Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'mechanics'.

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 22 results

  1. ReapingKnight

    Border Surfers

    Hello Forum Warriors! Recently I have been seeing more people using the border to surf away from danger as it's still harder to gauge shots on them compared to normal. As a clan we even encountered this in CW where they had two ships on the same flank doing it...which delayed my team enough for them to secure a win, this was infuriating as even mentioning it to them made them laugh and say it was a "feature"... In randoms I can understand people going on it by mistake but in CWs no...that is deliberate and planned. Does WG have any plans to make the border more of a disadvantage for CWs and potentially randoms? Has anyone else been encountering this, and what do you think? Is the border punishment too much already or not enough?
  2. Admiral_of_Greece

    Submarines and Update

    1. I am glad that they changed the Speed Icon, it was confusing for me when I started playing, it will be good for new players. 2. I like when they add mechanics in the game, if developers listened to the complainers the game would have only battleships and cruisers. ( I remember about the complaining on dds and cvs -Before the game entered the Steam-, people do not like to get countered, or have their position being disturbed) 3. Submarines will at last make the campers move, personally I will be going strictly for campers and premium ships if the situation allows it -Hate on Smolensk runs deep-. 4. Stream Sniping with Sub-Ramming will take place 100% (Mixed feelings about that). 5. The game becomes more interesting. Many of my shipmates are waiting for submarines in order to return to the game. Edit: 1) All ships must have anti-sub warfare. + Depth water torpedos. CVs included 2) Submarines need a small gun on their top like a machine gun doing very light damage quickly (like 120-150 damage per second/5km at tier X) (as they had in reality, cause torps were not reliable).
  3. Hello fellow captains, not really a newbie here, but I started my career as a CV captain more or less 2 days ago and cannot figure out some issues... so maybe the experienced air jockeys can give me a hand here: 1. If I strike with my US DB squadrons and really want to do just a single pass in order to conserve planes, do I press RTB right after the strike or do I fly out my bombers manually? Any benefit to that? (Evading flak, taking a more optimal route away from AA ships...) 2. Is it just me or is the pre-strike aiming reticle of the Midway's rocket planes (Tiny Tims... will change that, unreliable stuff) a bit too far out? About half a second to a second at normal flight speed? On the Langley and the Ranger those were more or less spot on, but I tend to overshoot a bit in the Midway's fighters... 3. I think I will figure that one out with experience, but: Does accelerating and decelerating still work while in a strike animation? I think it does for the RFs and TBs, but what about the divebombers? Can I slightly adjust my reticle when reaching up and diving down to strike? In the direction of my flight axis, not perpendicular to it ( that obviously works....)? Thanks in advance, CV newbie Mechthart out
  4. The game has expanded a lot since 2015. New ship lines, mechanics, consumables, etc has been implemented. Now cv-rework is getting near and possibly submarines. Some major changes are needed to have these lines implemented into the game. New consumables will be added, old will be changed, some captain skills will be changed, ships will have new roles added to the old ones. At the same time there are mechanics that aren't working as intended atm, bb AP on dds for example, another pet peeve of mine is the heavy cruiser on light cruiser match up that in theory should favour the heavy, but that's very situational. Even if I understand that a complete overhaul of the game is out of the question, I'm wondering if it's not the time to take a step back and look over the game and its concepts now that 2 'new' lines potentially can be released in the game? Should the old lines have their old roles? I think the game is good at the moment. I also think that introducing new aspects/ships/concepts to the game has increased the complexity and that the balance and roles of ships could be looked over and maybe improved upon, maybe now when there's a need for some rebalance regardless. Not just looking at stats how various ships perform but more from a conceptual perspective. For example - At close range a bb or a heavy cruiser should, imo, annihilate a broadsiding cruiser. Often you get plenty of overpens through the citadel. It's a mechanic in the game, but is it intuitive and good? (I know some of you think it is, because it's in the game). Or radars - should it penetrate islands? Maybe it should because the game is more fun that way, but maybe, with the possible introduction of subs, the game would improve from less radar spotting? DDs role could gravitate more toward counter subs and could perhaps be able to move in island areas more safely than now. The game is getting more complicated, it's getting more inaccessible for newcomers due to this. The majority of the players will never learn from tips or tutorials but play the game from what seems reasonable in their minds. The game shouldn't be dumbed down but the game and the mechanics needs to be intuitive. What's your take?
  5. Captain_KriegWurst

    CO-OP: Bots Vs Torps (A theory).

    Apparently there have been recent changes to the way Bots react to torps in Co-Op mode. They seem to slip past your torps like leaves on the wind. However, I play Co-op mode for the first battle of every session (I take the Southern Dragon out for a spin to see if my Internet connection is going to let me play or just teleport me round the map for 5 mind before DCing) and I think I've noticed something. They only dodge the torps aimed at them. Like most half decent players, whenever possible I launch multipurpose torps that have a chance of hitting more than one ship. Recently it seems to be that the ship I have targeted changes course, but my secondary target just blunders into them. So my suggestion is that people target their chosen ship as usual but before launching torps switch target with the X key and then launch the torps at the original target. I'll be trying this out myself over the next week or so, but I'd be interested to hear if it works out for others as well.
  6. Hi everyone! I’ll be direct with my questions: 1) Amagi angled at 31 degrees (so there is not autobounce), enemy BB penetrates the 32mm torpedo bulge on the side and reach the main belt which is so angled that the projectile can’t penetrate it: result is a shatter, a no damage penetration or a full penetration? 2) High tier french BBs seems to have the torpedo bulge incorporated on their side and the game shows a 32mm basic plating (=/= from torpedo bulge) in front of the main belt. So the answer to question 1) will be different if we swap Amagi with Richelieu/Alsace?
  7. I'm asking this since I'm just getting over pens with Orion on even the most lightly armored cruisers like Emile while landing 11k volleys with citadel hits, incapacitation and fires with HE (on cruisers). Also would like to mention that this instance is on broadside cruisers and not at some other angle. If my facts are right, short fuse AP can be devastating for cruisers since it can lead to more number of penetrations than over pens. It doesn't feel like it, imo. Maybe we have to aim differently (not waterline, that is)? Or does this short fuse mechanic really matter in the game?
  8. Schmidt_Fritz

    What about the Horn?

    Ahoy! What do you think about that new ship horn we have? I've noticed it's an usefull tactical information tool; you are busy (thats me tunnel visioning) doing stuff and you hear that horn. Immediately you shift your focus and avoid an unfortunate ram with your teammate. Have avoided couple of incidents including enemy torpedo soup and friendly ships in full panic with this little tool. I also had couple of fun moments informing my enemy that a ram is imminent .
  9. So I'm looking for genuine feedback on an idea that's been bugging me a while. The 20s detection penalty when firing guns. For every class except battleships firing at your maximum dpm means you stay spotted. But battleships - with massive guns that make a big muzzle flash - can "cloak" between salvoes and not lose any dpm. Under the right circumstances. Now i make use of this in montana. But I feel it's a bit wrong. Now I don't want to discuss BBs detection ranges (conqueror for example has far too good concealment) butjust the following idea. What if: - dds recloaked after 15s - cruisers 20s - BBs *their reload* ive heard the argument before that WG don't like ships appearing and disappearing. Well, firstly it already happens. Secondly by making BBs "bloom" longer after firing it would make BBs vs BBs engagements simpler and BBs would have to engage brain and think about recloaking. Not just have it happen by default. It also doesbt feel right that a bb can "recloak" just as fast as a dd. Don't like it by class? Then how about gun caliber. I'd be fine with that too. Thoughts?
  10. Huggykaze

    Carrier gameplay mechanics

    So, with 12 September Kantai Collection update carriers are receiving huge overhaul. Judging by hints and teasers, CVs in the browser game will become more mechanically advanced and engaging than World of Warship ones. Wargaming, where is the carrier overhaul? Are you really going to be beaten by a browser game? The same as with Russian BBs?
  11. Risalan


    As wiki says Fire DamageEdit Damage dealt by each instance of fire on a ship is fixed as 0.3% of its total health pool per fire per second (0.4% for aircraft carriers). Each fire has a base duration of 60 seconds, meaning that a fire which is allowed to burn for the full duration will consume 18% of a ship's maximum health (24% for carriers). Captains of capital ships — aircraft carriers and battleships — can quickly see, then, that while one fire might be considered a nuisance, two or more are a major threat to their ship. But the question is: Fire reduces HP of all ship or just the section burning? When section has 0 HP left fire makes no damage?
  12. Disclaimer Wargaming has stated multiple times that they will remove stealth fire alltogether. This change will come in the near future. So the question is just if and what we get in compensation for it. Initial statement I know this might be an unpopular opinion and highliy controversial but as a DD main myself I actually wouldn't be mad if the whole stealth firing mechanic as it right now goes away. It causes a lot of salt for battleships in general, makes the Zao overpowered as hell and in atempt to get rid of it Wargaming shafted the German the DDs for no reason. So how does stealth fire work right now? Every ships gets it gun caliber in mm multiplied by 30 and that value (in meters) is added to the concealment after firing the main guns. In addition the Russian destroyers get added an extra 2km penalty to it because their guns are to good. So depending on your base concealment this leaves a window in which you can fire your guns without being detected by the target. Let's take the Fletcher for example. Its maximum concealment is 5.8km and its gun range without modifiers is 12.9km. So when it fires the penalty added is 127 * 30 = 3810m. The concealment therefore is 9.6km leaving her with a nice 3.3km buffer where it can shoot the guns. On the German DDs the penalty is complete artificial and the only destroyer being able to stealth fire is the Z-52 and its window is very small. Wargaming has stated multiple times they don't like stealth fire and the German DD line is possibly a way to test waters on how to do it. And regarding to the nbumber of players who like and play those ships it is not a good way to do it. Now how can you fix that? First and foremost with a radical chance of the mechanics. No more stealth fire whatsoever. You detection after firing your guns now will always be the same as your maximum gun range. This seem radical and will of course nerf all excisting IJN and USN destroyers as they relied on their ability to stealth fire. To compensate for that I suggest to change another mechanic. Changing the bloom time Right now the time the firing penalty is applied is a fixed value of 20sec if you were detected when shooting. I suggest that the gun caliber doesn't affect the detection range after firing but instead it affects the bloom time. The bigger the caliber, the longer you should be detected after firing the guns. I propose the following formula: Bloom Time (in seconds) = gun caliber (in meters) * 50 How does that affect ships? Lets take a look at the Fletcher again. Now it would always be detected 12.9km away whhen firing (or more if you use range upgrades). But instead of being detected for 20 seconds that bloom would only last 0.127 * 50 = 6.35 seconds. A big German battleships with 420mm guns would receive the penalty for 0.42 * 50 = 21 seconds. I think those drastically shortened times on lower caliber ships would balance out the bigger detections as it is much easier to get undetected after shooting the guns. It might especially help the IJN and German destroyers to utilize their guns more often and be opportunistic with their shots. Balancing Of course this would required a lot of testing there could be tweaking around the factor for different classes for balancing reasons, but overall I think this would be a good change to the game. In certain cases there might even be a special factor for a special ship although I don't think this would be a great idea. Thoughts? edit: As mainy people demanded sources. This is the most recent source it could find and from the WorldofWarships Discord channel and it is the account of Sub_Octavian: http://imgur.com/a/C3r3w
  13. Edit: Leaving it as it is for today. Will heavily edit it tomorrow. Feel free to leave thoughts and feedback, I'll read and consider them all. Thank you. NOTE: unfinished Almost finished, have to complete, edit and check it after I get something to eat Greetings. This weekend, I am pleased to bring you some proposals I believe will be beneficial in advancing WoWs as a game. 1. Introduce the concept of a separate air-sphere of battle. The air-sphere now is a separate space from the sea-sphere, but the two spheres still overlap in influence. Air-sphere spotting mechanics are introduced. 2. Striking mechanics have been reworked and redesigned. Introduce "AA pressure". Altitude mechanics explained. 3. AA mechanics have been tweaked to be easier to understand and conceptualize, while still engaging and dynamic. 4. Potential for giving planes even more distinct options of differentiation and balance is considered. 5. Eventual evolution from Gen-1 to Gen-2 mechanics, and how these proposed mechanics fit in, as speculated. BCV is also considered. Overall, both CV gameplay and AA concepts will be more dynamic and humanistic. The optimization of mechanics will also allow introduction of BCV. Traditional CVs will still be balanced, and easy to grasp for all, yet fair and rewarding for skilled players. Section 1 The "air-sphere" of battle takes place above the sea-sphere of battle. The CV's view of the battlemap will not be the same view as current. By default, ships will not display their detailed 3D models. Instead, they will behave as if viewed from a strategic-map top-down, or resembling current digital displays of radar using air-traffic icons. The display still uses the 3D map, but only water, mountains and friendly ships will be fully rendered by default. Players will be able to see silhouettes of sea-spotted ships, the silhouette will be simply geometric lines, with the ship-type icon in the middle, and a directional pointer for the frontal of the ship. Thus players will be able to see ship class, ship direction, but not specific type, nor speed, or any detailed battle information. Under certain conditions, areas of the map can be viewed in full for the CV player, just like current, and with additional information related to the new mechanisms which will be covered in sections 2-5. The immediate area around a CV is fully spotted by the CV itself. Certain abilities, such as radar (from other ships), or yet-to-be introduced mechanics, may be capable of "sharing" vision from surface ships to the CV. The CV can also manually fly planes to scout and spot areas. Planes will have a "spotting radius", revealing an immediate area around them. However, planes will have an option to either fly at 'high altitude' or 'low altitude'. Basically, 'high altitude' gives smaller view radius, and even smaller "full reveal" radius, while 'lower altitude' gives much farther and detailed spotting info. The exact radius can vary by plane specs. Vice versa, planes at higher altitude and at far distances will not be able to be seen by surface ships in full reveal of info either, such as currently possible. At the furthest, they will only be able to see "planes" via icons, and nothing else. Closer, they will be able to see plane type, eg. fighter, or tb, or db, but not strength. Only when planes from high altitude pass almost directly overhead, or when planes change to low altitude, and are close enough, can their full detailed info be visible. The enemy CV's planes will function similarly. Planes will be able to spot other planes, with higher-altitude planes will almost always have a vision superiority compared to lower altitude. Because CV planes will no longer have the massive spotting range and spotted range as of now, some dynamic gameplay will be potentially possible. For instance, a CV sends a scout-plane in front of the main group. The scout plane runs into an enemy CV airgroup, sending his whole group in a bunch. Because the "bunched" CV planes have not spotted the main squad of the more discreet CV, they are surprised when a perfect formation of fighter-strafes suddenly appear from the clouds following the spotter plane and decimate his entire group before they have time to scatter, even though they took out the vanguard spotter plane. Here I would like to add firstly, that in this new version, fighter strafes will have at least double the range of current strafe length, while consuming the same ammo. In addition to some "ease of control" mechanisms introduced a bit further in, a "strafe wall" will now be quite possible even for the average player, due to A.I. assisted formation. Secondly, there will be certain "cloud-heavy" areas, similar to islands in the sea-sphere, except that planes can fly through clouds whilst ships cannot through islands. "Cloud-heavy" areas will reduce, but not eliminate, directional spotting efficiency working both ways. It will be possible to "hide" planes behind clouds, or even inside larger ones. Planes within spotting range, but unspotted due to cloud cover or other potential mechanics, will instead display as a small "!" icon to signify they are there. Scout planes and Spotter planes function as high-altitude planes. It is worth mentioning that "directional" here is only fully horizontal. All "directional" used in this proposal would thus be better understood as "semi-directional" area of direction, instead of "fully directional" with diagonal, spherical cones and height difference. Section 2 Current air strike mechanics are the same as when WoWs was still beta. While mechanics for other ships have progressed quite far, CV mechanics are still the same as when they were prototyped. Needless to say, they require rework. Firstly, planes will now display a standard strategy-game style "pathing" arrow when asked to fly to a certain location, instead of current UFO gliding. The arrow will be lighter in opaqueness at the tail, and deeper in color at the front of the arrow. Multiple arrows bunched together, such as in formation, will be dynamically "thinner". Planes will have a turning radius and cannot turn like gyros, so the arrows will have turning curves at turn points, such as in pathing. For a longer path or multiple waypoints, it will strictly follow the turn only when necessary, flying straight otherwise, similar to current. When sea-sphere ships are auto-piloted using one-click, they will also display this route arrow. The curves will be more noticeable for ships, since ships have a larger turning radius. The arrow will reflect the "A.I." controlled actual pathing the route will take. Players will be able to see their progress on the route much more clearly from the map, which will be useful for BCV. The path will automatically curve around islands and other ships, even dynamically. That means as you are sailing through a bunch of allied ships, you will actually be able to see your projected "route" wiggle and detour around the new obstacles in real-time, even without any input. Next, an introduction of the "heat" or "pressure" mechanism, relevant to both sea-sphere and air-sphere, with particularly direct consequences for air. This mechanic affects ships, planes, and AA mechanics, as whosn in the corresponding 3 examples below: (1) The sea sphere is mostly a heads up only. Imagine a BCV sailing along the edges of battle, not in first-person ship view, but in strategic map-view. He cannot easily know whether some ships are aiming and firing at him. However, with the new system, a small area around the ship, as part of the "route" color scheme, will change color dynamically to reflect "heat" of battle, or danger. Shells coming from the side of the ship will result in the side area of the colored oval lighting up, from cool turquoise (normal), to yellow, to orange, to a bright and alarming red, depending on the amount and caliber of shells incoming and already hit. Torpedoes with possible hit-chance will immediately change it to red. Closer enemies firing will also weight much heavier on the color bumping. Taking lots of damage will also bump up the alert level. etc. (2) Airplanes will be dynamically affected by AA pressure areas, and in certain situations react accordingly. For instance, planes forgotten by the CV but approached by danger, or encountering zones of enemy AA, or enemy planes' influence, will feel "pressure" of danger. Their directional zones will light up according to their "prediction of demise if encountered" with the danger. If the CV is still unresponsive, or busy elsewhere, they will automatically be "pressured" away from the danger. They will back away from enemy Ship AA towards friendly AA if left alone for about 5 seconds. Enemy fighters will provoke immediate retreat for planes without a set target or patrol pattern, regardless of whether they out-strength them. This will likely prevent forgotten planes hovering in place from taking a barrage, though they will probably not be able to run far and stay unscathed due to the barrage's speed and width (and boosted length). CVs forcing strikes in heavy AA will also be able to see the "relative" amount of damage the planes are receiving from particular directions easily via the color flooding. This scheme can be simply a small hoop, or colored border around the plane icon, instead of whole areas as with the BCV. This is relevant as the new AA barrage and panic mechanics are based both on overall AA damage as well as specific skills and modifications like barrage. (3) AA barrage, the consumable, and possibly certain captain skills, and even upgrade modules, will be reworked. No longer will any mechanics simply be defined as "raise number stat ..%". Everything will be actually able to be visualized, able to be physically conceptualized and imagined. For details, please see section 3. AA is now semi-directional, and their effectiveness will vary according to "focus", requiring limited manual aiming. "Focused" AA will be high in pressure, and this "pressure" will force planes to "make mistakes", die quicker, maybe even reduce fighters' area of influence, etc. Planes completely surrounded or under cross-fire will be additionally panicked after moderation from their stats, but will more likely be critically destroyed as they are cornered and cannot maneuver, and even actual maneuverability might take a hit. So planes trying to escape through cross-fire ship or fighter AA won't be able to do so under full speed. Ships, by default, will have "heavier" AA pressure angles and "lower" AA pressure angles, according to their actual layout. When AA components are destroyed in real-time while in battle, players will be able to use a command (probably a button press) to "check" their AA pressures. This will display the AA cones similarly to torpedo-launch cones when one selects the torpedo armament on their ship. The cones and areas around the ship will also be differently hued, from white to dark red, reflecting the AA threat from those angles. Completely destroyed AA components will lessen the "hue" and thus be visually reflecting change of the total strength. AA attacking planes using high-pressure angles will cause more damage to them, and help to panic them faster. It is possible that AA will also decrease in gradient according to distance, if distance is taken into account to AA strength, or reflect a new "accuracy" moderation stat of AA. Will go into specific examples in part 3. Back to the strike mechanics. Strike mechanics have been overhauled. Fighters: Fighters are a two-button press to start their barrage run, instead of requiring a set-strike plan as of current. First press will display the estimated barrage path, similar to selecting your torpedoes after changing from guns. Second press will start the barrage, with a tiny wind-up time and distance. Before the second press, you can aim and spin the barrage path around a bit for aiming. Actual spin speed dependent on turning speed and coordination of planes. (note: pressure reduces coordination and efficiency). If multiple fighter-groups are selected, they will try to form a "barrage wall", syncing their barrages parallel to each other so nothing can escape. It will not be possible for planes overshooting the barrage start-point to u-turn and mess up the run, they will simply start barraging a bit too forwards in the run. Barrages are not even necessarily straight according to the aimed path. Fighters will try to horizontally maneuver, very slightly, such as old "bullet-hell" games where your controlled fighter shoots frontal bullets, to actually hit as many enemies as possible. Converging maneuvers will stop when barrage paths overlap, for instance alongside each other in a "barrage wall". Diverging paths will be 1/10ths of the barrage width, so there are only tiny adjustments, or "hitbox" adjustments. I am actually not too sure about this feature, as I liked to engage a enemy fighter squad with one squad, then do a "selective" strafe only hitting the outer enemy squad, and not my friendly squad, with a separate fighter squad (I play AS Hakuryu), and to make the A.I. of strafe-adjustment recognize such a situation is a bit difficult for now. So if you want to do cycling barrages, cross-barrages, or bait-barrages you will have to do so manually, as well as overlapping barrages. Fighters will not cancel the barrage even if friendlies are in the way, or if their eventual path will overlap and they have danger of hurting each other, so pre-aim setup of positions is still important. When creating barrage wall, the fighters will all aim at your cursor position, slightly converging into a horizontal lineup. For now, the "barrage wall" will probably work by having a button one can hold when selecting multiple fighters squadrons, such as shift, and they will start converging into position facing your cursor ready for a "barrage wall", otherwise will just two-button barrage using own path if executed before they have lined up. Fighter mechanics will differ slightly from current. Fighter squads will exert a small area of "influence" around them. Enemy planes entering this area will be slowed, and will start to take increased damage from the fighters if stayed for too long, with the fighter's ammunition starting to trickle. After a small wind-up period, the enemy squad will be locked in place by the fighters and both plane squads will start to dogfight, and the fighters will deal maximum damage according to their stats. Fighters can be specified to engage a target, and it will chase after and focus on this target more instead of others passing by. Some implications of this include how you cannot suddenly instant-lock a torpedo-bomber squad in place just inches away from it getting a drop on your battleship: the panic and lock requires a few seconds of wind-up. During this time, the tb squad can maneuver slightly away in attempt to escape, or complete its drop, or at least fight outside the AA of the ships. "Ladder-locking" and stuttering using many fighter squads to engage more squadron than themselves, (I play AS Hakuryu), a griefing method, will thus be eliminated. If unspecified a target, the fighters will automatically start focusing and locking on a squad within its immediate area, so it will not be possible to glide a fighter squad alongside some strike squads and not specify a target, and act as a perma-slow. Fighters focusing on fighters will wind-up much faster, engaging in dogfight only seconds after contact, and as priority, so will be similar to current. However, for multiple fighter squads doing a big battle, they won't be little points of engagement, instead as an area, as defined by their engagement range (which will vary accordingly, see section 4). Overlapping engagement ranges will split the damage amongst all enemy squads inside, and vice versa. So in a big battle, fighter squads with smaller engagement areas will have better focused damage, but less split damage or damage reach. Fighter squads with big engagement areas will deal damage evenly to all enemies engaged, but will find it difficult to eliminate specific squads. Random strike squads flying through the battle areas will also take damage and help split some pressure off friendly fighters, slightly slowed while flying through, but won't be focused. It will also not be possible much more difficult to do "selective strafes" grazing just the enemy squad, and not your own squad, both locked in battle. It will also not be as easy to strategically "spend" a squad, such as sending a crippled squad, or a squad low on ammo, to do a particularly hard lock so it'll get spent, while preserving a full strength and ammo squad nearby. This also has profound implications for the balancing and differentiation of planes of different nations. It may even be possible to give planes "AA range" areas of focus, such as ships have, with different influence ranges and different intensity for these ranges. This will also partly make strafing in general more difficult to focus, and less singularly decimating, as squads are spread out evenly in a big cluster battle, because the positions are not insta-locked, but "slided" into place due to the wind-up mechanism and possibility to maneuver while still winding up. Torpedo Bombers: For torpedo bomber strikes, the current alt and click-to-rotate system is pretty much unusable, everyone just manually flies their tb to the right angle then drops straight in without every using the adjustment. I propose two major changes: torpedo aim is no longer a "path", specifying the route as of current. Instead, there will be two modes of manual drop: one is free-drop, other is locked-on drop. (1) In free-drop, the torpedo estimated entry-point to the water is displayed in little torpedo-shaped highlights a bit forward from the planes (due to inertia). This highlight will appear and stay on whenever torpedo planes are low-altitude and ready to drop (we'll get into altitude-change mechanics later). Players will have to infer the exact pathing of the torpedoes on their own. Thus experienced players will have to make use of their "feel", instead of some "laserdot" aiming, and long-range torp-drops will be more difficult. Because with the current pathed aim, I can literally put the path into perfect position so the torpedos will arm split second before they hit, or only hit at their max range, at max convergence. The new system will still allow players to distance and angle the torpedoes, just not as exact. For control scheme, scrolling middle mouse either increases the spacing (to a certain limit) between each torpedo, so a wider wall but wider spaces for ships to escape, or decrease space (to a certain limit) for a narrower concentrated torpedo spear. Clicking middle mouse resets to default spacing. Thus every drop will potentially be unique, and there will be no "set" formula to dodge torpedoes. Dropping can also be a one-button press like fighter barrage (which button, can customize). So a free-drop might go like this: player fly tb to a set angle (taking into account AA, hit chance, etc.), then guides the planes towards the ship, watching the highlight move closer and closer towards the ship. At the right distance, the player twitches the trigger-button, and torpedoes drop, hitting the water at the highlighted points, which stopped moving the split second trigger was pressed, and torpedoes dropped (there will actually be animations of little torpedoes dropping from the planes). Pressing the trigger too late would result in not enough time to arm. Pressing too early would just drop them too far from point, so either split second reflexes, or experienced "flow" of timing will be important to drop tb. However, one could simply not drop and keep maneuvering the planes over and around for another attempt, though AA might take its toll. It is also possible to design so it is not a quick-time one-button drop, but two-button: first button activates highlight and "arms", player can aim during this and preset a drop-point instead of quick-time drop, similar to current, then press drop button to execute (or just auto-execute once set, as current). (2) In locked-drop, the player first selects the ship, then the alt-circle appears around it, but locked on and following the ship, with the at the center. The camera will also be locked on and following the ship. Players can "assign" multiple squads of planes to strike the ship. Their attack angles will be shown at the circle, and their flight-route arrows will trace from their current position to the edge of the circle leading to their attack run. Players can use wasd keys to move the centre of the circle accordingly, for instance a bit forwards from the ship for a fast-moving ship, and a bit port-side for a port-turning ship (wasd sensitivity can customize). Middle-mouse rotates the circle, and all attack angles on it, clock-wise and counter-clockwise, a click will reset the angle (note: not wasd). Also possibility for a key to increase circle distance, or the distance from the ship the final route turn before setting into the attack procedure. Dragging attack angles around the edge of the circle will micro-tweak attack angles. There is no one-button drop: planes will start flying along the projected route and start dropping as soon as the lock-on is initiated. Players will have to manually sync plane positions for synchronized drops. No width adjustment or distance of drop is customizeable in this mode, spacing will be default, the distance will be similar to current auto-drop. When a ship is locked on, and planes have approached the end of the routing and are turning in for the drop, an air-siren will start to sound for the ship being striked. Planes already locked into the drop angle, and just a bit past the point of no-return, (just as torpedoes are gliding through the air) will have their attack angle displayed to the striked ship via a small arrowhead, synced to appear one second before dramatic appearance of torpedo icons in the water. So the ship still has a chance to maneuver. It is also possible to design so that the quick-time press-to-drop is instead used here, so planes will hover at the edge point of no-return and will not drop into angle unless final execute button is pressed. It may be possible for players to customize which style they choose, however there is the danger of cheating "auto-execute" mods being used. We'll see. Dive-bombers: For db drops, there will be two modes, listed to correspondence to tb drops (1 is "manual", 2 is "auto"). Players will probably have to have a button to switch between these modes, whenever a bomber squad is selected. (1) Dive-bomb. Planes will now, accordingly to history, potentially have more than 1 bomb per plane, or have different types of bombs. Unlike tb, there won't be little highlights of bombs on the water to estimate contact point. Instead, there will be a manual drop aiming circle highlight functioning similarly to the current tb highlights. Aiming will function similar to current, but by scrolling the middle mouse, players can slightly change the size of the area covered by the precision drop. However, a smaller, more precise area will incur a slightly longer attack run, so point of no return will be farther away from the ship. If you want only slightly more accuracy than the auto-drop, only a small pre-run will be required, so the bombers can almost turn in and dive-bomb sideways. Players will have to weigh their preference for a more precise drop, or a better angled drop along the length of the ship. A important mechanic here is that the bombers in dive-bomb mode will slightly adjust their bombings (similar to the slight auto-aim of new fighter barrage) to better hit the ship, but very slight, adjusting around 1/8 of the area covered, so it won't be a perfect oval as current, but instead an indented oval, lightly enveloping the ship, so less bombs will hit the water less in slight misses. The one-button release vs two-button scheme is open to change here as well. It could be possible for a quick-time drop have a "sweet point" mechanic which has to be executed neither too long nor too early during a drop for the most "enveloping" bonus (to almost 1/4 area difference). Dive bombers in this mode incur the normal AA pressure panicking. Dive-bombing a target takes a few seconds for all the planes to complete their run, about 2 seconds. For 2 seconds, your squad will be moving very slowly over a ship, almost locked in place, such as when fighters lock each other. They will still have to escape under AA pressure after their drops. (2) Fly-over drop. Not very accurate, comparable accuracy to current auto-drop. Tiny diamond-shaped highlights will appear at the centre of ships, with a small number underneath representing the amount of bombers targeting that ship, so players might get an idea of the amount. However, bombers performing this drop will not slow down for the drop, and will not be slowed at all by AA pressure (but can still be slightly panicked according to their settings, and enemy long-range AA strength and mods/skills, but considerably less than dive bomb). So players will have to weigh around the options of reduced accuracy by AA, or reduced accuracy in general. A circle about the size of the whole alt-circle will appear under the cursor (potentially can resize with middle-mouse, with press for default size). Players will put this circle over the ships a fly-over bombing is to happen, with a centre "priority" ship. The circle will be locked onto this ship as its centre, and most bombs will target this ship. However, Some bombers will also target other ships in the circle. For a small circle or only 1 ship, or too many bomber squads, bombers may have to "take turns" bombing the ship in sequence, so they will stay in the AA area for slightly longer, and with a bit reduced accuracy. For bombers with multiple bombs, a slew of many many small bombs (maybe even cluster bombs, or even guided bombs, or rockets, will discuss further down in section 4) will rain down on the ships, with animated dropping of the bombs flying through the air. Again, when bombers approach the point-of-no-return, an air-siren will sound, but not just for the centre targeted ship, instead by the centre ship. So with a 3D sound system, players will be able to hear the direction the siren is coming from, and sail away from it accordingly to dodge the bombs (or lessen the amount of bombs targeting them) (as in real life). Players will be able to define the angle of attack he wants to bombers to attack from, according to AA pressure, wind direction (maybe) (section 5), etc. Spread of bombs will be primarily vertical instead of horizontal, so attacking along the length of a ship will be ideal. This will be especially noticeable for planes with a large number of bombs, such as land-based bombers (section 5), which can carry at least half a dozen bombs each. AA panic effect on planes will not work as current. For tb, because of the possibility of adjusting width, and the removal of a set aiming-cone, torpedoes may end up getting dropped in even more erratic patterns, or not at the same time; some enter the water later than others. It may also be possible for a certain type or pressure amount of AA to stop synchronized torpedo drop altogether: under specific conditions, torpedos can't be dropped in waves, but instead is randomly dropped from totally scattered single torpedo planes, aimed at your cursor, which you will have to hold in the position you want the torpedoes to be launched at. So for instance, you hold down the drop button (or something like trigger left mouse key), and planes scattered in the immediate area will start an angle of attack to launch torpedoes converging on you cursor location, over a small duration of time (each single plane will have to path). You will have to keep your cursor moving and leading the ship you want to torp all during this time. This may actually be another drop mode altogether, and potentially even end up more efficient and satisfying, and really deadly, seeing torpedoes converge on an aimed location in a sequential manner, without clear gaps for escape. Bombs can be affected in more ways than just wider dispersion from panic, such as time it takes for the drop to be completed, accuracy of different drops, or the bonus of the enveloping effect, etc. If quick-time execution is considered, than slight changes to the time it takes for the db to reach "sweet point" could also have major impacts on the drop via impacting the player directly. If torpedo depth was also simulated, then it may be possible for the torpedo planes to mis-set the depth and torpedoes will pass too shallow, hitting the torpedo-protection for much reduced damage, or even pass underneath altogether. Section 3 How current AA works is clear to all. In the new system though, AA mechanics will not be arranged via perfect circles around the ship. Instead, depending on the actual layout of AA armaments on the ship, there will be certain angles of the ship at which AA should be realistically strongest. For instance, the sides should be much deadlier than the immediate front and back of a ship. Thus the sides could be hues of orange and red, or even dark-red/ reddish black (total panic), while the back would just be yellow, or even white (no AA). Actual color scheme can be customized by player preference, including opaqueness. A button can be pressed to show overlay of a system-rated strength of AA. Targeting allies will show allied AA circles, while targeting enemies will show info if close enough. For CV, this can be toggled to be permanently on as long as scouting is close enough for "full reveal", similar to the current "show advanced interface", except that's permanent no matter the range. I will present speculation for hiding player health-bars, but not in today's post. If AA is gradually affected by range, including accuracy (affecting focused efficiency), and efficiency (affecting flat output), then the AA strength display overlay will involve gradients of color and opaqueness. For instance close range AA with more combined flat damage and accuracy will be rated more deadly, while far AA less so. It is possible to have this overlay change dynamically according to overlapping AA range and strength from nearby allies. Due to the introduction of altitude mechanics, only long range AA cannons can hit high-altitude planes, or fly-over bomb drop runs. The way AA pressure works is similar to fighter area of influence: enemy planes flying through at low altitude will get slowed. If dodge mechanics are introduced, then planes may even be commanded to "dodge", affecting the relative accuracy of AA efficiency. This allows for unique balance options: Some ships with strong long-range AA will have their influence felt in more spheres than one, greatly increasing the depth of the game. "AA" radar, or even "AA DDs" will actually be a real concept. Flat AA strength will not be the only determining factor of a ship's AA capability, due to "accuracy" settings modifying flat damage. The width of AA kill-zones via the layout of its AA will have implications on gameplay and choice of ships. Experienced carrier players, having memorized AA layouts of ships, will be adequately rewarded. For instance, "suppressed" ships, unable to change angle direction under risk showing broadside to allied ships, will reward skilled drops from angles of approach with less AA. If AA accuracy was not flat scaling depending on range, but had more accuracy in their "optimal range", than "AA huddle" will be more strategic then simply "bunching ships together as closely as possible". AA panic, or barrage, will also work differently. As of current, a single press of the button will increase long-range AA to "black" level indiscriminant of angle. With the new design, AA "barrage" will work more akin to a barrage. The comparison will be like using an auto-firing machine-gun under normal mode, compared to an aimed semi-auto shotgun, under barrage mode. Specific angles of AA will be enhanced to either very high accuracy, but lower cone width, maybe for high-tech guns, or very high damage (to simulate high alert firing), but with normal cone width and accuracy for standard AA armaments. Probably both. The small cone width can be controlled and "aimed", to a certain extent, by the player. Managing to capture a squad of enemy planes within this cone then barrage it heavily. There will actually be an animated spout of bullets flying in that direction, with appropriate flak clouds in the air, and bits of machine-gun fire walking icicles on the water surface. This barrage may actually fire in barrages, so the player will have to time a barrage with the movement and aim to stay on target, dealing a tick of very high damage every few seconds of reload, and that's only if you hit. Leaving the barrage to auto-engage will likely lower its efficiency by default. The cone may also deepen in color while reloading, so the player will visually see the process of each reload. Because most of the long-range AA guns are secondary armaments with distinguishable reload times anyways. It may even be possible for barrages to be based on number of shots instead of a set time period. The barrage will automatically hit all planes within its angle of affect, splitting damage between them. There will be no need to vertically differ or horizontally aim the barrage. To panic planes, they will have to be under pressure of "black" AA for a consistent amount of time. To achieve that, either a real-time logging of damage on that squad, or something based on incoming damage versus plane stats, is in effect. Fully focused fighter fire will result in panic, but not during the wind-up period. A single barrage, even if it takes out 1-2 planes right away, will not fully panic the remaining planes unless a second barrage hits, or the combined amount of AA the planes receives from all auto-AA in the area first exceeded its maximum "slow", a kind of "soft cap". Higher amounts of AA will naturally reach this cap faster. So if the barrage is of sufficient "strength", it may outright panic the lower-tier planes as well. Compounding influence, from multiple types of AA, from cross-fire directions, will independently weigh more on this "damage cap", so mixed AA will be much more deadly. Higher tier planes, or specific plane designs from specific nations will vary on their susceptibility to these influences, partly based on historical considerations or actual specs. Thus in a high-tier game, with enough squadrons attacking even a Des Moines, it will not be able to barrage all of them, or panic all of them by itself, partly due to high-tier planes being more "resilient", as well the sheer number of squads splitting the damage soft cap. With certain captain skills, modules, or even premium ship designs, it may be possible to have more than 1 barrage cone, for many single-barrage targets, for it to auto-engage all squads, or increase its efficiency and width, but reduce number of cones/ auto-engage targets, etc. The best defence is still to be inside sufficient combined AA to be more than capable of pushing to the "soft damage cap" for each squadron, so they can then be easily panicked within a single scout fighter's area of influence (oh did I forget to mention that?), or even chance to be auto-panicked per barrage activated, because combined AA already excessively exceeded the soft-cap. So ships can either choose to focus on "soft overall power", "manual barrage power", or "tactical situational AA", to name a few possibilities.The key point is to still introduce many more options for diversification, unique characteristics and settings, and dynamic gameplay. Section 4 While the above points have already introduced many options for stat tweaks on planes, actual change of weapons and attack styles are still unconsidered. I will also first explain the altitude mechanic. Altitude: Altitude mechanic: Spotting mechanics have already been explained in former sections. How to change altitude not yet. Surface ships AA do not differ between altitude except via hard limits: only long-range AA, or even some medium range AA can hit high-altitude targets, and perhaps some planes with excessively low "high altitude" settings and stats. Fighters will still be needed to panic or slow planes at high altitude. It is possible that some multi-role fighters or heavy strike planes will be capable of exerting a small area of AA influence while still being able to carry out strikes against ships, but they will probably not have the same "focus" ability (similar to "accuracy" stat modification) used by pure fighters to maximize damage and lock squadrons. Their maneuverability, turning radius will also vary. It is possible for planes to have different speeds at high and low altitude, as well as varying spotting and concealment values. I envision that a single key-press, or even better, via auto, will be used to change the altitude of planes over a course of a few seconds, during which they maneuver vertically and less horizontally, moving slightly slower if increasing altitude, and faster if diving. Areas of influence will be difficult to balance if it was calculated separately by altitude, so influence should automatically concern both high and low altitude, but actual damage potential, and damage receiving potential will still vary dependent on the targets' altitude settings. If high altitude planes are ordered to carry out a strike, they will not change from their current altitude until within certain strike distance of target. While the altitude change is completed within few seconds for gameplay purposes, their altitude-dependent stats will not fully "activate" until a few more seconds. So no altitude juggling. Different plane types will also potentially have different altitude change parameters. Strike planes capable of striking from different altitudes may also have different altitude-specific effectiveness, depending on their historical specs. On special weapons for planes, Rockets: mix between the targeting method of bombs, and attack procedure of torpedoes. Many more individual projectiles than bombs capable from the same plane. Projectile speed much faster than bombs, so more responsive. Actual damage parameters I leave to WG to investigate and design. Angle of attack may or may not have heavy influence on the outcome. First-person camera mode may or may not be involved for aiming rockets. Horizontal range will probably be longer than other strike methods. Guided bombs: Can attack from high altitude, far range, retaining accuracy. Mechanics and control may be pretty troll depending on which bombs, from which technological stage, are used. Guided missiles: Only heavy strike land-based aircraft can carry these (except maybe some freak of a premium T10 carrier carrying only 30 planes). Sounds pretty strong. Bet it is. In response, the ships also have prototype anti-air missiles (works like AA magnetic torpedoes), or "proximity rounds" upgrade for use. Potentially even Type 3 for some BBs. Flying boats: I have advocated for flying boats to be used in a rescue mechanic for sailors from sunk ships. If there was any most important tradition in the navy, it's probably that they will rescue their people. This method could also be used to a better image than a random "loot crate" mechanic for reducing repair costs. Hopefully, you won't be able to fire on these flying boats on rescue missions. They can either land to fully pick up sailors for the biggest reward, or airdrop lifesaving equipment as a temporary measure because of whatever reasons prohibiting a full landing. Combat-use flying boats, from the nations which used them, or heavy bombers with area AA capability can be considered, AEWC aircraft and blimps: Not very useful in 1st generation theatres of battle, with current spotting mechanics, but can potentially be linked with the usage of prototype weaponry. Airships: Possible to carry out limited resupply and repair, or act as limited aerial control. Definitely not gen 1 mechanics. CV-based scout-planes: This can be done. They will probably have low detection but limited fuel. On combined strikes: Due to introduction of A.I. route pathing, with diversification of weapons, it may be possible to carry out "combined" strikes against ships, for instance the one I hear the most involves suppressing deck-AA fire. If you select an appropriate combination of squads, then it may be possible to engage in a coordinated strike, to counter the new AA mechanics of ships. Even more diverse weapons may allow for additional tactical and even strategic effects than just pure damage. This leads us to the BCV part of this discussion. I had envisioned it possible because of the advances in u.i. design, such as the route pathing and threat-sense displays. However, ideally, a BCV should be able to strike a ship without leaving first-person mode of the ship, while also use main armament in strategic display. The first requires limited optimization of aiming [break time.]
  14. I have a Question for the Devs and Programmers of WoWs in total, if you managed to animate Weather (Rain, Fog, Smoke, Rain) even on the Ship Deck. And your also manage to animate Guns, MainBatteries, Secondaries, AA Guns and even more Stuff like the Catapults for Recon Planes... even the Engine Blades in the Water are Rotating even changing Directions if you are reversing - why you cant animate the Rudder?! Even the Smoke from the Chimneys on the Land are smoking... is that Hard work to create that Small animation? Even if Wargaming says... you cant see the Rudder all the Time because of Big BattleShips... but well, isnt that a nice Feature to make the "Look" of the Game a bit more Realistic? I guess not much Players take care of that because they only pressing A and D Keys and the Ship turns... but you already try to make the Details on the Ships very nice so... its maybe like the Physiks of the Tracks Movement in World of Tanks - Would be nice so far if u manage to do that -
  15. You are right, it was a estupid rant with a lot of mumbo-jumbo mixed together, i'm actually an experienced player and that should be a reason to measure my words. I deleted it and I'll think twice before i get mad about something again and say things i don't really believe. In my poor english, i was actually trying to say it's too easy to hit a ship, not too hard. Maybe because i play mostly with DDs that have short range cannons. This is the class i play the most, from Isokaze to Kagero but i've been trying to play other classes and i just feel that aiming is not giving me the sensation that it was me hitting that ship, then again, maybe most people doesn't give so much importance to that. I can't say the same about torpedoes so maybe i'll just stick with DDs for a while. Before this i had some weird RNG moments ending with a game crash that made me restart my pc and that, along with some frustration related to other issues i think the game has but i doubt will be fixed any time soon, made me start "beating" the keyboard. Cheers "if i aim here... i may get a hit somewhere around there, ahhh failed, i'll hit again in the same spot, let's see.... nice, a citadel hit!" I have a hard time celebrating this kind of stuff.
  16. would it be possible to get a 3rd turn setting added between half and full rudder that tracked with turret traverse? just sees like this would be a functional/quality of life change to keep a little more turn rate while keeping the guns on target without having to micromanage the turn rate on boats with slow turrets.
  17. xOGxVevistyle

    Suggestions to mechanics

    Hello fellow Sailors, first i would apologise in advance if this is a double post or old ieas an maybe some bad grammar While playing since CBT, i observed, tested, played etc., every ship type in the game and experienced all the cons and pros of each ship, so a couple of maybe good and bad ideas went thru my head. i will describe for all Ship types and later Misc. ideas. Battleships: - I would suggest that the spoter aircraft that is pressent only on the BB, should not just extend the Main battery fire range, but also extend Ship and torpedo acquisition for XX%, like you would add Hydroacoustic sonar to the spot mechanics - Limit amount of deck fires from 3 to 2. Cruisers: - Cattapult fighter In my honest opinion is a waste of deck space, and dont see much usefullness in it, so I would add an optiont to swap it with a Spot aircraft but only for Main battery fire range increase, but with a smaller duration time that a Battleship has (reload speed) - Making more profit and Extra XP if you destroy aircraft when there is also a friendly Battleship or other ship type than cruiser inside your AAA bubble 6 km range max. (Escorting Battleships would maybe be seen more often) and BB drivers would be very greatfull. Destroyers: -Ok since these little fast buggers are allways full speed ahead into the front lines, they should have a spoting bonus... - increase DPM on AAA - Add consumable option Defensive AA barrage Aircraft Carriers: - Controlable secondary artillery - Add new Aircraft type ( equiped with Rockets ) but i dont remeber japanese aircraft with rocket armament - Disable or prevent Aircraft flight Outside the map border Misc mechanics: - Target gets spoted and unspoted with a jerky and kinda laggy feel to it, would recomend a 2-3 second Fade in out ( target still being tracked while in fade) - Slightly visible water splash when torpedo hits the water ( no icon, warning, sound, no skill, just a simple particle effect.... if you see it with your own eyes then you know whats coming if not...well you know what happenes next... XD) - Remove drunk unexperinced wannabe sailors from secondary armament and replace with sailors who knows if a ships is 6 km away or 6 meters away XD... properly said increase accuracy on all secondary armament
  18. While I do know its too far gone and WG far too stubborn to do a rethink, I hate ideas bouncing around in my head with no one to cast constructive critique on them. The current CV/AAA interaction is not effective imo. It creates too many all or nothing outcomes and does not scale well when mismatch tiers are present e.g. T8 CV vs. T6 AAA. The proposed idea gets rid of odd hit points mechanic for planes and intends to flatten the ends outs more and put emphasis on fighters being the killers of planes. Overall there will be less plane destruction but conversely there will be more chance of missed attacks. All squadrons to be 4 strong regardless of nation. All planes to have distance on them on map (why is this still not implemented?) Oh and a scale on the map like maps are meant to have. Alt view if squadron selected will show distances relative to squadron. 1. A2A Combat. No fighter lock. Ammo will remain as limiter fighter groups get x number seconds/ticks of ammo before rearming is necessary remaining fairly consistent across tiers. Equipment or Captain skills to give bonus? Planes will have a Air Defence and an Air Attack rating. initiators of combat get bonus for first few ticks (either strike first or bonus to attack rating). Each tick attack rolls are made if successful plane shot down. Rolls are made at same time. The idea is get rid of the current wipe outs that happen 1 vs. 1 and if you engage enemy fighters, you will expect losses even if you out tier them. This will also give sea planes and damaged fighter squadrons more bite. No free lunches in air combat. 2 Non CV planes. The core code is in game , allow non CV's to order their planes if they so chose via the minimap. 3 View from the skies. Rather than ,always on laser tracking, that all planes seem to have, planes engaged in A2A combat do not spot, they are after all busy. Perhaps even a chance to spot for all planes rather than always on. Combined with point 2 this would allow Sea planes to assist friendly DD's being spotted by enemy planes. Perhaps also have a dedicated spotter plane with equipment to match. 4 AAA. Currently 3 ships with the same AA rating as 1 ship will perform much worse at AA due to how it is worked out. AA zones to be kept but rather than work out on a per ship basis, AA is combined. Rolls made against all planes , AA rating not divided by planes in zone as is current. Removal of focus bonus. That combined ratings main effect is disruption rather than destruction. There would still be a chance to shoot down a plane but it would be the exception rather than the rule. Instead the higher the AA rating, the higher the chance of ditched attacks, higher chance of duds and reduced accuracy. Caps for each check to allow something to get through, which can be dodged if tinfish. This would allow weaker AA ships to group up and have a better effect than current, even alone they could do something ,again no free lunches. Conversely no fly zones would not exist and there would still be a chance even if low that something may launch correctly allowing low tier CV's in higher tier games to have some effect. This would also allow spotters to spot and essential behave as if they were above the AA ceiling without having to implement altitude. 5 CV curve. As you progress up the tiers the main changes in aircraft would be damage of anti ship weapons , size of air group , speed , AA resistance ; more likely to keck your pants in a tri plane than a new shiny DB, AA & AD ratings. Maybe spotters? You will be more likely to win against a lower tier CV but not with losses. The biggest advantage would be speed. 6 Nation flavour. If WG still wants a Nation flavour the above allows for that but does not make things such as better fighters or better torps be so overwhelming. The above is fairly rough , welcome constructive replies, thoughts etc.
  19. Tyrendian89

    Repair Party mechanics

    Greetings fellow captains, I can't for the life of me figure out what determines the amount of HP repaired by the Repair Party, or rather why it sometimes hardly repairs anything at all... Can someone enlighten me? Activating it only to see it repair a mere 200hp is rather frustrating at times...
  20. Hi guys, I'll be brief. Things I would like to see in the game after playing for some time: 1) Every ship should have an ammo limit... shells/torpedoes/bombs (CVs) based on historical values. Running out of ammo was an important aspect that literally decided the outcome of many sea battles. 2) Destroyers: mines and guided torpedoes (rationed) - mines - laying mines was an important part of marine warfare... It would be fun to see destroyers with limited torps but it'd be even more fun to see them protect their CVs and BBs by laying minefields to cut off probable approach paths for enemy destroyers - guided torpedoes - WW2 saw 3 types of those: with acoustic guidance (like 1943 German G7e or G7es), plus pattern-following (these would be fun to see) and wake-homing (not necessarily). Since these would be very powerful indeed maybe there should be a limit (explained by limited availability and thus supply of e.g. 10 per day or so... 3) Shell hits below waterline - these happened too and yet I don't see flooding caused by shells - especially AP ones. 4) Siege mode - an idea I had just now. Imagine a fiord with a harbour protected by a fort (operated automatically by AI) and two teams clashing together protecting/attacking the port. Also a vs. AI version would be fun to play with some increased difficulty for more satisfaction. That's all. Thanks. Stan
  21. StanleyHTweedle

    Drop the retraining

    Guys @WarGaming. Drop the captain retraining mechanics. It's counterproductive. It's only 200k. It doesn't add up to monetization of the game. It just annoys people.
  22. Hi there. Is there somewhere Experience and Cash gain mechanics ? I know some ppl. say that when you do % dmg to ship then u get experience, same for cash... Can anyone tell me where i can read this ? I was looking in this forum but cant find anything about this. If anyone knows it be cool. Regards Boold