Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
RenamedUser_92906789

Good tweaks (Dev blog info)

28 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
12,666 posts
9,841 battles

Meh... if they have time to do something like that, id rather have them implement a demount signals on a ship/all ships button. Would be much more usefull then this.

If potatoes gonna use those skills then let them maybe? Rather educate them properly and not just say "this is bad mkay". Also who is judging whats good or bad cptn wise? Are only the obvious skills bad (like CV skills on other classes?) Or is Survivabilty Expert marked as bad on BBs ? :Smile_trollface:

Also i wonder, are really that many players using wrong signals on their ship? I mean ive seen ppl using the extra flooding flag on a non-torpedo BB... So maybe thats an actual thing?!

 

More planes on BBs?... cmon srsly WG :cap_old:

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PMI]
Players
2,564 posts
9,156 battles

But instead of that, why not getting a decent port UI & chat?

 

And they finally noticed that going for the lowest common denominator is going to require warning lights when the shoes are going in the wrong feet, truely priceless.

  • Cool 3
  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ONE2]
Players
3,151 posts
26,891 battles

Whaddaya sayin'? @nambr9 So this would mean Iäll get a funny mark on my compulsory "Smokescreen Expert" skill in my TRB Yugumo from now on?:Smile_ohmy::cap_wander::cap_hmm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-HUN-]
[-HUN-]
Players
1,827 posts
12,895 battles
3 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

Meh... if they have time to do something like that, id rather have them implement a demount signals on a ship/all ships button. Would be much more usefull then this.

If potatoes gonna use those skills then let them maybe? Rather educate them properly and not just say "this is bad mkay". Also who is judging whats good or bad cptn wise? Are only the obvious skills bad (like CV skills on other classes?) Or is Survivabilty Expert marked as bad on BBs ? :Smile_trollface:

Also i wonder, are really that many players using wrong signals on their ship? I mean ive seen ppl using the extra flooding flag on a non-torpedo BB... So maybe thats an actual thing?!

 

More planes on BBs?... cmon srsly WG :cap_old:

 

 

 

Yesssssss. BBs can stay even farther back in the battle and snipe even more! Good balance comrades! But still missing the usual DD nerf from update. Is it gonna be a surprise?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
12,666 posts
9,841 battles
4 minutes ago, Juanx said:

And they finally noticed that going for the lowest common denominator is going to require warning lights when the shoes are going in the wrong feet, truely priceless.

 

LOL, THAT MADE MY DAY!!! IM TOTALY ROFLING :cap_haloween:

Thumbs up for that one :Smile_teethhappy:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NIKE]
Beta Tester
3,409 posts
7,446 battles
1 minute ago, DFens_666 said:

Meh... if they have time to do something like that, id rather have them implement a demount signals on a ship/all ships button. Would be much more usefull then this.

If potatoes gonna use those skills then let them maybe? Rather educate them properly and not just say "this is bad mkay". Also who is judging whats good or bad cptn wise? Are only the obvious skills bad (like CV skills on other classes?) Or is Survivabilty Expert marked as bad on BBs ? :Smile_trollface:

Also i wonder, are really that many players using wrong signals on their ship? I mean ive seen ppl using the extra flooding flag on a non-torpedo BB... So maybe thats an actual thing?!

 

More planes on BBs?... cmon srsly WG :cap_old:

 

 

 

From the pics it looks like it just marks the skills that literally won't do anything - e.g. expert loader on a minotaur.

 

While taking SE on a BB is generally seen as a bad thing, it at least does something, albeit just not the most sensible choice.

 

Regarding it being needed or not, EU has a lot where English isn't their strong point, and there has been several mistranslations - lots of people have thought that vigilance's "increaded acquisition range for torpedoes" means their torps go further.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PMI]
Players
2,564 posts
9,156 battles
3 minutes ago, Xevious_Red said:

lots of people have thought that vigilance's "increaded acquisition range for torpedoes" means their torps go further.

 

But that is that same people being dumb, "increased acquisition range for torpedoes" can never mean "increased range for torpedoes", if you understand otherwise, the issue lies elsewhere, and there is no software to fix that. English is quite straightforward.

 

This all ties to "catering for the lowest common denominator" issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
12,666 posts
9,841 battles
1 minute ago, Xevious_Red said:

From the pics it looks like it just marks the skills that literally won't do anything - e.g. expert loader on a minotaur.

 

While taking SE on a BB is generally seen as a bad thing, it at least does something, albeit just not the most sensible choice.

 

Regarding it being needed or not, EU has a lot where English isn't their strong point, and there has been several mistranslations - lots of people have thought that vigilance's "increaded acquisition range for torpedoes" means their torps go further.

 

hmm, so basicly useless if you understand the very smallest bits of the game?

 

2nd: Ye thats what i meant. It basicly will only tell you to not take skills which dont do anything. It would be better to include stuff like SE however. Problem with this is, devs would actually have to know what is usefull and what not :cap_haloween:

 

3rd: How many different languages does WoWs provide? ive seen several on screenshots, so not sure if thats a real thing. On the other hand, Vigilance wouldnt be marked as useless, since it does something for any class? I think the assured acquisition module is far worse, took my quite some time to understand it. I wouldnt wonder when most ppl dont understand what its actually doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
5,261 posts

For instance IFHE / DEMO EXPERT on RN CL (Belfast excluded) would be  logical. But, this would fail again if for instance a RN CL would fire HE secondaries.

They better think this trough.

 

There are also people saying CE should be marked useless for BBs ... so I hope people mark them stupid asap so no light headed dev takes them seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[COMFY]
Players
793 posts
2,080 battles
33 minutes ago, Juanx said:

But instead of that, why not getting a decent port UI & chat?

 

And they finally noticed that going for the lowest common denominator is going to require warning lights when the shoes are going in the wrong feet, truely priceless.

I do actually find that to be a small problem. When you get set on fire, your ship is on fire. For flooding, other then a torp hit and a notification+icon that you are flooding, not much visuals, not even a flooding icon on your hp bar.( war thunder have ships actually listing as they flood)

plus damage control crews are incompetent(how hard it is to actually shut the damm bulkhead doors?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
12,666 posts
9,841 battles
5 minutes ago, nambr9 said:

For instance IFHE / DEMO EXPERT on RN CL (Belfast excluded) would be  logical. But, this would fail again if for instance a RN CL would fire HE secondaries.

They better think this trough.

 

Probably why they used Mino in their example - doesnt have secondaries :cap_haloween:

Maybe they couldnt yet decide for the other RN CLs, if IFHE is a no-no or not :cap_fainting:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
535 posts

And yet they didn't find the space in port to put the most important sign -   "You will pay same amount of credit if you lose your ship or stay alive"

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ONE2]
Players
3,151 posts
26,891 battles
15 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

Probably why they used Mino in their example - doesnt have secondaries :cap_haloween:

Maybe they couldnt yet decide for the other RN CLs, if IFHE is a no-no or not :cap_fainting:

I actually had a fellow in the same team a couple of weeks ago (in a Neptune tho), who boasted about how he'd gotten BOTH of them (IFHE & DE) and how they had improved his results (somebody had asked for tips on what skill to take for his RN CL next)...:cap_like:

 

There was nothing I could say to that, so I stayed silent. But some others did not and so a huge chat debate/fight/name-calling event ensued and pretty much ruined our team's game, we lost quite miserably. It is a miracle no-one got TK'd... :Smile_facepalm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
12,666 posts
9,841 battles
Just now, RAHJAILARI said:

I actually had a fellow in the same team a couple of weeks ago (in a Neptune tho), who boasted about how he'd gotten BOTH of them (IFHE & DE) and how they had improved his results...:cap_like:

 

There was nothing I could say to that, so I stayed silent. But some others did not so a huge chat debate ensued and pretty much ruined our team's game, we lost. :Smile_facepalm:

 

facepalm.jpg

 

Maybe he pulled a Notser, back when IFHE was new and he argued that he had better restults on 203mm guns with IFHE :cap_old:

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[JRM]
Players
8,972 posts

Its rubbish, I ll choose my own Captain perks thank you very much and dont need a shepard to tell me what i want or not since they have no idea what i am doing or planing to do with that Captain (ie retraining a different class captain on a premium) it would be better if they debugged the aiming ui that spins your view randomy to the opposite side when you switch targets or something else more usefoul instead od wasting time with “suggestions” of Captain perks u should take

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[WTFNO]
Players
752 posts
13,421 battles
48 minutes ago, Juanx said:

 

But that is that same people being dumb, "increased acquisition range for torpedoes" can never mean "increased range for torpedoes", if you understand otherwise, the issue lies elsewhere, and there is no software to fix that. English is quite straightforward.

Hmm, I understand how you could interpret that as "increased acquisition range for YOUR torpedoes" . Not really consistent with the skill name, though.

Still, it seems a very minor step, unless WG has stats that indicate a lot of people actually take useless skills. I would be curious to know about that.

And as said above, what captain skills really need is a significant rework anyway.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
579 posts
5,038 battles

Moar Float Planes so new CV players have more things to work around with there 5 reserv planes yeah :fish_nerv:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Players
850 posts
34 minutes ago, Yedwy said:

Its rubbish, I ll choose my own Captain perks thank you very much and dont need a shepard to tell me what i want or not since they have no idea what i am doing or planing to do with that Captain (ie retraining a different class captain on a premium) it would be better if they debugged the aiming ui that spins your view randomy to the opposite side when you switch targets or something else more usefoul instead od wasting time with “suggestions” of Captain perks u should take

Its more about not taking torpedo reload speed on BB captain or CV skills on CA/BB captain and things like that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PMI]
Players
2,564 posts
9,156 battles
47 minutes ago, AmiralPotato said:

Hmm, I understand how you could interpret that as "increased acquisition range for YOUR torpedoes" .  

 

 

Sorry I dont, you can "acquire" them, as in buying them? How does that give them range?

 

For me, I see it sa a response to a question no one asked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[JRM]
Players
8,972 posts

Maybee they think they re self-guided torps and aquisition range means they will aquire target at greatet distance?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[WTFNO]
Players
752 posts
13,421 battles
16 minutes ago, Yedwy said:

Maybe they think they re self-guided torps and acquisition range means they will acquire target at greater distance?

This.

But overall I agree these little symbols will not bring much, unless WG has reasons / stats to think otherwise.

(to be honest, it would be a bit frightening if these 'useless' signs had a significant effect, meaning lots of people pick skills without knowing what they do :cap_hmm:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[JRM]
Players
8,972 posts

Well tbh most skill descriptions are sort of not really self explanatory on the way of the true effects if u dont have a firm grasp on core mechanics and Many people with even high tier line ships dont so its not surprising. For instance if IFHE skill description read something Like your he shells before penetrate 26mm and afterwards 32mm armor it might give more information what that change might bring you instead “increases by 30%” but then again Many dont even understand what penetration means for damage they will get from their shells...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ONE2]
Players
3,151 posts
26,891 battles
23 minutes ago, AmiralPotato said:

This.

But overall I agree these little symbols will not bring much, unless WG has reasons / stats to think otherwise.

(to be honest, it would be a bit frightening if these 'useless' signs had a significant effect, meaning lots of people pick skills without knowing what they do :cap_hmm:)

Weelll... I do know someone (not me God forbid) who seriously contemplated taking the "Expert Rear Gunner" skill for his Myoko:Smile_ohmy: - Luckily he talked to me first, listened and changed his mind... And he isn't normally even retarded. People get some funny ideas...:Smile_Default:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PMI]
Players
2,564 posts
9,156 battles
56 minutes ago, Yedwy said:

Maybee they think they re self-guided torps and aquisition range means they will aquire target at greatet distance?

 

This I can concede, still, the issue lies between monitor & chair.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×