Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'wg'.



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
  • 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 14 results

  1. KAAOS_Frosty

    Premuim DD

    This is for WG to answer. I have a question in reference to the Aigle tier 6 DD. In the arsenal in game it says 7km Torps in the premium shop it says 8km which is it??? This is the same ship. Thinking of getting it but with conflicting Stats it does concern me. Frosty
  2. Remove all ships and make it into a sea bird watching simulator
  3. D1xKnight

    WoWS dying?

    Recently i came across a few videos stating that WoWs is slowly dying due to complaints from the community demanding that the game has more improvements and such, so i'm investigating the reason behind this problem, since after 2015 videos for WoWS have slowly been declining in popularity and views, and that it has become irreverent now and a lost game in history, since then less and less people are coming to WOWS *Just a opinion* so is this downfall of wargaming's *ONLY* good game is caused by the people in the community? leave your comments below!
  4. Im sure there are a few threads like this but..here is another. Naturally these aren't all feasible but lets show that we can try and improve things rather than just complain. Problem: DDs have no counter to being spotted and pecked to death by attack planes. Possible solutions? 1. As others have said, make plane spotting local only. Being spotted by a plane only makes you visible in the immediate area, not across the map. Being focused by 6 ships doesn't work out if you have paper armor. 2. Give DDs better AA 3. Reduce accuracy of attack planes. 4. I've been flying near friendly dds when they are under attack and popping my fighters. Maybe WG could make the fighter consumable stronger but only when near a friendly? 5. Others? Problem: CVs being uptiered makes it nearly impossible to damage anything let alone survive. Many are saying that AA is now ineffective. Try playing a Tier 6 CV and go against any higher tier ship. Possible Solution: 1. Make damage scale based on tier? if a T4 CV is going up against a T6 ship, make one of them either upscale/downscale its damage or defense to match the other. Problem: F key gives a CV an instant advantage. Possible solutions: 1. Make it so that the F key option can only be used once per plane type. You use it to spam torp planes once and you cant do it again for any torp squadron again. Same for the rest. 2. Use of F key imposes a countdown timer of x seconds before you can launch again. Problem: Attack planes can cover ground so fast that they can camp any cap and wait to prey on any DD. Possible solutions: 1. Impose a delay on CV launch as soon as the game starts. Kind of like how torps have to countdown before they are even available. 2. Alter strategy. DDs don't try to cap immediately. Right now, with a CV in the game, a DD isn't really spotting much. The Planes are. The DDs can lurk and be more opportunists rather than leading the charge, which many shouldn't have been doing anyway.
  5. So the CV rework has be out for a few days now and there are arguably a lot of balance issues. With this post I hope to address what made CV's before the rework, as in what is liked and hated/ how they effected a game overall. I also will address how CV's currently do this and some possible re-balances and fixes for what I believe are issues. As well as issues with the new AA system. Pre-rework CV's: Pros: Multiple squadrons allowed for concentrated attacks on a target and for spotting in different locations. Fighter squadrons allowed for spotting and for covering teammates from enemy squadrons, air superiority. Control over the CV at will and over its consumables. On the receiving end a player would guarantee damage and shoot down planes in a squadron, this would also effect the combat performance of the squadron. Limited hanger size made it a risk vs reward game-play style, meaning it usually didn't benefit the CV player to attack AA ships, and having good AA would benefit the AA ship player, but did not make them unsinkable Slow squadrons and squadron timers allowed for breaks in CV coverage, giving bad AA ships a chance between strikes. Cons: Multiple squadrons allowed for very high alpha strikes on a single player, possibly ruining the game experience for said player. High skill floor. Fighter strafe was very abusable/glitchy and would normally result in a one CV's loosing all of their planes in an instant. If deplaned a CV was worthless. Management issues at high tier because of high number of squadrons. Different game-play removed the CV player from the game, as in it felt like your were playing a completely different game. Ships with bad AA when focused had zero chance. A CV's skill would determine the match in most cases. In conclusion, for the old CV's, a lot of people didn't like the black and white of a CV match. If your CV was a worse player, you would loose the game. A good CV player would shut down the enemy CV and stomp on ships at the same time leaving the other CV basically worthless. The old CV's were not without merit though as you knew that any planes you shot down would effect an enemy CV's ability to stay in the game and that CV's could fight other CV's. Post-rework CV's: Pros: Single direct control over a squadron allows for more interaction with the game and does not divide focus. (It feels like your part of WoWs not an RTS skin of WoWs). More engaging AA system, AA can be very deadly. (It looks very impressive now as well) Each type of squadrons has a set role that they are good at, each squadrons type is similar in damage type to that of the other ship classes. Aircraft consumables makes controlling a squadron more interactive. Lower skill floor. Cons: Speed of aircraft and zero launch time (Attack aircraft are the worst offenders) allows for very early game spotting and damage, ships get spotted seconds into the start of a match now. Invulnerability on return to your CV allows for no risk attacks on enemy ships, if you don't like the situation your in after an attack you get a "get-out-of-jail-free-card" by pressing F. Zero launch timers or penalty for losing aircraft make for constant spotting in the aircraft operating zone and no break in attacks on any one ship. Unlimited hanger makes any losses sustained by a CV trivial. AA can be very strong, but most damage is done by flak bursts which a decent CV player can cheese and take little to no damage from. Any damage taken by a squadron is spread out among all the planes, this means one plane isn't focused until its shot down. This makes for a lot of squadrons attacking high AA ships and only losing one or two planes and getting away with the rest at half HP. The new AA focus system doesn't allow for focusing on a specific squadron, if under attack by two CV's this can be a big issue. Though a CV can not necessarily one shot now, they can cause crippling damage in multiple strikes to DDs and most cruisers, because of the fast return time and launch of squadrons a CV can finish off a ship in a few minutes and lose only a few aircraft to do it Beyond the fighter consumable and CV sniping, a CV has zero interaction with the enemy CV. As a CV you can not prevent the enemy from attacking teammates Higher skill ceiling than before, CV's can cause even more damage now. In conclusion a CV's planes are more omnipresent in a match now making for detection range to be a non-issue (When all ships are spotted why does it matter?) This means most ships that rely on their detection range suffer the most, DD's are not safe anymore as at the beginning of a match they are spotting in their spawn by attack aircraft and can lose more than half their HP early game. Cruisers are always spotted so BBs have a field day and BBs are constantly under attack by a CV making them focus more on planes than the battle they are fighting (though this is true for all ship types). Battles start and end very fast now as no one can go undetected for more than a few seconds. What to do about it: Aircraft speed with or without boost should not exceed the speed of the old squadrons pre-rework. No invulnerability on return (Though maybe they take reduced damage). Fighter consumable should be able to be called in where it is needed and should have an extra Km of radius. AA damage should focus one plane out of a squad. Aircraft launch and return time should have a timer. Flak bursts should be all along the path the planes take rather than just in front of it (this will make flak much harder to cheese). Edit: Always between the plane and the ship. Hangers should either be limited in size, plane restoration should be slower, or you should only be able to launch a set number of squadrons of each type before a long reload. Return to carrier F key should have a cool-down. In conclusion (the last one I swear) the new CV's need a lot of balance changes, but I think that the greater interaction in game and to put it bluntly more fun of the new CV's is a step in the right direction and I hope that we as a community can help WG to properly balance the new CV's.
  6. ELOFan

    I am excited!

    I miss my Independence, Bogue and Zuiho but thank you for giving me the Ranger. :) I know I have to rebuy Hosho to get Ryujo and I played smart move by saving my commanders by placing in reserve. I am excited to relearn to play CV's I first going to go play against bots it will give me time to master by practicing how get better control of aircraft. But still I miss my other carriers so I will leave this song here. :(
  7. 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.
  8. I keep getting game after game that is DOMINATED by T10 ships, in contrast to how it used to be where there was some 10's some 9s and some 8s. This isnt fun, its frustrating as hell when my T8 ships are constantly having to run for their lives from all the T10s with uber modules that WG thought were great ideas. I don't know what they did, but most of my games look like these, I get maybe one out of 10 thats anything remotely resembling a decent game anymore. WG needs to take another look at this fix and take the time to get it right.
  9. First off I would like to say that i am very grateful of the fact that WG actually Tries to fix issues and make the player base happy (Unlike Gajin, EA, and many others) and granted its not perfect, its nice that they are trying. So with all the West Virginia Threads going around I figured i would give my impute on it as Colorado is one of my favorite ships with about 342 games in it as of this post and i want what is best for the class. I would recommend the following: Suggestion 1: Give the Colorado the Marylands 1945 Hull with the 5'38"s and buff the sigma back to 2.0 instead of 1.9/1.8. 2: Add WV-44 as ether a Free XP ship or a Premium ship and give it the Massachusetts Treatment, this would be the following: Give it a lower Sigma of ether 1.8 or 1.7 and also raise the reload to 32 seconds instead of Colorado's 30, Give it a Slightly weaker heal then Colorado only with a 60-50 second cooldown instead of 80 and the same Damage control party, Give it better performing secondaries with the +40% to Accuracy and a longer range, Give it an Improved Torpedo Belt as that was one of the main reasons it is so much wider, (I'd say around 45-50% instead of the 37% or so of Colorado) 3 Make the current WV-41 be Maryland 1941, I understand this means some Changes to the 3D Model but this would work best because then the whole class would be in the game instead of 2 of the same ship. I may have missed some things here but I feel this would make the Colorado and West virginia-1944 Balance Pretty well as they would have the Same secondaries and would have Comparable AA with these hulls. this would be the Colorado C hull: and this would be West Virginia-1944 (Obviously)
  10. So with all the West Virginia Threads going around I figured i would give my impute on it as Colorado is one of my favorite ships with about 342 games in it as of this post and i want what is best for the class. I would recommend the following: 1: Give the Colorado the Marylands 1945 Hull with the 5'38"s and buff the sigma back to 2.0 instead of 1.9/1.8. 2: Add WV-44 as ether a Free XP ship or a Premium ship and give it the Massachusetts Treatment, this would be the following: Give it a lower Sigma of ether 1.8 or 1.7 and also raise the reload to 32 seconds instead of Colorado's 30, Give it a Slightly weaker heal then Colorado only with a 60-50 second cooldown instead of 80 and the same Damage control party, Give it better performing secondaries with the +40% to Accuracy and a longer range, Give it an Improved Torpedo Belt as that was one of the main reasons it is so much wider, (I'd say around 45-50% instead of the 37% or so of Colorado) 3 Make the current WV-41 be Maryland 1941, I understand this means some Changes to the 3D Model but this would work best because then the whole class would be in the game instead of 2 of the same ship. I may have missed some things here but I feel this would make the Colorado and West virginia-1944 Balance Pretty well. this would be the Colorado C hull: and this would be West Virginia-1944 (Obviously)
  11. So, you screwed up every single skin by requiring that files be newly saved. I have 1740+ files in my skins folder that I'd have to resave in order to get them working again. I'd appreciate if WG let us know if you intend to undo this mindblowingly awful decision...
  12. I've heard that the Price change to tier 6 down will be Permanent next patch. so that leaves the question... Will Players who have already researched tier 6 and lower ships get Compensation? Example is I've researched 18 of the line to tier 6 at least. So when you consider the lower price then that adds up pretty quick to Credits and XP spent.
  13. When are we gonna get a set of ship sales? Maybe after all these premium ones? Standard tech sales have been gone for awhile it seems, with I think only an American sales of some sort for July4th.. What gives WG??
  14. I listened to the entire 2 hour 30 minute long Q&A. There are a number of questions from Flambass, Farazelleth, and Flamu in the middle. Some are obvious (like Fara asking the question he gets asked to ask most on his video comments, "When is the Graf Zepplin going to be for sale again?" to which the obvious answer is "When carriers are done being reworked." which is what WG confirmed). I would say over half of the questions were about radar and how broken it is and WG employees were getting audibly irritated. Here's the video (really just audio). What they did say which I've never heard before were: At around 1 hour 30 minutes, WG says there is no significant statistical difference between a team with 1 radar vs a team with 3 after Flambass asks if MM will ever take the numbers radar of ships on each side in to consideration. At around 2 hours 16 minutes WG gets asked again about anti-radar consumables and WG says they are talking about a radar "counter measure" internally. There are a lot of questions/answers many are ones I've heard before and frankly I was playing Hands of Fate and half listening so I'm sure I missed some. It's worth a listen. WARNING: The Russian guy singing the Russian national anthem with his "best American accent" at the end was so painful I had to shut it off before the rest of my skin peeled off.
×