battles

Curious what folks think on this. Since the start of the game, there have been a lot of controversial changes/additions to the game.

In your mind, what do you see as the single worst thing that has happened for the game?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,359
[NGAGE]
Members
3,594 posts
8,662 battles

As much as I dislike the CV rework, I think mine is the addition of the Dragon series of flags.

It basically busted the free/commander xp economy and has resulted in a lot of problems with WG trying to balance the economics of the game. 

  • Cool 6
  • Confused 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
282
[ADPT2]
[ADPT2]
Members
883 posts
2,494 battles
1 minute ago, enderland07 said:

As much as I dislike the CV rework, I think mine is the addition of the Dragon series of flags.

It basically busted the free/commander xp economy and has resulted in a lot of problems with WG trying to balance the economics of the game. 

Nope, has to be the CV's.  Can't think of anything worse.

  • Cool 14
  • Boring 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,359
[NGAGE]
Members
3,594 posts
8,662 battles
Just now, SJ_Sailer said:

Nope, has to be the CV's.  Can't think of anything worse.

Eh. Recency bias is a real thing.

Belfast is another good example, that ship basically single handedly has caused T7 competitive to be unworkable for WG since it was released.

  • Cool 3
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,506
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
3,154 posts
11,122 battles

Not having consistent +/-1 MM across all tiers. 

 

Spoiler

 

Close runner ups:

  • Enabling T10 to be profitable to play
  • Insisting on not nerfing premiums

Something about CVs too, but no one decision there, just a progressive train wreck.

 

 

  • Cool 7
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
0
[1KR]
Members
0 posts

70+ USD premium ships.

Not just bad for the game, but attempting to normalize that kind of nonsense is bad for gaming in general, as far as I'm concerned. 

  • Cool 8
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
282
[ADPT2]
[ADPT2]
Members
883 posts
2,494 battles
Just now, enderland07 said:

Eh. Recency bias is a real thing.

Belfast is another good example, that ship basically single handedly has caused T7 competitive to be unworkable for WG since it was released.

No doubt, but CV's have ruined game play for almost EVERYONE, not just a few.  In sheer volume of pain, I think it has to be CV but that is just my humble opinion.

  • Cool 9
  • Funny 1
  • Boring 3
  • Angry 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,359
[NGAGE]
Members
3,594 posts
8,662 battles
Just now, pikohan said:

Not having consistent +/-1 MM across all tiers. 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Close runner ups:

  • Enabling T10 to be profitable to play
  • Insisting on not nerfing premiums

Something about CVs too, but no one decision there, just a progressive train wreck.

 

 

These are all good contenders.

I'd be very curious what the game would feel like if WG just turned on +/-1 MM for a single patch cycle.

The TX economy is a good example, too.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,015
[DAKI]
Privateers, Members
8,712 posts
7,704 battles

Inflating the economy as a whole, there is no single event to be singled out, but many factors that resulted in it. Those are:

- Missouri
- Dragon flags and all those super amazing camos
- Ops with broken economy

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,407
[-BRS-]
Members
3,153 posts
17,056 battles

Well dumping the CV garbage on us 8.0 was the low point for me

Going Live on the main server In the state they were at was the stupidest thing I think I've seen them do

 I never seen that playerbase so split over one decision and also that we're 6 months into it and it still in fluxs on the live server  With no end in sight having no idea what state they will be in 6 months from now what a joke

Edited by silverdahc
  • Cool 6
  • Boring 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,090
[QQ7]
[QQ7]
Members
1,901 posts
6,809 battles

CV rework, moreso in keeping its focus on damage output.

  • Cool 3
  • Boring 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
339
[KP]
Members
412 posts
202 battles
10 minutes ago, enderland07 said:

Curious what folks think on this. Since the start of the game, there have been a lot of controversial changes/additions to the game.

In your mind, what do you see as the single worst thing that has happened for the game?

 

 

The bait and switch tactics used on the Alsace and others to make premiums more attractive. I had just bought the perma camo now I haven't played Alsace in 5 months.

And the CV abortion is a close second.

  • Cool 3
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30,375
[WG-CC]
WoWS Community Contributors
10,496 posts
8,644 battles

Graf Zeppelin's initial release.  Nothing else comes close.

  • Tried to pass off an unfinished product as complete.
  • Blindsided their Community Contributors into being made to appear to endorse said broken product.
  • Doubled down and told players to "git gud" when the flaws of said product were pointed out.
  • Failed to read the room when they disciplined iChase for a breach in CC code of conduct related to his review of said broken product.
Edited by LittleWhiteMouse
  • Cool 26
  • Funny 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,976
[HYDRO]
Members
3,557 posts
5,062 battles
  • Constant inflation of economy creating a snowball effect when it comes to pricing.
  • As much as I appreciate it, the early unlock system is simply horrendous for the game.
  • Proliferation of lootboxes often containing said early unlocks or resources.

Jury still out on the Rework, might be good to make the same thread in a few months.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
735
[PQUOD]
[PQUOD]
Members
2,476 posts
10,544 battles

Taking away the thumbs down emoji. 

 

lol

Edited by Capt_Ahab1776
was immediately given the angry emoji, so threw in a lol 🤣
  • Cool 11
  • Confused 1
  • Angry 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,359
[NGAGE]
Members
3,594 posts
8,662 battles
Just now, LittleWhiteMouse said:

Graf Zeppelin's initial release.

  • Tried to pass off an unfinished product as complete.
  • Blindsided their Community Contributors into appearing to endorse said broken product.
  • Doubled down and told players to "git gud" when the flaws of said product were pointed out.
  • Failed to read the room when they disciplined iChase for a breach in CC code of conduct.

This is a good example too. Not as much even about the specific event but rather the downstream impacts.

No one really trusts that WG listens to feedback from anyone after that whole debacle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,257
[SOV]
Members
2,916 posts
14 minutes ago, enderland07 said:

As much as I dislike the CV rework, I think mine is the addition of the Dragon series of flags.

It basically busted the free/commander xp economy and has resulted in a lot of problems with WG trying to balance the economics of the game. 

Its a valid point. With prem time and flags I went from t8 IJN CV to t10 in one day.

Similar eesults with the Seattle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30,375
[WG-CC]
WoWS Community Contributors
10,496 posts
8,644 battles
1 minute ago, enderland07 said:

This is a good example too. Not as much even about the specific event but rather the downstream impacts.

No one really trusts that WG listens to feedback from anyone after that whole debacle.

On the contrary, Wargaming stepped up their game in listening to feedback.  The second released version of the Graf Zeppelin was built entirely from player feedback.  It showed the dangers of listening too much to players.

  • Cool 4
  • Funny 3
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,257
[SOV]
Members
2,916 posts
6 minutes ago, silverdahc said:

Well dumping the CV garbage on us 8.0 was the low point for me

Going Live on the main server In the state they were at was the stupidest thing I think I've seen them do

 I never seen that playerbase so split over one decision and also that we're 6 months into it and it still in fluxs on the live server  With no end in sight having no idea what state they will be in 6 months from now what a joke

Lets be honest though. The same people that aee comaninf would have been complaning about anything they put out.

Everyone was begging for a cv rework 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,257
[SOV]
Members
2,916 posts
6 minutes ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

Graf Zeppelin's initial release.  Nothing else comes close.

  • Tried to pass off an unfinished product as complete.
  • Blindsided their Community Contributors into being made to appear to endorse said broken product.
  • Doubled down and told players to "git gud" when the flaws of said product were pointed out.
  • Failed to read the room when they disciplined iChase for a breach in CC code of conduct related to his review of said broken product.

I was Extreamly proud of WG with Graf Zepplin. Letting the players decise what waa best, doing a new camo for it. They did a great job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,407
[-BRS-]
Members
3,153 posts
17,056 battles
18 minutes ago, jags_domain said:

Lets be honest though. The same people that aee comaninf would have been complaning about anything they put out.

Everyone was begging for a cv rework 

  I was hopeful I guess

I still am or I wouldn't be here

it just nowhere near the finished product with no end date in sight

 I mean I can understand updates But we have whole Meta shifting game dynamics that are still not decided

 I wanna know whatever game im playing gonna be worth playing 6 months from now

 And if I'm not confident that I'll be here 6 months from now I'm definitely not spending money on it

 And if I'm not spending money on it then WG has failed

Edited by silverdahc
  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
717
[SOFOP]
Members
1,242 posts
8,791 battles

CVs in general:  Trying to shoehorn CVs into a surface ship game is like trying to balance M16s in a civil war FPS.

CV Rework:  They went WAAAAAAAAAY overboard on this and caused more problems than they solved.  They could have simply adjusted damage values on the original RTS system and called it a day, instead of rewriting the entire thing.

Power Creep:  Every new line, especially the BBs, has been made more powerful than the one before, culminating in the Russian BB line being absurdly OP (mere coincidence that with the pattern they had, that Russian BBs got pushed to the end of the line I'm sure).  Not to mention, every "flavor" has been seemingly pushed into them from other nations.  Big guns like Japan, Accurate guns and AA like US, awesome secondaries from KM.  Half surprised they didn't give them a speed burst to just round out the set.  Fix:  Stick with the flavors in each line, or go back and give older ships buffs.  I'll admit there is some "bias" against recently released ships, but there is some fact there too.

Matchmaking:  Refusing to make any changes that would even slightly hinder queue times.  WR isn't everything, but at the very least trying to balance ship WR across teams as close as possible would seem to be an improvement.  Won't fix everything but would have some impact to having more engaging games.  +1 tier matchmaking would be welcomed by I think everyone except a few outliers.

Edited by Old_Baldy_One
  • Cool 4
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×