Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
HellaCopterRescue

Development Alert from Sub_Octavian on controversial mods such as "Traffic Lights" and Angle Indicator

98 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

40
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Members
344 posts
3,710 battles

None of these mods have helped me it seems. :Smile_facepalm:

Edited by InventedThought

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
189
[WOLFB]
Beta Testers
1,458 posts
8,447 battles

So the next mod to be sewn into the game, hopefully will be give way sign's at spawn point's. It is obvious that traffic lights are not working. :Smile_teethhappy:

Yeah, I think all this stuff is pretty benign. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,884
Members
23,169 posts
5,841 battles
1 hour ago, awildseaking said:

 

My problem with x marks the spot isn't the advantage it confers, but the fact it directly contradicts game balance. At high tiers where range increases significantly, the sole purpose of using spotting aircraft is to more easily locate tracers from invisible ships. Aiming with spotters is a skill and I don't appreciate that WG is making that skill redundant with a mod.

You definitely have a point, but keep in mind that aiming with spotters into smoke is a skill that was created out of whole cloth by creative players, and not, in my belief anyway, an intended purpose of the spotter plane.

I get the lack of appreciation for making skill redundant, but the grumbling about it is lost in the thunderous rantings about useless teammates.

That's probably the most-mentioned issue here, and since WG doesn't seem inclined to close the skill disparity by introducing some kind of SBMM, and they can't raise the floor by making players play better, they're attempting to do it by lowering the ceiling.

The more people complain about bad teammates, the more you can expect WG to address those complaints in the only practical way possible, by force-feeding artificial skill.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
351
[GRFOX]
Members
2,242 posts
5,164 battles
On 4/25/2018 at 9:54 AM, Skpstr said:

That's probably what a lot of drivers said when the syncromesh was introduced, or power steering, or automatic transmissions.

Nowadays, it's automatic parallel parking, lane-departure and blind spot warnings, and backup cameras and proximity sensors. The message I get from automakers is that all that time I spent honing my situational awareness while driving, learning to parallel park, and reverse using mirrors and spatial awareness.....all a waste.

And don't even get me started on what great great Grandma would think of a modern, well-equipped kitchen.

Just curious, when you make breakfast, do you cook over an open fire, or do you use one of those stove things, that basically say "screw you" to people that took the time to learn to cook the hard way? I mean, anybody can cook a reasonably edible meal now.

Blasphemy!!!

 

That why I got my Motorcycle license.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,884
Members
23,169 posts
5,841 battles
2 hours ago, GreyFox78659 said:

That why I got my Motorcycle license.

Kick start or electric? :cap_haloween:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,446
[NMKJT]
Beta Testers
22,992 posts
3,895 battles
On 4/25/2018 at 11:22 AM, Junostorm said:

Funny how everyone expects a level of add-ons/mods for online games now.  Why do you bother playing if you cannot play without some add-on/mod telling where/when/how/now?  You end up spending too much time looking at all the additional info and stuff rather than playing the game.

I am not against add-ons/mods being used but how much is too much before it starts to degrade game/computer performance?

At least with WG coding them, should not impede the game performance.

Because they can play without the mods in place. The mods are just a convenience that makes the information easier to get.

 

Meanwhile, there seems to be a subculture in internet gaming that feels like a game has to be a job, and the less fun it is, the better it is.

 

I don't use X Marks The Spot, but I do use Navigator and Running Lights-- the first makes angling easier to manage and the second helps me when the game's own indication of speed and direction (smoke) refuses to load in due to a well known 2 year old graphical glitch.

Edited by KiyoSenkan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,827
[WOLF3]
Members
20,342 posts
18,644 battles
23 hours ago, Junostorm said:

Heresy! common sense & logic is not permitted on the web it only leads to a paradox resulting in the end of the universe :Smile_ohmy:

And we all know someone somewhere will make (if not done already) a post complaining about they can no longer play the game cause WG broke their add-ons/mods.

Considering the amount of regular crying about a certain threat to people's ships, but people refuse to adapt to those threats, Common Sense isn't common in WoWS Players :Smile_teethhappy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,528 posts
10 battles
18 hours ago, Ares1967 said:

 It would be enlightening to know who in the anti-mod crowd is playing on a 24" or larger monitor. The only machine I play on is my 17" lappy. Usually while parked in a truck stop for the night, on sometimes crap WiFi. My "mousepad" is the back of a clipboard resting on my right leg. I use a few select mods to help my old eyes out. I'll stop using the mods when WG bans them or the entire player base plays under the same conditions I do.

Do you have to go afk in the game to answer the door because a lot lizard is knocking on it?  lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
690
[BWC]
Beta Testers
1,434 posts
6,155 battles
19 hours ago, Ares1967 said:

 It would be enlightening to know who in the anti-mod crowd is playing on a 24" or larger monitor. The only machine I play on is my 17" lappy. Usually while parked in a truck stop for the night, on sometimes crap WiFi. My "mousepad" is the back of a clipboard resting on my right leg. I use a few select mods to help my old eyes out. I'll stop using the mods when WG bans them or the entire player base plays under the same conditions I do.

 

It would be just as enlightening to know how many of those who mod their game play on a 24" or larger monitor with a system that blows away what I'm using. I strongly believe the vast majority of people who use these mods do not do so from some perceived inferiority complex, but because the mods allow them to have even more advantages in the game.

The hardware that the other users in the game are using is almost certainly a zero concern when choosing if you will use a relative angle indicator, since you'll need the resolution to use it that would let you see if the opposing ship is angled or broadside, and the only reason to use it is to avoid firing until you -know- you will not bounce your shot (for those still insisting this does not provide very powerful information those without the mod cannot get, I challenge them to correctly state the relative angle on five different targets 10 km away that are at either 29 or 31 degrees relative angle ten times in a row without fail through only the vanilla client. Choosing the right angle is the difference between a pen and a bounce).

 

So, your argument falls apart, as it presumes modding is the result of a handicap, when it is, in fact, meant to induce a handicap on others.

 

 

Edited by Jakob_Knight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,446
[NMKJT]
Beta Testers
22,992 posts
3,895 battles
46 minutes ago, Jakob_Knight said:

So, your argument falls apart, as it presumes modding is the result of a handicap, when it is, in fact, meant to induce a handicap on others.

And this is where your argument falls apart. Mods such as Navigator and Running Lights are not the result of a handicap of a player nor are they meant to induce a handicap on other players.

 

What these mods do is take information already presented in the game, and present it in a different way. That's literally it. It's no different than smoke circles or AP vs HE ammo colors. Both of which are mods that the base game eventually incorporated. This is why the developers do not see these mods as game-breaking, cheating, or otherwise some kind of problem. They do not provide anything that is not already readily available. They just provide it in a different way.

 

In the case of Navigator, it's actually providing the information in the same way actual warships calculated it. Which actually improves immersion.

 

main-qimg-4f92253a21646d626d97d7548ae7f8

 

Look familiar?

 

I defend this not because I'm "afraid" I'll "lose the cheat I rely on". Which will no doubt be leveled my way. I defend these mods because there is nothing wrong with getting the same information in a different, more immersive way. You're basically just mad that you honed a skill that is being rendered obsolete.

Edited by KiyoSenkan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,400
[YORHA]
Members
4,200 posts
7,367 battles
25 minutes ago, Bullroarerr said:

Not sure why you ranting so hard, and quite frankly your stats don't reflect years of hard work.

 

What is legal/illegal or possible/impossible is basically arbitrary in a game ( unlike real world where the laws of nature, technology etc... are natural constraints). The only significant question is what provides for an enjoyable game based on the target demographic.

 

As an older player, I like these mods because my eyes aren't what they used to be and it is helpful. But you still need to know where to aim, by how much and even anticipate what they are trying to do.

Stat shaming. 

 

Wow.. you are one quality guy.  Keep up the excellent work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
332
Members
1,195 posts

@KiyoSenkan

 

All of the people in that room cannot see out, there for a visual reference to relative angles for the solution is needed.

 

On the other hand someone on the bridge etc who can see out doesn’t need that reference.

 

Thus calling it for “immersion” is at best pure B S.

Edited by b101uk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,111
[XBRTC]
Members
2,775 posts
8,857 battles
5 minutes ago, b101uk said:

@KiyoSenkan

 

All of the people in that room cannot see out, there for a visual reference to relative angles for the solution is needed.

 

On the other hand someone on the bridge etc who can see out doesn’t need that reference.

 

Thus calling it for “immersion” is at best pure B S.

 

Um.

Have you ever actually spent any time on the bridge of a warship?

Because, I mean, umm ... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,446
[NMKJT]
Beta Testers
22,992 posts
3,895 battles
9 minutes ago, b101uk said:

@KiyoSenkan

 

All of the people in that room cannot see out, there for a visual reference to relative angles for the solution is needed.

 

On the other hand someone on the bridge etc who can see out doesn’t need that reference.

 

Thus calling it for “immersion” is at best pure B S.

WkwaYdG.gif

 

Immersion was just one very narrow slice of what I said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
332
Members
1,195 posts
6 minutes ago, LT_Rusty_SWO said:

 

Um.

Have you ever actually spent any time on the bridge of a warship?

Because, I mean, umm ... 

A room with no windows.

Vs.

A wide room with lots of windows or the flying bridge etc.

 

 

Doesn’t take a lot of guesswork dose it as to which affords the better view out. :Smile-_tongue:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
871
[INTEL]
Members
1,426 posts
11,747 battles
23 minutes ago, b101uk said:

@KiyoSenkan

 

All of the people in that room cannot see out, there for a visual reference to relative angles for the solution is needed.

 

On the other hand someone on the bridge etc who can see out doesn’t need that reference.

 

Thus calling it for “immersion” is at best pure B S.

 You have no idea what you're talking about.

 The device shown by KiyoSenKan is a "Relative Angle Indicator", it goes by several diff names as well depending one the Era of the equipment involved. I can walk onto a 1940's era warship and immediately go to at least 3 of them, only one of which is on the Bridge. On a 1950's era Knox class Frigate I could show you EIGHT, thats "8", as in one more than SEVEN. Some are Stand-Alone Repeaters: One in Combat above the CIC watch officers console, one in Sonar Control, one in the CO's stateroom, one on the Bridge above the Plotting table. Also in Combat/CIC, there were two for the MK-114 FCS, one in the main console and one in the ASW Officers control panel. There was also one in the Mk112 Box launcher control station. I think I'm missing a couple but its been 28ish odd years since I stepped foot on a Knox.

 Edit:  I forgot the one in the Unit Commanders Stateroom.

Edited by Ares1967

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,051
[WOLF9]
Members
9,388 posts
4,243 battles
10 hours ago, Jakob_Knight said:

The fact that you believe the concept of cheating is completely dependent on what the Devs allow is a flawed idea. 

No, it's not.  For "devs" read "game moderators" or "referees".  These are the people who's job it is to interpret the RULES and apply them to particular situations.  You agreed to this setup when you accepted the Terms and Conditions.

 

The refs said that no foul occurred on the play.  Yammer all you want; rationalize and sophisticate.  It don't make it a foul.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
542
[DUCC]
Members
2,018 posts
7,110 battles
8 hours ago, Skpstr said:

You definitely have a point, but keep in mind that aiming with spotters into smoke is a skill that was created out of whole cloth by creative players, and not, in my belief anyway, an intended purpose of the spotter plane.

I get the lack of appreciation for making skill redundant, but the grumbling about it is lost in the thunderous rantings about useless teammates.

That's probably the most-mentioned issue here, and since WG doesn't seem inclined to close the skill disparity by introducing some kind of SBMM, and they can't raise the floor by making players play better, they're attempting to do it by lowering the ceiling.

The more people complain about bad teammates, the more you can expect WG to address those complaints in the only practical way possible, by force-feeding artificial skill.

I'd love for WG to clarify because I can't imagine any other reason for spotter aircraft on most ships. Like, going from 23 to 28km range on North Carolina? Nobody is shooting that far away, at least not reliably. Sometimes I'll cit someone asleep at the wheel at 20km, but not that far out.

Plus the aerial perspective doesn't make sense to me otherwise. It isn't necessary to aim at ships you can see and most people find it difficult to aim with. I use spotters on high tier CA in randoms and CB with range mod because you can reliably HE spam at extreme ranges.

Spotter vs. fighter isn't a significant meta issue, but I think it would be a shame to incorporate spotters, reward players for being skilled with them, and then make them redundant. I'm sure CVs won't appreciate everyone using fighters either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,111
[XBRTC]
Members
2,775 posts
8,857 battles
50 minutes ago, b101uk said:

A room with no windows.

Vs.

A wide room with lots of windows or the flying bridge etc.

 

 

Doesn’t take a lot of guesswork dose it as to which affords the better view out. :Smile-_tongue:

 

How much good does that view do you, though?

 

This is a pretty solid representation of the view of a modern CG-47 class cruiser at sea, probably taken from the deck of a carrier. From the picture, I'd say it's at a range of 8-10 thousand yards. It's also probably taken using a BIG zoom lens. More zoom than you get through the big eyes on the bridge wings, certainly.

Is it coming toward you? Is it going away from you? How can you tell?

0420-0904-2411-0401_ship_off_in_the_dist

Do you know how to actually calculate the course and speed of a target? How to actually figure out it's target angle, using the systems available in 1945? Do you know how long it takes to do? I do, and I can. If you want your bridge crew (by which I mean "you") to actually be doing their jobs in a manner consistent with even a best case technological scenario, from that time period, then you're not likely to get your first rounds off before the time runs out on the game.

 

 

44 minutes ago, Ares1967 said:

 You have no idea what you're talking about.

 The device shown by KiyoSenKan is a "Relative Angle Indicator", it goes by several diff names as well depending one the Era of the equipment involved. I can walk onto a 1940's era warship and immediately go to at least 3 of them, only one of which is on the Bridge. On a 1950's era Knox class Frigate I could show you EIGHT, thats "8", as in one more than SEVEN. Some are Stand-Alone Repeaters: One in Combat above the CIC watch officers console, one in Sonar Control, one in the CO's stateroom, one on the Bridge above the Plotting table. Also in Combat/CIC, there were two for the MK-114 FCS, one in the main console and one in the ASW Officers control panel. There was also one in the Mk112 Box launcher control station. I think I'm missing a couple but its been 28ish odd years since I stepped foot on a Knox.

 Edit:  I forgot the one in the Unit Commanders Stateroom.

 

We need to have moboards implemented in this game. You want good target angle information, you do a moboard on it, and hope that your target doesn't change course or speed in the next 6-10 minutes. :cap_book:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
402
[WOLF9]
Members
1,182 posts
5,156 battles

When I played WoT, I used historical tank skin mods as well as historical sound effects mods for the guns, engines, crew voices, etc, and some nice gunsight mods. It just made the game look and feel better especially in the early days of WoT.

Then I started playing WoWs. I have never used mods with WoWs. I have found what WG offers with the game as far as the look of the ships, the sound effects, and the game's UI to be more than adequate for me. I have just never felt the need to use any of the mods out there.

That being said. I don't have a problem with people using mods.

There are people on both sides of the fence here that will never budge from their opinion. You have people that think any and all mods should be considered a cheat or a hack, which IMO, they are just being ignorant and uninformed taking that stance... never the less, it is their stance. Then you have people that cannot live without playing WoWs with mods.

If WG says it is OK for folks to use mods that contain "Traffic Lights" and "Angle Indicator," then whether you disagree with it or not is mute at that point. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,111
[XBRTC]
Members
2,775 posts
8,857 battles
1 hour ago, iDuckman said:

No, it's not.  For "devs" read "game moderators" or "referees".  These are the people who's job it is to interpret CREATE the RULES and apply them to particular situations.  You agreed to this setup when you accepted the Terms and Conditions.

 

The refs said that no foul occurred on the play.  Yammer all you want; rationalize and sophisticate.  It don't make it a foul.

 

 

FTFY.

When the people who write the rules say something isn't a violation of those rules, then ... I mean, it's pretty silly to argue that they're wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,051
[WOLF9]
Members
9,388 posts
4,243 battles

True enough, though you don't need to go there to make the point.  I didn't because it seems to imply a shifting ground.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,111
[XBRTC]
Members
2,775 posts
8,857 battles
10 minutes ago, iDuckman said:

True enough, though you don't need to go there to make the point.  I didn't because it seems to imply a shifting ground.

 

 

Isn't it, though? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×