Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
desmo_2

WG...low tiers, seriously...wth

43 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

3,402
[O_O]
Members
6,966 posts
16,961 battles

I find myself perusing my fleet and find a considerable number of Tier 2-4 ships, both premium and tech tree, that I used to love.  I don't even consider them, anymore.  Why?  Let me tell you why:

  • No population equals long queue times and poorly filled games - I wait 3-5 minutes for a 3v3 game?  Uh, pass.  While 3v3 can be incredibly fun from time to time, this is now the norm rather than 'from time to time'.  Why are low tier populations so low?  I dunno...could be:
  • No motivation.  Back in the day, I could get some kind of daily rewards or mission rewards for Tier IV.  No longer.  Why?
  • CVs.  Many CVs.  Tier IV is chock full of CV players who realize they have no counter.  No ship AA.  No CV fighters.  The result?  2-3 CV's per team, and that is just ridiculous.  Tier VI is better...but not much better.  CV's should be 1 per team.  Period.  The CV feeding frenzy at low tiers is scaring off untold numbers of new players.  They get trounced from the air starting at Tier III, all the way to Tier VI and can't find a way to counter them.  So, they move on to other games.  This will hurt your "profitable" tiers in the long run.  Hook new players and turn them into veteran players.  THAT is how you make this game comfortably profitable.

Low tiers are important, WG.  Please give even a little bit of effort to beef up the populations, there.  Long term players have many premium ships they would like to play...and tech tree favorites.  Newer players need full low tier populations to learn against.  I fondly recall the days when low tiers were just as populated as higher tiers.

And this IS NOT a plea for seal clubbing.  I am all for protected matchmaking for players with a low battle count.  When I started, however, I lingered in low tiers longer than I had to because a) it was fun; and b) because there were players to play against.  That isn't the case, anymore.

Catering to high tiers only is shortsighted, WG.  Let's do some strategy for long term game health, can't we???

@Hapa_Fodder, because I don't know how else to get some attention to this issue.

  • Cool 20
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,740
[K-POP]
Members
3,064 posts
24,557 battles
26 minutes ago, desmo_2 said:

I find myself perusing my fleet and find a considerable number of Tier 2-4 ships, both premium and tech tree, that I used to love.  I don't even consider them, anymore.  Why?  Let me tell you why:

  • No population equals long queue times and poorly filled games - I wait 3-5 minutes for a 3v3 game?  Uh, pass.  While 3v3 can be incredibly fun from time to time, this is now the norm rather than 'from time to time'.  Why are low tier populations so low?  I dunno...could be:
  • No motivation.  Back in the day, I could get some kind of daily rewards or mission rewards for Tier IV.  No longer.  Why?
  • CVs.  Many CVs.  Tier IV is chock full of CV players who realize they have no counter.  No ship AA.  No CV fighters.  The result?  2-3 CV's per team, and that is just ridiculous.  Tier VI is better...but not much better.  CV's should be 1 per team.  Period.  The CV feeding frenzy at low tiers is scaring off untold numbers of new players.  They get trounced from the air starting at Tier III, all the way to Tier VI and can't find a way to counter them.  So, they move on to other games.  This will hurt your "profitable" tiers in the long run.  Hook new players and turn them into veteran players.  THAT is how you make this game comfortably profitable.

Low tiers are important, WG.  Please give even a little bit of effort to beef up the populations, there.  Long term players have many premium ships they would like to play...and tech tree favorites.  Newer players need full low tier populations to learn against.  I fondly recall the days when low tiers were just as populated as higher tiers.

And this IS NOT a plea for seal clubbing.  I am all for protected matchmaking for players with a low battle count.  When I started, however, I lingered in low tiers longer than I had to because a) it was fun; and b) because there were players to play against.  That isn't the case, anymore.

Catering to high tiers only is shortsighted, WG.  Let's do some strategy for long term game health, can't we???

@Hapa_Fodder, because I don't know how else to get some attention to this issue.

Couldn't agree more, love playing low tiers but there is no incentive, the CV's I'm fine with of course  I am in the minority on that subject, but i agree it does not help new players being smashed by CV's.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,067
[WORX]
Members
12,638 posts
19,898 battles

Low tiers are dead, WG says it can operate without them...Until something drastic changes, it is what it is...

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
256
[FG]
Members
566 posts
4,806 battles

WG need to find a way to reduce the grind for Tier 4 CVs to reduce their numbers, but also keep the ability to earn experience in CVs before a player reaches Tier 6. 

Some kind of tutorial system that teaches players the necessities of playing CVs after which a short grind to reach Tier 6 could help solve this issue. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,402
[O_O]
Members
6,966 posts
16,961 battles
12 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said:

Low tiers are dead, WG says it can operate without them...Until something drastic changes, it is what it is...

How can the higher tiers survive if there are no new players coming from low tiers?

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,067
[WORX]
Members
12,638 posts
19,898 battles
24 minutes ago, desmo_2 said:

How can the higher tiers survive if there are no new players coming from low tiers?

High tier gaming experience has many faults.. You and I can brain storm a shopping list sized of faults, we can be here for hrs....

Its evident ( at least as of time of this post), since the changes and implementation in 2018, WG feels it dont need new players as long as the core is thriving...

Considering the server population (even with alts) is around 5k to 12k (which is a 2k to 3k decline per year), we still have some years at present course to go..

For me its dejavu... Puzzle Pirates suffered the same problems as WG, it lasted a good 10 years (2004-2014)... Will WG last as long ??? At this point in time I am skeptical.

If they do, its not going to be with the same fun factor level of "fun" then it should be at.

Edited by Navalpride33

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,581
[C-CA]
[C-CA]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
4,304 posts
6,280 battles

I'm going to reiterate what I said over in @tm63au's thread a few minutes ago: To me the problems aren't the things that people are always complaining about, but rather some of the things that we actually LIKE and how Wargaming has responded to that. So stuff like CVs, long queue times, bad coordination and teamwork? Those aren't the CAUSES, they're the result of the population lowering at low tiers. The causes are much more warmly received and in some cases have been around since day one. There are two in particular that I can think of:

  1. Early Access to New Lines: Every other month we get an event that offers players of all skill levels, often for FREE, the option to skip to at least tier 5 of the latest ship line before it's released. Now these events are fun, they generate more interest in new ships than there might otherwise have been, and they make a lot of money from the people that want to get everything and shell out cash for that shiny tier 8 or 9. In the short term it's great, but it the long term? If the majority of the active playerbase can outright skip tiers 1 to 4, then those tiers may as well not exist.
  2. Free XP: So here's a question for you all: What's your favorite economic signal flag? Because I know mine, it's Papa Papa hands-down. Free XP has always been a big deal in Wargaming's tech tree model, but Warships has way more opportunities to gain AND use it than Tanks and Warplanes do. Seriously, I don't think I've ever had one million free XP or even convertible XP in Tanks and I KNOW I never have in Warplanes. But Warships? I've spent over FOUR million on premium ships alone! Free XP is really useful and easy to get, but not TOO easy so that Wargaming can still rake in the cash with it. So that means that a lot of people who get impatient will just skip the low tiers on a new line and jump right up to tier 5 or 6 (which also contributes to poor performance), and once again those tiers may as well not even exist.

Add in stuff like mission and directive restrictions based on tier and events like Ranked and Clan Battles being exclusively tiers 7 and up, and Wargaming has-intentionally or not-created a positive feedback loop where players keep gravitating towards the higher tiers. In all three games high tier play is incentivized to some degree, but Warships feels like the that comes closest to outright DE-incentivizing low tier play.

And the ironic thing? They DID have an idea that would have cycled people back into low tier play. It wouldn't have fixed everything singlehandedly, but in hindsight you COULD frame it as them testing the waters to see if they could come up with something that could make money while providing something to do at all tiers of play. That idea was the NTC, and I don't need to tell about 90% of people registered that it went over so badly as to be classified near the top of the "Top Ten Worst Ideas Wargaming Had for World of Warships (That We Know Of)".

So... Yeah.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,302
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
5,202 posts
12,101 battles
31 minutes ago, Landsraad said:

So stuff like CVs, long queue times, bad coordination and teamwork? Those aren't the CAUSES, they're the result of the population lowering at low tiers.

As far as CVs in low tier, as someone that play them but tries to stay out of tier 4 because of what they can do due to the lack of AA - it' basically an issue in which both cause the other making it progressively worse. As it was WG moved missions to tier 5 or higher, which was dumb, and helped pull people out of the tier, as did allowing manual drops at that tier and not buffing AA when they reworked aircraft. yer later they remove the manual attacks, which improves things slightly. But then do the rework, making all attacks manual and allowing up to 3 CV's. Which, the botched launching of a highly incomplete overhaul caused it's own issues and tiers 3-7 mostly had improperly balanced AA. However even when tier 5-7 ship could have OP AA, tier 3 and 4 were still far too weak. Which drove player down there and the nature of +2 battles and high tier AA keeps some hiding down there, as well as those trapped because Wargaming only removed the XP for the B hull and plane upgrades - so not only are you doing the Langley to Bogue grind on Langley but the grind that used to be Bogue to Independence as well. This keeps the CV population higher than normal there, meaning more matches with 1 or 2, that when combined with the lack of mission progress, drives players out of the tiers, reducing the population and increasing the percentage that CV's make up. Meaning that 2 CV game can become more common, which will drive more away, that will make 2-3 more common, and drive more away, etc. 

It's a self-sustaining circle that while in truth needs both things fixed needs at least one to stop and maybe revert the progress a little - were tier 3 and 4 to have properly balanced AA as well as the higher tiers this would dissuade some of the clubbers and have people simply hiding go back to playing higher tier CV's they want to play, which can lower the number of CV's per match and bring player back to low level, fixing the XP needed, at all tiers, for CV's or better yet give u back the odd tier we should have, this will again help better disperse CV players, allowing for fewer CV's per match and likely bring some player back to tier 4 and under. Which, if more non-CV player return to tier 4, that lower the percentage of population made up by CV players - lowering how many multi-CV matches are seen, helping to maintain and maybe get back those players. More so if they revert to tier 4 or higher to encourage gameplay at that tier. Or events that give bonuses at the tier like snowflakes. One of the few good ideas the WoWp team had post 1.5.1 was 'plane birthdays' where when you've had a plane for x time for a period of time around when you got it you get XP bonuses, resources, whatever. Implementing that those that held on to tier II freebies maybe get say 25 steel for their next 4 wins in them, or 300% captain training on that Charleston they got over the next say 20 matches, or that Wyoming sitting in port gets 1000 free xp on it's next 10 wins. Things that even if it's only within say a 1 week period of the day you got the ship's anniversary, that is time with more player in the tier. 

But that's my view on that one - Both are cause and result at the same time, with both requiring changing long term even if only one changes short term - to which I'd say while changing missions and adding things like 'ship anniversary' to try and help get players back to low tiers, CV balance - in this case nerfing rocket damage, buffing AA at those tier and returning some of the attack plane mobility is a bit more priority but more difficult - at least for Wargaming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,160
[INTEL]
Members
7,755 posts
36,904 battles

Couldn't agree more.

Up to about two years ago I loved to play Isokaze and Clemson - even Bogatyr every once in a while (Bogatyr AA rating is zero - not even a flare pistol).

Haven't bothered since. Not only 2 CVS per side way too often, but they do not get to participate in the daily missions. Why is that?

As said above, if there are no rewards and interest for low tiers, the population will not grow, and the game (and revenue) will eventually die. 

Edited by alexf24
  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
930 posts
2,737 battles
5 hours ago, Navalpride33 said:

Low tiers are dead, WG says it can operate without them

Did they?  Do you have a link handy?

I really wish missions and pretty much everything in the game can be done at T4 instead of the current T5 cut-off.  There are so many good ships and maps to play on there, it's a shame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,893
[FML]
Members
4,155 posts
16,067 battles
5 hours ago, desmo_2 said:
  • No motivation.  Back in the day, I could get some kind of daily rewards or mission rewards for Tier IV.  No longer.  Why?

I understand what you mean on the other points.  But in response to this one, I thought WG deliberately made all events from T5 and above to minimise the numbers of experienced players flooding low tiers in order to do bizzare events, like # number of torp hits, or whatever, and thus minimise the number of people preying on newer players (not complete newbies, who have protected matchmaking and face a mixture of total beginners and bots - i mean the players who have grown beyond those, but might still only have some 200 battles).  

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
12,597 posts
14,320 battles

I once in a while drop down into a Kuma or Yubari to seal club CVs and level the playing field.  Kuma if some skill points are invested into SI, Double cat fighters, premium consumables, plus some other useful skills can down some aircraft. CVs will try zeroing in on Kuma and you just pop the 2 squadrons  of Cat Fighters into the air when ever they attempt it, or when they try attacking allied warships those cat fighters give decent defense radius in those smaller maps. Only issue is without premium consumables and the SI skill you can quickly run out of Cat Fighters instead of having them last long enough to pretty much ensure your ship and any near you have been spared from air attack damage.

Lol it feels good to teach CVs that they do not get free reign... :Smile_trollface:

But without those Cat Fighters Kuma would be about as defenseless as many of the tier 3 and 4 ships when it comes to air attacks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15,274
[ARGSY]
Members
23,322 posts
17,285 battles
5 hours ago, SovereignEagle said:

WG need to find a way to reduce the grind for Tier 4 CVs to reduce their numbers

This is what I've been arguing for a while. Let them get out of the tier as fast as possible, the queues will go away, and we'll be back down to a more regular diet of 1-carrier matches (they are putting a hard cap of two on at T4 anyway, which is a good first move).

40,000 XP worth of battles is more than enough to teach a T4 player the basics. You already made them do a T5-level grind to get the CV; you don't need to make them do a grind equivalent to unlocking a T7 from T6. That, or make sure that carriers face Tier 5 a lot and only infrequently see Tier 3.

I was considering saying "Never see T3", but T3 players have to know what to expect when they get to T4.

T4 carrier players have to know what to expect when they come up against ships which have some decent AA, so it will not be as much of a shock when they are suddenly facing T8 in T6 stock aircraft and all of a sudden they are the ones getting trashed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
150 posts
1,494 battles
6 hours ago, desmo_2 said:

How can the higher tiers survive if there are no new players coming from low tiers?

simple, by releasing new lines in which you can jump straight to those high tiers, when was the last time we had an non early access lootbox launch of a new line? WG doesn't see this as an issue, even if it means high tier game play suffers.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,150
[DRFTR]
Beta Testers
3,919 posts

There is also no incentive to play them....  I just came back to the game... a couple weeks ago...  the only events I have seen have been T10, dailies.. all missions etc are T4 and up (Capt at the time), or tier 10 (KOTS), nothing like tossing a bone to new players and putting some up for them, how about Tier2-4 dailies with small rewards... anything to encourage a new player, even a small reward would likely go along way.

Yes the cv's...  in all these lowbie ships with 0-9 AA defence at best....

Does WoWs ever have grind the line deals like in WoT?  They choose a line, and offer tech tree discounts on all the ships in the line, and missions that reward consumables, crew exp combat exp multipliers that sort of thing.

Right now it looks like they are focusing on how to keep the old players around, by stealing ideas from Blizzard with the Diablo style re-grind for veterans, all these higher tier specials and premiums...  that are costly either in real cash or using resources only long time players can afford. (again carrots for the vets..)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
398 posts
7,284 battles
7 hours ago, desmo_2 said:

How can the higher tiers survive if there are no new players coming from low tiers?

Free xp Brother tons of FREE xp..you'll see a lot of them at tier 10 from time to time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,779
[SALVO]
Members
4,631 posts
21,345 battles

If WG moved T4 CVs to COOP only the lower tiers would flourish 

Give the players a spot where there isn't CVs then all sides could be happier 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,860
[WG]
Administrator, Developers, Community Department, WG Staff, In AlfaTesters
4,571 posts
15,077 battles
9 hours ago, Navalpride33 said:

Low tiers are dead, WG says it can operate without them...Until something drastic changes, it is what it is...

We have never said that. Please don't say we said things that aren't true..

3 hours ago, UltimateNewbie said:

I understand what you mean on the other points.  But in response to this one, I thought WG deliberately made all events from T5 and above to minimise the numbers of experienced players flooding low tiers in order to do bizzare events, like # number of torp hits, or whatever, and thus minimise the number of people preying on newer players (not complete newbies, who have protected matchmaking and face a mixture of total beginners and bots - i mean the players who have grown beyond those, but might still only have some 200 battles).  

THIS ^^^^^ is exactly why we don't do too many missions for the lower tier battles. Because the lower tier battles would be flooded with VERY experienced players, though NEW players do get protected MM even at 500 battles players get thrown in with people with thousands of battles and that is not particularly fun.

As for the CV meta, that is being addressed on WED with the new patch.

-Hapa

  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Guest
0 posts
10 hours ago, desmo_2 said:

I find myself perusing my fleet and find a considerable number of Tier 2-4 ships, both premium and tech tree, that I used to love.  I don't even consider them, anymore.  Why?  Let me tell you why:

  • No population equals long queue times and poorly filled games - I wait 3-5 minutes for a 3v3 game?  Uh, pass.  While 3v3 can be incredibly fun from time to time, this is now the norm rather than 'from time to time'.  Why are low tier populations so low?  I dunno...could be:
  • No motivation.  Back in the day, I could get some kind of daily rewards or mission rewards for Tier IV.  No longer.  Why?
  • CVs.  Many CVs.  Tier IV is chock full of CV players who realize they have no counter.  No ship AA.  No CV fighters.  The result?  2-3 CV's per team, and that is just ridiculous.  Tier VI is better...but not much better.  CV's should be 1 per team.  Period.  The CV feeding frenzy at low tiers is scaring off untold numbers of new players.  They get trounced from the air starting at Tier III, all the way to Tier VI and can't find a way to counter them.  So, they move on to other games.  This will hurt your "profitable" tiers in the long run.  Hook new players and turn them into veteran players.  THAT is how you make this game comfortably profitable.

Low tiers are important, WG.  Please give even a little bit of effort to beef up the populations, there.  Long term players have many premium ships they would like to play...and tech tree favorites.  Newer players need full low tier populations to learn against.  I fondly recall the days when low tiers were just as populated as higher tiers.

And this IS NOT a plea for seal clubbing.  I am all for protected matchmaking for players with a low battle count.  When I started, however, I lingered in low tiers longer than I had to because a) it was fun; and b) because there were players to play against.  That isn't the case, anymore.

Catering to high tiers only is shortsighted, WG.  Let's do some strategy for long term game health, can't we???

@Hapa_Fodder, because I don't know how else to get some attention to this issue.

good post +1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,067
[WORX]
Members
12,638 posts
19,898 battles
15 minutes ago, Hapa_Fodder said:

We have never said that. Please don't say we said things that aren't true..

I disagree Hapa, Octavian said it back in the very beginnings of 2018 what the path/direction WG is heading... They're/were concentrating on high tiers moving forward...

That is why tiers 4 and below were removed from the Combat missions and personal mission requirement. No more emphasis on low tier ships after the

Mikasa or the Vampire missions...

That was before he was given the promotion of his current title (while demoting/exiling his predecessor to NA head office)...

This was only one incident, Octavian (its not only him) is known for using funny language to describe Tier 4 (low tiers) and Co-op...

Due to NDA/embargo issues, I dont know what is the plan for WG for the next year... I concede that point, HOWEVER. The current elements in place at high tier and the neglect of low tiers, are spot on based on what I've noted above. 

Edited by Navalpride33
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,860
[WG]
Administrator, Developers, Community Department, WG Staff, In AlfaTesters
4,571 posts
15,077 battles
Just now, Navalpride33 said:

I disagree Hapa, Octavian said it back in the very beginnings of 2018 what the path/direction WG is heading... They're/were concentrating on high tiers moving forward...

That is why tiers 4 and below were removed from the Combat missions and personal mission requirement. No more emphasis on low tier ships after the

Mikasa or the Vampire missions...

That was before he was given the promotion of his current title (while demoting/exiling his predecessor to NA head office...

This was only one incident, Octavian (its not only him) is known for using funny language to describe Tier 4 (low tiers) and Co-op...

Due to NDA/embargo issues, I dont know what is the plan for WG for the next year... I concede that point, HOWEVER. The current elements in place at high tier and the neglect of low tiers, are spot on base on what I noted. 

So something that was said 2 years ago in just a passing conversation that I have no context on in terms of what the original question was or any information on is gospel?

Well I'll tell you that is not true at all, especially considering information I know that I can't talk about (again NDA). Though our FOCUS may be higher tiers, it does NOT mean that no energy is being focused to lower tiers.

Also, the current mission chains for the Operation Lifeboat campaign are tier IV and above I believe.

I will tell you officially what I quoted below is EXACTLY why.

4 hours ago, UltimateNewbie said:

I understand what you mean on the other points.  But in response to this one, I thought WG deliberately made all events from T5 and above to minimise the numbers of experienced players flooding low tiers in order to do bizzare events, like # number of torp hits, or whatever, and thus minimise the number of people preying on newer players (not complete newbies, who have protected matchmaking and face a mixture of total beginners and bots - i mean the players who have grown beyond those, but might still only have some 200 battles).  

-Hapa

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,150
[DRFTR]
Beta Testers
3,919 posts
20 minutes ago, Hapa_Fodder said:

We have never said that. Please don't say we said things that aren't true..

THIS ^^^^^ is exactly why we don't do too many missions for the lower tier battles. Because the lower tier battles would be flooded with VERY experienced players, though NEW players do get protected MM even at 500 battles players get thrown in with people with thousands of battles and that is not particularly fun.

As for the CV meta, that is being addressed on WED with the new patch.

-Hapa

This indicates a lack of imagination...  There are NO missions at low tier, even Capt was T4 and up (I think).

All content currently appears to be aimed at the veterans and the whales...  nothing at the new players, absolutely nothing to entice new players to even check out the game... new or even buffed premium ships (even low tier) do NOT count....

Restrict small rewards to players with new accounts for example that sort of thing.  Sure a vet could go start another account and go clubbing for kicks but that isn't the same thing and most couldn't be bothered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,150
[DRFTR]
Beta Testers
3,919 posts

Just a thought...

What if there were 2 sets of low tier MM's...  betting queue times will be thrown at me, and maybe it wouldn't be worth the resource cost to implement...   but there are alot of historical ships at the low tiers vets may want to play (or not) what if there was a separate queue for players with more than X matches at T1-4?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
12,597 posts
14,320 battles
13 minutes ago, Hapa_Fodder said:

We have never said that. Please don't say we said things that aren't true..

THIS ^^^^^ is exactly why we don't do too many missions for the lower tier battles. Because the lower tier battles would be flooded with VERY experienced players, though NEW players do get protected MM even at 500 battles players get thrown in with people with thousands of battles and that is not particularly fun.

As for the CV meta, that is being addressed on WED with the new patch.

-Hapa

Actually while you guys here in WOWs might not have said such things. WG pretty much has stated low tiers are not really needed as much as the mid and high tiers. At least in WOT Blitz, they even majorly stripped down low tiers of vehicles and sped up progression so you can bounce from tier 1 to tiers 4-5 before a new player is ready. That has caused problems with some players not getting quite as much practice and hitting the skill walls a little early and unprepared.

WOWs PC is different, but generally same sorts of issues as far as players getting in over their heads unless teamed up with veterans to guide them until they get well on their feet. Not to mention needing Veterans to escort most tier 3-4 ships or else they are mauled by CVs that often are seal clubbers seeking to pad their stats. Hence reason I keep some ships at tier IV more equipped than I should with Anti Air assets so that a I can escort new players allowed no them to get practice without being a snack for CVs. Not like I can allow friends I invited to simply suffer until they get to tier V with AA that actually can start to work. And while WG has not made statements about low tiers like with tanks, they still have cause harm to low tier just without saying much about it in WOWs.

Really makes me wish Wargaming would create a World of Pre Dreadnoughts using similar interfaces to WOWs as that would be a solution to things as you could invite friends and let them learn there without the CV issues among other things, then have them come over to WOWs with good understanding of pretty much all the game mechanics.  Except for CVs and AA which if they knew how to fight with the rest of the mechanics the CV and AA mechanics would be easy enough to adapt to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×