Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Hapa_Fodder

Developer Bulletin 0.9.9

33 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

7,404
[WG]
Administrator, Developers, Community Department, WG Staff, In AlfaTesters
4,300 posts
14,712 battles

The "U.S. Battleships: Part 1" event, Clan Battles, and other new features.


Read it on the portal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,112
[TARK]
Members
7,331 posts
2,839 battles

There has still been no comment on how the bomber trajectory change has 'no impact' on the bombing performance...when currently changes to the trajectory DO have an impact on bomb trajectory.

Also the shaking when taking damage is also going to nerf damage output...since the shaking when getting shot at by fighters currently nerfs damage output. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,520
[WOLFC]
Members
3,197 posts

Well, this is a nice change, only 1 instance to mod ... and a huge space savings!  Thanks, WG

Apparently, all Regions affected will now also be updated at the same time ... 

 

 

1inst.jpg

eu.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
141
[DIEBL]
Members
134 posts
16,116 battles
37 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

There has still been no comment on how the bomber trajectory change has 'no impact' on the bombing performance...when currently changes to the trajectory DO have an impact on bomb trajectory.

Also the shaking when taking damage is also going to nerf damage output...since the shaking when getting shot at by fighters currently nerfs damage output. 

I hope they put CVs in a special battle mode. Being target practice is getting old.

  • Cool 3
  • Boring 2
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,084
[-K-]
[-K-]
Members
5,581 posts
21,044 battles
42 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

There has still been no comment on how the bomber trajectory change has 'no impact' on the bombing performance...when currently changes to the trajectory DO have an impact on bomb trajectory.

Thought about this too. Best guess I could come up with is they're saying the on-screen models will move a bit differently but the actual server-side entities will behave exactly as they did before.

Edited by Edgecase

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
141
[DIEBL]
Members
134 posts
16,116 battles

Looking forward to the "Mercenary" feature. This will likely help out many clan leaders, and overall player inclusiveness. Do you get your normal clan bonuses? Hopefully any exploits will be minimal or manageable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
401
[BUOY]
Members
1,129 posts
15,596 battles
36 minutes ago, ShareholderProfit said:

Looking forward to the "Mercenary" feature. This will likely help out many clan leaders, and overall player inclusiveness. Do you get your normal clan bonuses? Hopefully any exploits will be minimal or manageable.

As of now all we know is that mercs don't get the clan bonuses from the clan they're divving with. We don't know if they have to be clanless or, if they can be part of a different clan, if they'll get their clan's bonuses.

And unfortunately there's a thousand and one EULA violating exploits theoretically made easier with this system depending on how they implement it... but after the last Clan Battles season crashed and burned...

Edited by lloyd1701
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
90
[STW-A]
Members
270 posts

There is no mention of the start of the "Fall Season" on the Public Test server.  Was the previous Summer Season of updates 0.9.6, 0.9.7 and 0.9.8 the last of these seasons?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
263
[AZUR1]
Members
188 posts
4,315 battles

With the release of Update 0.9.9, players will be able to play on all World of Warships servers within one game client, without the need to install separate game instances for each region. The game server will be determined by the currently selected account in the Wargaming Game Center.

 

Glad someone finally made the move, although I thought this change should be included 5 years ago.

Next change, all servers will united; player will be assigned to closest server when possible to reduce matchmacking waiting time.

  • Cool 1
  • Meh 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
611
[GRAVE]
Members
1,412 posts
19,890 battles

So Kansas is that bad you can actually get her by completing the directives? At least everyone gets something so whiny posts about getting f*ck all should subside for now

Clan Mercenaries: Good idea on paper, but if anyone doesn’t think this will get abused,  you’re about to be disappointed 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14,246
[ARGSY]
Members
22,402 posts
16,275 battles

LOL, the day after I finish putting 120,000 XP back on Colorado:

image.thumb.png.d95e0e5ed7ca7900e054bffcf8fe1311.png

On the other hand, I did it in the context of

1) Failing to get the Tallinn unlock.

2) Rationalizing that if this event were like the Russian Cruiser split (at the same tier), I was unlikely to get Kansas.

3) Having put 11,000 XP on V-170 as an insurance policy and then picking up the Rhein unlock mission the very next day.

So maybe I should just regard it as forcing the hand of fate. I was going to get the Kansas anyway; at least if I can swing the directives, I won't have to grind out or pay for the B modules (or pay for the ship)! 

 

As for the Minnesota in random bundles, we'll see. If the price is right and we get to "peek at the top card" (as it were) like we have in previous events, it might be worth it if she's first up.

Edited by Ensign_Cthulhu
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
66
[KOTSB]
Members
206 posts
10,778 battles
43 minutes ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

LOL, the day after I finish putting 120,000 XP back on Colorado:

image.thumb.png.d95e0e5ed7ca7900e054bffcf8fe1311.png

On the other hand, I did it in the context of

1) Failing to get the Tallinn unlock.

2) Rationalizing that if this event were like the Russian Cruiser split (at the same tier), I was unlikely to get Kansas.

3) Having put 11,000 XP on V-170 as an insurance policy and then picking up the Rhein unlock mission the very next day.

So maybe I should just regard it as forcing the hand of fate. I was going to get the Kansas anyway; at least if I can swing the directives, I won't have to grind out or pay for the B modules (or pay for the ship)! 

 

As for the Minnesota in random bundles, we'll see. If the price is right and we get to "peek at the top card" (as it were) like we have in previous events, it might be worth it if she's first up.

Did the same on my Colorado. She was ready to hit the buy button on the Kansas. Oh well. Got to dunk on some T6 carriers with spotter plane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14,246
[ARGSY]
Members
22,402 posts
16,275 battles
1 hour ago, Seaman_Rookie said:

There is no mention of the start of the "Fall Season" on the Public Test server.  Was the previous Summer Season of updates 0.9.6, 0.9.7 and 0.9.8 the last of these seasons?

We had Fall, Winter, Spring and Summer, so yeah, maybe it was. On the other hand, I got two premium ships out of it (DeGrasse, Huang He) so I'm not going to complain.

1 hour ago, tfcas119 said:

At least everyone gets something so whiny posts about getting f*ck all should subside for now

I'd wait until I saw the directives before making that comment. If they're giving away a Tier 8 early unlock to anyone who finishes them, you can guarantee that finishing will not be easy (especially if they throw in that lovely golden camo as part of the deal). Someone is going to find something to complain about for sure.

1 hour ago, tfcas119 said:

Clan Mercenaries: Good idea on paper, but if anyone doesn’t think this will get abused,  you’re about to be disappointed 

I want to see how it's executed on the main server. The PTS iteration means nothing because they're deliberately keeping the clan battle team size down and allowing 2 out of 3 to be mercenaries just so they can test the mechanism for flaws.

If the number of mercenary slots in the real thing is kept low and the mercs have to be clanless, I think it will curb the worst of the excesses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
140
[KAG]
Members
196 posts
10,310 battles
4 hours ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

There has still been no comment on how the bomber trajectory change has 'no impact' on the bombing performance...when currently changes to the trajectory DO have an impact on bomb trajectory.

Also the shaking when taking damage is also going to nerf damage output...since the shaking when getting shot at by fighters currently nerfs damage output. 

The Bomb Trajectories may VISUALLY change, but that doesn't mean the invisible math based on plane position at time of release has changed at all.
As it is, bombs are hard to spot as they fall and they can  appear to go completely wonky sideways, sometimes near 90deg. to the plane, at release when released at the last moment.  This is a visual change only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
401
[CRF]
Members
923 posts
8,725 battles

Oh boy - can't wait for super slow USN BB's, especially at the higher tiers....just hope you don't get placed far out on the flanks when you spawn...

On the server changes, I am not sure I understand this.  What happens if you have an account on the EU server and the NA server - will you still be able to play on those "servers", or if you are in the US, will both accounts be automatically directed to the NA server?  As I understand it, each server has generally unique play styles, and someone might prefer an offshore server play style rather than their"local" server play style...I know several streamers I follow have NA and EU accounts which they switch back and forth on.

On re-reading the description, I see that the different servers are still there, but still wonder about access to an "offshore" server....

Edited by sonoasailor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,112
[TARK]
Members
7,331 posts
2,839 battles
26 minutes ago, Digital_Wind said:

The Bomb Trajectories may VISUALLY change, but that doesn't mean the invisible math based on plane position at time of release has changed at all.
As it is, bombs are hard to spot as they fall and they can  appear to go completely wonky sideways, sometimes near 90deg. to the plane, at release when released at the last moment.  This is a visual change only.

Thats NOT how bombing works in game.

The plane trajectory up to and including release is a MAJOR component of the bomb release direction and penetration.

Bombs are EASY to spot as the carrier pilot...

...so yes, I am still waiting for comment on how this is not a change to dive bomber performance...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
660
[MR-1]
[MR-1]
Members
1,553 posts
21,289 battles

With the new ranked battles starting in 6 days , we’re going to get this also in the next update . Don’t you think there’s enough going on already 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
140
[KAG]
Members
196 posts
10,310 battles
1 hour ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

Thats NOT how bombing works in game.

The plane trajectory up to and including release is a MAJOR component of the bomb release direction and penetration.

Bombs are EASY to spot as the carrier pilot...

...so yes, I am still waiting for comment on how this is not a change to dive bomber performance...

No, you are wrong.  And petty.  I said the bombs are hard to spot, I didn't say they were impossible to spot.  Everyone knows watching 12 Brit carpet bombs fall nice and slow is much easier than 3 IJN AP bombs.   Jeez.
here's why....and anyone can test it themselves:

  1. Take something other than a carpet bomber or high altitude bomber and release your bombs at the last fraction of a second when you are just above the water.
  2. Keep your eye on the bombs.
  3. You will see the bombs fly off at extreme angles and counter to the momentum of the airplanes.
  4. Do it again for high altitude and you don't see this

This means that bomb drop locations are predetermined at the moment of drop AND NOT BASED ON THE PLANES MOMENTUM, the game does a simple check for things to collide with like mountains and ships.

There is a myth that if bombs are released at a shallow angle they can go through the side of a ship like a shell.  This is true*
*it is true because your planes are closer to the water and the bombs will travel at more magical shallow angles to hit their RNG locations...which can look like dropping in front or behind or way off at an 80deg turn to the left.... but not consistent with the planes motion.  DROPPING SHALLOW only makes this possible by changing the flight path to be more angular, not by adding to forward momentum (instead of downward).  The myth is true, but not for the reason people think.

Therefore, everything has been determined by invisible numbers and you only have control of the angle and the dispersion the bombs take...which is more numbers.  Difficult to understand but not impossible.

I assume that WG is simply changing the Linear path of the bombs to be more visually parabolic or visually appealing...and as WG themselves said, this will not change anything.

Edited by Digital_Wind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,112
[TARK]
Members
7,331 posts
2,839 battles
2 hours ago, Digital_Wind said:

No, you are wrong.  And petty.  I said the bombs are hard to spot, I didn't say they were impossible to spot.  Everyone knows watching 12 Brit carpet bombs fall nice and slow is much easier than 3 IJN AP bombs.   Jeez.
here's why....and anyone can test it themselves:

  1. Take something other than a carpet bomber or high altitude bomber and release your bombs at the last fraction of a second when you are just above the water.
  2. Keep your eye on the bombs.
  3. You will see the bombs fly off at extreme angles and counter to the momentum of the airplanes.
  4. Do it again for high altitude and you don't see this

This means that bomb drop locations are predetermined at the moment of drop AND NOT BASED ON THE PLANES MOMENTUM, the game does a simple check for things to collide with like mountains and ships.

There is a myth that if bombs are released at a shallow angle they can go through the side of a ship like a shell.  This is true*
*it is true because your planes are closer to the water and the bombs will travel at more magical shallow angles to hit their RNG locations...which can look like dropping in front or behind or way off at an 80deg turn to the left.... but not consistent with the planes motion.  DROPPING SHALLOW only makes this possible by changing the flight path to be more angular, not by adding to forward momentum (instead of downward).  The myth is true, but not for the reason people think.

Therefore, everything has been determined by invisible numbers and you only have control of the angle and the dispersion the bombs take...which is more numbers.  Difficult to understand but not impossible.

I assume that WG is simply changing the Linear path of the bombs to be more visually parabolic or visually appealing...and as WG themselves said, this will not change anything.

Ill have to test this...

...its an interesting and perhaps plausible theory.

It would be nice if WG would confirm it...and save me the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,497
[HINON]
[HINON]
Members
8,427 posts
12,365 battles
6 hours ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

LOL, the day after I finish putting 120,000 XP back on Colorado:

image.thumb.png.d95e0e5ed7ca7900e054bffcf8fe1311.png

On the other hand, I did it in the context of

1) Failing to get the Tallinn unlock.

2) Rationalizing that if this event were like the Russian Cruiser split (at the same tier), I was unlikely to get Kansas.

3) Having put 11,000 XP on V-170 as an insurance policy and then picking up the Rhein unlock mission the very next day.

So maybe I should just regard it as forcing the hand of fate. I was going to get the Kansas anyway; at least if I can swing the directives, I won't have to grind out or pay for the B modules (or pay for the ship)! 

 

As for the Minnesota in random bundles, we'll see. If the price is right and we get to "peek at the top card" (as it were) like we have in previous events, it might be worth it if she's first up.

like they say "Better safe than sorry" ive gotten Colorado to about 75K XP right now 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3
[WPP]
[WPP]
Members
14 posts
6,938 battles

With the release of Update 0.9.9, players will be able to play on all World of Warships servers within one game client, without the need to install separate game instances for each region.

Wake me up when I can play my existing ships on any server.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
49 posts
8,469 battles

Wargaming,

Please allow mercenaries of other clans, I understand why you would be hesitant about this for the higher level clans, but I have a proposal if you want an easy solution, if it is available on the back end (As I have no idea how you code your game).

Allow the creation of "family clans" in game. This would allow for some sharing of benefits and to allow mercenaries of one clan to play with the other as a mercenary. You can limit the number of allowable clans in a family to 3 or 4, and for a clan to join, they would be in a 7 day waiting period before they could join another family. Inversely, another option is to have a 7 day leaving period, where the clan can not have its mercenaries available to the family clan, and the clan leaving can not participate in clan battles. This would also prevent the cycling of clans into and out of a family.

Some of the proposed perks I am suggesting include: 1 day clan transfer rather than 3 days. The sharing of clan base resources to the other clan. Allowing for management of one clan to help with the management of the other clan.

I know the likely hood of this exact implementation is unlikely, but I wanted to propose a tool that would likely help improve the community and the many clans in the game. Do have a name suggestion, you can name the group of clans  "Armadas". The name of the armada would be the name of the founding clan. Example: I have AFK and AFK-2 for my clans. The founding clan of the armada is AFK, so the name of the armada is AFK Armada.

Thank you for your time!

Edited by Nickhasarrived

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×