Some interesting info around the world

[Babykim]

 

Q&A from RU dated January 27

 

Source: https://worldofwarships.ru/ru/news/common/question_dev_12/

 

---

Q: When will same keys activate same consumables on every ship?

A: This year will plan adding the option of mapping keys individually.

---

Q: It is unfair to nerf catapult fighters on battleships (90 seconds), but not on cruisers (360 seconds).

A: This is not an issue of fairness. This change in 0.6.0 was intended to balance ship classes. We needed to weaken the plane on battleships, but not on cruisers.

---

Q: Will you increase the skill point cap for commanders (currently 19)?

A: Not in the near future. The cap precludes well-rounded, universal commander builds, retaining a degree of variation.

---

Q: Do developers realize that players do not like high tier battles? Maps too large, distances too large, planes too fast, guns too powerful, etc. Do you plan changes to high tier gameplay?

A: The server statistics shows a steady increase in the number of high tier battles. Wether it is the long-awaited Yamato, or the tension of high tier matches, or the realization of a unique potential in each ship, we cannot say that high tiers are unpopular in general.

We understand that the game meta changes as the player climbs the tiers, and we do not see anything wrong with some players enjoying tiers V-VII more than tiers VIII-X. It is a personal preference.

Finally, the economy of high tiers is becoming more enjoyable not only due to changes in earnings and repair bills, but also due to containers and other sources of earnings that help adapting to high tiers by confering various bonuses.

---

Q: Do you plan changing the animations of sinking ships? All ships sink slowly till they explode, which looks a bit cheap for an otherwise great looking game. When will ships heel in battle (without affecting gameplay)? These changes would improve the show.

A: This year we plan to release a version in which all game effects will be reworked, not only the sinking animations. The heel is already in the game, but we do not see how to further increase it without affecting ship performance.

---

Q: Would it be possible to spend the elite ship experience on the commander, as in World of Tanks?

A: No, but since version 0.6.0 you can spend the elite commander experience on any commander of any nation.

---

Q: The permanent camouflage of tier X ships confers a 100 percent experience bonus that is quite useless. Change the bonus to free experience or commander experience would make this expensive upgrade (5k doubloons) more useful.

A: The experience is not entirely useless on tier X, as it is the basis for computing the free experience or commander experience. Moreover, the bonus allows obtaining containers and finishing tasks that require experience faster.

---

Q: What new types of weapons do you plan to add?

A: We cannot make such announcements here.

---

Q: When do you plan adding new game modes? The random battles are getting a bit boring; most players wait for ranked battles. Even online poker has seven game modes, yet ships have essentially only one, not counting the co-op.

A: We have two directions: the PvE and the PvP. Therein we have the co-op, random, ranked and team battles. Each of these for types has several game modes, such as Standard Battle, Domination, Epicenter, etc. On top of this we have unique game modes in special events, such as Bathtub and Halloween.

We are currently developing the PvE component by trying to maximize the variety of plays by offering different game modes. Additionally, we plan further developing the PvP component, and would be happy to share our plans with you in due time.

---

Q: Can you make the catapult fighter on battleships more aggressive to offset the shorted duration of 90 seconds?

A: The catapult fighter is working as intended, and we do not plan changing this in the near future.

---

Q: When will you get rid of the need to grind identical modules for different ships, for example top torpedoes on the IJN Ibuki and Kagero, requiring an additional 20k of experience.

A: Most of the modules in the game are unique to a ship, but sometimes the same type is used on several ships. The game economy already accounts for this. If the top torpedoes were available at the onset, then we would need to increase the cost of the hull accordingly.

---

Q: Can you change the team killer pink to any other color? I am colorblind and have difficulties telling the color.

A: You can use the Color Blindness Filter in the game graphics options. If you are still having difficulties telling team killers and enemies apart, note that allies direction is always shown left to right, whereas the enemy icons are oriented right to left.

---

Q: Do you plan compensating the top players on the losing team? I suggest giving the top two players of the losing team the bonus for winning, whereas the bottom two of the losing team should not be awarder the bonus for winning.

A: This is more of a suggestion than a question, but thank you nonetheless. We do not plan such changes in the near future. The player already receives the same amount of credits no matter if his team wins or loses. To get more experience you need to carry the game. There are battles in which a player carries hard, earns many achievements, but the game turns a loss. Because of that we plan additional awards for individual achievements.

---

Q: Will you add a timer for smoke?

A: The smoke timer is planned for this year.

---

Q: Tell us about the development of Russian battleships? Please do not tells us "not this year". This is a much anticipated branch, and players would like to have a more systematic information on its development.

A: The Q&A are not intended for announcements of new ship branches.

 

[ilhilh]

PT is getting an update.

 

USN CA buffs incoming:

 

To increase comfort in game we have increased main caliber guns turning speed:

• T-22 (from 10,0 degrees per second to 10,5 degrees per second);

• Ibuki (from 5 degrees per secnd to 6 degrees per second);

• Cruisers Marblehead and Marblehead L has received faster rudder shift (from 10,12 seconds to 7,5 seconds) to increase their

survivability.

• For the same reason, cruiser Pensacola's visibility has been decreased to 12.78 km

Main caliber guns reload time of several USN cruisers has been decreased in order to make them more attractive as damage dealers:

• Erie (from 7 seconds to 6 seconds);

• New Orleans (from 14 seconds to 12 seconds for top guns);

• Baltimore (from 13 seconds to 10 seconds for top guns);

• Des Moines (from 6 seconds to 5,5 seconds);

 

Sauce: https://www.reddit.com/r/WorldOfWarships/comments/5r7rhq/public_test_update_31012017/

 

EDIT:

 

Forgot to also include the fix for the smoke bug:

 

• Fixed incorrect smokes setting: Now, the last smoke cloud is deployed at the end of smoke generator work cycle. That will prevent some inconvenient game scenarios, especially with RN cruisers that have short smoke deploying timer.

 

 

[Bellegar]

I'd like to remind everyone that we have a dedicated discussion thread for this topic here: http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/56433-discussion-thread-for-some-interesting-info-from-ru/

Please keep this one clean

 

 

Edit: And I'd also like to remind the mods that they agreed to clean up the thread from time to time

[Comrad_StaIin]

oh here for the lazy guys

 

Balance changes:

• Rare Upgrades Repair party Modification 1 and Surveillance Radar Modification 1 performance has been increased from 20% to 40% to make them more attractive - the competition in the respected slots is very high;

Flooding:

• Maximum flooding time has been decreased by 25% (from 120 seconds to 90 second)

• Maximum HP that can be lost in flooding has been rebalanced:

• Low and mid tiers: Reduced

• High tiers: Increased

Goal:

• Increase the role of torpedoes in countering heavy ships

• Increase the role of IJN destroyers - their torpedoes traditionally have highest chances to cause flooding:

Changes by tier:

• I - III: - 33,3%

• IV: -16,7%

• V: -11,7%

• VI: -6,7%

• VII: -1,7%

• VIII: +3,3%

• IX: +8,3%

• X: +13,3%

• Speed drop penalty for flooding has been adjusted so that it is more systematic:

• Penalty for moving forward has been decreased from 35% to 20%: USN battleships (except Arkansas Beta), Koenig Albert, Kaiser, Koenig and G. Kurfurst;

• Penalty for moving forward has been decreased from 20% to 15% and for moving backward has been increased: Т 22, Ernst Gaede, Z-46, Ognevoy, Kiev, Leningrad, Udaloi and Khabarovsk;

• Penalty for moving forward has been decreased from 20% to 15%: Srorozhevoy, Derzkii, Izyaslav, Blyskawica, Smith, Tashkent;

 

 

 

same source as above

[Takru]

(Thanks to ThunderBird2678 on Reddit for finding and posting)

 

Interview with Chris Stott: http://gamingshogun.com/2017/02/01/world-warships-2017-community-manager-interview/

 

The only interesting part seems to be:

 

Second thing to mention is the Carrier rework. This has been a big request from the community and will be a high priority for us this year. Our current plan is to see first iteration of changes in March or April.

[Takru]

WellDone one the RU Forums, last post is on CV economy

 

I would like to hear something about the economy on aircraft carriers. whether it planned any changes to it, or something like that, in the current form of play AB generally reluctant when at 260K damage almost leaving minus a premium. account, but about the experience, I do not say anything to reach the top team should be pretty sweat.

With the economy on aircraft carriers is now following - on average, Avic earn as much as the rest of the classes, and studied separately by groups of players - everyone, and good players and bad. The only thing to do to them what Avik is not enough now - do more spread in earnings, it is lower than the rest. That is, other ships more often earned much less than average and much more. And as we all remember it as earning big numbers, and there is a myth that Avik earn less - they rarely are large earnings, but that also did not happen and small - no one sees.

This is not a simple task, but I think that in a couple of versions, we can do it.

 

If I interprete this correctly, he is saying that CVs are earning as much as any other class, on average. However, they're not earning as spectuarily much or little as other classes. That "spread" of earnings is being worked on.
Why he says that CVs earning less is a myth when also saying that they don't earn as much on a good game (or lose as much on a bad one) may be lost in translation.

 

 

[Babykim]

WellDone on carrier economy:

 

The current economic situation with the carriers is the following - carriers earn on as much as other classes on average. This is true both for good and bad players. What carriers currently need is a higher variance of earnings. In other words, other ship types more frequently have games that earn significantly higher or significantly lower than their overall average. The myth of carriers poor earnings owes to the fact that players tend to remember games with high earnings, but oversee the lack of games with low earnings. Increasing the variance of earnings is not an easy task for game developers, but we shall succeed in a few patches.

[Babykim]

 

Russian video blogger z1ooo:

 

Best and worst ships in 0.6.0 based on a large sample of RU server statistics.

 

Carriers: With few exceptions, the carriers are usually among top three of their tier by damage, kills and win rate. This assessment takes into account players skills. The conjecture that carrier statistics on higher tiers will become worse when average and bad players reached them turned out false.

The IJN carriers are better than USN carriers on every tier. Worst ships are Bogue and Independence.

---

Tier 2:

Best ships: Umikaze, V-25.

---

Tier 3:

König Albert surpassed Bogatyr and Nassau mentioned in previous evaluations.

---

Tier 4:

Best BB: Imperator Nikolai I and Arkansas Beta.

Worst BB: Myogi.

Best CA: Iwaki Alpha.

Worst CA: Karlsruhe and Danae.

Best DD: Clemson (after the nerf of Isokaze).

Worst DD: V-170.

---

Tier 5:

Best BB: König and Texas.

Worst BB: New York.

Best CA: Königsberg.

Worst CA: Emerald and Krasny Krim.

Best DD: Gremyashchy, Kamikaze and Fujin.

Worst DD: T-22.

Worst ship Bogue.

---

Tier 6:

Tier 6 battleships are much stronger than other tier 6 ships, even the carriers. This is true for most tiers, but especially for tier 6.

Best BB: Arizona.

Worst BB: Warspite

Best CA: Admiral Graf Spee (slightly ahead of other cruisers).

Worst CA: Nürnberg.

Best DD: Shinonome.

Worst DD: Ognevoi, Fubuki and Hatsuharu (but both are not as bad as Mutsuki before the split).

---

Tier 7:

Best BB: Sharnhorst significantly leads Gneisenau.

Best CA: Belfast, Flint and Fiji.

Worst CA: York and Pensacola.

Best DD: Blyskawia, Shiratsuyu and Leningrad.

Worst DD: Kiev, Mahan and Akatsuki.

---

Tier 8:

Best BB: Bismark.

Worst BB: North Caroline.

Best CA: Michail Kutuzov and Atago.

Worst CA: Hipper, Prinz Eugen and New Orleans.

Best DD: Akizuki and Z-23.

Worst DD: Kagero and Tashkent

---

Tier 9:

Best BB: Missouri (by a large margin).

Worst BB: Izumo (the second worst tier 9).

Best CA: Neptune.

Worst CA: Baltimore (the worst tier 9).

Best DD: Z-46.

Worst DD: Yugumo.

---

Tier 10:

Best BB: Großer Kurfürst.

Best CA: Minotaur.

Worst CA: Des Moines (even worse now compared to other cruisers).

Best DD: Khabarovsk.

Worst DD: Shimakaze (the worst tier 10).

---

German DDs:

V-25 (good)

G-101 (bad)

V-170 (bad)

T-22 (really bad)

Ernst Gaede (average)

Leberecht Maass (average)

Z-23 (good)

Z-46 (good)

Z-52 (average)

 

[Comrad_StaIin]

Sub_Octavian on Iowa/Montana raised citade

 

 

Hello everyone!

We gathered Game Designers and thoroughly looked through the question with Iowa and Montana armor/parts layout you've been raising several times (e.g. here and here).

As was stated before, these ships do not need serious buffs - while some of their avg. stats may be inferior comparing to other BBs, if we look at top results, they do good. They may be less colourful than IJN and KM rivals, they are harder to tank in, they are more demanding in terms of skill, but there is clearly no disaster with them. That said, we realize, that in BB-BB combat Iowa and Montana are not very comfortable and perhaps promote more passive play. We think that these community-proposed changes will not increase their overall efficiency dramatically, but can contribute to in-class balance positively and, at the same time, resolve the question that was bothering many of you. It looks like win-win solution right now. So, we decided to consider these changes for implementation in 0.6.4. In the meantime, thank you for your input and enjoy the game! Cheers!

 

 

[Babykim]

 

Some information from a transcript of the stream with JamesWhite of January 30

 

Note: I skip all the information concerning the membership in the Collectors Club and fan meetings, since these are irrelevant to the EU community.

 

Q: Public Test of 0.6.1. The new rank season, many smaller balancing changes, several new upgrades, and the much anticipated depot.

A: Unlike the previous versions, the feedback from the RU community on 0.6.1 has been very positive. Most of the new upgrades boost the effect of consumables or their duration, or modify them slightly.

The ranked battles will be on tier 7 using the rules of the previous season. The Epicenter mode will be added to the ranked battles.

---

Q: The depot.

A: The much anticipated depot will contain all accumulated modules, mounted as well as dismounted, camouflages, signals and consumables, all of which can now be sold for credits. You will not be able to buy anything in the depot *, but give us feedback if the buying option is desired.

*) which means you cannot stock on discounts.

---

Q: Do you connect the decrease in the server population with the introduction of new commander skills?

A: We have been hearing about the decrease since two years, yet the number of players online does not fall. At the moment there are 27.000 players online, which is a good number for a winter Monday. We expect more people once the ranked season starts (about 35 percent of players participate in ranked battles). The participation intensifies during a season, people playing more battles of a shorter duration. The online numbers fluctuate seasonally, with a small trough from the beginning of February till the end of April, then again in June and July. Starting from the August the online increases, reaching a peak during the holiday season at end of the year, and decrease thereafter. This is true with most online games.

---

Q: When will the US cruisers be buffed?

A: Read the developers bulletin. Then reiterates the published buffs…

---

Q: Will all ranked battles be tier 7, or will the tiers increase with ranks?

A: All tier 7.

---

Q: Concerning premium ships for free experience, do you plan something for tier 9, or also for lower tiers? Will the release of such premium ships be necessarily accompanied by a promotion, such as Steven Seagal?

A: We have not mentioned any plans. We said that we would like to offer premium ships for free experience at lower tiers and cost. We still do, but it is premature to announce any plans. We recently have introduced commander training as an alternative use of free experience.

---

Q: When will you move USN Cleveland to tier 8?

A: We have considered doing so, but this is up the people responsible for game balance. I do not thing this would happen any soon, but I am not responsible for game balance.

---

Q: Would it not make sense to have events that award camouflages of tier X ships, similar to that for the Tirpitz, or discounts on them?

A: We have many ideas, but this is not the place to announce discounts, because people stop buying following the announcement. Anything can happen, and the plans may change.

---

Q: Do not you think that releasing three destroyer lines in a row (Japanese split, German branch and now Russian split) is a bit exaggerated, as there are other classes too?

A: We do not see an oversaturation. The destroyers do not dominate higher tiers, while games with 6 battleships aside still occur.

---

Q: Will I be able to obtain Steven Seagal in a future event?

A: The APG contract has expired 2016. I cannot say anything about Steven Seagal before I checked the contract. We have no such plans in the near future, but I might be able to provide more details later on the forum.

 

[Takru]

Reddit + Sub_Octavian =

 

Wargaming is here, watching IJN DDs and here, too

You may do as you please, but there is not need to prove IJN DDs need attention - we are on it already. However, the outcome is to be determined later.

We're looking into IJN DD stats, and will keep doing so for a couple of updates.

 

No plans for an Emergency Stop ability / consumable

I can say we are not working on any kind of emergency stopping capability, and honestly, right now I don't think it would be a good idea.

 

No buffs for Indianapolis planned

Currently not planned, sorry.

 

No rudder shift buff for Iowa or Montana planned

Nothing is about that rudder shift.

[Gojuadorai]

guys please shift any discussion here:

 

http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/56433-discussion-thread-for-some-interesting-info-from-ru

 

 

[Babykim]

 

The developer WellDone mentioned in a thread about clan rigging on the RU forum that since the first Ranked Season, there is an individual random up to 24 seconds delay on entry of every player that is supposed to take care of 1/2/3 entry, but that this does not always work when the number of players is sufficiently low.

 

Source: http://forum.worldof...11#entry3222711

 

P.S.: I will put it here for future reference since the issue will likely be a permanent one.

 

[Babykim]

 

I have very little time at the moment. So the most interesting things first. Full transcript later.

 

From todays stream by JamesWhite

 

1. IJN Mutsu is coming to the shop this Thursday.

2. There are plans for a premium battleship based on a stock Amagi at tier 7. Not clear when.

3. For those who missed Steven Seagal, in the future there might be a possibility for obtaining him on an "individual basis". (Whatever this might mean).

 

[Takru]

From the colonies NA server

 

 

With carrier improvements coming this year, will we see a UK carrier branch or changes to the US tree?	We can’t say anything about new tech trees yet. Just know that that carrier tweaks are currently in Supertest. We’re shooting to make carrier gameplay more streamlined so squadron management is more intuitive.
Is it too late to change the tier of Season 6 of Ranked Battles? Lots of us are concerned about the power gap between Premium and tech tree ships at tier VII.	We don’t have plans to change it this season and don’t consider Premiums of that tier to have any major advantage. Look at Belfast vs. Fiji, for example. Belfast has radar and regular HE shells, but Fiji has Repair Party and Torpedoes. Scharnhorst and Gneisenau have different guns, and Leningrad and Kiev are two completely differing destroyers. The challenge is adjusting play style to the ship’s strengths. Of course Belfast will seem stronger if you try to play Fiji with the same playstyle. The ships themselves aren’t the issue.
Are there plans to have gun trajectory affected by waves and rough waters?	No. We don’t plan on adding more “random factors” to gameplay. It’s unnecessary.
Two words: Night fights! A special mode in darkness using search lights would be nice.	We don’t have any current plans for such a mode. There are already cyclones in the game to mimic a “limited visibility” mode.
Are the four ship classes set in stone, or is there a possibility of new classes being added?	The four core classes aren’t going anywhere but, as you’ve likely seen with Japanese destroyers and incoming Soviet destroyers, we’re including “subclasses” by introducing splits in the tech tree.
Why doesn’t the 2nd turret on Z-46 turn 360 degrees, despite lack of obstruction?	The Z-46 didn’t have a fully rotating turret due to the limits of its power supply.
In real life, warships could fire guns individually. Will this be possible in the game?	We don’t have plans for this. It would add unnecessary complications to the gameplay.
Will there be a change to fire probability? Fires do a lot of damage and with up to four fires burning simultaneously, this can quickly add up.	No plans currently. Setting fires is the main way lighter ships deal with big battleships. If fires are a recurring problem for you, try getting the "Fire Prevention" Skill for your ship’s commander along with other survivability skills and ship modifications.
Why does the Mogami’s 155mm turret have the same rotation speed of battleship guns?	Some design decisions are for balance purposes. In this case, we want upgraded ship modules to be better than the base ones, so Mogami’s 155mm turret is designed accordingly.
Can you give the URL guy a raise?	Of course! We’ve already sent him a bear and three balalaikas from Russia!
Will we ever get a "Nation vs. Nation" option (e.g., Japanese player ships vs. bots in US ships) for co-op play?	We are working on a co-operative mode, but can’t give too many details yet. The first version of co-op won’t be focused on nation vs. nation, but we might go in this direction with future releases.

[Takru]

Redditor nps found this interesting article:

 

Edit: This article seems to be a little bit older.

 

Announces for this year:

• Russian DDs (including Smeliy, Neustrashimiy and Project 56) will get some new weapon type
• New cruiser and battleship trees for France
• New Pan-Asian tree with RU, US and Japanese ships

Balance:

• Bismarck hydro nerf (done)
• No nerf for Minotaur because majority of players are only getting VII
• BBs are above 40%, so they want to make them less universal, which might fix long high tier battles

Variants for clan development:

1. Playing actively will provide personal and clan bonuses
2. Continuous clan battles or tournaments, similiar to team battles
3. Global map (not for this year)

Also

• Raid-like PvE with different difficulty levels
• Screenshot of BB with golden fist

CVs:

• Starcraft-like mouse controls
• Removal of alt-attacks on 4-5 level CVs, because sealcubbing is too common

New premiums:

• Graf Zeppelin
• Roma VIII Italian BB
• But VIII BB Alabama first

Removal of open-water stealth firing

Introduction of inventory (done)

Bastions nerf, no plans for removal (changed their plans apparently)

[Takru]

According to Sub_Octavian, the Akizuki is overperforming:

 

Akizuki is super over performing currently. Let's just hope we won't have to nerf her.

I don't think we ever asked to play her as AA platform. And still, she scores lots of planes kills on her tier.

As for VMF DDs, def AA wil stay, but we will most likely rebalance their top tier AA to make it less effecient.

[Babykim]

Q&A from RU dated Friday, 17 February

 

Source: https://worldofwarships.ru/ru/news/common/question_dev_14/

 

---

Q: Do you plan adding the option of selling inventories to the ship tab?
A: Not at the moment; perhaps in the future.

---

Q: Do you plan improving the display of clan tags? The problem with displaying long nicknames has been compounded by the introduction of clan tags. Can you enlarging the window at least by a factor of two?

A: Yes. You already see the full nickname by hovering the cursor. This only works on the loading screen and in battle, as the same principle applies to other elements of the interface, hover the curser for more information.

---

Q: Do you plan introducing premium commanders, who would not need retraining? If you plan commanders similar to Steven Seagal for other nations, what would be their speciality?

A: We do not plan adding premium commanders, and see no reason for doing so given that you can use elite commander experience for retraining. You can now retrain commanders for regular ships without the need to pay doubloons, and the premium ships do not need retraining anyway.

---

Q: Earlier, you mentioned adding "Sorry" as a quick command. Can you add "Spotted at XY" instead? It would also be nice to be able to tell your allies which equipment you are planning to use, reload times, etc. (see Dota 2).
A: The development of new functions is not a matter of one or two patches. We are collecting user feedback and proceeding accordingly. This year will see changes to quick commands.

---

Q: Do you plan introducing the carriers Kaga and Akagi as premium ships, and the hybrid ships such as Hyuga and Ise?
A: We cannot announce ships in this format. We consider adding the hybrid ship to the game, but only after having conceptualized their gameplay. These ships are currently subject to internal discussions.

---

Q: Why ignore user feedback on the position of the Inventory button below the user nickname rather than in line with Port, Modules, Exterior… under the Battle! button? It would be nice to have an option of selling several items (check boxes).
A: We are listening to feedback and are trying to take it into account. Although the Inventory is an important functionality, the majority of players will be using it less often than other options under the Battle! button. We know from the experience of our colleagues in Minsk that the majority of World of Tanks players do not use the inventory, and those who do visit the inventory about once per month. The main menu will include only the most frequently used options to unclutter the interface and reduce the load.

The option of multiple sales was excluded in the first version of this functionality to minimize the number of unwanted random sales. The risk is particularly high at the beginning, with all the excitement and many items to sell. We will include such an option in the future.

---

Q: Currently you cannot see the possible upgrades before buying the ship. Can you make them visible similarly as for the ships in port?
A: We do not plan this feature, but it is possible that we implement once more pressing issues are resolved.

---

Q: Please bind same consumables to identical keys.
A: We already answered similar questions in the past. We plan introducing customizable key bindings this year.

---

Q: You added rare upgrades, which are difficult to obtain, but which occupy the slot of the essential regular upgrades. Can you make a separate slot for rare upgrades?
A: The rare upgrades were not planned for a separate slot in the first version. Their aim is to add further variability in the customization of ships to fit a player's game style.

---

Q: Do you plan adding a means of determining the speed of a target?
A: No.

---

Q: When will you add a compensation for team damage? There is a fine but no compensation.
A: Version 5.12 introduced fixed cost than does not depend on the damage taken. A compensation might lead players to jump on friendly torpedoes, resulting in a large number of unfair bans for team killing. Fines are designed to punish and prevent team damage.

---

Q: Is this possible to add team statistics after the battle?
A: We plan allowing to view any players statistics after the battle, but I cannot name an implementation date.

---

Q: Do you plan introducing sea tenders as a class of ships?
A: We had them during the alpha stage, but they did not properly fit the game back then. I cannot exclude their reappearance in the future.

 

Wiki on sea tenders: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seaplane_tender

---

Q: Do you plan adding sailing ships and the armored ships prior to 1906?
A: Sailing ships will definitely not be added. We already have some ships of the second era, and certainly plan adding more.

---

Q: The Ocean map is now available at tier 10 only, with the probability of occurrence being halved. Many players want this map on all tiers. We are sick and tired of the "city" maps. Please make it as before.
A:  We reduce the chance of occurrence of this map and made it available to tiers 8-10 based on a careful evaluation of statistics and user feedback. This map is unique in that it open tactical possibilities that preclude a high chance of occurrence and the availability at lower tiers.

 

We balance the maps for all classes of ships. The game includes open maps such as Okinawa and The Atlantic. The criticism of the prevalence of "city" maps is incorrect.

[avenger121]

Shamelessly stolen from reddit:

All credits for translating goes to: https://www.reddit.com/user/Umbaretz

 

Original one here.

Tell us about yourself:
I work in Lesta on designing large surface artillery ships (cruisers and battleships).
Graduated from Leningrad Shipbuilding Institute with a degree in shipbuilding. I.e. was taught to create both civil and military ships. For two years worked in ship repair, serviced nuclear submarines.
I like everythin in my current work - from digging in arhcives to the process of recreating a ship which design sometimes have only a few lines in documentation.
I was intrested in a ships for a long time, from second grade in school, when i read "Book of future admirals", also my parents were subscribed to "Modelist constructor" magazine and it had "Cruiser" series. For "Battleship" series I had to dig in various libraries.

 

When did you begin working in Lesta? How was your team assemled? Have you worked in IT beforehand?

I have been working with Lesta for a very long time, ever since "Pacific storm", where I was ivolved in testing on outsource. Later, I was deeper involved in "Pacific storm: Allies", where I adived on hit-location system, the one responsible for inner modules workings of the ship: armor, compartments, battle stations. Also, initially did the same when WoWs begun, but there I was already making objects inside the ship myself in 3D editor and made descriptions for them. Have been working in IT since 1996.

 

How do you begin designing paperships, where do you start?

"Paper ship" usually either desriptive part - tactical and techincal elements or grapical part - usually nominal one, too simplified to make detailed 3d model based only on it. For that reason we take materials found as a basis and begin preliminary design process for the ship. As a result we get theoretical blueprint for ship's hull, plans for bridges, decks, superstructures, ship projections, armor sheme, internal module layout - powerplant, ammo storages for various weapon system, steering system.

 

How do you get reference material? Do you use archives in work? If you dou - which ones?

Archives are the primary source of refernce material, because they are the most trustworthy. Monographs, books are secondary sources and they are often plagued with inaccuracies and mistakes made by the autor. Often the stuff written in books doesn't match with archive data and needs cross-referencing with other sources.

 

What are the main stages in designing paper ship?

First we determine tactical and techincal elements of the ship using sources available. elements are usually with real-world ships as the paper ships possible aversaries - to make project ship's characterisics as close to reality as possible. Game conventions aren't taken into consideration - we're making a proper ship.
Then, when elements are determined we search for prototype that existed IRL and has a lot of archived design documentation. Using protype as a basis we recalculate for desired parameters length, beam and draft we get theoretical hull design and detirmine displacement for desing waterline.
After then, simultaneously with load calculation we create armor and weapon placement schemes. Then we determine stability and distance between frames (sections), create ship projections , plans for bridges, decks, superstructures. Everything that is needed for ship creation in 3D editor, for future in-game armor and module placement. Ship proceeds to preliminary design stage.

 

How speed, buoyancy, maneuverability of paper ships is calculated?

Speed is detemined using a prototype or similar ship with similar engine. Buoyancy is calculated using hydrostatics and theoretical blueprint. We can calculate maneuverablity, but it's one of game conventions (balance parameter - tr).

 

Readers questions:

What are your plans for Alaska and Stalingrad?

We are searching for materials for Stalingrad in archives. We have everything we need for Alaska. About plans to enter them in game I can't comment - don't know about them.

 

What is the shady ship Buffalo, appearing in the client? Where can I find materials for her? What project it is?

It's heavy cruiser project from 16 of september 1940. Called CA-B.
You can find information about her here

 

Why when creating IJN BB branch classical(give or take) Ishizuchi haven't gotten into branch, but instead something crazy called Myogi now is into branch now? AFAIK ships with unique gameplay are put into premiums.

Because we got materials for Ishizuchi much later. Whole preliminary design work has been made for Myogi. It was a huge help that we could find very detailed Kongou before modernization's blueprint in Hiiragi archive.

 

Why Großer Kurfürst is a lump of something and not exact project from H-40 to H-44? Where have you got triple turrets?

First, in archives we found nothing except H-class battleship project which was laid, but later cancelled. She has a lot of graphic material accompanнing her. We haven't found any data on other projects (in arhcives - tr). Also, there is no data on 420-mm gun. Instead we have information that during military tech cooperation Germany offered their naval weapons developments to USSR. Particulary in russian archives we found materials about directors and artillery systems offered for sale. And it those materials we found longitudinal section blueprint of triple turret and her main weights table - armor, guns, mechanisms.
Because ship with 8 420-mm guns (parameters for which were calculated) couldn't do anything against Yamato or Montana we decided to make a design based on "H" battelship with 4 such turrets. That's how Kurfürst appeared. During her design materials on "H" and Bismarck were used. Also we used materials for developped (and not quite) 55-mm AA mounts and 128mm DP mounts.

 

Why German Destroyers have mix of 128 and 150 mm guns?

Branch shows full development of german DD's, how they come to use 150-mm guns and how they abandoned them in their latest DD designs. So we can say that game German DD branch is grounded in history.

 

How long does it take to design a ships from idea to ready model?

Design can take from one month to two. It depends on quality of project materials and quality of prototype materials. Sometimes we need to design from scratch. Beginning from weapon systems - sometimes we have contraciting information about them and we have to check it using design and calculations. For model (3D - tr) it depens on how many artists are working on the ship.

 

Can you simply extrapolate while working on a ships branch, or are their pitfalls waiting for you?

There are a lot of pitfalls, so we can't extrapolate.

 

About soviet BB branch - what are the main problems for its assembly?

Main problem is archive material availability. Blueprints, documents. Work is proceeding, branch is turning out very intresting. (materials after 1941 are still classified - tr)

 

If you can tell us - what will be the branch main flavor?

If you look from realistic point of view - russian/soviet *artillery** (not targeting, not fire control, but guns themselves) is one of the best in the period. But its specialized for Baltic Sea and North Atlantic. A lot of stuff common with german and french ones. (you can expect good ballistics, but nothing will beat adamantium guns on Izumo - tr)*

 

Don't you think that Koenig and Bayern should sunk under the weight of their modernizations in top hulls?

No, we don't. To claim that you have to show us your load and displacement calculations for the ship. We did ours and are confident in them.

 

Gneisenau with ELEVEN DP 2x128 guns should be ... on the bottom - due to those weapons weight.

We made ship according to German modernization plans. Lenth of ship is increased by 11.3 m in forward main battery area. Displacement increase by 1500 tons. Considering known loads for Scharnhorst we acheived lowering of overload by 300 tons. That's why Gneisenau turned out to be less overloaded if you consider hull lenghtening than real Scharnorst, whose hull we checked by calculations.

 

Why did you "draw" catapult for german T9-10 BB between aft turrets, while on known scetches it's behind aft turret?

It's because of game mechanincs requirements. In project plane was put on catapult using main battery turret, and her barrels acted as crane. In addition, to launch plane turret would be removed from player control. That's why catapults, there are two of them, were put in between turrets where during launch they don't obstruct player. Overall, this desicion turned out better than german one.

 

Danae's bow should be with a lift, this is a characteristic of third supgroup of this class.

Danae is a collective image of the class. It has been said many times on official forum.

 

Chapaev's bow should be slanted. And Chapaev shouldn't have torpedoes.

We made Chapaev according to factory blueprints. And bow in particular. Torpedoes are inherited from first hull.

 

Quintiple torpedo launchers simply wouldn't fit in Zao's aft. See for yourself. Also aft should break away.

According to project she has quadruple launchers. To make quintiple fit in we had to reduce spare toprs quantity (he's talking about real project, not in-game one). Load from 4 quintiple launchers is miniscule - ship's structure and steering compartment armor weight much more.

 

Dmitriy Donskoi's superstructure is as tall as Empire State Building - itn't that height (number of floors) too much?

65's project IRL didnt come out of tactical and techincal elements coordination stage. So when we were making a collective image of more than 40 variants, a lot of them aren't represented in domestic literature it was decided to make her a preliminary design of project 66 cruiser, in game called Moskva. Her superstructure has less floors (lower) than Moskva's, while ships are close in linear dimensions, although, Dmitriy's Doskoi's superstructure is unarmored except conning tower.

 

Based on what have you come up with Minotaur? Is she a Super Tiger (based on real Tiger)?

There are sources in Friedman's book on british cruisers. Project Minotaur was considered by brits as an alternative to american CL-144 Worcester class cruisers. But as a result of designing for british weapons systems project turned out to be too expensive and wasn't carried on, also characterisics weren't batter than american counterpart's. Mark XXV turret was intended exactly for this project. But after Minotaur was cancelled Tiger was born as a cheaper alternative.

link for image

 

What about Neptune's DP turrets? And their number of torpedo launchers?

Project is also from Friedman's book. Was supposed to be a further development of Town-class. Also wasn't carried on.

link for image

 

Why have you draw Nikolai I the way she is in the game now? With forecastle and 300mm belt. In life she was "simpler".

Nikolai's belt is 270 mm, as in factory blueprints. Forecastle was considered as one of the measures to prevent excessive flooding of bow. It wasn't implemented IRL due to metal deficit and increase in construction time. To make this ship different in architecture from other (Sevastopols - tr) we went for this assumption.

 

What's your opinion on japanese shipbuilder Yuzuru Hiraga's works?

One of the greatest engineers of his time, he left a very rich archive after him. A couple of projects were advanced for his time.

 

How did you design IJN T10 CA Zao?

We had to design gun from scratch, because there weren't 203/55 guns in Japan. Make internal ballistics calculation and check pressure. As a prototype we took Tone, to be exact - her theoretical blueprint and ship armouring approach.

 

Should we call ships which have a full set of construction blueprints, but haven't been launched "paper ships"?

More correctly they should be called "not realized", because those are very devepped and thoroughly designed projects. From materials point of view they are sometimes better than a real ship (to implement in game - tr), but those ones are exeptions. ("paper ships" with full set of documentation - tr)

Do you dabble in ship model building? For how long? Which ships have been commisioned in "home shipyard"?

I have been doing this for a long time, from school. I've made North Carolina, Hood and Yamato. In the process are Richelieu and KGV. Have won Russian Championship in ship models with Yamato model.

 

How do you explain pagoda superstructures on japanese ships from a shipbuilding point of view?

Development of target designation and fire control systems.

 

Why did americans used lattice masts for their first dreadnaughts and superdreadnaughts? Why they were later abandoned?

Because fire control mechanisms and AAA(Brownings, to be exact - tr) were placed high above. Combined they have a considerable mass (and lattice masts allow to save weight). Also they wanted to make masts less succeptible to enemy fire. Also it was considered that they'll reduce vibrations from the hull. After all, they showed to be a complicated construct and the choice was made to make tall superstructures which allowed to place more platforms (for AAA, for example) and were sturdier and protected personnel better.

 

Whose archives are the hardest to work with? American, german, british, russian? Are there any peculiarities with working with archives in different countries?

As time has shown - all archives have their peculiarities. Comrades from historical-archive departments are working with them.

 

What archive materials are you most intrested in? Blueprints? Photos?

Blueprints, schemes, photos, various text documents - everything has a lot of necessary and important stuff for work (to work with).

 

How are project and construction blueprints different?

Level of detail is different. Construction blueprints show materials ships will be made of. Technical project blueprints show general idea of them. Preliminary design shows ship in general.

 

How reference conficts are handled? For example, photo and blueprint don't match.

Paper ships usually don't have such issues, because there are no photos of them. Usually there are photos for dismantled and incompleted ships.

 

Have you contacted with other historians during work? With war veterans? With military specialists?

I have contaced some historians by correspondens. But personally I do it on very rare occasions.

 

A great amount of work has been done gathering references, especially in case of not realized projects. Don't you want to write a book or a series of articles?

If such book will be in demand - why not?

 

Which ship service history is the most memorable for you?

Battleship Marat

 

Are you gather materials for carrier-bases aviation as meticulously as you do for ship?

Other people are working on carrier aviation.

 

Conversing with developpers you learn a lot of unique staff, which you can't neither in popular science nor in scientific publications dedicated to nautical themes. What do you think - why before you not a lot of people were so thourough in seeking techincal information about different projects?

Naval thematic isn't as popular in our country as it should be. In fact, our Navy history isn't properly described.

 

Do you play games yourself? Which ones?

Rarely, don't have a lot of time for games. But the stuff we make for WoWs we always watch in action.

 

Where do archive materials finding work begins?

By determing in which archive you have to search for materials.

 

Are there any cases where you have to find documentation for a ship, and it doesn't exist at all? What do you do then?

"There are. But we have ship theory, strength of materials, External and Internal ballistics Textbook and a lot of real-world prototype ships. It's never boring."

[yankee05]

All these screen shots from Wot magazine Issue 6, talking about wows future.

1. In short,getting pan-asian branch,
2. french crusiers and bbs,
3. Second set of Ru DDs, smely, neustrashimy and  project 56 destroyers will recieve the new weapon type (Mines?).
4. BB population at 40%. Trying to nerf it via captain skill changes
5. New high tiers wont be nerfed yet (ie British) until population size is large enough
6. Eu, Na ,SEA showing better results than (population wise) better than ru.
7. CVs getting starcraft controls, losing alt attack at lower tiers. Want to change CVs slowly/extreme caution
8. Stealth firing in the open being removed
9. Working on clan features. Something similar to team battles. Global map may happen in future, but not this year
10. PvE features are being worked on, something like raids
11. And some other info. 

 

[]. 

 

 

[Allied_Winter]

Again, the readers digest from the most recent reddit QnA. Be aware though, that Sub_Octavian has a so far only answered the top 20 questions, but will answer more within the next days/week.

 

 

Q: Can you explain why camo application works like it currently does? How it must must be destroyed to change types, unlike other things like signals and consumables? I understand the realism factor. Once you apply paint, you can't get it back. But from a gaming perspective, what does this add? I feel it only really adds some frustration. For example, maybe my ship is 5000 XP from being elite, and I want to use +100% XP camo to finish it off. If I leave the resupply on, then I run the risk of having a good game that elites the ship and then "wasting" the next camo because I don't need the bonuses anymore. I can turn resupply off, but then before every battle until I elite it I need to manually reapply it. And then I risk accidentally forgetting and entering battle with no camo. I can't see this adding player choices, it just makes a memory game of remembering when to turn on/off resupply or to put camo on before every battle.

A: Well, the original design was connected with IRL logic as you said - you cannot demount camo from the ship. However, when you think about it...this is not the matter where we should stick to IRL logic. Your idea is solid - this is the matter of comfort. We discussed your question with game designers and decided to improve camo application logic so it will be demountable like signal flags. I'm not promising 0.6.3 or 0.6.4, but I think we will manage to squeeze it into some of the foreseeable future updates. Thank you for your input!

---

Q: Impact of the Protected MM on Tier 5+6 How does WG feel about the protected MM many months on. Is the quantity of mid tier (5+6) games stabilized given any decrease in experienced players at these tiers compensated by the intended increase in new players having a more comfortable entry to mid tier. Was there an impact on tier 5+6 premium ship popularity due to the protected MM. I can only speak for myself that I rarely play my tier V premiums.

A: We feel that was the right decision. T V-VI are filled with quite powerful ships, including premiums. Now, they are not threatening new players at low tiers, while maintaining nice gameplay. And TVII-VIII became more popular, which is good. The quantity of mid tier games is not dramatically dropping, and I wouldn't say this change has put some major disadvantage to these ships. For example, from last 2 weeks stats: T V ships were top tier in battle in 38,5% of cases. It does not look like they are always uptiered. Thus, we don't see any need to change MM right now. But we're definitely keep monitoring the stats and your feedback on it.

---

Q: Can we have commands for destroyers, something like "I'm going to lay smoke" or "About to launch torpedoes" This will help with communication to tell other people that anyone who wants to join in the smoke knows im going to do it or warn allies so they dont get in between you and the enemies when they know ur about to torpedo. p.s. When can we expect to get higher tier premium IJN BBs?

A: Well, as I said in some of the previous Q&As, we want to upgrade the quick commands system at some point, including new features. We're not ready to share the details yet, but your suggestion about consumables and armament warnings is nice and logical. Thank you! P.S. I cannot disclose any ship release dates. Sorry.

---

Q: According to various leaks and a google-translated russian portal page, the RUDD are going to get their HE damage buffed. what was the balancing decision behind that, as currently the russian DDs dont seem to lack in the damage department according to third-party sites like warships.today, unlike a certain other nation.

A: We have to remember that HP absolute values are quite different between classes. VMF DDs are busy trying to make BBQ from BBs, so their absolute damage numbers look good. But when we studied their competitive aspect comparing to other light ships and relative damage, we realized they could use this buff. We don't expect them to rocket up, but at least will be in better balance with other destroyers.

---

Q: Have you considered making hydro and radar ranges dependent on the ship classes you're spotting? E.g. an Atlanta-type radar would spot a DD within 8.5km, a CL/CA within 9.5km and a BB within 10.5km. In my opinion this would be more realistic and it would discourage capital ships hiding in smoke for an extended period of time, possibly leading to a more dynamic gameplay experience.

A: Surely we considered similar idea when we were designing these consumables. However, we decided to reject it in favor of user-friendly and predictable mechanics, and honestly, we doubt it would be wise to change it now. Capital ships sitting in smoke is rare case, and without DD/UK CL speeding ability, they are easily countered by torpedo spamming.

---

Q: Take 2: My question is about the Clear Sky achievement. It got changed a long time ago as it was far too easy to achieve at high tiers. This was a necessary change. Whilst the change might have achieved the effect of reducing how often it was awarded, it has flipped too far the other way, particularly at high tier. For example see this screenshot: https://frm-wows-eu.wgcdn.co/wows_forum_eu/monthly_02_2017/post-531972083-0-44814600-1486197633.png So my questions are: How many clear sky awards are achieved in an average week at tiers 8-10? How many people have achieved 'Honorable Service with honors'? Then, if we have an answer to these questions, do the devs feel that this is what they wanted to happen with these changes? I mean, if that guy didn't get it for 82 kills then what more is expected? And how are you supposed to achieve it at those tiers particularly with ships like the Minotaur and Des Moines having massive AA themselves. I am not asking for the achievement to become easy/meaningless but can the devs consider trying to make it so that it can be attained (with some similar level of difficulty) across all tiers?

A: We think it's not necessary to dig in statistics to agree with your point Clear Sky achievement needs tweaking, and we will do it when it's time for achievements update. Thank you for highlighting this!

---

Q: Not long ago the 250x signal flag supercontainers were removed from the game. Similarly, signal flag rewards in the current ranked season were cut way back (by as much as 75%, I believe), with none at all being given out from ranks 9 through 2. Is this an indication that you believe signal flags are providing too much of an advantage to some players, and you're trying to cut back on their usage?

A: Not exactly. The problem is, these signals were initially designed as rare/medium items with remarkable bonuses and value. However, with more and more ways to get them, the situation started to get out of control. When such things become default, it is bad. It messes with balancing ships and reduces ship customization value. We want to reduce signals flow so that their usage is deliberate. We realize it may upset some of you folks, but it needs to be done. Otherwise, we may as well apply these bonuses by default to all ships and forget about signals.

---

Q: I guess not so many people will ask about maps so I will add more diversity to the question pool 1)How do you think about these particular high tier maps: Tears of the Desert, Okinawa and Mountain Range. I think these maps give the majority of playerbase little choice of movement and strategy and encourage passive play. -For Tears of the Desert, in Domination mode the area inside B cap has completely no cover and the routes leading to it are fairly narrow which makes pushing into it at the start in non-smoke cruisers or battleships extremely dangerous. Therefore most people decide to split up and go to A and C cap first. But these two caps don't have enough cover to support close-range engagement either and force both teams to exchange fire at long distance until one achieves assured HP advantage to push. -Okinawa also has very little cover at B and C cap. The A cap is too narrow for a big force to move in and maneuver inside, not to mention you cannot support B and C effectively due to the large island between A/B blocking your shells (except some special cases like t9/10 RN and US cruisers). Bow-on camping battleships at B and C seem to be the best choice on this map. -Mountain Range is almost the same as Okinawa, except that the problem is at A and B cap. In addition, the chain of islands in the middle of the map is designed vertically which forces cruisers/battleships to go undetected before they can move from A to B. It is not always possible to do so and if that is the case, they would have to risk showing broadside which is not a very good option. So again, camping BB at A and B cap. All these maps have worsened my t10 experience by a lot compared to lower tier maps which actually have some cover and provide many strategy alternatives. Do you have the same thought? I would appreciate if you can show us some internal analysis as well. 2)Will Warrior's Path in Epicenter mode get released to random battles or is it exclusive in ranked? Do you have any plan to expand the use of Epicenter mode in other maps too? (New Dawn and Loop are pretty good maps to do so imo)

A: Alright, thank you for detailed question and the ability to talk to Maps team

1. Okinawa, ToD and Mountain Range are intermediate maps according to our recent player survey. We will look into your feedback further on, but right now there are no plans to change these maps. 1a. Okinawa is a map based on IRL location and it is not to be changed.
2. We will discuss that after Ranked-6 is over and we have full analysis.

---

Q: How does the analysis go after a season of ranked battle, what are the focal points for you to determine if it was a successful season, and what needs tweaking/scrapping/adding? Superleague: what did urge the nerfing of the container reward from all players to just the Top2? Was it people AFKing, or the people just playing really fast-paced and "silly"? (I could also write 251 paragraphs about the longstanding issues and disdain with/from WG-EU, but as a dev you can't do much about that, so I'll leave it as it is (but if you can provide me with the coordinates to whom I should adress these concerns, please send them to me))

A: Well, in terms of data, our main interest is numbers (relative to game audience and absolute) of participants, their involvement (how much do they play), their progress to R1 and feedback. Feedback is to be analyzed after season ends, mostly, when we have full picture. As for the numbers - they are great, and in this respect Season 6 looks better than very successful Season 5. Of course there are lots of aspects to consider, including controversial ship balance and current meta. Superleague had both AFK and "silly" cases, unfortunately. Our solution was forced, and of course we will do our best to avoid such "live" changes in the future. But we really had to act. The situation in Superleague was getting ridiculous. P.S. Please let me state this very clear. While I personally work in S-Pete DEV office, I represent my company here, and we, World of Warships staff in all offices, are one big team. If I can help you, I will, to my best knowledge. But I kindly ask you to stop making divisions. Otherwise, I don't think I will be able to provide any meaningful communication. Thank you!

---

Q: Hi Octavian. I have quite a few things to ask, actually. -1s. Will we get permanent Camouflage for Tier 5 ships? There are quite a few popular ships both known for its history and in game performances, I am sure that people will want some special camo to go with them. 2.The new patch with the new special upgrades has been out for sometime, do you have statistics around what percentage of the people who got it have actually used it? As far as I can see the community is not happy with these upgrades and many simply sold it for credits. Do you think they need a rework? 3.I knew this question has been asked for a lot of times, but again. The IJN DD rework is out for quite sometime, do you still think they are competitive? How’s the statistics doing? I might be wrong here but on the main line they aren’t doing great are they? Is it really players who have to adapt to a newer playstyle? Or is it that they are not equipped good enough to do the job? Any words on potential buffs? 4.Could the Japanese techtree get some high tier trainers? https://www.reddit.com/r/WorldOfWarships/comments/5s4jou/the_japanese_tech_tree_seriously_needs_some_high/ They have one of the fewest amount of premiums for tier 5 and above despite having a full tech tree. Atago is the only good money maker/captain trainer out there. Mutsu is tier 6 but still not a very good trainer. 5.Haifuri collaboration details, if possible? I know this is handled mainly by the asia cluster but there is no way to directly connect with asia server Devs. 6.The long-awaited CV rework? Could you please give an approximation on how Long we will have to wait for? 7.With the gradual removal of open water stealth fighting, will there be buffs to ships very reliant on this feature? Notable examples like Akizuki and other gunboat DDs. I mean even in the Akizuki Amada video the concealment is advertised as one of its main advantages. Regards

A: Whoa, that's the spirit. Let's try to answer em all!

1. It is possible, but our Art team has very tight schedule and lots of incoming tasks. I think they will make it to T V some day, but I cannot promise. In terms of player usefulness, top-tier permanent camos are better, as T V economy is very mild and is not going to profit as much from permanent camos.

2. We will perform analysis approximately in a month. Now, it's too early. Personal experience: I got speed boost and smoke screen upgrades. My Shira and Perth are very happy

3. They are competitive, but, as I said many times, they have become more skill-dependent. Yes, many players adapted, and it's nice to see even well-performing Akatsukis in Ranked. However, large number of players seem to play in old style, lowering ships avg. stats. Ah, let me show you I downloaded their 0.6.1 stats of winrate and damage, compared them to other researchable DDs.

Let's look at avg WR ranking:

Minekaze 1/5 Mutsuki 3/5

Fubuki 5/5 Hatsuharu 2/5

Akatsuki 4/5 Shiratsuyu 1/5

Akizuki 1/5 Kagero 3/5

Yugumo 4/4

Shimakaze 4/4

Now, let's take a look at damage, but not avg. values. We will check out the top 5%, median and lowest 5% to see how skill affects their performance.

Charts

As you can see with this example, they often occupy low positions in median stats, but as for top players, they tend to be very competitive. That's exactly what we wanted, and thus, there is no need for any emergency changes (although, Shira may need some nerfing). Some additional tweaks may be applied in future, though. For example, we're currently not very happy with Yugumo performance. But the fact won't change: learn to play more aggressively and risky, and you will be scoring great results with IJN DDs. And while avg.winrate is not top most of the time, we see what these ships can do if played properly. Our team will be working with your feedback and try to keep all ships competitive and enjoyable.

1. It will. I can only ask for your kind patience.

2. We're working on ships, sounds and commanders. We aim for 2017, and I cannot provide more information than that. Sorry.

3. It will not be implemented as one big update that will change everything at once. We're testing first improvement pack right now and aiming for 0.6.3. Stay tuned!

4. No preliminary buffs will be made, because even with advantages, we did not design any ship in the game to rely only on SF. However, we will be observing the stats as thoroughly as we can after SF removal, and we will be ready to apply buffs, should any ships lose their value.

---

Q: Do you have any planned buffs for the Mikasa? The Mikasa is weaker than other tier 2 ships, and while it is a novelty vessel, it should also be competitive. Even simply allowing it to use Aiming Systems Mod 0 would be a significant improvement

A: Well, frankly speaking, she is not weaker than other tier 2 ships. She is somewhere in the middle in terms of damage, has unsurprisingly good survivability and has winrate of 52% (3rd place). We don't want to promote sealclubbing and thus, it wouldn't be wise to buff her. AS Mod 0...would probably make her ideal seal clubbing tool

---

Q: Greetings Sub With Montana and Iowa confirmed to get their citadel lowered (many thanks) Will the Missouri and Alabama also receive their historical citadel? Edit: We know from the game model from the ST version of the Alabama that she has the raised citadel. I am hoping that both the ST and regular version both have their citadel lowered.

A: Hello! Missouri should have same pattern as Iowa, so don't worry about it. As for Alabama, she was on production test, and we don't see any reason to buff her. She is absolutely fine in her current state. Please note that citadel spacing is not the question of realism, but more of balance. If we see any real need to do it, we can alter it to improve the gameplay.

---

Q: Hi there. 1. Is there a plan to balance MM so that 1 team doesn't get 4 radars and the other team gets none? In ranked this happened 6 games in a row to me. Obviously ridiculously unfair. 2. More campaigns please!

A: 1. We will think about it and other improvements for the next Ranked Seasons. 2. Sure!

---

Q: Status on HaiFuri Collaboration? We have 0 news on it since it's announcement.

A: (repeat) We're working on ships, sounds and commanders. We aim for 2017, and I cannot provide more information than that. Sorry.

---

Q: Heyho Sub! While reading the latest news on the new RU DDs I noticed that one branch gets the Defensive Fire AA consumable. Here the quote from the portal article: The destroyers Ognevoi, Udaloi, and Grozovoi are equipped with dual-purpose artillery, and this advantage is further emphasised by the possibility to mount the "Defensive AA fire" consumable on these ships in place of an "Engine Boost". Sauce: https://worldofwarships.eu/en/news/common/ru-destroyers/ After reading this I somehow felt a little bit strange. Yes, I know that the Akizuki is currently performing very well and you said some time ago (if i remember correctly) that she already shoots down more planes than you guys actually have planed. Which makes me curious somehow. Why does it make me curious? Because there is the fact, that where ever you read about Akizuki, it states that she was actually an AA DD. In other words: It kinda let me think about it why a dedicated AA Ship, which the Akizuki was (even the japanese ack then thought about the 100mm guns as their best AA guns), doesn't get a Defensife Fire AA consumable. And how can she as a AA platform even "shoot down too much planes". Historicaly spoken: It was her job to do that. Do not even get me started on the fact that T8-T10 CVs have a ton of planes anyway... A small quote: The Akizuki-class ships were originally designed as anti-aircraft escorts for carrier battle groups, but were modified with torpedo tubes and depth charges to meet the need for more general-purpose destroyer. Sauce: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_destroyer_Akizuki Even in a certain game (you most probably know which one i mean with the following description) where ships are "personalized" as "shipgirls" Akizuki class DDs introduce themself as AA ships. And I honestly do not think that a japanese game would make this up when you can read this literally everywhere anyway. So in the end Akizuki is with her 100mm guns kinda a snowflake. We know that her guns behave really strange and that you need a special kind of skillset on the captain to get the maximum out of it. But on the other hand it kinda feels strange. Why does it feel strange? Because it kinda looks like that you do not tread ships with same characteristics the same way? RU AA DDs (they most probably were ones, afterall you wouldn't make them to those kind of ships if they wouldn't be ones wouldn't you?) get the Def AA Skill meanwhile the Jap AA platform doesn't. You already use the 100mm as dual purpose anyway... But in the end you didn't gave a ship, where every gun is literally an AA gun, the Def AA ability... Why? Some more links:http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNJAP_39-65_t98.phphttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10_cm/65_Type_98_naval_gun

A: Hello. We are quite happy that Akizuki is good in shooting down the planes, and we are aware of her IRL role. That's why we gave her very strong base AA values (for her current tier). We will consider Def AA fire option instead of some other consumable, but I should say there is no rule that every ship with strong AA should have Def AA fire. For example, Minotaur is notorious for her AA, but she manages well without Def AA fire, and giving it to her actually would be pretty crazy. Many battleships in the game have large AA armament, not worse than AA cruiser's, but again, we're not giving them Def fire. This is where historical accuracy and gameplay collide. Thank you for interesting question

---

Q: Hello there Sub! Short one this time: Removal or change of stealth firing in the open water that was planned - will this enveloping change also affect premium ships capable of stealth fire?

A: Hi! Yes. As you probably know, we always do our best to preserve premium ships from nerfing. However, systematic changes to game mechanics should not skip premiums, as it is not fair and contradicts free-to-win model.

---

Q: 1. Could you provide the winrate difference when one team has 1 more DD than another in high tier game? 2. Could you provide the winrate difference when one team has more USN DD than another in high tier game? e.g. one team has 2 Gearing and another team has 2 Shima. 3. As you mentioned before that Iowa and Montana will get a citadel buff in 0.6.4, will Missouri get that buff as well? 4. Could the New Year 2017 camo get the -3% detect range and +4% dispersion bonus, like other exp boost camos? I got hunderds of them during the new year but I cannot even use them on my DDs and CAs because the loss of stealth. And I don't think add these bonus will cause any imbalance.

A: 1. Yes. It is around 1%, in the favour of fewer OR more DDs, depending on overall DD quantity in battle. We studied this case specifically, based on community feedback, and as a result, know that the influence is utterly low.

1. Uh-oh! If there are 2 Shimas and 2 Gearing in battle, they should be distributed evenly (if they are not in divisions). This is how MM should work. If you have evidence contrary to this, please PM me, and we will look into it.

2. Yes. But let us not dive into abyss of exaggeration I said we will consider this change for 0.6.4. That is not = "will be done in 0.6.4".

3. No. The reason is very simple - it is a cost-effecient camo designed for great economical boost. If it had standard combat bonuses, it should have been priced higher. Tip: you can actually do well in DD and CA without -3% detect range and +4% dispersion, unless you are ultra-pro-elite-kind-of-guy. Sorry.

---

Q: This is more a technical question than a gameplay one: how optimized is WoWS for multiple core usage - i.e, how nicely does it play with the new Ryzen processors (which are 8 cores, 16 threads)? Or is it more IPC-dependent?

A: The game is optimized for multiple core, and utilizes its power, but there is certainly room to improve. Unfortunately, we haven't tested it with Ryzen yet.

---

Q: Good morning Sub_Octavian! I hope the last few weeks went well. Now.... question time:

Question 1: Will there be an option to turn off notifications in port (e.g. the notification after every battle that consumables have been resuplied)?

Question 2: Please have a look in the (german) forum at the picture of an Amagi shooting a full HP Bismarck. The Amagi hits the Bismarck with three AP shells (according to the detailed ribbons two regular pens for 33% max AP dmg = 4158 DMG and one overpenetration for 10% max AP dmg = 1260 DMG. However the game displays 5418 DMG and 2239 DMG. Can you please explain why the numbers deviate? I assume the DMG calculator panel on the top right corner of the screen is correct. I know this calculation given by you

Question 3: How about more tutorials (similar to iChase's captain academy) for new(er) players (e.g. when to use HE vs. AP, how armour angeling works, what a CV manual drop is)?

Question 4: Are you statswise satisfied with the distribution of ships in the current ranked season? Are there any "off" ships that performed better/worse than you expected? Thank you very much for this! Looking forward to the new RU DDs

A: Good evening here!

1. I will discuss it with UI team. But honestly..is this option is widely requested? I have to look through UI feedbacks to know...

2. Looks like game logic bug with ribbons. I will pass it to QA dept. Thank you.

3. Yes! We are working on it, trying to implement quick, yet effecient solution.

4. More or less. Probably too much of Shira, too few Rangers and Kievs.

I look forward to them too. Thank you for your questions.

---

Q: 1. How do you feel about the perceived dominance of the Belfast, especially regarding the ranked season? A lot of players seem to be laughing at best about WG NA's claim that Fiji was just as strong if played correctly, when the ranked reality seems that the team with more smokes+radars always has a sizeable advantage, with Belfast being the only ship to provide both.

1. What do you think about the worries of the community that you are going overboard with radar? It seems that the first US and USSR radar ships had to pay hefty prices to get that tool, while new releases get powerful combinations of radar with good concealment and even smoke, while maintaining powerful weaponry.

2. What do you think about the community's concerns with the weakness of German DDs, and especially the complaints about their terrible concealment after firing their guns? I think most players accept that the USN DD situation (<10 km stealth firing) is very annoying, but are equally frustrated to be spotted from up to 15 km for firing a small calibre gun.

A:

1. Belfast is definitely very strong, that would be stupid to miss. But, at the same time, there are other very effecient ships at T VII, and there is nothing to laugh about. I think we should work hard to improve Ranked balance, but I don't share the point that this season is bad.

2. If "new releases" is Belfast, then yes, this is powerful combo, and I doubt that we will use it often.

3. Their concealment after firing is likely be tweaked along with stealth firing removal, pretty soon. Then, we will see if additional buffs are needed, but as I said before, right now only Z-52 looks as she could use our loves 

Source

 

Greetings

 

[Youti_God_of_Pantsu]

French cruisers is comming

source

[Babykim]

April 1 special leak (tanks on islands) here: https://sea-group.org/?p=2389&lang=en

 

Check the models of a sumarines and transport/landing craft.

[RUSSIANBlAS]

Think the Victor article is interesting?

 

Says he's giving each development team more freedom. So less lol RU bias and more sensible changes? Or just shifting responsibility?

 

Link here! 

http://www.polygon.com/2017/3/7/14834044/wargaming-ceo-interview-world-of-tanks

[Takru]

mal_h (General Manager Least Studio if I read this right) on the RU Forum

 

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fforum%2Eworldofwarships%2Eru%2Findex%2Ephp%3Fshowtopic%3D81827%26view%3Dfindpost%26p%3D3310832

"By the way, the current ranking season is the most successful among all the past. In all regions."

 

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fforum%2Eworldofwarships%2Eru%2Findex%2Ephp%3Fshowtopic%3D81827%26view%3Dfindpost%26p%3D3311227

"You are right about socialization*. Therefore, the main development goes in the direction of the two entities - the Clans and the PVE. In this case, the production of branches and nations will continue, these are not related things."

 

*sozialization probably refers to anything relating to social interaction in the game itself, hence the referrence to Clans.

 

 

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fforum%2Eworldofwarships%2Eru%2Findex%2Ephp%3Fshowtopic%3D81827%26view%3Dfindpost%26p%3D3311370

"12 February -36,000, 20 February 33,000, 26 February 34,000, 5 March 29300."*

 

*this appears to be peak users for the RU server on the given dates.

 

 

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fforum%2Eworldofwarships%2Eru%2Findex%2Ephp%3Fshowtopic%3D81827%26view%3Dfindpost%26p%3D3312020

Here, mal_h summarizes the Dunning-Kruger effect. Thought it would be interesting that he is explaining it. For more information on Dunning-Kruger, click here.

 

 

A (google translated) interview with mal_h on a Russian page, dated 1st March 2017, can be found here.