Jump to content
MrConway

Other Changes

28 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Tester
23 posts
1,809 battles

 

Hi

 

 

I've already seen a few times while playing that they at the time that a player like last about is that the coordinates via the in game chat.  is that an option to turn it off

 

 

I already noticed a number of times

 

 

Mvgr Joeri / Majordragola

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SFFR]
Beta Tester
4 posts
5,787 battles

I will say ;  Torpedo bomber is 50-70% OP and unless WG brakes that people will play less and even go out of the games with Aircraft carrier in pure protest! Looks more and more like not accepted when  2-3 torpedo bomber squadrons easily attack and knock out a battleship and it's 150% cuts every time! so greatly exaggerated, and many ships AA does no good.

 

This is totally unbalanced and not play on equal terms.

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,039 posts
7,436 battles

I will say ;  Torpedo bomber is 50-70% OP and unless WG brakes that people will play less and even go out of the games with Aircraft carrier in pure protest! Looks more and more like not accepted when  2-3 torpedo bomber squadrons easily attack and knock out a battleship and it's 150% cuts every time! so greatly exaggerated, and many ships AA does no good.

 

This is totally unbalanced and not play on equal terms.

 

 

 

This can happen only on Tier 4 and 5, therefore they have announced that they will take away the manual drop from T4 and T5 carriers to stop sealclubbing.
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,071 posts
8,209 battles

I hope the Shipnames on the minimap will be made editable via config file, because some names are really weird and confusing. Some examples:

MNKZ = Minekaze

FRGT = Farragut

FRTK = Furutaka

KBRG = Königsberg

EG = Gaede (EG stands for Ernst Gaede but ingame, on the map, in tech tree, everywhere is the ship named Gaede)

and so on ... those display names are horrible!

 

Better use the full name or when it's a long name use at least the first part of the ship name. Example:

MINE = Minekaze

FARRA = Farragut

FURU = Furutaka

and so on.

The ship names on the minimap are meant to be helpful, it's important to recognize the name with the blink of an eye and not after doing some 2 minute encryption what FRGT or FRTK could possibly stand for.

Edited by ThePurpleSmurf
  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Weekend Tester
430 posts

I hope the Shipnames on the minimap will be made editable via config file, because some names are really weird and confusing. Some examples:

MNKZ = Minekaze

FRGT = Farragut

FRTK = Furutaka

KBRG = Königsberg

EG = Gaede (EG stands for Ernst Gaede but ingame, on the map, in tech tree, everywhere is the ship named Gaede)

and so on ... those display names are horrible!

 

Better use the full name or when it's a long name use at least the first part of the ship name. Example:

MINE = Minekaze

FARRA = Farragut

FURU = Furutaka

and so on.

The ship names on the minimap are meant to be helpful, it's important to recognize the name with the blink of an eye and not after doing some 2 minute encryption what FRGT or FRTK could possibly stand for.

 

Just opened the thread to write this. The moment I saw "FRTK" I disabled the ship names. They are THAT bad imho.
Edited by Live85

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
52 posts
19,086 battles
The names of the ships, after the ship has disappeared, remains in red. This causes confusion in the mini-map; it is more logical that the name becomes light gray, as the signal (icon) of the ship that is no longer visible.

I hope I was clear. :)
  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,039 posts
7,436 battles

The names of the ships, after the ship has disappeared, remains in red. This causes confusion in the mini-map; it is more logical that the name becomes light gray, as the signal (icon) of the ship that is no longer visible.

I hope I was clear. :)

 

I like this idea, would be a small but nice change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[VC]
Weekend Tester
114 posts
10,468 battles

I really appreciate, that you are implementing the ship names on minimap!

But: I don't like the capital letter ship 'names' and the missing option to select text size.

I'm using the minimap ship name mod at the moment and I never had problems with fully written ship names (8pt font size) regarding clutter on the minimap or readability.

Please make it an option to use abbreviations or full ship names on the minimap (and NOT in capital letters only please!!) or like said before, introduce some simply moddable (say .txt) 'translation file' and let players customize it.

 

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,772 posts
12,699 battles

I really appreciate, that you are implementing the ship names on minimap!

But: I don't like the capital letter ship 'names' and the missing option to select text size.

I'm using the minimap ship name mod at the moment and I never had problems with fully written ship names (8pt font size) regarding clutter on the minimap or readability.

Please make it an option to use abbreviations or full ship names on the minimap (and NOT in capital letters only please!!) or like said before, introduce some simply moddable (say .txt) 'translation file' and let players customize it.

 

 

 

Superb idea!  :honoring:

* APPLAUSE *

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
42 posts
9,973 battles

 

Sorry I have a very lite Question!

 

Into the Window before starting testgame - i read only that this is Testing version 06.1.1 and 06.2. is comin soon. Have I the wrong version? Update is automaticly installing as setting - so where can i have a look the Version of Testing game is the write one? please inform me soon. THX a LOT! 

Screenshot (1).png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OFFS]
Players
125 posts
21,162 battles

I will say ;  Torpedo bomber is 50-70% OP and unless WG brakes that people will play less and even go out of the games with Aircraft carrier in pure protest! Looks more and more like not accepted when  2-3 torpedo bomber squadrons easily attack and knock out a battleship and it's 150% cuts every time! so greatly exaggerated, and many ships AA does no good.

 

This is totally unbalanced and not play on equal terms.

 

 

what tier do you play ?

IMO the reverse is true and lately one can play with carriers maybe one in ten games in the high tiers as no plane can go past the ferocious AA defense put on even by DD not to mention CA.

play a Fletcher with defensive fire ( and there are more like that) and speak of TB =OP later

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[VC]
Weekend Tester
114 posts
10,468 battles

Thanks for listening and dropping the minimap ship name abbreviations in the second test run! Full ship names are so much better to read.

(I still don't like them written in capital letters)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PNAVY]
Beta Tester
173 posts
12,819 battles

About Funnel Smoke

(funnel: a smokestack,esp. of a steamship.)

 

 would it be possble to inplenment funnel smoke contrast precentage/slider in the game settings?

or is it intentinal that the funnel smoke is hard to see, and sometimes invisable dou to bing the same Color as the background.

 

Is it intentinaly that the funnel smoke only renders when the ship is in your FOV,

making that it needs a second or 2 before you can estimate its speed?

 

ps, if in wrong section plz move (i think it is but i posted it allready, cant remove)

Edited by TomBombardil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PNAVY]
Beta Tester
173 posts
12,819 battles

About fighter barrages

 

I never see my, my opponents fighter barrages, i have to quess it from there movment and speed.

I tought this was the norm untill i saw bullit trails on higher grapics settings. Or is it intentaly that you need a better pc to remove this handicap.

 

What are the visual indicator that an enemy fighter sqadron is in a barrage on low graphic settings?

And if they are non, is this not worth inplementing? and testing what a subtle indicator can be?

 

Change color? change minimap mark?

 

ps, if in wrong section plz move (i think it is but i posted it allready, cant remove)

Edited by TomBombardil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SFFR]
Beta Tester
4 posts
5,787 battles

 

This can happen only on Tier 4 and 5, therefore they have announced that they will take away the manual drop from T4 and T5 carriers to stop sealclubbing.

 

No it is in higher tier and it is a big problem. Tier 8-10 it is the most OP Torpedo bombers.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PNAVY]
Players
6 posts
7,441 battles

Hi,

I just read the ¨PT 6.3 post and *** you are basically telling us that we won't be able to stealth fire with : ZAO ? CHAPAYEV ? US DDs ? AKIZUKI ?.......

I don't get it, What makes this game "unique" "fun"... will no longer be here on 6.3?

"We have carefully studied your feedback...causes more pain than profit." In my opinion what causes more pain than profit is to get killed one-shot, by a BB at 17KM. 

To me this change is ridiculous, to stealth fire you have to: - Be at the limit of your concealment after firing a main battery shell

                                                                                             - Make sure there are no enemies (DDs) within you and the target

                                                                                             - Make sure there are no RADAR CAs

                                                                                             - Make sure there are no planes nearby

Today stealth firing is not as easy as you can think and you can counter it by going at the oposite direction or try to use your mates to spot them (teamplay)...

You are simply removing an indispensable, essential part of the gameplay, and don't forget this changes will make smoke camping meta and long range shooting a.k.a BASE camping & shooting even more popular. Best exemple is "Tears of the desert in Epicenter.

 

If you really want to remove stealth fire, re-visit ALL YOUR HIGH TIER MAPS  why because they are all opened (OCEAN, Tears of the desert, Mountain Range..............)

Like they said: "We have carefully studied your feedback..." So ya, this is my opinion, my feedback and please reconsider your decision WG.

Thanks.

Edited by faw_41
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SQRL]
Players
95 posts
10,717 battles

Bit pointless playing anything but top tier Russian DDs. To nerf stealth fire without buffing the gun arcs of USN DDs - I suspect my gearing & fletcher will be getting rusty, once 0.6.3 is out.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ST-EU]
Supertester
2 posts
9,569 battles

if stealth  fier is removed from game itl be the end for enny skiled DD  and cruiser capten,  i dont se a point in making this change other then making the game skill free,  so if that is the case well make it turn based as well so we dont have to move u now aiming is a skill remove that as well.   im sorry that im coming out a bit grumpy and salty but latly ther have bean a bit to menny changes to make the game less skill and more skillfree 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
364 posts
9,567 battles

Bit pointless playing anything but top tier Russian DDs. To nerf stealth fire without buffing the gun arcs of USN DDs - I suspect my gearing & fletcher will be getting rusty, once 0.6.3 is out.

 

 

Absolutely agree with that, there are some ships Namely Zao that would need a little nerf in the Stealth fire Department but apart from her, really this is a bad nerf for American Destroyers namely unless you fix up their shell arcs substantially.

I concur that the window for Stealth fire should be a narrow one, but i also allready used to not having it thanks do i think that it should be taken away still? No, because it will badly encourage the Stealthbombers with bad arcs to start hard camping the game even more, it will slow the pace even futher down and it will encourage more Torpedoheavy Ships hooray comeback for more torp spammers.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-TWA-]
Players
8 posts
6,220 battles

Hey WG Staff. The link in the public Test 0.6.3 redirects to these obsolete part of the forum. Either the 0.6.3 section hasn't been created or it has and is not visible for us commoners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[FDUSH]
Players
1,122 posts
6,600 battles

0.6.3 PT:


Removal of manual attacks of carriers tier 4 and 5. I will make it short: its a big NO!!

There has been lots of reasons of why already discussed in the forum. But I want to remind that idea is plain stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,071 posts
8,209 battles

 In Update 0.6.3, we're fixing the key mapping and assignment system, meaning you'll be able to customize the control presets to best match your own preferences 

 

I use since forever the space bar, instead of the left shift key, to zoom in. On PTS the spacebar is the ONLY key i can not assign and only get the message 'hotkey reserved'. The space bar is assigned to another function and even if i clear this assignment i can not reassign the space bar to artillery cam. I strongly hope this will be fixed before it goes live!

 

shot_17_03_21_17_55_16_0472.jpg

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×