Why Kitakami is Bad while Defence is Good?

[Ocsimano18]

You might wonder why the more expensive Kitakami is meh, while the cheaper Defence is OP-ish. There is a marketing trick sales people use. They put an inferior and a superior product side-by-side, usually at the same price (but the inferior one can be more pricey, as in our case), then potential buyers will compare the two, and accept a much higher than reasonable price for the better product, because they compare the price to the carefully placed inferior product, instead of comparing it to a baseline. So this is all a marketing ploy here, as you could expect from WG’s sales team.

Edited December 13, 2023 by Ocsimano18

[Nevermore135]

You’re overthinking this. Kitakami was originally in the game as a tier VIII during alpha but was problematic so she was replaced with Atago. There’s simply a lot of undeserved hype built up around Kitakami, not helped by the fact that she has been in development hell for years (since 2020) at tier X as the devs have tweaked her every so often and been able to point to her reintroduction/testing as evidence that they listen to the playerbase (as there have been some calling for her to come back as long as the game has been active).

It doesn’t matter that the ship is a meme or what other ships are part of the event. She’s being offered for such a large amount of resources because WG (correctly) thinks that a lot of players will be willing to pay that price, especially with the promised 2+ years of exclusivity.

Edited December 13, 2023 by Nevermore135

[Frostbow]

37 minutes ago, Ocsimano18 said:

You might wonder why the more expensive Kitakami is meh, while the cheaper Defence is OP-ish. There is a marketing trick sales people use. They put an inferior and a superior product side-by-side, usually at the same price (but the inferior one can be more pricey, as in our case), then potential buyers will compare the two, and accept a much higher than reasonable price for the better product, because they compare the price to the carefully placed inferior product, instead of comparing it to a baseline. So this is all a marketing ploy here, as you could expect from WG’s sales team.

Is this what is called 'comparative pricing'? (I have only the casual knowledge on marketing and sales related concepts such as pricing.)

I've been wondering the exactly the same thing—why the disparity in their respective prices given their impact—immediately after I saw the first impression videos of the Kitakami and the Defence. Initially, I thought it was the prestige of owning a 'rare' ship, but I still feel that there was something missing in the picture. 

Thank you for your inputs; it has shown a light on the inner workings that I believe would help me make a better and more informed decision on what to do with all these Coal, Research Points I have right now.

 

 

[YouSatInGum]

1 hour ago, Ocsimano18 said:

You might wonder why the more expensive Kitakami is meh, while the cheaper Defence is OP-ish. There is a marketing trick sales people use. They put an inferior and a superior product side-by-side, usually at the same price (but the inferior one can be more pricey, as in our case), then potential buyers will compare the two, and accept a much higher than reasonable price for the better product, because they compare the price to the carefully placed inferior product, instead of comparing it to a baseline. So this is all a marketing ploy here, as you could expect from WG’s sales team.

Not sure I'd call Defense OP.

 

It's a good ship, but watching various streamers get 300k in a game doesn't mean it's OP.

I'll probably get it but the cost is still making me hesitate.

When I played it before, I found it to be fun in the same way Incomp can be when you use it's concealment to punish ships that lost their SA, but it also eats damage rather fast compared to other heavies. 

Bottom line...I don't expect to start seeing Defense heavy comps in CB...

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

3 hours ago, Ocsimano18 said:

You might wonder why the more expensive Kitakami is meh, while the cheaper Defence is OP-ish. There is a marketing trick sales people use. They put an inferior and a superior product side-by-side, usually at the same price (but the inferior one can be more pricey, as in our case), then potential buyers will compare the two, and accept a much higher than reasonable price for the better product, because they compare the price to the carefully placed inferior product, instead of comparing it to a baseline. So this is all a marketing ploy here, as you could expect from WG’s sales team.

WG has always been very competent at marketing and monetization.

[Andrewbassg]

3 hours ago, YouSatInGum said:

Not sure I'd call Defense OP.

Oh she is not.  She is VERY team dependent and definitively not a matchmaker ship. She is squishy as  fiddlesticks and her guns, tho they deal nice damage, needs quite a lead in. People who have bigger lag.......will find her problematic. Me playing from EU on NA......not the best experience. She is decently manoeuvrable. 

I would say that she is NOT for the casual player, needs a good grasp of situational awareness, positional play understanding and she is definitively aimed at better players, who have a wide knowledge of the game, its mechanics and its possible tactics. She is defo not EZ mode.

Also she is more of a "mexican standoff" kind of ship, can help maintain a position and can help pusher ships. But she is anything but a pusher. in many ways she is similar to USN heavy's, bar their utility. 

Edit: I would add that she is probably good at flanking, tho not alone.

 

I would say  she is kinda just one step away from being a griefer. She is definitively not my kind of ship, nor her playstyle. Im gonna keep playing her but...... not really my cup pf tea.

Edited December 13, 2023 by Andrewbassg