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

Malta in the Armory

7 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

10,318
[WPORT]
Members
23,332 posts
24,874 battles

Discussion of the Malta has preceded this topic.  :-)
 


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
98
[HI-CS]
[HI-CS]
Members
181 posts
21,924 battles

Here's a question ... 
If camos no longer hold any significance WHATSOEVER, why does WoWs keep adding them to bundles as though it makes the whole deal any more valuable than NOT adding them? It might have been one thing while they carried battle significance, but that's not the case now.

At the same time, WoWs stopped putting any effort into real / historic permanent camos.  They have become cheap, silly and no effort has been applied; and yet they continually brag about how they "pride themselves in their historic reconstruction".  These camos do not impress me.  They are in childish and cartoonish colors that do not meet any definition of "camouflage", and they carry no significant contribution to the battle.  I'm sure someone will buy this ridiculous $200.00 money scam (as opposed to the lesser-cost ridiculous money scam), but I for one value accurate and HISTORIC ships and would rather have one or two permanent HISTORICAL camouflages.  Even if not to that particular ship, a camouflage type that was accurate to a ship of that nation, same class, theater of combat, time frame or something that makes sense, not merely the easiest, simplest form of your low-effort "grey" is more valuable than the stupid colors and patterns you now shove at us.

WoWs, you really need to put a renewed effort into the permanent camos as they have now obviously become your zero-priority "red-headed step-child", yet you keep pushing insignificant, inaccurate, childish-colored combinations (which in the past at least had value attached).  I want historically accurate camos with the ship, as well as an ability to acquire more accurate and historical camos after acquiring the ship.  I hope others feel the same way.  I appreciate the historical accuracy and I cannot fathom someone who would play this game if they did not have some sort of love for Naval warfare and the ships in their true form and presentation; you just are making it more and more STUPID!

  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,081
[CAAT]
Members
7,186 posts
8,674 battles
3 hours ago, Jonas_Brent said:

If camos no longer hold any significance WHATSOEVER, why does WoWs keep adding them to bundles as though it makes the whole deal any more valuable than NOT adding them? It might have been one thing while they carried battle significance, but that's not the case now.

This is very true, and it's why I REFUSED to buy the Anhalt with the camo and commander. IT's just not REMOTELY worth that price anymore. Frankly, even collaboration/special camos need to be dropped down in price a bit (I'm not saying make it dirt-cheap, but....drop the price gauge down a notch or two please).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,081
[CAAT]
Members
7,186 posts
8,674 battles
3 hours ago, Jonas_Brent said:

I want historically accurate camos with the ship, as well as an ability to acquire more accurate and historical camos after acquiring the ship.

I DO 100% prefer historically accurate camos for my ships (always have). The only exceptions to me are collaboration/special camos, because they are truly unique (and I'm guilty of appreciating my anime camos, Ok?! ;P). EVERY STANDARD(as in not anime/collab/special/event) permacamo for ships SHOULD be historically accurate though.

For instance, give Oklahoma the option to wear the New York permacamo, she actually wore it!!

V8evRFRGMx8zIAYBriBSvWZjKrRRrOUAQ6wjQvFp

Give West Virginia '41 the Arizona-style camo please:

4850_2-auto_downl.jpg.2800f6662c5e0d052283e1cb6715143f.jpg

And for Japanese ships? Give them a simple gray camo, unless they actually had a different camo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,954
[PVE]
[PVE]
Members
12,106 posts
31,222 battles
23 hours ago, Jonas_Brent said:

Here's a question ... 
If camos no longer hold any significance WHATSOEVER, why does WoWs keep adding them to bundles as though it makes the whole deal any more valuable than NOT adding them? It might have been one thing while they carried battle significance, but that's not the case now.

At the same time, WoWs stopped putting any effort into real / historic permanent camos.  They have become cheap, silly and no effort has been applied; and yet they continually brag about how they "pride themselves in their historic reconstruction".  These camos do not impress me.  They are in childish and cartoonish colors that do not meet any definition of "camouflage", and they carry no significant contribution to the battle.  I'm sure someone will buy this ridiculous $200.00 money scam (as opposed to the lesser-cost ridiculous money scam), but I for one value accurate and HISTORIC ships and would rather have one or two permanent HISTORICAL camouflages.  Even if not to that particular ship, a camouflage type that was accurate to a ship of that nation, same class, theater of combat, time frame or something that makes sense, not merely the easiest, simplest form of your low-effort "grey" is more valuable than the stupid colors and patterns you now shove at us.

WoWs, you really need to put a renewed effort into the permanent camos as they have now obviously become your zero-priority "red-headed step-child", yet you keep pushing insignificant, inaccurate, childish-colored combinations (which in the past at least had value attached).  I want historically accurate camos with the ship, as well as an ability to acquire more accurate and historical camos after acquiring the ship.  I hope others feel the same way.  I appreciate the historical accuracy and I cannot fathom someone who would play this game if they did not have some sort of love for Naval warfare and the ships in their true form and presentation; you just are making it more and more STUPID!

Unlike a lot of people, I was on the fence about the camo rework. I didn't hate it, didn't love it either. I kind of understand the idea behind removing the economic benefits and making them separate and now that it is in the game, I am ok with it. The removal of the combat bonuses for camos was a poor idea. There really is no reason whatsoever to spend money or resources on them now. The one use camos are nothing more than things to be sold for far more useful credits. You are correct, putting camos into bundles adds absolutely nothing to the value from a player's perspective. 

The camo rework is a huge failure in another way. Instead of offering hundreds of different ways to paint your ship permanently, they offered just the normal camos that have always existed. All the one use camos should have a permeant option available. All those paints they added, should have a permanent option available. Who the hell at Wargaming, could not foresee the attraction of putting that yellow school bus camo on the submarines they were adding to the game? I say that as someone who hates subs, but even the dumbest person could have figured that one out. All that art department time is wasted on camos now. I imagine there are a few players using the one use camos other than the ones they get for free but from what I have seen in game, they are a tiny percentage of players. In all my games since the change, I have seen exactly one ship using a temporary camo. One. Course I don't play nearly as much as I used to but it is still a couple hundred games over that time period (just a guess). 

IMHO Wargaming needs to bail on the one use camos and start making permanent versions of the ones already modeled in game. The dazzling camo is a wonderful looking camo on many ships but I am not going to spend resources applying it every single game. A one time buy for my favorite ships? Sure but the constant reapplying is not only annoying, it is resource draining. Heck even if you have a stock of them and resupply automatically, it is entirely likely that you forget about it and you could start spending resources by accident after your supply runs out. If I were cynical, I might think that was the intent. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×