Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'Balance'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Forum
    • English Speaking Forum
    • Deutschsprachige Community
    • Polska Społeczność
    • Česká a slovenská komunita
    • Communauté francophone
    • Comunità Italiana
    • Comunidad de habla española
    • Türkçe Topluluk
  • Mod Section
    • Rules, Announcements and General Discussion (English)
    • Modding Tutorials, Guides and Tools (English)
    • Interface Mods
    • Visual Mods
    • Sound Mods
    • Modpacks
    • Other Mods and Programs
    • Archive
  • Historical Section


  • Community Calendar
  • This Day in History

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL








Found 136 results

  1. ultimatedestroyer_sniper

    Passive play and HE spam

    as i said in another thread, HE is currently way too powerful. sure it does less damage than ap but its much more consistant. a change i want to suggest is changing HE which would also very likely fix the passive matches we get all the time. one of the changes i can think of is fire saturation. i would love to hear more ideas on this and want to discuss this in a civil way. thank you for participating in something that needs to happen
  2. Daemon_Blackfyre

    An idea for Duke of York

    I don't think Duke of York is a very good ship, just worse copy of the King George V. In fact I think it's thoroughly a "Meh bote", only made worse by the (now not so recent) citadel nerf that got applied to the whole line of RN BBs. The problem: she's squishy AND has no teeth The crux is that she is a modern, all-or-nothing armour scheme ship, but with relatively small guns at tier 7. Out of the 12 tier 7 battleships, 6 (so half) of them use the all-or-nothing armour scheme, crucially important at tier 7, because as we know, tier 7 BBs only get 26mm plating so they massively vulnerable to any ship with 15" guns (not to mention light cruisers spamming HE). (I find this more than a little ironic considering till Yamato was launched, the class were the most heavily armoured ships in the world, but I digress) Out of those 12 tier 7 BBs, all but 5 of them (DoY, KGV, Lyon, Scharnhorst and Poltava) have 15" guns or bigger. BUT Lyon, Scharnhorst and Poltava have a distributed armour scheme. Leaving only Duke of York and her sister ship KGV, vulnerable to being over-matched through the bow and citadelled, but unable to do the same in reply, in theory only being able to over-match 24.895mm. KGV's not nearly as hard done-by with a 20% faster reload than Duke of York, making her a far more potent HE spammer. DoY has no such luck, only a fractionally quicker cool on her damage control and heal, slightly better AA (but not enough to make any appreciable difference), and hydro instead of a spotter plane, kind of a niche item on a long-range support oriented battleship. The suggestion: Make Duke of York a tier 8 I know WG would never do this as it would mean "upgrading" people's ships and where is the profit in that? But business aside... The DoY (and KGV) are some of the only modern battleships at tier 7, the only others being Scharnhorst and Gneisenau (and they're historically speaking, questionably true battleships at all) so at tier 8 she would be matched up with contemporary battleships from history. The original statement from WG when the RN BB line was released was that "14" guns were too small at tier 8", but I counter with "they're the same size at tier 7 or tier 8"... At tier 8 it doesn't matter as much that they can't over-pen the plating of another battleship, because NO tier 8 battleships can, and with the 32mm plating that comes with tier 8, she will be safer from her peers too. Of course the other stats of the ship will have to be buffed too with the raise in tier, but as for her guns, I think a simple reload buff, say to roughly 23-25s (probably slightly faster than the 15" Monarch and KGV), and the accuracy improved greatly. The big problem will be cruisers, as at tier 8, they will all be able to bounce her AP shells of the nose, so you could look at giving her shells slightly improved ricochet angles to help her deal with them, but she might not even need that since she already fights them most matches anyway. There are plenty of stats they could use to boost her effectiveness at tier 8 (should it be needed), once the fundamental flaws of her design at tier 7 have been taken care of. Eg restore the 0.033s fuse time regular battleships get (also reflective of Prince of Wales' underwater hit on Bismarck which penetrated under the belt and exploded against the inner bulkhead, flooding part of her citadel), increase turret rotation speed, increase her krupp values, or even give her higher base AP damage since her shells had larger bursting charges (so would do more actual damage irl) than most 16" guns. Giving her radar instead of hydro would be a fun nod to the Battle of the North Cape.
  3. There is one thing I do not understand. Why do we have another Season of Ranked with Carriers. WG obviously knows something is wrong with the DD/Carrier-Interaction. Otherwise they would not publicize their plans to adjust those ships in several ways (changing the attack plane reticle, reducing air visibility of DDs, and so on...) If they know that they have to adjust those values (which is a fact) why would they introduce another competitive Season of ranked with Carriers? It makes no sense whatsoever to introduce a competitive Game Mode (or Season) if you know the Balance of whole Ship-Classes (not talking about individual ships here) is totally off! Now let's get started with OP Carriers or OP Ships in general. Someone with a WG Tag just noted that you would not ban individual ships from Game Modes (f.e. Ranked) and even asked why you would do such a thing... Well, the colleagues working at World of Tanks did JUST THAT. They banned several Reward Vehicles from Ranked Game Modes because they are too strong. So please do not tell us that this would not be an option.
  4. Hello fellow gamer people, I am writing this as I'm more than a little concerned with the current state of the game in general, the direction it appears to be going, and several other concerns regarding things like customer service and transparency. It may end up being a long post and maybe in more than one part, and, just to be clear, these are only MY opinions, you can agree or disagree as you see fit and I welcome constructive comment, however trolling because you haven't had enough attention today will be reported. First, a brief description of myself mainly for insight as to where I'm coming from with all this. I suppose I'm a whale, probably a Blue Whale If I'm going to be honest. Over the years I have given Wargaming a lot of money, thousands most likely, ok not likely, It's a fact, since starting playing tanks nine years ago I have spent?, invested? money, though I'm not going to think about that too much, but I game a lot. I'm also a bit of a Cliche, I'm 52 and live with my parent's, although I'm not In the basement, and am not antisocial, I do have friends and like a drink once or twice a week, but due to circumstances and family health issue's I'm back home and have a lot of free time. I've played games and built computers for 32 ish years ever since 4mb of ram was a big deal. I'm not an expert on gaming but I have a lot of years In the area. So, on to the meat of the subject, Wargaming, what are they doing, why are they doing it, and are they doing it for us?. Well, and again, my opinion, no, no they are not doing it for us, or if they THINK they are, they are not listening. I'm going to break it down, firstly by game type, then class and at the end I'll touch on the business side of things I suppose. So Game types, Random: I actualy have very few issue's with random, other than camping and skill level's of some players It's not too bad, with a couple of exceptions, but I'll address those In the class section. Co_op: Sorry but shouldn't we rename this DD-oP?, trying to get anywhere with , let's say, a bb Is 90% of the time (random % pulled out of thin air) pointless, by the time you get to engage half the time, the game is over and the Destroyer's have gobbled all the Exp, not a go at Destroyers, but the Mechanics of the game mean rushing forward and torp'ing is the way to go. How to fix? *&%@ if i know. Ranked: It's painful, I have seen people defending it, but as a reasonably skilled player who is just not good enough to carry hard I find ranked horribly frustrating. The amount of games in the last sprint I've lost due to players either rushing straight in and being sunk in the first two to three minutes, Going off alone down a flank in a BB....and getting sunk in the first two to three minutes, or sitting in a position that they are unable to make any difference to the game, until team is dead and they are outnumberes etc....... well a lot of you know what I'm trying to say. As of right now, ranked does not reward you as a player for playing the game, it relies on a team effort, and trying to get a lot of the players to work together Is Impossible. I've ranked out then next time never got passed rank 9 etc. Completely Inconsistant. Clan Battles: Borked, CV's, Stalin Rico's everywhere, etc. Only just started playing CB, but first impression's, while ok funwise, I just don't get some WG decisions. So CV's, why am I unimpressed with them in Clan Battles, well they completely take away using the Element of surpise / positioning. CV in game? yup, Flank from an unexpected place/angle to try get an advantage? nope, you were spotted four day's ago by planes that can perma spot you while you can do nothing to mitigate it, now that's a GREAT game design . So, coal / steel ships, you know I wouldn't give a flying If It wasn't for the simple fact that Wargaming don't even attempt to balance, and I know some of you are going to say I'm wrong, but let me be blunt, IF I'm wrong, why the hell was everyone who had them, using them?, how many other ship's did you see, how many Henri's, Mino's?, Ibuki's?, not many from my experience. While I'm not expecting every ship to be practicle, having only 4 or 5 being the Go To ship's just scream's Imbalance to me. I'd like to know what the % WR of CB's with CV's in was and then have skill level like for like factored in and a nice big bar graph putting out as well. I don't have issue with CV's being in game(See class DD's later for further comment), but honestly think they take too much away when It come to Clan battles. Sceanrio: no problems other than they should reset rewards each cycle of each scenario. So Class next I guess: Battleships: At some point Wargaming were going on about trying to get BB's to be more active in the game, everyone was sat at the back, hiding behing Islands and sniping, Battleship brawling was only happening late game when pretty much everything else was dead or one team was done for and out of options. Well, that hasn't worked has it. BB's now camp like they forgot to weigh anchor, and to be honest I can't really blame them. New ships introduced make It pretty much suicide to push early to mid game (though I personally do try now and then for lol's), Smolensk, Worcester, Halland etc. have pretty much turned the game into a campfest, which Is not as fun, also certain BB's just seem to be inferior to others due to power creep, or unique flavour (Thunderer armour / Citadel anyone). Cruisers: I think they are probably best class in game at moment, they do pretty much everything at least to a decent degree, and some of them excel in certain areas. Want a Denial ship, Smol, Worcester etc. AA Des, Salem, Utility, Stalin, Des, Moskva, an answer to every problem lies somewhere In one of the MANY cruisers and with the new lines we have even more to choose from. They can wreck BB's, hunt destroyer's, provide AA, I can't think of anything that they are bad at, with a few expcetions pertaining to specific cruisers. The only issue I have with them Is again that some just seem too powerful when compared to others of same tier. CV's: Currently I think they are the equivalent of Arty in World Of Tanks, I don't think Wargaming truly know what to do with them, got close(ish) to having them balanced and then gave up. Spotting Mechanic Is just bad, being perma spotted and not being able to do anything about It Is just a bad Idea and takes so much away from the game as far as strategy is concerned. I think AA on some ships needs BUFFING (yes, I said it, so sue me) I also think that Ships detection range from the air should be equal to the LR AA umbrella of the ship being spotted and that ships should be able to detect the plane's at Maz AA range, so spotting has some cost. I also thin MM needs looking at, If you have ever been a bottom tier DD and had to face a CV two tiers above you, well yeah that's fun, sure you can stay at the back and hide with the cruisers / bb's, but isn't that the complete opposite of a DD's purpose (generally, yeah we have exceptions). I played a French DD the other day as an experiment for several games, no smoke and meh AA, every time I had a CV in game, well, It was bad, and If the CV was two tiers higher, It was bad, but not for long.... DD: Over taxed and soon even more so. CV's are a nightmare, Radar is everywhere, Hydro, sub's on the way (oh lord I hope not) I think, again with exceptions, that DD'ss are the hardest ship to play at the moment and when/If Sub's come then, well I don't know, will people just stop playing them?. Teams want you to spot or cap but at the moemnt your life expectancy a lot of the time Is pretty short if you even attempt, it. "Cap C" ok I'll go cap C, oh damn, planes incoming, no problem, I'll smoke up he will never see me , Oh damn, radar from a cruiser 12k away, behind an island....with a Smolensk , oh and look, those rocket planes are coming back, It will be ok, happy thoughts, happy thoughts, happ..."Return to Port?" ho hum. Subs: not played them, don't want them, special game mode please thanks. From what I have seen on YT etc at the moment, they are nowhere near balanced. I am still trying to figure out as of now what a BB is suposed to do In a one on one with a Sub, Raise a white flag?. My answers to some of the problems that >I SEE< : I'd get rid of Radar and bring a little tension back to the game, "what's behind this Island?, I don't know, should I go look????? ewwwww what to do!!!", give more ships Hydro maybe to counter lack of radar, get rid of proximity spotting, above changes to CV spotting, Change MM so dd's are not uptiered with CV's two levels higher and deleted in first couple of minutes (or) Change rocket dispersion V DD's maybe, make them harder to hit, take cv's out of comp gaming. I would also like to see WG go back and balance ALL ships so they all serve a purpose, probably not realistic but hey. Zao, Henri, Mino to some extent are under played, anyone wonder why. Possibly look at rewarding active play and penalties for innactive play. Stop releasing ships that skew balance badly or are a bit silly in a specific are. Wargaming: Firstly, they are a business, they are not here because they love you, they are here to make money, and I am fine with that. What I'm not fine Is the downright vile methods they use to get that money. Loot box gambling In the Armoury for progression is just BAD and a horrible money grab, the whole PR fiasco was offensive and again IMHO an intentional money grab by WG, I truly beleive If the stink that was created regarding It hadn't occured they would have carried on with the concept. The current Dock Isn't as bad, In fact I look at It as simply a way to get a discount on a ship If I want to. I don't mind things like the Xmas Box's got to say, they are far enough away from the game itself to be out of mind, but something that you are actively taking part in via missions... another story. Premium ships, the prices are ridiculus, I have never seen a comment from WG regarding the pricing they use, but as hundreds have said before me, having a single in game ship costing the same as AAA title, and in some cases a couple of AAA titles, Is greedy, and let's be honest, they seem to knock them out at a insane rate, what is it, when you include reskins? One a week, two?. And yet how often do we see a new maps released?, game modes?. Yes they give stuff away, but a fair few have been pretty awful, others some are older ships that many people may have already bought...they ain't stupid that's for sure. I don't know If they even take note of feedback, LWM is probably the most level headed and does some pretty amazing and detailed reviews and has commented a lot on what she thinks a particular ship may need, both buff or nerf to be a good, balanced ship but do WG listen? do they care? do they try to give us, the gamers what we want or is it more of a case of they give us what they SAY we want, I don't know, I am starting to come around to the idea that a lot of it is just hot air and smoke. When I first started playing, the game was totaly different, far more balanced and after the way Tanks has gone downhill, a breath of fresh air, but now I'm starting to think that that was just the hooks going In before they reverted back to same old same old. I hope I'm wrong, the game isn't broke beyond repair, it just needs a little nudge here and there. Oh yeah, Wargaming, out of interest, you know those server transfers you promised NA to EU for world of tanks, like over two years ago, you know, the subject you point blank refuse to acknowledge on your forums any more in World of Tanks? well as you refuse to respond on THOSE forums how about someone reach out to them from here and find out WTF is going on? you now, customer service, valued customers, transparency, Integrity, honesty and so on??, I mean I know Wargaming didn't do a complete U turn and just not tell the customers, that would be a completely shameful way to treat the player base wouldn't it? just asking anyway, probably a metric tonne of spelling mistakes and punctuation error's and trolls have probably smelled blood and are crawling out from under the bridges, but I'm trying. Srgt_Misfire Deep Impact EU "I may be old n slow kid, but I still sunk you"
  5. Sweedish_Gunner

    Tier 10 gameplay is a mess.

    I'm not quite sure when it started, but the quality and enjoyment of T10 matches has taken a complete nosedive in the last year or so. The actual core gameplay of T10 is so skewed and flawed that I find it really hard to even enjoy playing at T10 anymore, the gameplay itself seems toxic and uninviting. A huge problem T10 suffers (in my mind) is the almost complete lack of brawling and close quarters engagements, which has been exacerbated recently by all the new ships added to the game. The two main reasons for the poor quality of gameplay are the maps and as I mentioned earlier, all the new ships. As for maps, there are a few good ones, maps like Sleeping Giant and Hotspot are some of the best in the game. However there are some absolute stinkers in the T10 pool, I'm sure I don't have to mention Okinawa, Ocean or Ice Islands for being absolutely awful. The reason behind the maps feeling really poor to play is (again imo) the lack of cover within or on approach to certain caps or parts of the map, the best maps have lots of varied options on how to approach objectives and corridors, they offer a balance of long open water sight-lines and tall covering islands allowing ships to get in closer, for example, on Hotspot, both sides of the maps offer the opportunity to both get in close and brawl and to let people keep their distance if they wish. These tall, long islands are absolutely key to allowing dynamic and aggressive gameplay at T10 where the damage and range of most ships is quite high. The bigger problem though, is the new T10 ships. Nearly every single new battleship and cruiser in the last year or more has been designed to run away, avoid direct gunfights and not push in aggressively, the only exception to this being the Kremlin which wasn't exactly balanced on release. So what have we had? We have the Conqueror, a long range HE spammer made of rice crackers with a citadel the size of Mars, the République, a long range (26.1km base range xd) AP spammer made of dry grass and kindling (armed with an AP black hole device though), the Bourgogne, a long range Swiss army knife made of plasterboard, the Thunderer, a long-mid range flexible boi that has the rice cracker armour and Martian citadel from the Conq, the Ohio, which is the only ship so far other than the Kreml that wants to even get remotely close to the action and even then it doesn't have to get close if you don't mind not using one of your gimmicks and finally we have the Shikishima which is just Yamato gameplay but you're compensating even harder for something. Not one of these ships wants to go sub 12km range bar maybe the Ohio, they're all designed to sit far away from HE and incoming damage whilst flinging their own shells at something 21 km away. Then we have the cruisers, oh boy (I don't exactly remember the release order). So the Henri is a fast, long range kiting ship with little armour, the Worcester is a island hugger with little armour and awful shell arcs for chasing ships, the Salem is a DM that's actually encouraged to go closer (crazy I know), the Yoshino is a long range kiting ship with 20km torps and no armour, the Colbert is an island hugger with no armour and awful shell arcs for chasing ships, the Smolensk is an abomination and one that's designed to not push because of its smoke and awful armour, the Venezia is a long range. SAP kiting ship with smoke (that can actually be used to play aggro but it's super risky), the Goliath is a kiting HE spammer with no armour, the Al Nevsky is another, you guessed it, long range HE spammer with questionable armour. The only ship that looks interesting is the upcoming Petropavlovsk because maybe it might not just run away spamming HE for the whole match. And don't forget the DD's, obviously there's Shimakaze's everywhere (there always is) but the addition of the underwater missile armed Swedish DD's doesn't exactly make pushing any easier when a good player can basically perma flood you, whilst things like the Haragumo and Daring can just smoke up and spam HE to their hearts content with their cruiser levels of DPM. The combination of bad maps, with little cover, cruisers who's only interest is spamming HE along with BB's who don't want to eat said HE makes for one hell of a frustrating experience where close range, fun, skill expressive engagements are few and far between. I've been slowly playing less solo T10 and I'm continuing to drift away from it, which is a shame because T10 has some of the most interesting ships in the game and it is, ultimately, the end goal of playing WoWS. Anyways this was a bit of a rant as I just needed to get this off my chest and of course this goes without saying, the presence of T10 CV's makes the whole experience 100 times worse as they ruin everyone's game being the incurable malignant tumour they are.
  6. I always thought about some adjustments that could be added to already existing lines to make them enjoyable again. I didn't play all lines so i can't say how the state of those are so you are more then welcome to correct me or write your thoughts down. Let's go from top to bottom in the tech tree: Japan First of the japanese battleships. I think most of them are fine and don't need any buffs or nerfs, but i do think that Izumo does not need 2 hulls to be researched that you can work on your Yamato. So my suggestion is here to add the B hull as a stock hull and make the C hull the cost of the B hull to make the grind more enjoyable. The japanese Cruiser line is imo. pretty outdated but i am biased there in favor of the french so no neutral opinion there, but i do think that some of those ships especially the Aoba, Myoko and Mogami could need some love in terms of turret angles that you don't need to show full broadside when you want to fire more then two turrets. Also replace the Mogami with an actual heavy cruiser and may replace her in a potential light cruiser branch ( if this is possible idk) All japanese DD's are on a kinda "meh" stage. Their torpedos still hit very hard but the detection range is huge. Also their concealment isn't so special any longer. So i think it could be a good buff either to increase the torpedo reload or increase their concealment to keep one advantage that they always should have: by far the best concealment. The gunboat line from T8 - 10 doesn't need any buffs or nerfs i think they are fine. T9 Cruiser Azuma: I think she is in a horrible stage and really could need some love to make her competitive to a Kronshtadt or an Alaska. Kron and Alaska have both 18.5sec reload so why shouldn't the Azuma get it as well ? Also she could really need some extra armour that she doesn't get cita'd the whole game. Another addition could be to add Shimas/Zaos 12km torpedoes. i can't say anything about the current CV's since i don't play them USA tbh. i skipped all low tier USN BB's because i hate their slowness so i can't say much about them and their current state. NC looks good as well. But now the Iowa: The same things with the Izumo make the B hull the stock hull and reduce the costs for the C hull. Both were the first lines which got introduced and in terms of research nothing got changed there meanwhile any other BB line which got added has only two hulls on their T9's. In terms of the upcoming plate changes could it be a good adjustment if the Iowa and Montana would get improved AP angles to stay competitive. I think the USN cruisers are in a fine stage and don't need any buffs or nerfs ( ofc correct me if i am wrong there), the american DD's were known for their good AA in RTS times. So i think it would be a good adjustment to give the Benson, Fletcher and Gearing the 3rd slot with def AA instead of choose if you want the boost or def AA. again i can't say anything about the current USN CV state historical accurate navy of the USSR Okay let's start with the historical accurate battleships. The BB maniacs will know probably better what to change here but my opinion here is first of make the Citadel of the Vladivostok, Sovetsky Soyuz and Kreml as vulnerable as from the Sinop. Then nerf the deck armour from the Soyuz and Kreml to 57mm. I don't know exactly how it works with the Ellipses and accuracy but make the accuracy really worse on long ranges for example Mikasa level or worse that you don't have the magical "bad dispersion on range which is somehow still a citadel" and also nerf the turrert turning circle extremely. And never add Slava into the game I think the current light cruisers are fine, but as with the americans reduce the radar range from all light cruisers to maybe 10km and only the heavy cruisers should have 12km. let's don't talk about the upcoming cruisers they are still WiP and hopefully will change Russian DD's are imo in a very bad spot. Imo. T2 - T8 could get a better turret traverse and an improved dmg controll that reduces the cooldown time until it's up again. Also the Khaba should get more range, a better rudder shift time and better concealment. I never played the hybrid line so i can't say anything about those T10 "balanced light cruiser" Smolensk: First of remove the smoke generator completly and remove the Gun Fire Control System Mod.2 in the last slot. Also raise it's citadel to Mino level + troll armour. Germany With the last buff i think the german BB's are in a good spot but i think GK could get some buffs in terms of turret angles. The german cruisers are in an okaish state except the Hipper. First of take the B hull as the stock hull.....you know what it comes next. Also increase the reload from the main guns to a competitive level. German DD's..........i think a good adjustment is to extend the torpedo range from the T22 to the Z52 for at least 1km or more and also give them a competitive reload and maybe concealment buffs. Also imo. the Z-23 and Z-46 should get the improved hydro from the Z-52. U.K. i think none of those lines is actualy in a bad spot and don't need any buffs or nerfs. However i don't how the current status of the british CV's are. France I never played the french BB line so i have no idea what could be changed here The french Cruisers are in a good spot imo. but however i don't like the acceleration nerf on the Henri and the upcoming IFHE nerf which throws the Henri behind her competition. The french DD's are imo. in a fast and good spot however i think some could get some turret traverse buffs. Pan-Asia First of: All DWT's from the Pan-Asian nation should be unaffected from the Torpedo Lookout System in Slot 5 to remain their unique spotting range from .8km . Then increase the torpedo and gun reload and also maybe change the slot for the radar for the Hsienyang, Chung Mu and Yueyang. Either it goes to the 2nd slot and can be traded for Speed Boost or place it on a new 3rd slot to make them viable again. Italy I never played the low tier Cruisers so i have no idea if they are bad or good but in general T7+ is in a good spot and the Venezia is may be OP so some nerfs for the reload time could be adjusted here. Keep in mind all of those thoughts are just my opinion and you are more then welcome to correct me anywhere and add your own opinion to it. Have a great day !
  7. Necro_von_Cortex

    AA and secoundaries

    I've looked through the game wiki, as anyone who likes to know the details about the game should now and then. But I found myself stumble over some details, or in some cases lack of details. If we start with the AA part. The game wiki stages all calibers over 85mm guns will have a Flak effect in the form of a flak cloud or clouds. This makes sense cause that's how AAA warfare works BUT... Why 85mm and not just 80mm? The reason I ask is because this means FlaK 88s dated as far back as 1905 will throw clouds at 4.6km, while "modern" 85mm 90-K and 92-K guns will be limited to 3.5km range and only do regular DPS. Eventhough in this specific case, the 85mm fires a heavier AA shell than the FlaK 8.8cm L/45 in question. Yes the 90-K will on average do more DPS pr gun onboard than an old FlaK, but it fires the heavier shell, it has the longer barrel and it is the newer design by over 30 years. I would suggest FlaK effect should rather have been based on available shell types for AA guns rather than "just" caliber, Alternatively, it could have 80mm as the threashold, as guns like the 8cm/40 type 3, is a 76.2mm gun, not a 80mm. (as far as I can tell, there are no such naval caliber) You could of course argue it would take a lot of time for the developers to figure out excatly how much a power a specific AA shell has for a specific gun. But once it was done, it would be copypaste as many of the ships use the same guns, even across nations/factions, with UK ordinance being the most common. http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNGER_88mm-45_skc13.php AA shells at about 9kg http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNRussian_85mm-52_90k.php AA shells at about 9.2kg Guns at 76.2mm only weight about 6kg pr shell at best. Secoundary batteries? While I find the ranges just fine and have little fear from DDs down to 4km range (as the smallest bit of manouver can get you out of the way) I've noticed under the page for Secoundary batteries, (which might have been removed from the wiki entirely), There is/was no notice of a minimum caliber. While in several cases BBs and protected cruisers have animated guns which are inactive. Sure, it might be a question about balance as it makes a lot of ships have an overall higher potential damage output. But this is already at close range where even Bofors 40mm guns would be targeting enemy surface targets, and in the game the inaccurate nature and somewhat short range wouldn't be a gamebreaker. It understandable they wouldn't add every single gun like 37mm guns, 47mm Hotchkiss and 5.2cm guns but there is no writen limit and it kind of denies some ships a minor boost to their stats and survival. An example where minimum caliber come into play would be the Tier V BB, Viribus Unitis, Unitis was equiped with nothing shorter than 12x Skoda K10 7cm guns + 3x K16 7cm guns (Ingame she has 4x K16 AA guns, and her sisters had 18x K10) These guns are 66mm in caliber and each projectile weighs 4.5kg fired at a rate of 15rpm. That's a total of 67,5kg ordinance thrown at the enemy pr gun. +BFT For referrance, the 3"/50 throws 88,5kg of ordinance at the same rate. (which is seemingly never noted as a DP gun for some reason) If damage calculation was a linear function, this would leave each HE shell with a potential damage of about 750-800 with a fire chance of 3% and a penetration of 11mm at a range of 3.5km +AFT & SBM1 I see a lot of cases, where the developers have added guns, but they are inactive, my best example being the IJN Ishizuchi. Now, Ishizuchi is nothing more than a paper project in the first place, so creative liberty is allowed BUT. She is equiped with 6x 8cm L/40 Type 3 guns, which are ww1 guns with a high rate of fire. They have also added what looks to be 10x 3" QF 18cwt or 20cwt guns, 2 on each turret. Is this important? eeeeh. But considering the cwt is better than the Type 3 and there are more of them... why the hæll wouldn't they be active? they share about the same rate of fire, though the cwt fires heavier shells, The cwt are L/45 vs L/40, the cwt can fire at a higher velocity or it can fire a heavier shell at lower velocity. All in it's favor both as an AA gun and as a secoundary. All this, would make ships like Viribus Unitis and Ishizuchi look more scary to DDs as they sail close to attack, but on paper it would maybe give 1 point in artillery rating.
  8. So, I've been thinking about the little nerfs accumulating on Kremlin. It's good that it's getting attention, but what if curbing Kremlin was approached in a different way? What if, in addition to the next nerf which lowers the sigma, we raise the model? At the moment, Kremlin's model sits very low in the water at the midsection, and is not in line with most other BBs at this tier. Only Kurfurst is comparable, and even then its higher up than Kremlin. Yama GK Conq Repu Monty Krem and GK from another angle Not perfect screens, but I tried to get them right. You get the idea and you can also view the same in port. Right now, People complain about not being able to punish Kremlin in the side properly. If we raise the model, it should make the citadel and upper armour belt even more accessible, which would be emphasising the weakness of Kremlin to damage from the flanks, like other RU BBs. In this way, the ship keeps what is strong about it, while magnifying it's weaknesses and making it less forgiving to bad plays. It becomes easier to punish. After this and the sigma nerf, we sit on it for a while and see what happens. Though, a concealment nerf to at least 14, maybe 14.1km with full concealment build I would not be opposed to on top of these as well. Thoughts?
  9. siraiaw

    CV Primary Objective

    What should be cv's primary objective in the game please if you have other ideas for what the cv's job should be please write your idea. and please do not say that cvs should be removed from the game, that most likely will not happen at this point. and if you wan't you can also come with suggestions as to how cvs can be change to fit the primary objective you chose
  10. Constructive simple discussion and checklist of the issues wg must / should consider now prioritise to fix, for the good survivability and sustainablility of the game and the good of the playerbase community. Imho following are obvious to consider: i cv re-rework upheaval, ..... i.i Bring back some skill and tactics or go on dumbing down to arcadey pac-man gamestyle. ii balance (ship and now plane classes, ammo types and characteristics eg ifhe, etc.) iii loss of players and lack of new recruits or decline of playerbase population iv ntc aka rb v dockyard vi regional segregation, and separation, bizarre for a modern worldwide MMO. Inability to play with global friends anytime anywhere, unlike most any other game. vii no global server option (nor single global account, as advertised and promised, like any other MMO , eg on steam). viii continually excluding continents, eg especially Africa ix submarines x simplifying so many in game currencies or 'tokens' xi matchmaking ..(?) xii UI improvements and QoL improvements, eg friends list xiii more maps xiv) more modes (?) xv) operations xvi) make great events like hunt for Bismarck, or the Dunkirk campaign permanent, and available to new players xvii) better tutorials xviii) ranked mode(s) xix) clans & clan wars xx) power creep, op / new premiums, modernise tired out dated lines. Please add to the checklist or constructive positive suggestions and comments to encourage improvements and change.
  11. SmokyButtons

    Save Random battle mode

    I have been feeling, and rapidly in last 6 monthe that random battle has more and frustrating and less fun especially in high tier! To the point ijust simply stopped playing, unless there are a special event like Halloween or ranked Sprint! I don't know the fix but, I think a good way be to reduce number of players, maybe to 7? Like the last ranked Sprint? That amazingly fun compared to random? The would as make it easier to a better MM, maybe even a limited skill based one? You fellow Sailor, Smokybuttons
  12. jonahemp_


    Hallo. Ich habe vor paar Minuten ein Gefecht gespielt. Ich habe mit meinem Kolberg der Stufe 3 gekämpft. Gegen mich war ein Spieler mit einem comischen Shiff, hab das zum ersten Mal gesehen. Ich habe mindestens 40-50 direkte Einschläge gemacht - es ist mir nicht gelungen eben irgendwelchen Schaden anzurichten. Aber nach dem Spiel es erwies sich, dass das ein eirgendwelches "Testschiff" war. Wieso denn soll ich gegen offensichtlich unbalancierten Schiffe spielen?! Habt ihr auch sowas gesehn? Oder eher nicht?!
  13. I'm wondering what Wargamings' stance is regarding the current state of the Graf Zeppelin. My own opinion is that her Dive Bombers could use a buff since the AP alpha is the lowest per strike among the Tier 8 CVs on top of having a very RNG heavy drop pattern. Does Wargaming have any information that they could share regarding Graf Zeppelins' performance compared to her peers? If some kind of buff is warranted would it be possible Engine-wise to add HE Bombs to the bomb loadout? A pair of wing-mounted 50KG bombs could make the bombers feel less RNG-based due to more bombs dropped on target.
  14. Hello Dear Team at WOWS, My name is Martin, I am a 36 year old divorced father of one who really enjoys playing World of Warships. I started by playing the German line purely because Bismarck was a ship I have heard. As soon as I unlocked Gneisenau I knew something was terrible wrong, the ships struggled to hit anything past 10km , Bismarck was better due to useful secondaries and better armor/HP pool. Soon i decided to try cruiser gameplay and really liked the Japanese line going as far as Tier 10 Zao. My next step after watching WOWS contributor Flambass, Flamu and Notser was to try the destroyers. So far its the class I like most. I have 56% win rate in Shiratsuyu and 51% in T-61 with destruction ratio of 3.12. Few days ago i decided to finish your "Happy Anniversary" campaign which gave me the T-61, after that i decided to go for the Hall of Fame. As of now I am in the Top 5%, which as you can guess costed me quite few hours to achieve, granted I go to work full time, have to look at kid etc. It is a fact nobody forces me to "grind" and I am not going to complain about it BUT I have a question for your developers - Do you even play the game? Have you tried taking a Tier 6 dd and play against not 1 but 2 CVs. Do you think you will make it out of the spawn with half of your HP? DO you think you can reach the cap? What are you people thinking? Just today I have had at least 5 games with 2 CVs - this is a joke. You are clearly not listening to your clients, how are we dd players suppose to have a "fair" fight? Looking forward to hearing from you, Sincerely Yours, Soon to be ex user.
  15. SamuraiShakaViking

    IJN power creep? .. again

    The IJN is so power creep.. forgotten, ignored again: To make a balanced game, you need balanced nations, as well as ships. Especially as the game evolves dynamically, and 'metas' change. (This neglect ruined wot). We all want future sustainability and survivability for this game. Which entails that it needs to grow and expand, retain it's fun factor, maintain balancing, while also consolidating from regions to globalized worldwide option like other mmo on steam and attracting new playerbase and increasing profitability for r&d and design. The CV rework, the new premiums, especially at tier 9, and recent ranked and clan battles show how veteran ships of the game are neglected, and certain nations given token minor buffs , if any, just to keep up with balanced development and meta memes. Eg the very weak flak on most IJN ships in the now CV dominated games is very evident.. I. Azuma, weakest of all the recent tier 9 battle cruisers.. ijn cruiser flavour is torps. Azuma gets no torps. All other battle cruisers got their nation flavour gimmicks (radar, secondaries, anti air, speed boost, reload boost, etc. Azuma gets no torps, paper armour, and no gimmicks. Why? If azuma was built she would have had torps and radar and 18 inch guns. Ywt, Eg. Georgia even gets a speed boost. Now even Benham, a USA destroyer gets better torps than the ijn... so then Why would anyone buy the azuma as well as or instead of an Alaska or stalingrad or j b??? (a bundle of tier 9s is now in the shop for $300). II. Ibuki is example , it has been so power crept by new tier 9s, it's a joke. Even premiums such as mutsu, kii, kaga (lower tier planes against tier x?) and even icon mikasa are so out of balance with present game. Kii the most expensive tier viii premium , at least gets torps and some flak, .. but still struggles against newer premiums or even tirpitz. III. There are no "brother special captains" for ijn and pan Asia. Why??? Only white males. IV (Is this racial bias, similar to ignoring / sidelining an entire continent, Africa, from this product.). Segregation? V There have been no special ijn arcs or events , even as there is now a second French event arc.. even though the French navy is hardly famous at all... Japan could be the biggest lucrative market for this game, together with pan Asian countries, Korea, Taiwan, india. But if their ships are essentially continuously nerfed and under powered, wg lose the profits and playerbase. Also collaborate more with manga and anime , but include guys anime too. Constructive suggestion: keep all nations balanced, enrich their flavors equally. If u do buff a ship to bring it up to date, with new ships, buff it properly. Since wg claim the game isn't historical simulator, they seem to try make some ships historical, and others op, early 1940s ships against 1945 to 1960 ships. Start a global world wide server, which players can access from different regions including africa to be able to play 24/7/365 (as in some clan wars,) so you have a proper global mmo like any other international mmo on steam. End regional separation when you could have a shared global playerbase. It works well on steam.. Also for collectors and naval players, bring back some legend ships (which may have been op b4, but are now no longer, such as kamikaze variants,) on special offers. Offer the collectors flags, special camps, or event badges etc in the armory.or to absorb "free xp". Why not use already developed operations and campaigns permanently, so that new players , or veterans who missed them, can benefit from hunt for Bismarck, or dunkirk op. Dynamo for example. Why not re use such well developed and designed campaigns, (eg instead of regrinding lines in the NtC?) Space battles and arms race is an awesome game mode. Why not make it available permanently.? Re events, instead of endless new currencies and tokens , make a single currency or token, which players can carry over to future events, if there's nothing they can get, or nothing they want in a particular event. There's so much you wg already have to build on, so much wg has already developed and designed, which can be expanded, that things such as the NYC are so unnecessary and superfluous. Stop the gambling loot crates, especially to skip a new tech tree. It's entirely unfair and discriminatory. Fix matchmaking, especially at tier viii. This also ruined wot. Include your global playerbase in queue ,on a global server option, instead of segregating regions, like any steam mmo. But please give the IJN some TLC and update and modernize the balance of Asia with the dynamics and meta memes of the game. And try remember and embrace the forgotten continent. Africa. They actually do have PCs and consoles, fiber, and 5g is rolling out soon. Several fiber connectivity to the EU including via Cyprus.. same time zone as EU. Why ignore this potential? Make a global worldwide server soon. And grow.
  16. TheNamelessLegend

    Nerf HE and fires.

    Ever since the game has been released from open beta, all I can remember is the huge focus Wargaming has on fires and high explosive. Time and time again I have returned to the game only to meet with continuous, overpowered high explosive spam. Even when I play ships that are supposed to be resistant to high explosive, it is impossible to avoid the damage. And the damage is way too much. And then I see what ships are in testing... More stupid, high rate of fire, high fire chance ships that have too little armour for armour piercing shells to do sufficient damage. Over the years I have seen more and more ships get their citadels lowered or changed in a way to make it impossible to hit, mainly the American battleships. Not to mention the overpowered heal that British ships get! WHY?! ALL BATTLESHIPS SHOULD GET THAT KIND OF HEAL, ESPECIALLY TO COUNTER AGAINST THE DUMB DAMAGE OVER TIME AND HIGH EXPLOSIVE SPAM. The aircraft carrier "rework" (ruin) was a joke. I hope that gets reverted as soon as possible. If Wargaming considers that a success, then I'll consider my life a success. Which neither are.
  17. OdinDarkside

    Radar Rework Idea's

    Hi guys, So, recently, in a game with clan mates after a count in, we were on opposing teams, dd's & mino's, pitted against each other, and at a bit of a stand off with islands between us...... until I popped my radar and caught them off guard, thinking I had smokes. Anyways, after a bit of light hearted insulting and jovial name calling, I proposed an idea for radar, which was well received, so I'll bring it to the forum to discuss, and maybe a dev will see it and pay attention to it's potential for improved game play and to make the game less....... annoying.... So, I proposed that radar should 'pulse' the location of other ships, periodically revealing the location for a second or 2, then go dark for a few more. I also think ranges should be increased with this change. Also, it shouldn't reveal ships out of line of sight, behind islands, it cant do this irl, and shouldn't in game. The impact on game play would be beneficial I think. Involving more dynamic DD play (I play DD's a lot recently). I would appreciate other's thoughts on this. Also, if this has been discussed before in the forum's I apologize forthwith, I just wanted to see the communities reactions and if a dev would support this. Regards, Odes.
  18. VeryHonarbrah

    Paragon System

    Speechless, watch the vid. Upto 10 mins is a break down, afterwards is the QA about said topic (ccs being dumbfounded) Summary you regrind your lines to add three additional power levels you can upgrade up to three times upgrades add things like 10-15% more health, 10% better dispersion you can spent new currency or freeXP to hasten the upgrade EDIT: BB: I: +15% HP II: -10% ellipse size (apparently not dispersion), boost for secondaries III: -10% consumable reload time + +1 on all consumables CA: I: +10% HP -20% rudder shift II: -15% ??? III: -10% consumable reload time, +1 on all consumables DD: I: +10% HP, boost rudder/engine repair II: -10% cooldown torps and guns III: 10% boost on torp damage .
  19. All right. We're all here because we like to fight with these digital ships. More that this, players enjoy Clan Battles, a way to prove their worthiness in team battles, which could be a nice experience. Some players choose big ships, big guns and accept the idea of being spotted (almost) all the time, while some players choose different tactics/ships, strategies. That's ok, as long things are balanced. Personally, I enjoy fighting a skilled and honorable enemy. What I do NOT enjoy - are battles where players make abuse of game's bugs or lack of balance (or both in the same time). I can understand the appearance of a problem in WoW's behavior because it's about programming. What I do NOT understand is this: how you get payed and still do a poor job, when your job is to test ships and think the principles of the game? How hard can it be? Why we, the players, can see it, and you, Wargaming developers and testers... don't? I assume the persons responsible for all the problems we had to face as players/customers, are payed, Right? Let's start with the oldest problem caused by the lack of balance in Random mode, one that everybody knows - one team had 2 or even 3 CV's, while the other team had only 2 CV's, 1, or even NONE. It took many months, if not a year and some, for this to be fixed. Let's continue by touching the destroyers subject. One team had 6 or 5 destroyers, while the other had 4, or 3. Or 3/2 destroyers in one team, NONE in the other. Again, it took a very long time to fix this. All right. Not only we had to play in these conditions for a long time, we also had a horrible lack of balance between the planes attacks (manual drops) and the defense provided by the automatic anti-aircraft guns. For a time there was some balance. Of course, it didn't last. Then there was the Flint, which had a very, extreme short smoke consumable cool down. Basically, Flint was able to pop up smoke after smoke. Then it was the Belfast, capable of HE, smoke and radar, so efficient that it had to be removed from the premium shop (you can read "efficient" as "poorly tested"). And so on, and so on... Coming back to Clan Battles, it seems that someone hasn't done his job (again). Yesterday, our clan had a battle with a clan from NA. Now... our guys play pretty well, generally speaking. We won some battles and we also lost a few. Everything was ok until we met these NA guys. They came in this battle with 6 (SIX) destroyers (4 Harugumo, 2 Shimakaze) and a battleship. Even we had radars and hydroacustics, and we took cover behind islands, all our ships were destroyed in a matter of minutes. Torps were everywhere, Harugumo's were shooting continuously from smoke while Shimakaze's spotted us, not to count the battleship who had no problem picking targets. Why all these happened? We played badly? No, I don't think so. It happened because you simply cannot beat this lack of balance. Because some people in Wargaming are not doing their jobs properly. Let's make something clear. Most problems in this game don't come from the visual designers. The problems are caused by the people who make inefficient tests and which have a vary vague idea about what "balance" is. So, Wargaming, what is to be done? Call it "World of Destroyers" instead of "World of Warships"? For all of us to play with destroyers, or for you to do your job the way you should? Really now, how hard can it be?
  20. I play the game for 2 years, I have given my money too WG. PLZ fix the problems that are NOW on the game. CVs Spotting rewards. DDs RADAR MM The problems are known too every player and are BASIC for a better gameplay.
  21. Hey WG and the Community One potential balance fix for the current CV meta could be: Limit number of carriers per game to maximum 1 per team. They are a nice touch in the game. By limiting them to max 1 per game the overall experience would rise. It would mean more games will include a carrier and when they do it will be better balanced for both teams. Introduce a minimum time cool-down between carrier strikes from active squadron. Around up to 25 seconds. This would serve as an equivalent to reload of guns on battleships and help the overall feeling when you attack or are under attack form a carrier. Preferably this cool-down would start low at maybe 15 seconds and rise with the tiers to about 25 seconds at tier 10. This would allow different strategies for both attacking and defending parties; both on evading damage and using consumables with a little breather to maneuver. This could also come with a new consumable for higher tier carriers to allow them to shorten this cool-down momentarily - think french reload booster. These are just some thoughts me and my clan mates had and I expect and hope to see the communities thoughts around such changes, possible flaws and improvements and of course other ideas. Thank you
  22. i suggested before using a captin skill to level out the tiering problems in the mm before. but reading the forums today, i get the impression that having the mm spread actively modify ship stats at the start of a match would help a lot of gameplay balance problems. such as rudder, accelleration, sigma, rof and aa. possibly citadel damage(recieved) modifiers for ships that stand out a lot for cv this could be reflected in replenishment times, aiming time and plane armour. im not saying try and perfectly level, just have enough of a nudge for viability in the balancing. providing another tool to fix game balance and problems from player distribution across tiers.
  23. Ronchabale

    Press F to save your planes

    This needs to be sorted, finally bringing down some of the planes and the squad vanishes (klingon cloaking device perk )
  24. Alelos


    Me the past two days trying to have perfect drops etc. Me after this video just spamming torps everywhere ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... If you guys having issues with your aim in the game( Conqueror braindead gameplay farming dmg etc.) I Recommend you a Haku.