Jump to content


Not a came for casuals - too bad


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

Lebowski #1 Posted Mar 20 2017 - 18:29

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 11580 battles
  • 72
  • Member since:
    04-15-2011

I've been playing this game casually since beta as life commitments don't allow me to take part in many clan activities or grind missions.

I love a lot of what this game offers and I am interested in seeing all the "upcoming" changes WG has been selling us on for ages.

 

Unfortunately I feel like taking a break as I'm getting tired of playing the game as it is now with arty changes probably a year or more away, the new MM and light tank changes probably farther off than we have all been told and the east coast server being rubbish with no word from WG about fixing it. Also, the proposed changes to ammo accuracy and penetration over distance are a #$%en joke. Adjust premium ammo (damage, load out, or pen values) to suit the game not the other way around.

 

I have a month of premium time left which will be wasted as we can not put our account on hold (this should be something players can do once a year if something comes up). But I don't think I'll be coming back, or at least not as a paying customer, which is too bad for WG as they do not provide a good environment for casual players to play in. 

 

I think I'll be putting my money towards something else WG, which is too bad as the potential for this game is so high.

Are we still not allowed to sell our accounts? :trollface:

 



WorldConqueror #2 Posted Mar 20 2017 - 18:32

    Captain

  • Players
  • 27340 battles
  • 1,023
  • [5LINE] 5LINE
  • Member since:
    02-19-2011
The Dude was never this passive aggressive :(

jd1986 #3 Posted Mar 20 2017 - 18:39

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 42 battles
  • 24
  • Member since:
    05-04-2012
We all need breaks now and then

BattleField_JM #4 Posted Mar 20 2017 - 18:45

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 12552 battles
  • 549
  • [TEMPL] TEMPL
  • Member since:
    12-31-2014
Just play Russian tanks rush B and B happy

Kliphie #5 Posted Mar 20 2017 - 18:46

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 24200 battles
  • 503
  • [IOC] IOC
  • Member since:
    07-20-2012

View PostWorldConqueror, on Mar 20 2017 - 12:32, said:

The Dude was never this passive aggressive :(

 

Yeah, well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.  

WorldConqueror #6 Posted Mar 20 2017 - 18:54

    Captain

  • Players
  • 27340 battles
  • 1,023
  • [5LINE] 5LINE
  • Member since:
    02-19-2011

View PostKliphie, on Mar 20 2017 - 18:46, said:

 

Yeah, well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.  

 

God damn you Kliphie! You [edited]in' [edited]! Everything's a [edited]in' travesty with you, man! And what was all that crap about Vietnam?

Kamahl1234 #7 Posted Mar 20 2017 - 18:54

    Major

  • Players
  • 16569 battles
  • 7,398
  • [TIP] TIP
  • Member since:
    04-06-2012

You, like many, don't seem to understand the nature of sandbox, and frankly this is why I feel a NDA should have stayed on it. Players don't understand this type of testing, testing changes like accuracy and penetration aren't tests for final decisions, they're tests for "what if" proposals. The current intended changes for testing are the arty changes, MM changes and tier 10 lights. Only things that pass will make it to common test, then into the game itself. 

 

WG tests random changes to things all the time, many of them don't see beyond internal dev ideas. This is extremely common for games and is an indication of a healthy dev environment for a game. 

 

 

Welcome to game development on a grand scale, and the risk of informing players of intentions. Things may not go smoothly (Havok) or could simply take a long time due to the complex nature of the problem and potential solutions (arty). 



SenaKashiwazaki #8 Posted Mar 20 2017 - 18:59

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 6698 battles
  • 1,189
  • [4SAKN] 4SAKN
  • Member since:
    06-09-2015

Things in the sandbox can change at anytime or be scraped.  Of what you said "Ammo accuracy and Loss of penetration" Will probably never make it into the game because people will probably Enrage at it.



Lebowski #9 Posted Mar 20 2017 - 19:01

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 11580 battles
  • 72
  • Member since:
    04-15-2011

View PostKamahl1234, on Mar 20 2017 - 17:54, said:

You, like many, don't seem to understand the nature of sandbox, and frankly this is why I feel a NDA should have stayed on it. Players don't understand this type of testing, testing changes like accuracy and penetration aren't tests for final decisions, they're tests for "what if" proposals. The current intended changes for testing are the arty changes, MM changes and tier 10 lights. Only things that pass will make it to common test, then into the game itself. 

 

WG tests random changes to things all the time, many of them don't see beyond internal dev ideas. This is extremely common for games and is an indication of a healthy dev environment for a game. 

 

 

Welcome to game development on a grand scale, and the risk of informing players of intentions. Things may not go smoothly (Havok) or could simply take a long time due to the complex nature of the problem and potential solutions (arty). 

 

Fair enough, and I know that a lot of what happens on sandbox will never see the light of day. My main concern is that to get the most out of this game you need to have a premium account as I will never be a unicum and to make a reasonable profit I need to play premium tanks and have a premium account. I would like to stick around very casually to see how the game evolves but if I am not financially invested I likely won't make enough credits or experience to see the point but to pay for an account I will log into a couple times a week or less does not make sense. WG needs to find a way to make casual playing more financially viable.

WorldConqueror #10 Posted Mar 20 2017 - 19:05

    Captain

  • Players
  • 27340 battles
  • 1,023
  • [5LINE] 5LINE
  • Member since:
    02-19-2011

View PostLebowski, on Mar 20 2017 - 19:01, said:

 

Fair enough, and I know that a lot of what happens on sandbox will never see the light of day. My main concern is that to get the most out of this game you need to have a premium account as I will never be a unicum and to make a reasonable profit I need to play premium tanks and have a premium account. I would like to stick around very casually to see how the game evolves but if I am not financially invested I likely won't make enough credits or experience to see the point but to pay for an account I will log into a couple times a week or less does not make sense. WG needs to find a way to make casual playing more financially viable.

 

If you think a premium account is absolutely critical (it isn't) you can buy 1 day at a time if you want to. Not like you have to buy in year increments.

Kliphie #11 Posted Mar 20 2017 - 19:07

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 24200 battles
  • 503
  • [IOC] IOC
  • Member since:
    07-20-2012

View PostWorldConqueror, on Mar 20 2017 - 12:54, said:

 

God damn you Kliphie! You [edited]in' [edited]! Everything's a [edited]in' travesty with you, man! And what was all that crap about Vietnam?

 

Shomer Shabbos!

Kamahl1234 #12 Posted Mar 20 2017 - 19:18

    Major

  • Players
  • 16569 battles
  • 7,398
  • [TIP] TIP
  • Member since:
    04-06-2012

View PostLebowski, on Mar 20 2017 - 18:01, said:

 

Fair enough, and I know that a lot of what happens on sandbox will never see the light of day. My main concern is that to get the most out of this game you need to have a premium account as I will never be a unicum and to make a reasonable profit I need to play premium tanks and have a premium account. I would like to stick around very casually to see how the game evolves but if I am not financially invested I likely won't make enough credits or experience to see the point but to pay for an account I will log into a couple times a week or less does not make sense. WG needs to find a way to make casual playing more financially viable.

 

I think you'll notice that this is very very common for long-running F2P games, as if the game economy is too "easy" for players you end up having enormous stockpiles of in-game cash for the average player, tightening it incentivizes play as you play more to acquire said currency. 

 

Generally in F2P games it's more worthwhile for players to be premium players as 9/10 games actually have proper benefits for play. In most cases it's either faster exp progression, additional income or general boosters if the game doesn't want a P2W oriented premium.  

 

 

Generally F2P games aren't designed for casual players, but for those that can invest a good amount of time into it. You want this for a F2P game, as you both see longer life-span as well as increased profits per player as a fast grind requires constant improvements to raw gameplay to create interest (AW) or you can go the reliable route with grinds and "interesting enough" gameplay. These grinds create both long-term and short-term goals for players to attain, meaning less constant improvement is needed for ensuring the longevity of a game. 



BrassFire #13 Posted Mar 20 2017 - 19:21

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 962 battles
  • 487
  • [1_DIV] 1_DIV
  • Member since:
    10-28-2016

View PostKamahl1234, on Mar 20 2017 - 19:18, said:

 

I think you'll notice that this is very very common for long-running F2P games, as if the game economy is too "easy" for players you end up having enormous stockpiles of in-game cash for the average player, tightening it incentivizes play as you play more to acquire said currency. 

 

Generally in F2P games it's more worthwhile for players to be premium players as 9/10 games actually have proper benefits for play. In most cases it's either faster exp progression, additional income or general boosters if the game doesn't want a P2W oriented premium.  

 

 

Generally F2P games aren't designed for casual players, but for those that can invest a good amount of time into it. You want this for a F2P game, as you both see longer life-span as well as increased profits per player as a fast grind requires constant improvements to raw gameplay to create interest (AW) or you can go the reliable route with grinds and "interesting enough" gameplay. These grinds create both long-term and short-term goals for players to attain, meaning less constant improvement is needed for ensuring the longevity of a game. 

 

I just wish some of the grinds were shorter. I want my KV-1, [edited] it, and I want it yesterday! T-28 is a perfect example of Tier IV hell for me, even with the ZiS 4 gun.

Edited by BrassFire, Mar 20 2017 - 19:21.


Hammaneggs #14 Posted Mar 20 2017 - 19:33

    Captain

  • Players
  • 19988 battles
  • 1,240
  • [SAKE] SAKE
  • Member since:
    07-30-2012

View PostLebowski, on Mar 20 2017 - 10:01, said:

 

Fair enough, and I know that a lot of what happens on sandbox will never see the light of day. My main concern is that to get the most out of this game you need to have a premium account as I will never be a unicum and to make a reasonable profit I need to play premium tanks and have a premium account. I would like to stick around very casually to see how the game evolves but if I am not financially invested I likely won't make enough credits or experience to see the point but to pay for an account I will log into a couple times a week or less does not make sense. WG needs to find a way to make casual playing more financially viable.

 

There's a cheaper option that becoming a unicum, just collect weird and interesting tanks, premium and non-prem alike. Playing "underpowered" and overlooked tanks well always gets a good laugh. But yeah, I too have had the need for multi-month breaks before.

GeorgePreddy #15 Posted Mar 20 2017 - 19:39

    Major

  • Players
  • 14281 battles
  • 4,898
  • [L_LEG] L_LEG
  • Member since:
    04-11-2013

View PostLebowski, on Mar 20 2017 - 15:01, said:

.WG needs to find a way to make casual playing more financially viable.

 

I paid $46 for 360 days of premium last "Black Friday" at Thanksgiving. I guess 12+ cents per day is just too much money for some folks.

 

I could get a stick of gum for that, after all.



KnightOfEris #16 Posted Mar 21 2017 - 03:24

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 5481 battles
  • 136
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014
A 'casual' mode based on skill based MM is much needed. I tried to turn two of my friends on to WoT last month, they both said 'Thanks, but no thanks'. Statpadders are turning off folks trying to learn the game in lower tiers, and that comes at the expense of making it harder to get new folks to enjoy the game, and keep playing it. Yeah, WG is insisting they won't do SBMM, but that's a typical Russian mindset - 'There is nothing wronk with reactor 4, it best reaktor in the worlt!' - and boom! - Chernobyl; WG will learn that the hard way, eventually.

Edited by KnightOfEris, Mar 21 2017 - 03:38.


Gothraul #17 Posted Mar 21 2017 - 04:01

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 1069 battles
  • 599
  • Member since:
    11-17-2014
We're getting 9.18 in a couple of weeks and that might have the fixes you like everyone else is tired waiting for, some details should be available sometime tomorrow. 




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users