![]() ![]() Players like me, having been suggesting things, fixes, etc, for years, in my case since before the game ever went live. Graf Zeppelin - multiple times, the CV rework, Submarines, this, and so many other examples through the years, in fact a lot of them related to CV's. Your company never wanted feedback, they never take feedback - at least not that isn't what they want to hear. :((((Ībsolute brutal honesty - stop lying by saying you want our feedback, or people at the company in charge of things like PR and keeping us players happy or the like need to be shown the door. the mention of former elite xp earners is few and far between this so called commander rework is pure to say the least. ![]() I'll play and test it, but if my Alaska suddenly becomes useless/less adequate or any other premium ship I paid for, then I'm out and a paying customer is gone. 21 points is going to get us the same set-up as 19 did with the added inconvenience of having to do immense grinding for commanders OR just forking over the doubloons to convert XP via numerous ways. Lets also just address the real issue here, that being the blantant money grab. Supercruisers will burn longer than BB's. I hate to be the people that ground the steel for that one. Because a cruiser with sub 12km gun range facing 12km soviet radar is just a great move. I was waiting for the final notes to pass judgement but using us as test subjects to test the rework in live settings versus you (WG) doing adequate in house testing or test server testing is going to be the CV rework all over again.Īs far as I can see right now, the Flint never had it's range adjusted. A disaster in the making and sure to alienate quite a few players. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |