Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'Feedback'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • 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

Calendars

  • Community Calendar
  • This Day in History

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Twitter


Location


Interests

Found 71 results

  1. 1MajorKoenig

    SUBMARINES — Feedback Poll

    Hey, Reading the Subs Feedback thread I wondered how WG wants to use this feedback — tons of posts but really hard to digest. Therefore I would like to create a poll thread — I start with a couple of feedbacks — suggestions and add to a poll if additional Suggestions + Feedback arise in the discussion. Please leave a vote on the ones you support! Plus: I try to further suggestions out of the discussion —————————————————————————— Here — as a starting point my feedback from the general thread: 1) have three distinct depths with different mechanics attached to them:  - surfaced (recharge batteries, Concealment on par with DDs, full spotting, torping, manual deck gun, AA) - periscope depth (consume battery, better Concealment, reduced Spotting, torping, recharge battery only if boat has a snorkel-I.e. T8+10 boats?) - submerged (Consume battery, no own spotting, make use of spotting from friendlies, reduces speed, reduced damage) - Crash dive depth Consumable (no spotting from own boat or friendlies unless own hydro Consumable, reduced damage, consumes battery)  2) battery only rechargeable in the surface or - if you have it - via snorkel. Make the subs surface after a while 3) two types of Torpedos: a slower acoustic one as today just a little less powerful AND a straight runner for manual aiming with better stats (speed + range) 4) add manual deck gun for the lulz and give it the 1/4 pen rule 5) add AA (even if it’s not powerful) 6) add some indicator for CVs to see how deep a sub is currently
  2. I've got 2 New Zealand clan mates who are unable to load the game or access the website.. basically same problems we all experienced yesterday. Anyone have any ideas howwe can get them playing again? I have submitted a ticket on their behalf but Im hoping by posting it on forum we can get this resolved quickly.
  3. Riche_heu_Lieux

    Quelques idées d'améliorations !

    Salut à tous Je viens vers vous car il y a en ce moment quelques trucs qui m'embêtent en jeu en ce moment. Là hier j'ai eu le problème que j'évoquais dans ma vidéo qui est le changement de mode de jeu non sollicité quand tu invites quelqu'un en batailles classées. Du coup hier moi et @LeAzur sommes partis en FFA au lieu de partir en classées ! Bien sûr nous sommes tombés bottom tier sur le fameux mode épicentre de la "carte îles de glace". Il faut le souligner il n'y avait pas cette horreur de tempête de glace au milieu de la carte! par contre voici les résultats : Voilà tout ça pour dire qu'Épicentre est un mode de jeu super équilibré . Voici donc une petite liste d'améliorations que j'ai encore trouvé depuis ma vidéo : pouvoir récupérer ses 3 conteneurs à gagner en faisant de l'xp en même temps pouvoir changer entre tous les consommables premium/base en 1 clic ! mettre des améliorations légendaires sur les nouveaux navires T10 ? Harugumo, Daring, Kremlin, Kléber ? En plus de cela je vais remettre la liste des améliorations de ma vidéo comme ça WG ne pourra pas dire qu'ils n'ont pas vu ma vidéo: De nouvelles opérations permanentes et en tier 10 sur des batailles historiques de la WW2 Un autre mode de jeu PvP permanent à côté du FFA comme Arm Race Un système de tri des camouflages par bonus, un peu comme les navires Un bouton pour démonter tous les pavillons en un clic Le fait de pouvoir faire des kits de pavillon (kit croiseur, destroyer, farm de crédits, d'expérience) Mettre le verrouillage des division de clan en "ouvert" par défaut Harmoniser les consommables pour pas avoir d’aberration du type République-Bourgogne, au moins entre chaque classe Sélection manuelle de la tourelle pour faire feu Penser à réutiliser le système des campagnes ! Les directives c'est marrant mais c'est bien quand ça change Voilà ce serait dommage que WG devienne une de ces firmes du JV qui se reposent à 200% sur les mods pour pas bosser, oh wait c'est déjà le cas Ah aussi j'ai pas compris comment le nouveau système de son a pu sortir comme ça. C'est très désagréable, on dirait qu'aucun mélange de volume n'a été prévu. World of Warships est un jeu super de base. Mais franchement ça fait 10 mois qu'on a l'impression que WG fait n'importe quoi alors PAR PITIÉ ÉCOUTEZ LES JOUEURS.
  4. Hallo World of Warships-Team. Mit den letzten Updates und veröffentlichten Premiumschiffen (insbesondere Yudachi, Ark Royal) kam mir vermehrt ein Wunsch und Gedanke. Ich wünsche mir, ab und zu neue Premiumschiffe für einen kurzen Zeitraum oder eine begrenzte Anzahl Gefechte testen zu können. So ähnlich wie in World of Tanks. Das Freischalten könnte entweder über einen Testcode oder über einen einfachen Auftrag im Spiel stattfinden. So hätte man die Möglichkeit einige Premiumschiffe unter "realen" Bedingungen, also auf dem Live-Server zu testen (und nicht nur auf dem Testserver - wenn überhaupt) und dann besser zu entscheiden, ob man sich das eine oder andere vielleicht kauft. Ich hoffe, dass sich das Spiel weiterhin so gut entwickelt wie bisher. Mit freundlichen Grüßen pk_e11
  5. I've been using the Wargaming wiki recently, I've tried with two different browsers. These function just doesn't work. I can't find a wiki feedback page, so I've posted here. Please fix
  6. I have suggestion how WG can avoid pissing of the players of there games! Do in game survey!!! Just everytime you have an idea on a big game change, do popup for players when they login, Where they can rate the idear from 1 to 10, 1 being horrible and 10 being fantastic, And let them give feedback, and link to a discussion thread on forum! Run this for a month, and take the feedback to heart, and have a happy players You save manpower and money, not working on things, that break the community and make players leave the game You can even make a monthly survey what players most what you focused! A very concerned Sailor Smokybutton
  7. Randathamane

    So, The carrier rework then...

    Here is a simple poll for the community regarding the aircraft carrier rework. Simple question, is it better now or has it been broken?
  8. Hallo Wargamin und Community ... Folgendes Feedback... Zwei Eigenschaften die mich schon etwas stören was die Sichtung im Spiel angeht. 1. Das man man Schiffe durch Inseln / Berge markieren und sehen kann die eigentlich nur durch andere Mitspieler ihrem Sichtwinkel gesehen werden können, da man ja selbst nicht über den Berg sehen kann. Außer die Inseln / Berge sind niedriger wo man darüber sehen und Schießen kann und man befindet sich in dessen Bereich "Erkennbarkeit zu Wasser / Luft". > Hier sieht man es mal als Beispiel. Auf 23,7 km Sicht auf Schiff. Bei Regen/Sturm wird die Sicht auch minimiert, wie man es auch im Sichtkegel auf der Mini Map sehen kann. So könnte es auch bei Inseln / Bergen gemacht werden. 2. Das wenn man Schiffe erkennt und entdeckt oder wurde, das dann andere Schiffe auch aufschalten und beschießen können obwohl diese gar nicht in dessen dem Bereich "Erkennbarkeit zu Wasser / Luft" sind sondern nur durch Flugzeuge oder andere Schiffe die im Bereich "Erkennbarkeit zu Wasser / Luft" sich aufhalten. zu 1. und 2. So wie es zur Zeit ist, ist es als Zerstörer oder Kreuzer schwer sich etwas bedeckt zu halten und nicht gleich von 3-4 Schiffen gleichzeitig beschossen und zerstört zu werden. Was ich Sagen möchte ist das es für solche Ziele nur Koordinaten sind und genau so dargestellt werden sollte wie es unter Markierung "letzter bekannte Position" gehandhabt wird und nicht in der Gameplay Sicht zusehen sollte sondern nur über die Map und Mini Map. * Das die Schiffe und vor allem Flugzeuge und Zerstören Schiffe aufklären, ist so alles in Ordnung und so soll es auch sein. Aber dann auch nur für diejenigen die sich in dessen Bereich "Erkennbarkeit zu Wasser / Luft" aufhalten. So wie es zur zeit ist, ist es als Zerstörer oder Kreuzer schwer sich etwas bedeckt zu halten und nicht gleich von 3-4 Schiffen gleichzeitig beschossen und zerstört zu werden. Mein Änderungsvorschlag: Wenn ein Schiff aufgeklärt wurde so sollte es für diejenigen die sich in dessen im Bereich "Erkennbarkeit zu Wasser / Luft" aufhalten können diesen auch im Gameplay Sichtbereich Sehen, Markieren und Beschießen wie bisher, außer es sind Berge usw. dazwischen, alle anderen außerhalb des Bereichs sehen das aufgeklärte Schiff nur in der Mini Map bzw. Map und können es nur darüber bekämpfen. Wenn also solche Aufklärung und Sichtungen nur durch Mini Map zu sehen sind kann man auch darauf schießen in dem man auf der Mini Map zielt oder eventuell auf der Map. Auf der Mini Map hat man ja jetzt schon eine Zielrichtung und ein kleinen Kreis wo man ca. hin Zielt, dass kann man so nutzen um auf letzte aktuelle Koordinate zu schießen! Sozusagen wäre es ein art mini Game für Zielen außerhalb vom Erkennbarkeit Bereich. Die Einstellung: Markierung "letzte bekannte Position" muss schon aktiviert sein bzw. fest voreingestellt sein. > So sollte es aussehen... In der Gameplay Sicht sieht man den Zerstörer auf ca.12 km nicht und auf der Mini Map sieht man seine Markierung "letzte bekannte Position" Momentan ist es ja so, kurz vorher hatte ich den Zerstören noch Sehen, Markieren und Beschießen können weil eine eigene Bomberstaffel ihn gesichtet hatte. > Man beacht die Mini Map... Die Sicht und der Sichtkegel schaut man in die Richtung des Zerstörers, mit dem Kreis Zielt man auf die "letzte bekannte Position", da keine eigenen Schiffe oder Flugzeuge ihn Sichten können bleibt er weiß und man zielt ungenauer. Wenn sich jetzt aber ein eigene Schiffe oder Flugzeuge in dessen erkennbaren Bereich aufhalten und ihn sichten so sollte er dann nur auf der Map rot und beweglich zu sehen sein und man dann in der Mini Map das Ziel verfolgen und beschießen. Also eine Art zielen durch Koordinaten, wie es nun mal auch in Wirklichkeit abläuft! Und ja ich weiß es ist nur ein Spiel und da ist es nicht wie in Wirklichkeit, aber warum sind die Schiffe usw. alles so Original gehalten und man fährt da ja nicht mit einer Gießkanne rum!? Ich hoffe ich konnte mein anliegen etwas rüberbringen. Persönlich geht sowas natürlich besser...
  9. "Much Better Than Any Anime Mod Out There, Satisfaction Guaranteed Or Your Internets Back" By WhiskeyWolf WHAT'S THIS MOD ABOUT? Basically, this modification for World of Warships aims to convert as much as possible the UI and text descriptions of the game, in order to make WoWs photorealistic (I've used real photos in high resolution of the WW2 conflict) and historically correct. Without forget to mention the documentary like flavour I've given to the art style of WoWs. FOR WHAT KIND OF PLAYER IS THIS MOD FOR? This mod aims to compel whoever loves the naval history behind World of Warships. Poeple that would love to see realistic pictures of their favorite warships implemented in the game client. People with much knowledge regarding the naval battles exploded inside the atlantic, mediterranean and pacific theatres. "If this was any more realistic you would have Japanese Kamikaze flying out of your monitor." By WhiskeyWolf WHO IS WORKING ON THIS PROJECT? Sys7ema (Ex. Founder of Team 20.3cm and Rising Sun), one of the very first modders during the Alpha of the game, also known in the global WoWs community for his great Kantai Collection modifications. Examples of his past works: WHO IS ADVISING THIS PROJECT? Chamorro, probably one of the most knowledgeable persons and contributors that Tsukotaku ever met, especially in this community. Wihtout his help and information, this project wouldn't be able to take off. WHAT'S THE STATUS OF THIS MOD? I've covered only 5% of the total GUI and 3% of the text descriptions as per 27/11/17, with much more to come during the following weeks! The results are incredible already: WHERE IS THE DOWNLOAD? Since the mod is in very early stage of delevopement the download is NOT AVAILABLE yet. I need first to rebalance the contrast of certain in-battles elements to make it actually playable by everyone in grayscale tones. Once this is done, I'll submit everything to WG in order to publish a working version with the lastest build of the game. This topic is just a showcase of the work that me and Chamorro are doing, to let know the community that such project is happening. HOW CAN YOU HELP US? Simple! By providing us with feedbacks and comments! What's better than having you, the users (The final target of this mod), express your thoughts about this "Photorealistic WW2 Total UI Conversion"? "MAN UP!" By WhiskeyWolf
  10. Elias_D

    Is there a backup plan ?

    Can you please inform us if there is a backup plan if all the negative feedback keeps growing. You will admit the mistake and bring us back the game we loved or you are going to ignore everyone and try to find new users ? Can you handle the stop on cash flow from old dedicated players ? So far less than a 10 % likes the changes and this anyone can see in poll here in comments here and in YouTube in twich lives also etc so I am very curious to know if there is a backup plan at all (the more time it takes you to respond the worst will become be sure about this).
  11. Poll up above: What are your reactions to the update? (Quick disclaimer: I am not happy with the update and this is my reaction to it. I hope the community shares their point of view on it) To start off: I decided to write down everything I think is wrong with the CV rework.... Again. WG devs turned a blind eye on the PTS feedback to an extent and even though the update was delayed, it clearly was not enough. As such, the game suffered. Here are my thoughts on what is driving the WoWs community into a more upset state than before: 1) IJN 25mm AA short range?!? Wargaming, why did you nerf a nation with already bad AA to begin with? The 25mm mid-range was a saving grace for many IJN ships, including almost all DDs and the Yamato (Compare it to any other BB of the same tier and you had only 75% or less of their AA. At the same time there was no introduction of the dual-purpose nature of their 155mm and 203mm guns (Dubious nature, but it would have helped). Overall, this means that IJN vessels are unable to stand up to the increased amounts of aircraft carriers effectively. All this while the Chicago Piano stays as mid-range 2) Skill changes Okay, this is a complex topic and I hate to break it: The older skills were far more useful than the new ones. AFT and BFT have their necessity increased, however, they are worse than before A 10% increase to the entire AA potency for 3 points was a skill worth taking even without secondary guns and AFT with the 20% range increase made team AA play a viable tactic. While this denied CVs access to a ship up until a point, now with infinite planes (even with those being limited by spawning times) will win as the game progresses and AA mounts are destroyed. All in all, less potent AA skills at a time where you will find far more aircraft in the air Concealment expert change made the game campier and along with the CV spotting remaining practically what it was. Now you are far less likely to engage in sneaking into capture points as cruisers and are absolutely unable to retreat and stealth up if you have pushed as a BB and are forced to retreat. Along with the change to the firing penalty (discussed later) being agressive is harder and in certain situations almost impossible. I get that it was weird when an Iowa out-spotted your Donskoi, but this should have been given more thought than it did. Possibly increasing concealment of the ships affected when the update dropped, or to bake the skill in, play around with the values and heavily discussing the change. It definitely should not have been baked into an already huge update for the game. Definitely an... unfortunately handled change. As for the CV skills and the additions to skills to help CVs, I can not speak on those due to their obviosly new nature. 3) AA vs CVs: Not ballanced As it stands with the current patch the AA is not ballanced. While WG said this would happen it is definitely important enough to warrant its own part of the discussion. With the changes to how different AA calibers are percieved and skill changes it may not come as a surprise that at points AA feels lackluster in certain situations. The sectors are a good idea, however there needs to be much refining and ballancing to get it right, particularly with the sectors themselves. A CV will still sink you no matter the ship, it is just a matter of time and how many squadrons he is willing to send at you. 4) Concealment penalty after firing change As was the consent of the majority of the community on a post made by Spithas on the EU server and by Ducky_Shot on the NA server , the old mechanic was far more popular with the playerbase. The new mechanic makes no sense since if you break LoS how can the enemy spotter know your exact position and direction after you clear the island? Here I am offering an option for WG to consider: Bake in the Concealment expert and do something with the lenght of being spotted (-5 sec on the bloom?) But listen to the community and give us the pre-8.0 mechanic! Anyways, Warships has always been a game I liked, but now I am seriously considering a long break before WG puts out all of the wildfires raging because of 8.0 The biggest question is: What do you think about 8.0 in general? Tell me down below and please participate in the poll posted with this thread. My hope is that wargaming will listen and do something in the very near future to help the game get back up.
  12. …..Erm no. After my earlier issues with the rework and specifically the AA-CV interaction (or lack of it) I wanted to see if things were any better. I mainly went out in the Montana, Worcester and Midway to see what had changed from Round 1 to Round 2. I didn't go in any other ships - just the ones I'd previously used a fair bit in the different test phases. As a rule, I generally aimed to play as aggressively and gung-ho as possible in the CV - gunning for enemy AA cruisers and AA-strong BBs like the Republique at every opportunity. On the other hand, I would play very cautiously and passively in the surface ships - sticking close to friendly AA where possible, throwing the ship around as much as I could to throw off a CV attack's aim, etc. Here's what I've found. SURFACE SHIP EXPERIENCE... oh dear 1) Long-mid AA is stronger....IF it hits. I definitely knocked down around a dozen planes per match in the Worc and Montana - which is about four/five times more than the first PTS. However the basic issue remains. We run into a core problem with the rework AA - you can just drive around it. It really is as simple as it sounds. Anyone stupid enough to fly headfirst into flak clouds deserves to lose planes. Everyone else, just fly around it and immediately you negate 90% of the damage output of an enemy ship's AA defence suite. I noticed this both as a surface ship and as a CV player trying to attack said surface ship. 2) DFAA STILL doesn't seem to do anything? Not sure if it's a bug or just a simple lack of feedback - but my Worcester's AA seemed no different with DFAA engaged as it was without. I mean it was useless before and it's much the same now - so I suppose at least it hasn't gotten worse... The CV player gets no inkling that his/her planes are being hit any harder than usual by DFAA - it doesn't seem too different whichever side you're playing on. 3) Sector mechanic is pointless due to the speed planes move and the fact that most attacking flights will strike you and fly OVER your ship to the other (less defended) side. I suggest replacing the sector command with something more useful - like the option to play mournful music (Titanic theme for example) as your AA cruiser gets wrecked by planes. Other alternatives are available. On a serious note - it's a gimmick that doesn't really offer any noticeable benefit to you as the defending player - on a larger ship it just makes sense to ignore the thing entirely and keep all AA equally useless on both sides of the ship. 4) 2 v 2 CV games are pure hell. I don't really need to elaborate - suffice to say that your entire game feels like it is spent running away from planes. 3 v 3 CVs were not a pleasure I experienced - but I can't imagine it would be any more fun. CV EXPERIENCE...aka Farming Simulator 1) Carrier play remains the most mind-numbingly repetitive rinse-and-repeat process going. Do you get nice big damage numbers for little effort? Yes. Is it hard to do so? No. The purpose of a rework CV is to farm damage in ludicrous quantities - that's it. There really isn't much more to it than that - since countering a CV is now close to impossible and the option of supporting actions to help your team are non-existent. 2) Planes recycle quick enough to always have striking power ready. Losing planes still has no downsides - besides perhaps having to occasionally press a different button when it came to lobbing out another strike squadron. Bearing in mind I was sometimes being a berk on purpose and losing planes by yolo-ing AA cruisers - I NEVER found my Midway unable to form a full attack flight. I always seemed to have a plentiful supply of rocket planes (see below). So the stronger, effective AA (which it isn't if you drive around it) still has no real bite to your strike ability as the game plays out. 3) USN rockets really are a whole new level of idiocy. They seem even stronger now? With a flight of Bearcats and the ability to aim - you can pretty much tackle anything. DDs? Sprinkle HVARs on the poor sods and knock out modules aplenty. 3000 damage per attack run is perfectly achievable on an actively dodging DD-sized target. Hammer the superstructures of Cruisers and BBs - you get the added bonus of more damage, a few fires here and there combined with AA modules being decimated on top of that. I did 100K+ using just HVARs in most games. 4) Fighters are really, really, really, pointless. No change from PTS Round 1 - however this time I tried using them defensively over friendly ships to try and 'catch' incoming enemy air. In reality they are just too slow and dim-witted to attack enemy squadrons BEFORE they've dropped all of their ordnance on their target. Most enemy CV players kind of just flew around them anyway and I avoided most enemy fighter groups myself. We've got to the point where the opposing CV players can just flat-out ignore each other and go for surface ships all game. 5) AA is still no deterrence. As a CV player - you now have no targets that you cannot take down. AA Cruisers are no more capable than other cruisers - their reliance on long-range flak (of the 'drive around it' variety) is ironically their weakness. DDs can't do anything. USN BBs make lots of flak but fly beyond that and you don't really find yourself losing much HP. You really do have no incentive to plan your attack and select your targets in the way that an RTS CV has to now. -TLDR- So my conclusions are as follows - the CV rework is possibly the worst change to this game since it left Beta. It appears that every change up to this point from the various test phases to the most recent patch on PTS is just window dressing. The problems are everything to with the CORE of the rework - not just a few damage numbers tweaking up or down. I appreciate WG want to make the CV class more accessible, more fun and likely get more people playing it. However I think they've got it wrong. The rework will be unique in that it will antagonise everybody, whatever you currently enjoy sailing around in. CV players who currently know their craft will be treated to this new point-and-click adventure game without depth, strategy or finesse. Just fly around and bomb everything - nothing is going to fight back... not even the opposing CV can do anything to you. New players are likely to lose the will to live after a few hundred games grinding the new CVs - it will probably be more enthralling to visit the Dentist and have a few teeth extracted with some mole-grips. Surface ship players will basically enjoy being targets all game, every game. The CV will be the most powerful unit on anyone's team - everything else just serves to be rocketed/bombed/torped/immolated/flooded by the opposing CV(s). Because that sounds incredibly fun and entertaining doesn't it? If that's the 'vision' that WG have for WOWS - I'm out of here.* *I don't often post on this forum but the rework was enough of an issue to make me want to. This will be my last post on the subject, since I feel that this is all going to hit the live server whatever the player feedback tells them to the contrary. Now if you don't mind, I'm going to enjoy my last week or two of WOWS before 0.8.0 - I think I need to find another game to scratch that 'drive big stuff and make pretty explosions' itch in the meantime...
  13. W związku z kolejną "aferą" na forum przedstawmy @WG_Lumberjack feedback odnośnie naszej reakcji na przeniesienie tematu o przeciekach do działu off-topic. Ankieta zakończy się 1.01.19 o godzinie 00.01. Liczę na odzew społeczności w sprawie jednego z najpopularniejszych i w mojej opinii jednego z najwartościowszych tematów tego forum. Pozdrawiam
  14. Hello, as one of the people who was quite vocal on this forum regarding the need for CV reworks for years I feel the need to write something regarding todays stream. First things first What I find important during the stream was that WG focused their presentation on showcasing the core gameplay loop. Plenty of mechanics, quirks and most importantly statistics are not there. My feedback similarly will be limited to this core loop. Rest of the elements like stats or specific mechanics will be in general ignored. So lets start. The Core As of this moment, WG decided to deemphasize the strategic layer of the CV gameplay and focus almost all player attention on the screen. For the purpose of the gameplay we have one very fast and nimble unit that can perform offensive action couple of time before reseting itself to the starting position on the carrier. Attacks are performed by entering "attack mode" in which aiming indicator is shown. Attack mode is limited by time. Early during the attack mode time, the accuracy of a drop is low. With time it increases. Aiming and abillity to predict movement stays the same as it is right now, as the only thing changed is the controls and camera point of view. Principles themselves stay the same. This is very promissing concept for a core. As of this moment the best thing and feeling carriers have is the mindgames between target and cv skipper. Considering that aiming principles stayed the same, this feeling of predicting enemy movement is safe. This concept also has proper tension flow and can be expanded further. The Flow Tension flow is just emotional state of the player during every step of the game flow. For almost all of the media it can be boiled down to, Start high Slow down Increase tension above initial point, Climax and slow down below earlier slow down. So in general you want to have good mixup of slowing down and building up tension for the climax to feel good. Slowing down emphasises the highs and other way around. With that in mind lets have a look at the flow of the core on the very micro level. Lets focus on just the attack. So we have target and we fly towards it. One of the big elements in the concept is fact that operating plane is manual and you have to press button to enter time limited attack mode. This pressing attack mode button is your initial increase of tension. You commit yourself to something. It is very short moment, but after clicking it you are engaged. The domino started. Planes fly down for torpedo bombers/fly up for dive bombers. You observe initial animation which is a typical slowdown. You have no big control as of this moment and initial spike of decision making mellows down. Tension rises through the dakadakadaka all around you. Considering you also have abillity to minimize your damage by dodging you are kept on your toes while you approach to the source of bad dakadaka. Here visual aspect is really important as you want for the player to feel the excitment of diving into a gunfire. This here is a fantasy those CVs want to fulfill. The tension rises way above initial decision making. Then you press a drop button and for the DBs and Short torpedo runs you get your reward. Planes fly away and tension resets only for the circle to restart. For long TB drops the tension drops down after attack starts, but it isn't supposed to be end. You observe planes flying back and going high in the air increasing feeling of safety. Then you observer your torps swimming in water. If your prediction was correct, or wasn't. Then you have your long drop TB climax on hit. This is very good loop if properly supported visually. Additionally it is important that this concept focuses on this loop, as even with one squadron you will experience this loop fully for at least couple of times, before your planes will have to reload. This is much better than right now in which game is focused on few attacks long time inbetween each other with high cost of failure. Proposed concept is focusing on many attack with short times inbetween each other with low cost of failure (no deplane). My only concern with it is that for Long Drops people might miss the buildup of the torps swimming in water and hitting the target, because they will be too focused on their own survival. After attack you kind of want to run away and not marvel at your drop. Rockets themselves also did not look particularly exciting, they flew flat and their hits just didn't have that oomf. In general though this section is the longest because damn... This flow is fine as f.ck The Strategy The AA The Fantasy As we discussed in the earlier sections the fantasy that WG tries to fulfill here is closer to the one of the pilot. I just want to say that I feel this is kind of sad. Old CV players started game because they were in love with the ships themselves and the strategic presence they commanded. Old guy sitting with a map trying to make sense out of the all the intel he has to make a good decision. Decisions that will bear fruits after quite a while. While I can agree that this concept of rework is good and proper, there is some dichotomy here. Fans of the airplanes have better games to anwser their needs and I do not think there is many CV players that wanted to see this particular fantasy. As a result I do not believe many people will love the class even though more people will like it in general. The Potential Edit. The Fighters Edit2. The Ideas for developers The Reaction of mine In general I must commend WG dev for actually doing some proper work. Earlier work of WG on the class was straight up embarassing and many of the class problems were selfinflicted. This one at least looks like properly thought up. I find it funny that idea of playing from the point of view of planes is something I actually already was playing around in games with bots way back. You can try doing it on your own, the camera is garbage and you fight with everything just to stay in that view, but if I was trying to do it on my own years back it means that there is some inherit curiousity in this approach. The big draws to this idea really is the visual aspect (so something WG can deliver). I do have a lot of the concerns regarding specific things like, if I want to play my carrier aggresively I need a good quick way to control it in a situation when it is in danger. The tactical map is absolutely not good enough and never will be good enough! So unless WG wants for people to play very defensively with their carrier, this has to be adresssed. In general though, just because of how I like the main flow of the core loop. I will play this, I will come back to the game to try it. It looks proper, not something I will love, but concept of the fast response support attacker that has to have amazing map awarness. Might be fun, but I just kind of wished they went with the old guy with a map fantasy, the deep strategy layer. Looks fun though tldr; What I most wanted to talk about is the flow of the new concept in the flow section. So in general to analyse why I think this type of gameplay should be universaly liked. The other big part is that when you analyse the core of the presentation you see that they try to appease pilot fantasy with it and this creates dichotomy with the carrier fantasy those ships supposed to fulfill. That is why they will not be loved and by some they will be hated as it is betreyal of the concept.
  15. Duncan_OConner

    Zu wenig Kreditpunkte

    Hallo zusammen, Ich mag dieses Spiel sehr und bis zum Freischalten meines ersten Tier 9 BB vorgedrungen. Momentan falle ich aber in ein Motivationsloch da ich bei meinem derzeitigen Spielstil noch 3 Monate brauchen werde um mein freigeschaltetes Schiff kaufen und ausrüsten zu können. Es fehlt an Kreditpunkten, trotz Premiumaccount. Ich verstehe den Sinn dieser Limitation nicht und bin kurz davor das Spiel trotz Premiumaccount aufzugeben, da ich mir niemals ein Tier X Schiff kaufen können werde. Und da man zu 90% in Tier 10 Spielen unterwegs ist, ist das keine Option für mehrere Monate. Schade um dieses sonst sehr schöne Spiel. Viele Grüße
  16. majogl

    Normandie sucks

    I hate this ship. The accuracy sucks. I get it, it has to if the ship has 12 guns. But when I hit a colorado, broadside, point blank with 9 shells, I expect to do at least 20 k damage and at least one citadel. But NO. I get 6 overpens and 3 shatters. Did noone test these ships WG?! Fix this ASAP!
  17. Commander_Cornflakes

    Dark Theme of the Forum

    Hi guys, I'm using the Dark theme for this forum and there are sites where it has contrast problems making texts unreadable. -> background has nearly the same color as text Like here: And how it looks after marking the text: Please make it readable again Obligatory WG-staff ping: @MrConway
  18. Hello everyone. Now the bulk of King of the Sea V is done, it is time to start gathering feedback. We have this questionnaire for you to fill out (if you want) we are trying to get both the viewer and player opinions, so we can optimize in the future. So if you tuned in to a few matches, please do leave your opinion! https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1SBAAL7icjI6zoZUCmtLvQemVy-OQpFpLgZdUCUFw1b4/edit?usp=drive_web Just take 5 minutes to fill it out, it helps a great deal. Thanks in advance The KotS Admin Team
  19. dCK_Ad_Hominem

    So the Mahan. ...

    Hi guys. First off yes, I did use the search function, but most threads on this topic are at least six months old. Given the recent changes I thought a new one would be warranted. I recently unlocked the Mahan and am having a hard time making her work. Now I'm not just straight out saying she was bad, but her combination of low speed, lack of agility, slow torps, lazy gun arcs and lack of concealment are really difficult for me to get used to. Smoke firing only works if you have another guy spotting your target and attracts torps. Torping from stealth can be done, but is hindered by the torp range and speed, and also by the likely presence of enemy dds that will outspot you (by 1.5km in the worst case). Running is difficult due to its clumsy movement, fighting a gun fight at range disadvantages me. I would argue I know how to play the class, in fact i enjoyed the Clemson, Nicholas and Farragut a lot. So..... What am I doing wrong? And how can I be more useful in her?
  20. Quick few words of introduction. People know me here by nick Ishiro. I played CVs since beta, I was ST and I managed to trick quite a few polish players into believing that I am their best carrier. Hillarious I know. I have spent a lot of time thinking about this class and all little issues that are related to it and I consider myself expert in this topic. Today I want to talk about very worrying change that showed up on the PTS. The removal of manual drop on tier IV and V. I rarely write topics and anyone who read any of my topics will know that it will be the long one. So be prepared.Breaking down Manual Drop as a mechanic Current state of low tier My Frustration with WG What I consider most insulting is that current Langley form with her 1/1/1 setup was introduced with speed normalization. During that patch all low tier ships received speed buff it its planes. This has given them significant power spike and it was done without lowering their alpha on torps. I was giving WG feedback that this is very problematic. Both changes are designed to appeal to seal clubbing players and not ones that are learning game. This combined with fact that WG consistently were making higher tier less appealing to players resulted in current situation. WG created this problem. I can not stress hard enough fact that almost all CV players were telling WG that this will be a problem. I myself called Langley, new Midway. Changes were done with disregard of the new players and ignoring opinions of most experienced playerbase. New player experience tier by tier WG solution So now that we have all the information. Let’s dive into WG solution to the problem. Official reasoning is that removal of manual drop is to help new players learn and to discourage seal clubbing. The result will be as expected, but here is important thing. It does not address core of the issue. It isn’t even close. Me writing this long topic and explaining how manual and CVs at low tier work is to present to you dear reader from where the issue came. So you can understand problem itself. Solution proposed will actually put extreme strain of the learning curve on tier VI. It ignore the causes and it "solves" problem by removing key gameplay element. Element which while easy in execution requires quite some time to feel comfortable. Manual drop challenges come in three different forms and it is essential for players to have a lot of practice with it as it isn’t something you can just do after explaining and it isn't something you can progress out of from auto drop. Now truth about carriers is that manual drop is not be all end all. It was when to perform well you had to do “Perfect drop” with a perfect activation near broadside. Right now it isn’t, right now majority of best players are great because they understand fleet movement. Best players don’t have to have perfect accuracy and hit 4/4 IJN torps. Most often 2 will suffice, but their two torps will do much more for their team that avg player 4 torps hit. Saying that… You need to feel comfortable with manual drop, it’s basic, it’s easy when you get it. It is really important to feel ok with your planes and drops before you can think about bigger picture. The longer players are taking to understand manual drop, the longer it will take for them to understand bigger picture. Because manual drop is BASIC part of gameplay loop, leaving it out of tier IV and V just doesn’t make any sense, because when those player will be on tier VII and VIII on which you are supposed to start thinking about grand strategy, you are stuck with thinking about how to perform most basic thing. Most fun aspect of CVs is prediction challenge during manual drop. It is fun to get great drop because you understand other person intentions. Manual drop is essential for CV cpt to feel that they improve, to feel that their skill goes up. There is nothing better that hitting that sweet spot after trying it thousand times. I myself often use Long Drops and they are very satisfying. The core of the enjoyment of this gameplay loop lies here… hiding it from new players is really quite strange. I undestand that there are other "fun" parts of carrier gameplay loop, but let's be honest... they are even less developted and highlighted than manual drop. WG straight up is taking most interesting aspect of their class from design perspective and they use issue they themselves created as an excuse to limit it. WG solution will do what they want, but it's the perfect example of bad game design. Trying to hide issues instead of resolving them. Final Words Huh... Anyway that's all from me. I hope some of you will look at this issue and at manual drop in a new light. Also at new player struggle and how we as a playerbase should fight for WG to really address the problems this game has. Thank you for reading ^^. Also... obligatory anime picture
  21. QuickAndDirtyOne

    Eure alternativen Ideen zum RNG

    Hallo... Vorweg: Das hier ist mein Erster Beitrag. Bitte tötet mich nicht wenn ich irgendwelche Regeln verletzte die ich mir nicht durchgelesen habe. Ich gehe von der Prämisse aus, dass eine Abhängigkeit vom Zufall in Player vs Player Situationen die Unterschiede in der Geschicklichkeit verschwimmen lässt. Diese Unschärfe sorgt dafür das der Ausgang des Spiels oft als Glück oder Pech empfunden wird und nicht als Ergebnis eines Kräftemessens. Der Wettbewerbs-Charakter des Spiels wird meiner Meinung nach durch RNG gemindert. Das ist schlecht. -Der Schaden/Detonationen/Ausfälle/Brände/Lecks Es kann sein das ich das falsch wahrnehme, aber die Projektile/Torpedos würfeln die Schadensumme aus. Bei so einem komplexen Panzerungsmodell sollte es auch möglich sein ein Schadensmodell mitzuliefern. Zitadellen gibt es ja auch schon. -Die Streuung der Projektile Die Streuung sollte nicht zufällig sein, sondern jedes Schiff könnte 3 oder 4 feste rotierende Streumuster haben, auf die man sich einstellen kann. Was sagt ihr dazu? Was würdet ihr in der Sache RNG ändern?
  22. Please use this thread to discuss (reasonably!) your thoughts on how often we should be running the King of the Sea tournaments, as well as related issues such as on-the-day scheduling and seeding. By way of some background, what we are aiming for here is a to help create a sustained competitive scene until official clan-v-clan is introduced into the game. We want to hear everyone’s preferences from their own teams/streaming/viewer perspective. Please bear in mind that there are a bunch of constituencies here, basically: Organisers and how often we can pull this off WG, who supply the prize pool Streamers and viewer interest Established teams, who reasonably expect to play a lot of games in each tournament Newer teams. My assumption is they may want to play more often, but I may be way off base here We will take on all the feedback, but we can’t make everyone happy. Yes, there’s a poll, but this is not a democracy, we’re not going to base the final decision on votes alone. We’re much more interested in the arguments for one decision or the other rather than the number of votes. We are kicking around a couple ideas for improving this tournament, from expanding to more teams or introducing double elimination brackets, to improving the gameflow on the day. We won’t be able to realize all of this of this course, but what we get here will help us prioritize. So with that, have at it!
  23. procrastinatingStudent

    how would you prefer the monthly calendar

    I had a quick look at the Na forums and saw a poll about how people would like to see the monthly calendar and it maybe a good idea to find out what people like, plus it give WG some nice feedback for them do do what they wish. I personally would like it on both, i like the NA version on their portal.
  24. In my view, the new sounds are absolutely horrendous. Especially those endless noisy water splashes. I think we really need a roll back. I've opened this poll to make the feedback more visual. Please Poll!
  25. Fiery_Kathy

    Feedback to Jingles' 500K sub contest

    DISCLAIMER: Every single one of the video's jingles selected as winners deserve it for 100% DISCLAIMER 2: I don't really know in what part of the forum this should be in since I was doubting between this, video and streams and contests. I liked to participate in this contest and it really was a very nice initiative and it got me started in editting my videos. BUT, it's a shame that you made a 2nd playlist (the shortlist), my video was on the playlist for 1 day before you made your 2nd playlist. On that one day my video got approximately 100 views and 5 subs (which is very nice) The day after the 2nd playlist was introduced, I didn't get 1 single view, not 1 (which is very sad) I know it was propably a lot easier for you to make one to at least know out of which people you have to chose the final winners, but in my opinion making that 2nd playlist PUBLIC was a big mistake. No-one will even take a look at the first one because that's where the unfiltered "trash" is, it didn't help either that you never mentionned the first playlist after its first debut on your social media (facebook) Instead you were already promoting the shortlist, you had to scroll down to the 8th OF JULY to find the original playlist. This thread might look salty, that's because it kinda is, because I think it is unfair, both for me AND for the other people who didn't get selected. (As I said in the disclaimer, all people who did get selected really do deserve it tho) The point was to promote new youtubers (At least that's what I thought it was), but you kindoff sank (haha ship pun) your own idea with the introduction of the 2nd playlist AKA the shortlist. To anyone who is still reading this, thanks for reading. (I'm terrible in writing an ending to an opinion thingy) I hope maybe an other youtuber with the same idea as Jingles had might keep this feedback in mind) Sorry for eventual bad English. Have a nice day.
×