Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'dev blog'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • World of Warships - News and Information
    • News And Announcements
    • Update Notes
    • Public Test
    • Contests and Competitions
    • Events
  • General WoWs Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Developer's Corner
    • Community Contributor Corner
    • Support
  • Off Topic
    • Off-Topic
  • Historical Discussion
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
  • Player's Section
    • Team Play
    • Player Modifications
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro
  • Contest Entries
  • Contest Entries
  • New Captains
  • Guías y Estrategias
  • Árboles Tecnológicos
  • Fan Art and Community Creations
  • Community Created Events and Contests

Calendars

  • World of Warships Event Calendar

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 7 results

  1. I will post PSAs and Dev blog stuff here and try to catch all of it. If you want to see the latest changes and what has been going on since Dec 2018, here is the place. This post is current events and past events will be in post 7. Important PSAs not related to events will be in post 2 and past ones in post 8. Dev blog stuff will be in post 3 and past Dev blogs (after patch has been out) will be in post 9. I will also post them as the next item, to bring up the notification that something was added. Here are the event PSAs with the latest ones first. Jan 28th Jan 17th When Events are over, they will move to a post a few posts down. Events will stay here until the last bit is done, so for events with temporary currencies, they can stay long after the event is over until when the temp currency is converted to credits. ================================================================================================================================ PvE Clan News & Discussion thread for my fellow clan members so they can find it easy.
  2. https://www.facebook.com/pg/wowsdevblog/posts/ World of Warships Development Blog Page Liked · 1 hr · ST, British cruiser Exeter, tier V Hit points – 29 400. Plating - 13 mm. Main battery - 3x2 203 mm. Firing range - 14.3 km. Maximum HE shell damage – 2850. Chance to cause fire – 15%. Maximum AP shell damage - 4550. Reload time - 12.0 s. 180 degree turn time - 22.5 s. Maximum dispersion - 131 м. HE initial velocity - 855 m/s. AP initial velocity - 855 m/s. Sigma – 2.00. Torpedo tubes - 2x3 533 mm. Maximum damage - 15867. Range - 8.0 km. Speed - 61 kt. Reload time - 72 s. Launcher 180 degree turn time – 7.2 s. Torpedo detectability - 1.3 km. Instead of choosing between wide and narrow spreads, captains can choose to fire off individual torpedoes or expend the entire launcher at once. Maximum speed - 32 kt. Turning circle radius - 650 m. Rudder shift time – 8.4 s. Surface detectability – 11.0 km. Air detectability – 7.1 km. Detectability after firing main guns in smoke – 6.1 km. Available consumables: Slot 1 - Damage Control Party Slot 2 - Repair Party Slot 3 - Hydroacoustic Search Slot 4 - Catapult Fighter / Smoke Generator All stats are listed without crew and upgrade modifiers but with the best available modules mounted. These stats are subject to change during testing. Please note that the information in the Development Blog is preliminary. Thanks for the head's up to @TheMightyJingles
  3. Here's the text so you don't have to go to <shudder> FB: ST. Warships premium account The warships premium account will be added to the game. It will give you an extra 15% experience compared to the general premium account, but it only will work in World of Warships. The cost of the warships PA will be equal to the cost of the general PA. The bonus at the end of the battle will be calculated with the active premium account with the higher modifier. If both premium accounts are active, the bonus for the battle will be based on the warships PA. This service is developed for players who mainly play World of Warships, and don't mind getting an increased bonus in one game in exchange for a lack of bonuses in others. Its presence will allow us more flexibility in customizing in-game rewards and compensation. When the warships premium account will be added, all players with an active premium account will receive a warships premium account with the same duration. Thus, they will be able to test the service and evaluate its benefits for themselves, without incurring any additional costs. Please note that the information in the Development Blog is preliminary. So 65% bonus instead of 50% bonus for us WoWS-only players. Cool. One presumes that this is what will be awarded and sold in the Premium Shop henceforth. Much to speculate on as to "why", but I don't really care.
  4. Normally I am not one to tell people how to do their jobs. However, I keep on seeing issues regarding the way WG communicates with it's playerbase, at least regarding the NA server. Please keep in mind this is not a rant, tantrum or anything of the sort; consider it more of a personal opinion on some things that if changed, could benefit both sides. Anyway, here goes: WoWs is a free to play game, and as such every player is a potential customer. This means that a player has to be attracted not only by the game to spend money, but also by factors such as community outreach, healthy developer-playerbase relationship etc. While WG tries to engage in them, I consider them lacking when it comes to communication. Namely, three quite important examples of communication issues spring to mind, which if in my opinion were solved could create a better environment and thus lead to happier players. A reasonable amount of these players could even become customers, turning the effort of proper communication into profits. EXHIBIT A: WoWs Dev Blog. First of all, let me begin by saying the Dev Blog is already one of the best things WG has done for the community, giving us some insight into upcoming ships, designs, mechanics. It gives us a feeling that we can witness the evolution of the game first hand, be it good or bad. That said, the method of delivery, namely exclusively posting on Facebook, isn't optimal. While it's the most common social platform, quite a few people simply don't use it anymore. Many people can't see the posts or social media are blocked on their workplace. People have to copy the post in plain text, then post on the forum for all to see. The value of social platforms in attracting an audience shouldn't be discounted, but it's not of much benefit in this case. What WG could instead do is reach a compromise. Post ONLY the teaser pictures on Facebook as a way to pique interest, then follow up on the same day with a locked post on the forums with the preliminary stats of the upcoming ship on a separate subforum. EXHIBIT B: Monthly Missions and Discounts: We are being drip fed Missions and Discounts, with us often having to look on other servers to see what we most likely will get. Why can't all the missions and discounts be instead listed at the start of each month, with a simple tab for each week providing additional detail on offers and missions? The playerbase is old by gaming standards and with jobs/university, why not let us plan ahead on what to buy and when to have our sessions? EXHIBIT C: Purpose and Pricing for upcoming Premium Ships. With the proliferation of Free XP and in general the spread of various resources such as Steel or Coal, the way in which one can obtain a new premium ship has become quite important. People often hoard their resources or Free XP because the pricing simply isn't disclosed. This further continues the circle of Free XP and resource hoarding, creating issues for the ingame economy. Alaska is an obvious and recent example of such a case. Now, I get that plans change and a ship that was planned to be obtainable in a certain way has to become available in another. However, if it's made absolutely clear that all info is subject to change I don't see why the preliminary method of getting a new premium shouldn't be mentioned. The planned amount doesn't have to be included, just a heads up for people to know when to spend. I am sure more issues can be found with the current way things function, but I feel these are quite important. Information in our time is very valuable especially when it comes to buying products. By providing us with this info in a timely manner not only does WG create a more enjoyable environment, but also helps up make informed decisions that may result in a purchase of their digital products. Thanks for reading and sorry for the ramble.
  5. Come on WG forum staff, you already do wonderful work, why not post and sticky it yourselves? Cheers to @YamatoA150 for posting it first on a different thread, but I feel this needs its own separate. Commanders! Following yesterday's article about the next iteration of the carrier rework testing some questions have been asked which we had not properly addressed. We'll try to do that below and hopefully clarify the situation around odd-tiered aircraft carriers. Why did you decide to leave only even tiers of aircraft carriers in the game? There are three main reasons for that: The match-making will benefit from this Carriers always get into battle symmetrically, so if 20 people queue up with different aircraft carriers, each at a different tier between 4 and 10, then will be standing in 7 different queues. If only even tiers are available, then the number of queues decreases to 4, which means it will be noticeably faster to get into battle. Waiting times will decrease, while the number of balanced battles will increase. Progression between carriers will be better Many significant parameters of air groups which noticeably affect what they feel like and how they perform in battle do not change smoothly, but only in discrete jumps. An example of such a parameter is the number of aircraft in a strike group (these are the aircraft that are separated from the main squadron to make an attack with torpedoes, bombs or rockets). At tier 4, there are currently two aircraft in a strike group, while at level 6 there are three. This obviously does not leave any room for progression at tier 5, within this parameter. There are a lot of such parameters and having them change noticeably and clearly contributes to a feeling of progression, which is one of the effects we wanted to achieve. Gameplay becomes clearer Having a clear progression between carriers will also mean more clarity for a carrier's teammates and opponents. The mentioned differences in air group parameters will be more pronounced between even tiers than they are now, which will make it easier to evaluate relative carrier strength and choose how to counteract it, even just by looking at the battle loading screen. So what's the plan? Here's where it gets interesting, as there are many options to choose from. Obviously we haven't spent months modelling these odd-tier carriers just to scrap them. At the moment we intend to transition them into second carrier branches of aircraft carriers with alternate gameplay styles - another way to influence the battle, a different approach to claiming victory for you and your team, as well as different interactions with allies and enemies. There are a lot of different options here: they could do a little less damage and assist their allies more instead in different ways like spotting enemies or through other advanced capabilities which were abundant with aircraft. It's possible that some types of aircraft in such alternative branches would be able to set smoke screens, saving heavily damaged ships from destruction. They might also be able to help allied battleships with putting out fires, or even land on water and capture objectives. Aircraft might even have something in their arsenal to help combat submarines should that ever become necessary. These are just some of the options and you should understand that they are meant as auxiliary interactions that can be done together with directly causing damage to the enemy team, not instead of that. Certainly not all of these ideas will make it into the game, but those most promising ones have a good chance of seeing it through. Most likely such carriers and their squadrons would be slightly more difficult to play than simple strike setups, which would make them a good choice for those players who will have mastered the initial post-rework carrier gameplay. Why not simply shift all aircraft carriers to even tiers and release 2 branches immediately? In this case, same-tier carriers in one nation would be almost identical in terms of gameplay. We're doing a lot of work to make aircraft carriers of various nations different from each other. However, we can't make multiple branches different, yet equally interesting and balanced using just the existing parameters of dropping bombs and torpedoes or launching rockets. These ships deserve a different, more interesting fate, but it will take some time to make that happen. When can we expect these new branches? We are currently focusing all our attention on the mechanics themselves and the balance of these initial strike carriers. After the rework is done we will start work on these alternative branches. To give you a perspective of what the future might look like, here are screenshots of the American and Japanese tech trees: The state of the branches of the new aircraft carriers at the time of the carrier rework release (note that the information is preliminary): IJN tech tree USN tech tree Estimated state of the branches of new aircraft carriers by the time of the introduction of alternative carrier branches (note that the information is preliminary) IJN tech tree USN tech tree
  6. Well, it seems that the upcoming armor changes are going to impact all ships with a torpedo belt. Pens on the belt are now guaranteed to do 10% damage regardless of it penning the belt armor. The impacted ships include and are not limited to: https://m.facebook.com/wowsdevblog/posts/2204959589830376 USS Alabama and USS Massachusetts USS Iowa and USS Missouri USS Arizona IJN Yamato and IJN Musashi (Less than others since the belt is below the waterline) Dunkerque Almost all Pre T6 Tech Tree BBs (Exclusions are South Carolina, Turrenne, Courbet, Nassau, Konig, Kawachi, and Myogi) Most ships with a Turtleback armor design (French High Tier BBs) T6+ Japanese Cruisers T8+ German Cruisers T10 Cruiser Henri IV For more info, go see Little White Mouse's post on the topic
  7. ST, British destroyer Medea, tier II Hit points – 8700. Plating - 6 mm. Main battery - 3x1 102 mm. Firing range – 8.8 km. Maximum HE shell damage – 1500. Chance to cause fire – 6%. Maximum AP shell damage - 1800. Reload time - 5s. 180 degree turn time - 18 s. Maximum dispersion - 81 m. HE initial velocity - 811 m/s. AP initial velocity - 811 m/s. Sigma value – 2.0. Torpedo tubes - 2x2 533 mm. Maximum damage - 10000. Range - 6.0 km. Speed - 53 kt. Reload time - 53 s. Launcher 180 degree turn time – 7.2 s. Torpedo detectability - 1.1 km. Instead of choosing between wide and narrow spreads, captains can choose to fire off individual torpedoes or expend the entire launcher at once. Maximum speed - 32 kt. Turning circle radius - 460 m. Rudder shift time – 2,3 s. Surface detectability – 5,4 km. Air detectability – 2,4 km. Detectability after firing main guns in smoke – 1,7 km. Available consumables: Slot 1 - Damage Control Party Slot 2 - Smoke Generator Emission time 15 s; Duration time 85 s; Cooldown 240 s and 160 s for Smoke Generator II; Charges 2 and 3 for Smoke Generator II; Radius - 600 m. Slot 3 - Engine Boost All stats are listed without crew and upgrade modifiers but with best available modules. The stats are subject to change during the testing.
×