Pigeon_of_War

Feedback and Thoughts Directly to Pigeon_of_War

  • You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.

2,887 posts in this topic

Musings of a one track mind… 

 

On the topic of a Commonwealth tec tree… There is no arguing that the British Empire and Commonwealth were essentially the same thing through the first half of the 20th century.. Hence, ships build for the Commonwealth were pretty much copies of what the Brits were building for their own Navy. 

 

If there is no basis for a stand alone Commonwealth tree, then maybe we just need to look at this from a different prospective…

 

Could this be an option… (example using HMS Leander and HMZS Achilles)  see below…     

Add another Hull designated as HMZS Achilles….  You now have the option to play this ship as either the RN or RNZN ship… 

 

Untitled.png

Edited by heave_ho

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I take it that the 2nd mods on your lists are for the Achilles ...?

The left side of your list was cut off.  Can't tell if there is more info missing.


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Idea for incorporating the commonwealth ships into the existing RN tree…  Example - My suggestion (if workable) would add an extra hull (C) to Leander representing HMNZS Achilles, thereby allowing players to choose what ship they want to play in game..    (Leander herself was in actuality a NZ ship (1941)

Hit Points
(HP)

Armor
(mm)

Armor
(mm)

Main Turrets
(pcs.)

Secondary Gun Turrets
(pcs.)

AA Mounts
(pcs.)

Torpedo Tubes
(pcs.)

Hangar Capacity
(pcs.)

 

Research price
(exp)

Purchase price
(
)

HMS Leander (A)

24,500

6

100

4

4

2/2/5/4

2

0

 

0

370,000

HMS Leander (B)

28,700

6

100

4

4

5/4

2

0

 

12,000

780,000

HMNZS Achilles (C)

28,700

6

100

4

4

5/4

2

0

 

0

0

 

This would also apply to other existing ships classes such as the Weymouth, Danae and  Fiji…

07 


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just finished collecting all 8 Super Containers from the Yamamoto Campaign, such a disappointing collection of flags, camos and 'special mods' really not worth the effort. Mission 4 took the most time of all the missions to this point and those two super containers was what kept me slugging through these tough tasks. So imagine my excitement when I went to open the SC's. 50 Ouroboros flags not bad can be useful. Last one.....Defensive AA Fire Modification..... 

(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻

 

WG once again I must ask for these Special Mods to be removed from Super Containers. SC's are rare enough on most days and to finally get one, only to find a crappy special mod in it is just an insult.   

Edited by RedSeaBear

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RedSeaBear said:

Just finished collecting all 8 Super Containers from the Yamamoto Campaign, such a disappointing collection of flags, camos and 'special mods' really not worth the effort. Mission 4 took the most time of all the missions to this point and those two super containers was what kept me slugging through these tough tasks. So imagine my excitement when I went to open the SC's. 50 Ouroboros flags not bad can be useful. Last one.....Defensive AA Fire Modification..... (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻

WG once again I must ask for these Special Mods to be removed from Super Containers. SC's are rare enough on most days and to finally get one, only to find a crappy special mod in it is just an insult.   

They've already reduced the frequency of special mods in supercontainers and buffed several of the mods themselves to be more useful. I don't see any reason to remove them entirely. Especially since many of us would still like to get some Engine Boost, Hydro and Radar mods.


2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Lord_Magus said:

They've already reduced the frequency of special mods in supercontainers and buffed several of the mods themselves to be more useful. I don't see any reason to remove them entirely. Especially since many of us would still like to get some Engine Boost, Hydro and Radar mods.

 

I got two 'special mod's' from those 8 Yamamoto SC's, the first one was a the stupid Spotter plane one. Than on my last SC I get the Defensive AA Fire mod. Heck last week I even got SC from with the Try Your Luck option and it was a Damage Control Party Mod 1. So while I applauded WG's changing which slots the Mods are used on I doubt the reduction of getting them in SC because I'm still getting a lot of them. And not the useful ones either.  


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Radio Direction Finding upgrade - ships with radio direction finding can also locate ships with radar. 

1) The technology and maths behind radio direction finding and radar direction finding are the same. 

2) It let's ships with RDF know if the ship targeting them are behind an island or an actual threat. 

3) It makes RDF even more useful (more worth the 4 points). 

4) You can see the searchlight in the dark long before the person with the searchlight can see you. 


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, OgreMkV said:

Radio Direction Finding upgrade - ships with radio direction finding can also locate ships with radar. 

1) The technology and maths behind radio direction finding and radar direction finding are the same. 

2) It let's ships with RDF know if the ship targeting them are behind an island or an actual threat. 

3) It makes RDF even more useful (more worth the 4 points). 

4) You can see the searchlight in the dark long before the person with the searchlight can see you. 

Next thing you know, the counter to that which is a RF jammer will be requested next. Do you really want to create EW in this game?

Edited by Bill_Halsey

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Bill_Halsey said:

Next thing you know, the counter to that which is a RF jammer will be requested next. Do you really want to create EW in this game?

Why not? It would be another reason to use ships that specialize in spreading out and finding things. Carriers could start loading up ELINT aircraft. Then we can add chaff to the destroyers and such to prevent radar. 

Sure. Sounds like fun.

As much fun as it is to have smoke block LOS for 90 seconds and sit in it shooting. As much as it is to be complete surrounded by smoke, but not actually in smoke and thus, still be spotted, 

If radar ships can sit behind islands and find destroyers on the other side of the island AND, somehow, radio sufficiently accurate targeting information to ships on the other side of the map, then anything is reasonable. 


1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/9/2017 at 1:58 PM, OgreMkV said:

Why not? It would be another reason to use ships that specialize in spreading out and finding things. Carriers could start loading up ELINT aircraft. Then we can add chaff to the destroyers and such to prevent radar. 

Sure. Sounds like fun.

As much fun as it is to have smoke block LOS for 90 seconds and sit in it shooting. As much as it is to be complete surrounded by smoke, but not actually in smoke and thus, still be spotted, 

If radar ships can sit behind islands and find destroyers on the other side of the island AND, somehow, radio sufficiently accurate targeting information to ships on the other side of the map, then anything is reasonable. 

I hate to agree with you but I have never liked the whole system they used for spotting and being able to spot behind and through an island.


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how to make this game better..eays FIX it first before adding more stuff that breaks the game EVER MORE. simple as that


2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About 10 minutes ago I was in this loss. (Epicentre game on tears of the desert if that isn't bad enough by itself")

We had 3 DDs to the enemy's 4
We had 3 tier 7s to the enemy's 0
7 tier 9s each

According to one of the enemy DDs "You got the radar advantage because we had the DD advantage in numbers..."

I am still at a loss as to where the "balance" existed?

3l3oq2B.jpg


1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, 33nfidel said:

About 10 minutes ago I was in this loss. (Epicentre game on tears of the desert if that isn't bad enough by itself")

We had 3 DDs to the enemy's 4
We had 3 tier 7s to the enemy's 0
7 tier 9s each

According to one of the enemy DDs "You got the radar advantage because we had the DD advantage in numbers..."

I am still at a loss as to where the "balance" existed?

3l3oq2B.jpg

I get that there had to be 2 T8 DDs on the other team because they were  a division, and if there's no other T8 DDs in the queue for 5 minutes (as rare as that would be) there's nothing the MM can do about it. But putting all the T7s on the team that also was down 1 DD isn't something that should ever happen.

Also the MM doesn't take radar into account, contrary to what that enemy DD said in chat. It should consider things like balancing out the number of radar ships, but it doesn't.


1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/11/2017 at 11:33 PM, 33nfidel said:

About 10 minutes ago I was in this loss. (Epicentre game on tears of the desert if that isn't bad enough by itself")

We had 3 DDs to the enemy's 4
We had 3 tier 7s to the enemy's 0
7 tier 9s each

According to one of the enemy DDs "You got the radar advantage because we had the DD advantage in numbers..."

I am still at a loss as to where the "balance" existed?

3l3oq2B.jpg

 

See this right here is what I keep saying.  The MM program is broken/bugged.  No I am not complaining about how it works, I am complaining that it doesn't work.  WG says it evens the tiers/DD/BB/nations but it doesnt.  Games with 4 german vessels versus 0 is not an issue due to a 3 person division, games with 1 CV versus No CV.  It is a bug in the MM coding since according to Sub Octavian it CANT do that, yet like this screenshot, you play enough games you see it every few days.  


Clearly something is wrong with the code and needs fixing, has for a long time now. 


1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/11/2017 at 8:04 AM, Symbiot_1 said:

how to make this game better..eays FIX it first before adding more stuff that breaks the game EVER MORE. simple as that

 

This is quite possibly the most non-constructive post in this thread. I see it a lot and I think it's long past time it get properly addressed for the poor piece of commentary it is, in hopes of hedging it off to not be said again without some degree of scrutiny and scorn.  I also want to use it as an example as to why to prevent future posts like this: 

 

- "FIX IT" = Fix, what, in particular? I am all for the criticism that the game is not perfect (it's not, I can personally count on my hand only 5 games that are "perfect"), but if you're going to say the words "FIX the game" or some line of reasoning like this, please do everyone that reads this thread the courtesy and collect your thoughts into a more concise ideals of "how" or "what you think needs fixing".

-"Before adding more stuff to it" = This sort of mentality might apply to a game that's in Alpha or Beta, but World of Warships is over two years old. It's going to keep getting content added to it and the vast majority of other players do appreciate this. Players do like the new tech tree ships. Players like Halloween mode. Players like the new premium ships. People liked earning Okt. Rev in a marathon for free.  Placing the brakes on more content in hopes of reaching a arbitrary state of "fixed" in a constantly online game is not wise or beneficial for anyone.

-" That breaks the game EVER MORE" = Perhaps we can agree that it's completely subjective that the game is "broken". It functions as advertised, so I personally can't agree with this sentiment in any capacity, but I am willing to admit I am completely biased. 

-" Simple as that" = Everytime you click the left mouse button to fire one volley, over 12 different calculations are done server-side for that one shot. From shell speed, angle of flight, potential armor impact based on shell speed, penetration based one enemy ship angle, continued penetration based on number of layers the shell must penetrate, module damage, and more. This is just for one shell, and one button click. There is nothing simple about World of Warships, its balance, its design, etc. To think otherwise is to under-appreciate the years of work placed into this game by very dedicated people, present company included. Please just look at our WoWS Wiki in the mechanics section just for a visual of the scope and scale placed into this game. 

 

TL;DR; In the future, more constructive feedback in this section of the forums is appreciated. Simple and base comments like "Fix the game" will no longer be tolerated and will just get removed. 


5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and for the my quick list of five most perfect games ever made:

 

- Tetris

- Super Mario World

- Super Metroid

- Capcom vs. SNK 2

- Undertale


1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Pigeon_of_War said:

- "FIX IT" = Fix, what, in particular? I am all for the criticism that the game is not perfect (it's not, I can personally count on my hand only 5 games that are "perfect"), but if you're going to say the words "FIX the game" or some line of reasoning like this, please do everyone that reads this thread the courtesy and collect your thoughts into a more concise ideals of "how" or "what you think needs fixing".

-"Before adding more stuff to it" 

-" That breaks the game EVER MORE" = Perhaps we can agree that it's completely subjective that the game is "broken". It functions as advertised, so I personally can't agree with this sentiment in any capacity, but I am willing to admit I am completely biased. 

-" Simple as that

TL;DR; In the future, more constructive feedback in this section of the forums is appreciated. Simple and base comments like "Fix the game" will no longer be tolerated and will just get removed. 

I plead guilty to having included everything on this list at least once. additionally, I feel devs are superbeings for which something like fixing 'rigged MM' (not a real thing, of course) is a simple push of a button, or maybe two. thank you for taking the time for a reality check!

1) please, please, please consider maybe introducing a jutland type BB exclusive Random battle type in the game as a SELECTABLE map/Tier option. for the lower tier WW1 pre-modified BBs this would be a lot of fun. for the new players entering the game by the hundreds of thousands on steam, this would be a go to battle type. possibly even consider keeping the seal clubbers out of the mix vs newbies, this would serve to revive BB play without nerfing CA or DD mains again (not that this is a real thing, again, it's just a term I use, possibly in error) or finishing off the CVs. just a thought, resubmitted again.

2) please consider maybe introducing a thread or venue in which players can submit ideas without subjecting themselves to ridicule from the super unicum trollers that lurk everywhere, waiting to pounce on ideas that they feel would jeopardize their playstyle or status among the elite. a newbie player, or a long time player that struggles to be average in the game at best (like me) may have something to contribute even without all purple stats or a winning record.

3) I think of the rock paper scissors thing as broken, in favor of vocal BB players. am hoping WG staff such as yourself can help to sift thru and screen input of that sort, in order to re-generate the rock paper scissors balance that felt more balanced a year ago.

(ed. note: this is not an attempt to insult anybody, or cause unrest or anything negative, I really do appreciate your efforts to generate a more positive situation for us to be heard. am still waiting for my Atlanta :o)

Edited by not_acceptable

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Birdboss, any news on this Tier VIII PvE Op I've heard about?
Will it just be one Op or are there others that'll be released at the same time?


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pigeon, I know it's low priority and has been on the back burner due to that.  But I figured I would ask if any progress or thought had been made to upgrading improving the Replay feature for the game.  Considering it's useful for bug reports, claims of grief and abuse in game, and, lastly a huge thing for some of us guys who do reviews, gameplay commentary and the like on youtube.  At this point, I would only hope for one or two things to be added but I'll list an overall "Wish List" so to speak for what I would hope for in a full fledged replay system

1) Rewind button.  Oh dear a rewind button.  How many times I've been fast forwarding a long clip just so I can grab one little highlight, pass by it then have to start all over again from the beginning of a replay

2) Prior patch support.  I'm not expecting a player that will do every version of the game ever made.  But maybe 3 or 4 prior patches?  Again mainly for the youtubers.  I usually clip a replay, save the screenshots, throw it into a folder.  I try to keep up to date with recording but sometimes I get a little back log.  Then i have to remember to go through and record before I go to update the client and play my next session of warships.  It's caught me once or twice, especially when the auto download feature came out and I've lost a few very nice replays I wish I could have saved.


1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Pigeon_of_War said:

In the future, more constructive feedback in this section of the forums is appreciated. Simple and base comments like "Fix the game" will no longer be tolerated and will just get removed. 

Suggestion (probably impossible, but I'll make it anyway).

Get more feedback from active CV players (as in genuinely active, not just owners of CVs, but actually playing them too) as a way to involve those most interested (from a gameplay point of view) and refine any proposed rework/ (Would an in game survey of some sort be workable, every 100 battles on a particular ship, for example?)


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Pigeon_of_War said:

"FIX IT" = Fix, what, in particular? I am all for the criticism that the game is not perfect (it's not, I can personally count on my hand only 5 games that are "perfect"), but if you're going to say the words "FIX the game" or some line of reasoning like this, please do everyone that reads this thread the courtesy and collect your thoughts into a more concise ideals of "how" or "what you think needs fixing".

 

  1. Commander voices were broken in the last patch.  The hotfix helped but some still are not right, especially in relation to operations commands.
  2. Friends list still showing online people as offline, locking up when searching a player name, or showing no such player for correct spelling of a player.
  3. Division members can still lose ability to see the rest of their division in the port screen.
  4. MM is still broken, see post right above your own in this thread.  1 CV vs Zero still happens, 2 Gearings versus 1 Yugumo still happens, 3 German ships versus zero still happens,   etc etc.   Yes it is rare, but it keeps happening on occasion so either WG changed the MM rules from what they told us and what the Wiki says or there is something broken.
  5. Appearing/Disappearing ships.   It was stated this was fixed, but we still have ships that enter detection for a split second appear on the minimap but never render in game, and creates interesting artifacts in replays.  
  6. Replays not being supported, but being requested by official WG support.  Having had to talk down more than one new player who submitted a support ticket to only get a response of "need a replay", who then finds out replays are not a game supported feature nor automatically activated, well this is a "broken" issue
  7. Replays crashing/buggy (seriously a high chance of crash on load, then doing anything but watching at normal speed is taking a high risk of it crashing).
  8. Port UI freezing and locking up.  High performance machines on dedicated T1 lines should not take upwards of 30 seconds to mount/demount a single signal flag.   The majority of game client crashes are in port or switching from port to loading into a battle.   Something is wrong when the high performance battles cause less crashing than the port screen.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, SyndicatedINC said:

 

  1. Commander voices were broken in the last patch.  The hotfix helped but some still are not right, especially in relation to operations commands.

Quite right. Kongou, Ashigara, Haguro, and the HSF ship commanders are not working. Nachi only works when engine boost is activated and Segal only works when DC is finished. @Pigeon_of_War tell Wargaming that they need to fix this.


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Fog_Repair_Ship_Akashi said:

Quite right. Kongou, Ashigara, Haguro, and the HSF ship commanders are not working. Nachi only works when engine boost is activated and Segal only works when DC is finished. @Pigeon_of_War tell Wargaming that they need to fix this.

 

We are aware of the issue. Your patience in the upcoming fix is appreciated.


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.