Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'Fix'.



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 8 results

  1. Crusherheads

    Kanguru poping ships - any fix?

    This is getting realy anoying and not sure what the cause of it though do know its from this lastes patches and updates that this is been doing and its frustrating since i rarely had this problem. Its just what tittles mentions, the moment they pop from a island it takes 2-3 seconds for the game process their movement, and its totaly anoying. So wondering if theres any fix from my part or anything that i can do to fix this? Did appreciate a redirect link if theres any post that talking about this and it speaks of a possible fix of it.. Thank you.
  2. Yes, I am aware how very often "secondaries need a buff" topic gets brought up, and so I am going to take a full view on secondaries as a whole.The Problem (Gameplay):Important Issues with secondary armaments that all need to be considered:-Range -Accuracy -Shell type When ever an adjustment is made to them, considerations in all 3 categories need to be made. Shell Type is probably the most ignored stat that has a significant impact.Range: As it stands, the range on secondary armaments is lack luster, and useless to 80% of the vessels in the game at the current moment. As it stands, even with buffing with skills and hardware, the only a few ships in particular that can do secondary gun builds "well" is Warspite Nagato, Izumo and Yamato. Accuracy:Accuracy is the 2nd most complained issue on secondaries, the "drunk gunner" problem. In Game the Manual Fire control of Secondary Armament skill does solve it, but the cost of it being a 5 skill points makes it so it is usually only attainable when you have grinded a line with a captain until tier 8-9 at minimum. (unless you play ALOT of games with premiums)Shell Type:This is a very important factor as it defines whether or not your secondaries will set fires for passive damage. In game as it is, the size of the secondary gun more-or-less defines what shell type it will fire, but it is a somewhat blurry line as guns between 1mm-150mm fire HE, however guns between 140mm-155mm fire AP. that small overlap is more or less picked by balancing. This shell type issue is why USN BBs, of which ALL secondary guns on them are 127mm, all fire HE shells. As opposed to all the casement guns lining IJN bbs till tier 8 which are 140mm-152mm all fire AP shells. This is the probable reason as to why USN BBs get shorter ranges on their secondary armament. This theme is quirked by the fact that Izumo and Yamato switch over to primarily 127mm guns, and in addition receive even farther range on them. Overall conclusion on problems:As it stands, if a player wishes to do a secondary gun build, they really have to choose IJN, and only really to start to be effective at tier 9/10. Aswell, even with the maximized ranges, the range is still so short that in order to use them you must close in within a range at which your risk of receiving damage from your opponents is greater then that of the damage output that your secondary guns can output. Possible Solutions: 1) An all across the board buff to secondary gun range, with accuracy and chance of fire setting nerf to balance. IMHO, the loss in accuracy and fire chance to get better base ranges on all ships of all classes is preferable then sticking with the current base ranges. 2) Significantly buff the "Manual Control of Secondary Armament" captain skill. As it stands, the accuracy buff that it gives still leaves the weapons relatively balanced for longer range combat. What should be buffed is the skill should be moved to level 4 skill level, and give an additional range boost to them, even if the accuracy buff is reduced as a cost for the range boost would be acceptable.3) Seconadry Gun Accuracy could be affected by range. Primary Armament of BB guns allready have an accuracy buff to targets less then 5km away, so to make a similar effect to secondaries is theoretically doable in regards to how RNG gets calculated. (targets within 50% of their range are 50% more accurate, as an example, testing would need to verify what numbers works) If it were up to me, I'd implement number 2 and 3 solutions. They together would open up viability for secondary gun builds for battleships, and even cruisers, of both the IJN, USN, and even the KM and IRN. The Destroyer issue: With all the buffs that I suggested, clearly, DDs would be completely and mercilessly murdered, other classes would do rather fine I think. So, here are 2 solutions: 1) A class bonus, in which DDs just will have a bonus to their class as a whole in that the firing accuracy on them from secondaries is reduced (perhaps an upwards of 15-20% accuracy nerf for secondary gunners when they are firing at a DD)2) An active skill bonus. As it stands, the speed boost active skill doesn't give a real big effect. Sure, you are slightly faster while its active, but thats it aside from your camouflage nerf that temporarily occurs whilst it is used. I would suggest that when a DD uses this consumable, in addition to the speed boost, it also adds an accuracy nerf to secondary guns that fire at a target using that consumable. A DD could use the consumable more tactically for an offensive strategy rather then using it for just getting across the map faster or running away a tad bit faster. A similar effect could be applied to when a DD is in or behind a smoke screen. If both consumables had this additional effect, it would balance out the accuracy gain in my proposed solutions.In my honest opinion, either one of both of the solutions to help DDs survive would be viable. The Problem (GUI): For the most part, the GUI for secondary gun usage is simple but lack luster. I only have 2 issues with it: Damage Numbers: As it is, there are no damage numbers displayed when a secondary gun deals damage. This is annoying as you have no real time conception as to how well they are doing, are they penning armor, etc. This could be easily remedied by the damage dealt popping up the same way as it does for primary guns, but perhaps with secondary gun damage being displayed in italics for easy comprehension. In the very least, this would allow damage counter mods to be able to read and add this damage actively. Target: A minor option would could be useful is the ability to right click a username in the enemy team list and click "Target Secondaries" which would be useful to getting a lock unto a DD popping in and out of detection. Banner: For some reason or another, their is no banner for secondary gun hits. I have actually made a banner on what I could imagine that the banner could look like: If this banner would show up under the conditions of a secondary shell hitting AND damaging the target, I'd be happy. The only rational argument against it is "but its an AI getting banners for you!" the counter to this being of course, plane kills are also AI kills that you yourself didn't do actively. An additional reason as to why this banner would be useful is for missions. There are missions that require to get certain amount of banners, as it stands, BBs are the least capable for acquiring large numbers of badges. This would level the playing field for them potentially. Visual:As it stands, secondary shells look a lot dimmer then regular shells. A 155mm shell from a yamato looks half as bright as a 155 from a mogami. If secondary guns are going to be nothing more then light shows for some ships, then they actually should be light shows. I like to see my secondary shots, but as is I have to actually distract myself and focus on looking at them to see where they are going, are they hitting, etc. This should be remedied IMHO.Ships I believe need secondary buffs.Montana; 7km, (currently 5km) -To help her compete against Yamato, since Montana does suffer compared to her. Aswell, Montana's secondaries are 127mm/54, her predecessors are 127mm/38 and yet montana's range is the same. This seems unrealistic upgrade-wise. (in regards to competition, Yamato's are 127mm/40) Amagi, 6km, (currently 4.5) -For progression and gameplay, the Amagi is a let down. All ships previous to her in the tech tree have increasingly good ranges on their secondary battery. Nagato is a highlight with her 5km range, with her 18x1-140mm(AP) guns and 4x2-127mm(HE) guns. The Amagi has 16x1-140mm(AP) guns and 8x2-127mm(HE) guns. Allthough it is true the Amagi is an upgrade for HE output, its completely nullified by the reduced range, and doesnt suit the progression system at all when you consider Izumo gets 7km. The Amagi's secondaries should actually be an upgrade, as is, due solely to the range loss, they are a downgrade despite the player moving up a tier from Nagato. 6km would flow the transition of Nagato to Amagi to Izumo. Zao and Hindenburg, 5km, (currently 4.5km)-Again, its the progression through the tech tree, the ships before her get 5km, and the when a player upgrades to Zao/Hindenburg, they lose range on secondaries. 4.5km is pretty useless at tier 10. North Carolina/Iowa, 6km (Currently 5km) -This would help flow the transition if Montana had 7km, plus, it would add the relevence of USN secondary gun builds. As is, it does feel unfair in that such builds are exclusive to the IJN. (Allthough the Tirpitz and Warspite suggests that there could be competition for secondary gun builds in those nations) If there are ships that in particular you believe need buffs to secondary range, comment them and why! If I could make only one single change, I would have the "Manual Control of Secondary Armament" skill also add a 30-50% range boost. Comments, questions, suggestions, concerns? I run a duplicate thread in NA
  3. Guten Abend, seitdem letzten Update ist es mir kaum noch möglich World of Warships zu spielen. Im Hafen habe ich horizontale "schwarze Blitze" über den Bildschirm, diese verschwinden zwar im Spiel, doch dort belästigen mich die FPS-Einbrüche. Die FPS springen von 80FPS auf 8FPS und dies im drei Sekunden takt. Das geht das ganze Spiel so, bis ich wieder zurückkehre in den Hafen und auf mich die "schwarzen Blitze" warten. Bisherige versucht habe ich: Wows deinstalliert und neu installiert auf einer anderen Festplatte, Meine Grafikkartentreiber aktualisiert, deinstalliert und sogar ältere Versionen ausprobiert, sowie jegliche Mods entfernt, zum einen durch die Deinstallation und zum anderen zuerst eigenhändig. Zu meinen Hardware und Software-Komponenten, an denen es vermutlich nicht hapern sollte: Windows 10 Home, 6GB DDR3 Arbeitsspeicher, ein Intel i5 2500K 3,30GHz, eine gtx970, sowie eiine 1TB HDD und eine 256GG SSD. Im Spiel selbst habe ich auch schon alles erdenkliche probiert einzustellen, dennoch bin ich für Tipps sehr dankbar. es hat den Anschein, dass meine Grafikkarte das Problem sein könnte, doch da dieses Problem ausschließlich in Wows auftritt, wage ich es zu bezweifeln, denn jegliches Benchmark oder ähnlich forderndes Spiel funktioniert einwandfrei. Für Anregungen oder sogar die Lösung, wäre ich sehr dankbar Grüße an alle Kapitäne
  4. Hi all, Recently after the 0.5.3 Update i have been getting a black screen everytime i load the game up (What i mean is after the launcher and then black screen) Anyone have the same problem and have a fix on hand. P.s. I play on the mac and use the official world of warships client made from codeweavers. Never had this experience before
  5. Hello all, I'm using Parallels desktop for Mac with Window 8.1 Installed. I have only installed the World Of Warships game onto Windows 8 and i'm having no Ships showing up in the game. Like they have totally disappeared and all the background too as disappeared. It's like this in the game menu and in the game play. I have had ago reinstalling the game and installing the latest Directx. Is their any fix to this i can try? Thank you
  6. SnowWulF

    Wrong Collider on Map Big Race

    Just found out that there is a false collider set on the Big Race map. The issue is at G-6, pls take a look on the screenshot for exact position.
  7. Hi, as an avid World of Warships player I couldn't help but go and read up on my next big purchase. I know it is nothing mayor and don't know where to post this or even if the developers read this , but in the Cleveland's description in the end it states :''None of them was lost." According to myself this should be changed to :''None of them were lost." as them indicates plural. Thanks.
  8. Shoukaku_Kai

    Japanese carriers

    Fix Japanese carriers I've played all classes in the game and I honestly believe that Japanese carriers are the most unbalanced against american counter-parts, The Americans have stronger planes with anti-ship units having rear gunners and fighters being stronger with larger units. I've had cases where my fighters have moved to intercept torp bombers and the fighters have been destroyed despite having friendly AA cover, other cases are that a T7 US carrier Ranger has been matched with a T6 carrier Ryujo vs T7 carrier Hiryu, The Hiryu has an extremely low chance of establishing air superiority, In the current state, a fair match would be T7 Carrier Hiryu + T6 carrier Ryujo vs T7 carrier Ranger as a US carrier can't be matched 1v1 fairly against a IJN Carrier. At the moment carriers are unbalanced and need to be fixed as soon as possible otherwise people will stop playing carrier, I suggest making the Americans have smaller units (same strength aircraft) and letting the Japanese have larger units.
×