I am totally fine and I don’t care if there is a TT F-14D coming or not. I hate to grind and spade as this is a big waste of time, which one should be spending flying and tanking.
1 Like
I bought it from selling event vehicles so it isn’t actually my money so I’m fine with it.
But what I’m not fine about it the complete 180 turn from “No why would we add a TT F-14D we already have the B that’s enough” to “We’re listening to your feedback and now are adding a TT version”. That’s a bit scummy to me.
2 Likes
Its a little unclear what the objective is here. Everything Grom said was in the context of the time it was posted.
At the time there were no plans for a TT F-14D. We reveiewed all feedback from the major update and based on that, it was decided to implement one as a result of said feedback. As it was clear regardless of how similar it would be to the F-14B, people really wanted a TT one regardless.
It had nothing to do with “sales”. The F-14D is still
a hugely popular premium and the premium will continue to be an option for those that want it.
We are however still following the feedback since yesterday’s announcement. Its incredibly disappointing to see some of the vulgar insults thrown back at devs / staff here and on reddit by some in this topic as a result of this feedback being actioned. So that will be factored into future decisions too.
5 Likes
Grom was rather adamant about the reasons for the 14D not coming as a TT addition. Indeed he was very dismissive - stating that obviously the results of team compositions would support his view.
Unfortunately, this is the age of the internet. If you nail your colours to the mast on a public forum and say everyone else is wrong - the means exist by which your comments can come back as an unwelcome reminder.
There is also the issue of those who bought a 14D having been told that it was not coming in future in any non-paid avenue - only for it to indeed arrive months later for free.
Amidst that, you can probably see why some of us see a little bit of irony in all this. Insults or abuse are of course not called for.
7 Likes
Naturally its our job to pass on the reasoning from the devs as to why decisions were made. These were the facts at that moment, so spoken as such.
This was in response to a claim about pre-orders being “bad”. Which was not the case for AIM-9M being added, but again feedback.
Thats more than fine. Context is however important. When its cut out, its easy to paint a different picture for people.
We laid clear our plans. However demand and feedback from the community was clear. We have therefore actioned that. premium F-14D retains all its same capabilities as a premium and has not been degraded at all.
The F-14D in the tree is an option for those that requested it as an alternative.
8 Likes
are there any plans in place for the F-14D (and tt equiv) to receive AIM-7P?
1 Like
Currently no.
I have already purchased the Premium F-14D. I am very satisfied with the product itself and have no regrets. Even if I had known that the TT F-14D would be implemented, I think I would have still purchased the Premium F-14D.
However, even with that in mind, whether your business practices at Gaijin are honest and whether I can forgive them is a completely different matter.
Unfortunately, many of us, including myself, believe that “Gaijin intentionally concealed the planned implementation of the TT F-14D to encourage the purchase of the Premium F-14D, deliberately stirring up customer demand before announcing the TT F-14D to appear as if they were responding to customer feedback.”
You may deny this, but I don’t think it’s an unreasonable or unfair accusation at all. In fact, I would even say it’s natural to think that way.
Certainly, it may be true that there were no plans to implement the TT F-14D at the time of the last update, and I don’t completely disbelieve that. However, the announcement that the F-14D would be limited to premium models, the fact that the initially planned equipment was inappropriate, and the belated announcement of the TT F-14D—all of these were things that anyone with a little thought could easily have predicted would lead to a flood of complaints.
Continuing to do things that even a child could predict, and then acting as if people will believe you just because you deny it, makes people feel like they’ve been “made a fool of.”
Isn’t it about time you realized that the criticism against you stems not only from your actual actions, but also from your fundamental attitude and dishonesty towards your users?
You’re running a business. We’re happy to pay for products we genuinely want to buy, and it’s great if you can make a profit from them.
It’s unacceptable to make a fool of the people who support you for that reason.
4 Likes
That is a major disappointment
Seeing one of the best sparrows limited to just F-18s is pretty sad
1 Like
They will eat their words on “F-14D is a F-14B analogue” argument too, though later. The F-16 ADF is not doing well around 13.3 and hordes of down BRed Su-30s need a competitor.
If they drop a TT equivalent of canardless Su-30s, F-14D will take an AIM-7P and go up
And by that I hope you mean that any future discussion about potential TT/Premium additon and possible plans will be communicated more clearly with the playerbase in order to avoid any such controversy and misinterpretation, instead of ignoring playerfeedback to avoid mean words.
4 Likes
Plans were communicated fully throughout the whole process. The plan to introduce a TT variant was only added after the major for this current major. Not daring the last one.
Quite then opposite. Feedback was listened too here and the reaction from some here has not been positive at all.
Its also far from just “mean words” and frankly inexcusable and unjustified regarding some of the insults thrown back and leveled at staff as a result of feedback being implemented.
Yet they changed between then and now. If gromvoiny merely said “we do not have such plans currently/as far as i know”, I do believe reaction to TT F-14D addition would be entirely different.
I dont claim I speak for everyone or that I see into gaijins decisions, but I know for sure I wouldnt have laugh at his expense were that the case.
The whole addition is clouded in controversy, tis to be expected.
Obivously, not trying to justify that. Feedback needs to be within certain rules.
2 Likes
Plans can always change. That should be very apparent from the history of the game over 14 years. Development is always fluid.
When they do, we communicate that as we have here.
At the time of Groms response, there indeed were no plans for this. Only after the major update, as I previously mentioned, when reviewing the feedback it was clear regardless of the similarity to the F-14B and after the release of the major, people would still like to see a TT F-14D.
1 Like
Yes, but there’s a slight nuance to how the information was presented.
As far as I know, your answers usually follow the wording of “we currently don’t have such plans.” That’s perfectly fine. I doubt many people would have an issue with that, and obviously no one can reasonably complain if those plans change in the future.
However, Grom explicitly stated that there were no plans, without the usual qualification that this reflected the current situation and could theoretically change.
That distinction matters. If the standard way of communicating this is “we currently have no plans,” then a statement that categorically says there are no plans is naturally going to be understood differently. When those plans inevitably do change, people are therefore going to point back to the categorical statement.
It’s not like this exchange matters in the grand scheme of things. I just don’t think Grom should get a pass on the wording here simply because plans can always change.
6 Likes
I appreciate different people may have differing speaking styles. Particularly when different languages are involved. With myself, I often add those words at the end of everything, perhaps over excessively some may say, simply because I know how answers can be twisted and taken out of their context. Its only after several times of someone digging out a 4, 5 or 8 year old post in some cases to go “haha got you!” That it becomes second nature to add them.
It should be however understood that anything is subject to change. There never is a definite “never” in the sense of the word. We can only ever speak withtin the current context and facts. Regardless of who is saying it. So Grom was absolutely correct here in the context of when this answer was given. Plans have simply changed since.
2 Likes
If that’s your final stance, so be it. There’s no changing it, I suppose. I was just hoping for an entirely different outcome to this whole controversy surrounding the F-14D.
Thank you for taking the time to respond.
2 Likes
As someone who did not buy the F-14D, I myself am very pleased with the TT version coming next patch. I do have to agree though with everybody else here, that the way this is being managed is far below optimal and is highly questionable.
We have had a similar situation before with a far less famous vehicle, the JA37DI, and Gaijin acted on the feedback within the same patch. With this precedent in mind, the implementation of only the premium version of the F14D, together with the strict denial of any possible TT version in the future couldn’t end in any other way but people asking themselves if this was done purely for the sake of more sales, since it was clear from the get-go that people would be more willing to spend money on a F14 than a JA37. Can you blame them?
3 Likes
Well obviously.
Love it when a company that bases it’s business model on peoples good will, villainizes them.
People are going over board with slurs but their point still stands
1 Like