Update 0.10.1: Italian Battleships

[Maris_Piper]

3 hours ago, Europizza said:

Yeah keep removing ships in the name of 'diversity'. ROFL.

Remove Battleships with a shorter than 33 second reload and stick them into some sort of Money Grab offer perhaps?

[rimmer_the]

Loading the update, for myself and what Ive heard of others is pic related. There has to be a faster way of downloading than how your snail bloat launcher does it, and no Ive seen this with more people, its not my connection. 

[rimmer_the]

On 2/15/2021 at 2:50 PM, YabbaCoe said:

It is never directly said, how long data gathering and evaluation takes and that certain action needs to be taken after that. We are still analyzing the impact of all skills and their performance.

Maybe do it faster so people will not be left with 'broken' ships, regret, and uncertainty. You have a legion of players saying how bad Deadeye is for the game, how poor Dazzle is etc. You are ignoring entire forums's worth of feedback and the only reason I can think of, its not the feedback you want to know about. 

[YabbaCoe]

Před 2 hodinami MojaEkscelencja řekl/a:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alea_iacta_est

 

"iacta" or "jacta"?

https://www.infoplease.com/askeds/iacta-vs-jacta

 

Před 2 hodinami MBrandis řekl/a:

No, even modern works use the classical spelling when referring to the famous quote by Caesar attributed to him by Sueton. 

 

Citation needed. I can go to my bookshelf right now and pick up any of my 100+ books on latin and roman history and I can guarantee you not a single one spells it with a j. 

Do I need to scan and post my degrees here as well? 


EDIT: Even more importantly, it is generally considered best practice to use the original language when citing a quote. This being classical latin. 

I trust you, you don't need to scan your degree. As I mentioned I am not an expert for latin, so that is why I asked particular people, why "jacta" was used.

The response I received and the reasons for this, I wrote down here.

I can't judge, if it was right, or wrong decision.

 

 

[MojaEkscelencja]

1 minute ago, YabbaCoe said:

https://www.infoplease.com/askeds/iacta-vs-jacta

Editors working now that I and J are seen as distinct letters usually keep the words the way they were written at the time: thus, "iacta alea est".

 

Am I correct that providing this link you admitted that you (WG) made a mistake in the sentence?

[YabbaCoe]

Před 13 minutami MojaEkscelencja řekl/a:

Editors working now that I and J are seen as distinct letters usually keep the words the way they were written at the time: thus, "iacta alea est".

 

Am I correct that providing this link you admitted that you (WG) made a mistake in the sentence?

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/alea jacta est

 

And from the previous one, it is visible, that it can be used with J.

[MojaEkscelencja]

14 minutes ago, YabbaCoe said:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/alea jacta est

 

And from the previous one, it is visible, that it can be used with J.

Of course, it's your game. You can write whatever you want.

You may even use Y or write "The die has been cast" (because in one movie someone from WG saw that the Romans were talking in English) but it doesn't change the fact that the original sentence was "alea iacta est".

[doerhoff_damian]

Maybe they should have ask the Metatron about the correct Pronumciation.

Barbarians: Is The LATIN Correct? - YouTube

[416taylor]

5 hours ago, MBrandis said:

No. It is not. This phrase is not spelled with a j because everybody understands that it is a classical latin quote. And It was definitely not spelled with a j whenever it was quoted in WWII literature or literally any history book. 

If you want to claim the Italian Navy had some sort of convention where they actually spelled it with a J during WWII I will need some examples of that. 

Furthermore, the argument makes no sense. Russian ships in the game use old Russian that is not used in modern Russian alphabet either. So why the double standard? 

 

 

It's properbly the same misstake as with 8x57 JS (IS) The J is in fact a gotic I  They are a little linguistic wrong  and took for granted that it is an I. but in russia "nemo saltat sorbrius^"

[FixCVs_Nautical_Metaphor]

Strangely the news bulletin does not seem to have anything to say on the subject of the failed Commander Skill rework, nor on any extension of the free skill point redistribution, or free demounting of upgrades, and nothing about any reworking the rework either.

[YabbaCoe]

Před 12 hodinami FixCVs_Nautical_Metaphor řekl/a:

Strangely the news bulletin does not seem to have anything to say on the subject of the failed Commander Skill rework, nor on any extension of the free skill point redistribution, or free demounting of upgrades, and nothing about any reworking the rework either.

 

Even if there is no mention about Commander Skills rework changes, that’s doesn’t mean that we’re not planning to change anything. Actually we are, but since the Skill Rework is very big, it requires a lot of analysis. Now we’re working on the internal report for Skills Rework and soon after we finish the internal part, we, of course, will come back with the announcement and all the details.

[TheWarJaC]

15 hours ago, 416taylor said:

It's properbly the same misstake as with 8x57 JS (IS) The J is in fact a gotic I  They are a little linguistic wrong  and took for granted that it is an I. but in russia "nemo saltat sorbrius^"

 

18 hours ago, doerhoff_damian said:

Maybe they should have ask the Metatron about the correct Pronumciation.

Barbarians: Is The LATIN Correct? - YouTube

 

18 hours ago, MojaEkscelencja said:

Of course, it's your game. You can write whatever you want.

You may even use Y or write "The die has been cast" (because in one movie someone from WG saw that the Romans were talking in English) but it doesn't change the fact that the original sentence was "alea iacta est".

 

18 hours ago, MojaEkscelencja said:

Editors working now that I and J are seen as distinct letters usually keep the words the way they were written at the time: thus, "iacta alea est".

 

Am I correct that providing this link you admitted that you (WG) made a mistake in the sentence?

 

21 hours ago, MBrandis said:

No, even modern works use the classical spelling when referring to the famous quote by Caesar attributed to him by Sueton. 

 

Citation needed. I can go to my bookshelf right now and pick up any of my 100+ books on latin and roman history and I can guarantee you not a single one spells it with a j. 

Do I need to scan and post my degrees here as well? 


EDIT: Even more importantly, it is generally considered best practice to use the original language when citing a quote. This being classical latin. 

 

Ciao Capitani!

 

Here I will provide further insight into the matter. 😊

 

While it is true that the original Latin quote is written "alea iacta est", the Italian orthography has changed over time and during the 17th century "j" started being used in place of "i", when "i" was part of a diphthong (sequence of two vowels) [which is the case for the Latin word Iacta]. In these cases, "i" becomes phonetically different from the normal /i/, as it is uttered as a semi-consonant. This orthographic change had an "inconsistent" success, and nowadays the use of j is only retained in a few arbitrary words of Italian. For a history of j in Italian see: https://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/j/ - it should be stressed that this orthographic change did however have some level of success, and in fact, some references provide the Latin quote with a modern spelling containing j [see the Webster dictionary]. Since the boats used in the game were produced in the 20th century, we decided to use this modern spelling, thinking that there was a good chance people at the time would have chosen this spelling over the other.

[Iannis_3]

The installation process  why takes so long?

[YabbaCoe]

Před 21 hodinami Iannis_3 řekl/a:

The installation process  why takes so long?

How long it took to you?

Because the installation itself should be pretty fast. What probably takes a most time for plenty people is the downloading phase.

[Iannis_3]

27 minutes ago, YabbaCoe said:

How long it took to you?

Because the installation itself should be pretty fast. What probably takes a most time for plenty people is the downloading phase.

After the download finished it takes so long the install process on SSD disk

About 30 mins read wright on SSD (pc with 16GB ram)

[YabbaCoe]

Před 3 minutami Iannis_3 řekl/a:

After the download finished it takes so long the install process on SSD disk

About 30 mins read wright on SSD (pc with 16GB ram)

30 minutes is still quite a long just for installation process. For example to me it took around 30 minutes, but compiled download and instalation.

But anyway, atleast you were ready to directly launch the game today after current update hit the server

 

[mad_maaax]

Just noticed the special commanders for doubloons are no longer available in the armoury!
I've read the patch notes and this isn't mentioned anywhere so I hope it's a bug ;)

EDIT: found them just the appearance has changed, lol

[Axilian_1]

With the sequential bundle purchases - what happens if you already have the Dante - I assume you have to use tokens to unlock the next bundle but do you get refunded for the fact you have the ship and if so ids the refund in credits (which sucks) or italian tokens (which would be far better though doubloon better still ;) )

 

[YabbaCoe]

Před 1 hodinou Axilian_1 řekl/a:

With the sequential bundle purchases - what happens if you already have the Dante - I assume you have to use tokens to unlock the next bundle but do you get refunded for the fact you have the ship and if so ids the refund in credits (which sucks) or italian tokens (which would be far better though doubloon better still ;) )

 

Unfortunately yes. It doesn't matter if you already have Dante from Prime or not. To be able to reach second bundle, you have to unlock the previous one.

You will be refunded in credits + you will get port slot and commander.

[NewHorizons_1]

Quite like the checks that are made before you enter a battle.

1) Ship has no commander

2) Commander has no skills assigned.

 

Team-mate in a Cleveland made the 1st mistake a week ago and had a really good game which would have netted him a shed load of commander XP.

After hitting the big red reset skills button I've fallen to (2) several times.

[MBrandis]

On 2/17/2021 at 10:50 AM, TheWarJaC said:

 

While it is true that the original Latin quote is written "alea iacta est", the Italian orthography has changed over time and during the 17th century "j" started being used in place of "i", when "i" was part of a diphthong (sequence of two vowels) [which is the case for the Latin word Iacta]. In these cases, "i" becomes phonetically different from the normal /i/, as it is uttered as a semi-consonant. This orthographic change had an "inconsistent" success, and nowadays the use of j is only retained in a few arbitrary words of Italian. For a history of j in Italian see: https://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/j/ - it should be stressed that this orthographic change did however have some level of success, and in fact, some references provide the Latin quote with a modern spelling containing j [see the Webster dictionary]. Since the boats used in the game were produced in the 20th century, we decided to use this modern spelling, thinking that there was a good chance people at the time would have chosen this spelling over the other.

 

Your argument is basically "some people decided to change it", but you provide no evidence it was ever the majority spelling or the one that was advanced by classical scholars during the era.  Meanwhile here you have the Loeb edition (first 1914) spelling it with I. (https://www.loebclassics.com/view/suetonius-lives_caesars_book_i_deified_julius/1914/pb_LCL031.77.xml) You also have the same spelling in the Teubner edition (1907). Both editions are the relevant, primarily accepted editions of Suetonius and the quote. 

Now somebody who would write a new book in latin during the 20th century might chose to use J when writing latin instead of I. But this is a quote from classical latin, not modern latin. Especially in the context the camo is trying to sell (Roman Empire, which spoke classical latin) a j is simply the wrong choice. 

 

And here is one more reason why you are wrong about using J here - you are assuming that Mussolini's Italy would have chosen J instead of I, that he would have preferred "modern" latin over "classical" latin. But Mussolini himself preferred to use classical latin.On official documents ordered by his own government for propaganda purposes - he preferred to use classical latin. You can look for example at the Codex Fori Mussolini. 

Or you can take a look at this image, where they even copied the classical look from ancient roman inscriptions - note for example the use of hedera marks. 

This of course is quote simply because he saw himself as the heir to the Roman Emperors of old and thus emulated their language and stylings. 

 

So why would he have used a "modern" version of a quote of Caesar when a) the relevant editions during that time used an i and b) he wanted to emulate the Romans of old and c) his other usage of latin is consistent with classical latin modelled after Ancient Rome. 

So I for one cannot really follow the argument as shown. 
 

[arquata2019_]

34 minuti fa, MBrandis ha scritto:

 

Your argument is basically "some people decided to change it", but you provide no evidence it was ever the majority spelling or the one that was advanced by classical scholars during the era.  Meanwhile here you have the Loeb edition (first 1914) spelling it with I. (https://www.loebclassics.com/view/suetonius-lives_caesars_book_i_deified_julius/1914/pb_LCL031.77.xml) You also have the same spelling in the Teubner edition (1907). Both editions are the relevant, primarily accepted editions of Suetonius and the quote. 

Now somebody who would write a new book in latin during the 20th century might chose to use J when writing latin instead of I. But this is a quote from classical latin, not modern latin. Especially in the context the camo is trying to sell (Roman Empire, which spoke classical latin) a j is simply the wrong choice. 

 

And here is one more reason why you are wrong about using J here - you are assuming that Mussolini's Italy would have chosen J instead of I, that he would have preferred "modern" latin over "classical" latin. But Mussolini himself preferred to use classical latin.On official documents ordered by his own government for propaganda purposes - he preferred to use classical latin. You can look for example at the Codex Fori Mussolini. 

Or you can take a look at this image, where they even copied the classical look from ancient roman inscriptions - note for example the use of hedera marks. 

This of course is quote simply because he saw himself as the heir to the Roman Emperors of old and thus emulated their language and stylings. 

 

So why would he have used a "modern" version of a quote of Caesar when a) the relevant editions during that time used an i and b) he wanted to emulate the Romans of old and c) his other usage of latin is consistent with classical latin modelled after Ancient Rome. 

So I for one cannot really follow the argument as shown. 
 

all this for

Who would win?

J          or           I

[TheBicentennialman]

On 2/16/2021 at 10:56 AM, YabbaCoe said:

When we gather data and analyze them, we also take a look on usage of those ships per certain time and their statistics. So we will definitely also see those changes of number of battles played with any ship.

broken skills that still need a rework (deadEye)

broken ships that are underpowered that you put into high tier match 

 

[HBuhring]

Nobody pointed this out, but Caracciolo model is a complete shame.

 

The Caracciolo BBs never entered service; only the first in class was launched -- and then construction was sadly discontinued due to the changed context (WWI had ended) and to financial constraints. But, all in all, there was a real project -- and it had interesting features. I do not want to make a long discussion on this, but the project looked like this:

The preliminary project looked somewhat different, but the look and feel is there:

... and this is how she looked on the day of her launching:

 

So what did the WG geniuses do instead? they invented a Caracciolo rebuild on the broad lines of the Doria, changing the hull lines, the superstructures, the armament (secondary guns were meant to be in casemates), and erasing the originality of the design, to make a bad clone of other Italian BBs. Not bad for people boasting of "original blueprints" and "diversity" in the game...

 

Moreover, in other cases, an effort had been done to respect both the historical accuracy and the itch for what-ifs transformations: think of the Bayern class BBs, that have two different 3d models, one for the historical hull, one for the "renovated" one. Italian ships do not deserve such attention, it seems.

 

But... wait... I found the authoritative blueprint for the hypothetical rebuild of the WG designers!

From a fantasy ship design site: https://www.deviantart.com/morgansshipyard/gallery

 

(do I have to add anything else?)

 

[I'm playing WoWS mostly for the visuals, as the gaming model, according to me, sucks. Give me another couple of sh***y models like this one and I'm done]

 

HB

[BruceRKF]

5 hours ago, HBuhring said:

Nobody pointed this out, but Caracciolo model is a complete shame.

 

The Caracciolo BBs never entered service; only the first in class was launched -- and then construction was sadly discontinued due to the changed context (WWI had ended) and to financial constraints. But, all in all, there was a real project -- and it had interesting features. I do not want to make a long discussion on this, but the project looked like this:

The preliminary project looked somewhat different, but the look and feel is there:

... and this is how she looked on the day of her launching:

 

So what did the WG geniuses do instead? they invented a Caracciolo rebuild on the broad lines of the Doria, changing the hull lines, the superstructures, the armament (secondary guns were meant to be in casemates), and erasing the originality of the design, to make a bad clone of other Italian BBs. Not bad for people boasting of "original blueprints" and "diversity" in the game...

 

Moreover, in other cases, an effort had been done to respect both the historical accuracy and the itch for what-ifs transformations: think of the Bayern class BBs, that have two different 3d models, one for the historical hull, one for the "renovated" one. Italian ships do not deserve such attention, it seems.

 

But... wait... I found the authoritative blueprint for the hypothetical rebuild of the WG designers!

From a fantasy ship design site: https://www.deviantart.com/morgansshipyard/gallery

 

(do I have to add anything else?)

 

[I'm playing WoWS mostly for the visuals, as the gaming model, according to me, sucks. Give me another couple of sh***y models like this one and I'm done]

 

HB

Honestly, you don't expect effort from WG these days, do you? Everything has to look the same, or players might be confused. Imagine if we had an oldschool battleship (including casemates) at tier 7, like Colorado or Nagato. Not happening, it has to be shiny and modern! (Bonus points for not bothering with creating a new model at all -> Veneto)

Sarcasm aside, ruining refits on dreadnoughts goes way back to the German tier 4-6 BBs... At least the tier 4-6 adhere to their historical counterparts (I guess if Andrea Doria did not have a historical refit, they would have ruined her as well).