32 replies to this topic

[Pete_C]

Profanisaurus, on 21 February 2017 - 11:18 AM, said:

 

I'm not sure you undertsand the basics of the economics in this case. Wargaming are a profit making entity and your proposal would impact two of their most significant streams of revenue from the game.

I understand but thanks for making sure I know, like I said, I'm sure they will find other ways to make an income, there will be a stage when less ppl buy gold or premium tanks and they will have to come up with new ideas.

 

just like any business

[Pete_C]

afoxq, on 21 February 2017 - 11:50 AM, said:

 

When even trolling KELLY has reached the point of zero satisfaction. 

Edited by Pete_C, 21 February 2017 - 12:24 PM.

[Otakubouzu]

Pete_C, on 21 February 2017 - 11:22 AM, said:

there will be a stage when less ppl buy gold or premium tanks and they will have to come up with new ideas.

With how they keep churning new premium tanks lately?

With new, rather too good and oh so balanced premium tanks like AMX45/49, T26E5 or god forbid, Obj 252U?

 

In fact, your suggestion might make them to release more of "balanced" premium tanks in future so people would keep purchasing premium tanks.

[mttspiii]

Pete_C, on 21 February 2017 - 12:22 PM, said:

I understand but thanks for making sure I know, like I said, I'm sure they will find other ways to make an income, there will be a stage when less ppl buy gold or premium tanks and they will have to come up with new ideas.

 

just like any business

 

Like investing in a moon base?

 

Oh, you mean in-game? Remember that the playerbase is whiny, so if WG finds another way to make an income off WoT then expect the playerbase to whine a lot that the game is becoming pay-to-win due to the new feature.

[neokai]

Pete_C, on 21 February 2017 - 12:22 PM, said:

I understand but thanks for making sure I know, like I said, I'm sure they will find other ways to make an income, there will be a stage when less ppl buy gold or premium tanks and they will have to come up with new ideas.

 

just like any business

 

Generally, for a suggestion to gain traction it has to benefit the person implementing the suggestion. Removing a revenue stream without a convincing rationale is suicidal for WG, unless you have an alternative model that can make them more money, e.g. "premium-izing" tanks.

 

Personally, I would premium-ize some tier 8 tanks for use in CW/SH. That would allow me to cross-train my tier X crews and maintain fewer sets of crews across all my tanks.

[Ezz]

As an aside I've never quite worked out why a radio operator needs to be re trained to use exactly the same type of radio in the next tank.

 

However following that logic maybe they should require re training every time you upgrade a module... new gun, gunner re train etc...

[Profanisaurus]

Retraining is built into the cost of the purchase.

 

Any good equipment contractor tries to upsell a training course as part of the services with a product.  We see one price but there has been a full RFP and RFI process to decide on what vendor will supply the equipment with the winner of that bidding process being bent over until they are willing to throw in support, training and services for virtually nothing.

 

The final price you see is the result of a 6 month negotiation.

[Matt_B]

Ezz, on 22 February 2017 - 04:10 AM, said:

As an aside I've never quite worked out why a radio operator needs to be re trained to use exactly the same type of radio in the next tank.

 

However following that logic maybe they should require re training every time you upgrade a module... new gun, gunner re train etc...

I'd reckon that it's not so much re-training to use the radio as figuring out how to squeeze their way into whatever tiny void space their seat is in without losing a limb in the process, given the internal layout of most tanks.

 

Alternatively crew training is just an in-game fudge to soak up our gold reserves, and make WG more profit.

[Inglorious_Aussie_Tanker]

It'd be Nice if your Crews retained their Tank history, as in they can Use ANY Tank they were previously Trained in, instead of copping a penalty.

 

Mainly for when you want to run an Old favorite, and either have to put a new crew in it, or Transfer another crew to it. 

[neokai]

nameviolation2006696151, on 22 February 2017 - 05:20 AM, said:

It'd be Nice if your Crews retained their Tank history, as in they can Use ANY Tank they were previously Trained in, instead of copping a penalty.

 

Mainly for when you want to run an Old favorite, and either have to put a new crew in it, or Transfer another crew to it. 

 

Issue with that suggestion is that it turns a continuous revenue stream into a one-off purchase, which then forces WG to push for other continuous revenue streams.

 

It's also unfair to folks who paid for their 100% crews from the academy (gold option) since it rewards players who kept original crews. Especially for players like me - my IS-7 crew literally went through every vehicle on the line up from the original MS-1 down the KV-1 line through to IS-8 (T-10) and the present IS-7

 

P.S. random navel-gazing. I think my Pershing or T-57 heavy crew is my second oldest crew - my first american crew in the T1 Cunning went up to the Pershing, then got retrained across to T57 heavy to replace the 2-skill crew it originally had.

[Inglorious_Aussie_Tanker]

I some what agree, but Assuming a crew is "MIND WIPED" (50% proficiency) as they get in a NEW Tank silly.  Why wouldn't they remember what Tank they were previously in?

(why wouldn't you want a 5 skill crew in your T1 Cunningham? )  It'd provide INSPIRATION (Tears/Bottom Hurt maybe? ) to those unfortunate Beginners.  

 

I assume Most players would Retrain their Crews as they go up the line, rather than use effectively "Stunned" crews for the next 50 odd matches until they reach 100% and regain their senses.  Players would STILL use Gold for the Trained Advantage in a NEW Tank wouldn't they?

 

Maybe WOT could introduce "Premium Crews"  to fit ANY tank that are limited to maybe 3 Skills  (Perhaps "X" Gold per Skill? ), and Gain NO crew Experience but instead Bonus Vehicle XP to help with grinds?

(I know Personal Reserves can in effect do the same thing, but the Few Personal reserves I've used seem to actually be "Personal Curses" and seem to set RNGesus and MM on a Personal Vendetta against me. ) 

 

In a related Crew Question, those Crew who are Multi Station (Commander/Radio or Commander Gunner etc.....) skilled, say the Commander has "Jack of all Trades" Perk, and is Multi positionaly skilled, does this give ANY Bonus when say a Gunner is Taken out, "Jack of all Trades" kicks in, and the Commander who is also a Trained Gunner takes over?

 

I should have a look at Potentially how MANY positions a Single crew member can be trained for?  "Swiss Army Crew" 

[Profanisaurus]

nameviolation2006696151, on 22 February 2017 - 12:27 AM, said:

I should have a look at Potentially how MANY positions a Single crew member can be trained for?  "Swiss Army Crew" 

 

ELC or something else with a two man crew would be where to start.

[Pete_C]

some good ideas and I think the suggestion of how WG would then make some income is something I didn't factor when thinking of this as a feature