Jump to content

dayofmone

Supertester
  • Content Сount

    241
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    4848
  • Clan

    [RNG]

About dayofmone

  • Rank
    Chief Petty Officer
  • Birthday 06/10/1996
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Germany
  • Interests
    3D Modelling, reading, discussing stuff that bothers me

Recent Profile Visitors

607 profile views
  1. dayofmone

    Bug Reports

    1. Description Omaha C Hull torpedo launchers are clipping into mast fastenings. 2. Reproduction steps Take Omaha into any battle, aim torpedo launchers towards the bow. 3. Result Launchers clip into structures Fastenings on B hull are set up different, torpedo tube rotation limited correctly in that case.
  2. dayofmone

    Got a ST Ship E-mail?

    Before people start a riot because you don't have the ST tag, he's supposed to have the ships.
  3. dayofmone

    Got a ST Ship E-mail?

    I got the ships but no E-Mail
  4. dayofmone

    Bug Reports

    Desc: Sun's occasionally a wee lil bright. Repro: Start a game, look at the sun. (No responsibility taken for potential harm to your eyes!) Reality: Blinded by the light Expectation: Sunshades on the bridge?
  5. Wenn ihr noch wen zum Übersetzten braucht bin ich gern verfügbar! Für alles andere bräucht ich ne Übersicht und Erklärung, dann kann ich da auch was machen.
  6. Because I'm rather unhappy about the "Gold of France" campaign design. Posting this in the gameplay section since I am discussing the general problem on the exacmple of the latest occasion, it is not a topic only related to the most recent update. Grinding is in the right manner a good thing but can quite quickly become torture for the player. Firstly, Why do we play videogames? Because we want to have fun! What is fun? Doing what you want, when you want, how you want and how fast you want, is fun. And Grinding? The Good Grinding up a ship line is fun. Why is it fun? It is your choice, nobody forces you to mdo it and you have as much time for it as you like to take. Fancy something? Go for it as fast as you are comfortable with it and take a break and play another line when you feel like you want to do so. In essence: You don't notice that you are actually grinding something. It just kinda happens because you want to play that ship or for the next in line. The Bad Bad grinding is the type of grinding that puts boundaries to the above listed factors of "videogames for fun". With every limit you add to the grind you put stress on a player. Stress is not fun, stress is work. Work is not why we play videogames. In essence: It pushes you to do things you don't want to do. Anything that influences how the person goes about playing his game. This can very quickly become a fun killer. You cut away on a players freedom. That's a no-go. Time limits on the grind push a player to a faster pace than he is comfortable with. Limiting the ships he can use for the grind pushes him even further out of his comfort zone. The bigger of a reward you put behind the grind, the more pressure you put on the player and too much pressure is bad. To explain the thought process of grinding I have created "The Playground plot". The hype Players get excited about the new stuff and can't wait for patch day to start getting it. Climbing the ladder one step per day. The grind Patch day has hit the calendar and all the new awesome stuff is in the game. You get going. The Wall of Nope Breaking point where the frustration wins over the players desire to go on with the grind. You hit the wall. The higher you lift up the players with anticipation, the deeper you can let him fall. The more pressure you now put behind him during the grind, the faster you send him down the slind and the harder you collide him with the Wall of Nope. Real life example: French missions I am on purpose drawing a rather simplistic and colourful imagery of the situation. "OMG OMG, Aigle looks so awesome. I'm gonna buy her! And look at those awesome 200% XP missions to help me get the captain leveled faster! And that beautiful camo." I take out Aigle on a bunch of games and quite enjoy her despite her quirks. Shorty after the French Battleships get released, I have Richelieu, and again I can enjoy her despite her imperfections. Taking a look at "The Gold of France" campaign. Stage one: Get credits, optionally in Aigle and Richelieu for faster completion. A decent mission. It pushes me to play Aigle and Richelieu a bit more often than one game per day for the containers, but that's fine for a little while. Stage two: Ribons So. Many. Ribons. By now I have played Aigle a lot and gotten slighty annoyed by her slow turret traverse, poor turret angles, lack of concealment and torpedo range, smoke duration and constant loss of engine and steering. I have lost sight of her upsides. I played a few games in Richelieu, for the kmission, and her inaccuracy and tendency to overpenetrate everything has gotten me to a little fed up with that ship, too, at this point. Her upsides are slowly fading away in the distance. Every other additional perceived imperfection in the game now serves as a frustration multiplyer. Your team got wrecked 3 games in a row? Usually cause for annoyance, now a major factor of frustration. Constantly poor matchamking putting you against teams that you can't do much about? Usually a "Deal with it" situation, now a major factor of frustration. DETONATION?!?!!! Major factor of RAGE. In essence: The player took out his ships signifficantly more times than he was comfortable with. Cause of frustration. Every other cause of annoyance blows up that bubble even further. Result: Frustrated escape into Co-op for power grinding, generally being fed up with the game, rapid build up of frustration. 10 days into the grind, 50 games played in Aigle and Richelieu total, way more than I ever intended to play in those ships. And there is no end in sight, I haven't even started stage 3 yet. I was baited up the ladder with awesome campaign rewards. Half way down the slide i realized that I kind of didn't want to go anymore but Wargaming kept pushing harder and harder and I went down the slide of frustration faster and faster. Stage three: XP So. Much. XP. All my Aigle 200% XP missions are used up since a week ago. I have to play those cursed ships even more. I don't want to. In essence: The player was already fed up doing the mission 3 days ago. Now he is looking towards another 3 - 5 days worth of grind. The result: Wargaming pushed the player up to hyperwarp speed and he crashed face first into the Wall of Nope. Expected recovery time away from the playground for healing: UNKNOWN Overall evaluation The grind was too much. Already early on WG put way too much stress onto the player which caused a build up in frustration. The end result is burnout. Bye bye game, see you in "ERROR: Time not specified" Problem solutions Hang the bait a little lower so it does not seem quite so far away. 1. A larger ammount of different types of short an easy missions. 1500 ribons in one go? Can barely even see the progress made in one game, can't see yourself getting closer to the goal. Have a mission with a different requirement after that for a wind of change. Instead of 3 stages, make it 6 that take the same time to complete in the end. Show the player the progress he made. Balance out the rewards in perspective, big ones every second stage, smaller ones in between. Campaign stage difficultry according to reward. 2. Starting dates for stages ERROR: Unable to accept mission Start date: in 4 days Gives the player 4 days of relaxation playing whatever he wants until he gets back to the grind. Pressure relief is the codeword. In essence: You want this Caution: Slippery when wet. You don't even notice you're sliding, you only feel the fun. Flat sections in between for a short break in the action. Sliding parts not too steep in between. A nice pool of clear water at the bottom for a gentle catch and more fun in sight. Overall experience: "Can we do it again?" "Gold of France" redesigned - option one Stage 1: Cut credits down to 75% of the current. The missions were pretty OK to begin with but need a tweaks for the reenvisioned concept. Reward: 5 containers Stage 2: Earn 300-400 ribons. Reward: Fleur d'Acier - Dunkerque Stage 3: Play 5-8 games in ships with the specification "X" (Important: play, not win) Reward: 5 containers Stage 4: Earn 20.000 XP Reward: The Maid of Orleans - Gascogne Stage 5: 200 main battery hits Reward: 5 containers Stage 6: Spend 750.000 credits on service and supplies (i.e. ship after battle cost, camo and consumable resupply. Reward: The Maid of Orleans - Richelieu Task individual adjustments in perspective. "Gold of France" redesigned - option two One mission stage becoming accessible one weak after the other. Cut down the grind on ribons to something reasonable and less infuriating.
  7. dayofmone

    This games lighting needs an overhaul

    Well, mine are on max, too :)
  8. dayofmone

    This games lighting needs an overhaul

    Especially at sea there are many. It isn't a flat surface, there's waves bouncing light everywhere.
  9. The games lighing is as it is on the moon. Sunny side = brigt Not sunny side = dark If you look towards the sun the game is blinding bright. Anything that is not hit by that light source is so dark you can't see a thing. Why is it like that? Because in this game the light comes from one source - the sun. Why is that a problem? Because unlike in real life the game engine doesn't calculate light reflection so far that areas not hit by the sun are dark. If you take an object and put it onto a desk you will find out that all sides of that object are pretty brightly lit even if the light source is on the other side. That's because light is reflected from all over the place and lands on every side of the object. That game doesn't emulate that. It just can't, it's impossible to calculate sufficient and still have somewhat reasonable FPS. Usually that is fixed by having the enire skybox emmit light in addition to the sun. It seems that WG didn't to that. All the light comes from the sun. It should be pretty easy to fix that. Step 1: Decrease the brightness of the sun Step 2: Increase the brightness of the skybox Step 3: ??? Step 4: Profit Directional light is beautiful until it becomes a problem. With the fix I suggested you keep directional lighting but remove the problems. In game examples: If you look towards the sun you get this Why is that a problem? Because AP shells are white/silverish, their tracers are white/silverish, the sky is white/silverish/blueish and the water is white/silverish/blueish. You can't see incoming fire and can't dodge accordingly because the AP shells and their tracers blend right in. If the sun is on the other side you get this Why is that a problem? Because it's nice to be able to see you ship. For example to see on which sides you lost more secondaries. Other times you just get this The current system just doesn't work really well.
  10. dayofmone

    [Suggestion] New Graf Zeppelin drop mechanic

    It is consistent for all ships as with torpedo bombers. AP bombs are not designed to be effective against DDs. But the option to scale it with size is there if that is what is considered the most beneficial.
  11. Currently the Graf Zeppelin has the bad habit of dumping a high damage load onto an enemy ship without them being unable to avoid it. In other occasions nothing or little happens. Unlike other carriers that have a high alpha strike with torpedo bombers, AP bombs can not be dodged reliably to avoid damage. The current mechanic is set up in a way that Zeppelin's bombers drop their payload all together in a tight area with a delay between the attack order and the actual bomb impact. This is quite dodgy and neither allows the carrier player to consistently predict an attack location, nor does it enable the enemy to dodge reliably. I suggest a patterned drop that can be dodged like torpedos. The bombers would not engage in a group but carpet bomb one in front of another. I'll explain it with a timeline. 1. You issue an attack command. 2. Upon approach to the target location the airplanes break formation and line up behind each other with x seconds flight time in between. These x seconds flight time between each plane dictate the distance in which the bombs drop in front of each other. 3. The bombers drop the target after each other, however the bombs do not get grouped into an area but impact in a line. The first bomber drops on the first circle, the last bomber on the last. This is what the UI for it would look like. The green line is the flight path of the airplanes while each of the circles indicates the position where a bomb will be dropped. Each of these bombs has an individual randomized dispersion factor to determinate an impact point in the area here shown as a red circle. 4. After the engagement all remaining aircrafts resume formation to return to the carrier. Defensive AA would - as it is currently in the game - cause the squad to break formation and attack in panic. A pattern would look like this: The airplanes no longer attack in a straight line formation but in irratical flight paths to avoid enemy AA fire. This moves the bomb drop locations around over the ship to randomized positions. An increased chances for bombs to drop off the side of the ship into the water is increased. However bombs also drop closer or further apart from each other so they no longer spread out over an even distance. This again simulates a torpedo bomber attack, no longer can you tell exctly where the torpedos will go and the caps in between to avoid damage get bigger or smaller. What impact that shooting down planes has on the drop pattern is open for consideration. 1. Another airplane takes their lost squadmates position in the formation, effectively shortening the lenght of the bombing run. 2. Bombers stay at their position, there is a gap in the drop pattern. What advantages does this mechanic have? It basically enforces a playstyle similar to torpedo bombers onto the CV player and the targeted ship. 1. The carrier player gets forced to assume direct control over his airplanes attack but is allowed to fine tune his engagement to maximize damage. 2. Reduced RNG factor for increased reliability and predictability for both carrier player and his target. 3. The engaged enemy ship can attempt an evasive maneuver based on the planes approach to his ship. 4. Simple adjustability for balance. Of course these images are just one example. This system has many factors to change the accuracy of the drops and therefore the reliability how much damage they will do. - distance between bomb impacts - dispersion radius - dispersion shape (it could be an oval along the flight path) - if the disperison pattern is an oval, its alignment could be changed while def AA is active so it is no longer parallel to the ship (increased chance for bombs to go over board with Def AA) My examples applied to the game, in this case an Amagi The carrier players view: With dispersion: With Def AA active: I hope you like the idea. I would certainly prefere this as an option that offers reliability similar to torpedo bombers but a different approach to target selection.
  12. dayofmone

    Lightning fast damage popups after standby

    It is not because of the current update, it happens since months.
  13. Since a few months damage numbers pop up and are gone extremely fast after standby without closing the game. Do any of you have the same problem? Repro: - Open World Of Warships - Alt + Tab / Win + D out to the desktop - put the PC into standby If you log back in immediately you are still logged in in game. Leave the PC in standby for ~15 minutes, for example while you have dinner. - wake PC up - click on the WoWs icon in the task bar - login and start a battle - look at damage numbers when you hit enemy ships Result: Damage numbers pop up over the ship you hit and are gone in the blink of an eye as if you were watching a timelapse. Expected result: Damage numbers should pop up and fade away slowly Additional info: The background video on the login information screen is sped up as well. My PC: OS: Win 10 CPU: i5-4690 @3.5 GHz GPU: GTX 970
  14. The Atlanta is at the same time insanely overpowered and incredibly weak. She has the capability unleash hell on a target but completely depends on her team and the map situation to do it with little room for errors. There's no point arguing about something without bringing some visual aids, so I spent a few hours gathering and calculating statistics for a few diagrams. The EU average stats are from warships.today Let's first look how the Atlanta compares to the other cruisers of her tier in the most relevant areas. I left out the Flint as the pinnacle of T7 balance and all the Myoko versions. I will quickly sum up what you see: The Atlanta sports the strongest broadside at T7 with 14 guns and demonstrates the fastest reload times. However she has the smallest gun calibre and shortest firing range combined with the lowest damage per shell for both ammunition types. Her overall health is very low but counterbalanced by great concealment. Now let's look at the damage per minute (DPM) of each ship. The Atlanta is at the top of the board due to the large number of guns, combined with a short reload. However it is important to keep in mind that all guns differ in their ease to use. Factors that affect a guns handling are projectile velocity, shell archs and accuracy. Therefore I have taken the European average hit ratio to calculate a more accurate potential DPM. As visible this changed the values signifficantly. Let's take a look at further EU average statistics. The Atlanta has an average winrate, however her overall damage is rather low, so is her survival rate and main battery accuracy. She earns a decent ammount of XP, has a mediocore kill to death ratio and number of kills per game. Well then, why is she in need of help? Because the ship is situational to a point where she can only fullfill a few very specific tasks but is unable to perform in any other situation. What is Atlanta good at? - killing aircrafts - murdering cruisers with radar - camping behind an island What is Atlanta bad at? - sustaining any kind of incoming damage (no armor, low HP) - dealing with any situation that is not 100% ideal for her - being humble about captain points, you need AFT, IFHE and CE to be competitive which equals an 18 point captain She needs a map with small islands to fire over, not being spotted by aircrafts or a flanking DD in her hideout, an enemy team that pushes close enough to come into her firing range but does not compromise her position, an allied team that prevents the enemy team from pushing the Atlanta's position and DDs that smoke her up. In other words she needs a perfect scenarion that rarely ever happens. If the aforementioned requirements do not occour the Atlanta is useless. You choices are: - to run away As soon as you get spotted every somewhat sane enemy in range will try to kill you. You don't have the armor or health to sustain incoming damage and will die very quickly unless you manage to become unspotted. - attempting a suicide mission to cause as much damage as possible before dying It is time that this very early ship is adapted to a meta where fights happen at long range and teams do not want to push. The Atlanta desperately needs a buff to her firing range and nerfs in other areas for counterbalance. If she got 15km firing range she still would not have a Fiji's or Belfast's smoke for surviveability, no heal, little armor and short range. If in turn her shell damage and fire chance was nerfed signifficantly the Atlanta would be a mid range sustained damage dealer. As a result the Atlanta could be active for larger parts of the battle.
  15. Bit late but if you still need models tell me which and I can give em to you. I get them from a website but it needs a pay account to get access to the 3D models.
×