0.5.3 is coming. Public Test confirms WGs changes.

[Admiral_H_Nelson]

The Public Test of 0.5.3. seems to have confirmed to WG that their original proposals were correct.

 

I can't see anything different from the original plans - but I only had a quick scan.

 

http://worldofwarships.eu/en/news/cbt/update-053-release/

 

D-Day is 18th February.

 

Comments?

[Spithas]

Comments?

 

I find Dasha's crooked smile irksome.

 

On a more serious note i am worried about the multiple direct and indirect buffs to DDs. They don't need them.

[Kurbain]

Here is the video for the lazy:

 

 

I'm not gonna post the patch notes, though, they are really long. Better read those yourself. 

 

 

I'm very surprised that no notable changes have been made to the planned changes during the public test period. I'm wondering what the point was considering a lot of feedback (especially negative) was gathered from the Public Test server. Didn't seem to have bothered WG, though.

[N00b32]

 

Comments?

 

 

Team battles +

"Manual" fire control +

slower caping in ranked -

Clear Sky +

improved matchmaker - (will only shift the problems new players have)

 

what is the safe mode ? Will it bring a faster client ?

[Earl_of_Northesk]

I have a question: why do we bother with these public test servers? Our gameplay and feedback is irrelevant anyway, there never has been a change after PT. Only hidden ones which ruined the game, like that AP bug.

[Spithas]

improved matchmaker - (will only shift the problems new players have)

 

Evening out those Shimakazes or other DDs especially at high tier so each team gets 1 is a very big +.... can't see how you can give the improved MM a minus.

[Seikin]

 

I'm very surprised that no notable changes have been made to the planned changes during the public test period. I'm wondering what the point was considering a lot of feedback (especially negative) was gathered from the Public Test server. Didn't seem to have bothered WG, though.

I suspect the purpose of the public test is purely to find bugs - areas where it is not working as WG intended - not to change the content of their intended changes.

I work in software development and that's how testing generally works:- you get the requirement from the product owner e.g. 'we want the sea to be yellow'.. coders make it yellow. Testers check that it matches the requirement 'yup, the sea is yellow'. They don't generally get to say 'I don't like yellow, can it be pink'..   

[Vanhal]

I don't like the skill changes (except AFT nerf, which was bound to happen for some time anyway).

Absolutely don't care for team battles.

Rest of the changes seems a minor step, but at least in the more or less good direction (except buffs to IJN DD's).

Worst thing and biggest disapointment is no new line of ships and furthermore, not even any info when one would be released, except vague promise of German BB's in august, which is too damn long.

 

I would ask of elaborating on those two points:

1. "Various types of missions are introduced for the Arpeggio of Blue Steel -Ars Nova- mode." - is this some framework for the future or those missions will be added with patch?

2. "A new system was introduced to protect against unsigned mods. When you install mods, you put your game client's stability at risk." - what mods, how will it work, and what exactly "you put your game client stability at risk" means? The obvious meaning, or client is somehow purposely tweaked to work worse with mods? If so, what mods did you mean?

[Admiral_noodle]

Overall I like the skill changes. Well I don't dislike them. They might be interesting.

 

I really like team battles

 

The next update needs to be new content though. More trees are now needed.

[Admiral_H_Nelson]

I suspect the purpose of the public test is purely to find bugs - areas where it is not working as WG intended - not to change the content of their intended changes.

I work in software development and that's how testing generally works:- you get the requirement from the product owner e.g. 'we want the sea to be yellow'.. coders make it yellow. Testers check that it matches the requirement 'yup, the sea is yellow'. They don't generally get to say 'I don't like yellow, can it be pink'..   

 

I believe that you are correct. I think that is exactly what WG are doing. I used to work in Software Testing myself, and that is "Functional Testing". We used to do other sorts of test though, such as Performance testing and Usability testing.

 

Beware the law of unintended consequences!

 

I notice in another thread that WG had picked up on the fact that there were more fires being created in Public Test. This will spill over onto the live game.

 

The reason that there are more fires is because a lot of cruiser captains are picking Demolition Expert as the level 4 captains skill, now that AFT will not be of so much benefit (just the AA part). I did this myself when I tried out Public test.

[N00b32]

 

Evening out those Shimakazes or other DDs especially at high tier so each team gets 1 is a very big +.... can't see how you can give the improved MM a minus.

 

Yeah, that is + or at least neutral (not sure about it, but certainly ok).  What I meant was, what Wargaming wrote under impoved MM. That was the protected game mode for new players. I do not play low tier at all, the lowest I have is an Arkansas (ok and Emden/Albany, but I do not play them out of Wargaming missions), but I do not think shifting the learning process to higher tiers will help.

 

[Spithas]

 

I believe that you are correct. I think that is exactly what WG are doing. I used to work in Software Testing myself, and that is "Functional Testing". We used to do other sorts of test though, such as Performance testing and Usability testing.

 

Beware the law of unintended consequences!

 

I notice in another thread that WG had picked up on the fact that there were more fires being created in Public Test. This will spill over onto the live game.

 

The reason that there are more fires is because a lot of cruiser captains are picking Demolition Expert as the level 4 captains skill, now that AFT will not be of so much benefit (just the AA part). I did this myself when I tried out Public test.

 

Well some Cruisers (Germans maybe some US too) will probably consider HP Buff skill or (US mostly) the New AA skill, both of which are at level 4.

[Mayv]

Tachibana buff  Detection increase while firing reduced from 3.6km to 2.28km. I think stealth fire is possible now.

[ilhilh]

I didn't have much time to go on the test server (too much to do on the live server when I have time to play!) so I am interested in seeing what the Team Battles are like and also how the AA changes affect CV play.  I am not a predominantly CV player but I do like playing them... but I am worried these changed will make playing them entirely unrewarding.

 

Also, I'm looking forwards to kitting out my captains with the new skills - particularly my 2 newest purchases, Yamato and Montana that I am setting up as full-secondary and full-AA respectively.

[Kazomir]

World of Warships 0.5.3

 

I am dubbing thee "Rise of the Destroyers"

[Admiral_H_Nelson]

 

Well some Cruisers (Germans maybe some US too) will probably consider HP Buff skill or (US mostly) the New AA skill, both of which are at level 4.

 

Yes - there is a case to be made for those skills. You are right.

 

Personally, I think that DE for, say, Omaha is more attractive than the HP buff (2000 HP) - that's less than half of a single BB shell!

I suppose it depends on whether you prefer the "Offensive" option or the "Defensive" one.

[Kazomir]

 

Yes - there is a case to be made for those skills. You are right.

 

Personally, I think that DE for, say, Omaha is more attractive than the HP buff (2000 HP) - that's less than half of a single BB shell!

I suppose it depends on whether you prefer the "Offensive" option or the "Defensive" one.

 

The DE (Demo expert)  / SE (survivability expert) Dillema is only hard for US destroyer captains. Who would have to ponder over which one to chose. More fires on BBs is attractive, but more survivability in a gun knife-fight against an other DD (especially one that is using suvivability expert )  is also very valuable. But since fires dont give you credits, I think I know which one to chose myself.

[MrFingers]

 I'm wondering what the point was considering a lot of feedback (especially negative) was gathered from the Public Test server. Didn't seem to have bothered WG, though.

Public Tests aren't really for feedback purposes (despite what the name suggests), it's just to give people a chance to have a look on what the game brings in the next version (see it as an "avant premiere"). Suggestions are, if taken at all, mainly from the RU players.

[Vaderan]

Yeah, another patch. Not sure what to think about it. Intentions might have been good, but many changes implemented seem hald hearted.

What i don´t get: DDs receive their "easier getaway" captains perk changed to tier two, BBs (basically) receive their new "better close combat defense" captains perk at tier 5. The new secondary armament perk is a nice thing to have (although it really starts to kick in only at tier 7+), but i am not yet convinced it is worth a tier 5 "elite" perk. Tier 2 or 3 would have been more than adequate...

[Babykim]

 

I subscribe to what some have said before, even if an MMO needs to be constantly developed, vehicles rebalanced, etc. why would you make so many changes simultaneously?

 

I will not be playing for a few weeks simply because I will wait till the community and video makers evaluate the new skills and combos before I pick mine, as I don't want to spend gold on retraining.

 

[gr0pah]

As a primary DD captain I've been exited about my 2 new "free" skill points since the change to Last Stand was first mentioned. I've been more and more un-exited ever since though. Because before it was a tactical choice to have it or not, and as I always used it I would get out of situations where my DE/AFT-spamming brethren couldn't. Torping a floundering DD always felt great. Now every single DD will have it, no ifs or buts.

 

It means that 

1. DDs will never ever be unmaneuverable 

2. DDs will either have more hp or set quite a lot more fires

= DD become unequivocally stronger.

 

I'm not sure, and again I overwhelmingly play DD, either (not to mention both) of those are needed. 

[Kazomir]

As a primary DD captain I've been exited about my 2 new "free" skill points since the change to Last Stand was first mentioned. I've been more and more un-exited ever since though. Because before it was a tactical choice to have it or not, and as I always used it I would get out of situations where my DE/AFT-spamming brethren couldn't. Torping a floundering DD always felt great. Now every single DD will have it, no ifs or buts.

 

It means that 

1. DDs will never ever be unmaneuverable 

2. DDs will either have more hp or set quite a lot more fires

= DD become unequivocally stronger.

 

I'm not sure, and again I overwhelmingly play DD, either (not to mention both) of those are needed. 

 

As a player who also mains DDs I also feel DDs benefit too much from this patch (even their AA becomes better ). Especially compared to other classes like cruisers.

[warlock07rox]

So basically when patch goes live just get DDs and your elected

[Admiral_H_Nelson]

I subscribe to what some have said before, even if an MMO needs to be constantly developed, vehicles rebalanced, etc. why would you make so many changes simultaneously?

 

I will not be playing for a few weeks simply because I will wait till the community and video makers evaluate the new skills and combos before I pick mine, as I don't want to spend gold on retraining.

 

Exactly! Apologies for reposting from another thread, but I feel that it gives an example to support your point about "many changes simultaneously".

 

Mogami is affected by three major nerfs in 0.5.3 :-

1)  AFT, affecting range

2) Basic Firing Training, affecting rate of fire

3) Expert Marksman, affecting turret traverse

 

Wargaming say that Mogami needs the nerf in order to rebalance it. I'm sure that damage WILL be reduced.

 

However since Mogami has THREE nerfs, Wargaming (and us) will have no idea how much of the damage reduction is purely down to the AFT nerf.

 

Personally, I think that the AFT nerf is the LEAST serious of the three nerfs.

 

Post # 72 in http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/41013-ijn-mogami/page__st__60#topmost

[Babykim]

I happen to grind the Mogami, and I don't know how to go about it after the nerf. Playing coop battles to find out is boring.