Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'co-op'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • World of Warships - News and Information
    • News And Announcements
    • Updates and PTS
    • Developer's Corner
    • Community Volunteer Programs
  • Feedback and Support
    • Game Support and Bug Reporting
    • Player Feature and Gameplay Suggestions
    • Game Guides and Tutorials
  • General WoWs Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Player Modifications
  • Off Topic
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
    • Off-Topic
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro
  • External testing groups
    • Supertest Academy
    • Supertest
    • Clantest

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL







Found 23 results

  1. Hukom

    No Mini Map in Co-op

    No problem. I encountered this problem with the mod I was using when update 11.6 arrived. Quite awkward to play without a mini-map; but I welcome challenges like these in Co-op. l will not do this as of now, in Randoms. 😂
  2. Taylor3006

    Arms Race in Co-op Observation

    I hate Arms Race and think it was a terrible trade off for Epicenter, especially for co-op play. That said, been trying to figure out how the bots behave in the mode, like whether or not they go for the power ups or do they chase DDs, etc but hadn't really been able to figure it out. At first I thought they rushed the human spawn points but that really didn't prove correct over a bunch of games. Decided to take out Big Mo to farm some credits a little while ago and when I loaded into the match, realized I was the only human playing and it was an Arms Race map so figured this was the perfect time to see what happens since everyone else was a bot. I stayed on the flank headed to the power ups and firing my guns here and there but mainly watching what all the bots did. They ALL rushed into the center of the map and stopped dead, firing at each other at point blank range. I stayed out of the fray just firing into it all. The bots were so close to one another that when I fired my guns at the reds, I often hit my own team mates due to dispersion. On Missouri that isn't much btw, she is pretty accurate, especially at the ranges I was shooting at. Just wanted to let my fellow co-op players know this information in case it is helpful.
  3. It's been, what, 6 months now and the bots still can't aim, still randomly all go to the middle cap, still are constantly running aground for quite literally no reason, and can't seem to figure out how to get off the island afterwards. What happened to fixing the AI? You guys added a tool that makes messing with the AI easier and seemingly did nothing with it.
  4. Co-op battles tend to be very repetitive and boring, not to mention the bot cvs magically know where you are all the time. And as for tier 1? you might aswell die since it takes forever to get into a game, and yet i still see ppl with 10k games on co-op and tier 1
  5. Slimeball91

    BXP needed for superships tokens.

    I really haven't paid much attention to the whole supership thing; and I generally don't play a lot of T10 so I haven't gotten any but single token. Recently I looked at the requirements for earning the supership tokens. I see you get a token for 800 bxp in randoms/ranked, but you need 7k bxp in co-op. What? I understand WG doesn't want people farming supership tokens in co-op. Fair enough, but such a massive discrepancy seems crazy. You'll get 800 bxp in almost every match in randoms/ranked, and 7k xp is something like 15-20 co-op games. Then there's the random bundle thing meaning you have to grind a bunch of tokens just to have a chance of getting the rentals. This seems to make superships largely unobtainable in co-op. We all know WG looks on co-op as the redhead step child, but this seems to be taking it to another level. Anyone getting enough of these tokens to get the superships?
  6. Slimeball91

    Salem build for co-op?

    I just grabbed the Salem, wondering what you guys use for dedicated co-op build. I'll likely use Halsey. I haven't played randoms in a while but I'm finding myself still in that mindset. And having not warmed up to the new commander skills yet doesn't help. Thanks.
  7. Det0naMarkBR

    Azur Lane Guild Recruit

    -Eng- This is a new guild of Azur Lane called "Azul Lane" I dont have many friends, so i want more people in this guild. lol please help me and join now uwu!! -Pt/BR- Esta é uma nova guilda de Azur Lane chamada "Azul Lane" Não tenho muitos amigos, então quero mais pessoas nesta guilda. hehe por favor me ajude e entre agora uwu !! Info: Server: Amagi Guild Name: Azul Lane Guild ID: 335546564 Guild Lvl: 06 (Grinding ^-^) Members: 6/30 (pls join :( ) Discord Link: https://discord.gg/2Zwwn93mWS
  8. I quit spending completely after the Puerto Rico kerfluffle, and my premium time is running out. Doubloons and econ flags are long gone. Playing high tiers, even premiums with perm camos is going to get expensive credit-wise. And now we have the Great Commander Rebork coming up. What's a poor PvE potato to do? Since Rebork 2.0 will feature a 30-day free respec, I'm considering moving my best commanders (Ovechkin, Halsey, Capt Badadvice, Jingles, Bert Dunkirk) along with a dozen or so common and ARP waifu 19-pointers to Tier 3-6 ships (and of course the Mighty Mikasa!) to leverage lower repair costs with higher performance. Since 90% of the ships in my port are premiums, swapping them around for free will make it possible to play the big boys like Ohio when the credit supply permits. Anybody else have a plan built around 100% free-to-play PvE?
  9. Snoopys_Odyssey

    CO-OP Fun

    When you need to complete the "get 420 ribbons" mission in one battle......bring the Grober Kurfurst. Such a beast
  10. 0ldRichard

    Thank Heaven for Co-op

    If it weren't for Co-op, I'd have quit this game years ago. Even with some pretty heinous doings from WG like the PR debacle and the CV Rebork, it occurs to me that I should just be grateful for the hundreds of hours of relaxation it provides. I've got a bunch of the fancy-shmancy rare and special boats, like Kutuzov, Enterprise, Ohio, Smolensk, and the like. Got a bunch of special event flags and badges too. I don't care. I get more enjoyment out of just leisurely cruising around in Konig Albert or WV '41, casually blasting away at poor helpless toasters. I don't care about rewards, bot cheats, or Random players doing stupid things costing matches. I don't care about stats, events, karma, or prestige. I'm just glad for what we've got. I'm just a happy common spud in a Golden Russet potato patch.
  11. black_hull4

    Warhammer 40K in Co-Op

    In Co-Op Battles, shouldn't the matchmaker put only Imperium ships on one side & Traitors on the other? That way we can keep things simple. I could easily see teamkilling going up when there are both ships on the same team. Ragnarok vs Ragnarok could make sense, but having Imperium ships fight each other in Co-Op would be pure heresy. Reason I'm not saying this for Random Battles would be because the matchmaker is...well...random.
  12. While I personally do not mind the change in Co Op Match Making from 8v8 to 9v9; I definitely mind the fact that the battles now end far too quickly as compared to their former average duration in the 8v8 format. Here is the exact reason for the problem: In the 8v8 format both teams started with 300 points. In the 9v9 format, both teams STILL start with 300 points. In the 9v9 format there is a more dense dispersion of each team's ships across the map which means that it is far more difficult for either team to capture zones because the threat and actuality of capture resets is far greater. Human players can compensate for this and still successfully capture zones. The capture of zones is critical to the earning of points to compensate for ship losses during battle. As you are well aware, there are three ways to achieve victory: 1. Destroy all enemy ships. 2. Reach 1000 points through the successful capture and uncontested control of zones. 3 Drive the opposing team's points negative through the continued destruction of their ships. NUMBER THREE IS THE PROBLEM WITH THE NEW 9V9 FORMAT!!! The team rosters were increased by 12.5%, but the starting points were never adjusted at all! Because this starting value has not been adjusted for the 9v9 format, far too many battles are finished in under 5 minutes and that makes for very frustrated players. especially when Matchmaker places them all by their lonesome on the map and very few bots head in their direction and their ship is too slow to get to the bots nearer the rest of their allies. I HAVE HAD BATTLES IN THE 9V9 FORMAT (MOUNTAIN RIDGE IN PARTICULAR) WHERE I SPAWNED NORTH OF A AND ALL THE BOTS WENT B & C AND I WAS NEVER WAS ABLE TO GET IN MAIN BATTERY RANGE AND FIRE A SINGLE SALVO BEFORE THE REST OF MY TEAM DROVE THE POINTS NEGATIVE OR ON OTHER OCCURRENCES NEVER BE ABLE TO CAPTURE A BEFORE THE BATTLE ENDED!!! Under the 8v8 format; 300 starting points accounts for roughly 60 points for each of the ships comprising roughly 2/3 of the team in the 8v8 format or 5 ships of 8 appraised at 60 points each ( 5 x 60 = 300 ) To compensate for the larger teams; roughly 2/3 of the team in the 9v9 format should also be valued at approximately 60 points each to obtain a more functional starting point value for battles - or... Since the math is extremely simplified... 2/3 of 9 is 6... and the adjusted starting points should be very close to this! ( 6 X 60 ) or 360 starting points. A 360 point starting total for each team is about as simple a place for WG to start with without much difficulty and WG won't even acknowledge that it's even worth a try to alleviate the current situation. At least 360 would be a huge step in the right direction; maybe 380, or 400, or 420 might work better than 360 because 300 is undeniably too low a starting number! The new "Independent zone" EPICENTER starts at 450pts per team. Why? Why was the need felt to raise the 300 point start to 450 there, but no thought given to raise any other starting values to 450? 300 is too low a starting point value for the new 9v9 Co Op format. That fact is irrefutable! >>>>> The following is not so much of a continuation of the problems with the 9v9 format as it is a VERY PROMINENT SUGGESTION as to how to make Co Op battles truly a cooperative: Change the format from a max queue of 30 seconds where unfilled slots will be filled with bots, to the following: 1.SIX human players needed in queue regardless of ship type to initiate a server side battle loading sequence. 2. No max queue time 3. The format will be 6v10 where it will always be 6 real players verses 10 bots consisting of 1 each of every players ship selected for battle regardless of types and numbers, PLUS 1 random CV (even if it means the bot team has 2 CV), 1 random BB, 1 random Cruiser, and 1 random DD 4. Random Map 5. Random Battle Mode Since this format will always place the all human team against 66% greater enemy numbers; it will force the ally team to truly cooperate to overcome the enemy forces. This will also force players to think twice about simply rushing in and being focus fired by the greater enemy numbers and possibly triggering a cascade of ship losses leading to a Co Op loss if they do rush in. This will also remove the problem of ally bots simply doing the unwanted suicide ram kill because there will be no bots on the ally team with this format. This will also significantly reduce human players from suicide ram killing because that is the worst thing you can do when your team has the lesser ship count. This will also increase the hit point pool for farming damage from which is the only reason I can think of as to why WG raised the Co Op team rosters to 9v9 to begin with, because considering the total lack of follow through in ensuring that everything balanced out properly after switching to the 9v9 format; a greater hp pool for farming damage from is the only thing that makes any possible sense as being the reason for the change. This will also raise the difficulty level of Co Op without any adjustment to the bot AI and totally get rid of the current 9v9 fiasco's problem of ending so fast and being so boring. PLEA TO WARGAMING! Please do something FOR your player base for once to actually make the game much more interesting. Thank you! PLEA TO YOU! This suggestion needs your support to garner the attention from the developers. Thank you!
  13. SteelRain_Rifleman

    I am going to say this as nice as possible.

    In the case of, 3 or more caps, the team should let the bots take one. Why? So the match does not end with 2 or more bot ships not sunk. It would seem players lately have to be reminded of the points system. 1000 ends the match. If bots points reach zero, end of match. What I have been finding is a lot of players prefer fish in a barrel. There is no skill in a game like that. And that will not gain you any experience in Randoms. In Randoms, points management and awareness of the map is critical. Knowing what can he done and Knowing when to tactically withdraw or fight a delayed action by resetting caps is an important fundamental part of Random play. Never mind team work. That should be a given. But if a player thinks shooting up bots without providing every player an opportunity to engage a target and leave 2 or more bots alive, then they need to remember that it will be done to them in almost every match. That becomes a disease that eventually has no cure. And players that keep doing it are ruining it for the rest. It has already happened in Randoms. Only divisions do well to average. The meta there is not sustainable as we will eventually lose players. I liked playing Randoms a ways back and those days were fun. But it seems to me that the mode needs a rework. Even co-op needs a rework. WG can release all the lines they want, but there may be nobody around to play them if the pink elephants in the room are not addressed. It started with the idea that went south fast, and now more bandaids started to be applied. Eventually events started to be a problem. So, until WG fixes the game modes, we must take it upon ourselves to manage the games we play with some generosity to other players. If we don't, we have only to blame ourselves if it gets lonely playing overnight and the Random que takes days to get a match put together. Good luck Captains <O
  14. Please. please get rid of the mercy rule in Co-op games. It's hard enough to grind through co-op as it is, and when the game ends with three red ships still on the map, it makes it very frustrating. Put this on top of the current PR grind, and the game gets very frustrating!
  15. I'm just sooooooo OUTRAGED! Why does everybody else get sooooo LUCKY? Where are MY MERCY RULE SHORTENED BATTLES? Yeah. Ran 6 in the Smolensk and 3 in the Enterprise and completed 4 of the missions and about 80 % of two others that will allow me to get the six required for the Token dump. I had a mix of teammates, one match where I was the only human, to two matches where it was all humans on my team. There was some extreme salt from a Fletcher on a team that had 4 human DD's, claiming that his match was "ruined" by MM and that his first win 50% was "wasted" because he only got 13k damage. Entitlement is an attitude, not a racial prerogative, something the world might see if they ever spent some time on introspection instead of reactive venting. Also, YES I am aware that 9 battles are a small sample size for all the statistics Nazis out there. This isn't a serious thread in case your penchant for corrective math analysis starts kicking in.
  16. Thought some of you might be entertained by this replay (see further below). It's just a CO-OP battle, but was pretty amazed at how the "player in question" (a member of a different clan) decided to farm damage by shooting me! not a "stellar" showing -- pressed the wrong key to activate hydro and wasted my smoke near the end. I blame WG for making the Smolensk a DPM monster! and here's the replay (judge for yourself). 20190922_145908_PRSC610-Smolensk_19_OC_prey.wowsreplay
  17. Cpt_Snafu_Idgaf

    Well, that was unexpected.

    Here I thought Bots were filthy cheaters and immune to detonation. May only be Co-Op but avert your eyes kids, this isn't pretty.
  18. With the anticipated influx of everyone into PvE this weekend for Naval Battles, perhaps we can collectively plead with WoWs to get rid of the mercy rule in Co-Op so we can kill every ship in every battle and get as much damage as possible. Battles ending with one or two enemy ships left when their score drops to zero is unnecessary, frustrating, and TOXIC TO FUN.
  19. I would like to see WG start working on more PVE content for ships of all tiers. I have a few friends that i got to start playing it but do not like the PVP random battles, they attempt to play standard PVE battles with bots but the rewards are so terrible that they cannot progress to the next tier before they get frustrated and stop playing. I am lucky enough to have T7 and T8s that let me play some of the Co-op operations, from playing the game since beta, but my friends do not. They have told me they would get back into the game if they where able to grind the trees playing only PVE, and there was Operations for every Tier of ship. We have enough nations in the game now, with enough ships, and naval history is deep and wide enough that we should be able to plenty of battles and engagements for Every Tier of ship to have at least 3 operations to play through so new players that do not like PVP, can grind the trees like everyone else.
  20. If I am the only human player in a co-op match, and I go afk, do I still get penalized? Does it upset the bots??
  21. 0ldRichard

    Bot Cv's coming soon?

    Quick question for someone in the loop, maybe @iKami or @Gneisenau013. Any time frame set for when we will see the return of AI carriers to Co-op? I've been lazier than usual keeping up with the blogs and streams. Thanks in advance.
  22. anonym_ISAzB7zh2G8O

    Too many carriers in co-op now.

    Wargaming I like most of what you did with the CV gameplay (reminder for the dimwits, this is an account for playing without any kind of premium, not a primary). The only issue I have however is that you UPPED the number of carriers in co-op. With only 8 ships a side TWO carriers is just too much, there's not enough targets for both carriers AND surface ships to hammer, especially with each carrier having a battleship counterpart as of right now.
  23. This is a general frustration thread as well as a possible solution to the problems with bots in the game. If players are going to receive less XP and credits in coop and receive a harder bot algorithm in Operations then something has to be done about the AI. AI about a month ago or so was tweaked so badly that it reverted to the hard AI that existed in the PTS for operations. I as well as a lot of players suggested that the AI needed toning down extremely to make it balanced for the players as well as making it fair. I'm not sure who in the WG devs decided that they needed to be tweaked back to that PTS phase garbage but it really needs to be reverted back. I understand that the change probably has to do with statistical wins based on the players but it shouldn't be since this is PvE not PvP balance. An easy fix would be to lower the RNG chances that the bots have for hits/fire chance/ flooding/ incapacitation. This is also a fairly new field for the WG team to develop but the tweaking of the bots back to the PTS phase has basically made operations not enjoyable and the AI tweak has bled into Co-op mode making the bots frustratingly hard and insanely accurate. If there is going to be a change to the AI in such a dramatic way that you literally break a mode that was a new set of progression for players that like PVE and lets be honest there are a lot of players in this game who enjoy coop more than PvP. Then you can't break their mode without tweaking some other aspect. In summary, I feel like the AI needs to be toned back again. The imbalance created from this has ruined a perfectly balanced mode that literally could have been tweaked by altering the economy not the bots themselves who were to be honest perfectly find the way they were. Granted Narai needed to be changed that's understandable but the AI didn't need a tweak just the economy if you had a problem with too many player wins. (Also release Narai again you've had like 5 months. Just tone back the economy and change the bots back to before the garbage AI we have now.)