Procrastes

That would explain a few embarrassing losses in Co-op games, I guess. (Yes, I've been outplayed by bots. It can happen to anyone; just ask Kyle Reese.)

So it would. But permit me a couple of questions? If there are several human players on the team, what would be the chain of command? Would the bots simply obey the last command given? Or would the player with the most battles under his belt be Admiral of the Fleet, and thus be able to override the bot commands of his subordinate team mates? Or would supreme command go to the captain with the most skill points? And what would happen in a tie? Or do you imagine this function to kick in only in a battle with just a single human player? If so, should it also activate in a situation where all human players but one are sunk? Should the ability to command the bots be dependent on still being alive, or should a human player be able to direct the bots even after being sunk himself? As I've said above, I find your idea to be hugely entertaining. But I'd imagine it to be more of a single-player game thing. It would most likely require an inordinate amount of programming effort, to work in WoWs. In any case, though - my compliments for brainstorming, Captain Gebbly! It's what this game needs!

Much like most human players, bot ships do not, in any way, react to in-game chat messages. But I will freely admit that I find the very idea that they might do so, to be hugely entertaining. It would put a whole new spin on Co-op and Scenario battles!

I agree, on both counts. I have absolutely no problem with paying for extra game content, but I prefer to know beforehand what I'm paying for. It's worth noting, however, that the random loot box mechanic is in line with basic human mammalian psychology. Studies have shown that rats in captivity are much more triggered to press a lever that rewards them with the occasional pellet, than a lever that always rewards them with one. This "intermittent reward" mechanic has long been a part of human money making schemes as well. So I guess we are all rats in a cage, here...?

Yeah, I saw that. But while I am certainly no stranger to splurging, I take a bit of a dim view on spending doubloons in order to get the chance to earn a lesser amount of doubloons.

This would be my hope for the future of the game as well. Ideally, the game would focus on improving the core gameplay and on creating extra content based around that. The Scenario battles mode is a good example of this, since it added a new way of having fun with existing game mechanics. Since Wargaming is a business venture and not a philanthropic organisation, it's hard to fault them for trying to earn money. Personally, I would of course prefer that they focus on quality content over time rather than making a quick buck, but it's not my company (and hence not my buck). Again, I agree.

My biggest problem with submarine spotting mechanics so far, has been that submarines keep spotting enemy ships for their team even while submerged. In my opinion, a submerged submarine should not be able to spot enemy ships for their team, at all. It should be forced to surface in order to do so. This would solve a big part of the spotting/counter-spotting problem visavi destroyers in particular, and make the interaction between submarines and ships of other classes more dynamic. And not that it matters, but this mechanic would also fit in well with historical reality, since WW2-era submarines were not (to my knowledge) able to transmit radio signals from under water. They would know that an enemy ship was there right enough, but they wouldn't be able to tell their team mates about it.

This. Yes. But to be fair, this does not apply solely to kids. An online multiplayer PvP game needs to offer new content now and then, or it will almost certainly stagnate and die. In a typical fantasy dungeon hack game like World of Warcraft, the developers have an easier time of it since they can just add new races to play and new worlds to conquer. In a game such as WoWs, which is set against the real backdrop of 20th century naval warfare, the options for variety are more limited. As time goes by and the more viable options are exploited, the developers will start to go for less balance-friendly alternatives. I very much doubt that today's World of Warships will have very much in common with the game in ten years time, assuming that it even exists by then.

Most impressive! I'd buy it in a jiffy, proud potato that I am. Self-irony is a good defense against calumny.

Ok, so here are my two cents so far. The Z-35 We are getting a tier VIII premium German destroyer with hydro+British smoke... ...but with only 6 km torpedoes, and no engine boost... ...that sounds interesting enough, I suppose. (Although I think they could afford another 2 km range on the torpedoes!) The new German aircraft carriers So we are still not getting either Junkers Ju-87 Stukas or Heinkel He-111:s as dive bombers and torpedo bombers respectively? On any of those ships? Bummer. I mean, I can see why they wouldn't want to squeeze in those inter war-era plane types at tiers VIII or X. They would have to either get ridiculously inflated stats, or be completely outclassed by planes of other nations. But at tiers IV and VI, surely they could be made to work...?

Thanks a lot, mates - this tells me all I need to know! I don't think the Research Bureau will be anything for me. I can make do without the special RB ships, and I don't feel tempted at all by the new legendary upgrades that Flamu presented in his video the other day. With the possible exception of the Harugumo one, which offers a play style that might be fun to play for a while but very frustrating to play against (long range smoked up HE spam), they mostly seem to offer alternative but less fun play styles for the respective ships. And that is just as well as I see it, since we absolutely do not need a bunch of hard to get, balance-upsetting magic toys for the top 1% of the player base.

I see no Stukas in the picture of the presumably German aircraft carriers on today's loading screen. Does that mean we will actually have Stukas, this time around...?

So how does this Research Bureau work in practice? You activate a reset of a fully researched ship line, its starts over from zero, and you get a set number of Research Points? And when a multiplier arrives, your current unspent Research Points get multiplied? (Automatically?)

This is excellent advice. Playing even a few games in a CV (of at least tier VI, I'd say) will teach you a lot about their strengths and weaknesses. If nothing else, it will give you a hint of what to do when you're in a DD and want to avoid getting hit by the vengeful Sky God. Well, yes and no. Kinda sorta. I once did that in a tier IV carrier just to try it out. And by "that", I mean going after the enemy destroyers exclusively and trying to hunt them down to extinction, ruining their game and stomping on their will to live. It worked (and then I had to go and donate to charity in order to maintain my status as a decent human being)... but when I tried doing the same thing at higher tiers, it presented more of a problem. The AA, while certainly not a game-changer, was strong enough to actually present an obstacle at times, and the opposition generally played smarter as well (as could be expected). Now it is true that I suck goose eggs as a CV captain, so I'm not a mark for what can be done in those things, but I have a bit more experience in destroyers - and I am thankfully only rarely completely shut down in those even if focused by an enemy CV. (If there are two enemy CV:s, and both go for me, I am toast of course.) A good CV player can do just what Captain Itwastuesday says and "casually ruin a DD's game with no effort", that's true enough. But a run-of-the-mill CV player has to at least put in an effort, and even then a moderately well-played destroyer can make him sweat and bleed plane hp for every hit he lands. Not that that stops him, due to magical plane-spawning carriers and all that, but it does make a difference. Or so I keep telling myself, at least...

You can pray to the fickle Gods of anime show marketing? From what I know, the HSF Harekaze was introduced as part of a collaboration between Wargaming and whatever company owns the High School Fleet anime TV-series. The designation "HSF" stands for "High School Fleet" in this context. So any further appearances of the HSF Harekaze would most likely be dependent on whatever deals between these companies might occur in the future. It's probably not hopeless, but it might be a long wait and nothing I'd be entirely sure of. If you want the 100 mm guns Harekaze experience, my advice would be to grind either the Akizuki or the Kitakaze in the regular IJN tech tree instead. This can be done fairly quickly with the aid of free xp and a bunch of well-hoisted signal flags. Both of these ships are arguably at least equal to the Harekaze with regards to the general playstyle, if you would go for the 100 mm guns option. And with that special penetration boost those guns get in the game, it's probably the most entertaining option in my opinion. Best of luck!

I just watched Flambass go to town in the upcoming tier VIII German CV, the August von Parseval, by the way. The damage he did with AP rockets against cruisers was downright brutal. Those rockets didn't seem very effective against destroyers or battleships, though. As for the AP bombs, they citadelled a Bismarck easily enough but failed to do the same to a Champagne over at least two well-aimed drops, one of which landed right between the smoke stacks. The torpedoes seemed to be very reliable damage-dealers over time, to both cruisers and battleships. This one battle obviously gave nowhere near enough statistics for any outright conclusions, but at least it gave a hint of what to expect. Destroyers can look forward to not having to deal with HE rockets when fighting the new German CV:s, I guess.

If they sport AP rockets, having a broad target ellipse - that allows for hits across a broadside target - is the only one to make sense.

How about giving her homing Mark 14 torpedoes? That way, she will probably only ever sink herself...! For further study, see the eminent Drachinifel documentary below:

Please forgive another question: What is the difference when having the Alternative interface mode on "full", instead of "off"?

What has changed with the Kitakami, from the point of Wargaming? The Kitakami was originally launched as the first tier VIII IJN premium cruiser, and was shortly thereafter removed from the game. Not removed from the shop; removed from the game. The reasons being, as far as I've gathered, that the only thing she brought to the table - a wildly unrestrained torpedo spamming life style - was bad for the general gameplay. She was replaced with the Atago, which was - and still is - a much more worthwhile and versatile ship. So the question is, in what way has the game changed since then, to mean that the Kitakami will no longer - in the eyes of Wargaming, at least - be as disruptive to the game as she was when she was first released? Is it the prevalence of ships equipped with hydro and radar, that will be able to counter even the Kitakami's massive torpedo waves? Is it the new, reworked carriers? Will the Kitakami, in her tier IV Kuma hull, be uniquely vulnerable to air attack, making CV:s into the good guys for a change? Or is it simply that the WoWs player base is now so large and steady, that Wargaming figures that any disruption to the game will be offset by the massive cash influx from a Kitakami sale? I'm not being deliberately cynical here, and I should add that I have as of now no knowledge of for which currency - steel, coal or cash - the Kitakami will eventually be sold. I am simply curious.

Thanks a bunch, mate!

Reporting someone for playing a ship or ship class that the reporting party disapproves (or is envious) of, is just another way of abusing the report system. It is completely pointless. Given that the reported player rightfully shouldn't care about such a report, it has no effect other than to further devalue the report system itself. But since this was quite likely introduced mostly as a vent for player rage to begin with, there is no real call for worries either. WoWs Karma value has no official exchange rate in either the Vatican or in Valhalla.

I've been looking for a way to activate the display of potential damage on the in-battle screen, but so far without any success. A friend of mine has it on display in the upper right corner of his in-battle screen, so it should be possible for me to have it as well. He has no mods installed, so it's not a mod feature either. My computer-fu is not strong...

So the One Trick Pony of WoWs returns. WG cash bid extraordinaire, or what? I suppose we shouldn't be surprised - or at least, I'm not. Wargaming have been inching their way back to this point for a while now, with the release of such ships as the Benham and the Somers, so a return of the Kitakami was kinda sorta written in the stars. It seems that torpedo soup will once again be the dish of the day. A re-release of the Kitakami opens up for many questions. The most relevant perhaps being the one posed by Captain gopher31: I find it hard to imagine this to mean anything other than that the torpedoes of the Kitakami will do no damage, or at least significantly less damage, to allies. Which, if implemented, opens up an altogether new can of worms game mechanic in WoWs Random Battles, namely that of selective team damage. This is something that I, if given the the choice, would rather not have in normal Random Battles (it already exists and works fine in Scenario Battles, where torpedoes do no damage to allies). Planning your attacks so as to maximize the potential damage to enemies while at the same time eliminating the risk of damage to allies, is a vital part of what it means to be a torpedo boat captain. Part of the challenge would be lost if the risk for team damage was nullified. (Now, please don't take this as any kind of endorsement of second line torping or other forms of wanton team killing. I am as much against those forms of game sabotage as anyone else. But even so, I feel that removing team damage as a mechanic would be another step down the road of dumbing down the gameplay. And that's a way I'd rather not travel.) To be fair, here, I'll have to admit that this outburst of scepticism is probably not entirely warranted. I doubt that a ship like the Kitakami will have all that much of an impact on tier X gameplay. I never played the original one, but from what I've heard she was the proverbial one trick pony, that was easily countered and quickly focused down and obliterated whenever she appeared. I find it unlikely that she will have an easier time of it on tier X.

It's not just you. Knowing about the consumable options of various ships, and trying to guess which one they are currently running when you face them in battle, is part of the fun - at least for me. This game is very much about trying to outthink and outplay your opponent, which is why I tend dislike such game mechanics as, for instance, the 'Radio Location' skill. Sure, it's useful, and yes, it can also be used against you by a clever opponent - but at the heart of it, it removes a fair bit of the battle of wits between the involved players; especially towards the endgame. Personally, if I see a ship that can equip radar, I proceed with the assumption that she does carry radar, until the opposite has been proved. I don't need, or want, that information to be plastered across the HUD. Being forty-plus, the HUD is hard enough for me to handle as it is without any extra information on top of what we already have.* * Although I would like to know how to activate the 'Potential damage' counter on the HUD. Consistency is for the weak!