Jump to content


When will they sell the glorious DEFENDER again?

Defender premium shop

  • Please log in to reply
99 replies to this topic

Browarszky #1 Posted 09 April 2018 - 09:43 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 14901 battles
  • 2,742
  • [I-S-L] I-S-L
  • Member since:
    12-03-2013

It's been over a year now since the Defender/Object 252U was available for purchase on the infamous EU servers. WG failed to put in for sale on the Defender of the fatherland day. Outrageous! Are there any plans for it to be at the head of the parade come Victory Day in May? Or sooner? Or is WG going to pull an epic fail and leave Motherland-mother completely defenderless?

 

I don't believe the EU players hate the Defender, or that the Defender hates them, but it's more like they fear it and feel defenseless before it. Whereas it can be said that the EU players have feared the Defender and felt defenseless next to it. So.. let's have more Defenders so we can all feel much safer.

 

Browarszky



HaZardeur #2 Posted 09 April 2018 - 09:49 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 33257 battles
  • 1,057
  • Member since:
    08-14-2010
:popcorn:

AvalancheZ257 #3 Posted 09 April 2018 - 09:50 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 3070 battles
  • 205
  • [3WCST] 3WCST
  • Member since:
    05-26-2017

Well with the Obj. 268 V4 existing, I don't think a Defender sale could destroy Tier 8 MM any further... 

 

WG HQ: Dew it



lord_chipmonk #4 Posted 09 April 2018 - 09:50 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 32183 battles
  • 10,166
  • [-HOW-] -HOW-
  • Member since:
    12-23-2012
No thanks. 

DutchBaron_ #5 Posted 09 April 2018 - 10:09 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 9458 battles
  • 59
  • [FDAD] FDAD
  • Member since:
    10-06-2016
If you want your defender go play for the motherland and play in the Russia server,we don't need anymore of those defenders here

DutchBaron_ #6 Posted 09 April 2018 - 10:17 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 9458 battles
  • 59
  • [FDAD] FDAD
  • Member since:
    10-06-2016
If that tank ever comes on sale again everyone will by one (or 2) just because if the reputation and it flat out being very OP. The only thing you will achieve with this is that you get teams with 8 defenders on each side shooting full gold to try and pen each other while the rest of the team barely can do anything. Does that sound fun to you?

Junglist_ #7 Posted 09 April 2018 - 10:18 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35127 battles
  • 1,297
  • Member since:
    06-17-2013

Why not any other of the prem panks? Not OP enough? No worries just get a 268v4 if you feel like driving a ridiculously OP tank and at least that one isn't P2W. 

In the meantime let's keep EU the only server who avoided the second plague of that abomination.



Nishi_Kinuyo #8 Posted 09 April 2018 - 10:23 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 6971 battles
  • 3,466
  • [GUP] GUP
  • Member since:
    05-28-2011

Normally, the saying would be "when hell friezes over" but given that hell is a village in norway, that happens with some frequency.

So how about... when jabster hates sprouts? :trollface:



Ceeb #9 Posted 10 April 2018 - 03:06 AM

    Major General

  • Beta Tester
  • 30073 battles
  • 5,012
  • Member since:
    01-14-2011

Wish I could swap you mine...for gold or a Type 59... (because I want one)

 

Hate the thing...it has a layer of dust and if you see my game count in it (from first day it came out) you can see I don't play it.

 

 


Edited by Ceeb, 10 April 2018 - 03:23 AM.


Balc0ra #10 Posted 10 April 2018 - 03:25 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 62749 battles
  • 14,361
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

After the next meta change comes making it meh and useless I hope. And not before that.  Like right after they buff the IS-6 to auto pen it.

 

View PostBrowarszky, on 09 April 2018 - 09:43 PM, said:

I don't believe the EU players hate the Defender, 

 

 No they loved it so much that EU was the only server that almost unanimous told WG to remove it. And why EU was the only server that did not sell it again recently.



Alidore #11 Posted 10 April 2018 - 03:34 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 10652 battles
  • 217
  • [EMB3R] EMB3R
  • Member since:
    10-13-2013
Some people have it so why not make it available to all, not just those elite who got it when it was available. Absolutely no point in releasing a tank to all then restricting it. That's kinda unethical.

Strappster #12 Posted 10 April 2018 - 04:19 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 23556 battles
  • 8,745
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    10-20-2015

View PostBrowarszky, on 09 April 2018 - 08:43 PM, said:

WG failed to put in for sale on the Defender of the fatherland day.

 

They didn't sell it in EU because of the complaints from those demanding the opportunity to buy one and those demanding it's never sold again. My personal opinion is that I'd sell you mine if I could without a moment's hesitation, I really don't like it. I suck in heavies in general, though I have a 56% win rate in the Defender (39 battles). But then my win rate in the 112 is 58% over 60 battles and I find that a lot more fun and engaging to play.



Mike_Mckay #13 Posted 10 April 2018 - 05:09 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 16648 battles
  • 1,008
  • [-AWF-] -AWF-
  • Member since:
    09-02-2015

I actually think a tank being "OP" is the worst reason to never sell a tank tbh


If a tank is totally crap like many of the longstanding premiums most definitely are due to power creep then yeah, it shouldn't be sold until its been made competitive as its substandard goods


But when its thought to be "OP" it should either be on offer to EVERYONE constantly, or at least regularly to balance the game out that way or even though its a premium it should be nerfed to make it ONLY "competitive", and if that results in droves of people wanting their money back then that's good too as perhaps it might actually make WG pick a competitive meta for each tier and then actually stick to it in the future

After all, if you have several hundred tanks "tuned" to within a set spectrum of competitiveness the logical thing to do is make sure ALL new tanks, whether premium or normal fit within that, Adding ones that break that scope then spending pointless thousands of hours over years trying to "patch" the other few hundred tanks to fit in around the one that broke it would seem retarded and totally idiotic if it was done by "accident" but takes on a much darker shroud when its clearly done as a funds grabbing act as often these tanks are KNOWN to be OP during testing and some even get a final buff AFTER that has been ascertained before being added to the game so "accident" doesn't really factor into the process at all, its planned and deliberate

So IMO either let everyone get them, nerf them or the other alternative and possibly the best is to just remove them totally so that NOBODY has them and refund the gold


Because letting a select few keep severely OP tanks whilst denying them to anyone else and then still not nerfing them is the absolute worst of the three choices


 



Hedgehog1963 #14 Posted 10 April 2018 - 05:30 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 50122 battles
  • 6,904
  • [DIRTY] DIRTY
  • Member since:
    04-26-2011

View PostAlidore, on 10 April 2018 - 02:34 AM, said:

Some people have it so why not make it available to all, not just those elite who got it when it was available. Absolutely no point in releasing a tank to all then restricting it. That's kinda unethical.

 

"Elite" lol.

Hedgehog1963 #15 Posted 10 April 2018 - 05:42 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 50122 battles
  • 6,904
  • [DIRTY] DIRTY
  • Member since:
    04-26-2011

View PostMike_Mckay, on 10 April 2018 - 04:09 AM, said:

I actually think a tank being "OP" is the worst reason to never sell a tank tbh


If a tank is totally crap like many of the longstanding premiums most definitely are due to power creep then yeah, it shouldn't be sold until its been made competitive as its substandard goods


But when its thought to be "OP" it should either be on offer to EVERYONE constantly, or at least regularly to balance the game out that way or even though its a premium it should be nerfed to make it ONLY "competitive", and if that results in droves of people wanting their money back then that's good too as perhaps it might actually make WG pick a competitive meta for each tier and then actually stick to it in the future

After all, if you have several hundred tanks "tuned" to within a set spectrum of competitiveness the logical thing to do is make sure ALL new tanks, whether premium or normal fit within that, Adding ones that break that scope then spending pointless thousands of hours over years trying to "patch" the other few hundred tanks to fit in around the one that broke it would seem retarded and totally idiotic if it was done by "accident" but takes on a much darker shroud when its clearly done as a funds grabbing act as often these tanks are KNOWN to be OP during testing and some even get a final buff AFTER that has been ascertained before being added to the game so "accident" doesn't really factor into the process at all, its planned and deliberate

So IMO either let everyone get them, nerf them or the other alternative and possibly the best is to just remove them totally so that NOBODY has them and refund the gold


Because letting a select few keep severely OP tanks whilst denying them to anyone else and then still not nerfing them is the absolute worst of the three choices


 

 

There are four choices.

 

"So IMO either let everyone get them, nerf them or the other alternative and possibly the best is to just remove them totally so that NOBODY has them and refund the gold" - Is three.

 

"Because letting a select few keep severely OP tanks whilst denying them to anyone else and then still not nerfing them is the absolute worst of the three choices" - The fourth

 

So your post entirely wrong.  The tank breaks the game and your solution is to sell more?

 

WG will not nerf it because we paid money for it.  Nor will they refund us the gold and remove it because that wiil cost them money.

 

The least worst option is to do nothing which is what they are doing.  Sell no more and the incidence of defenders will diminish as the turnover of players takes its course.  They're not denying anyone anything, They've just realised the brainless mistake they made and are playing it smarter than I expected by no longer selling it.

 

 

 


Edited by Hedgehog1963, 10 April 2018 - 05:52 AM.


Mike_Mckay #16 Posted 10 April 2018 - 06:10 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 16648 battles
  • 1,008
  • [-AWF-] -AWF-
  • Member since:
    09-02-2015

View PostHedgehog1963, on 10 April 2018 - 04:42 AM, said:

 

There are four choices.

 

"So IMO either let everyone get them, nerf them or the other alternative and possibly the best is to just remove them totally so that NOBODY has them and refund the gold" - Is three.

 

"Because letting a select few keep severely OP tanks whilst denying them to anyone else and then still not nerfing them is the absolute worst of the three choices" - The fourth

 

So your post entirely wrong.  The tank breaks the game and your solution is to sell more?

 

WG will not nerf it because we paid money for it.  Nor will they refund us the gold and remove it because that wiil cost them money.

 

The least worst option is to do nothing which is what they are doing.  Sell no more and the incidence of defenders will diminish as the turnover of players takes its course.  They're not denying anyone anything, They've just realised the brainless mistake they made and are playing it smarter than I expected by no longer selling it.

 

 

 

 

Youre "fourth" isn't even an option, its a reiteration of the previous three options

So how on earth does stating the previous three options again somehow morph into a 4th and different one? Problems with comprehension?

ED IT: Actually I re read that an think I get where youre coming from. If I had said "choices" then yeah, doing nothing is the fourth choice. I was thinking "alternative options" whilst just writing options/ Bit pedantic, but I concede your point


And why is letting an allegedly "OP" meta breaking tank remain in the game in nerfed "better" than fixing it or removing it? That's like saying "the brakes on your new car don't work, but we feel its better to just wait 10 years till all the cars with faulty brakes are scrapped rather than fixing the issue now", its moronic lol

If as you seem to think it was a "mistake" then by definition it not only "could" but should be "fixed"

The only reason I included it being sold again however was that if its not going to be nerfed or removed then it becomes patently unfair to let "some" people keep them but not allow anyone else to have them. I have one, so its not because I want to buy it, but I do feel that if its OP as some claim then why should people like me be allowed to keep them and others be stopped?

Really though I think theres two main choices, either its OP and game breaking and should be nerfed or removed. But if WG doesn't think that's the case then it should be sold as often as any other tank. Either its OP or its not.

Admitting its OP by not selling it but then also not nerfing or removing it is a business decision not one based on decency, ethics or valuing customers. Its not the "right" decision, its just the most financially beneficial one and the laziest one by simply ignoring an alleged problem of their own making and pretending its not there
 

Edited by Mike_Mckay, 10 April 2018 - 06:16 AM.


LordMuffin #17 Posted 10 April 2018 - 08:24 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 47010 battles
  • 9,988
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    06-21-2011

View PostBrowarszky, on 09 April 2018 - 09:43 PM, said:

It's been over a year now since the Defender/Object 252U was available for purchase on the infamous EU servers. WG failed to put in for sale on the Defender of the fatherland day. Outrageous! Are there any plans for it to be at the head of the parade come Victory Day in May? Or sooner? Or is WG going to pull an epic fail and leave Motherland-mother completely defenderless?

 

I don't believe the EU players hate the Defender, or that the Defender hates them, but it's more like they fear it and feel defenseless before it. Whereas it can be said that the EU players have feared the Defender and felt defenseless next to it. So.. let's have more Defenders so we can all feel much safer.

 

Browarszky

 

Quite a decent troll attempt.

 



test_2018 #18 Posted 10 April 2018 - 08:46 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 2218 battles
  • 118
  • Member since:
    01-01-2018

 

LOCK THE TOPIC



Simeon85 #19 Posted 10 April 2018 - 08:49 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 1097 battles
  • 1,373
  • Member since:
    04-19-2013

View PostMike_Mckay, on 10 April 2018 - 06:10 AM, said:

 

Youre "fourth" isn't even an option, its a reiteration of the previous three options

So how on earth does stating the previous three options again somehow morph into a 4th and different one? Problems with comprehension?

ED IT: Actually I re read that an think I get where youre coming from. If I had said "choices" then yeah, doing nothing is the fourth choice. I was thinking "alternative options" whilst just writing options/ Bit pedantic, but I concede your point


And why is letting an allegedly "OP" meta breaking tank remain in the game in nerfed "better" than fixing it or removing it? That's like saying "the brakes on your new car don't work, but we feel its better to just wait 10 years till all the cars with faulty brakes are scrapped rather than fixing the issue now", its moronic lol

If as you seem to think it was a "mistake" then by definition it not only "could" but should be "fixed"

The only reason I included it being sold again however was that if its not going to be nerfed or removed then it becomes patently unfair to let "some" people keep them but not allow anyone else to have them. I have one, so its not because I want to buy it, but I do feel that if its OP as some claim then why should people like me be allowed to keep them and others be stopped?

Really though I think theres two main choices, either its OP and game breaking and should be nerfed or removed. But if WG doesn't think that's the case then it should be sold as often as any other tank. Either its OP or its not.

Admitting its OP by not selling it but then also not nerfing or removing it is a business decision not one based on decency, ethics or valuing customers. Its not the "right" decision, its just the most financially beneficial one and the laziest one by simply ignoring an alleged problem of their own making and pretending its not there
 

 

1. They have not admitted it's OP, not officially, they have just said it causes negative feedback on EU or something along those lines and that is their reason for not selling it.

 

2. WG has never nerfed a premium and only once have they refunded one for gold IIRC, they are unlikely to do either again. IIRC there are something like 65k Defenders and 252Us on the EU server, at around 40 Euros a pop, that is 2.5 million Euros to refund, that is basically not happening.

 

So you have a company that wants to make money, doesn't want to refund money they have already made and doesn't want to annoy 65k of their customers, doesn't leave you with many options on the nerfing or removing front. 

 

What they are doing is basically the best we could have hoped for, eventually the numbers will dwindle where the tank is not so problematic. 

 

The tank (both version together) is already only about the 16th or 17th most played tank on tier 8 as it is (according to vbaddict and that is only likely to drop down on the EU server. 



MaxxyNL #20 Posted 10 April 2018 - 09:05 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 10761 battles
  • 580
  • [RANGX] RANGX
  • Member since:
    04-05-2013

View Postlord_chipmonk, on 09 April 2018 - 09:50 PM, said:

No thanks. 

 

Typical reply from someone that already owns the tank. :hiding:





Also tagged with Defender, premium shop

2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users