arasgrandpa, on 18 June 2018 - 05:38 AM, said:
Good post from the EU Forum
Please see post http://forum.worldof...164#entry561164, where I listed aspects of the patch that I liked, had no strong opinion upon and disliked. Having played the patch for a few days, this is my first fully-formed opinion of it. If anything below is factually wrong, please let me know. The complexity of the patch is such that even a few days' familiarity with it is not enough to guarantee I have understood all aspects of it correctly. If I haved missed something (for instance, I'm aware of discontent concerning conversion of certain items in the game that amounts to a serious loss of gold for some players, but I don't know the details currently), please let me know this too.
Concept
The concept of the patch, which is to increase the complexity of the equipment system, is excellent. The ability to customise an aircraft and kit it up for different playing styles has been enhanced considerably. This ought to provide considerable interest to existing players and it also provides something to do with tier 10 aircraft. The decision to include penalties that accompany enhancements for equipment is controversial, because having provided choice to players, the developers have then limited each choice with a constraint that tends to encourage players down a particular path of customisation.
Implementation
The implementation of the concept is what we see in the game and some of the developers' decisions are questionable.
Major Problems
- This system is too complicated for new players, who in any case won't have the materials to enhance equipment. It will also put them at an even greater disadvantage against experienced players, who are likely to have relatively abundant equipment and materials, and who are forced to play at low tiers to gain tokens. Giving the nuisances that are seal clubbing players more of an advantage is also not a good idea.
- Limiting the award of materials solely to winning teams may be a conceptually satisfying idea (the winning team wins control of the ground and therefore their salvage teams can scour the battlefield), but in practice is not sensible.
- Players should not have to choose between mounting a first aid kit and a fire extinguisher. It is not possible to mitigate satisfactorily the consequences of not having one of these important consumables, particularly pilot injury.
Recommendations and reasoning
Major
- The new system is limited to tier 5 and above aircraft. The old system should apply for newer players. This won't eliminate the problem of them meeting experienced players or nuisance seal clubbers, but it will reverse the even greater disadvantage at which this patch puts them.
- Materials should be awarded under certain circumstances to players on the losing side, perhaps for those that finish in the top three, who earn epic medals, who score a certain amount of personal points or a combination of these and perhaps other factors. Good play even in losing teams should be rewarded.
- A "universal" slot should be provided to allow players to mount both first aid kit and fire extinguisher. This may upset some carefully constructed equipment/consumable balancing mechanism in the developers' minds, but only being able to choose one of these is loathed by the majority of players to whom I have talked. They care little for that "balancing mechanism".
Minor
- The amount of tokens needed to complete an aircraft's specialist mission should reduce proportionally the closer it is to completion. If it takes 110 tokens to complete a tier 10 aircraft mission, then at 50% completion it should take 55 tokens. Tokens cannot be earned quickly enough to make it viable to complete specialist missions if full price has to be paid no matter how near to completion they are.
- If you decide not to apply a calibration you have invoked on a piece of equipment you should not lose your credits and materials. You should just be prevented from attempting to calibrate it again until you have played another game in the aircraft.
- Inappropriate specialist missions should be revised where they are not suited to certain aircraft. I have noted missions for multirole aircraft that are unsuitable for them, e.g. the F-94D Starfire.
- Aircraft in the specialist configuration should not be highlighted with a special symbol in the game. Player hunting is already a problem in the game; this will make it worse for players in specialist aircraft.
- New premium ordnance should be removed from the game. Most players do not want this kind of "pay to win" development within the game.
- More information to be provided on exactly how the enhancement and negative consequences of it affect the parameters of the equipment and aircraft. 8% more accuracy on the gunsight and 3% more chance of pilot injury means what, exactly? The current information within game is too indicative and not explanatory enough.
Bugs
- Delayed server-side hit registration needs to be fixed urgently.
- Clicking on the progress note in the battle results for the specialist mission does not open the specialist mission dialogue, though it does close the battle results dialogue.
- Daily multiplier signifiers (note: not daily multipliers themselves) do not disappear after the first win of the day on an aircraft.
- The hanger UI is noticeably slow compared to previous iterations of the game. Optimisation is required.
Other items
- Patches should not override players' button or joystick assignments.
- The nerfing of the Soviet female pilot's 'Femme Fatale' skill was handled very badly. Encouraging players to play hundreds of man-hours over a weekend to obtain her and then debilitating her not two weeks later was an aggravatingly stupid thing for WoWP to do. As an aside, her skill is now wrongly described in the game.
Conclusion
I like the concept behind this patch. If the few major problems are fixed, I think it will be a good development in the game. As it is, I think it's flawed and it is producing, alongside interest in the new ways aircraft can be configured, a lot of frustration in the player population. It could have been much worse, but it could also have been much better. WoWP, you have work to do to make this patch welcome to many of the players of this game.
Xr901, on 18 June 2018 - 02:38 PM, said:
Yes, they have posts about the patch started by their community manager asking for feedback about the patch... and supposedly the developers have been engaging with the community about the patch as well... As for issues, much the same as us.
They are all pinned here:
http://forum.worldof...current-update/
Thank you, gentlemen. There was a time when any new patch came out our Community Manager would create a thread for player feedback.