How go get Missouri

[Dr_Venture]

https://blog.worldofwarships.com/blog/190

Just when you think they can't go ANY LOWER.

Instead of a direct purchase option...you now have to grind a mission chain, THEN you can buy the boat.

Buuuuut why grind the boat on a time locked campaign when you can...

JUST BUY LOOTBOXES!

[Nevermore135]

1 hour ago, Dr_Venture said:

https://blog.worldofwarships.com/blog/190

Just when you think they can't go ANY LOWER.

Instead of a direct purchase option...you now have to grind a mission chain, THEN you can buy the boat.

Got to provide the incentive to gamble. WG just can’t let go of their second money-making scheme in the last month (the first being the laughable excuse for a summer “sale”).

If this had been the announced plan all along, there would be some grumbling (rightfully so), but this could have been written off as just another example of WG practicing business as usual. To present this as some kind of concession to the player base after their massive -up is downright insulting.

[Window_Licking_Potato]

WeeGee RN: 

If we ignore CC Exodus, CC Exodus does not exist. Also, how we further make money from hunk of pixel metal?

Whatever they're drinking or smoking in St. Petey's, puff-puff pass or glug-glug pass. That's gotta be some good crap.

[Tpaktop2_1]

Is it me, or am I hearing the ghost of Puerto Rico calling? They never mentioned what the mission directives are.

[vereybowring]

So in summary, grind your heart out then pay us a big wad of cash on top.

Yeah, either gamble+cash or grind+cash - nope. . .

[Yandere_Roon]

Yeah that isn't a 'fix' that's bullcrap. Jesus even when they're trying to 'fix' things that screw it up to such a degree WG is becoming a parody of themselves...

[iRA6E]

I guess I would have to see what the mission requirements look like before deciding how bad  this is really?     Though.. not sure what you all are griping about this for?  Hasn't everyone already committed to closing your wallets anyway?   Why gripe about any of this if you aren't going to give anymore money to WG?  I mean all the mission will be is a way for F2P or protest (while still playing) players to get some of WG's free stuff.  I for one have no interest in the ship..      

[DrHolmes52]

I swear WG has burning dumpsters on a conveyor belt.

[Yandere_Roon]

Just now, iRA6E said:

I guess I would have to see what the mission requirements look like before deciding how bad  this is really?     Though.. not sure what you all are griping about this for?  Hasn't everyone already committed to closing your wallets anyway?   Why gripe about any of this if you aren't going to give anymore money to WG?  I mean all the mission will be is a way for F2P or protest (while still playing) players to get some of WG's free stuff.  I for one have no interest in the ship..      

I mean I already HAVE the MO and won't be playing the game any longer but it's still a farce what they're doing. Just because I'm not interested doesn't mean I can't watch the dumpster fire keep rolling down the street and try to tell people to get out of the way.

[Ensign_Cthulhu]

You know, this doesn't sound so bad:

We haven't had a major Tier 4-eligible event since late 2017 (Taste of Blood, for T3 HMAS Vampire, was the very last). 60 battles in 19 days? It sounds like it has the potential to be a walkover. 

8 minutes ago, iRA6E said:

I guess I would have to see what the mission requirements look like before deciding how bad  this is really?     Though.. not sure what you all are griping about this for?  Hasn't everyone already committed to closing your wallets anyway?   Why gripe about any of this if you aren't going to give anymore money to WG?  I mean all the mission will be is a way for F2P or protest (while still playing) players to get some of WG's free stuff.  I for one have no interest in the ship..      

Yep. I don't want her either - I have enough Tier 9 premiums, and I can get even more of them without paying a cent. I'm still going to pick up the free goodies, though. 

21 minutes ago, vereybowring said:

So in summary, grind your heart out then pay us a big wad of cash on top.

Yeah, either gamble+cash or grind+cash - nope. . .

I'm not getting a grind-your-heart-out vibe here. Not with Tier 4 ships involved.

[Bill_Halsey]

I can see a scheme where it's like to Puerto Rico grind. Which you can by pass by paying doubloons. Then you can buy the ship. WG gets their money one way or another.

[landedkiller]

I am so disgusted by how they are treating a World War 2 Iowa class Missouri like it was some children’s plaything. I wish that the license holders of USS Missouri could know about all of this and put pressure on Wargaming to play nice. 

[FirestormMk3]

So wait, you need to do a multi-week grindy campaign like they used to do with old reward ships before they switched to dockyard and made all reward ships cost money forevermore, and after completing it you will be ALLOWED to purchase what will almost certainly be the most expensive ship in the game available for direct purchase and definitely ~$100!?  Can WG even go hours without a PR disaster anymore, because days seems to be out the window now.

[Nota_Chance]

12 minutes ago, landedkiller said:

I am so disgusted by how they are treating a World War 2 Iowa class Missouri like it was some children’s plaything. I wish that the license holders of USS Missouri could know about all of this and put pressure on Wargaming to play nice. 

License holders?

 

What license holders? The ship is collectively owned by the people of the United States.  Just spitballing here, but I'm pretty sure there there aren't any license holders over the ship's image.

 

In fact, I think you can FOIA just about anything you would want to know about her... including her original drawings.

[Warped_1]

1 hour ago, Dr_Venture said:

https://blog.worldofwarships.com/blog/190

Just when you think they can't go ANY LOWER.

Instead of a direct purchase option...you now have to grind a mission chain, THEN you can buy the boat.

Yep, for this reason they decided to neuter the full credit earning potential of the original ship.  

Now those that don't have it "get" to buy one at full price after grinding through a chain of missions.  Why didn't they just create a new Missouri R (course, being able to spend cash on one doesn't exactly make it a reward)?

[Dudefella]

1 hour ago, Dr_Venture said:

https://blog.worldofwarships.com/blog/190

Just when you think they can't go ANY LOWER.

Instead of a direct purchase option...you now have to grind a mission chain, THEN you can buy the boat.

Web-based means opt-in, which means some people will miss out.  THEN it unlocks a premium shop purchase, which is cash not FXP or doubloons.

 

They really do go out of their way to make us like them less.

 

[Versili]

9 minutes ago, Warped_1 said:

Yep, for this reason they decided to neuter the full credit earning potential of the original ship.  

Now those that don't have it "get" to buy one at full price after grinding through a chain of missions.  Why didn't they just create a new Missouri R (course, being able to spend cash on one doesn't exactly make it a reward)?

That is s good idea . Missouri R for re-release status . Same but different.  Like the black ships.

Oh Wegee another missed opportunity.

[Tzarevitch]

53 minutes ago, iRA6E said:

I guess I would have to see what the mission requirements look like before deciding how bad  this is really?     Though.. not sure what you all are griping about this for?  Hasn't everyone already committed to closing your wallets anyway?   Why gripe about any of this if you aren't going to give anymore money to WG?  I mean all the mission will be is a way for F2P or protest (while still playing) players to get some of WG's free stuff.  I for one have no interest in the ship..      

I agree 100%. That's pretty much what I was thinking.

People howled about the loot boxes, which is understandable because you have no idea what you actually have to do to get the ship.  Then they open it for purchase if you complete a campaign but people still howl. 

Admittedly, we don't know what the missions are, but the fact they called it a "campaign" suggests it is the same as the previous campaigns - sink 5 ships, spot 20 torpedoes, etc. You complete them while playing the game normally. They're a non-issue to finish. 

I don't get the new griping either. They aren't going to give it for free. Ever. They were convinced to give a fairer alternative to the crappy loot boxes, but they want to tie it to one of the cheesy campaigns that you usually can sleepwalk through. So be it. Anyone who is going to buy Missouri is actually playing the game and can probably complete the missions easily. My opinion will change if they insert bizarre or hard to complete requirements, but they haven't done that in the past for a campaign. I have no beef with the dedicated F2P players but by definition they aren't ever going pay for it regardless of how it is available so Wargaming isn't concerned about their opinion on this matter. 

Also despite the new howling, it isnt the first time Wargaming has expected people to buy and do some grinding to get a ship. That's basically how the dockyards work. After the Puerto Rico debacle, even the subsequent dockyard stages are easy to complete. Also you now now what it will cost you to get it. 

In the interest of full disclosure, I got Missouri when it first came out. That being said, I'm already playing the game so I will happily complete the Missouri campaign  and get the free stuff they are offering. 

 

[gatorken]

After all this with the CC's and other recent miscommunications I would like to thing WG is self aware enough to not make the Mighty Mo missions near impossible like the Puerto Rico. I realize it's WG so i am not holding my breath.....

 

[iRA6E]

23 minutes ago, Tzarevitch said:

I agree 100%. That's pretty much what I was thinking.

People howled about the loot boxes, which is understandable because you have no idea what you actually have to do to get the ship.  Then they open it for purchase if you complete a campaign but people still howl. 

Admittedly, we don't know what the missions are, but the fact they called it a "campaign" suggests it is the same as the previous campaigns - sink 5 ships, spot 20 torpedoes, etc. You complete them while playing the game normally. They're a non-issue to finish. 

I don't get the new griping either. They aren't going to give it for free. Ever. They were convinced to give a fairer alternative to the crappy loot boxes, but they want to tie it to one of the cheesy campaigns that you usually can sleepwalk through. So be it. Anyone who is going to buy Missouri is actually playing the game and can probably complete the missions easily. My opinion will change if they insert bizarre or hard to complete requirements, but they haven't done that in the past for a campaign. I have no beef with the dedicated F2P players but by definition they aren't ever going pay for it regardless of how it is available so Wargaming isn't concerned about their opinion on this matter. 

Also despite the new howling, it isnt the first time Wargaming has expected people to buy and do some grinding to get a ship. That's basically how the dockyards work. After the Puerto Rico debacle, even the subsequent dockyard stages are easy to complete. Also you now now what it will cost you to get it. 

In the interest of full disclosure, I got Missouri when it first came out. That being said, I'm already playing the game so I will happily complete the Missouri campaign  and get the free stuff they are offering. 

 

Well...   It is good that they listened about locking something important behind a loot box only, at least this time.. So maybe that lesson will take hold. That's the only really unique thing about this event IMO.   But if we all want to really take a hard look in the mirror about why WOWS has increasingly gone towards the loot box revenue grab.  All we have to do is examine the absolute insanity that is  Santa crates.   I'd almost guarantee that's WG's biggest cash haul of the year.   Players start clamoring for it every year way prior to the season.   Almost no one gripes about it except maybe when they draw back a nub on a 20 crate purchase, getting a bunch of camos and no ships, of getting Makarovs instead of Belfasts  .. And you know what it has always been ... A loot box.  Take a chance, roll your dice and see what you get?    I admittedly spend a bunch at it every year.    I'm not exactly financially vulnerable..  But it's still loot boxes and has been around and very very popular for almost as long as this has been out.     I'd gander to say.. if they quit that event.. forums would be ablaze with anger.  There's now a number of premium ships that are only locked behind them and you can bet a bunch of players whaling it up gladly to get them.   So if you look at it close enough,  we are really blaming the company for behavior we reward them for.      If you jump in a F2P title and don't expect to be tempted to grab your wallet frequently.. You deserve the shock you get when you realize your mistake.   I doubt the Missouri loot box would have been little more than a speed bump on the forums had it not been for the LWM/CC  blow-up igniting them.  Like I've said in past posts.. they won't stop it until they are legally made to.  Bet on that.      

[Murcc]

2 hours ago, Dr_Venture said:

https://blog.worldofwarships.com/blog/190

Just when you think they can't go ANY LOWER.

Instead of a direct purchase option...you now have to grind a mission chain, THEN you can buy the boat.

If this was a free boat, then a long grind would be acceptable.  But a grind to be able to purchase it at full price is just bad.  They could add a grind to make it less expensive, but not full price.  For a full price ship, it needs to be immediately available for purchase with no other barriers.

[Nevermore135]

1 hour ago, iRA6E said:

Though.. not sure what you all are griping about this for? 

31 minutes ago, Tzarevitch said:

I don't get the new griping either.

For me, I would have been a bit annoyed (on principle, since I will probably play enough to complete the missions without much effort) but perfectly fine with this IF this was WG’s originally announced plan.

For them to present it this way after they screwed up to such a degree in the first place comes across as tone deaf and reinforces the perception that they don’t truly understand or care why so many people are upset. If this was supposed to serve as an olive branch to the community, a sign that they understood our frustrations and were committed to addressing them, it honestly falls a little flat. It’s certainly better than nothing, but it seems like WG is still committed to erecting barriers around MO that encourage gambling with random bundles.

[iRA6E]

1 minute ago, Nevermore135 said:

For me, I would have been a bit annoyed (on principle, since I will probably play enough to complete the missions without much effort) but perfectly fine with this IF this was WG’s originally announced plan.

For them to present it this way after they screwed up to such a degree in the first place comes across as tone deaf and reinforces the perception that they don’t truly understand or care why so many people are upset. If this was supposed to serve as an olive branch to the community, a sign that they understood our frustrations and were committed to addressing them, it honestly falls a little flat. It’s certainly better than nothing, but it seems like WG is still committed to erecting barriers around MO that encourage gambling with random bundles.

They don't understand or care,  and this is barely even an olive branch.   It's little more than just a quick PR maneuver to avoid actively appearing to be ignoring all this.  Loot boxes aren't going anywhere, and players will keep buying them..   Missouri loot boxes will be a big profit win for WG.. literally taking an old FXP ship that was pulled and turning into a profit center.. already modeled and no money needed to reinsert into the game.  someone in marketing will get an attaboy pat for coming up with a great idea.   I guess best case scenario is they'll start considering offering a cash option for any new content instead of hiding it completely behind loot boxes. Though, pretty much every pulled rare exclusive ship is already hidden behind loot boxes for the most part already.        

[Yandere_Roon]

1 hour ago, Versili said:

That is s good idea . Missouri R for re-release status . Same but different.  Like the black ships.

Oh Wegee another missed opportunity.

As other's have said, Make it the Missouri '50 with the Korean War livery as her unique camo. Original Missouri stays the same, no need to futz around with mission credit earning etc. Copy and paste of basic ship, small amount of time for the art team, boom, done.

[Nevermore135]

1 minute ago, iRA6E said:

They don't understand or care,  and this is barely even an olive branch.

That’s my point. This is WG doing the bare minimum to try to save face and say “See, we did something, why aren’t you grateful?” without acknowledging the core problem of the gambling mechanics or, more importantly in this specific case, the fact that they hyped up the return of MO and then tried to bury her behind said mechanics.