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

Why not sell rares?

53 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

17
[FFG33]
Members
34 posts
1,638 battles

I know I'm the newbie, and don't know it all about the game, but would WG not make a buttload more money selling the ships everyone covets that are in the crates? Or would they still make more cash with crates, with the near impossible odds to get them?

  • Cool 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,756
[-ARP-]
[-ARP-]
Members
1,289 posts
19,944 battles

The removed ships "broken" ships. They would imbalance the game too much. 

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1
  • Haha 1
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
856
[SAINT]
[SAINT]
Members
1,518 posts
18,144 battles

Well, they removed the ships from sale for a reason (too popular, too OP, make too many credits etc). Putting them back up for sale would therefore make little sense. But, dangling them in front of the player base to encourage them to gamble away their money in a foolish attempt to acquire them clearly makes sense however. 

This makes no sense Microwave meme - AhSeeit

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17
[SLDS]
Members
118 posts
7,335 battles

Most were removed for being to powerful or to popular. Fewer buy enough Santa containers to get them then would buy them directly on their own, but those that do will mostly need to spend a LOT of money because until all the less valuable ships have been obtained the odds of getting the rare ones is really low. This way WG can make money on them, but still somewhat limit the number of them out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
515
[A-D-F]
Members
1,290 posts
12,046 battles
35 minutes ago, Cit_the_bed said:

The removed ships "broken" ships. They would imbalance the game too much. 

This is not wrong.

1 minute ago, Jolly_Rodgered said:

Well, they removed the ships from sale for a reason (too popular, too OP, make too many credits etc). Putting them back up for sale would therefore make little sense. But, dangling them in front of the player base to encourage them to gamble away their money in a foolish attempt to acquire them clearly makes sense however. 

This makes no sense Microwave meme - AhSeeit

 

But this is far more to the point.

Artificial rarity and the ability to take the laws of probability personally yield a far greater income for the WeeG. 

H/T to Penn & Teller for the great lines on gambling. 

"Taking the odds of probability personally" "The excitement of bad math."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
398 posts
7,284 battles
1 hour ago, Cit_the_bed said:

The removed ships "broken" ships. They would imbalance the game too much. 

Talking about broken and imbalance and here we are having CVs .

 

Anyways OP idea is nice having WG sale rare ship for a limited time only this will boost their sale and makes some players like me happy having a rare ship for my collection.

  • Cool 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Boring 2
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
449
[FOXEH]
Members
1,945 posts
12,796 battles
1 hour ago, Jolly_Rodgered said:

Well, they removed the ships from sale for a reason (too popular, too OP, make too many credits etc). Putting them back up for sale would therefore make little sense. But, dangling them in front of the player base to encourage them to gamble away their money in a foolish attempt to acquire them clearly makes sense however. 

 

 

This the dumbest justification I have ever heard.  Too popular?  So a lot of people like them.  So what?  A popular ship isn’t going to break the game when thousands already have the ship because it’s popular...

Too OP?  How many times have you seen Imperator Nickolia or Koenig Albert in a match, even though they were both removed as OP and thousands if not hundreds of thousands have them already.  For the Epoch campaign I used Koenig Albert some, everybody else, even players I know have been on forever and have the ship, weren’t using them.  It’s not going to unbalance the game to any extent, and we survived them when they were being sold before.  Plus, everybody complains about power creep, has the thought that those supposedly OP ships have been powercreeped to the point they aren’t OP anymore?  

and the final one that just pisses me off.  “They make too many credits”, as if this game has an actual economy.  Mostly this argument is from people who already have their billions and don’t give a crap about the rest of us.  There is no economy in this game.  Supply and demand simply doesn’t exist in this game.  There are an infinite amount of ships that can be bought by players all at artificially fixed prices.  The only things you can spend money on is ships, flags, and modules.  (Repairs and ammo cost is negligible and unlimited anyway.)  so it doesn’t matter how many credits people get from their ships, they can buy as much of anything as they want from the Stores.  And there is one whole Tier of ships that they have tried to make unprofitable to play, T10.  And WG wants you to grind as hard as you can to get to a Tier of ships you can’t ultimately afford to play.  That’s just stupid.  

If they don’t want to sell them all the time, fine.  Just sell them on a rotating basis.  As far as the crates go, why the “shortlist” at all?  Just open up all the possible ships for eligibility and put yet another RNG on it.  (WG seems to like RNG’s so much what’s one more?). 
 

How people can defend WG for stupid excuses like these above I probably will never understand.  

  • Cool 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Boring 1
  • Meh 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,146
[WOLFC]
Members
2,200 posts
10,557 battles
4 hours ago, comtedumas said:

This the dumbest justification I have ever heard.  Too popular?  So a lot of people like them.  So what?  A popular ship isn’t going to break the game when thousands already have the ship because it’s popular...

Too many of a certain ship flooding the MM queues leads to less variety and a less enjoyable player experience. That’s WG’s stance on it, at least, and it has some merit. Look at all the threads you see complaining about the prevalence of “X ship” after a new line is introduced (although the early access events have helped with that somewhat).

4 hours ago, comtedumas said:

Too OP?  How many times have you seen Imperator Nickolia or Koenig Albert in a match, even though they were both removed as OP and thousands if not hundreds of thousands have them already.  For the Epoch campaign I used Koenig Albert some, everybody else, even players I know have been on forever and have the ship, weren’t using them.  It’s not going to unbalance the game to any extent, and we survived them when they were being sold before.  Plus, everybody complains about power creep, has the thought that those supposedly OP ships have been powercreeped to the point they aren’t OP anymore?

It’s not about your anecdotal experience, it’s about the statistical aggregate of everyone’s experience, i.e. the infamous spreadsheet. WG pulled these ships for overperforming relative to their peers according to objective, measurable criteria. Flooding the game with such ships would certainly unbalance the game. The two ships you mentioned are also exceptionally poor examples to use. Both were available for an incredibly short time before being pulled - Nikolai was literally available for only days, IIRC. Of course there are going to be very few of them around.

Consider the case of GC. WG left her available for quite some time (even buffed her) and also gave her out like candy to returning players for a while. There is a reason we have not had a tier V ranked season in years: last time we did GC was overrepresented and dominant, significantly outperforming her piers.

Now, you can make an argument that some previously removed ships are not as overpowered as they used to be due to changes to the meta and the CV rework. KA is a good example, because her AA is terrible and there a lot more CVs nowadays. However, she is still a tier IV Kaiser stuck at tier III, with all the combat advantages that bestows over her tier III counterparts. Musashi is also less powerful than she once was, with her tier VI-VII level of AA being a much greater weakness post-rework, but she is still very powerful.

Finally, there’s also the fact that these ships have been dangled in front of players as prizes from loot crates, and such an arrangement encourages players to gamble away huge amounts of money to try to to obtain them. Making them available again would eliminate this revenue stream, and would set a precedent for any future ships WG tried to market in this manner that would result in  many players simply “waiting until the ship is made available again.” Such a move would also anger those who have thrown away huge sums of money to obtain these ships, many of whom are the ones often derogatorily described as “whales:” i.e. WG’s biggest customers. I personally don’t approve of this practice of putting exclusive, balance-breaking prizes in loot boxes, but I completely understand why WG chooses to so - it makes them boatloads of money.

Edited by Nevermore135
  • Cool 2
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,029
[USCC2]
Members
6,274 posts
3 hours ago, Cit_the_bed said:

The removed ships "broken" ships. They would imbalance the game too much. 

I question that logic:

If you allow everyone to have the same ship then everyone has as equal a chance as they are going to get, then it is down to skill - as close to balance as it comes.

Limiting the ships to those that already have them, or who can afford to throw cash in the hope of getting them in containers - that means the ships are still available in game, still used by many and that causes the imbalance. 

 

Now if WG had integrity and either changed the ships so they were not OP or removed them altogether, then that would also create a better balance, but money is money! :cap_haloween:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
7,026 posts
27,717 battles

Since I have all of them: no need to sell them anymore.

Real reason for WG: $$$$$$$

Why you think that they could sell a Missouri in last year charity event for $200 within seconds?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,969
[V_KNG]
Beta Testers
13,185 posts

When all the "rares" become available for RL $$$, know then is the true beginning of the end for the game. 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
324 posts
25 battles
1 hour ago, comtedumas said:

This the dumbest justification I have ever heard.  Too popular?  So a lot of people like them.  So what?  A popular ship isn’t going to break the game when thousands already have the ship because it’s popular...

Too OP?  How many times have you seen Imperator Nickolia or Koenig Albert in a match, even though they were both removed as OP and thousands if not hundreds of thousands have them already.  For the Epoch campaign I used Koenig Albert some, everybody else, even players I know have been on forever and have the ship, weren’t using them.  It’s not going to unbalance the game to any extent, and we survived them when they were being sold before.  Plus, everybody complains about power creep, has the thought that those supposedly OP ships have been powercreeped to the point they aren’t OP anymore?  

So whether or not Smolensk is truly overpowered or simply an extreme glass cannon that can be countered relatively simply, providing the said relevant ships on the team go and do it is still open to debate.*

However from personal experience I run into them (on the EU server) far less often than when they were available at the go to coal ship. It's likely there was also a spike caused by knowledge that it was going away.

If anything I've noticed a bit of a delayed reaction to "Thunderer is OP" because Smolensk was released at a similar time.

Ideally of course such problematic ships shouldn't be released in a problematic state, or reward/premium ships should be nerfable (which has also created backlash) but removing them from availability does eventually cut down on them,  as eventually many of the players with them will end up mostly playing something else.

*(Being a battleship main I naturally didn't like seeing it but it did tend to die swiftly when caught and the thin hull nonsense didn't save it)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,522
[NONE]
Members
3,757 posts
2 hours ago, 9TenSix2Eight said:

Talking about broken and imbalance and here we are having CVs .

There's a difference.

The old-school removed rares were mistakes in individual balancing, economics, or both.

CV's are broken and imbalanced by intentional design. Full stop.

Want broken rares? Spend your IRA on crates.

Want to avoid broken CV's? Play Co-op or quit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,099
[WOLFG]
Members
31,369 posts
9,649 battles
3 hours ago, Jolly_Rodgered said:

Well, they removed the ships from sale for a reason (too popular, too OP, make too many credits etc). Putting them back up for sale would therefore make little sense. But, dangling them in front of the player base to encourage them to gamble away their money in a foolish attempt to acquire them clearly makes sense however. 

This makes no sense Microwave meme - AhSeeit

 

It does make sense in a way. I see it as a compromise. People are given the chance to get ships that they want, but in a way that means far fewer of them hitting the queue, than if they were sold outright.

There will likely be fewer of those removed ships than there were when they removed, as some people that had them will have quit or otherwise moved on.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,969
[V_KNG]
Beta Testers
13,185 posts
8 minutes ago, Skpstr said:

It does make sense in a way. I see it as a compromise. People are given the chance to get ships that they want, but in a way that means far fewer of them hitting the queue, than if they were sold outright.

There will likely be fewer of those removed ships than there were when they removed, as some people that had them will have quit or otherwise moved on.

The way I see it is this: 
 

"Oh, so you want some of these rare or ships no longer being sold? How much will you pay for them? Hey devs, how can we determine the market price of these ships so we aren't cheating ourselves out of some profit? Uh huh... hmm... really? Okay, do it." 

They now have an established upper limit on how much players will spend, don't you think? Then again, look at the ARP Yamato.. nearl;y $200 fully equipped with a LM?" 

Honestly, since they are into this game, they might as well put the FDR out there for $199 and be done with it. They might actually be able to push over $200 for a single ship. 

Think about that for just a moment. Then contemplate... does greed know any limits? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,343
[O_O]
Members
6,906 posts
16,573 battles
1 minute ago, Herr_Reitz said:

Think about that for just a moment. Then contemplate... does greed know any limits?  

I don't know if 'greed' is the right word.

WG offers game content for sale.  The players dictate how much that content sells for.  If WG prices it too high, players won't buy it.  Price it too low, and either they are missing out on profit and/or they potentially affect game balance.  If players weren't willing to spend $200 for a single vehicle of game content, they wouldn't price it for that.  But, A LOT of players DO spend that much.  Hey, it boggles my mind, too.

I don't believe OP ships like Nikolai, Belfast, Gremyashchy, etc., are an accident.  Put a few OP ships in the game, then remove them for being OP, and you now have rare, highly sought after content to use as a dangling sales carrot in front of the player mule.  Again, I don't know if I would call it 'greed'.  WoWS is a free-to-play game that needs to generate money to make its creation and development profitable (without profit, it doesn't exist).  That highly desirable content isn't necessary to succeed in the game as a player...players just WANT that content.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
150
[BEA5T]
Members
482 posts
16,558 battles

Think they sort of did this already with "Chance of obtaining the CV Enterprise".   Also sort of kinda in a slight way with Black Friday which included a Jean Bart B.

Since Jean Bart is no longer available.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17
[FFG33]
Members
34 posts
1,638 battles

Are these ships really OP tho?

 

I also play Warships legends on XBOX. Yes I am addicted, and I have lots of friends on that platform.

Anyway, legends put out the Kutuzov, and Belfast. While I dont have them on PC to compare, I do have them on Legends and can say they are beasts. On Legends they are more powerful because not all the ships from PC are on Legends yet,so these ships are more spicy than normal.

So, if they are so broken, why did they include them in legends? So I can only conclude, they removed them on PC for some other reason. Gin up demand? Sell more crates? Do something with them later? I don't know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,825
[--K--]
[--K--]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
2,555 posts

Some of the "broken" ships are definitely  not that broken anymore, merely strong.  

However.

The santa boxes are truly the perfect, ingenious move by WG-- It hits two birds with one stone.  One, it lets the OP premiums in there to be limited, therefore not flood the game with them so letting some out into the wild won't hurt the game.  Two, the gambling exploitation boxes are ripe for preying on people to spend tons of cash on the hopes of getting them, dangling a very shiny carrot on a stick.

Absolutely dirty, but intelligent move.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,343
[O_O]
Members
6,906 posts
16,573 battles
46 minutes ago, FirstDawnn said:

I also play Warships legends on XBOX. Yes I am addicted, and I have lots of friends on that platform.

Anyway, legends put out the Kutuzov, and Belfast. While I dont have them on PC to compare, I do have them on Legends and can say they are beasts. On Legends they are more powerful because not all the ships from PC are on Legends yet,so these ships are more spicy than normal.

So, if they are so broken, why did they include them in legends? So I can only conclude, they removed them on PC for some other reason. Gin up demand? Sell more crates? Do something with them later? I don't know.

XBox and PC versions of this game really cannot be compared to each other.  Individual ships may be completely different performance-wise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,047
[IND8]
[IND8]
Members
1,117 posts
11,064 battles

There are three types of rare ships:

1. Ships that are not available anymore by any means, because they were given out as a reward to specific people. They don't even drop from Supercontainers or Santa crates. Examples are Arkansas and Iwaki.

2. Ships that are overpowered and have been removed to keep their numbers low. Examples: Belfast (T7), Kutuzov, and Guilio Cesare.

3. Ships that were too popular, but not good to the point of breaking the game. Examples: Jean Bart and Georgia (soon to be removed)

What is really interesting is there is a ship from the second group that could probably be brought back now because it broke the game not with in battle mechanics, but with unbalanced economic rewards, yet if it were reissued via Steel or the research bureau today, the high gate would be enough to prevent it from flooding the game and breaking credits. That ship is Missouri. Doubt they would ever reissue it for steel or RB, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
269
[IMP]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
362 posts
5,652 battles

WG deliberately created OP ships, sold them in the store for some time, people bought them because they were OP, quite a bit of money was made. Then WG removed them due to "balance concerns" (lol) and decided to keep selling them inside lootboxes, these ships continue to make money for WG.

They could sell these ships in the store once again (some were not sold, like Kron, Musashi, Missouri because you could get them for fxp in game) and it would make them a lot of money, but hiding them behind countless of lootboxes due to very very low drop chances nets them even MORE money, they also have the chance to create more addicts which means more money!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
324 posts
25 battles
53 minutes ago, FirstDawnn said:

Are these ships really OP tho?

 

I also play Warships legends on XBOX. Yes I am addicted, and I have lots of friends on that platform.

Anyway, legends put out the Kutuzov, and Belfast. While I dont have them on PC to compare, I do have them on Legends and can say they are beasts. On Legends they are more powerful because not all the ships from PC are on Legends yet,so these ships are more spicy than normal.

So, if they are so broken, why did they include them in legends? So I can only conclude, they removed them on PC for some other reason. Gin up demand? Sell more crates? Do something with them later? I don't know.

As desmo_2 said, different games.
Likewise many Premium ships could quite easily be "fixed" if WG were not so reluctant to have to suffer the backlash of changing them.

Legends tends to have the hindsight of seeing what *doesn't* work well in the PC version and perhaps taking that on board.

Personally whilst I don't play Legends I'm rather jealous of how it does captains and I prefer what I've seen of their tech trees.

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.

×