Hugh_Ruka

This is a case of hidden stats (like torpedo flooding chance f.e.) that are taken into account by the game engine but are not immediately visible to the player affected :-) I was puzzled by this after the stealth fire nerf until I figured the view range limitation.

Well as to this point, this is actually not the case. You can do invisifire still in the game, you just have to have a longer range than the spotting range of the ship you are shooting. It is kind of odd as in theory this should not be possible, but it is. I see this all the time playing a DD as they have the least spotting range. I am detected by other ships nearby and I can see shells coming my way from open sea (no islands or smoke in sight). Once I get a few km closer to the firing ship it pops into view. IIRC my spotting range in an Udaloi is some 16-17km or so. Any ship with longer range can shoot me when proxy spotted. Generally spotting range is either higher or at least your max gun range. I cannot think of a ship that has less spotting range than gun range (unless Cyclone).

tak na tomto som sa vyzuril v ENG fore :-) teraz uz len zbieram reakcie co vydavaju CC pripadne ini ludia na YT a podobne ... vecer si ku tomu spravim pukance ....

I do agree. Unfortunately there's no readily available team format in WoWs (Training rooms are a hidden "bug").

So after reading through this threadnought and cooling off a bit (MrConway did rather slow down that process) I think I have a workable proposal for WG: If you want a competitive scene, you have to make it neutral and let the players sort this out themselves. Thus you have to provide a wide enough framework but with clear to understand rules and limitations. I am taking my inspiration from Alliance tournament as it was organized in Eve Online (I spent several years in that game) as it is the closest to what we have or want in WoWs. We already have 2 PvP modes that are both restricted in different ways. Random battles do not allow for good team coordination as they lack proper communication means (voice limited to divisions of 3) and Ranked are basically the same problem with the additional Rank and Season limit. We had Team battles (I did not participate in those) for the time unrestricted all team coms type of game. I do not include Training room based formats here. To allow the majority of players to participate, you have to break Clan Wars (CW from now on) into separate leagues with no restriction on Clan participation (i.e. a single Clan can enter multiple Leagues): 1. tier 8 and up, no mixed tier Leagues, 5v5/7v7/9v9 (or only 5v5 and 9v9), a no-Premium league and a FFA league - yes, there will be a lot of Leagues, but that is the goal (so far 18 leagues, you can reduce them by removing some of the combinations, f.e. there are no Premium T 10 ships, or Tier 8 will not feature the 9v9 format etc...) 2. point system for ship classes. basically for each team format there'll be point limit and each ship comes with a point requirement (similar to what we have in Randoms when ships die). This way you can weight ship classes (and Premiums as well) and let the Clans pick their own fleet composition. 3. CW season windows with rewards (similar as we have in Ranked), non-reward off-season format, friendly match format for training (and to replace the now removed Team battles). The Ranked CW season will feature the usual rewards as we know them + Oil (whatever WG deems appropriate). The off-season will just feature a leader board for clans to compare to each other, will be reset at the end of each Ranked CW season and suspended during the Ranked CW season. Both off-season and friendly match format will not give any rewards except those for achievements maybe - we want to keep this for training and basic balance checking. I hope I explained the framework properly. There are some tweaks needed to the idea. F.e. if there are no rewards for the off-season, what's the reason to participate (here a clan only reward should be reason) ? Also there needs to be a limit on number of battles per team/clan in a given league, so the online activity in the ranked formats is not a factor (i.e. you can get to a point total only and that is ranked after the number of battles is reached).

WTH ??? Anybody understands that load of .... bollocks ? 1. Rented tier X ships with no captains and camo ??? And the selection is up to WG (limit of 3 ships) ? Wouldn't it be better to just make 3 separate Leagues for tier 8,9,10 ? With exclusion of Premiums to keep at least some balance .... 2. Now that WG removed Team battles there's no option for small clans to participate in team events AT ALL !!!! What about 5v5 on smaller maps with no CVs ? 3. The no CV rule is really stupid. Yes they are great recon ships but that is their role !!! 4. MOUNTAIN RANGE ??? I hope they will rework Clan battles before releasing them to something more usable and enjoyable for more players. I am getting quite frustrated with the last few updates. The last good one was the Dunkirk special and Operations. Since then we are getting untested and incomplete stuff ...

Once again for the slow folks: Training room is NOT a normal game mode, you do not get it in the regular client. Thus using it to obtain SCs without paying the usual fees (post-battle service and game time invested) is cheating. It is the same as if somebody found a way to earn XP from training room battles ....

So you build a community by forcing them to search for hidden information in game client data ? REALLY ? How would you go about discovering the Shinonome achievement in 2 weeks ? I thought you build a community by GIVING the players ample tools to cooperate and help each other ... f.e. divisions/clans/proper communication and coordination tools ....

If training room battles are not counted towards total battles, how does the game tell that it should count a training room battle towards the goal ? yes the WoWs player stats page does not show it, because there is no category for that on the web page. however if they are not counted, then there's no way you'd get the SC from a training room battle, it does not increase the battle played per ship indicator. After all, training room is not a regular battle mode.

Just read the 0.6.11. patch news and I noticed one interesting topic: DW torpedoes that will not hit my ship are displayed with a different icon and the torpedo alarm does not go off. How does this behave for the ships that would be hit by the torp in the distance ? F.e. picture this scenario: I am in a Kagero doing spotting and torpedo sentry for a smoked up battleship. I am some 5-6km away from the BB. I detect a spread of DW torps heading for the smoke. Will the BB receive the usual indicator of incoming torpedoes that were detected ? How will aircraft detected DW torpedoes behave in this regard ? Actually I do not think DW torps should have a different warning system to regular torps. How is the ship crew able to tell the running depth of the torp based on the bubble trail ?

Flamu cheated the requirements. And based on his cheat, I could achieve the 1000 battles requirement but simply relaunching training room battles ...

Where can I get ARP ships ? Win a battle using Shinonome - this one got me. Why didn't they ask for a Kraken battle with Jack Dunkirk or Yamamoto ? Asking for tech tree ships is fine. Asking for premium ships is ok if not nice. However go through the achievements and have a look at the ones that do not need named ships. 7 out of the 16 achievements are for NAMED ships. And don't get me started on the way the achievements are documented. I have not found an official anything on them (only that they exist, I do not consider forum/reddit posts official sources). Given how specific the requirements are, waiting on people to discover them in regular gameplay is quite brave (if not arrogant). And don't get me started on why a camo for a French cruiser requires all but French ships to get ? Similar the New Orleans camo ... The sub-collections are freaking unbalanced .... Yes I am pissed and I know it shows in my comments ... Considering how the Hunt for Bismarck and Jack Dunkirk collections worked, I was expecting something similar. However what we got is a pile of crap ... EDIT: Oh, the achievements are documented now on the WOWS EU page. I am sure they were not 2 days ago.

This Anniversary collection and all associated stuff is pure crap in my case: 1. I have no T10 ships yet (I need about 70K exp for Grozovoi) 2. I have just under 1000 battles (and I refuse to cheat like Flamu published) 3. I have basically only RU DDs and some IJN DDs So I cannot complete any of the collections, since they call for ships that I do not have (Why the hell does WG include unobtainable ships as requirements ??? They could include them for additional bonuses, but not as nbase requirements). The Achievements that I can complete regularly do not count towards duplicate items for the collection, so no luck there either. Again WG screwed a lot of people over.

Why do they even bother posting the info on the EU site then ? I even planed to do some testing, arranged for the free time. Test was not available as advertised, screw them. I'll use PT just to try new ship builds for Live. Don't care about testing anymore if they don't care about their "free" testers.

Hmm .. already running ? Failed to connect to server ... however it seems to me CEST or whatever timezone is indicated in WG news is different to what is commonly used (why does EU weekend end on Monday evening f.e.) ? Anyway I installed PT client this week for the first time, so I might have done something wrong ...

Fixing smoke ? Increase dispersion scaled by gun caliber as a smoked up debuf. DDs are hit the least or not at all, 6" cruisers +5-8%, 8" cuisers + 10-12%, higher calibers + 15% ??? I think that would be enough of a penalty to discourage BB smoke camping while affecting smoke generator equipped ships the least. A defensive smoke is still possible, an offensive smoke for a BB is rather useless while DDs and CLs keep their effectivity mostly. Disable spotter/fighter plane launching from smoke, if spotter/fighter is out when entering smoke, let it land immediately. Yes, this will somewhat decrease exp for DDs as they get less spotting damage, this could be compensated by having them take a share of the damage done from their smoke.

Udaloi uses the same turret as Khaba but shorter gun barrels, so the shell speed is less than Khaba. @OP: It was already described, the Tashkent works well in randoms if you avoid caps about first 10 minutes. Stay at range (or with your cruisers/BBs) and rain fire at everything in your range. If you get into 10-12km range, you can use AP on broadsides. The ship is fast but not very agile (as destroyers go) and BIG, so you are easier to hit (f.e. the Udaloi while being slower is much easier to dodge due to being more agile and smaller profile). If your PT counter says 1-2, you can dodge without speed boost. Once it goes 3+ activate speed boost and dance in the rain :-)))

At tier IX/X I only drop smoke to hide other ships or if I pull a Notser and need to GTFO. I also use smokes as decoys to draw out radar .... basically lay a smoke screen, launch torps in the direction of enemy ships and run ... the result is usually a wasted radar (a few times a stupid Kagero or similar parked in my decoy smoke, you can guess the result).

I'd love to meet the idiots you play against if you can do what you describe ... I am a kamikaze style player (Udaloi, Tashkent), I do contest caps as a rule in ANY DD I play. I die to radar very rarely, usually it's bad positioning and not watching the map that kills me. Radar is not a problem for any sane DD captain.

DW torps ? will it be similar dumb idea as the UP launchers on the Hood ?

don't forget the torps ... you have a small stealth torp window, but with the agility and speed of the ship you can make good use of it. took 2 Bismarcks by surprise in my first random in the Leningrad, each ate 2 torps, then burned them to death from 11km or so ...

Since divisions can be formed after MM did the work, there is no way to balance that ... also Divs do not cover out of game comms, so that cannot be balanced either ... I do not see a problem with the screenshot ... been on both sides frequently ....

That EM are 2 points that you can spend into other things on the Grozovoi :-) 1/2 of Concealment Expert :-))

hmm ... Tashkent has better rudder ? where did you see that ? I do not think wargaming wiki is always 100% accurate (cannot use the game client now) but it shows otherwise. Grozovoi has 3375 dps vs Tashkent 25440 hp that's about 8 seconds for the Tashkent to live given 100% damage On the other hand, Tashkent is fully capable of killing the Grozovoi in those 8 seconds (it will get exactly 2 salvos worth 22800 damage) However Grozo has the better shell velocity, so given all the other differences, Grozovoi is clearly better on paper (I have tried to dodge Khabarovsk shells that are a bit slower in a Tashkent and I was consistently nailed from 12km away by the Khaba, so dodging Grozo shells is harder). And as a last nail, Tashkent has worse turret traverse, so it cannot use as aggresive dodging as the Grozo or it will not track the enemy.

that's a matter of opinion ... given the differences. I do prefer a wider torpedo spread per launch than more launchers ... you are less dependent on the accuracy of your prediction of enemy movement with a wider spread (more torps per salvo) .... but maybe I am just bad at aiming torps ...