Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'Suggestion'.



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 35 results

  1. Dear gamers of World of Warships. I'd like to have your opinion, as well as that from the Staff. I'd love to see the USS Missouri BB-63 in World of Warships. Since the US TechTree is already full, I thought, maybe, to bring the USS Missouri in as a tier VIII or IX premium ship. I would love to see the "Mighty Mo" in the game, as I've been to Peral Harbor last year. The Missouri is an Iowa-Class battleship, but still, can a tier IX be a premium ship? Since the highest is VIII so far. I would like to see your opinion about this idea. Thanks in advance. ~Teh MetalDeuce
  2. Okay so recently I bought my first carrier from the US. Not the best, but it can match up to anything at long range with its bombers. So every time I play, my team and the enemy team seem to switch sides and it doesn't really give me a chance to actually move my carrier. So is there maybe a way we could reward people for defending a friendly ship?
  3. Hello all. I have a suggestion, that carriers should have to make speed in order to launch and recover aircraft. It has some historical merit, as real carriers have to make full speed into the wind to operate aircraft, but more importantly, it would prevent the carrier players who park their ship in a corner somewhere, or just sit where they spawn the whole game. It would force carriers to take positions on the map, and keep up with their teams, and while some would see it inconvenient, I ultimately think it would benefit carreirs as too often I see carriers remaining for too long in a vulnerable position, only using their engines once it's already too late.
  4. coolxlfc289

    USS Enterprise

    Good day everyone, I hope we are all feeling well today! So I have recently started playing World of Warships, but been a long time player of World of Tanks. Now before I begin, I must say I am new to forums, never used them before, here or anywhere. So be easy on me if this is in the wrong location on the forums. Now, I love looking at history, especially WW2, which is probably why I love this game so much. So my favourite type of ship, no matter what, is the air craft carrier. I am a very big fan of the pacific naval wars between Japan and America, and I watch lots of programmes on it, and books... oh I love my books. My favourite naval unit of all time is the USS Enterprise, for a very good reason. USS Enterprise is the ONLY ship in the US Navy in WW2 that received 20 (thats a lot btw) battle stars. I believe 8 more than another carrier in the whole of WW2 and 6 more than any other ship. At one time it was the ONLY US Aircraft Carrier in the pacific, this is the overall most valued ship in the whole of the WW2 pacific naval war. It was in every major battle that the US fought in, and took so many torpedoes and bombs that it is hard for anyone to count. So I would love for this ship to be added. History: USS Enterprise - Specifications Displacement: 25,500 tons Length: 824 ft., 9 in. Beam: 109 ft., 6 in. Draft: 25 ft., 11.5 in. Propulsion: 4 × Parsons geared steam turbines, 9 × Babcock & Wilcox boilers, 4 × shafts Speed: 32.5 knots Range: 14,380 nautical miles at 15 knots Complement: 2,217 men USS Enterprise (CV-6) - Armament (as built): 8 × single 5 in. guns 4 × quad 1.1 in. guns 24 × .50 caliber machine guns Aircraft 90 aircraft These are the specifications at the START of the war. It improved a lot in middle of the war when it went through a complete overhaul due to the damage it took from torpedoes and dive bombers. I said why i love it, and why I think it should be added. Maybe others will disagree but it is such a nice and well earned ship that it should be added to the game. Now the war in the pacific began because of Pearl Harbour, one of the worst US Defeats EVER. The major flaw in this was that not one of the seven aircraft carriers were actually in port because of a storm which delayed them by a day. So all 7 were still going at the start, but 2 were lost early on in the war leaving USS Enterprise to be the only one left out of the seven. It was a very respected ship before it was scrapped because of costs. Please add this for historical reasons. Thank you for your time, and again sorry if this is in the wrong place.
  5. MaliciousNL

    MAn Overboard!

    I had a idea, Wouldnt it be nice if you see sailers on your ship itself walking and running arround, if you get hit you see sailers being blown overboard. By being hit and losing crew, the ship might be less operational, because you service the ship with less crew. Let me know what you guys think.... and of course if you blow up, the suriving crew flowing in sea, and be able to be picked-up buy allied ships. MAN OVERBOARD.
  6. Intreductor

    Boss Fight Game Mode

    Was thinking about a Boss Fight game mode where 5 ships (1 Destroyed, 2 Cruisers and 2 Battleships) would fight a Bot steered H-44 (a 140 000 tons Battleship that was part of the German "Wunderwaffe" program, a Super Yamato of some sort). Based on its size my guess would be that it would have around 180 000 HP and 508 mm main guns, maybe its too much for only 5 ships but this is just a imperfect idea. Any thoughts?
  7. Sup pirates, was most ppl knows commander skill cap is at 18 points after that u simple get a cumulative xp for 999999. Man its sad to see that XP for nothingess, though i alredy read many posts about this matter, and well no bright adieas for it or no plans from Dev team for it. Though let me make a suggestion for it, since people buys premium ships to skill up their commander faster(one of the many reasons) commanders should have a system that when they hit a 18 skills their XP cumulative at 0-999999 should be used when we change them to new ship. What do you mean? Simple, here's a example, if the commander has 200000-999999 in 1 boat, and the person want switch that commander for other different and same nation boat, instent of level it again or pay 200,000 credits for 50% half progress orange bar, why not give benefits such, as a commander skill 18 with the 200,000xp he has 2 spend abit more (instent of 100,000) xp, also paying 1,5millions or 3millions credit to get out instantly of the orange bar? Do know we can spend doubloons to get out of the orange, or simple use the flags to speed out the progress, or having premium account for doing the same, though having this process was a unique system for a fully skilled commander would be great, at least for myself. It would still need a good amount of XP farming for that same commander to switch the boats, would still need alot credits to purchase that benefit(something worth 500 doubloons), so yeah ppl would still needed premium account or premium ships, or farm to be able to purchase that for that 18 skill commander. Anyways, you pirates are more than welcome to speak ur mind and ur opinion about this matter, give adiea, and probably people should have way better suggestions than myself, so yeah did be glad to hear them out or criticism about my suggestion. Oh and sorry for my crapy english lol.
  8. DMA27

    MM T8,9,10 - CV

    Hi there, I happily grinded the US-CV line to T10, felt the pain against swarms of TB and DB from IJN-CV pre4.1 and all, and now at T10 I can exist but ... I cannot play anymore!!! Since 4.1 and the MM balance for CV, CV-T10 battles take ages to pop if at all within the so said 5min timer!! I believe with the large amount of AA on all ships and CC fighters on T8+, the CV restriction should be lifted for tier 8, 9 and 10!
  9. Hello, I'm bit new to this forum, although been enjoying the game for a while now and just thought of an option that could be really great addition and solve some balancing issues with ships that lack the turret traverse speed. I've used the search option to see if such suggestion was made, but couldn't find it so far, so here it goes: There are ships that have certain problems traversing turrets, Battleships of course and couple (especially Japanese) lighter boats. Furutaka is a great example of a ship which could be potentially very good at agressive angling, but it's firing rate decreases significantly when tight maneuvers are in progress, simply the turrets can't keep up. Similarly Battleships have this problem, when all of their turrets, even though not firing at the enemy, since he's far out of arc in the chosen angle of attack, still desperately try to reach the reticle at all cost. They are not needed, and quite frankly having them face backwards would be much more useful, especially if we have reasons to predict someone to approach us from behind, or we can change the course without having them swing aaaaalll the way from the other side. Instead of boosting stats on traverse, which would be pointless, how about turning it into part of the gameplay mechanic? I would propose having two buttons (which isn't much) that upon hit, would cause bow or aft oriented turrets return to their default positions and stay locked, and upon another hit, they'd be released following the reticle once again. What would that mean in effect: If we are cruising head on target and not using our aft guns, we can get them ready for a change of course to the opposite side (it also makes sense, since I don't know why me, as a captain can't just tell the lousy gits to set the guns straight ) It's still based on assessment and decision of the player! The decision of turning the slow turrets back or forth still takes time, so the player, which has to plan ahead such gun rotation must be aware of the surrounding. If he makes a wrong call, cause he thinks someone may get him from behind, but such event doesn't happen, he just wasted long seconds of his turrets traversing, whereas they could be ready for a full broadside at the next turn. It gives flexibility to BB captains, If they just noticed some destroyer or fast cruiser heading their way and taking an obvious turn to the opposite side where their guns were pointing, they can order the aft batteries to start turning ahead of time. Cruisers like Furutaka or some japanese DDs would gain balancing power based on skill and wise use of a mechanic that still can be outsmarted. It does not hamper the weakness of slow turret traversing vessels, they still turn slowly, just can be ordered to do that ahead of time... and once again it can bite the captain in the butt if he makes a wrong call It won't make much difference to ships with fast turret traverse speed... since they are quite fast with turning their turrets in the first place. They can keep up with whatever anyway. BBs could profit due to optional firing capabilities, potentially shooting now back and forth, switching between frontal and aft batteries, giving more fire coverage to their teams and overall be more useful without sacrificing more mobility they already lack. So let's say you got just two buttons: F and V for Bow and Aft respectively, I think it wouldn't be a big of a deal to code, and could certainly give a solid edge in defensive for BBs, but again, only to captains who know how to use such option. And I believe that to be the key - it's player driven option, and it unloads whole load of frustration when I know I'm gonna need the guns turned to the other side, but I still keep the target on my opposite arc for the time being, watching how the aft batteries sit there, looking to my left, doing nothing, whereas I'm gonna need them in few moments on the right side. It's a very simple solution, not perfect, but one which could provide players with a bit more precise control of their ships without handing out changes in stats. Slow turret traversing ships therefore would simply require more skill to use properly, but I believe in hands of good players that could be a solid and interesting mechanic. Just a suggestion. What do you think? Is it worth giving certain ships boost through stats or rather mechanics which engage the player?
  10. Slo_Mo_Shun

    Fleet Admiral role?

    Was thinking that perhaps a role other than operating a ship may make the game more interesting (for some) and rewarding others who would not normally get rewarded and improve teamwork. By this I mean a role something like a Fleet Admiral. This role would only have access to one ship and then not in the same mode as the other players on his/her team. Using an interface not unlike the one used by aircraft carriers the Fleet Admiral could direct operations, award experience to ships offering AA cover to the BBs (they would normally get zero for chasing planes away) or to players who benefit the team by say guarding a base.They could launch their own reconnaissance aircraft, send out a repair ship (only self defence AA fitted) to quickly repair say a badly damaged ship. Of course all of these activities would be time limited as is the norm with ship functions today. This role would only be obtainable by a player who has maxed out on all the classes of ship available for one of the represented nations. Of course players could still choose to ignore the advice given and play the game the way they want to but may miss out on Fleet Admiral teamwork experience points. What do people think? Its only a very quickly thought out concept at the moment.
  11. CaptainNorse

    Fire Damage - Suggestion

    Seeing someone else post some suggestions on changes to HE vs. AP damage gave me an idea as to how to perhaps balance fire damage a bit more. Suggestion is that a ship can only have 1 Fire debuff at the time. But it can be a grade 1-4 fire. Grade 1 causes X damage Grade 2 causes 2X damage Grade 3 causes 4X damage Grade 4 causes 8X damage Each time a hit's RNG comes up with a positive for fire, a grade 1-4 fire is started onboard the target ship. But the chance of what grade of fire started would vary on caliber. So as an example: 5in guns (i.e destroyers) could have a 3% chance of a grade 4, 7% chance of grade 3, 20% chance of grade 2 and 70% chance of grade 1 fire. 6in guns (i.e Cleveland) could have a 5% chance of a grade 4, 15% chance of a grade 3, 35% chance of a grade 2 and 35% of a grade 1 fire. 16in guns (i.e Yamamoto) could have a 25% chance of a grade 4, 35% chance of a grade 3, 30% chance of a grade 2, and 10% chance of a grade 1 fire. Once a ship is burning, and is hit again, the RNG is once again rolled. If the new fire started is of a lower grade than the one already in place, nothing happens. If the new fire is same grade, it continues to burn and the timer is reset. If the new grade is higher, the fire is upgraded, and timer reset. This would allow ships to have everything from smaller fires (that can in many cases be ignored if you're not at low health or in a DD) to large conflagrations that need immediate attention if they're not to do crippling damage to the ship. In addtion to fire, HE would of course keep a steady explosive damage that is easier negated by armor, while AP will still be the more random damage depending on whether you can hit critical parts/citadel or overpen.
  12. Hello there commanders, i here asking for suggestion or some help from the tiers10 experience carrier players from both nation's carriers, although i have "Hakuryu" carrier, its about the upgrade layout, atm my lay out is: Slot 1: "Air group modification 1" Slot 2: "Air group modification 2" Slot 3: Empty Slot 4: "Damage control system modification 1" Slot 5: "Steering gears modification 2" Slot 6: "Concealment system modification 1" Pretty regular upgrade layouts, although i cant decide the 3º upgrade between "flight control modification 2" that gives extra 8.2 Knots speed to the planes, such the torpedos bombers raising their speed from 164 into 172.2 knots and i think same speed aka the 8.2 knots applys for remaining plane types. Or go forwards with "air group modification 3" that increases healthpool from bombers and torpedos bombers with a extra 324.45 health, raising the torpedos bombers health from 2163 health to 2487.45 health and bombers from 2081 to 2405,45 health pool. Both setups gives tactical and diferent advandge, such if u got speed means u get there faster and drop or get in position to drop ur stuff into the enemy, meaning u can act faster before you lose most of ur squadrons to a enemy AA boat, or health poll to increase their survival during engagements and position. Regarless please let me know about your experience between this 2 upgrades because we all know tiers10 boats has a pretty heavy AA system not to mention the consumables and commanders layouts. Thank you for your attention and for your help.
  13. DenmarkRadar

    View oversight of other player's stats

    Currently in game you are not able to see the other players' stats (think of the page "Summary" in your profile). Now my suggestion is that out of combat (not in battle...) you can right-click a player and see that player's stats. Maybe not as detailed as "Summary", but something along those lines. Currently I have to leave the game to see how a player that is inviting me to a division might perform... making the invitation process take longer. Now you can say "that's not something we desire, because it will foster stat-padding, eliteism, ..." But all this information is already mostly public - just outside the game :-)
  14. We see alot of idle'rs in battles and I have seen my share of those afk'ers, carried players, etc. So, I have a suggestion when it comes to ranked battles. Rank (star) system by XP placement. WINNING TEAM: 1. Top 4 xp'ers on the winning team Gets a Star 2. Bottom 3 xp'ers on the winning team gets a Shell-symbol (or what-ever symbol/half star) next to your actual rank,and you have to collect 2 shell-symbols/half stars and they convert to a star. This way the workhorses of the winning team gets more credit than those that "barely" did anything. LOOSING TEAM: 3. Nr. 1 xp'er on the loosing team doesnt loose a star - like in S4. 4. Nr. 2-4 xp'ers on the loosing team looses "only" a shell-symbol/half star 5. Bottom 3 xp'ers on the loosing team looses a star. Or, It can go as allways on the Loosing team - everyone looses a star except the Nr.1, like in S4. Hope it was explanatory enough. What do you think.
  15. General1010

    Other Factions

    I think that they should add two new factions to the game. The Royal British Navy, and the German Navy. This would help create a realistic feel to the game and both played a massive part throughout the Naval era. Also the amount of ship produce by both factions is staggering and would produce a great diversity is faction and ship choise.
  16. I am not too young (56), and my eyes are a bit tired. I am not (yet) visually impaired, but I definitely suffer from a lack of contrasts and find myself pixel hunting, especially when in my carrier and having to play with the top-view map ... Well, for young and sharp guns, things look evident like mountains, but to me, it looks like microscopic pixels... My screen resolution is 1280 x 800, which is the most comfortable to me, and for everything. I would like to suggest 2 future improvements. My concerns are both contained in what I experienced 2 days ago, in heavy fog... Problem 1: The sizes of the minimap There are 5 pre-determined sizes for the minimap: I use minimap size 4 because size 3 makes things too small. I heavily rely on minimap, and most of the time, it shows only a garbage of red icons where I can not see if it is a fighter/bomber/diver or ship. I find minimap MUCH more difficult to read than in WoT... But as you can see above, there is a large size gap between size 3 and size 4. Unfortunately, as shown in my 1st image, size 4 overlaps with targets coming from right side of the map, and also on the aiming line. Problem 2: Aiming Indicators almost invisible in some (most?) environments. My 1st image is the extreme case, with fog from a destroyer. But fog should be on sea (and target, which is ghostly as it should). But it should not interfere with my ship reticles and indicators... Suggestions: 1- either: reduce slightly the size of minimap 4 so then it comes just below the aiming line, or better: add a free resizing button so then we can resize freely "our" minimap (position/size being recorded in our "preferences" file, server side if possible for having same comfort when changing PC login PC. 2- increase the reticle and aiming line visibility, with Hi Vis colour (yellow ?), and also Hi Vis colours for minimap col/line coordinates. Example below: I really do NOT want to rely on future mods for vision improvements, as I am against in-battle mods (which should be a total protected area, common to ALL players !) , and such mods would be unfair to players if all players have not the same vision quality...
  17. Quazie

    Premium Ship Boot Camp

    Hi Everybody. I have seen a number of posts where it has been mentioned that "Noobs" are sailing around in Premiums that they have no idea how to play. Players generally get annoyed that the Terpitz or whatever ship has someone is sailing around not having a clue what they are doing when that is a resource the team badly needed. Well I have attached a PDF for an idea that would minimize that senario. Let me know what you think of the concept, not so much specific content. Premium Boot Camp.pdf 3.06MB Premium Boot Camp.pdf
  18. Hello, Today I was playing a battle and I was thinking about how nice it would be to be able to view the rest of the battle from planes (that have been launched), to have an aerial view on the rest of the battle. What do you guys think about this? PS> Sorry if I posted in wrong topic
  19. BIANiklasNiko

    Suggestion for a Skill Tree overhaul

    Hello Community, I have some ideas for a Skill Tree Overhaul and im looking forward for your Feedback (Opinions,what´s bad, what´s good, more suggestions to improve and Names for the Skills if they don´t fit) Im hope you´ll like it guys ^_^7 Please no flaming these are just ideas and still need improvments ! Instead of Flame spent some Mintues and give me your Feedback. So I Begin : Artillery Secondary Armarment Ships Survivability Concealment Planes Special Main Gun Loading Expert No Changes No Changes Incoming Fire Alert Rear Gun suppression fire No Changes -2 % Reload speed for -20% DMG of enemy Fighters calibere above 139 mm (Won´t work for Strafes and get weaker when squad lose planes) No Changes No Changes On your Positions ! Vigilance Engine Maintance No Changes -7 % risk of fire +5% Speed Boost and flooding (All Plane Types) Main Gun Aiming Expert No Changes No Changes Ready for impact ! Elite Pilot Training No Changes -3 % Main Gun Dispersion Starts an Air Siren Uses 20 % less Ammunition when Attack Planes moving for strafes in your direction/Attacking you No Changes Advanced Firing Training No Changes Hold your Fire ! Aircraft Servicing Expert Advanced Training +20 % Range for guns with calibere The Concealment nerf you (The HP Buff won´t work For AA Gunnery Crew under 139 and 20 % Accuracy for recieve after shooting work for Fighters) 20 % AA Range and 100 % Secondary Armarment pass 30 % faster Average dmg for calibere above 85 Crew Adrenalin Kick Vateran Status Preventative Maintance No Changes Air Supremacy Jack of all trades (At 20 % of ships Health) - +55 % Secondary Accuracy -50% to the risk of incapacitation + 1 Fighter per squadron -15% to reload time - Main Guns -20 % Reload - +10 % Average DMG and range of modules + 1 Bomber per squadron of all consumables - Torpedos -20 % Reload - for AA (caliber at and under -10 % risk flooding and fire + 5 % Torpedobomber HP + 1 Consumable (Max 5) - AA +15 % Average DMG 25 MM) - Secondarys -25 % Reload - Planes -30 % Service Time I hope you guys like it as I already said im looking forward to your Feedback to Improve it.
  20. DMA27

    Fighters on DD

    Looking at some documentaries on what happened during WWII, it appears that fighters happened to turn their guns against DD due to their very light AA protection and armor. Since these little guys are hard to hit with bombs and torp, could FT be able to target them?
  21. Hello everyone at Wargaming at community, This game is really great and i enjoy playing it since May this year. It is already a lot of fun and i want to add some personal insight. Problem : Most players seem to have no plan where to go in a battle and drive randomly around, engage alone or just stay there afk, maybe because they missed the start of the game. Solution Ideas: AFK Players. After 15 seconds of no input (no mouse movement, keyboard, disconnect etc, an Bot takes over and uses the Ship as good as possible.Since the player is afk or not playing, no credits and no XP should be awarded for hits, destroyed planes, caps etc, but at least the team won't suffer from the imbalance of AFK Players. Besides a tutorial to show players how to use their ships classes, i would love to see various improvements. For Example. Bonus XP for fulfilling your ships Main Purpose (for example a CV get more credits and more XP for killing planes, which would players focus on doing what they are supposed to do. Another Idea, Admirals. One player of each team will be appointed admiral when the game starts. He can then plan (visible on the minimap) which points to cap, which position to defend. Fulfilling these orders could grant bonus XP and Credits again. It should be easy commands, so it won't distract the team from the battle. For Example evey admiral could have 3 active orders and change them if needed or one is achieved. Debuff players who stay on border of the map, for example, make all their shots miss, make them slower, let the ship take damage which increases with time, bounce the ship back into the map, Just do something to decrease the number of map border abuses. Some other small ideas Show All damage Done on the right side of the UI, divided in AP, HE, Fire Damage, etc. Make it possible to see which upgrades can be built in ships you have not unlocked Add Champaign's as in WOT to help players understand their classes Add Feedback if a reported player got punished and how. Decrease the gold cost for fully retraining a captain on a ship, depending on how many skill points he has Show the ship name on the minimap next to its icon DON'T ADD GOLD AMMO Give carriers more room to customize their squad setup Reward Blocked Damage with some XP and Creds Reward Spotting as in WOT , for example if some ships is hit, that your team can just see because of you, you get a part of XP and Credits for that. Well this is it for the beginning, i am sure other players will follow up. Regards.
  22. Boold

    Suggestion

    Hi. I got a suggestion. It be nice if we can see exterior changes in ships before we buy parts and when we buy it. I mean it be nice to just click on module and see that ship change. Now its just reloading whole model and its hard to see if You got e.g. new AA or something. New parts can just flash and appear on ship so You can easily see what difference was made. Regards. Boold
  23. Hello Community, Maybe some of you Guys playing World of Tanks and you remind those "failed" Historical Battles. Maybe i would suggest to give it a Reunion in World of Warships? But please put a bit more Love in the Details. I already said that in the Closed Beta Testing, it would be nice if you add some Historical Naval Battles. At least you got already 4 Nations who can start up against each other. Like the US Navy vs Japanese // or the Kriegsmarine vs Royal Navy where you may implant new Maps espeicially for that. Not sure if that is a good Idea, but i guess it could make fun? But, again, put more love in the Details instead of using WoTs Grey Ideas who failed badly. Also there is an old Suggestion, which i made before about the Map "TRAP" there is a Rock in the Middle, which looks like an inactive Volcano. Why your not using this as another Version of the Cyclone. If that Volcano breaches out and coveres the whole Map with Fog and Smoke, adding some Lava Effects around that Rock (maybe no Dmg for the Ships in this Area but Designers can do much about this) with the Sound and the Atmosphere its possible to create a very scary environment. I know the Topic which i posted before, would have some Guys who love that Idea, but how about programming it? So and the last one... Wargaming is also aware of making the Client more Smother and better Running, you Guys may know there is a little Tweak in Warships which hasnt implented yet. It makes old PCs running more slightly and better. If you Remember from WoT there was a Program called WoT Tweaker, so why here are no Programmers who use it, OR Wargaming by itself implanted it? Its like this: If you go into your Game Folder there is a little Data File which is called engine_config.xml / if you open it with your Editor you can change 3 Things at least. Search for the following Strings: cacheEffects>false</cacheEffects - which is Original on FALSE. If you change this into true it enables the Preload of ongoing Data so it might reduce the Stuttering in the Game streamCacheSizeKB>2048</streamCacheSizeKB - which is Original at 2048. This one you can change depending on your Ram 4096 for 8GB - 8192 for 16GB Ram and so on and the last one is called maxFrameRate>75</maxFrameRate - which is Original at 75. This can be changed into 0 which means there is no more FPS Limitation to 75 only. If you got a decent System your FPS can go up much more. Im not sure, if WG is aware of that, but there are serval Topics about this Changes and its not a Hack or Cheat, or what ever. Its show in the DataFile Description itself, whats the Effect of those Changes. But it would be nice if Wargaming implented this Serverside or at least give an Option how MANY Ram you got... Because well, the Options are a bit weird to understand, and finding the best Options for your System is the same... it takes a while before it fits you. How ever. Cheers, and have a good one. Skycat
  24. It would be great if players could set their country's flag on their ship and then they would sail with it with more pride and valiancy !!! For example : I'm from Greece and i would LOVE to play with my flag behind me .... there would be so emotionally "charged" moments that i personally like to have, in this type of games!!!! But of course this type of item would be not free-of-charge..... pretty much the same feature as WoT has . I believe this is a MUST feature for the players !!!!!!! What do you think about it ?
  25. General1010

    Two New Factions

    I think that they should add two new factions to the game. The Royal British Navy, and the German Navy. This would help create a realistic feel to the game and both played a massive part throughout the Naval era. Also the amount of ship produce by both factions is staggering and would produce a great diversity is faction and ship choise.
×