Q/A with developer

[loppantorkel]

Found out from people referring to it. Not to promote Flamu, but why not give a rare Q/A some exposure?

 

[RUSSIANBlAS]

Is there a transcript of the propaganda anywhere?

 

I don't really want to give up all that time to listen to the lols...

[Humorpalanta]

Is there a transcript of the propaganda anywhere?

 

I don't really want to give up all that time to listen to the lols...

Look in the comments and laugh.

[tsachev]

Yep, comments are epic - the society of "I can play Blyska and IJN destroyers only from stealth" in its finest.

 

After 300 games with Gremy, I am happy to have this mechanics gone. It was difficult for me to learn how to play without stealth fire on Soviet destroyers. I remember that Khaba had stealth fire on the first test and it was ridiculous. Now I am not using stealth fire even for Zao.

 

So, take this challenge guys and show you can play Blyska without stealth fire. Perhaps with torpedoes, or smoke, or using this WASD keys. 

 

[loppantorkel]

Is there a transcript of the propaganda anywhere?

 

I don't really want to give up all that time to listen to the lols...

I liked it. It was reasonable, good questions and answers. Very good format and I hope it's done again in a few months or so.

[MaxxyNL]

or using this WASD keys. 

 

[cro_pwr]

Is there a transcript of the propaganda anywhere?

 

I don't really want to give up all that time to listen to the lols...

 

tl;dr:

"Erm, uhm, hm, yea. We will look into statistics too see if anything needs to be changed."

"Erm, hm, didn't know there is a problem with that, but we will look into it."

"Hm, I played that and it seemed fine, I have no idea why wouldn't it be."

"Yea, you might say its a weak ship but stats say that its a good ship"

"We will continue to do what ever the f**k we want without listening to player base"

 

Honestly, this whole interview sounds a lot like a political speech, where someone talks a lot but says nothing in the end. Bunch of question dodging, and giving political answers without of actually adressing the problem.

[robihr]

flamu: "shima is underperforming. is there any plan of it getting buffs in future?"

octavian: "shima is actually second best dd. we dont look at average score, cause more potatoes play one ship, worse average is for that ship so we took top 5%, worst 5% and median and compared it. "

 

 

[ghostbuster_]

 

tl;dr:

"Erm, uhm, hm, yea. We will look into statistics too see if anything needs to be changed."

"Erm, hm, didn't know there is a problem with that, but we will look into it."

"Hm, I played that and it seemed fine, I have no idea why wouldn't it be."

"Yea, you might say its a weak ship but stats say that its a good ship"

"We will continue to do what ever the f**k we want without listening to player base"

 

Honestly, this whole interview sounds a lot like a political speech, where someone talks a lot but says nothing in the end. Bunch of question dodging, and giving political answers without of actually adressing the problem.

 

what did you expect? of course he was gonna tell those kind of things. 

[EdiJo]

 

tl;dr:

"Erm, uhm, hm, yea. We will look into statistics too see if anything needs to be changed."

"Erm, hm, didn't know there is a problem with that, but we will look into it."

"Hm, I played that and it seemed fine, I have no idea why wouldn't it be."

"Yea, you might say its a weak ship but stats say that its a good ship"

"We will continue to do what ever the f**k we want without listening to player base"

 

Honestly, this whole interview sounds a lot like a political speech, where someone talks a lot but says nothing in the end. Bunch of question dodging, and giving political answers without of actually adressing the problem.

 

And WG doesn't allow us to access those statistics, so we have to take their word for it. Also, some problems don't directly show in stats - recent Flamu RPF video is obvious example. If they compare only 5% best players (who know how to use the skill) and 5% worst (who are potatos anyway), plus median (which doesn't change much because median is resistant to outliers) this will point at "RPF having no effect", while in fact good players will just mop the floor with average Joe using this "feature".

 

We could prove it, but we have no data. Too confidential stuff. 

[Admiral_H_Nelson]

This is what happens when there is a monopoly. There is no direct competitor to WoWS at the moment, so they don't have to try to hard.

I guess the Russians are used to this situation, since there are still state monopolies even after the fall of communism.

[Krikkio82]

I liked it. It was reasonable, good questions and answers. Very good format and I hope it's done again in a few months or so.

 

Question were right ones but a big NO to the answers. It was like Q&A with a politic man in Italy (I'm italian) were they never really answer the question.

 

I like Flamu but IMO he was a little "light" with the dev. Quite sure he was pretty upset but had to stay professional during interview...

[cro_pwr]

 

what did you expect? of course he was gonna tell those kind of things. 

 

What did I expect? Nothing really.

Well, to be honest, expected at least few normal answers for the most troubling things present at the moment.

But, well, the amount of BS I've heard pissed me off a bit even with a really low expectations.

[Krikkio82]

What made me worry the most was not only

 

- lack of knolenge on common and old issues

- no real answers to the questions

- "I will check but don't think so" 100 times answer

 

What made me worry was the huge distance beetween my point of view (that is usually similar to this community) and his (WG), blind in front of huge problems and sledgehammer against others wen telling they like small gameplay changes....WTF..

I don't know may at the end WG will be right and we all are not able to see the grand scheme but i'm skeptical.

[loppantorkel]

All the negativity made me listen to the interview again. I think he's a bit off about the strength of the Shima, but otherwise he offered good insights and some their thoughts on various issues. Maybe people here are just a bit too demanding.. ..or entitled?

[cro_pwr]

All the negativity made me listen to the interview again. I think he's a bit off about the strength of the Shima, but otherwise he offered good insights and some their thoughts on various issues. Maybe people here are just a bit too demanding.. ..or entitled?

 

Or maybe "We will look into it by checking our sikret stats." is not what people usually consider "Good insight".

[RenamedUser_92906789]

At 25:40 he is talking about some "preliminary" buffs for Blyska to be implemented in 0.6.3. I searched the patch notes, but Blyska is not even mentioned. Am I missing something?

[RUSSIANBlAS]

At 25:40 he is talking about some "preliminary" buffs for Blyska to be implemented in 0.6.3. I searched the patch notes, but Blyska is not even mentioned. Am I missing something?

 

It could use a rof buff. I've been playing it a bit recently and it's been power crept by the Russians. 6.5s guns are almost cruiser like in reload.

[cro_pwr]

At 25:40 he is talking about some "preliminary" buffs for Blyska to be implemented in 0.6.3. I searched the patch notes, but Blyska is not even mentioned. Am I missing something?

 

IIRC he said that Blyska is a strong ship even without stealth fire, so they don't want to buff her before they see how well she will do in the new patch. Because if they do any preliminary buffs, she could get OP and they can't just nerf her so easily afterwards.

But I might be mistaken.

[RenamedUser_92906789]

 

IIRC he said that Blyska is a strong ship even without stealth fire, so they don't want to buff her before they see how well she will do in the new patch. Because if they do any preliminary buffs, she could get OP and they can't just nerf her so easily afterwards.

But I might be mistaken.

 

If you listen to 25:40 he explicitly states that Blyska and Akizuki will receive some "preliminary" buffs in 0.6.3, since they both heavily depend on stealth firing.

About the part that you are mentioning ... he talks about that later on, but he does not say what ships are in that basket.

 

Lets me make myself clear ... I am OK about stealth fireing gone .. but Blyska and Akizuki were both dependent on that. Without it ... they lost significant edge. And since Blyska was sold as a "stealth fireing god" (I am almost sure WG advertised its capability to shoot from concealment, when I was buying it) it should receive some compensation (at least slightly higher ROF).

 

[Procrastes]

So, take this challenge guys and show you can play Blyska without stealth fire. Perhaps with torpedoes, or smoke, or using this WASD keys.

 

 

I do believe I can play the Blyskawica, or indeed any other destroyer, without stealth fire.

It's not this single game mechanic change as such, that worries me, but the possibility of an ongoing trend where small, lightly armoured scout vehicles are continuously nerfed over time up to the point where their very gameplay has been downgraded to the edge of unplayability.

 

I'm not saying that I believe this is going to happen in WoWs. What I'm saying is, I hope it won't.

[MrConway]

This is the (more or less accurate) transcription of the Q&A!

 

UI

• Clan Tag: Visibility of names in battle, name tags are cut off.
  • No immediate plans to fix – UI gets improved in „packages“, but we hear the feedback.

 

• Any chance of reworking the in-game radio communications to include more radio messages – i.e. warnings for torpedoes?
  • Its challenging to design a system that players really use and is helpful. We might be introducing something in summer and are still collecting feedback.

 

• Blacklisted players can still spam you with division invites, muted and ignored players can still spam ingame commands (a common troll tactic). What about the ability to appear offline?
  • We will look into it.

 

• The port UI in its current state is a really bad experience. It feels laggy, every action takes seconds to load, many actions in a row can even freeze the client, requiring a restart.
  • We are already working on optimizing the port experience and performance increases are our highest priority here.

 

Competitive, clan

• n the future, will it be possible to choose where you spawn in training rooms?
  • Training rooms are not enabled by default because they do still have issues and are not at the quality level we want. We are working on it and might consider choosing spawns – no promises.

 

• Talking about training rooms, when are they going to become an actual part of the client?
  • We are not ready to talk about a date yet.\

 

• When will we see an expansion of the clan system in terms of slots for players?
  • The option to expand a clan is connected to next step in clan development
  • Four steps are planned:
    • Social functionality (what we have now)
    • Casual clan gameplay (without much competition)
    • Competitive combat
    • Clan metagaming

 

 

• When will we see clan battles?
  • We will be implementing this sometime in the future. But we want clans to be for all kinds of players, not just the competitive hard-core, which is why we are working on social features first.

 

• What is our opinion about season 6 considering that many players are complaining about the heavy importance of premium ships?
  • It was a controversial season, Sub_Octavian thinks there was not enough brawling and players were too careful. Preliminary stats however say that it was the most popular season so far, but we are still analysing.

 

 

Balance

• Any plans to modify the special modules that can only be obtained through ranked or supercontainers? Most players see these consumable as worthless with a few exceptions.
  • We are still looking into this and need more feedback and analysis.

 

• Many people see the entire removal of stealth fire as one massive BB buff. Is it?
  • Our goal is not to buff battleships, we do however want to remove game mechanics like open water stealth firing that have no counter and are not fun to play against. Most open water stealth play is also not very efficient due to inaccuracy and promotes passive play.
  • Three groups of players are unhappy:
    • People who are stealth firing are upset because they need to learn how to get closer
    • People who don’t do it often are still affected due to the gun bloom
    • Some people are upset about specific ships now being nerfed. We will look into these and buff them if necessary, but are still looking at feedback.
  • Will ships that used stealth firing get buffed to compensate?
    • Blyskawica - pretty good even without stealthfire.
    • Zao – is currently too powerful anyway.
    • Akizuki – her range will be increased to compensate.
    • Right now researching PTS feedback

 

• With the removal of open seas stealth fire, what will you do to encourage DD players to make use of their guns?
  • We’re still looking into it.

 

• When undetected firing is limited to firing from behind cover or inside smoke, the German destroyers are at a distinct disadvantage because of their inexplicably short smoke duration. They also cannot reliably fire from range like Russian DDs as they are too easy to land shells on. Any plans on changing that?
  • As we knew we would be removing stealth fire, we specifically did not give them the ability to do so.
  • The Z-52 is already being buffed in 0.6.3 with better concealment.
  • The low-tier DD’s, as well as tiers VI-IX are doing well statistically.
  • The T-22 is debatable, we’re looking at it.

 

• Germans suffer especially heavily at T8, the tier where most competitive gameplay happens. Any plans to look at the German ship performances and perhaps improve them?
  • We’ll look into it. However bear in mind that currently balance is done mostly for Random PvP battles – we do not balance ships for Ranked. In more competitive game modes, optimal ships / builds are often specialist and all-rounders are less popular. In Randoms the German Tier VII/VIII cruisers do not seem to be doing bad.

 

• With the new stealth fire nerf, some cruisers have a shooting concealment penalty that is worse than some battleships. As someone who plays all the ships, that does not make much sense to me. Have you considered alternative approaches to detection increases, like lets say a proper "bloom", where your detection range sits at max range for like, 5 seconds, and then starts reducing linearly to your normal detection range. Bloom differing depending on class and so forth. Or alternatively a class based timer for when the firing debuff disappears? Like DD 7s, CL/CA 12s and BB 20s before they restealth after firing?
  • The penalty of 20 seconds is designed to keep ships from popping up and disappearing all the time, this would be weird.
  • 20 seconds mean that all players can understand the penalty easily.
  • We might think about an increase for battleships.

 

• Shimakaze, as much as I love it, suffers quite heavily in the current meta. My personal solution would be giving it better stealth, for example around 5.4 or so to allow it to actually outspot its competition, as it can not outgun any T10 in the game and the torps are too easily dodgeable to be usable in a knife-fight.
  • We don’t think F3’s are easy to dodge and currently Shimakaze is the second best performing ship. It also has the highest flooding chance and is was buffed in 0.6.3 with better firing range. We will look into it however, as players’ performance on the ship is very inconsistent.
  • EU stats for 0.6.2
    • Avg. Damage: 132k Gearing, 133k Shimakaze, Fletcher 140k

 

• Are the devs satisfied with the current T10 cruiser balance? For example the Hindenburg has the lowest winrate and lowest average XP by a large margin, is this something you plan on addressing or are you satisfied with the current situation?
  • The biggest problem right now is Zao, she is good at everything.
  • Stats don’t show any big issues though, we will look at it again after 0.6.3

 

Carriers

• With the removal of Alt attacks for CVs on T4-5, those ships will inflict a lot less damage even in capable hands, I assume that's why it's added, to prevent sealclubbing. However, will these CVs in particular be compensated otherwise? As clearly they will be a lot weaker now. Also do you not fear this will deter new players from advancing in this parcular line of ships as the gameplay is simplified to such an incredible degree?
  • These changes are made to make current CVs better and are not a real rework yet, just fixes for the current bad situation. This will hopefully be addressed with a general carrier rework.
    • US bombers need a better automatic attack.
    • Japanese are fine as they are right now
  • The biggest challenge is to create a learning curve that doesn’t discourage new players and to teach players how to play carriers in game without allowing sealclubbing of low-tier ships.

 

• Will Tier V CV’s have protected MM?
  • Not planned, should not be needed as there will always be a balance with carriers. If the enemy team has a tier VI CV, your team will have one as well.
    • We will however watch the situation.

 

• Why does Saipan not lose planes when strafing out of a dogfight? Why Saipan loses no planes?
  • Due to the very low number of planes (3 per squadron) this would cripple Saipan.

 

• What is Wargamings vision for CVs in this game, beyond 0.6.3?
  • Some ideas, nothing definite:
    • Being able to replenish planes in battle
    • Universal attack with variable difficulty instead of auto / manual
    • AA mechanics – very black and white right now
    • Better balanced loadouts

 

Other

• How satisfied are the devs with the new skilltree? Any changes there in the near future? I will mention that I personally really enjoy the new skilltree, disclaimer, except for RPF, there's less need to grind a cumbersome 15p captain for that mandatory CE and there's much greater variety in viable builds.
  • We are very happy with the changes despite the initial outrage over the RPF skill, as we expected it is not having as much of an impact as many players thought.

 

• In World of Tanks, players have the option to select/deselect which battle modes they want to engage in - why can't Warships implement this same system. Many players dislike the Epicenter and Bastion game modes you've experimented with and would prefer to just play Domination. Many, like me, dislike the passive standard battle game mode, will we ever have the option to avoid them?
  • We are not planning any changes here as all of the game modes have players that really enjoy them and splitting the player base up would be bad for the matchmaker and queue times.

 

• Epicenter – this mode seems to be very map dependant, with the worst case being the Tears of the Desert with huge open space in the middle.
  • While there are improvements planned for the future, we do not plan removing the mode.
  • Overall it seems that Standard battles are less popular than the Epicenter.
  • Popularity measured not only in forum (hardcore) feedback, but also from surveys.

 

• Is there a possibility of reconsidering the addition of another consumable slot for Cruisers to better maximize their versatility? As picking between Hydro over Def AA or vice versa is not as straightforward given the RNG-ish nature of MM where a CV is available or not thus nullifying the viability of Def AA.
  • The same can be said for CV’s and their loadouts. We are trying to make all builds viable and would like to see a CV in each battle to make them relevant.

 

• Are there any plans to incentivise teamplay in random battles more? I.e. rewards for smoking allies, radaring/spotting for allies, providing defensive AA for allies?
  • Blocking caps and tanking is already taken into account, just not shown in the results. This is however something we are looking into in general.

 

• Will the current campaigns be ended when new ones begin? Any plans on new ones? People who are not moving along very fast, as well as people who have long since completed them would like to know.
  • The current campaigns will stay as permanent ones, the Shinonome especially is popular. We would like the new player campaign to be more educational that it is now and are working on a new tutorial to teach players more skills.

 

• Kitakami has been spotted both in trailers and in recent patch notes, is the ship making a glorious return?
  • 

 

• Any additional information regarding the High School Fleet collaboration mentioned by WG Japan?
  • No news yet

 

• Finally, any plans of new game types? Even though Bastion wasn't that well received and Epicenter hasn't exactly captured our hearts, us players do love new modes to try.
  • We are currently testing some cooperative PVE game modes internally.

[ColonelPete]

 

 

• Many people see the entire removal of stealth fire as one massive BB buff. Is it?
  • Our goal is not to buff battleships, we do however want to remove game mechanics like open water stealth firing that have no counter and are not fun to play against. Most open water stealth play is also not very efficient due to inaccuracy and promotes passive play.

...

• Shimakaze, as much as I love it, suffers quite heavily in the current meta. My personal solution would be giving it better stealth, for example around 5.4 or so to allow it to actually outspot its competition, as it can not outgun any T10 in the game and the torps are too easily dodgeable to be usable in a knife-fight.
  • We don’t think F3’s are easy to dodge and currently Shimakaze is the second best performing ship. It also has the highest flooding chance and is was buffed in 0.6.3 with better firing range. We will look into it however, as players’ performance on the ship is very inconsistent.
  • EU stats for 0.6.2
    • Avg. Damage: 132k Gearing, 133k Shimakaze, Fletcher 140k

 

 

No Counter? Perhaps Teamplay?

In a recent game a BB player complained about Blyska stealth firing at him. I took my DD and spotted the Blyska --> no more SF.

 

Average Damage. The numbers we get from the EU Server are VERY different:

Player Average for Ships [ at 2017/03/18 ]
Nation	Class	Tier	Name	Win	Damage	Kills/Battle	Survival
JP	DD	10	Shimakaze	47.14	47.398	0.77	35.85
KM	DD	10	Z-52	47.27	48.155	0.84	33.00
SN	DD	10	Khabarovsk	58.02	75.936	1.14	48.73
SN	DD	10	Grozovoi	47.38	41.442	0.70	29.98
US	DD	10	Gearing	49.13	50.616	0.84	35.04

http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/ranking/index.html

 

Did you perhaps evaluate a specific player group only?

[Ze_Reckless]

Did you perhaps evaluate a specific player group only?

 

Yes, they said in the video these numbers are from top 5% of the players. They know how to do statistics, right? 

[RUSSIANBlAS]

 

Thankyou for the writeup MrConway!