Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'balance'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • 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


  • Community Calendar
  • This Day in History

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL








Found 10 results

  1. Necro_von_Cortex

    AA and secoundaries

    I've looked through the game wiki, as anyone who likes to know the details about the game should now and then. But I found myself stumble over some details, or in some cases lack of details. If we start with the AA part. The game wiki stages all calibers over 85mm guns will have a Flak effect in the form of a flak cloud or clouds. This makes sense cause that's how AAA warfare works BUT... Why 85mm and not just 80mm? The reason I ask is because this means FlaK 88s dated as far back as 1905 will throw clouds at 4.6km, while "modern" 85mm 90-K and 92-K guns will be limited to 3.5km range and only do regular DPS. Eventhough in this specific case, the 85mm fires a heavier AA shell than the FlaK 8.8cm L/45 in question. Yes the 90-K will on average do more DPS pr gun onboard than an old FlaK, but it fires the heavier shell, it has the longer barrel and it is the newer design by over 30 years. I would suggest FlaK effect should rather have been based on available shell types for AA guns rather than "just" caliber, Alternatively, it could have 80mm as the threashold, as guns like the 8cm/40 type 3, is a 76.2mm gun, not a 80mm. (as far as I can tell, there are no such naval caliber) You could of course argue it would take a lot of time for the developers to figure out excatly how much a power a specific AA shell has for a specific gun. But once it was done, it would be copypaste as many of the ships use the same guns, even across nations/factions, with UK ordinance being the most common. http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNGER_88mm-45_skc13.php AA shells at about 9kg http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNRussian_85mm-52_90k.php AA shells at about 9.2kg Guns at 76.2mm only weight about 6kg pr shell at best. Secoundary batteries? While I find the ranges just fine and have little fear from DDs down to 4km range (as the smallest bit of manouver can get you out of the way) I've noticed under the page for Secoundary batteries, (which might have been removed from the wiki entirely), There is/was no notice of a minimum caliber. While in several cases BBs and protected cruisers have animated guns which are inactive. Sure, it might be a question about balance as it makes a lot of ships have an overall higher potential damage output. But this is already at close range where even Bofors 40mm guns would be targeting enemy surface targets, and in the game the inaccurate nature and somewhat short range wouldn't be a gamebreaker. It understandable they wouldn't add every single gun like 37mm guns, 47mm Hotchkiss and 5.2cm guns but there is no writen limit and it kind of denies some ships a minor boost to their stats and survival. An example where minimum caliber come into play would be the Tier V BB, Viribus Unitis, Unitis was equiped with nothing shorter than 12x Skoda K10 7cm guns + 3x K16 7cm guns (Ingame she has 4x K16 AA guns, and her sisters had 18x K10) These guns are 66mm in caliber and each projectile weighs 4.5kg fired at a rate of 15rpm. That's a total of 67,5kg ordinance thrown at the enemy pr gun. +BFT For referrance, the 3"/50 throws 88,5kg of ordinance at the same rate. (which is seemingly never noted as a DP gun for some reason) If damage calculation was a linear function, this would leave each HE shell with a potential damage of about 750-800 with a fire chance of 3% and a penetration of 11mm at a range of 3.5km +AFT & SBM1 I see a lot of cases, where the developers have added guns, but they are inactive, my best example being the IJN Ishizuchi. Now, Ishizuchi is nothing more than a paper project in the first place, so creative liberty is allowed BUT. She is equiped with 6x 8cm L/40 Type 3 guns, which are ww1 guns with a high rate of fire. They have also added what looks to be 10x 3" QF 18cwt or 20cwt guns, 2 on each turret. Is this important? eeeeh. But considering the cwt is better than the Type 3 and there are more of them... why the hæll wouldn't they be active? they share about the same rate of fire, though the cwt fires heavier shells, The cwt are L/45 vs L/40, the cwt can fire at a higher velocity or it can fire a heavier shell at lower velocity. All in it's favor both as an AA gun and as a secoundary. All this, would make ships like Viribus Unitis and Ishizuchi look more scary to DDs as they sail close to attack, but on paper it would maybe give 1 point in artillery rating.
  2. So, I've been thinking about the little nerfs accumulating on Kremlin. It's good that it's getting attention, but what if curbing Kremlin was approached in a different way? What if, in addition to the next nerf which lowers the sigma, we raise the model? At the moment, Kremlin's model sits very low in the water at the midsection, and is not in line with most other BBs at this tier. Only Kurfurst is comparable, and even then its higher up than Kremlin. Yama GK Conq Repu Monty Krem and GK from another angle Not perfect screens, but I tried to get them right. You get the idea and you can also view the same in port. Right now, People complain about not being able to punish Kremlin in the side properly. If we raise the model, it should make the citadel and upper armour belt even more accessible, which would be emphasising the weakness of Kremlin to damage from the flanks, like other RU BBs. In this way, the ship keeps what is strong about it, while magnifying it's weaknesses and making it less forgiving to bad plays. It becomes easier to punish. After this and the sigma nerf, we sit on it for a while and see what happens. Though, a concealment nerf to at least 14, maybe 14.1km with full concealment build I would not be opposed to on top of these as well. Thoughts?
  3. siraiaw

    CV Primary Objective

    What should be cv's primary objective in the game please if you have other ideas for what the cv's job should be please write your idea. and please do not say that cvs should be removed from the game, that most likely will not happen at this point. and if you wan't you can also come with suggestions as to how cvs can be change to fit the primary objective you chose
  4. SamuraiShakaViking

    Checklist : what WG must fix in wows asap?

    Constructive simple discussion and checklist of the issues wg must / should consider now prioritise to fix, for the good survivability and sustainablility of the game and the good of the playerbase community. Imho following are obvious to consider: i cv re-rework upheaval, ..... i.i Bring back some skill and tactics or go on dumbing down to arcadey pac-man gamestyle. ii balance (ship and now plane classes, ammo types and characteristics eg ifhe, etc.) iii loss of players and lack of new recruits or decline of playerbase population iv ntc aka rb v dockyard vi regional segregation, and separation, bizarre for a modern worldwide MMO. Inability to play with global friends anytime anywhere, unlike most any other game. vii no global server option (nor single global account, as advertised and promised, like any other MMO , eg on steam). viii continually excluding continents, eg especially Africa ix submarines x simplifying so many in game currencies or 'tokens' xi matchmaking ..(?) xii UI improvements and QoL improvements, eg friends list xiii more maps xiv) more modes (?) xv) operations xvi) make great events like hunt for Bismarck, or the Dunkirk campaign permanent, and available to new players xvii) better tutorials xviii) ranked mode(s) xix) clans & clan wars xx) power creep, op / new premiums, modernise tired out dated lines. Please add to the checklist or constructive positive suggestions and comments to encourage improvements and change.
  5. SmokyButtons

    Save Random battle mode

    I have been feeling, and rapidly in last 6 monthe that random battle has more and frustrating and less fun especially in high tier! To the point ijust simply stopped playing, unless there are a special event like Halloween or ranked Sprint! I don't know the fix but, I think a good way be to reduce number of players, maybe to 7? Like the last ranked Sprint? That amazingly fun compared to random? The would as make it easier to a better MM, maybe even a limited skill based one? You fellow Sailor, Smokybuttons
  6. jonahemp_


    Hallo. Ich habe vor paar Minuten ein Gefecht gespielt. Ich habe mit meinem Kolberg der Stufe 3 gekämpft. Gegen mich war ein Spieler mit einem comischen Shiff, hab das zum ersten Mal gesehen. Ich habe mindestens 40-50 direkte Einschläge gemacht - es ist mir nicht gelungen eben irgendwelchen Schaden anzurichten. Aber nach dem Spiel es erwies sich, dass das ein eirgendwelches "Testschiff" war. Wieso denn soll ich gegen offensichtlich unbalancierten Schiffe spielen?! Habt ihr auch sowas gesehn? Oder eher nicht?!
  7. I'm wondering what Wargamings' stance is regarding the current state of the Graf Zeppelin. My own opinion is that her Dive Bombers could use a buff since the AP alpha is the lowest per strike among the Tier 8 CVs on top of having a very RNG heavy drop pattern. Does Wargaming have any information that they could share regarding Graf Zeppelins' performance compared to her peers? If some kind of buff is warranted would it be possible Engine-wise to add HE Bombs to the bomb loadout? A pair of wing-mounted 50KG bombs could make the bombers feel less RNG-based due to more bombs dropped on target.
  8. Hello Dear Team at WOWS, My name is Martin, I am a 36 year old divorced father of one who really enjoys playing World of Warships. I started by playing the German line purely because Bismarck was a ship I have heard. As soon as I unlocked Gneisenau I knew something was terrible wrong, the ships struggled to hit anything past 10km , Bismarck was better due to useful secondaries and better armor/HP pool. Soon i decided to try cruiser gameplay and really liked the Japanese line going as far as Tier 10 Zao. My next step after watching WOWS contributor Flambass, Flamu and Notser was to try the destroyers. So far its the class I like most. I have 56% win rate in Shiratsuyu and 51% in T-61 with destruction ratio of 3.12. Few days ago i decided to finish your "Happy Anniversary" campaign which gave me the T-61, after that i decided to go for the Hall of Fame. As of now I am in the Top 5%, which as you can guess costed me quite few hours to achieve, granted I go to work full time, have to look at kid etc. It is a fact nobody forces me to "grind" and I am not going to complain about it BUT I have a question for your developers - Do you even play the game? Have you tried taking a Tier 6 dd and play against not 1 but 2 CVs. Do you think you will make it out of the spawn with half of your HP? DO you think you can reach the cap? What are you people thinking? Just today I have had at least 5 games with 2 CVs - this is a joke. You are clearly not listening to your clients, how are we dd players suppose to have a "fair" fight? Looking forward to hearing from you, Sincerely Yours, Soon to be ex user.
  9. OdinDarkside

    Radar Rework Idea's

    Hi guys, So, recently, in a game with clan mates after a count in, we were on opposing teams, dd's & mino's, pitted against each other, and at a bit of a stand off with islands between us...... until I popped my radar and caught them off guard, thinking I had smokes. Anyways, after a bit of light hearted insulting and jovial name calling, I proposed an idea for radar, which was well received, so I'll bring it to the forum to discuss, and maybe a dev will see it and pay attention to it's potential for improved game play and to make the game less....... annoying.... So, I proposed that radar should 'pulse' the location of other ships, periodically revealing the location for a second or 2, then go dark for a few more. I also think ranges should be increased with this change. Also, it shouldn't reveal ships out of line of sight, behind islands, it cant do this irl, and shouldn't in game. The impact on game play would be beneficial I think. Involving more dynamic DD play (I play DD's a lot recently). I would appreciate other's thoughts on this. Also, if this has been discussed before in the forum's I apologize forthwith, I just wanted to see the communities reactions and if a dev would support this. Regards, Odes.
  10. VeryHonarbrah

    Paragon System

    Speechless, watch the vid. Upto 10 mins is a break down, afterwards is the QA about said topic (ccs being dumbfounded) Summary you regrind your lines to add three additional power levels you can upgrade up to three times upgrades add things like 10-15% more health, 10% better dispersion you can spent new currency or freeXP to hasten the upgrade EDIT: BB: I: +15% HP II: -10% ellipse size (apparently not dispersion), boost for secondaries III: -10% consumable reload time + +1 on all consumables CA: I: +10% HP -20% rudder shift II: -15% ??? III: -10% consumable reload time, +1 on all consumables DD: I: +10% HP, boost rudder/engine repair II: -10% cooldown torps and guns III: 10% boost on torp damage .