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

Hey Wargaming

27 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,037
[GRETA]
Members
1,384 posts
10,609 battles

You said that your intention was not for this rework to make secondary builds any less effective.   Well since the rework the nerf to my Massachusetts,  Georgia and Ohio my secondary builds in those ships are definitely "less effective".

Fix them or refund my steel, coal and cash.  They were advertised as secondary ships and now they are absolutely "less effective" as secondary ships.

P.S. oh and by the way my Flint would like a word too.

  • Cool 10
  • Thanks 1
  • Boring 4
  • Meh 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,462
[SALVO]
Members
7,061 posts
5,529 battles

Question: do they still have better secondaries than other ships?

Then, they are still the best secondary ships.

  • Cool 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
  • Meh 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,037
[GRETA]
Members
1,384 posts
10,609 battles
2 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

Question: do they still have better secondaries than other ships?

Then, they are still the best secondary ships.

That has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that they are "less effective".  

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,462
[SALVO]
Members
7,061 posts
5,529 battles
2 minutes ago, HallaSnackbar said:

That has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that they are "less effective".  

Understand the rework as a nerf to secondary performance, nerf happens in games. No need to refund.

  • Cool 1
  • Meh 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
576 posts
7 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

Question: do they still have better secondaries than other ships?

Then, they are still the best secondary ships.

Playing subject dodgeball straight outta the gate.

  • Funny 3
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,462
[SALVO]
Members
7,061 posts
5,529 battles
1 minute ago, OuijaApologist said:

Playing subject dodgeball straight outta the gate.

Can't help it, I'm a player :Smile_playing:

  • Meh 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,328
[CLUMP]
Members
1,527 posts
2,189 battles
7 minutes ago, neptunes_wrath said:

fRyM5uo.jpg

I don't get it what does movie Obvlion have anything to with this :Smile_amazed:  

 

Not defend wargaming but if they refund you they would have to refund people using certain CVs :Smile_hiding: Cough Cough Graf Zeppelin :Smile_popcorn:

Edited by LastRemnant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
588
[GOOF]
Members
816 posts
6,801 battles

Gneisenau would agree, people were asking for help for German ships before the rebork now it's even worse. 

National flavor nerfed.

Please sir I'd like some more,  takes my shoes and spoon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,216
[KWF]
Members
5,807 posts
7,013 battles
23 minutes ago, DrHolmes52 said:

I figure the refund will come right after those for the IFHE rework.

And the one for stealthfire too, can't forget that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,150
[DRFTR]
Beta Testers
3,922 posts
1 hour ago, HallaSnackbar said:

You said that your intention was not for this rework to make secondary builds any less effective.   Well since the rework the nerf to my Massachusetts,  Georgia and Ohio my secondary builds in those ships are definitely "less effective".

Fix them or refund my steel, coal and cash.  They were advertised as secondary ships and now they are absolutely "less effective" as secondary ships.

P.S. oh and by the way my Flint would like a word too.

be sure to post the relevant article... or well you know...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,772
[A-D-F]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
8,783 posts
1 hour ago, HallaSnackbar said:

 

Fix them or refund my steel, coal and cash. 

 

https://legal.na.wargaming.net/en/end-user-licence-agreement/

"6.4.5 once you have redeemed or activated Content, including without limitation any Additional Feature, it is not returnable, exchangeable, or refundable for other Content, cash, goods or services;

6.4.6 we may change, replace, remove access to or update the Content at any time at our sole discretion"

  • Cool 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,200 posts
591 battles
1 hour ago, LastRemnant said:

I don't get it what does movie Obvlion have anything to with this :Smile_amazed:  

 

Not defend wargaming but if they refund you they would have to refund people using certain CVs :Smile_hiding: Cough Cough Graf Zeppelin :Smile_popcorn:

 

1 hour ago, neptunes_wrath said:

RVlInN2.gif

I fixed it...
 

Using the KEY WORD   effective. I thought if this first, as it is one of my favs and top ten best SCI FI, (legit sci fi, like a "Surrogates" with Bruce Willis, "it can happen" kind of sci fi)
 

Edited by neptunes_wrath

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,380
[CVA16]
Members
6,189 posts
19,067 battles
2 hours ago, HallaSnackbar said:

Well since the rework the nerf to my Massachusetts,  Georgia and Ohio my secondary builds in those ships are definitely "less effective".

WG will claim they are more effective since you can shoot to both sides. You apparently just aren't taking advantage of this by driving down the middle between 2 opponents.

WG may say it  was not their intent to make the meta long range sniping but that is what they did and it took the playerbase two seconds to point that out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,847
[RKLES]
[RKLES]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
6,494 posts
22,906 battles
2 hours ago, HallaSnackbar said:

You said that your intention was not for this rework to make secondary builds any less effective.   Well since the rework the nerf to my Massachusetts,  Georgia and Ohio my secondary builds in those ships are definitely "less effective".

Fix them or refund my steel, coal and cash.  They were advertised as secondary ships and now they are absolutely "less effective" as secondary ships.

P.S. oh and by the way my Flint would like a word too.

Put me on that list too....

Oh wait...

You don't care.

Just like my Texas and Atlanta AA being nerfed to the ground through the aft andbpost cv rework fiasco...

 

You really don't care...

Spend money, get a smolensk that CAN shoot out to 19.1 and be effective...

Captain rework, nerfs range... oh well....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
558
[CAAT]
Members
1,033 posts
4,626 battles
1 hour ago, Sabot_100 said:

WG will claim they are more effective since you can shoot to both sides. You apparently just aren't taking advantage of this by driving down the middle between 2 opponents.

WG may say it  was not their intent to make the meta long range sniping but that is what they did and it took the playerbase two seconds to point that out.

Oh yes, I am now shooting ineffectively from both sides, what a trade-off for adding like nearly 40% more dispersion per firing side(because that's actually what the loss of -25% dispersion buff amounts to), and ISBA DOESN'T EVEN APPLY TO BOTH SIDES.

Btw, I totally agree with you Sabot, just fyi. Also, here are some "quick maffs":

200m dispersion with ISBA

123m dispersion with old Manual Secondaries

Therefore, the difference is 77m, which divided into 200m, is a 38.5% GAIN in dispersion. So the -25% dispersion buff loss actually correlates to a 38.5% gain in dispersion. That's PRETTY BIG. But it DOES go a long way to explaining why the hit rates on secondaries are so low.

God, ISBA could use a buff to -50% dispersion right now.

Edited by SaiIor_Moon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,037
[GRETA]
Members
1,384 posts
10,609 battles

To be clear I am completely aware that Wargaming is not legally obligated to fix nor refund anything.   They do however have a past practice of not nerfing premium ships.  They also stated they did not intend to nerf the effectiveness of secondary builds with the rework.   This rework is also still fresh and I am sure balance changes are yet to come.  They are probably waiting for most to commit all their captain builds before "balance changes" make respec necessary on most of them.  

With that said, I am a paying customer,  have been for years.  I spend upwards of 400.00 a year between premium,  crates and doubloons.   As a customer I am free to tell them when I am displeased with their products and I am also free to stop spending money on said product.   No I am not going to threaten to uninstall, that is a waste.   I will however not hesitate to become a 100% free to play player if they choose to take products I have already paid for and change them unnecessarily just so they can release something newer and stronger in hopes I will buy that instead.  That is unethical and shady as f.

Massachusetts,  Georgia  and Ohio just like every other secondary focused ships out there were not over performing prior to the rework.   Tier for tier there are plenty of other ships that are much stronger (Musashi for example) that got big fat buffs with this rework.   Sniper builds got massive buffs and gave up nothing meanwhile secondary builds got more expensive and gave up baked in AA and accuracy.  

Like I said before, Wargaming needs to either fix these ships they just broke or admit they don't want this build in the game and just refund them.  The ships were advertised as secondary ships but are more effective as snipers thanks to deadeye.  

As for Flint, that needs no explanation as multiple streamers and CC's have already pointed out how useless that ship is now with a max 11km range in a ship that regularly sees T9.

Truth is I think Wargaming jumped the gun on this rework and rolled it out before it was ready.  Now they are using us to give them the data to polish and balance it.  I am just making sure my voice is heard while this is going on.  Squeaky wheel gets the grease.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,150
[DRFTR]
Beta Testers
3,922 posts

they get around the nerfing of a particular premium ship by nerfing em all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,037
[GRETA]
Members
1,384 posts
10,609 battles
43 minutes ago, SaiIor_Moon said:

Oh yes, I am now shooting ineffectively from both sides, what a trade-off for adding like nearly 40% more dispersion per firing side(because that's actually what the loss of -25% dispersion buff amounts to), and ISBA DOESN'T EVEN APPLY TO BOTH SIDES.

Btw, I totally agree with you Sabot, just fyi. Also, here are some "quick maffs":

200m dispersion with ISBA

123m dispersion with old Manual Secondaries

Therefore, the difference is 77m, which divided into 200m, is a 38.5% GAIN in dispersion. So the -25% dispersion buff loss actually correlates to a 38.5% gain in dispersion. That's PRETTY BIG. But it DOES go a long way to explaining why the hit rates on secondaries are so low.

God, ISBA could use a buff to -50% dispersion right now.

Meanwhile they gave ships like Thunderer, Musashi and Slava a 10% dispersion buff to main battery with deadeye without giving up anything.   

Clearly these buffs/nerfs had nothing to do with balance and everything to do with releasing an unfinished product at the expense of our ships and game time.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
951
[WOOKY]
Beta Testers
1,830 posts
4 hours ago, HallaSnackbar said:

That has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that they are "less effective".  

less effective vs single target secondary focus... more effective vs multi-side secondary spray.

Ive run my mass, tirp, GK, ohio often enough since rework and they still pull 400 or so secondary hits without doing anything too Yolo.

yes, the days of ctlr-click dakka a charging DD are gone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,981
[V_KNG]
Beta Testers
13,192 posts
52 minutes ago, HallaSnackbar said:

They are probably waiting for most to commit all their captain builds before "balance changes" make respec necessary on most of them.  

One of the main reasons my ships still sit in port without skills assigned. I did choose two, maybe three ships/commanders and spec'd them out, but no others. I am content to wait for the second great skill rebork.. excuse me, adjustment. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
79
[OGF]
Members
168 posts
6,161 battles
1 hour ago, HallaSnackbar said:

Squeaky wheel gets the grease.

Breh, if you get some of that grease can you give me some for my now busted-up turrets?  

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
558
[CAAT]
Members
1,033 posts
4,626 battles
15 hours ago, buglips said:

Breh, if you get some of that grease can you give me some for my now busted-up turrets?  

Right? That's ANOTHER thing that desperately needs fixing. Grease the Gears. The way it works right now, is so stupid, I cannot honestly believe anyone at Wargaming tested that skill before implementing it. Same goes for testing ISBA, tbh.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
79
[OGF]
Members
168 posts
6,161 battles
12 minutes ago, SaiIor_Moon said:

Right? That's ANOTHER thing that desperately needs fixing. Grease the Gears. The way it works right now, is so stupid, I cannot honestly believe anyone at Wargaming tested that skill before implementing it. Same goes for testing ISBA, tbh.

Yeah, it's quite horrid.  It's so horrid that I'm reasonably confident they will have to fix it, because right now it's essentially useless.  And not "useless" in the sense maybe we used before, where it really meant "sub-optimal", "useless" in the sense that it objectively serves no practical purpose at all.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×