New Aim Mod (No, realy, this one is new)

[Doolio]

Maybe you are right... But also, maybe, you are focusing your paranoia on the wrong aspects of that maphack incident (Which I'm not familiar with)... But do you think you are the only one? Or do you think that more ppl will think twice before attempting using such hacks in the future? Do you know personally some1 been banned... Or you just read about it somewhere?

 

 I don't know anyone personally, that's true. But, people were posting their frustrated threads about being banned and later they were posting the apology they got through the ticket system. Some of them remained perma-banned. I don't think they all cheated, as the complaints came at "zero" time. Actual cheaters might have later jumped in to try and get unbanned when they saw there's a commotion going on with the system. But a large bunch of first wave of complainers, I would be pretty certain that they were completely innocent. The banning was real, the apology was real, the unbanning was real and the non-unbanning was real too. What we do not know is, percentages of all those.

That said, it was a screw up by blizzard. Yes, if all those who danced around the forums and got unbanned and a free premium as an apology and the other that weren't so lucky, if all those were some kind of blizzard sock puppets made to instill fear into potential cheaters, then it would be brilliant, but that surely wasn't the case, for several reasons:

-too big of a scale. there were much of them and the whole thing went from official forums to reddit and to other non-blizzard forums.

-there was a lot of insecurity among innocent players and players that generally wouldn't think of cheating. Including me and some guys I knew.

-players and users on redit discovered one of the main reasons for false positives (some sound driver in combination with some motherboard or something like that), which again, instilled insecurity into perfectly normal players and also decreased faith in the blizzard's anti-cheat script and the handling of player support in general.

The had to thank the reddit community and thank the players and apologize on forums publicly and all that jazz, I don't think it was exactly the best scenario for them. They made people wary, but they made majority of regular players wary. Some have even having thoughts of not purchasing stuff anymore (not out of spite, but in order not to invest in something that might be taken away from them by a flawed system). And blizzard's player base is a bit specific, they are used to high maintenance products and they are willing to spend enormous amounts of money on figures, comics, books etc. as well. That said, blizzard's f2p models (which they have developed only recently) are pretty expensive AND I think a much larger percent of the player base as a whole spends money on HotS than on other f2p games, as other games/companies lack that "flavor".

So, all in all, I don't think that was a good scenario for blizzard.

 

 

That said, about the topic at hand - I actually don't yet possess the perception to "detect" the mod. In other words, I never felt that someone was using the mod, because my perception isn't at that level of refinement as to differentiate between a good shot and some aim assist consistency. I get shot, I go "ouch" and I wiggle and aim and that pretty much takes away my brain power

If it's 1v1, I can generally tell if the player on the other side is in the "good bracket" or in the "bad bracket", but beyond that, nope, not yet Your last sentence thus, can't exactly apply to me, as I don't actually perceive anything I have ~280 battles, all in open beta or release - if literally everyone was using the mod except me, I wouldn't know about it as I don't have the reference. I would probably just be like "wow this game is hard".

So, basically, in this moment, I don't know if I am experiencing the mod, or how many people are using it, or how effective it is, or how much it ruins the game of someone who is good enough to perceive if something's off.

 

Then again, I don't know if I'll ever be sure about someone using such mod - as it's not evident, it's not an aimbot or some kind of twitchy aim mod.

 

Does the existance of such mod bother me? Yes. No doubt about that. It turns the gameplay into something else and the game into something that's not what the game is about. It's bad for the game, I don't think anyone would even try to deny that. On the other hand, if I haven't opened this topic, I would have no idea about the mod and my personal experience would be like "yay, press battle". So, there's that.

 

But you mentioned bunch of gray areas - I think those apply to everything. Not just to the policies and calculations of WG. But to the discussion as well. I wouldn't make blanket statement about mod's popularity or about how people who say they don't think the mod's influence is that great. That's assuming, with more or less "data" and "feel", but it's still assuming.

You don't want to know how the community in the US HotS forums received people's complaints about false positive bans. I have never seen so much projection and so much hatred and happiness about someone else's fall. I mean, in one instant the answers poured in, "well, it suits you good, cheater", "good. scum" etc. And what's ironic is that exactly those several guys who were the most adamant in their complaints received an apology and a free premium from blizzard (which they ofc pasted into their threads later). But the lynch mob is always blind. Even after the fact, when they were unbanned, they received an apology and blizzard announced a public general apology, there were people who were like "well, cheater, you got free this time" - even though there wasn't even a mathematical chance of that guy being a cheater.

You can't ignore the existance of that side of things, too.

To be honest, I find this discussion here to be very level-headed. I mean, it actually lasts and people exchange posts.

 

 

 

[Elgerino]

 So if we mention facts and data with some numbers on top we have a scientific fact and its credible to the eyes of some people here but if we instead extrapolate an empirical observation its just slander?

 

Hard to trust the experience of someone prepared to lie about what he said. Maybe you just forgot you said it, but either way you're lying about or forgetting things you've said, so how are we supposed to trust that you aren't lying or misremembering what happened to you before/after the aim mod? 

 

In any case, you couldn't give the slightest turd for scientific method or objectivity, so your opinion was probably untrustworthy in the beginning. Now it's plain fact.

[Ast3lan]

 

Hard to trust the experience of someone prepared to lie about what he said. Maybe you just forgot you said it, but either way you're lying about or forgetting things you've said, so how are we supposed to trust that you aren't lying or misremembering what happened to you before/after the aim mod? 

 

In any case, you couldn't give the slightest turd for scientific method or objectivity, so your opinion was probably untrustworthy in the beginning. Now it's plain fact.

 

You either have dificulties reading and understanding what people write or you are just a plain simple guy trying to act as if he was smart.

 

Go read again sports friend and perhaps this time you can actually understand whats meant. 

 

 

[Elgerino]

 

You either have dificulties reading and understanding what people write or you are just a plain simple guy trying to act as if he was smart.

 

Go read again sports friend and perhaps this time you can actually understand whats meant. 

 

 

 

No you're right, I might have reading difficulties. When I said you were saying a majority of people use the aim mod and you denied it and I then found this quote: 

 

The aimbot is vastly used by most players.

 

That made you look like a lying twerp, where exactly did I go wrong? Perhaps you could explain the situation to me, seeing as you have the better reading comprehension and I'm just a pseudo-intellectual caught in an obvious pretense. Or will you just go on pretending I haven't read it properly and never explain yourself, as all insecure people caught in a lie tend to?

 

Unlike you lot, I don't need to lie about what other people have said to make my point and I certainly don't need to selectively remember or lie about what I've said in the past. I am straight away greatly more credible than you are. If you want to say the majority of people are cheating then you need to actually prove it, your word isn't good enough.

[shulzidar]

If it's 1v1, I can generally tell if the player on the other side is in the "good bracket" or in the "bad bracket", but beyond that, nope, not yet Your last sentence thus, can't exactly apply to me, as I don't actually perceive anything I have ~280 battles, all in open beta or release - if literally everyone was using the mod except me, I wouldn't know about it as I don't have the reference.

 

With the exception that you can have that reference literally at the point of your fingers with the best tester of all... You!. Just test the mod and see how it affects your perception of the game, what you try that you didn't before, what you do with the extra info and then, after you delete it... You will have a much better perception on what's possible and over the course of the test you may have learned a few of the characteristic patterns that most aimbotters fall into.

 

True needs to be said that been a witness of the previous escalation wave on CB helps at perceiving the change much faster and how it manifest on this particular game... But lead prediction (ie autoaim) is always a demanded feature on any competitive FPS game were shots have appreciable travel time. After enough games you don't even need to use the cheat yourself to know what "extra features" they allow to their users (If you combine it with some programming knowledge, you also have a good idea on what info is exposed on an online application and what a cheat Developer can do with it). 

 

Then, on the field, as you said when you find something funny on a 1v1 "duel" you can start triggering situations were legit good gunners behaves in one way while an aimbotter does in another.

 

You put an example... I will put you a funny example that happened yesterday. I was in my Cleveland in DD screen role for the small group of ships that were advancing on the East side of Two Brothers to try to cap A. Enemy DD pressence was suspected at A as they started the cap early, so when I was about to exit the cover of an island I killed my engine. The enemy had a New Mexico at around 15k covering their A cap attempt... The expected torpedo barrage appeared a bit forward but the surprise was the full AP barrage that landed right in front of me just about to hit the island itself and perfectly aimed at the center of my ship... If I didn't have killed my engine, that's it. Well, the battle proceed until the point of my task force were pursuing the New Mexico. He chose to lock on me his guns as I was setting him on fire repeteadly... I was with my nose pointed at him to minimize target size and to increase bounce chances of his AP bullets and I saw how he was waiting after each reload to see if I made the mistake of showing my flank to shoot all my guns... A sign of some1 with experience with WOWS damage mechanics. When he realized that I was also waiting for him to shoot to show my flank, he started to shoot on CD. All his volleys (Including the 1st one) were shot exquisitely aimed to the possition I would be if I weren't actively dodging his shots (I repeat, my nose was pointed at him most of the time, the scenario that any human gunner will find very hard to estimate speed)... And then I remember the "island incident", well... Instead of actively dodging I started changing my rudder left and right fast so my nose was doing fast (but very slight) course changes, on the average, I was travelling in a straight line... Reaction? 75 seconds with the guns reloaded aimed at me without performing a shot... Do you want to know when he fired again? When I stopped moving and travelled 3 seconds in a straight line.

 

That's what I perceived and I'm sure, based on their goal by posting here, you will find other posters offering "plausible" explanations... Here is mine:

 

- His aimbot circle was erraticaly moving left and right, so he didn't have the comfidence to perform the shot... Any good human gunner would immediatly realize that my stupid movements were a straight line on the average and proceed to shot again as if I were not moving at all. Combine the above with the excellent shot attempted at me while I was behind the island (the one S of A... Which has such a height that even using the scout at 15k will not let you see my ship... A legit player only has the minimap and the target marker to guess were I really I'm and were I'm pointing).

 

Isolated incidents that start like above happen sooner or later... It's no biggie... Players trying their luck, shots performed at a nearby ally that are horribly aimed, players distracted by RL, etc... It's the linked set of events coming from the same player during the match what makes me decide the guy was an aimbotter, because simply put, it's the easiest explanation... But even on this ones, there is no sigh of alarm if they did happen once per week, even once per day... The problem is that when you find yourself "testing for aimbot" on situations like the above each other battle... That's why the change on frequency of situations like the above is so brutal that you can't simply ignore it any longer.

 

This is what I was shortening as "perception of what's happening around you". And that's why the arguments of some posters try to bring to the table lack any weight... They can't match what I observe. The fact that, once you remove dialectics, insults and exagerations, what they are really trying is to stop ppl from paying attention to "incidents" like the above, just smells.

 

I envy you... As if you aren't perceiving anything wrong, you can keep enjoying the game as usual... I'm already spoiled by past experiences, because perceiving this early Community patterns that end converting a nice game (Like for example WoT the 1st 2 years live compared to the current situation... Specially on Clan wars) into a cheatfest, will slowly kill my will to invest time into progressing here.

[Elgerino]

 - His aimbot circle was erraticaly moving left and right, so he didn't have the comfidence to perform the shot... Any good human gunner would immediatly realize that my stupid movements were a straight line on the average and proceed to shot again as if I were not moving at all. Combine the above with the excellent shot attempted at me while I was behind the island (the one S of A... Which has such a height that even using the scout at 15k will not let you see my ship... A legit player only has the minimap and the target marker to guess were I really I'm and were I'm pointing).

 

Or you know, he kept mistaking your movements for full turns. You were juking and it works on people whether they aim mod or not, because anyone hoping to hit you (especially if he's a decent player, which seems to be the case) knows that they have to aim where you're going to be and not to take a shot at a Clevelands bow. You're talking about a normal situation that you've rationalised an aim mod circle into. 

[cherry2blost]

 

Or you know, he kept mistaking your movements for full turns. You were juking and it works on people whether they aim mod or not, because anyone hoping to hit you (especially if he's a decent player, which seems to be the case) knows that they have to aim where you're going to be and not to take a shot at a Clevelands bow. You're talking about a normal situation that you've rationalised an aim mod circle into. 

 

No you are wrong here, an experienced player would see the jinking and drop one turret straight on, a 2nd tothe left slightly, 3rd to Right slightly and 4th straight on again...... he wouldn't wait until target gave optimum angle.... some damage is better than no damage.... Aim assist user may be confused with the lead marker jinking about, as they have minmal knowledge (maybe) of individual turret fire and are waiting for the salvo shot.....

[Elgerino]

 

No you are wrong here, an experienced player would see the jinking and drop one turret straight on, a 2nd tothe left slightly, 3rd to Right slightly and 4th straight on again...... he wouldn't wait until target gave optimum angle.... some damage is better than no damage.... Aim assist user may be confused with the lead marker jinking about, as they have minmal knowledge (maybe) of individual turret fire and are waiting for the salvo shot.....

 

Have you ever heard the term ''A general who defends everything defends nothing.''? 

 

If you divide your damage up between several possibilities, you can't do enough damage to win the engagement. That's just a fact, especially when you're playing the HE vulnerable New Mexico versus Cleveland. BB's live or die by the availability and exploitation of the perfect shot.

 

Anyway, it doesn't matter what the right course of action is. Just because he didn't do the right thing in your opinion it doesn't mean he's aim modding. If he's like me and he waits for Cruisers to move themselves into vulnerable positions (I use this method in ranked to destroy Clevelands with New Mexico and I'd say it's worked out swimmingly, no pun intended), then his behaviour is natural.

[shulzidar]

No you are wrong here, an experienced player would see the jinking and drop one turret straight on, a 2nd tothe left slightly, 3rd to Right slightly and 4th straight on again...... he wouldn't wait until target gave optimum angle.... some damage is better than no damage.... Aim assist user may be confused with the lead marker jinking about, as they have minmal knowledge (maybe) of individual turret fire and are waiting for the salvo shot

 

Argrgr... My bad english at play again, I edited the explanation on what I was doing, I hope I was clearer this time... My rudder was the one that was shifting fast, my average course almost didn't change. The trick is that I was at full speed and close to max range (13k) of my guns... Translated to the eyes of the aimbotter, the circle was very separated from my center. That's why the slight changes on course resulted into a very apparent vibration of the aimbot circle. I was also using the fact that when you shift rudder your speed instantaneously goes down which also resulted in the circle moving back and forth... This behaviour is triggered by how the aimbot "samples" your speed and course changes. If you visited cheater forums dedicated to aimbots... You would know that most of them believe that this behaviour is just the aimbot temporaily "going nuts" and yielding false information.

 

A player using the default UI would have difficulties even appreciating the slight changes of course and would just kept on shooting, and would probably sank me without problems at some point.

 

And yes, a good BB gunner that acknowledges that the player in the cruiser is synching his flank expose with his reload periods unlinks his batteries so the CA player can't be so sure on when the BB is not able to shoot back... Not to mention that single battery shots are more accurate than double click barrages or hold-click volleys. The other option, which is suprising the CA player with a sudden turn to use your frontal batteries wasn't available to him... He was been pursued by my task force so couldn't afford to slowdown. A BB player with a cooler head, would just simply take the time to swap to HE and just kill me by sheer DPS... But I know that most BB captains get really anoyed by those [edited]clevelands setting them on fire all the time and want to see them explode in pieces in a single shot... I also try to do it when I'm on my BBs... Firestarters are a real pain in the [edited]and very frustating to shake off... When you see them blown by a good citadel hit, it's very satisfying, even if it's not the best tactical decission.

[Elgerino]

I don't see how rudder shifts would matter to how the aim mod is visually representing the data if you barely moved the ships direction of travel? The aim mod is client based, it extrapolates based on the position of your ship, not the position of your rudder. It's true you lose speed quickly but wouldn't this just result in the circle suddenly being closer to you then moving back when you sped back up?

 

 Not so mention that single battery shots are far more accurate than double click barrages or hold-click volleys.

 

Citation needed.

[mtm78]

Citation needed.

 

Don't think you'll get one, I'm not aware of such a thing at least.

 

I do think that per turret volley at times gives better result due to difference in trajectories between forward and aft turrets when shooting a close enough target, usually a destroyer. That way you can adjust fire slightly between shots from the front turrets and rear turret(s). 

 

But that's the only situation that I'm aware off where firing a turret at a time would be more accurate.

 

Btw guys, can you please stop fighting over who might or might not be using it, it's not something you can proof from a single game or even a replay, it's always open for debate right up to the point where you have access to historical and current performance figures of the person under scrutiny. 

 

I think everyone is in agreement that there is a lead indicator mod out there, that it's functional, and that 'people' are using it. This arguing about details/percentages/specific players, is starting to drown the actual issue: WG's intended fix for the problem at hand.

 

Can we agree to drop the personal accusations ( yes, that includes me ), and don't give WG a reason to lock the thread because of the non constructive back and forth arguments ( which are at times close to ad hominem, as close as one can get )?

 

Let's try to self moderate, instead of waiting for a real mod to jump in, since if that happens we got no control over what action will be taken and I'd like the thread to stay open/alive at least until a fix is in place 

[Ast3lan]

[Elgerino]

 

Considering the counters on the dowload websites for this mod i can safely say that a large margin of players are using it , and as neither you nor i have the exact figures of who is using what its about as accurate a statement as you can get at the moment. ( before some Dev deigns to come here and say otherwise ) 

 

Quoting one website running at least 5 to 6 variations of this mod ,

 

You can't say a large margin use it at all. You don't know how many people 30k downloads translates to online at the same time, all you can do is make educated guesses. Based on the debate between myself and cherry, we concluded that the maximum amount of aim modders based on his numbers that could be online at the same time across all servers was about 18,000, even that is based on flawed ideas and assumptions, all that favour your side of the argument. That is NOT A MAJORITY and the real figure is likely far less, because Cherry was assuming less than a million people across the globe play WoWs which is almost certainly wrong, seeing as the game maintains a population of 150k on peak and the closed beta population sample was 410k. 

 

Because we don't have the figures, there are no safe assumptions here. You can't safely assume either jack nor crap at this stage on how many people are using it. You're rabble rousing with bugger all solid info.

 

 On a final note to you i'd say you should lose the ad hominens also, it just shows lack of self restrain and a profound lack of class on your part.

 

Yes well, on the topic of class I am at least the one eyed king amongst the blind here.

[mtm78]

On a final note to you i'd say you should lose the ad hominens also, it just shows lack of self restrain and a profound lack of class on your part.

 

Yes well, on the topic of class I am at least the one eyed king amongst the blind here.

 

 

Good, now kiss and make up please

[yXOLAXy]

there is only one free, there is one style warpack (x wot) but created specifically for wows at a cost of $ 70 life time

 

I forgot apparently undetectable by the game client

[Ast3lan]

 

You can't say a large margin use it at all. You don't know how many people 30k downloads translates to online at the same time, all you can do is make educated guesses. Based on the debate between myself and cherry, we concluded that the maximum amount of aim modders based on his numbers that could be online at the same time across all servers was about 18,000, even that is based on flawed ideas and assumptions, all that favour your side of the argument. That is NOT A MAJORITY and the real figure is likely far less, because Cherry was assuming less than a million people across the globe play WoWs which is almost certainly wrong, seeing as the game maintains a population of 150k on peak and the closed beta population sample was 410k. 

 

Because we don't have the figures, there are no safe assumptions here. You can't safely assume either jack nor crap at this stage on how many people are using it. You're rabble rousing with bugger all solid info.

 

 

Yes well, on the topic of class I am at least the one eyed king amongst the blind here.

 

Jesus must i point out the obvious every single time?

 

Its 30K for 1 mod, now add 4 more in just one website and do the math. Its not just one mod, one website is advertising 5 and even , and yes this is an estimate, if 3 or 2 of those 5 are fully working then you have an unknown ammount of players per download link ,now add more websites to the issue and we have way more then 30K downloads and quite a bit more than just your number of users using it.

 

The problem is you assume that only bad / mediocre players use this when in fact , and if WG looks at the playerbase, you can deduce that almost every class of player ( from bad to godlike ) will be using this. Its not bad to admit that even good players use these kind of "advantages" to secure their lead even more on their stats or whatever ruffles their willies , bad is to close your eyes to the reality and assume that just because some people are not using this kind of exploit to its full extent it should be considered harmless or as not having impact on gameplay.

 

 

 

@mtm78

Yes MTM find me a suitable female and i'll kiss and make up . 

[yXOLAXy]

 

Jesus must i point out the obvious every single time?

 

Its 30K for 1 mod, now add 4 more in just one website and do the math. Its not just one mod, one website is advertising 5 and even , and yes this is an estimate, if 3 or 2 of those 5 are fully working then you have an unknown ammount of players per download link ,now add more websites to the issue and we have way more then 30K downloads and quite a bit more than just your number of users using it.

 

The problem is you assume that only bad / mediocre players use this when in fact , and if WG looks at the playerbase, you can deduce that almost every class of player ( from bad to godlike ) will be using this. Its not bad to admit that even good players use these kind of "advantages" to secure their lead even more on their stats or whatever ruffles their willies , bad is to close your eyes to the reality and assume that just because some people are not using this kind of exploit to its full extent it should be considered harmless or as not having impact on gameplay.

 

 

 

@mtm78

Yes MTM find me a suitable female and i'll kiss and make up . 

 

you believe that the present state of things too if 2/3 of the players usassere this mod the wg take action on? I do not think so because they block the bill to 2/3 of the players would be to close the game.

[shulzidar]

I do think that per turret volley at times gives better result due to difference in trajectories between forward and aft turrets when shooting a close enough target, usually a destroyer. That way you can adjust fire slightly between shots from the front turrets and rear turret(s).

 

Any1 that bothers to check things can make the test for themselves to get their own conclusions. The event I like to pay atention to is what I end calling the "Drunk Gunner" syndrome (Born between my Division buddies when we were all together playing with the Arkansas Beta... ;)). When the shots coming from the same turret show badly missaligned trajectories... It's quite an easy event to detect if you compare what happens with a given turret when you double-click, when you hold click or when you single click multiple times while tracking the same target.

 

Notice that we are speaking about visible trajectories clientside here... One thing, I suppose every1 is already aware of, is that shots rarely land serverside were you see them on your screen (And connection latency is NOT enough to explain the difference I see sometimes).

 

Returning to "accuracy", if you do the tests yourself... After you get your own results, if you have played WoT and paid attention to the gunnery model cannons use there, you may develop a theory on what you see here (or not see... if your tests contradict mine).

[mtm78]

Arkansas Beta has a quite high dispersion, so I guess that's what you're talking about. Btw, I also don't think that the difference between rendered trajectories and serverside trajectories is as high as you make it out to be.

 

If you want me to test something specific, pm me the details and I'll gladly do it, I like being surprised and learn new things

[Elgerino]

 

Jesus must i point out the obvious every single time?

 

Its 30K for 1 mod, now add 4 more in just one website and do the math. Its not just one mod, one website is advertising 5 and even , and yes this is an estimate, if 3 or 2 of those 5 are fully working then you have an unknown ammount of players per download link ,now add more websites to the issue and we have way more then 30K downloads and quite a bit more than just your number of users using it.

 

The problem is you assume that only bad / mediocre players use this when in fact , and if WG looks at the playerbase, you can deduce that almost every class of player ( from bad to godlike ) will be using this. Its not bad to admit that even good players use these kind of "advantages" to secure their lead even more on their stats or whatever ruffles their willies , bad is to close your eyes to the reality and assume that just because some people are not using this kind of exploit to its full extent it should be considered harmless or as not having impact on gameplay.

 

 

 

@mtm78

Yes MTM find me a suitable female and i'll kiss and make up . 

 

Sigh. In the debate with Cherry ( you presumably didn't read it because you're recycling the same dumb points ) he assumed 120k people downloaded it by totting up different sources. That's where the 18k number came from you see, because he said with there being 150k peak online players and a 120k downloads, there must be a majority of people using it. 

 

Except that's not how it works. Only a fraction of a total sample is ever going to be online at the same time, the ratio of cheaters online at the same time versus the total number of cheaters must be similar to the total players who play the game online at the same time versus the total number of players. He made the point that there can't be more than a million WoWs players, I doubted this but I made the necessary calculation regardless. 150k peak online players versus a million total players is a retention rate of 15%, apply that to the 120k downloads and you get 18k. Spread across all servers this means a rather small minority not the majority you guys claim and the calculation makes a lot of assumptions that work in favor of your argument. If you have a better way of calculating this then be my guest. But until then you can swallow it and admit you were wrong to say a majority of people use it with absolutely no evidence, even worse to deny it afterwards. 

 

 

Arkansas Beta has a quite high dispersion, so I guess that's what you're talking about. Btw, I also don't think that the difference between rendered trajectories and serverside trajectories is as high as you make it out to be.

 

If you want me to test something specific, pm me the details and I'll gladly do it, I like being surprised and learn new things

 

 I don't like making stats based arguments. But Shulzidar's hit ratio with BB's is rather poor and I would say he's a dunning kruger on this point.

[DestoryerO_o]

WG kinda silent for a long time IMO... i hope it doesn't take them ages for a fix like the last time..

I'm taking vacation from WOWS until the mod is dealt with. Forums only, until i totally lose patience.

[woppy101]

I thought it was still working, I seem to be getting 20-30000 citadel shots on my Iowa quite regularly, I can understand them at very short ranges but at 15km+ I thought it was strange 

[Admiral_noodle]

I thought it was still working, I seem to be getting 20-30000 citadel shots on my Iowa quite regularly, I can understand them at very short ranges but at 15km+ I thought it was strange 

 

Stop sailing in straight lines then

[shulzidar]

Arkansas Beta has a quite high dispersion, so I guess that's what you're talking about. Btw, I also don't think that the difference between rendered trajectories and serverside trajectories is as high as you make it out to be.

 

The Arkansas Beta was the joke my Division buddies used to refer to it... There is, obviously, something I'm hiding on the explanation aimed to detect which players actually bother to test what they claim from the ones that have their own agendas trying to hide what aimbots do and will never realize what I'm talking about (It's less related to a particular ship inherent accuracy stats and more with the players behaviours some gun configurations encourage/trigger). I will send you a PM explaining the real deal.

 

Returning to the serverside trajectories... There are a LOT of inconsistencies with them. One fresh example from yesterday... On a mid-range (17k) duel against a North Caroline with my Colorado. I did a single lead shot with my frontal turrent (2 bullets) the rightmost bullet missed the nose of the NC (The apparent movement of the NC was from left to right in my screen), but the other appeared to hit literally the last pixel of its nose (at least my client shown the tiny explosion there)... To my surprise that hit was registered as a Citadel Hit. So:

 

a) The gunners of the NC were doing a "Titanic's" carrying TNT with them.

 

b) In reality that shot was evaluated serverside as if it had landed much closer to the frontal turret. If you see the NC model and appreciate the distance between the nose and the 1st turret, you can see the big "error" between were the shot explosion appeared and were the damage could have been applied.

 

But landed shots are not the best clue... The best clue is the shots you receive... It's quite frequent that you see the explosions on your hull BEFORE the bullets of the enemy have ended their trajectory. Happens almost constantly, and is better perceived if you are on a BB... Specially if you pay attention to trayectories that intercept your superstructure.

 

Now the last piece of the puzzle... I have changed my ISP and connection approach between CB and live (Went from DSL to fiber) and the latency registered by the client has changed from 110ms to 40ms as expected... Meanwhile most "weirdness" you usually would blame latency for haven't been altered much by the big change in average latency I experienced. In addition to the above trajectories weirdness:

 

- Jumps in hull aligments. Specially apparent on thin "clear" hulls... The best example, the Clevelands. Observe what happens when they are performing a full turn at full speed... At certain angles their angular speed suddenly accelerates briefly making them to apparently "jump".

 

- Zoom in "world acceleration". If, in your gameplay, you are constantly switching back and forth from sniping mode... You could observe how, again frequently, all the ships in your viewport apparent trayectories are "accelerated" briefly right after you zoom all in. This is usually a synthom that the cleint-server application is priorizing entity updates based on distance to the observer.

 

All of the above, together, make me speculate about a few factors that may be affecting all this:

 

- Latency meter is just showing what a ping command would do. It's telling nothing about serverside processing delays.

 

- Comparing how "blunt"  the client is at extrapolating ship possitions/bearings with how "accurate" rendered trayectories are... And comparing this with how WoT deals with latency in their trayectories (The "zig zag" effect). I guess that, on WOWS, WG Devs chose to priorized "beautifull trayectories rendering", put in other words, trayectories are placeholders sent to/generated by the clients at the start of the shot and impacts are evaluated with all the data the server holds, which, ofc, invariaby result in discrepancies.

 

At this level of depth, only a WG dev can tell you exactly why it happens... But the apparent differences are there for attentive testers to observe.

[Admiral_noodle]

Interesting - rarely I've seen things but running on lowish graphics with very high broadband I don't think I get many of these issues. I think it's because my client isn't doing very much so what it does do is very close to what the server tells it.