Hugh_Ruka

I watched several KoTS battles and the situation is always the same. If there's smoke, there's planes around the smoke and there are regularly torps heading into the smoke. Actually I saw a few battles that were decided by the team in smoke being torped because they failed to organize their information gathering and were blind to torps for a brief moment. My random battle scenario is very relevant as those are being played constantly while CW/Ranked are limited to a few seasons a year. So the impact on Randoms is more important. Also torps missed in smoke ? It is not important to hit the ship in the smoke but to drive it out of cover.... That's why people torp smokes regularly. Yes you cannot tell if there's somebody in there if he's not shooting, but you want to make sure he does not STAY there.

if the change in detection is triggered by firing the gun then there is no logical reason to factor in normal surface detection. in the old detection mechanics, the firing penalty was constant per ship line/nation, there was no difference between ships and it was a more reasonable system.

have you seen Grozo and Udaloi side by side, or Tashkent for that matter ? Udaloi is the smallest of them !!! And it has the smallest turning circle because of that. You Yamato example is one of the things I'd like to see changed with the smoke stuff as well ... make assured detection of cruisers and BBs 3 and 4km (or rather 3 and 5km) and then the system is somehow fair (tbh we won's need the smoke firing mechanic with that change implemented as it will be trivial for a DD to approach a smoked up larger ship and torp the hell out of them). What I am getting at is that the numbers are completely arbitrary and there is no system or reason behind them. Not to point out that the whole smoke firing stuff is utter BS. There are several better ways to fix the problem.

That does not have anything to do with this, since detection in smoke while NOT firing is the same for all DDs. A full concealment Udaloi is only about 1km worse than a Grozo (7.3 vs 6.1 iirc). Also that argument of yours does not hold as the detection in smoke when not firing is the same for all DDs, their concealment is not taken into account there. Either it is based on gun caliber and number of guns, or it is based on concealment (but then why is the Akizuki better than Benson while having worse concealment ?). All in all, this is another arbitrary parameter that can be used to change selected ships without any consistency or logic behind it.

Have not played yet, just checked the new smoke detection numbers ... for firing in smoke: Kiev - 3.5 Tashkent - 3.7 Khabarovsk - 4.1 Udaloi - 3.3 Grozovoi - 2.9 Gearing - 2.8 Shima - 2.8 Z-23 - 3.4 (6" guns are the same) Z-46 - 2.8 Z-52 - 2.9 4.1 km on the Khabarovsk ? 3.7 for Tashkent ? That's more than the 6" guns on the Z-23 !!! Also all the DDs have a progression in tier 8-9-10, just the Udaloi is WORSE than his direct T10 follower. WHY ? Gun caliber is the same and the Grozo can achieve a heavier volume of fire due to the better reload time. One other observation (might be a bug), but why is the Z-23 detection the same for both gun calibers ? At least the UI shows the same number in port.

See, the problem is the Conq, not the smoke. If it were a Montana or Kurfurst, you just angle as he's shooting 99% AP. With Conq, that's suddenly a problem ... I wonder why ... Had a game in Udaloi 2 days ago where a Gearing smoked 2 DMs in cap, the alternated radar on me (was quite fun). I still got within my torp range, fired 10 torps, 6 of them connected. So there' enough smoke countermeasures as is. There's a lot more LoS creation in game than removal: not counting islands that are a map design thing, you have only smoke to to limit LoS. However there's Hydro, Radar and planes to establish LoS.

Better yet, implement a dispersion/sigma/vertical dispersion penalty when firing from smoke. After all you are reliant on other ships to spot targets, so the information transmitted should not be realtime or that mush accurate. The smoke generator module will decrease the penalty, so even a DD without a smoke gen equipped will get the full penalty relevant for the gun caliber. HOW ABOUT THAT ?

switch back to DX9 client and try again, maybe your DX11 driver is not up to stuff :-)

So basically this is not a bug but working as intended ? Any discount placed in the game is factored in both purchase and refund price. Well the refund price change is an unintended consequence I guess, but at least it is consistent.

Why are the Russian based buildings named in English ? The Japanese,French and German ones have the proper names (minus some spelling mistakes), Russian ones are just plain English !!! If you don't want to name them in Azbuka, at least do the proper Latin names.

That's the price of people not understanding the game :-) Personally I do not care about the Karma indicator, simply because there is no way to trace it back to your actions.

You cannot check in Port. You have to go to the Clan screen, expand the members list (arrow at bottom) and check your own entry. yes I agree it's stupid and slow :-)

Can we get a modification to the Collections screen that show which collections are already closed/expired ? There's an icon for a finished collection, but the ones that expired (Jack Dunkirk, 2nd Anniversary) are still marked the same as if active. Also please, PLEASE for the love of God, create an option to completely disable the News section. Or at least that stupid "new item" notification from the News section.

please ignore, noticed my error ...

Is this the FAQ that MrConway was talking about ? Because this is just another spin of the same record. Oh well ... I'll give up on Clan battles for a few seasons ... (My assumption: CBs are just a small rework of Team battles and the match making did not take into account carriers there, so WG is simply excluding them. Having TBs and CBs, nobody would play CBs as they require a clan and thus doubloons to enter while TBs are essentially free + you can pad out your team with people not in your clan. Cash grab on WG side)

Shouldn't DW torps hit below the torpedo belt and thus get less damage reduction and cause more floodings ? I thought that was he idea, but it sure does not look like that in the video .... Also going by the logic, the Minotaur should have had each torp hit a flood since his keel is close to the dw running depth.

SO you do know how they will work or you are guessing ? Because going by the available information both of us are correct (as there is no information on that subject we can speculate as much as we like).

There's one crucial difference between planes and radar from a DD view point, YOU CAN ALWAYS SEE THE PLANES COMING !!! Generally all DDs have lower air detection than plane spotting range. But you have no way to see a radar cruiser behind an island. Also planes do not see through smoke. I have no problems playing against CVs (they do make my game more difficult, but I have no issues with that). I do hate RPF and radar cruisers as there is NOTHING you can do about them except stay out of range (but then what good are you as a DD).

When I see arguments like this, I kinda get the impression that the writer only thinks of a CV without equal opposition. Hello there !!! There will be an equal tier CV on the other team as well to balance things out. Yes if one of the CV captains is bad, then they will get stomped most probably, but then they should have gone without a CV and the MM would match them up against a non-CV team (same as in Randoms and Ranked). At tier 10, AA is very heavy. The only option to strike is on isolated targets and even then only some ships (a Minotaur or DM will shred most of the attack squadron).

REQUEST: Name ONE (just one) game mechanic that was properly fixed by WG after the first iteration did not work out. Clan battles will work the same. We'll get a watered down team battle format that will be tweaked here and there but never properly fleshed out. Just look at the long standing issues in the game and you can see how capable WG is in fixing them.

And you forgot that without CVs, cruisers and battleships will have 4 free skill points from AFT to pick RL/RPF, thus flanking manouvers will be impossible. What gets me is the pretended stupidity of WG. MM equalizes CVs already, so CWs can only take place between equally matched teams in that regard. If CVs are OP, they either drop completely (nobody wants to play against them without a skilled CV of their own) from all but the best CV clans or the dominate the MM since they are so OP and everybody thinks they need them. Removing CVs from CWs is a stupid idea any way you look at it (besides they should have plenty evidence of the above from Ranked battles statistics).

I don't get these topics. There are load of threads and YT videos and whatnot about how CVs are imbalanced, broken, unplayable etc. And when they are excluded from a feature (let's not discuss the validity of the reasoning behind the exclusion) suddenly there's a lot of people complaining that it is the only class they play and enjoy. Why then don't I see a CV in most games I play at T9+ then ?

Biggest screw up was asking money for a 1/2 finished product ...

I know that, and there's a nice wiki article about how this work. However there's no real ingame information for this.

Do you want me to code them for you (I'd have to learn some programing lingo, I am seriously rusty on that front) ? You already have all the partial mechanics in place except the league ladders (you have something almost usable in the player stats provided on the web). Seriously, you (WG) are actively destroying the game by releasing half-baked and half-implemented ideas. If you cannot release a properly implemented game mechanic, do NOT release it to public. Keep it on the test server for further testing/development, invite more people to test, create a reduced season with selected clans etc ... do not be lazy. As an aside, how do you want to implement any serious e-sports format when you cannot do a simple multi-league clan battle system ?