Jump to content


Difference between WoT and WoWs devs.


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

JocMeister #1 Posted 27 August 2017 - 06:14 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 20521 battles
  • 1,599
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    08-03-2015

WoT devs:

Nothing wrong. VTU can beat Defender no prob. Maus fine. Type 4 and 5 derp fine. NP. Vodka vodka. MM is fine. Tier 8 pref MM no problem. No problems. We collect data. E5 cupola fine. No problem.

 

6 months later:

Okay maybe E5 a little strong we change cupola now. Maus to strong too. We make floor armor on Maus weaker. Now its fine. Defender no prob. VTU can still beat it no problem. Type 4 and 5? What is that? Armor buffs? More gold ammo usage? No no. Only 5% gold. Vodka vodka.

 

Okay, not too serious obviously but the gist of it isnt too far from the truth. I don´t think I´m alone in perceiving the WoT devs as arrogant and with a blatant disregard to the community and the actual players. 

 

This on the other hand is how WoWs devs handles things and I think the WoT devs could learn a lot from them. 

 

 We admit that the decision to release this ship in the current condition was wrong, and we should have spent more time working on it and we would like to take responsibility for this mistake and provide our apologies to the community.

However, we know that a simple “sorry” is by far not enough in this case, so we will do the following:

First of all, the refund policy for this ship will be changed. No matter how many battles you played on it, until it is fixed you can request to have your purchase refunded by following these links:

EDIT: Full article can be found here: https://thearmoredpa...ers/#more-55386


Edited by JocMeister, 27 August 2017 - 06:15 PM.


Unknown_Lifeform #2 Posted 27 August 2017 - 06:45 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 27275 battles
  • 505
  • Member since:
    12-11-2012

The Graf Zepplin release in WoWS was a disaster with all the CCs openly slating it and telling people not to buy it, 1 CC dismissed from the program and the community furious about the WG charging full price for a tier 8 premium that was blatantly unready for release, put into the shop without contributors having time to review the final version, and also a turd. WG had to respond, simply raising the drawbridge and denying there was a problem would just have thrown oil on the flames. Credit where it is due they did respond well. They've clearly learnt from earlier problems.

 

But I don't think the comparisons you draw are really appropriate. This was shaping up to be more fochgate level drama rather than "E5 cupola is overbuffed" level drama. WoWS have their own history of sticking their fingers in their ears and not listening to the community when it comes to lesser issues (e.g. radio position finding).



Derethim #3 Posted 27 August 2017 - 08:33 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 16426 battles
  • 1,717
  • Member since:
    04-03-2012

They can't treat their relatively new game's playerbase like crap, because there's just not enough people to keep it afloat if they did so.

 

WoWs is a pretty good game, but it doesen't have people flocking to it like to WoT that fast. Partially it's because of the slower-paced and strategic gameplay, which discourages kids from playing and for the other part - people know Wargaming now, they know they are pretty greedy as a company and they know, that whatever the game will become, money will always be above balance, above content playerbase, above a fun game.

 

What Wargaming tends to do, is refusing to nerf a certain tank for a longer period of time, making people buy it to stay competitive, or just to pad stats and then nerfing it and releasing a new tank/selling a tank they were not meant to sell anymore, like the Mutant or the E-25.



Warzey #4 Posted 27 August 2017 - 10:21 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 56221 battles
  • 792
  • [XEQTE] XEQTE
  • Member since:
    04-29-2011

Well the truth is that only WG has all the data. Vbbadic stats that people on forums use to "prove" that tank X is OP are a joke compared to the amount of data WG has. Now it's up to you if you want to believe in their data. It goes without say that WG could be lying but on the other hand they have the data and we don't.

On a side note VTU can indeed kill a Defender, Tiger I (H) can also kill a Defender, I've done that myself a couple of times.

 



Derethim #5 Posted 27 August 2017 - 10:32 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 16426 battles
  • 1,717
  • Member since:
    04-03-2012

View PostWarzey, on 27 August 2017 - 10:21 PM, said:

Well the truth is that only WG has all the data. Vbbadic stats that people on forums use to "prove" that tank X is OP are a joke compared to the amount of data WG has. Now it's up to you if you want to believe in their data. It goes without say that WG could be lying but on the other hand they have the data and we don't.

On a side note VTU can indeed kill a Defender, Tiger I (H) can also kill a Defender, I've done that myself a couple of times.

 

 

Of course a skilled player (not me), can easily kill a Defender in a VTU, but the problem with the Defender is, that it's more powerful than most of the heavies on it's own tier.

Defender vs T32 without any cover or gold ammo - Defender wins.

Defender vs IS-3 without any cover or gold ammo - Defender wins.

 

This would go on until you would reach a heavy tank of the same tier, that can actually frontally penetrate it without gold ammo - T34 and IS-3 can reliable penetrate it's lower glacis maybe, but you'd still have to be front-to-front with them and let's say it's a Defender in a corridor with at leat one of his teammates in any tank really and now you have to sacrifice your game just to (maybe) take out the other player, just because he has an inpenetrable tank.


Edited by Derethim, 27 August 2017 - 10:37 PM.


Hedgehog1963 #6 Posted 27 August 2017 - 10:54 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 50122 battles
  • 6,916
  • [DIRTY] DIRTY
  • Member since:
    04-26-2011

View PostWarzey, on 27 August 2017 - 09:21 PM, said:

Well the truth is that only WG has all the data. Vbbadic stats that people on forums use to "prove" that tank X is OP are a joke compared to the amount of data WG has. Now it's up to you if you want to believe in their data. It goes without say that WG could be lying but on the other hand they have the data and we don't.

On a side note VTU can indeed kill a Defender, Tiger I (H) can also kill a Defender, I've done that myself a couple of times.

 

 

This is exactly the stich.  WG will also look at the release of OP tanks and try to figure whether the money made vs the damage to the game was worth it.

Balc0ra #7 Posted 27 August 2017 - 10:57 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 62764 battles
  • 14,379
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View PostJocMeister, on 27 August 2017 - 06:14 PM, said:

This on the other hand is how WoWs devs handles things and I think the WoT devs could learn a lot from them.

 

Learn from what? That all their reviewers had to call the ship a POS and get removed as a CC due to their reaction, before they did notice their mistake?

Derethim #8 Posted 27 August 2017 - 11:21 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 16426 battles
  • 1,717
  • Member since:
    04-03-2012

View PostHedgehog1963, on 27 August 2017 - 10:54 PM, said:

 

This is exactly the stich.  WG will also look at the release of OP tanks and try to figure whether the money made vs the damage to the game was worth it.

 

Exactly this..

And it would be fine if they did it every now and then fixed it.

But they just release something broken, everyone buys it and then they release a broken counter to it. All the other non-premium, non-gift tanks are then just some fodder.



DracheimFlug #9 Posted 27 August 2017 - 11:51 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 8925 battles
  • 3,710
  • Member since:
    11-13-2014

View PostDerethim, on 27 August 2017 - 08:33 PM, said:

They can't treat their relatively new game's playerbase like crap, because there's just not enough people to keep it afloat if they did so.

 

WoWs is a pretty good game, but it doesen't have people flocking to it like to WoT that fast. Partially it's because of the slower-paced and strategic gameplay, which discourages kids from playing and for the other part - people know Wargaming now, they know they are pretty greedy as a company and they know, that whatever the game will become, money will always be above balance, above content playerbase, above a fun game.

 

What Wargaming tends to do, is refusing to nerf a certain tank for a longer period of time, making people buy it to stay competitive, or just to pad stats and then nerfing it and releasing a new tank/selling a tank they were not meant to sell anymore, like the Mutant or the E-25.

 

That doesn't explain WoWp, though.... 



DaSmith #10 Posted 28 August 2017 - 12:32 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 45997 battles
  • 189
  • Member since:
    01-21-2012
WoT WG was just as nice in the beginning when they were still fishing for players. Every weekend special was almost as good as a big anniversary one now...

Now they have enough players, many of them mindless moneycows, now they are all about milking.

DracheimFlug #11 Posted 28 August 2017 - 12:36 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 8925 battles
  • 3,710
  • Member since:
    11-13-2014

View PostDaSmith, on 28 August 2017 - 12:32 AM, said:

WoT WG was just as nice in the beginning when they were still fishing for players. Every weekend special was almost as good as a big anniversary one now...

Now they have enough players, many of them mindless moneycows, now they are all about milking.

 

More accurately they have been around long enough and have tried long enough to make everyone happy that they have become either jaded or realistic (depending on perspective) and have mostly given up hope of that.

Derethim #12 Posted 28 August 2017 - 12:38 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 16426 battles
  • 1,717
  • Member since:
    04-03-2012

View PostDracheimFlug, on 27 August 2017 - 11:51 PM, said:

 

That doesn't explain WoWp, though.... 

 

DaSmith above explained it for you.

They'll be nice at the start, they'll promise a lot and once you're hooked enough they'll just milk it.

WoT could be the next Warcraft, but Wargaming's approach towards game balance and releasing premiums tank after tank prevents this.



Hedgehog1963 #13 Posted 28 August 2017 - 02:10 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 50122 battles
  • 6,916
  • [DIRTY] DIRTY
  • Member since:
    04-26-2011

View PostDracheimFlug, on 27 August 2017 - 10:51 PM, said:

 

That doesn't explain WoWp, though.... 

 

Don't even go there.  I never did.

DracheimFlug #14 Posted 28 August 2017 - 05:59 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 8925 battles
  • 3,710
  • Member since:
    11-13-2014

View PostDerethim, on 28 August 2017 - 12:38 AM, said:

 

DaSmith above explained it for you.

They'll be nice at the start, they'll promise a lot and once you're hooked enough they'll just milk it.

WoT could be the next Warcraft, but Wargaming's approach towards game balance and releasing premiums tank after tank prevents this.

 

View PostHedgehog1963, on 28 August 2017 - 02:10 AM, said:

 

Don't even go there.  I never did.

 

I was in WoWp from closed beta and WoWs from alpha.

 

WoWp listened to players, alright... then changed the game balance completely with no consultation on launch and a bit later, messed up the controls completely (again with no real testing or consultation). No clue how the game is these days. I gave up after a while of too many bad decisions.

 

WoWs was somewhat the other direction. They launched better but then post launch paid too much attention to the whines of battleship players and again the game changed considerably. It is still ok, but not as good as at launch, IMO.

 

Not a matter of milking. The changes have often been substantial (and thus likely pricey to develop), which are not the kind of thing you do if you are trying to earn faster cash.



Yaccay #15 Posted 28 August 2017 - 06:39 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 31559 battles
  • 1,825
  • Member since:
    11-21-2012

The reason for the difference:

There are abundant WoT players.

There are only a few WoWs players.

 

(WoWs is not popuplar, WoWs fights for survival    -  WoT is thriving)



ZlatanArKung #16 Posted 28 August 2017 - 06:45 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 5,112
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

View PostWarzey, on 27 August 2017 - 10:21 PM, said:

Well the truth is that only WG has all the data. Vbbadic stats that people on forums use to "prove" that tank X is OP are a joke compared to the amount of data WG has. Now it's up to you if you want to believe in their data. It goes without say that WG could be lying but on the other hand they have the data and we don't.

On a side note VTU can indeed kill a Defender, Tiger I (H) can also kill a Defender, I've done that myself a couple of times.

 

 

 

WG might have other numbers.

But claiming that Defender/Maus are balanced is lieing however you slice it.



ZlatanArKung #17 Posted 28 August 2017 - 06:49 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 5,112
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

View PostYaccay, on 28 August 2017 - 06:39 AM, said:

The reason for the difference:

There are abundant WoT players.

There are only a few WoWs players.

 

(WoWs is not popuplar, WoWs fights for survival    -  WoT is thriving)

 

Number of games played on EU server is still declining. Despite the earlier historical trend of having lowest amount of players in start of August to then rise all the way to January.

 

The summer dip in players this year is longer and deeper then before in WoT.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users