Jump to content


Return the King Dragon to a Fun Tank


  • Please log in to reply
99 replies to this topic

f1mitku #81 Posted 18 April 2018 - 09:44 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 32691 battles
  • 2,464
  • Member since:
    01-26-2016
I skipped the King 59 previous time but decided to buy it now with its current buffed stats. Tried it only for one WS battle with 0 skills 100% crew and it seems quite capable. The difference in gun handling (compared to Type 59) is good, alpha is awesome, aiming time is better, pen is better, even DPM is marginally better. Also it's far better trainer while the silver earnings are almost the same. And it still can be used with the same "close and personal" play style as Type 59 (of course this would depend of the opponent and not for many T-IX and T-X). Plus it's better at long range with this alpha and gun handling. Later I'll pass the Ace Op in MP to see it in real action... in these T-X battles and good amount of skill rounds.

Larimus #82 Posted 18 April 2018 - 06:17 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 42711 battles
  • 308
  • Member since:
    05-08-2014

View PostSHRiIVIP, on 12 April 2018 - 11:00 PM, said:

 

This has gotten to a point that's more ridiculous than me trying to teach calculus to a ficus. But, I'll try one last time.

 

You brought up the King Dragons reload with 105mm and 390 alpha and how it's worse than the M103.

A completely understandable and rational thing by WG because the alphas are similar and the King Dragon is tier 8 while the M103 is tier 9.

Which is what I responded to.

You then deiced to bring up tanks with faster reloads yet you somehow failed to understand that comes at the cost of significantly lower alpha. Which is what I mentioned in my response.

You somehow took this as me contradicting my own point when in reality I was merely responding to your completely off base comparison.

I then proceeded to give a comparison of every tier 8 medium premium without PMM to show you that even with the 100mm it had the worst reload and dpm in it's class.

Honestly, a 5 year old can follow logic this simple.

 

 

 

The King Dragon never had a fast reload. It's only fast in comparison to what it has now. It literally had one the worst reloads, if not the worst, for any medium at tier 8 with a similar caliber gun. How do you neither you nor S5 V8 not understand this? You both also need to learn the difference between 'fast' and 'faster' and I would recommend a dictionary.

 

 

Shimp, why are you such a butt?

A fur-trapper (who was strictly from commercial), had the unmitigated audacity to jump up from behind my igloo (peekaboo). And he started into whippin' on my favorite baby seal with a lead-filled snowshoe.....Seal Clubbing with Frank Zappa and my Pz.Kpfw.38H :great:


 

 


SHRiIVIP #83 Posted 18 April 2018 - 09:16 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 15419 battles
  • 2,135
  • [-NL-]
  • Member since:
    02-18-2017

View PostLarimus, on 18 April 2018 - 06:17 PM, said:

 

Shimp, why are you such a butt?

 

Why can't you spell?

Former Account: HappeningShrimp

44 Tanks with 3 MoE

 Spoiler


Gallant Prime #84 Posted 18 April 2018 - 11:50 PM

    Major

  • WoTC Ambassador
  • 37744 battles
  • 2,631
  • [47R]
  • Member since:
    02-12-2014

View PostCorporal Derpy, on 17 April 2018 - 10:12 AM, said:

 

I've circled hundreds of things in the Type 59.

 

:trollface:

 

lol that is pretty funny!--I was pretty imprecise there.  I imagine some arties and super heavies could be circled if absolutely alone.

 

View PostLoganX891, on 17 April 2018 - 11:28 AM, said:

 

Gallant, I don't think any one here used the term 'nerfed' until your post. I'm not saying it was nerfed, I'm saying that switching the gun has 'balanced' it far past the tank I paid real money for. WG had other options they could have used (PMM being one that comes to mind), but they went with a complete gun change. Some people love the new gun, and I'm glad they do. But others don't. From what I can see so far, the option that would make most players happy would be for WG to make the King Dragon the first Premium Tank (I don't know of any other, at least) where the player can pick which gun they want to use. That seems like good PR for the game, if nothing else. I hope that anyone reading this who likes the new gun would have the kindness to send in a ticket asking for that option.

 

Technically you are correct, however, the original post put "buff" in quotes as to imply it was not a buff, which is to suggest a nerf.  While it is possible for something to lie somewhere between buff and nerf when talking about a change in performance, that it not typically the case and certainly does not make sense given the flow of the thread. 

 

As to the more important part of your post--your suggestion, I would love for the KD to have the option of 2 different gun packages.  I would probably mess around with both.  The other tank that should have this is the M4 Champion.  



S5 V8 #85 Posted 19 April 2018 - 04:55 PM

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 28804 battles
  • 225
  • Member since:
    02-13-2014

My original "buff" text referred to a questionable change or tradeoff. While the change may enhance some players styles it is a detriment to others. My self I played the Type 59 a great deal and had marked that tank and saw the offering as another slightly upgraded Type 59 with a better crew training perk. As I enjoyed the Type 59 immensely my goal was to switch crews between them for the daily doubles.  I jumped at this offering happily spending the $43. to my surprise I enjoyed the King Dragon more than the Type 59. I marked the original King Dragon in 56 games a record for me. I was quickly headed toward my second mark with a win rate of 57.6% and 79.8% on second MOE.  Upon the change/buff my win rate dropped to 51.7% my MOE dropped to 59.9%. I could not "dance" behind heavies as with the original version. My views of this change were echoed by this YouTuber at the 6.18 mark  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlzL8ifrqQQ


 

 

 

 

 

That said I have a Revoralise that I earned in the op. I have never done particularly well in that tank, however I keep this tank because I desire a French trainer. If the King Dragon was originally offered as it is currently a Revoralise type tank I would not have been a purchaser.


 

My proposed solution would be to offer both guns on the same tank. That way those that paid for a Type 59 class tank and played this for nearly 54 days prior to the change would have the ability to play tank they purchased. And those that favor a Revoralise type tank would also be able to play the tank they presently enjoy. My desire is once again play the tank I reviewed, assessed and ultimately decided to purchased. This is not a minor change or tweak to a tank, this is a severe game change to the play style of this tank in which people have laid out real cash.



Wroclaw #86 Posted 22 April 2018 - 12:03 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 40833 battles
  • 3,578
  • Member since:
    08-28-2016
well it being significantly different to the old Hype paves the way for the original Type 59 to get some badly needed gun buffs now doesnt it.

Edited by Wroclaw, 22 April 2018 - 12:13 AM.


S5 V8 #87 Posted 23 April 2018 - 06:09 PM

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 28804 battles
  • 225
  • Member since:
    02-13-2014

View PostWroclaw, on 21 April 2018 - 05:03 PM, said:

well it being significantly different to the old Hype paves the way for the original Type 59 to get some badly needed gun buffs now doesnt it.

 

I am unsure. I love my Type 59 as is, I loved the original King Dragon as was, now hate it. This almost seems like when the government attempts to fix something. It seems to always turn out worse the it was originally. My philosophy is "if it is not broken don't fix it".

Doctor_Who_22 #88 Posted 23 April 2018 - 07:52 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 12430 battles
  • 2,716
  • [-WHO-]
  • Member since:
    12-04-2015

View PostGallant Prime, on 16 April 2018 - 09:07 PM, said:

Wow...

 

Perhaps because most of the posters here were not here back in the first year, but the 5/4 was nerfed with a traverse nerf and tier weight nerf.  So even if you believe the KD was nerfed, it is not unprecedented.  

 

But the KD has not been nerfed.  Changed yes, but not nerfed.  The DPM has actually increased from its original version (Old 1725, New 1775).  And to those that think they have to play sniper--I just don't know what to say that is appropriate here for the forum.  The KD actually has a better power to weight ratio now than the 59, not that you could circle anything with either.  They are referred to as pocket heavies for a reason.  If you are circling something I want to see a video.  

 

The King Dragon is picking up the nick-name Kong Dragon now because people think it is OP.  

 

Now I can understand if you have a preference for just ROF over High Alpha, but to say the tank is nerfed is just wrong.  For the six people asking WG for a refund, I can understand because of the small change, and it is not wrong to ask for such.  But, the tank is great and just plays a bit different--more to its strengths with armor and gun depression--a little longer on the peek a boom but bigger boom and much better at fighting off yolos because of the alpha.

This isn't really the same issue as what they did to the PZ V/IV - that tank was massively OP, and it needed more than just a small 'nerf'. Heck, it's still OP, just not as bad.  But even still, they didn't completely change out the gun. 

 

The King Dragon would NEVER been called OP, and it still isn't. However, WG CHANGED A PREMIUM TANK THAT HAS DRASTICALLY ALTERED IT'S PLAY STYLE. And yes, they are 'technically' allowed to do whatever they want.... but that doesn't mean it's the 'right' thing to do. Sound to me like they didn't fully test or get sufficient feedback on this tank before releasing it, and that is a big problem. 

 

Why should anyone feel confident in buying premium tanks when WG can (and now has) made significant changes after it has already been released for sale? This is a classic example of a poor business decision - and we ALL end up suffering, because players lose faith in this game and go elsewhere (or just stop spending money).

 

And again....if as tank was going to get a gun upgrade, why the heck was the KD the one they did it to..... there a more than a few others that need it more(Vindicator??)


 

I play for fun, not for stats..... but I always play to WIN!! 


Doctor_Who_22 #89 Posted 23 April 2018 - 08:00 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 12430 battles
  • 2,716
  • [-WHO-]
  • Member since:
    12-04-2015

View PostDutchCupid62, on 16 April 2018 - 03:03 PM, said:

Uhm PC is going to test the exact same thing this year to the KV-5. They are planning to change PMM tanks to be able to remove PMM from those tanks.

 

This isn't the same issue - for one, we are supposed to be 'different and separate' from PC, so just because they do something doesn't mean we should (or will).  Secondly, this isn't a case of changing a gun simply to remove PMM - this was a major change that really wasn't needed or asked for.... and it should have been done BEFORE they ever released it in the first place. 

 

But whatever..... since not enough players appear to want to call out WG for such a big change, then don't be surprised (and don't complain) when it's done to other premiums in the name of 'balancing' - maybe they'll even 'buff' the Tiger 131 by just giving it a 90 mm gun with a reload speed of 6 rounds per minute (10 seconds) - 'but it's an upgrade' will be the excuse.

 

 


 

I play for fun, not for stats..... but I always play to WIN!! 


Corporal Derpy #90 Posted 23 April 2018 - 11:56 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 20764 battles
  • 17,988
  • [KMD]
  • Member since:
    02-12-2014
Spoiler

 

Not something you could hope to accomplish with the shoddy 100mm.

Tank seems enjoyable as hell, only so far put down by the overall poor performance of teams that went as far as having players on opposing teams work together because they were in the same clan one battle. And while 10s reload is still slow, it isn't slow enough to limit you into a sniper role and the tank has so far serviced quite successfully as a front line brawler all the same as the regular Hype.


Edited by Corporal Derpy, 23 April 2018 - 11:58 PM.

Garage : 

'Imagine if this forum had only players who actually win more than lose trying to tell others how to play. Would be the best forum ever. Instead, we have a bunch of morons who lose more often than not trying to tell their betters how to play their tanks.'

'The term "casual gamer" is actually not accurate enough anymore to describe what the larger market is like. They want the illusion of accomplishment, but not the effort associated with it. The players aren't really doing anything, something else is doing it for them, and the player takes the credit for it.


Gallant Prime #91 Posted 24 April 2018 - 02:22 AM

    Major

  • WoTC Ambassador
  • 37744 battles
  • 2,631
  • [47R]
  • Member since:
    02-12-2014

View PostDoctor_Who_22, on 23 April 2018 - 01:52 PM, said:

This isn't really the same issue as what they did to the PZ V/IV - that tank was massively OP, and it needed more than just a small 'nerf'. Heck, it's still OP, just not as bad.  But even still, they didn't completely change out the gun. 

 

The King Dragon would NEVER been called OP, and it still isn't. However, WG CHANGED A PREMIUM TANK THAT HAS DRASTICALLY ALTERED IT'S PLAY STYLE. And yes, they are 'technically' allowed to do whatever they want.... but that doesn't mean it's the 'right' thing to do. Sound to me like they didn't fully test or get sufficient feedback on this tank before releasing it, and that is a big problem. 

 

Why should anyone feel confident in buying premium tanks when WG can (and now has) made significant changes after it has already been released for sale? This is a classic example of a poor business decision - and we ALL end up suffering, because players lose faith in this game and go elsewhere (or just stop spending money).

 

And again....if as tank was going to get a gun upgrade, why the heck was the KD the one they did it to..... there a more than a few others that need it more(Vindicator??)

 

WHY ARE WE YELLING!?

 

While you may think the KD "would NEVER been" (?) called OP, (not sure what you even means there) please tell me why the Type 59 was pulled from the store on the PC and why WG will continue to refuse to give it buffs (without a loss of PMM)? 

 

As far as play style, I would disagree with you on the alteration being drastic.  It is still a bit sluggish correct?  Still has great turret armor?  What type of playstyle were you using?  

 

Technicality?  Does it not state as much in the EULA?  Perhaps I am mistaken, but I don't think there was any reach to any extrinsic rule or trick of language that was necessary to allow this. 

 

Right thing to do?  Hmmm...how do you measure that?  If 7 of 13 people like the change, does that make it the right thing to do?  What if it is 7 of 10?  

 

​Fully test?  I'm not sure you could ever fully test before release.  Perhaps they could have tested more, perhaps not.  Would it even be possible to know until you hit the live server?  Does it matter now?  It would be interesting to know what WG saw that made them want to make the change.  

 

​In regards to confident in buying premiums, I understand what you are saying, but like I said, it has happened before, and I think you are too new to console to remember the great gnashing of teeth at the 5/4 nerf.  I know it is joked around a lot but SP also received a significant change to its armor (most think it is better, some think it is worse).  I'm just surprised that people are surprised this can happen.  

 

​I am not against the idea that customers should be accommodated/compensated if possible when changes are made.  I am against the overstatements that give the appearance of stamping feet in a kiddie pool, which just allows WG to dismiss players that much more.  Focus the argument on as many accurate facts as possible, build a coalition of players using a common goal they can agree to, and push the unified message repeatedly.  The two gun option is the best.

 

 

 

View PostCorporal Derpy, on 23 April 2018 - 05:56 PM, said:

Spoiler

 

Not something you could hope to accomplish with the shoddy 100mm.

Tank seems enjoyable as hell, only so far put down by the overall poor performance of teams that went as far as having players on opposing teams work together because they were in the same clan one battle. And while 10s reload is still slow, it isn't slow enough to limit you into a sniper role and the tank has so far serviced quite successfully as a front line brawler all the same as the regular Hype.

 

Nice game--the thing can earn some handsome silver to boot.  Ace tanker by any chance?

 

 

 



Corporal Derpy #92 Posted 24 April 2018 - 02:25 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 20764 battles
  • 17,988
  • [KMD]
  • Member since:
    02-12-2014

View PostGallant Prime, on 24 April 2018 - 02:22 AM, said:

Nice game--the thing can earn some handsome silver to boot.  Ace tanker by any chance?

 

Only way to get it apparently.

5k in a game where I mostly shot at VIII's except for this one KV-85 I bullied only got 2nd Class, so just needed to do over 6k in a game shooting almost exclusively at IX-X's.


Garage : 

'Imagine if this forum had only players who actually win more than lose trying to tell others how to play. Would be the best forum ever. Instead, we have a bunch of morons who lose more often than not trying to tell their betters how to play their tanks.'

'The term "casual gamer" is actually not accurate enough anymore to describe what the larger market is like. They want the illusion of accomplishment, but not the effort associated with it. The players aren't really doing anything, something else is doing it for them, and the player takes the credit for it.


JustDUDE #93 Posted 24 April 2018 - 03:58 AM

    Corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 25157 battles
  • 50
  • [-JTT-]
  • Member since:
    08-10-2013
We bought it as it was, we should have the option of returning it now. It is simple. Anyone discussed the premium round velocity then and now? The tank is not what i bought and i want the option to return it, simple.

kromhout55 #94 Posted 24 April 2018 - 04:00 AM

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 24992 battles
  • 416
  • Member since:
    01-26-2017

I would certainly second the proposal that the King Dragon be given the two gun option.

Having bought it with an eye on the recent Clash of the Titans op, as well as another Chinese crew trainer, I was dismayed by the reload time of the present gun set-up. I enjoy playing with my Type 59 but the King Dragon is just no fun at all for me. It's making me adopt to a play style I don't like and I feel lessens my contribution towards the team's success.



Corporal Derpy #95 Posted 24 April 2018 - 12:32 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 20764 battles
  • 17,988
  • [KMD]
  • Member since:
    02-12-2014

View PostJustDUDE, on 24 April 2018 - 03:58 AM, said:

We bought it as it was, we should have the option of returning it now. It is simple. Anyone discussed the premium round velocity then and now? The tank is not what i bought and i want the option to return it, simple.

 

 

The base shell velocity got better, given that it is APCR now and APCR is the fastest shell type in game.

Whereas being HEAT, the Premium Round became slower due to the fact that HEAT has the same velocity as HE I believe.

 

It's not that hard to wrap your head around, and the ranges you engage with the vehicle shouldn't be causing grievances with shell velocity.

 

View Postkromhout55, on 24 April 2018 - 04:00 AM, said:

Having bought it with an eye on the recent Clash of the Titans op, as well as another Chinese crew trainer, I was dismayed by the reload time of the present gun set-up. I enjoy playing with my Type 59 but the King Dragon is just no fun at all for me. It's making me adopt to a play style I don't like and I feel lessens my contribution towards the team's success.

 

Having looked up a video of the original KD, it seem as though the player had a 7.77s reload, and they weren't running Rations and Vents which could get it down to, I'll wager a guess something like 7.43s perhaps.

So the reload was always the worst of any VIII Medium with 250 alpha. Now you're in the middle of those with 390 alpha but you have the reliability of the 105mm over the T-34-3's 122mm while retaining armour unlike the Ravioli.

 

I've found that the tank actually plays better so far in the areas I'd use my original Type 59, and has actually allowed me to be a bit more aggressive because the gun hits hard on anything. The extra 3 seconds on the reload are not as controlling as everyone seems to think it is and it does not force the tank into a Support/Sniper Role.


Garage : 

'Imagine if this forum had only players who actually win more than lose trying to tell others how to play. Would be the best forum ever. Instead, we have a bunch of morons who lose more often than not trying to tell their betters how to play their tanks.'

'The term "casual gamer" is actually not accurate enough anymore to describe what the larger market is like. They want the illusion of accomplishment, but not the effort associated with it. The players aren't really doing anything, something else is doing it for them, and the player takes the credit for it.


Doctor_Who_22 #96 Posted 24 April 2018 - 02:06 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 12430 battles
  • 2,716
  • [-WHO-]
  • Member since:
    12-04-2015

View PostGallant Prime, on 23 April 2018 - 08:22 PM, said:

 

WHY ARE WE YELLING!?

 

While you may think the KD "would NEVER been" (?) called OP, (not sure what you even means there) please tell me why the Type 59 was pulled from the store on the PC and why WG will continue to refuse to give it buffs (without a loss of PMM)? 

 

As far as play style, I would disagree with you on the alteration being drastic.  It is still a bit sluggish correct?  Still has great turret armor?  What type of playstyle were you using?  

 

Technicality?  Does it not state as much in the EULA?  Perhaps I am mistaken, but I don't think there was any reach to any extrinsic rule or trick of language that was necessary to allow this. 

 

Right thing to do?  Hmmm...how do you measure that?  If 7 of 13 people like the change, does that make it the right thing to do?  What if it is 7 of 10?  

 

​Fully test?  I'm not sure you could ever fully test before release.  Perhaps they could have tested more, perhaps not.  Would it even be possible to know until you hit the live server?  Does it matter now?  It would be interesting to know what WG saw that made them want to make the change.  

 

​In regards to confident in buying premiums, I understand what you are saying, but like I said, it has happened before, and I think you are too new to console to remember the great gnashing of teeth at the 5/4 nerf.  I know it is joked around a lot but SP also received a significant change to its armor (most think it is better, some think it is worse).  I'm just surprised that people are surprised this can happen.  

 

​I am not against the idea that customers should be accommodated/compensated if possible when changes are made.  I am against the overstatements that give the appearance of stamping feet in a kiddie pool, which just allows WG to dismiss players that much more.  Focus the argument on as many accurate facts as possible, build a coalition of players using a common goal they can agree to, and push the unified message repeatedly.  The two gun option is the best.

 

 

 

 

Nice game--the thing can earn some handsome silver to boot.  Ace tanker by any chance?

 

 

 

Not yelling, trying to make a point (maybe I should have used bold letters) - not a big deal.....  and I've been around since the game first debuted on the xbox 360 - not as an active poster here, but I was lurking on these boards.

 

The simple point is this..... if you spend money on an in-game item (and this isn't 'chump change' to many players), and WG can simply come in at any time and make drastic changes to a premium tank - a complete gun change is drastic in that it changes the play style of this tank - then when players lose confidence in WG and stop or reduce spending money,  where does that put the future of the game? 

 

And if anyone has seen the recent 'bug' fix, which eliminated the extra emblem/inscription slots on the T-34-88, yet players who spent gold on permanent emblems/inscriptions are basically told 'too bad'.... again, how is this instilling consumer confidence in WG and WoT? These moves, while allowable under the EULA, are simply stupid business decisions that would get people fired in the 'real world'. 

 

But like I said, since not enough players are willing to call WG out for these recent actions, then don't be surprised (and don't complain) when they significantly change or eliminate other in-game items that players have paid real money for.  I'm trying to point out the major issues that WG are creating for themselves....... but that not enough players are willing to speak up about.


 

I play for fun, not for stats..... but I always play to WIN!! 


SHRiIVIP #97 Posted 24 April 2018 - 02:42 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 15419 battles
  • 2,135
  • [-NL-]
  • Member since:
    02-18-2017

View PostDoctor_Who_22, on 24 April 2018 - 02:06 PM, said:

Not yelling, trying to make a point (maybe I should have used bold letters) - not a big deal.....  and I've been around since the game first debuted on the xbox 360 - not as an active poster here, but I was lurking on these boards.

 

The simple point is this..... if you spend money on an in-game item (and this isn't 'chump change' to many players), and WG can simply come in at any time and make drastic changes to a premium tank - a complete gun change is drastic in that it changes the play style of this tank - then when players lose confidence in WG and stop or reduce spending money,  where does that put the future of the game? 

 

And if anyone has seen the recent 'bug' fix, which eliminated the extra emblem/inscription slots on the T-34-88, yet players who spent gold on permanent emblems/inscriptions are basically told 'too bad'.... again, how is this instilling consumer confidence in WG and WoT? These moves, while allowable under the EULA, are simply stupid business decisions that would get people fired in the 'real world'. 

 

But like I said, since not enough players are willing to call WG out for these recent actions, then don't be surprised (and don't complain) when they significantly change or eliminate other in-game items that players have paid real money for.  I'm trying to point out the major issues that WG are creating for themselves....... but that not enough players are willing to speak up about.

 

It slightly changed the play style of the tank but it was in such a way that it made the gun better in every single way except for the reload. The tank already had the worst reload with the 100mm of any tier 8 medium in the game, PMM or not, with a similar alpha gun. This is nothing but a vast improvement.

 

WG has been shooting themselves in the foot for years now, so the idea that they might lose more players is only a matter of time anyway. I will gladly speak up about something like this when WG changes a premium tank for the worse, not the better. Especially since I now have a premium tank that is even better than what I paid for. 

 


Former Account: HappeningShrimp

44 Tanks with 3 MoE

 Spoiler


Corporal Derpy #98 Posted 24 April 2018 - 03:00 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 20764 battles
  • 17,988
  • [KMD]
  • Member since:
    02-12-2014

View PostDoctor_Who_22, on 24 April 2018 - 02:06 PM, said:

And if anyone has seen the recent 'bug' fix, which eliminated the extra emblem/inscription slots on the T-34-88, yet players who spent gold on permanent emblems/inscriptions are basically told 'too bad'.... again

 

You mean these?

Spoiler

 

I recall reporting them as a problem like half a year ago, and I was told to sod off.


Garage : 

'Imagine if this forum had only players who actually win more than lose trying to tell others how to play. Would be the best forum ever. Instead, we have a bunch of morons who lose more often than not trying to tell their betters how to play their tanks.'

'The term "casual gamer" is actually not accurate enough anymore to describe what the larger market is like. They want the illusion of accomplishment, but not the effort associated with it. The players aren't really doing anything, something else is doing it for them, and the player takes the credit for it.


Doctor_Who_22 #99 Posted 24 April 2018 - 04:24 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 12430 battles
  • 2,716
  • [-WHO-]
  • Member since:
    12-04-2015

View PostCorporal Derpy, on 24 April 2018 - 09:00 AM, said:

 

You mean these?

Spoiler

 

I recall reporting them as a problem like half a year ago, and I was told to sod off.

 

Sort of..... the main issue is that there were extra slots (4, I believe) for emblems and/or inscriptions. Apparently this also caused the issue you have picture above.

 

WG just came out today and said they are eliminated two of the slots, but they aren't going to refund or even offer fair compensation for those players who may have purchased permanent emblems/inscriptions that now may not be able to be used. If you used silver to purchase temporary emblems you'll get a refund, but gold (real money) and you're out of luck. So if you happened to buy multiple emblems (say three or four) to fill up the four slots, you're now screwed in that only two emblems can be used, and the others are wasted......

 

Its a very poor way to treat your customers, and another poke in the eye to those players who have spent money on this game. And yes, we're not talking large dollars here, but it's the way that WG simply disregards it's players and paying customers., and (again) this sets a very bad precedent moving forward.


 

I play for fun, not for stats..... but I always play to WIN!! 


Gallant Prime #100 Posted 24 April 2018 - 04:37 PM

    Major

  • WoTC Ambassador
  • 37744 battles
  • 2,631
  • [47R]
  • Member since:
    02-12-2014

View PostDoctor_Who_22, on 24 April 2018 - 08:06 AM, said:

Not yelling, trying to make a point (maybe I should have used bold letters) - not a big deal.....  and I've been around since the game first debuted on the xbox 360 - not as an active poster here, but I was lurking on these boards.

 

The simple point is this..... if you spend money on an in-game item (and this isn't 'chump change' to many players), and WG can simply come in at any time and make drastic changes to a premium tank - a complete gun change is drastic in that it changes the play style of this tank - then when players lose confidence in WG and stop or reduce spending money,  where does that put the future of the game? 

 

And if anyone has seen the recent 'bug' fix, which eliminated the extra emblem/inscription slots on the T-34-88, yet players who spent gold on permanent emblems/inscriptions are basically told 'too bad'.... again, how is this instilling consumer confidence in WG and WoT? These moves, while allowable under the EULA, are simply stupid business decisions that would get people fired in the 'real world'. 

 

But like I said, since not enough players are willing to call WG out for these recent actions, then don't be surprised (and don't complain) when they significantly change or eliminate other in-game items that players have paid real money for.  I'm trying to point out the major issues that WG are creating for themselves....... but that not enough players are willing to speak up about.

 

​I understand your points.  I understand some people would want refunds, and don't disagree with them on that point.  Hard to justify refunds with use though--maybe a partial refund based on games played?  I don't think you will be able to gather enough momentum on this to revert the change because a lot of people like the change, though I do support the two gun option.  

 

The T-34-88, I just don't know what to say about that other than to say I was surprised.  I had known it had the ability to have 4 emblems for awhile now.  Vaguely remember something a long time ago about issues with the emblems--thought it was about not being able to replace certain emblems (German cross).  They just had an emblem sale and I very nearly put 4 different ones on but had not settled on the last two.  I count myself lucky but apparently others are just screwed.  I don't understand why it could not have 4 or 20 emblems (if someone wanted to paint their tank like a NASCAR).  WG would get more gold use with more emblems on tanks.  I would certainly support those that want a refund of the gold paid for emblems on the tank.  At the very least, give them emblem vouchers they could use on another tank.  

 

In regards to speaking up, part of my original point was that WG has done this before, so we really should not be surprised.  I was surprised by the toxicity so far in the thread because it was essentially player on player.  I have no issue with players asking for a refund, though I think the tank is actually better--it was not what they anticipated.  Asking for a revert, well, that is a bit tricky--get into the player on player.  The two gun option is the best option to satisfy all. 

 

I can tell you the two gun option has been put on the list of feedback (ticket?), but I have no idea if it will be implemented.  I suggest you comment on the two gun option thread and encourage others to do likewise.  If there is not a two gun option thread in Suggestions, make one.  Things I would like to see, (additional garage filters, clear camo, sniper view in replays), I make sure to add my voice every time I see a thread pops up.  Keep at it and make sure your facts are right.  They may come back and say no initially.  Keep at it some more, but don't devolve into insults and hyperbole (I know it is hard sometimes).  Insults and hyperbole just creates a personal wedge that makes it that much easier to be dismissive of the person and in that the issue.        

 






2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users