Sign in to follow this  
ZXrage

Murazor Q&A

26 posts in this topic

https://thearmoredpatrol.com/2018/05/16/murazor-qa/

Apparently he answered some Qs on his YT channel. Full answers below.

 

Q: Did Murazor get fired? 
A: There were some youtube videos being made about me being fired from WG. Unfortunately for many of my haters out there, I did not get fired. The main reason I came back to youtube was not because I want money from youtube, but because I want to make videos for people that are still subscribed to me.

Q(from commenters to other commenters): Do you really believe that Murazor alone can change the entire game? 
A(from Murazor): A lot of people falsely assume that I am the director of the World of Tanks balancing project. I have been a part of replacing certain vehicles in tech trees, and I have had some direct impact on some things in the game. However, I am not in charge of global game changes. In fact, the job of being balance director belongs to Slava Makarov currently.

Q: Can you explain the logic behind some balancing changes, for example why Japanese Heavy Tanks received high caliber HE guns? 
A: Because Japanese heavies were rarely played in the past, and the main objective was to reanimate the tech tree and give these tanks their own special feature to make them more interesting. Because Japanese Heavy tanks were intertwined with the Japanese Naval Forces in aspects like gigantic sizes, high caliber weapons, etc. we decided to give the tanks high caliber HE weapons. Many other commenters said that this was a bad change, and that not a lot of people like having to deal with Japanese HE guns, but I personally believe that the only thing that is too strong about these tanks currently is the fact that they are too well armored in certain places. In my personal experiences against Japanese Heavies, it was common for the machine to fire off only one shot before being eaten apart by its enemies. If, for example, a T-54 were to get around to your side, it means certain death because these machines are not capable of doing much in head to head combat.

Q: Will limited matchmaking tanks get buffed/changed? 
A: Here it is important to stress that I have very limited power over the final decision being made about changing limited mm tanks. What I personally stress about this issue is that pref mm needs to be taken away from all tanks(while the tanks are buffed accordingly). However, this brings up the issue that tanks like E-25 do not necessarily need to be changed since the tank feels great in its current state, while the KV-5 needs to be balanced to have more armor and better gun stats to be battling tier 10s. Both the E-25 and the KV-5 have pref mm, but very different balancing changes have to be made to these machines. Of course, to balance these vehicles stat-wise is very easy and can be done fast, however there are a lot of legal aspects the company has to worry about, and this is not within my power to worry about. If you are looking for specific answers, talk with Slava at a fest event because it is a hard thing for me to answer.

Q: What is your duty exactly at WG and when are you getting relieved? 
A: My “duty” in this company is an interesting topic for discussion. It is important to stress that my position name and the things I do at WG may not necessarily go hand in hand. I answer some questions, I make some small decisions, I may do some more direct things in the future, but my job title will not really tell you much at all about what I actually do. Like I said before, I am not getting relieved.

Q: How did Object 268 Version 4 happen? 
A: The only connection I have to this tank is its looks. I have been tasked to search for a potential replacement tank, and I decided that Obj 268 V 4 looked potentially balanceable and the model itself looked good. Yes, I was one of the people that picked out blueprints for a potential replacement, but I had nothing to do with the balancing of this vehicle. I played this tank, and I did not personally think it was overpowered, instead I thought of it as a more weird tank than overpowered tank. Following from the winrate of this vehicle, I can say that it is a good tank, thus, as you can see from the supertest changes, this vehicle received some negative changes. This will not change the playstyle or anything, but nevertheless it is a nerf to the main characteristics of the tank. I don’t see a reason to create such whine and drama about this tank. The tank has good frontal armor, however gets penned very easily in the sides through its tracks. The problem may not solely pertain to Object 268 V-4, given how many maps in the game have tunneled gameplay.

Q: Have my views changed since I started working at WG? 
A: Yes, since I saw how things worked on the inside rather on the outside, my views on certain topics have changed. Though, it is not like I believe that the game is in a perfect state or anything of the sort. I believe the game has gotten better however. Many people say that the game became worse, but I think it is better than it used to be, especially with update 1.0, the game became a lot more fresh for me. Yes some maps are not perfectly balanced, but welcome to the real world, where nothing is truly ideal.

Q: If you could change one thing in this game right now, what would it be? 
A: If I had to make a choice, I would say buff Tiger II. E-100 is well armored, E-75 is well armored, the Tiger II is a mess. It does not fulfill its role as a heavy tank. Though, its armor is historical and changing things too drastically could prove to be a challenging task.

Closing Remarks(By Murazor):
I strongly believe that besides very few exceptions, every tier 8, 9, and 10 tanks are competitive and there are no truly awful tanks at those tiers. Lots of people are asking about the WZ-111 5A and Super Conqueror. 5A is an excellent tank in hands of skilled players, but it is much easier to kill than an IS-7. Super Conqueror, once hull down is absolutely unstoppable, but it has weak side armor and once the lower plate is exposed, it is easily taken out of the game as well. Same deal with the FV 4005 Stage 2; it is very vulnerable and is easily destroyed. Balancing such a huge game is an exceptionally hard task. It is like attempting to solve an unsolvable mathematical equation. However, we can always attempt to make it better. Same deal with gold ammo. If we just took it out of the game, it would probably cause a huge whine. For such a huge company to take such a risky move is dangerous. Consequently, such global changes may take a longer period of time to fix.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, ZXrage said:

Slava Makarov

This is the vehement arty and tunnel map defender.

 

Arty is "good for the game" according to him because it "stops blobs of enemies from bunching up close and steamrolling one flank".

 


That would be harder if the maps weren't corridors but the buffoon can't think that far. 

 

He also contradicts himself multiple times in his explanation saying both that people play like there is arty when there is a no arty game and people play like there is no arty game when there is arty.

 

 

No surprise a 44%er like him is leading WG Mep und Balans dept

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did all the right thing; It was not me; Blame da balanca departa da Wot?

But most importantly

I wasn't fired, How Terrible.:serb:

Anyway,

Quote

Yes some maps are not perfectly balanced, but welcome to the real world, where nothing is truly ideal.

I wonder how thick a face have to be in order to put this sentence out for self-defense. Made corridors just doing a flavour for one type/role of tank, when he allows maps that are more solid than gaps how would he imagine driving tanks around a massive bunker? Maybe round the globe to take one shot, in the meantime hoping the bunker didn't move its traverse gear, with coastal defense busy eating sushi. So you take first shot say 700 dmg, turn around and run away, not even reaching the half-point he has already reloaded, give the SushiBunker a 40 second reload I will go flank.

Similar to what @Vesirott said in the 268v4 post, either balance tanks around the map, or I would say the other way works.

Focus on one thing might be too harsh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, MagicalFlyingFox said:

Arty is "good for the game" according to him because it "stops blobs of enemies from bunching up close and steamrolling one flank".

Stunning became useless the moment they decided to make the medic consumable reusable. The one moment where a blob-stun is useful is instantly negated by everyone just healing the stun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What an idiot. This guy was supposed to be a good player? What good player uses his type5 vs t54 argument? You balance tanks only for their 1 vs 1 capability? That would explain why they keep buffing heavies. Heavies when isolated lose to meds and lights so "keep buffing comrade, werld is not idel we need to make buffs and then bleme mep"

 

Also on him thinking a faster than meds e3 was not OP because you could pen its sides (but lower tier tanks can't...). 

 

I'm sure he used this to look better since so many people hate him but then if he failed at that miserably by supporting the most hated decisions WG made. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 v 1 scenarios could kinda explain things.

A Bobject can very well lose a 1 v 1 fight, because it still lacks a turret. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this was his attempt to clean himself from shitty changes that happened to the game he failed miserably. I don't even play the game anymore and most of his "answers" triggered me. Fucking thickheaded shitlord.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Madner Kami said:

Stunning became useless the moment they decided to make the medic consumable reusable. The one moment where a blob-stun is useful is instantly negated by everyone just healing the stun.

But the frustration when there's 3 arty permastunning you...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scapegoating always did seem like a poor, albeit tempting explanation for everything that's been going wrong. Murazor is right in that balancing is complex. I think the issue is that people would still wish for there to be someone like Murazor, but with actual common sense, to be able to make good old-fashioned value judgments.

Relying on pure numbers doesn't cut it. Not only is the winrate skewed for certain vehicles because of the differences in the sub-populations of players who play them, but not all vehicles should even be equally competitive. For example, the Type 5 is a specialty anime derp that will have a detrimental effect on gameplay if tuned too highly. It should have a winrate much lower than the IS-7 and 140.

As long as there is no insight on how the game should play, the only system driving development seems to be the game economy and premium sales. I suppose the developers must also have all kinds of indicators of what makes people spend more time on the game. All on their own, without much conscious conspiring against the playerbase, the system will lead to more marketing gimmicks, marathons, derps, power creep, and over-buffing of obscure tanks.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mureke said:

Relying on pure numbers doesn't cut it.

Piffle! (no offense)

The issue is not with the numbers but with how or if they are analysed. WG would have a great deal more information than we do but are either too lazy or unwilling to address them. Eg overall WR for a tank has obvious flaws yet WG would have access to WR at a far more granular level. With very little effort they could produce a '% WR change vs overall' for every tank for every subset of players (similar to what wot-news produces). Moreover they'd have this data with a significant sample size within days of a balance change.

The fact such obvious balance outliers exist is either evidence that they are useless at balance or are simply trying to live under the pretense of incompetence while happily living up to their their power creep based business model.

All this being said, my reading between the lines is that murazor's ego had started eating away at him enough to post something of this sort. His evasiveness over things like his job title underscore this. He doesn't want accountability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if anyone got a straight answer from WG regarding premium ammo usage per tier after they claimed "5% of all ammo used is premium"? Their unwillingness to release more granual data is irrefutable evidence that they know what the fuck is going on and they know we know, but refuse to deal with it because it doesnt support their business model. I think someone with influence who isnt a shill, should ask this question every day of the week until a proper answer is given.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Mureke said:

Scapegoating always did seem like a poor, albeit tempting explanation for everything that's been going wrong. Murazor is right in that balancing is complex. I think the issue is that people would still wish for there to be someone like Murazor, but with actual common sense, to be able to make good old-fashioned value judgments.

Relying on pure numbers doesn't cut it. Not only is the winrate skewed for certain vehicles because of the differences in the sub-populations of players who play them, but not all vehicles should even be equally competitive. For example, the Type 5 is a specialty anime derp that will have a detrimental effect on gameplay if tuned too highly. It should have a winrate much lower than the IS-7 and 140.

As long as there is no insight on how the game should play, the only system driving development seems to be the game economy and premium sales. I suppose the developers must also have all kinds of indicators of what makes people spend more time on the game. All on their own, without much conscious conspiring against the playerbase, the system will lead to more marketing gimmicks, marathons, derps, power creep, and over-buffing of obscure tanks.

 

I'm still trying to wrap my head around why the generally squishier and more defensively oriented NATO-tanks universally get the worse gun soft- and accuracy-stats (except final accuracy, which is of limited value for various reasons), while the much more sturdy and offensively oriented WP-tanks get the godlike soft-stats they have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Madner Kami said:

I'm still trying to wrap my head around why the generally squishier and more defensively oriented NATO-tanks universally get the worse gun soft- and accuracy-stats (except final accuracy, which is of limited value for various reasons), while the much more sturdy and offensively oriented WP-tanks get the godlike soft-stats they have.

Stalin does not need an explanation. You do his will or go to gulag comrade.

The reason is Russian Bias is a thing and fuck Germans coz they are Nazi and attacked the holy motherland. Also because Eurofags like me dont spend as much in this game. 

Or maybe WG is right about the Tvp vtu and the Leo1 :kappa:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

do you really think wg has a single employee who actually understands their own game? no? don't expect them to balance accordingly when they hire people based off of their ability to roll their face on the keyboard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/17/2018 at 10:35 PM, leggasiini said:

1 v 1 scenarios could kinda explain things.

A Bobject can very well lose a 1 v 1 fight, because it still lacks a turret. 

Funny thing in most cases it will still win since it will blast you for 650 than butt ram you.

56 minutes ago, Kolni said:

do you really think wg has a single employee who actually understands their own game? no? don't expect them to balance accordingly when they hire people based off of their ability to roll their face on the keyboard

No. I am almost sure they have someone who understands the game. They just probably don't listen to him.

On 5/18/2018 at 11:57 AM, Mureke said:

Scapegoating always did seem like a poor, albeit tempting explanation for everything that's been going wrong. Murazor is right in that balancing is complex. I think the issue is that people would still wish for there to be someone like Murazor, but with actual common sense, to be able to make good old-fashioned value judgments.

Relying on pure numbers doesn't cut it. Not only is the winrate skewed for certain vehicles because of the differences in the sub-populations of players who play them, but not all vehicles should even be equally competitive. For example, the Type 5 is a specialty anime derp that will have a detrimental effect on gameplay if tuned too highly. It should have a winrate much lower than the IS-7 and 140.

As long as there is no insight on how the game should play, the only system driving development seems to be the game economy and premium sales. I suppose the developers must also have all kinds of indicators of what makes people spend more time on the game. All on their own, without much conscious conspiring against the playerbase, the system will lead to more marketing gimmicks, marathons, derps, power creep, and over-buffing of obscure tanks.

 

Relying on pure numbers cuts it if you know how to interpret the numbers. This is you adjust the win rate for tanks played by unis and compare tank wr to player wr. This is why we have WR curves. 

 

Also no a Type5 should not have a lower WR than is7. The problem isn't it's ability to win. The problem is the broken mechanic. A bad but broken tank is still a broken tank. That's the problem.

 

Also there is a ton of insight of how a game should play. Less imbalance = less player frustration = less player leakage. The focus of WG should be to maximize player satisfaction and retention plus they should rework lower tiers so it's not as frustrating for new players. Actually the theory of how to make online games work well is pretty simple. WG has nailed a lot of the basics the problem is they also screwed up many thins really bad. WoT is a bit like a super hot girlfriend that throws knives at you and steals your money. 

 

Finally - Yeah balancing is complex but he still is an idiot. There is nothing complex about balacing obj 268 v4. Same for type5. Same for buffing Leopard or not introducing Defenders. Balancing the game is complex. Not creating overpowered tanks is easy as fuck. WoT actually provides its developers with tons of data while the tanks themselves have a ton of easily comparable stats. There is nothing hard or complex in Seeing that Obj430U and Leopard 1 don't even belong in the same tier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, hazzgar said:

Not creating overpowered tanks is easy as fuck.

This. If us arm chair morons can tell just by looking at the fucking stats of a tank that it is OP and it being validated when it is in the game multiple times now, and WG are still ignoring the community, why the fuck should we be supporting WG as a company? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not about the balance 'numbers' its about the fact that none of their dev teams seems to actually play the game at even a basic competency level.  You can move the sliders for armor/pen/mobility/vision etc. up and down and get 'balance'  but unless you play the game you don't realize you're creating balance at the expense of the game quality. 

Any decent player could play a few games in the V4 and the Foch B and tell you why the balance numbers don't mean shit to the play experience.  If however you have never even unlocked a tier 7 tank in-game yet, you won't have a clue why those two so called balanced equals are so vastly different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Archaic_One said:

Its not about the balance 'numbers' its about the fact that none of their dev teams seems to actually play the game at even a basic competency level.  You can move the sliders for armor/pen/mobility/vision etc. up and down and get 'balance'  but unless you play the game you don't realize you're creating balance at the expense of the game quality. 

Any decent player could play a few games in the V4 and the Foch B and tell you why the balance numbers don't mean shit to the play experience.  If however you have never even unlocked a tier 7 tank in-game yet, you won't have a clue why those two so called balanced equals are so vastly different.

Naaah. You can still be a moderately competent balance dev without playing the game. You will create broken tanks but then again you can still limit those by balancing tanks to have lower damage variance. Hell it's not even hard since it's basic statistics. You need close to no mathematical knowledge to do it. All you need is to go through a basic data interpretation course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you peoples stop being soo naive... WG is totally capable creating balanced tanks, that there is underpowered and overpowered tanks is calculated business from their side. Even the amount of how much exactly some tank is under or overpowered is probably calculated for best profit and customer retention.

Ok guess sometimes they could honestly miss balance when tank they make is of new type for which they have no prior data... like swedish TD's etc. But if there is nothing special in tank, they can dig for old data of 400 or so tanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, sahtila said:

Can you peoples stop being soo naive... WG is totally capable creating balanced tanks, that there is underpowered and overpowered tanks is calculated business from their side. Even the amount of how much exactly some tank is under or overpowered is probably calculated for best profit and customer retention.

Ok guess sometimes they could honestly miss balance when tank they make is of new type for which they have no prior data... like swedish TD's etc. But if there is nothing special in tank, they can dig for old data of 400 or so tanks.

LOL. The fact that something can be done doesn't mean it is done. Also no they don't calculate how much to overpower a tank to make the most profits. You not only assume competence, you assume perfect competence. Just look at the movie business (as in my business) - see how many movies flop badly because a studio hired bad writers, agreed to a bad script, hired a bad director and hoped it will all work out? This is probably 10x worse in WG which can't pick and chose from many applications

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, hazzgar said:

LOL. The fact that something can be done doesn't mean it is done. Also no they don't calculate how much to overpower a tank to make the most profits. You not only assume competence, you assume perfect competence. Just look at the movie business (as in my business) - see how many movies flop badly because a studio hired bad writers, agreed to a bad script, hired a bad director and hoped it will all work out? This is probably 10x worse in WG which can't pick and chose from many applications

True, maybe they do not have THAT much control. But just like someone wrote earlier this thread, when we see prerelease tank stats we already have pretty good and accurate idea about its powerlevel... just by simple numbers  and armor model, even without single test match. Add WG:s internal testing and well,  clearly overpowered/underpowered tanks do not "just happen". Remember they have straigth out admitted years ago that some tech tree tank are made underpowered to make more money. I thing that comment was originally about tier 7 Chi-Ri years ago, tier 7 was common weak/cash grab tier for many tech trees back then.

Notice how almost all newer premiums just happen to be strong or even more than slightly OP? How many of the lately released premiums have not been strong/better than tech tree equivalent? Often not that much overpowered outside some special cases (Defender, maybe wz-120whatever TD, scorpion G) but almost all of them are clearly little bit too good... Are there ANY newly released tier8 premiums which are even slightly underpowered? Funnily WG seems to be able to balance those premium tanks just perfectly for profitability. Better than tech tree but not too good because that causes public backslash (Defender) or fills matches with too many of them (Scorpion G, E25). Especially newer premiums seem to be all competently balanced for good, some older were straight out trash (t59-patton, original t34-3, panther88) but those older ones were released years ago and well, I can believe WG balancing department was really honestly bad back then. That or financial department had not yet taken control of company.

AFAIK WG is making hundreds of millions profit per year, they have probably PhD/equivalent level peoples in marketing/financial departments who crunch numbers and see exactly what makes money and how. And when those peoples tell balance peoples (murazor etc) that new top tier needs to overpowered (or that new tech tree need to be special intresting = something overpowered there), Murazor asks "jump how high?". Anyway reading between lines Murazor's comments kind of imply he has no real saying about balancing, seems he is just lowly scrub there and doing whatever higher ups (Balancing Director etc) tell him do.

Btw now thinging about premiums, intresting how there seems to be generally two categories of premium tanks:  Tanks which sell for being good/competitive and then tanks which sell for being historic/intresting somehow. Competetive tanks are usually tier 8,  often non-historic paper designs which are statwise strong. They sell for competetive high tier players who want to win games. Examples, pretty much all newer tier 8 premiums. Then another category, historical tanks with somewhat historical stats (for example fitting guns used in real life, not fantasy oversized guns like usual). Often not very good for winning games. Often lower tiers. Probably aimed more to casual, less playing players who buy those tanks because they saw it in movie or know them from history stories. Example Loza's M4-A2 Sherman, KanonenJagdPanzer (rare case of weak t8 premium)

Oh and special props for WG balancing department for releasing ELC EVEN 90. Intresting, unique, not overpowered but still strong when played by good player, straight out weak in bad hands. Probably very difficult tank to balance well being soo unique and they still did it very well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, sahtila said:

True, maybe they do not have THAT much control. But just like someone wrote earlier this thread, when we see prerelease tank stats we already have pretty good and accurate idea about its powerlevel... just by simple numbers  and armor model, even without single test match. Add WG:s internal testing and well,  clearly overpowered/underpowered tanks do not "just happen". Remember they have straigth out admitted years ago that some tech tree tank are made underpowered to make more money. I thing that comment was originally about tier 7 Chi-Ri years ago, tier 7 was common weak/cash grab tier for many tech trees back then.

Yes when we see those tanks we get a pretty good idea how they are going to work but first of all wotlabs isn't everyone. Secondly that doesn't mean every wot player knows. Most pubs are super bad at knowing if tanks are balanced. People still dispute WR curves. Third is wotlabs community has also been wrong about tanks on test. So no the fact that a niche community of highly dedicated and knowledgable players is decent at predicting tank balance doesn't mean WG is as good or better. They can as well be bad at balancing because unless the hiring person is good at balancing they will never know how to check if new employees are good. The skills needed for balancing can't be listed in CV's.

 

 As for WG claims - Yes they admit they make certain tanks worse or better to increase profits but those are basic ideas like "make t4 and t7 dump tiers" and create OP looking t10s so people powergrind to them and use gold. 

 

Quote

Notice how almost all newer premiums just happen to be strong or even more than slightly OP? How many of the lately released premiums have not been strong/better than tech tree equivalent? Often not that much overpowered outside some special cases (Defender, maybe wz-120whatever TD, scorpion G) but almost all of them are clearly little bit too good... Are there ANY newly released tier8 premiums which are even slightly underpowered? Funnily WG seems to be able to balance those premium tanks just perfectly for profitability. Better than tech tree but not too good because that causes public backslash (Defender) or fills matches with too many of them (Scorpion G, E25). Especially newer premiums seem to be all competently balanced for good, some older were straight out trash (t59-patton, original t34-3, panther88) but those older ones were released years ago and well, I can believe WG balancing department was really honestly bad back then. That or financial department had not yet taken control of company.

How do you know WG balanced anything "perfectly" for profitability? Do you have the data that the mentioned tanks are the most profitable out of all the possible options? Have they been against a variety of other proposed premiums with accurate profit prediction models? From what I see WG doesn't even have a team that predicts product profitability (and I'd know I do this for a living and I'm pretty sure my accuracy is better than anything wg does). Also I think you don't even know what "balancing profitability" means. You have to balanced it against something. Short term vs long term. Profitability vs player dissadisfaction leading to drop in active players and therefore paying players. 

You are basically assuming competence for no apparent reason. You think since WG is a big company they must know what they are doing. This is a fallacy that has been debunked in business hundreds of times. Again I mention the movie industry - much bigger companies than WG like Warner or Sony make huge mistakes. So WG on average may be even less competent than the people who thought letting Bret Ratner direct movies is a good idea.

Quote

AFAIK WG is making hundreds of millions profit per year, they have probably PhD/equivalent level peoples in marketing/financial departments who crunch numbers and see exactly what makes money and how. And when those peoples tell balance peoples (murazor etc) that new top tier needs to overpowered (or that new tech tree need to be special intresting = something overpowered there), Murazor asks "jump how high?". Anyway reading between lines Murazor's comments kind of imply he has no real saying about balancing, seems he is just lowly scrub there and doing whatever higher ups (Balancing Director etc) tell him do.

 

 How do you know they have PhD level marketing/forecasting people? AFAIK means "as far as I know" yet you clearny know nothing and you just speculate. Sorry it may sound mean but that's what it is.. What is funny is you don't even know what positions should those be and don't realize the best forecasters in the world are self thought and there are close to no university diplomes in forecasting (unless Tetlock has changed that). Again this is a common

 

Also you don't know what "reading between the lines" means since Murazor has implicitly stated that as you say he has little infuence. The problem is even if he has little influence he still repeats the idiotic statements that other WG execs write/say. What is more this is a simple PR Q&A and you taking PR on face value is naive.

 

 

I can sum up your opinion as "WG is a big company that makes a lot of money so they must be smart and everything they make must be calculated". Just think how naive that is. It's the same thinking that made people think Trump was a good businessman, hell you probably think the people who killed Kodak were smart, same for Nokia. I don't want to brag but I just came from Cannes film market - a business event that runs pararell to the film festival there. The companies I meet are much bigger than WG, much more profitable too. Yet still somehow they tend to do monsterously stupid shit. Using your logic Hollywood makes bad, unprofitable movies on purpose. R.I.P.D and Green Lantern were bad and losing money on purpose. Jesus how can you be so gullible

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, hazzgar said:

Yes when we see those tanks we get a pretty good idea how they are going to work but first of all wotlabs isn't everyone. Secondly that doesn't mean every wot player knows. Most pubs are super bad at knowing if tanks are balanced. People still dispute WR curves. Third is wotlabs community has also been wrong about tanks on test. So no the fact that a niche community of highly dedicated and knowledgable players is decent at predicting tank balance doesn't mean WG is as good or better. They can as well be bad at balancing because unless the hiring person is good at balancing they will never know how to check if new employees are good. The skills needed for balancing can't be listed in CV's.

 

We see the supertest stats, opinions flow not just from us but from people on official forums to (at least in ASIA, so likely everywhere else too). Then it gets tested on the test server, where the exact same descriptions are repeated in some cases. Then things might get changed like the obj 257 which is now super weak frontally. That tank is an outlier though, usually they do shit fucking all, release the tank, then nerf it 3-10 patches later saying "oh, its OP so we are nerfing it" even though every said that before it was even released.

 

Its just typical now, except WG outdone themselves with the 268-4. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably already seen by most, but rita pulling no punches... https://ritastatusreport.live/2018/05/22/good-news/#more-54099

So no longer head of balans... did they shift him to 'Lead MM fixer upper'?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they probably realized that having a badly groomed beard and a youtube channel was maybe not actually the high level of qualification for a job at a gaming company that they thought it would be

I have regained some faith in Rita however, lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.