Sub_Octavian

Random mechanics like lootboxes or random bundles constitute only a part of monetization of the game. Not insignificant, but also not in any way determinative. World of Warships monetization is still largely based on direct ship sales and Premium Account sales. Everything else is complementary.

If you look at our random-based stuff objectively, you will notice that in the majority of cases it does not contain anything that can't be obtained otherwise or that is gameplay-critical (i.e. early access random bundles allow you to play a ship a couple of months in advance, and that's it). Overwhelming majority of content is not locked this way.

That said, in no way I claim we're doing everything correct. On the contrary, the Missouri case clearly shows we should be more considerate. And, of course, we follow all industry regulations, and looking at how it goes and how the world changes, it does not make sense to rely on such mechanics too much.

Hello,

I can clear it up for you. We do not have a single person who decides everything in the game. We have instead different roles and areas of responsibility, so there is always one person who makes the final call, but we always have a process where we sit down and discuss the decisions before they are made. There is also a role - Game Director, who is accountable for the whole game and sometimes when other folks can't agree on something it's his duty to decide what to do and carry the ultimate responsibility for it.

Regarding monetization events - they are designed by the monetization team based on our roadmap and financial goals. Far in advance (a couple of months typically) their drafts are reviewed and discussed, including by me and my guys (shonai, Vessery) and regional offices too.

So, answering your question directly, I did not decide to put Missouri in random bundles, but as executive producer, here I carry responsibility f...

Hey,

We've got agreement from @Chobittsu and, via him, from @LittleWhiteMouse to proceed with HMCS Huron.

As promised, we also will be working on a special alternative camo for Huron @Chobittsu will be probably cooking in a while, but he's the man to tell you the details. From what I heard from Chobi, the idea is pretty cool.

We will also start giving both of them extra details and information once the ship enters active development, but this will happen in more distant future, as the ship is officially scheduled to release in 2022.

In no way we think this step is enough to immediately fix all problems that had led to this incident, in fact, it will be a "physical" form of our sincere apology. Nevertheless we hope it's a good step, and we thank both Chobi and Mouse for accepting it and giving us this chance.

I believe in future there will be a separate thread on HMCS Huron development process, but that'...

It's a good point, as not clearly setting the expectations (or setting them and then failing to meet them) is what has resulted in this mess.

But right now the conditions are clear and they also have been presented here publicly, so the whole thing is definite to everyone: Mouse and Chobi named two ships they'd be interested in for us to choose, and we're ready to implement one of them in 2022. All development and design is 100% on our side, but should they wish, they can offer a Permanent camo concept/design - historical or more fictional - and we will also implement it for the ship as a main or alternative camo option.

Thanks, @Chobittsu

Should we proceed, we will gladly support your idea to highlight Huron development more and give some extra details and behind-the-scenes insights. I think we could send this extra information to you and @LittleWhiteMouse so you can share it with the community as you'd like.

...

Hi,

I explicitly said that's a commitment from us. Unless a big meteor aka "force majeure we objectively don't have influence on" falls on our office (I hope that won't happen, but if it does, I won't be here to tell you that), we will release this ship in 2022.
The only thing I'm waiting for to initiate putting it into our schedule is the approval from both Mouse and Chobi

@Chobittsu @LittleWhiteMouse, I have good news for you and for everyone else.

I've just received an answer from our historical and research team and also talked to the development right away.

We are happy to confirm we can implement one of the ships you brought up - HMCS Huron - to honor you and own our mistakes that lead to the incident.

While we will be taking all care of design and production process ourselves, we also would be happy to implement a Permanent camo for this ship based on your design/ideas, if, of course you'd be interested.

Moreover, even though our content is in works for ~2 years ahead, after some squeezing and plans changing we're ready to commit to releasing this ship in 2022.

We humbly hope that you will appreciate this commitment and it will show you that despite of the mess we created around Yukon, we want you to feel valued and repair our relations.

Please let us...

Why should she? Why are you discussing it?
Mouse has been one of the most valuable CC and we barely had any issues with her. She is extremely nice to other players, CC and WG staff, and she's very attentive to all the details and rules of CC Program. There are zero reasons currently to question her CC status and I doubt it will change.

I don't think the core issue is with how Yukon plays, but instead in how LittleWhiteMouse and Chobi were invited to participate in its creation and how they were treated subsequently. There is no problem with buffing Yukon if needed, but it's a separate question of game balance, not community relations. Hence we're addressing LWM and Chobi here, and specifically what can be done to make them feel better.

TBH, I don't think the ships proposed will be proper T8, more likely T7, but we shall see when the evaluation is done.

Thank you, Chobi. I appreciate your patience.

Unfortunately I kinda agree. The incident was first allowed to happen (by initiating the co-working on ship design process without any internal approvals), then was allowed to continue (by not having the information passed on), then was not prevented (by not paying attention to the concerns that were repeatedly raised by Chobi and LWM before ...

Thanks, Chobittsu,
We're in different time zones, so I will make mine now, and you will make yours when you have a good rest - good night to you!

I feel I have to comment on all that, as I was probably the most involved in conversation with Chobittsu and AprilWhiteMouse after the incident happened.
But first of all, as my colleagues said above, I am terribly sorry that Chobi and Mouse had such bad experience in dealing with WoWS team. No matter who played what part in this incident, it's on World of Warships side, and I once again apologize for that.
Regarding the conversation, I feel his representation of our talks was not full. However, I understand that both Chobi and Mouse were under big stress from this situation, and I don't think there is any point in trying to dwell upon it further. At this moment, what's the most important is to make sure we understand each other and to find what we can do, apart from apologising. So here's how the ...

Hey,

I did not say there won't be maintenance. All the current content is anyway being maintained and adjusted as needed, including Operations. But as I said back then, for now, we're not putting the work in expanding this area of the game. We're working on something else for PvP, and would like to test our ideas thoroughly first. Maybe later we will be able to get back to Operations and PvE with more involvement, I certainly hope so.

Cheers and have a good day!

That is an open question, mate. We've "upgraded" our devblog quite a lot and now it consistently gives the vision of game's upcoming changes and content 2-3 months forward. If we try to shift the horizon more, the plans will be less specific and less reliable, and there will be less to show in general. We do think about it, but we haven't found a good approach yet.

No, that's very different on a conceptual level.

To be a CC you don't even need to have relations with Wargaming, and quite a few CC established themselves well enough before they got into CC Program. Likewise, CC leaving the program does not mean they immediately stop being part of the community; they're absolutely fine with doing what they want to do.

The goal of CC Program is to help CC who want to have relations with us, thus they are provided with the information, press accounts, some in game content, giveaways to help them engage with their audience, but it's not "compensation" for their "work".

CC do work (and IMO no amount of prem ships could actually compensate the efforts they put in their creative content), but they work on their channels and their content. They can monetize it, they control what and how they say apart from VERY few limitations CC program brings (which as Mouse described are very reasonable and tbh mostly ec...

I mean, we all want our pasta to be perfectly al dente, but on the other hand, we don't want to undercook. Give it some time to boil.

(Taken from Reddit - Added by Fem)

I can understand why @NoZoupForYou feels that way and share some of the concerns, however, I respectfully disagree with some others. Here are my thoughts on the subject(s).

Russian Bias.

KOTS lineup is indeed skewed, but it's rather a combination of unfortunate circumstances and meta state at this period of time. Kremlin was indeed stronger than needed, while it was nerfed recently, due to tech stuff, KoTS was conducted on the server where Kremlin was pre-nerf. Of course I am not saying that alpha damage reduction instantly makes Kremlin bad lineup choice - she is still amazing in pushing, and it is needed at this level of play, but so far I see 1% of avg PvP WR drop after the change, for example, which is a step in the right direction at minimum).

At the same time we have Grozovoi, which is actually viable in competitive after the buff. At the same time we have Moskva, which is actual...

Thank you for the feedback, I guess. Or was it a pointless rant aimed at us?
Historical aspect is quite strong in our game - models, lore and a lot of IRL specs applied to ships, how we work with ballistics and armor, etc, etc, however OF COURSE a lot of things work vastly differently because we're not a sim. That's fine, no need to see it as black & white. Hitsory is a part of this game identity, like it or not, it influences how game feels and plays, but it does not need to be 100%...even 75% accurate.

That's fine, we're scared too, and we don't want to ruin the game as well. You know, looks like here devs and players have a lot of same goals, which is good.

How do you know that? The above poster just commented on how people adapt (or not) to meta change. This does not prove absolutely anything.

Your theory, it is. Time will tell

No, top management people responsible for the game on company level do not interfere with game design. We work on the subs because we (WoWS team) believe they can be good and fun addition to the game. Also, have some faith please. We've made this game which brought all of us together and we've been keeping it hot for 4 years now. We had a lot of bumps and lessons learned hard way, but tons of fun and good updates as well. We (both players and devs) can handle some tiny underwater boats

I am sorry that our change of plans collided with your infinite hate (or phobia?) of submarines. I really do. But you have to understand that most people don't feel like that. For the most people submarines, even without track record of taking part in big fleet battles, are a part of WWII naval warfare. And our game is..about WWII naval warfare. There is demand for this class. Even the situation where we had to reply to "subs when" over and over again proves that.

Some details:

Stats from test;


Surveys;


Forum+Reddit+SM impressions;


CCT impressions;


Our own assessment.

Something like that will affect our decision making. How exactly - I don't know until we started.

If you, by any chance, have a ready formula which will somehow tell us 100% precisely how to move on or not to move on with the subs, please DM it to me. I will gladly shower you with Missouris, Belfasts and Kamikazes for the rest of your WoWS lifetime :)

Hint: there is NO universal solution to such cases. You need to love the game and the players, have vision for it, and have some guts to make a call in the end. And still, you can be wrong, and in this case you need to show ownership and work your aft off to fix stuff. That's tough dev life right here

Nobody thinks you are. But you definitely like to pick on words. I explained this above. Historical aspect is already selective in the game, and it was like this from the start. It's a game based on history, and we reflect the history when we can, but if needed we're willing to sacrifice it for gameplay.

They will go to separate game mode for testing. If it has good results, they WILL be added to the main game mode with time. But a dedicated mode gives us the chance to collect a lot of viable feedback without changing the game experience for everyone overnight.