Bravo Wargaming
Дата: 05.06.2018 00:10:58
the_Deadly_Bulb, on Jun 04 2018 - 13:11, said: The term "Global Team" is in reference to a previous post by
Cabbage Mechanic where I first read it. Please reference post
#1 http://forum.worldoftanks.com/index.php?/topic/578659-changes-to-vehicles-with-preferential-matchmaking-notes-on-trade-in/#topmost
Maybe read each others posts? Here's an example of the
kind of response the community is waiting for: Players,
we have been made aware of your sincere and vocal protest against
our intended changes to PMM Premium tanks. We've heard you. Having
given this issue further consideration and due to the overwhelming
negative response to this proposal we are now announcing the
discontinuation of the proposal to remove/re-balance PMM
Premiums. PMM Premiums will be left as they were sold.
Going forward we will endeavour to make changes to MM
to facilitate a better player experience, rather than changing
items paying customers have purchased. We are
currently considering a reprogramming of MM to include provisions
to make 1/3 of all matches same tier, 1/3 of all matches 2 tiers
and 1/3 of all matches 3 tiers. Our inflexible position on
3/5/7 as the preferred template has been identified, along with our
preoccupation with +2/-2 MM as the true problem with the current
MM. Given the success of Frontline we can see no realistic
alternative to increasing the frequency of single tier and 2 tier
matches for all tiers in any effort to improve the player
experience. Thank You for your patience and continued
patronage. Hope this is clear enough for you. FYI,
when it comes to insults no one meets or
matches WG's treatment of its own customers. Your
organisation takes the cake when it comes to "wiping with the hand
that feeds you". 
DomoSapien: Sorry, appears I was drawing an inference that wasn't there as
well. I got a bit confused because the quotation marks typically
implies sarcasm, but the term Global Team was being used literally
in this case.
To clarify, CabbageMechanic is one of my Supervisors. I am a Community Coordinator, not a Manager. Making those types of responses is moreso in his wheelhouse. Making official statements regarding controversial policy is not something I am always able to do, but reporting on sentiment is indeed. I try to do whatever I can, even when I can't do much. I really do apologize if that is, in your opinion, me deflecting or not taking ownership of the issue, but I am not the only member of this team and I can't overstep my boundaries. So in this case I can't give you the type of response you would like to receive, if that's supposed to be an official policy statement.
And I appreciate the clarification as well! I apologize for the misunderstanding but text is not the most efficient way to convey tone. We do indeed have a global team, namely the leadership team at Wargaming HQ in Cyprus, as well as the development team in Minsk!
To clarify, CabbageMechanic is one of my Supervisors. I am a Community Coordinator, not a Manager. Making those types of responses is moreso in his wheelhouse. Making official statements regarding controversial policy is not something I am always able to do, but reporting on sentiment is indeed. I try to do whatever I can, even when I can't do much. I really do apologize if that is, in your opinion, me deflecting or not taking ownership of the issue, but I am not the only member of this team and I can't overstep my boundaries. So in this case I can't give you the type of response you would like to receive, if that's supposed to be an official policy statement.
And I appreciate the clarification as well! I apologize for the misunderstanding but text is not the most efficient way to convey tone. We do indeed have a global team, namely the leadership team at Wargaming HQ in Cyprus, as well as the development team in Minsk!
__WarChild__, on Jun 04 2018 - 13:23, said: What we have hee-yar...is a failure...to communicate (Cool Hand
Luke) First, let me address this: the_Deadly_Bulb is
one of the best allies Wargaming NA has. He is incredibly
supportive of new players. He is patient, kind (isn't this
from the Bible?), etc. Additionally, he spends a lot of money
on this game, not just for himself, but for other players as
well. He is a wise man and therefore ANYTHING he says should
be taken to heart and given full consideration. I have nothing but
respect and admiration for the_Deadly_Bulb. 
Second, Wargaming NA has hired a bunch of new folks
and I am impressed with their NA moxie, i.e. willingness to engage
in conversations with the playerbase. This is especially true
since EVERY word they type will be used against them by the
hundreds/thousands of viewers on the Forums - just check out some
of the recent rant videos citing NA moderator responses. Keep
in mind that Wargaming is many different things and not just
different companies like WoT and WoWS. Wargaming RU is very
different from Wargaming NA. The people we deal with are
Wargaming NA folks who are mostly American and have empathy for our
plight here. People like MeatheadMilitia, Bted72, TragicLoss,
etc. are some of the well known public faces of WG here and I don't
think anyone can say they're not decent, nice, good-hearted
people. I don't know Cabbage or Domo or KRZY, but they appear
to WANT to respond to us to help keep the NA playerbase informed
and somewhat content. But they are hamstrung by a Wargaming
RU company that is secretive, a little sneaky, and in a
COST-SAVINGS mode currently - i.e. eliminating entire Seattle
office, moving CA to TX, etc. The future of Wargaming,
especially here in NA seems a bit sketchy to me at the
moment. There is tremendous frustration and anger over PMM,
MM and the lack of response out of Cypress. NA Staff are well
aware of this but are relatively powerless to deal with anything of
significance. I believe that they WANT to respond to us, but
are given strict guidelines and fed Memos of Understanding from the
home office (the equivalent of Kool-Aid) that they are required to
disseminate. Like their mothers taught them, when they don't
have anything good to say, they keep it to themselves. (And if they
talk out of turn, Wargaming will kill them apparently - just watch
Meathead's WoT Weekly from 2 weeks ago). The point is, we should be thankful and respectful to the Wargaming NA staff and do our best not to put them into the middle of the fray with Wargaming RU. If they get out of line, then they should be chastised for it like anyone. But most of what has been said so far I do not believe is as negative as many people are taking it. Cut them some slack and hopefully they will continue to try and keep us updated on the things that are ahead. We ALL want Wargaming NA to be successful
Happy Tanking! __WarChild__ PS - Got ninja'd
by the_Deadly_Bulb while typing this... 
DomoSapien:
Thanks WarChild, I appreciate the kind words! I wouldn't say we are hamstrung by our global organization, as every part of our organization is working to improve our communication and transparency. It's a work in progress, and it's no easy task but I have a lot of confidence in all our teams moving forward. And I have no doubts as to the_Deadly_bulb's positivity in the community, he/she simply took me by surprise because I'm familiar with acronyms, including the meaning of that one in particular, and wasn't sure why it was directed at me personally. Really didn't mean any offense by my initial comment, I was trying to help direct a frustrated player to a cost-effective alternative to the expensive bundles included with the T14 sale, and include a quick thank-you for the folks who support our game and literally provide me with a livelihood.
The offer still stands, if you'd like to platoon up and get to know me better, I always accept any and all friend requests, and I'm happy to answer whatever questions I reasonably can. If being human and actually trying to have a conversation with you is indicative of failure, I'd rather be a failure and have meaningful conversations than selectively read and reply only to comments that are positive. Even if you don't have anything nice to say, and all the feedback is negative, it's still possible to rationally explain your position without resorting to insults. I simply ask that you treat others the way you would like to be treated.
Thanks WarChild, I appreciate the kind words! I wouldn't say we are hamstrung by our global organization, as every part of our organization is working to improve our communication and transparency. It's a work in progress, and it's no easy task but I have a lot of confidence in all our teams moving forward. And I have no doubts as to the_Deadly_bulb's positivity in the community, he/she simply took me by surprise because I'm familiar with acronyms, including the meaning of that one in particular, and wasn't sure why it was directed at me personally. Really didn't mean any offense by my initial comment, I was trying to help direct a frustrated player to a cost-effective alternative to the expensive bundles included with the T14 sale, and include a quick thank-you for the folks who support our game and literally provide me with a livelihood.
The offer still stands, if you'd like to platoon up and get to know me better, I always accept any and all friend requests, and I'm happy to answer whatever questions I reasonably can. If being human and actually trying to have a conversation with you is indicative of failure, I'd rather be a failure and have meaningful conversations than selectively read and reply only to comments that are positive. Even if you don't have anything nice to say, and all the feedback is negative, it's still possible to rationally explain your position without resorting to insults. I simply ask that you treat others the way you would like to be treated.
_Kradok_, on Jun 04 2018 - 13:50, said: Domo... I appreciate all the comments... but you've still
failed to answer the question... If PMM tanks are the
problem for MM, then why are you still selling them? Can we
get an answer for this? All the 'compiling of data" doesn't
really do squat to answer that for us...DomoSapien: This is information that I quite literally do not have at my
disposal. As soon as we find out what exactly is going on with
Preferential Matchmaking, I should hopefully have an answer for
that question. So, my personal take on it is
this: I think the language in the article wasn't the greatest,
because it suggests that pref MM tanks are the only issue with
Matchmaking. That's not true, there are quite a few issues: you
have games of 30 players each, with 5 different classes, classes
that are divisible into subclasses, from 11 different nations, with
mechanics unique to certain nations, and different maps that favor
different classes above others (Prokhorovka vs. Himmelsdorf),
furthermore some classes and subclasses are weighted differently
than others (ie: the way the number of SPG's in a battle is
limited.) In addition, players can leave the battle as soon as
their vehicle is destroyed, meaning MM can't accurately predict how
many vehicles it'll have at its disposal when forming a match. I
can't claim to know precisely how each match is formed, but I know
that there are tons of different variables it needs to account for:
pref MM is just one of them. It adds strain to the matchmaker,
versus being the sole burden and only cause for the lack of
top-tier matches. By that logic the magic formula to being top-tier
would therefore be playing tier IX exclusively, and I've had plenty
of tier X games in my tier IX vehicles.
On the other hand, it never hurts to gather as much feedback as possible. Believe me, I understand that selling pref MM tanks despite the recent controversy is also a controversial move. Gathering more feedback to illustrate the volume & significance of sentiment, as well as urgency of this issue should theoretically expedite the process of getting that information, however. I'm not monitoring the thread, I'm doing my best to answer your questions with the information I have.
Like I said, I don't want to speculate because speculation leads to misinformation. I'd rather be honest with you and tell you that I don't know than start guessing and end up making promises on behalf of an organization that's much bigger than just little old me. Yes, the question has in fact been raised in a feedback report, I have not received any information regarding the question, and I don't think you're being mean at all (maybe a bit heavy on the sarcasm side, but definitely not mean
) On the contrary that's much
more polite than some of the stuff I saw when I was working in CS
On the other hand, it never hurts to gather as much feedback as possible. Believe me, I understand that selling pref MM tanks despite the recent controversy is also a controversial move. Gathering more feedback to illustrate the volume & significance of sentiment, as well as urgency of this issue should theoretically expedite the process of getting that information, however. I'm not monitoring the thread, I'm doing my best to answer your questions with the information I have.
Like I said, I don't want to speculate because speculation leads to misinformation. I'd rather be honest with you and tell you that I don't know than start guessing and end up making promises on behalf of an organization that's much bigger than just little old me. Yes, the question has in fact been raised in a feedback report, I have not received any information regarding the question, and I don't think you're being mean at all (maybe a bit heavy on the sarcasm side, but definitely not mean
) On the contrary that's much
more polite than some of the stuff I saw when I was working in CS
Bravo Wargaming