Querulous

Is this really release in all but name ? except for more bugs?

I can live with them being the top scorers, as exp/minute may be lower than being top makes them appear they do sometimes seem a bit godly and wipe out unescorted ships. However virtually never have I seen any team try to coordinate escorts in chat - which could be why they are so good on EU server

Lots of good reasons to stop this. What works depends on programming - make it like a collision, or perhaps make it deduct a small but escalating amount of Health. In no scenario should it give an advantage.

Perhaps he means per flag type ?

Mechanic does seem a bit unclear. We need some way of testing it. Training rooms !

The situation with this fire. Each shell has a chance to cause podgoraniepozhar. Let's take for example 12%. Each ship has a meaning fire, it decreases the level. For example, the vehicle 10 level it will be equal to 0.5. After contact with the projectile in the ship, these two values ​​are multiplied and get 6%. The percentage of the "pyromaniac" adds to the chance of projectile fire. For example, it was 12%, was 17%, hit by a shell in our "top ten" - the risk of fire came out 8.5%. Percentage of modernization to protect the fire risk is multiplied with the ship. For example, the value was 0.5, it is multiplied by 0.95, 0.475, and get the final chance of the fire 8.075% (this is based on "Pyromaniac" in the previous example). This seems to indicate that pyromaniac / Demolition expert ? adds around one fire every 30 hits, so I would assume that an average game with a fast firing ship would create very roughly one more fire than normal whereas the defensive tier 2 skill Fire prevention reduces fires on a BB that was badly peppered by 60 odd shots by about 2 fires a game. Would be glad of any greater analysis. Are these gems from the Russian threads gathered anywhere in English ?

Yes, needs a specific punishment

Thanks. Google translate is sadly the best I can do though.

I wonder how the fire preventaton stats really works ? Has anyone ever seen a thread that delves deep into it?

Almost everything is a lose - lose here.

A huge number of potential useful mods are linked to XVM. Outright ban is wrong.

Indeed, a warning for players (especially tier 1) would be nice

Presumably whilst you controlled the secondaries the primaries would be auto controlled..... which would be interesting. For an arcade game, its likely alright as it is.

Change the ship sinking animation to somehing involving huge tentacles....

Indeed- and as a tester you will likely also choose to play to test things that cause you to lose too.

It is perhaps a little too esoteric a term for usage here, even if naval. Destroyed or sunk is better perhaps.

Its going to be interesting what the crop of new players think

Could be they are being spotted and not / They need to add a huge added modifier for spotted ships to remain spotted if on the border of spotting range.....just like tanks should

Just waiting til some US state actually receives a petition to sponsor a ship in WoWS - if you get enough signatures, they have to do it......

It seems subs are unlikely, very very so. I think it would be interesting to have something weird like the big gun subs as non submerging glass cannons at tier IV say, but subs are often suggested and always denied.

They must have been completely lost too !

It would be interesting to know more. Always lots of argument about these ships, perhaps this can help give some light on their armour etc

Could be the alpha test reward ship !

I guess they are trying anything to avoid the WoWP fiasco happening again. Not sure this is the right way.

It would be fun, although chat would fill with ***** Searchlights, explosions - whats not to like ? Fog would be good too