Реклама | Adv
  • Rotator
  • Rotator
  • Rotator
  • Rotator
  • Rotator
  • Rotator
  • Rotator
  • Rotator
  • Rotator
  • Rotator
  • Rotator
  • Rotator
  • Rotator
  • Rotator
Сообщения форума
Реклама | Adv

Bravo Wargaming

Дата: 04.06.2018 21:50:55
View PostShookYang, on Jun 04 2018 - 11:56, said: Make upgrading pref mm tanks to non-pref mm with buffs an option that we can opt out of.  If we prefer to keep our pref mm tanks as is, let us.  That means no buffs and still have pref mm, with the expectation that WG will stop trying to fix matchmaking for pref mm tanks.

DomoSapien:
I think one of the concerns would be that segmenting players into Pref/Non-Pref matchmaking pools would place even more strain on the matchmaker than prior, resulting in long queue times for one of these groups of players, and the potential for drastically imbalanced matches. But perhaps there is a way to account for this! Thank you for the suggestion.
 

View PostSpectreHD, on Jun 04 2018 - 12:01, said:   I think he is just highlighting that he has been a WG supporter that others on the forums have gone as far and labelled him a shill. Even then he does not like the decision to alter the PMM vehicles.   He is also not insulting anyone. The "[edited]" in his post is just him showing how discontent he is. The profanity was not directed at any individual.     No, WG should still alter the MM. They got themselves into this mess with their wonderful 3/5/7 template even as tanks are more or less balanced within their same tier. So they should alter the MM, not only for preferential MM tanks even after whatever change the implement and players still keeping their original PMM vehicles, but for all tanks to not always be bottom tier MOST of the time.

DomoSapien:
Personally, I think it's disrespectful to call someone a shill for expressing support regarding something they enjoy. By that same logic I think it's unfair to ignore someone's feedback simply because they are upset and don't express it in the politest way. I understand where he's coming from and I genuinely want to hear what his suggestions would be to best address the situation. I genuinely don't know if Pref MM vehicles are having such a drastic impact on the 3/5/7 MM template or if that was simply poor wording on our part, but I want to make sure I can make my report as comprehensive and clear as possible. That means the largest possible volume of citations for all feedback points. The more people that express a particular position, the more examples of that I can include in the report.

View PostLesser_Spotted_Panzer, on Jun 04 2018 - 12:03, said:   Since you want to know what we would consider an acceptable alternative to the PMM changes, here are my demands/suggestions. Feel free to put them in your feedback report so that the development team can ignore them.     1) Fix the current MM system. 4tankers produced a video that suggested changing MM to 5/5/5 (among other changes). If that worked out as suggested, I would be fine with the removal of PMM status on my PMM tanks (so long as they get some buffage). The main reason people have their pitch forks out is because they are sick and tired of their premium tanks always being bottom tier. So changing our PMM tanks to always see tier 10 tanks is a major kick in the nads. 2) If you don't fix the current MM, I want my PMM tanks to remain as PMM tanks, but they still need to be buffed to be competitive. They are generally unplayable (or unprofitable) since the MM change a year ago. 3) If you really insist on removing their PMM status, I either want a) a full refund (in actual cash - yes I know that is not practical), b) The option to change to another equivalent tank (which is a problem for me since I have them all, or c) Give me a free BIA crew for each one as compensation for losing their PMM status.

DomoSapien: All interesting suggestions! I am genuinely curious to see how a 5/5/5 template would play out, and I'd definitely be interested in testing something like that out. I think some Pref tanks are in a better place than others, and it would have to be done carefully but usually they are only lacking in certain parameters. Slight buffs to these parameters (for example, the IS-6's penetration values) might be a great way to do it. I agree that a cash refund would be pretty impractical, but honestly the free BIA crew as compensation sounds pretty reasonable to me as a player. 

View Postcommander42, on Jun 04 2018 - 12:11, said:   anecdotal but, I know that some people on the forums have said they have spent thousands.  Most people who spend on the game will not spend that much, there are many many people who haven't spent any, and a lot of people who have contributed a small amount, and then the outliers who spend 4(or more..) digits on the game

DomoSapien: Certainly, with every free to play game there are some players who spend a loooot of money. And it's difficult to balance the needs of the players who have spent quite a bit on the game, make sure they feel like they're appreciated for the overwhelming financial support they have given our product, but make sure that all players are treated fairly, and players who spend less aren't treated as second-class citizens simply because they can't afford to dish out a bunch of cash on tanks.

View PostWhisky_A_Go_Go, on Jun 04 2018 - 12:13, said: I love when the "Admin" post a bunch of elitist, snobbish, condescending crap and when he gets called on it he tries to play the victim and post more elitist, snobbish, condescending crap.   Well done, bud.   Look, we all know who you are. We all know you got this gig as a thankless addition to other crap already on your plate. We all know you're also part time which is why you're not here often enough to follow a conversation, let alone be able to comment intelligently in it.   We know a lot more than you think, so the least you can do is not shell out baseless lip service.   The fact is we've complained about the same things for 6 years. You are the 39th community admin I've seen here. You wont be the last.   All of you do the same exact thing: deflect, detract and make hollow promises.   To be frank, it would be in your best interest to stop posting altogether and let us move on to Admin number 40 just for kicks and grins and an absolute lack of anything better to do.

DomoSapien:   To be frank, I wasn't aware that "without folks like you, I wouldn't have this cool job so thanks!" was snobbish, elitist, and condescending. I'm genuinely doing my best to be as honest and understanding as I can. After all, I've been part of this community since well before I started working with Wargaming (just 1 year less than you, actually), and I accepted this job/moved to Texas because I'm confident that our team will be able to make a positive difference in the community. I haven't promised anything other than the promise that I will compile all of your feedback. I'm not a developer, and I don't have the ability to directly implement your suggestions, but I do what I can. 

I would disagree, based on what you've said so far I'd actually say you don't know me at all. I encourage you to read my meet the staff post and actually get to know me instead of wildly drawing inferences that don't exist. I'd be more than happy to platoon up, run some battles and chat with you on teamspeak so we can get to know eachother better and clear up any misunderstandings between us :) Feel free to send me an invite in-game! 


To everyone who has provided suggestions and feedback, thank you for taking the time to provide those! I appreciate all your passion, as well as your creative thinking. World of Tanks is something that, for better or for worse, we all know and love. With every relationship, there are ups and downs, and with every relationship, communication is key. I want to do everything I can to improve that communication, and I can personally promise you all that I'm adding all your feedback to my next report immediately after clicking that "post" button. You guys rock <3 Please keep the suggestions coming! 

Реклама | Adv