hipcanuck Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 In a shocking turn of events....... Due to development needs, the test has been postponed. It will take place from July 29th to August 5th. 1 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aethervox Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 13 minutes ago, hipcanuck said: Due to development needs Don't you mean .... 'monetization needs' ... 😁 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfswetpaws Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 18 minutes ago, hipcanuck said: In a shocking turn of events....... Due to development needs, the test has been postponed. It will take place from July 29th to August 5th. Source? Article? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ensign Cthulhu Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 6 minutes ago, Aethervox said: Don't you mean .... 'monetization needs' ... 😁 Would you like to explain how you monetize the PTS? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HogHammer Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 5 minutes ago, Wolfswetpaws said: 24 minutes ago, hipcanuck said: In a shocking turn of events....... Due to development needs, the test has been postponed. It will take place from July 29th to August 5th. Source? Article? From the WoWs Discord... 3 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aethervox Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 9 minutes ago, Ensign Cthulhu said: Would you like to explain how you monetize the PTS? Ask yourself why or what could be reason for this 'delay'? With Wedgie's track record, I suppose they aren't ready, in some way, to 'sell' their CV alterations. What alterations to anything does Wedgie not monetize? It's all they do. Surely, even YOU can see this. For myself, I refuse to join Wedgie CV rewrecking (no matter the current iteration they eventually barf out). 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel_Allan_Clark Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 No surprise to me. The changes to make the proposals in any way viable are big from a programming perspective. Better to wait than have it rushed (remember 0.8.0?). 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ensign Cthulhu Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 20 minutes ago, Aethervox said: What alterations to anything does Wedgie not monetize? It's all they do. The last time WG made fundamental changes to the way carriers are played, they allowed players who didn't like what was coming to sell their premium CVs (and I think permacamos too) back to the company for doubloons in hand. CV grinds that were incomplete were credited 1:1 in FXP and you could dump entire lines for FXP too. When the Commander Skill rework came in, they let you shift as many commanders as you wanted into different ships at no cost. I moved two 19 pointers the night before and they were retrained to their new ships the next day at zero cost and effort. So there are two examples of changes which if anything were incredibly costly for WG in terms of doubloons paid out or opportunities to make doubloons set aside. I have a feeling we're probably going to get concessions for the spotting-change rework like free commander skill respecs (for CVs at least) and possibly free module demounts. Let's see how it works out in the long run. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hipcanuck Posted July 22 Author Share Posted July 22 8 minutes ago, Ensign Cthulhu said: I have a feeling we're probably going to get concessions for the spotting-change rework like free commander skill respecs (for CVs at least) and possibly free module demounts. Let's see how it works out in the long run. While I am generally on the pessimistic side (getting old will do that to you), Im at least going to make the effort to participate in the test. I am neither the best and by far not the worst CV driver in the game but I am pretty consistent in damage output and fairly good at dodging flak, which is easier in some CV's than others. Some CV's I just cant get to work for me...Im lookin at you Midway!...most I have no issues with putting up the numbers and being on the + side of 50% WR. I hope that spotting will be done via mini map. If not, even average DD players will influence the outcome of the match once again. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_KlRlTO_ Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 What we really need in the test isn't people playing the CVs, but rather playing asgainst the CVs. We need players trying to put the new AA systems to the proper test and not leave it to bots. 4 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3LUE Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 (edited) If no CV plane spotting goes into effect on the live server, then DD players are going to be relied on more for spotting, and they also lose an excuse for not spotting. Many DD players have been begging WG to do this, and I hope if it goes live, DD players just do not find another excuse. Yes, radar will still be in the game, but that can be managed by knowing what ships have radar, the range, the length of time it is active, and cooldown time. Edited July 22 by 3LUE 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel_Allan_Clark Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 1 hour ago, 3LUE said: If no CV plane spotting goes into effect on the live server, then DD players are going to be relied on more for spotting, and they also lose an excuse for not spotting. Many DD players have been begging WG to do this, and I hope if it goes live, DD players just do not find another excuse. Yes, radar will still be in the game, but that can be managed by knowing what ships have radar, the range, the length of time it is active, and cooldown time. We already had this in game prior to 0.8.0...DDs were too powerful when it came to game impact. Concealment needs a rework more than CVs do, IMO. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3LUE Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 1 minute ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said: We already had this in game prior to 0.8.0...DDs were too powerful when it came to game impact. Concealment needs a rework more than CVs do, IMO. We also had a lot more "GOOD" DD players. Many of them have left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel_Allan_Clark Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 Just now, 3LUE said: We also had a lot more "GOOD" DD players. Many of them have left. That makes the problem worse, in my experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thornzero Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 2 hours ago, _KlRlTO_ said: What we really need in the test isn't people playing the CVs, but rather playing asgainst the CVs. We need players trying to put the new AA systems to the proper test and not leave it to bots. This is why I volunteered was to play against CVs. However, if it requires downloading a third instance of the game, I might not be so compelled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wulf_Ace Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 I have no idea how will they make this happen. Not to mention it will use a lot of their resources on nothing. Instead of just doing what they did on Wows Legends, simple and clean 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Itwastuesday Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 1 hour ago, thornzero said: This is why I volunteered was to play against CVs. However, if it requires downloading a third instance of the game, I might not be so compelled. I suspect this makes the test a farce. Who in the world would download a third wows just to get to play against carriers? The rewards would need to be significant. 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ensign Cthulhu Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 3 hours ago, Itwastuesday said: Who in the world would download a third wows just to get to play against carriers? If you want a say at the table, you have to have skin in the game. Otherwise you're just talking at second hand without any actual experience. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Itwastuesday Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 53 minutes ago, Ensign Cthulhu said: If you want a say at the table, you have to have skin in the game. Otherwise you're just talking at second hand without any actual experience. What? There's no say. If I do this free work for them and tell everything they're doing is wrong, they'll just go along anyway as they always have. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfswetpaws Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 (edited) 12 hours ago, Aethervox said: Ask yourself why or what could be reason for this 'delay'? With Wedgie's track record, I suppose they aren't ready, in some way, to 'sell' their CV alterations. What alterations to anything does Wedgie not monetize? It's all they do. Surely, even YOU can see this. For myself, I refuse to join Wedgie CV rewrecking (no matter the current iteration they eventually barf out). I wonder if it has ever occurred to you to accompany your grandiose announcements of your "For myself..." plans with a large soap-box to stand on and some evil villain laughter? 😉 https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/NoblewomansLaugh Edited July 22 by Wolfswetpaws 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jakob Knight Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 (edited) 12 hours ago, Aethervox said: Ask yourself why or what could be reason for this 'delay'? With Wedgie's track record, I suppose they aren't ready, in some way, to 'sell' their CV alterations. What alterations to anything does Wedgie not monetize? It's all they do. Surely, even YOU can see this. For myself, I refuse to join Wedgie CV rewrecking (no matter the current iteration they eventually barf out). There are several reasons that come to mind 1. The coding of so many major changes is snarled, bugged, and otherwise not ready on schedule. 2. They haven't gotten the number of players to test the changes as they thought they would / that are required. 3. Actual pre-testing run through is having them wanting to tweak certain changes that they don't think will cause a big delay but they are not ready to put forth without. A fourth reason could, of course, be tied to the Star Trek Collab and not wanting to spook players away from buying the Enterprise camo for a ship that will be in jeopardy with these changes. Any and all, or some, of these could be to blame. Or it could be the code monkeys had a really great party on the weekend and need time to recover. Edited July 22 by Jakob Knight 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfswetpaws Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 7 hours ago, 3LUE said: We also had a lot more "GOOD" DD players. Many of them have left. Good at "what"? Crying & whining to the developers until the criers get what they want? 😎 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfswetpaws Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 47 minutes ago, Itwastuesday said: What? There's no say. If I do this free work for them and tell everything they're doing is wrong, they'll just go along anyway as they always have. Sure. WG/WOWs may ignore the player feedback. There are examples of them doing so in the past. There are also examples of them acting according to WG/WOWs interpretation of player's feedback. It may not have been what everyone wanted, but they did "do something". I anticipate that WG/WOWs will do what they think will make them the most money. Players may disagree in various ways, each to their own preferences & criteria. Yet, WG/WOWs is gonna do what they are going to do. That said, I'd rather tell them what I think instead of not speaking my mind or failing to respond to a survey. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ensign Cthulhu Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 1 hour ago, Itwastuesday said: as they always have. As a matter of fact, they have not 'always'. Do I take it that you weren't here for the NTC fiasco? Do I take it that you weren't here when they offered people their starter-pack doubloons back during the first Puerto Rico dockyard? Do I take it that you weren't here when they folded to playerbase pressure and removed the Deadeye skill? This ENTIRE CARRIER-SPOTTING REWORK is in response to CONSTANT DEMANDS from (parts of) the playerbase to make carriers less pervasive in their ability to see what other ships are doing. For the record, I've said over and over again in chat during official WG twitch streams that I think the best and least complicated compromise to sort this problem out is just to give all the carriers the same limited surface vision that the Bearn gets, and to make all fighter CAP drops into interceptors (cannot spot surface ships). I am therefore literally in fundamental disagreement with WG over the optimal solution to this problem. But I'm doing this test because (a) I want to see what implications it has for me as a carrier player, (b) I want to give their system a fair try for myself, and (c) I want to keep open the possibility that they might be right on this one. 1 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfswetpaws Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 Interesting food for thought. I think I'll have some popcorn and watch what happens. 🍿 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now