Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


Community Reputation

50 Good

About zuiKatsu

  • Rank
    Petty Officer
  • Insignia

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests

Recent Profile Visitors

400 profile views
  1. zuiKatsu

    Indomitable Review - Impotent

    Target selection is actually useful info even for experienced players give this man cc
  2. I'm buying three boosters AND the ship to show my undying love for WG!
  3. Flak burst count is affected by accuracy, via this post: https://forum.worldofwarships.eu/topic/112949-new-aa-mechanics-explained/
  4. zuiKatsu

    Georgia needs it's 2.0 SIGMA back .

    It's not particularly hard to have such hit-rates in co-op where bots literally don't dodge and fights are at extremely close range anyways. I had a look over your PvP hit rate in both of your accounts and they're average at best
  5. zuiKatsu

    Balanced MM "tree" SPOTTED!!

    Where does one sign up for this once-in-a-while rigged game that supercharges my ship and makes me invincible?
  6. zuiKatsu

    Yet Another NTC Alternative

    A big barrier to my playing tiers other than 10 in the particular line are that I can't be bothered to 1. retrain my commander from my T10 to whatever other tier in the line, or 2. create a new commander specifically for a certain ship. The additional earnings you gain throughout the stages are meant to speed up future stages and also to 'diversify' your earnings, per se. If I could freely send my commander currently trained for my Montana over to my North Carolina (for example, for the upcoming T8 Clan Brawl and Clan Wars), this would greatly incentivise me to play the T8 more. Additionally, the slight gameplay bonuses for the 4th stage as well as the potential for coal/steel earnings outside of the scheduled competitive modes is incentive enough for many. Grinding lines as a veteran player (without the addition of the NTC) with the high-yield signals and camos is basically credit-neutral and freexp-positive anyways. Thanks for the feedback anyways, I'll consider it if I want to expand on it in the future.
  7. Let me preface this by explaining the stance from which I'm making this proposal. I've had my foot in the door in WoWS since Closed Beta (my first account was on the EU server), but only played in stints here and there early on in the game's lifespan. Clan Battles really pushed me to play and improve and thus the majority of the games I've played on my account are post-Season 1 of Clan Battles. If you want to dig deeper, you'll find I play vastly more Tier 10 than any other tier in the game, and I have an extremely high percentage of games on my account played in Clan Battles (~1200 of however many I have listed under my forum avatar). My stance on the Naval Training Center proposal by Wargaming is that the initial problem they've identified (lack of post-Tier 10 content, especially for veteran players) is a crucial issue for the longevity of the game, especially in player retention. The method by which WG is trying to combat this issue is to introduce valuable rewards for replaying a line of ships in the form of concrete stat buffs to a ship of your choice in that nation. Now let's dig deeper into the concept - it's no surprise that many people are familiar with this "re-grinding" concept in games where 'new game+' exist. A notable parallel we can draw is in Call of Duty titles, where you can choose to "prestige," resetting your unlock progress and unlocking a particular thing (be it a class slot, permanently unlocking a gun or perk, etc.). This rewards players who sink more time and effort into the game past its 'full completion,' without explicitly giving said veteran players any advantage over new players (other than their accumulated experience in the game). This is a system that doesn't affect the 'new player' experience other than maybe running into veteran players more often. WG's most recent PSA on the NTC says that they are working on improving this feature and trying to make the gap between veteran/new players smaller, but any sort of stat buffs to a ship they can introduce will have noticeable impact on said new player's experience. This is an issue of competitive edge and fair play; if I were to bring my Yamato into battle, I expect to start every match on even grounds with other players in the same ship. This kind of 'equal start' is considered one of the most important traits of PVP games, as evidenced by the longevity and success of games such as CS:GO, Dota 2, and League of Legends, among numerous other titles. While they may each have their own issues, these games highlight individual play and knowledge instead of 'time spent playing,' allowing the players in each particular game to showcase their own skills. Now, let's get on to my proposal. Wargaming stated in the most recent PSA that "completely switching the system to cosmetics or resources is not going to work." While I agree that simply cosmetics or resources are not attractive enough resources to keep progression meaningful, these are not the only non-stat bonuses that can be given to veteran players to reward them for their continued contribution to the game. I'll explore other rewards that can be given as part of the Naval Training Center, other than the statistic buffs that WG originally proposed, without changing the method for earning them. In other words, I'm not going to suggest changes to how you earn stages in the Naval Training Center, but rather what you can earn. I'm also going to extend the number of stages available and try to reward these long grinds accordingly. Only one stage will have any tangible impact on gameplay, but it is in a form that should reduce the impact felt by newer players. However, I'm not going to give concrete numbers to the bonuses I propose because I don't know enough background to create reasonable values - I'm sure WG has access to the data they might need to balance these. The Naval Training Center gives "stages" of upgrades to a certain ship of the nation in which you reset a line. Here are my updated stages: Stage 1. Reduced service costs and extra credit earning. Stage 2. Increased Free XP + commander XP earning. Stage 3. (for non-premium ships) Full 'premium' status for the ship. This would give you all the bonuses that premium ships have (increased credit, xp earning, a permanent camouflage, elite status, assigning of commanders without retraining). Maybe this should also reward the permanent camouflage for the ship in particular. Stage 3. (for premium ships) An alternate camouflage with even higher xp/credit earning than 'regular' premiums (think Missouri's base credit multiplier or Sims' base xp multiplier) maybe introduce coal earning per battle based on base xp earned* Stage 4. The ability to assign commanders from other nations onto the ship, the ability to mount a higher number of signals (the current base is 8 signals). Stage 5. The ability to freely convert the XP on the ship to Free XP or Commander XP, and another incremental increase in the XP + credit earning of the ship. The ability to mount as many flags as you want. maybe introduce steel earning per battle based on base xp earned* Stage 6-7-8 etc. The ability to earn coal and steel in each battle, depending on the base xp of the game Each stage in this new NTC would provide a set xp/credit bonus to the ship (ie. stage 1 = x% bonus xp+creds, stage 2 = 2x%, stage 3 = 3x%... stage 100 = 10x%). The first 3 stages will provide immediate and tangible benefits to silver ships that basically "premium-ify" them in 3 steps. The speed at which this happens should be somewhat similar to the grind for a free-xp ship for the average player in terms of time commitment, so I think this is a valuable enough reward for even veteran players. The 4th stage is the only stage which can actually provide a benefit in battle -- the ability to mount additional signals. Signal flags have a small enough impact in game that a player with only the base 8 signals is not significantly disadvantaged against a player with the higher number of signals, and also provides an option for a veteran player to mount even more economic signals on their ship for very high earnings. Stage 5 allows a player to enjoy playing a particular ship while being able to use their play in that ship to progress quickly in other lines or be able to afford new premium ships easily. *The other obvious additions to the stages I've proposed are to fit in coal and steel earning for the ship. This seems like an extremely high economic advantage for an 'upgraded' ship that I could see even the most veteran players grinding for, to acquire a ship that was able to earn coal or steel. However, I'm not too familiar with the 'value' of coal or steel in particular so while I'd like to see them be a part of the 5 stages, I don't know exactly where they'd go. They can either be added onto current stages to increase the incentive to a particular stage (if it is deemed 'not enough') or to future stages. I'd really like to see what you guys think about this proposal, whether you'd grind for these bonuses, any possible additions that could be made, or any suggestions for changes to my proposal. World of Warships has provided me with a great clan, great friends, tons of great experiences, and a lot of cool in-game moments. While I understand it's cool to bash WG, Lesta, devs in general, etc. they've created a game where I've spent tons of time and even more effort. I'd hate for the game's playerbase to die following this change and it's something I'm kind of afraid of. At the very least, the community I am a part of would be greatly impacted if the Naval Training Center entered the live server as it was initially proposed, so I hope that with threads like mine and many other suggestions and feedback, we can come to a good solution that satisfies both the casual players, the competitive players, and Wargaming itself.
  8. zuiKatsu

    RMOVE Recruiting for High-Level Play

    i figure it'd be bad if the commander didnt bump once in a while
  9. zuiKatsu

    Update 0.8.5 - Bugs Report

    Yoshino's armoury text has not been updated to reflect her buffed reload of 18.5s
  10. zuiKatsu

    It's hard to take CV feedback to the devs when...

  11. As you both seem to not know exactly what I'm talking about, here is a video from iChase which details the execution and result of the correctly-done bomber bug.
  12. Hi all! I'm zuikatsu from [ARP] (formerly [RMOVE]) and here to ramble about the hot current topic of the 'enlightened drop.' I don't consider myself much of an expert on this topic outside of a. knowing how to perform it myself, b. watching Gaishu smash people with it on stream, and c. watching it plow through both teammates and enemies alike in the recent King of the Sea. I've dabbled in carriers and I think I'm mostly competent in them now but am mostly a surface ship player, with battles spread fairly evenly throughout the 3 non-CV classes. I play mostly BB in random battles and a mix of classes in clan wars, though I used to be exclusively a DD player in previous seasons. First off: I don't really have that much of an agenda regarding this post, I'm just speculating on what may be the cause of what we know is happening. I'm not an avid CV player nor am I completely opposed to the idea of playing with and against CVs, but clearly there is more work to be done to make them a healthy addition to the game. Again, I'm trying to just lay out my speculation in as objective a view as possible. I want to address the 'enlightened' bomb drop (as called by many) as one of the big issues with carrier play at the moment. This technique allows CVs incredible amounts of control over the accuracy of their dive bombers, especially HE bombers. Pinpoint accuracy with HE bombs allows American to deal massive damage without fear of dispersion screwing with their output - as such, as we've seen in King of the Sea and in the hands of skilled players in random battles, carriers have incredible DD-killing potential, as well as the ability to negate 'proper dodging' from cruisers and battleships. For instance, against a 'normal' HE bomb drop, it is usually ideal to be perpendicular to the direction of the plane's flight, so that as little of your ship as possible is inside the carrier's aiming reticle. However, doing this exposes you to taking great damage from the 'enlightened' bomb drop technique, as it clusters the bombs in the upper portion of the aiming reticle. This is obviously (I hope?) an unintended mechanic that we may have patched out soon, in which case I'm just taking a shot in the wind here with no real purpose, but I hope that what I'm doing here is helpful for both explaining to more people what the enlightened drop entails, and maybe for devs to take a look at this mechanic. This is the drop technique I'm talking about. What appears to be happening is that as your bombers pull up from their attack run, your aiming reticle lengthens and begins to move further ahead of your bombers to reflect their current trajectory. However, the instant you click your mouse button to drop the bombs, the aiming reticle stays exactly where you clicked and your bombs begin their flight towards the target. However, for the moment where your reticle is stationary (between when you click and when your bombs actually reach their target), your planes are still traveling quite fast due to the boost you have applied. Thus, the actual position of the planes is quite a bit further ahead from where your reticle has been stuck for a brief moment. What I believe is happening is that the bombers have their own hidden 'true drop area' which keeps moving along with the bombers while your aiming reticle is stuck at the position you clicked. The intersect between them is where your bombs end up hitting. As you speed boost and pull up with your planes, you make the intersect between your visible aiming reticle and the 'true drop area' smaller and smaller, which contributes to the much higher accuracy of the bomb drop. The reason I believe this is the case is that there are rare cases, such as when initiating the drop too late or when dropping near islands (which affect the true height of your bombers), your bombs can land wildly far ahead or behind your aiming reticle. Too difficult to understand the wall of text above? Here's a quick paint illustration of what I believe is happening: And in the case of dropping near an island and your bombers dropping their payload way ahead of your aiming reticle: Keep in mind that what I'm explaining here is pure speculation based on two or three known and repeatable scenarios, so don't take my word for actually what is going on in the game engine. I've just found that this explanation works in all the clips from streams I've watched and a bit of training room testing from myself and various others. Thanks for your time!
  13. zuiKatsu

    CV Balance discord server

    i agree let's buff CV and add them to clan wars because they're ready to be introduced into the competitive meta in their very balanced state