Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


About dayofmone

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

Profile Information

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

Recent Profile Visitors

675 profile views
  1. dayofmone

    Bug Reports

    1. Description After Kitakaze's torpedo tubes were disabled before loading for the first time in a ranked game, Torpedo Reload Booster was disfunctional. The icon blinked, recognizing activation, however the consumable did not activate. 2. Reproduction steps Unable to reproduce in a Training Room. 1. Select Type93 mod. 3 torpedos 2. Start a Ranked Game in Kitakaze 3. Get your Torpedo Tubes disabled by a shell impact within the first 170 seconds of the game, aka before the tubes ever load. 4. When Torpedo Tubes are repaired, use Torpedo Reload Booster 3. Result TRB Icon will blink but not activate 4. Expected result TRB activation 5. Technical details Example: Bug time: about 19:30 (UTC).Replay (attempt at 01:00), python.log, DxDiag If you encounter this error, please zip your ~\crashes\ folder, upload it to any online file storage and add the link to your report.
  2. dayofmone

    Bug Reports

    1. Description: Haida's rear turret firing angle still desynced from the turret rotation indicator. 2. Reproduction steps: Select Haida, enter battle, barely line up all 3 turrets to the front, fire guns. 3. Result: Rear turret will not fire unless you counterrotate towards the stern by a few degrees. 4. Expected result: Rear turret rotation capability should be accurately represented by the indicator. 5. Technical details: Indicator
  3. dayofmone


    On lowest graphics settings, there is no lighting on ships from one side and the port is in general extremely dark.
  4. dayofmone

    Bug Reports

    1. Description Division chat timestamps seem to get set to the time you exited the last battle. If a message was written at 16:00 o'clock and you exit to port at 16:20 o'clock, the chat timestamp will read 16:20 o'clock. If this bug also happens with non division chat is yet unknown, I will try to find out and update when possible. 2. Reproduction steps Enter Division, write a emssage in chat, play game, leave the game when it is over, inspect the timestamps in chat. 3. Result The chat timestamp will read the current Real Life time instead of the time the message was written. 4. Expected result The timestamp should show when the message was written If you look at the timestamps in chat and the clock in the bottom right, you see that they are the same, the real world clock just ticked up one minute when I took the screenshot. The messages in chat had in fact been written at least 15 minutes before, however.
  5. 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.
  6. 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.
  7. dayofmone

    Got a ST Ship E-mail?

    I got the ships but no E-Mail
  8. 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?
  9. 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.
  10. 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.
  11. dayofmone

    This games lighting needs an overhaul

    Well, mine are on max, too :)
  12. 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.
  13. 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.
  14. 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.
  15. 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.