Jump to content


Official Update 2.0.5 Feedback Thread


  • Please log in to reply
139 replies to this topic

Reitousair #21 Posted 23 June 2018 - 09:28 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 6034 battles
  • 432
  • [HVAR] HVAR
  • Member since:
    08-10-2013

Just taking an excerpt of a previous post I made about what could be done with 2.0.5 on another thread,

 

First off: ALL consumable and equipment slots should be available on all aircraft (unless they lack offensive/defensive guns and/or ordinance), you should be able to well and truly make your plane yours, and not be restricted by at times seemingly random equipment and consumable slots. Specialist config could still be used here in that the amount of slots you can use is limited, but you have all of your options open, however specialist will let you use one more consumable/equipment slot. Specialist config should not limit your options, it should expand upon them, after all you've specialized your aircraft, why should you make it the same as everybody else's?

 

Second: Allow any payload option on specialist to be used, and possibly any gun option. Not all planes perform 100% better with top guns/ordinance, the IL-8 is actually better with the six 100kg bombs it gets, but you're restricted to two 250kg bombs with specialist. The I-211 has high-RoF 37mm cannons that it flatout can never use because of specialist configuration, even though they're perfectly viable compared to the sniper-37's.

 

Third: Remove all winning conditions for these new systems. Nobody has a 100% winrate, and making it so people have to win to get materials/make progress on half of their specialist mission is very unproductive, why should people have to win to make their planes theirs? Some people might not do very well, but they fly the planes they love because they love those planes, why should they be restricted from making their beloved planes the way they want them to be because they can't win all the time? Losing/Drawing could perhaps halve the materials/progress made in order to make winning still a priority, but not a necessity.

 

Fourth: Remove configurations on premium aircraft. Configurations should not be something you have to worry about when buying a plane, it should come with all configurations right out of the box, premiums are meant to be fully open to you right out of the box, not restricted like every other plane. People do pay money for them, but I don't think many look at premiums as new planes to grind, they look at them as new planes to help them grind.

 

Fifth: Allow for people to decisively choose what characteristics they want/performance of their equipment. Remove the luck factor, it does destroy some of the fun, but, at the same time, one should be able to choose how they want to build their plane, not constantly rerolling equipment. What could be done however is keep the RNG system and make it a side thing where the costs are cheap but you're not always going to get what you want, that way people can still get a kick out of gambling for cheap, or at a higher price decide what they want.


Edited by Reitousair, 23 June 2018 - 09:29 AM.

I do fly Chinese aircraft a fair amount so... *ahem*

CHINA NUMBAH WAN

 

I even made a custom skin for my IL-10M!

 


cobra_marksman #22 Posted 23 June 2018 - 10:05 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 3383 battles
  • 294
  • [R-A-W] R-A-W
  • Member since:
    01-28-2014

View PostClosedCoffin, on 22 June 2018 - 11:15 PM, said:

The winner take all materials situation feels right to me. It just does.

I'm at 50% or so winrate in 20+ games today and i still like this aspect of the new update.

 

 

 

You seem to miss the point of plz. remove  " Must Win " . I can Grind my bombers at a 65% win rate, then I grind my ga's at a 50% rate. But that's just 25% of my planes. Everything else the Win ratio drops off to below 40% & probably my heavy's are at 25%. So grinding them is like pulling teeth. So now you can see..... leveling those planes becomes frustrating, & to be honest,..... just simply painful. We play the game for Enjoyment....somehow they seem to be confuse between the difference of  Enjoyment & Frustration.  So those planes collect dust,& are never flown, Wowp…. becomes one-sided & boring. Then my teammates, clan members, & knowned players begin to play less & eventually go elsewhere for On-Line game enjoyment.  Now... do you see the light at the end of the tunnel. They are leaving Wowp, & the one's who join won't be around much longer if thing don't get fixed or get better.

cobra_marksman #23 Posted 23 June 2018 - 11:10 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 3383 battles
  • 294
  • [R-A-W] R-A-W
  • Member since:
    01-28-2014
Quote :

Hi all,

I don't usually whine and dislike those that do .... so lets just call this, I'd like to get it off my chest and maybe someone will hear it.

 

You work your rear off taking territory, high kill count, medal after medal ... 14,400 personal points at the end ... team defeated despite your superior efforts and it sucks.

 

Would be nice during this scavenger event for the 1st place of defeated team to get some perk, it's obvious they worked for it.   *shrug*

 

Now I feel better ... anyone else feel like this?

 

Thanks for reading & watch your 6    ( Moved from another post  )


Edited by cobra_marksman, 23 June 2018 - 11:12 AM.


Krautjaeger #24 Posted 23 June 2018 - 11:34 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 688 battles
  • 252
  • [KOOKS] KOOKS
  • Member since:
    05-27-2017
Update 2.0.5.5 changed the mod directory, but not the paths.xml to point to it... Not major, just confusing for some.

FlakValleyExpress #25 Posted 23 June 2018 - 12:06 PM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 26 battles
  • 3,913
  • Member since:
    02-09-2012

 

Block Quote

My evaluation, feedback and suggestions are all in these two review, Sonic.  I also have a text version of my suggestions.

 

1.  Specialist Aircraft.  Specialist aircraft remain in the game, but not as currently designed.  All aircraft, be they premium or tech line, have ALL of their equipment and consumable slots unlocked and available for use upon research or purchase.  Specialist aircraft instead are tech-tree aircraft only, and when a tech line aircraft becomes Specialist its economics are altered to perform in the exact same manner as a premium aircraft of the same class and tier for credit and xp generation only.  These Specialist aircraft still must have a crew trained specifically for them for crew abilities to function at full effect.

 

2.  Specialist Aircraft Mission.  Get rid of the Victory requirement to advance.  If I'm spending time in the game I expect every minute spent to advance my goals in a very linear manner.  In 2.0 particularly solo carrying is an impossibility, so stop punishing us for having stupid team mates and useless bots.  If I'm playing, I'm advancing.  Period.

 

3.  Consumables.  Make all consumable slots available on all aircraft; this is part of changing the Specialist status from something terrible to something good.  Furthermore, unlock the consumable placements and let us use them in the order we choose.  Also, give us an additional "Embellishment" consumable slot that can mount only the non-combat consumables like Smoke Flares, Sparklers and Firework Rockets.  A parting shot on this; you may want to rethink bringing back things like High Octane Fuel, which you stated was OP and Game Breaking back when you removed it over two years ago.

 

4.  Equipment.  Remove all negatives from all equipment immediately.  Combined with the limited consumable slots these are restricting fun and making it a chore to play your game.  That does not result in increased concurrent player logins and more battles played.  Quite the opposite, really.  The greater variety of equipment now available is completely overshadowed by these negatives and the needlessly complex Improvement system.  The base level of all equipment should be available for credit purchase with no negatives, regardless of aircraft class or player skill.

 

5.  Equipment Improvement.  This system is needlessly complex, obtuse and arcane.  Add to that the RNG element of "maybe you get nothing" and "maybe you don't get what you want" and the system is just horrible.  I would want this completely removed, but since you've already made the mistake of SELLING this advantage we can't do that, now can we?  But what you CAN do is remove the failure chance RNG aspect, allow players to collect their salvage whether the battle was a win or a loss and allow us to choose what we improve and how we improve it once the required materials are gathered.  Give reduced salvage on a loss, but give us something.  And finally STOP selling this advantage in the premium shop.

 

I support everything MagusGerhardt has said. 

 

And to add:

 

  •  Stop adding "concept ideas" into WoWP. WoWP looks like a developer debugging the gameplay. For example, in what the bots do, how large the maps are, and equipment on planes over what other planes have for equipment. Focus on the current plane in the hanger and the depot when it comes to equipment. Make it pilot usable. 
  • Make the premium planes a joy to fly. There should be no equipment and consumable restrictions. Only the pilot skills and plane characteristics should be the restriction factor.
  • Your test button puts the equipment changes in question. It does not give feedback effectively for a base line in understanding.
  • You are really making it "work like" (no joy) to make sure you fly your plane or be a tail gunner. The tail gunner should go back to AI gunner skills like before update 2.X. Eliminate human interaction of access to the tail gunner.  Either that or allow the option to be a tail gunner, and the pilot is then reliable AI, switching between the functions before the match is chosen, not during the match. How many spinning plates in the air do you what us to do in playing WoWP?
  • Due to low WoWP player population, make all matches Co-Op versus Bots. Fill all human teams only for now. Once the player population grows then open the combat 4v4 for PVP and no bots.
  • Allow for 3 to 4 player flights based on the combat mode.
  • Make "War of Attrition", "Invasion", "Operation Westwall" a special battle mode selections like WoWS has in their game for "Operations of the week".
  • Get the training room back, so we can test the new changes after the updates. For now, you go into a mode to queue for 4 minutes, be part of and face a full bot team, on a large map. Make the test a one battle zone and not having to fly across the map to get to the one zone. Make it so you are entering the zone. Make it practical.
  • Make the pilot skills and gunner practical. You are not getting your point across on how to add up the skills. Make it easier. My brother tells me to look at what WoWS does in noting the commander skills bonuses.
  • Let me know the limits of my "envelope" for flying. For now, its all vapor skills into the unknown.
  • Make the maps smaller based on tiers. For the example, tiers 1 to 4 small map (two battle zones); tiers 5 to 8 medium map (three battle zones); tiers 8 to 10 large map (five battle zones). All this should be based on the speed of the aircraft versus the distance they can fly to the next zone. If a quarter of your time is wasted flying to your first battle zone, then the map is too large. Either extend the battle time or shorten the map.

 

That is my take in making a better WoWP product.

 


Edited by FlakValleyExpress, 23 June 2018 - 12:09 PM.

1.X WoWP veteran - Airborne Scout - Class of 1.0

Vae victis

Update 2.0 - It's not a bug, it's a feature

"Battle is the Great Redeemer. It is the fiery crucible in which true heroes are forged. The one place where all men truly share the same rank, regardless of what kind of parasitic scum they were going in."

 


GiN_nTonic #26 Posted 23 June 2018 - 02:12 PM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 226 battles
  • 3,873
  • [-WS-] -WS-
  • Member since:
    10-13-2013

As i watched the current Development diaries for this game I was struck by the fact WG has a lot of the same team.  It should be obvious by now this Dev team needs to be replaced.  Why not take inspiring WoT and WoWS Devs and promote them into the WoWP side? 

 

We keep having the same thing happen in WoWP over and over again.  If this studio had a real board to answer to, this dev team would have been sacked some time ago. 



FlakValleyExpress #27 Posted 23 June 2018 - 02:31 PM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 26 battles
  • 3,913
  • Member since:
    02-09-2012

View PostGiN_nTonic, on 23 June 2018 - 09:12 AM, said:

As i watched the current Development diaries for this game I was struck by the fact WG has a lot of the same team.  It should be obvious by now this Dev team needs to be replaced.  Why not take inspiring WoT and WoWS Devs and promote them into the WoWP side? 

 

We keep having the same thing happen in WoWP over and over again.  If this studio had a real board to answer to, this dev team would have been sacked some time ago. 

 

Watch it. You could get into trouble over this. :hiding: I know I did. You can't say bad things of you know who.


1.X WoWP veteran - Airborne Scout - Class of 1.0

Vae victis

Update 2.0 - It's not a bug, it's a feature

"Battle is the Great Redeemer. It is the fiery crucible in which true heroes are forged. The one place where all men truly share the same rank, regardless of what kind of parasitic scum they were going in."

 


Ace_BOTlistic_Cosmo #28 Posted 23 June 2018 - 02:32 PM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 642 battles
  • 3,225
  • [3NIC] 3NIC
  • Member since:
    01-26-2014

We need to put the fun back in the game... it was removed.

The game seems to me to have changed with an odd goal in mind. If you look at it honestly you may see what I've observed. Think of what you would do back in 1.9 if your main objective were to reap as much profit from this existing game... be damned the outcome. If you could look at this as a short game profit grab... be damned the customer.

To accomplish such a feat you'd have to use tactics like a greedy used car salesmen. Making dishonorable promises and inflating values to sell a pretended glory. 

Looks like what we are seeing now. I get a bad feeling. Not fun.


if the pilot's good, see, I mean, if he's really..sharp, he can barrel that baby in so low [he spreads his arms like wings and laughs],

you oughtta see it sometime, it's a sight. A big plane like a '52. VRROOM! There's jet exhaust, fryin' chickens in the barnyard.


trikke #29 Posted 23 June 2018 - 03:17 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 2152 battles
  • 1,572
  • [R-A-W] R-A-W
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

i was hoping that this patch would be the one that featured changes that help brand new pilots survive...   maybe the next one will

 

maybe next patch, the new pilots could get mechanical parts whether they win or lose?   T1-T3?   T1-T4?   but only if total battles are <400?  <500?

 

then fully upped brand new pilots could maybe have a chance against high stick time vets, when missions 'force' the vets to fly low tier

 

if WG decisions push vets away to other games, then there had better be a red carpet invitation for new players that don't even know how to fly yet

 

edit:  spelling


Edited by trikke, 23 June 2018 - 08:30 PM.

Spittoon says #smarterpilotswinmore

SlappedbyRommel #30 Posted 23 June 2018 - 03:51 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 1697 battles
  • 337
  • [JG52] JG52
  • Member since:
    01-13-2017

Great observations and btw War Gaming here is some incite from someone who works with a lot of corporate people and companies.

 

When you want change to happen get buy in from as many parties who are stake holders it actually works since all have some kind of a voice to affect the change. Transition becomes easier and there is a little bit for most not everyone will be happy but the many will. In this patch you did none of the above you did not include the player base unless you were in communication with the select few. Try next time to actually have a good discourse with the many.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



comtedumas #31 Posted 23 June 2018 - 05:40 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 4895 battles
  • 904
  • [FK] FK
  • Member since:
    04-11-2016

Give me my AA protection at altitude for bombers back and unlock the bombsite from being a specialist item only.  Its stupid that aa is so powerful now and we lost protection from it, and sending up bombers with no bombsite at all is really stupid.  I am not asking for radar or Norden bombsite levels, just give me back what I had.  I went from being a very good bomber to having a shotgun at altitude, and even multiple bombs cant make up for the inaccuracy now.  How am I supposed to get the equipment to specialize the bombers if I can't hit anything with the bombers at all?  

 

And lets not even mention that everything is behind a "got to win" requirement now too.  As a game you made it so that individual players cant win a match by themselves, but then you require victories to do basic stuff like gather salvage or specialize your airplane.  Logically you cant have it both ways.  3 random people and a bunch of bots do not a "team" make, so you cant logically expect them to perform like a team would to get wins. 

 

To specialize the bombers you want me to get "X" number of turret kills against enemy players only, not air defense aircraft and the German bombers have little better than a M1 Garand sticking out of the back of the bomber to shoot at enemy planes with.  Gee, can I be the only one seeing a problem there?  I cant fly and shoot the turret at enemy planes, when I fly I cant hit anything bombing, I cant win because I cant hit anything bombing, 

You have set the bombers up for failure.  

 

Oh, yes, one more thing.  fix the framerate.  I just got a new computer, a Ryzen 7 1700X (16GB of ram and a 500GB NVME game drive) with a RX 580, but I only get 15-30 fps, and every other game on the planet I get in the 100s.  And I have a new monitor too with AMD Freesync support so that's not an issue.  Other than crappy frame rate the game looks great, all you have to do is optimize it some and you have a winner in this category.  


Edited by comtedumas, 23 June 2018 - 05:50 PM.


Ace_BOTlistic_Cosmo #32 Posted 23 June 2018 - 08:14 PM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 642 battles
  • 3,225
  • [3NIC] 3NIC
  • Member since:
    01-26-2014

View PostSlappedbyRommel, on 23 June 2018 - 10:51 AM, said:

Great observations and btw War Gaming here is some incite from someone who works with a lot of corporate people and companies.

 

When you want change to happen get buy in from as many parties who are stake holders it actually works since all have some kind of a voice to affect the change. Transition becomes easier and there is a little bit for most not everyone will be happy but the many will. In this patch you did none of the above you did not include the player base unless you were in communication with the select few. Try next time to actually have a good discourse with the many.

hehe... good summation and observations from you Slapp...

marketing and planning pro?

agreed... got to have a plan that uses proven test studies,

forethought is cheaper than guessing


if the pilot's good, see, I mean, if he's really..sharp, he can barrel that baby in so low [he spreads his arms like wings and laughs],

you oughtta see it sometime, it's a sight. A big plane like a '52. VRROOM! There's jet exhaust, fryin' chickens in the barnyard.


Wombatmetal #33 Posted 23 June 2018 - 08:27 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 785 battles
  • 813
  • Member since:
    06-02-2013

- Remove the "must win" constraint. Reward less, but don't punish players. It makes the game too grindy

- Rethink the negative traits deal. I would love my Yak 7 with the 37mm to have greater ranger or faster reload, but not at the expense of accuracy. I cannot afford that at all. 

- Instead of locking the equipment slots, give us choice. Take my P51A, which I want to specialize. It will have a a cockpit slot, an airframe slot, and two engine slots for equipment. Maybe I'd like a forward firing weapon slot so I can get a little more range on the guns. Give me 4 slots, but let me choose which 4. Or take my LaGG-3 (4). It has 3 slots, one is for outboard weapons. The rockets are such a small part of its game, and one third it's upgrade slots is tied up. If I could choose this would not matter. The LaGG-3 (4) is a plane I looked at to specialize and decided it's a waste of time. 

- To go with that, give us a tool, could be on the web page, where we can tinker with different setups. Include pilot skills, so I can see what the planes will look like when I'm done. It is such an investment in grind that I would like to do it more efficiently. 

- Don't force the "top" loadout on us.  On my P38J I might just prefer the 23mm auto cannon over the derpy 37mm. And I might not want to mount bombs and rockets. 

- Tailor the missions to unlock specialist. Where an RB17 shoots down planes well, and so does an A26, a Do 217 is going to have a tough time throwing enough paper wads to knock down a plane. 

- Get rid of the "Oh shoot me now" symbol over planes in battle for specialist aircraft

- Prorate the tokens to unlock specialist. If I am halfway through the grind of the missions, cut the tokens to outright finish it in half. 



crow_man #34 Posted 23 June 2018 - 09:31 PM

    Airman Basic

  • Member
  • 42 battles
  • 3
  • Member since:
    10-04-2014
Pull in every developer from other titles who worked on and created 1.4 and have them recreate it as best they can and launch it.
 


SgtSchlautter #35 Posted 23 June 2018 - 09:58 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 3555 battles
  • 129
  • [HVAR] HVAR
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

I'm glad there is an official spot where I can voice my opinions as well as my concerns about this latest patch. However, as others have said in this forum post, I am pessimistic as to whether or not my opinions matter much and whether they will even be taken into account. However, if you would truly like to know my opinion, then I will link my video on this patch: 

 

https://www.youtube....h?v=42oC85zBgUE

 

However, here are my opinions in written form instead.

 

1. Failure to Keep Promises: This patch was delayed by 2 months from its initial release date. This means the content in this patch spanned development at least for 4 or 5 months I bet. When the patch was delayed, I was disappointed. Especially since it was delayed twice. However, it gave me hope that u guys actually were taking our concerns seriously and delayed the patch to guarantee as few bugs to be introduced as possible. Additionally, I'm pretty sure this patch was promised to include a large quantity of bug fixes and optimizations for performance. In fact, I thought that was going to be the focal point of the patch. When the patch notes were released, I saw very few bug fixes, optimizations, and balance changes and instead saw a great deal of emphasis placed on redoing consumables, equipment, and adding the specialist feature. There was a multitude of new changes and hanger load times were WORSE. Hit registration was so completely wacked that I would be killed with still 85% of my health remaining. FPS was hardly better and the load times to change crew members took an absolute eternity. This, above all, is the most unacceptable part of the patch.

 

2.  Lack of in-game Tutorials: The wording of the changes and such in the patch notes was difficult to follow if i'm completely honest and even after reading the entirety of the notes, navigating the new changes was immensely tricky. There were hardly any tutorials in-game when loading up the update about how to go about dealing with the changes. For those who didn't read the patch notes or watch a video, or had a clan to talk to about the update, I fear navigating the changes would be immensely challenging.

 

3. Replay Feature: I appreciate the replay feature being added in. Of all things, this is probably one of the best parts of the update. That being said, I have some issues with it. First, it makes it look as if players are hitting planes without even aiming at them. Now I'm not sure if it was part of the replay system or the hit registration thing. But either way, it is off. I myself will not be using the replay system in its current form due to a lack of first person view in the replay system. By first person view, I mean a view which shows what the player was looking at when in battle. It shows their exact view and zooms into sniper mode when the player zooms into sniper mode. If these two things get changed, then the replay feature would be perfect.

 

4. Specialist Configuration: Continuing on a positive note, I really like the CONCEPT of specialist configuration. Giving players a goal to strive for after completing all the tech trees is brilliant as many players have completed or have nearly completed all of the tech trees. I also REALLY appreciate the fact that the requirements for specialist are time based rather than skill based. That being said, the victorious conditions NEED to be scrapped. Everyone hates them and it makes losing just that much worse. At the very least, make the top 3 or so players on the losing team in terms of personal points not be punished. But the best way is to just remove that condition. The need to purchase the specialist configuration after already completing the missions does seem a bit janky. But, I don't mind it TOO much as many players have millions of credits just lying around doing them no good anyway. It is a bit wacked up though. Especially since players are required to invest so much more credits on upgrading and calibrating their equipment then they did previously. However, the worst part is the option to bypass the missions with tokens. Once WG inevitably sells tokens for real life currency, then the feature becomes pay to progress. After the huge debacle going on over loot crates and pay to progress features in titles like Battlefront II the past couple of years, this was the WORST time for WG to implement that feature. That debacle has sparked international attention as lootcrates and pay to progress features have even been banned in some countries. That being said, arguments could be made that pay to progress features have always been in the game as players could buy premium, gold, credits, and free experience previously to progress quicker than free to play players. While that is true, the availability of those features (excluding gold) for free to play players and the grind for those items was not too bad (at least in WoWP). The availability of tokens for a free to player player is really low. In order for WG to offer buying tokens for cash to be acceptable, tokens first should become more accessible to free to play players. This includes, but is not limited to, redoing the daily missions, offering events to earn tokens, and increasing drop rates of tokens (because the number of things tokens can be used for now is substantially higher). In either way, the requirements for achieving specialist configuration need tweaking. 

 

5. Consumables: In the past version, players could choose between any 3 consumables and place universal ammunition onto their planes when it was stock or elite. Now, mid tier planes can only mount 2 or 3 consumables and now universal ammo is registered as a consumable. Additionally, each consumable slot is restricted to which consumables can be used in that slot. This makes it impossible for stock or elite planes to mount the same consumables as they could prepatch. In many cases, the specialist status unlocks slots to allow players to mount the same consumables they had on their plane prepatch without allowing them to mount new consumables. So although the number of consumable slots has indeed increased, the amount of consumables available really hasn't changed. For example, my Corsair can mount engine restarter, control surfaces, first aid kits, and universal ammunition. There is one other slot for outboard weapons, but improved fragmentation is the only logical choice. WG claimed that this new system offered MORE options for consumables, but infact it has instead offered fewer. A stock plane and an elite plane have fewer slots available than prepatch and specialized planes don't have much more options than before. Also, the restriction of each slot in terms of what can go into that slot reduces even further the customization options compared to prepatch. The solution? remove the restrictions of what can go into each consumable slot. Offer 3 consumable slots stock and unlock one slot for elite and one more unlocked for a specialist configuration. I do have one other thing to say: the new consumables don't really seem to have as much opportunities to be used when it is unwise to mount them without having the consumables that heal dead pilots and such. Those consumables are so vitally important in my opinion that not mounting them is immensely foolish. If it were up to me, I would really like having a pneumatic re-starter, control surface trim, First aid kit, and fire extinguisher be universal between all planes. The feature would workd just like 6th sense in Armored Warfare. Every tank and every commander comes with 6th sense automatically and does not take a skill slot. The consumables I mentioned earlier are so important that not putting them on just doesn't make sense. So make those universal on every plane so that the choices between which consumable to use makes people think. Do they want to have a consumable that increases the effect of their boost for a limited time, or a consumable that restores boost availability? Do players want a consumable that increases maneuverability in all axes for limited time, or a consumable that improves roll rate? Do players want a consumable that improves engine thrust for a few seconds or a consumable that lowers the stall speed for a  limited time? Or would players rather have both of the consumables that enhance boosting at the cost of not being able to mount other consumables? Those kind of changes would lead to consumables having value and make players truly think about what works best for their plane and their playstyle rather than sticking to a cookie cuter formula. I get that the current changes are supposed to break the cookie cutter formula, but players hate not having a pneumatic restarter on their planes. Or having to chose between a med kit or a fire extinguisher. Those consumables have completely different purposes and shouldn't even be offered in the same slot.

 

P.S: The changes to Universal ammunition becoming a consumable is a great idea and they are reasonably priced. Good change in my opinion.

 

6. Now for the big one: Equipment. other than lack of bug fixes, optimizations, and balance changes, this is by far the WORST change in this patch. Your previous system was highly cookie cutter and I believe these changes were to break that up. However, what you have essentially done was drive people crazy by not being able to mount equipment that they deem most important on their plane until they reach a specialist configuration. In some cases, a specialist configuration still can't activate the equipment they want because that plane doesn't even have an equipment slot for the piece of equipment they want. This restriction from being able to put on the plane what players want on their plane is one of the largest issues. To fix this issue, remove the restriction to have only particular equipment available in particular slots. So in other words, do what I suggested for consumables. Offer 3 equipment slots stock, unlock one equipment slot for an elite aircraft, and a final unlocked equipment slot for a specialized aircraft. Having only universal equipment slots allows players to choose what is best for their playstyle and the plane they are trying to outfit.

 

7. Enhancing Equipment: Fairly decent system. I like the idea of having different levels of equipment efficiency. However, players do not like negatives on their equipment modules when in the past, there were no negatives. Furthermore, the negatives get worse as you enhance the equipment. This drives players crazy. Additionally, stock equipment is now worse than it was pre patch while ultimate equipment is arguably better than before. Players must first mount a worse equipment module than they had before with an added negative and slowly improve the equipment module over time. Players feel cheated as their plane now performs worse than it did pre patch and they must now enhance their equipment and unlock specialist status to get their plane back to the way it was. This issues has kind of started to morph into the compensation plan, so I'll leave the rest of my argument about that to the next point. My solution? Well, the compensation plan should have been far better if this new system was to be received correctly. However, I personally would like to see materials removed completely and also the different tiers of equipment to be split up as well. Under my new proposal, I would like to see 4 tiers of equipment available to players. The first tier has the lowest positive effect but is also the cheapest while the highest tier equipment has the highest positive effect, but is also the most expensive. This would allow players to purchase equipment based on how many CREDITS they have lying around. Additionally, the 3rd and 4th tier equipment modules would not be available for tiers 1-4. The negative side of the equipment would also be completely removed. This solution would still not be highly accepted by players though. So here I will take it a step further. Instead of giving players a set number of equipment slots, give players a certain limit on points of customization options they would receive for their plane. These customization points would be used to choose which equipment modules to put on the plane. A tier 4 piece of equipment would take more customization options than a tier 1 piece of equipment. Furthermore, elite configuration and the specialist status would give players more customization points. In this system, a player may decide to have only 3 tier 4 equipment modules whereas another player may chose to have like 4 or 5 tier 2 and tier 3 equipment modules. Under this new system, players would be given the ultimate choices to customize their plane EXACTLY how they see fit. If these changes ever came about, I would go absolutely crazy. It would make playing this game FUN, ENGAGING, and STRATEGIC!! :D (I'm going crazy right now as I come up with these ideas. If this ever became a reality, WoWP would be my favorite game of all time).

 

P.S: Remove the bonuses equipment give you. Some are useless while others are invaluable. The RNG part of it too is just stupid. Offering a reroll option is better, but it is still RNG based. Just get rid of the stupid bonuses.

 

8. Calibration: Players hate this system as they've already had to put a ton of credits and materials into getting a specialized plane, ultimate equipment, and gathered the required materials. Now they have to put more credits and more materials into the equipment to squeeze out the best possible performance from the plane. On top of that, the system is 100% RNG based. If a player purchased materials with real money just to try to calibrate their equipment, then the system is entirely loot-crate based. It is a loot crate system and it is nothing but a cash grab. I already said loot-crates have sparked international controversy and having them in this game is absolute garbage. On top of that, this system ties players to the hanger for even longer amounts of time preventing them from actually PLAYING the game. When u guys had those Christmas loot crates, I wasn't exactly for it. Especially with the controversy in 2017. However, you guys surprised us and made the contents in those incredibly generous and I never heard anyone complain about bad rolls. There were guaranteed minimum prizes and the rewards were more than generous. In the end, I thought the loot crates were actually really good and honestly, I never thought I'd say loot crates were good. But u guys surprised me. This calibration loot crate system is AWFUL. My solution? Remove calibration all-together. It is just simply a cash grab and no amount of salvaging can fix this system.

 

9. Materials: Materials were a new currency and type of resource added in this latest patch. They are used to enhance and calibrate equipment. However, their low spawn rate and ridiculous requirement to win in order to receive any makes them the worst resource in the game. When trying to play battles for a particular resource it is always incredibly frustrating to get none of the resource you were after. The solution? Offer materials for draws and defeats. Furthermore, the drop rate comparison to all the materials you need in order to enhance and calibrate all of your equipment is far too low. Increase the drop rate by at least 100%. Furthermore, offering an option to trade in resources you have excess of for more valuable resources you currently need is a great way to make materials a decent resource.

 

10. Compensation: Despite all of these changes, a solid compensation plan would have enticed players to try the changes with a positive attitude. Compensating people with either the credit value of the equipment or exchanging their equipment for ultimate versions of the equal valued equipment module would have made people much more open to trying the changes. Players would still have to spend credits to purchase new equipment and new consumables as well as calibrating them, but the compensation plan would have felt to favor the consumer. Happy customers means more money. Your compensation plan for this update was horrific and was frankly an insult to my investment into the game thus far. The value of a stock equipment module pales in comparison to the value of the equipment on our planes previously. It would have been more advantageous for players to sell all of their equipment on their planes previously before being 'compensated' with stock garbage.

 

11. Terrible Prioritization: In a bug ridden and poorly optimized game, bug fixes and optimizations should be the ultimate priority. When I loaded into the game for the first time after the patch, I was greeted with a 'cinematic' giving me a tour of a new hanger. Making that cinematic is a waste of time when the dev team is so tiny. Also, why did you make a new hanger? Is it really necessary? If you were going to make any new hangers, the hanger should be much simpler than it was previously in order for load times to be reduced. The hanger we have now is more complicated and the load times are even worse. I feel this was highly uncessary when game breaking bugs and terrible optimization plagued the game.

 

Overall, there were some decent concepts, but the way those concepts were implemented was horrific. I suppose change could have been viewed as necessary, but should have been a lower priority than fixing bugs and improving optimization. We had to wait an extra two months for this update, and for those two months to not remove massive, game breaking bugs from the game was horrible. Many of the changes felt like cash grabs and the compensation plan was not in player's best interest. As for the actual changes in the patch, some were good in concept, but need massive revisions. I hope WG takes us seriously or at least half the community is gone. I look forward to seeing the next patch


Edited by SgtSchlautter, 23 June 2018 - 10:27 PM.


MagusGerhardt #36 Posted 23 June 2018 - 10:59 PM

    Horten Test Pilot

  • -Community Ace-
  • 504 battles
  • 5,527
  • [DRACS] DRACS
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012
In WG's defense to the above poster, the Zeppelin Hangar has existed since before the Bombers were introduced into the game.  It's a "special use" hangar that appears from time to time.

 

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith, Paris, 13 Nov. 1787


SgtSchlautter #37 Posted 23 June 2018 - 11:11 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 3555 battles
  • 129
  • [HVAR] HVAR
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostMagusGerhardt, on 23 June 2018 - 10:59 PM, said:

In WG's defense to the above poster, the Zeppelin Hangar has existed since before the Bombers were introduced into the game.  It's a "special use" hangar that appears from time to time.

 

Ah. Thanks for the clarification. I suppose this now makes a fair bit more sense. Especially if this special hanger is easier to customize. Additionally, from what I can tell, it is a universal hanger now for both premium and nonpremium accounts. Guess I can let that one slide then

Edited by SgtSchlautter, 23 June 2018 - 11:12 PM.


mnbv_fockewulfe #38 Posted 23 June 2018 - 11:42 PM

    First Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 247 battles
  • 2,971
  • [3NIC] 3NIC
  • Member since:
    12-06-2013

Seems a lot of us of coming up with the same points.

However, our solutions are different.

I fear this discrepancy may cause a solution that none of us want to be chosen.:( 


Be sure to check your logic privileges before posting on the forum.

 

mnbv_fockewulfe.png


 


SgtSchlautter #39 Posted 23 June 2018 - 11:48 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 3555 battles
  • 129
  • [HVAR] HVAR
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Postmnbv_fockewulfe, on 23 June 2018 - 11:42 PM, said:

Seems a lot of us of coming up with the same points.

However, our solutions are different.

I fear this discrepancy may cause a solution that none of us want to be chosen.:( 

 

True, but it is clear that no one is satisfied with their current solution anyways. So even if one of our solutions are chosen, then it has to be better than no change at all. right?

mnbv_fockewulfe #40 Posted 23 June 2018 - 11:54 PM

    First Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 247 battles
  • 2,971
  • [3NIC] 3NIC
  • Member since:
    12-06-2013

View PostSgtSchlautter, on 23 June 2018 - 11:48 PM, said:

 

True, but it is clear that no one is satisfied with their current solution anyways. So even if one of our solutions are chosen, then it has to be better than no change at all. right?

 

It'll be like this.

The direction of the game is headed south right now.

I suggest we go north east, you suggest we north west.

The devs will probably end up going south east/west.

I like your optimism. 


Be sure to check your logic privileges before posting on the forum.

 

mnbv_fockewulfe.png


 





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users