Jump to content


Well...


  • Please log in to reply
81 replies to this topic

klbergmen #21 Posted 22 June 2018 - 01:56 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 3997 battles
  • 386
  • [JV44] JV44
  • Member since:
    08-13-2014

View Posteekeeboo, on 22 June 2018 - 01:54 PM, said:

 

The poll on forums full of people who want 1.9 to come back too? ;)  That poll wasn't exactly representative either.

 

fair point :)

dreambill #22 Posted 22 June 2018 - 02:20 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Conquest Member
  • 1995 battles
  • 605
  • [GR-12] GR-12
  • Member since:
    07-25-2013

View Posteekeeboo, on 22 June 2018 - 01:54 PM, said:

 

The poll on forums full of people who want 1.9 to come back too? ;)  That poll wasn't exactly representative either.

 

Why whasn't representative ?

BravelyRanAway #23 Posted 22 June 2018 - 02:59 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 2563 battles
  • 955
  • [H_I_T] H_I_T
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Postdreambill, on 22 June 2018 - 02:20 PM, said:

 

Why whasn't representative ?

 

Because not all the players visit the forum.

"We don't stop playing because we grow old, we grow old because we stop playing".G.B.Shaw


dreambill #24 Posted 22 June 2018 - 03:11 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Conquest Member
  • 1995 battles
  • 605
  • [GR-12] GR-12
  • Member since:
    07-25-2013

From the ones that are visiting forums though, there is a clear result, and usually these are the people more interested in the game.

If we follow this logic, everything we ask to be fixed - changed in the game, has no meaning, since it is been asked only by the people who are visiting the forum


Edited by dreambill, 22 June 2018 - 03:15 PM.


Grumpy_Guts #25 Posted 22 June 2018 - 03:20 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Conquest Member
  • 5333 battles
  • 921
  • [BBMM] BBMM
  • Member since:
    08-08-2012
That actually makes sense in an illogical logical kind off way, no/yes ?   

Nytril #26 Posted 22 June 2018 - 03:22 PM

    Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 4675 battles
  • 61
  • Member since:
    12-22-2014

View PostBravelyRanAway, on 22 June 2018 - 10:52 AM, said:

No...it doesn't...not even in WoT.

 

Nearly 6 hours later and still waiting for you to substantiate your statement. Or was it just a guess based upon.... nothing?

BravelyRanAway #27 Posted 22 June 2018 - 03:49 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 2563 battles
  • 955
  • [H_I_T] H_I_T
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostCyclonite_, on 22 June 2018 - 03:22 PM, said:

 

Nearly 6 hours later and still waiting for you to substantiate your statement. Or was it just a guess based upon.... nothing?

Sorry, we don't all have six hours to spare to stare at a computer screen. eekaboo has already asked the devs about the MM being random....and they say it is. There was a time in WoT when they tried making the first ten battles for newbies easier but that was dropped a few years ago. In that patent is also described the MM that we currently use. Just because something is in a patent does not mean it is used. It cost the same amount of money $15-25 K to lodge a patent whether it contains one idea or many....so being a company that doesn't like to waste money, they packed as many ideas as they could for the same price.


"We don't stop playing because we grow old, we grow old because we stop playing".G.B.Shaw


Homer_J #28 Posted 22 June 2018 - 05:37 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 515 battles
  • 149
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostCyclonite_, on 21 June 2018 - 05:47 PM, said:

 

...

Nice well thought out and logical argument there.

View Postdreambill, on 22 June 2018 - 03:11 PM, said:

From the ones that are visiting forums though, there is a clear result, and usually these are the people more interested in the game.

Those are the ones who the devs listened to at release and killed off any interest the general playerbase had.

 

View PostCyclonite_, on 22 June 2018 - 03:22 PM, said:

 

Nearly 6 hours later and still waiting for you to substantiate your statement. Or was it just a guess based upon.... nothing?

Like I said, the patent has several ideas for a matchmaker, you can't use them all.  The random one is the best fit for the results we see in game.



dreambill #29 Posted 22 June 2018 - 05:42 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Conquest Member
  • 1995 battles
  • 605
  • [GR-12] GR-12
  • Member since:
    07-25-2013

View PostHomer_J, on 22 June 2018 - 05:37 PM, said:

Those are the ones who the devs listened to at release and killed off any interest the general playerbase had

And now that they do what ever they want, the interest is back to a bigger playerbase ?

Edited by dreambill, 22 June 2018 - 07:30 PM.


Nytril #30 Posted 22 June 2018 - 07:28 PM

    Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 4675 battles
  • 61
  • Member since:
    12-22-2014
....and the cabbage heads reply. This is why companies walk all over their players, because there are players like you amongst us who display such lack of intelligence and toxic atitude. 

BravelyRanAway #31 Posted 22 June 2018 - 07:36 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 2563 battles
  • 955
  • [H_I_T] H_I_T
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostCyclonite_, on 22 June 2018 - 07:28 PM, said:

....and the cabbage heads reply. This is why companies walk all over their players, because there are players like you amongst us who display such lack of intelligence and toxic atitude. 

 

Do point out the toxic replies besides your own one.

"We don't stop playing because we grow old, we grow old because we stop playing".G.B.Shaw


Funny_Farmer #32 Posted 22 June 2018 - 08:29 PM

    Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 611 battles
  • 68
  • Member since:
    12-31-2012

I could just VOMIT.

 

WHY did they have to add this "only in victorious battles" requirement to the mission? So game after game I do good, destroy 22 ground targets etc. but one crushing loss after another. And having to kill 10 aircraft in a bomber just makes no sense at all.

 

This update really killed the game for me. I will play my other planes now and then but never again consider putting any money into this.

 



BravelyRanAway #33 Posted 22 June 2018 - 08:44 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 2563 battles
  • 955
  • [H_I_T] H_I_T
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostFunny_Farmer, on 22 June 2018 - 08:29 PM, said:

I could just VOMIT.

 

WHY did they have to add this "only in victorious battles" requirement to the mission? So game after game I do good, destroy 22 ground targets etc. but one crushing loss after another. And having to kill 10 aircraft in a bomber just makes no sense at all.

 

This update really killed the game for me. I will play my other planes now and then but never again consider putting any money into this.

 

It's a massive credit sink to slow progression to the next plane.


"We don't stop playing because we grow old, we grow old because we stop playing".G.B.Shaw


zen_monk_ #34 Posted 22 June 2018 - 11:08 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Alpha Tester
  • 4255 battles
  • 1,013
  • [__] __
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostFunny_Farmer, on 22 June 2018 - 08:29 PM, said:

I could just VOMIT.

 

WHY did they have to add this "only in victorious battles" requirement to the mission? So game after game I do good, destroy 22 ground targets etc. but one crushing loss after another. And having to kill 10 aircraft in a bomber just makes no sense at all.

 

This update really killed the game for me. I will play my other planes now and then but never again consider putting any money into this.

 

 

This, million time this!

 

The sinking feeling when you excel in game after game and you lose and lose... and gain *****! And no progress!

 

Persha, stop this nonsense already!

 

I will repeat Farmer's words with the volume they deserve:

 

View PostFunny_Farmer, on 22 June 2018 - 08:29 PM, said

 

WHY did they have to add this "only in victorious battles" requirement to the mission?!!!

 


stats were invented by Satan himself to suck the carefree fun out of gaming

BravelyRanAway #35 Posted 23 June 2018 - 08:37 AM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 2563 battles
  • 955
  • [H_I_T] H_I_T
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Postdreambill, on 22 June 2018 - 03:11 PM, said:

From the ones that are visiting forums though, there is a clear result, and usually these are the people more interested in the game.

If we follow this logic, everything we ask to be fixed - changed in the game, has no meaning, since it is been asked only by the people who are visiting the forum

 

Eeer no. Because the players who voted for reverting back to 1.9 were the few remaining after four years of failure.....the majority voted with their feet and left. Those few skewed the result.

To the logic you mention,  fixing things is a different issue to asking for changes, most of what we ask for on the forums regarding changes will be ignored and only changes that happen to coincide with WG's thinking will be dressed up as responding to players needs.


"We don't stop playing because we grow old, we grow old because we stop playing".G.B.Shaw


zen_monk_ #36 Posted 23 June 2018 - 08:45 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Alpha Tester
  • 4255 battles
  • 1,013
  • [__] __
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostBravelyRanAway, on 23 June 2018 - 08:37 AM, said:

 

Eeer no. Because the players who voted for reverting back to 1.9 were the few remaining after four years of failure.....the majority voted with their feet and left. Those few skewed the result.

 

True point.

 

Might hurt if you're one of those, but still is true.


Edited by zen_monk_, 23 June 2018 - 08:46 AM.

stats were invented by Satan himself to suck the carefree fun out of gaming

svadilfari #37 Posted 23 June 2018 - 08:46 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Conquest Member
  • 3629 battles
  • 307
  • [FEED] FEED
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

i enjoy 2.0+ much more than 1.9

if only wg would concentrate on fixing all the bugs.

it honestly looks like no one is even testing the patches before the release



Horcan #38 Posted 23 June 2018 - 09:00 AM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 3623 battles
  • 698
  • [_VI_] _VI_
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Postsvadilfari, on 23 June 2018 - 09:46 AM, said:

i enjoy 2.0+ much more than 1.9

if only wg would concentrate on fixing all the bugs.

it honestly looks like no one is even testing the patches before the release

 

I enjoy it more too. But usually in gaming industry, beta testers are paid by the company, not the other way around. They should stop releasing unbalanced stuff and gameplay elements before they test it. Like freaking AA guns and defense planes shredding half of your HP before you even get above the freaking base.

Nytril #39 Posted 23 June 2018 - 11:36 AM

    Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 4675 battles
  • 61
  • Member since:
    12-22-2014

View PostBravelyRanAway, on 22 June 2018 - 07:36 PM, said:

 

Do point out the toxic replies besides your own one.

 

^ brain missing

 

All my replies have been following the nature of your initial response. Are you really such a dimwit? 



chief_de_wrecker #40 Posted 23 June 2018 - 01:46 PM

    Master Sergeant

  • Conquest Member
  • 2135 battles
  • 62
  • [A_D_C] A_D_C
  • Member since:
    04-30-2016

View Posteekeeboo, on 22 June 2018 - 01:54 PM, said:

 

The poll on forums full of people who want 1.9 to come back too? ;)  That poll wasn't exactly representative either.

 

Really?..why data you have to think otherwise mate?

What on forum represents that, it is full of people who begged for 2.0??...

cmon guys, See, this is the kind of thing that p***es players off......not taking them into confidence...

WG is free to tweak game since it owns it...no probs..but please, be ******* honest!!!






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users