Admiral_noodle

Yes but people see "pen". No damage. And it creates confusion.

Is it bad that I think I understood this post and could (if you want) translate?

0 pen AP pens do happen. Certainly when you hit a gun but fail to knock it out. Guns have a separate HP. There are examples in videos I'll see if I can find some.

Had a game yesterday where a player was giving out advice. Good advice too. The team listened and we won the game. He came last on XP although did OK. Everyone played at least ok. But his stats say he's a potato. He appeared to be strategically skilled but his shooting was bad and his angling bad. But his advice was sound. WTR in game would have been counter productive in this case.

If something is flat out broken ST can feed that back. However if it's just "concerning" there is no way we can get enough data on ST to show this. Radar cooldown would be an example. We would need thousands of games to demonstrate an effect and feedback from a lot of people... Which is the point of PT. if there follows an obvious statistical flop in one class - let's say DDs - then PT would indicate there is a problem. Then devs might change things. Not everything that goes into ST goes into PT and not everything in PT goes into live. I would say the new cooldowns are better tested "at scale" in PT before a final decision is made.

Funny. I had several exciting games yesterday and one this morning. Exciting as in winning or losing due to one salvo or by less than 15 points. Teams playing together and coming up with strategy! I also had a couple of awful games. Objectively there are more good games than bad ones. We just remember the frustrating ones. While testing new ships and using my spreadsheet I have a column where I rate the game out of ten for drama/interest/excitement. Funny thing is the average is 7. A lot higher than I thought it would be based on my perception. The bad games seem to just stick in my mind more. Sadly.

And this is the problem. You can't choose to not get them. You can't dismiss them because some fool will do it accidentally and then complain they can't sail their arp ships any more. They should have had a separate "barracks" from day 1. Putting such a solution in after the fact will be a pain. But it's probably the best solution and likely why it's taking time.

Another example of someone raging that the game is broken because they weren't good right away. Why do people have such a lack of self awareness and never think "what am I doing wrong". And if you come to the forum complaining the game is rubbish after 2 days of course you're going to get attacked. It's a ridiculous attitude v

Konig is a decent reliable ship that doesn't suddenly blow up. I like her durability. I like her accuracy, although that's perceived accuracy because of her poor range. Downsides are: - range. Sometimes the event just avoids me and I do little damage. Yesterday I actually sat on B cap on neighbours and couldn't hit anything the enemy were camping so hard. And when I got into range my Kongo division mate would delete them before I could. - speed. She isn't fast - penetration. I actually struggle to get decent damage against a lot of ships unless they are easy targets. But she's good for her tier because of that tankiness.

I think the reason cruiser players don't whine is because as utility all rounders cruisers expect to die randomly. It comes with the territory. Plus there is always *something* you can do in a cruiser. The other classes are more specialised which means if they struggle in their role it leads to complaints (or if people don't understand the role or aren't good). Cruisers have more options in play style. However there are plenty of complaints about specific ships. I've also noticed that one shotting cruisers is rare unless the player makes an awful mistake or detonates. Losing half your HP in one salvo is very common, but kind of expected.

Tier 8 cruisers. The bane of my life. Not counting Atago (heal) and Kutuzov (smoke) I can't get the three regular tier 8s to work. Especially since I always seem to be bottom tier. Hipper... I'm sure the AP is great but I rarely get to use it as intended. Enemy cruisers simply won't get close enough or show their side. At least in the other two there are options. Chapyev I can sit at range spamming HE and dancing around with battleships until someone notices me. New Orleans I can at least radar and dodge torps while hunting DDs. Hipper... What does this ship do? If someone is daft then they are dead but waiting for a mistake is a dreadful scavenger existence. Her lack of decent HE and mediocrity at everything else is just sad So Hipper Unicums. Some tips please.

I hate land of fire as it is now... So maybe it shouldn't change Point is the maps need to be different and make you think. Too many maps feel the same now. Although I do actually like loop and warriors path. But my "feel" for a map is based on whether it looks realistic. Screw gameplay I want realistic maps with fewer larger islands and some variation.

Well this is why the testing is useful. Maybe it's entirely OP. Maybe it's not even much of a buff. Until you try it out in a large number of real in game scenarios it's going to be hard to judge how significant the buff is. And the reaction of the DDs. What if they are more cautious? How does that affect capping? Will that make BBs venture forward? Will that delete cruisers faster... Because of the interlock between the classes you can never predict anything in isolation.

A great idea in principle. It would be very useful for me. However it would create rage as people misinterpret the rating as an accurate guide as to how someone will play in a game. You can't know that from a rating. So unless you educate everyone on how to use ratings it will just end up with some seriously innaproprate behaviour. Better than a rating would be a type of player. "Camper" "yolos" "never caps" "always fires HE" But seriously what would "WTR 870" actually tell you about say a Colorado next to you? If it's his overall WTR, not very much, except the player has had a bad record overall up till now. Doesn't mean he won't have the game of his life. Over time you just learn to "read" players. Are they communicating? Even "affirmative" lets you know they are thinking. What happens when they get shot at? Do they turn away? It's a lot to have to do but I regard most players as AI anyway.

The good thing about PT is you get to try all the changes as a whole. The problem with patch notes is they don't tell you how the changes work combined, which is what really matters. So I agree with Mtm. Go public test. See how the changes work. Sometimes a minor buff becomes op and a massive nerf is hardly noticeable. It depends on gameplay effect, which is hard to judge without random battles. It's not even easy with STs playing on the test server because we kinda know each other and can't really simulate "random" players. Well sometimes we can. Reminds me I need to do a ST session drunk

in game chat got a bad rep on WoT so I expect there is some residual "prejudice" as well. I never use it when divving either.

Can you verify the source of your information? YT etc doesn't count In any case "0 damage pens to 100% HP ships" is a good one I will need to add.

And yet this forum also claims WG don't listen to the forum, so both can't be true, otherwise they'd be leaking information to get a reaction from the forum and then not listen to it.

As this is a rank 1 reward ship I can't believe you went here...

It's not clear at all what's going on to the casual observer. The armour model probably isn't "broken" In other words the server side calculations of what happens when a shell hits a ship is probably working fine and as designed. However it's not well explained anywhere. Shells "going through" ships is desync. I can prove this as it happened when I lagged massively. Shells flew landed and went through a ship. 0 damage pens: these happen if you hit a gun turret and don't do damage evough to incapacitate. Guns have a separate hit pool. However I'm not convinced they are the only things which have independent hit pools... Needs further investigation Depletion of hull sections. This reduces damage a shell does (even AP) and often explains some of the "lower than expected" results. Overpen "massive damage". Ships are made of superstructure and hull. I believe. Shell can overpen the superstructure *and then* pen the hull. I've never seen overpen massive damage not hit from above first. The overpen ribbon is the *first* thing that happens, which is why you get that ribbon. The sounds are not done this way which is why you can get the pen sound. Anything else I will need to address/confirm?

Don't check my stats I was playing on my "friends" account Bogatyr: 4 games in I've tried both sets of guns. The bigger, stock guns are powerful but don't track on full rudder even with expert marksman. The upgraded smaller guns benefit from AFT and the other skills so I recommend them. Upgraded she's almost like the St. Louis when firing. I would recommend last stand aswell though as her rudder seems vulnerable. Although sailing in a circle shooting isn't so bad faster and more agile than St. Louis she's a perfect tier 3 ship in my opinion. Sure she's squishier than St. Louis but if she wasn't she would be OP. In 4 games I have 45k average damage. I'd recommend demolitions too if you intend to keep her for seal club... I mean fun games

Am on it. Planning to do the Q&A this weekend. I hope I can get dev input.

Tactical awareness. This includes situational awareness and anticipation by the way You can be relatively unskilled but if you are aware of your skill level and tactically aware, you can and will be better than a better "skilled" player who has poor tactical skills

The problem is the damage model is unknown. So we can't say it's broken. I've been ill but I still intend to get a full Q&A on these things.

Totally. The information probably isn't "wrong". But it's not actually a great deal of us, is confusion, and leads to threads like this. It certainly needs reworking.