Jump to content


Getting silenced?


  • Please log in to reply
37 replies to this topic

anonym_kL7qtn3e52MB #1 Posted 09 August 2017 - 10:46 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 6,815
  • Member since:
    07-10-2018

How many posts do you people see in the "Gamescom Q&A"  thread?

I have seen a couple of different names (stated that they made replies), but I see only my own reply.

Didn't think much of it since the names I saw were from Spanish and other nationalities (and I thought those would only show in their respective language forums).

Now I'm a bit supicious

 

Also, it shows that the thread has 7 views.

uglycousin made a reply in the thread, it doesn't show though.

 

 

Am I being "moderated" specifically for this thread?


Edited by Spek_en_Bonen, 09 August 2017 - 10:49 AM.


jugilismaani #2 Posted 09 August 2017 - 10:49 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 21989 battles
  • 1,114
  • [SPIKE] SPIKE
  • Member since:
    04-29-2014
I see 7 views 0 replies 

uglycousin #3 Posted 09 August 2017 - 10:49 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 44458 battles
  • 3,653
  • [TFUK] TFUK
  • Member since:
    09-01-2014
Yes, we all are "moderated" for that thread and only able to see our own posts. It was also stated in the news post, it probably slipped by you. :)

Spurtung #4 Posted 09 August 2017 - 10:49 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 62900 battles
  • 5,900
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

Really, conspiracy is your thing.

 

 

https://worldoftanks.eu/en/news/gamescom/gamescom2017-dev-qa/

Block Quote

 Attention! The forum thread, accessible via the button above, hides the posts automatically to prevent any discussions in this thread, which means you'll only be able to see your own posts, but not anyone else's. This will make it easier for us to find the best questions for the developers. Thank you for your understanding!

 

 

 

Got it big enough so even you can get a grip.


Edited by Spurtung, 09 August 2017 - 10:50 AM.


anonym_kL7qtn3e52MB #5 Posted 09 August 2017 - 10:51 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 6,815
  • Member since:
    07-10-2018

Thank you very much gentlement.

 

Bit of a downer that they didn't make a statement about this thread in the actuall thread.

I never read the "news" (since it's always fake,wrong, not on time)

 

View PostSpurtung, on 09 August 2017 - 10:49 AM, said:

Really, conspiracy is your thing.

 

 

https://worldoftanks.eu/en/news/gamescom/gamescom2017-dev-qa/

 

 

 

Got it big enough so even you can get a grip.

 

Thanks for the snarky remark, jerk
 

Kozzy #6 Posted 09 August 2017 - 10:53 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 38855 battles
  • 2,705
  • [EAB2] EAB2
  • Member since:
    06-29-2011

View PostSpek_en_Bonen, on 09 August 2017 - 09:51 AM, said:

Thank you very much gentlement.

 

Bit of a downer that they didn't make a statement about this thread in the actuall thread.

I never read the "news" (since it's always fake,wrong, not on time)

 

Nothing stopping you creating a new thread about it yourself to generate some discussion ;)

Jigabachi #7 Posted 09 August 2017 - 10:56 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 17923 battles
  • 18,952
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011

View PostSpurtung, on 09 August 2017 - 10:49 AM, said:

Got it big enough so even you can get a grip.

Would have helped to post that in the actual thread, too. 

 

Btw: What a horribly lazy decision again. But hey, otherwise the poor overworked mods might have to twitch a finger...



Spurtung #8 Posted 09 August 2017 - 10:58 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 62900 battles
  • 5,900
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

View PostSpek_en_Bonen, on 09 August 2017 - 11:51 AM, said:

 

Thanks for the snarky remark, jerk

 

Really, I'm in the wrong how? You just come guns blazing about how you're supposedly having some special treatment when you can't even bother to read the news and then still squirm like you're being attacked by me?
 

View PostJigabachi, on 09 August 2017 - 11:56 AM, said:

Would have helped to post that in the actual thread, too. 

 

Btw: What a horribly lazy decision again. But hey, otherwise the poor overworked mods might have to twitch a finger...

 

The funny part is that nobody will really give a crap about what's in the EU forum.

I mean, they even managed to screw up the ToTT vote by adding a missing tank when the vote count was already over 3k...


 

Jigabachi #9 Posted 09 August 2017 - 11:02 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 17923 battles
  • 18,952
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011
And at the end they will only pick boring "let us explain why it will be awesome"-questions anyway...

Spurtung #10 Posted 09 August 2017 - 11:07 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 62900 battles
  • 5,900
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

View PostJigabachi, on 09 August 2017 - 12:02 PM, said:

And at the end they will only pick boring "let us explain why it will be awesome"-questions anyway...

 

I'd be surprised if there wasn't a list of Q and A already done.

 

And what would be so wrong with people discussing the questions anyway? Afraid the EU forum would come up with a list of 10 or so questions everyone agreed with and that would be tacky to not have them being asked at all? Yeah, better leave it to the mods to filter it, I'm sure they'll spend an incredible lot of time looking at the suggested ones...



Cobra6 #11 Posted 09 August 2017 - 11:09 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16332 battles
  • 15,691
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

Obviously they don't want people + voting questions they actually want to hear answered, WG staff wants to choose their own questions which most players are not actually interested in but which come out best for them.

 

For instance here are my questions which I can guarantee you none of which will be asked:

Block Quote

Spoiler

 

 

 

Cobra 6


Edited by Cobra6, 09 August 2017 - 11:10 AM.


Kozzy #12 Posted 09 August 2017 - 11:10 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 38855 battles
  • 2,705
  • [EAB2] EAB2
  • Member since:
    06-29-2011

View PostSpurtung, on 09 August 2017 - 10:07 AM, said:

 

I'd be surprised if there wasn't a list of Q and A already done.

 

And what would be so wrong with people discussing the questions anyway? Afraid the EU forum would come up with a list of 10 or so questions everyone agreed with and that would be tacky to not have them being asked at all? Yeah, better leave it to the mods to filter it, I'm sure they'll spend an incredible lot of time looking at the suggested ones...

 

I think people are getting the wrong end of the stick here.  I don't think WG is trying to stifle discussion on the subject in general but only in THAT thread.  They want that thread to be simply a matter of gathering questions.  It's harder to sift through all the nonsense bickering and memes to get to the answers they are asking for.  If they closed any other thread on the subject then sure, we can agree they don't want discussion.  To test this, someone just needs a thread with a title along the lines of: "What was your answer to the question and why?"

Edited by Kozzy, 09 August 2017 - 11:32 AM.


_b_ #13 Posted 09 August 2017 - 11:11 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 55149 battles
  • 3,991
  • Member since:
    04-06-2011

Posted in thread and yes like spek missed the 'news' ... but guessed it was something along those lines as stated in news .

 

But ... would rather guess the real reason is they don't give a flying duck about whatever any player on EU thinks ... this way making it easy to lie say "we have read and taken into careful considerations all your crap useless great feedback!"



SaintMaddenus #14 Posted 09 August 2017 - 11:14 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 34525 battles
  • 1,277
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    03-04-2011

A thread where I can only see my own posts, finally!   Intelligent conversations*, well thought through and concise without hijacking and stat driven "your opinion is not worth a darn as you are a tomato"  comments.


 


 

*This is subjective....


 


 



Aikl #15 Posted 09 August 2017 - 11:21 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25307 battles
  • 4,349
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

View PostCobra6, on 09 August 2017 - 10:09 AM, said:

Obviously they don't want people + voting questions they actually want to hear answered, WG staff wants to choose their own questions which most players are not actually interested in but which come out best for them.

 

For instance here are my questions which I can guarantee you none of which will be asked:

Spoiler

 

Cobra 6

 

Since you're right, I've taken the liberty of providing you with the kind of answers we like so much from the Q&As.

 

Q1: We're gathering data. Takes time. They are not that good, you just need to press 2 twice "flank them". We need crude oil. Please convert XP and go for them, they're still FOTM.

Q2: Will be fixed soonTM when we look at buffed stats for Cent/Patton. Just kidding, those buffs aren't permanent, we just need a tank that people can whine at while superheavies and the maps are the real problem.

Q3: If you're unhappy with T8 - don't play T8.
      Alt: Player feedback for 3-5-7 is great and working as intended. Everyone very happy.

Q4: This is why we put them into T10 matches, comrade, so they can't roflstomp unless they're lucky enough to get into a 3-5-7 (and get so good game and be so happy they spend more money on game).

Q5: Good idea, we'll increase all operating costs by a flat fee of ~30k credits to compensate for the foreseen lack of Fort Knox packages. It's either that or selling OP premium tanks. Pick yo' poison.

Q6: Most WoT players only look at the colourful armor models, but can't actually read the numbers - looking like weakspot is good comrade.



Spurtung #16 Posted 09 August 2017 - 11:25 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 62900 battles
  • 5,900
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

View PostKozzy, on 09 August 2017 - 12:10 PM, said:

 

I think people are getting the wrong end of the stick here.  I don't think WG is trying to stifle discussion on the subject in general but only in THAT thread.  They want that thread to be simply a matter of gathering answers.  It's harder to sift through all the nonsense bickering and memes to get to the answers they are asking for.  If they closed any other thread on the subject then sure, we can agree they don't want discussion.  To test this, someone just needs a thread with a title along the lines of: "What was your answer to the question and why?"

 

But THAT is the thread they're supposedly be picking questions from...

 

Discussion anywhere else won't do anything, unfortunately, by design.

Ideally speaking, we would want to be able to see, and choose, the questions that we collectively want answered. If there's no "official" list, there's no way to know for sure if we were ignored or not.



TankkiPoju #17 Posted 09 August 2017 - 11:27 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 20087 battles
  • 6,192
  • Member since:
    05-20-2011

View PostAikl, on 09 August 2017 - 11:21 AM, said:

 

Since you're right, I've taken the liberty of providing you with the kind of answers we like so much from the Q&As.

 

Q1: We're gathering data. Takes time. They are not that good, you just need to press 2 twice "flank them". We need crude oil. Please convert XP and go for them, they're still FOTM.

Q2: Will be fixed soonTM when we look at buffed stats for Cent/Patton. Just kidding, those buffs aren't permanent, we just need a tank that people can whine at while superheavies and the maps are the real problem.

Q3: If you're unhappy with T8 - don't play T8.
      Alt: Player feedback for 3-5-7 is great and working as intended. Everyone very happy.

Q4: This is why we put them into T10 matches, comrade, so they can't roflstomp unless they're lucky enough to get into a 3-5-7 (and get so good game and be so happy they spend more money on game).

Q5: Good idea, we'll increase all operating costs by a flat fee of ~30k credits to compensate for the foreseen lack of Fort Knox packages. It's either that or selling OP premium tanks. Pick yo' poison.

Q6: Most WoT players only look at the colourful armor models, but can't actually read the numbers - looking like weakspot is good comrade.

 

Other answer may include:

 

Q7: How terrible.

Q8: We haven't been able to replicate the issue.

Q9: That's really rare, it practically never happens.

Q10: Our statistics show tank X is balanced despite having 46% global winrate.
Q11: Our statistics show tank X is balanced despite having 56% global winrate.

Q12: IS-3 is historical, honestly.

 



Kozzy #18 Posted 09 August 2017 - 11:30 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 38855 battles
  • 2,705
  • [EAB2] EAB2
  • Member since:
    06-29-2011

View PostSpurtung, on 09 August 2017 - 10:25 AM, said:

 

But THAT is the thread they're supposedly be picking questions from...

 

Discussion anywhere else won't do anything, unfortunately, by design.

Ideally speaking, we would want to be able to see, and choose, the questions that we collectively want answered. If there's no "official" list, there's no way to know for sure if we were ignored or not.

 

They just want a tidy list of questions though.  1 poster, 1 question.  Not 1 poster 1 question 12 idiots arguing over biased question, 1 poster with 27 questions 15 posters then arguing over nonsense 1 poster with serious question 5 posters agreeing with question 5 disagreeing with question.  It becomes an irrelevant mess in no time.  I think what they are doing is right (as long as they don't stop people discussing it elsewhere).  You want discussion on it/  Start a damn thread already...

 

Even if we could somehow trust the forum to have a mature, group response to the thread there is no way of knowing if WG ignore it or not, so why worry anyway?

 

*Edited to add:  See?  Look at this thread already, people posting questions and people adding memey responses/additions.  How would WG possibly sift through this to work out the 'real' questions? 


Edited by Kozzy, 09 August 2017 - 11:32 AM.


jabster #19 Posted 09 August 2017 - 11:32 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 12535 battles
  • 23,141
  • [WSAT] WSAT
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View PostKozzy, on 09 August 2017 - 10:10 AM, said:

 

I think people are getting the wrong end of the stick here.  I don't think WG is trying to stifle discussion on the subject in general but only in THAT thread.  They want that thread to be simply a matter of gathering answers.  It's harder to sift through all the nonsense bickering and memes to get to the answers they are asking for.  If they closed any other thread on the subject then sure, we can agree they don't want discussion.  To test this, someone just needs a thread with a title along the lines of: "What was your answer to the question and why?"

 

Have to agree as they'll still going to pick the question they 'like' but it's better than it degenerating it a thread which would basically be yet another flame war over you're dumb if you think that's a problem.

qpranger #20 Posted 09 August 2017 - 11:34 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 32183 battles
  • 5,061
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-25-2013
Censorship in its pure form.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users