1 Year Since Rubicon

“Patch 10.0 is completely cancelled” – this was the news headline on 29th October 2015. Now, one whole year later, many things have changed. Back then, almost the whole WoT community exploded and didn’t quiet down for about 2 months, and even now some echoes are still heard. The following month, official announcements by Wargaming’s CEO and video conferences from Cyprus came along…
1 year has passed. And this is how the trailer looked like:

27 thoughts on “1 Year Since Rubicon

  1. There shitload of epic trailers. This one aint different.

    Tho I wonder what the hell did they even expect to do for patch 10.
    Besides – WoT already had two Rubirubicons – graphics and physics patches😀

    Liked by 3 people

  2. the start of the P.R. stunt “We will listen to our customers from now”… continued in sandbox…
    But nothing changed, just look at this weekends special🙂

    Liked by 6 people

      1. Yeah, I was asking myself the same question. Never heard of it again. The concept was to radical anyway. Just nerf arty into oblivion and rebalance the OP and UP tanks, nerf goldammo, fix MM (+/-1) and you have your game back, no ‘role-playing’-system required.

        Like

  3. IMO nothing major changed WG’s their development path. They just removed those features from v10 which got major criticism, changed the versioning back to 9.xx and continued their development path as was planned before. Business as usual, minus v10 stuff they removed of course.

    Sandbox IMO was just one big ‘stick and carrot’ lab test, to please the Rubicon critics. As 2016 draws to an end the ‘the year of change promise’ is broken again, as was in previous year….Stick and carrot folks.

    Liked by 8 people

  4. I don’t think it’s so much a question of broken promises as it is that WG is now somewhat gunshy about creating new problems with major changes. So long as they have to compensate for the lousy computers so many of their customers play on they’ll always be somewhat constrained in their options.

    Liked by 7 people

  5. I wonder if they’ll ever learn from their mistakes.
    I mean, it couldn’t be that difficult to look back and think, “We dun fuck’d up!” and then not make the same mistakes.

    Actually, nevermind, they will fuck it up. Oh well.

    Liked by 6 people

  6. I still don’t know why was everybody so butthurt when they wanted to name the patch “rubiconx” ??
    I mean it was just another patch with a little different name…
    Was it because they named it as if it was something new but in reality it was just another planned patch ?

    Liked by 1 person

      1. Can you explain your comment please… because i was asking why the hell they named it
        “Rub a cock XXX” and what was the reason for the insanely negative feedback.

        I would get it if they named the patch with improved physics something like “Ruby porn X” but not the one that featured just those shitty emblems, fps drops and server destabilizations.
        … because every single patch something like that

        Liked by 1 person

          1. Ty both of you, you refreshed my DRAM.
            I totally forgot about T-22 sr.

            You order A5 kobe steak, pay 400€ and you are served cow shit.
            classic WG😀

            Liked by 1 person

        1. Well biggest flaw was the emblem/inscription system. Main problems were high cost (basically you’d pay half of what you pay for equipment I think…. but monthly) so it was only sustainable by paying for with gold and “forced” inscription to a bonus – so you had to pick something you didn’t want on your tank to get a bonus you wanted (i.e. you had to pick “Jäger” to get bonus for everybody). Then there were issues with certain tanks/classes (arty..) – you don’t need to boost your commander’s/driver’s skill in arty, so you could’ve used all bonuses on your loader/gunner (8% to loading time/accuracy+aimtime). Was also an issue on tanks with few crew members (bigger boost theoretically).
          But mainly this bonus system was criticized by community contributors (even WG caterer QB) so they just had to scrape it. IMO they didn’t have to, they needed to massively reduce the credit price and fix some unbalanced things + put ability to apply any bonus to any emblem and it’d be fine, but I guess they were scared that people already made their decision.

          Also, it made it into 9.12 but it also had the Rampage mode, which most people remember as “mission rigging for OP T-22”.

          Liked by 2 people

        2. Ty both of you, you refreshed my DRAM.
          I totally forgot about T-22 sr.

          You order A5 kobe steak, pay 400€ and you are served cow shit.
          classic WG😀

          Like

    1. More like how they implemented/marketed it, what they claimed and that it would have been a blatant p2w feature.

      Instead of listing to the critiques and postponed the patch by 2 months for reworkbased on well formulated feedback (lower cost and refund of existing player emblems). They just scrapped the whole thing all together, while in base the idea of it ain’t half as bad

      The ‘butthurt’ on my part is that it is just Wargaming development as usual: design a game element as cheap-ass and as RIGID as possible. That when developed/added and it’s is not up to par they need to scrap it whole cause changing it to ‘work’ is seemingly too much effort (spaghetti code?)

      Btw, yes I do have a cream for it and works wonders xD

      Liked by 2 people

  7. All WG staff can fuck themselves specialy both slavas, storm, victor and other “emplopyees”. Most ideas them cum up with are stupid and not relevant or feasable or funn.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s