Discussion thread for "some interesting info around the world"

[HystericalAccuracy]

13 hours ago, Toivia said:

WG was able to code Roma, Giulio Cesare, Duca d'Aosta and Duca degli Abruzzi while supposedly not having access to Italian archives yet they are not able to complete a single tech line.

Giulio and D´Aosta were no problems since these ships were transferred to the Soviet Union, including their plans. So WG got the plans from Russian archives.

 

Regarding Roma and Abruzzi i am not sure... Maybe WG created Abruzzi with an eye on Aosta´s plans since they were half-sisters.

 

Also the fact that Italy "fell apart" mid-war and lost its construction-bureau to plan new mega-ships (which would fit TX in Wows) leaves some blank spots for high-tier material. (Just guessing here)

[howardxu_23]

From some info I found somewhere, they are realeasing french DD line, the yuudachi and some other preimiums.

 

As of now, french DDs have a improved speedboost alongside a aready high top speed, higher tiered once are masssive compared to other ships and are loaded with torps to the brim, with some having Clemson style port and starboard torps. All of them have no smoke whatsoever though.

 

yuudachi will be identical to shiratyu apart from having ashsio deep water torps, so only hit BBs and CVs. Not really sure I want that, they could have given her PA DD torps or something else instead, or even a ablility to swap torp type in the middle of the battle.

 

The T10 RU BB is basically the test Kremlin with 406mm guns, a move I find questionable, but it does have Russian bias dispersion all the way though it’s range instead of up to mid range.

 

 Yoshino is basically Azuma with better AA and torps, armor is still unknown. Speaking of IJN cruisers, both azuma and yoshino does not get lolDD dispersion that other IJN crusiers use, azuma uses slightly worse then standard crusier dispersion, yoshino uses a more Stalingrad style one. I think it will be better if both has access to IJN cruiser DD dispersion, since they are from IJN so armor is most likely to be on the meh side.

2 hours ago, howardxu_23 said:

T10 Russian preimium BB

According to stats, it will have 3x3 406mm guns, but everything else about it will be exactly the same as the kerml/t10 tech tree RU BB.(slower then usual reload, armor layout, fast turning turrets, speed)

 

it will however feature Russian dispersion most of the way though it’s ranges instead of just up to mid range.

 

55 minutes ago, FooFaFie said:

Tier VIII premium French cruiser Bayard

 

 

 

Tier V premium French destroyer Siroco

 

 

Tier VIII Japanese destroyer Yuudachi

 

Tier X Japanese cruiser Yoshino

 

Tier IX premium US destroyer Benham

 

 

The French destroyers

Tier II: Enseigne Gabolde

 

Tier III: Fusilier

 

Tier IV: Bourrasque

Tier V: Jaguar

Tier VI: Guepard

Tier VII: Vauquelin

Tier VIII: Le Fantasque

Tier IX: Mogador

 

Tier X: Kléber

 

 

 

 

[ImperialAdmiral]

5 hours ago, fallenkezef said:

 

It was the same for the Brits, we had to wait and watch line after line until the 2nd most significant navy of WW2 turned up.

 

At least Royal Navy have a full tech tree right now.

Full.

[NothingButTheRain]

On 3/23/2019 at 5:49 PM, fumtu said:

T9 US Pemium DD Benham will probably start testing with 4x4 9.2km range torps, I guess same as Benson

I was wondering directly after that announcement, perhaps someone at some moment mixed up DD-397 Benham with DD-796 Benham?

DD-796 is a Fletcher and would fit much better in tier 9. Right? I mean, a Fletcher at tier 9? Not exactly a new idea 

 

But DD-397 is a Benham class DD which was actually succeeded by the Sims (now in the game as a tier 7) and then by the Bensons (also a tier 7 tier 8 of course ) and then Gleaves and only after that class came the Fletchers.

 

I feel like they have mixed something up internally or something.

[NothingButTheRain]

On 3/24/2019 at 12:11 PM, FishDogFoodShack said:

Horseshit. We know for a fact that the UK was actually quite open with their archives, it just didn't line up with what WG wanted. They chose to not go through with what they got from the archives so that they could theorycraft some HE bbs instead.

 

Besides, they've has proven that they have absolutely no qualms about just making crap up (RU bbs), regardless of how [edited]ridiculous it is (Lyon). Considering how joyless these French dds seem to be, it seems to me that it was just easier for them. Why put effort into a line of Italian Heavy cruisers when you can copy/paste the french gimmick into the line they don't have yet? regardless of the fact that that gimmick is self-destructively worthless for that class of ships?

 

It is laziness, plain and simple.

Lazyness? And btw, do you have any idea how fugly some of those British designs are? They make even Izumo look like a real port queen! 

Spoiler

And there's nothing wrong with the British BBs. I even saw @wilkatis_LV state that the RN BBs were horrible to play against or something along those lines. So I asked him what made them so terrible to play against but I think he never responded?

 

I don't see any problem with the RN BBs, they are actually adding something unique to the game and I think they should stay this way.

[El2aZeR]

There's currently a reddit Q&A with S_O running.

https://www.reddit.com/r/WorldOfWarships/comments/b58p3y/wows_live_qa_21/

 

Some of the answers are already topkek.

E.g. plans with 1 CV per team at high tiers have been scrapped. 2 CVs per team is now the new hard limit with no change in the foreseeable future.

[fumtu]

1 minute ago, NothingButTheRain said:

I was wondering directly after that announcement, perhaps someone at some moment mixed up DD-397 Benham with DD-796 Benham?

DD-796 is a Fletcher and would fit much better in tier 9. Right? I mean, a Fletcher at tier 9? Not exactly a new idea 

 

But DD-397 is a Benham class DD which was actually succeeded by the Sims (now in the game as a tier 7) and then by the Bensons (also a tier 7) and then Gleaves and only after that class came the Fletchers.

 

I feel like they have mixed something up internally or something.

 

Benson is T8 not T7. Mahan is T7. Main Difference between Sims and Benham is in torpedo battery. While Sims had 2x4 torpedo launchers, Benham class has 4x4 torpedo launchers, two launchers per side, very similar to Clemson class. We already have two other Benson/Gleaves classes in the game, Loyang and Hsienyang, both with 4 guns only. Benham had same number of guns, worse AA, but 60% more torpedoes. I think, with Beson torps, that she would better fit at T8, but I guess WG just want another high tier coal/steel/FXP destroyer.

[Redcap375]

1 minute ago, El2aZeR said:

There's currently a reddit Q&A with S_O running.

Some of the answers are already topkek.

 

E.g. plans with 1 CV per team at high tiers have been scrapped. 2 CVs per team is now the new hard limit with no change in the foreseeable future.

 

Well, there you have it 

[NothingButTheRain]

3 minutes ago, fumtu said:

 

Benson is T8 not T7. Mahan is T7.

Doh I potatoed! 

 

Gonna rectify this mistake, how embaressing 

[FishDogFoodShack]

4 minutes ago, Redcap375 said:

 

Well, there you have it 

 

[Mr_Tayto]

11 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

There's currently a reddit Q&A with S_O running.

https://www.reddit.com/r/WorldOfWarships/comments/b58p3y/wows_live_qa_21/

 

Some of the answers are already topkek.

E.g. plans with 1 CV per team at high tiers have been scrapped. 2 CVs per team is now the new hard limit with no change in the foreseeable future.

Terrible news.

[NothingButTheRain]

15 hours ago, Toivia said:

What I still fail to understand is how WG was able to code Roma, Giulio Cesare, Duca d'Aosta and Duca degli Abruzzi while supposedly not having access to Italian archives yet they are not able to complete a single tech line.

I mean, either they need actual precise information to actually create a ship or they can do without the archives. Did they create the four ships just based on generally known info yet unwilling to do other ships? Or do they actually have all the info they need and simply don't feel like releasing italian lines?

Why not ask Wargaming about this?

[Aragathor]

30 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

There's currently a reddit Q&A with S_O running.

https://www.reddit.com/r/WorldOfWarships/comments/b58p3y/wows_live_qa_21/

 

Some of the answers are already topkek.

E.g. plans with 1 CV per team at high tiers have been scrapped. 2 CVs per team is now the new hard limit with no change in the foreseeable future.

It is clear from the answers that they are not playing their own game and they will never listen to feedback. They have been told time and time again, supported by proof, that Blyska is in a bad place. Their constant answer "sHe'S fInE".

[MrFingers]

4 minutes ago, Aragathor said:

Their constant answer "sHe'S fInE".

She's performing alright, and the numbers reflect that. It's just not fun to play, that's why it's now being sidetracked. One should be careful to buff it (since buffs can't be reverted) just to revamp the attraction to it. She will be touched when the Pan-EU tree is there.

[Aragathor]

2 minutes ago, MrFingers said:

She's performing alright, and the numbers reflect that.

Which numbers? Those on maplesyrup say a different story. Last week she had the worst winrate, worst avg. XP, 4th lowest damage, 3rd lowest k/d ratio, all compared to T7 DDs.

The pan-european tree isn't even on the horizon, so it means that the ship will remain garbage for the time being.

[Culiacan_Mexico]

58 minutes ago, Aragathor said:

Which numbers? Those on maplesyrup say a different story. Last week she had the worst winrate, worst avg. XP, 4th lowest damage, 3rd lowest k/d ratio, all compared to T7 DDs.

The pan-european tree isn't even on the horizon, so it means that the ship will remain garbage for the time being.

Sub_Octavian
"Our methods have seriously improved since game release. We have much better tools at the moment. For example, while we still pay attention to avg. stats everyone usually discusses (WR, damage, etc) and popularity, we use MUCH more relative data nowadays, and it really helps."

[fallenkezef]

2 hours ago, ImperialAdmiral said:

 

At least Royal Navy have a full tech tree right now.

Full.

And Italy will.. eventualy.

 

We Brit fans had to watch German, French and Russian lines be added before we got our full lines.

[Aragathor]

16 minutes ago, Culiacan_Mexico said:

Sub_Octavian
"Our methods have seriously improved since game release. We have much better tools at the moment. For example, while we still pay attention to avg. stats everyone usually discusses (WR, damage, etc) and popularity, we use MUCH more relative data nowadays, and it really helps."

Saw that post of his. And I'm wondering, if their tools are so great and better detailed, then why are they so bad at balancing? With data beyond our ability to see, they should be able to pinpoint issues and correct them, without resorting to heavy handed nerfs. And yet here we are, with YueYang being the least played T10 DD after Daring and having the second worst WR after Z-52. Something doesn't add up.

[El2aZeR]

Quick summary of everything of importance I've seen so far:

- CV rework "went more or less as planned" (LOL)

- CV spotting is fine beyond initial spotting speed

- CV overall balance is largely fine. Individual CV, CV-DD interaction, AA sector mechanic and auto pilot changes are still planned

- premium CVs will be on sale in the near future

- 2 CVs per team is new hard limit, 3 CVs per team will likely be removed

- new CV AI is still wip

- UI improvements take a lot of time due to various factors

- CA vs CL changes are still planned, took a backseat to rework etc.

- no accuracy buff for German BBs (who the  even asked for that?!)

- HIV competitive dominance has been noticed, will be addressed but no big nerfs

- no comment on subs

- no comment on AL collab phase 2

- MM tiering issues are being worked on

- updates to old models is low priority due to more pressing issues

[DFens_666]

3 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

Quick summary of everything I've seen so far:

- CV rework "went more or less as planned" (LOL)

- CV spotting is fine beyond initial spotting speed

[...]

 

 

[Toivia]

2 hours ago, NothingButTheRain said:

Why not ask Wargaming about this?

If you have a way to do that, feel free. I've only been getting "no info on future lines".

[El2aZeR]

Oh, and

- Stalingrad is a well balanced ship

[DFens_666]

2 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

Oh, and

- Stalingrad is a well balanced ship

 

 Compared to Bourgogne i would agree

[fumtu]

6 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

- 2 CVs per team is new hard limit, 3 CVs per team will likely be removed

 

I think that he said that T4 MM could still get 3 CVs per team. Kind of

 

Quote

Removing three (at all tiers except for 4 at least) is quite possible.

 

[Aragathor]

7 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

- HIV competitive dominance has been noticed, will be addressed but no big nerfs

According to Sub they are looking at the Legendary Module and not the ship, because "we feel it contributes to her status a lot". As someone who has played CBs up to Typhoon I must say I haven't seen any HIV's with the LM, so I don't get where they are getting this. Am I missing something? Did the KOTS teams use only LM HIVs?

 

You also forgot to mention the hard no to implementing a tutorial.