World of Warships- The Slippery Slope Of Selling Tier X Premiums

8,266 views
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (466 votes, average: 4.86 out of 5)
Loading...

Hey guys! Today with the next TX ship outright sold for cash, we talk about the slippery slope that the game is heading down, let me know what you guys think!

Outro Music: Stranger Think- C418

Have a replay?

Join the Discord here!: https://discordapp.com/invite/QA7G9pr

45 Comments:

  1. I agree with you fully. Many times I take Amagi into randoms and see higher tier premium ships in battle. I felt very assured at first, only to see them push into the centre and get done. The higher tiers are gone already, and the opponents take the advantage.

  2. I remember the time WG were clear T8s were the highest tier they would sell as a premium ship because they expressly understood the MM imbalance. They never promised not to sell T9/10 but they knew why they shouldn’t. WGs answer to this in order to increase revenue was to create CBs and Ranked. This means they can tell the player base who complain about MM imbalance to play competitive formats instead.

    • @drake consumer of souls and cheese strings no. We’re talking many years ago. But I know it was WOWS not WOT and it was a Q and A response as I recall.

    • I remember this statement but to be fair: when they made this statement there were A LOT less ships in game then now. The older the game gets and the more ships get added to the game it also means that more and more people will have regular tier IX and X ships and the less adding a premium of that tier will have an effect on ship balance.

      So the cap on tier VIII made sense back then, but these days far less.

    • drake consumer of souls and cheese strings

      @Martin Laver can you link the Q&A then? I’ve trawled all over their oldest articles, videos and dev updates and have yet to find any of WGs “promises” that supposedly exist

    • drake consumer of souls and cheese strings

      @Castigador1982 I can’t think of any game that’s remained unchanged in 5+ years. As you introduce new stuff your focus and priorities slowly change.

    • @drake consumer of souls and cheese strings nope. Sorry. Im not that fussed to go trawling. But I was very clear that I said they I didn’t ever recall them promising anything. But that they had no plans at that time because it would potentially degrade top tier battles. As I said that doesn’t really matter now and WG make it easy to get to TX.

  3. I mean, with the amount of people that have been abandoning the game, I’m not surprised that they’ll start selling tier 10s every so often. They gotta milk the people who are left, rather than improving the game and bringing people back.

    As for actually doing it, I mean high tier gameplay is already wack anyways, so I don’t really vibe with the “selling tier 10s will degrade high tier gameplay”. I mean Jingles is a wonderful example pretty much any time he posts a video as to why tier 10 gameplay isn’t the stellar example of big brain plays.

    Only thing WG really needs to do is put some kind of “X number of battles required” for competitive game modes. That’s it.

    As for WG’s stat point about “1500 Yamato’s sold to people with no tier 8 tech tree ship” I imagine that was chosen because “top tier matchmaking” is tier 8-10. Very arbitrary reasoning but still, that’s probably the logic.

    Last point I’ll mention: why would a regular player have purchased the ARP Yamato? I bought it and I have a couple thousand battles under my belt. Reason being is because (A: I like the show it came from) but more importantly, as having the ARP Yamato in my back pocket allows me to freely regrind the Japanese battleship line without losing access to the Yamato for competitive play, as I rather enjoy using it in ranked. So it means I can grind RP without actually losing anything at the top level.

    • yeah, not to mention how many t9 premiums are honestly closer to tier 10 than anything else in the t9 lineup and when it comes down to it, any level of justification of “balance” or to make people “grind a line to be good at the ship at t10” is a joke. the people who claim that dont have t10’s or are too bad at the game to realize that is a lie

  4. I really don’t want to see any more tier 9 or 10 premiums being sold. If anything, they MUST cost coal or steel, and can’t be brought outright by inexperienced players. Half the North Carolinas I run into these days are utterly inexperienced, they have no idea what they are doing, but they brought the King Kong bundle and now they get to play at tier 8. If it already doesn’t work for tier 8 ships, there’s no way in hell it will work for tier 10 ships.

  5. i now mostly play T6 in randoms and the only time i play high tiers its usually Ranked or Competitive

    • Same. I’ve been playing a lot of lower and mid tiers lately. More interesting maps, more interesting ships, more interesting meta, and usually less toxicity.

  6. Buying into high tier is never a problem, as long as MM makes sure to evenly distribute those players between teams.

    Unfortunately, MM doesn’t, so landslide game happens, and landslide games is what really ruins the experience.

    • it’s hard to distribute them between teams. if there was skill-based matchmaking, it would probably use winrate as the “skill meter”, and they might have few battles but a good winrate

    • @WarMike_1 Would still be better than now.

  7. Playing less and less, have had 3 weeks break for the first time since 16/17.. Think i have lost my fun in this game

  8. Waiting for them to sell the Tier XI Satsumas and Hannovers.

    • I mean, if they want to introduce T11 that would potentially alleviate pressure on T7-8 matchmaking, so… some good in the bad, I think

    • if that is true, and the T9 can stuck with T11 ships
      iam happy because my paolo finally can get more credits from it lmao

    • @Stefano Crosazzo I think we need some variation on the random modes. e.g. where 2 T7 = 1 T10 or something and you can have unequal numbers.

    • I remember the Puerto Rico

      Tier 8 and tier 10 can be in the same match. I dont think it matters. “Good” players just sit way back and wait for “noobs” to spot for them so why not let them spot in a ship they paid for.

  9. Sell the ships that’s their choice its their game. However some mechanic to make it obvious to all who has experiance might work. Not stats based maybe just number of games played or something simple on the team sheet ?

  10. Eh, the way higher tiers are going, I don’t think that selling tier 10 ships will cause too much more damage

  11. To be honest, I’m fine with them selling ships at T10 for cash, as long as there’s still a way of getting them via ingame ressources.

  12. seeing how fast people can grind to t10, and the number of blowout games that I see. i think this ship has already sailed
    I mean there are already so many players in higher tier that you might as well exchange from a bot. is this going to make a lot of difference?

  13. Wargaming walked back on a lot of their “promises” and I use that term lightly. Beat part is they are selling a highly situational ship for over $100 bucks. On top of that, secondary builds are not really a good choice anymore from what I see from CCs and my own ingame experimentation.

    I want it because I see it as a decent ranked ship but I just dont play this that much anymore

  14. this wouldnt be an issue of there was a skill based MM…….

  15. It’d be cool if you could buy them, but you had to be a certain ingame level to actually get them, so people who have like 10 battles can’t buy one instantly

    • just limit them to co-op, that’s what i do, bought the Jean-Bart and exclusively play co-op with it

    • @Alain Sterckx That’s just stupid. That would massively reduce the value of the ship.

    • @dzello so you prefer having guys with sub 100 games on your team in T10’s ?

    • @Alain Sterckx I prefer having enough braincells to know selling a ship that’s limited to co-op is a trash idea because no one would buy it hence no point selling it in the first place.

      Plus, I ALSO couldn’t care less if someone with sub 100 games buys a tier 10 ship, it’s not gonna affect me whatsoever. There’s a 11/24 chance he’ll be on my team and 12/24 chance he’ll be on the other which is literally positive for me.

  16. For over $100 the ship had better have 16 inch guns with the option of Mk 23 shells with an explosive yield of 15-20 kilotons as a 3rd ammo type to choose from.

  17. They should sell Tier 10 ships to players that have played for at least a year, that way I won’t throw my drink at the wall and Microwave my laptop when playing with someone that grounds in the ARP Yammy and can’t get off the Island for 7 minutes.

  18. All the people saying that grinding to higher tiers isn‘t the point of the game do not understand game design.

    Without a goal the fun will be minimal. You generally play the game with the goal of getting a „Bismarck“ or „Yamato“.

    Even in Sandbox games the player sets their own goals (Building something big in Minecraft, etc.)

    • This comment. Perfection.

      I started playing the game back in the late open beta (or early release in ’15, don’t really remember) with the sole intent of getting to the Montana. I did that. I still play this game though, mainly because said Montana is extremely fun (for me) and it’s gonna take a lot for me to let go of that.

    • Same. Team.

  19. Maybe this is selfish of me, but I’m fine with them selling pretty much whatever they want. Keeps the game free for blokes like me who have never spent a dime on any WG title.

    • Firstname Lastname

      The game was free and viable years ago when there weren’t T10s for sale and when the game wasn’t full of lootboxes.

      This excuse is pure bullshit.

      Shit like selling T10s or RB or any of the other gameplay impacting microtransactions WG’s introduced has nothing to do with financial viability, and everything to do with greed.

  20. Oh yes, I forgot about the Derpitz! That is plain nostalgia.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *