it3llig3nc3

While there are several different topics on the recent GZ and iChase incident I intentionally wanted to place my remarks into a separate one so I can refer to it in the future if needed. First I'm somewhat pleased that WG took the stand and acted on the mistakes rather quickly, however as for me the trust and faith is lost towards them now. This is because to me it seems WG has a serious internal issue that revolves around human values other than anything else (management principles, technical, communication, etc...) Evidence shows that WG does not learn from past mistakes - despite they say so. How many months had to pass since the Christmas Convoy incident to have the next one? Or to name a more closer one, the copyright strike fear issue for Youtubers? How many valuable and good people will have to become victim of WGs behavior to have them realize: a significant change is required internally. So I stop ranting on this but want WG to read the below story - it is not mine, I heard a long time ago first, but I believe it perfectly fits the current situation.

Seeing the comments above I realized that I made one mistake - choose a wrong topic title for the point. My intention was not to rant on the GZ or iCase story as I agree with you that it is finished. The main point is that these "mistake" episodes are getting way to frequent since end of last year and I wanted to remind all of you that despite the apologies and promises from WG to learn from the mistakes it is evident that it is not happening. I choose the story to underline my fear that the learning does not stick in WG because they do not share the same human values than most of us the Customers in managing the company. Any of you who has seen a company from inside can realize that the magnitude of the wrong decisions WG made in the past are not small things: - rewards for mayor events such as the Kamikaze-R story - inclusion or exclusion of promotional content for regions (Christmas Convoy) - threatening Youtubers with a copyright strike - firing a good old Community Contributor These things are not a result of a simple bad decision (i.e. a wrong click with the mouse) - these are results of a SERIES for ACTIONS and DECISIONS (no one person can do them alone) Therefore the only way WG can improve in this is to change the way they MANAGE the company. And this is the hardest thing to do. The Fence and Nail story tells them about this. Main point for me in the analogy is not the boy who learned something - it is the fence that is full of holes. And those holes in reality are the players who are no longer playing the game with us. Who knows how much these mistakes contributed to NOT having 40k players on the EU server at peak times by now...?

I'm 100% with iChase on this. He may have been a bit rough in his opinion, but overall it was neccessary under the circumstances. He was a faithful CC with lot of insight and strategic overview over the game. He was always vocel to IMPROVE. And WG can thank for him for his series of Captain Academy in which he teaches how to play the game. Something WG should have done on its own early on. Now WG fires him from the program like that... ...to me it shows that he hit WG's nerve at the right place. Because firing him means: HE WAS RIGHT. WG's confirmation and 'appreciation' is the pivotal evidence. Good job WG creating the next shitstorm for which you can apologize - but of course only after you make the eruption colossal.

Interesting changes - even if some of them (i.e. smoke) is already being reviewed. What everyone needs to keep in mind that CHANGES are the bread and butter of this game - in fact it is true for all games that are "Free to Play" with micro/marcro transactions. This is what keeps it interesting. Unfortunate or not this is how the XXI century marketing works "new is good". But there is another aspect for involved and enthusiast players here, the human psychology to resist change -- in other words: leave comfort zone. Remember how many times the sky was falling in WoWs? Just to name my two favorites: 1. Removal of stealth firing - impact on DDs 2. Introduction of RDF (funny enough that even today half the players even in Ranked battles doesn't even know what it means) But we can mention the crowd opinion about Royal Navy Cruiser line being terrible Of course there were bad changes and good changes. However inevitably change will come. So I'll live with them and see how they work out, and then judge based on my own experience. Last but not least - I'm more worried about the fact that 0.6.9 is already announced, we are almost in August this year and Wargaming does not speak a word about the carrier class redesign, It is now very certain that the Royal Navy BBs are coming - and yet again nothing will happen with the carrier mechanics. For me NOT seeing this change is the worst.

Reading through this thread and a few others about the current Ranked season makes my head shaking. While it is obvious that this new T6 Season is less "interesting" in a sense of ship capabilities and variety we often tend to forget that the game itself and the Ranked Mode is not an exclusive VIP club for hardcore WoWs veterans. Looking through the posts I see members with multiple thousand battles under their belt (mine including) and of course you (WE) feel that this season is not as interesting as it was before. On the other hand you can go and see for yourself the results of the last T7 Ranked season: the official data shows that it was the most successful season if the criteria is number of participants and players reached rank 1. Therefore the situation is this: WG is trying to open the gate to involve more players - that is GOOD! to the game itself and as a "side effect" it seems that for hardcore veterans the challenges is less and less interesting. But if we want that this game lives long - we need not to complain about this but take the opportunity to help raising the new generation of veterans - that starts with novice players finding it interesting to join the Ranked Battlest the first time. So yes this season may be boring - but if you are really good, you rank out to 1 quickly and you can enjoy the benefits and prizes and do something else... ...and in the meantime you leave the space for players who find it interesting because for them it is NEW and they are at the beginning of the learning curve. Circle of Life... eh?

Today is the 1 months anniversary of me asking my first question regarding the Carriers. No answer provided yet. In the meantime Kaga was released and also on the NA site the announcement is public that Enterprise is arriving into the Prem Shop tomorrow. Therefore the questions are more important than ever. When can I expect an answer?

While I responded on this subject into a new and different topic, I dug out this good old one as well to document the evolution of the story. It seems as many of you predicted GOLD and DOUBLONS will stay different for the foreseeable future. While back in 2016 the Wargaming official position was this: As of today it is different: So I believe it only remains a kind of legal question if a player believes he/she was given misleading information based on which decisions were made that given the new situation have caused direct or indirect damage (financial, personal, etc...) At least it would have been nice from WG to make an official announcement about their policy change. Because we remember:

Well guys, first I believed this topic will go all the way like the others before - going in circles about speculations of what WG is thinking. All has changed by now. A while ago we have been informed by ECTAR as follows: and during that time and after the Wargaming website had the following information available for World of Warships: However if you check the site now you see a different thing: This is the public Wargaming.NET website: http://wargaming.com/en/games/world-of-warships/about Therefore it is official that World of Warships will not be part of the GOLD unification. It is SO decided that Wargaming changed the description of services on its main website. Now this step that I believed WG will never do establishes one option to players: to claim that WG misinformed them about a major game element, that impacted decisions and spending on the game for which now compensation must be given.

Well, not mine but Flamu's Flamu's Ranked Guide (Or: The Unicum Guide to Picking Effective Ships) Extract thanks to a contributor on Youtube:

Having seen Flamu's Youtube video on the subject I learned some interesting factors to consider besides the "obvious" ones. One element I completely ignored before Flamu's input is that certain BBs will have much more resistance against HE spamming, most notably IFHE spams due to their DECK armor thickness. Assuming that many players will bring down high skillpoint captains to their T6 ships for ranked it is a good bet to assume IFHE will be frequent, therefore BBs will have to endure this type of punishment from cruisers. Second thing that I tend to accept as a fair prediction is that besides SMOKE there will be a lot of BOW-IN BBs to fight against - and here comes the issue of being able to over-penetrate bow armor that certain BBs can do, others do not. Last of my learning points was that unlike for BBs or cruisers the DD choice is still very difficult. The main parameters: detectability, torp range, smoke quality are not coming together nicely. And I can just realize how much mistake was for me to NOT finish the Campaign yet that gives Shinonome....

I made a vote based on general ship characteristics (pro-cons) and also for which one I can put a 19skillpoint captain on. Where I'm undecided is the anticipation of the Tier 6 ranked meta in a sense to be able to make decisive impact on the battle even if my own team struggles. Past seasons in Tier 7 or 8 there were obvious choices either to save the day or to push victory "alone" mostly in a DD or a good BB. In Tier 6 I'm not sure what ship become this decisive factor (like Sims was in Tier 7) Looking around in the community I hear voices that mostly Premium ships will take the key role (again) and standard tech-tree ships won't be on the TOP lists. That I find sad and disappointing especially because it impacts my own thinking: why would I chose Fuso over Mutsu? Why would I chose any standard cruiser over Perth and De Grasse? Greatest dilemma I have is with DDs where the relative differences of ships are rather small (i.e. detection range) and almost all of them has some significant downsides that is hard to deal with in a competitive environment. OK CV is no question I go with the Ryujo - if I really have to.

That is your interpretation. Mine is that I pulled a wrong example to underline and illustrate a point. I admitted the mistake and clarified the main point around communication. This is one aspect. The other is having receiving and enduring comments resulted from making the mistake - and on this path there is no mention of the WG EU communication issue that is supposed to be the subject of this thread.

I can agree to that, sure. With that in mind please consider that the way you put it is a individual personal matter (self knowledge). Obviously it helps if one is reminded to the importance of that - the question is how the reminder is communicated, especially if it is not between eye-to-eye, but in front of public. Even the very best intent can backfire if it is communicated improperly. Further to that I retain my personal view that if this is the only contribution to the story, one can wonder based on what motivation it is done (help or hurt)

Well it is always the easy path to criticize and smile on mistakes, but I take it as I have opened the gate. Yet personally myself prefer comments that move the story ahead. (call me old fashioned...) This is called communication management. The theory of communication says that people receive a lot of communication input - most of it doesn't even get processed or registered. Therefore if somebody wants to make impact or wants to get recognized it increases repetition and/or use different channels to reach the target audience. The in-game information system of WoWs is very complex and "news" information is not visible on the main screen. (besides can u tell me how and where can I check in-game ALL the details of ALL the Operations missions?) The Portal, Facebook, Twitter, Forum, Reddit, Youtube are just a few of the channels through which communication reaches the playerbase. Just go and test what comes up when you GOOGLE Warship subjects: the Portal. So just imagine yourself in the shoes of an average Joe who may be interested in knowing a few things. Why on Earth would you ignore channels such as a Portal for them? This is not "holding the hand" - this is just communication strategy. Last but not least consider that WoWs player-base is not growing significantly. Just another reason to reach out to more people thought more channels with EVERY information available. You can roast me all week long that I have made the mistake of picking the wrong sample, but again my opinion hasn't changed: WG EU needs to improve drastically on communication.

Nice debate of popular or UNpopular as for Tier 6 - I think it can be both. What I meant is that Tier 6 is very reachable for most players as the grind to get there is not absurdly high even with Standard account. Hence it is popular as many players CAN reach it and wants to play it What you mean is that playing with Tier 6 ships is UNpopular, because of MatchMaking - most notably that you too often get matched with a lot of Tier 8 opponents. But either way - the point is made. I remember the two stage Ranked. During that time the community complaint was that when the Tier got switched it necessitated to re-train and re-skill commanders and also prepare more ships to maximum best condition. Many people did not like it. Also back then there were different "fixed" ranks that created more "turbulence" around Rank10 if I remember correctly --> many players were able to get up to there but got stuck "forever" because of inability to play with the high tier ships (no experience) and thus made it very difficult for others to progress as well. My strictly personal view is that Ranked should be 3 tiers for ships: an entry level T6 or T7, a mid tier up till rank 6 or 7, and then Tier 10 (or Tier 9) for the Rank 1 I know this seems to be a tough requirement, however this game mode is purely designed to have players play a lot and therefore if time investment is made it should allow grind for high tiers given the preferential XP and Credit volumes (vs. Random) But again: this is my personal opinion.

I made a recommendation earlier to have the CV tech tree revised and make Tier II and Tier III CVs into the game - simple ships carrying 1 or 2 squads of float-planes for example from the preWW2 era. By doing this players would be able to start learning CVs from the get go in small scale instead of having to unlock several ships before getting a chance to play CV Back in World of Tanks the Arty (distant similarly difficult class) was available from Tier 1 or 2 - and many players had fun with it despite the difficulties to play - and through that got used to it. WG seems to be deaf to all community proposals regarding CVs so far - I could link at least 5 threads in which valuable discussions were going on related to CVs - without a single acknowledgement from WG

ops... indeed it is there in the 3rd box down What tricked me in this is the fact that the order of priority the information is displayed on NA is rather different than in the EU: So when you start looking the page in the browser you see Gameplay information on NA on the right side, whereas on the very same spot EU displays PREMIUM SHOP and newest PREMIUM SHIP therefore you have to start scrolling down to display the gameplay related infos. I obviously made a mistake on this - so hopefully the thread can be adjusted. Yet I hold my main comment element that I believe WG NA does a much better job at creating public information. For example the weekend announcements are great (and funny) there whereas in EU it just made it back to the portal in June - before it was sunk in the Forum (WG EU said when they removed from portal earlier that it was due to lack of interest...) Also when events are running (i.e. Ranked, Clash of the Elements) the NA site makes efforts to motivate portal visitors to learn about them (i.e. during Ranked they display in the top right section the newest RANK1 player name). But this does not saves me from standing corrected I obviously took the wrong example to surface my main point. Edit: changed WG EU to WG NA based on comments below.

I wish to make a note about the significantly different communication treatment of different regions related to useful and interesting information about the product itself - the Warships game content. Have a look at this link https://worldofwarships.com/en/content/pilot-episode/ this is how North America treats its users and communicates about the new feature of the game: operations. Clear, easy to understand and makes all tasks and rewards clear. Europe has nothing similar. Shame. If the WG EU team has no creativity, idea, resource to do such things at least PLEASE copy over what North America does. It is not a bad idea to copy from better skilled people, organization.

AP Bombs created great "BUZZ" in the experienced and pro playerbase - understanding implications and building up hopes for something new. This is good achievement from WG. I'm still on the side that neither the manipulation of torpedo plane drop patterns that started with Kaga, nor the AP bomb gimmick proposed for the Enterprise are key and important elements that will improve the carrier class gameplay and popularity. These are marketing "sugar coats" that will sell more premium ships but won't revolutionize the struggling CV class at all. This is sad that without a properly balanced and playable carrier class this game will never be what it could be. I wish WG would focus on more fundamental elements for CVs instead of just focusing on short term money grab marketing features.

The language issues is often pulled out by WG EU as an explanation of inefficiency and lack of good public content. Honestly I do not buy it. The EU region by definition is a multi cultural and multi language environment therefore it must be respected. Many international organizations are able to handle this, be it governmental or businesses. If it was me I would completely remove WG EU resources from CREATING content for public display and take everything from NA and use my EU resources for pure translation work. This game has a very special and limited vocabulary therefore GOOGLE translate and a little skill can solve the main issues very efficiently.

Funny thing why WG put the Ranked game mode on the PTS server - this concept is rather "old" so nothing special to test about it - unless WG is uncertain how the meta will look like in T6 - but that is also a redundant point as in one of the first seasons we had a T6 --> T8 season... My wild guess is that WG wants to increase the participation in Ranked, and making a T6 season will allow many average players to try it. Also since T6 matchmaking is poisoned the "clean" T6 games in ranked may ease the pressure on WG to improve game experience in this popular tier. My major disappointment with the new season is that the main rule elements are unchanged: namely the fairness of the penalty of the losing team and the unfair advantage of the under-performing players in the winning team. Assuming that Ranked is half team based, half personal skill based mode the forum members have proposed much better reward systems (awarding and losing stars) than currently in place that costs nothing to implement

I tried the weekly mission with CV. It is OK, but since I'm not a good CV player I misplayed sometimes against enemy CVs (especially when the Hiryu arrives) and it led me to many misses in torp drops. Overall it looks to be a good game mode, however it shows how an average joe messes up strategy --> over-stretching beyond the perimeter and gets killed. Sane players staying in the right place can certainly survive and win the game (REPAIR!!) even if secondary objectives are missed here and there. My great disappointment is that compared to the time invested the XP and Credit reward is terribly low - especially when I compare it with RANDOM. Therefore this game mode is mostly for fun and won't help a lot in developing tech tree ships (grind). That I do not like....

The problem with nVidia 980 videocard performance issues is still with us since 0.6.4. Shame!!!!! Do I get 400EUR from Wargaming to change my videocard?????????????????? Pathetic negligence! Category: World of Warships Sub-category: Reporting a bug 1. DescriptionThe bug resulting significant performance drop on Nvidia GTX 980 videocard is still present in 0.6.5 (was introduced with 0.6.4)2. Reproduction stepsThe occurrence does not significantly change with different level of graphics settings, it can be observed with VERY HIGH, HIGH and MEDIUM as well, on 1650x1050 resolution for me with a Core i7 processor..I tried to narrow down to a specific option element, but it was not possible.The issue is clearly evident in one of the following cases:1. In ship view zoom OUT to max and look around in at least 90 degree or more (pan the horizon) - FPS drops from 55 to352. Any time there are airplanes nearby the FPS drops immediately (i.e. player's ship is getting bombed or torped, or fighters fly nearby (1-4km) FPS drops from 55 to 203. Using a carrier and MAP view, when zoomed in to for example to manual torpedo drop FPS is constantly in the 35-25 range3. ResultAs it was noted about there is a very significant FPS drop from the normal range to unacceptable 20-25 range that in some cases gets even below that to 10.What is important to note that with other videocard even a weaker one with weaker processor and memory, the game remains more enjoyable. My test benchmark is a laptop with Intel Core i5-6300HQ / 3,2GHz CPU 8GB DDR3 RAM, nVidia® GeForce® GTX 960M with which the game runs BETTER in MEDIUM Graphic setting than with the Alienware Area 51 Intel® Core i7-5930K (6-cores, 15MB Cache, Overclocked up to 3.9 GHz w/ Turbo Boost), 16GB Quad Channel DDR4 at 2133MHz, 4GB GDDR5 NVIDIA® GeForce® GTX 980.4. Expected resultJust like before patch 0.6.4 the FPS stays constantly in the 45-55 range with the configuration.5. Technical detailsThe configurations are detailed above.Screen resolution is not even HD, only 1650x1050

1. What response did you get from Support when you submitted a ticked about this? 2. Need to get details on the system spec and internet provider / parameters 3. Need to know what you call "normal" FPS and Ping/Lag, and what are the figures when you play CV and everything breaks Until then we can just guess. Based on my own experience it is a known bug that WoWs has performance issues with nVidia videocards, more specifically with the 980 series. What you describe as symptoms is similar to what I experience when I play carrier with the GTX980 except that I do not have lag, "only" huge drop on FPS that basically makes it impossible to play. I guess that the carrier play is mostly impacted as it seems very resource intensive (i.e. map overview, and manual drop zoom screens). However I'm not sure why is the LAG related to different screen modes on which you play - as LAG is basically the representation of the connection quality and that should not be dependent on what you display on the screen - the one exception is if your system is CPU limited --> so displaying the graphical elements eats up all the CPU time, so there is nothing left to deal with other jobs, such as network... You can check this if you run the Task Manager app and check your CPU utilization rate while playing WoWs... However CPU limitation in these days is very rare... Another idea is how you are connected to the internet: cable or WiFI? With what connection speed / protocol? Last but not least: if you have any competing network elements (i.e. downloads, other devices using the internet connection, etc...) that should be checked too.

I agree that the Duca experience for me is s...t as well. However it is a well known fact that Tier VI is kind of a difficult place now in MM and game experience. I decided to purchase the Duca, because I was not interested in the French Cruiser line, but wanted to try something new, and Duca got good reviews. The thing is I simply can't play her well, and also MM seems to put me on really weak teams: 24% winrate out of 17 battles that is pathetic even with my average game performance with similar vessels (cruisers): Yorck 49%WR, Fiji 46%WR, Nurnberg 67%WR, Roon 58% WR, Myoko 40%WR. Unfortunately according to EULA you can't give back ships once you started to use them. So no way back - swallow the sour experience.