Jump to content


Same 'bad' packages


  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

Hiero_Glyph #1 Posted 31 January 2014 - 03:59 PM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 270 battles
  • 2,442
  • Member since:
    07-04-2013
Despite Matthew J35U5 posting a very informative and detailed thread on the flaws of the current packages (http://forum-console.worldoftanks.com/index.php?/topic/16166-the-package-system-an-analysis%E2%80%94updated-with-all-tanks/), and the numerous complaints from this community in terms of how strictly inferior packages are due to not allowing for immediate stock upgrades, WGW has decided to improve not a single package.  This is 100% unacceptable.  Even on tanks like the Matilda where we are only asking for a 2-pdr variant for the top package you have done literally nothing to improve the inherent flaws of the package system.  It is bad enough that you did not even get the gold prices right for things like the 30-day pass with 100k silver (should be 2,500 gold or the same as a month of premium, but instead is 2,600), but to completely ignore the months of feedback just to push the game to release is absolutely pathetic.  If this is the quality we can expect from your team when we have highlighted exactly what is wrong with packages and given you several options on how to improve them, I really don't feel that supporting this game will ever be a smart decision.  As Travis so accurately stated before, this is the MechAssault of WoT (and that is not a good thing).

Mucal1st #2 Posted 31 January 2014 - 04:11 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 4526 battles
  • 336
  • Member since:
    09-05-2013

View PostHiero Glyph, on 31 January 2014 - 04:59 PM, said:

Despite Matthew J35U5 posting a very informative and detailed thread on the flaws of the current packages (http://forum-console.worldoftanks.com/index.php?/topic/16166-the-package-system-an-analysis%E2%80%94updated-with-all-tanks/), and the numerous complaints from this community in terms of how strictly inferior packages are due to not allowing for immediate stock upgrades, WGW has decided to improve not a single package.  This is 100% unacceptable.  Even on tanks like the Matilda where we are only asking for a 2-pdr variant for the top package you have done literally nothing to improve the inherent flaws of the package system.  It is bad enough that you did not even get the gold prices right for things like the 30-day pass with 100k silver (should be 2,500 gold or the same as a month of premium, but instead is 2,600), but to completely ignore the months of feedback just to push the game to release is absolutely pathetic.  If this is the quality we can expect from your team when we have highlighted exactly what is wrong with packages and given you several options on how to improve them, I really don't feel that supporting this game will ever be a smart decision.  As Travis so accurately stated before, this is the MechAssault of WoT (and that is not a good thing).

 

They said weeks ago that the release version will be the same as the beta currently is. 

If you dont like something, make a feedback thread and not a whine thread. You are in no position to demand something.

I can understand you but please stop acting like a little kid.

 



Hiero_Glyph #3 Posted 31 January 2014 - 04:30 PM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 270 battles
  • 2,442
  • Member since:
    07-04-2013

View PostMucal1st, on 31 January 2014 - 10:11 AM, said:

 

They said weeks ago that the release version will be the same as the beta currently is. 

If you dont like something, make a feedback thread and not a whine thread. You are in no position to demand something.

I can understand you but please stop acting like a little kid.

 

 

No, actually they said the content would be the same but the build would be different.  As such you expect bugs and issues like this to be resolved or at least improved.  Also, as this is a game that many of us will pay for it is a legitimate issue at this stage as the game is no longer in beta.  Every single complaint from this point forward is several times more severe than when the game was in beta.  This includes not improving a single issue with packages.

 

Issues like the Panther II downgrading its gun from a tier VIII to a tier VII when upgrading packages, or not having options for the top turret or engine on the Matilda and Jumbo respectively depending on which gun you want to use.  I am not, as a consumer (not a beta tester) going to give the developer any slack on a full release version of a game.  If it has bugs, flaws, or other serious issues they are just that and it is not my responsibility to test these things for them any longer (I already did that for many, many months).  So no, I am not complaining about the same game as the beta, I am pointing out the serious flaws of a full release game.



BGUNTER #4 Posted 31 January 2014 - 04:38 PM

    Captain

  • Beta Tester
  • 7847 battles
  • 1,147
  • Member since:
    08-08-2013
I'm hoping they released it the same to just get it out of beta. Call me crazy but I still think they will change it with updates to help with bad packages. We may never get full modules but I do think they will improve what we have.

TtargetPractice #5 Posted 31 January 2014 - 07:31 PM

    Captain

  • Beta Tester
  • 5724 battles
  • 1,111
  • Member since:
    11-08-2013

View PostMucal1st, on 31 January 2014 - 04:11 PM, said:

 

They said weeks ago that the release version will be the same as the beta currently is. 

If you dont like something, make a feedback thread and not a whine thread. You are in no position to demand something.

I can understand you but please stop acting like a little kid.

 

 

There have been multiple "feedback" threads posted in regards to packages. All of them state almost the exact same thing "We want modules, not packages". WG has stated that despite our feedback, they're going to stick with packages.

 

There's only one way to make them listen, and that's by speaking with your wallet. They won't be getting a cent from this guy.


the lol is implied.

Kuchiki29 #6 Posted 01 February 2014 - 08:51 AM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 15956 battles
  • 5,001
  • [SLBM]
  • Member since:
    08-12-2013
but but but every package is a viable upgrade said no one ever well except Paingod aka PainWGA but lets not beat this dead horse,we need a new stick first....someone have a 2x4 handy?


Fear... It is something vital to us puny creatures. The instant man stops fearing is the instant the species reaches a dead end, only to sink to pitable lows, only to sit and wait apathetically for extinction. Humans who lose the ability to think become creatures whose existance has no value. Wake up! Don't be afraid of knowledge! Think, you humans who are split into two worlds, unless you want the gulf between humans to expand into oblivian, you must think! Signed, Schwarzwald.


Matthew J35U5 #7 Posted 01 February 2014 - 01:43 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 14028 battles
  • 12,033
  • [GIRLS]
  • Member since:
    09-09-2013

View PostHiero Glyph, on 31 January 2014 - 10:59 AM, said:

Despite Matthew J35U5 posting a very informative and detailed thread on the flaws of the current packages (http://forum-console.worldoftanks.com/index.php?/topic/16166-the-package-system-an-analysis%E2%80%94updated-with-all-tanks/),
...

Keep your eyes out once the soviet tanks are released, I'll be planning to make another one dealing with those packages as well. Unless of course Wargaming suddenly become so good at this that all of their packages are perfect and I have nothing to comment on. :glasses:

View PostKuchiki28 CIC, on 01 February 2014 - 03:51 AM, said:

but but but every package is a viable upgrade said no one ever well except Paingod aka PainWGA but lets not beat this dead horse,we need a new stick first....someone have a 2x4 handy?
 

As little as I like the packages, I don't really think this is fair complaint to keep bringing up. "Viable upgrade" in the sense that WGWPain meant it meant, "It actually works", e.g. there are no packages that allow you to buy a module that will overload your suspension before you can buy the suspension. And from that point of view, yes, all of the packages are "viable". Just seems like a miscommunication to me. Continue onwards with your other complaints though. 


Edited by Matthew J35U5, 01 February 2014 - 01:50 PM.

KeystoneCops, on 14 June 2015 - 12:51 PM, said:


Ctej #8 Posted 01 February 2014 - 02:44 PM

    Corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 3728 battles
  • 44
  • Member since:
    08-10-2013

View PostHiero Glyph, on 31 January 2014 - 04:30 

 

Issues like the Panther II downgrading its gun from a tier VIII to a tier VII when upgrading packages, or not having options for the top turret or engine on the Matilda and Jumbo respectively depending on which gun you want to use.  I am not, as a consumer (not a beta tester) going to give the developer any slack on a full release version of a game.  If it has bugs, flaws, or other serious issues they are just that and it is not my responsibility to test these things for them any longer (I already did that for many, many months).  So no, I am not complaining about the same game as the beta, I am pointing out the serious flaws of a full release game.

I agree. Upon researching the E-75 I end up with a 88mm? Huh!? Are you kidding me? What a let down. Should have gotten rid of packages. And speaking of E-75, there is no reason to have 4 packages with an 88 cannon to start. Also, I agree that whining/griping or whatever you want to call it is totally legit now as we are paying for this if so chosen by the tanker. I just paid $100 for premium so in my mind I can [edited]as much as I want to now. Furthermore, the more tankers that gripe then devs might eventually listen. If not, then game might not do nearly as well as the devs expect. This is NOT a COD first person shooter with a gazillion players worldwide. This is a small community of WWII nerds. The devs know understand this. 



Matthew J35U5 #9 Posted 01 February 2014 - 02:55 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 14028 battles
  • 12,033
  • [GIRLS]
  • Member since:
    09-09-2013

View PostCtej, on 01 February 2014 - 09:44 AM, said:

I agree. Upon researching the E-75 I end up with a 88mm? Huh!? Are you kidding me? What a let down. Should have gotten rid of packages. And speaking of E-75, there is no reason to have 4 packages with an 88 cannon to start. Also, I agree that whining/griping or whatever you want to call it is totally legit now as we are paying for this if so chosen by the tanker. I just paid $100 for premium so in my mind I can [edited]as much as I want to now. Furthermore, the more tankers that gripe then devs might eventually listen. If not, then game might not do nearly as well as the devs expect. This is NOT a COD first person shooter with a gazillion players worldwide. This is a small community of WWII nerds. The devs know understand this. 

The 88L/71 is actually good enough to use on the Tiger II and the E-50 though. They're definitely better than the 90 mm that the M46 Patton or T32 gets. The real problem with the E-75 is that they have the suspension bundled with the first package, when on PC you would be able to equip the 105L/68 right away.


KeystoneCops, on 14 June 2015 - 12:51 PM, said:


Hiero_Glyph #10 Posted 01 February 2014 - 03:38 PM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 270 battles
  • 2,442
  • Member since:
    07-04-2013

View PostMatthew J35U5, on 01 February 2014 - 08:55 AM, said:

The 88L/71 is actually good enough to use on the Tiger II and the E-50 though. They're definitely better than the 90 mm that the M46 Patton or T32 gets. The real problem with the E-75 is that they have the suspension bundled with the first package, when on PC you would be able to equip the 105L/68 right away.


Yeah, the packages were designed by someone who has absolutely zero understanding of how you would upgrade modules, and in what order, on the PC version.  Why the previous tier's top engine and gun are not included in the very first package is simply idiotic, especially when it would cost zero research in many cases.  While I understand that the tank may require the suspension to mount these items, as out version has no load capacity there is absolutely no excuse for delaying such upgrades until the further down the package line.

 

Yes, this issue has been detailed several times but I, and others, will continue to detail such flaws until WG/WGW fixes their broken package system.  As I suggested before, hire a professional player from the PC version as a consultant for a week and they will vastly improve the current package system by pairing necessary module upgrades together and leaving the non-essential ones for later packages.  Trust me, they will be abhorred as much as us by what they see but at least they will be able to improve what was done incorrectly.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users