Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Pillbox_7

Nerfable Premiums

99 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

50
[RG-1]
Members
89 posts
4,450 battles

So does anyone have any information on nerfable prems in general after Flandre and Hyuga, is this just going to be every premium sold from now on? Was there some legal change/ruling involved? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,061
[SLI]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
10,579 posts
2 minutes ago, Pillbox_7 said:

So does anyone have any information on nerfable prems in general after Flandre and Hyuga, is this just going to be every premium sold from now on? Was there some legal change/ruling involved? 

It was never "illegal" to change them that I am aware of.  WG just avoided it....mostly. They have nerfed premiums in the past, directly and by name in patch notes, so it's not a new thing.  They are just being upfront about it now I guess.

  • Haha 2
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,198
[WOLF5]
Supertester
5,240 posts
4,523 battles

WG is just being clear about their ability to nerf premiums. They've always been able to do it, but have refrained from it. I think they're just keeping their options open now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,856
[PVE]
Members
1,197 posts
30 minutes ago, Burnsy said:

It was never "illegal" to change them that I am aware of.  WG just avoided it....mostly. They have nerfed premiums in the past, directly and by name in patch notes, so it's not a new thing.  They are just being upfront about it now I guess.

It's a gray area.  Because changing a product after a purchase can be seen as shady business practice

  WG is a very big company, I'm sure some euro lawyer would be ready to try to get some cash out of WG.  IMO, That disclaimer isnt going to hold up.  

WG can dodge the issue by offering refunds if people dont like the changes, but we all know what WG thinks about refunds.  

Things like this is why actuaries get paid big salaries.

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50
[RG-1]
Members
89 posts
4,450 battles
41 minutes ago, Burnsy said:

directly and by name in patch notes

Do you remember one so I can look it up in the devblog? I’ve never heard this but I haven’t searched every ship in the devblog either. I’ve only heard that they can’t nerf ones sold for real money up until this recent business I asked about in my op. Thanks!

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,061
[SLI]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
10,579 posts
20 minutes ago, Farm_Fresh_Eggs said:

It's a gray area.  Because changing a product after a purchase can be seen as shady business practice

  WG is a very big company, I'm sure some euro lawyer would be ready to try to get some cash out of WG.  IMO, That disclaimer isnt going to hold up.  

WG can dodge the issue by offering refunds if people dont like the changes, but we all know what WG thinks about refunds.  

Things like this is why actuaries get paid big salaries.

WG has been doing this for over a decade.  I very much doubt they just up and made this very important decision without their own lawyers doing their research and being ready to defend it.

Not saying either side is right or wrong,  what would hold up and what wouldn't, saying WG didn't just fall off the turnip truck yesterday.  In fact, I would venture to say that in this particular area of video game digital items, WG is likely one of the most experienced companies.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,061
[SLI]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
10,579 posts
9 minutes ago, Pillbox_7 said:

Do you remember one so I can look it up in the devblog? I’ve never heard this but I haven’t searched every ship in the devblog either. I’ve only heard that they can’t nerf ones sold for real money up until this recent business I asked about in my op. Thanks!

https://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Update_0.8.1.1

"The falling time of bombs from the planes of aircraft carrier Kaga has been increased by 10%, which will allow the target to dodge some of the bombs with the help of a well-timed counter-maneuver. The recovery time of one torpedo bomber on deck is increased from 75 to 90 seconds, which will require more careful control of Torpedo Bombers and make the aircraft carrier more sensitive to the loss of aircraft. "

"To reduce the high attack potential of Graf Zeppelin Torpedo Bombers, the damage from one torpedo is reduced from 6,000 to 5,500. "

Etc.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50
[RG-1]
Members
89 posts
4,450 battles
8 minutes ago, Burnsy said:

Etc

Thanks, I didn’t know about that. Any non CVs? Either way it’s odd they decided to throw that language in now for some reason. Thanks for your time sir.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,061
[SLI]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
10,579 posts
4 minutes ago, Pillbox_7 said:

Thanks, I didn’t know about that. Any non CVs? Either way it’s odd they decided to throw that language in now for some reason. Thanks for your time sir.

Someone posted a comprehensive list a while ago in a thread of all direct and indirect nerfs to premiums, I haven't seen in a while though.  WG does try to avoid nerfing premiums as it doesn't make people very happy. The whole "WG doesn't touch premium ships" though, is much more of a thing that players say to each other, than what WG actually says in their terms of service.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,603
[WMD]
Members
2,132 posts
13,055 battles
31 minutes ago, Farm_Fresh_Eggs said:

It's a gray area.  Because changing a product after a purchase can be seen as shady business practice

  WG is a very big company, I'm sure some euro lawyer would be ready to try to get some cash out of WG.  IMO, That disclaimer isnt going to hold up.  

WG can dodge the issue by offering refunds if people dont like the changes, but we all know what WG thinks about refunds.  

Things like this is why actuaries get paid big salaries.

Is it, or is that wishful thinking?

What is the likelihood that you know more about the laws surrounding video games than a company that exists solely to make video games? 

This reminds me of the people who read something on the internet once, and think they know more about meteorology and forecasting than me... Sure you know that a tornado forms in the SW quadrant of a CB, but can you forecast the CB formation? Can you forecast the severity of the CB? Do you even know what a CB is? 

  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12,403
[SALVO]
Members
28,054 posts
41,668 battles
50 minutes ago, RenamedUser_1014381829 said:

Got to make them OP to sell them and then nerf them once the money has been spent.

There are a LOT of premium ships that are far, far from OP when released.  Heck, some are pretty crappy and deserve to be  buffed (for example, the Yudachi).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
339 posts
11,150 battles
1 hour ago, Burnsy said:

saying WG didn't just fall off the turnip truck yesterday.  In fact, I would venture to say that in this particular area of video game digital items, WG is likely one of the most experienced companies.

With all the recent changes (Captain skills change for example) and how they have pissed off the people that play the game.  I would say they got THROWN off the turnip truck, bounced off a cliff and landed in lava!!

It is like watching someone slowly drive a knife into themselves.

Or they really are just this guy...

tenor.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
339 posts
11,150 battles
1 hour ago, Burnsy said:

"To reduce the high attack potential of Graf Zeppelin Torpedo Bombers, the damage from one torpedo is reduced from 6,000 to 5,500. "

Perfect example!  A lot of people bought the Graf Zeppelin then they nerfed it.  I have not seen one since, no joke, not one!

I wonder how may players that cost WG!??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,061
[SLI]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
10,579 posts
8 minutes ago, Girlz_Day said:

Perfect example!  A lot of people bought the Graf Zeppelin then they nerfed it.  I have not seen one since, no joke, not one!

I wonder how may players that cost WG!??

I dunno, that patch was nearly 2 years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,776
[SIM]
Members
6,307 posts
10,286 battles

It's reasonable to assume that WG will be applying this disclaimer to all premium ships from here on out. What will be interesting is to see how they act on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,737
[KIA]
Members
3,839 posts
18,545 battles

This is something they should have been doing from the beginning. 

 

Better late than never I guess, but this is interesting to see how they'll handle premium balancing compared to silver ship balance. 

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,198
[PVE]
Members
12,065 posts
21,313 battles

All ships rust I guess. Time takes it's toll no matter what a ship costs, be it credits, steel, coal, Doubloons, Dollars, campaigns, grinding, or RB points (kind of like gold bond stamps.) Oh yeah I forgot Crates, like KOTS, CC, Super Containers and Santa Gifts. There is also the PTs.

Did I miss any?

Edited by Sovereigndawg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,856
[PVE]
Members
1,197 posts
1 hour ago, VeatherVitch said:

Is it, or is that wishful thinking?

What is the likelihood that you know more about the laws surrounding video games than a company that exists solely to make video games? 

This reminds me of the people who read something on the internet once, and think they know more about meteorology and forecasting than me... Sure you know that a tornado forms in the SW quadrant of a CB, but can you forecast the CB formation? Can you forecast the severity of the CB? Do you even know what a CB is? 

You are reading far more into those words than what I wrote.  I wasnt making any prediction.  I can see a case for either side.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39,266
[HINON]
Alpha Tester
27,729 posts
26,569 battles
3 hours ago, VeatherVitch said:

What is the likelihood that you know more about the laws surrounding video games than a company that exists solely to make video games?

... Including a legal team which costs more to run for a week than I will make in a year?

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,297
[A-D-F]
Members
7,877 posts
43,440 battles

Come on!

You seem to be accusing WG of saying untruths (aka lying). Not so!

- We will not nerf Premiums

- We will not have subs, ever

- We will never sell a T10 Premium

...and more

  • Cool 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,598
[PVE]
Members
10,597 posts
32,075 battles
4 hours ago, Burnsy said:

Someone posted a comprehensive list a while ago in a thread of all direct and indirect nerfs to premiums, I haven't seen in a while though.  WG does try to avoid nerfing premiums as it doesn't make people very happy. The whole "WG doesn't touch premium ships" though, is much more of a thing that players say to each other, than what WG actually says in their terms of service.

So you seen this list...was there any specific ships besides CVs during the rebork that actually got direct nerfs...as opposed to universal nerfs that effected them?

You're "etc" (in the post about Kaga & GZ) seemed to imply that there are some.

Other than the attempt of GC I've never seen any mentioned...although there may have been 1 or 2 I missed as I don't read any dev blogs unless somebody posts them on the forums...but I'm sure I would have seen the backlash on the forums if there had been & I don't recall any of those off the top of my head.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,361
[FOXY]
Members
4,717 posts
8,947 battles
1 hour ago, IfYouSeeKhaos said:

So you seen this list...was there any specific ships besides CVs during the rebork that actually got direct nerfs...as opposed to universal nerfs that effected them?

You're "etc" (in the post about Kaga & GZ) seemed to imply that there are some.

Other than the attempt of GC I've never seen any mentioned...although there may have been 1 or 2 I missed as I don't read any dev blogs unless somebody posts them on the forums...but I'm sure I would have seen the backlash on the forums if there had been & I don't recall any of those off the top of my head.

So, i found a list..its for buffs

I didnt read the whole thread, there may be a list of nerfs in there.

BUT.

 

If they buff them, they can nerf them too. I dont thing premium ships should be allowed to be overpowered, nor should they be useless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,598
[PVE]
Members
10,597 posts
32,075 battles
26 minutes ago, Princess_Daystar said:

So, i found a list..its for buffs

I didnt read the whole thread, there may be a list of nerfs in there.

BUT.

 

If they buff them, they can nerf them too. I dont thing premium ships should be allowed to be overpowered, nor should they be useless.

No...that was all buffs...

Unless you want to count the .1km nerf to (detection or speed...forget which) on 1 of the ship's torpedoes...but at the same time it got around a 4km range increase & each torps damage increased from 10k something to 14k something...so yeah...there was a nerf...but I don't think anybody was complaining about that 1).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,846
Members
878 posts
20 battles
6 hours ago, Burnsy said:

https://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Update_0.8.1.1

"The falling time of bombs from the planes of aircraft carrier Kaga has been increased by 10%, which will allow the target to dodge some of the bombs with the help of a well-timed counter-maneuver. The recovery time of one torpedo bomber on deck is increased from 75 to 90 seconds, which will require more careful control of Torpedo Bombers and make the aircraft carrier more sensitive to the loss of aircraft. "

"To reduce the high attack potential of Graf Zeppelin Torpedo Bombers, the damage from one torpedo is reduced from 6,000 to 5,500. "

Etc.

This doesn't count as nerfing premiums, because WG said that these ships would be considered as back in testing following the CV rework until announced as finalised, which didn't happen till later on, about 0.8.3 or so from memory.  These are just the equivalent of standard pre-release tuning changes.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×