During the weeks that the content creators had the vehicles, we were monitoring the statistics of the vehicle to obtain accurate data to model the repair costs on as closely as possible. These vehicles were played extensively enough for a sufficient data set, from which we can mark and create a repair cost that reflects their earnings and expenditure.
Thats actually more than enough data to be gathered to create a reasonable data set and follow trends and predictions to create baseline numbers. Consider there was more content creators playing these machines than for example some people playing vehicles in SB or Naval. Content creators also played them for a considerable amount of time more than many other new machines are played when they join the game. So it was more than large enough to get the data needed.
As we also made clear, as time goes by and more data is collected, the costs will be adjusted based on further data thats collected now the vehicles are in the wider player base.
Content creators actually span quite a range of players and as I explained above, actually provide more of a larger data set than some vehicles get in Naval, SB or other areas. There are even some vehicles in RB that get played by under 100 people, yet we are still able to get a repair cost from their data.
The content creators played these machines extensively and provided the starting point of a repair cost. Should that data have been proven incorrect, then you will see those changes be reflected in the next economy update.
Lastly for clarification, a Gift Vehicle relates to the classifaction of the type of distribution. All vehicles in game are subject to repair cost and BR changes, regardless of how they are obtained.
Its actually a common request by people when it comes to things like repair costs or BRs to say "why dont you allow people to test them before you assign them a predicted value".
This is an example of when we have actually done that, because content creators represent both a large enough and good enough range to get quantifiable data to create a starting point from which we can then tweak and adjust to be more arcuate over time.
Had we have released the machines with a really low repair cost, far below what they are now, only for us to have had to correct them days after release, the same arguments would have been made "oh look at how you bait and switched us just raise it after we got it!".
The data sample showed us clearly this is where the vehicles were performing at. As I said, its its proven wrong, it will go down in the next patch. But at least this way its both more fair and was actually grounded in a data set.
When you have over 1700+ vehicles in game, you cannot have manually adjusted numbers for every vehicle. That is simply impossible and unreasonable to expect.
With that said, we have been working on some changes specifically for event vehicles repair costs, that we hope to be able to share very soon.
Of course not
Data is a statistical fact. Feedback and personal opinion is subject to personal bias, certain perspective and confirmation bias that cannot be used as the sole point of cost calculation.
We use data and the actual factual numbers to determine the values with all feedback taken into account, but there are very clear and obvious reasons why you cannot use personal opinion or only manual adjustment in our game with 1700+ machines.
Different people play the machines and they are used in entirely different way in Arcade to SB.
Both of these factors are taken into account. As I said previously, if the numbers were wrong, then they will be corrected in the next economical update. So its possible it will indeed go down
I am simply explaining why they were given their starting point cost and how that was obtained.
Premium account bonuses are taken into account has no baring on how baseline costs/rewards are obtained.
Im actually here to help, provide you guys with answers from the developers as well as forward your constructive feedback along.
I have already explained that a adjustment to specifically event vehicles repair cost calculations are being worked on, that we hope to be able to share very soon.
Throwing personal insults around is not going to help this topic at all.
Content creators had the vehicles for over a week and played them excessively. Again, we have vehicles in SB and Naval played significantly less, yet we are still able to create a baseline repair / reward cost value for them. We also had an economy patch planned for that week that overlapped.
As I have said multiple times though now, we have something thats been in the works for a little while now that we hope to share soon regarding repair cost calculation for event vehicles based on previous feedback (going back further from this event too).
This is incorrect.
There are not developers constantly present on the RU forum answering every single topic. They are also present here on the .com forum reading it not only for themselves but before we even pass on all the additional feedback we collect.
Im not really sure here what you are insinuating, but personal opinion or views has no baring on how feedback is collected, passed along or reviewed. Thats not the job of any Community Manager in any game and I dont really know where your idea of that comes from, except that its just your personal opinion you made up. Its not my job, or any Community Managers job to "disagree" with your feedback. We may explain the facts to you and correct statements incorrect made that may mislead people, because that is our job. But that has no baring at all on what we forward or collect.
As one of the people that spend their hours reviewing not just every corner of this forum to collect feedback, but also the website comments, content partners, YouTube/livestreams and social media, I can confirm your idea of what effects feedback is simply incorrect and not at all reflective of how its actually handled or done by any Community Manager.
Everyone has their own opinions on different areas of repair costs, however I am responding specifically to this topic and the points made here for clarification.
Once again, we are not in need of convincing to forward anything on. Its not our job to halt feedback based on our opinion. Just because I respond to you with an answer on something does not mean whatever promoted you to ask the question or your response is not also forwarded on. Not only that, but the developers can see for themselves this forum or any other platform without or feedback collections.
The issue with your grand concept of everything getting an answer is simply because not everything can. In an ideal world where there are thousands of developers and tons more staff able to constantly translate things backwards and forwards all day long, sitting around just waiting to jump on every topic and respond with a full essay of what can/cant be done, sure. But the reality is no game can do that. No other F2P MMO out there has a forum full of developer responded answers or a complete list of all things forwarded and denied and approved unless they are either 1) so small their playerbase numbers are manageable to do it or 2) so huge they have huge amount of manpower to do it. But I think you will find our forums and our outlets in general have tons more communication, responses and feedback collection than most other games (certainly of our size) out there.
Having just explained it very transparently all then, there can be no doubt then that personal opinion has no baring on feedback collection
As one of the people who collect the questions for every Q and A, allow me to confirm that they are not.
A satisfying answer is entirely subjective to personal opinion. Its also a case that not everything has a "satisfying answer" because at the end of the day, not every piece of feedback can actually be implemented exactly as desired. We implement as much as we can as far as we can, but what you and others often seem to loose track of is we are a game and thus also a company. The game has to make money to continue its existence and unfortunately, what many people don't take into account Is not every change is actually both logical and sustainable for the health and support of the game to continue.
Its also all very well to cherry pick the examples of feedback that could not be implemented as desired and just ignore 8 years of development of this game that has been shaped, from its inception by the community overall.
The "main concerns" have mostly all been answered before several times over. They can be devolved down into roughly 5 subjects, all of which we have answered before in some form.
The issue comes with the fact that we cannot keep repeating the same questions over and over and over in different forms in every Q and A. The whole point of Q and As is supposed to cover a wide range of topics. Its also supposed to be covering all areas of the game. SB for example does not get attention on every single Q and A, so giving it more in 1 example is not "revolving" them all around Sim.
We have already previously explained for example the top battle rating expansions, spawn area issues, matchmaking issues, event reasonings, repair cost explanations, HEAT FS changes and all of the other "main concerns" you refer too. You do not agree with the answer, but that does not mean they have not been previously answered.
Not at all. If a vehicle for example achieves what you consider to be "normal" which is lower than what it currently was recorded at, then it would go down indeed and this is evident in every economy patch when there are always vehicles that go down, including new ones from a previous major.
With regards to the C2A1, F-11 and other event vehicles, as I said previously in the thread, we have something in the works for event vehicle repair costs that we hope to share soon.
People are entirely free to disagree and hold their own opinions. We are not trying to "suppress" that. But if we have already provided an answer to something before, dont expect it to keep coming up over and over in Q and As. The developers also dont want to just keep repeating themselves.
No one time paid games or games with "free content drops" have run for 8 years. You are confusing multiple different types of game into a type that does not exist.
You have already received the best answer possible. The answers we provide (CMs) are the best explanation possible the developers can give and its the same case for Q and As.
This comes down to the fact you dislike the answers and dont agree with them, but that doesn't mean the question is going to be asked over and over again because the answer is not going to change.
We share the information we are given. Sometimes, plans and development changes thats entirely outside of our control. It doesn't mean you were lied too or mislead. People are asking for more and more transparency and answers earlier, yet that comes with the consequence of too much info too early can change rapidly. Hence why everything is subject to change. The supersonic example is also a prime example of community demand. We said that we didn't want to peruse it, but the community made it very clear over a long period its what they wanted, so like anything in development, plans and direction can change.
If you cant trust anything thats said by anyone, then there's not much we can do about that im afraid. We are just here to do our job to pass you the correct info that we can at the time we receive it. Any game thats in active development is subject to change.
Once again, this is incorrect. We pass everything, but just because you have feedback of any kind does not mean all of it can be implemented. It depends vastly on subject to subject.
Im sorry to correct you, but your assumptions of how feedback is passed are wrong.
Because I don't think you are aware of what a Community Manager actually is. A Community Manager is a member of Gaijin staff with the purpose of providing answers directly from developers and passing feedback along. A Community Manager in any game has no purpose whatsoever to express their own personal opinion in a forum topic if they dislike something, because thats completely meaningless?
We are not here to share our views on things, we are here to provide you guys with information from the devs and pass constructive feedback on. Since we are the ones that collect feedback from the forum, what would be the purpose for example of me posting my own opinion on something, just for me to then collect my own post to pass it with a developer, when we work with them and communicate with them personally.
Our job is to pass you guys changes, explanations from the developers and deliver the facts. Not post our personal opinions on changes. No Community Manager for any game does that.
We also have the ability to do that, but there is also a reason why aircraft like the A6M5 Otsu have the cost they do. That aircraft is able to make huge sums of lions on a consistent basis and thats what the majority get for it to be able to have that repair cost.
Repair cost has never depended on a similar variant or same vehicle in different trees. It depends solely on the economics of any given individual vehicle.
devtrackers.gg