LittleLILI

It is true that a SSD, and fast memory are a nice path for speed ! I dream of it... But... I also have the same issue with WoW, especially with the 1st battle, and I come alive around the 18th or even 17th minute... I do not have this problem in WoT though, and it is ok since 2011. Having an Alienware (M17X-R2) with 2 video cards on Crossfire and an IS7- X range should be ok for this game, still not using fully multicore potentials... WoW definitely needs a better file/memory management. However, this game is still very very new, and I guess it will be polished step by step...

exactly. Mods FORBIDDEN if in-battle. Mods ALLOWED if in port / training, and for global comfort/display/information...

thanks for this thread... I discovered that I have the DVD for SH3 stored in a box... since 2006!... and I never played it!!! still in it's box... i try to find my dvd reader, download the 1.4GB of Grey Fox, and the week end will be SH3 !!!! Thanks !

Il faut avouer que ce jeu semble beau, semble avoir des similitudes avec la lumière/design de WoWs, et la période (voile) ne vient pas en concurrent de WoWs mais en complémentaire... Je garde ce jeu en mémoire et regarderai les prochaines ouvertures d’inscriptions...

Superb... We have a thread saying Aren't battleships kinda underpowered right now? And another one with: BB players are killing this game ... and how do you want us to provide devs with a good feedback? They will nerf BB in 0.4.431 and buff in 0.4.6 and nerf in 0.5.2 and buff in 0.5.5 and ...

I understand what you mean. Obvious is ... well ... not obvious... I am afraid the only viable way to say "no" to in-battle mods, is Wargaming taking the lead and providing players with a set of official in-game features, optionnal and activated at will through the Settings, thus giving a chance to all player to enjoy battles the way they like... Or, unlock some "official" mods as a level is also unlocked...

well... not always. by instance, for moving you use the sequence WASD. On an AZERTY, if you use W.A.S.D, you will be in trouble as you would need to hit ZQSD ... ... and I don't tell you what it is on my thai girlfriend's keyboard - can't read and find the X or anything else !

rigolo ! mais en touchpad, c'est moins évident...

C'est justement ce que j'essaye d'apprendre avec mes destroyers japonais, car j'ai tué plusieurs fois des cuirassés en 1 salve. Mais c'est aussi un suicide complet le plus souvent, car pour toucher en salve groupée, il faut etre pret du cuirassé (par exemple le prendre au coin d'une ile...). La salve étroite va partir et toucher, mais le BB m'explose ensuite et souvent le kill est posthume... Malheureusement je n'ai pas encore déterminé si l’échange vaut le cout, 1 destroyer vs 1 cuirassé. Surtout en mode Domination ou Standard (ou beaucoup de joueurs en navires lents font le tour de la carte et ne peuvent revenir á temps pour une décap...)

No mods at all in battles, with a locked/hash client for having all players with same interface BUT - mods as much as you wish in port. - Wargaming improving a lot more the in-battle interface (ex.: high visibility of reticle/lines, better minimap,...) I would rather prefer this...

In WoT, capping is the last resort, because most tanks can go back and defend. In WoWs, if you are on a side of the map, you can be too far for coming back in time because things are much slower. I am sure you have seen (or be in) a group of ships chasing by instance a CV, and way too far and too slow for coming back in time to your base... Capping is then a valid strategic choice punishing the players trying to go around without watching the minimap for evaluating the risks.

Il y a eu de tres nombreux navires de services pour les hydravions. Par exemple, le Langley qui est dans le jeu a été un CV pour hydravions a partir de 1936/37. Mais il est vrai que le role des CVS n'est pas vraiment celui d'un CV... ("...On 25 October 1936 she put into Mare Island Navy Yard, Calif., for overhaul and conversion to a seaplane tender..." http://www.history.navy.mil/research/histories/ship-histories/danfs/l/langley-i.html)

And now, imagine that this ship has Rommel or Yamamoto aboard sailing to another assignment.. he is still alive then.. is not it worth a draw (or a future defeat ?...) ;)

Ce debat me rappelle celui qu'il y a eut pour Diablo III (Blizzard), avec les salles de ventes aux encheres (auction houses) en credits ou euros d'armures et armes. Du pur pur P2W (pay to win, payer pour gagner) Cela a tellement tué le jeu que Blizzard a fait marche arrière l'année dernière et supprimé les 2 auction houses. Je n'ai aucun problème pour qu'ils gagnent de l'argent, au contraire ! Mais effectivement, Wargaming pourrait avec WoWs revoir l'opportunité des éléments qui changent les capacités de jeux selon les capacités financières.

Ces DD ne sont pas faciles à jouer ... mais ils ont un vrai potentiel qui est difficile (pour moi) a exploiter car c'est un jeu en apnée et focus mental qui est 2 a 3 fois plus long que dans un tank, et donc plus exigeant... faire des breaks pour "ressourcer" est une bonne idée... mais si on les compare a WoT, c'est comme jouer un T49 ou même un hellcat (d'avant les 2 nerfs)! Il y aura beaucoup d'appelés, mais pas tant que cela d'élus. Si on la la capacité de les jouer, autant apprendre maintenant car l'apprentissage est dur... (comme les CVs...) retour au sujet: gardons peut-être les piastres pour l'open bêta, il y aura un wipe avant, donc les piastres gagnées ne seront probablement pas conservées ensuite, sauf si ce que dit darkreter3 se fait.

Dans WoT, il était a l'origine impensable d'avoir des autoloaders. ... et vous connaissez le résultat maintenant... Il n'est pas interdit de proposer des navires et avions qui ont des particularités spécifiques à une nation! Des navires hybrides, des avions hybrides... Des hydravions par exemple, pourraient être proposés en commun pour CVs et Cruisers? Donc des cruisers avec 1 scout qui fait aussi bomber ?... Et des hydravions qui, même si le CV est coulé , RESTE en contrôle du joueur, donc peut faire une dernière mission d'attaque ou même continuer à faire de la recon guidée... Ou être mis a disposition d'un autre navire compatible qui en prendrait le contrôle?... et/ou pouvoir recharger des bombes, non pas en revenant au CV, mais en se "posant" a proximité d'un autre navire de la flotte ?... bref, c'est juste une question de faire un brainstorming sans dire au départ "je ne sais pas...". Il faut aussi se rappeler que c'est un jeu, et il peut prendre des libertés historiques pour justement équilibrer le gameplay entre nations (le simple fait de mettre ensemble des machines réelles et d'autres sortant de blueprints est déjà une adaptation). En final, ce seront les devs qui trancheront, évitons de nous couper les branches de l'imagination: ils le feront pour nous... p.s.: pour la mise a jour de l'arbre, il vaut mieux le faire en éditant le post de depart: c'est toujours cela que l'on regarde en 1er en découvrant une thread ;) et c'est plus facile à trouver que chercher une maj noyée dans une thread qui peut devenir longue... p.s.2: pourquoi ne pas mettre aussi cet arbre dans le forum en anglais: il y aurait beaucoup plus de lecteurs (et plus de chances d'etre remarqué par devs... et si quelqu'un ecrit le russe, cela aussi!...;) ) +1 pour la thread, il faut encourager le travail et le brainstorming!!

I had a big smile reading you: it is exactly what I like to do in DD, in some corridors.. I go at the entrance of the corridor, especially if I am alone, and launch a smoke screen, then I run back and go to another front, hoping for ships to get suspicious when seeing my fog, and push less or even attract some fire and hunters. just a tactical move giving you no XPs, but as ships are slow, keeping some busy with ghosts can help the whole team...

It is why the minimap should 1- be freely resized by a player to whatever size she/he wishes 2- position changed freely on the screen, and minimap repositioned on-the-fly by selecting and dragging it anywhere like a simple window, with possibility to lock it in a position (for avoiding accidental moves during in the heat of a battle) 3- for lucky and wealthy players, ability to have minimap full-screen on a 2nd monitor 4- customization of what appears on minimap: in Settings, having a choice for "simplified / regular / full" 5- in case of large/full minimap, ability to add your own markers, lines, azimuths (as would do a captain on his own paper map). Very useful for drawing lines on aircraft/bombers flights, and azimuthing a carrier... 6- add the UI scaling with different screen resolutions Minimap in WoWs is perhaps more important than in WoT... In WoT, basically, you want to know the location and amount of "red" left or right, etc... and you have less, and simplified symbols easier to spot. In WoWs, you really want to determine - the type of threat: air or sea and sub-sea/torpedoes (3 different layers) - the speed of the threat (a slow, as it is not like WoT, here, we are all T95s... if too much left, no time for rushing back right side in time before the end of a cap... We need to think ahead, MUCH more than in WoT, in terms of paths and tactical moves... The minimap is the main tool in WoWs...

I am not too young (56), and my eyes are a bit tired. I am not (yet) visually impaired, but I definitely suffer from a lack of contrasts and find myself pixel hunting, especially when in my carrier and having to play with the top-view map ... Well, for young and sharp guns, things look evident like mountains, but to me, it looks like microscopic pixels... My screen resolution is 1280 x 800, which is the most comfortable to me, and for everything. I would like to suggest 2 future improvements. My concerns are both contained in what I experienced 2 days ago, in heavy fog... Problem 1: The sizes of the minimap There are 5 pre-determined sizes for the minimap: I use minimap size 4 because size 3 makes things too small. I heavily rely on minimap, and most of the time, it shows only a garbage of red icons where I can not see if it is a fighter/bomber/diver or ship. I find minimap MUCH more difficult to read than in WoT... But as you can see above, there is a large size gap between size 3 and size 4. Unfortunately, as shown in my 1st image, size 4 overlaps with targets coming from right side of the map, and also on the aiming line. Problem 2: Aiming Indicators almost invisible in some (most?) environments. My 1st image is the extreme case, with fog from a destroyer. But fog should be on sea (and target, which is ghostly as it should). But it should not interfere with my ship reticles and indicators... Suggestions: 1- either: reduce slightly the size of minimap 4 so then it comes just below the aiming line, or better: add a free resizing button so then we can resize freely "our" minimap (position/size being recorded in our "preferences" file, server side if possible for having same comfort when changing PC login PC. 2- increase the reticle and aiming line visibility, with Hi Vis colour (yellow ?), and also Hi Vis colours for minimap col/line coordinates. Example below: I really do NOT want to rely on future mods for vision improvements, as I am against in-battle mods (which should be a total protected area, common to ALL players !) , and such mods would be unfair to players if all players have not the same vision quality...

I had the same trouble 2 days ago. As I know my computer can behave strangely (an old M17x portable Alienware), I quit, and de-activated the AMD Crossfire for working on only 1 video card. After rebooting and reloading the game, it was fine. I do not know though if it is linked but for some games (like Skyrim), it was the trick for solving weird video issues... DxDiag64-M17X.txt

A time limit on invitation codes for CBT? This is weird... With just 2 days off limits, I am sure it will be ok. It is not as if it was 2 weeks or 2 months... After all, we heard that God needed 6 days for creating the World? So Him too was late by 6 days as he is supposed to have All Powers... ;)

Well... It is unfortunate to recall such sad events, but look at what happened in the German flight crashing south of France, with probably a mentally ill co-pilot committing suicide. The unexpected had to be expected. Here too... It is a game. It means there are no control on the sanity/insanity of who is between the screen and the chair. Open to any one. Healthy or not. Mentally fit .. or not ... Working (with boss who can step in at any moments) or relax at home, or less relax with a crying baby. It can be also a guy with a computer problem, an external wireless mouse not responding, and the time you find new batteries, you try using this damn touchpad, hence very erratic results... Of course, it is also probable that bots are tried in beta, it is the point of hackers to find asap the weak parts of a code... But it is also possible, even remotely, that it is something else. the pattern of this player should then be scrutinized by wargaming (in WoWs and also in WoT/WoP) to see if it is an accident or not

I wonder where you got this picture... I bought the 3 packages as I could afford them. Of course, the 3 tanks are still in my garage, even if some (the A-32, Pz5/4) are very rusty... I intend to do probably the same with WoWs as, after playing a few battles, I know I will like the game and play it in 3 years or so...

what about a delay proportional to the battle length? After all, if you fought almost 20 minutes, you can afford waiting a few more seconds, can´t you?... ;) Each minute of battle can add an extra time at the end where all fire/ram are disabled (you can not play after the time expires), but there is a time where your actions initiated before the regular end are still calculated. each minute of battle = 0.5 second delay? It would make a max 10 sec where we are all observers... Besides, it would be nice if, during this dead time, all ships are revealed on the map...

Yes.. and no ...It is not always true: you can fire/launch a torpedo WAY before the battleship that is about to kill you even point his guns at you. With some torpedoes (Long Lance), it can take 20+ seconds! It is a difficult choice: the winner is the one firing 1st, ... or hitting 1st ? At the moment, choice is: hitting 1st...