Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Jitta77

Unnecessary Evil...Missions that say Scenario but VII-X

32 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

134
[CAP]
Members
338 posts
15,078 battles

Hey @Hapa_Fodder ,

I just want to get it down on the record that showing that you can do a mission in the Scenario game mode but then limiting the mission to T7+ is an confusing at best.  The combination is impossible so why do they give a false impression that a mission could be done in a game mode when it really can't?

image.png.0a8491eea040ffe4d9c2597b41eb68ba.png

I mean, why even allow that game mode on the mission?

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
6 posts
8,047 battles

Same reason Narai is the only operation that had a "critical issue" when this directive came up. :Smile_trollface:

  • Cool 4
  • Funny 3
  • Thanks 3
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
194
[FFG33]
[FFG33]
Members
334 posts
13,514 battles

I think we found the “critical issue”.

  • Cool 2
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
73
[-PVE-]
Members
253 posts
13,017 battles

Yea, saw this in the directives and put on my hat (it's tin.) Wonder why only one one OP needed to be fixed (pulled) now when they all appear to be broken?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
622
[O_O]
Members
673 posts
7 hours ago, Jitta77 said:

Hey @Hapa_Fodder ,

I just want to get it down on the record that showing that you can do a mission in the Scenario game mode but then limiting the mission to T7+ is an confusing at best.  The combination is impossible so why do they give a false impression that a mission could be done in a game mode when it really can't?

image.png.0a8491eea040ffe4d9c2597b41eb68ba.png

I mean, why even allow that game mode on the mission?

Why else would they pull Narai?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,261
[PVE]
Members
4,253 posts
18,541 battles
7 hours ago, absboodoo said:

Same reason Narai is the only operation that had a "critical issue" when this directive came up. :Smile_trollface:

It's a coo-inky-dink that Narai was...........err, has some "issues".  Trust is gone.  They don't care.  And that, is sad........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
444
[A-D-F]
Members
1,160 posts
10,374 battles
8 minutes ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

47q514.jpg&key=061811ce5800001ec086bfa86

:Smile_teethhappy:

Yes, Weeg's definition of "fixed" or "Improved" is quite fungible. Conveniently so.

Rather than keep screwing with the player base they could just man up and pull ops period. 

This death by a thousand cuts [edited] is getting old. 

Just do it already. 

 

 

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,940
[ARGSY]
Members
19,977 posts
14,258 battles
8 hours ago, Jitta77 said:

I just want to get it down on the record that showing that you can do a mission in the Scenario game mode but then limiting the mission to T7+ is an confusing at best.  The combination is impossible so why do they give a false impression that a mission could be done in a game mode when it really can't?

Either or both of the following:

1) When they designed these directives, they weren't anticipating Narai being pulled.

2) There is a certain amount of cut and paste going on here to cut down workload and coding burden, and ALL economic directives (whether for credits or any form of XP - base, ship, free or commander) are automatically tagged for scenarios and clan battles. It's an unironic coincidence that the tier 7 restriction happens to coexist with this task. 

You're looking for something that isn't there and not seeing things in the broader context.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,548
[WG]
Administrator, Developers, Community Department, WG Staff, In AlfaTesters
3,498 posts
13,885 battles
9 hours ago, Jitta77 said:

Hey @Hapa_Fodder ,

I just want to get it down on the record that showing that you can do a mission in the Scenario game mode but then limiting the mission to T7+ is an confusing at best.  The combination is impossible so why do they give a false impression that a mission could be done in a game mode when it really can't?

image.png.0a8491eea040ffe4d9c2597b41eb68ba.png

I mean, why even allow that game mode on the mission?

Because the directives were written up well before the operations rotation was built, this is a standard we are placing on all missions in terms of what mode you can do them in so that someone doesn't have to go in one by one and do it.

-Hapa

  • Sad 2
  • Boring 2
  • Meh 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
622
[O_O]
Members
673 posts
5 hours ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

You're looking for something that isn't there and not seeing things in the broader context.

WG's contempt for Operations is the reason people will always assume the worst.

Some examples:

In 8.0 we were told "every effort to get them back into the game."  That was 18 months ago.  We did get Raptor back after 6 months, but only because it was a 3x carrier swap.  After being told for months no work on Operations, Narai transports suddenly became a top priority (and a trojan horse for economy nerfs).

In 9.1 Narai was pulled the very week it was supposed to be the weekly, then they did it again in 9.6.  Why didn't they pull Narai during an off week in each of these cases?  Neither of the "critical errors" were game breaking, because WG had ignored them for so long already (transport bug lasted weeks, end of battle screen bug was not new). 

It is not a stretch to assume WG pulled Narai for more than one reason.  The bug they are fixing is just the excuse we got, and is probably a trojan horse for another nerf like in 9.3 when Narai first returned.

Edited by Rustyhole
  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
407 posts
5,904 battles

I seem to recall an earlier mission that said it could be done in co-op but it wass get 10 achievements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
134
[CAP]
Members
338 posts
15,078 battles
11 minutes ago, ithekro said:

I seem to recall an earlier mission that said it could be done in co-op but it wass get 10 achievements.

yeah, that's another example where the approach they are using to set requirements on missions falls short of providing clear information on the requirements to fill it.

Maybe they need to show a "filter missions for current ship/mode" button so you can pick a ship to play that gives you the biggest bang for your buck when you have 30-40 missions open.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
63
[ABCD3]
Members
475 posts
11,844 battles
 
 
 
 
21 minutes ago, Jitta77 said:

Maybe they need to show a "filter missions for current ship/mode" button so you can pick a ship to play that gives you the biggest bang for your buck when you have 30-40 missions open.

This would make sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,577
[WOLF3]
Members
26,967 posts
23,767 battles
7 hours ago, Curly__san said:

Yes, Weeg's definition of "fixed" or "Improved" is quite fungible. Conveniently so.

Rather than keep screwing with the player base they could just man up and pull ops period. 

This death by a thousand cuts [edited] is getting old. 

Just do it already.

Narai got kicked in the gonads with a steel toed boot not long ago, but I guess here comes the next kick.

WG "fixing" Operation Narai, 2020 (Colorized)

SparklingZigzagBellsnake-size_restricted

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,884
[SYN]
Members
15,857 posts
12,803 battles
6 hours ago, Hapa_Fodder said:

Because the directives were written up well before the operations rotation was built, this is a standard we are placing on all missions in terms of what mode you can do them in so that someone doesn't have to go in one by one and do it.

-Hapa

Or, you know, maybe, just maybe, it would be prudent to go with writing the directives, so they aren't so stingy on requirements to begin with.

It's not like WoWs is suffering a serious lower tier population problem right now, is it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,537
[PQUOD]
Members
2,386 posts
5,095 battles

You guys make the game. You guys can control the content you put out. It's not out of your hands to fix this. 

This coincidence is too much for me.

Narai would have come up at the exact same time and it gets pulled for "reasons" again.

That timing when it would have been valid for missions.

 

I love this game but i'm sick of the company.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,548
[WG]
Administrator, Developers, Community Department, WG Staff, In AlfaTesters
3,498 posts
13,885 battles
On 7/14/2020 at 11:11 PM, xalmgrey said:

You guys make the game. You guys can control the content you put out. It's not out of your hands to fix this. 

This coincidence is too much for me.

Narai would have come up at the exact same time and it gets pulled for "reasons" again.

That timing when it would have been valid for missions.

 

I love this game but i'm sick of the company.

There is NOTHING malicious to Narai being pulled, with the last update there was a critical error that made the operation crash for A LOT of people during the completion of the operation, this was causing a lot of issues. They pulled it to fix it, that is all, pure and simple. It's obviously not a small fix, otherwise it would be back already.

If you think that we have the time or inclination to have some some evil plan, or someone is sitting in a dark room rolling their hands and attempting to figure out some devious reason to pull operations, you're wrong. 

Players were having critical crashes, they put tickets in, we noted the uptick, tested the operation and it showed a problem that made it have to be repaired.

-Hapa

  • Thanks 2
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,192
[SYN]
Members
5,877 posts
13,296 battles
On 7/14/2020 at 8:00 AM, Hapa_Fodder said:

Because the directives were written up well before the operations rotation was built, this is a standard we are placing on all missions in terms of what mode you can do them in so that someone doesn't have to go in one by one and do it.

-Hapa

 

This isn't the first time it's happened.  If you're going to say anything just admit they either made a mistake or didn't check.

This isn't a slight against you; you're just doing your job.  But manufacturing excuses every time WG screws up gets annoying.

  • Haha 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,548
[WG]
Administrator, Developers, Community Department, WG Staff, In AlfaTesters
3,498 posts
13,885 battles
20 minutes ago, Kuckoo said:

 

This isn't the first time it's happened.  If you're going to say anything just admit they either made a mistake or didn't check.

This isn't a slight against you; you're just doing your job.  But manufacturing excuses every time WG screws up gets annoying.

I'm not "manufacturing excuses" I'm literally telling you all, that when we continuously move requirements (specifically adding PvE case in point) to all our mission chains, this was a last minute change and initiative that I have personally been working towards to improve the QoL specifically for our NA PvE community. And then we moved CBs because players informed us via feedback that they were not happy with the way it was being handled so it was also a last min change....

These directives were set up months ago....  so yes, we missed some things. As i said, we are setting a NEW standard to try to allow everyone that plays every game mode do many of these missions, because that was the feedback we received, that we didn't allow this in the past. So we scrambled to add all modes and not all the correct changes occurred.

Which is why THIS MORNING I updated the community that our Devs went through last night and changed them. I don't need to be "manufacturing excuses" ever, regardless of the fact I work for WG.

-Hapa

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,465
[TARK]
Members
6,496 posts
2,496 battles

Its unfortunate for WG that past choices are now feeding the memes.

Of course, the root cause is to think through the process for setting out mission requirements a bit more...

...which (reads thread), seems to be happening.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,607
[CMFRT]
[CMFRT]
Members
15,702 posts
8 minutes ago, Kuckoo said:

This isn't the first time it's happened.  If you're going to say anything just admit they either made a mistake or didn't check.

This isn't a slight against you; you're just doing your job.  But manufacturing excuses every time WG screws up gets annoying.

In this case I'd have to say that it's plausible, the mission descriptions and requirements, and the ops rotation, probably were set a month or more ago.  And if Narai hadn't been pulled, I think it would have lined up for part of this week's Directive (at work, no time to triple-check the timing on that). 

Now, more work and patch-compatibility testing need to go into Ops, that's a fair criticism -- and by neglecting them, WG sets themselves up for some criticism.   It's aggravating as hell when something that's one of the better parts of the game (IMO) gets yanked out right before its turn in the rotation and right before it would have been useful for heavy grind Directive mission. 

@Hapa_Fodder says he's pushing for improvements to Co-op and Ops, and we've seen the "mercy rule" mitigation go through, so at this point we can either give him a chance to advance our concerns to the development level and push for improvements... or keep being so blindly angry that it makes him not care. 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×