Jump to content

DeMatt

Beta Testers
  • Content Сount

    274
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    9542

Community Reputation

62 Good

About DeMatt

  • Rank
    Master Chief Petty Officer
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Firstly, remember that you can set a series of waypoints by Shift-clicking. Need to turn around and run away? Specify the direction of turn by Shift-clicking! Secondly, the programmers don't know what circumstances are making the autopilot, in your view, misbehave. Spend some time in a Training Room and figure out what, exactly, you think should make the autopilot pull a U-turn instead of backing up. I just spent some time steering my Saipan around a Training Room, and I can safely say that anything up to a 135-degree angle will cause the autopilot to move forwards and turn. (180 degrees, FYI, is directly astern.) More than that causes it to reverse. There does not appear to be any minimum or maximum distance for this decision - just the angle. Do you think there should be - that is, if it's more than, say, 5 km away, the autopilot should go forwards and pull a U-turn? Here's a concrete example: The autopilot waypoints are D5-F5-G5, getting to the west of the island in G6, then G5 again to guarantee facing southwest, then F7 on the other side of the island. It goes forwards to the second G5 point, then reverses to reach F7, but since the island's in the way and the collision avoidance only kicks in when you're going forwards, it backs into the island and stalls. Should it reverse? Maybe yes - it could divert north of the island, staying in the channel, and avoid getting into open waters. Maybe no - it's already going forwards at G5, so pulling a left turn and diverting south of the island would let it keep the speed up. But, and this is just one example, how does it decide?
  2. DeMatt

    Carpet bombing: RN carrier 'perk'

    I wouldn't put too much faith in that post, given that all the stats and icons are for an RTS-style carrier. While it's certainly possible that WG'd be lazy and reuse the Firebrand model for all three attack squads, I'd bet that they're going to use different planes for at least one of the squads; e.g. a Sea Mosquito would have mount points for more bombs, plus the twin engines would pair nicely against the J5N Tenrai on the Hakuryu.
  3. DeMatt

    General question on fighters (RTS version)

    To the best of my knowledge, a fighter's "loadout" stat is how many seconds of ammunition it has. While more is obviously better, generally damage-per-second is more valuable. So, yes, upgrading from the F4F-3 through to the F4F-4 is good. Once you move up to tier 6 and gain access to manual attacks, "strafing" with your fighters uses up ammo much faster. I believe it's either 15 or 20 seconds' worth, but I could be wrong.
  4. DeMatt

    CV Rework Feedback

    Alright, I haven't received an email survey for feedback for the second round of rework testing, so I'm writing up a post. I'm using "carrier" to refer to the ship, "aircraft" to refer to the planes, and "CV" to refer to both. I really don't think this is the "right" direction for CV gameplay. I feel there is too much of a mental disconnect between the aircraft and the carrier, and thus between the carrier and other ships. I feel it is worse in this mode than it is in RTS - you get much more focused on the performance of the aircraft in this mode (and why not, you're staring at their tails for most of the game!) and thus lose awareness of the carrier. Continuing that thought: I want to be Rear Admiral Ray Spruance, not Lieutenant Commander Wade McClusky; Vice Admiral Chuichi Nagumo, not Lieutenant Commander Shigeharu Murata. If I wanted to fly airplanes, I hear there's this perfectly good game - Warplanes of the World, or somesuch. The dive bomber reference marker (the white cross you see in flight, for where an attack would try to land) felt wildly distant from the actual point of attack. Might have been just the change from level flight to diving, and it actually was where the dive bombs would aim without adjustment. But the radical camera switch from "horizontal" to "vertical" didn't help. The rocket attack marker seemed to be "low" from where the rockets tended to land. Again, might have been due to the camera movement as the aircraft flew away. I really think that a tutorial mission, that can be played without server resources (meaning purely locally) would be a good thing. Just a simple "attack these anchored freighters", "attack these slowly-moving freighters", "attack this fast-moving launch" sequence would be enough. And repeatable so that a player can go ahead and spam it until they feel comfortable, or whenever they get a new ship. Training Rooms are almost there, but the local-versus-online bit means that WG doesn't need to worry about server space for these tutorials. Bug: sound effects for radar/sonar/damage control party/other consumables were continually playing. They seemed to be playing when other players/bots triggered their consumables. WHYYYYY. Bug: Tiny Tim-variant rocket planes on the Lexington had both Tiny Tims on the left wing, instead of one on each wing. Probably just need to change the order in which the hardpoints get populated.
  5. DeMatt

    CV Rework Feedback

    Assuming you got the TST client working, then when you reached the client login screen, you needed to fill in the login details from your acceptance email. Control-C (to copy the password out of the email) and Control-V (to paste it into the client) are your friends here.
  6. DeMatt

    CV Rework Feedback

    The second round of rework testing has ended, as of about 16 hours ago. All you can do is hope you'll be invited to the next round of testing.
  7. DeMatt

    Targeted by aircraft carriers

    Because you only notice (and therefore remember) the enemy CV's attack when it's attacking you. BB yelling for fighter cover on the other side of the map? You're not going to notice, because you're busy trying to splatter that DD before it gets away. Friendly CV locked in a swirl of fighter duels in the center? You're not going to notice, because you're MUCH more worried about the enemy BB currently flinging AP at you. But when the enemy CV drops a bomb on you, it's "Oh yeah, there's aircraft carriers in this match, dammit why do they always target me?".
  8. DeMatt

    Hero of Dunkirk

    It's just the Scenario mode. You can play the weekly scenario (Raptor Rescue this week) with other random players, or you can assemble a division of seven and play a different scenario.
  9. Question... Campbeltown is a UK DD... Is there a tier 5 minimum for these missions?
  10. DeMatt

    CV Rework Rocket Aircraft

    Both the US (FFAR, HVAR, etc.) and the UK (RP-3) deployed rockets on their CV-borne aircraft. Yes, their effect on armored capital warships was limited; that wasn't what they were for. Instead they were for the much more numerous and much more lightly armored merchant ships and escorts. A Swordfish, for example, could choose to carry ONE torpedo or EIGHT rockets. If he was going after a convoy of tankers with destroyer escort, which would he choose? Decisively sink just one ship, or get eight tries? In game terms, having watched the "full play through" preview video, I think WG is making TB and DB attacks useless against alert DDs by giving the planes dispersion penalties when they have to adjust their attacks. This, in turn, means the area saturation potential of the rockets is the only reliable way to actually hit them. While each rocket is only the equivalent of a 5" HE shell (literally - the early FFARs used spare 5" ammo as their warheads, before being replaced with purpose-built ones), such ammo is quite sufficient against DDs. You want to strike a battleship? Use DBs or TBs instead. You do get to choose which squad you launch, after all.
  11. DeMatt

    Harugumo armor?

    Pretty sure Harugumo's made of typical DD armor - that is, 19mm pretty much everywhere. As such, Donskoi's 180mm guns don't overmatch it, so if you hit a surface inclined at more than 60 degrees, you bounce off. Note that the 60-degree angle doesn't have to be in the horizontal, that is left-to-right... it could easily be in the vertical, that is steep-versus-shallow, instead. Since Donskoi's guns have fast and flat trajectories, and the listed range is mid-to-short range, I'd bet your half-a-dozen ricochets were off of horizontal surfaces like the main deck. A bit unlucky that you didn't land hull or superstructure hits, but it can happen.
  12. DeMatt

    Russian CVs

    How about we get the actually-built British CVs into the game before we go hunting for more paper?
  13. DeMatt

    Dealing with strong AA ships..how?

    ...I think that a destroyed mount can cause an HE shell to detonate, and if said HE shell is sufficiently small, the blast won't reach the hull. But the same is true if the mount had been intact. I know that AP rounds can cause zero-damage pens if they penetrate the torpedo bulge and then shatter against the actual belt armor. It's possible that the same effect could happen against a secondary turret - overpen the secondary, then fail to pen the superstructure/hull behind it - but I would be surprised to hear that happening with battleship-caliber AP. If you could demonstrate it in a Training Room, so that it's easily replicated, I'm sure the devs would be interested in the setup.
  14. DeMatt

    Dealing with strong AA ships..how?

    As I understand it, it's a dice roll, not hit points. So, to use your numbers as an example, the first hit would have a 10 in 15 chance of smashing the mount, and if it survived, the second would have a 10 in 15 chance, and so on and so forth. A 20-damage hit would smash the mount immediately.
  15. 40 collected, 40 duplicates. What annoys me, and gets me posting, is this: those eight missing collection items? There was exactly one in each sub-collection. DAAAAAAAAGH... /rabbidyell
×