Type 5 Heavy review - why this tank is extremely bad for the game, very poorl...
Дата: 25.09.2017 14:45:38
WunderWurst, on 25 September 2017 - 11:26 AM, said: Eks Deh.... I know its not your job you are about as far away from
the actual development of the game as I am but eks to the deh.
A billion Dollar company (BILLION!!111!1one!!1Eleven!) which
cannot handle balancing to an at least decent level is something
new. Oh wait I forgot... WG abuses the balancing to make the game
more pay2win so we can finally get SerBs moon base. If you dont
have anything usefull to say how about dont say anything at all and
dont make a fool out of yourself as you most certainly wont be able
to back up your claims, even though that is most certainly not your
fault but the fault of the Devs. A competent and not as greedy
company as WG would have understood the problems certain aspects of
the game cause. They would have pulled the plug of these problems a
long time ago. Not so much WG.Ph3lan: Hey WunderWurst! First of all, this is not the first
time that I come across your posts and each and every time they are
non-constructive and passive aggressive. Please consider this fair
warning that if I keep bumping into similar posts from you I'll
give you a longer time-out from the forums. These kind of posts
won't achieve anything, so there is no reason to have them here.
Not sure what you mean by not backing up my claims: I
said that I will include the post in my report - This is simply a
fact. I said that if the tank needs more balancing our devs will do
so - this is also a fact and it is true for the whole game. While I
think you severely underestimate how complicated it is to balance a
huge game like WoT, balancing is actually happening continuously
and with every Update.
Aikl, on 25 September 2017 - 11:31 AM, said: Feedback reports? This sounds new. I'm sure it isn't,
however. Jokes aside, I'm sure it would benefit both
the forum users taking the time to write extensive essays on
gameplay elements and WG staff writing reports on them to have a
more systematic approach. Maybe a template and a dedicated section?
At least some way of setting a 'minimum requirement' for a
submission, keeping it away from the Gameplay subsection, and
perhaps a voting system. Maybe a Yes/No poll with no comments might
suffiice for feedback, not too sure. A separate system for
filtering users in the forum might also help. Minimum
account age, battle requirements, separate 'banning system' for the
subsection... endless options. As for the general 'tone' and
language of the post in question: That is the result of
long-lasting issues with the game that aren't addressed properly -
and having a forum where we're told that our opinions are
considered, but with no real proof (until recently). Yes, the
Japanese heavy tanks have undergone changes, but ultimately changes
that don't fix the real problems with them. They're still
slow bricks with a huge derp gun and armor largely impervious to
standard ammo. While Maus is far from a weak tank even
now, it at least got a nerf addressing what seemed to be the main
problem with it - the insane DPM.Ph3lan: Believe it or not we are collecting a lot feedback from you
guys. We are gathering general feedback about the game as well as
specific feedback about certain content as well. For example, we
are gathering specific feedback about every piece of new content we
introduce to the game. The important thing to bear in mind here,
that feedback is not the only source of information the devs are
looking into, they also have access to a lot of backyard data about
the game. They use a combination of feedback and backyard data to
make balance changes. I like your ideas for the feedback
section and we might consider something like this in the future,
but for now the best place to submit your feedback is in the
Public Test forum section for upcoming changes and the Current
Update sections for all the content that is already on the live
client. These are the sections, we always check when we look for
feedback. As far as the format is concerned I would
leave it up to you guys, not everyone is comfortable using the same
template. The best feedback focuses on one argument and backs it up
with clear facts and reasoning. I would also keep it much shorter
than the OP, although if you cut out the saltines and hyperbole
this post would be much shorter as well 
Tone: I understand where
you guys are coming from, I have been on these forums since the
beta days. But this is something we need to change if we want to
have a constructive discourse about the game. We have to
communicate more and show you that we are listening to the
community, and I think we have improved in that regard, but I think
we can also expect a bit of goodwill from you guys in return.
Tone: I understand where
you guys are coming from, I have been on these forums since the
beta days. But this is something we need to change if we want to
have a constructive discourse about the game. We have to
communicate more and show you that we are listening to the
community, and I think we have improved in that regard, but I think
we can also expect a bit of goodwill from you guys in return.
Type 5 Heavy review - why this tank is extremely bad for the game, very poorl...