Ev1n_NA

This is not me at my most sociable. When we finally get through the pandemic and are able to resume offline events, then you will see my most sociable. I do look forward to meeting players at some of those events. :)

We will do our best to achieve that.

That is the point - we need to find a middle ground where we address your concerns and give you the experiences you individually desire and meeting our goals. As I've posted above, we will give you an updates (the scoop) on those commitments.

We used to do that on stream and the forums very early on and when we asked people "what would you like to see?" we basically got a list of all the ships that ever existed - one from each player. This is why we usually would reply to questions like "Is THIS ship coming?" by saying that we want to introduce all the ships eventually. The other problem is that the NA part of that would likely be focused heavily on US Navy ships, while we need to make sure we cater relatively equally to our global community.

This is not to say we can't or won't do that, but we just need to organize it in some meaningful way.

The name was mentioned because a comment was made referring to the person. Just for the record, Flamu did not leave the program in the current situation.

I absolutely value Flamu for his gameplay analyses - he is extremely good at that and that content is simply very good. However, that does not mean that his opinion on other topics is objective or true. He is a content creator and will cater to his audience. It's not personal, just an evaluation of the modern media environment.

Yes. We will do this. We'll just try to see if we can automate it at least a bit, to try to avoid a situation when on NA it will be outdated because we're in a different time zone than the dev team.

1. As above - we will revamp that, but we'll.

2. We will make that happen - most likely through our streams.

3. Yes. Either him or when he can't you're stuck with me.

I can't answer this directly right now - we're planning different ways to address that lack of clarity on the balance process, but those items tied to new mechanics will come closer to the date when the mechanics are in final stages. I just currently don't know exactly what the ETA is on those mechanics. I will come back to you on that.

I can make a polite suggestion, but ultimately it will be up to their game teams to choose the tools they feel they need. We do not have company-wide guidelines for that specifically, because different regions and games require different approaches.

As we've said before, it's not a simple matter of "just do it". Sure, coding the drop rates themselves and the front-end UI may not take that long, but changing the business model to fit the new mechanics and behavioral trends is something that needs to be done carefully. We'll try to do it as fast as we can, but the commitment horizon we give is the next year.

She looks average in the stats. 53% avg WR, average DPM, average survivability, average damage per battle. What was painful about her?

Thank you, I will tell the mods to not moderate without stating the reason. I'm sorry they did that.

Generally, we want to make sure that we keep an open forum for discussing the message in question, not Flamu's content. People are absolutely free to go view it on his channels though.

As for responding to it - I am happy to respond to normal discussion points, but its hard for me to find those there. There is his opinion based on his personal understanding - which is wrong in the case of his evaluation of our legal practice or refund policies. I find it interesting though that he flaunts the in-game kickbacks he receives in-game from his audience and then proceeds to discuss what's wrong with the monetization of the game.

Thank you. Now i can reply t...

We are not reluctant to buff such ships. The problem is with the assessment of "clearly underperforming". In terms of win rate, the ship is at 49.95%, it has the second highest plane kills in tier, it is absolutely average in kills and KvD (better than Colorado and Nagato though). It is currently a bit below average in DPM though, but above average in survivability and lifetime. I understand that for players gunplay is often the most important factor, so we will look at the possibility of buffing that slightly, so that she is closer to the average.

We will take that into consideration and see if we can make that happen within the agreement between us and the partner, but I can't make any commitments on this at present.

Fair Assessment. Nothing unexpected in Flamuu trashing us.

As I've replied to some of those comments here today - we will back them up, but it will take time, please do hold us accountable.

I'm not the right person to address these specific concerns, but as always - if they underperform, we will tweak them again. However, we will tweak them based on broad performance data.

Guys, I can't really answer those questions at this time, because recently we were focusing on making decisions and plans on the big items. Yes, we will look at these kinds of small wishlist items like buffing California in the near future, but we will still look closely at the data to validate whether/what needs adjusting. As for adding any specific new ships - i can't promise that, for sure not in the short term. This depends on our production pipeline and multiple other factors like whether we have the necessary references. Some specific ship classes are also pre-assigned to be part of future tech tree branches or to be premiums accompanying those branches and we believe that's the best fit for them.

I can't commit to this right now, an...

I will do my best.

Just please don't freak out if tomorrow I'm not on the forums full-time. Today this is the most important item on the agenda, but i also have to get back to my regular job of keeping NA running. We will schedule some more specific weekly or bi-weekly time frames when i'll make myself available to talk to you guys. We will figure out how to make this work sustainably to fulfill the commitment.

I know and i appreciate the kind words.

I'm fine with criticism, but the challenge is explaining the background of some decisions without going into also explaining all the connected systems and dependencies. I will do my best though.

I'm sorry but I can't read Portuguese and don't want to misinform you based on a web translator. We'll do our best to come back to this.

We've been working on the AI for scenarios in the background for a while, but it's not been a priority for the team due to the fact that they are not very popular overall (i.e. not many players play them).

The main point here is that if CCs are still supposed to be the ambassadors for the community, as most participants in these discussions seem to want, then it stands to reason that we would use the CC program to communicate with them, because its the best channel to do so and has always been. We will improve this channel and fix all those complaints and issues that we conceivably can (that are not based on an immovable difference of opinion) and continue using it, because while it may be a part of the problem, it is also a part of the solution.

This is interesting and i appreciate the effort. However, we can't discuss the business at this level of detail without you having an NDA. It's just good practice. :)

I do, of course, but that does not remove the point. Many of our oldest CCs left, but the majority remain, because not all issues quoted are systemic. It's just easy to extrapolate and think that all we do is treat everyone poorly.

Our loot boxes are not pay 2 win. Well, we seem to disagree on a simple point here: you are saying that all players understand everything about the game and the business, because its all common sense. I allege that this is not the case and so we try to address that.

And I did not mean that as a demeaning or diminishing comment - just to make it clear that the QA process is more complicated than that. Just don't see the joke there, especially that the topics being addressed are supposed to be serious.

I don't currently have an answer for the first question. Regarding loot boxes the answer is, because they are not illegal, its not true that all (or even the majority) players hate them despite what it may look like from this discussion or that they actively hurt financially. There are different points of view on this and i understand that we may not agree on it, but the bottom line is that we are addressing some of the specific items related to...

This is a mischaracterization. I was responding to a comment that said we should leave QA to the community based on the example of a CC. This is not possible, because this is not how gamedev works in general.

We have no contempt for the community nor any specific player groups. Otherwise i would not be here replying to you and trying to separate opinions from business practice from our commitments for changes.

Once we deliver on this commitment, please feel free to collate community data, just like you are doing now. The research will have the same limitations, but may help to catch any issues.

I appreciate the level of introspective you have. It's difficult to not use a spreadsheet in IT though - I guess we will rephrase this to "the data". I do agree that we should give proactive updates on some of these changes - the idea of a community-facing roadmap will hopefully contribute to that, with updates probably every few months. Other than that you will see smaller changes reflected in dev blogs and patch notes, since those are released much more frequently, to follow our current 4-week development cycle.

While I appreciate the reasonable analysis, we generally separate the concept of apology from commitments to change. From that perspective we need to be on the same page that we just have different points of view on what is good for the ...

That's a reasonable concept, but some of the suggestions are based on your opinion and your perceived value of certain things. We are committed to the concept, but still need to balance the game around the meta and need to disconnect performance from value.

We will try.

We do not delete any posts that are not inflammatory or otherwise breaking the rules. This thread is an example of that i believe, while i can't say that all the comments are favorable towards us.

Yesterday's locked thread was a counter-example, where we did not moderate enough.

Developers do play the game, some religiously - the vast majority on the RU server. As for the other point, we will do our best so that this doesn't happen systematically, though please remember that it might happen at times. Sometimes the ticket queue is empty and sometimes its full, while staffing is planned for the average.

We will update our moderation policies on NA, to make sure its clear what is appropriate and so that moderation is clearer and more effective. In terms of locking threads - if you see someone derailing your discussion, please report them and the mods will mod as soon as they can.

We absolutely understand this sentiment, but all that we can do is plan changes, tell you about them, start the changes, implement the changes over time. You will see them over time - some sooner, some later.