mtm78

Actually the cap on spg's was not because they where in any way 'unpopular', quite the opposite in fact. Matches with 10 spg's per side where not that uncommon, and those weren't fun at all ( well maybe once in a lifetime but not that often ). Also if they cap classes per team, they could better do it in cbt then on an official released version ( as the change is drastic and would involve a cascade of needed tweaking to be done which is better suited for a cbt phase then release ). It is a tough choice though, because of the reasons you mentioned. My first ship model I built was Bismarck, I am so looking forward to this ship. But atm I like playing my destroyers mostly, don't like my Des Moines at all ( even though many say she is a very stronk sheep ). So for me it wouldn't be as much of a problem. Also, I mentioned balancing to encourage teamwork, I never said a DD should never beat a BB in a 1v1. If the DD is using it's smoke and torpedo's very well and the BB captain is stupidly trying to chase the DD into the smoke ( or around an island and so on ) then by all means the DD should beat the snot out of the BB. But if the engagement is instigated by force rather then choice of the DD captain, a DD should not be able to beat a BB ( regularly ). I know that even a slight imbalance will make classes unpopular by some, light tanks in WoT are not that popular except by a few who are good enough to get good results with them. If WoWs would have DD's which are rewarded properly for things they excel at with for instance a good and visible mechanism for assisted damage by spotting by a DD, there will always be players which are good enough to do that task so well that the rewards given by the game as well as their own feeling of accomplishment will be enough for them to play the class. How exactly, idk I'm not a game developer

Anyone else getting a malware warning on this page? If so it could be the image I posted and which isn't showing in my previous post.. This is the same image from a different source. It is Kaneda's 500,000t battleship -> http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/forum/getrefs/id/157143/type/0

If I where a WWII ship designer I would either design H45 or this baby...

That's what I would call

It would piss off people who want a free for all where every ship is capable of beating every single ship on it's own. The people interested in a game where teamwork is a needed aspect wouldn't be to bothered by classes which support each other. If that means the strongest classes need a limit for how many can be in a single battle at the same time, so be it. Better then trying to make a new Unreal Tournament but with ships ( btw I played the Goty edition like a mad man ). And if you don't like sitting in queue longer, then pick another class. No one is forcing anyone either way, it's still free choice. In AW there is a limit of 2 spg's per team, do you see a lot of complaints about that? Or the limit on spg's per team in WoT, many complains ( other then it being to high )? It's not as black and white as you try to make it out. You where right about my misreading the post, sorry about that.

ⓈⓂⓄⓄⓉⒽ

I wanted him to find out about the search function, y u ruin this for me he could have actually learned one of the most useful things in life ┻━┻ ︵ヽ(`Д´)ﾉ︵ ┻━┻

Yeah the scouting should be properly rewarded, and the team should depend on it more ( which would lead to them learning to use it correctly ). Can this be archived with giving assisted damage to carriers providing targets though? Idk, I am not even sure hoping for/dreaming about such a gameplay change is even remotely realistic. It seems WoWs is going in the wrong direction and a change of this magnitude to correct that seems implausible

It's still better with text, and even sounds and moving pictures

Sharana made a very good topic about basic spotting mechanics, I would do a forum search for it ;)

^^ This one get's it

Why? What would it not fix? Why would it create a shitstorm and why the *censored* would a full account reset fix that shitstorm? Did you put a lot of thought into making that post? It's not showing sorry

I didn't even mention fun, I don't play CV's check my profile. I said that carriers like in Navy Field for instance, provided their fleet with reconnaissance just as much as they where a damage dealer. Without air superiority it was pretty risky to get bombers into the air as if they would encounter enemy fighters they would suffer heavy losses. Which is why I think air superiority and reconsissance should be just as much a part of carrier play as sending torp bombers to damage ships. I understand that there are people who just think doing damage from safety with their carriers acting as main damage dealers is 'fun' for them, it's just only their opinion of fun and it's worth nothing more then one who feels a bit different about that ;)

In game there is a channel called 'Forumites', with the super secret password: play4fun. You will likely find some people willing to division with you for some more coordinated play, most if not all of us are capable of jumping on a ts server for voice coms and the likes as well.

​ Do you think the NDA gives them any wiggle room? "We can't" should give you some indications of the answer to that. ​

And this would self correct because people don't want to spend all their time in queue and therefore will switch to a class better suited to the current queue. In fact this limited classes in game would also do a lot to promote actual team work and ships playing to their roles instead of being lone wolfs. I am not asking for simulator style naval combat, but a system where a single DD can beat a single BB ( given equal captain skills ) is just wrong imo. The DD should be able to win if the captain is able to commit to an engagement only in favorable situations ( BB coming round an island / spamming torps from outside spotting range ).

Exactly, as I said many times before, how hard is it to add a radial menu?

But since WG portrays this as a team game, they could do more to cater to it. Where is our short communications menu, where are our hotkeys? I would mention being able to use chat prior to the game starting but then I realized they already want us to be able to do that, they just haven't been able to fix the queue issues so lots of people me included still are being dropped right into battle. Edit: what I am trying to say is this: adding that communication ability in 'late' as it is currently not implemented, changes people's perception of the game. If we had communication tools from the start of CBT it would be so much easier to tell new players that communication and team work is important. Now everyone can point out that in game chat is useless ( because reason xyz which will always be semi viable reasons depending no who you ask ) and there are no other ways of communication.

Fair points, I hope you will be able to sort it out with him as I like your mod and would like for it to stay included in the modpack

No they can't, stop being a troll you bloody well know they signed a non disclosure agreement.

The only RNG in torps is dmg. Long range torps missing due to course changes is not RNG as it is player input causing it.....

Posting from phone so no quote. As said directly above discussion about statistics we shouldn't even know is pointless that is the whole issue here. Also, questioning peoples ability to read = calling people dyslexic. Semantics aside, Bismarck was the fist ship I ever built a model off so it is not that I don't care it is just not worth getting upset about preliminary statistics.

I don't fully agree, if this is a team based game we should be testing in a team based environment. And WG should do everything it can to cater to the people who would like team based coordinated tactics. So simple things like implementing a message carousel as in WoT should imo be quite high on the priority list.

well at least WG said they will now make sure that no ships will be left in cbt branch of client which isn't meant to be there, so in a way it's kind of understandable that people take them 'too serious'. But when told 1000x times to stop making a fuss about something which hasn't even passed step 2 (Q&A right?), I loose my interest quickly. I'm a big fan of Bismarck but I have yet to post anything about the preliminary stats because I feel it's totally out off place to comment on it. If I where in ST and I was asked for feedback I would surely give it ( based also on actual knowledge not just numbers ) to the people who need to hear it. But somoene calling out people for being ad hominem when he himself is repeatedly claiming others are dyslectic and/or unable to grasp the meaning of something bothered me enough to finally post in the thread. And that says something as well