Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'Suggestions'.



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 61 results

  1. TheCinC

    Suggestions thread

    Please read this before posting, at least read the bold parts, so we can keep this thread effective and clean! Ever since beta I've tried to create a suggestion thread like this, but so far without success.. Please help make World of Warships great again and add your own suggestions here. When you add a suggestion, please keep it positive, constructive and if possible, to the point. Be clear, be specific if possible, use terminology we all understand. I've added a catalogue of suggestions, per topic, here in this OP, so you can just go to whichever subject interests you most, or check if something already exists, to make voting easier and prevent duplicates. Please use the appropriate subforum for discussing current or future ships or branches, it is an interesting subject, but too vast to cover here. Please do not comment on the suggestions, just like them or not, so we can keep this clean and people can just trawl through the suggestions of us forumites. If you run out of likes, come back another day. I've seen quite a few inspiring suggestions, but most of those threads die a lonely death sooner or later, this is my way of trying to keep them alive. If you want a separate topic, or already have one and want me to add them here, PM me and I'll try to add a link in the OP ASAP. If you want to comment/discuss any or all of the suggestions, please start a separate topic for that suggestion, PM me and I'll try to add a link in the OP ASAP. If you agree with a suggestion, just click 'Like this'. The more likes, the more popular a suggestion is, the more likely it will at least attract attention. Thank you for your attention and your cooperation. Stickied and maintenance Edit: as of the 5th of May 2017, this topic has been stickied. Thanks Kandly, and thanks to everyone who has participated so far! You've all helped make this effort at providing constructive feedback a success! I will keep track of this topic and keep adding to the index, but will now do so every few days or maybe once a week, as this topic has now become way more popular due to being more visible, so otherwise I won't have any time left to actually play the game. EDIT: due to the backlog in maintenance, please just add a reply to this topic with a link to a new topic you've created, so people will be able to find yours if it drops off the front page. EDIT: I realise I am way behind on keeping the index up to date, but that is in part due to this topic becoming a runaway success. It was already doing pretty well before being stickied, now suggestions are still added at least a few times a week. I haven't found the time to do this in a while, busybusybusy, and will have to decide whether I want to keep doing that, especially since I don't know how important the index is to everyone. PM me if you think the index should stay. If my inbox is overwhelmed, that is encouragement to keep doing this. Important edit as of 28th April 2017: See here. So Kandly has promised to forward our suggestions to the Devs, which now happens weekly, and Sub_Octavian himself may pop in once in a while as well. Sub_Octavian explained that, for various reasons, nothing may come of it, which I understand, but we will at least be seen and heard by the Devs. I also don't expect answers or replies, or even a notification things have been looked at or forwarded, so don't get upset if that doesn't happen, just post a question in the 'Questions of the community thread' if you really want an answer. I for one am very happy just to know that things posted will get the attention of the people who can do something with them. So let's make the most of this! List of all topics in this thread, and topics covered elsewhere on this forum. If you create a new thread to discuss a new proposal, just add a reply with a link to that topic so it can be found from here. Topic: General (everything related to World of Warships that does not fit in any of the other categories) Communication - Added by: TheCinC Date: 8th of January 2017 WoWs APP - Added by: Dominico Date: 8th of January 2017 Rank based matchmaking - Added by: TomaszuJerzy Date: 8th of January 2017 Rank based matchmating - Added by: Rethyl Date: 11th of January 2017 Skill based matchmaking - Added by: Shagulon Date: 3rd of March 2017 Enable replay in game and ability to create output ready for Youtube - Added by Capra76 Date: 9th of January 2017 Ability to continue chat after completing game - Added by Capra76 Date: 9th of January 2017 Revised report system - Topic by FaceFisted Date: 8th of January 2017 Captain training for future ships - Added by: Cosseria Date: 5th April 2017 More varieties of signal bundles, as on other servers - Added by: Leo_Apollo11 Date: April 17th 2017 Remove new upgrades from containers - Added by: SyntheticMan Date: April 27th 2017 Historical captains, with unique abilities I (see also below) - Added by: Phlogistoned Date: 7th May 2017 Remove special upgrades from supercontainers - Added by: Mydgard Date: 15th May 2017 Reward XP based on playing a role that fits your ship class, to encourage team work - Added by: Black_Baron_MC Date: 15th May 2017 Additional suggestions for rewarding XP based on playing a role that fits your ship class, to encourage team work - Added by: tsounts Date: 17th May 2017 Add an option to 'opt out' of receiving special upgrades - Added by: blindhai Date: 17th May 2017 Reward laying smoke for allies - Added by: blindhai Date: 17th May 2017 Historical captains, with unique abilities II (see also above) - Added by: Zen71_sniper Date: 18th May 2017 Fictional captains, with unique abilities - Added by: Gnirf Date: 18th May 2017 Topic: Gameplay (Bastion/Challenges/Missions/Game modes, etc.) New (historical) game modes - Added by: TheCinC Date: 8th of January 2017 AI controlled landbased planes - Added by: Affeks Date: 9th of January 2017 More time to cap in domination mode - Added by: Svadilfari Date: 11th January 2017 RTS-style game mode where CV controls all the ships on its team - Added by: Hawg Date: 23rd April 2017 Add means to decrease capture time - Added by: FallOutBoi Date: 5th May 2017 Add means to apply first win bonus to a game in which you actually did well - Added by: FallOutBoi Date: 5th May 2017 Topic: Game mechanics (Detection/Fires/Flooding/Shooting/Smoke/Spotting/Torpedoes, etc.) Realistic gun arcs for AA - Added by: Wembley_Mark Date: 27th February 2017 Upgrade that trades gun range for improved muzzle velocity/sigma/RoF - Added by: Aoteras Date: 30th March 2017 Either remove Radio Location or give us the option of turning off our Radio - Added by: TheCinC Date: 5th April 2017 Increase Manoeuvrability for DDs and CAs - Added by: TheCinC Date: 5th April 2017 Decrease accuracy for ship firing at target that manoeuvres and/or changes speed - Added by: TheCinC Date: 5th April 2017 Remove Hydro/Proximity Detection/Radar working through Islands - Added by: TheCinC Date: 5th April 2017 Scalable armour penetration - Added by: iFax Date: 5th April 2017 Add Semi-Armour Piercing (RN feature) to the skill tree, just like IFHE - Added by: Mymeria Date: 27th April 2017 Reduce reload time for spotter aircraft by 60 seconds, so having 4 due to 'Superintendant' skill would be more useful - Added by: TheRonson Date: 28th April 2017 Remove Hydro/Proximity Detection/Radar until it no longer works through obstacles - Added by: TheRonson Date: 28th April 2017 Gyroscopes allowing torpedoes to be launched sideways, then turn in any direction - Topic by: 1MajorKoenig Date: 25th April 2017 Allow players more freedom in choosing modifications - Added by: iFax Date: 6th May 2017 Allow player to set one ship as flagship, unlocking options for customization - Added by: Malhadras Date: 7th May 2017 Various options for balancing BBs and CVs - Added by: Han951753 Date: 11th May 2017 Change IJN DD torpedo launchers to launch volleys with random spread - Added by: tenacious_torps Date: 12th May 2017 Have radar only work for the ship using it, or not allow enemy ships to lock on - Added by: Klinkerhoffen Date: 15th May 2017 Change accuracy of fire based on how your opponent is spotted - Added by: Phlogistoned Date: 16th May 2017 Topic: Graphics (Animations, Improvements, etc.) More detonation/sinking effects - Added by: Dominico Date: 8th of January 2017 Corrections to various ship models - Added by: Piet11111 Date: 9th of January 2017 More variety in camouflage schemes - Added by: Ferry_25 Date: 27th of February 2017 Night battles with working light houses - Added by: Ferry_25 Date: 3rd of March 2017 Dynamic lighting in port based on time of day - Added by: Skyllon Date: 21st April 2017 Preference for historical camouflages, even if they are 'dull' - Added by: drmajga Date: 23rd April 2017 Ability to choose camouflages and bonuses separately - Added by: TheCinC Date: 5th May 2017 Allow players to fly multiple flags at once - Added by: NyronGT Date: 6th May 2017 Topic: Game client (user friendliness, options) Remember previous choice of currency for in game items - Added by: SyntheticMan Date: 11th January 2017 Remember previous choice for choosing a captain (From other ships or Reserves) - Added by: xxNihilanxx Date: 3rd March 2017 Option to have Minimap on second display - Added by: CaptainEbola Date: 4th March 2017 More information in the modules screen, allowing preview of module/upgrades - Added by: ThePurpleSmurf Date: 8th May 2017 Add ability to sell empty slots and captain's Reserve slots - Added by: Kibbari Date: 9th May 2017 Add option to set map preferences for all ships at once - Added by: Srle_Vigilante Date: 10th May 2017 Add separate slot for special upgrades to increase their worth - Added by: Gnirf Date: 17th May 2017 Show Challenges, Missions and Tasks that you can currently contribute to while in battle - Added by: blindhai Date: 17th May 2017 Show spotting damage while in battle - Added by: blindhai Date: 17th May 2017 Maximize air detection range at 10, as that is the maximum possible value - Added by: NoMoreAngel Date: 19th May 2017 Separate topics: https://forum.worldofwarships.eu/topic/114181-recruit-rewards-for-game-veterans-as-well-a-suggestion/ [This space intentionally left blank]
  2. "Spotting have killed the game" Many players, to the more famous gamers/streamers have been saying the above line about the new CV rework. Ever since the major RTS was shelved, with many seesawing of micro updates, to major patches along the way. The look and feel of the new "mode". Effectively, World of Warships have changed forever... I feel I need to include the following. Instead of starting another thread in the forum, nor restarting what is already been said many times since. Yes, Wargaming (WG) have essentially "succeeded" in raising the players to try the CV lines. That's a fact, to which I will not challenge. After all, the numbers do reflect the rise in CV usage according to their data. As well as in game. That was their intention (they proved many times during their public statements in many 'summits'), but was that the only intention? Doubt it. With any introduction of anything "new", (this case being CV changes) WG have placed many Premium CVs on their shops. Many were sold. Only to have the players who bought them the feeling of buyers remorse. Subsequent updates/patches later. This is not only a rumour mill (From NA players to EU players), it's a fact. I've spoken to many players directly on both sides of the pond. None of them were glad to have bought them. What WG have consequently done. Their drop in the ocean, is now being felt on the shores of all the playerbases around the regions. A message to players. Could we please keep any and all arguments of why there is a CV / or the need for CV in this game out of this thread. This is not about that. It's about working with what we have now, to make it hopefully better for all. No, I'm not a pro-CV or against-CV. I just play with what the WG have given access me. Back on topic. Let's face it. Going back is not an option for WG. After many, many months of work and money poured into it. We know that it isn't going to happen. We get it. Instead of pressing for the hard reset. Let's find a way to maintain the changes, and tweak what could be better for all player base/game itself. So the following is what I will suggest for the WG team to maybe bring to their next internal meeting, hopefully. Currently, the spotting mechanic allows for X amount of distance from plane to ship to be 'hard spotted'. Much like surface ships to surface ships spotting mechanic. The distance varies from ship to ship, and their individual configurations that users chose to use their particular ships. I do not think that the players are unhappy with such mechanic. The fact that a plane can spot a ship at a certain fixed distance is nothing new. This was also true from the RTS days. So I can't say that this could be the issue. What is questionable, and begs the question of "spotting have killed the game". Is something else from the aforementioned hard spot mechanics. What it does now? It allows for CV planes to spot ships anywhere on the map. The detection ranges of the ships plus the range of the planes spotting distance to the ships overlaps too closely. What does that mean? Let's say ship has air detection of 5km, the plane have hard potting distance of 6km. That leaves 1km buffer in favour of the the planes. If anything, this gap should be addressed. If it hasn't already. I feel I might get lost in my own words here, so let me just jump right into it. Suggestions: Dropped Fighters (Close air patrol - CAP): A: Their spotting ability is active as long as they are patrolling in their dropped areas. With an active "aircraft fuel" timer. I feel I need to write this, just in case the current mechanic will be drastically changed for something else. This mechanic is fine as is. As a DD player, I think this wouldn't impact me as much. Or any other ship types. B: Their spotting ability is only active for a limited period, while retaining the ability to fight other enemy fighters. For example: Spotting time for full strength fighter squadron = 45 seconds, CAP time = 60secs. So upon 45 second mark, the spotting will stop. But the air to air will remain until the timer runs out. Or until the Combat Air Patrol (air to air) area is still active until the planes are shot down. Then the area goes dark. C: Their spotting radius is decided upon how many fighters are patrolling the area. i.e. 6 planes maximum (insert arbitrary number here) spotting distance, 1 plane minimum (inset arbitrary number here) spotting distance from centre of axis/flight pattern. D: The fighters can be replaced by being reinforced by another set of fighters from the CV; Automated flight. This will need to be done by addition of a CV consumable. Players choice, selectable for Premium consumable or non-premium. This will free up the CV player to assist one side of of map, while not having to fly from across the map to drop fighters. (I fear this as the most vulnerable idea, that the public may not agree with) CV vs CV gameplay: What is a missed opportunity. Not having the ability to directly PvP against a CV, as a CV player in game. Currently the CV is in battle with themselves to get as much damage, not versus enemy CV player. No matter how much we dissect this mechanic. That is what it results to. In the older system, there were. Skill level was player input controlled, versus the RNG automated as it is now. Now it's drop the fighters, let the automated RNG figure it out. This is nothing close to what the surface ship players do. They position, they aim, they time, etc. To achieve a particular result of their choices and actions. Why should it be any different for the CV? Imagine, if destroyers, cruisers, battleships with a press of a consumable. Allowing the shells to land on target depending totally on the automated RNG without any other input form the player. I'm quite sure that the player would disagree with this, why can't the CV players actions reflect this too? Why make the CV gameplay automated when fighting versus another CV player? This is something that should be addressed, if CV is to be more than just a damage collector. Introduce a consumable for player controlled Air to Air dogfighting: When a player is flying their squadron, and sees/wants to engage with the enemy squadron. Allow the player to press a consumable or a key, to change the reticule to Air-to-Air mode to engage in their dog fighting. Once either side have been shot down, the remaining planes will switch to the current "flying" mode. Or please find another way for Air-to-air dogfighting to be player input related, and not automated. I just find that the exclusion of player controlled input with Air-to-Air is a huge missed opportunity during the current rework. Flying player controlled planes (Rockets, torpedoes, bombs): When a player is actively controlling the squadron. The fog of war will be lifted off the minimal. In conjunction with the main battle screen. As the flying squadron is moving from grid to grid/area to area. Think of the planes directly (Line of sight) spotting the ships while it is on coarse. The planes can turn around to keep the target spotted, provided it is still airborne. Also the squadrons spotting is limited to X amount of distance from the centre point of axis/formation. So the squadrons will have to actively seek to find a target, loiter the target area to receive spotting damage (this should be boosted & reflected to CV players, not just relying on damage alone when calculating the credit earning formula). If the squadron all gets shot down, effectively fog of war reactivating instantly. Or until another squadron flies into the unmasked zone. I'm quite sure I've missed more ideas at the time of this writing. Summary The battle space is no longer open "spotted" for the whole duration. It would give all the ships the option to maneuver freely (provided they are not being actively spotted). It would also limit the CV's purpose to farm just for their own needs (opposite of team play). Re-introduce the manual controls of player selected inputs for Air-to-Air dogfights. Wargaming, can we test this idea at least? @Sub_Octavian,
  3. Hello there fellow skippers! I would like to make a repost of a discussion found on Reddit that I thought was very interesting: I personally feel that GZ is in need of a rework when it comes to the Dive Bombers. Not only is their Alpha damage rather pitiful, but the attack angle and drop dispersion makes every drop a roll of the dice. My suggestion is to give GZ her JU-87 Stukas back with a loadout consisting of the current AP bomb plus 2 HE bombs. The current 2/8 flight would be reused as well as the dive pattern and dispersion. This would make the RNG of the bombers a bit less harsh, while still keeping the unique way of attacking. The rather high alpha damage per plane would be balanced by being carried by a rather slow and flimsy aircraft. Would love to hear you guys opinion on this matter!
  4. Hey there folks, With Submarines being in testing since a while a while back, I have wondered why WG have decided to start the Submarine Tech Trees at Tier 6. There are quite a few classes of submarines from the WW1 and inter-war period that could be used for lower tier submarines. The myriad of U-boat classes of the Imperial German Navy and the N- and O-classes of the U.S. Navy come to mind here. What are you guys thought on this subject? Is there a place for lower tier submarines, and if so, should the trees start at Tier 2 or Tier 4?
  5. CaptainEdmond

    New Content Ideas

    I always thought about what new content WARGAMING may be upto everyday to improve the game further, and thought Why not state some of the stuff which I Look forward to. 1. German High Tier Premium Battleship : Lately I personally feel that the German BB line is suffering from not having a tier IX/X premium. ( I know Battlecruiser Siegfried is coming) but battleship line in general needs a Heavy Slow turning "glass cannon" with high accuracy (like Ohio/Pobeda/Georgia). A) H44 Class Super Battleships Can be a thing > If H44 is too big in terms of size H43 or previous ones almost same size of GK can be looked into. 2. More Varied Customisation Options : A) Personal "pennant" customisation (NOT FLAG), with symbols and insignias which already ingame. B) The Option to Colour certain areas of the ship (I know if this will make its way into the game, then certain people will make pink Hulls and eye cancer ships) So, to counter that maybe have 3-4 Premade selectable Scheme colours. EXAMPLE - i) HULL colour - Red rusted, Brown, Dark Military Green(for Uk ship alternate colour matching) Dark Navy/Prussian rusted blue (for USN ships alternate Colour matching) ii) Smoke colour Customisation - Maybe bring back ARP ships smoke effects / New FX for smoke purchase with doubloons / research bureau currency iii) Custom Plated anchors (GOLD/Chrome/Bronze/Rusted) For achievements earned on a ship iv) Aircraft Visual Customisation for CV (cause why not, No one would say no to more visual uniqueness) Premade options to select Country Related symbols on the wings of the plane Can be a thing like Bee Logo on USN Fighter aircrafts and bombers, Rising flag/GOJIRA logo on Japanese fighters v) CV Runway Themes (asphalt dark/Yellow centrelines on grey runway/red) , Very Small Custom LIGHTS on Starboard and Portside furthest ends like they have on real aircraft carriers ^^ Note - These can actually be a way for players to spend their excess Free XP/ Research bureau points in a nice way C) Unique Commanders Can be released With their Unique EMBLEM / Insignia / Base Patch. 3. If The AA reinforcement Sector works out in update 0.8.7 > maybe we can expect some premium Russian Carrier like Admiral Kuznetsov or paper ships made into russian CV line. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuznetsov-class_aircraft_carrier 4. And I know its really hard for Wargaming to procure the Historically Accurate Blueprints and Info and hire historians to know a ship like the back of their hand before adding to a game, I would still like to suggest 7 interesting ships : A) USS Saratoga - USN CV T VIII B) USS Long Beach - USN CA T IX C) German Hermann Schoemann Z7 - German Tier VIII/Tier IX https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_destroyer_Z7_Hermann_Schoemann D) IJN AKAGI - JAP CV T VIII E) French Battleship Strasbourg - T IX premium after Jean bart goes out of Armory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_battleship_Strasbourg F) ^already mentioned^ Admiral Kuznetsov - Premium Russian CV T VIII or why not as the first Premium T X CV in game. G) ^already mentioned^ H44 Battleship - Premium German BB T X Premium so that It can be "COAL/STEEL/Free Xp/Research Bureau Points" Ship / Tech Tree Branch split (which is a Herculean Task to do XD) Have a nice day.
  6. Hello everyone, I recently came back to WoWs after a longer hiatus and decided to main Carriers after their rework. I am having a blast but, as with many others, I feel that they are a bit too strong now. (Although weaker than before the rework, there are A LOT more of them playing) In my opinion the primary reason that the Carriers are so strong is their unparalleled ability to spot enemy ships. The global lack of concealment hits the Destroyers especially hard since it is their primary means of survival. Currently the Carriers sits at a comparable damage potential to Battleships while at the same time having a far greater spotting potential than Destroyers. My suggestion would be to greatly reduce the Carriers ability to directly spot for their team by only having the Carriers spotting showing up on the minimap of their teammates. This would bring back a lot of the spotting role to the Destroyers. However, there are times when as a Carrier you can’t reliably strike the enemy without taking heavy losses due to them grouping up effectively (as they should be). In order for the carrier to still be useful in such a scenario I would give them a new consumable called “Radio Relay”. This consumable would enable the Carriers to relay spotting information to their allies, effectively enabling them to spot ships like normal. The duration and cooldown could be comparable to the radars available to Cruisers. The suggested rework would: A) Remove the CVs ability to keep the enemies permanently spotted. B) Bring back the majority of the spotting role to DDs. C) Make CV spotting more of a tactical tool rather than a strategic one. TL;DR: In order to nerf their effectiveness make CV spotting only show up on the minimap of its teammates unless a new consumable “Radio Relay” is used.
  7. how I would change the CVS This is ofc my personal opinion that I would like to share with you. I was one of the “CVS superunicum” who wg tried to kill off with this update, even though I played CVS since they were introduced in alpha, back in the days where the top tier cv was Essex at tier 10, and the air supremacy skill added 3 DBS and 2 fighters. POEM ALERT changes that help surface ship: -as it was before, and as it is for every ship in the game, at the start of the game, planes need “reloading” (servicing) before taking off. I would say around 60-to -90 secs servicing time. In this way surface ships have that 90 to- 120 secs window at the start of the game of clear sky, so they can position and dds can get near the cap without getting spotted in the first 30 secs of the game, ruining their game. This will also have a good side effect for CVS, especially the potatoes: you will see a lot fewer idiots CVS not moving and don’t follow the fleet and dying stupidly, as they don’t have anything else to do. I can already hear you say: but it would be boring for the CVS, yes as it is boring for a bb to wait 30-35 secs before his guns reload, or a dd that have to wait 2 min before his torps reload at the start of the game. In the first 2 min in the game, everyone is basically “happy sailing” around. Ofc this servicing time would be only at the start of the game - change to the rockets planes, I thought about a few alternatives: 1) rockets planes squad become a consumable, or rather, you have a limited amount of squadrons attacks; let’s say you can do 4-5 squadron runs per game with rockets (so around 15-20 attacks runs) so CVS can’t poop on dds the entire game. This is ofc heavily tweakable 2) reduce the air spotting of dds ( something that I don’t like to change very much) so you have to do a spotting pass to find the dd, then do a u-turn and doing a “blind” attack run start while doing last minute correction at the end of the attack when the dds get spotted again 3) make so that there is a delay between the time you drop your ordinance and the time the rockets hits the dds ( or rather increase the time it takes the rockets to connect with the target), maybe you can make a cool animation were the rockets drop from the plane and then after a set amount of times their rocket engine start. In this way, the dds have some way of limiting the damage they take from rockets 4) remove them altogether 1to3 could be mixed -maybe put a servicing time for all planes like in the old RTS ( ofc a way shorter one, like 15-20 secs) so you can’t spam the same amount of plane all match long Changes to help the CVS: -cut the aa power in half or thereabouts, right now playing with anything else than midway ( that basically poops HVAR on dds all the game long) is suicide, unfun and unrewarding, my riju planes get swatted by Dallas and Kongo aa’s ( and I’m not taking any flack) like there is no tomorrow, even in the aegis mission 2 furutaka grouped up nuke my planes left right and center. And I’m not even talking about when tier 6 get into tier 8 mm or a tier 8 in tier 10mm. -make so that the long-range aa don’t deal continuous damage, also medium range aa shouldn’t do dps damage. What I would do, that would make the game looks better, more realistic and more enjoyable to play : - leave the long-range aura as it is, with “few” big explosions that deal massive damage but can be completely avoided -leave the short range as dps ( but toning down the current insane values) -make the medium range aa a crapton of small burst that deals little-medium damage, that you can somewhat avoid, or rather limit his destruction potential with maneuvering, but you can’t completely avoid, especially during the last moments when you are lining up your drop. It has to be something that damages your planes a bit if you can avoid them ( like some shrapnel hitting the plane) but it shred them if you fly in a straight line ( like a 40mm Bofors would do). -lower the time planes need to get to their “immunity altitude”, right now recalling a squadron means it will get wiped out. Or at least change it in a way that: planes who dropped their ordinance climb faster than the ones who didn’t ( change the empty planes to 8.0 values and the full ones to something between 8.02 and 8.0) - same as above for returning planes speed, it has to happen faster, especially for empty planes - give a bit more alpha strike to the CVS in general? Please wg? As a refound of losing strike power on dds? or a bit faster aiming on tbs in general. - GIVE US BACK DIRECT CONTROL OF THE CVS AND CONSUMABLES. -fix the camera on DBS drops, sometimes you can’t see where are you aiming, and fix the aiming in general that sometimes is way off the real drop point -give us the possibility to disable the ability to aim with the mouse, I find it extremely annoying and botched some drops for that. -carrier vs carrier: if you are in the last 3 people of your team, the enemy carries has to have a way to strike you. It’s annoying that I can’t strike the enemy carrier when he is the last of his team. I would also suggest a change for the infamous “stealth drop” tbs of the haku: make them more extreme/rewarding: -give them back the 50 knots speed and the very fast aiming time with narrow spread -increase their range to 10 kms -increase the attack run from 4 ( 3 now) to 6 planes, so you do 2 drops total with 12 planes -decrease the concealment of the planes to 5kms ( with full concealment build) How to make them not op and rewarding? -give them 4-4.5 km of arming distance, so you HAVE to do a stealth run, and you have to be very good at predicting an enemy, but if you manage to pull it off and the enemy is potatoes enough to go straight-lining for all that time, you can be rewarded with up to 40k of damage. As it is for dds now, if you caught a bb straighlining for the entire time your torps are in the waters, they get deleted. The same should happen with the haku (maybe make the shokaku similar, but with only 4 torps), especially considering that you don’t have any lead indicator to give you the ballpark idea of were to fire them, so you have more damage potential than a dd ( faster drops than a dd torps reload), but you are also way less flexible and is way harder for your torps to lands tanks to your arming distance, speed of torps and lack of indicator. thx if you arrived at the end of this, what do you think?
  8. Capt_SH

    New content suggestions

    Wish to have below listed gameplay elements, which would be highly appreciated; - Night battles ( Not evening / but complete moonless dark night / where we shall search for navigational lights and have them as only guides to survive and determine enemies, with option to disable min-map ) - Strict area wars, with restricted maneuverability, like Bosporus strait, or huge harbors, or canals,... in which players have to be very careful for surroundings, - each one against all, no friends battle, where every one have to survive all other enemies / Battle royal type +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Sea life is full of diversity and hope - as we always anticipated from great developers such WoWs guys - to have them all included.
  9. loppantorkel

    CV rework suggestions

    I just want cv planes not to provide direct vision for the team. They could spot and a ghost icons of the enemy ships could appear on the minimap, they could make torps visible, but I think the permaspotting of dds should be a thing of the past. I visual indicator on the minimap should be enough and not enable the whole team to open fire unless spotted by a proper ship. It's all I got for now.
  10. NOTE: I posted this earlier in the suggestions thread but since (1) the OP there is not updated and people in the recent replies are talking about submarines, (2) other people have made similar posts outside of the suggestions thread and because (3) it's now an active topic of discussion & focus of development, different from all the hypotheticals and wishful thinking, I decided to make a separate post. I love the preview, and I'm really eager to see some of what was shown brought to any testing environment ASAP. I've been playing CVs, and I can say I'm mediocre-ish: got a solid grasp of the fundamentals, I've had my moments and some luck. I've been paying attention to the constant drama surrounding CVs, and I'm pretty sure I understand WG's position in all of this. However I do think some sort of compromises ought to be considered: - MAKE FIGHTERS A DEPLOYABLE, NPC-like, drone-like blob, that receives commands to either escort your strike squadron, or be sent around the 3D world (not the minimap) to fly combat air patrol (CAP) over an area, over a friendly ship, or stay "home" and fly CAP over your carrier. This could be done by having a radius around your strike squadron, within which you can POINT & CLICK (or press a key) to set the fighters' target location or object. Maybe add a good amount of cooldown time, for how often they can receive a new command. "Summoning" fighters out of thin air just seems kooky to me. - NERF ALL CARRIER PLANES' SPOTTING ability by having enemy vessels spotted by just carrier aircraft (including the strike craft) ONLY APPEAR AS "OUTLINED" SHIPS to the rest of your team, giving a rough location on the minimap, but not visible in the 3D viewport - no target lock, no aim-assist mechanics, someone has to go and deal with the threat the old fashion way. This would negate the current, much lamented mechanics of CVs planes being omnipresent & spotting those ships which really don't want to be targeted. Realistically, I imagine that a group of planes trying to avoid AA and focusing on their attack runs would have a really hard time walking friendly artillery onto its target in the chaos of battle. - ADD LOW, STATIC CLOUD COVER - plumes scattered over the maps (maybe randomized?), to give planes a hiding place. The concealment on these would work both ways - diminish the effect of incoming enemy AA, but the planes would lose sight of all enemies around them. Make RADAR penetrate these clouds or maybe add a separate AIR RADAR consumable. Also make CYCLONES limit planes abilities in a similar way, or even more (affect accuracy, speed, maybe get damaged, etc). This to add to the feeling that you're controlling an air asset, navigating through different features, not just a Z-clipped surface asset. Also because the airspace looks bland with the current "skybox above, water texture below" situation. My main reasoning about fighters and spotting here is that instead of completely removing some features, we should keep them to retain an authentic feel to the CV role, but nerf them to the point where they require luck and strategic foresight, instead of who's got better ping / RNG / clicks per minute. The same goes for people's concerns on the Twitch stream regarding CV sniping and side-rushing DDs: you won't be caught with your pants down if you pay attention and have a bit of foresight. What do y'all think?
  11. So, what is this "replay analysis service"? Video version -Old video, but not much has really changed. Still the same package now as it was over a year ago. As the title kinda suggests, its basically something I wanted to offer to the community! TL;DR: Send me replays and I can go over them, and talk crap about constructively criticise them! So, what can I actually offer you with this? Not much, and quite a lot, actually! I can provide you my opinion on things. This opinion can obviously vary quite drastically between different players and their preferred style, nothing wrong about that! However I feel that its nice to have a look at ones gameplay from another persons point of view. So, for those that want the LONGER version...(which is surprisingly short for my standards) Submit me a replay, preferably (but not necessarily) with post battle results screens. If you have older replays, thats fine as well (I have old clients working down to patch 0.3.1.2 (Thats like may 2015 back in CBT!) If you have any specifics that you want me to pay attention to (such as a certain time where you are uncertain about your decisions, for example, please tell me which segment you want me to pay attention to, and what you specifically want me to pay attention to So, whats the process of submitting a replay to me? I would prefer that you send them to me as a email to replays.strangers123@gmail.com Don't exactly feel comfortable sending me an email? Send me a private message on the forums, although I would prefer it as an email so its less likely to get lost in the void called forums D: If you plan to send it as a forum PM, you might have to put the replay into a zip folder due to forum rights (not so sure about this one actually) I hope you guys enjoy this content, and please provide your feedback, and feel free to discuss tactics, strategies and playstyles with me either in the video's comments section or here, where I will also post any replay analysis I post! Just as a final note: My opinion may be different to yours, or others, and thats the way it should be! This is only a "layer" for you to get a potentially different opinion on your gameplay! You may disagree with me, and thats perfectly fine and right! Please post your opinion, and what you would have done different to what I would have!
  12. Lyno_Lemon

    Fixing radar issue

    Hi all, I think most people will agree that there is too much radar at the moment with the US light cruiser line. I'd like to propose some suggestions and see what people think and hopefully WG will agree. The way I see it is there are several options: 1. Cap the number of radar cruisers allowed in the game to 2. and cap the number of radar ships per division to 1 maybe. 2. Take the US light cruisers back to the drawing board and re-hash the design. Perhaps they get radar replaced with a very good hydro, or no radar at all and find a new gimmick. Maybe give them a long lasting shorter range radar (7-8km or something). 3. Re-hash radar in the game completely, maybe making it shorter duration, only showing people on the min-map (not screen) or making DDs immune to it (or at least detected at a closer range). 4. Re-work radar and aircraft so they need line of site. It is completely ridiculous how a plane or radar sees would when there is no line of site due to an island being in the. Let islands serve ad physical barriers. 5. Maybe let everyone know when a ship uses radar and point him out to everyone as a priority target. Make him spotted for the duration. This would make people actually think about when to use it more. 6. Perhaps equip DDs with a radar blocking/ scrambling consumable so they have a counter -maybe only applies to their ship and not the team - with 2-3 charges with a cooldown. 7. On a separate note, can we also get a buff to low-tier British cruisers detection whilst in smoke. Emerald and below are already quite bad ships. Maybe give Leander the same buff. Thoughts?
  13. Please add more buildings in the naval base or make the old ones upgrade-able. Having almost 100k oil in the naval base and not able to spend them is kind of itchy. Same story with the credits, it would be nice to be able to convert credits into coal, maybe 3~5k credits for 1 coal.
  14. MELONFACTORY

    Reporting system - hit back

    I found that dead players in the battle have tendencies to complain on others ie "how useless they are". Of course they have really nothing to do except bullying and If you try to defend you are mostly reported then. I suggest that ANY report coming from players listed lower in final result of the battle will not be counted AND will even hit them back. I suppose this is the only way to make things just in the reporting system.
  15. vikingw

    Midway AP bombs

    Hi WG. As some of the few players, I actually enjoy a CV play once in a while. Recently I played with some friends in a division, and I have to agree with them. Midway AP bombs are pretty broken. You can delete some cruisers in 1 strike, but tier 9-10 bbs go almost unpunished (10-30 K dmg) It seems pretty ironic, that cruisers set up to counter CVs can get wrecked in that matter. But I am not here to complain, I just wanted to outline the issue. I was wondering, if not the AP bombs could be designed in such a way, that cruisers couldn't be killed in 1 strike, but BBs get hit a bit harder. Maybe let the AP bombs have a more niche-kind of dmg on ships with turtleback, since they get extra protection CQC due to the armors cheme? I know Tirpitz and Bismarck players will complain, since they already suffer under AP bombs, but that is simply up to the WG staffs;-) Bottomline: why not make AP-bombs more specialized against turtleback - let the design have a drawback, like every other armor scheme No hard feelings folk - this is just a suggestion:) Ps. Please stay on the subject, and do not post anything unless it is related to the topic:)
  16. Skyllon

    Unique Achievements

    Probably screenshots like that, have been posted thousand times, but I've missed them somehow. Anyhoo... I think it should be self explanatory... On the second thought, if those existed, we probably would have witnessed all sort of craziness... EDIT: And in case it isn't obvious. Sinking ship by setting fire in RN cruiser doesn't happen that often. Any ideas for other similiar situations, that are rather rare and could yield achievement either nation or class specific?
  17. Flavio1997

    some thought on the game

    some thought on how I would rework the mechanics of the game, I’m a player that back in the days was very active, right now with university, I can’t play as often as I did before. i would remark that theese are very personal opinions Wall of text incoming, getting into the suggestion: 1) changing the bloom “flat tax”: right now, after you fire, with any ship in the game, be it a 100mm gun’s dd or a 460mm gun Yamato, your concealment bloom to you max firing range, now I agree with this change, as stealth fire was a cancerous thing, but imho the fact that it blooms for 20 seconds is detrimental to some classes ( fast firing cl and dds) while is a great advantage to bbs, that can go invisible between each shot, meanwhile if a cruiser want to do so, it has to massively reduce is dpm, but it’s super detrimental for dds, especially at the start of the game, when they go cap contesting and do those knife fights with other dds, because even after you have killed the enemy dd, you stay spotted for another 20 seconds unless you smoke up, and in those 20 seconds you usually get nuked/ lose a lot of hp, or when you have to finish a low hp enemy, you still get spotted for 20 seconds, and that’s a very big price to pay. Also, the fact that guns so different have the same bloom time is rather counterintuitive, unrealistic and bad for the gameplay, especially for the most volatile ship of the game. I would change that to a sistem like: after you fire, you have 4secs of “ bloom flat tax” +1sec/ inch of the gun fired, so a 127 secs dd will have a 9 secs bloom penality, a ligh cruiser 10 secs, a CA 12 secs and a bb 18-20 seconds, the only one who would have a slight penality would be the yamatyo at 22 secs and the republique at 21 ( meanwhile all the 16 inch have 20 secs, so for the vast majority of bbs it would be the same/improvement). 2) smoke visibility after fire, even here, I like the fact that after you fire in smoke your detection range increase because it was silly to have a bbs sitting 3 km from you and hammering you without getting detected, however, I think that WG overdid it, especially on bbs. Because with the current 14-16 km-detection-after-fire-in-smoke, smoking an allied bbs is useless ( or at least in only a defensive measure) because every time he fires it will almost always get spotted, while if I smoke up a bbs, it’s should be considered good teamplay and should get rewarded and encouraged ( maybe giving to the smoker some exp on the damage that the smoked up to do in the meanwhile). Imho the bb detection range in smoke should be reduced to 10 km ( to prevent that silly situation of beta’s days, as described before). 3) spotting damage: right now this matter is handled in a VERY crappy way from WG, because when a dds spot someone, the one spotted will open up fire ( you have nothing to lose after all) , so his detection range will bloom and the everyone “spot” that target, and the dds don’t receive any exp from it, or at least very little. Imho this should change, the closest ship to the target ( with a line of sight obviously) should be the one who gets the spotting damage. The same is for when an enemy is spotted with radar/hydro/planes of sorts (catapulted, cv, spotter), the ship radaring him should get the spotting damage. There should be also medals and achievements for spotting ships/spotting damage 4) reward cap contesting, if I with a dd contest the enemy dd capping ( even if no one spot each other), I should get a reward/ribbon of some sorts, like a cap contested for every 20 seconds in which the enemy dd can’t cap the area. And like a medal for contesting cap for 2 mins or so 5) raising the bbs citadel, that’s one of the changes that I notice the most in my 15 months pause, right now hitting another bb’citadel is very hard, even when the enemy is doing a “closing in manoeuvre” in which he shows the under the water part of the ship ( that back in alpha/beta was a “send me to the port immediately”). Wg please stop dumbing down this game, let the ones who do mistakes get nuked 6) on the same train of the last sentence above: make it in a way that cruiser who get overmatched from the nose/bow don’t get full citadel damage (maybe only penetration/ half citadel damage). Is not fun when you are doing you 150k damage in your Mogami, you have still 32khp and get deleted by a Grober Kufurst 14 kms away who get lucky and do to you a 3 citadel hit when you where presenting him only your stern ( and I mean only your stern, perfectly steaming away from him). This don’t ancourage aggressive and intelligent play, and reward camping behind an island right now this is what I thought I would change of this game, what do you agree/disagree on? I will probably get back when something else crosses my mind Flavio
  18. Excavatus

    What statistics tell?

    Dear salty ladies and gentelmen of the world of warships! (salty because sea.. not because watching all the team camping behind an island size of a matchbox!) For some of you know, I am a cruious bob who likes to learn and learn! (but I can't.. :P) and I love numbers.. statistics.. I love analyzing them.. I check my stats after every daily session of WOWs and try to analyze that. I did that in WOT for over 2 years and always thought numbers are good to deduce some good and bad things. Help with the progress of the improvement of one's self skill cap! Anyway, This morning, I've just realised, with some of the numbers, I don't know what to make of them because I don't have anything to compare them in general. and decided to help some of the bobs out there just like me, in the way of feeding my curiosity. I know what the damage numbers mean, I know what to do with WTR and WR, but can you give me some meaning for the following numbers and some comments on mine especially. What do they mean? I mean in gameplay wise... My general survival rate is, %35,17 and my last 21 days (270 battles) survival rate is %45,19. What do I make with these? Are they low? am I playing too YOLO? or are they high? am I playing too cautious? holding miself back? What do you think that a good survival rating should be? in battleships, DDs, Cruisers.. etc? My main battery accuracy is %27,94 My torpedo accuracy is %7,71 They seem very low to me.. are they low really? I am spotting 1,04 ships in total average and 1,15 ships in 21 day average.. low, high? any relation with my survival rating? 1095 xp average in general and 1464 xp in 21 days average.. does this number includes bonus from premium acc or premium ships? because this is the time I bought Graf Spee roughly.. I really believe, watching one's own replays and analyzing own stats is the very basic first step of the stairway to improvement. (Led zeppelin style!) Cheers caps.. PS: I may be totally missing or not looking for more important stats. Please feel free to check them.. https://wows-numbers.com/player/512538544,Excavatus/ and bash them If needed in the road of enlightment.
  19. World of warships CV improvements, I have played CV’s for awhile now, while the gameplay at lower tier is okay, Higher tier play is more akin to micromanager game play more than strategy! I have a few suggestions that would make CV gameplay much fun and engaging, 1 Do away with alt attacks, get fukus back on the strategy game, instead give all type of planes an alternative modes of fire, Like give Dive bombers, high alt bomb drop, where there is reduced accuracy, but they less DMG from anti air! Torp Bombers could have early drop, where they drop farther away and take less flak Fighters should have the ability to strafe a target ship, doing a small amount of dmg, low fire chance, but good chance of temporary disabling some anti air! 2 CV’s should have limit control range where they can give orders to planes, they should still be able to send planes outside that, but just not give them new orders, and once they orders are done, they should return! 3 Lastly all CV should have unlimited Fighters planes, never losing the ability to stay in the fight, and give a more dynamic play, squads of other planes, should be replaced with 3 planes squads of fighter planes, as they are lost! All this lead to CV be more engende in the fight, and more fun and dynamic to play, and a better balance between Anti Air strong CV’s and Bombers based!
  20. _Flyto_

    Spectator mode please?

    It would need to be limited to same-clan, to avoid misuse, but it would be great if clan members could spectate a battle that other members of their clan were in.
  21. mrk421

    A 'Suggestions' section

    Despite the skepticism of many people, I think that having a dedicated Q&A section is a very nice idea that could have tremendous potential, IF handled responsibly by the community. With that in mind: - Would you consider having a dedicated forum section for ideas and suggestions of new features the players would like to see in the game? In relation to that, do you even consider ideas proposed by players as a source of inspiration for new features at least? Or is there no point for us to even think about what could be done to improve the game since the developers will not consider any of it anyway? In case you DO at least occasionally consider ideas put forth by the player base, having a dedicated 'suggestions' section could be immensely useful, I think...
  22. Hello , I want to suggest for some impovements. We have to make cv's a little bit more comlex so players can have multiple options in the way inflicting dmg. That will improve the rpg experience . Ofcourse restrictions will ballance the gameplay. 1st . There is an option in controls , Select next squadron but in the other hand there is no option to select previous squadron. 2nd. A carrier is a floating airfield and that means great armory. You have to add more than 2 type of weapons . As example light torpedos , heavy torpedos , ap bombs , incendiary bombs , standar bombs , rockets etc. (the choise of weapponary will taking place ingame from inactive buttons ) 3rd. a special consumable to be add. Long range air radar that will be somthing like an rpf for airplanes. 4th. kamikaze attacks for ijn cv to be available when the team is close to lose. 5th. Add to Fighters 3 alter role. 1st Air superiority (heavy ammo ), 2nd reconnaissance ( light ammo , greater speed , 3rd multirole ( rockets for soft targets(dd's) and low hp enemys will added ) 6th. Evolve map to a tactical level so we can make active planing to avvoid enemy aa bubbles.
  23. First off, I don't know if something like this have been suggested, but didn't find any when I searched for it. In my opinion there should be separate commander skill trees which should be more unique to each ship type - one tree for each of these: Aircraft Carrier - Battleship - Cruiser - Destroyer. Where each of these commander skills-trees should have the aspects which is already in the game but with skills that are unique to the individual ship class - Endurance - Attack - Support - Versatility. Currently there is only ONE commander skill-tree with skills that really would make no sense for some captains to have because the player wouldn't benefit from in those particular classes of ships, like having skills that modify aspects of the torpedos or aircraft when its a battleship, cruiser or destroyer. Also, many of the current skills are only really usable for certain ship classes which leaves very little options, at least from a perspective of having the most optimal. This would in my opinion open up a lot of possibilities and would especially make it possible take skills that would better fit one's playstyle, or gear a ship towards one or more specific functions. There are a lot of possibilities as to what these skills could or should be, some skills possibilities are more obvious than others. I'm sure a lot of us captains could think of some, so can WG I'm sure. What does my fellow captains think about this? // Inc.
  24. Hello Guys, i would to suggest an Option for the Transparency or Visibility of the Chatbox for some Maps especially this one here. Where the Sun Glare or the Reflection of the Sea makes it nearly impossible to read whats going on (in that Case it was Ranked and i have to switch to Ship Mode in my Carrier, to read whats going on) in this Case it the North Map. But what so ever, it would be nice... if you can add such an Option to the Chatbox as it is on the Minimap. I mean your Watercolor is almost the same then the Sea and on serval Maps its a bit hard to read... (if you rly need whats going on in the Chatbox)
  25. Hello Comunity, WG moderators, bots who are programed to spam forum's with hate and ofc. all those intolerant people that hate my "GL and have Poi all! Nepu!" greeting, this time, and yes i said my last one (the one for the arp event) would be my last ever forum topic, i come bevor you for something more drastic than a simple event. Something that should have ben done as early as the CAT test. Actualy i tried back then yet NO ONE of you Dev's or Moderators LISTENED. You actualy droped quiet some stuff that this game NEEDS and should have even if it means WORK for you! Lets get started , i suggest a rather DRASTIC reballancement and reprograming of nearly all major aspects of this game. It can keep the Arcadiness it has atm. yet some parts should be reballanced ASAP. I will only state ship classes here that are currently ingame and not future ones (like the BC's, they will get into this in the future no mather the outcome of this topic and its poll) First my Favorite (Obviously) because some of the most drastic changes should happen here: BB. -BB should be like in reality, almost indestructable through gunfire. Armor of Warships in History could repell extreme punishment even while being not that thick compared ot the penetrationpower. The reason for this is quiet simple (and everyone with some knowledge about google can simply google the facts, i will (it would be to big of a topic then) not post anything in here, i can ofc. give links to the sorces of it later (if people cant realy search for the armor's of warships of WW2 themselfes), the reason is because the armor is EFFECTIVLY twice to three times as thick. Like modern Tanks the effective thickness far outperformes the actual one (for example (even thou i guess they exagurate a little with that) the armor of the T80 is like 200 to 500 mm , yet effectivly it is as powerfull as 2 meter steel (thus most guns would have NO IMPACT from the front even on close ranges, even missles wich are build for AT duty can only penetrate like 1000 mm of steel wich is not enogh (thus the world still uses tanks because they still are nearly inpenetrable at least frontal). For ships its the same : the armor (even the one from WW1) was twice if not three times as thick effectivly. Thus making the claim that yamato can repell her own gunfire from ranges of 5km onvard no rumor but actual prove. Shure the armor would still be heavily damaged, yet it would not go through it with 1 hit. Against 16 inch she would be almost imune (like Bismarck was BTW. we all know that more than 2 RN BB's fired on her in her crippled state. she survived long enogh (ship, not the superstructure on top of it as well as the guns) for the RN to actualy bring in torpedo's against her because they got more and more desperate. I suggest that Citadells should be erased from the game, yet the ammo depo hit should remain and not get any kind of buff against it rather it should be in specific area's of the ship (mainly benath the guns) and extremly hard to actualy hit. A reballancement like that would mean that BB would actualy get active again as they have no fear to be shreaded by AP in like the instant they hit 10km range for most ships. Plus Broadsiding would be put into the game that way, wich means the proper way BB should fight. This will aslo be their weakness as their still, even the fastest turning ones, to big and clumsy to evade torps from either cruisers or destroyers. -BB's sub guns should be boosted like those of mutsu actualy are. Without the better sub gun aim skill she still hits nearly as good as my T7 Nagato, and she has a brand new lvl 4 (atm.) captain on her. I admit that it will be a nightmare for DD , yet to ballance this off i suggest a fix range for ALL subguns on any tier level. Wich would be like 4km on T3 , 4.5 on T4 and so on, alway's with 0.5 km increases (not counting skills or modifications into this atm.) , so most DD that are new would know in wich range a BB could potentialy be deadly for them. (my nagato has a max of 7.2 km with them, enogh to repell most DD that come to close yet not destroy them untill they launched their torps, and nagato has the second most sub guns of all BB atm. most being the Yamato and they work quiet well yet still not against most T9 and 10 DD). The second suggestion aside from a fixed range for all ships on one tier level would be the dmg output. Obviously there are differences in HE and AP shells for each nation. IJN ofc with the Sanshiki shells (Beehive or Type 3) should have the edge in HE dmg as well as penetration power(those shells where carried by any gun of them) , yet their AP should be somewhat lower in pen power and dmg output. This was only an example of why the dmg should be different from nation to nation on sub guns. - BB and angeling. Ofc its a little nice mechanic that shells of that magnitude could actualy riccochet off of armor, yet its actualy IMPOSIBLE given the mass is just to big. AP shells should alway's hit and deal dmg. One can , like they did in WOT, say it could not penetrate the armor, thus rendering any dmg useless (exept you hit something like the superstructure (actualy not only the cunning tower is heavily armored WG, the entire structure is) then you should do some dmg regardless of penetrating as there is alway's crew or other systems behind the wall). More shells that hit frontal that actualy do dmg would mean people would try to cross the T of the enemy and broadside them as they would not be near invunerable that way. In fact the front and back of ships are alway's the least protected area's even on Yamato (obviously earlier ships (for IJN up to Nagato, for KM up to Bayern, for USN sadly not so much , they alway's had the all or nothing armor on those ships we have currently ingame, and for RN for anything even the HOOD , only Vanguard and Lion 1/2 would have the all or nothing style, should be exeptions as they have ALL AROUND armor and not just an armored central area(thats actualy the reason nagato is A: slower than other Fast Battleships(more on that later btw.) and B: as heavy as bismarck wile being smaller in size by a good amount) - BB should regain the extra torpedo HP bar from the CAT. This was simply the BEST feature that was in the CAT test, it was a shame after you took it out for , back then, reballancement. Yet you did never reinsert it in a more refined form. Ofc. the reason for this would be that BB should be less likely to be sunk by fire and bombs, but rather torpedo's. Torps do an ungodly amount of dmg, and having only 1 HP bar for both would mean that a BB that repelled some torps would be crippled by gunfire even from a DD(and HE only ofc. as no AP shell smaller than 12 inch could even hope to get past the painting of a BB). It is drastic and hard to reinvent this bar, yet its something that would greatly add to the gameplay for BB. They have less fear of torps when they know they where only bombarded by shells for the last couple of minutes and thus would actualy do their job, wich is CAPPING POINTS, rather than camping. Now on to the second category of ships wich are CV. Will not be that long as a current Supertest is already running (thx US forum for that info, they put that info on their main forum by accident, and quickly removed it i guess, yet that info came from one of the moderators and i do not belive it was a lie) but 2 points are actualy the big headache points atm. - CV should have unified squad sizes. IJN and USN used 3 plane squads for fighters, even thou their quanity per CV was different. 3 was the perfect number for manouvers and attacks. In terms of bombers one could stick with 4 DB and 4 TB. Obviously the skill would push both fighters and DB to 4 fighter and 5 DB per squad yet would not OP any CV at all. In fact IJN had the better fighters (and thats proven by historicans and even the USN archives where they even store some of the old zero's that where captured after the first one crashlanded and proved its superiority to ANYTHING the USN had up to 1944/45) than the USN yet i do agree that both should be equal in that term so CV gameplay is not all about : you have USN and i have IJN so i as IJN dont launch anything because you outpower me easily. - CV should also be customizable. Even thou WG did answer me in their Question and answer round for christmas i still belive that switching the slots should be added ASAP. Even if you dont care about unified squad sizes you should reconsider this at least so USN could use their full DB power to their advantage as well as IJN could use their more accurate and stronger (reballance them too pls, IJN had the best aerial torps of WW2 wich is another proven fact (ask the crew of the Arizona if ya have to WG! and yes i am actualy quiet angry about this sry for that) torps. On to the Cruisers, something wich should be support and not main attack ships. - Cruiser should have a little nerfed HE alpha dmg. I , for example, can sink BB with the HE alpha dmg alone of my IJN cruisers with no need for fires and torps. This is just plain wrong, even in WOT only a handfull of guns are strong enogh to be usefull for HE, and thats all the SPG guns and ofc. the oversiced tank guns of the KV2 and the ISU 152. Those 2 tanks where designed with that gun in mind to be used as fortress breakers(they even had special shells for concrete fortification breaking). Or even better : make armor stronger against this alpha dmg. I admit that fire should pose a threat (especiel against those large ammo transports for AA guns on ALL BB, and yes even 20 mm gun ammo can detonate quiet well when it gets to hot) but the alpha dmg should be not high enogh to pose a thread. BB shells on the other hand should have a lethal impact against everything save other BB but even they should get some degree of dmg from them. AP should obviously the primary shell type to take on BB . Especiel CA with their 8 inch guns (203 to 210(ijn) mm guns) they can be a threat to some of the lower armored parts of BB such as the front or back, or some parts of the structure (like AA guns and rangefinder, or radar systems(actualy i want cruisers to be as lethal as Takao and Atago where against South Dakota, doing heavy dmg to the structures and killing her means of targeting by knocking out the radar yet having no chanze of penetrating the ship itselfe to cause serious harm). - Cruisers should lose the AA barage item, as well as the AA barage should be taken out of the game. Most cruisers, despite NO ONE atm. play's CV, still use that instead of hydro. Hydro is one of the best items to counter those smoke DD. I dont want(compared to many i talked to) an nerf for smoke screens, i actualy want cruisers to be the perfect counter against it with the hydro especiel when the DD launches torps from the smoke(radar cant deteckt torps, hydro can). Back to the barage: its just to damn powerfull , thus rendering airplane attacks useless the moment they start. AA in history was effective yes, but no fighter or bomber pilot lost their target and aim despite heavy AA fire. The reasons they missed where that hitting a moving target from above with a bomb is harder than it looks and sounds. Torping too is damn hard if you have to consider waves that could let the torp run a different direction than aimed as well as the targets manovuers and speed. On to DD, the last stuff i would love to get more attention to especiel after the new patch: - First: DD should lose the AA barage skill again! CV atm. are not only at a disadvantage against DD , but with this skill and the smokescreen ballance, they can render eintire air assaults useless and dead in seconds. There where DD with exeptional well AA armament (Akitzuki, Gering and so on) yet none of them would pose a serious thread to planes that target the ship their escorting. Its more of rendering them useless for further assaults even thou the Type 3 shells could kill a plane instantly with some degree of luck (the spread of the shrapnells is random in that cone it creates , potentialy it could miss entirely (like early headghhog launcher did.. creating an area that would not be hit by them at all) - DD should also be reballanced historicaly. And there is NO PROVE that you , the russians, did even come close to Shimakaze's speed in WW2. There where plans , i admit that , yet they where not put into action for a reason. And thats not because building tanks. It was just imposible. The only DD ever to exceed Shimakaze in sheer speed was a French one with 45 knots but like Shimakaze, she was unique. Neither her nor SHimakaze could be rebuild duo to the nature of the engine used. It was like the try to hybrid the engine for the Tiger (P) (it had a diesel/electro hybrid motor wich was prone to overheating, thus rendering the tank useless bevor it even saw combat even thou they fixed the problem somewhat for the Ferdinant/elephant TD) it could not be rebuild that easily. - IJN should have access to long lance the moment the first DD that actualy carried them can be used wich is T5. Yet i admit that giving those 20 km range ones to a T5 DD would be overkill, thus i would say they use the short range, full speed versions of them with longer reload. After hitting T8 i would then put in the real Long lance torp for them to be used (akitzuki had them too btw. albeit only 1 quadro launcher compared to kagerou and her subclasses and ofc. shimakaze). They also should remain the most ranged torps in the game, all esle should actualy cap at 10 km most to show how different the long lance compared to others was. Shure the USN ones where faster yet did never acchieve the range of the long lance. Thats quiet everything right now. I hope you actualy read it like you did for the arp event suggestion (thus i take you can read what i did write so i dont make exeptions here in terms of gramatic or stuff like that!) and that some of this will get through to the dev's. Untill then ! GL and have Poi all! Nepu! Kouta PS. Again i am sry about gramatic fails of me, i am not native english speaking plus as long as people understand whats written there i see no reason to actualy change anything about that. I also want to mention that i did not mean to offend anybody with this even thou i hardly critizise WG with this yet i tryed to stay calm for most of it. Now ya can vote and comment ofc. yet the Poll is actualy more important than written words from others. Pls tell others about this so they can vote as well. Only if we, the Comunity, stay united as one, can we hope to change this game to the better.
×