I’m looking at monthly played rates and it’s miserable. Two year old premiums are still much more played on a monthly basis than the new hot thing in town.
Those resources could improve cash cow modes.
You know, so that they wouldn’t release slop with AI watermarks still on. Basic quality control goes a long way.
Naval mains are as rare as black rhinos.
That just means that they had 2 years more time to be sold and 2 years more sales. And again doesnt tell you anything about profitability.
Could being the important word here and im sure Gaijin has some very well paid beancounters employed whose entire job it is to figure out exactly this. At least thats how every business this size operates but maybe they should fire these guys and ask forum randos that dont know anything about BA.
Keep in mind that 14th place is reserved for the most played premium in NAB, others are much lower.
For GRB there are 4 premiums present in top 10.
For ARB there are 6 premiums present in top 10.
So yeah, relatively speaking premiums in Naval are barely played.
People will use TT ships more often.
These are some hard times for Naval if they have to rely on such people lol.
Naval is a very big project that seemingly didn’t get on it’s feet as barely anyone even speaks or cares about it.
You’re asking a lot for a game held together with duct tape and prayers.
That’s not an excuse.
Type 61 (B) is a premium vehicle released for Japan in December of 2025 and it has extremely similar play numbers as Kate Abrams.
I mean it’s up to them where those resources would end up, but if invested into improving cash cow modes there would definitely be results.
I’m sure countless other companies had those employed as well, but that still didn’t stop them from developing products that were a failure.
Let me take a picture, probably won’t see another one in months.
Yeah, sometimes even the most basic things aren’t that basic to some.
A good surrogate for how many premiums are sold, when we had reliable data for a while in 2025, was spawns per day in the first few days after they went on sale.
It’s a reasonable presumption that if people purchase a product and pay it, they will tend to play it. If there is a significant difference between how many spawns two vehicles generated after going on sale, the one with more spawns presumably sold more at the outset.
I ran those figures around the time of the first Senrai sale comparing them to regular premiums:
The three Senrai premiums are on the right side in purple, compared to all other premiums offered earlier in 2025 color-coded for air/ground/naval.
A rough idea of the numbers involved, between the three Senrai packs there were an average of 50,000 spawns (AB/RB) per day in the first two weeks after they went on sale. This is about the same, taken together, as all spawns for the previous ground premium, the T58, which by itself managed 43,000 spawns per day in its first 8 days of sale (it was only $50 however).
The two previous Naval premiums (Nelson and Maryland) had an average of ~700 spawns per day in the first week after they went on sale each. This is mostly going to be a reflection of the much smaller naval player base, which only accounted for 1-2% of all spawns in 2025. The Gneisenau earlier in the year performed the best of all naval premiums by a considerable margin, at around 6,200 spawns/day immediately after launch.
Arguably the most successful premium in 2025 up to that point, the F-18, had 102,000 spawns per day in the first two weeks after IT was purchaseable, or about 145x what the later naval premiums did.
So the first $70 Senrai batch, despite an obviously much higher investment in marketing, did about half as well as the $80 F/A-18C (early), which was barely marketed at all. However, they did about 70x better than the $80 naval premiums. Naval premiums, it’s clear, make nowhere near the gross revenue for Gaijin as a good air premium will. How much they cost to make is unclear but to be economical they’d have had to cost less than 1% each of what it cost to make and market that F/A-18C, which seems unlikely. The Senrai offering seems to have done fairly well compared to other ground premiums last year, but three air premiums and one ground premium (T58) sold significantly better than the individual Senrai tanks.
Okay so youre comparing completely different vehicles now, because youre running out of straws?
According to random dude on the forum without any economic education whatsoever.
Sure but youd still have to proof that both senrai and naval are actually failures. And the fact that one is being suppported for 8 years now and the other got a new version makes that questionable.
Nice writeup but youre completely wrong here. What youre showing is that the F18 early has more overall profit but that doesnt mean that
A. Naval premiums are not economical on their own
B. not selling a naval premium means selling an air premium instead.
Both of you are grossly oversimplifying how a product palette and sales work.
If apple stopped selling Ipads tomorrow, because the Iphone is more profitable then that doesnt automatically mean that theyre selling more Iphones in the same quantity. They are different products for different customers just like naval/air/ground premiums are.
It’s not hard sales data but it’s good enough. More than enough to make the point.
6.7 premium vehicle under a minor nation is getting very similar number of games played as a 12.0 premium suitable for grinding in a major nation. Doesn’t look good.
Flagship premiums getting similar sales as some obscure Japanese vehicle added in WW2 tier…
Investment into quality control will improve quality control.
Shocker, I know.
I already told you what I think about Senrai and their profit per amount of work invested.
A little more speculative, but you could put an estimate on profitability. Let’s say each 10 spawns/day in those first few days equates to an owner. I think most owners will put in {0…20} spawns per day, so we go with the mid range. (If you think more people buy premiums to own than play, all the numbers below go up, so this is setting a minimum number on immediate sales.
By that measure, the 740 Nelsons or Marylands equate to no less than 74 purchases, or 74x$80 or $5,920 gross in the first week.
The F/A-18C early equates to no less than 10,240 purchases, or 10,240x80, a minimum of $819,000 in the first week, gross.
An individual Senrai pack had no less than 1,670 purchases in the first week, or a floor of $116,900 they grossed, each.
Most of the costs here are labour. What you can say is to break even on a naval premium, Gaijin would have had to bring in the entire effort of that premium on one person charging under $6000 for the whole project, or multiple people adding up to that $6000. For the F/A-18C, they could have had a team of 15 full-time equivalents charging $50k each just to make that premium and they’d still have shown a tidy profit. Senrais are somewhere in between.
Which is also more than 40% cheaper…
What on earth does quality control have to do with that now? Quality control doesnt magically improve profitability and youre still not grasping the concept of different products catching different customers.
Yes based on a non understanding of BA and no idea of how much they cost and what work was invested. Truly a worthwhile thought.
Again assuming that putting those people away from naval directly translates into more sales for the air premium which is not how different products work at all.
Please for the love of god read the second part of the comment before you repeat the same rubbish.
And unsuitable for grinding that minor tech tree.
Quality control improves vehicles and modes, right ?
Yeah, you just aren’t ready to accept the reality.
My point there is either
a) there’s almost no one to pull away from naval, if they’re making $6000 gross per premium, that’s not a big team, and/or
b) making a profit in naval is not particularly important to Gaijin’s bottom line.
In a bricks-and-mortar store, if one product outsells the other product over 100-1, and yet you still give them both the same amount of storefront and shelf space (F/A-18C and HMS Nelson got the same amount of store promotion), there’s concerns other than profitability at play there (like taking a bit of a loss to try to stay in a niche market with a current commercial competitor cough WoWS cough).
Uhm so? Do people only buy rank 7 premiums now?
Probably but that doesnt automatically increase profitability and again doesnt automatically mean that one product gains the profitability of another.
What reality lol? You made 2 claims based on nothing but your own opinion, 0 valuable data and a gross misunderstanding of what youre actually talking about. There is no reality here, just MotorolaCROs unfounded mindfarts.
Which is
A. not the point Motorola tried to make and
B. still grossly oversimplified. The storefront argument is moot, because there is no limited space for digital products and like i said there is no automatism that means that stopping investments into product 1 means the same money is being spent on product 2 if theyre completely different products for different customers. We know that naval is vastly less important than Ground and air for Gaijins profits but that doesnt mean that Air+Ground is definitely more profitable overall than Air+Ground+Naval.
No, but higher tier premiums in general are more popular for obvious reasons.
The main point of Naval going down was to use those resources for something else, like improving stuff in other places. Making things better for larger groups of people definitely has impact on their willingness to spend.
Not universially.
And for the gazillionth time: Pulling resources from product a doesnt automatically translate to the same profits going to product b.
We get it, you dont like naval and you dont like anime girls but please for the love of god dont make claims about the profitability of them if you have 0 data and even less expertise about these things.
