Jump to content

Sub_Octavian

Untouchables
  • Content Сount

    21
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Sub_Octavian

  • Rank
    Lieutenant (junior grade)
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

929 profile views
  1. 2. If you agree, put your nickname in.       >>  I do not understand

    4. Reply with this text and artwork to this thread.  >>    and I do not understand  

  2. Sub_Octavian

    ASIA Q&A, round 2 answers

    Helloes again! After a short business trip and holidays, I'm proceeding with your questions Hello, and you are welcome. 1. Theoretically it is possible to add advanced torps to these ships. However, we don't want to do it gameplay-wise, as torps are not main armament for German cruisers. Let's see how recent and near-planned buffs play out and then we'll see whether it is an option. 2-3. Technically, there were not that many cases with 360 turn for big turrets. Sometimes we do it out of gameplay purposes even when we're not sure (like with Koenigsberg). But we'd rather not do it on every ship just because there's no visible obstacle for 360 turn. Anyways, the most important obstacle is turret internal structure and communications with the hull. 4. We'll check this out, thanks. 5. Hi. I checked this with the team, and the point is that there were many complaints about profanity from players, that's why the censorship is like this. However, we're considering both improving profanity filter AND implementing an option to turn it off. Thanks for bringing this up. 6. Out UI team has such task, hopefully, we'll get to it in some time. Sorry for inconvenience. 7. We're still researching the effect of the changes, but preliminary, they were good, and moved some CVs on higher tier (which is also good). Of course these changes were not everything we want to do - more tweaks and changes are being developed. I think it's safe to say that we'll try to do them one by one, without rushing everything into one big update. One of our closest goals is looking into USN vs. IJN balance and working on some new bomb mechanics. Improving CV experience was, and remains one of our important priorities. 8. Updating AA mechanics could be a thing, but only after some other CV issues are resolved. For now, it does its job, and we'd rather not change it. Yamato turret AA: we'll check this out. No need to buff Yamato, though. I'd reserve the judgement on WoT MM improvement applied to WoWs. We're very interested in their experiment, we're observing the effects, but for now it's too early to say whether it's needed in WoWs. Hey, you're welcome! 2. Honestly, it's not a big issue, so for now, the answer is no. 3. It is possible. Right now we're not working on such ships, but we don't have any strict objections against it...so we'll see. 4. Thanks! The next campaigns are already in development. They are not what you're saying, but still should be very interesting and should bring something new. You will see 1. It's one of the strongest ships. There are super strong researchable ships, too. As you probably know, we support the concept of not nerfing premium ships unless absolutely needed, so Kutuzov remains as it is. 2. It was tuned this way based on production test. We're looking into it, and it may be buffed in the near future. 3. This may change in the near future, if we successfully design and test updated loadouts. 4. This change is not planned. We tweak firing range more or less for balance purposes, but not that dramatically, especially when it's not really needed. 5. Not planned, sorry. 6. We're doing this already. I recommend reading patch notes. E.g., USN cruisers buff, IJN DD buff, Z-52 buff, USN top BB buff, upcoming KM cruisers buff, etc, etc. Cheers! No. Slow turret speed is one of the negative traits of IJN DDs, and it won't change. 1. This is avaliable in control settings right now. Check them out. 2. I think that will be around 0.6.8. It's not THAT hard, but with 3-week development cycle, each team also has LOTS of things to do, so often the problem is not with the difficulty of a task, but rather with finding a place for it in schedule. Cheers! Hi. So I have a question from Eurobeat. I'll be damned! Nation is already counted in current MM, but the logic is far from perfect. We implemented several tweaks in 0.6.5 (it should be better now), but we're not going to stop. Right now we're designing a set of MM tweaks (can't give you ETA, probably 0.6.8-6.9, but again, not yet sure), and these tweaks should take care of national MM balancing. We're being somewhat slow here, because with all the additional rules, it's too easy to make mistake and increase MM queue time (which is very bad for session game), but as I said, we're working on it, and understand the importance for national balance. Hello! 1-2. Not planned. 3. More or less, but AA issues is only a part of CV problems. I think we may tweak AA stats and mechanics in the future, when we resolve other issues with CVs. Definitely not planned for the near future. 4. Report the bugs, and we'll do our best to fix them. 5. Good. 6. Working on IJN - USN balance, studying the effect of recent changes, thinking about further CV improvements. 7. All developers that matter in this case *** 1. No direct nerf is currently planned. Counter-buffs, however, are planned, and being implemented gradually. Honestly, torpedo / secondaries looks like trolling 2. Not planned. 3. Not planned, no sense. 4. Smoke probably has too much "bad" use in competitive meta. By bad use I mean BBs hiding in smoke and passive play, mostly. We have several thoughts on that, probably will prototype some of them and then show to players on one of the PTS. Not the very near future, but still possible. No problem. Fair seas! 1. I think it is planned for 0.6.6, the same way we did with gun sounds. 2. Work in progress, not exact ETA, but I'd hope for one of the next several updates. Fingers crossed! 1. Overall, radius depends on ship hull proportions. Dynamically, you can get a tighter turn if you slow down to 1/2. 1/2 gives the best radius mostly. 2. There are several non-bug cases that may result in penetration without damage ribbon. E.g, hitting and penetrating a turret (in this case the damage goes to the turret) or penetration of anti-torpedo bulge without penetrating further armor. These cases are fine because this is what actually happens - non-damage pen. As for bugs, they are possible (although I think we fixed most of them). If you see something really bug-looking, report this to CSC please. 3. This is a bug, and it will be fixed prior to version release. Dear players, this Q&A is closed! Thank you for your questions, see you next time, and fair seas
  3. Sub_Octavian

    ASIA Q&A, round 2 answers

    Hi! Skill-based MM will not be introduced to Random battles. As you rightfully noticed, there are Ranked for that. Implementing it to Random is not a good idea, as well as creating a parallel game mode for that. P.S. Me too, they are magnificent. It's sad, their specs won't allow them to get to middle tiers, so they will remain low tier warriors. "Hey. Most of the line uses these shells, so making exception for Khaba would not be very nice - while buffing other RU DDs was necessary. And, what's most important, Khaba OP-ness is connected mainly with her high protection by dodging shells. Thus, we are nerfing her real strengths, and needed drop is already seen on server stats. Will it be enough? We don't know yet."This shows you won't buff IJN DDs because they do not need it, but you so simply increased Khaba's alpha from 1600-1900. Keep in mind that Khaba had the highest WR and damage as well as kill rate which nulled your answer of "Khaba targets BBs more often than other DDs, so of course its damage will be the highest". Not to mention, nerfing Khaba's rudder does not decrease its damage output. Another example is you wanting to nerf ships that only a small percentage of players do well in. Your magazine article says you wanted to nerf RNCL because they perform well and another more prime example is removing manual drops from T4-T5 CVs due to “sealclubbing” yet only 10%~ players sealclub with T5 CVs (Nikolai is also a huge sealclubber). 2) If you want to reduce BB population, why do you keep buffing BBs?This ties in with the first question. Since 0.6.0, you have allowed BBs to pick two previous T5 skills (Concealment expert + Secondaries accuracy), removed stealth fire (which benefits BBs the most) as well as removing all BB’s stock hulls. Last patch you reduced Warsprite's turret traverse by 38% for reasons of "In order to improve gameplay".If you really wanted to improve gameplay, why not remove any stock loadouts from cruisers or destroyers or carriers? Carriers suffer the most as they have to deal with stock planes which is far worse than some stock hulls, not to mention T10 carriers still require you to unlock everything. 3) The most important question - Why do you treat us (the players) as stupid?No offense but when players suggest a few high skill mechanics (setting individual turrets at different angles, saturation of high tier cruisers etc), you respond with “it is too complex for our playerbase”. Adding a mechanic which lets players of more skill perform better won’t make players of less skill feel stupid. If anything, I am more offended that you keep removing skill-related elements like stealth fire, giving everyone sixth sense, giving more fighter ammo universally, etc. It is one thing to make this game more easy by “buffing the less skilled playerbase” but why do you have to do this at the expense of the better players? These are genuine questions and I would appreciate it if you do not find them stupid (nor are they meant to be offensive). Thanks. 1. If you don't like our decisions, that doesn't mean they are inconsistent. I'm not sure what are you trying to prove - that you want Khaba nerfed? Well, that's not going to happen in the near future. There are very powerful ships, Khaba is one of them, not the best ship in the game. Also, we don't want to nerf RN CL. There are no plans for that. I even don't know what article are you talking about, but here I am, seeing absolutely no plans for RN CL nerf. Removing manual drop from T4-5 was very good both against sealclubbing and for new players. Nikolay I, if you haven't noticed, is not sold currently. 2. Please check out the last several patch notes and you will see what we're buffing (tip: it is not BB). SF was bad for the game as a whole, not for BBs. With 0.6.0 BBs were forced to specialize more, without the ability to take everything and be universal. It may be considered a nerf, not a buff. Warspite needed this, and the removed stock hulls were too bad. 3. We don't treat anyone as stupid. Get some sense please. The only thing we do is observe who, and how plays the game. We are NOT a hardcore simulator, and won't be. We're tactical shooter with much depth, but LOTS of over complicated mechanics have no place in World of Warships. Sorry, but if you're "offended" by SF removal, it is a problem of your attitude. With all due respect, these questions are offensive, because you make attacks to prove your point - even making a statement "you treat the players as stupid" is enough. I don't feel it's right to support such communication. Questions with such attitude will not be answered in the future. The rationale of selling anything is to earn money. The rationale of making staggered release is to earn more money by creating more value. As we work within free-to-play AND free-to-win model, we have to leverage on time and visuals. Staggered release is leveraging on time (faster access, quicker campaign progression) and visuals (flag and alternative camo), while giving approx. 30% discount on additional content. Now, I don't think it's appropriate to tell us we shouldn't earn money. Surely we need it to keep developing and expanding World of Warships, making new content and features on monthly basis. On the other hand, if a business practice is both inefficient and badly perceived, why do it? So, if you like staggered release, buy the bundle and tell us "thanks, it's cool". If you don't want it, then, don't buy it, and tell us "hey, I don't like it". Simple as that. The outcome is analyzed, and then we either go on - because the considerable amount of players like it this way, or stop it - because it's not popular and only upsets people. No need to make it over complicated, run pseudo-analysis ("you're putting off fans" - that's a strong assumption based on almost no data), no need to play "punish" thing - come on, guys, this is an option in premium shop. If it is not used, and everyone hates it, we're absolutely taking it into account. I hope I was able to explain the reasoning and sorry for any possible misunderstanding. 1. It is an option, but there are other, more interesting as well. We will see. 2. Unlikely. For now, we plan to add new stuff without repeating. 3. That's too early for this question. We'll see how Scenario mode performs first
  4. Sub_Octavian

    ASIA Q&A, round 2 answers

    We'd be fine with it. Sure. The height of this point is always = the top height of 3d model (e.g. a tip of the highest mast). Other coordinates are exact center of the ship. Let me demonstrate my mad paint skillz: I don't really see any need to do it. Torpedo splash works very similar to HE splash, but its explosion power is sufficient to damage ship parts, not only modules. The splash radius is average, so when hitting the center, you probably won't reach anything like aft and bow. The damage dealt this way is VERY small. Actually, we may consider removing it completely for the sake of damage mechanics clarity. Cheers! It is simple, and does the job. But it is to be improved. We're working on Radio Commands update, with more features and radial menu. Hold on! No, it's not true. If it's happening, it is a bug, and should be reported. I never saw that, and not aware of such bug.
  5. Sub_Octavian

    ASIA Q&A, round 2 answers

    Hi. There are quite many special requests regarding port filters, and they are often very individual. Instead of adding numerous options, we added "favourite ship" tag, which can be used for many purposes. In your case, you can simply mark your non-elite ships. Unfortunately, we are not planning to add more, as our UI team is busy with other improvements. CV balancing is going fine. We're analyzing the results of previous changes and planning next steps. The closest steps may include new type of strike plane armament and loadout re-balancing. Some of these may be tested with the help of USS Enterprise - and if they are successful, they may be implemented on her, and on other CVs shortly. No MM changes are planned though. 1. I am not sure about this statement, but anyways, yes, we're going to add the opportunity to expand clan limit. I won't speculate on ETA, though. 2. We'd love it, and we will work on it when we have the opportunity - unfortunately, not right now. Hi. Thanks for the welcome! 1a. No. 1b. Because she has less planes in squadrons, in reserve, and she is balanced by air combat perk (her planes of tier IX get debuffed when fighting regular tier VII). 2. Because Black is super rare reward ship, and Kidd is still WIP. Kidd deck will probably be tuned to 13 mm before release. UPD: Actually, we may rethink it and make it 19 mm everywhere. We'll think about it. Thanks for the question! UPD2: Yes, you know, we did some math, and decided to give Benson, Fletcher, Kagero, Yugumo and Shimakaze and other high-tier DDs 19 mm / 16 mm decks. Will probably squeeze it into 0.6.6. This way, deck thickness will be more clear and systematic across DDs.
  6. Sub_Octavian

    ASIA Q&A, round 2

    Hi again! Thank you for your questions! I'm locking this thread now. I will be picking and answering the most interesting questions in the following days. Answers will be published here.
  7. Sub_Octavian

    ASIA Q&A, round 2 answers

    Hi again! I will publish answers from 2nd round here in this topic. Let's do it
  8. Sub_Octavian

    ASIA Q&A, round 2

    Hello everyone!My name is Phil, nickname Sub_Octavian, and I am contuniuing official Q&A session for ASIAShort introduction: I am Game Analytics Team Lead in WG Saint-Petersburg, responsible for many interesting activities, including developers-players communication on gameplay topics.Please ask any game-related questions, I will pick the best ones (and as many as I can) - but no leaks on unreleased ships! This topic will be open until May 23, then I will close it to work with your questions. The answers will be published as a separate topic withing a week. Please upvote the questions you really like, so I know they are important to you!Action stations! Previous Q&A Round 1
  9. Sub_Octavian

    Engine boost Modification 1

    Ha, looks like you found a bug in description. In-game is correct. Will pass it to the team. Thank you!
  10. Sub_Octavian

    ASIA Q&A, round 1 answers

    Hello. Such things should be reported to Customer Support. I'm not handling this kind of stuff as well as forum bans, etc. Yes, but we will wait until the event is over to make final conclusions. 1. Intended. Top prize should not necessarily be handed to everyone or to majority. Events may have various difficulty. 2. The event remains as it is. In developement, sir! Yes, there are plans, and some actual work on these plans as well. ETA: this year, hopefully, in the near future. Thank you for your suggestion, will look into it. Hey, nice to be here. 1. I'm afraid right now, with latest changes, they don't need much buffing. We will keep looking, though. 2. We're working on it. One nice graphical thing is new FX - we're re-doing explosions, fire and water effects. You are welcome. 1-2. It may use some tweaks, and we're working on it - both on balance changes and some new stuff. No leaks for now. 3. Yes and yes (I'm personally terrible CV player, but that's just me). I gave several dev profiles in the replies above). 4. The general incentive is to win, right? Some things are quite difficult to determine automatically. Hello! Thank you for your suggestions. As they are really more suggestions than questions, you may not be satisfied with answers - sorry for that. 1-2. Noted, and sent to UI team. 3-5. No. Again, sorry for sounding harsh, but it is impossible for us to take and work on every personal suggestion. If you want to influence the game development, complete surveys and write feedback in relevant section of the forum. Cheers. 1. Hopefully, pretty soon. 2. No, I cannot leak such things. 3. It is going to be a particular scenario, which should be different enough from random battles. You will see for yourself No. We're tweaking specific IJN DDs that need help, and this is going to be enough. As for 20 km torps, we have several ideas for them, and queued them for prototyping internally. Hello, and thank you. 1. Yes. 2. Sometimes yes, especially when the demand for shiny gimmicks is quite high. 3. Such things are nice to have, and even planned, but stand very long way in queue, because other new features are more important. 4. Yes, that would be great, but for now we don't have any immediate solution. I hope we will get to it later. Thanks everyone for your questions. Sorry for not leaking stuff and providing answers you may not like sometimes - but overall, I hope, it was interesting for you. See you next time! Fair seas!
  11. Sub_Octavian

    ASIA Q&A, round 1 answers

    Hey, thanks. 1. We normally don't mess with ballistics. Yes, ballistics of these shells is rather bad - thus, you need either to rain HE, or get closer and punish the enemy with AP (that are quite strong). We're fine with it. 2. Yes, that would be a strange notion, I am sorry. Hello, and thank you. 1. Yes, we're working on it. 2. We'd rather not nerf BBs in general, but nerf camping BBs. We're working on possible solutions. 3. There are something we consider to be improved here. 4. The problem is recognized, and will be acted upon, along with other CV tweaks. 5. No, because Akatsuki is fine, being middle-performing within her group. Nice to do it, and see you soon. Hello, player. 1. We have several intersting ideas that undergo internal testing. We'll see... 2. No, because she is absolutely fine after all changes made to her. They will get camo and credit bonus for "double" ship. Well, I whill have to ask her what she thinks. Thank you Hello, and thanks for welcome. You are right, the model is wrong. Noted, and queued for fixing (not promising it will happy very soon, as queue of 3D stuff is quite busy, but anyways, it is in the plan now). Hello. No, I think it is the matter of our web team The event is global, and not small. Not as epic as Xmas set, but definitely bigger than usual local stuff. There will be other events with different rewards, but that doesn't mean we will constantly give away mid-tier premiums ships to everyone. Sorry, not going to happen. Hello. We stopped this for now. There is much work, much performance affected, and efficiency for the game is quite small. Right now our visual team is working on more important stuff - new visual effects. They are going to have much bigger positive impact. Hello. 1. Ah, it's a bit tricky. Here you go: 2. This data is not intended to be shown. 3. The problem of CV-AA balance is recognized, and will be considered along with others. 4. Skills are fine, nothing to change here for now. Player who chose them, sacrificing something else. 5. It is true that RU DD are not very good at capping compared to other DDs - and this is absolutely fine. They have another role. Hello! 1. We cannot release and support 4 different games, thus, we balance around all 4 servers. 2. Yelling is not relevant. Sometimes it helps to start looking for problems, sometimes (mostly) it does not do anything at all. Unfortunately we cannot please everyone, and those who complain, are naturally louder. We analyze feedback, stats, surveys (if there are relevant data from them) and use our own vision. 3. Sorry, but I'd leave this for marketing and PR guys to decide. Feedback and suggestion noted. One thing, though - you cannot run from data mining if you do production test. So, what's better - to pretend the stuff is not here, or give some guys the ability to explore it (even WIP) and tell others? For me, the answer is not simple. 4. That's false impression caused by several bad timings and hard decisions. 5. Eh? Duca, Kaga, Hood, anyone? 6. If you mean mountable flags - not in priority. 7.To prevent shooting your teammates in the very beginning by accident.
  12. Sub_Octavian

    ASIA Q&A, round 1 answers

    1. No comment, as I wrote in OP "no leaks on unreleased ships". 2. I think you are right. We are working on it. 3. In 0.6.4, she looks very good and in place. According to the stats I have, the buff made her one of the strongest, and there is absolutely no need to buff anything else right now. 1. Not sure they are weak, honestly. 2. We don't "feel", but rather think that German cruisers from Nurnberg to Hindenburg may use some buffing. However, I cannot tell you what it will be and when. 3. Yep, the chance is equal and universal. Don't be upset - a guy from my team seems to get 1 SC in 3 weeks, and I got situation just like you. Bad luck. But we shall overcome RNG is not "unfair" - it's RNG. It doesn't care. Hi! No comment, as I wrote in OP "no leaks on unreleased ships". Feedback noted, but as I said before, if a problem with specific ship or small group of ship is acknowledged, it shouldn't be solved with MM rules. This is absolutely not right thing to do. 1. No. BBs, and these two as well, are strong enough. 2. You will see for yourself. I'm not going to spoil the surprise for you Hello. Well, this system will be upgraded, hopefully, pretty soon. And at the same time, we plan to introduce an option to swithc between new and old systems. Cheers! Hello. Now, I am here as well. Please don't hurt me 1. Not sure what you mean by "game engine" here. We're upgrading FX, sound engine, working on server optimization and utilizing DX11. 2. It has some limitations. Sometimes we upgrade or rework the problematic part, sometimes we realize it's not worth it. Generally, it is not a big problem. 3. Yes, but you always can wish more. 4. No comment on unreleased content. 5.Right now - no. There is considerable amount of skill in shooting, and it is fine. Those who want more consistent hits, should play cruisers instead of BBs, because it's BB dispersion that causes such impression mainly. And it is here for a reason. Hello. Right now - no, we don't. Adding this info to port stats makes some sense for us. But to crosshairs - it's definitely no. We want players to play the game, not UI. It is way too hardcore. Helloes! No comment on unreleased content. Sorry. We're experimenting, because we want to have something unique about her and similar ships. Cheers!
  13. Sub_Octavian

    ASIA Q&A, round 1 answers

    Hello, and thank you.1. Gunnery bug: if you have a replay, please submit a ticket to Customer Support. We are working on solution, but need more data.2. CV bug: fix in progress, should be here in 0.6.5, if I got you right. Sorry for inconvenience. Hello. Yes, we did quite deep analysis on this, because the idea about DD quantity imbalance was very popular. It was very interesting to learn that difference of winrate may slightly vary, depending on conditions, but overall, difference in DD number has no meaningful impact on win chance. So, we decided not to add more balancing rules for now. You know, part of players complains about too many islands and inability to maneuver, while part of players prefer more dense maps. We have different maps for this reason As for capturing points, we try not to place islands inside them, as this leads to quite dull camping, or we try to place them with equal advantage to each team. Overall, we try to balance all maps for all classes, so CL/CAs, DDs and BBs have something to do, including cap contesting.Thank you for your feedback (it is really more feedback than question).Cheers. 1. CV improvements and tweaks, not just "buff". Hopefully, several updates in 2017.2. No comment.3. No comment.4. No comment.5. No comment. But hey, I want them too I hope you understand I cannot comment on unreleased ships and lines - this would be breaking PR concept, where each new line or premium ship is announced globally through official channel. Sorry. I warned you in the OP. Helloes.1. No, for now it seems we buffed her good enough. 2. When there were only IJN and USN, they had best AA. But the game, and the meta, changes, so now their AA role is not that glorious. On the other hand, we buffed their AP, and recently buffed their RoF and concealment. We keep them updated.3. Yes, but as conning tower is not a designated module, it has no gameplay impact. Hi, nice to meet you.Sorry, no comment on unreleased ships. Hello.1. Consumables are not to be counted in MM. If any consumable would have THAT big impact, we'd rather nerf it than create MM rulses for it.2. Player skills are not to be counted in Random MM. Players who want to be matched with more precision, may want to explore Ranked; while RB are not exact "skill MM", they are relatively close to it. 3. Right now, we don't want to add more MM rules, but we may change it in future. As for DD count, I explained it above. The impact is not as big as players often suggest. Even some maps have bigger impact themselves (and thus, we're tweaking them for better balance).Cheers. Some data may be added to the client. When something is not shown, the "secrecy" is not the reason. The reason is usually either:"We think it is too specific information that will help almost noone, and port UI is not made for hardcore players only" - like dispersion sigmaOr:"We think it is important, but we need to figure out the best way to show it, so it is queued for now" - like penetration. Helloes!1. No.2. Perma camo for low-tier ship is possible, but not very high priority. And copying the tricolour scheme is not the best way here. 1. Because with current improvements, we think it's fair to say CV players may enjoy premium IJN CV, even while we're still working on bigger improvements. 2. I don't know if this is going to be REAL MAJOR overhaul or a series of updates. I don't know if it will be done fully this year. There is no point in asking this, really. We're working on CVs step by step - slowly, but this is how we can do it for now. 3. There is no "instead". Adding Kaga does not prevent from calculating balance changes.4. There are no urgent MM issues from our point of view. There are some "nice to improve" things.5. There is no urgent issue with IJN DDs. We buffed them, especially Shima, and working on Yugumo buff. This is not different from updating other underperforming ships, like German cruisers.Sorry for not agreeing with you on some points, but I think it's fair to have different opinions on game state. Cheers.
  14. Sub_Octavian

    ASIA Q&A, round 1

    ===
×