All Activity
This stream auto-updates
- Past hour
-
Yeah ok , I've seen enough to know.
Mizzerys_Fate replied to Col_Nasty's topic in General Game Discussion
@Col_Nastyfrom the very beginning I have enjoyed the game and loved it. Open water stealth firing was a big PITA until my Gremmy got AFT...2 days later poof gone.... Carriers doing a 3 flight cross drop during RTS days...got my Bogue to counter them....poof gone. Captain rework to fix shooting planes down issue. CV rework...FDR king of the hill.....European DD's becoming no fly zone.. This game has had lot's of ups and downs. .... I am one of the 0f the loudest critics on cv rework and how subs entered the game. I deal with the inconvenience, but still enjoy most games... BUT This mechanic is absurd. As I try to improve my stats....I see others tanking on purpose. -
where would i submit a ticket about a ship that dont show up
-
this happen a while ago when i was still new to the game i know that now to keep and save up but im trying to get all my old ships back from when i was a noob.
-
Ship REuse in Clan Battles, Can we?
MidnightPhoenix07 replied to MadMaxMav's topic in General Game Discussion
From the 12.4 patch notes: So the answer is no. Until the clan battle finishes, that ship is "locked" just as it would have been previously. -
I have to admit subs make the game more challenging
Vaffu replied to ole_seabee's topic in General Game Discussion
Every ship the "elite" players find too hard to deal with gets banned from KOTS. -
Realistically? Return to the Battle of Salamis.
-
I got Immelmann, Kaga, and another T8 CV from super containers. I have played since 2015 and only got those SC ships in the last few years.
-
To try and get players to spend cash on that battle pass thing. You get a decent amount of coal if you do.
-
Over 600k players lost due to submarines, wows now has less players than when it launched.
that_wot_player replied to Cit_the_bed's topic in General Game Discussion
And the company has given a reason to believe them? Haven’t they been caught in their lies and abused several of the content creators? Yeah, they sound trustworthy… in opposite world. -
If you’re hurting for credits, you need to know you’ll have to have enough to equal what you got for selling it to get it back. Also; even if you don’t play it; NEVER sell a premium; especially one like Enterprise, which isn’t available any more. If you’re hurting for credits, play lower tiers and build up more.
-
Had 10 games in a row today without CV's at TX
Undependable posted a topic in General Game Discussion
God bless you Repeated battle entry. Haven't had this much fun in years. Now if only we could do the same to subs. -
20230530_202345_PASB518-Massachusetts_52_Britain.wowsreplay Don't judge my tactics; I was trying to take as much damage as possible. =) BUT... I did not want not to be able to shoot back... I think WG gave the bots anti-mice rounds. I will say its a good thing there is no microphone recording... LOL
-
While I think you are somewhat aware of how difficult this would be, I dont think you fully realize just how terrible this would play....so here are some issues. 1) In WoWs, ships are roughly 3 times their actual size in relation to displayed distances. 2) It is EXTREMELY difficult for a non radar directed BB to hit another ship that is actively trying to not get hit.....IE salvo chasing. While this maneuver is harder to perform in a BB, it is relatively easy for a DD to do this. By the time the mechanical computer has a firing solution and the guns are trained to that location, the target bearing and range has changed. Conversely, if you are salvo chasing, you are unlikely to get an accurate fire solution...WSAD hack is for living, not for shooting! 3) Historically, it only takes 3-4 penetrating, exploding hits from a BB to incapacitate another BB or significantly reduce the fighting capacity of another BB. 1 15" shell hit on a cruiser will likely end it. 4) It would take a couple of minutes for a BB's main battery to switch from AP to HE shells. 5) LOS and range visibility would be entirely dependent on the height of the primary rangefinder. You'd be surprised at how close you really have to be to see a ships waterline (and therefore obtain an accurate range) from the bridge position....for a destroyer, its roughly 7 miles....I lived on one for a few years. 6) If more than one ship is shooting at a single target, it can be very confusing as to where your shells are landing....there are NO TRACERS!! 7) In a gun duel, speed is life. Ships are more stable at speed than when going slow...faster is better, more stable, more accurate. A ship stopped at sea will bob and heal and will always....ALWAYS... turn sideways to the waves/swells. 8) CV's would rule the waves, dev strikes with every trip....mind you, AA would be more effective lol 9) Fire = BAD....very BAD! Your ship is on fire, smoke everywhere.....you cannot see to shoot....going fast accelerates the fire....30 knots is wind = 35mph or so + whatever natural wind there is. Should you chose to deploy your damage control party to contain the fire, you will lose your AA defense as they are your damage control party during a gun fight. 10) Larger ships do get heals. Flooding can be contained and reduced to the original source in a surprisingly short period of time, provided a shell hasnt knocked out some of your electricity. Counter flooding can level the ship as all ships had reserve buoyancy, bigger ships have more, however it comes at a cost of speed. 11) Main Gun incapacitation. It was not uncommon for a single shell hit to take out 2 adjacent main guns, sometimes for a few minutes, sometimes permanently. 12) While smoke is a great defense, it becomes problematic when there are 24 ships in the battle and every ship has smoke making ability! If the weather is damp, the smoke (dispensed smoke and gunfire smoke) will stay low, slowly blinding everyone. In the game you get an auto detect range, if you are in dense smoke.....the auto detect range is 0 because you cannot see out of smoke. You'll know they are there when you run into them. 13) Ships planes....nope, major fire hazard. Lauched into the ocean if they are on the catapult, or, if you are in a US ship or Yamato/Musashi and fire at a target that is astern of you...you blast them off the catapult lol. If youve read this far, its important to say that often the outcome of a battle is down to blind luck. The first hit could take out a rudder, a prop shaft, main fire control director, knock out 2 turrets with a non penetrating hit, take out the senior command staff. Should you be in a DD, a single hit could end your match if it hit you anywhere a larger ship would have a citadel. Or....it could go through a funnel, through the bow, take out the ships boats etc.
- Today
-
Aw, heII no. I believe that WoWS' CBs should be similar to how I remember WOT's CW's, where destroyed tanks would be locked from use in CW's for a number of hours. This also has the benefit of encouraging players to play different ships beyond the meta.
-
Ship REuse in Clan Battles, Can we?
Alaska_Enjoyer replied to MadMaxMav's topic in General Game Discussion
lmbo, dude just be better at the game -
Bow on Bow tanking will have to go away because ships fight broadside were all the armor is.
-
Poll regarding a new game mode
pepe_trueno replied to Lord_Slayer's topic in General Game Discussion
this game is way to arcade to even try to convert it to a simulator, WG would need to rework olmost everything. so how about a hardcore mode? *aim asistance removed, now we have to elevate the guns to accout for range like old battlefield *ships spoted by others will appear on the minimap but wont be visible without line of sight *radar and hydro will stay but they wont be able to go trhow islands. *heals removed and other than engine / rudder a damaged module can not be repaired. *caps wont give points instead they will have facilitys like repair docks to repair damaged modules or a radar that every minute will display enemy position in the minimap -
How about South Park? We could get a Terrance and Phillip captain duo for Canadian ships...
-
Wargaming!, Reusing a ship in another battle while you still have that same ship in a battle that isn't finished yet, that came in the latest update, does this also happen/work in Clan Battles that start tomorrow. I always have to have an extra ship type in waiting so I can join another Division, is that still necessary or I can still use that same ship? Please answer soon b/c I have to buy another tech tree ship if the answer is no.
-
You can restore a sold premium ship through the vehicle restoration tool on the support page. https://na.wargaming.net/support/en/products/wows/article/27196/ If it doesn’t show up on that list, you’ll probably need to submit a support ticket.
-
I think you sumarize very well the situation and the subsequent practical problem the Devs must face. I can theorize about the conceptual beauty of asymmetry but it's worth a raddish if players are not enjoying the iteractions and they prove to be many. I thoroughly enjoyed reading your reply and hope to come back to this for a more in-depth follow up when there's more time.
-
Poll regarding a new game mode
pepe_trueno replied to Lord_Slayer's topic in General Game Discussion
in a real life scenario the only advantage a destroyer/cruiser had over a BB was cost. guess WG could give them couple respawn to simulate the cost diference but overall this game is way to arcade to even try to pull a "real life" mode. -
i had the cv enterprise and played it i needed the credits to buy my first t10 and now i have found out i could get it back but its not showing up in the list of ships to claim back any ideas its been a while ago and i couldnt get her back before they removed her from the shop
-
Worked for me, many thanx!
-
I think you are playing too loose with the definition of asymmetry similar to what Ahskance was doing. The classes not having all the tools are fantastic for a unique flavor. It gives identity to classes and nations, and facilitates teamwork or should. I am trying to stay focused on the experience of a match. The asymmetric feeling of a match. Which you start to dive into in this paragraph. It is clear there is a line, and maybe I'm being too black and white with it, but clearly, there is a point where asymmetric design and asymmetric feeling meet. The negative interaction between a class with no tools or ineffective tools to deal with a CV or Sub is an asymmetric experience. That interaction can be overcome by the surface ship. That requires a great deal of skill. It seems like you are saying people crave that on some level. However, I would argue the opposite is true. Even when these classes are overcome, the experience leaves the player feeling more frustrated than elated. These interactions, regardless of outcome feel bad. They feel like one person is holding all the cards and beating them was mostly a series of mistakes on their part or bad play. Skill on your part feels secondary to the poor play on the part of the sub or cv. This is a fundamentally bad experience. It is why asymmetric PvP games are not popular. People like to feel like they outplayed somebody; they do not like feeling like they accomplished something because it was handed to them. Proof of this is nobody thinks blow-out games are fun, even if you are on the winning team. People don't care if they are the ones with the tools, just that they have the tools available to them. This is my point the matchmaker rather often doesn't provide the tools to deal with the enemy. It feels like a dice roll. I think this is a fundamentally bad experience; games that have a system to compensate for an asymmetric distribution of abilities/consumables are far more popular, and some of them are considerably older than this game. This is why I think most of the asymmetric experiences I'm discussing could be solved partially by a better matchmaker that takes synergy more seriously. I understand you really like the concept, but winning or losing is a frustrating experience. The more frustrated you are with an interaction the less likely you are to play it. The more frustrating asymmetric experiences they add-in, without a compensating force, the less likely people are to deal with it. You are a rare person that enjoys that experience. I play a lot of competitive games, I'm just a boat/history nerd that enjoys this game. All the other asymmetric games I play have major balancing factors to keep those asymmetric experiences at a minimum. Those games are also hugely successful while being older titles. People tend to experience things in microdoses they do not evaluate their experience as a whole. They ask themselves if they had fun in that last game, not have I had fun over my last 5000 games. If that last game was not fun, you log out. If it was extremely bad maybe you don't come back for a few days. If enough time elapses they may say, "hey, I loved that game I should try it again. They hop in get bullied by a CV/Sub, and say you know that's why I left I hate when this happens." I think that summarizes why we get graphs with no Y-axis. People are not enjoying the individual match experiences and fewer and fewer long-term players are staying. There is a saying that you can't blame your team because the only common denominator is you. So when an experience is thrust upon you, where you are the only one you can rely on to do your job and you don't have the tools to deal with every situation you find yourself in by design. Then your team isn't given the tools to deal with certain enemy types because of a chance MM pool. That asymmetric experience is very poor. We can ignore whether or not players could use those tools properly, because I think you are correct, it is a philosophical discussion on how these things should go in a vacuum. Humans are unreliable creatures so the best way to deal with that unreliable human is to give them the tools to deal with any situation to varying degrees. That way that person never feels hopeless during a video game they are supposed to be enjoying. We can discuss how varying those degrees need to be but I don't think the current model is healthy for a supposedly competitive game experience. Still, though I think a better matchmaker that more carefully builds teams with tools in mind would probably do more to help the situation than anything else they could do.
.thumb.png.5a2672017a56870f35d4b3d9e22178db.png)
