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 155 results

  1. Hello fellow captains, I made a post yesterday on reddit about the idea of adding a new IJN BB line split. Most of you who responded seemed like liking the idea, so I decided to post on this forum as well for a little more exposure ( hopefully WG dev team can take an eye to it as well). Bellow is the repost of the specification idea for a new IJN BB line (original thread : https://www.reddit.com/r/WorldOfWarships/comments/fto0d5/suggestion_second_ijn_bb_line/) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It will be a cool addition to have an extra BB line for the IJN tech tree. These will be characterized by battlecruiser-ish BBs, featuring good speed, maneuverability and torpedoes (post Ise class) in exchange for less armor and less guns. It will be differentiated from existing tech tree ships in the following way : German BBs : More reliable guns but less armor French BBs : Higher caliber guns with slower shells + torps British BBs : Longer AP fuse time and less HE fire chance, better secondary + torps American BBs : Higher caliber guns but less AA + torps Techtree is as follows (I came up with this in 10min so subject to change) : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tier VI : Ise (Ise class battleship) HP : 57100 Artillery : 2*6 356mm Main gun Range : 17km Sigma : 1.7 Reload : 27 sec Secondary range : 6km Maneuverability : Speed : 25.5kts Rudder : 14.5sec Concealment : 16.5km Protection : about the same as Fuso ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tier VII : Tsukuba (Kongo-Daikan class battlecruiser, Fujimoto proposal with 356mm guns) HP : 63000 Artillery : 3*3 356mm Main gun Range : 17km Sigma : 1.9 Reload : 25 sec Secondary range : 7km Maneuverability : Speed : 27kts Rudder : 16sec Concealment : 15km Protection : about the same as Nagato but longer ship so worse ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tier VIII (Main tech line replacement) : Tosa (Kaga class battleship) HP : 67000 Artillery : 2*5 410mm Main gun Range : 21km Sigma : 1.9 Reload : 31 sec Secondary range : 5km Maneuverability : Speed : 26kts Rudder : 17sec Concealment : 14km Protection : about the same as Kii ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tier IX : Ikoma (Kongo-Daikan class battlecruiser, Hiraga proposal) HP : 70000 Artillery : 2 * 2 + 2 * 3 410mm Main gun Range : 20km Sigma : 2.0 Reload : 26 sec Secondary range : 9km Torpedo Armament : 2*3 type93 Range : 12km Maneuverability : Speed : 30kts Rudder : 14sec Concealment : 13km Protection : about the same as Kii ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tier X : Kurama (Number 13 class battleship) HP : 75000 Artillery : 4*2 460mm Main gun Range : 20km Sigma : 2.0 Reload : 26 sec Secondary range : 9km Torpedo Armament : 2*3 type93 Range : 12km Maneuverability : Speed : 30kts Rudder : 14sec Concealment : 13km Protection : a little bit better than Kii -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Optional : Tier VI Premium : Hyuga (Ise class hybrid carrier) HP : 59000 Artillery : 2*4 356mm Main gun Range : 17km Sigma : 1.8 Reload : 25 sec Secondary range : 7km Maneuverability : Speed : 25.5kts Rudder : 14.5sec Concealment : 15.5km Protection : about the same as Fuso Special consumable : CV style Fighter plane bubble that follows the ship, 2.5min duration, 3 available ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- As you can see, this isn't an accurate nor complete depiction of possible in-game stat. Feel free to add any correction or idea edit 1: format
  2. Bonjour, J'ai recruté récemment 5 joueurs, qui ont été bien actifs depuis 2 semaines, tant et si bien que j'ai obtenu assez de points de recrutement pour débloquer des conteneurs cadeaux pour eux ET moi. J'aimerais pouvoir répartir les bonus non pas entre moi et eux, mais seulement entre mes matelots les plus méritants (j'ai déjà tous les navires et bonus que je veux, je monte ou remonte d'autres branches). Ce n'est pas encore possible mais ça me semblerait être une suggestion intéressante. POuvez-vous faire remonter l'info/idée suivante, svp? ==> Prévoir la possibilité pour le recruteur d'allouer plus précisément les bonus aux matelots (sans forcément inclure le recruteur)? C'est pour motiver nos ouailles! En vous remerciant!
  3. Hi, I just started to reinstall Warships to play with a friend. I did this via the launcher since I`m playing Tanks usually. The second I started the installation a youtube video startet to play in the launcher. For me personnaly its a huge annoyance if programms do this on their own and I really much would like to have an option in the launcher to disable this in the future. Thanks and stay healthy. S.
  4. Hello everyone, First thank you to click on my subject, I wish you a well reading. I created a new topic for propose news ships implementation in “world of warship”. I propose to add aircraft carrier in several technological tree. I think notably to French technological tree, because like you can see here ( https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_des_porte-aéronefs_français), French navy had some aircraft carrier in this history. Of course, add new aircraft carrier anywhere in the game well be a good news. I propose to increase aircraft carrier numbers, because, these ship type is only presented on 3 faction, USA, Japan and UK. My idea is to open a new branch on technological tree, for obtain new ships, with new suit. Furthermore, add new aircraft carrier, develop new ships in others ranks in technological tree, like rank V, VII, IX. Today (1 march 2020), proposed aircraft carriers are ranks IV, VI, VIII and X. Thank you to have reading my text all the way. I wish you a good day or night, and good match on the game.
  5. Dear WG, I honestly think you should make a special commander available for the Puerto Rico! fr4gm3ntation Simply for his attempt to grind the Puerto Rico at no money spent
  6. Maty83_Cz

    Gascogne buff: Case and point

    First of all, I will mention that I am a BB main. I absolutely love playing the steel behemoths and I find them really satisfying. As such I have played through all the BB lines at T8 except for one: Soviets. I don't have the entire premium BB collection, but from playing against them, I can guess as to how good they are. Thus through my experience with T8 battleships I believe I am able to evaluate her. So, why do I think Gascogne needs a buff? First, let me use WoWs numbers to demonstrate why. Gascogne as she is sits is one of the worst T8 premiums in terms of winrate (Tirpitz B is a more accurate representation as to where Tirpitz stands now, and even that ship has better stats than Gascogne). As I own her, I will endeavour to explain why. From the get-go, we can see advantages and disadvantages to her. She is very maneuverable, boasting the same speed and engine boost consumable as her tech tree counterpart, the Richelieu. The similarities don't end there. The armour is practically the same as well, both ships have 32mm plating practically everywhere, even including the black hole of a torpedo bulge near the waterline. this doesn't help against cruiser shells unless you are at close range where they may fall on the bulge, but can be beneficial against BBs. Unlike Richelieu though, she boasts a unique feature to help her. The repair party has a very quick cooldown, helping against HE spam. This can potentially make the ship live longer than her counterparts and helps in tight brawls. So far so good. So, from just those numbers you may think "She seems quite good. What is not to like?" Well, here is the category the ship loses on all fronts. Firepower. Yes, she is by far the worts battleship in terms of effective firepower you can bring on target, being surpassed by even some T6 ships in those terms (Warspite, W. V. '41) First, let us look at the secondaries. Her secondaries seem decent on the surface level. Both 3.9" and 6" in plentiful numbers, right? Not really. the 6" guns have a horrible reload of 12s and the 3.9" don't fare well when compared to other secondaries of the same caliber. At the same time, none of these guns get improved HE penetration. So they are not going to be dealing almost any direct damage. Additionally, their spread looks more like that of a shotgun firing than accurate naval rifles, even with flags and skills to boost their effect...... Plus the second and third 3.9" gun do no superfire over the first and fourth respectively, which reduced the angle of use for them. But the main point of the ship, the primary armament is even worse... Not ONLY does she lack the numbers of guns, but she has THE worst accuracy for her tier when grouping of turrets is taken into account. Worse than EVEN Bismarck and Tirpitz. Ships with 3s FASTER reload and the same number of guns. And add to that the absolutely terrible back turret arc. 35 degrees to each side. To put it in better perspective, this means you have to expose your entire side with every salvo to bring them on target, opening you up to devastating salvos frm enemy battleships. And even if you do decide to do so, the guns are inaccurate enough to miss all but the closest-range shots. Richelieu has 1.8 sigma as compared to Gascogne's 1.9, but since she can minimize her target profile and use the close proximity of her turrets, she has a better time hitting the enemy than Gascogne. This is without mentioning the worst aspect of the main guns: Low survival. Practically every other game, one of your turrets gets damaged, or destroyed. This is an issue plagueging every French BB with quads, but it is particularlybad here. One shot can rid your entire ship of the entirety of your forward firepower. 50% of your guns. Gone. Worst part? In real life the French navy designed these turrets to AVOID this happening. Only half of the turret would be knocked out by a single hit. But in WOWs you can lose your entire forward firepower in a single hit. Even damage is severe as for the next 30s you only have half of your turrets available. So, in conclusion, Gascogne is ripe for a buff. As the stat-wise weakest of all the T8 battleships, she deserves, if not out-right needs one. What would I suggest? >Accuracy buff (Priority): Reduce maximum dispersion of the guns by 10-13% (Down to 260-270m). This would give her disadvantageous turret setup the benefit of accuracy on par with other same-tier BBs and help her accomplish the role of a flanking battleship by being able to effectively strike at the enemy from an unexpected angle >Reduce reload times by 1-2s. This means Gascogne's DPM is brought on par with at least the far more survivable German BBs. The slightly faster reload would benefit the ship as she could potentially fight on equal terms with same-tier battleships without relying on their mistakes. >Faster rudder shift :Faster rudder shift would allow Gascogne to quickly expose the back turret for firing before returning to her original angle. As the turret arc cannot be improved without remodelling the ship, this would be a good alternative. >Improvement to 6" secondary guns: Reducing their reload to 10s and slightly buffing accuracy should allow Gascogne to stand her ground in CQC matches better than currently. As they have only 24mm base HE penetration, the change would not affect DPM significantly unless specced into IFHE. >Turret HP buff. Due the the turret and superstructure positions, both of Gascogne's main gun turrets stand a high chance of being damaged in battle. Either buffing the HP, or developing a mechanic for French quad BB guns where only a half of the turret gets damaged/destroyed upon the first critical hit would alleviate this issue In my opinion, if at least the accuracy buff and two of the other ones mentioned here get implemented, Gascogne will become far more effective at her role, finally taking her rightful place as a T8 premium worth purchasing.
  7. Hallo World of Warships Team, ich finde leider das korrekte Forum nicht, ich dachte es gab mal so eine Art Vorschlagsforum oder etwas in der Art. Über die Such-Funktion habe ich erstaunlicherweise keinen Eintrag bzw. Wunsch dieser Art gefunden. Nun gibt es ja den Launch-Kalender, der ist ganz witzig. Wichtiger wäre in meinen Augen aber ein ingame Kalender in welchem sich die Mitspieler in Clans zu den Clanwarzeiten an- und abmelden können. Clanwars werden mit steigender Teilnehmerzahl planungsintensiver und wir erreichen langsam einen Punkt an welchem wir immer erst am Abend des CWs sicher wissen ob wir mit einer, zwei oder keiner Division fahren können. Externe Tools wie Google Calendar, Guilded oder andere sind umständlich und jeder muss einzeln eingeladen werden. Dann werden Mitspieler vergessen oder andere sind schlicht und einfach zu faul noch eine weitere App oder Plattform zu benutzen. Daher wäre es super wenn wir nach dem Vorbild von World of Warcraft einen ingame Kalender hätten in welchem man als Clan interne Events eintragen kann wie zum Beispiel Trainings oder Turniere, zu welchen sich die Clanmitglieder an- und abmelden können. Ausserdem sollen die offiziellen Clanwar-Zeiten als einzelne Events voreingetragen sein mit An- und Abmeldefunktion. Noch genialer wäre wenn man evtl. sogar die Aufstellung anhand der angemeldeteten Spieler und deren verfügbaren Schiffen planen könnte, aber das wäre nur die Kirsche auf der Sahne. Ich habe im offiziellen Stream gehört dass im Jahr 2020 einige Port Verbesserungen kommen sollen. Bitte habt so etwas auch auf dem Schirm, ich denke das wäre ein wichtiges Feature welches von allen Clan-Spielern dankend angenommen wird. Falls jemand die Idee weiterspinnen möchte kann er das gerne hier tun oder einfach nur seinen Servus druntersetzen falls ihr euch so etwas auch wünscht. Mit bestem Gruß Noray
  8. Dear WG, here's my suggestion what you really should do with the dockyard: When people are grinding up through the lines in the tech-tree the next ship in the line is being built in the dockyard, by earning xp. Not any ticking per minute, just when you win a game you can go to the dockyard and see some extra parts of the next ship being built. Sincerely DenmarkRadar. !! See !! I can wear a positive hat !!
  9. Well a window popped up about my experience so far, ofc there was no text to elaborate my thoughts and rating etc., so I thought i'd pop here and share my take on it. Since you already have it implemented, how about you insert a poll like system, where people can vote, e.g. do you like ijn 20km torps, yes/no type of thing. That would make things much more transparent for you and for the player base, without any kind of ensuing dispute. If you want to know what displeases the players etc. no need to destroy your eyes at reddit and forums to get an idea of what's what. Plus you can correlate and balance the votes depending on what kind of answers you get from new players/older ones, depending on winratio activity and so on, so that you can make more educated moves in the future. It seems to me as a very reliable system to receive definitive and unconvoluted feedback while still following your own dev path.
  10. Hello there folks! One thing that just rubs me the wrong way is the notion that Carriers have "Unlimited Planes", which just isn't true. Using the regen times of a Stock Hakuryu without any commander skills or modules the maximum theoretical regen of aircraft in a match (20 minutes) would be 16 Attack Aircraft (14 on deck), 15 Torpedo Bombers (20 on deck) and 17 Dive Bombers (18 on deck). In total this would give the Stock Hakuryu a maximum of 100 Aircraft in a game. If I recall correctly Hakuryu had a Hangar Capacity of 100 planes pre rework, which makes the maximum amount of Aircraft basically unchanged. My suggestion would be to show the maximum amount of planes available to the Carrier somewhere in the game (on the Tech Tree or in the Menus) so that the playerbase can put the notion to rest that CVs have "unlimited planes" to harass them. Edit: Counting all 9 Fighter consumables of the squadrons as well the 4 on the Carrier the Stock Hakuryu ends up having 179 Aircraft, which is quite the increase compared to before the rework. So reducing the "total" amount of Aircraft on a Carrier might be a reasonable nerf. (Also making the Fighters a bit more user-friendly would also help!)
  11. Before we start, I will admit that I don’t play Aircraft Carriers and this is no doubt going to rub someone up the wrong way. My issue with Aircraft Carriers is during the setup phase of the match (the first 1.5 minutes of the match where everyone is getting into position), this is usually when an Aircraft Carrier sends out its attack planes to do a bit of spotting before rocket spamming their chosen DD. Which 4 times out of 5 results in the DD losing 50-70% of its health before anyone in the game has fires a single shot (especially when the DD is bottom Tier). Now when this situation happens during the fighting part of the match, then its fair game the DD got themselves into that position it’s their fault for not considering the Aircraft Carrier when fighting with other ships, however when it happens in the setup it’s really bit infuriating and could almost be considered spawn killing. I didn’t start this thread to bash Aircraft Carriers (there's enough of that), I’ve Identified a problem as I see it so it’s only right that I suggest a possible solution. Which is to make it so that no aircraft can be launched until the first ship is spotted in the match (not the first ship spotted on the enemy team, just the first ship spotted), to make it fair across the board this should also include spotter planes. I think implementing this would: - Enable ships to get into position before the fight, promoting more tactical thinking - Force Aircraft Carrier players to consider their positioning of the carrier at the beginning of the match, rather than set up camp in the spawn until the brown trouser moment later when a BB launches a salvo at them - Give better data with regard how Aircraft Carrier’s perform in a match, leading to more accurate balancing of Aircraft Carrier vs ship AA rather than the pendulum swing that's been implied in so many other posts - I believe for a good Aircraft Carrier player this would not interfere with the gameplay or results and ideally there would be less complaining about Aircraft Carriers in game. But this is m perspective, What do you think?
  12. I want to play clan battles for a while now, even before I had to leave the game for almost one year. Now even more so, but like many others who started late to the whole clan party, I struggle to find members. Recently, two players joined which make me very happy, but to play CBs, you need a big(ger) rooster as not everyone can play everyday due to real life and whatnot. When checking someone‘s stats last night, I accidentally clicked on his team battle tab instead of ranked. Which reminded me, back in the day, when team battles was the closest thing we had to clan battles, you could hire mercs to fill up your ranks. I‘d like to see this feature implemented for clans as well. The way it could work is, a member of a clan or a player without clan registers as merc and can get hired. For each victory, he not only gets the rewards from the battles itself, but also some oil and coal and possibly other goodies that clan members are willing to donate from the treasury of the clan that hired him. Would require some additions to the clan treasury. Exceptions are ships, doubloons, steel, credits or basically anything that could hurt WGs profits. It also would prevent clans and players with a thick wallet snatching all good/ available mercs and leaving smaller clans in the dust. To avoid clan hoping, a merc can only sign with two clans per Season, all other restrictions in regards to switching clans apply. To prevent clans from scamming mercs, they get all bonuses automatically after a set period. Same applies in the other direction tho, if a merc leaves the clan without fulfilling his contract, he only receives the rewards for the time he was active. For instance, both parties agree to have the contract run 4 weeks with a playtime of 20 hours. After playing 4hours total, the merc wants to leave. In this case, he’d only receive the rewards for the time played and not the 4 weeks. It might be a piece of work, but it could work and it would help smaller clans getting their feet wet in CBs while giving players of other clans a chance to play for additional rewards. Thoughts?
  13. In this post I want to discuss the use of Secondary Battery Mod 2, the upgrade that gives -20% reload speed in slot 6. Currently, there are a lot of useful upgrades in slot 6: +15% AA gun performance (AAGM2) -12% reload for main guns, -13% turning speed (MBM3) -20% secondary reload speed (SBM2) +16% firing range (GFCSM2) -11% dispersion for main battery (APRM2 - USA only) Now, of those four, SBM2 is considered too weak by many, many players. It's fun to use, but there are nearly no ships that can effectively benefit from this -20% reload speed, and for ships that can benefit from it (Alsace, Großer Kurfürst), MBM3, or even GFCSM2, is usually a better choice. Therefore I would like to start a discussion about the following: Shouldn't SBM2 move to slot 5? In my opinion, this would have some very interesting consequences: Tier 8 ships will get acces to this upgrade, meaning it's usable on a lot of popular secondary build ships: Tirpitz, Bismarck, Massachusetts, Graf Zeppelin, Richelieu. Battleships have to compromise their concealment/torpedo detection in order to use it, allowing for more variation in upgrades. What do you think about moving SBM2 to slot 5?
  14. Uninstalatus

    Submarine suggestion

    Greetings everyone, as submarines are coming to game, I wanted to make a suggestion for rarely known, particular type of submarine, if there is an interest for them. It is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronis-class_submarine RONIS (seal) class submarines from latvian/soviet navy. That could be interesting addition, but there is not alot of information about them. Not sure what tier it should be, its up to devs to decide that, but question for everyone else, would you like to see those submarines in game? Just want to see my country represented in the game, sorry if I sound too pushy. AS this type of submarine is not widley known, then this might be interesting addition from forgotten pages of history. But it is up to game devs to decide if this is worthvile addition to their game.
  15. 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
  16. Niikichi

    Verbesserungsvorschlag

    Liebes Wargaming Team, keine Ahnung ob es schon an anderer stelle vorgeschlagen wurde oder es vielleicht schon in Arbeit u./o. ob es das richtige Forum ist,wenn dem so sein sollte entschuldige ich mich dafür es nochmals angerissen zu haben. Ich würde mir gerne ein besseres whisper-system wünschen, sprich: Das man mit Freunden die gerade in einer Runde sind auch schreiben kann wenn man selbst zur gleichen Zeit im Port ist und vice versa. Damit verbunden vielleicht auch ein neues oder verbessertes System für die Freundesliste. Das wars auch schon,vielen Dank. Mit freundlichem gruß
  17. Butterfield8

    Night/Dawn/Dusk Battles

    While I realize that developing and adding submarines into the WOW game is inevitable, I would prefer to see nighttime engagements, as well as dusk and dawn battles as well.
  18. Reasons why Graf Zeppelin dive bombers need to be changed. Ta-152 a high altitude interceptor fighter is non-sensical for the dive bomber role for naval engagement since this fighter isn't designed for low altitude engagements. The Ta-152 loadout with 1x PD 500 AP bomb and size of attacking flight being only 2 planes, dealing in maximum 14,000 potential damage if you manage to hit both bombs in the citadel is the lowest potential damage in-game for dive bombers even Langley's HE bombs have higher potential damage with their two bombs being 14,600 potential damage at Tier IV. Ta-152 with 1x PD 500 AP bomb suffers the worst accuracy to hit in-game with their size of attacking flight being only 2 planes being tied with other Tier IV Carriers with similar size of attacking flight of being two planes per drop and having payload being only one bomb, while Graf Zeppelin is supposed to be a T8 carrier and should be balanced by its piers at same tier, Enterprise, Kaga, Saipan etc. Enterprise respectably having the size of attacking flight being 3 planes with having 2 bombs each respectably increasing its accuracy to hit and potential to do 35,400 maximum potential damage. More than twice Graf Zeppelin could possibly do with a single drop. Ta-152 suffers the worst dive-bombing run I seen in the game. It requires a player with a high skill ceiling to able to take advantage of the angle of the bomb drop effectively. The bombs only drop directly down if you drop them early as possible when the bombing reticle appears this is when piercing battleships with strong deck armor is possible which is highly unreliable due to the bombs dropping very early and the accuracy suffers but it's the only way to get the optimal angle for the bombs to pierce.. Ta-152 was designed by Wargaming to be a divebomber but it performs best as a horizontal bomber like the RN Horizontal bombers. Best result using these dive bombers is to side bomb cruisers with big side citadels but you sacrifice velocity to able to pierce in the last second of the run and have a chance to hit the torpedo belt which is highly armored, still being highly unreliable despise using it optimally. False advertisement, this cannot be pointed enough that Wargaming used Ju-87 Stukas in promoting the Graf Zeppelin but they never managed to be added due to the poor excuse of the Stukas being too slow to be viable for the dive bomber role in Tier 8, while a carrier like the Enterprise that use dive bombers that fly at similar speeds like the SB2C helldive but still are highly successful despite being slow. Graf Zeppelin currently sits at 48% winrate average being the least effective CV in the game at Tier 8. Suggestion 1. Bringing back the Ju-87 Stuka and use regular AP bombs. Majority of Graf Zeppelin owners want it back, the plane was highly iconic during the second world war and Wargaming put already lot of resources on making it, it wouldn't require more of wargaming money to use already made assets. Speed is useless if the weapon that is used isn't reliable, the Ju-87 in the second world war was a very reliable close air support plane that could dive and pull up in very steep vertical dives, perfect for naval bombing. It was already planned to be used for the real Graf Zeppelin for historical reasons it should be with the carrier. The SB2C helldiver that the T8 Enterprise uses flies at 160 knots which would practically be the same speed that the Ju-87 would fly in-game. Yet the SB2C helldiver on the Enterprise is the most successful dive bomber in T8 despite being slow. The argument of Stukas being too slow to be used in-game is completely false. Suggestion 2. Change the existing dive bombers into horizontal bombers. Option 1. PC RS 1000-500 series, Rocket-Assisted Anti-Shipment Bomb. Rocket Assisted Anti-Shipment Bombs was a short term project used during 1941 in the Mediterranean sea funded by Rhein Metal to sink allied ships, the project lasted till 1942 April and saw continuous anti-shipping action until the project was canceled due to the favor of other projects. All these bombs were meant to be dropped like conventional bombs at minimum 50´ angle. Meaning they were meant for the horizontal bombing. Most of these bombs were dropped by Focke Wulf 190 fighters, a logical replaced for the Ta-152. Since FW-190 saw anti-shipping action and had low altitude configurations. One notable record of the bombs hitting allied vessels was with the PC 1000 RS "Paul", were achieved in the Mediterranean on a cruiser "Dido class" the bomb hit at a speed of 1152 km / h and the igniter detonated on 0.065 sec after the impact, but as the bomb had already leaked out of the ship's bottom and detonated 5 m below the water. Switching from dive bomber to horizontal bomber would be logical for the high-speed planes the Graf Zeppelin already has and would not be too big of a change. Could penetrate 180 mm armor steel so a hit would be pretty deadly to big capital ships such as battleships, bombs were specifically designed to destroy the Nelson. Option 2. SB 800 RS SB 800 RS also known as the bouncing bomb was a later project after the Rocket Assisted Anti-Shipment Bomb project. The whole idea of the bomb is to hit the side of the ship and detonate as it sinks under the ship after reaching the right depth for the fuse to activate, while the plane needs to reach maximum speed to drop it so it would get enough velocity to bounce depending if the bomb is with the rocket-assisted motor or not. The whole concept is new and would be an interesting unique mechanic in-game, currently, Graf Zeppelin dive bombers perform most effectively by side bombing so the technique would be quite similar on how to use this bomb. Would require a lot of testing to get it to work and personally is my least favorite option but it exists if the developers need some new creative mechanic, would still be hundred times more reliable than the current state of the dive bombers right now. Footage of both Options in a rare restored tape.
  19. The Led Zepp is in a bit of a meh position, I gather? I thought I'd float an idea and see who salutes. Alternate Dive-bomber selection in port: Stukkas with *mixed* bomb loadout (one medium AP with high pen meh alpha, two small HE firestarters). It leaves the current ship intact for people who go "I bought the ship as X, it should stay as X", but also gives it a unique-selling-point (other than secondaries) for those who want it to distinguish it from others. It should, in theory, give some bombers with good consistency – citadel penning potential to avoid damage saturation albeit with lower alpha than dedicated heavy AP bombs, but also some HEs to light some fires too.
  20. So I had the idea when looking at the sail training ship in the Hamburg port and it reminded me of this pic with the Queen Elizabeth and the ship of the line HMS Victory at the bottom. Just replace the Queen Elizabeth or that destroyer with your ship and that would be a really classy port imho.
  21. 159Hunter

    Paragon system

    Dear moderators, I understand that there is a dedicated topic for this. However: most people come to this particular section of the forum to discus the game as it is, as it was and how we expect it to be when WG announces changes (we did this for CV rework, for the 0.8.5 AA changes, when clan battles were announced, when Stalingrad was announced, when steel was announced .... ). Point is, people are used to this. If you don't want us to discus the game here (ok, a decision you made based upon an interpretation of a forum rule I misread I guess) could you then please add a locked, sticky topic with the direct link to the correct topic? This will avoid you having to close a lot more topics AND it will also show that WG is not trying to hide the discussion in an obscure part of the forum that most of us don't use.
  22. In World of Tanks we have Marks of Excellences on tanks above tier 5, essentially a sort of bragging rights cosmetic feature. There are 3 steps that get progressively harder, and what is calculated into the Mark is average damage and spotting/assistance damage. So step one is to get above 50% of the population in that tank, step 2 75% and step 3 95% if I'm not mistaken. Now could this be applied to ships and why? Well for me atleast with the current clan battle rotation, ranked season and plenty of missions most ships below tier 8 are collecting rust in my port. Having Marks of Excellence or something similar to try and achieve would give myself some form of incentive to drop down and dust off plenty of ships in my port. Playing lower tiers for fun only get me so far, as while lower tiers are fun at the higher tiers is where my money and captain XP makers make their work. So a system along these lines would give most people something to work towards and hopefully have fun in the process. This has been brought up a while back now, and I don't see that many drawbacks to a system like this as it is purely a bragging rights tool and a sense of achievment. Limit it to tier 5 so you restrict sealclubbing and you should be golden. I should clarify that this is about individual ships, not the distinctive insignias that we already have (and are from tier 8 and up). So what is the general consensus on this? Is it a stupid idea, any pitfalls, improvements, a good idea or just whatever?
  23. Dunno if this is the correct place for suggestions, or if it has been brought up a million times before, but.. Talking about the "Earn X amount of money" or similar on missions for example. "Score 10000000 citadel hits" (yeah, that would be a fun one..) would be so much simpler if you could just separate the zeros into thousands, either comma, space, period or whatever you see fit. "Score 10 000 000 citadel hits" or "Score 10,000,000 citadel hits", is instantly readable, no annoyance required. Now this isnt really a big issue at all, could even be just me, but whenever I have to start counting zeros it does slightly annoy me.
  24. Hello ! First of all, i would like to say that I understand why would WG want to rework the CV section. So, i will introduce my self first. You my notice that i is one of my first topic launch. Because as a player, i dedicate more of my time playing than going on forums. (not that it is useless, but because i like play. But i like to check it sometimes for guides etc.) You also might ask why would i introduce myself a bit, and that would be not useful ? It is to show what profile is talking about that big warzone topic that is CV. I am a player that came when playing wot around 2015. I heard about WoWs during this period (not exact). and WoWs was the only game that make me interested about ships in WW2, because before that, i was more in star wars stuff but never mind. I play WoWs when most of the ships where IJN and USN. So as a newbie a "make" a dream list of boat. Bceuase a a newcomer of WG game we dont know how much exp it will requiert to reach TX and even get skills to even carry or can play at lower tier. So chose somes. ad begin the play. PLUS as i am not a big ultra fan at the beginning, i play and farm mostly "for fun and learn purposes" first. But as a casual player i also switch games to games. I play WoWs more like seasonly or intensly but not continously. As some player already said in other post while searching for guides was that: the first 500 game whill show you how hard it is to learn. The 1000 game will give u a little bit of XP and show you how deep the strat can be. I am now at my 1000 game. I know few thing but not a lot as a dedicated WoWs player. So i had a lot of feelings in the game because i might not be well describe their but i might not play the game has a loyal man. But when i play a game, and this game. I like to learn, lose, win and understand the mechanics. Remember the FEELINGS. When it comes to feelings, you chose your ships and then became the first impressions. BB are slow tanky and not that manoeuvrable. CA/CL are kind of a medium ship DD are fast manoeuvrable and sneaky ships. AND THEN CV: when i first tried out (in RTS version) i was a bit lost because of the RTS view. Not because it was a strange design. But because i wasnt able to see the more straigt. The view was to much zoomed and was in a feeling of dive. Much like watching the ground. (FIRST SUGGESTION IN RTS MODE that disapear was and would be: having a scaling RTS view between the actual view and the map one.) I feel CV a different and interesting gameplay. EVEN if i lost most of my first CV game. I felt like if i was a bit better, i would shredd ships. So i learnt about manual drop and straffs (SECOND SUGGESTION IN RTS MODE taht disapear was and would be: why does manual straffs and drop removed for T4/T5 ?) Beside overall interfaces view of CV game play. I would like to compare both the RTS version of the CV gameplay and the 0.8.0 now 0.8.3 gameplay. But after that you might also say that feelings or not important compared to the balance. Maybe but WG isnt trash as a dev team. (maybe only edit team might be the one) So game designer can pretty sur mix both things. Game play design and feelings shared by it. Back to the comparison: RTS first feelings: The CV seems to be a strategic boat which need to be greatly placed to get to the point where both defending team mates and attacking is efficient. because of the multi suqad control thing. 0.8.0 firstr feelings: The CV seems to be a hangar for squad aircraft spawn to play a shoot game I know i might exaggerate. But it is that. The RTS view show and make the CV playuer more immersed as a CV captain. Feelings like how CV works in real life during WW2. (I know they dont do exactly same ! but will be more fidele to it) The best image for CV feels during RTS mode was that the captain/player was like a captain faced to a map whith icon that represent the suad that he control, more like an essential role. Where now the 0.8 make it feel an other way. For sur it keep his same role but loses that feeling. But more of a hangar where u are a pilot squad captain that just takeoff a ship. SO ! i am almost in the RTS team for sur, BUT i also understand what make the new system more appealing for some reasons and for some player bases. Thats why it is the same with each boat. DD feels weak but manoeuvrable, and can make some supprise attack CA/CL feels like a support ground force. That have the role of giving opportunity for mate to could do their role (their might be exeption but corect me if so) As HE on BB to avoid them aving great angle on mates. Radaring DD to avoid traps. Hydroing avoinding and preventing Torps for BB. Etc... BB feels tanky and powerful in exchange of their manoeuvrability. and CV are same, they have the role of controling the air space, provinding air supp and air attack to give opportunity to other to accomplish their own role. For me it is almost like a RPG/MOBA game where each ship have their own spec and gameplay role. it is the same thing and must be fiedel as much as possible in synergy with the game design. (I almost talk about the feels more that the game adjstement. but wait a bit...) For the good sake of CV from RTS to 0.8. Why not just merge both design to be accurate ? Why not keeping the RTS par because of the feelings ? Because most of the time from what i saw, 0.8 is better because alpha stike is less painfull. But more for DD. It cant deplane harder an oppennent. It is more joyful for newcomer. (not me sadly, but why not make them enoying the ancien ver ? (thats mostly because of the inefficency of T4/T5)) And about the feeling of being closer to the fight that on RTS view. It is false acording to the CV feels design. It isnt meant to be Close combat feeling. (ofc according to the feels again) So why not mix feels of CV and adjustment to make it pleasant for all ? Now maybe my aumentation and essay was woobly, but for sur, all player who are passionnate about ships whill understand what are those feelings. It is not about simplifying gameplay. It is about TWEAKING to get the perfect mesure for low tier and top tier as the Mighty shredder midway. SO What are what i suggest ? remember that this is suggestion. First i will use the battle of midway as an example. When Lexington and other USN CV iirc where attempting to attack yamamoto's main fleet. It was at first a recon war where they both "reconing" to could be the first to give the strike. And then being the big waves of planes. from wikipedia, not sur exactly. USS lexington had a space for aircraft of 22 fighters, 36 bombers and 12 torps bombers. I know that the desing of making only one big armada of planes going threw the map isnt great... or IS IT ? So why not for the new hypothetical rerework have a limited hangar of planes ? As accurate as possible but with possibility to tweak and changes the ammount of each kind of Aircrafts for diversity and design purpose. Because of the enoughly big amount of planes, like multi squad control as the RTS mode. The view will be mainly RTS but wil more scale view to get the perfect angling. Iwould add like a new type of planes while erasing the inacurate missile attack planes (tell me if i am wrong). Their will be 4 type : Recon planes Fighters Bombers Torp Bombers CAUTION. i know that CV were not meant to recon on both game build. But why not as in midway battle ? We have to tweak Fighters Bombers Torp Bombers to have a shorter range of view. And a rannge of view for recon planes to be limited at 6km (even fewer than the current stage) OFC, they wont be a lot. Only one can be flying around per CV, and only on other one is in the hangar. With as the RTS have given to fighters=AMMO. Here for recoin will be fuel or time limited flying path. like 3 min for 2 min CD. Enough fragile to get shredded when on risky moves because of the 6km. And more over to be less paintless ofr DD ! = they wont ping the type of boat at a certain rage like 6 km for a point ping in minimap only, and a ship type ping on minimap only when at 4-3 km. (depending on the type of boat. Which gives a deeper mecanics for concealment in relation with planes). More over ! Even if info is shared for all team. It will be retarded and delay of around 10 or 15 sec depending on CV to consider the "logistic" of how does recon transmit the message to the CV and when the CV will give info (as a radio wave) AGAIN more over, only recon will send infos to CV for Point ping and ship type ping on minimap ONLY. (CV will share that for all mates. BUT Fighters Bombers Torp Bombers wont recon for others, only info for CV) From the begining of a game their would be like maybe a timer for all planes. before take of. But only recon one is working on CD. Other wil be like generating planes in CD from hangar to completly make a squad. maybe like 60 sec before recon take off. And 90 sec before Squand ready with only one plane and others ore preparing for CV dock and squad ? Like that CV early snipe and early recon woudnt be effective. Wouldint that be interresting. (Remeber that this is suggestion about my argumentation of how would rework be interesting and how could it be to please every body) So we please DD and all for "reconning" thing no ? The system of attack would for me be same as RTS for Fighters Bombers Torp Bombers BUT with already fully aimed system. with only AA degrading the aim. Maybe as for BB normalisation variable, penetration variable etc. Planes as Fighters Bombers Torp Bombers can have their own variable as morale or "determination" Where the more AA they took, the more they began inacurate and have less window time to launch attack. OFC it will be tweaked for each nation. (ex: IJN will withstand more AA damage to degrade the accuration of the drop fewer, but increase the chance of taking AA damage. That will give as more "secret deth" as penetration variable, healing party, fires, flooding. etc. Overall, from stats the planes would have a greater chance to hit targer or at least drop payload. even with the AA debuff aiming. But will take more damage. So less plane form same squad can drop. It will drop but not as a full squad. For AA work now. It woulbe be interesting to keep this new AA system. But also with his own accuracy variable. lIke the more time planes are in the AA range, the more damage it will took from it. of course the variable will depend on remaing aa on boat and in how many AA zone they are in (from how many ships zones) And maybe put more over the sector renforcement system, a target priority thing as before which act like 5 or 10% faster atteining a Max AA damage from the variable. Like it will take more and faster damage from stying in zone. which by this way will decrease the variable of other ssquand in the same zone. Doesnt adding new variable for CV planes AA system better that rework all the system and loosing all the feels ? I know that it might need tweak in my suggestion buyt also as the actual rework to see how it could shine. But being able to kept the accurate feelings for the same role is IMO better that changing the feels for only the good sake of balance. MOREOVER and maybe out of topic. But why not having radars and hydro modules being destroyable on CA/CL ? or as engine, they can at least being disable ? Liek that i will again increase interaction betaween team mate where DD would need others to disable radars that can or cannot get repared by repair system. It will IRCC decrease the DD oppression if it still have one. Like that DD attacks will be more confortable because of the ability to disable radar or even hydro. (hydro will be a compartment inside the citadel or casemate as engine, ammo rack stuffs...) And also be less oppresive because of AA variable which make them take more damage and see less further. unless it is recon that only ping on minimal and with a delay. Finaly, main question would be like does each sugestion will be interesting enough for Wg to take a look at that ? or it is a hopeless topic that wont be even read by anyone and that WG will ignore ? THANKS A LOT FOR READING this BIG BLOC. I cant thank you a lot. Any critizise is welcome because this was a big though for me. I love the game because of the game but also of how WG devs mainly succes a making you feel each boat to ! AS i repeat my self, all that suggestion might took off my credibility, or contradict each argument each other. I am not sur about that. But be sur to correct me !. PS sry for a not gramaticaly accurate english, i am not a native english writer :/
  25. HentaiSquirrel

    Idea for tournament "King of the Seals"

    Hello Captains, hello Staff, when today i was having a peak into the King Of The Seas streams an idea came up: The King Of The Seals Tournament. (working title) KoTS and Shipstorm are addressed to higher tier players. Since there are probably a lot of people out there who like a competitive approach on occasion but haven't yet made their way into the higher echelons of competitive gaming... Why not have a tournament basically like Shipstorm or/and KoTS but limited to players who haven't been playing WoWs for more than, say, a year. Ships allowed from tier IV-VI. The Name is a working title derived from the 'seal clubbing' meme but evolved from the perspective of a seal that clubs back hard );-> The spread from TIV to VI sponaneously seemed viable imo... while a Minekaze /w a reasonably well trained captain (10-12 pt) can certainly wreak havoc in that environment - or go down hilariously if handled poorly - even an IFHE equipped Duguay-Trouin or a 13 pt. captain Shenyang could probably contribute more than a fair share against, say, a halfheartedly equipped/played TVI BB or CL, etc. Players /w no more than a year (?) of experience so there's no actual 'seal clubbing'. What are your thoughts on this? A mere brain fart due to an exhausting weekend or would this actually be something worthwhile pulling off? Since i'm not sure where to post this and don't want to spam one of the tournament related sections i'm putting it into 'off-topic' for now. If anyone likes the idea and has the experience and motivation to make something out of it, please feel free to pick it up. I even might be willing to contribute some of my time organising - if the chemistry is right - and taking part in the actual tournament, of course. (Having organised and contributed to organising smaller and larger 'rl events' in the past professionally... hey WG, i work freelance now XD ). Oh, and if something like this already exists, nevermind, i've only been playing the game for a couple of months now myself, grinding my way up to TVIII (and passable in random up to TVI... TVII on good days ;-> ). So if i'm late withe the idea, just point me to where i can apply, please ;-) Have a splendid time and good hunting everyone!
×