Jump to content


Just something to have a little giggle over.

Top Kek M8

  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

Dennyb #1 Posted 29 August 2017 - 04:31 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 21178 battles
  • 1,936
  • Member since:
    12-14-2012

So this was asked to the Warships team at Gamescom: 

 

Q (Mikhail__): What do you think about paid ammunition? It can help with sniping Battleships.

 

A: It's something we were looking into and are still thinking about. However at the moment such a feature would bring nothing in regards to gameplay, except for just being OP. We are not favourable of P2W mechanics and avoid them at all costs.

 

So paid (Premium) ammo is very much regarded as a pay-to-win mechanic and negative for the game by the Warships team (WarGaming) but it's entirely fine to the Tanks team (WarGaming). That tickled me. Also, for those who don't know, apparently recently they released an unfinished premium ship which they sold, I think some comminuty contributer talked crapabout it and then swiftly got removed from the program for which the Ships team then released an apology about; seems awfully familiar.



DaSmith #2 Posted 29 August 2017 - 04:35 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 45997 battles
  • 189
  • Member since:
    01-21-2012

I hate goldammo, but in this case the devs talk about real goldammo, that you can only buy for gold=real money, and not premium ammo that you can buy for ingame credits. 

But yeah, prem ammo is ruining WoT.



SuedKAT #3 Posted 29 August 2017 - 04:36 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 12154 battles
  • 6,493
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-21-2014

View PostDennyb, on 29 August 2017 - 04:31 PM, said:

So this was asked to the Warships team at Gamescom: 

 

Q (Mikhail__): What do you think about paid ammunition? It can help with sniping Battleships.

 

A: It's something we were looking into and are still thinking about. However at the moment such a feature would bring nothing in regards to gameplay, except for just being OP. We are not favourable of P2W mechanics and avoid them at all costs.

 

So paid (Premium) ammo is very much regarded as a pay-to-win mechanic and negative for the game by the Warships team (WarGaming) but it's entirely fine to the Tanks team (WarGaming). That tickled me. Also, for those who don't know, apparently recently they released an unfinished premium ship which they sold, I think some comminuty contributer talked crapabout it and then swiftly got removed from the program for which the Ships team then released an apology about; seems awfully familiar.

 

Yeah they don't really seem to think alike when it comes to WoWs and WoT, that's for sure. The CC that got sacked was iChase, however they made a public statement apologizing both to him but also regarding the ships state and in the process the reinstated him as a CC, took just a couple of days, compare that to Fochgate and it's just bizarre.

 

Edit: Link: https://thedailyboun...tuation-update/


Edited by SuedKAT, 29 August 2017 - 04:37 PM.


Dennyb #4 Posted 29 August 2017 - 04:47 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 21178 battles
  • 1,936
  • Member since:
    12-14-2012

View PostSuedKAT, on 29 August 2017 - 03:36 PM, said:

Yeah they don't really seem to think alike when it comes to WoWs and WoT, that's for sure. The CC that got sacked was iChase, however they made a public statement apologizing both to him but also regarding the ships state and in the process the reinstated him as a CC, took just a couple of days, compare that to Fochgate and it's just bizarre.

 

Strange though considering it's still WarGaming, how they apparently have a policy of what's pay-to-win in one of their games and a different view in another of their games for the same mechanic. Well done on them, seems they at least learnt to apologise quicker when they [edited]up to satisfy the masses.

Hedgehog1963 #5 Posted 29 August 2017 - 04:54 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 51282 battles
  • 7,473
  • [DIRTY] DIRTY
  • Member since:
    04-26-2011

View PostDennyb, on 29 August 2017 - 03:47 PM, said:

 

Strange though considering it's still WarGaming, how they apparently have a policy of what's pay-to-win in one of their games and a different view in another of their games for the same mechanic. Well done on them, seems they at least learnt to apologise quicker when they [edited]up to satisfy the masses.

 

You don't really know the half of it.  In WoWS you can buy for gold a camouflage that effectively turns a silver ship into a premium, even at Tier X.  Also the cooldown on the WoWS the damage repair kit is much shorter if you run the premium one.  Same with other important consumables including the healing/damage repair kit. Also the performance of your ship depends to quite a large degree on signal flags you mount before battle. You might well run out but can buy more.

 

But so far no golden torpedoes or shells or 'planes.



Dennyb #6 Posted 29 August 2017 - 05:04 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 21178 battles
  • 1,936
  • Member since:
    12-14-2012

View PostHedgehog1963, on 29 August 2017 - 03:54 PM, said:

You don't really know the half of it.  In WoWS you can buy for gold a camouflage that effectively turns a silver ship into a premium, even at Tier X.  Also the cooldown on the WoWS the damage repair kit is much shorter if you run the premium one.  Same with other important consumables including the healing/damage repair kit. Also the performance of your ship depends to quite a large degree on signal flags you mount before battle. You might well run out but can buy more.

 

But so far no golden torpedoes or shells or 'planes.

 

Oh I know, I've been playing Warships on and off casually since I quit Tanks. It's far from a "balanced" game but it's yet to reach the levels of cancer Tanks hit so it satisfies my itch for these type of games for now.

Hedgehog1963 #7 Posted 29 August 2017 - 09:40 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 51282 battles
  • 7,473
  • [DIRTY] DIRTY
  • Member since:
    04-26-2011

View PostDennyb, on 29 August 2017 - 04:04 PM, said:

 

Oh I know, I've been playing Warships on and off casually since I quit Tanks. It's far from a "balanced" game but it's yet to reach the levels of cancer Tanks hit so it satisfies my itch for these type of games for now.

 

It's an enterntaing diversion from the tanks.  I just wish they'd stop constantly nerfing DD play and can those really stupid camos.

Balc0ra #8 Posted 29 August 2017 - 09:50 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 66275 battles
  • 16,274
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View PostDennyb, on 29 August 2017 - 04:31 PM, said:

So paid (Premium) ammo is very much regarded as a pay-to-win mechanic and negative for the game by the Warships team (WarGaming) but it's entirely fine to the Tanks team (WarGaming). That tickled me. Also, for those who don't know, apparently recently they released an unfinished premium ship which they sold, I think some comminuty contributer talked crapabout it and then swiftly got removed from the program for which the Ships team then released an apology about; seems awfully familiar.

 

To be fair, his review was one of the nicest of them all. But the others did not call the WG staff that released it a "F**ker that needs to be fired". As the other one that that said nasty things about that ship besides him. Did not call out WG on it. They simply did title their movie "don't buy this s**t" instead.

 

That said.. WOWS only has 2 ammo types. None of them goes for gold. So why start now?


Edited by Balc0ra, 29 August 2017 - 09:52 PM.


AliceUnchained #9 Posted 29 August 2017 - 10:01 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 38414 battles
  • 8,928
  • [322] 322
  • Member since:
    10-18-2011

View PostDennyb, on 29 August 2017 - 04:31 PM, said:

So paid (Premium) ammo is very much regarded as a pay-to-win mechanic and negative for the game by the Warships team (WarGaming) but it's entirely fine to the Tanks team (WarGaming). T

 

Which is probably why they made it available for credits, and thus is not a paid ammunition. Just drop it with the nonsense already will you?



Dennyb #10 Posted 29 August 2017 - 10:45 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 21178 battles
  • 1,936
  • Member since:
    12-14-2012

View PostBalc0ra, on 29 August 2017 - 08:50 PM, said:

That said.. WOWS only has 2 ammo types. None of them goes for gold. So why start now?

 

Because moooooooooooooooooooooney! The reason WarGaming makes most of their terrible decisions.

shishx_the_animal #11 Posted 30 August 2017 - 08:34 AM

    Colonel

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 31059 battles
  • 3,861
  • [MEME] MEME
  • Member since:
    04-06-2013
So water is still wet?

AliceUnchained #12 Posted 30 August 2017 - 09:56 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 38414 battles
  • 8,928
  • [322] 322
  • Member since:
    10-18-2011

View Postshishx_the_animal, on 30 August 2017 - 08:34 AM, said:

So water is still wet?

 

It's sparkling wet too. And running wet.

shishx_the_animal #13 Posted 30 August 2017 - 11:54 AM

    Colonel

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 31059 battles
  • 3,861
  • [MEME] MEME
  • Member since:
    04-06-2013

View PostAliceUnchained, on 30 August 2017 - 08:56 AM, said:

 

It's sparkling wet too. And running wet.

 

Thanks, I was slighlty worried for a split second.

Strappster #14 Posted 30 August 2017 - 12:09 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 23971 battles
  • 9,019
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    10-20-2015

View PostDennyb, on 29 August 2017 - 03:31 PM, said:

So this was asked to the Warships team at Gamescom: 

 

Q (Mikhail__): What do you think about paid ammunition? It can help with sniping Battleships.

 

A: It's something we were looking into and are still thinking about. However at the moment such a feature would bring nothing in regards to gameplay, except for just being OP. We are not favourable of P2W mechanics and avoid them at all costs.

 

So paid (Premium) ammo is very much regarded as a pay-to-win mechanic and negative for the game by the Warships team (WarGaming) but it's entirely fine to the Tanks team (WarGaming). That tickled me. Also, for those who don't know, apparently recently they released an unfinished premium ship which they sold, I think some comminuty contributer talked crapabout it and then swiftly got removed from the program for which the Ships team then released an apology about; seems awfully familiar.

 

You need to work on your comprehension skills. "We are not favourable of P2W mechanics ..." is a separate statement to them looking at paid ammunition. You've conflated the two statements to fit your prejudice that premium ammo is P2W. "...P2W mechanics ... avoid them at all costs" is exactly the same thing as the WoT lot have been saying for years.

 

 

View PostSuedKAT, on 29 August 2017 - 03:36 PM, said:

The CC that got sacked was iChase, however they made a public statement apologizing both to him but also regarding the ships state and in the process the reinstated him as a CC, took just a couple of days, compare that to Fochgate and it's just bizarre.

 

You can't sack someone that you don't employ. iChase was removed from the CC programme and following the apology was offered his CC place back but according to his video released this morning, he hasn't decided whether to take them up on it yet. Which is odd because in the "what happened" video before this one he was saying that it was WG's fault that he wouldn't be able to produce any videos of up-coming ships because he'd no longer get early access and he'd have to look at other content.

 

It's worth noting that WG NA have said all along that they had no issue with his feedback but they did object to the way he presented it. He says in today's update that it should have been obvious that he was joking about someone being sacked ... which isn't exactly how it came over in the GZ review.

 

The whole situation smells funny from whichever side you approach it.



AliceUnchained #15 Posted 30 August 2017 - 12:15 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 38414 battles
  • 8,928
  • [322] 322
  • Member since:
    10-18-2011

View Postshishx_the_animal, on 30 August 2017 - 11:54 AM, said:

Thanks, I was slighlty worried for a split second.

 

Prosze. As that is something to be avoided at all cost. 

Hedgehog1963 #16 Posted 30 August 2017 - 02:36 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 51282 battles
  • 7,473
  • [DIRTY] DIRTY
  • Member since:
    04-26-2011

View PostStrappster, on 30 August 2017 - 11:09 AM, said:

 

 

 

You can't sack someone that you don't employ. iChase was removed from the CC programme and following the apology was offered his CC place back but according to his video released this morning, he hasn't decided whether to take them up on it yet. Which is odd because in the "what happened" video before this one he was saying that it was WG's fault that he wouldn't be able to produce any videos of up-coming ships because he'd no longer get early access and he'd have to look at other content.

 

 

 

You might not be aware that Jingles got early access to the WoWS Royal Navy Battleship line as though he were still a CC, despite not being one any more.



omglaserspewpew #17 Posted 30 August 2017 - 03:21 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 32966 battles
  • 341
  • [3VS27] 3VS27
  • Member since:
    05-01-2011

View PostAliceUnchained, on 29 August 2017 - 10:01 PM, said:

View PostDennyb, on 29 August 2017 - 04:31 PM, said:

So paid (Premium) ammo is very much regarded as a pay-to-win mechanic and negative for the game by the Warships team (WarGaming) but it's entirely fine to the Tanks team (WarGaming). T

 

Which is probably why they made it available for credits, and thus is not a paid ammunition. Just drop it with the nonsense already will you?

 

It seems you should be the one dropping the nonsense; eventhough prem ammo is available for silver credits, it's still out of reach for common use for most of the playerbase without running prem account and vehicles - and is, as such, clearly a pay-to-win mechanic.

 

 



Strappster #18 Posted 30 August 2017 - 03:58 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 23971 battles
  • 9,019
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    10-20-2015

View PostHedgehog1963, on 30 August 2017 - 01:36 PM, said:

You might not be aware that Jingles got early access to the WoWS Royal Navy Battleship line as though he were still a CC, despite not being one any more.

 

I was aware but the thread hadn't mentioned Jingles so I didn't either.



Dennyb #19 Posted 30 August 2017 - 04:17 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 21178 battles
  • 1,936
  • Member since:
    12-14-2012

View Postshishx_the_animal, on 30 August 2017 - 10:54 AM, said:

So water is still wet?

 

I'll show you wet, bby.

 

View Postomglaserspewpew, on 30 August 2017 - 02:21 PM, said:

It seems you should be the one dropping the nonsense; eventhough prem ammo is available for silver credits, it's still out of reach for common use for most of the playerbase without running prem account and vehicles - and is, as such, clearly a pay-to-win mechanic.

 

I find it best to ignore him, logic doesn't work most of the time. I suggest you do also.

 

View PostStrappster, on 30 August 2017 - 11:09 AM, said:

You need to work on your comprehension skills. "We are not favourable of P2W mechanics ..." is a separate statement to them looking at paid ammunition. You've conflated the two statements to fit your prejudice that premium ammo is P2W. "...P2W mechanics ... avoid them at all costs" is exactly the same thing as the WoT lot have been saying for years.

 

Oh I see! So the fact that the Tanks team don't say "Yes, premium ammo is a pay-to-win mechanic." or "Yes, the premium tanks we've released recently are definitely pay-to-win." then it means they aren't. Silly me, I should have known companies are always honest about that stuff.

 


Edited by Dennyb, 30 August 2017 - 04:39 PM.


Velvet_Underground #20 Posted 30 August 2017 - 04:32 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 22243 battles
  • 3,191
  • Member since:
    12-19-2014

 

 

2̈́̂f̨͖̲̗̳̦̣̳̈́̑͒̅ͣuň̷͈̞̼͖̺̗̈́́ͅn͈̳̥̼ͭ̾͝y͉̯̻̰̔ͦ̃̆̚4̒҉̠̼̪͙̝m͍͎̦̔ͯ̑́ͮ͟e̗̜̾ͯ̆̓ͨͣ







Also tagged with Top, Kek, M8

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users