45 replies to this topic

[MagusGerhardt]

blindfoId, on 06 August 2018 - 06:01 AM, said:

 

I see. Well, I totally agree on this point. Dependence on wining plays kind of a cruel joke. Probably, I can please you a little bit with saying that the developers think the same, that is why the system of gaining materials is being developed at the moment. It is likely that some types of materials won't be dependent upon a win.

 

 

I appreciate your, and by extension their, interest in improving this.  It is a MAJOR quality of life issue in the game right now and the biggest reason that my playtime has been majorly cut back since this patch came out.

 

I don't have enough free time to waste any of it.  Right now, time played in Warplanes that results in a loss is time wasted because I earn progression for nothing I am currently working on.

 

Making "some types of materials" available on a loss is a non-starter.  It will just create an artificial scarcity of the parts that can only be gained on wins.  If WG wants this crafting system to have any level of success, the parts must be given out in large enough amounts that players feel comfortable actually using them instead of hoarding the pittance we get.

 

All parts for era earned based on personal performance in any battle, win or lose.  That's what the game needs.  Specialist (Though the issues with having to equip crappy configurations is terrible) progression must happen on a win or a loss, non-negotiable, if WG wants to reduce the sting felt by the players from this change. 

 

After those two things are accomplished we can discuss some of the ridiculous requirements for Specialist that some planes have to endure.  My German bombers MUST SHOOT DOWN enemy team aircraft to get specialist?  When their role is crapping bombs from high altitude and their self defense weapons are incapable of the task of actually defending them?  That's a sick joke, right there, and many other aircraft have the same issues with their requirements for specialist.

[mnbv_fockewulfe]

MagusGerhardt, on 07 August 2018 - 10:31 PM, said:

 

I appreciate your, and by extension their, interest in improving this.  It is a MAJOR quality of life issue in the game right now and the biggest reason that my playtime has been majorly cut back since this patch came out.

 

I don't have enough free time to waste any of it.  Right now, time played in Warplanes that results in a loss is time wasted because I earn progression for nothing I am currently working on.

 

Making "some types of materials" available on a loss is a non-starter.  It will just create an artificial scarcity of the parts that can only be gained on wins.  If WG wants this crafting system to have any level of success, the parts must be given out in large enough amounts that players feel comfortable actually using them instead of hoarding the pittance we get.

 

All parts for era earned based on personal performance in any battle, win or lose.  That's what the game needs.  Specialist (Though the issues with having to equip crappy configurations is terrible) progression must happen on a win or a loss, non-negotiable, if WG wants to reduce the sting felt by the players from this change. 

 

After those two things are accomplished we can discuss some of the ridiculous requirements for Specialist that some planes have to endure.  My German bombers MUST SHOOT DOWN enemy team aircraft to get specialist?  When their role is crapping bombs from high altitude and their self defense weapons are incapable of the task of actually defending them?  That's a sick joke, right there, and many other aircraft have the same issues with their requirements for specialist.

 

I'm sorry Magus, but your feedback is read and valued only for content that will later be added to the game. Based on blindfold's response to my question if the devs will give us a proper response to our feedback (which I can only assume is verbatim barring translation) which amounted to "no" in so many words, there is no point in writing any well thought out feedback (holy run-on sentence batman!).

By telling us "no, we will not tell you what changes will be made based on your feedback" they told me exactly the issues that they will not fix based on our feedback. A lot of which you and I provided similar and overlapping issues, problems, and solutions on. 

Our feedback is valuable only in confirming content they want to add. 

 

It's a slap in your face and mine, as well as our esteemed CM Sonic. If the devs aren't going to tell us what feedback will be implemented, how do you think Sonic feels for having probably wasted hours of his time compiling our concerns? 
There is literally no point to feedback anymore. There is no limit to the incompetence of the devs to give the players what they want.

"Material gains on wins was a cruel joke"? Really? Then why are they so hesitant to abolish their own admitted failure? Maybe something got lost in translation, which seems to be the story of the whole game's existence.  

[blindfoId]

MagusGerhardt, on 08 August 2018 - 01:31 AM, said:

All parts for era earned based on personal performance in any battle, win or lose.  That's what the game needs.  Specialist (Though the issues with having to equip crappy configurations is terrible) progression must happen on a win or a loss, non-negotiable, if WG wants to reduce the sting felt by the players from this change. 

 

Wow, it seems like you spied on our development team! Not long ago we asked the team to share some of their plans which are based on the collected feedback and these changes are  mentioned on the first places. 

The concepts based on the analysis of players' feedback, which are being reviewed and processed at the moment, are as follows:

 

• Removing the dependence on victory in Specialist missions. It should make the obtaining of Specialist configuration easier and more affordable;
• Reducing the cost of skipping Specialist configuration missions for tokens if there is actual progress on this mission (the more progress - the lower the cost in the tokens);
• Gaining materials in non-victorious battles by players who show outstanding results in such a battle (for example, gain 10,000 combat points or the like), i. e. not just giving out materials for a lost battle but rewarding the players who played for the victory, but for some reason (whether it is an unsuccessful coordination of the team, or a small number of real players in the team), the battle was lost. 

 

These ideas are adopted and processed, though at the moment we are not ready to say when exactly these changes will appear in the game. Here you can find some more information. The topic is edited.

 

mnbv_fockewulfe, on 08 August 2018 - 04:04 AM, said:

It's a slap in your face and mine, as well as our esteemed CM Sonic. If the devs aren't going to tell us what feedback will be implemented, how do you think Sonic feels for having probably wasted hours of his time compiling our concerns? 

There is literally no point to feedback anymore. There is no limit to the incompetence of the devs to give the players what they want.

"Material gains on wins was a cruel joke"? Really? Then why are they so hesitant to abolish their own admitted failure? Maybe something got lost in translation, which seems to be the story of the whole game's existence.  

 

I am sorry, but you are getting it wrong. The devs are ready to give answers when they are asked. For example, you can find the answers in the topic created for your questions or in this topic  created for the purpose to get the players informed concerning different issues. The feedback from that topic was collected and processed long time ago and if you were not informed about the results it is not the devs fault in any case. 

[SlappedbyPatton]

MagusGerhardt, on 07 August 2018 - 05:31 PM, said:

 

I appreciate your, and by extension their, interest in improving this.  It is a MAJOR quality of life issue in the game right now and the biggest reason that my playtime has been majorly cut back since this patch came out.

 

I don't have enough free time to waste any of it.  Right now, time played in Warplanes that results in a loss is time wasted because I earn progression for nothing I am currently working on.

 

Making "some types of materials" available on a loss is a non-starter.  It will just create an artificial scarcity of the parts that can only be gained on wins.  If WG wants this crafting system to have any level of success, the parts must be given out in large enough amounts that players feel comfortable actually using them instead of hoarding the pittance we get.

 

All parts for era earned based on personal performance in any battle, win or lose.  That's what the game needs.  Specialist (Though the issues with having to equip crappy configurations is terrible) progression must happen on a win or a loss, non-negotiable, if WG wants to reduce the sting felt by the players from this change. 

 

After those two things are accomplished we can discuss some of the ridiculous requirements for Specialist that some planes have to endure.  My German bombers MUST SHOOT DOWN enemy team aircraft to get specialist?  When their role is crapping bombs from high altitude and their self defense weapons are incapable of the task of actually defending them?  That's a sick joke, right there, and many other aircraft have the same issues with their requirements for specialist.

 

^ WG , If you listen to anything ...listen to what Magus is explaining for the love of ^%@ ....  save the game while you still can.

 

W_W

 

 

[SlappedbyRommel]

blindfoId, on 24 July 2018 - 03:25 PM, said:

 

Yeah, you are totally right - you get something only if you win, so racing for materials at the expense of winning (capturing points or whatever) is not really a good idea. 

Still not sure about the continuation of your comment. You mean that drop must be dependent on personal points or? Could you please specify?

 

Yeah, I've got you point. For now we're researching and gathering feedback on this particular part of gameplay as well, so there's a chance that some changes may be applied to the drop system or restrictions. So the more reasoned and sensible feedback we get, the better.

Actually, the thing is that there's a chance to earn more materials from certain type of aircraft not with the help of. Or you mean there are certain types which are more suitable for farm? (:

 

My pleasure to bring you some information!

The last part is from a player who has lost with 19k points and played a great game but receives nothing for their efforts no reward no drops just xp and silver.

[SlappedbyPatton]

and maybe consider a "Test server"  would have saved a ton of grief and aggravation to the player base ..... but on 2nd thought with this minuscule player base, and numbers dropping ..... it wouldn't matter anyhow...so it makes logic how this patch was just "Trumped" out.

 

W_W

 

 

[SlappedbyPatton]

mnbv_fockewulfe, on 07 August 2018 - 08:04 PM, said:

 

I'm sorry Magus, but your feedback is read and valued only for content that will later be added to the game. Based on blindfold's response to my question if the devs will give us a proper response to our feedback (which I can only assume is verbatim barring translation) which amounted to "no" in so many words, there is no point in writing any well thought out feedback (holy run-on sentence batman!).

By telling us "no, we will not tell you what changes will be made based on your feedback" they told me exactly the issues that they will not fix based on our feedback. A lot of which you and I provided similar and overlapping issues, problems, and solutions on. 

Our feedback is valuable only in confirming content they want to add. 

 

It's a slap in your face and mine, as well as our esteemed CM Sonic. If the devs aren't going to tell us what feedback will be implemented, how do you think Sonic feels for having probably wasted hours of his time compiling our concerns? 
There is literally no point to feedback anymore. There is no limit to the incompetence of the devs to give the players what they want.

"Material gains on wins was a cruel joke"? Really? Then why are they so hesitant to abolish their own admitted failure? Maybe something got lost in translation, which seems to be the story of the whole game's existence.  

 

+1 and +100 more....... well said. and thank you !!

 

W_W

[BoredSightsNA]

There is that old saying that a person can make a first impression only once. I and a few others here seem to believe in more than one second chance.  Your customer's have been extremely patient with WOWP. But, how much patience does the average player need to have to wait for the next update?

 

I get that the goal of materials currency and the specialty sink is to let us have more controls with modifying our planes. My concern is when a F2P game adds too many currencies and sinks, especially when population problems exist, are very rough and almost impossible to come back from. I don't envy you and your company.

 

I'm positive you guys need to give active player's boosters. But the slot that uses  the booster slot is also reserved for the fire extinguisher and other necessary items. A x3 XP multiplier and a 50% credit multiplier for every battle, or even the first battle, until the next update will temporarily help with the population and be an effective motivator for the devs to make the next patch as perfect as humanly possible. You will have to wait for word of mouth and maybe a Twitch campaign to get the word out. Then again you don't want to attract too many bot accounts or idle players.

 

Honestly I don't know all the tools that are at your  and the devs disposal to address the current population problem. Just don't forget us customers have to wait for the next update for anything to be fixed. I hope the best for you and this game. It can be a lot of fun but it's currently not filling the seats. Oh and reassign or layoff the yes-men. I've got a hunch  you have too many yes-men influencing decisions. Take care.

Edited by BoredSights, 08 August 2018 - 05:21 PM.

[mnbv_fockewulfe]

Feedback on the feedback is what I'm advocating for. 

Let me get this straight. The devs are not responsible for letting their customers know when their feedback has been heard. 

This begs the question: then who's responsibility is it? It's not my (the player's) responsibility. It's not immediately the CM's responsibility (the the CM's job is that of relaying info, if there are not given the info to relay, then they cannot relay it). And according to you, it's not the responsibility of the people who will ultimately make the decisions about what will happen. 

Great logic from the devs there. 

All the devs have to do, is go through Sonic's document, and after each bullet point write a "yes" or a "no" and send it back to the forum. If there is an abundance of "no", I will be able to quit wasting my time and move on to something else.

 

slight outrage activated/ How on earth was I supposed to know that our feedback had been processed long ago if I never saw anything on the forums about it, and if I got no response when I asked in discord? /slight outrage deactivated 

Edited by mnbv_fockewulfe, 08 August 2018 - 08:21 PM.

[GonerNL]

blindfoId, on 08 August 2018 - 04:30 PM, said:

• Removing the dependence on victory in Specialist missions.
• Reducing the cost of skipping Specialist configuration missions for tokens if there is actual progress on this mission (the more progress - the lower the cost in the tokens);
• Gaining materials in non-victorious battles by players who show outstanding results in such a battle

 

That would be fantastic !!

I still do not like the whole specialist, materials, enhancing/calibrating thing, but that would make it bearable.

 

And after that some tweaking in the match-maker re. pilot-and bot-skils and not just plane/tier.

[blindfoId]

I would greatly appreciate it if you read my posts attentively as they contain much more information than you quote. For example, many questions asked have already been answered previously. 

---

 

SlappedbyRommel, on 08 August 2018 - 07:35 PM, said:

The last part is from a player who has lost with 19k points and played a great game but receives nothing for their efforts no reward no drops just xp and silver.

 

Some posts above you can find the information on the issue, particularly:

 

blindfoId, on 08 August 2018 - 06:30 PM, said:

• Gaining materials in non-victorious battles by players who show outstanding results in such a battle (for example, gain 10,000 combat points or the like), i. e. not just giving out materials for a lost battle but rewarding the players who played for the victory, but for some reason (whether it is an unsuccessful coordination of the team, or a small number of real players in the team), the battle was lost. 

 

These ideas are adopted and processed, though at the moment we are not ready to say when exactly these changes will appear in the game. 

 

Here you can find some more information. The topic is edited.

 

mnbv_fockewulfe, on 08 August 2018 - 08:53 PM, said:

 It's not immediately the CM's responsibility (the the CM's job is that of relaying info, if there are not given the info to relay, then they cannot relay it). 

 

Actually, it is. I am not the part of the developers team, I am a CM. As you can see I find the information to relay. Still, I cannot change the past I can only make a change in the present and hope for a great collaboration to continue in the future. That is why topics like "Questions for the developers" or "F.A.Q" are created. Though it is kind of off-topic now.

 

GonerNL, on 09 August 2018 - 10:50 AM, said:

 

That would be fantastic !!

I still do not like the whole specialist, materials, enhancing/calibrating thing, but that would make it bearable.

 

And after that some tweaking in the match-maker re. pilot-and bot-skils and not just plane/tier.

 

I personally like the specialist thing, though I think it to be a little bit too grindy, so I am looking forward to the changes too.

 

The team is working on the MM balancer as well, but I have no news to share at the moment.

 

The_Wild_Weasel, on 08 August 2018 - 07:38 PM, said:

and maybe consider a "Test server"  would have saved a ton of grief and aggravation to the player base ..... but on 2nd thought with this minuscule player base, and numbers dropping ..... it wouldn't matter anyhow...so it makes logic how this patch was just "Trumped" out.

 

W_W

 

 

 

The position concerning common test has already been explained over here and here. It may be easier to find the related info if you use the search function in your browser (Ctrl+F). As I see the question still appears, I will probably add this point to the F.A.Q. thread, thank you!
 

[trikke]

blindfoId, on 09 August 2018 - 05:44 AM, said:

I would greatly appreciate it if you read my posts attentively as they contain much more information than you quote. For example, many questions asked have already been answered previously. 

---

Some posts above you can find the information on the issue, particularly:

 

Here you can find some more information. The topic is edited.

 

Actually, it is. I am not the part of the developers team, I am a CM. As you can see I find the information to relay. Still, I cannot change the past I can only make a change in the present and hope for a great collaboration to continue in the future. That is why topics like "Questions for the developers" or "F.A.Q" are created. Though it is kind of off-topic now.

 

I personally like the specialist thing, though I think it to be a little bit too grindy, so I am looking forward to the changes too.

 

The team is working on the MM balancer as well, but I have no news to share at the moment.

 

The position concerning common test has already been explained over here and here. It may be easier to find the related info if you use the search function in your browser (Ctrl+F). As I see the question still appears, I will probably add this point to the F.A.Q. thread, thank you!

 

thank you, BF

[blindfoId]

Spoiler

Total type rank

The total type rank is calculated by the sum of the ranks received by the player for fulfilling all three type tasks of his current aircraft type.

When playing on several types of aircraft (during one match), a separate type rank is calculated for each of the types.

Total rank	1	2	3	4	5	--
The sum of the ranks	13-15	11-12	9-10	7-8	4-6	0-3

 

 

Grade I Achievement Hero of the Sky Badge	Grade II	Grade III	Grade IV	Grade V

 

The first post of the topic has been edited to correspond to the changes in Heavy Fighters personal missions. Also added the medals for achieving maximum effectiveness in fulfilling every mission. 

 

For some reason forum won't display images when there are more images in one post then it allows, so I duplicated the last part in this post under the spoiler.

[Bluegoose02]

Any and all infoe is great and very helpfull ,thanks.

[toshiaki_virgin]

I thought,
Multi-role, sector defense,
5 kills to get grade II, 8 kills to get Grade I.

[blindfoId]

toshiaki_virgin, on 12 March 2019 - 08:17 PM, said:

I thought,
Multi-role, sector defense,
5 kills to get grade II, 8 kills to get Grade I.

 

You are right. Thank you. edited. 

[Mercsn]

blindfoId, on 08 August 2018 - 09:30 AM, said:

 

• Gaining materials in non-victorious battles by players who show outstanding results in such a battle (for example, gain 10,000 combat points or the like), i. e. not just giving out materials for a lost battle but rewarding the players who played for the victory, but for some reason (whether it is an unsuccessful coordination of the team, or a small number of real players in the team), the battle was lost. 

 

These ideas are adopted and processed, though at the moment we are not ready to say when exactly these changes will appear in the game. Here you can find some more information. The topic is edited.

 

 

 

 

Still waiting on that one...

 

Remember, the game is currently designed to minimize single player impact on the overall match.  Punishing a player who performs well, but is unable to affect any meaningful and positive match outcome (because that's the current game design), is stupid and cruel (and the reason I usually stop playing for months at a time). 

[Captain_Underpants53]

Mercsn, on 30 April 2019 - 08:50 AM, said:

 

Still waiting on that one...

 

Remember, the game is currently designed to minimize single player impact on the overall match.  Punishing a player who performs well, but is unable to affect any meaningful and positive match outcome (because that's the current game design), is stupid and cruel (and the reason I usually stop playing for months at a time). 

 

It's only been NINE months. (sarc)  Rome and WoWP weren't ruined in just one day.

[trikke]

Mercsn, on 30 April 2019 - 08:50 AM, said:

 

Still waiting on that one...

 

Remember, the game is currently designed to minimize single player impact on the overall match.  Punishing a player who performs well, but is unable to affect any meaningful and positive match outcome (because that's the current game design), is stupid and cruel (and the reason I usually stop playing for months at a time). 

 

not stupid and cruel at all

 

that's the way all 'team sports' work      sometimes you win as a team, sometimes you lose as a team

 

hardly ever  seldom  never is every member of any team equal in ability        except... maybe tennis or bridge

[losttwo]

trikke, on 02 May 2019 - 07:10 AM, said:

 

not stupid and cruel at all

 

that's the way all 'team sports' work      sometimes you win as a team, sometimes you lose as a team

 

hardly ever  seldom  never is every member of any team equal in ability        except... maybe tennis or bridge

 

That only works if you have all human matches rather than programmed bots.

 

Current meta is a hand full of bots with a handful of various codes assigned for each match.

There is no human element or minuscule at best.