bubbleboy264

Seriously, the 19 point skill system was fine. Have the devs never heard the expression if it isn't broke don't fix it? Have they ever given a specific reason why the old system needed fixing? As far as I know they haven't. They ruined skills for no good reason.

As title says, I haven't played WoWs in more than 6 months as I've been too busy for it but might be able to play a bit again. I completely missed the commander rework and have no clue how it works. Can anyone point me to some good guides on the rework/new meta? I don't know if my commanders have had their skills reset or anything and I don't know where to begin. Any help would be appreciated, thanks.

Unfortunately for me the game is pretty much unplayable again, will only load into a battle after 2 minutes, massive minute long freezes/lag spikes in the middle of rounds, it was a lot better before but now I can’t play it. What happened?

I’m thinking of updating the Mac I use for WoWs to Catalina but I’m worried that the game won’t work after I update it. Should I update my Mac? Has WoWs been optimized for the most recent OS? I hope it can run better on Catalina but I’m worried it might not

Seriously, I’m so done with this garbage. I’m trying to play and have fun with my mid tier ships but it’s literally endless game after game with 2 carriers per side, it’s just absurd. What is going on why are there so many CVs now.

I've played 6 games in her, and already have gotten a 194k dmg game and have an average damage of 138k, with an average experience of 2900k. The guns and armor are just hilariously strong. In my highest damage game I was able to brawl a full health GK and win easily, I just angled and pummeled 10-20k AP salvo after AP salvo into his broadside. I've citadeled North Carolinas and Thunderers from 16km away, and have just overall been having a blast. It's so much fun but also so disgusting, I love it but I feel like I have to take a shower after every round. I'm certainly not pretending that I'm basing my opinion off of some incredibly scientific statistical analysis, I'm just basing it off of my experience. I think that for good players the ship's strengths can make it absurdly strong, but for average players they will have a harder time making use of them. However I would also say that the ship isn't the hardest to play, it isn't like a Minotaur or other squishy cruiser that requires good positioning and awareness to avoid getting deleted, your armor is so tough that you can take very aggressive positions and come out on top. Oh WG...

That would not work. At all.

I recently completed all of the free directives for the Odin and figured I should just buy it, since I would be getting a unique premium for a low price. I was well aware of the nerfs but still wanted it for the novelty (I am not a whale/ship collector so this was unusual for me). I have been playing it for a bit and have done quite well, but I am very sad about how good this ship could have been. The HP nerf was absurd, even with your armor 52k health at tier 8 is just not enough. You simply do not have the survivability to truly brawl/push. You can still carry a flank and make big plays, but if you make even one mistake your health will melt instantly, and even if you do everything right you can still die easily due to simple bad luck. The guns are another case of what could have been. WG nerfed the reload and fuse time but gave slightly better secondaries in return, although that trade is not worth it at all as the secondaries are bad anyway (the pen/range simply can't make up for the crap accuracy). And you have to go full tank build because of the low health so the sec buffs don't matter anyway. The guns can still do well, especially against cruisers, and they also work well for me specifically as I enjoy the Scharnhorst-style low caliber cruiser killer guns at tier 8, but I can't help thinking about how much better these guns used to be. The Odin can do very well if played correctly, but it still needs buffs. The original version with 62k health, 20 sec reload main guns and a low fuse time was perfectly fine and well-balanced. But the Odin isn't Russian, so it just had to be nerfed into mediocrity. This should be fixed. I would either return the ship to the original WIP version or I would buff it like this: - give the ship a superheal and warspite damage control, along with buffing the reload to 20 seconds. This keeps the unique low hp pool and play style but also gives it a lot more survivability such that the Odin can push in and brawl like it was meant to. The fuse time should also be lowered in this version but that might be too much. Whatever happens, the Odin has the potential to be a great ship, and it deserves buffs. I am enjoying playing it and love the idea of a tier 8 Scharnhorst, I just wish this ship could be allowed to shine by WG. It doesn't need to be OP or even great, just decent. That doesn't seem like too much to ask.

McNulty from The Wire.

Yeah they all look horrible from the initial stats. For me the biggest issue is the 23 knot speed, its just so bad. It should be at least 25 or 26.

Would like to clear something up. I'm not saying they shouldn't use statistics/spreadsheet type stuff at all, it is very important and useful. But it should not be the only metric used when deciding whether to nerf/buff something. Play testing/feedback should play a big role as well.

And they wonder why we criticize them for being so out of touch...

Of course. I mean just look at this: (WR difference between UU equipped ships and those without it) minus (WR difference between players using UU and not using UU but owning it) gives us our actual UU WR difference Because of the nuances above, as well as the facts that player account WR has more impact on battle performance than the WR on a particular ship, we consider the results of up to +2% acceptable. For example: X DES MOINES: ships WR difference (6,7%) - Players WR difference (3,9%) = +2,8% difference. Above the acceptable 2%, which means the upgrade is too strong. X SHIMAKAZE: ships WR difference (-0,1%) - Players WR difference (-0.1%) = 0% difference. Acceptable. X GEARING: ships WR difference (1,5%) - Players WR difference (0,3%) = +1,2% difference. Fully acceptable. What? The Gearing and Shima upgrades are objectively trash, but since the data is "acceptable" they don't get buffed, and the DM upgrade is OP because it is slightly higher than the "acceptable" win rate difference, then though the Kremlin is still in the game... Have they considered that ship win rate can easily be skewed/manipulated based on the player population that is using said ships? It's why very rare ships often have super high win rates even though they actually aren't that good, because only the best players have them. Have they considered that this might happen with Ultimate upgrades too? Of course not, because the spreadsheet rules all...

Not surprised, but to see how openly they try to justify their ridiculous logic with this is just mind boggling. Do they actually play their game?

Recent devblog: https://blog.worldofwarships.com/blog/30 You need to see this for yourself, they are just right out saying that they aren't balancing them based on testing/player feedback, just with win rates/other useless spreadsheet data. No wonder game balance is such a mess right now, when this is WG's attitude. Just look at this: UU's popularity should not be significantly above 65% - if it is, that's a sign that the UU is becoming a no-brainer instead of being an alternative. UU's popularity should not be significantly lower than 40% - if it is, that's a sign that the UU doesn't offer an interesting enough alternative to the existing upgrades. The UU should not make the relative WR worse (in this case it becomes a downgrade, not a sidegrade). The target WR limit is +2%, as was explained above. Each UU case should be reviewed individually before the suggestion of a final version This sounds good in theory, but it practice it just leads to incredibly stupid balance decisions based on data that can easily be skewed and unrepresentative (for example, a legendary mod can have a higher win rate than it normally would due to only better/more experienced players using them). They don't take into account how strong or weak the upgrades actually are through player testing/feedback, they just look at the sekrit documents and say "look tovarish! Des Moines legendary is too popular! Therefore it must be OP! Bring in the nerf hammer comrade, da this is good game balance taktik." This spreadsheet nonsense leads to stupid nerfs like the Henri speed nerf all the time, and yet they still refuse to nerf the [edited]Kremlin. WG balance department, please stop this. Edit: Would like to clear something up. I am not saying that statistics/spreadsheet type stuff should not be used at all when deciding whether to nerf/buff something. Stats are very important and useful, but they should not be the main/only metric used. Play testing/feedback should play a big role as well. I just think the framing they use in the devblog is really dumb for example.