DLRevan

Super Tester
  • Content count

    237
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

4 Followers

About DLRevan

  • Rank
    Lieutenant
  • Birthday
  • Portal profile DLRevan

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Portal profile DLRevan

Recent Profile Visitors

118 profile views
  1. This game isn't for everyone, its far more niche than other mainstream games, while in turn being far more accessible than other war or naval games. Many relatively new players will quit after they realise its not their kind of game compared to something that has more universal appeal. Nothing unusual about that.
  2. Certainly battleship main guns don't need it. But the secondaries do. I would add the skill to my high tier BBs (Yamato has 127mm HE, Fred 105mm and 150mm, Grober 128mm and 150mm). Depending on the caliber affected, they can now more reliably damage high tier DDs, or the bow/sterns/decks of cruisers. It doesn't change the point of the OP though. I agree with just about everything being said. Said skills as of the current PT iteration generally lower the skill floor while not raising the skill ceiling, including my above example, and they do not seem to meet many of the developers own stated reasons for tree rework. In fact in this case it is curious to see a buff to secondaries considering how idiot-proof they are in their current iteration, something which the devs have pointed out before and have supposedly been careful to keep in check.
  3. Thanks for the answers so far. Have a few more questions. 1. You mention that you require STers with a wide range of system and probably network specifications. That makes sense. But the application form does not ask about that. So is it not relevant now during application? I play on two different systems at the moment. 2. The recruitment requirements state that we need to be familiar with only 2 types of ship and 2 nations. Are there times when STers are specifically asked to test ships that do not fit in their "experienced" categories? For existing ships and mechanics of course, obviously new tech tree lines are new for everyone.
  4. 1. How often and what time are the scheduled sessions? Proportion between weekends and weekdays? If information on this is limited, at least do the sessions ever run really late local time (GMT +8-9), ie. close to or past midnight. 2. I understand that on the ST server, rather than playing "normal" matches, there may be very specific setups to create controlled test situations. How about ST ships on live, are there instructions and restrictions given on "how to use" them in the live environment (such as to vary the playstyle between two STers with the same ship, or no mods allowed), and is there a "match quota" that has to be met? 3. If there is a previous "leak" of ST information via other sources (other STers, data-mining, etc) that was broadly covered by NDA, how is the leak treated as far as regular STers are concerned? 4. Are we able to propose improved processes for STers, such as communication, feedback, etc. 5. Do changes sometimes bypass the ST round of testing? Such as the most recent PT changes to battleship/destroyer armor, steering mod 3 for destroyers, economy adjustments, they seem like they were implemented in a hurry, but that does not preclude the possibility it was tested by ST first. I assume if it does happen, then we are just to give feedback via PT. But if it does not, are there sometimes" emergency sessions" to test things in a hurry?
  5. DLRevan I've seen WG improve a lot on community engagement on real gameplay issues the last few months. If that notion continues, then I'm willing to meet them halfway on making this a better game. So... I would like to apply to be a Supertester.
  6. Are there any kinds of mods that will cause your Name Selector tool to break? At the moment it crashes when trying to access my install directory.
  7. The same promotion on the US website says that besides new players, we can also "invite" players who haven't played for more than three months or players who have not yet reached account level 3. Is this also the case for our server?
  8. I am certain that it was not like this before. I tested Amagi's secondaries extensively in training room when the manual secondaries skill was first introduced and as far as I can remember all shots were centered on the mid-point of every target ship at the waterline. Now the aiming point for the secondaries is very far below the waterline. The only shots that hit the target are those that suffer a poor dispersion RNG roll and hit "too high". In a real match, this makes the guns virtually useless on targets that are roughly moving parallel to you, although perpendicularly moving targets may get hit because you are shooting down the length of the target.
  9. Issue: Secondary batteries aiming point too low Video: Pardon the visual mods, shouldn't be an issue seeing the bug. Ship: Presumably any ship with secondary batteriesMap: AnyOccurrences: Always presentTested: Reproducible, tested with secondaries flag and commander 5 point skill manual secondaries targeting, vs various targets. Issue was also highlighted on a reddit thread, example stated was for Nagato. Reddit comments also include a , no mods. Severity: Medium-High impact, depending on ship being used and commander build. Affects individual ship performance.Details: Secondary batteries appear to be aiming too low. This is especially noticeable on T7 and higher ships with the manual targeting skill, where the secondaries gain a significant accuracy upgrade. As can be seen from the video provided, as well as the reddit comments, the secondaries are unable to hit the target even at a short distance of <2km. The shells are obviously hitting too 'low' relative to the target.
  10. Forget who or what is a supertester. This has less to do with that than these are long time normal posters, since they are, after all, supertesters. Whatever, some things don't change.
  11. This is amazingly arrogant, but you don't really see it, which is part of the problem. I am aware a supertester is not a WG representative. Does that excuse you from acting with decency? In fact since you have some status, however unrelated to forum activity or unofficial, shouldn't you act more circumspectly? On one hand I read Supertesters hinting and meting out information like a privileged class, while at others times "I'm just a normal member". Depends on what suits the situation. Who cares if you're right. I never disputed that your point was wrong. There's a big difference between "I know right? German cruisers are like Maus tanks in WoT, inpenetrable fortresses, am I right?" and "Actually, just to correct you, German Cruisers don't have very high armor protection. Maybe you could present a replay from your next game?" First is sarcasm and dismissal. Second is common decency.
  12. How the hell do people discuss anything here when the only thing 2 out of 3 supertesters say is dripping with sarcasm and condescending words? Is there any part of what the OP is saying a complaint? Flaming? Whining? He's asking for the experience of others because he isn't sure and thinks its worth discussing. He has merely presented what he thinks, in a congenial manner. What is it with you people? Do you see wolves after the developers or peons who aren't at your level everywhere that you must act like this? Pass it off your posts as jokes if you like, but that's my definition of toxicity. On my own part, this motivates me to try the test build out. If AP is ineffective versus certain thickness of armor at closer ranges and requires a switch to HE, it would have a definite impact on BB player habits. I'm concerned how much more complexity it would bring or what the rules are, since there are already many permutations of caliber to armor interactions, and armor protection for different Cruisers vary quite a bit.
  13. I do, however, agree still with the sentiment. Weekend or no, someone should have thought of a mitigation plan by Friday along with a news post. Nobody's leaving because of this, that doesn't mean WG can't or shouldn't do better. The milestone page now shows a new milestone at 1.8 million Pearls. Good, that's a partial mitigation plan. But there's no news post and no clarification about it. So I still consider this a halfway job. I'm not about to stake the WG Asia webteam to the cross, but surely, this can be done better. Other developers, and WG's own EU and US offices have set higher standards. Also, hard to discuss this topic when everyone is either in the "DED GAEM" camp or white knight camp and assumes everyone else is only in either of these two categories, yes? We're just talking about an event. And as an official event, yeah, I really don't think our best sources of information should be through the grapevine of volunteers and testers.
  14. Boycott is a strong measure that I have never truly seen done by a community since EVE Online's monocle debacle. Which happened because people were really deeply invested in the game in terms of time and money, while having such a strong community voice, on top of the issue at hand being potentially ruinous to gameplay. None of these apply for WoWs and Project R, so people will keep playing. And I'm certain at least 1/4-1/3 of active players don't even know Project R exists, despite it being plastered everywhere. I think if it were 1.4 million as a final goal from the beginning, I'd see it as an acceptable first experiment. Starting out with 14 million, then revising it too far down while tacking on the 29th Dec date, makes me think they're lacking in common sense. It's done solely by the web team anyway, using some API probably that interfaces with the game and our accounts. It's not that much work. As they say...."You had one job". However, regarding how this community event has been handled so far, I would say its on one hand a complete joke. On the other hand, I didn't really expect otherwise from WG, so I'm somehow OK with it. Funny, that. A lot more thought could have been put into this to conduct this better. There's some obvious inspiration from Razer style contests, but they didn't really have a clue how to balance out the goals and rewards. Not once but twice. We all know these "hidden milestones", both the first one and upcoming one, are not "hidden" surprises, they're actually fixes to the event they're thinking up as they go along. I expect some new missions in the projected 1-2 more days to ensure some people at least do get the ship. Then at least they can cap off the event with some dignity.