Jump to content


Shame on You, Wargaming (ISU-152K)

ISU-152K

  • Please log in to reply
31 replies to this topic

Poll: ISU-152K Opinion (67 members have cast votes)

Is this acceptable? (Removing a free item to sell it back at a later date.)

  1. Yes. (28 votes [41.79%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 41.79%

  2. No. (30 votes [44.78%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 44.78%

  3. Other. (9 votes [13.43%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 13.43%

Vote Guests cannot vote Hide poll

King_Of_Chaos #1 Posted May 23 2020 - 06:15

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 12143 battles
  • 822
  • Member since:
    04-25-2011

For those who are unaware, as witnessed by the community contributor's reviews, Wargaming is going ahead with releasing the ISU-152K, tier 8 premium Russian TD.

Why is this an issue? Allow me to explain.

 

Approximately 3 years ago, WG decided to re-balance the ISU-152 tier 8 Russian tech tree TD. The main attraction of the ISU-152 at this time was the monstrous BL-10 gun. According to WG, the BL-10 was too powerful to be on a tier 8 TD, so they removed it, and replaced it with the fictional D4-S gun we now have, while buffing other stats of the vehicle to make it more "dynamic".

 

Now, they are selling this previously free attraction point, the BL-10, back to us as a new tier 8 Russian premium TD, the ISU-152K, which is a heavily modernized and upgraded ISU-152. This is absolutely shameful, and a completely disgusting move to pull on your players. Removing the main attraction point of a vehicle, which was previously free, only to sell it back later, as if we had forgotten. This is incredibly disrespectful on numerous levels. I have supported and loved World of Tanks since the closed beta. No longer. I refuse to support a company who is willing to pull such shady tactics on its loyal customers. I highly recommend refraining from continuing this practice, WoT's population still has not recovered from the Chysler K debacle, and it quite frankly, can't take another massive hit to the NA playerbase. This type of thing may fly over on the RU server, but it is most certainly not ok for EU and NA players.

 

Please, Wargaming, as a concerned player, and a loyal fan to your once fantastic games. If you are going to release the ISU-152K, at least add the BL-10 back to the normal tech tree ISU-152. If this continues, I'm very sorry, but I will no longer support any of your products. I've loved WoT, WoWS, and WoWP, but I cannot stand for such deceitful business practices. 

 

I'm curious to know what you guys think. Is this acceptable in your eyes? If yes, then why? 

 

Cheers, and I appreciate you giving this a read. I imagine it will be taken down or censored at some point, but I needed to get this out. It comes from a place of love, of passion, for a game I've sunk a lot of hours into over the years. I don't want to see this game die off or suffer any more hits to its playerbase. I want to see it grow over the years to come. Thank you.


Edited by King_Of_Chaos, May 23 2020 - 06:22.


Xeraux_TV #2 Posted May 23 2020 - 06:17

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 20 battles
  • 833
  • Member since:
    03-24-2020
:D this is your final straw? Mate the ISU-152 is fine, if you don't want to buy the K version, don't.

Sturm_Schnitzel #3 Posted May 23 2020 - 06:21

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 32 battles
  • 148
  • Member since:
    11-25-2019
I've stopped buying anything from them as of this last patch and they're planning on ruining the Progetto and Standard B with the next patch. WG can eat a bowl of poop.

Volcanic_lobster_220 #4 Posted May 23 2020 - 06:34

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 9132 battles
  • 1,546
  • Member since:
    06-04-2016

Did the ISU-152 losing it's gun happen the same time around when the Object 263 was moved down a tier? i can't remember.

Also what's the difference with it's guns now? Tanks gg and the Wiki says the 152 still has a 750 alpha gun...



Xeraux_TV #5 Posted May 23 2020 - 06:43

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 20 battles
  • 833
  • Member since:
    03-24-2020

View PostVolcanic_lobster_220, on May 23 2020 - 06:34, said:

Did the ISU-152 losing it's gun happen the same time around when the Object 263 was moved down a tier? i can't remember.

Also what's the difference with it's guns now? Tanks gg and the Wiki says the 152 still has a 750 alpha gun...

Negligible penetration difference, essentially. The change was almost completely inconsequential, which is why I find this totally ridiculous.



Ironmike11B #6 Posted May 23 2020 - 07:01

    Major

  • Players
  • 33126 battles
  • 3,627
  • [BOND] BOND
  • Member since:
    01-11-2013
Ok, first off, the old ISU with the BL-10 was a monster. I LOVED IT when I was grinding that line. I actually understood why the BL-10 was removed. The trade offs that have been implemented seem to balance it out.

__WarChild__ #7 Posted May 23 2020 - 07:46

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 38626 battles
  • 7,477
  • [OPIC] OPIC
  • Member since:
    06-03-2017

You know, I've only been here almost 3 years.  I get very angry when Tier X tanks that I work so hard to get and work on their crews, etc. get nerfed.  I dedicate a lot of time, credits, gold, etc. to getting Tier X tanks set up just right - to have them later nerfed with 0 compensation or ability to assist me with moving crews, etc. upsets me a lot.  I have an awesome crew in the Type 5 that is collecting dust and I'd love to move them to another line.  I work hard to get great tanks, like the 430U, and then later get the word that they're nerfing it too.  At some point, I just have to wonder if the effort is worth it.  I'm starting to wonder that.

 

How about check the tank out for 6 months before introducing it so that you will NEVER nerf the tank?  Rebalancing/nerfing ticks me off.  Same with this potential crew rework.  That might be the ultimate straw for a lot of folks.

 

On this issue of the ISU-152K, it's a really fun tank to play but it's slow and has a number of drawbacks.  I understand OP's frustration with WG over this BL issue, but nothing to me tops the EBR cancer that has now been introduced and will remain with us forever.  Buy it, don't buy it.  If you have fun in the game, play and don't sweat the small stuff.  These issues are fleeting.



PTwr #8 Posted May 23 2020 - 11:40

    Major

  • Players
  • 47962 battles
  • 11,535
  • [BITSA] BITSA
  • Member since:
    04-25-2011

Generally I do not mind "premium clones", after all they allow us to play favorite tank with best crew available and still rake credits.

ISU had to be nerfed a bit, but in this case its mostly just longer grind as its practically same machine. And with situational nature of ISU its premium clone is in no danger of being overpowered.

There are several tanks that are better examples of "removing free", for example 90mm Bulldogs, T28 F30, and to some degree PzIVS, where WG sells superior/pre-nerf version of tank.



venom286 #9 Posted May 23 2020 - 13:18

    Captain

  • Players
  • 44125 battles
  • 1,507
  • Member since:
    11-08-2012
so when does it go on sale 

General_Lee_Miserable #10 Posted May 23 2020 - 13:34

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 11149 battles
  • 2,368
  • Member since:
    07-27-2013
Cannot wait to hit the buy button on this one. I don't care how good or bad it is. It's just so gratifying to whack someone for massive dmg on a high roll with a high alpha tank. 

RHeadshot #11 Posted May 23 2020 - 14:29

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 8886 battles
  • 1,517
  • Member since:
    10-12-2018

View PostXeraux_TV, on May 23 2020 - 06:17, said:

:D this is your final straw? Mate the ISU-152 is fine, if you don't want to buy the K version, don't.

I swear, you'd defend this organization if they had murdered Mother Teresa.



Cowcat137 #12 Posted May 23 2020 - 14:33

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 16801 battles
  • 7,907
  • [HHOUR] HHOUR
  • Member since:
    08-17-2015

430U : we're going to take it's medium tank cupola armor down, not as far as an American Heavy tank cupola, but down 30mm.

 

Progetto's are a threat to those new cupolas, so we gotta take their rammers and bend their barrels slightly. You understand don't you?



heavymetal1967 #13 Posted May 23 2020 - 14:55

    Major

  • Players
  • 76935 battles
  • 24,913
  • [HSOLO] HSOLO
  • Member since:
    05-30-2012

Voted other cause all we can do is close (or open) our wallets.

 

Italian line changes are more of a Foxtrot Uniform to the players tbh and Cowcat makes a good point on the 430U changes in comparison of the grand scheme. 

 

Honestly some of their decisions seem to be just trolling.  Or justifying their existence.  Look what I came up with even though it makes no sense.  :P

 

 

 



GenPanzer #14 Posted May 23 2020 - 16:11

    Major

  • Players
  • 46865 battles
  • 4,191
  • [EFFIT] EFFIT
  • Member since:
    08-15-2011

These Russian premiums are getting sooooo boring. WG does not have the creativity to come up with any kind of different premiums? Maybe for other nations?

 

Whatever. The nerf to the Italian line might be my last straw for me. I've never really settled on a national line as a favorite. Sure, I like my Mericans. But, I really enjoy the Italians. I don't understand the logic behind nerfing them. They don't want long range shooting?? wth? So dumb.



Christojojo #15 Posted May 23 2020 - 16:33

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 37264 battles
  • 3,481
  • [CHEAP] CHEAP
  • Member since:
    10-09-2010
I do not understand why people are getting bent on this. They gave us premium tanks and upgraded other tanks when they made changes. the 183 for instance. It's still in my garage and is now a trainer thanks to their compensation policy.  Most times they have done well in that. NMy only current tech tree change gripe has been the money I wasted on converting to free XP spending it on tanks I wanted to skip and they no longer need that XP to unlock. I should have gotten better comp that 12 unis and 4 french BPs. but reintroducing a tank taken out when it was too powerful and selling it to us sounds great. It would be more awesome to just give it to us for the 10 year anniversary -present :)

King_Of_Chaos #16 Posted May 23 2020 - 19:16

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 12143 battles
  • 822
  • Member since:
    04-25-2011

Sorry for the late response guys, I appreciate your feedback. It's nice to see different perspectives on this. The issue I have with it, is the principle of what they're doing. I don't mean to sound like a broken record, but it's the nerve to remove something that was once free and readily available to players, using balance as an excuse, only to sell it back for real world currency later. That's what bothers me. They may not have had bad intentions, I don't think so. Chances are, they're just so busy with the game, that they totally forgot they took the gun from the tech tree ISU in the first place. Problem is, that BL-10 was the only reason to get the ISU. It was my absolute favourite tank in the game at one point, so it upsets me greatly to see that they killed it off, only to sell it back in its original state.

 

Anyways, maybe my point of view is wrong, and maybe I'm just being overly sensitive to their practices. Still though, this is coming after a long line of scumby things that've been pulled on the community over the past couple of years. I just don't want to see this game die due to lack of respect for the playerbase. If they're willing to go this far, what else will they do in the future? I really love this game, but man, sometimes it's hard for me to find reasons to support it. I try not to focus on the negatives though.

 

Thanks again for your responses guys, I do appreciate it. 



LED_BR #17 Posted May 23 2020 - 20:22

    Private

  • Players
  • 22346 battles
  • 9
  • [XBLAU] XBLAU
  • Member since:
    09-21-2013

I sent the following ticket to Wargaming:

- It is absurd and unacceptable to nerf the ISU 152 by decreasing its penetration and then launching a premium tank - ISU 152 K - with the penetration that the player had in his original tank. I am embarrassed to ask what is evident: Do you realize that you treat the player like a sucker? It is evidently an irrational conduct, and harmful to the game; revolting, which will drive players away, who will then look for another game ... This can be done in a less covert, more honest and clear way, as follows: after the modification, the next time the player clicks on the tank in your garage, would show a message: "Your tank has been nerfed. Now, to be able to get your penetration back, just buy your similar premium that we just launched." If the player complains, you can say: "That's right, we treat you like a sucker. Do you know all those hours you spent to get this tank, to improve it, to learn to play with it, to train your crew? That money you spend to speed up your training? Its over. If it was getting harder to play with ISU 152 due to the appearance of new tanks, mostly premiums, it’s over now: we’ve turned your tank into a butt and it’s not worth playing with. To recover, just spend more money on this new ISU 152K tank. Be a fool and do it because it's worth it ". I hope you understand that this type of conduct is not part of the game. Want to nerf a tank? that is for the next to be acquired, those in the garage must remain unchanged... I really hope that this attitude will change. I appreciate the attention.

They replied that it would be better to post here.


Edited by LED_BR, May 31 2020 - 00:36.


Xeraux_TV #18 Posted May 23 2020 - 21:12

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 20 battles
  • 833
  • Member since:
    03-24-2020

View PostRHeadshot, on May 23 2020 - 14:29, said:

I swear, you'd defend this organization if they had murdered Mother Teresa.

I'll argue against poor points all damn day, don't care who makes them.



Avalon304 #19 Posted May 23 2020 - 22:29

    Major

  • Players
  • 25320 battles
  • 11,050
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

If the removal of the BL-10 from the tech tree tank had actually affected the tank in any meaningful way, I could see being angry about this... but the difference between the pre-nerf ISU-152 and the post-nerf ISU-152 is on noticable on paper (the loss of 26mm of penetration and like 30m/s of shell velocity). The tank wasnt meaningfully affected by the loss of its gun. I saw no decrease in combat performance from the tank after the nerf. Had there been one, a meaningful one, I too might be annoyed at this. But as it is? No. WG didnt actually nerf my tech tree ISU in practice... so I dont care.



King_Of_Chaos #20 Posted May 23 2020 - 23:21

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 12143 battles
  • 822
  • Member since:
    04-25-2011

In rebuttal to the "the tank was balanced, so I don't care" type of comments. I understand. I really do. My point is not whether or not the ISU-152 is balanced. My point is. They took the original reason to play the ISU-152 away, only to sell it back. They forcefully took away something people could have spent money to achieve only to sell it back again. Please understand that.

 

How would you like it if you spent months working your butt off to buy a really cool car, you get that awesome car, you drive it around and enjoy it, but given the company's policy you bought it from you understand they have the right to alter it to keep it in-line with other cars to remain competitive. So, years down the road, the engine gets ripped out of your car and replaced with a slightly weaker one. In return, they upgrade the suspension and brakes to keep you happy.

 

Fast forward 3 years, and now said company is re-releasing that very same car you originally purchased, in it's original state, just as powerful as it was before, only using minor changes as an excuse to keep it in line. Now, they expect you to pay again for something you previously owned, making their original reasons for altering it effectively null and void.

 

That. Is. The. Issue. If it's not a violation of consumer rights, then I don't know what it is. They held the lollipop out, gave it to you, let you enjoy it, took it away, gave you a worse one, and now expect you to pay for the original one that you spent time, and maybe even money to achieve. It is incredibly close to being extortion. Ask yourself this question. If they are willing to do it to the ISU-152K, how long until they decide to pull the same trick on other tech tree tanks? Would you be happy if I removed the 120mm from the T110E5, replaced it with a slightly worse one, then expected you to buy the original T110E5 again later down the road after feeding you some nonsense about balance? No. No you wouldn't. You spent time and likely money getting to that tank. I completely understand that their policy states that they have complete control over tech tree tanks to maintain balance. Nowhere in there does it say that they are going to purposely nerf tanks to sell their attractive features back to you as premium copies.

 

That's my issue. Sorry. I know it's seems aggressive to put it that way, but this is essentially just throwing dirt in the face of their players and asking them to lie down and accept it. If you think these practices are ok, that's totally fine. Just don't be surprised when it starts happening to other tanks, eventually effecting ones you actually care about and enjoy.

 

It's one thing to alter a vehicle for balance. It's another thing entirely to sell that original unaltered vehicle back to you at a later date.  


Edited by King_Of_Chaos, May 23 2020 - 23:30.






Also tagged with ISU-152K

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users