• Announcements

    • IronGuard

      World of Warships Forum Rules   06/08/2017

        Welcome to the Official World of Warships ASIA forums! These forums are here to provide you with a friendly atmosphere where you can discuss ideas, give and receive game play advice, and discuss any other aspects of World of Warships with other players. Community forums are at their best when participants treat their fellow posters with respect and courtesy. Therefore, we ask that you conduct yourself in a civilized manner when participating on these forums and be mindful of your audience.   The guidelines and rules listed below explain what behaviours is expected of you and what behaviour you can expect from other community members. Note that the following guidelines are not exhaustive, and may not address all manner of offensive behaviour. As such, the forum moderators and administrators shall have full discretion to address any behaviour that they feel is inappropriate. Also, suspension or banishment from the game will always result in the same in regard to forum access. Your access to these forums is a “privilege,” and not a “right.” Wargaming.net reserves the right to suspend your access to these forums at any time for reasons that include, but are not necessarily limited to, your failure to abide by these guidelines.   Wargaming.net reserves the right to evaluate each incident on a case by case basis. The actions taken may be more lenient or more severe than those listed under each category. Before posting any kind of information on this forum, all users are to read the following rules. These rules are obligatory for all registered users on this forum.     1. GENERAL PROVISIONS   1.1 Registration Requirements   There is no requirement for a user to use his or her real name or to use any other form of identification that can be used to easily trace identities, and all e-mail addresses that are provided will be kept private. In order to register on World of Warships forum, registrants must be thirteen (13) years of age or older.   Users are solely responsible for protecting their accounts from access by others. Users are strongly encouraged to select a hard-to-guess password and not re-use that password on any other sites where it may be read by the owners or administrators of that site. It is highly recommended that board users do not share their accounts with others, or share their computers used to access the site with others. In case of a lost or hacked account, users are to inform support immediately.   1.2 Forum purpose   The purpose of this forum is to discuss World of Warships and related topics, get to know fellow players, find a clan to join, and to give feedback to the Wargaming.net developers.   1.3 Responsibility   Wargaming.net is not responsible for any user messages posted. Wargaming.net does not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and is not responsible for the contents of any message. The messages express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of this board. Any user who feels that a posted message is objectionable is encouraged to contact the moderation team immediately. Wargaming.net employees and community moderators have the ability to remove objectionable messages and will make every effort to do so, within a reasonable time limit, if it is found that removal is necessary. Users agree, through the use of this service, that they will not use this forum to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise in violation of any law. Users agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by said user or by this board.   1.4 Sanction Policy   Violations of these rules/guidelines may lead to users being sanctioned temporarily or permanently within this forum or even in game bans of a players account on severe or repetitive offenses.   1.5 Error reporting   Bugs and errors can be reported at the support website (http://support.worldoftanks.asia/), Users can also report any bugs and errors on the corresponding forum thread.     2. PROHIBITIONS and RESTRICTIONS   2.1 Forum etiquette   Users are not allowed to abuse others, make personal attacks or behave disrespectfully. This prohibition applies to both public threads and private messages (PMs).   Disrespect can include but is not limited to: FlamingTrollingHarassment or Defamatory remarksProfanity, Inappropriate language or abbreviations there ofPersonal abuse or attacksRacial, Religious, Sexual, National or Ethnic, slurs or insults, this includes "jokes" in bad taste.Excessive CapitalizationInappropriate or adult content   This behaviour has no place on the World of Warships forums due to its extremely offensive and inappropriate nature.   2.2 Distribution of real life information and real-life threats   Postings and discussions which have users’ personal data (such as addresses, telephone numbers, emails, other contact information) - regardless of whether this is their own or that of other users - will be removed. Users who publish this type of content on the forum will be warned or sanctioned by an administrator or moderator. No rude or disrespectful posts to or about any forum moderators or Wargaming.net employees, as well as no release of real-life information about moderators or Wargaming.net employees are allowed on this forum. Real-life threats include both clear and masked language and/or links to websites containing such language or images which refers to violence in any capacity that is not directly related to the game world   2.3 Advertising   Users are not allowed to post threads or comments that advertise or solicit any non-beneficial, non-Wargaming related businesses, organization, or website. Explicit advertising and solicitation in signatures are also prohibited.   Forum rules allow "light" discussion other games; however any kind of direct promotion, solicitation, or linking to other games is not permitted. Also please do not use images related to games other than World of Warships in your signature, avatar or name.   2.4 Accounts, Gold/Credits, Pre-order & Promotional codes, Leveling services, Begging.   This category includes: Advertising of, or selling of game accounts. Advertising of, or selling of in game currency such as gold/credits. Advertising of, or selling of leveling services. Advertising of, or selling of promotional codes or pre-order codes. Begging in any form. Begging includes but is not limited to: requesting users to transfer real money to the virtual wallet, asking for additional gold/credits, and requests to transfer game gold/credits, promotional codes, pre-order codes, or anything similar. Linking to or promoting websites that contain the above prohibited services.   All types of posts for the sale or promotion of the exchange or transfer of accounts, currency, codes, and other services from one user to another violate the EULA and are prohibited within the forums and game channels.   2.5 Off Topic, spamming and trolling   This category includes: Excessively communicating the same phrase, similar phrases, or pure gibberishCreating threads on topics that already exist on the forums, (Please use search and add to existing topics were possible)Off-topic PostingCreating threads/posts for the sole purpose of causing unrest on the forumsCreating threads/posts for purpose of reporting or discussing in game violations. Such incidences are to be directed to supportCausing disturbances in forum threads, such as picking fights, making off topic posts that ruin the thread, insulting other postersMaking non-constructive posts, or posts with non-constructive topicsAbusing the "Reported Post" feature by sending false alarms or nonsensical messagesNumbering a thread, posting “First!”, “IBTL” (“in before thread lock”) or any other fad statements“Bumping” posts are only permitted in the clan recruiting sections of the forums, please refer to the rules for that section.Petition posts or polls that are not aimed at conducting a discussion.   Users should make sure that they post new threads and postings into the appropriate forum, and users are asked to familiarize themselves with the forums. This helps other users and moderators maintain an overview and to be able to respond faster with an appropriate answer to players questions. Before beginning a new thread, look to see if an active thread on that topic has already been established using the Search feature. If so, place your comments there instead. Keep discussions about one topic to one thread only.   Posts which drift off topic, or content-free posts will be edited or removed. Posting multiple messages with the same content across several forums is unwelcome and inappropriate, since such activities divide the targeted discussions and makes gathering feedback considerably more difficult. Such ‘cross posts’ will be merged, closed and redirected or removed. Before beginning a new thread, look to see if an active thread on that topic has already been established using the Search feature. If so, place your comments there instead. Keep discussions about one topic to one thread only.   2.6 Politics, Major Religions or Religious Figures   Posting about social, religious, political, illegal or other controversial topics that may create offense. As well as negative portrayal of religious and political figures is prohibited within the forums.   2.7 Law Violations   This category includes: Posting discussion threads on, or linking to, cheats, hacks, Trojan horses, or malicious programs. If you suspect that a cheat or hack exists, provide the necessary information to support, it is not to be discussed within the forums.Posting unreleased content / hacking data files: showing unreleased in-game items, equipment, or areas that have been unlocked by hacking into client data files; discussing or displaying any data not available through normal game play;Illegal drugs or activities. Both clear and masked language and/or links to websites containing such language or images which reference to abusing illegal drugs or to performing illegal activities are prohibited.   Users are expected to act lawfully when participating on the forums. Posting about or discussing issues that violate local or international laws is not allowed under any circumstance. The administration reserves the right to delete, update or modify any information which is considered inappropriate on these forums.   2.8 Discussing disciplinary actions   Discussion or disputing of disciplinary actions is prohibited within the forums.   This category includes: Creating posts or threads to discuss or dispute disciplinary actions taken against a player in game or on the forumsCreating posts or threads to discuss or dispute moderators, moderator decisions or actions   Appeals on sanctions received or questions and suggestions relating to rule enforcement are to be submitted to support and are not to be discussed within the forums.   3. MISCELLANEOUS   3.1 Language   The official language of this forum is English. Use of other languages may be allowed in special forum sections only. Users are to be considerate to those who have difficulties with English.   3.2 Hard-to-Read Posts   Posts that disrupt the message boards for other users, intentional or not, are prohibited. This category includes, but is not limited, to: Conducting conversations in foreign languages, outside designated forums Posting excessively in capital letters, Excessive whitespace or line breaks, leet speak, or other hard-to-read writing styles Using misleading topic titles, excessive punctuation, and/or non-standard symbols   While posting on these forums users are to be reasonable with font size and color. Stick to default font size and try to avoid use of text colors different from black. The administration reserves the right to modify inappropriate posts and give warnings to their authors.   3.3 Links and Images   Whenever linking to a website or image or posting an image, be sure to check that they don't violate any of the rules above. Sites or images that display illegal content, pornography, nudity, gratuitous violence, Nazi symbols such as swastikas, obscenities and any other content that goes against the standards of this community will be moderated. In addition to the above we also request you not post ASCII art (pictures created by using letters and symbols on a keyboard) they are usually quite large and can be misinterpreted based on display issues.   The size of files and images referred may not exceed 100 kilobytes (kb).   3.4 Names (Players and Clans), Avatars, Images/Video, Signatures & Clan logos   Certain content for names, avatars, images/video, signatures & clan logos, have no place on the World of Warships forums or within the World of Warships game, due to their extremely offensive, annoying or inappropriate nature. The following list is only a summary, but it gives some idea of names, images, signatures, avatars and clan logos which are not accepted with the World of Warships environment: Names, Avatars, Images/Video, Signatures & Clan logos .... that contains insults, personal attacks, abuse or harassment. that contains unprintable words or abbreviations, or which are unattractive and/or unreadable. which have (in any way) racist or nationalistic implications which may create offense to a certain nation, ethnic, religious or racial group. that contain an allusion of racial or national supremacy, as well as discriminative propaganda on any level. which are derogatory discriminative or offensive to people with a disability or illness. which have an association with sexuality, pedophilia, sexual abuse; or have an offensive connection to the human body or bodily functions. which contain excessive gore or violence, or are obscene/vulgar. which make reference to addictive or illegal substances or their use, or any other illegal activities. which either in whole or partly contain copyrighted or registered trade mark elements. that contain reference to current mainstream religions that may create offense, i.e. names such as God, Jesus, Allah, etc. that contain Logotypes, symbols, emblems or figures connected in one way or another with organizations, that violate or were violating existing laws and rules (For example, using different variations of Nazi symbolic, abridgments and signs as well as credentials, names and surnames of Nazi leaders) which may provoke strong negative reaction/association or promote national/ethnic/religious hatred. that are connected with negative historical or political personalities, first of all those who are judged by international courts for crimes against humanity, those that generally arouse feelings of suffering or disgust in the majority of people, as well as members of currently existing terrorist organizations; that negatively portraits the projects moderators, staff or administration; which in any other manner violates the End User License Agreement or local laws;   ....... either implicitly or explicitly are prohibited (This also contains links to websites containing the above). If names (player or clan), avatars, signatures, images/video, clan logos within the forums or within the game violate these rules the offending account may be changed and/or the accounts may be sanctioned or suspended. Moreover, the administration reserves the right to delete, update or modify any names (player or clans) and avatars, images or clan images which are considered inappropriate on the forums or within the game environment.   Additionally, excessively long forum signatures are not permitted. Signatures may not exceed two lines. If these limitations are exceeded, then the disruptive elements will be removed without explanation and the offending account may receive sanctions. Users are allowed to use images in your signatures, but their size must not exceed 468px×120px (length x width). The signatures can contain animation, but it should not be annoying.   4. FORUM ADMINISTRATION and MODERATION   4.1 Administrators   Administrators are Wargaming.net employees. The administrator status is confirmed by “Group: Administrators, Game Master, Developer, Support” inscription under the user nickname.   4.2 Moderators   Moderators are community contributors (players) Recruited from forum members, the moderators uphold the forum rules, with the Game Master team. The moderator status is confirmed by “Group: "Forum Moderators” inscription under the user nickname.   4.3 Administrators and Moderators’ powers   Administrators and moderators have the right to warn or suspend forum members in the case of forum rules violation. Any measures taken by moderators can be appealed to support via the website (http://asia.wargaming.net/support/), in accordance with the established procedure. Measures taken by administration are not subject to appeal. In some cases, which go beyond the forum rules, administrators can warn or suspend a particular forum member, even if their actions formally don’t fall under the current prohibitions and restrictions.   4.4 Warnings   The warnings and official notifications are set off in red, this font color is reserved by Moderators and Administrators. Any other moderators message is considered to be an ordinary one and is equal to a message of any forum member. Once one of a posts has been moderated, users are not permitted to edit the moderators notes placed within the post. Similarly, the impersonation of the administration or moderating team in any way, is not permitted.   4.5 Restrictions on Administrators and Moderators   Administrators Game Masters Developers and support staff being official employees are representatives of Wargaming.net, they are avid World of Warships players, but do not normally partake in clans and clan wars with the exception of special events.   Moderators however are not official employees of Wargaming.net and recruited from the player base. They have no special abilities in game to give them any advantage, other than the ability to issue chat mutes within the game. Moderators participation within clans or clan-wars is not limited. If users believe a moderator to be biased in any way or acted inappropriately, they are to send the details to support via the website (http://asia.wargaming.net/support/) and it shall be investigated by management.   5. CONTACT LIST   1. Technical Support service (both forum and in-game):   Web form: (http://asia.wargaming.net/support/) for Billing and Payment issues - Billing and Payment department for technical problems and bugs - Technical issues department for forum and game name and password changes - Account Administration department for disputes on game or forum bans, or disputes against moderators or their decisions and actions. for inquiries that don’t suit the above, including reporting hacks, cheats, Trojans, bots etc - In-game general questions department   2. Appeals   The report should contain the complete description of the dispute with the corresponding screenshots attached if needed. Any other ways of appeal are not subject to consideration. Any appeals lodged within the forums are regarded as off-topic.   IMPORTANT   The administration reserves the right to update and modify these rules as the needs of the community dictate to ensure the smooth operation of this community.   Repeatedly violating any area of these Rules or EULA, including the areas detailed above, will often result in permanent suspension from the game and/or forums. This policy is not language-restrictive. Language that falls under this policy will always be subject to the repercussions listed, whether it is inappropriate in English or any other language.   The bottom line is that we want World of Warships to be a fun and safe environment for all players. World of Warships is a Massive Multiplayer Online Game with a mixture of genres, and the key words are “Massively Multiplayer.” While playing this game and posting on its forums, you will encounter thousands of other players who share different experiences and come from vastly different backgrounds. While certain language and images may not be offensive to you, consider the fact that that same language and images may have a completely different effect on someone else. We’ve done everything we can to make this a great game but now it’s up to you, the players, to breathe life into the world.  
Sub_Octavian

ASIA Q&A, round 2 answers

  • You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.

4 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

 Can Wargaming Gave us a new Filter Option?

 

Right now you have a filter to Show 

~ Elite Ship

~ Premium Ship

~ First Win Bonus

~ With Commander

~ Without Commander

~ Scenario Only

 

since the very first i always hope you will add 1 more fillter

~ Non Elite Ship

this way i can track down all my ship that i need to grind and combining with the First win, i can tell what ship i should play next.

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.  

 Just a few Questions:

 

1.How is the CV balancing going on ? Any chance of help/buff/reform/rework to USN CVs prior to USS Enterprise is released?

 

2.Plus any chance of MM fix?I was playing Ranger which is already a horrible ship but the I got in a battle against Saipan, and Langley. On my side was my 111 Ranger which already is unable to fight a Saipan 1 on 1, enter a Langley on both sides, the enemy Langley at least has AS thanks to Saipan but not the Langley on my team, I couldn't get air supremacy from a numerically and Qualitatively better enemy.

 

3.Do you guys plane on giving USN tec tree CVs a load out change or a reduction in rearm time ( IJN get 60 seconds rearm if they lose a squad of 4, add 2 more planes for USN and it becomes 2 minutes)? In it's current state they are all horrible against anything against except each other and 111 doesn't really work too well at tier 7 (cause Saipan) onwards.

 

4.Also why does a line of CV which put "Air supremacy first" have no fighters in damage emphasis loadout but a line that does not prioritise Air supremacy but rather the opposite have 2 Fighter squads in their "Damage emphasis" load out? This looks rather messed up it should be the opposite.

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. There is information say: "Limit clan member up to 100 in this spring" and now is May (Spring in Asia starts from March to May), Clan update will be available in this month ?
2. Training room will appear on live server ?

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 Sub, I've been looking forward to meeting you again!

 

1) about Saipan...

  a) FTs can disengage with no less of a plane. It's definitely broken and overpowered. Do you have any plans on it?(I hope it to be removed ALT disengage from Saipan...)

  b) Torp Bombers and Dive Bombers are faster than Es***(censored) ones, Why?(Hiryu and Ranger FTs cannot catch them)

 

2)Fletcher has 13mm deck (that can be overmatched by 8in AP), while USS Black has 19mm (can ricochet 8in), and USS Kidd also gets 19mm deck! (I saw them with tech tree mod in Official mod pack)

   They are all Fletcher class, but Why should be the original Fletcher exceptional?

 

Thanks.

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.

 

Edited by Sub_Octavian
UPD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If someone finds a way to make a crosshair mod that shows penetration and AoF for a given distance, would such a mod be deemed illegal?

 We'd be fine with it.

If I'm not mistaken there is only one vision checkpoint on a ship (in which checks are made between ships to determine whether it is within detection range and has unobstructed LoS), and it's located at the top of the ship? Can you explain its exact location i.e. is it at the highest point of the ship's geometry or is it at an arbitrary point on the superstructure/mast such as where the highest observer would normally be on a real ship

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:

G3skPiT.jpg 

Any chance of explaining how torpedo splash damage is calculated and distributed in more detail?

E.g.

For shells we know that 1/6 shell damage goes to the section it hit + 1/6 damage goes to the hull/body or whatever it is the devs refer to it internally (both subject to saturation).

Full damage only for citadel pen.

1/10 damage for AP overpen.

 

So is torp damage = 1/2* to section it hit, 1/2* to hull/body and x amount to neighbouring section? And if so, how is x calculated?

*Lets assume the torp damage values are using the ones shown in port instead of using datamined values for the sake of avoiding topics that you can't comment on.

If you can't give specifics, can you give an approximate on the proportion of damage that goes to the neighbouring section?

 

Also, how close to the neighbouring section would the torpedo have to hit in order to inflict splash damage?

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!

What was the reasoning behind the current in game command system (F keys)?  Yes it is simple to use, but F9,10,11 are absolutely useless tactically. Is there any reason why the game cant use a radial menus such as the custom WOT radial menu? 

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! :izmena:

Is it true that Dev teams are listening opinion from Ru and NA region more carefully than Asian region because of the market share and population difference?

No, it's not true.

One of my friend saw that the ship, with Juliet Charlie (-100% Detonation chance), was detonated. Is it possibly happening?

If it's happening, it is a bug, and should be reported. I never saw that, and not aware of such bug.

 

 

 

 


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Hello sub,

sorry if someone  has already asked this  but is there a chance that WG can introduce a experienced MM, so that the better players can have battles with each other, instead of having each team full of lemmings & potatos?

 

like when we play ranked, we actually have good, challenging games, the players understand how to play together, &  not go lemming train  as much...

 

have another mode, like advanced battles, so like only players that have 2500 battles or more can join, tjst way we will know that they should have some idea how  to  play.

 

PS.....  Thank you for finally allowing Albany to become available. I have been wanting that ship for 2 years.

I absolutely love the older predreadnought ships, I hope one day more will come in.

I love how everyone is getting into & having fun with all the Mikasas....

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.

 

1) Why are the answers to your questions so inconsistent?

 

For example, in this thread, 

  • Will IJN DD ever get back its old HE alpha? This is because dev buffed the RU HE on DD from 1600 back to its 1900 original alpha.

you replied with "2. No. This change is not needed from balancing point of view.", yet in your other answers to this question, 

Hey Sub_Octavian, i would like to ask about the logic behind the RuDD HE buff to improve their damage done to other nations DDs (when they damage done to other classes was perfectly fine) and then later on you nerf the rudder shift of the Khab because it was far too strong against DDs at close range?

Why not just roll back the HE buff? 

"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. 

I'm a big fan of warships in general and have been thoroughly enjoying this game so far. However, there is one issue that's always befuddled me and that is the staggered release of certain premium ship bundles, like the recent Hood releases. If it's appropriate, I'd like to know the rationale behind such staggered releases and why players do not get the option of purchasing the ship as is without the additional doodads like flags, premium account and whatnot during the moment of release. Frankly, I was looking forward to the Hood but found the initial bundle too pricey because I simply had enough flags and premium time and did not need any more. In fact, I am quite puzzled as to why a certain package is called the "I Want It Now" bundle despite said bundle ONLY being available on in June. 
 
Already, I know of friends and acquaintences who feel this practice is exploiting those who do not wish to wait and have held off from buying the ship entirely simply because they do not agree with what they feel are questionable practices. While I understand that WG is ultimately running a business, would turning off such fans not run counter to WG's overall goal of keeping a solid and stable userbase?
 
I understand such packaged bundles exist because they can be value for money to some, but for those that already have loads of flags, premium time etc. and do not wish to buy the additional items, why are they being "punished" and forced to wait for a cheaper package? 

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.

 

Campaign and reward

1./ Collections is a good idea and quite good rewards, Do U gonna release historical camos through campaigns/collections?

2./ Do the old Campaigns return again(Hunt for Graf Spee, Christmas convoy)?

3./ Bismarck Campaigns quite fair for all players, quanity of tasks and deadline to complete. Any chance campaigns (not daily missions) execute for Scenario mode up coming?

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:)

 

 


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Helloes again! After a short business trip and holidays, I'm proceeding with your questions :izmena:

 

Greetings Sub_Octavian. First, thanks for the answers to the previous Q&A session. The Asian Wows community has long awaited chances to communicate with WG-developers 

 

I've a few questions

1. Torpedos Armament Upgrades on German Cruisers

Starting from the Tier V Konigsberg, all German Cruisers bear the same G7E torpedo and there were no Torpedo upgrades toward the very end of the line. Seeing that the Tier X Zaou may mount the proposed/experimental (or as some would say, fictional) F3 Torpedo that is available on the Tier X Shimakaze, would it make sense if the Tier IX Roon or Tier X Hindenburg could access the G7 Wolfsbarch or G7 Steinwal as an Torpedo upgrade, albeit requiring extra xp?

 

2. Possibility of 360-degree Turrets on Hindenburg

While viewing the model of various ships in the port, I've noticed that there seems to exist enough space between the turret and the Bridge of the Hindenburg (Tier X) to turn 360 degrees. Would the devs consider giving this ability to the ship? 

Pic related

pNl22C9.jpg

3. The Third Turret of La Galissoniere 

Is it entirely impossible of the third turret of the La Galissoniere to turn all 360-degree? It seems that the turret can turn above that box on the deck with enough elevation. 

 

4. La Galissoniere's missing catapult

Historically, there exists a catapult launcher on the third turret of the La Galissonniere-class Cruiser and that the Cruiser historically carried a GL-832 HY catapult fighter. However, neither the catapult nor the plane was present in the game. While I understand that the development team may exclude float planes on the La Galissonniere out of game design & balance decisions, it's very disappointing that the ship has missing components. Would Wargaming consider adding the catapult back onto the ship?

La_Galissonniere_06.jpg

 

5. Chat Censorship in the Asia Client

Regarding the Asia Client.

s7daotU.jpg

Why is the Chat function heavily censored on the World of Warships Asia Client? I've seen footage from NA and EU where "offensive words" are not blocked. Why does the Asia Client get this special treatment? Also, in World of Tanks, you get this option in the settings where you can opt-in or out the word filter, will the devs consider adding this option to World of Warships as well?

 
6. Language display in the WoWs Asia Client
4E4hRzo.png?1

Also about the chat service on the Asia server. The Asia server is famous (or infamous) for its multilingual nature where there are multiple languages popping up in the chat. However, these oriental characters cannot fully render correctly and would show up as [][][][][][][] boxes instead. For example, English client cannot render any of the Asian Characters with the exception of Thai, the Chinese client can display Japanese but not Korean or ThaiJapanese client can display Korean but not simplified Chinese, etc. This create a problem where a player who speak Japanese cannot see the Japanese characters if he uses the English client; or other combination of the listed languages .

Hence, the sixth question:Can the Asia Localisation be optimized such that all characters can be displayed in every version of the WoWs Asia Client? or at the very least, all the languages officially supported by WoWs Asia?

 

7. CV changes and population

One of the highlighted objectives of Wows in 2017 is the reworked CV control. Three patches ago, the game saw a new mouse clicking control added and removed manual drops for the low tier CVs. Has all the planed changes regarding CVs been implemented, or are there still changes yet to come,; and has the CV population changed as anticipated by the devs?

 

8. Skill oriented AA

Are there plans to make Anti-Air more skill-dependent of the player's input instead of "Ctrl-Clicking the enemy plons and press T", or does Wargaming consider this is good enough.

 

 

In addition:

Spoiler  

 "Hi, Sorry my English is not good. I want ask AA on ijn yamato turret 2 and 3 lost ?"

 

Once again, thanks for coming to Asia.

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.

My question is whether we will get the new MM changes that WoT received. Currently in WoWs if you play a Tier 8 ship you will end up mostly in T10 games. And you almost always will be the minority tier. This is very frustrating to play and just ruins the motivation for most people when they get into a T10 game as a T8.

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 Sub, thanks for another Q&A!

1. Is there any new game mode in works? Is Bastion will be back? I remembered there are coop mode which got 7 vs 14, are they canceled? Because I forgot. Looks like I am late to party, didnt knew about the Technical Test.

2. Can we just got 1 vs 1 CV game? Because T5 CV could meet T6 CV, and T6s could use alt-action. Its worrying.

3. Will there be more ships that can be obtain with Free EXP? I really liked the idea, I hope we can get it for lower and mid tier. Maybe?

4. Good job on the new campaign, I hope we can get Pacific-based campaign next? Or Mediterranean

 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:)

 Hello Sub_Octavian
 
1) What do you think about the ridiculously high performing Kutuzov?
 
2) Why the T6 French cruiser have a 12s reload? When there's ship like Budyonny which has a similiar armament(better actually) with better range, and ballistics, but only has around 8s reload time. Is it to make De Grasse "unique"?
 
3) USN CV doesnt have the versatility of IJN CV and Saipan. When will that change?
 
4) When will you cut down Kongo's and Fuso's range to a more logical 16-17km? Their insane range teaches average player to camp at spawn. which isn't good for everyone.
 
5) Buff stock configuration for CVs? Especially on USN CV. Their stock hangar capacity is pretty painful.
 
6) There are a lot of tech tree ship that needs help right now. Can you pause the premium ship buffs and help them?

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!

Will there be more plans to buff the IJN DDs turret traverse? Currently when you meet any enemy DD at your minimum detection range, basically 9 times out of 10 you will lose the trade, while trying to brawl due to the really slow turret traverse. Will there be any buffs towards this?

No. Slow turret speed is one of the negative traits of IJN DDs, and it won't change. 

 Hey mate, good to see you again, just want to ask -

~ Will we be able to see the "marker" settings in WoWS just like in WoT so that we can see the warships name, tier, modal, (HP left/ HP total), etc, Without pressing the Alt button just to see it and same goes to the minimap if we want to see the ships' name in the minimap?

~ So, in what patch do you think the option to switch between the new and old audio soundtrack system will arrive? I mean it's not that hard to do it right? Why the long time? I'm both impatient and excited just to hear the news.

Thx! :medal:

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 Sub, I had some questions regarding the matchmaking system,
 
Currently MM logic is to put the same number of equal tier ships on both team, which is fine and all, but would it be better if it take into account ship capabilities aswell?
Me and a lot other folks have had discrepancies of ships capabilities of the same tier between the two teams. Sometimes we have 3 radar cruisers vs none at all, not good for the DDs on the other side which resulted in a curbstomp match nobody wants. Another example is the discrepancies between IJN DDs vs all DDs from other nation in terms of practical combat effectiveness.  A lot of times I saw IJN DDs losing most of its HP or straight up dead early on the match due to them having to fight DDs from other nation that have the same superior concealment (particularly USN & KM ones) but way higher firepower. How can this be balanced by their torpedoes capabilities when they have to do a gunfight 90% of the times?
 
But since each nation have a "gimmick" already, I'd suggest implementing nation balanced MM logic, so its gonna be USN/IJN vs USN/IJN (i.e Fletcher/Yugumo vs Fletcher/Yugumo instead of Fletcher/Fletcher vs Yugumo/Yugumo). I'm pretty sure this small change would make the match more equal between both teams without taking away variety.

Hi.

So I have a question from Eurobeat. I'll be damned! :ohmy:

 

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 Sub_Octavian
 
Questions on cv balancing:
1. when will the manual aa skill(4-6) change?
Abusing 60% drop rate at the first contact + 100% drop rate after 2.5seconds is problematic, especially when it is an invisible target.
And this only happens in asia server, not happening in other region EVEN competitive included.(recently only one team on KoTs hosted by eu used akizuki, while majority of the teams in Grand Japan Cup 2nd used akizuki)
 
2. Exit strafing on saipan too powerful and shown a 60% win rate(short term) in asia, maybe u should increase the ammo requirement for strafing on saipan?
 
3. Is the aa specific ships are balanced enough considering what they can do on other ships except cv? ( ahhh but yes not every one got a 19skill captain and aa spec) (e.g. texas cleverland gnei akizuki neptune minotaur/DM)
 
4. The CV UI keep bugging in recent patches, when will it be fixed?
 
5. How is the feeling about removing t4-5 cv manual control?
 
6. i know even if i mention about MM you won't touch on it, so is there anything that can leak about cv rework?
 
7. last one on cv, how many developers are playing cv class constantly(seriously)?
 
General:
1. When will the BB nerf come in? it seems secondaries are more reliable than torpedos, or devs think it is ok :D
 
2. Will north be removed/reworked after more maps coming out?
 
3. Will you think of disable premiums for rank?(payfast)
 
4. Smoke is too strong if played properly, any thoughts on lower the smoke usage(make smoke less powerful)?
 
Sorry for long questions, hope you can reply me. 
 
Good job for the Q&As.

 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!

 Can we possibly have moddable commander voices in the future? Like custom music type not just using an actual mod. I want my Russian commander to say ANUUU CHEEKI BREEKI IV DAMKE

also, I hope no one asked this already but... NEW FIRING ANIMATION WHEN :izmena: 

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! 

 

Hi sub!

 

I have some several questions about game mechanisms and others.

 

1) Is there any specific equation between turning radius and ship velocity?

 

First I though that two variable has linear relationships, but when I did experiment about it with Ryujo, the result wasn't same as I thought and even got larger turning radius at 1/4 speed.

I just want to know tendency about turning radius.

 

2) Ribbon bug(maybe?) still exist?

Few weeks ago I shoot yamato with Iowa AP and did 2 non-penetrating hits and 3 ricochet hits but did 1 penetrating damage.

Is this Ribbon bug? or unknown AP mechanisms?

 

3) I played 0.6.6 Technical Test today and then I saw...

 

8Ww7BSF.jpg

 

Montana deck armor 29mm?

 

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:honoring:


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.