Please be patient until 14 June!

[Slickshotz 93]

They're buying themselves time to let the dust settle! We want a road map to this fix by the end of this week or next! We've given you plenty of ideas in the past months/years, stop giving us bad responses. You DO NOT NEED over 3 weeks to figure out a road map, that is corporate wanting everything to settle down so they can do their normal tactics of letting the players calm down. If you're truly listening they put some ACTION to those words this week!!

[Vamilad 238]

"Over the past week, we've been diligently analyzing the feedback you've provided. We acknowledge and agree with your concerns regarding the balance of the economy (Silver Lions and Research Points), as well as modification research. We have therefore prioritized addressing these issues as our immediate concern."

If the developers agreed with our concerns about the economy then why did they try to implement the May changes?

They claim they've been analyzing feedback provided via the survey, why hasn't feedback across this forum or through other social media been taken prior?  Did it simply not matter enough?

Players have been leaving feedback about the economy for years.  Claiming this is something sudden which they need to take time to work through is disingenuous. 

 

[Slickshotz 93]

8 minutes ago, Vamilad said:

"Over the past week, we've been diligently analyzing the feedback you've provided. We acknowledge and agree with your concerns regarding the balance of the economy (Silver Lions and Research Points), as well as modification research. We have therefore prioritized addressing these issues as our immediate concern."

If the developers agreed with our concerns about the economy then why did they try to implement the May changes?

They claim they've been analyzing feedback provided via the survey, why hasn't feedback across this forum or through other social media been taken prior?  Did it simply not matter enough?

Players have been leaving feedback about the economy for years.  Claiming this is something sudden which they need to take time to work through is disingenuous. 

 

It simply did not matter to them at all. All they're after is how can they get players to spend more money month after month. It just another one of their tactics to stall then screw us over again.

[PEAKVIRGIN 1,254]

27 minutes ago, Slickshotz said:

They're buying themselves time to let the dust settle! We want a road map to this fix by the end of this week or next! We've given you plenty of ideas in the past months/years, stop giving us bad responses. You DO NOT NEED over 3 weeks to figure out a road map, that is corporate wanting everything to settle down so they can do their normal tactics of letting the players calm down. If you're truly listening they put some ACTION to those words this week!!

dude ur just bad it takes long time to MAKE ROADMAP FOR CURRENT AND FUTURE ROADMAPS of eco changes 

[Delta-Wing 13]

12 minutes ago, Vamilad said:

the May changes

The May changes Lowered the total RP and SL to get to top tier, and on average increased the SL modifiers while decreasing the repair costs.

The main reason this was not noticed is that quite a few of the minority of vehicles that became more expensive after the change we played heavily by a large number of people because they were some of the most profitable vehicles before the update. (also gaijin increased repair costs across the board in air RB for higher ranks for some reason, but they did also increase the SL modifiers, effectively giving a steath decrease in the relative cost of buying and crewing vehicles)

 

In other words gaijin did try to improve the economy for players, they just failed to actually tell players about all the good things they changed. And at the same time the few bad changes (which were more obvious than the good changes) like taking more vehicles out of folders released the years of built up anger from the community.

 

Im not saying Gaijin is perfect, they have failed their community, but the main failiure was in poor communication from gaijin more than anything else (and yes more feedback surveys would be nice, hopefully that will happen from now on)

Edited May 23, 2023 by UnknowenPlayer

[ProgramTheta 726]

3 weeks is definitely waiting for things to settle down. They can claim they are listening to us now and trying to fix things (which implicitly means that they were not listening to us before), and hoping that by June 14th people will have thoroughly calmed down and will be in more of a mood to settle for whatever questionable promises of marginal improvement they will give out at that date.

[Vamilad 238]

17 minutes ago, UnknowenPlayer said:

The May changes Lowered the total RP and SL to get to top tier, and on average increased the SL modifiers while decreasing the repair costs.

The main reason this was not noticed is that quite a few of the minority of vehicles that became more expensive after the change we played heavily by a large number of people because they were some of the most profitable vehicles before the update. (also gaijin increased repair costs across the board in air RB for higher ranks for some reason, but they did also increase the SL modifiers, effectively giving a steath decrease in the relative cost of buying and crewing vehicles)

 

In other words gaijin did try to improve the economy for players, they just failed to actually tell players about all the good things they changed. And at the same time the few bad changes (which were more obvious than the good changes) like taking more vehicles out of folders released the years of built up anger from the community.

 

Im not saying Gaijin is perfect, they have failed their community, but the main failiure was in poor communication from gaijin more than anything else (and yes more feedback surveys would be nice, hopefully that will happen from now on)

 

They did, but they also decreased top tier rewards and increased top tier costs.

 

I don't care about RP costs, I think they're fine as is.  My opinion is in the minority.  I do care about being able to play my top tier lineups to their full potential, and right now even before the flat nerf to everything Rank VI onwards I have to consider whether I want to risk losing SL taking a second / third spawn.  Each latter spawn increases chance of dying to CAS before engaging a ground target.  Even taking SPAA will require you to kill multiple targets to break even on the SPAA, if your spawn is overrun before you meet that threshold then you will have lost SL.

 

I don't want the game to encourage me to drop to the hanger after my first death.

[cashmeowsidehbd 1,269]

7 aerial kills in a 4.3br mission gives a score of 1288. HUH? After getting killed once? That's not very economical if you ask me.

[Vamilad 238]

22 minutes ago, PEAKVIRGIN said:

dude ur just bad it takes long time to MAKE ROADMAP FOR CURRENT AND FUTURE ROADMAPS of eco changes 

 

However long it takes is irrelevant.  It's whether the changes will be positive for the player.  We don't trust that they will be.

Just now, cashmeowsidehbd said:

7 aerial kills in a 4.3br mission gives a score of 1288. HUH? After getting killed once? That's not very economical if you ask me.

 

"score" do you mean Research Points?

[x1BRAVO9x 190]

1 minute ago, Vamilad said:

 

They did, but they also decreased top tier rewards and increased top tier costs.

 

I don't care about RP costs, I think they're fine as is.  My opinion is in the minority.  I do care about being able to play my top tier lineups to their full potential, and right now even before the flat nerf to everything Rank VI onwards I have to consider whether I want to risk losing SL taking a second / third spawn.  Each latter spawn increases chance of dying to CAS before engaging a ground target.  Even taking SPAA will require you to kill multiple targets to break even on the SPAA, if your spawn is overrun before you meet that threshold then you will have lost SL.

 

I don't want the game to encourage me to drop to the hanger after my first death.

 

 

You touch on something that I have discussed previously and is at the root of one of WT major problems.

 

WT gameplay modeling encourages nonconstructive, poor, and counterproductive gameplay.

 

The kneejerk reaction is to get mad at the player, but in actuality they are doing nothing but playing the hand they are dealt.

[cashmeowsidehbd 1,269]

5 minutes ago, Vamilad said:

 

However long it takes is irrelevant.  It's whether the changes will be positive for the player.  We don't trust that they will be.

 

"score" do you mean Research Points?

no. whatever you call the number under the star on the report after the mission(sl). People died 4 times and doubled my score with one assist and 2 ground targets more than i had.  So that means i got 1288sl and paid out 1458sl in a 7 kill mission. That's Caca de Toro if you ask me.

 

Edited May 23, 2023 by cashmeowsidehbd

[Stavroforos 15,367]

Yes, you're right, what they need to do is present some half-arsed pitch that gives into the 32,302 different demands which every individual player throwing a temper tantrum has made. 

 

This is why this whole "community outrage" is a joke, and the worst part is I'm afraid that now that the whole extortionary "review bombing" floodgates have been opened, temper tantrums and extortion will be more and more common whenever some demand isn't met. 

[Slickshotz 93]

33 minutes ago, PEAKVIRGIN said:

dude ur just bad it takes long time to MAKE ROADMAP FOR CURRENT AND FUTURE ROADMAPS of eco changes 

No, no it does not. It's actually very simple to say we're increasing research points and silver lion rewards across the board by 20% or more. Then they can have the time they need to do that. You're very simple minded and it shows. 

 

Also 20% is the bare minimum 

Edited May 23, 2023 by Slickshotz

[Vamilad 238]

Just now, Stavroforos said:

Yes, you're right, what they need to do is present some half-arsed pitch that gives into the 32,302 different demands which every individual player throwing a temper tantrum has made. 

 

This is why this whole "community outrage" is a joke, and the worst part is I'm afraid that now that the whole extortionary "review bombing" floodgates have been opened, temper tantrums and extortion will be more and more common whenever some demand isn't met. 

 

Does any of those 32,000 players you discount as "temper tantrums / extortion" want a negative SL balance economy?

I think the feedback is quite resoundingly clear.  Make SL gains better, lower costs.

 

How you get to that state is up to the developers.  It's their game.  Whether they want players to enjoy playing it or not is up to them.

[Stavroforos 15,367]

Just now, Vamilad said:

 

Does any of those 32,000 players you discount as "temper tantrums / extortion" want a negative SL balance economy?

I think the feedback is quite resoundingly clear.  Make SL gains better, lower costs.

 

How you get to that state is up to the developers.  It's their game.  Whether they want players to enjoy playing it or not is up to them.

Okay comrade. 

[Delta-Wing 13]

2 minutes ago, Vamilad said:

want a negative SL balance economy

What would be the point in SL if everyone always had enough of it?

The game is designed so that you can make SL but you cant make enough to buy everything (unless you become very good at the game) which adds some strategy to choosing what to and what not to spend your SL on and at the same time rewards players for getting better at the game because they then earn more SL and can afford to spend it on more things.

Do i still think that SL earnings should be increased?- Yes, but probably not by more than 10%, scarcety of SL is part of the game and although it might seem like its making the game worse, the game would be far more boring without it

[x1BRAVO9x 190]

Breakdown your individual game performance into 4 categories, great, good, average, and bad.

 

Great being the top 3, the other three broken into 3rds. Good top 1/3, average in the middle, and the bad at the bottom.

 

I can't tell you how many games I have been in the top 1/3rd of battle report, even in the top 3 and lost SL.

 

It's ridiculous that in this economy you can be in the top 3, 4, or even 5 players in the match and lose SL. That's absolutely asinine.

 

You should not have to have an exceptional game to have a positive SL balance from a match.

 

Regardless of how they arrange the economy, as a general rule of thumb the top 3 should have a very good SL return for the match. the rest of the top 1/3 a postive SL balance, the middle 1/3 very little to zero, and if their must be a negative payout it should be relegated to the bottom third.

 

That being said I'm actually against a negative SL payout for a match.

 

The fact that you can finish the match in the top 5 and lose SL is beyond stupid to me.

Edited May 23, 2023 by x1BRAVO9x

[_Zekken 714]

Holy moly guys. 

 

They just put out an apologetic statement and gave you a SET DATE. 

 

It takes time to go through all the feedback, work it all between all the different departments, layers of management and game designers, brainstorm exactly what and how they are going to change it to satisfy the most people while keeping the game in a healthy state (because you will NEVER satisfy everyone and frankly plenty of the demands people have made in this whole thing widely range from logical to completely rediculous) and then build a roadmap around that plan. 

 

This stuff all takes time and careful planning and consideration. You cant get it done in a week. Not at this scale.

 

They said they would do better, they pledged to fix it and they gave an exact deadline for when they promise to give more information. At this stage that is good enough for me, and if its not good enough for you then you're just ranting for the sake of ranting.

 

If that june 14 date passes with no words from them, THEN its fair to start ranting again, but right now the people still complaining are acting a bit like spoilt children. 

 

Disagree with me if you want, I dont care. But its getting rediculous now, even though I am fully in agreement with the complaints about the economy. 

Edited May 23, 2023 by _Zekken

[Delta-Wing 13]

7 minutes ago, x1BRAVO9x said:

It's ridiculous that in this economy you can be in the top 3, 4, or even 5 players in the match and lose SL. That's absolutely asinine.

 

You should not have to have an exceptional game to have a positive SL balance from a match.

I dont really get this very often, so im guessing that this is more an issue of the ballencing of repair costs on some specific vehicles rather than sl earnings on war thunder as a whole. (note that no one is forcing you to play vehicles that are unprofitable right now)

Typically if im in the bottom 1/2 of the team ill loose maybe 3-5k SL and if im in the top half im often making between 4x and 10x the vehicles repair cost if not more. (yes that is with a premium account, but not with a premium vehicle and i didnt really struggle for SL even before i had premium, which was for about 90% of my playtime) and this is with me being at best an average player

[Vamilad 238]

17 minutes ago, UnknowenPlayer said:

What would be the point in SL if everyone always had enough of it?

The game is designed so that you can make SL but you cant make enough to buy everything (unless you become very good at the game) which adds some strategy to choosing what to and what not to spend your SL on and at the same time rewards players for getting better at the game because they then earn more SL and can afford to spend it on more things.

Do i still think that SL earnings should be increased?- Yes, but probably not by more than 10%, scarcety of SL is part of the game and although it might seem like its making the game worse, the game would be far more boring without it

 

"What would be the point of SL if everyone had enough of it" to buy vehicles.

 

It's a grind to buy vehicles.

It costs 1.3 million SL just to buy a top tier vehicle, that's before crew train and crew experting. 

 

You can spend it on lootboxes occasionally.  You spend it on repair costs.  You spend it on ammo, crew replenishment.  You spend it on retraining a crew to move a vehicle to another slot.

 

I've stated elsewhere even bringing forward the May economy changes would be fine if there was a system to stop you from going negative in SL.  You would have the ability to choose to grind SL elsewhere other than top tier to get SL for the above mentioned things.  I do not agree that SL should ever be a factor in whether I choose to respawn a tank.  Top tier matches  generally end within 10 minutes due to this.  People do not want to take a second or third spawn if it means they will die without making up the SL balance.  If SL earned could never go below zero, you'd still have to grind, but you'd be able to play to your lineup's full potential.  

I believe that is the most equitable solution which retains incentives for premium and premium vehicles (RP gain, SL profit) while not encouraging ODL / RTB.

Edited May 23, 2023 by Vamilad

[Target1331 3,055]

10 minutes ago, _Zekken said:

Holy moly guys. 

 

They just put out an apologetic statement and gave you a SET DATE. 

 

It takes time to go through all the feedback, work it all between all the different departments, layers of management and game designers, brainstorm exactly what and how they are going to change it to satisfy the most people while keeping the game in a healthy state (because you will NEVER satisfy everyone and frankly plenty of the demands people have made in this whole thing widely range from logical to completely rediculous) and then build a roadmap around that plan. 

 

This stuff all takes time and careful planning and consideration. You cant get it done in a week. Not at this scale.

 

They said they would do better, they pledged to fix it and they gave an exact deadline for when they promise to give more information. At this stage that is good enough for me, and if its not good enough for you then you're just ranting for the sake of ranting.

 

If that june 14 date passes with no words from them, THEN its fair to start ranting again, but right now the people still complaining are acting a bit like spoilt children. 

 

Disagree with me if you want, I dont care. But its getting rediculous now, even though I am fully in agreement with the complaints about the economy. 

Ran out of reactions, but yes, agreed. Headless reactions to an outrage are rarely a good idea, maybe for a few weeks, but when one realizes the reaction did not account for this or that result and then one has to backtrack fast on some or all changes, it will be an even worse look.

Best regards,

Phil

---------------- Manual signature until those and profile pics are returned ----------------
Bring back forum profile pictures and signatures!
https://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/578365-return-custom-avatar/

My complete tech trees (incl. all special vehicles) spreadsheet is updated to match 2.23 (only accurate atm for list & status of vehicles): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/13bjEgsDhTjJhXt9N4fzIzvWa7cvy-KSDQc1HNNOZuaI/edit Contains probably all vehicles WT has published.

[Delta-Wing 13]

1 minute ago, Vamilad said:

I believe that is the most equitable solution which retains incentives for premium and premium vehicles (RP gain, SL profit) while not encouraging ODL / RTB.

Repair costs do also serve as a disincentive against some things, ive already explained this too many times today so think of it like this: right now enlisted has no repair costs so as soon as a team starts to loose, all the players on that team just leave the match. This is the equivalent of war thunder where the enemy team gets the first 2-3 kills in a match so everyone else just Js out, more like a 0 death- leave which is even worse than the current 1 death- leave (which could be partly resolved but in a way that dosent involve reducing repair costs to avoid this problem)

At the moment you should be making more SL than you spend on repair costs (even as a player with a serious skill issue), but less than the cost of repairs+ buying new stuff. if you arent then you are doing something wrong, even if that is just playing the wrong vehicles (a slight imballence in vehicles is good for the game, it would be boring if everything was perfectly ballenced. Much better if which vehicles are and arent the best changes over time)

remember you can always not play a vehicle if its current ballencing makes it uncompetative or unprofitable

[IAMTRIGGERED 1,087]

19 minutes ago, _Zekken said:

Holy moly guys. 

 

They just put out an apologetic statement and gave you a SET DATE. 

 

It takes time to go through all the feedback, work it all between all the different departments, layers of management and game designers, brainstorm exactly what and how they are going to change it to satisfy the most people while keeping the game in a healthy state (because you will NEVER satisfy everyone and frankly plenty of the demands people have made in this whole thing widely range from logical to completely rediculous) and then build a roadmap around that plan. 

 

This stuff all takes time and careful planning and consideration. You cant get it done in a week. Not at this scale.

 

They said they would do better, they pledged to fix it and they gave an exact deadline for when they promise to give more information. At this stage that is good enough for me, and if its not good enough for you then you're just ranting for the sake of ranting.

 

If that june 14 date passes with no words from them, THEN its fair to start ranting again, but right now the people still complaining are acting a bit like spoilt children. 

 

Disagree with me if you want, I dont care. But its getting rediculous now, even though I am fully in agreement with the complaints about the economy. 

I disagree.

 

Remember last year when they pulled the 'ol monkeys paw on us? Buddy, there is no goodwill from Gaijin towards the community.

They tried to do it again and got what they asked for.

[x1BRAVO9x 190]

19 minutes ago, Vamilad said:

 

"What would be the point of SL if everyone had enough of it" to buy vehicles.

 

It's a grind to buy vehicles.

It costs 1.3 million SL just to buy a top tier vehicle, that's before crew train and crew experting. 

 

You can spend it on lootboxes occasionally.  You spend it on repair costs.  You spend it on ammo, crew replenishment.  You spend it on retraining a crew to move a vehicle to another slot.

 

I've stated elsewhere even bringing forward the May economy changes would be fine if there was a system to stop you from going negative in SL.  You would have the ability to choose to grind SL elsewhere other than top tier to get SL for the above mentioned things.  I do not agree that SL should ever be a factor in whether I choose to respawn a tank.  Top tier matches  generally end within 10 minutes due to this.  People do not want to take a second or third spawn if it means they will die without making up the SL balance.  If SL earned could never go below zero, you'd still have to grind, but you'd be able to play to your lineup's full potential.  

I believe that is the most equitable solution which retains incentives for premium and premium vehicles (RP gain, SL profit) while not encouraging ODL / RTB.

 

It really has nothing to do with what vehicle you play as much as how you play the vehicle.

 

Let's take Realistic Air Battles for example.

 

The vast majority of Realistic Air Battles are won through attrition, I would say North of 90%.

 

Yet players received more reward for playing in a manner that most would consider somewhat selfish and counterproductive to winning.

 

Gaijin has developed, created, fostered, and rewarded gameplay that is counterproductive and anything but team oriented.

 

A player that plays to win and keeps the team gameplay in mind is punished in this game.

Edited May 23, 2023 by x1BRAVO9x

[Vamilad 238]

4 minutes ago, UnknowenPlayer said:

Repair costs do also serve as a disincentive against some things, ive already explained this too many times today so think of it like this: right now enlisted has no repair costs so as soon as a team starts to loose, all the players on that team just leave the match. This is the equivalent of war thunder where the enemy team gets the first 2-3 kills in a match so everyone else just Js out, more like a 0 death- leave which is even worse than the current 1 death- leave (which could be partly resolved but in a way that dosent involve reducing repair costs to avoid this problem)

At the moment you should be making more SL than you spend on repair costs (even as a player with a serious skill issue), but less than the cost of repairs+ buying new stuff. if you arent then you are doing something wrong, even if that is just playing the wrong vehicles (a slight imballence in vehicles is good for the game, it would be boring if everything was perfectly ballenced. Much better if which vehicles are and arent the best changes over time)

remember you can always not play a vehicle if its current ballencing makes it uncompetative or unprofitable

 

The May economy changes would have raised the repair costs of all three LeClercs and lowered each of their multipliers by 10%.  What other French tank would you like me to play at Rank 7?  The SPAA's?  The ones that cost 11k to repair?

In Ground RB people can bring in at least two vehicles without landing a single kill, so by "2-3" I assume you are referring to Air RB.  In Air there are ground targets for players to engage to earn more SL.

 

I do not have a perfect solution towards Air RB, that game mode is atrociously organized and bores me to tears.  I play Ground RB almost exclusively unless I'm grinding a plane for the purpose of flying it in Ground RB.  Repair costs in Ground RB do nothing but stop me from taking second / third / fourth spawns.  How do I know it would change if I could afford those extra spawns?  Because I can at low tier.  If you play low tier matches go on for much much longer because everyone can afford to bring out 4-5 vehicles.  People can play a match to its full potential.  The change I support would allow players to do that even at high tier.