CTO_KPAKEHOB

LittleWhiteMouse has already stated that their next reviews will be available via Reddit rather than Discord.

Steam has forums for interactions with players. Blizzard has forums for interactions with players. EA (of all) also has forums for interactions with players. Are you guys completely sure that you are really following the best industry practices by moving to Discord? I think there is a generational and mindset gap issue behind this decision. If you focus your efforts on this shiny new communications platform, you will inevitably alienate a lot of aged players who prefer "a more structured environment", in your own words. I can only hope this shift in priority is indeed a calculated risk.

There is a severe bug in this update that is related to the settings rework. Prior to this update, I was able to set mouse sensitivity separately for the X axis and the Y axis. Here's how the settings looked like in the old preferences.xml file — I made a backup copy of it because I kinda had a gut feeling about this settings rework :( sens X is the X axis sensitivity, sensY is the Y axis sensitivity, and sensZ is the mouse wheel sensitivity. <sensX> 0.7400 </sensX> <sensY> 0.0100 </sensY> <sensZ> 0.3300 </sensZ> Also, here's the screenshot with the old mouse settings (in is in Russian but I highlighted the relevant settings). However after the update, I am able to set mouse sensitivity for the X axis only!!! Here's how the settings look in the new user_preferences.xml file: <mouse> <sensivity>0.7400</sensivity> <wheelSensivity>0.3300</wheelSensivity> </mouse> And here's the screenshot of the new mouse settings where there is only one slider available for setting the mouse sensitivity. The default Y axis (vertical) sensitivity is too high for me and because of that aiming at longer distances has now become a nightmare for me. Please do address and resolve this bug ASAP because it makes the gameplay experience VERY uncomfortable for me! And I do believe I will not be the only one to be upset about the lack of the Y axis sensitivity setting.

@Seraphice @YabbaCoe Guys, there is a severe issue in this update that is related to the settings rework. I have also added the bug description with screenshots in the Bug Reports topic. Prior to this update, I was able to set mouse sensitivity separately for the X axis and the Y axis. Here's how the settings looked like in the old preferences.xml file — I made a backup copy of it because I kinda had a gut feeling about this settings rework :( sens X is the X axis sensitivity, sensY is the Y axis sensitivity, and sensZ is the mouse wheel sensitivity. <sensX> 0.7400 </sensX> <sensY> 0.0100 </sensY> <sensZ> 0.3300 </sensZ> However after the update, I am able to set mouse sensitivity for the X axis only!!! Here's how the settings look in the new user_preferences.xml file: <mouse> <sensivity>0.7400</sensivity> <wheelSensivity>0.3300</wheelSensivity> </mouse> The default Y axis (vertical) sensitivity is too high for me and because of that aiming at longer distances has now become a nightmare for me. Please do address and resolve this issue ASAP because it makes the gameplay experience VERY uncomfortable for me! And I do believe I will not be the only one to be upset about the lack of the Y axis sensitivity setting.

If WG guys have fixed CVs, then why are CVs currently not allowed into the Clan Battles (and will not be allowed into the next season of the Clan Battles too, according to the devblog)? Nope, CVs and of course subs are still unbalanced AF and are still OP in the hands of any decently skilled player. And this is exactly the reason why these classes are being excluded from the only truly competitive game type in WoWS — Clan Battles. PS AFAIK Indomitable is still a slinghshot Ebola.

I also noticed a lot of us CBT players in the Asymmetric Battles, and it was nice to know that I was not the only one who still plays this game :) I do not play in Clan Battles so Asymmetric Battles was my only option to have fun playing Tier IX-X ships without being shotgunned by subs.

You might want to first focus on obtaining and leveling up special (unique) commanders. More information is available here: https://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Special_Commanders

I believe the message in the bolded part of this statement might be somewhat incorrect. I checked the RU server site, and the statement there sounds clearer to me: (The current statement is way too broad to be correct. Like for example, some ships in WoWS have multilayered space armor. To achieve more efficient penetration against this armor type, you need the right combination of many more factors, including but not limited to the projectile profile, fuse arming threshold, and fuse arming time. And don't even get me started on the more arcane stuff like the ballistic cap (windshield) shape and the Krupp value.)

Oh c'mon. WG (AFAIR it was SubOctavian when he still was on the WoWS team) used to insist that there would never be subs in the game. Never say never, you know :)

To progress to the Silver League, you will still have to persevere though the Bronze League. And there is only one way to NOT get shotgunned by subs and slingshotted by Indomitable aces on a regular basis while playing in the Ranked Battles — play a sub or a CV yourself. Tough choice between the two most hated classes, if you ask me.

I'd add Alaska and Kronshtadt to this list.

There is no black mark on you. This seems to be by design (or lack thereof) — bots focus fire on the target in range that has the lowest HP.

Visual changes will be really massive after the rendering engine has been migrated to a modern GFX API: Vulkan (preferably) or DirectX 12 Ultra. Of course these changes are welcome, and kudos to visual artists for creating this sweet GFX candy. However, with DirectX 11 under the hood, they still won't make the game look less dated :( Now talking about sound changes: can you guys resurrect the original Wardrums in-game music mode with percussion instruments only? I mean the one that was initially a bug but everyone loved it so much that you decided to keep it, with some improvements along the way. Then after some patch it changed to the current one and the current one is meh...

She is a great fun ship for Asymmetric Battles, period. In any PvP mode, a CV/gunboat DD/CL/you name it will probs turn her into a smoking piece of Jaegerwurst in a couple minutes.

Has WG's game monetization dept already contacted you with a five-zero offer?

(putting on my conspiracy theorist hat) They want to understand which ships players are comfortable to play in and then nerf said ships into oblivion. (putting off my conspiracy theorist hat)

I'd instantly trade in both Hizen and Wujing to get Giuseppe Verdi.

If my team's average winrate was e.g. 45% and the enemy team's average winrate was e.g. 55%, I'd do the same — stay in the back, use my potato teammates to spot for me, and rake in enough damage to at least come even in terms of credit earnings. Signals are costly and — thanks to some brilliant game designer at WG — I am no longer able to receive them for scoring game achievements. Teamplay makes no sense if your team is just not up to par — sad but true.

Was. For years, WG has been dumbing the game down with what they call improvements to make gameplay experience more comfortable for unskilled players at the expense of skilled ones. In CBT/PBT days, skilled players used to be able to carry single handed if need be. Nowadays, even a division of unicum players is oftentimes unable to carry due to the negative impact of those improvements on their battle performance. The game just protects the pepega player, at all costs.

Yes, the Pareto principle is hard to swallow :)

I have read those RNs long ago. In my book, the only relevant statement available there is: To me, the meaning of this statement is that the player's ship destruction does not have any impact on the ship repair cost. It is still unclear whether the player's ship destruction affects player earnings (base XP, credits, Commander XP, Elite Commander XP, and Free XP) in any way.

It would be great to see that explicitly stated in whatever official source — wiki article, devblog, devbulletin, you name it. (Forum answers do not qualify because there have been multiple occasions where WG have backtracked on statements made via forums and then put the weight of the blame on individual employees who made those statements.)

Well it is sort of obvious from my example above (vertical dispersion values) that the information available via the wiki does have gaps in it. It might be worthwhile to ask someone from WG staff a direct question about whether in-battle or post-battle ship destruction has any impact on player earnings. However, being a new guy on this server, I have no idea which WG employee would be competent enough to provide a definite and meaningful answer :(

Not exactly. It means that I have been playing WoWS since CBT. CBT stands for the Closed Beta Test. I have already forgotten more about this game than most players will ever know :)

Do you know what does the Beta sigil below my name and the number of posts mean? :)