Jump to content


Feedback and Thoughts Directly to Pigeon_of_War

feedback ideas wows

  • Please log in to reply
1981 replies to this topic

Pendragon1951 #21 Posted 03 June 2016 - 04:11 AM

    Master Chief Petty Officer

  • Members

  • 373
  • Member since:
    06-29-2013
Pigeon welcome and first off let me say thank you for taking this much interest in the community. I came over to World of Warships in Feb of this year from Warframe, which is also a game that the Devs take a very high interest in their community and it has benefited the game immensely. As far as the game itself I don't have much that I myself think needs to be done other than as far as the zoom control, I like something War Thunder has which is clicking the right mouse button to zoom to target then clicking again for normal view, instead of having to scroll my middle mouse button. Now that I think of it there is one thing I would like you to look into and it's kinda the elephant in the middle of the room. It has to do with TKer's and how you handle them. First off and not to go and on but I believe WG is very naive about who TKer's are these are people who don't care about rules and about the consequences of their actions. No matter what WG does they won't care and will continue to do it. As I stated before WG has so gone over the hill that I read a forum post where an entire team was pink, now to me that would set off all kinds of alarms that something is quite wrong with this system. The simple solution would be to eliminate friendly fire but retain the collision physics this would not impact the game for those who play legitimately and for those that don't you have removed their biggest weapon. To be honest I would rather someone troll me by firing at me just to annoy rather than some idiot killing me at the start of a game.  Once again thank you for taking the time, fair winds and full sails.

Lord_Zath #22 Posted 03 June 2016 - 05:19 AM

    Commander

  • WoWS Wiki Editor
  • Beta Testers
    Supertester

  • 3,100
  • Member since:
    12-02-2013

View PostPigeon_of_War, on 02 June 2016 - 09:38 PM, said:

 

Though I thought the rues and clarifications for Season 4 were pretty sound, [please direct most of your questions on it in that thread, don't want to create multi-thread confusion or start stepping on things CorgiPower has said. 

As per running multi-events over the course of a month, typically this is to give a couple of different levels of players things to strive for. For instance, not every player plays Ranked battles (many players don't like the intense competition) but every player CAN play the Arpeggio missions in Random battles.

 

I hope this makes sense?

 

The rules for season 4 are somewhat confusing regarding the reward ship and how all of that works.  Just check out that thread - TONS of posts with people unsure about exactly how things are going to work.  There has been a history of miscommunication regarding rewards for Ranked Battles, so I was hoping to hear some definitive answers on that.  I'm not asking you to respond to those questions here - multiple threads do indeed cause confusion.  I was hoping you'd be able to look over that thread and weigh in, though I agree I don't want you and Niko tripping over each other.  I apologize if I was trying to get you to say something that he'd disagree with - I am not quite sure where you fit in with the hierarchy.  Perhaps a flow chart modeled after the Byzantine Empire (anyone get the reference? :)) could help!

 

As for concurrent events, the problem I have is that there were months of little to nothing, so to suddenly have two major events seems like a wasted opportunity.  I would imagine that if each of these events ran on their own, perhaps server population would have a more prolonged increase.  And while I agree that there are some who won't want to play ranked, have you considered a co-op event instead?  As someone who likes completing missions, it's just very difficult and frustrating to know that as soon as I come home, I need to boot up the computer and get the Arpeggio missions done right away.  Next, I have one week or so to complete Ranked.  I know it can be done, but at a significant personal life sacrifice...  I love the game, love the people, and really want to do as much as I can, but...  it will cause some serious burnout!

 

Either way, I appreciate the response thank you!!!!


Edited by Lord_Zath, 03 June 2016 - 05:20 AM.


Selek_7101 #23 Posted 03 June 2016 - 05:59 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Members

  • 403
  • Member since:
    07-09-2015
Please, please, please add the Russian cruiser Askold!

WanderingGhost #24 Posted 03 June 2016 - 06:13 AM

    Lieutenant Junior Grade

  • Alpha Tester

  • 1,530
  • Member since:
    01-27-2014

Aside from the suggestions linked in my sig(kinda relevant to my main one at the moment) - you guys need to simplify carriers for other players. Don't get me wrong, my personal belief is that Carriers need an all out rebalance, and likely AA as well because the current system just does not work. Some players complain of planes getting through on ships I routinely see, and use, to shred incoming aircraft. Unless the other player refuses or does not know how to use strafe, you have to use it to win. Manual torpedo drops wreak havoc because even a half decent user will hit with it. And yeah, DB's with their current HE limitation are meh, and are hurt most by the most recent buff to AA. Right now the things killing the CV population, which hurts any ship based around AA as it's thing, are 

 

-learning curve partially created by strafing

-AA balance

-"National Flavour"/National Balance

-Tier balance

 

Trying to make CV play more "engaging" was the wrong idea. Just being more RTS like was the way to go honestly. But here, I think because too many will complain, again, because they don't want to just click, we need a compromise. Keep the strafing but change it to purely a debuff on grouped attack squadrons. The current strafing mechanic is broken, particularly in USN's favor. And it makes it a pain for anyone just starting out when facing anyone that's had practice with it since it was introduced way back when. So you also now throw in having to micro manage your fighters to dodge and use it on the enemy fighters, which really, should not have to be a CV players main focus. It should be attack planes and using it's attack planes to take out ships. Sure if fighters engage it's boring, but you get something you can use strategically against groups and just worry about how to break up that group so they have less accuracy while not getting your aircraft engaged by enemy fighters. As it stands, 1 squadron with 1 alt press wiping out 6 squadrons is a joke. You take this out it goes a long way towards balancing AND makes it so that new players are on a more level field using CV's vs experienced players than it currently is.

 

You have some crying not enough AA, others crying too much. Me, I see too much AA power even when not on the receiving end. And it's doubly bad when your CV is 2 tiers lower. I've seen 1 tier difference result in 75% of planes sent against a lone BB lost on the way in and out. And that was BEFORE the last buff. And unlike a BB or cruiser that has guns that fire and have armour so that you typically only lose 1, maybe 2 guns if the guy gets a lucky couple shots or RNG hates you, but your still in the fight. CV's are routinely rendered near useless through attrition. They are technically speaking, the only class with a finite ammo supply and it leaves them at a massive disadvantage. If what I read is true that the system works as basically X% chance per second to down a plane, that system needs to be scrapped. It needs to be simplified to guns average x damage, plane group has y combined hp, every x hp 1 plane is shot down. That way maybe it's a little more uniform in that 1 ships AA can inflict damage and losses, regardless of tier, but not wipe out several squadrons on it's own. It's one thing to lose 16 of 20 planes attacking a couple of ships or more grouped up, it's another to take it against a lone target, especially when thats basically me losing 1/3 of the attack planes I have in reserves.

 

The "National Flavour" of USN and IJN as it's balanced as is does not work. USN lacks viable attack options till late tiers, and even then a slight question mark. IJN lacks the ability to control the air at all, though apparently rectified by high tiers (or by being two tiers higher than the the USN fighters) and with current AA and the fact any captain with, sorry to phrase it this way, no offense to anyone, half a brain, is going to focus on TB's which hurt's IJN in that it's DB's are at best, anemic. The link in my sig that says about reworking aircraft and all has more details on what I think should change in that regard, it's a long wall because I even suggested what the groups shouls look like in regards to how many fighters/TB's/DB's per tier. But the short version - fighters should be able to engage 1v1 in he open ocean with no difference in captain skills, upgrades, etc, and both sides have a 50/50 shot or close to it at winning. And all aircraft setups should have at least one fighter so as to defend the attack aircraft and fleet, not be all or nothing. Again, sig link is more in-depth. 

 

And tier balance, don't get me wrong, it is way better than the beta weekend days. but it is still a massive issue in regards to CV vs CV (and CV vs AA but I covered that already). It's bad enough when your the lone tier 6 in a tier 8 battle other than the other tier 6 enemy CV, it's 10x worse when you have to also face a +2 CV. It's rare, but it happens. And it never ends well for the tier 6. Save the fact that my fighters on tier 6 USN with all the upgrades, were nearly a match for the Tier 8 IJN ships fighters with whatever he had, no strafing or anything, which I think speaks more to the fact IJN fighters have serious issues though he still won, but usually only one plane was left. Otherwise, usually an easy stomp of enemy planes. Theres still just too much of a power difference between CV tiers for inter tier play to truly be viable, discounting all other issues with CV's. I didn't mind losing to the t8's fighters, that was expected, but because it was close. Had it been Lexington's fighters, I'd have been utterly stomped.

 

Anyway, thats all for now. Hopefully your presence here will benefit all, at the very least we'll feel like our suggestions are actually being looked at.



Atomicfireball #25 Posted 03 June 2016 - 06:54 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Testers

  • 695
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

I would like to see some clarification on the metrics and information WG uses to determine how balanced things are. Remove some of the speculation etc.

 

A new German line would be lovely with more German premiums.

 

Calibrated scopes or the ability to adjust ours. 

 

Except the German line bit, I am not sure WG can do or will do the rest. 


Watching two Battleships duel it out is like watching two old people fornicate. It's slow, sloppy and not very satisfying. 

Watching two Destroyers duel it out is like watching two orphans fighting over the last scraps on the floor. 


TurboT #26 Posted 03 June 2016 - 06:56 AM

    Lieutenant Commander

  • Beta Testers

  • 2,698
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View PostPigeon_of_War, on 03 June 2016 - 03:38 AM, said:

 

Though I thought the rues and clarifications for Season 4 were pretty sound, [please direct most of your questions on it in that thread, don't want to create multi-thread confusion or start stepping on things CorgiPower has said. 

As per running multi-events over the course of a month, typically this is to give a couple of different levels of players things to strive for. For instance, not every player plays Ranked battles (many players don't like the intense competition) but every player CAN play the Arpeggio missions in Random battles.

 

I hope this makes sense?

NO.


It makes no sense.

 

It makes no sense to run no major event for months and then run two at the same time and make people choose.  

 

It makes MORE sense, to give every player in the game an opportunity to try ranked, and when that Season is over, alleviate the hangover by running the ARP Missions and giving them something else to do in Randoms than just aimlessly grinding XP.  Countless members have come to these forums claiming 'grind burnout' based on limited ship lines and repetitiveness of the grind itself.  Yet, here you have a chance to alleviate that by two separate events that a lot of people look forward to, and you run them at the same time, instead of separating them.

 

NO, it makes NO SENSE.

 

Sorry for sounding harsh with you on your first week here, but I'm fairly certain I'm speaking for the BULK of the forum going population that play Ranked and wish to do the Arpeggio missions, because most of us here care to take part in both.

 

 


http://www.twitch.tv/turbotboss

Computer Specs:

Spoiler

 


StephenHopkins #27 Posted 03 June 2016 - 11:10 AM

    Master Chief Petty Officer

  • Beta Testers

  • 226
  • Member since:
    07-23-2014
Welcome and I'm glad you're here and doing this.

Yukimiku #28 Posted 03 June 2016 - 12:29 PM

    Seaman

  • Members

  • 42
  • Member since:
    01-20-2013
need japanese premium carriers. i prefer Unryu-class aircraft carrier

LuckyOtter #29 Posted 03 June 2016 - 01:12 PM

    Ensign

  • Members

  • 1,117
  • Member since:
    07-12-2015

Pigeon, welcome to warships forum, glad to have you here.

Also, thank you for your service. o7   And your involvement in Fisher House, as well, great cause.

 

An item of discussion of late has been the "citadel hit sound"  which is generic term for several high-pitched, or grating sounds that were incorporated a few patches ago.  There have been some improvement to the volume levels lately, but there are still a large number of players that would like to see this removed altogether.

It's understood that the  "Immersion effect" is the reasoning for the addition, but many players, particularly ones that may have a hearing hyper-sensitivity to the pitch, the sound is so disagreeable that it effect's their decision to play this game.

 

My suggestion is a control slider that allows the player to set the volume of these particular sounds to their liking. Similar to the one that controls gun volume.

 

I made this suggestion to Boyarsky, and NikoPower in another thread... Here it is.

http://forum.worldof...52#entry1992452

 

Again, thanks for being here!


                                     Gray Wolf Recruitment Officer                                 

USN: T4 Langley; T6 Farragut and Cleveland; T7 Ranger; T8 Lexington, North Carolina, New Orleans; T9 Fletcher and Iowa --- IJN: T4 Isokaze; T5 Zuiho; T6 Fuso, Fubuki and Ryuho; T7 Myoko and Shiratsuya; T8 Shokaku  T9 Yugumo and Ibuki; --- RU: T6 Budyonny; T7 Minsk; T8 Chapeyev and Kiev; T9 Udaloi; T10 Moskva --- KM:  T5 Konigsberg, T7 Leberecht Maass, T8 Adm. Hipper and Bismark T9 Roon; T10 Gorber Kurfurst; --- UK: T6 Leander, T8 Edinburgh; --- FR: T3 Friant T4 Duguay-Trouin T5 Emile Bertin >> PREMIUMS: T3 Campbeltown; T4 Imperitor Nickolai I and Ishizuchi; T5 Texas, Kamikaze R, Gremyashchy, Murmansk; T6 Warspite and Molotov; T7 Atlanta, Belfast,  Saipan, Scharnhorst, Blyskawica, Sims; T8 Mikhail Kutuzov, Lo Yang, Atago, and Tirpitz!

 


SeaRaptor00 #30 Posted 03 June 2016 - 02:01 PM

    Lieutenant

  • WoWS Wiki Editor
  • Members

  • 1,698
  • Member since:
    07-06-2015

View PostLord_Zath, on 02 June 2016 - 11:19 PM, said:

Perhaps a flow chart modeled after the Byzantine Empire (anyone get the reference? :)) could help!

 

 


Latest World of Warships Wiki Updates -- My Talk page -- My YouTube channel

"Wiki editors do the Lord's work." --Pigeon_of_War @ WGNA

 

  

Acolyte of the Church of Hindenburg and Official Scrub of Task Force Apocalypse (Salt Queens)


TacoSallust #31 Posted 03 June 2016 - 02:10 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Testers

  • 559
  • Member since:
    05-31-2015
How am I supposed to take this "Pigeon" seriously when he doesn't have a good avatar?

Kill da wabbit!


Nachoo31 #32 Posted 03 June 2016 - 02:18 PM

    Lieutenant Commander

  • Beta Testers

  • 2,317
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012
My life is over with classes every-week till  the end of October.  Damn urge to get a Masters.. for what?  LOL  so stack them all you want lol

Edited by Nachoo31, 03 June 2016 - 02:18 PM.

Looking for Clan?  TheKriegsmarines [KMS]  

Have you clicked on the picture in my profile?  Enjoy!

http://na.warshipsto...836912/dark.png


Lord_Zath #33 Posted 03 June 2016 - 03:07 PM

    Commander

  • WoWS Wiki Editor
  • Beta Testers
    Supertester

  • 3,100
  • Member since:
    12-02-2013

View PostSeaRaptor00, on 03 June 2016 - 08:01 AM, said:

 

 

 

You win a +1 :)


FOX_Battleship_Kentucky #34 Posted 03 June 2016 - 04:09 PM

    Admiral of the Navy

  • Banned
  • In AlfaTesters

  • 17,140
  • Member since:
    04-02-2015
"Sea Trials" Like the WoT testing range. You will be able to spawn in new ships to test and shoot at, even if you don't have them. It will help new captains to decide what line they want to try and veteran captains to find where the weakest parts of enemy ships are. You can also toggle whether the enemy ships shoot back so you can learn how to angle most effectively. I play Fractured Space and they just put this thing in. It's a great resource.

Grand Emperor of Fox Empire and Fox Fleets and proud member of Waffles Brigade

Proud owner of the Bluegrass Bar and Grill

Join the club. Have a jacket.

Sig by Fuchsy


ENO75 #35 Posted 03 June 2016 - 04:42 PM

    Lieutenant Junior Grade

  • Members

  • 1,223
  • Member since:
    07-07-2014

One thing I've been a bit curious about is that at the beginning of the game names that are parsed can still be viewed by hovering your mouse over them- their ship comes up with their name across the top of the box that describes their ship capabilities... 

 

But at the end of the match the names are parsed and yet hovering your mouse over them / clicking only brings up the ability to report without expanding the name. 

 

It's a very minor thing, but quite often I'll go back and look for a name to either compliment or report and as silly as it sounds I won't recall the name of the person I am looking for. I'd recognize it to see it... but can't tell what it is from the 4 letters or so that we can see. I will look over my own score, then go to the team score to see how I stacked up and by the time I focus on figuring out who I wanted to compliment my mind is blank.

 

I'd just ask that the name be attached to the report / compliment box in the same fashion as it is in the pre-game screen. 

 

I'm quite happy with most things and definitely engaged with the way things are moving forward. 

 



HAGZ1LLA #36 Posted 03 June 2016 - 04:48 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Testers

  • 581
  • Member since:
    12-31-2012
1. Mahan, Fix the numbering on the Torpedo tubes. Make the Center line torps number 3 so they launch last and the sides 1 & 2.

                           If the Devs tell you no(like they did to me during Beta), just say typical. Ill understand.

2. Radar needs to stop working thru Islands. Period this is so broken it's not funny.

3. Just do what every tester in Beta(Even the DD groupies like myself) were saying and make smoke a 0 way mirror. Nobody gets to see thru them period.

4. Lower the amount of RNG in the game, WG should be embracing the better players instead of pandering to the worst players. Beta was a phenomenal time for good players, but currently the RNG is making this game meh....

5. Take Domination mode with 3 caps, and remove the game ending if they go to 0. Remove negative wins and start at 0. For the love of all the players who are tired of crappy teammates/enemies and all the potential XP/damage left.

6. Fix the water lines(2-5meters high) on the t5 Konigsberg & t6 Nurnberg. I was led to this conclussion by Cpt_Kill_jack, if this claim is true then there is no "balance" excuse WG can make now that the Molotov has been put in the game, it's t9 guns(WG sale claim) are more than a good reason to lower them in the water.

7. Get some tier 10 competitive games already. It will give people a reason to get their t10s and then the population of t10 players would be higher.....That way the same tired excuse of "there aren't enough players" would be useless. But i said that over a year ago and here we are.....still....

8. Ranked needs to be tier 8-10 already seriously, and the after party of 10's doesn't count. same reasoning as above, WG"nobody has them", here is an idea give them a GOOD reason to get high tiers.


Ill be back with more salt and ideas later.  *Drops Torpedo* "Ow! F*** my toe!"

USS Barb Sinking Trains from under the waves.

LittleWhiteMouse #37 Posted 03 June 2016 - 04:56 PM

    Captain

  • WoWS Community Contributors
  • Members
    Beta Testers

  • 5,809
  • Member since:
    01-04-2013

My big question is in regards to the reward ship for Season 4.

 

  • Wargaming North America did not issue the Pirate Flag II to players who consecutively reached Rank 1 through Seasons 2 & 3.
  • The EU server (and presumably other servers) did issue Pirate Flag II to players who consecutively reached Rank 1 through Seasons 2 & 3.
  • Pirate Flag II is now a requirement to earn the reward ship for Season 4 / 5.
  • There is no way to earn a Pirate Flag II in Season 4.

 

So, no one on our server can earn the reward ship this season despite the front page saying otherwise.  The descriptive text of the reward system is working under the assumption that we should have been awarded something we were not.  Worse, the reward we need is not available this season.  Even worse than that, the conditions of earning the reward we need in Season 5 isn't properly disclosed.  Do we have to get Rank 1 in Seasons 4 & 5 to be eligible for Pirate Flag II?  Perhaps more importantly, if we manage to get Pirate Flag II in Season 5, will the USS Flint still be available or will the conditions of earning her change again?

 

Wargaming has not had a good track record in regards to reward ships through Ranked Battles.  And I, for one, am getting very, very frustrated.

 

 


Q♥  Most Recent Review: HMS Hood
  


SeaRaptor00 #38 Posted 03 June 2016 - 05:02 PM

    Lieutenant

  • WoWS Wiki Editor
  • Members

  • 1,698
  • Member since:
    07-06-2015

View PostLord_Zath, on 03 June 2016 - 09:07 AM, said:

 

You win a +1 :)

 

My work here is complete.

Latest World of Warships Wiki Updates -- My Talk page -- My YouTube channel

"Wiki editors do the Lord's work." --Pigeon_of_War @ WGNA

 

  

Acolyte of the Church of Hindenburg and Official Scrub of Task Force Apocalypse (Salt Queens)


Pigeon_of_War #39 Posted 03 June 2016 - 06:56 PM

    Assistant Producer

  • Developers

  • 594
  • Member since:
    10-21-2013

Quick reminder in case you think I'm a bit quiet. 

 

I read every comment here and take notes where i can, so please keep it coming. Just bear in mind not all ideas will be implemented or jotted down. 


(Main Avatar created by xtcmax)

(Signature avatar created by Kombat_W0MBAT)

Follow me on Twitter
Find us on Facebook!

 

Lert #40 Posted 03 June 2016 - 07:04 PM

    Admiral

  • Supertester
  • In AlfaTesters
    Beta Testers

  • 11,511
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012
Pigeon, can you comment on the issues addressed in this thread please? It's the same issue that LWM addressed a few posts up.

(Above stats not guaranteed accurate. I'm a supertester and test ships don't always register correctly)

 

Ship hipster: I liked Alabama before it was cool






Also tagged with feedback, ideas, wows

13 user(s) are reading this topic

1 members, 12 guests, 0 anonymous users


    Battleship_Kentucky