[UNT] HaganeNoKaze Beta Tester 152 posts 11,794 battles Report post #7251 Posted October 25, 2017 Year of the CV again. After the joke in 2016, WG repeat it again in 2017. Instead of focusing on nullify the capacitiy of carrier to engage such or such target (cause AA nullify CV, it does not limit them ! You infringe your owns rules about fair play by preventing CV players to play and habving fun..), It should be interesting to improve other spec of the ships (improving DD concealment vs planes, reducing damage of Air Torpedoes/Bombers agains DD)... I heared that devs working on AA and the ones working on CV are not in the same team... If that's true, it's very stupid. 2018, Year to remove CV ?... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[NECRO] Deckeru_Maiku Beta Tester 6,636 posts 24,864 battles Report post #7252 Posted October 25, 2017 4 hours ago, Verdius said: YEAR OF CV I bet that was just a misunderstanding... It was supposed to be: CV players should better take a(nother) year off. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[-FF-] elblancogringo Players 1,207 posts 7,342 battles Report post #7253 Posted October 25, 2017 5 hours ago, JaiFoh said: ST, Defensive AA Fire efficiency Increased efficiency of Defensive AA Fire consumable for all American and Soviet/Russian destroyers, as well as the Huang He cruiser and the Lo Yang destroyer. Now it quadruples the aura strength (previously: x3). This change is designed to bring more variety to this consumable. Mark my words guys. This is the 1st step. Next one will be: decrease in AA efficiency for BBs, then nerf of RN BB HE module destruction and BB APs, then rework of CV, then buff of cruisers AA and we will have it yeah! A new balance and a decrease in BB population. #Ibelieve Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[HMSR] Major_Damage225 Beta Tester 2,875 posts 7,295 battles Report post #7254 Posted October 25, 2017 1 hour ago, elblancogringo said: Mark my words guys. This is the 1st step. Next one will be: decrease in AA efficiency for BBs, then nerf of RN BB HE module destruction and BB APs, then rework of CV, then buff of cruisers AA and we will have it yeah! A new balance and a decrease in BB population. #Ibelieve Bellive me, going by the track record, i'll bellive that when i see it, hope you'r right though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[UTW] ShinGetsu Weekend Tester, In AlfaTesters 8,985 posts 7,359 battles Report post #7255 Posted October 25, 2017 7 hours ago, Major_Damage225 said: Arkansas got a secondary buff, me like, Iwaki gotten hydro lool. seriously, well the alphas are going to be happy. Yeah I can say I was laughing my [edited]off when I saw this. My Iwaki is already a master-of-sealclubbing™ and they decided to buff it even more. xD As for the new CV nerf disguised as "more variety", I won't say anything or I'll just start insulting WG. I'm pretty sure now that some WG dev got one-shot by a CV and hate them since. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[HMSR] Major_Damage225 Beta Tester 2,875 posts 7,295 battles Report post #7256 Posted October 25, 2017 15 minutes ago, ShinGetsu said: Yeah I can say I was laughing my [edited]off when I saw this. My Iwaki is already a low tier team assist specialist™ and they decided to help it more. xD As for the new CV nerf disguised as "more variety", I won't say anything or I'll just start insulting WG. I'm pretty sure now that some WG dev got one-shot with CV and hate them. There fixed the typos for you. (never say it's op, only up ) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LastButterfly Beta Tester 5,519 posts 2,939 battles Report post #7257 Posted October 25, 2017 20 minutes ago, ShinGetsu said: As for the new CV nerf disguised as "more variety", I won't say anything or I'll just start insulting WG. I don't mind that, so I'll say stuff. It's trash, WG is disgusting, they can't even admit they wanna make CVs disappear and hide behind pretexts like "variety" which are obviously entirely made up, discriminating a part of their playerbase no matter how low is just despicable, they can't even take responsability for what they put in their game, and they'll keep quiet or deny every comment we may make about that matter until everyone stops talking about it so they'll get away with it again just like the god-knows-how-many times before, I've lost count. I pity those who like this game, genuinly, for they are in the hands of one hateful, abject,... contemptuous compagny. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[TORAZ] El2aZeR Beta Tester 15,786 posts 26,801 battles Report post #7258 Posted October 25, 2017 2 hours ago, ShinGetsu said: I'm pretty sure now that some WG dev got one-shot by a CV and hate them since. Sorry, my fault. I actually deleted a dev at the start of the match not too long ago. Even contemplated whether or not I should take advantage of him exposing himself fully by going for a cap without support. Spoiler I'M SO SORRY GUYS. T_T On a more serious note, really WG? "Variety"? DFAA is already a mandatory pick for those DDs that can use it in lieu of the speed boost. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LastButterfly Beta Tester 5,519 posts 2,939 battles Report post #7259 Posted October 25, 2017 Now that I think of it, maybe "variety" was meant as in "the amount and type of ships capable of annhilating aircrafts is now more diverse"... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PseudoMi Players 607 posts 7,274 battles Report post #7260 Posted October 25, 2017 Krasny Krym: main turret reload time is decreased from 9,2 to 8,1 seconds Finally this ship got some love !! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LilJumpa Beta Tester 4,603 posts 7,488 battles Report post #7261 Posted October 30, 2017 Quote [–]flamuchzFlamu Go to the World_of_Warships\res\ folder, open engine_config.xml with notepad or smth similar. Find the lines <cacheEffects>false</cacheEffects> (right at the top) and change it from false to true. A few steps below find <streamCacheSizeKB>2048</streamCacheSizeKB> and put in half your ram size in it. I have 16gb so I use 8192, default is 2048 afaik. Save, close, start your game and notice how all the weird [edited]micro-stuttering, especially when playing CV, has mostly disappeared. Quality coding comrade, da. Not so sure about this one, since 2048 KB is only 2 MB and Mr Flamu is upping that to 8MB Unless ofc the variable is named wrong/strange in the script itself. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[NECRO] Deckeru_Maiku Beta Tester 6,636 posts 24,864 battles Report post #7262 Posted October 30, 2017 9 hours ago, LilJumpa said: Not so sure about this one, since 2048 KB is only 2 MB and Mr Flamu is upping that to 8MB Unless ofc the variable is named wrong/strange in the script itself. Only proves that being a unicorn has nothing to do with computer hardware skillz Nonetheless should 8mb stream cache be quite good for most applications, as it is four times the number used by the standard config.xml. Assigning 8 GB would be rather close to overkill though, as I don't think that the in game effects memory needs are in the gigabyte department... 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darth_Glorious Beta Tester 2,464 posts Report post #7263 Posted November 2, 2017 Roma soonTM Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[BLITZ] WeGreedy Players 3,005 posts 14,972 battles Report post #7264 Posted November 2, 2017 On 30.10.2017 at 11:39 AM, LilJumpa said: Not so sure about this one, since 2048 KB is only 2 MB and Mr Flamu is upping that to 8MB Never had any sort of stuttering, but maybe that's because I've got more than 16 MiB of RAM. I gu€$$ f£amu n€€ds €v€n mor€ donation$. Quote Quality coding knowledge comrade, da. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[COMFY] ImperialAdmiral [COMFY] Players 1,649 posts 9,828 battles Report post #7265 Posted November 2, 2017 1 hour ago, Darth_Glorious said: Roma soonTM Week old news But still Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[UNICS] Nechrom Beta Tester 4,870 posts 10,112 battles Report post #7266 Posted November 2, 2017 42 minutes ago, ImperialAdmiral said: Week old news But still It's literally from earlier today. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[COMFY] ImperialAdmiral [COMFY] Players 1,649 posts 9,828 battles Report post #7267 Posted November 2, 2017 7 minutes ago, Nechrom said: It's literally from earlier today. Posted October 25th in the Roma thread. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[UNICS] Nechrom Beta Tester 4,870 posts 10,112 battles Report post #7268 Posted November 2, 2017 4 minutes ago, ImperialAdmiral said: Posted October 25th in the Roma thread. First time with a source then. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[COMFY] ImperialAdmiral [COMFY] Players 1,649 posts 9,828 battles Report post #7269 Posted November 2, 2017 2 minutes ago, Nechrom said: First time with a source then. Yup :3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vanhal Alpha Tester 5,609 posts 5,569 battles Report post #7270 Posted November 2, 2017 I'm kinda disapointed by French T3 not being Courbet. That means Bretagne on T5 and that means Either Lyon or Strasbourg is off. With Dunkerque here i can't imagine they won't make Strasbourg, so the ship that won't be there is most probably Lyon. And i wanted Lyon very much. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[DREAD] 1MajorKoenig Players 13,110 posts 7,885 battles Report post #7271 Posted November 2, 2017 14 minutes ago, Vanhal said: I'm kinda disapointed by French T3 not being Courbet. That means Bretagne on T5 and that means Either Lyon or Strasbourg is off. With Dunkerque here i can't imagine they won't make Strasbourg, so the ship that won't be there is most probably Lyon. And i wanted Lyon very much. Hmmm Bretagne is more of a T4 to be honest. With Normandie or Lyon at T5 and Strasbourg T6? Where did you find the info that Courbet isn't T3? She would be the logical candidate? And certainly not OP... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vanhal Alpha Tester 5,609 posts 5,569 battles Report post #7272 Posted November 2, 2017 1 hour ago, 1MajorKoenig said: Hmmm Bretagne is more of a T4 to be honest. With Normandie or Lyon at T5 and Strasbourg T6? Where did you find the info that Courbet isn't T3? She would be the logical candidate? And certainly not OP... Ofc i would agree with Bretagne on T4, like most of us on this forum already did in several threads. Which would make Courbet T3, already revealed Normandie at T5. T6 and T7 would be Lyon and Strasbourg. But look here: https://thearmoredpatrol.com/2017/11/02/wows-upcoming-ships-sneak-peek/ Especially this pic: It's a French tier 3 BB, probably named Turenne. Looking very similar to the Danton class, but since it's not Danton i would bet it have 12 x 305 guns like the Kawachi. Bretagne, Normandie and Richelieu were already revealed. Assuming they all will be in the tree, not premium, and they won't dump two unrevealed historical ships that is Courbet and Strasbourg, now we will probably have something like this: T3 - Turenne T4 - Courbet T5 - Bretagne T6 - Normandie T7 - (?) i bet Strasbourg since Dunkerque is already here as premium T8 - Richelieu And i still want Lyon. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[SCRUB] Leo_Apollo11 Quality Poster 7,146 posts 31,536 battles Report post #7273 Posted November 2, 2017 Hi all, 6 minutes ago, LilJumpa said: indirectly confirmed by conway that it is official: You literally overtook me by few seconds... Leo "Apollo11" 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LilJumpa Beta Tester 4,603 posts 7,488 battles Report post #7274 Posted November 2, 2017 I'm a Ninja ;) But you got the pics in before me ^^ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[COMFY] ImperialAdmiral [COMFY] Players 1,649 posts 9,828 battles Report post #7275 Posted November 2, 2017 What is USS Seattle? Anyone knows? I found info only about some armoured cruiser and support ship. Improved Fargo or Worcester prototype? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
