Search the Community

Why do we still have a sticky for LWM reviews that are over 3 years old?

Which ones do you guys like and think are worth doing?? I added a list of choices I was looking at. Also feel free to specify CL or CA line for countries that have both. Feel free to say anything you like about line or dislike about others.

The Pommern has not had a 3rd equipment slot unlike most tier IX's This poll is to discuss if it needs one or not.

Hey everyone. So I read on the "Comments on the Sub Poll" thread that the only poll that matters to WeGe is "The Money Poll". So I figured to get the poll of uno importante out there, well somebody had to do it. So without further ado.

Because not many people have it and it is rarely discussed

Greetings! Is time for the reset coupon and Im wondering what should I pick? My ship type preference in order is: Battleships, Cruisers and Destroyers/Carriers. I play all game mods, from PVP to PVE, Coops, Scenarios, Rankeds, Randoms.. If a ship is not in the list is because I have it or maybe im not interested in it. Doubloons ships are easy pick maybe, but steel ones...I don't have any Steel ship and with 40.000 of steel maybe I could pick two. I was thinking about the Stalingrad because she is old and maybe could be retired soon, also the Bourgogne. Shikishima is nice but I think when I get the Yamato and maybe the Satsuma it will become obsolete. Mecklenburg seems very nice but for some reasons I don't trust german ships in this game (after buying Tirpitz and Pommern, boom, secondaries nerfed. Incomparable, stealthy and interesting but maybe to squishy? Thanks a lot and please feel free to use this poll for pickin your ship of choice Have a nice week!

Just a small poll on general opiñon for subs right now, on both the live server and test server. Feel free to write your opiñon as well.

This poll is aimed to those of you that dislike Submarines, please mark all the options you find relevant. Also feel free to post the reason of your dislike if it isn't a current option, I might include it if it is relevant enough. The objective here is trying to quantify the "most negative" features of Submarines. Maybe that could be actionable at some point. Cheers.

With the recent announcement of ship camos on planes I would really like to see an option to toggle off plane camos just because I, like a lot of other players, like the default look of planes.

Hello, With patch 0.11.2 just around the corner, I would like to take a second and address a very large issue, mainly with USS United States. Armor. The ship's armor is almost nonexistent, and any salvo that you fire at it (from any angle) will result in at least one citadel. However, I have an easy fix that also brings some historical accuracy back to the ship. Replace US United State's ship model with her original blueprinted plan. Basically it would be exactly like how USS US is modeled in-game currently, just with the conning tower replaced by one x1,000 smaller and with the deck layout being relayed out because of the conning tower being moved (see spoiler below) With the model change, the armor would be completely reworked to be similar to Midway. Thoughts? Tell me what you think in the poll above!

Random suggestion: I would really like to see a perma camo for USS San Diego (or for any US ship really) where the ship's hull would be painted like the ocean. But, between the two smokestacks there would be a little suspension bridge with the two smokestacks being the brick pillars that hold up the bridge. The superstructure would be modeled off of a teeny tiny 1940s style city where each of the ship's turrets would be a building. Bonus points if you can somehow get little cars driving across the bridge. This was inspired by the background to the San Diego image in the devblog.

Hello, This proposal is meant as a jump start to a weapon type that is most likely going to be added to the game soontm. Tell me what you think in the poll above! I AM NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY (MENTAL) INJURIES THAT MAY RESULT DUE TO THIS POST The following is a proposal for USS Cusk to be added to the game. Ship model: USS Cusk would be modeled in her post-war configuration, where she had a storage area strapped to the deck behind her conning tower to hold test missiles which is her tactical weapon. See top image in spoiler for conning tower + storage modeling. Basically, Cusk would be a Balao-class submarine with Salmon's stats and torpedoes yet at the benefit of a "tactical weapon" that the ship would be able to use after an extremely long cool down. The tactical weapon, consisting of a missile, would be a lot like the tactical attack aircraft for USS US but intstead of launching rockets on attack, it would crash into its target (no it's not a Kamikaze its a unmanned missile) dealing massive damage. However, a lot like USS US's tactical attack aircraft the missile would be very weak and with poor turning radius (no matter what) Pros: Access to a "tactical weapon" that the player would be able to use after a period of time Hard-hitting Fast speed Cons: Very long cooldown on the tactical weapon Tactical weapon is very weak to AA Submarine HP and armor is poor for its tier having T8 stats Submarine consumables are noticeably weaker due to T8 consumables However, damage control party consumables are the same as Balao Time taken to surface and dive is slightly decreased due to T8 stats, but maximum depth is unaffected Battery action time and reload time is also unaffected Torpedoes deal significantly less damage compared to Balao being of a smaller tier No secondary weapon Consumables: Slot 1: Damage control party: (Same as Balao) Slot 2: Hydrophone (Same as Salmon) Slot 3: Tactical weapon (See stats below) Stats: Survivability: Hit points: 18,800 (Same as Salmon +1000 HP to compensate for tier) Torpedo damage reduction: Armor: Same as Salmon except... 25mm hangar Torpedoes: 3x double torpedo tubes (2 bow, 1 stern) Homing torpedoes: Range: 12 km (upped by 1 to compensate for tier) Damage: 7900 (upped by 77 to compensate for tier) 86 knots Unguided torpedo: Range: 8 km (upped by 1 to compensate for tier) Damage: 26500 (upped by 230 to compensate for tier) 60 knots Battery: Same as Balao Secondary armament: N/A AA armament: N/A Maneuverability: Max speed: 31.0 knots Turning radius: 640 meters Rudder shift time: 6.9 seconds Underwater Maneuverability: Max speed: 18.0 knots Max vertical travel speed: 2.9 m/s Dive plane shift time: 19.0 seconds Concealment: Detectability range by sea: 6.3 km (Upped due to large objects on deck) Detectability range by depths: 0 - 2.3 km (Upped due to large objects on deck) Detectability range by air: 2.3 km  (Upped due to large objects on deck) Assured detectability range: 2.0 km  Slot 3: Tactical weapon (KGW-1 Loon) Hit points: 3,000 Cruising speed: 236 knots Maximum speed: 369 knots Engine boost time: 80s Engine boost cooldown time: N/A (like tactical squadrons, the engine boost cannot be restored in-flight) Size of attacking flight: 1 Maximum missile damage: 45,750 (I decided to base this number off of the alpha damage potential of USS United State's tactical torpedo bombers) Penetration: 150 mm Fire chance: 55% Detectability range by sea: 10 km Detectability range by air: 10 km Restoration time: 300 seconds/1 unit So, what do you think? Tell me in the poll above! I am proposing this while subs are in testing just because I was thinking that by the time that this could actually be implemented in-game, submarines would already be released. Tank you <3 - Elijah2159

Gate's gothic lolita demigod Rory Mercury vs everyone's favorite flat chested vampire; Shalltear from Overlord. Who wins? Who loses? Why? Who just wants them to make out?

WG put out a poll for the 10.9 update, and that poll did not reference submarines in random battles. In lieu of this, I thought that I would put up my own. note that this poll is mostly about in game perception of subs from the perspective of surface ships. This poll won't have the obvious questions as to what people think of the subs and mechanics, i'll post a poll on that later. You can answer this if you have driven subs, or if you have not. I'm going to do my best to keep my personal biases out of this.

Alright folks, I tried this yesterday, but because I am crap, the poll was riddled with issues, some small, and one potentially devastating. But all that is fixed now, and I present to you a pair of polls, the last polls on subs that we may ever need... unless there are good suggestions, or the data leads to new questions or whatever. But this should cover everything. The links below will take you to the polls. The first poll is for people who have played submarines, the second poll is for surface ship players. You will have to sign in to a Google account, but I assume that everyone has one of those. This poll does not collect emails, don't worry about that. POLL CLOSED. Thanks for participating! I will share stats once we get 100 participants total, or tomorrow afternoon, whichever is first.

Previous topic, but now fixed (with increased bacon) Just curious for a transparent and anonymous poll of what people have sunk so far or planning to bid for a tech tree ship, and why? AFAIK only the top 1,000 bidders by monetary value win the bid.Discussion below, Keep it civil and professional.

Just curious for a transparent and anonymous poll of what people have sunk so far or planning to gamble for a tech tree ship, and why? Discussion below, Keep it civil and professional.

I've finally saved 1m free XP. What should I do with it, and why?

Per the title. As you can observe there are six answers sooo.....you can roll.   I mean the dice of course. We have to respect the preferences of our host. Still if you think that I missed something...please comment. Disclaimer :To be perfectly honest l'm not trying to make this in any way hillarious. Those CC's...didn't take that decision lightly. This poll is aimed solely and only at what answer could Weegee came up with.

Disclaimer: this has been posted in the Misc category of the Off-Topic Sub-forum as this has nothing to do with ships, this disclaimer has been put up here to avoid "quick-to-comment" forumers from making a fool of themselves in replying to the post. Also, some of the numbers below have been converted from metric to imperial by a non-US former, for the ease of reading for our NA forum users, if you see something wrong, point it out to me and harbour your patience, not my fault I wasn't raised in a country where they use Metric instead of Imperial measurements. And finally, I'm looking to see if there are any other car guys in this community if this post is well recieved I'll do more car polls like this one, now let's get on to why you click on this title. let's say, I gave you a choice of 3 cars all in their 2007 model year and from the Japanese manufacturer, which one would you pick? _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TRD Aurion Layout: Front engine, Front wheel drive. Engine: 3.5 L Supercharged V6 Power: 323 Horsepower Torque: 295 lb.ft fuel consumption: 21.6 mpg 0-60 mph: 5.9 sec turn radius: 36.1 ft This 1st car of choice has the largest and most fuel demanding engine and for a time was claimed as the world's most powerful front-wheel-drive production car, the Aurion is a Camry with changes done by the Australian branch of Toyota, its engine is shared among cars built by Lotus such as the Evora S and Exige S. As a current owner for 2014 Toyota Aurion Prodigy and also my 2nd car(my 1st ever car is a 2012 Toyota FJ cruiser) I would be biased to this choice, the V6 engine features power that is competitive for its prize before factoring in the supercharger along with an unmatched reliability reputation, though I must admit this car would have so much more potential if it was rear-wheel drive. _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Subaru Liberty(Legacy if you live outside of Australia) GT tuned by Sti Layout: Front-engine, all-wheel drive. Engine: 2.5 L Turbo H4 Power: 260 Horsepower Torque: 258 lb.ft fuel consumption: 24 mpg 0-60 mph: 5.2 sec turn radius: 35.4 ft The Liberty or Legacy on paper is lacking in the engine power output compared to the Aurion, but it makes up for this with economical fuel comsumption which really if you looking at this car... you are not looking at fuel economy, you are looking at that AWD system giving you more traction, launch, wet-roadworthiness, control off-road, speaking bout off-road it shares its engine with its smaller more well known sportier little brother, the Impreza WRX and if you know your World Rally Championship history, especially the 1990s then you probably convince yourself that this is the one for you. It's just like the WRX but it's larger and carrying extra weight just to make sure the occupants are more comfortable going places over to going places sooner. _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Mazdaspeed6 Layout: Front engine, all wheel drive. Engine: 2.3 L Turbo I4 Power: 270 Horsepower Torque: 280 lb.ft fuel consumption: 29 mpg 0-60 mph: 5.8 sec turn radius: 36.8 ft When you 1st see this car, you are greeted by are boring looking sedan that has no business being in this poll. Upon looking at the fine prints the smallest engine here is making more power and torque than the Subaru and when you have a boring car with a high performing engine, that ladies and gents is what we call a sleeper car. So if you see a teenager in their used 5th gen V6 mustang at the traffic lights wanting to race you, he's in for a rude awakening when your 4 doors slide ahead of his 2 doors, as well as function as a family car and drink less fuel compared to his Mustang. _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

4 fleets One fight One victor 4 fleets enter 1 Fleet leaves Who wins and why?

The achievement rework is a change which I believe has effected the entire player base. Whether you're a average player, a competitive player, or a co-op player this rework has undoubtedly effected your signal earnings. This change has benefitted those who primarily play co-op while screwing over average, and competitive players. I'm not against co-op players having a way to gain signals for free, however, this should not mean that those who primarily play randoms/ranked/CB's earn a significantly reduced amount of signals. Of course that is just my opinion but the point of this poll is to gather the opinions of the forum community. For me this change has meant that I'd have to be extra stingy with my use of signals as I've earned, and it has also completely removed the fun/excitement I got when I obtained an achievement as they no longer have any actual rewards associated with them. As Dr_Venture has pointed out achievements have become like a "gold star" with no actual value. Ultimately, I hope this change is reversed as I believe it would be for the benefit of the community overall, and it seemed to me the previous system was fine.

Is the growing number of hybrids going to cause more issues? The T9 looks OP https://blog.worldofwarships.com/blog/162

Poll for wargaming to rollback commander skill rework

A quick and cheerful survey, in keeping with the festive season, "Which class of warship do you HATE the most?" Which class of warship makes you sweat and worry, which makes you bite your fingernails, which class of warship is most likely to make you use a four letter word? Which class of warship do you consider to be toxic? Do you rejoice when a particular class of warship is absent from WOWS? edit : I see multiple requests for the ability to vote for individual ships, such as Smolensk. Unfortunately this just isn't practical, given the thousands of warships that are playable in WOWS/ However, please do name and shame the exceptionally, uniquely, hateful warships. As for Bacon, there is no option, because the poll is not about what we like, but what we hate, and well, everyone loves bacon. Does everyone hate chilled spinach with a vinegar and banana dressing? Maybe I could try that another time.