Jump to content


Discussion thread for "some interesting info from RU"


  • Please log in to reply
3692 replies to this topic

Deamon93 #1 Posted 13 July 2016 - 07:33 PM

    Captain

  • Supertester

  • 4,737
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

Since that threads gets derailed quite often(sometimes also by myself, I must admit) I thought would be nice for everyone to create a thread where people could discuss freely about the various pieces of info collected in the original one. Hopefully this will avoid more "spam" flooding "some interesting info from RU"

 

Have a nice day!

Deamon93


Patches for the patch god, bugs for the bug throne! :izmena:

Fan made Italian tech tree

Fan made Spanish tech tree

WG official TS server - Server Address: 92.223.3.90:9989


Vogel #2 Posted 13 July 2016 - 10:31 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Supertester

  • 2,006
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View Postmtm78, on 13 July 2016 - 11:28 PM, said:

I agree, also, it's a user request ( which has been made before ) so everyone is free to ignore it :)

 

A 'clean' Q&A thread would be very nice to have though, coupled with a discussion thread where everyone can talk about the last news items. I also go off topic, don't get me wrong, I'm not pretending to be a saint, but I also agree that this is one of the first threads I read when I log into the forums and that it is not always a positive experience because instead of new info I just see the same discussions as are being held in the other threads. Like all this talk about the gun options, it's also in many threads including one dedicated to the upcoming German BB's.

 

I also seem to remember the moderators once already stating that there is no need for a separate thread if people can stick mostly on topic. The problem there is that 'mostly on topic' is a loose definition, and some people have lower thresholds for 'off topic-ness' than others. And, some of the discussions about the news items are actually at least as informative as the Q&A on it's own. 

 

But, a lot of the off topic is also constantly between the same people ( me included this time at least ). Might be better than to put the off topic's in a spoiler or something as to not clutter the thread?

 

 

Yes, but if we just start to use this topic, then we might get a shift from people actually discussing their stuff here instead of the other one.

 

A more hardline approach is to only let certain people post in the other one, or even make every reply "approve only".


Bagel pls

Deamon93 #3 Posted 14 July 2016 - 06:04 AM

    Captain

  • Supertester

  • 4,737
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View PostVogel, on 13 July 2016 - 11:31 PM, said:

 

Yes, but if we just start to use this topic, then we might get a shift from people actually discussing their stuff here instead of the other one.

 

A more hardline approach is to only let certain people post in the other one, or even make every reply "approve only".

 

Well I created this thread so that it's easier to get the various pieces of info from the original thread without hunting between more or less on topic discussions. Granted may be a little more annoying having a thread for discussions but it's a small price to pay to have the original clean. Regarding what WG could do I don't know, I hope the mod team will find a way(like moving posts here from now on as example)

 

 

 

 


Patches for the patch god, bugs for the bug throne! :izmena:

Fan made Italian tech tree

Fan made Spanish tech tree

WG official TS server - Server Address: 92.223.3.90:9989


von_Boeg #4 Posted 14 July 2016 - 09:21 AM

    Midshipman

  • Players

  • 1,108
  • Member since:
    03-25-2015

View PostVogel, on 13 July 2016 - 10:31 PM, said:

 

Yes, but if we just start to use this topic, then we might get a shift from people actually discussing their stuff here instead of the other one.

 

A more hardline approach is to only let certain people post in the other one, or even make every reply "approve only".

 

I do not understand what the fuss is about, how can it be that hard to not read the posts that are not translations from Russian if one do not like the discussion? Besides, it is not like it takes more then a few minutes to read everything as it is now in the thread. Personally I like the idea that we can discuss the Russian news.
NO TO RADIO POSITION FINDING!!

mtm78 #5 Posted 14 July 2016 - 09:33 AM

    Admiral

  • Alpha Tester

  • 13,794
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View PostVogel, on 13 July 2016 - 11:31 PM, said:

 

Yes, but if we just start to use this topic, then we might get a shift from people actually discussing their stuff here instead of the other one.

 

A more hardline approach is to only let certain people post in the other one, or even make every reply "approve only".

 

View PostDeamon93, on 14 July 2016 - 07:04 AM, said:

 

Well I created this thread so that it's easier to get the various pieces of info from the original thread without hunting between more or less on topic discussions. Granted may be a little more annoying having a thread for discussions but it's a small price to pay to have the original clean. Regarding what WG could do I don't know, I hope the mod team will find a way(like moving posts here from now on as example)

 

 

 

 

 

View Postvon_Boeg, on 14 July 2016 - 10:21 AM, said:

 

I do not understand what the fuss is about, how can it be that hard to not read the posts that are not translations from Russian if one do not like the discussion? Besides, it is not like it takes more then a few minutes to read everything as it is now in the thread. Personally I like the idea that we can discuss the Russian news.

 

This is the problem, different people have different opinions. As I said I would like a clean news thread, but there are some discussions about the news items I also like reading and which add to the news. On the other hand, there are many more which I don't think should be held in the news thread ( aka GE BB gun options, since that is already being discussed elsewhere ).

 

Splitting off all off topic is not feasible to do for the moderators, the thread is to active and I don't want the moderators to be overburdened.

 

The option of giving only Cartozenet and perhaps a few others who speak RU and who are doing translations, write access has crossed my mind more then once. But I don't think this is possible with current forum user management. Community contributors don't have special forum rights, and for almost all of them having those wouldn't give any benefits at all. If WG could give our community translators a special forum group ( doesn't even have to be visible, can be a hidden group ) and make a new 'News' section where they can post their translations and separate discussion topics in the regular forum which are linked from the news items.. 

 

Maybe I'm overthinking it though :hiding: 

 

 


"First they nerfed the carriers and I didn't speak out because I didn't play carriers.                                    Then they nerfed the torpedoes and I didn't speak out because I didn't play IJN DDs.

Then they nerfed cruiser HE and I didn't speak out because I didn't spam HE.                                             Then they nerved concealment on every class except BB's, and I didn't speak out because I didn't have common sense

Then the BBabies came for me, and there was no one left to speak out for me."        

 


aguir #6 Posted 14 July 2016 - 09:53 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Players

  • 2,366
  • Member since:
    08-16-2013
So, any interesting news from RU?

1989, June 4th: first (partially) free parliamentary elections in post-war Poland
2016, June 4th: Polish Death Ride - the biggest Polish players' action of protest against WG

 

Sorry, previous sig - EU finger - was cut and censored by a moderator.

 


oosel #7 Posted 14 July 2016 - 09:59 AM

    Able Seaman

  • Players

  • 81
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

i like this as sometimes the forum doesnt split the uber long threads into pages and when its a 1000 long it takes forever to open to the point where i dont open the ru news one any more



Userext #8 Posted 14 July 2016 - 10:04 AM

    Commodore

  • Beta Tester

  • 5,300
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View Postaguir, on 14 July 2016 - 09:53 AM, said:

So, any interesting news from RU?

 

SHOCKING NEWS

 

 

we dont know


Jarhead

Vogel #9 Posted 14 July 2016 - 10:14 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Supertester

  • 2,006
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012
I think as long as we start using this topic, at least the other one will be less spammy.

Edited by Vogel, 14 July 2016 - 11:28 AM.

Bagel pls

mtm78 #10 Posted 14 July 2016 - 10:17 AM

    Admiral

  • Alpha Tester

  • 13,794
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012
It's worth a shot :great:

"First they nerfed the carriers and I didn't speak out because I didn't play carriers.                                    Then they nerfed the torpedoes and I didn't speak out because I didn't play IJN DDs.

Then they nerfed cruiser HE and I didn't speak out because I didn't spam HE.                                             Then they nerved concealment on every class except BB's, and I didn't speak out because I didn't have common sense

Then the BBabies came for me, and there was no one left to speak out for me."        

 


1MajorKoenig #11 Posted 14 July 2016 - 12:01 PM

    Midshipman

  • Players

  • 1,730
  • Member since:
    04-13-2013

Good luck guys :-)

 

Seriously - good idea and never loose hope ppl will stop discussing off Topic in the original thread!


 

Cheers


"Gefahr erkannt - Kraft gespannt"

Zed_Von_Toza #12 Posted 14 July 2016 - 12:16 PM

    Petty Officer

  • Players

  • 326
  • Member since:
    12-03-2015

If there are people prepared and willing to translate the RU news on a regular basis and post it, then Hell yes please.

 

And thank you.

 

To stop things going off topic all the time, and new news being lost in the soup, how about pulling all the new news together into a once a week sort of news letter type post. Of course if something dramatic pops up then ad hoc posts could be made,

 

Maybe the moderators and forum admins would consider giving this effort its own channel/section. 


There is no 'i' in team. Oh wait there is ,,,,
​It's hidden in the hole between e and m.
 
Looking for a place to learn about World of Warships? Specialists Global Warships Academy can help!
 

Vanhal #13 Posted 14 July 2016 - 12:17 PM

    Commodore

  • Alpha Tester

  • 5,059
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View PostVogel, on 14 July 2016 - 12:14 PM, said:

I think as long as we start using this topic, at least the other one will be less spammy.

 

I predict that both of them will be spammy, but it's worth trying anyway.

ಠ_ಠ


Deamon93 #14 Posted 14 July 2016 - 12:50 PM

    Captain

  • Supertester

  • 4,737
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View PostZed_Von_Toza, on 14 July 2016 - 01:16 PM, said:

If there are people prepared and willing to translate the RU news on a regular basis and post it, then Hell yes please.

 

And thank you.

 

To stop things going off topic all the time, and new news being lost in the soup, how about pulling all the new news together into a once a week sort of news letter type post. Of course if something dramatic pops up then ad hoc posts could be made,

 

Maybe the moderators and forum admins would consider giving this effort its own channel/section. 

 

Well that depends on how often the Q&As are done, still I'm sure they start translating soon after the information is available there.

 

View PostVanhal, on 14 July 2016 - 01:17 PM, said:

 

I predict that both of them will be spammy, but it's worth trying anyway.

 

Well I created this thread hoping the original one won't get as spammy, then again only time will tell

Patches for the patch god, bugs for the bug throne! :izmena:

Fan made Italian tech tree

Fan made Spanish tech tree

WG official TS server - Server Address: 92.223.3.90:9989


Userext #15 Posted 14 July 2016 - 12:57 PM

    Commodore

  • Beta Tester

  • 5,300
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

 

Sub_Octavian (translated)

 "For all of those who are not aware of this conundrum, here is a brief summary: players are questioning the developers' decision to equip the premium ship Schranhorst with her historical 283mm guns whereas the standard Gneisenau is planned to be equipped with 380mm guns.

 

More than once, we have explained that historicity cannot be entirely supported in the game for several reasons. We try to conform to historical realities or at least take them into consideration but the gameplay will always come first. In some rare cases, we have decided not to implement certain changes because of their glaring inconsistency with reality, but it happened extremely rarely. On the other hand, we try to model our ships as close to their historical counterpart as possible. Standard ships represent their class whereas premium ships represent one concrete ship in a given period.

 

Do some ships have errors or lack precision ? Of course. We are progressively identifying and fixing them. In our Supertesters team, we have one expert whose work for the year ahead is to fix all these little things.

 

Have we already deliberately forsaken historicity for gameplay ? 100% yes. As an example, we can take the AA configuration of Atago or Arizona (to make them more balanced, the first one had her AA made worse, the second one, better) or the coats of arms displayed on German ships (during combat, they were not displayed, but they are rather pleasing to the eye). There are a lot more of these examples.

 

The calibers on German BB's follow the same deliberate choice.

Here are the reasons behind our decision:

 

1. We currently think that it is best to avoid caliber size going back and forth when advancing in a line. Regarding Scharnhorst, it's not a problem since it is a premium ship and stands apart from the main line. Regarding Gneisenau, the problem is as follows:

283-305-305-380-380-380-406-406. This is the current caliber progression.

If we had equipped Gneisenau with her historical guns, it would be 283-3055-305-380-283-380-406-406.

 

When gun caliber changes drastically, players have to change the tactics they use considerably. In general, when the main gun caliber changes, it is a risky and stressful moment. Just remember for example the jumps that occur when hopping onPensacola or Furutaka. Both ships are more difficult to learn because players have to change the way they approach these ships' gameplay.

 

Let's not forget about the enemy ships Gneisenau will face. They are equipped with 410 and 406 mm guns. In this case, a decrease in caliber can be even more off-putting.

 

2. One ship having more than one gun caliber size option is, sadly, a bad idea. According to our research, Mogami, which is often cited as an example, having the gameplay option between being a heavy cruiser and a HE spam monster is negatively affecting the "audience" of the ship. Now, players are talking more about the satisfaction this ships brings, how it affects their desire to get better and master the game (etc.) than the ship's combat effectiveness. 

 

3. We are not against sometimes releasing sisterships or developing premium ships that play like their standard counterparts. However, in this case, taking into account the arguments that were previously given, we had the opportunity to release a premium BB with an unusual gameplay (Scharnhorst + 283 mm) as well as fit a standard ship into the BB line (Gneisenau + 380 mm), which will be a logical step in regards to the lower and higher tier ships.

 

We believe that both ships will be interesting to play as well as being different and needing different styles and tactics. We also believe that with our current plans each of these remarkable ships will find its place.

 

When both ships will be made available to everyone, we will see if we were right. Currently, we have however no reason to change our plans or question them.

 

Thank you for your attention !"

 

 

All thanks to Carnotzet. So what do you say about this people?


Jarhead

Tyrendian89 #16 Posted 14 July 2016 - 12:59 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Players

  • 2,210
  • Member since:
    07-06-2015

derp... ofc I immediately forgot we had this now, and posted over there... shame on me :child:

 

very good answer - an answer that not everyone will agree with, but one that most people should be able to respect at least. It's their game, and they have what they believe are good reasons for the decision made - let's see how both of these ships end up playing before passing final judgement on whether it was a good idea after all. From what I've seen and heard, Scharnhorst is rather wacky in terms of playstyle, but still fun and potentially very effective - perfect hallmarks for a Premium I would say...


Tora Tora Tora


mtm78 #17 Posted 14 July 2016 - 01:04 PM

    Admiral

  • Alpha Tester

  • 13,794
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View PostUserext, on 14 July 2016 - 01:57 PM, said:

 

 

 

All thanks to Carnotzet. So what do you say about this people?

 

I think the calibre progression is a good explanation, though I confess I think it wouldn't be enough for purists who really want to stick with historical configurations. 

 

But to them, as I posted in another thread, I would like to quote a specific part: 

 

Block Quote

Have we already deliberately forsaken historicity for gameplay ? 100% yes. As an example, we can take the AA configuration of Atago or Arizona (to make them more balanced, the first one had her AA made worse, the second one, better) or the coats of arms displayed on German ships (during combat, they were not displayed, but they are rather pleasing to the eye). There are a lot more of these examples.

 

:)

 

Not sure about Mogami, the 155's would be fine if they didn't have the terrible turret traverse.. 


"First they nerfed the carriers and I didn't speak out because I didn't play carriers.                                    Then they nerfed the torpedoes and I didn't speak out because I didn't play IJN DDs.

Then they nerfed cruiser HE and I didn't speak out because I didn't spam HE.                                             Then they nerved concealment on every class except BB's, and I didn't speak out because I didn't have common sense

Then the BBabies came for me, and there was no one left to speak out for me."        

 


Vogel #18 Posted 14 July 2016 - 01:08 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Supertester

  • 2,006
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

Sub_Octavian (translated)

If we had equipped Gneisenau with her historical guns, it would be 283-3055-305-380-283-380-406-406.

 

When gun caliber changes drastically, players have to change the tactics they use considerably. In general, when the main gun caliber changes, it is a risky and stressful moment. Just remember for example the jumps that occur when hopping onPensacola or Furutaka. Both ships are more difficult to learn because players have to change the way they approach these ships' gameplay.

 

This is a very silly design choice, to put it mildly. If we have to sacrifice interesting and unique ships due to the average player can't be bothered to adapt to a single ship, then lines will be stale and too uniform very fast. ATM, Yorck is my favourite CA, probably in the game, and the gun progression from T3 is as followed: 105->150->150->150->210->203->203->203. By that logic, the Yorck should never exist. Granting two top configurations would be a much more elegant solution, just as they do it in certain cases in WoT. 

 

IF the average player is the benchmark to decide what passes or not, we might as well remove minimap altogether.


Edited by Vogel, 14 July 2016 - 01:12 PM.

Bagel pls

Deamon93 #19 Posted 14 July 2016 - 01:13 PM

    Captain

  • Supertester

  • 4,737
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

I hoped for more reasonable arguments but oh well, time to debunk them

 

Counter arguments:

  1. The calibre progression in the Russian cruiser line is non-existent: 120->152->130->180->152->180->220
  2. A ship has two different calibres available(Bogatyr), which has a caliber which benefits from AFT and BFT(just like Mogami had before the changes to the aforementioned skills).
  3. Well considering the amount of clones we have around at least they aren't exact clones, still there could have been a late WWI design at that tier and we wouldn't have had this issue to begin with

 

With this said those are just my opinions but based on cold facts

 


Patches for the patch god, bugs for the bug throne! :izmena:

Fan made Italian tech tree

Fan made Spanish tech tree

WG official TS server - Server Address: 92.223.3.90:9989


Unintentional_submarine #20 Posted 14 July 2016 - 01:13 PM

    Commander

  • Beta Tester

  • 3,645
  • Member since:
    04-29-2015

It would ring true if there wasn't the issue of Kirov - Budyonny. While the size of the guns don't exactly change massively, gmaeplaywise they do. But that's ok. A) Because it is, there is no problem with power or problems with difficulty of playing, and B) nobody has complained about it.

 

Yet when it comes to the battleships it suddenly isn't ok? I'm not going to lower myself to the 'Russian-Bias' argument but I can certainly see a lot of people thinking it. And what of the British? They can't seriously think about giving KGV the the 15 inchers that were proposed for her. That would be stupid, besides it would still be a step down the progression ladder, using their terms.

 

I simply don't buy this. It was done in order to have an attractive Premium, nothing more. A Premium Scharnhorst with 380s wouldn't have generated much interest because hte guns are known, and people dislike the 6 gun issues (Myogi haunts a lot of people's dreams). Such a ship would sell badly. Ok, so keep it 283mm and let the silver ship have the option then? Why buy the Premium then? For some minor secondary differences? Nah, I'll just keep my Gneisenau with 283s thank you very much.

 

This is not a balance, progression or anything gameplay related, decision. It is a pure money decision.


- World of Warships is a game featuring ten tiers, three of which are Tier 7.





6 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 6 guests, 0 anonymous users