Equipment 2.0 Is Here!
Дата: 12.08.2020 20:33:45
gunslingerXXX, on 10 August 2020 - 09:20 AM, said: Thank you for commenting. I find it odd that none of
the CC's that I've watched mentioned that for example 30 demount
kits is a bit low for players with large garages. I find it a bit
odd that none mentioned (that I'm aware of) their opinion about
bino's etc. not free to move around anymore. I find it odd that
none mentioned that for tier 8+ lots of equipment units will become
more expensive. When I notice (in my perception) odd
behaviour I quickly think other things are happening/being
manipulated. Maybe I sould be less critical. I can assure you this
is not about spreading misinformation (at least not on purpose)eekeeboo: Hello, I believe the ones I've watched did bring it up, but for the
most part they only reply if prompted for this. Many of the
contributors actually don't mention it because they don't need them
and will already have purchased them or just keep their set up. I
know many people are currently wrapping their heads around the
content and making sure they're well informed before potentially
having to do guide videos twice 
A few mentioned the
binos in that "It's not good for free to play players.... but...."
or something to that effect, but for that is usually followed by "I
like the ability to move them in slots for free" and highlighting
the way if you are smart you can make credits and looking at ways
to maximise builds. I appreciate that you may seem this, but many
content creators are indeed just trying to figure everything out
before making a statement. But if you watch their streams a few
have already settled into a rhythm with the new equipment favouring
loadouts that suit their agenda (like dpm farming or spotting for 3
moe) etc. Hope this helps.
A few mentioned the
binos in that "It's not good for free to play players.... but...."
or something to that effect, but for that is usually followed by "I
like the ability to move them in slots for free" and highlighting
the way if you are smart you can make credits and looking at ways
to maximise builds. I appreciate that you may seem this, but many
content creators are indeed just trying to figure everything out
before making a statement. But if you watch their streams a few
have already settled into a rhythm with the new equipment favouring
loadouts that suit their agenda (like dpm farming or spotting for 3
moe) etc. Hope this helps. dasdon, on 10 August 2020 - 10:03 AM, said: The game companies that survive are the ones that are also
not afraid to monetise effectively to stay alive. heres the rub tho you havent been effective and its plainly showing now. this game is in the terminal decline stage now. by that i mean theres no new players to replace the old and the bored so what do we get a grubby money grabbing company that tries to bend its loyal supporters over a barrel to extort every last penny, and for what? wargaming has been laughing all the way to the bank selling us crap pixel tanks for the price of a real game and we keep falling for it.
mind now one day when wargaming is a stain on your shoe your going to realise crap i gave them 1000s and i have nothing to show for it.well maybe a teashirt at best saying i got scammed by a greedy company once.
eekeeboo: Whil you say haven't been effective, not many F2P games make it 5
years, let alone 10, let alone the size of tanks and publishing
other titles. You say not effective, but by what standard, there's
plenty of figures and numbers that say otherwise. I don't know of a
single game ever, that after 10 years has not seen decline, if you
have any knowledge of game development and life cycle you will know
that this is natural and things like rejuvenation and targetting
your game for different segments and ensuring you're able to cater
to new audiences easier by checking the main pain points for people
who install and play less than 10 games (for instance). Loyal
supporters are not always supporters, supporters are people who are
invested in your game both in time but money. For many people their
invest time and expect everything in return without spending a
penny. You can cater your game to them, but you should not tailor
your game to them, just like any business. While you say selling
"crap pixel tanks" that is your judgement on lack of value, many
people I know see it as spending money on time they would have
otherwise spent on models, or other hobies and past time. And your
final statement gives a solid insight into your mindset, I wonder
if you have any large corporate experience?
geekuma, on 10 August 2020 - 10:19 AM, said: Thank you, eekeeboo. I always appreciate it, when I get
feedback from staff or community members :-) I am not
disagreeing with the fact, that every business needs to make money.
I am disagreeing with the business decisions, which have
unfortunately destroyed the reputation of Equipment 2.0. After
these few days of playing I have really gotten into liking the new
equipment to play with. They really add new and usable options to
the game. Because it could have been made in a more
player-friendly way. I have suggested the alternative approach:
replace all the equipment on players' tanks with the best
equivalent and give players the remaining difference in credits
back as credits. That would have helped with the acceptance of the
change and the credits on the saldo would have encouraged more
active in-game economy. It's just like in the real life: when
governments give tax-payers tax returns, tax-payers are going to
feed that money back into the economy and boost it.
Making Binoculars and Camouflage net fixed equipment, and therefore
forcing users make more purchases has also caused a lot of bad
blood in the player base. There has been nothing wrong with this
solution for 10 years, so why change it now? Creating different
classes of Binoculars and Camouflage nets (like now has been done)
was not forcing to change them into fixed equipment at the same
time. And lastly, the measly number of 30 Demount kits
in return to player... That literally feels like an insult to all
of us older players with a lot (more than 10) tanks. We have spent
a lot of money in the game over the years, and this "gesture" just
makes us feel very unappreciated. It's almost like Donald Trump's
recent phone call to billionaire and major Republican supporter
Sheldon Adelson, where he was complaining not receiving enough
support (he has been donating at least $100m to Trump's
re-election campaign). While it's a nice idea to help new players
to get into the game, the execution of this idea has slapped the
oldest and most loyal players straight onto their faces.
Edit: As a business analyst myself I know there has been a
lot of Excel woodoo and shiny PowerPoint slides being tossed around
before making those business decisions. And to me it seems that
whoever made the decision, just simply doesn't understand the
player base. It does not help a bit, that on paper no player is
losing any credits (because of the replacing gear and the resale
value of them). My suggestion above would have also been performed
with the exact same number of in-game credits, but it would have
boosted the in-game economy instead of stagnating it and causing
rejectful feelings in the most loyal player base. It is still not
too late to change this. There is a ton of equipment still waiting
to be demounted in the next patch, there is still time to withdraw
the bad decisions, there is still time to say sorry and try again
with a better attitude towards players. I can only hope, that
someone in the management with a big enough tie will listen to this
and show some common sense. Making players like the game will
make them pay for it. Trying to force players to pay for the game
will make them disappear. Simple as that. I want to
repeat again, that I am not blaming the WG foot soldiers, like
developers, coders, testers, customer support or community members
for any of this. You guys have the unpleasant job of taking the
heat from the player base and trying to explain things the best way
to angry players. Sterkte, as the Dutchies say.
gl&hf, geekuma Edit: Corrected some English and
added one more paragraph. eekeeboo: The problem with "best equivelant" is that they are not best for
everyone, some people really do want other items. Sorry for jumping
to the point but I am past the time I should stop and am just
scouting the forums and replying in off time right now. I hope
you're still having fun with the equipment. While you see no
problem with the camo net and bino issue for 10 years, I can assure
you if there was actually no issue, then it wouldn't have been
touched. Quite seriously if there was nothing wrong with equipment
and it was perfect. We would not have spent the time, energy and
resources changing it for as long as we have And for the 30 demount kits, this
is as I mentioned (not sure if here) there's a number you have to
go with on averages, at which point it's never ending and you draw
a line somewhere or you just make them pointless. People can get
them easily and for free if they so choose. And while I
appreciate your view point, I'm sure you can appreciate with your
industry knowledge, that sometimes decisions have to be made that
can aggrivate some parts of the players, risking the benefit to
many others. For instance, there's a system right now if you look
carefully into the exchange where some and many players make
positive net gain on credits (which i'm not going to share for
obvious reasons), while some will lose out, they are by far no
where near the majority Again I wish you
continued fun in the game and I will slack on the forums and spend
my time on other places these days due to more responsibilities
elsewhere
And for the 30 demount kits, this
is as I mentioned (not sure if here) there's a number you have to
go with on averages, at which point it's never ending and you draw
a line somewhere or you just make them pointless. People can get
them easily and for free if they so choose. And while I
appreciate your view point, I'm sure you can appreciate with your
industry knowledge, that sometimes decisions have to be made that
can aggrivate some parts of the players, risking the benefit to
many others. For instance, there's a system right now if you look
carefully into the exchange where some and many players make
positive net gain on credits (which i'm not going to share for
obvious reasons), while some will lose out, they are by far no
where near the majority Again I wish you
continued fun in the game and I will slack on the forums and spend
my time on other places these days due to more responsibilities
elsewhere BRONSON1972, on 10 August 2020 - 10:32 AM, said: Well you just proved how out of touch you are with the core of your
players, the ones who played this game a lot, for many years and
were happy to spend money on it, you have taken a big dump on all
of us, not one of my clan is happy with the changes so that's 99%
unhappy (allowing 1% for those absent or lying) , when your new
players try the game, get bored, don't spend a penny on it and
leave, maybe then you will realise what a mistake you made, I just
hope I am around to see it.eekeeboo: Me in particular because so far nearly ever point of feedback I've
seen I already predicted months ago But if you mean overall, it's not
being out of touch but making the decisions to help the game
survive longer. Can you please tell me exactly what and how many of
your clan don't like? Because 99% is interest statistic for a
number of the average clan and the amount they will dislike on
equipment.
But if you mean overall, it's not
being out of touch but making the decisions to help the game
survive longer. Can you please tell me exactly what and how many of
your clan don't like? Because 99% is interest statistic for a
number of the average clan and the amount they will dislike on
equipment. grasho, on 10 August 2020 - 10:39 AM, said: Eek Thank you for taking the time to engage with us. It is
appreciated. I generally agree with a lot of what you are
saying: new content is good and you cannot please
everyone. I have been having exactly the same conversations
with my customers for a decade. However, what WG appear to
be missing is that not all change is good, and some change
causes unexpected pain. All we want is for that pain to be
taken away and the destructive changes removed. You keep
saying demounting for gold is not a problem because we now get free
demount kits (whilst charging a million or more for
them 
). Demount kits are a powerful
tool to achieve the Equip 2.0 aim of more diverse setups. Yet
you ration them, actively discouraging players from changing.
Players need a regular and consistent supply of demount kits
(or a number saved) to help achieve WG’s aim. Forcing players
to choose between gold (a cost), destruction (a cost) or
hoping for a mission (frustration or luck) when they realise
better equipment is available will discourage change.You say you want to move in the direction of the majority. Again, a good idea. Yet every time you move towards the majority, the number of players reduces. Maybe your methods for feedback are failing to identify negative factors? For example, at the weekend, I was surveyed (would I recommend the game?). I gave a negative answer and the survey closed. As an individual who has conducted customer surveys, this was surprising. The survey provided no useful feedback for WG. It would have been more valuable if it then asked why my response was negative. This makes me wonder if your feedback methods skew results so they favour positives and ignore negatives.
You know my other gripes and they are not particularly negative towards Equip 2.0 (as we English say, c’est la vie) but are around unfair loss , how the changes work against the Equip 2.0 aims, and how you are trying to achieve uniformity and compliance (something that discourages fun). I will finish by highlighting one of your quotes (and please do not see this as cherry picking, but a practical example). And while you can have fun playing a tanke the way it's not supposed to be played, you should only do this when you know HOW, a player with less than 1k games who doesn't know spotting, camo or armout mechanics yolog scouting on Prok is going to rage more than a person who knows how it should be done. There is a point when you can get away with it, for yourself after that many battles you know how it should be done, many do not. I was that player. I had hundreds of BT7 games when I started playing WoT, whizzing around Prok trying to scout and failing hard (we did not have the “last seen here” markers and viewrange drawn on the minimap). I did not rage, I did not complain, I was not discouraged. I leant not to cross the centre line until 8 enemy had died, at which point I could devastate the rest Failures are more useful than successes.
eekeeboo: Hello, Any time, I know my answers won't always be
popular and I can seem harsh at times, but that's my blunt
Yorkshire way and that I'm usually here in rushed moments while
neglecting other parts of my work (or on off time like now). And
you are very right about not all change is good, but sometimes
necessary non-the-less, especially in business. And
while it seems like "rationing" the average player is not likely to
need the amount of demount kits made readily available, 30 may seem
low, but I can speak from personal experience having bought as many
as I could for credits, I've used 2 since the changes. That's how
little I've changed my set-ups since the update. And no matter how
many you give, it's never enough until it's too much, and that's
where you have to draw the line where you keep things reasonable
and don't destroy the economy of them and their value, this has
been done in the past for some items and you need to avoid
it. Can you specify the survey, we've given a few at the
moment and feedback is more than just surveys. We use those,
platforms and CM feedback, the responsible people will spend time
in streams and blogs and will look at the opinions from people then
there's a large process of putting it all together and decisions
are then made on what to do and if anything does in fact need
doing. Negative answers are checked and noted, but for the most
part there's even more checking into that feedback on... is this
player a supporter or someone who is just giving negative feedback
until they get free stuff? etc And I very much see your point
with your example, I too was one of those people, but the amount of
people like us who stuck around during the "hardcore" days are not
as plentiful. The game environment and ecosystem has changed since
those days. Players expect different things from days gone by and
require a difference experience. If you see the main reason for
most of your new players leaving is X Y and Z, then you should act
on those while natural player churn continuesm, trying to bring in
new blood before you run out of your existing player base, the
staple of any game life cycle
vanderkat, on 10 August 2020 - 10:41 AM, said: Nit-picking over the accuracy of fractions of a percentage
does not negate the point of the comment, though.eekeeboo: It is important in that it highlights the difference between "all
99 people" vs "all 20/25" people. And did all 25 speak to you, did
they all say the same, have all 25 logged in, or is that more
like... 9? Of those 9 have they all said the exact same thing? Or
did they have their own opinions and points? This is the difference
in feedback, and why it's important to be specific in what you
say.
AngryObnoxiousOtter, on 10 August 2020 - 10:41 AM, said: The vast Majority in my clan are also extremely unhappy. The map
and ping changes are the biggest gripe and highlights how
detached the devs are. There are changes that no one needed or
asked for, ever!!!! Golden rule If it's not broken DO
NOT FIX ITeekeeboo: Map changes are a bit different as they're mostly done on stats and
battle data than requests. The communication system I'm sure no one
in your clan asked for, but I can tell you for a fact many people
have for a long time asked for changes in the ping system ability
to ask for help, asking for the mini map to be easier to read, more
usable in battle, make it more prominant for new players and so on
and so forth. You've said yourself during streams, many people
don't use mini map, now they're quite possibly more inclined to do
so.
grasho, on 10 August 2020 - 10:58 AM, said: Hey, if WG can claim a 10% discount is “slashing prices” and having to grind to Tier X is “making it easier to earn bonds”, then I think the 99% is a perfectly acceptable calculation using WG’s standards as the benchmark.
eekeeboo: You can Slash the price on 1 target, or you slash by hitting
multiple targets. Just a note to remember.
BRONSON1972, on 10 August 2020 - 11:00 AM, said: 85% of comments on here disagree with you I think, sorry if
I might be a % or two out.eekeeboo: Out of those 85% how many are the same people?
geekuma, on 10 August 2020 - 11:10 AM, said: A statistical fact: 92,7% of people who use percentages to
back their claims up, pull that number out of their hat. Or a sock.
Or a belly bag. Whatever people like to wear and pull things out
from. :-P gl&hf, geekuma eekeeboo: 60% of the time it works every
time!
Equipment 2.0 Is Here!