Jump to content


Your Questions to Developers

Q&A

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
747 replies to this topic

Ev1n #41 Posted 04 December 2013 - 11:18 AM

    a large troll

  • WG Staff

  • 502
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View PostGeneral_badger1, on 25 November 2013 - 12:51 PM, said:

will there be weather conditions? e.g rainstorms?

Yes.

View PostCamiroq, on 26 November 2013 - 02:07 PM, said:

What's new about Soviet warships? Can you tell some warships + tiers?

Aurora is heading for an overhaul.

View Postdomen3, on 29 November 2013 - 03:30 PM, said:

What kind of perks will be avalible?

Too early to say. Still designing those.

View PostRC_8015, on 29 November 2013 - 04:54 PM, said:

1) Will there be the possibility to ram a ship and deal a good damage when your ship is more heavy, or will this damage both ships hard? (For the case your reloading but need enemy dead fast)
2) Can we expect more equipment for the ships, more like we have it in WoT with stuff like extended view range, camouflage, faster reload, more accuracy, more life for some modules and so on or will it be more like WoWP with only a few equipment items?
3) Will the crew perk system be like WoT, WoWP or again something new?

1) Yes, ramming does deal damage to both ships and you could say that you deal more (or take less) depending on ship size and collision location.
2) We don't want too much equipment and we've not decided on the amount yet.
3) Not finished yet.

View PostNordmannenwut, on 01 December 2013 - 09:58 AM, said:

I don´t think that you are able to change depth, when you can change anything, then the torpedos, as exemples torpedos who don´t make a bubbletrace or make less noise.
_
World of warships is like wot or wowp more an arcadegame and then a realistic simulation, but wargaming will find the best way to combine the features to get in the end a easy to handle gamemechanic.
_
A shipbattle is more complex then a tankfight or airfight. I also opened a thread with the question about the fire and focussystem. http://forum.worldof...argets-or-more/

No, you cannot change torpedo depth and imho, this is redundant. Torpedoes are already difficult to use effectively without another chance to do it wrong. The way they are balanced they already to a ton of damage to all ship types and don't need to be tweakable for more effectiveness.

View PostDeamon93, on 01 December 2013 - 10:09 AM, said:

Well a slider is enough, doesn't require a sim game to put a slider with 0 and 10 metres as upper and lower limits(maybe 10 is too much but it's just to make the idea). Due to their arcade crusade they've created witchcrafs in WoWP like force fields to protect ground attackers from their own bombs just because they don't want the fuse delay slider

Believe it or not, but such a slider is too difficult for a casual audience.

View PostJimMorr, on 01 December 2013 - 04:58 PM, said:

Players
11
Member since:
09-07-2012

0 warning points
As far as I understand in the game we will become captains of single ships.
I have problem with the idea. Destroyer was a ship with a displacement of 1000 - 2000 tons while battleship could have displacement of more then 64 000 tons. Destroyer hit with a single torpedo usually broke in two and sunk while it took 11 torpedoes and six bombs to take down Yamato. Most destroyer could fire only a single torpedo salvo and were unable to reload during battle. Battleships could fire their main guns every minute and each salvo was no less effective then torpedoes of destroyers.
I do not want to see ships 'balanced' so it would be fun to play DD vs BB. If the ships were equall no fleet would built anything but DDs.
I wonder if it was possible to put players in command of whole squadrons instead of single ships. For example a player could control:
1 battleship / carrier
2 heavy cruiser
3 light cruisers
4-6 destroyers
While commanding a squadron player would be captain of squadrons flagship. Remaining ships in squadron would be AI controlled and player would get limited set of commands to infuence them. When loosing his flagship player would take over control over next ship of his squadron. It would requiere probably the battles to become 7vs7.

At least in battles on Battleship level. I can imagine Cruser level battles (10vs10, no battleships, heavy cruisers as capital ships, smaller squadrons of light cruisers and destroyers) and Destroyer level battles (15vs15, destroyers only, each player controlling single ship)

Thought about it and discarded the idea. Just go back and think about the gameplay aspects of commanding the firepower of a BB and a squadron of DDs.

View Postreamun, on 02 December 2013 - 11:14 AM, said:

could there be much differences between the Maps and are there possibilities to hide (maybe behind a growler)

when I think about it, my only Ideas are a big Ocean and a map with bigger or smaller islands (rocks or ice)

There are very different maps - some more open, some with many terrain features that block LOS/LOF.

View PostEnggorra, on 02 December 2013 - 02:33 PM, said:

is it possible for light cruisers to use torpedo's? Since the IJN often disguised them as Destroyers.

Yes, of course. <3 Takao.

View Postbourdonnais, on 02 December 2013 - 02:44 PM, said:

Will there some ingame armed merchantman playable?

Very unlikely.

Murphy's Law of Combat Operations:
6. If it's stupid but it works, it isn't stupid!

Ev1n #42 Posted 04 December 2013 - 11:26 AM

    a large troll

  • WG Staff

  • 502
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View Postmr3awsome, on 02 December 2013 - 10:03 PM, said:

Some companies (such as Ansaldo and Vickers) designed warships that were tendered to other nations.
If these ships were to be implemented would they go with the home nation of the company or the intended user?

I don't know about that atm. I think we haven't gone that far yet.

View PostJoza_Seraf, on 03 December 2013 - 04:28 PM, said:

Nice one :)
One question: Will the MM consider that destroyer is effective in a pack and will put lets say at least 5 destroyers in one team?. So that dosen't happen a fight 10 BB, 3 CV and 2 DD
edit: about ramming and kamikazi.. Kamikazi is when you ram enemy ehrn you are lower hp than him, lower tier, and will die when enemy reload or outmanouver you.. I would say thats good kamikazi.. bad kamikazi is lets say from WOWP when tier 6 HF rams tier 4 LF in few HP..
ramming in ships will be nice :)

We're currently testing a slot system that will hopefully answer that issue.


Btw, sorry for the long delay in replying - we were in St. Pete's visiting the developers and discussing the future of the project.
Also, stop discussing stuff in the Q&A thread - go make another topic. :)

Murphy's Law of Combat Operations:
6. If it's stupid but it works, it isn't stupid!

Ev1n #43 Posted 04 December 2013 - 11:31 AM

    a large troll

  • WG Staff

  • 502
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View PostDeamon93, on 04 December 2013 - 11:27 AM, said:

In previous Q&A it was told that Essex and Shinano were both at 9. So where the Yorktown and the CV N 111 will be placed?

Correct! My bad. Yorktown is 8 and Essex is 9. Shinano is 9 and Over-Shinano 111 is 10.

Murphy's Law of Combat Operations:
6. If it's stupid but it works, it isn't stupid!

Ev1n #44 Posted 04 December 2013 - 03:57 PM

    a large troll

  • WG Staff

  • 502
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View PostPhobos86, on 04 December 2013 - 01:56 PM, said:

Can we drop Mines? Or will there be Mines in the game?

        

No mines.

Attached Files

  • Attached File   Nemo-seagulls1.jpg   23.9K


Murphy's Law of Combat Operations:
6. If it's stupid but it works, it isn't stupid!

Ev1n #45 Posted 17 December 2013 - 11:29 AM

    a large troll

  • WG Staff

  • 502
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View Postmr3awsome, on 04 December 2013 - 07:34 PM, said:

I believe the general point is that they may be in the game but they will not be labelled as such.
Could some of the last pre-Dreadnought battleships appear as tier 2 premiums?

 

Not likely. These are for another game, about the Russian-Japanese war - World of Ironclads :)

 

View PostDeamon93, on 05 December 2013 - 10:19 PM, said:

I have just a question for you Ev1n this time but it's quite big, to compensante :trollface:
In an old Q&A post of yours you said there will be jet planes for tier X carriers so the problem is: what will WG do with nations which don't have enough planes(Italy, France and Germany) or nations which never had carrier based planes(Russia)? Will you navalize land based planes for "balance" purpuses?

 

We plan to navalize land based planes (for example, Russian Jak-9 or German Ju-87 had naval modifications) and use naval aircraft projects (almost all countries have such projects).

 

View Postbourdonnais, on 06 December 2013 - 12:00 PM, said:

Could ennemies coincidence rangefinders be destroyed? If yes will this have an influence on firing control of the target?

 

Yes, rangefinders or any other modules of a fire control system can be destroyed. This will decrease ship accuracy (sometimes heavily).

 

View Postcloud2011, on 07 December 2013 - 11:11 AM, said:

Can you adjust the scattering of torpedoes (shoot at the same time all torpedoes)?

 

Yes, you can adjust torpedo spread and you fire all tubes in one launcher with a single click before proceeding to the next launcher.

 

View PostJareel_Skaj, on 08 December 2013 - 01:57 PM, said:

Question: Are you planning a paid access to alpha or beta version? Similar to the one War Thunder sells now for it's land warfare module - where players can pay now to get a tank + unique items + an early access to the game.

 

Nope.

 

View Postmr3awsome, on 08 December 2013 - 02:27 PM, said:

I has been said on the North American forum that the Borodino class battlecruisers weren't planned to be part of the game.
Can you expand on the reasoning behind this?
If the Gangut class are tier 4, where are the Imperatritsa Mariya in relation? Are they the tier above or on the same tier as part of another line?

 

If you mean Ismail-class battlecruiser (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borodino-class_battlecruiser) – this is in the tree already. As Ismail-class BC.

Imperatritsa Mariya will most likely be tier 4 in another line.

 

View PostSmederevac94, on 09 December 2013 - 11:24 PM, said:

1.When will you put in the alpha battleship Montana?

2.What are you think about USS Alaska (CB-1) and is itpossible thatwe see this shipin the game as tier X?

 

1. When it's ready.

2. Theoretically its possible, but it's not planned atm.

 

View PostPichu_Trainer, on 09 December 2013 - 11:27 PM, said:

Do you plan on adding Land-Based planes to carriers if they are needed?
Do you plan on implementing the BTD-1 Destroyer and TB2D Skypirate?

 

Yes.

Yes, these are already in the tree.

 

View Postbourdonnais, on 14 December 2013 - 12:32 AM, said:

Wich kind of weapons will have the planes in the first times? Torpeedoes and bombs?

 

Will we have a Christmas present? :eyesup:

 

Both.

Do you think you deserve it? :)

 

View PostRedBear87, on 14 December 2013 - 10:45 AM, said:

A pair of destroyers-related questions:

1) Is there any disclosable info about Akizuki class' tier placement?

2) Is there any chance of seeing post-war all-gun destroyers (especially JMSDF ones)?

 

1. Currently slotted for tier 9.

2. Seeing as the main hallmark of DDs in the game are supposed to be torpedoes, this is highly unlikely.



Murphy's Law of Combat Operations:
6. If it's stupid but it works, it isn't stupid!

Ev1n #46 Posted 17 December 2013 - 11:53 AM

    a large troll

  • WG Staff

  • 502
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View Postkacey8, on 15 December 2013 - 10:21 AM, said:

Not sure if been asked or answered but I haven't seen it.

 

So, from what we've read, if aiming broadside (ie all turrets bear on target) you click the button, ALL main guns go off, right?

Now, if I am firing forward, I have two forward turrets firing but my rear turret can't as it hasn't got angel (same as real ships)

 

This is how I understand it and now for my questions.

 

1: When I fire my forward turrets, can I assume they will reload automatically after this, ie I don't have to wait until the rear have been fired to initiate the reload?

 

2: If I fire my forward turrets can I then aim my rear turrets and fire those guns off (while the forward turrets are reloading.

 

For example I have an enemy ship to my north, one to my south, I fire my front turrets at the north, can I then immediately aim and fire my rear turrets to the south target or are they locked while the front turret reloads

 

Whilst I assume that I can, I know great emphasis has been laid out that when you click the button, ALL guns fire.

 

1. Yes, each turret immediately starts reloading after it has fired.

2. Yes, your assumption is correct. You can fire your forward turrets at a target to the north, where your aft turret cannot traverse. Then, while your forward turrets are reloading, you can move the cursor to aim at an enemy to the south - your aft turret will follow and when it has traversed to that bearing it will be ready to fire.

 

View Postkacey8, on 15 December 2013 - 01:15 PM, said:

Another two question,

 

1: Purely cosmetic of course, when the guns reload, do the Barrels drop elevation to allow this, or can the barrels stay elevated and they're just reloaded anyway?

 

2: I know tech tree questions are hard to answer, especially as things do change but do you know if there is a good chance of the Avenger Class Escort carriers may appearing for the British Royal Navy?

 

1. This cosmetic effect is not in the game at this time and is unlikely to appear.

2. Avenger is not in the UK tree atm.

 



Murphy's Law of Combat Operations:
6. If it's stupid but it works, it isn't stupid!

Ev1n #47 Posted 17 December 2013 - 02:01 PM

    a large troll

  • WG Staff

  • 502
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View Postkacey8, on 17 December 2013 - 02:11 PM, said:

Thank you so much Ev1n, I appreciate you must be busy yet take the time to reply to our questions.

 

A random question, Which ship are you most looking forward to personally?

 

The Richelieu... If my calculations are correct it will fit my play style perfectly.

 

View PostRedBear87, on 17 December 2013 - 02:19 PM, said:

 

1. Currently slotted for tier 9.

2. Seeing as the main hallmark of DDs in the game are supposed to be torpedoes, this is highly unlikely.

Thanks for your reply; actually the two questions were kind of related, isn't the torpedo armament of Akizuki class a little too weak for tier 9? Just 4 tubes as opposed to 9 of Fubuki or 8 of Shiratsuyu.

 

We'll see. If it's horribly underpowered and not fun to play, we'll look for alternatives to replace it.

 



Murphy's Law of Combat Operations:
6. If it's stupid but it works, it isn't stupid!

Ev1n #48 Posted 02 January 2014 - 03:21 PM

    a large troll

  • WG Staff

  • 502
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View PostSmederevac94, on 17 December 2013 - 04:03 PM, said:

I'm a big fan of the pennsylvania-class battleship and i have questionfor you...Will you put on this ship 1942 or 1945 configuration???

1942 and 1945 configuration:

 

 

We've not decided the configuration yet - both may appear as module upgrades/presets.

 

View Postmr3awsome, on 17 December 2013 - 07:17 PM, said:

Any idea of the tier of the Izmail class BC?

 

Could Akizuki-kai be a tier 10 Japanese DD?

 

It has been said that Soryu is tier 7, where is the Unryu class in relation to it?

 

Currently 6.

Tier X slots for IJN destroyer lines are already occupied, but its not impossible.

Currently also at tier 7.

 

View PostRedBear87, on 19 December 2013 - 05:09 AM, said:

1. Do you have a specific Seaplane Tender in mind that could compete with a potential tier X Carrier?

Perhaps the Commencement Bay conversion into seaplane tender for P6M jet-powered flying boats?

 

Interesting idea, but looks unbalanced from a gameplay perspective.

 

View PostOrlunu, on 20 December 2013 - 03:15 AM, said:


Not to try and pick an argument, but you can see pilots in WoWp.  Mebbe that's just the newest patch and me memory's acting up, dunno.

On to the question(s):
Will it be possible to name the ships (other than just in your head)?  If so would it be a choice of the actual ships in the class/configuration?  Also if so, how would it be done; like buying writing on your vehicle in the other titles and it shows up in big on the side of the ship like on some of the smaller IJN craft, or could it actually change the name that appears for your ship type (unlikely, but I like the idea)?

I shall leave off the rest of my questions in this vein, in order to prevent too much of an essay forming.  Don't think that this is covered yet, but I didn't thoroughly search the entire net, sorry if I missed it.

 

We said this before: we're looking into the possibility of ship customization, including naming, but we've not made any decisions.  

 

View Postkacey8, on 21 December 2013 - 02:33 PM, said:

Not sure if it's been asked but will the IJN Yamato have the full compliment of 162 25mm AA guns?

 

Not sure. Did it really have that amount? 



Murphy's Law of Combat Operations:
6. If it's stupid but it works, it isn't stupid!

Ev1n #49 Posted 02 January 2014 - 03:52 PM

    a large troll

  • WG Staff

  • 502
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View PostCleygan, on 23 December 2013 - 03:53 PM, said:

Hello all,

 

Here are a questions pack.
I'm not sure one of it was answered. At least I haven't found answers by "search" tab.

 

1/ Gun-shell flying time
How long time a shell stay in sky for typical situation : Close (4-5km) and max range (10-25km) ?
And Torpedoes in ocean (well i know that it won't leave ocean after it explode, but I expect another answer than "till end of time") ?

 

2/ Tactical
Will you release sample tactical schemes ?
I have in mind some simple and clear pics like those used for punch line contest on the blog.
It should take basic tactical hints :
 - DD are expendables shield for other.
 - LC and CC awaits for a breach to hunt for CV's.
 - Etc.
I think the need exists because WoWs is not a classic FPS game. I'm pretty sure all gamers fond of submarine and ship video game do not need any advise. But newcomer sould need some advise to be peace-minded when they will test it. Better minded is better play. Better play is longer love. Long love is money.

 

3/ Weather condition define at start
You told us weather condition will be definded at game start.
Fine.
Will these conditions are randomly placed on map ? That mean "What the hell is this fog doing there ?"
Or, in contrary, will it be pre-defined position ? That means "Ok, I've played 21k games and it's only the Delta-bis configuration."

 

4/ Castaway
Does a wrecked / sunk ship release survivors on boats ?

 

5/ Plane safe return
5-a/ Will plane squadrons be able to be Fuel-safe-return setting ? Which mean that they cannot ran out of fuel. Or have we to keep an eye on planes fuel tanks ?
5-b/ Will we be able to define a Squadron survivor number cap for an automatic retreat ? or have we to keep an eye on squadron planes still in life ?

 

6/ Sand banks
Can we destroy a sand banks with torpedo/gun shots ?

 

7/ Plane pathway
will team member be able to see planes defined pathway ?

 

8/ Iceberg
Can I push that damn Iceberg with my Yamato ?
Can I wrecked that iceberg with my AWESOME power ?
Can I be the "King of the World" on the Yamato ?

 

9/ Landscape terraforming
Far more than tanks, ships have great power.
Can I deforest with my power to reveal a foe ? Or is that damn bush greater armored that my Yamato ?

 

10/ Radio crypted signal (fantasm)
If I ram to death an enemy ship, or if I anchor near a stuck-and-dead-in-sand ship, can I take her radio ?
More of that is can I interceped enemy radio signal to know where it is ?
These actions need to stay near the dead ship, as an capture area.
Sound great in my opinion !

 

11/ Smoke screen
Is a smoke screen affected be the weather ?
Strong wind should dispell it fast.
Etc.

 

12/ Following speed
When I want to go as fast, and as slow, as a friend ship, can I set up a Following Speed that keep the same ?

 

13/ Clouds and Shell (fantasm)
Will clouds be drilled be shell ?

 

14/ Last joke question

Will we be able to buy the Prenium Ship "Nimitz" as tier XII ?

 

If not returened for, i'd to greets everyone merry christmas and an happy new year !

I hope God of steel and powder will stadn by your side for your next battle.

--

Cleygan

 

1. Hard to say, especially since we're tweaking these settings at the moment. Times range from 1 to several seconds.

2. I'm not fond of doing tactical diagrams for a team of 15 random players. However, we are working hard on a good tutorial and are already writing articles on class tactics.

3. This is not set in stone yet, but it is more likely that these will be map-wide effects.

4. No.

5. Planes are controllable until they are bingo fuel. They then automatically return to the mothership. 

6. No.

7. Not at the moment, but we're thinking about that.

8. No / No / Yes.

9. There are no bushes that would make any difference for spotting.

10. Interesting idea, but rather for a separate game mode than as an addition to normal gameplay.

11. Not likely - we don't wan't random events to diminish its effectiveness.

12. No - you need to manage this yourself.

13. No. We like clouds and don't want to hurt them.

14. How much would you pay? :>

 

View PostCleygan, on 24 December 2013 - 11:00 AM, said:

Good morning sailors & asmirals,

 

Here another questions pack.

 

1/ DD's suicide-covert XP
How's consider XP gain for a DD that suicide to covert friend ?
As the Wiki Rôle explain, at beginnning of the game, or when needed, DD are expandables.
How that expense is rewarded ?

 

2/ Plan Vs Flying shell
When it can be  considered so rare that it is not take into account.
But are planes hurt by (enemy) flying shells ?

 

3/ Alpha start related : Tech Trees
Now that Alpha test has started, can you provide us WIP tech trees (with/without Prenium) ?

 

4/ Turorial pictures pack for contributors
Can you provide us pictures pack with background, vessels and icons so that we can make our tutorial and poster ?

 

5/ FPS-God revealed
Number of old answers were dedicated to FPS-god limit.
Now that minimum system requirement is revealed, what's up ?
Are coastal bunker alive ?
Can we destroy buildings, trees and sand castle ?
Will there be different sea effect, like calm and storm sea ?
Will radio antenna rotate ?

 

6/ Old evasive answers perhaps have one written in rock now
Are vessel's flags changing with keybind communication ("Help !", "Defend the Base !", etc.) ?
Will we be able to edit flag for Clans ?
How is the collision alarm represented in game ? Icon like 6th sens ? Crew voice ? Flashing screen ? Friend boat flashlighting ? Etc.
Will we have a Horn bindkey (that reduce camo for sure) ?
Will there have some animation in hangar / dock ? Like a painter on hull, some cranes at work, mouse hunted by cats, etc.

 

7/ Help signal
Is "Help !" signal producing a flare in the sky ?

 

8/ Firing area
Navy ships never fire without informing friend. Nobody wants to see her friend be under her rain of fire.
Will it be represented in game ? Like, say, colored circle ?
For me, in such a long time flying-shell game, it should have it's place ingame. Instead of WoT arty that is a minority.
Same for Torpedoes :)

 

9/ Final classic fun/fantasm question
Will there be garbages over the sea after each shots ?
Will there have effect in game ?
Will these garbages follow waterflow ?

 

10/ Regrets

Players, me, testers, always speak and ask about future features and expectations.

That's great because we can dream about it ! But I do not read somewhere the odd and inconvenient questions.

Now that the game runs in CAT, that the game engine roars, and feature list become more and more final...

...

Are there features the team didn't manage to put in game and she regrets ?

 

11/ WG bought BigWorld a year and a half ago

What did this invest manage / allow for WoWs dev' ?

 

12/ United Prenium Vehicule

Will there be united Prenium Vehicule ?

Because some Nations are the same.

Because some Role ingame are the same.

Because even Free XP and Gold are united.

For all this reason I wonder why such a thing isn't in starting block yet.

 

13/ no 13 because it's bad luck.

 

14/ WG Trilogy breaking

Will WG make a Fourth game ?

 - World of Submarines ?

 - World of Spaceships ?

 - World of Toys ? <-- sound great, even if it's only Bonus maps on present WoT / WoP / WoWs !!!

 - World of Woodships ?

 - World of Hounds ? <-- players are carnivore that hunt each other !!!

 - World of Dinos ? <--- same with T-Rex, megalausorus, etc.

 - World of Post Apo' (Madmax) ?

 - Etc.

 

EDIT : Instead of created another post I had there questions from 10 to 14
--
cleygan
I hope God of Steel and Powder will be at your side during your next battle. 

 

1. There is no reward planned for suicide. 

2. Yes, planes are generally hurt by shells, though generally not by main artillery shells.

3. I can and I am, one bit at a time.

4. Not at this time.

5. There will be weather effects. The rest is still a maybe.

6. "Flags" as in having a visual representation for the last sent message? No.

Maybe.

Collision alarm is both visible on screen and annoying you through your speakers.

No horn.

In the current WIP-dock there are already animations.

7. Nope.

8. This is optional. You can signal which ship you are attacking by pressing "T".

9. Nope.

10. Not yet. Ask us at game release. :)

11. Better Q&A and optimization processes.

12. I honestly don't know what you mean by this. Can you clarify?

14. No comment. :)

 

View Posttiger192, on 24 December 2013 - 12:52 PM, said:

will you add physics at the beginning or later(like WoT 8.0)

e.g. ships sink/get damage by a ramming attack ?

 

Yes, this is already implemented and being refined.

 

View Postdrakkon01, on 29 December 2013 - 12:36 PM, said:

my question is more technical on a boat in particular, yamato.
As we all know is one of the biggest destroyers of the world, for it is in the industry, but besides being a destruztor had a few seaplanes. Are these all you can control as if you were an aircraft carrier?

 

Yes, you can control onboard planes and this is similar to playing an aircraft carrier.

 

View PostCamiroq, on 29 December 2013 - 01:00 PM, said:

 You will do a new game?

 

Maybe one day. :)

 

View Postkacey8, on 29 December 2013 - 01:05 PM, said:

For clarification, can you confirm what will happen with the Town-Class for the Royal Navy, will they be split in to the three distinct sub classes, Southampton, Edinburgh & Gloucester?

 

The Town class is spread along the tech tree.



Murphy's Law of Combat Operations:
6. If it's stupid but it works, it isn't stupid!

Ev1n #50 Posted 02 January 2014 - 04:06 PM

    a large troll

  • WG Staff

  • 502
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View PostRedBear87, on 29 December 2013 - 07:37 PM, said:

Do you plan to add Shinano/111/797 as Yamato presets or will Yamato configurations be limited only to the historical ones?

Will it be possible to name the ships (other than just in your head)? 

It's been asked in the latest interview, apparently they fear people would abuse it, but final choices on similar aesthetic aspects probably won't be finalised until before the release.

 

They will be separate from Yamato.

 

View PostDeamon93, on 30 December 2013 - 08:40 PM, said:

I have tons of questions related to the carrier based planes, probably you will hate me Ev1n :trollface:

1)Which planes will be available for low tier CVs?

2)It was said that jets will be used as top tiers, is it confirmed?

3)Will carriers have also scout planes?

4)Could you give some information about the already implemented planes and in which tier are placed?

5)Some planes, like the B7A, were used as torpedo bomber or as a dive bomber. Will the player be able to choose which payload of this particular plane while in battle?

6)Will planes be available in more than a single tier?

 

That's it for now ^^

 

To quote a Portal turret: "I don't hate you..."

However, its difficult to talk about already implemented planes, since atm they're not clearly named in the client. Bear with us for answers on plane questions.

 

View Posttomas144, on 31 December 2013 - 02:03 AM, said:

I read that battles will be up to 25 minutes long ... will there be option of playing faster game ? like less boats or maybe smaller map ???

 

in WoT ,battles are rarely 15 minutes long (they are usually 10 min. max.) so will this be the same in WoWs so battles will be usually like 15 mins long ??

 

Battles might be up to 25mins long, but we're working on reducing average game time to a manageable mark around or under 10 mins.

 

View PosthomerNEIN, on 31 December 2013 - 04:37 PM, said:

When the next wave of alpha testers will come?

 

When we are ready to accept them.

 

View PostCleygan, on 02 January 2014 - 09:31 AM, said:

Hello,

And I wish you an Happy WGNY2014 !

 

After the read of Destroyer tactical Deployement, and "What awaits..." on the blog a few questions arise :

 

1/ Support XP, aka detrack ans spot XP in WoT

How is considered the following support actions ?

 - Destroy totally or partially an air strike.

 - When a DD put an end to AA devices on an enemy ship, does the DD gain support XP from Air strike dmg from allies on that enemy ship ?

 - More generally, can you tell us whole "Support XP" action planned ?

 

2/ CAT end, CBT, OBT and Release in 2014

Hell, it's about time folks !

Be conscious everyone will keep in mind hte deadline for CBT :hiding:

I do not consider release as needed. We all play WoT and the release only arrives this year  :eyesup:

 

3/ Santa Claus and New Year

How did WG WoWs project team, and Dev team, have fest ?

Have you done something special ?

 

4/ 2013 Feedback

Due to the fact that a new year is a strong step in mind of all players, I think you had some debrief about planning and true achievement.

So... What's up ?

Did you reach your expectations ?

Now that the core game is running in Alpha, can you tell us what was your best achievement about Gameplay, Physics and Render ?

 

Greetings to all teams :)

 

1. Can't go too much into details of the game's economy, but in general the principle mechanics will be similar to WoT, so you will get XP for module damage as well as regular damage dealt.

2. We're working full-steam to meet our release schedule. :)

3. Depends on the region. Facebook tells me that the devs had a great NY party. I was at home. ;)

4. Have a read here: http://blog.worldofwarships.eu/the-new-year-pt-2/



Murphy's Law of Combat Operations:
6. If it's stupid but it works, it isn't stupid!

Ev1n #51 Posted 02 January 2014 - 04:09 PM

    a large troll

  • WG Staff

  • 502
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View Postsagittarius_PL, on 02 January 2014 - 01:54 PM, said:

Do You plan to release similar to WoT and WoWP mobile application for WoWS for iOS/Android with accout info and statistics?

If "yes" - maybe it would be a good idea to start developing it for tablets to, with more options (maybe: garadge/port preview; equiping the ships etc) ?

 

In the future such an app will probably make an appearance. What kind of options and platforms it will sport remains open for now, but we're currently working on expanding our mobile portfolio.



Murphy's Law of Combat Operations:
6. If it's stupid but it works, it isn't stupid!

Ev1n #52 Posted 13 January 2014 - 04:23 PM

    a large troll

  • WG Staff

  • 502
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View PostPichu_Trainer, on 02 January 2014 - 05:15 PM, said:

Will the Forrestal class Carriers be ingame? And if so what tier?

Can we expect nations to have planes from the other nations if they used them historically?

Will Aircraft Research be separate from Carrier, Sea Tender and Cruiser/Battleship trees?

 

Not planned. Tree ends Midway. (pun intended)

This is possible.

We're currently deciding on this. Aircraft as module choices for ships is a more likely variant imho.

 

View PostCleygan, on 02 January 2014 - 06:38 PM, said:

Hello Ev1n, thanks a lot for the time you take to answer us.

 

I thank we all have read Blog and wiki (hope so) before posting. Even last part.2 ^^

 

For the Nimitz completely unbalance ship ?

Well... One leg or an eye.

 

For the question with not enought clarity :

 - Question 13 should never exist because it is damn curse by fate ! ;)

 - Flag using shoul be representative of : if active msg command --> the command itself, or for passive --> device state or random flag state (moving forward, engine in fire, etc.)

 

By the way I love you folks !

At the end there will be some animations in docks ! Groovy baby :)

 

I'm busy at the moment and away from keyboard till end of the week (or alike).

But I'll comment your answer as soon as possible.

 

We love you too. <3

Flag idea is interesting, but might be too complicated and/or not user friendly.

 

View PostD3ATHBR1NG3R96, on 02 January 2014 - 07:04 PM, said:

Trivial question but I'm curious. :)

 

In the Dock (garage), will the ships be in a drydock or docked in water?

 

Good question. Dock is in production at the moment - we'll see what it will look like when it's done. Both are equally possible.

Actually, personally I'd like it to be a drydock where you can really see the size of the ships in comparison to dockside equipment etc.

 

View Postmr3awsome, on 02 January 2014 - 07:37 PM, said:

Which ships fill these slots?

 

Which ship does the Unryu class lead to in the tech tree?

 

What tier would you put the Bristol class cruiser at? (1st sub-class of the 1910 Town class)

 

For now I will say that these slots are occupied by light cruisers.

Unryu currently leads to Zuikaku.

Bristol is currently not represented in the tech tree. The earliest Town-class are the Weymouth group and Birkenhead group, though Bristol may actually appear as a stock preset for Weymouth.

 

View Postkacey8, on 02 January 2014 - 08:19 PM, said:

 

Firstly, Thank you for your time in answering this, and the other questions.

 

Secondly

 

She Sure did....

 

She was commission in 1941 with the following weapons systems

 

9 x 18.1 in (460mm) (3x3)

12 x 6.1 in (155mm) (4x3)

12 x 5.0 in (127mm) (6x2)

24 x 0.98 in (25mm) (8x3)

4 x 0.52 in (13.2mm (2x2)

 

However in her 1944 refit they went a bit overboard and upgraded her to the following

 

9 x 18.1 in (460mm) (3x3)

6 x 6.1 in (155mm) (2x3) LOST 6

24 x 5.0 in (127mm) (12x2) ADDED 12

162 x 0.98 in (25mm) (52x3) (6x1) ADDED 138

4 x 0.52 in (13.2mm (2x2)

 

So yeah, she REALLY did have that many AA guns on her. My main question is obviously a balance issue as whilst if it was in the game it'd be understandable as it is histroically accurate, I also understand if you guys had to dial it back for two reasons

 

1 - It'd be hard to animate 162 25mm's firing at once (although sounds amazing)

2 - for balancing purposes.

 

I will be interested to see the end results, my sources are as follows

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_battleship_Yamato

http://www.combinedfleet.com/yamato.htm - This source says 152 not 162 (however I doubt that affects it to much)

View Postkacey8, on 02 January 2014 - 08:22 PM, said:

My next question is, will the USS Iowa also feature her full compliment of AA guns (for similar reasons I guess) I expect the answer will be the same of unsure, but she was outfitted with the following

 

80 x 40mm/56 cal AA guns

49 x 20mm/70 cal AA guns

 

Just curious if we're going to have that immense firepower.

 

Hmm, honestly I don't remember, but even if the models themselves have the full complement of AA (and both have more guns than a hedgehog has needles), they might not feel like it, since drawing tracers for that amount of guns on just one ship might kill the server or your client.

 

View PostPichu_Trainer, on 03 January 2014 - 02:17 AM, said:

Will Landing Assault ships be in the game as Premiums? As some Landing Ships were armed and Armored enough to pose a threat to some Surface ships.

 

Unlikely, but not impossible.

 

View PostLiner8, on 03 January 2014 - 02:27 AM, said:

I heard that the economy is "the same like in WoT and in WoWP but with other numbers"

Does that mean that when I farm XP and convert to Free XP, I should do this in WoWS (when I earn more XP there)?

 

The amounts of resources gained are not set yet (and won't be for a while), but the principle is the same. Grind here and spend there, or vice versa.

 

View PostCleygan, on 03 January 2014 - 02:19 PM, said:

Hello folks,

 

I read that some ship took 7 month of modelization: http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/798-new-wows-screenshotsrenders-07may13/page__st__100__pid__46926#entry46926

We all read that release should date be 2014.

 

When did the WoWs project became started ?

When did you started modelization work ?

 

 

Beginning of 2011. As for modelling, this article might be an interesting read: http://blog.worldofwarships.eu/leaps-and-bounds/

 

View PostRedBear87, on 03 January 2014 - 03:46 PM, said:

Sorry Ev1n  if I'm asking again, but is there any info on Matsu/Tachibana? We've accumulated a lot of questions lately so I perfectly understand that you could have missed some bits.

Their battleship (planned) versions? I wasn't referring to the carriers already confirmed to be in-game.

Yeah, it was more like a half-joke than a serious proposal; also I looked into it but there was no provision for anti-ship weapons, only ASW and mines, besides the nuclear bombs.

 

Thanks as usual for your replies.

 

I see Sakura/Tachibana currently slotted at tier 2.

No, their BB versions are not currently planned.



Murphy's Law of Combat Operations:
6. If it's stupid but it works, it isn't stupid!

Ev1n #53 Posted 13 January 2014 - 04:42 PM

    a large troll

  • WG Staff

  • 502
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View PostD3ATHBR1NG3R96, on 05 January 2014 - 07:51 PM, said:

Browsing through the wiki, I noticed a question that asked what tech trees had already been completed. The answer was that the US, Japan, the UK, Germany and the Soviets have all been completed.

 

Does this mean that the tech tree plans have been completed or the models themselves?

 

Preliminary tech trees are completed, but still change-around a lot. 

 

View Postkacey8, on 06 January 2014 - 04:06 PM, said:

Is there any chance of comfirming if the PBY Catalina may make an appearance

 

Cannot confirm at the moment. The problem with flying boats is that their role was mostly independent, rather than tied to a specific ship, afaik.

 

View Posttiger192, on 06 January 2014 - 08:54 PM, said:

can a ship have defence for torpedos or can avoid them?

 

Both.

 

View PostTall_Toot, on 07 January 2014 - 10:02 AM, said:

Apologies if these have been asked before dev's;

 

Depending on the game mode, is it likely ships will be able to sail beyond the confines of the map and leave the game intact (obviously cannot take any further part in that game not gain any further experience from the action)?

I appreciate this would need some control i.e. limited to escaping only from certain map edges, cannot leave the combat area before/ after a certain amount of game time has elapsed, etc. But a tactical withdrawl/ Monty Pythonesque "Runaway!!!!!" is a legitimate tactic that has always been used in naval warfare and should be reflected in gameplay - especially if a Convoy game mode requires you to escort a convoy to safety. This frustrates the hell out of me in WOT - but that's another story.

 

Is there a possibility of a 'campaign' type mode where ships will be forced to carry out a series of actions with only minimal time for repairs, diminishing ammunition and aircraft, etc. between battles before returning for refit/ replen?

Or is this something more likely to appear in a Clan Wars type scenario?

 

No such option planned. If you need to quit, just exit the battle normally, but accept the penalties.

Not directly as described, but we're thinking of using a similar concept for something. 

 

View PostSmederevac94, on 07 January 2014 - 07:35 PM, said:

1.Have youmade ​​somemedals for WoWs?

2.In WOT for 6 kills we get Top gun and in WoWs whatwillwe get for 5 or 6 kills(name of medal)?

3.What tier will be this ships?

Spoiler

 

 

1 & 2. Not yet.

3. BB-CV Ise? Currently at tier 7.

 

View Posteekeeboo, on 08 January 2014 - 04:08 AM, said:

I'm curious how Ramming will work in the game, will it be like early WoT and WoP, or more like modern WoT with weight and speed differences etc?

 

The latter. In general, ramming is a bad idea, unless you're Yamato and they are a destroyer. :)

 

View PostD3ATHBR1NG3R96, on 08 January 2014 - 05:42 PM, said:

1) Is it likely that the Town subclasses of Cruisers will be in the first update with the RN or a later one?

2) Are you able to say what tiers the Southampton, Gloucester and Edinburgh classes are?

 

Thanks in advance for answers, even if they're "no"! :)

 

 

1) One of the Town subclasses is in the UK release tree.

2) Currently tier 7 and tier 8.

 

View PostRedBear87, on 10 January 2014 - 07:26 AM, said:

I have one question about Tenryu: do you plan to implement the proposed AA cruiser configuration? If yes, will it be a separate ship at higher tier? The infos we have about Tenryu place her at tier II but this configuration is probably excessively advanced for that tier.

Just to make it clear, I'm referring to the proposal mentioned at page 162 of the Japanese cruiser's bible (Lacroix):

 

Well, Tenryu/Tatsuta are at tier II and are succeeded by their modified version at tier III.

 

View PostNordmannenwut, on 12 January 2014 - 10:42 PM, said:

Since 10 Days no post from the developers... There must anything big coming! :ohmy:

 

Working on CAT and a lot of other things around the project. :hiding:



Murphy's Law of Combat Operations:
6. If it's stupid but it works, it isn't stupid!

Ev1n #54 Posted 23 January 2014 - 03:54 PM

    a large troll

  • WG Staff

  • 502
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View PostRedBear87, on 13 January 2014 - 07:22 PM, said:

 

I see Sakura/Tachibana currently slotted at tier 2.

That's most likely the 1918 class destroyers, I was referring to the 1943 ones. Sorry again for bugging you with questions about those little silly ships, are they just absent from the current tree? I guess you would have noticed them otherwise.

And thanks as usual for answering my questions, it's much appreciated.

 

Hmm, yes, those are the early destroyers. The newer ones are not currently present in the tech tree.

 

View PostSmederevac94, on 13 January 2014 - 09:07 PM, said:

Tnx for answers

 

1.What tier will be IJN Mogami Aircraft Cruiser?

Spoiler

2.What do you think about this ship andwhat are the chancesthatwe see this ship in the game?

Spoiler

3.When will we be able to upgrade something on ship?

 

1. Currently at tier 7.

2. Sorry, can't access the images anymore.

3. Soon.

 

View PostCleygan, on 14 January 2014 - 03:53 PM, said:

Let's talk a little about power sensation/feeling.
In my opnion what will be amazing in WoWs is fire power. When we know that a full equipped Yamato sail with 12 000 Tons of equipment, munitions and sailors, we can only imagine how powerful was this monster.
I can easily imagine that WG and dev's look tight to the power sensation in-game must provide to player.
As ni WoT and WoWp firepower feeling is easy to provide to player. Cam sight is always near the vehicle, sounds are boost as you zoom near yours, flaring and trembling screen helps too.

 

BUT, how will it be for WoWs ?
Majority of ships will provide their power through Arty view. This is a distant one that, by the sound rules, lessen the gunfire sound. More of that you won't see your ship fire at all.
I played a lot arty in WoT so I can tell that only other players of the arty one can really hear and smell the power of an arty gunfiring.
Is there something will be done about it lack of firepower sensation in arty view ?

 

What are the two or three in-game effects that give firepower sensation in each view option ?

 

This is one of the things we are working on as part of players immersion.

 

View Postsagittarius_PL, on 15 January 2014 - 08:20 AM, said:

I am not sure if that question was asked or not (I can't find it anyway, If yes - sorry for asking)

Do You plan to implement some kind of special type of ammo dedicated for precise nation? (e.g like it is in WoT: the HESH ammo is available speciffically for a british tanks)

 

Not for the time being, but maybe in the future. To be honest, considering the scale in the game, it would probably be difficult to notice whether a shell has, say, 15% more penetration or not. If this happens, it will probably have to be addressed differently.

 

View PostPichu_Trainer, on 20 January 2014 - 05:56 PM, said:

Will Motor Torpedo Boat Tenders be ingame? Such as the USS Hilo (AGP-2)

 

Highly unlikely.

 

View PostDinozauriusz, on 23 January 2014 - 02:28 PM, said:

1. will ship types be given by symbol and name, like in WoT? In real battles identification was very difficult and often ships were misidentified.

2. Will exact composition of enemy team be known like in WoT and WoWP?

3. Are you going to split bouancy point for left and right side, so it would be possible to simply capsize the ship by flooding him from one side only? If yes – are you going to make possible controlled flooding of compartments to rebalance the ship?

4. How much planes will be on carriers, historical numbers (depending on type ~85) or some other?

5. Will there be a limit for number of planes which may be launched at once or we will be able to launch all what we have onboard?

6. Will there be landbased planes (PBYs, long range recons, heavy long range bombers) ?

 

1. Yes, ships have similar iconography to WoT and WoWP and the UI options will probably be similar as well.

2. Most Likely.

3. Buoyancy hitboxes are split into compartments, but you don't need to flood every compartment for the ship to sink. Controlled flooding would probably be a bit too complicated so its unlikely to be implemented.

4. Depends on carrier type. Numbers are close to historical ones.

5. Planes need to queue for take off, which takes some time, and are split into squadrons and reserve. You can have all your squadrons in the air at the same time, but the reserve is launched only in replacement of downed planes.

6. Unlikely.



Murphy's Law of Combat Operations:
6. If it's stupid but it works, it isn't stupid!

Ev1n #55 Posted 24 January 2014 - 09:36 AM

    a large troll

  • WG Staff

  • 502
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View PostRedBear87, on 23 January 2014 - 06:02 PM, said:

Thanks a lot for the confirmation. About Mogami in "Aircraft Cruiser" configuration, do you plan to link her to the heavy/light cruiser version or is there going to be a separate hybrid ships tree? Or do you still have to take a decision about this point? I can't remember whether this question was asked recently or not, I'm sorry if it's been already answered recently.

 

There will be a separate tree.

 

View Postyowanvista, on 23 January 2014 - 07:39 PM, said:

So here are my questions:

 

1. Will the entire crew have trainable skills or would those be limited to certain key crew members?

2. Will the game feature a DX11 renderer or possibly a 64-bit client? (like Warframe).

3. Will there be a dynamic weather system which alters gameplay and forces the player to adapt to evolving conditions? i.e fog, waves, rain, wind speed etc or will the game just be static like WoT.

 

 

1. Officers only. Believe me, you don't want to click through thousands of personnel files.

2. If the engine permits it.

3. There will be weather effects, some of them more dynamic than others. Some of them will have impact on player behavior.

 

View PostDinozauriusz, on 23 January 2014 - 07:43 PM, said:

Great, but will they be splited for left and right (or should I say port and starboard :) ) so it would be possible to sink ship by capsizing it due to shooting and flooding it from only one side (faster than sinking it on leveled keel due to equal flooding from both sides)?

 

This may be possible in the future. Will probably depend on gameplay balance.

 

View Postmr3awsome, on 13 January 2014 - 05:41 PM, said:

Can you tell us which ones they are?

 

Does that mean that other nations might have light cruisers at the tenth tier? (Like Mogador and Capitani Romani for France and Italy respectively)

 

Which ship/class does Soryu lead to?

 

What tier are the Weymouth and Birkenhead groups? 

 

What is the current tier two British destroyer?

View Postmr3awsome, on 23 January 2014 - 07:57 PM, said:

Previously you said that the Weymouth and Birkenhead class cruisers are in your current planned tech trees. What are their respective tiers?

 

Does that mean that other nations might have light cruisers at the tenth tier? (Like Mogador and Capitani Romani for France and Italy respectively)

 

Is the Leander class light cruiser a tier 6 British cruiser?

 

Sorry for forgetting your questions, man! :ohmy:

 

They are Agano and Kitakami (probably the ridiculous variant which will make everyone want to kill you first).

That is possible.

Soryu/Hiryu currently leads to Akagi.

Weymouth and Birkenhead are currently tier 2.

Medea-class/M-class.

Yes, you are correct about the Leander group.

 



Murphy's Law of Combat Operations:
6. If it's stupid but it works, it isn't stupid!

Ev1n #56 Posted 04 February 2014 - 11:47 AM

    a large troll

  • WG Staff

  • 502
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View PostRedBear87, on 24 January 2014 - 12:31 PM, said:

That's interesting, is there going to be a hybrid tree for the US too?

MFW I read Kitakami

Spoiler

That's going to be ridiculous, I feared you weren't going to implement that madness.

Talking about light cruisers, do you have any info about Oyodo's current placement? She was larger and better armed than Agano, but a lot of space was taken by catapults and hangars for large seaplanes and she didn't have torpedoes....

 

CL-AV Oyodo is currently tier 5.

 

View PostDeamon93, on 24 January 2014 - 02:08 PM, said:

Jeez how many torpedoes the Kitakami can carry, it's insane :amazed:. I'm sure that it will be the most awsome thing to do firing 40 torps at the enemy while he's in a strait :trollface:

 

I have few questions:

I)Will AA cruisers be implemented?

II)At the moment the USS Ranger and the USS Wasp are missing, where they will be placed?

III)Will a player be able to give priorities to the AA armament or it will completely controlled by the AI? Because in WoWP the gunners aren't perfect and they usually choose to shoot at the "wrong" target(if there are two planes chasing, one full health and the other almost dead, the gunner shoots at the first one usually)

IV)At the moment which is the fastest ship available ingame? Just a curiosity :) because i'm sure this title will change when the French and the Italian ships show up :trollface:

 

I) Yes.

II) Tier 7.

III) We are still deciding on that.

IV) One of the Japanese destroyers.

 

View Postmr3awsome, on 24 January 2014 - 05:44 PM, said:

Is Mogami a single cruiser slot, or is it there a slot each for CL and CA? 

Is the hybrid tier 7 and does it have the option of both CL and CA turrets?

 

Possible enough to confirm, or is it too far in the future to say for Italy and France?

 

What currently leads to Kaga?

 

Surely it would make more sense to have the Bristol class cruisers at tier 2, with the Weymouth and Birkenhead classes at a higher tier, specifically tier 3?

 

Could the other M-class destroyers (Admiralty M, Hawthorn M, Thornycroft M and Yarrow M) be tier 2s as well, or will they be grouped together? (They could probably form some short lines at the beginning based around each manufacturer)

 

Is the Arethusa class 1934 tier 5 in that case?

 

 

And I don't mind you missing out my questions, as long as you remember for the next one :)

 

 

 

 

They are currently separate slots. As for turrets, we don't know the exact modules for it yet.

For Italy and France, what do you want me to confirm? Yes, they are coming, in the far future. :)

Ise.

I'm not a that big a naval expert to discuss that. :)

Some of them might cross over to tier 3 in the same line.

Yes, Arethusa is currently the tier 5 in the cruiser tree.

 

View Postsilviu609, on 25 January 2014 - 04:28 PM, said:

some questions:

1) How long until you release another trailer or any video about WoWs ? (i know that WG policy is: everything is top secret and comes soon™ but at least say something vague like: in a few weeks/months/years )

2) When WoWs goes in closed beta will you consider partially lifting NDA so that players will be able to post gameplay videos or we have to wait untill open beta for that ?

3)this question would have been about closed beta release date but i know i won't get an answer so i won't bother asking

4) Since you have given information about ships names and positions in tech trees is it long before you release  the tech trees ? will it be before or after closed beta ?

5) Do you have a premade list with annoying questions and possible answers that you can give ? For example if someone asks: when will you release a gameplay video you have a list with answers to choose from something like:

 

a) we really don’t want to let you down showing a low quality title!

b) current stage of the project doesn’t resemble the final, high quality graphics

c) i am not allowed to give an answer

and my favourite:

d)  soon™

 

edit: 6) https://www.youtube....ships/videos is this youtube channel for both russian and eu/na ? i am asking because the only english video is Warships Expedition  and everything else is in russian

 

1) Soon. Months.

2) Not likely. That's what open beta is for.

3) Very considerate of you. :)

4) When we're certain that we won't change anything, as much as we can be. In this case, my guess is as good as yours.

5) No, I don't.  I have creative freedom to tell you whatever I think is appropriate. Also, I'd pity the fool whose job it would be to come up with a list like that. We don't have time for that.

6) For the time being, yes. We are working on setting up EU and NA resources.

 

View PostBRS11, on 26 January 2014 - 04:56 AM, said:

What about the actual time in the gameplay. Is it going to be fixed, or there will be, for example, night battles or dawn ones? :unsure:
Oh, and will it affect ships performance like view- range or accuracy, because of the weather and time interaction. :ph34r:

 

We're working on that, but atm it's unlikely weather effects will affect gameplay.

 

View PostPichu_Trainer, on 27 January 2014 - 09:39 PM, said:

I want to put R.R.W on my ships

 

Destroyer Questions;

  • Will it be possible to Replace a main gun with a set of Torpedo Tubes?
  • Will there be any destroyers with triple gun turrets?
  • What is the maximum calibre gun on a Destroyer?

Cruiser Questions;

  • Will it be possible to replace AA Guns with secondary armament and vice versa? (Question also applies to Carriers and Battleships)
  • Will there be any cruisers with 16" guns?
  • Will there be any high tier AA Cruisers?

Aircraft Question;

  • Will different types of Aerial weapons be effective against different types of ships? Such as Torpedoes being effective against Battleships and Carriers and bombs against Destroyers, Carriers and Cruisers?
  • Will we be able to equip Drop Tanks to Fighters, bombers and Observation Aircraft to increase their effective range?

 

DD1 Nope.

DD2. Not that I can see.

DD3. 127mm as far as the eye can see.

CA1. In a limited way, some module presets may allow this.

CA2. Aside from some battlecruisers, not that I can see.

CA3. There should be.

A1. Not likely, but in a way it already works like this, considering how sluggish BBs and CVs are.

A2. It's possible.

 

View Postsagittarius_PL, on 28 January 2014 - 02:37 PM, said:

Question about crew skills: I know that like in WoT or WoWP there will be "common skills" for all nations. But do You maybe consider implementation skills which will be available only for specific nation ? e.g skill that is available only for UK and unavailable for other nations ?

 

Unlikely, but not impossible. What would you recommend as nation-specific skills? 

And please don't say "Divine Wind for Japanese CAG"...

 

View PostLance1978, on 29 January 2014 - 08:47 AM, said:

Regarding the crew skills.

In WOWp some skills are locked until you reach 100% with another skill. For example, in order to open crack shot I had to reach 100% stamina. In WOT however (if I am not mistaken) crew skills are open, there is no such restriction. What are you plans for WOWs in this regard, if any?

 

My apologies if this was asked before.

 

This is not decided yet. 

 

View Postsilviu609, on 02 February 2014 - 04:54 PM, said:

Another question:

I know that you will only be able to fire all guns in one salvo , but if for example the rear gun's line of fire is blocked by a part of your ship it won't shoot but the front guns will shoot even if the rear ones won't and if you turn the ship and the rear gun's have line of fire and they are not reloading but the front ones are you will be able to shoot. This sounds like a good tactic to use if there is an enemy ship with low hp so you don't waste more shells so the question is:

 

1)So if you can intentionally block a gun/guns from shooting and shoot them later why don't you just add an option to switch between fire modes to make it easier for players something like when you press left click you shoot all guns at once and if you hold for example "shift" each time you press left click you shoot all guns from a turret (something like when you press left click you shoot all guns from turret 1, if you press again you shoot all guns from turret 2 and soo on) and if you hold "ctrl" each time you press left click you fire a single gun. This could be very useful if you don't want to shot all guns at a 5% hp target or when you are still new to the game and you don't know exactly how much to lead the target you can just shoot one gun and see where the shell goes then shot again

 

This is a concept we were also debating on, but it makes firing your guns a bit more complicated and requires more indicators that would clutter your screen even more. Maybe we will revisit it in the future.

 

View PostSmederevac94, on 03 February 2014 - 02:51 PM, said:

1.How much will USS Montana carry AA guns in the game?

 

Preliminary data: 16 dual-mount 76mm and 20 dual-mount 20mm.

 



Murphy's Law of Combat Operations:
6. If it's stupid but it works, it isn't stupid!

Ev1n #57 Posted 20 February 2014 - 03:11 PM

    a large troll

  • WG Staff

  • 502
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012


View PostSmederevac94, on 04 February 2014 - 02:57 PM, said:

Tnx for answers Ev1n

 

1.Where did you find that info. about Montana's AA guns? Because on wiki and one other site Montana had for AA defense: 10-40 × Bofors 40 mm anti-aircraft gun and 56 × Oerlikon 20 mm anti-aircraft cannons. On one site with allthis AA guns I mentionedhere Montana has had even 50 caliber machineguns for close-in self-defense as needed. What do you think about this I wrote? Isthistoo much AA defense for this ship?

2.What ship isbetweenthe Nagato (tier 7 for now) and A140 Hiraga (tier 9 for now) on Yamato's line?

 

1. Internal design data. Where our developers got that - I don't know. Probably our historians dug it up somewhere. ;)

2. That would be a certain battlecruiser.

 

View PostRedBear87, on 04 February 2014 - 04:01 PM, said:

 

CL-AV Oyodo is currently tier 5.

Thanks for the answer. Is she part of a regular cruiser line or of the hybrid line mentioned before?

Another couple of questions:

1) Do you plan to introduce some American destroyer escorts as low tier destroyers?

2) Any chance of seeing torpedo boats like Spica or Chidori? They're fast and seaworthy ships, if I vaguely understand the role of destroyers in-game they could be easier to implement than slower (20-25 knots) American destroyer escorts.

 

She's in a hybrid line for now.

1. No.

2. Not likely.

 

View Postmr3awsome, on 04 February 2014 - 06:55 PM, said:

Thank you for your answers

 

If the "M" class destroyers are tier 2, then are they followed by the "V and W" class destroyers at tier 3?

 

What are the current tier 8 and 9 between Nelson class and L3 class?

 

Yes, that's mostly correct.

Two Lions - an old and a young one.

 

View Postsilviu609, on 06 February 2014 - 11:48 AM, said:

 

 You are right having 9 or more reload bars/timers and other stuff for each gun on your screen can be overwhelming and annoying but adding an option to shoot all the guns from one turret each time you left click is doable, thats  the way i am seeing things:

 

I am guessing that when a turrets line of fire is blocked all guns from it won't shoot (not just the ones that are blocked)

so all the guns from that turret have the same reload time but they will have different  reload time than the guns from the

other turrets so that requires different reload bars/timers for each turret wich probably you already have (just like the way

bombs, rockets, cannons, machine guns have in world warplanes).

 

So if i am right for a ship with 3 turrets you already have 3 different reload times so all you have to do is add a code similar to the one that prevents guns from a turret to shoot when the line of fire is blocked something like: when you hold "ctrl" and you left click it checks for the turret 1, if the guns are ready they will fire if not it will check for turret 2,  if it the guns from turret 2 are still reloading it will check for turret 3, and if the guns from turret 3 are still reloading then it goes back to turret 1.

 

So as a conclusion having an option to fire all guns from each turret when you hold a button and left click is not overwhelming the only thing that will change is that the player instead of turning his ship to intentionally block guns from shooting he just holds a button and shoots, having each gun fire when you press a button is indeed hard to do and overwhelming for both players and servers but shooting all guns from a single turret it is already implemented, by adding an option to do that without turning your ship it is easier  for players especially for the new ones 

 

 

Most assumptions are correct, but the conclusions are debatable. 

We'll see - if we decide this is a necessary feature, then we'll do it.


Edited by Ev1n, 20 February 2014 - 03:31 PM.


Murphy's Law of Combat Operations:
6. If it's stupid but it works, it isn't stupid!

Ev1n #58 Posted 20 February 2014 - 03:29 PM

    a large troll

  • WG Staff

  • 502
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View Postmr3awsome, on 10 February 2014 - 06:24 PM, said:

Can you give us a list of current premium ships, and their tier if possible?

 

I could give you the current list, but it's not final and mostly untiered, so I won't disclose that at this time.

 

View Postsagittarius_PL, on 10 February 2014 - 08:20 PM, said:

I can't find any info on forum, so I will ask question here (if there are somewere an answer dorry for asking again):

- in WoT there are no "weapon control by computer/sytem" which shot to players vehilces (e.g. anti-tank guns ets)

- in WoWP there are ani-aircraft guns "controled by computer/sytem" which can damage or even destroy pleyer's plane

 

What about WoWS? Do You plan to implement something like  "coastal defence gun", or "land torpedo launcher" control by computer/system ?

 

We've not planned it, but we're thinking hard about our game modes at the moment, so who knows.

 

View PostMerdis, on 11 February 2014 - 12:36 PM, said:

 

@Ev1n 


As far I know Lesta Studio from Petersburg has been developing World of Warships. How does cooperation between Lesta and devs creating other "World of ..." titles - Game Stream (WoT creators from Minsk) or Persha Studia (WoWP) from Ukraine - look like?

 

I am interested because I noticed some very useful ideas (which proved their worth when implemented in WoT/WoWP) are often not transferred to second game quickly (if all). Even UI is not similar.

 

Small example: post-battle results screen.More than year ago ( if I recall correctly  patch 8.0, September 2012)  WoT introduced new, very  detailed battle result summary. It is possible to open it from garage (so we don't have to wait in battle after destruction anymore) and it contains far more detailed information (compared to old, which was very let's say 'basic'). Change was welcomed warmly by players. It is very useful feature which made players happy (and very well designed by the way, please take a look at it when creating post-battle summary in WoWS).

But in WoWP we still have post-battle summary screen which is almost identical to the one from 2010 (from closed WoT beta), when I am writing this post at the moment (and now it is February 2014, 16 months after change in WoT). 

 

This may look like small detail, but there are plenty similar issues in WoWP (some far more important). Combine them all and suddenly it has a significant effect on fun. It looks like Persha Studia and Game Stream cooperation and using each other's previous experience with creating "World of... " titles could be improved.

 

So once again, how does cooperation look like with WoWS? Do developers from different studios communicate each other and exchange ideas from time to time? (Like "this feature pleased our players, we think you could make use of it"). Or they are totally independent and do not influence each other?

 

 

Additional question, what did you like and dislike the most in  WoT/WoWP as a player?

 

 

This is a question that can be answered in many ways, most of which would result in a very long post. I will keep it short and say that yes, stuff is being shared between our development studios from time to time, but a development cycle is usually a long-term commitment, so it simply takes time to implement new ideas.

 

As for the other question: in WoT I really hate how many whining or abusive players there are. In WoWP I hate kamikaze pilots.

 

View PostZvonzi, on 13 February 2014 - 04:36 PM, said:

How exactly will matchmaker work when it comes to ship classes? Will there be balance when it comes to number of specific class in teams, for example - if one team has 2 carriers, other team will also have 2?

 

Can't answer 'cause not final yet. Might go both ways - towards a slot-based or weight-based system. Most likely weight-based with class caps.

 



Murphy's Law of Combat Operations:
6. If it's stupid but it works, it isn't stupid!

Ev1n #59 Posted 20 February 2014 - 05:07 PM

    a large troll

  • WG Staff

  • 502
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View PostDeamon93, on 20 February 2014 - 05:05 PM, said:

As the Lions are concerned in previous updates they were between the King George V and the N3 with the Vanguard at tier VIII above the Nelson. With the Lions above the Nelson will the Vanguard be at tier VIII above KGV?

 

KGV and Vanguard are same tiers alongside the two Lions. They are in another branch, but will probably make it to the release version before the cats.



Murphy's Law of Combat Operations:
6. If it's stupid but it works, it isn't stupid!

Ev1n #60 Posted 21 February 2014 - 10:19 AM

    a large troll

  • WG Staff

  • 502
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View Postmr3awsome, on 20 February 2014 - 06:13 PM, said:

Thanks for the answers!

 

Could the Talisman class destroyer go after the Medea class destroyer?

 

Why are the Lion class currently in a slow BB line? 

 

So KGV 1938 is tier 8 with Vanguard tier 9?

If so then What is between KGV 1938 and Queen Elizabeth?

 

Talisman was succeeded by Medea afaik. Why would it come after - just because of two more guns?

 

I made a mistake yesterday - KGV is currently tier 7 and Vanguard tier 8, while the Lions are 1 tier higher respectively. These lines converge here.

 



Murphy's Law of Combat Operations:
6. If it's stupid but it works, it isn't stupid!




11 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 11 guests, 0 anonymous users