Jump to content

WoWP 1.9 Public test Feedback

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
166 replies to this topic

Poll: Changes in 1.9 CT (115 members have cast votes)

How do you like the changes to the Crit system?

  1. I like the new system. (36 votes [31.30%])

    Percentage of vote: 31.30%

  2. I do not like the feature (31 votes [26.96%])

    Percentage of vote: 26.96%

  3. It's a step in the right direction, but still needs work. (48 votes [41.74%])

    Percentage of vote: 41.74%

What do you think of the smarter bots?

  1. The bots are too smart, and destroy me often. (28 votes [24.14%])

    Percentage of vote: 24.14%

  2. The new bots are too easy, they need more work. (13 votes [11.21%])

    Percentage of vote: 11.21%

  3. Doesn't concern me at all. (75 votes [64.66%])

    Percentage of vote: 64.66%

New interface changes

  1. I think the new interface changes are good. (43 votes [37.39%])

    Percentage of vote: 37.39%

  2. I do not like the new interface changes. (29 votes [25.22%])

    Percentage of vote: 25.22%

  3. I like the changes to the UI, but more work is needed (43 votes [37.39%])

    Percentage of vote: 37.39%

How do you feel about the changes to equipment?

  1. They make the planes overpowered. (8 votes [6.90%])

    Percentage of vote: 6.90%

  2. They do not make enough of a change for me to really notice. (10 votes [8.62%])

    Percentage of vote: 8.62%

  3. Some are okay, others need work. (45 votes [38.79%])

    Percentage of vote: 38.79%

  4. Do not like at all. (25 votes [21.55%])

    Percentage of vote: 21.55%

  5. I like the new options I have (28 votes [24.14%])

    Percentage of vote: 24.14%

Changes to ammo belts

  1. I like the new ammo belt types (13 votes [11.30%])

    Percentage of vote: 11.30%

  2. I do not like the new types of ammo belts (14 votes [12.17%])

    Percentage of vote: 12.17%

  3. The belts are good, but bring back the option to purchase with credits (88 votes [76.52%])

    Percentage of vote: 76.52%

Bots in the Standard Battles

  1. I like having full battles, even if bots are involved. (65 votes [59.63%])

    Percentage of vote: 59.63%

  2. Bots in the standard battles is terrible. (22 votes [20.18%])

    Percentage of vote: 20.18%

  3. I like the bots, but they are not "Smart" enough (8 votes [7.34%])

    Percentage of vote: 7.34%

  4. I like the bots, but they are too powerful (14 votes [12.84%])

    Percentage of vote: 12.84%

Vote Hide poll

broslicer #21 Posted 18 September 2015 - 09:32 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 9894 battles
  • 1,466
  • [-WS-] -WS-
  • Member since:

as I said here: http://forum.worldof...763#entry584763


what really erks me is the fact a bot (GA) will lawn dart in the first 5 seconds... Are you encouraging players to do this? Or maybe it's just me who has seen it.

Edited by broslicer, 18 September 2015 - 09:32 PM.




losttwo #22 Posted 18 September 2015 - 09:36 PM

    which way do we go?

  • Community Ace
  • 29924 battles
  • 12,609
  • [S-S-G] S-S-G
  • Member since:

View PostDaeima, on 18 September 2015 - 04:28 PM, said:


Well said, +1


Also, will the Development Team be keeping a copy of the present version this time around? Let's not have another 1.5 "Can't roll back, that version wasn't saved".


it is impossible to save more than 1.44 MB of information on a 3.5 floppy disk.

Edited by losttwo, 18 September 2015 - 09:38 PM.

Daeima #23 Posted 18 September 2015 - 09:40 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 1441 battles
  • 323
  • [GWG] GWG
  • Member since:

View Postlosttwo, on 18 September 2015 - 04:36 PM, said:


it is impossible to save more than 1.44 MB of information on a 3.5 floppy disk.



Edited by Daeima, 18 September 2015 - 09:42 PM.

EasternDragon_2014 #24 Posted 18 September 2015 - 10:27 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 5951 battles
  • 1,206
  • Member since:

View PostGhostPrime, on 18 September 2015 - 04:26 PM, said:

Please keep the thoughtful feedback coming, it's very appreciated. I added one more question to the poll, about the bots in the standard battles.

You may appreciate it, but apparently the dev team does not even care.

_Old_Bear_ #25 Posted 18 September 2015 - 11:44 PM

    Master Sergeant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 16660 battles
  • 33
  • [_EFF_] _EFF_
  • Member since:

So far, having been unable to get only one kill against the bots, I believe that if the game is release in this state, I will stop playing it.

I am only an average player, trying just to have some fun while playing.

I do like some challenge in the games I am playing but I am not a masochist. 

 ... so I will have to wait for 2.0.


WanderingGhost #26 Posted 18 September 2015 - 11:46 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 9345 battles
  • 1,040
  • [S-S-G] S-S-G
  • Member since:

View PostDaeima, on 18 September 2015 - 04:40 PM, said:




See, thats the right idea, write down the coding so you can just uncode it or reinsert it.


Anyway, round one GA "Maneuverability changes" quoting the patch notes " increase the comfort of ground attack we have changed the manoeuvrability of all attack planes" - this needs to NOT be as super vague as it is. Certain plane configurations got a buff to roll and turn rate, others got nerfed, I don't care if it makes the patch notes an even bigger wall of text, I don't care at this point if I have to go through every plane before this test is (because if I have to, I will), note every change and send by pm, email or even friggin carrier pigeon it should be in the bloody notes. it'd be nice to change it on other vague statements as well like HP and speed but given these are flying bricks and some are being made less brick in set up A or more bricky in set up B or overall (IL-10 has an out right nerf which yes, is about a second but that difference can end up very big, just look at the 109 vs the 51A or the ki-43 vs the zero). Pretty sure for most of us that have flown GA, or fly GA all day everyday "more comfortable" would mean tighter turning, not an extra degree of roll rate or turns taking a second longer.


Aces/Destroyer/Ace(post1.9)(#of/#) - A6M1(7/1), P-36(1), BF-109b(3), Ao-192(1), beaufighter(3/1), BF-109z(2), P-12(2), A6M2(3), P-51a(4), Yak-7(2), Bf-110C-6(2), F4F(2/4), Blenheim(2), BSH-2(1), XP-50(1),  BF-109f(1), LA-5(1), Spitfire I(2), P-40 M-105(3), BF-110e(1), F4U-1(1), FW-190 A-5(4), I-16e.(1), XF4F-3(1), A6M5(5), F7F(1), XF4U-1(1), Bf-109E (1), A7M (2), I-16l (1), P-38f (1), P-40 (1), Mig-3 (1)

EasternDragon_2014 #27 Posted 18 September 2015 - 11:56 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 5951 battles
  • 1,206
  • Member since:
More hp for GAs? sheesh

CrayoIaCrayon #28 Posted 19 September 2015 - 12:01 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 15850 battles
  • 1,025
  • Member since:
Ghost you whine.  Stop it.  I liked playing the test server.  Lots of fun.  Only negatives I see is I hate the new gun firing noises and the high ping of playing on a Russian server.  So basically leave our current sounds and I think it's a great update just from what I have played so far.

Undefeated 1st place, Clantastrophy tournament

Air Raid 6  3rd place,  Air Raid 7  2nd place, Air Raid 8 1st place

dityboycom #29 Posted 19 September 2015 - 12:05 AM


  • Member
  • 10241 battles
  • 9,226
  • Member since:

View PostJetway, on 18 September 2015 - 08:01 PM, said:

Ghost you whine.  Stop it.  I liked playing the test server.  Lots of fun.  Only negatives I see is I hate the new gun firing noises and the high ping of playing on a Russian server.  So basically leave our current sounds and I think it's a great update just from what I have played so far.



This is 1.5 of 2015.


The fact that you enjoy it is mind boggling, this is one of the most drastic changes to the game they have made in a very long time.

209 #30 Posted 19 September 2015 - 12:20 AM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 5817 battles
  • 571
  • Member since:
I downloaded the common test and was only given tier 1 planes to run with. I thought we were suppose to get everything that we purchased up Sept.1st. The download version that I was given says File Version Help !!!!

Arkaiko #31 Posted 19 September 2015 - 01:03 AM

    Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 1308 battles
  • 98
  • Member since:

server down? :(

i want to help



WanderingGhost #32 Posted 19 September 2015 - 01:26 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 9345 battles
  • 1,040
  • [S-S-G] S-S-G
  • Member since:

Know what, here, let me "whine" some more -


Sounds - I'm uncertain if the cannon sounds are the same as the current one or different, I'll figure that out in a bit when I jump back to the live server but if there different, keep them. The MG noises though after playing my F4F, yeah, no, those need to go.


Bot's - are actually rather surprising. I figured they'd be as clueless as battle against bots or team training ones, but I was proven wrong. They aren't the sharpest tools in the shed, but I actually had a Ki-43 throw me for a loop in a zero when he actually tried (and nearly succeeded) in forcing me to over shoot him so he could get behind me. They may need further refining one way or the other, but at mid tier they seem to be about right so far. Not too insanely good like WoWs, but not as terrible and useless as training room bots.


Module damage (weapon balance) - not nearly as utterly horrifying as I thought it was going to be as I haven't really seen one shot kills from high caliber guns and MG's seem to match about as well at damaging modules all things considered.


Module damage (frequency/severity) - This may well need some dialing back, time today I've only manged getting my wildcat and zero's out for testing. The wildcat with the equipment worst I had was the engine and the pilot really, aside from fires that appear to be way more frequent (another thing that may need to be dialed back a little). However, much like 1.2 when we introduced module damage then, the zero's I'm basically finding useless again. Every single match I used one a hit knocked out the tail and planes like the 109 with nearly double the turn radius are turning inside it, making it so it has no advantage at all where as most hits won't knock out a BnZ planes edge over the zero. I feel things once again shifting to BnZ having a clear edge over TnB.


A6M series - While they have never been the most durable planes in game, it feels like they are taking way more damage and that their survivability has dropped dramatically, with hit points vanishing before I can really even react, something that rarely happens in current version on live server save for encountering planes like the 410, 109z and 262. Unsure if this and previous statement applies to yaks and other similar planes.


New Equipment - For the most part I like these, I feel they add something especially for planes that are considered multi-role because you can tailor it a bit more to one side or the other. Though I'd like light airframe and the control surface one to be a little more clear. 3% increase mobility in turns? What exactly does that mean? Do I turn 3% faster, Do I change directions from a turn 3% faster? If these have any effect on stats it'd help if it actually shows them.


UI - Took a second to figure out, but I actually like it, keep it as is.


Optimization - I still have only the same 20+ fps I've had, but noted that I seem to be on a slightly higher setting looks wise, the plane looked different as did lighting effects, could be wrong though. Either way, I didn't lose FPS this time so, good job.


Also going to note accuracy does appear to be off but I can't be sure if thats something done by the dev team or is simply the server lag.


Overall so far while I intend to do more testing, I'll disagree with Dity in that it's not nearly as bad as 1.5. I'd say overall, I like where the patch is trying to go, I wouldn't recommend releasing it live as is, but this could be a good patch. Just needs some work. Also MM does need to grab a minimum similar to what we have for live players, then fill bots.

Aces/Destroyer/Ace(post1.9)(#of/#) - A6M1(7/1), P-36(1), BF-109b(3), Ao-192(1), beaufighter(3/1), BF-109z(2), P-12(2), A6M2(3), P-51a(4), Yak-7(2), Bf-110C-6(2), F4F(2/4), Blenheim(2), BSH-2(1), XP-50(1),  BF-109f(1), LA-5(1), Spitfire I(2), P-40 M-105(3), BF-110e(1), F4U-1(1), FW-190 A-5(4), I-16e.(1), XF4F-3(1), A6M5(5), F7F(1), XF4U-1(1), Bf-109E (1), A7M (2), I-16l (1), P-38f (1), P-40 (1), Mig-3 (1)

BellJack95 #33 Posted 19 September 2015 - 03:16 AM

    Airman Basic

  • Member
  • 3139 battles
  • 2
  • [FAM_G] FAM_G
  • Member since:

Two questions:

First - Why are they removing Armored Plexiglas?  I save up and use this on select aircraft in order to help protect my pilot and it was used in real life so why remove it? 

Second - why is some ammo only going to be gold bought now?  Most times I only purchase standard ammo but it is nice to be able to buy better ammo with credits.  With this change to gold only and this new ammo being greatly improved over standard ammo I guess that means those that spend the gold will have a greater advantage in firepower.

SkywhaleExpress #34 Posted 19 September 2015 - 04:54 AM

    noob leader

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 17397 battles
  • 10,677
  • Member since:

View Postlosttwo, on 18 September 2015 - 04:36 PM, said:


it is impossible to save more than 1.44 MB of information on a 3.5 floppy disk.


yes... but to further answer the 'rollback' question....


This isn't Walmart...  Game developers are too stupid or to egotistical to recognize when mass exodus' happen and their players tell them to rollback to a better working version...


For example:


1.4 was the best post release version of the game.

0.4.1 (Closed Beta) was the most balanced AND historically accurate version of the game, barring some minor balancing issues (My J7W1/2 could follow even an F-86 and F7U) up long enough to likely kill it, given the 4x30mm cannons...

WG's answer to that - dispersion and accuracy nerfs.



Now... they're not telling us which way they're going with dispersion and accuracy (more pronounced or more closed-beta/realistic) OR the damage model.



More importantly: WHY has Wargaming chosen to continuously alienate us Attack Aircraft pilots by not bringing our damage vs. players back in line with equivalent model weapons on Light/Multirole/Heavy Fighters?  I'm sorry, but a 30/37/45/57mm cannon shot (especially if you're dumb enough to go head on with me) SHOULD result in high damage to you... not the paltry less than 10%-15% damage that the 57mm gives and and 7-10% dmg the 45mm gives, and sub 7% damage that the 37mm cannons give.


Yet, they continuously provide XP/credit/damage bonuses to light/multirole/heavy fighters for doing both Air and Ground attack.



Why not just eliminate our aircraft at all? Or subjugate us to our own queues where we compete for ground superiority and/or dogfight amongst ourselves... because ONLY the most talented of us IL drivers right now can do significant damage to LF/MRF/HF craft. And it's usually with a combination of lucky rocket/bomb or tailgun (we NEVER asked for OP tailguns let alone the HP. Give us back our lower HP we have pre-release, and RESTORE our innate armor... that's all we ever needed we more armor and slightly more hitpoints than the lights.




And then with bombs-- stop letting people survive their own (or their teammates') bombs...  return them to their 0.4.1 blast radius/damage and timers

And then rockets- Again, return them back to their original blast radius/damage rates of 0.4.1. There's no reason a rocket should be able to kill a Warship (destroyer or higher, I'm guessing?) but barely hurt an enemy plane even if it's a direct hit. A direct hit with any high explosive to most aircraft would knock them out of the sky.

Air Raid 8 Champions - BrushFyre

MIA - pappabear

Gang_Starr #35 Posted 19 September 2015 - 05:51 AM


  • Member
  • 12324 battles
  • 3,834
  • Member since:
None of those questions in the poll ask if we like the new gun overhaul. Yes I like the critical damage but I HATE the new guns on every plane.


FreeFOXMIKE #36 Posted 19 September 2015 - 07:09 AM

    G.A.T.P. (Global Alpha Test Pilot)

  • Member
  • 19128 battles
  • 6,485
  • [332ND] 332ND
  • Member since:

Well a few things of interest they are adding squadron paint jobs it seem to the more iconic aircraft I noticed on of the paint jobs from the Blue noses for the P-51 ,and a Red tail paint job. The damage seems more specific now , a damaged engine actually belches smoke from the exhaust. And we seem to have new AC coming down the pike .


Noticed the ranges to engage seen a lot shorter now , forcing you to get closer to engage>






Edited by FreeFOXMIKE, 20 September 2015 - 01:27 AM.

           332 Virtual  Fighter  Group


diddel_wotan #37 Posted 19 September 2015 - 09:47 AM

    Airman Basic

  • Member
  • 16312 battles
  • 7
  • [S-S-G] S-S-G
  • Member since:

the idea with the new way to pay for the better belts in gold only is not good. if you stick with it than at least make the caliber of the belts payed by credits stronger. instead of having them at 7.7mm i would like to see them to be 9.9mm. and for the canons 22mm.

also there are pilots out there who are pensioners and others with medical conditions who might can't effort to pay with gold all the time.

i can only access the net when i babysit my grandson as where i live i can't get the net on so i miss out on some competitions where you get gold or different prizes.

see if you can find a way that balances the credit payed belts with the gold payed belts.

the staff of wowp has done a terrific job so far, would be a shame if the new implements backfire.

thank you for time and help.

CaptainJoeyCusack #38 Posted 19 September 2015 - 11:11 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 9264 battles
  • 356
  • Member since:

I played it for about 40 battles and my thoughts are:

1. All Auto cannons including the 20mm overheat way to rapidly. On the larger cannons you literally get about 3 secs of fire and they shut down not sputter. Needs to be reduced by 50% ( This is really bad for some pilots like myself who just has bad aim.)

2. The CRIT damage is to severe. Two hits by virtually any autocannon and your dead or seriously wounded. And even worse by MG in closer range.= Scale this back by half.

3. I understand that the new consumables will generate revenue for you but mixed with the too heavy Crit damage and new Belt ammo with gold only. You literally are attempting to charge around over 50 Gold per round. This will severely turn into a pay to win game. Which is fine if the franchise was successful and thriving but not in the current state of needing to grow the population dramatically. For some players they fly over 25 rounds a day thats over 1250 Gold per day. Which takes me to when crafts get Crit damage now we lose all control not like current game where we sputter but still have control minus boost.  In every single round I played I caught fire at least twice, Pilot injured, and Crit damage to a major component. Its simply way overboard on all levels. So we are forced to carry the new consumable as we obviously cant turn or anything except glide in the direction we were headed. A good example of what I mean is we now can stack 2 equipment that each provide 20-25 % protection to our major components and add consumables to make them even stronger. Yet a craft 2 tiers lower kills your craft with full HP instantly, in 2 hits. See what im saying? So I cant even imagine what its like for new players who simply cant afford the equipment even with credits or dont understand the importance of them. I have to imagine any craft not being triple stacked with same/similar type of protection must die by enemy's plane just flying by it?

4. I have noticed that you have made some of the BOTS much smarter then others. In almost every round 2 will crash but only on one team side. 1 on losing team will make 2 kills. But on winning team they always have one that makes about 3-5 kills.I do like that every round now has a almost identical line up of types of crafts but what I dont understand is why put the MM to put 2 of same type of heavy one one team then 2 of a different nation on other team instead of each team just getting one of each. Seems odd every round and does give an advantage with altitude or manuvering and such. But right step. **Also for our GA players I no longer see how they will have those rounds where they are the only ones left in round as now the firefight begins in every round before you have even used up 15 secs of your boost. =Some measure needs to be put in place that most of the bots or at least non GA bots stay on there side until a human crosses the line maybe? Other then that I did get hit by my own teammate bots about 4 times lol . They are no longer afraid of colliding. They will be a benefit to the game if they can be tweaked a bit. I even got killed by a GA bot dropping a bomb and his timing was amazing as most humans couldn't have pulled that one off.

5.The last major thing I noticed that I think needs addressing is that every single plane will now stall if you use the boost to climb at start of round, where with current set up most crafts can easily climb their full boost and coast into normal speed. All crafts move very differently. I have my identical set up for controls minus my shift bind as it doesnt work. But every craft I have in existing game just doesnt handle the same way. They are more sluggish and dont turn as well. Even all the crafts that you said got buffs , you cant tell in anyway as every craft got nerfed with maneuvering and speed.


To sum it up most of the changes like the UI and most of the equipment and consumables are great. The new graphics are amazing. Like most others have said, You simply have not learned from your past. To me its obvious that you are EXTREMIST. You simply can not make this many dramatic changes to a game at one time and especially to the extent of making guns overheat extremely fast, making crafts die or Crit damaged in 2 shots and nerfing every craft. Mixed with now needing gold to play and bots immediately going into enemy territory and rounds with 10 VS 10 ending almost instantly every round.  Your headed in the right direction with making these changes just scale every single one of them back by 50 % and you actually have a great game that can grow its population quickly then you can go adding gold only items slowly not all at once. LOL Crazy WG WoWP management people. :facepalm::kamikaze: Here we call this behavior suicidal tendencies with a masochistic persona. Its usually only seen from inexperienced managers/supervisors who are trying to constantly show they are capable but always prove otherwise.   Scale it all back by 50% and watch the game get better. 

Edited by CaptainJoeyCusack, 19 September 2015 - 11:21 AM.

WanderingGhost #39 Posted 19 September 2015 - 02:48 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 9345 battles
  • 1,040
  • [S-S-G] S-S-G
  • Member since:
Yeah, okay, this one may be whining a bit, but seriously WG, list changes your making to aircrafts performance even if they seem minuscule. Only because I was checking stats on mobility due to the weapon research change and looking at paint schemes did I realize that the 190 a-1 and a-5 are having their time to make a full circle increased. I think what time I was going to spend flying is going to be cut to find all the changes your making to planes, unless somehow you've created a bug in all these changes that has warped performance on multiple aircraft.

Edited by WanderingGhost, 19 September 2015 - 02:48 PM.

Aces/Destroyer/Ace(post1.9)(#of/#) - A6M1(7/1), P-36(1), BF-109b(3), Ao-192(1), beaufighter(3/1), BF-109z(2), P-12(2), A6M2(3), P-51a(4), Yak-7(2), Bf-110C-6(2), F4F(2/4), Blenheim(2), BSH-2(1), XP-50(1),  BF-109f(1), LA-5(1), Spitfire I(2), P-40 M-105(3), BF-110e(1), F4U-1(1), FW-190 A-5(4), I-16e.(1), XF4F-3(1), A6M5(5), F7F(1), XF4U-1(1), Bf-109E (1), A7M (2), I-16l (1), P-38f (1), P-40 (1), Mig-3 (1)

Ens #40 Posted 19 September 2015 - 02:55 PM

    Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 9399 battles
  • 70
  • Member since:

I don't like the feel of the planes in 1.9 the nose simply does not go where I tell it to like it does in 1.8.3 (I use mouse + keyboard, here i'm referring to mouse behavior). I can't play the game like this so I'm not able to evaluate the rest of the new features. It feels like the plane is on ice or something - this does not feel like previous CT lag to me, it's something very different... I'll see if i can turn off the client side prediction stuff and give it one more try.


Ok, so I actually turned client side prediction ON and things got MUCH better. I'm still playing in soup with 250ms pings but at least I have some traction now (on NA servers my ping is normally 80-120ms which is still crap but such is life on the west coast for WoWP).


Initial impressions (after 5 or 6 games): 

* Machine guns are ineffective - right up to the point they get a lucky crit and kill something with 3/4 health - outside of crits their damage is nearly laughable.

* Still no BRACKETS? I use the brackets mod and life is sooo much better in this game (also note the green markers on allied planes), please make this stock.

* So, bots cry for help, but don't answer calls for help which makes them about as useful to me as a new player - maybe in 1.9.1 could bots respond to SOS calls and coordinated attacks (within reason)?

* I'm still getting use to the new cannons - I like that crits are coming back but this might be a bit much. I honestly don't remember 1.4.1 well enough to make a fair comparison but I think that 1.9.0 is looking to do even more crits than 1.4.1. While I missed crits when they were gone I sympathized with new players - it's just not fun to get blown out of the sky with a single shot with 50% or more HP remaining - which has been the majority of my deaths so far in 1.9.0 

* Crits currently feel way to RNG to me. I know by nature they will be random, but when someone is on your tail doing trivial damage then all of a sudden you blow up because they got a lucky crit from a 20mm it's a "surprise" - why did all of a sudden my armor fail? A simple explanation of why you blew up might go a long ways to helping people accept this new mechanic: e.g. "Fred got a lucky shot with an HE round which caused your damage fuel tank to explode" or "Jack's 20mm AP round detached your wing"

* Sound changes are fine to me - they are different but i'll get use to them fast enough

* Is it just me or are tracers harder to see now?


This risks being another 1.5 - I'm not saying this lightly - it's a matter of too much changing in a single patch. You guys are throwing your pilots into a pot of boiling water AGAIN and people may simply "give up" before they adjust. Please teach the Project Management team how to, and how NOT to, cook a live lobster - I'm serious!



In closing to this post

I love the direction 1.9 is going, but it's not there yet. Please please take your time in releasing it. Be willing to take in the mounds of feedback you are getting, take CT down for a couple of weeks while changes are made, then bring CT back up, gather more feedback, and be willing to do it again if needed. Too often CT feedback is rolled in then it goes live without another CT iteration - this practice of blind fixing has failed enough times that it shouldn't be too hard to make a solid case to run another round of CT. Then still plan for the worst - have a roll back plan no matter how extreme it may be - this will still be a major change which may warrant a temporary rollback no matter how much care is taken prior to launch. Even if the rollback essentially resets everyone, even new accounts, to the day before 1.9.0 goes live - so be it - give an apology and prevent a fatal population drop. And make it known to every player that WG is taking the release very seriously and has such a contingency plan will make the decision to roll back or not in X many days. This game will simply not survive another major population drop of even 30% for two weeks in the US and EU isn't far behind. I truly love this game and I do not want to witness its death anytime soon.



P.S. I've updated my marker range mod for 1.9.0 - markers to 10k!

Edited by Ens, 19 September 2015 - 04:27 PM.

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users