My few cents

[Fly_Wheel]

Here some of my experiences, etc.

 

First, I think the World of Warships seems to be a scissors-paper-stone like sort of tactical game.

I have played ships up to level 5 of both Japanese and US nations.

It gives a look and feel of warships at sea, light and faster ships with teeth, fast-firing cruisers and slower but more deadly battleships that can take a punch. The carriers have a little bit more overview but have limits as they cannot be everywhere at once, and are relatively weak and slow.

Also I can see why it is at risk of being called World of Torpedo's, as this is a dominant element in the game.

 

Some comments:

- As a general improvement torpedo's should have an ammo limit, even more so for cruisers. Or a limit for ammo and longer reload to get the batch from below deck.

Unlimited torpedo's seems to unbalance the game.

- As a general improvement the secondary guns (on battleships) should be hitting more. Either that or the player should be able to take some form of control.

It is either long range fire for the batleships or this misfiring short range defenses, nothing in-between?

- One group of fighters against another group of fighters and one of them is completely wiped out, while the winner has lost nothing? Nah.

- I get temporary interface hiccups during play sometimes, usually when hitting something, I'd say every 15-20 minutes or so. It does happen more when I am already sunk and only watching, but sometimes during exiting combat actions. Not good. Dunno if it is my machine, my provider or the game? The ping goes to up thousands afterwards, at that moment during hiccup the ping looks fine (but is frozen I guess).

- It would be great if multiple ships can somehow combine firecontrol, like able to combine fighters or long range guns.

- I see different tactics for different types of ships, which is very good. I tried various carrier tactics and one tactic that seems to be working well is to highlight the position of enemy destroyers with a group of fighters, so they can be killed easily. Or attacking enemy destroyers with torp bombers, that seems to be working well also. Enemy battleships are easy prey really for torp bombers.

- In general I find the battleships the most lacking in power. Their reload times suck, their capacity for speed or turning sucks and their defenses are no good, whether from air or close combat attacks. I expected better resistance against torpedo's but they are just fat sitting ducks. And the reload is so slow that enemy cruisers can literally bombard you to death in between heavy salvo's, that will miss 50% of the time because of the cruisers turning all the time. I'd say they should be excellent hitters at least, doing awesome damage most of the time. That would compensate for the continuing salvo's from cruisers.

- Some cruisers are just great. They brisk with guns, have long range and short reloads, while the guns are well-placed around the ship. If you'd combine that with staying power then they rule the game. So that should not happen. I think in general the range of the cruisers is too much and perhaps some have too much hitpoints. It allows for retreating at speed, while still bombarding enemies from afar. I dunno if this is what they are supposed to be able to.

- I miss a clock, a real-time indication in the window. Why is that not there? Surely no mod should be made for this, should be easely done in the game?

- If you want reality then torps should be nerfed (yes I know, not always fun) so they really can be duds. I read a lot of hitting torpedo's never went off because they had problems. If the ammo stays unlimited, then at least this should be a factor.

- I'd wonder what submarines should do in this game. It would make it more unique (as there is no equivalent in WoT for them) and add another dimension. It would also add the role for submarine hunters that destroyers did fulfill. Would there be any plans for them?

- I'd consider myself a noob or otherwise just average, but I wonder why also this game is plagued by so many players that just don't work inside a team? Is there no way to encourage this, like give points for helping team mates or whatever such things as catching torpedo's or fighters for a team mate? Some never learn of course. There should be points for scouting?

Also the tactic which I call 'Lemmings' I get really bored and frustrated of it. All players just moving in one direction, acting as a steamrolling force should not be productive. Please find some solution for this senseless tactic which is boring and I personally dislike.

Small flotillas, small groups of ships working together is what I would expect to be the better tactic, but it seems not to be working well as these teams encounter the enemy lemming force and are wiped.

- Also some games are just too short. I think it would be good if remaining players could vote for extending the time, so one single remaining destroyer could not force a draw so easily (for example).

- The edge of the map seems to work as some kind of bug exploit. Ships on/through the edge are less well to hit it seems. Any comments to that? I think it should not work like that. I suggest a 'grey' area that forces you to turn around or something similar.

- Most things work out quite well, the destroyers are really fast, their torps do awful damage and they are only seen at short range. Their guns suck with a turning speed that usually sucks too. I think as they only fight close range really, the turn speeds of the guns should be much faster. And their hitpoints and armor suck, which is good. Only some destroyers are way to good in hiding, can only be seen at even shorter range and have an awful short reload time on their unlimited torps. And that is unbalanced.

The cruisers are quite good at destroyer hunting, but are easy prey for battleships. Unless their range matches or outdoes even that of the battleships. As mentioned, unbalanced.

The battleships have awesome power but I see too many of them on the field. They can repair themselves, which I think is a very nice addition to them, but their close range abilities are very weak. I reality no one would like to be close to a battleship. It would blow you away. It would be very risky to come within a range of 7km of less. I would expect to see less battleships with more power.

The carriers to me look reasonably balanced, including with the fact that they are countered with other carriers. But as mentioned the fighter battles are no good, carriers are seen from short range only (why is that, that cannot be real?) and even if they have protection they are easy prey. I have seen two Omaha cruisers trying to protect a carrier under attack from torp and other bombers and not succeeding well. Should that be the case? Should perhaps the pilots, facing all this defense fire, turn back? And if they are intercepted and losing, try to break away? Planes seem to be the only things that have limited ammo and are limited in numbers. Then either some more power or the ability to leave the battlefield for carriers should be there. Perhaps extension of the map only for carriers?

 

So far, so good,

 

Flywheel

[anonym_E4frrPsISLY2]

I actually read your post Fly_Wheel. I have to say 99% of the forum members will see this wall of text and their eyes will roll back in their heads. You do make some valid points and some not so valid points which would take another wall of text to explain. So...my real comment here is keep your posts a little shorter and compact. Also note that many, many, many of the topics you brought up have been discussed many times here already. Instead of just giving you the rude "search the forum" and "google is your friend" you may want to take that into consideration for you next post.

 

I sure am glad you are posting though, and everyone welcomes new ideas. As the game matures I think many of your issues will resolve themselves. But as in other WG titles alot of them will not. You just have to decide if you are willing to accept that or not.

 

Hope to see you in a game and good luck!

[AzraelIshi]

1- This would basically kill any and all IJN DD. They rely far more than any other ship in-game on torps. They already have long reload times for their "main" weapon at higher tiers (even reaching 2 minutes between shot and shot) and high detectability rating (up to 13 seconds before impact). We do the imposible to not miss a shot as to not become basically useless for those 1:40 - 2 mins that it takes to reload (because our main guns are just for decoration, specially at mid-tiers). If we get limited torps most will go to USN DD's due to their main guns, or other classes altogether. 
2-Nothing to add here
3-They are adressing this in the Public Test that it's undergoing right now.
4-Can't say anything about this.
5-Why would you need that...? Skippers already can comunicate on a "Hey, see that Nagato? Focus her" way. Why would you link fire control from 2 or more ships (Basically meaning one skipper loses control of his turrets?)
6- Some USN DD's are getting buffed up AA to destroy the fighters.
7- Basically, you suck at using a BB and it's somehow the ship fault.
8- They are. They serve as jack-of-all-trades ships, designed to hunt down DD's and provide fire support for BB's and AA cover. They have better armor than CV's and DD's, but less than BB's. They have better speed than BB's but less than DD's. They have better weaponry than DD's but worse than BB's. It basically boils down to that. For example, my Zao has 44k HP, and it's a tier X Heavy Cruiser. A Kongo or Myogi, a tier IV BB has more HP than me. The fully upgraded Kongo has around the same speed than me, but better weaponry.
9-Nothing to say
10- They already answered that they will never implement duds.
11- They already answered that they found no way whatsoever to balance subs compared to other ships and simply abandoned the concept altogether.
12- At lower tiers people simply go and kill things out. As you start going to higher tiers (VI, VII) skippers start to group more, BB's stay in formatiuon, CA/CL provide cover. Even some CA provide AA and fire support to CV's (many CV know I do), who stay with the fleet  It's just a mentality problem which works itself out as players notice that grouping up makes them harder to hit by bombers and easily defendable (it has its drawbacks tho, 3 destroyers firing a full salvo into a formation are bound to hit something, somewhere)
13- So, you disliking a tactic makes it automatically bad and it should be somehow removed. Classy.
14- You can eqasily ignore the destroyer and just go cap.
15- WG is already working on the issue
 

That's basically it. 

[Strike_Witch_Tomoko]

1- This would basically kill any and all IJN DD. They rely far more than any other ship in-game on torps. They already have long reload times for their "main" weapon at higher tiers (even reaching 2 minutes between shot and shot) and high detectability rating (up to 13 seconds before impact). We do the imposible to not miss a shot as to not become basically useless for those 1:40 - 2 mins that it takes to reload (because our main guns are just for decoration, specially at mid-tiers). If we get limited torps most will go to USN DD's due to their main guns, or other classes altogether. 

2-Nothing to add here

3-They are adressing this in the Public Test that it's undergoing right now.

4-Can't say anything about this.

5-Why would you need that...? Skippers already can comunicate on a "Hey, see that Nagato? Focus her" way. Why would you link fire control from 2 or more ships (Basically meaning one skipper loses control of his turrets?)

6- Some USN DD's are getting buffed up AA to destroy the fighters.

7- Basically, you suck at using a BB and it's somehow the ship fault.

8- They are. They serve as jack-of-all-trades ships, designed to hunt down DD's and provide fire support for BB's and AA cover. They have better armor than CV's and DD's, but less than BB's. They have better speed than BB's but less than DD's. They have better weaponry than DD's but worse than BB's. It basically boils down to that. For example, my Zao has 44k HP, and it's a tier X Heavy Cruiser. A Kongo or Myogi, a tier IV BB has more HP than me. The fully upgraded Kongo has around the same speed than me, but better weaponry.

9-Nothing to say

10- They already answered that they will never implement duds.

11- They already answered that they found no way whatsoever to balance subs compared to other ships and simply abandoned the concept altogether.

12- At lower tiers people simply go and kill things out. As you start going to higher tiers (VI, VII) skippers start to group more, BB's stay in formatiuon, CA/CL provide cover. Even some CA provide AA and fire support to CV's (many CV know I do), who stay with the fleet  It's just a mentality problem which works itself out as players notice that grouping up makes them harder to hit by bombers and easily defendable (it has its drawbacks tho, 3 destroyers firing a full salvo into a formation are bound to hit something, somewhere)

13- So, you disliking a tactic makes it automatically bad and it should be somehow removed. Classy.

14- You can eqasily ignore the destroyer and just go cap.

15- WG is already working on the issue

 

That's basically it. 

 

add on to #8

IJN Cruisers lean a bit more towards anti BB (due to torps, and flatter gun arcs)

USN Cruisers lean a bit more towards anti CV and DD (due to rof and AA)

 

[anonym_E4frrPsISLY2]

1- This would basically kill any and all IJN DD. They rely far more than any other ship in-game on torps. They already have long reload times for their "main" weapon at higher tiers (even reaching 2 minutes between shot and shot) and high detectability rating (up to 13 seconds before impact). We do the imposible to not miss a shot as to not become basically useless for those 1:40 - 2 mins that it takes to reload (because our main guns are just for decoration, specially at mid-tiers). If we get limited torps most will go to USN DD's due to their main guns, or other classes altogether. 

2-Nothing to add here

3-They are adressing this in the Public Test that it's undergoing right now.

4-Can't say anything about this.

5-Why would you need that...? Skippers already can comunicate on a "Hey, see that Nagato? Focus her" way. Why would you link fire control from 2 or more ships (Basically meaning one skipper loses control of his turrets?)

6- Some USN DD's are getting buffed up AA to destroy the fighters.

7- Basically, you suck at using a BB and it's somehow the ship fault.

8- They are. They serve as jack-of-all-trades ships, designed to hunt down DD's and provide fire support for BB's and AA cover. They have better armor than CV's and DD's, but less than BB's. They have better speed than BB's but less than DD's. They have better weaponry than DD's but worse than BB's. It basically boils down to that. For example, my Zao has 44k HP, and it's a tier X Heavy Cruiser. A Kongo or Myogi, a tier IV BB has more HP than me. The fully upgraded Kongo has around the same speed than me, but better weaponry.

9-Nothing to say

10- They already answered that they will never implement duds.

11- They already answered that they found no way whatsoever to balance subs compared to other ships and simply abandoned the concept altogether.

12- At lower tiers people simply go and kill things out. As you start going to higher tiers (VI, VII) skippers start to group more, BB's stay in formatiuon, CA/CL provide cover. Even some CA provide AA and fire support to CV's (many CV know I do), who stay with the fleet  It's just a mentality problem which works itself out as players notice that grouping up makes them harder to hit by bombers and easily defendable (it has its drawbacks tho, 3 destroyers firing a full salvo into a formation are bound to hit something, somewhere)

13- So, you disliking a tactic makes it automatically bad and it should be somehow removed. Classy.

14- You can eqasily ignore the destroyer and just go cap.

15- WG is already working on the issue

 

That's basically it. 

 

And the majority of this could have been answered with a search of the forum. It did take another wall of text to answer. Constructive criticism intended.

[Fishrokk]

How come when I look up your profile it says you haven't played any games?

http://worldofwarships.com/en/community/accounts/1001358686-Fly_Wheel/

[_BloodHawk_]

How come when I look up your profile it says you haven't played any games?

http://worldofwarships.com/en/community/accounts/1001358686-Fly_Wheel/

 

Probably only playing co-op. Those games dont count or appear in the profiles. (Different server might be the case too, but why post here then)

 

If OP has these Learn To Play issues playing only co-op mode, then his head might implode when he starts playing against real people instead of bots.

[Flarvin]

 

Probably only playing co-op. Those games dont count or appear in the profiles. (Different server might be the case too, but why post here then)

 

If OP has these Learn To Play issues playing only co-op mode, then his head might implode when he starts playing against real people instead of bots.

 

Co-op battles do appear on the profiles, under a different tab. 

[Fly_Wheel]

Heheh,

 

I dunno why you'd wanna lookup my mediocre character, the forum name Flywheel was taken, but Flywheel is my player name.

I did play some co-op in the beginning, I guess like everyone else and sometimes try a new ship this way. But mostly I play player vs player as it gives more points ;-)

My stats are 46% win and 48% lose, if you want to know. Only 468 battles so far, enough to get some idea of the game.

 

Anyway thanks for the replies, very much appreciated!

As for looking things up in the forum, I know how to do this, I just wanted to write down my honest few cents instead of mirroring everyone else's opinion. Just giving something of my own experience.

I'm not a 'professional level' player, my experience is limited to level 5 ships max at this moment. So very interesting to know about the higher level stuff, thanks.

I do have much experience playing many different games since 1980 to now. I design games and games rules systems.

I was involved somewhat with a game called VGA Planets, which was a scissors-paper-stone type of game.

As with many of these games I see the risk when the designers try to make it 'better', they ruin the balance. Wich may be difficult to keep anyway, but at this time I see this positive side to World of Warships.

 

Regards, Flywheel