Great WoWS Q&A – 18th May 2016

Carnotzet is back. 🙂 Thanks to Babykim too. And Xerkics (he was our translator in the past). I will post some more WoWS tomorrow.

Disclaimer: Please be advised that the following information comes from the Russian speaking community and thus statistics, offers, specific projects, plan or dates may not be relevant for the EU community.

First series

1. US Battleships have lower accuracy than their Japanese counterparts. I heard that you have some plans to fix this. However, there’s another issue. On Montana and Iowa, the third upgrade slot has the reload module as well as the accuracy module. It is a difficult choice to make, all the more since Japanese BB’s don’t have to make that choice since the accuracy module is in the second slot. Why is that so and do you plan to make all upgrade slots similar between nations?

A. The upgrades configuration is set as it is for balancing reasons. However, in addition to improvements to NC, Iowa and Montana stats (not only to their main guns) I already talked about, we plan to rework some aspects regarding upgrades (this is estimated to come in 0.5.7.). We plan to improve the effects of the accuracy upgrade in particular. Stay tuned, the situation is bound to change.

2. Do you plan to fix the ensign placement on the overpowered Kutuzov?

A. First of all, Kutuzov is not overpowered, she is a fine ship and is in the right place. Regarding your concern, I will ask my colleagues to examine the issue. If it proves to be correct, we will undoubtedly fix it.

3. Why do Mahan and Farragut get a reduced rudder shift time on their B hull (in addition to their C hull) and Benson only get it on the C hull?

A. This decision was made for balance reasons.

4. Do you plan to rework CV’s economy, for example, by giving them credits/xp for spotting DD’s, providing air cover, etc? In other words, do you plan to make CV’s focus more on helping the team than doing damage?

A. We plan to add several new elements to our economy system and reward teamplay actions such as spotting and tanking (though I cannot say when this will be available).

5. What are US cruisers good at (in comparison to their IJN and VMF counterparts)?

A. Excellent AA in general, radar at tier 8-10, and better bouncing angles for their 203mm shells (tier 7-10) – which means less bounces when firing at angled ships.

6. Did you consider giving Kutuzov radar?

A. Of course we did, but the ship plays very well as it is, so we decided to leave radar for her researchable counterparts.

7. From you standpoint, is the game different across the different regions? Europeans could directly buy the Saipan and it seems playing CV’s is harder on their server. Moreover, the torpedo soup issue doesn’t seem to be as pressing as it is on the RU cluster. Is there a statistical difference (ships/classes) between servers?

A. From my standpoint, yes, there is a difference. From a statistical standpoint, there is also a difference even though it is small. We have to take these differences into consideration so that the changes we make to the game satisfy the players from all regions. We can’t afford to make four different games simultaneously.

8. What do you think about Dogfighting Expert skill? More often than not, it is useless since you face a mirrored CV. Do you plan to rework this skill?

A. The skill is fine as it is, but we may improve the captain skill system further.

9. Don’t you think that DD’s are too durable? Sometimes, they take more than 40 shells before going down.

Wouldn’t you consider giving players the possibility to make their ship name visible on the model? You could create a name registry for each ship type so that two ships couldn’t have the same name. Moreover, you could make so that ship type names (Cleveland, Kirov, etc.) would be unavailable.

A. DD’s durability is not very logical from a historical standpoint. However, it is so for balance reasons since we consider gameplay more important.

We could add a ship naming feature but we haven’t received requests for it for now.

Second series

1. Why is Atago‘s model still not historically accurate? Actually, we have Takao, rather than Atago. [The post lists several flaws in the model]

A. We are very slow in revising this ship. We are more focused on creating and releasing new ships and branches.Taking into account your expertise in this domain, I understand your concerns and apologize for the disappointment you feel regarding our models. On the other hand, the vast majority of players consider gameplay more important than ship models, and, in this regard, Atago is not really an issue (that is why fixing her model is not really a priority since it plays very well and is quite the looker).

2. I watched a video where Altatriste suggested that ship formations be introduced to promote teamplay [he suggested that formations could give several bonuses regarding the classes of ships within them]. What do you think of it? Link to the video (in Russian).

A. I saw that video as well and shared it with my colleagues. His idea – as well as all the suggestions we receive –  is interesting and deserves consideration. In our long term plans, we don’t intend only to make minor changes but we also want to add new major features. Therefore, anything can happen (but it won’t happen very quickly since we’re focusing on rapidly fixing and perfecting what is already in the game).

3. [Question regarding unbalanced matchmaking]

A. We understand that the matchmaker is one of the most important problems currently remaining in the game (and not only due to divisions). That is why we are actively working on developing a new version of the matchmaker, which we plan to release in the medium term (in 2-3 major updates).

4. When will you rebalance the following premium ships? Mikasa, Tachibana, Diana, Aurora, Ishizuchi, Yubari, Marblehead, Atlanta.

A. Ishizuchi was already buffed in 0.5.5.

We’re currently working on Atlanta.

We’re looking into different variants for the Yubari.

We currently have no plans to change the other ships. It would be great if you could explain what you think is wrong with them.

5. Kongo‘s firing range is 21.2km and 25.4km with the spotter plane. The spotter plane is essentially useless since here base firing range is more than enough. Wouldn’t you consider giving her a fighter plane?

A. No since we don’t want to give her additional AA defense.

6. Considering the 19th captain skill cost 10M (up from 300k for the 18th point), do you plan on expanding the captain skill tree?

A. When we added this xp “sink”, we didn’t think players would deliberately aim at getting 10M xp. In the future, it will be changed for some other feature for the captain. At the same time, we will consider what we can do with the xp gained after the 18th point.

7. Does the matchmaker take into account divisions?

A. At the current moment, it does not. However, as I have already explained, the system needs a major overhaul.

8. Do you plan to reward loyal customers with discounts?

A. We may offer some discounts through personal offers. However, we don’t plan to add discounts “cards” or permanent discounts.

Third series

1. Molotov seems to be missing her quad 37mm AA guns on her third and fourth main turrets. Moreover, those guns are clearly visible on her website presentation page. Why is that so? Technically speaking, it shouldn’t be a problem since Tirpitz also has AA guns on her main turrets.

A. Tirpitz’s AA guns located on her main turrets don’t work. They will in patch 0.5.6. Molotov and several other ships will also appear as they should in patch 0.5.6. It is a technical problem.

2. When do you plan to stop team battles? Do you plan to add rewards for teams that are constantly ranked top?

A. We understand that the mode should be further developed. However, we don’t need to put it on hold to do that. We never said we would add rewards to team battles (if you think so, please show us where and when). The only plan we disclosed was we’d like to hold tournaments. This plan is currently postponed.

I’d recommend seeing team battles as the mode it is without expecting any rewards in the near future.

If you (or your teammates) have any suggestions on how to improve team battles, feel free to contact us.

3. When will clans be introduced? When will you add something to do at tier 9-10?

A. The so-called “high tier content” is part of our strategic plans for the game and is currently being worked on. However, at the moment, I cannot disclose anything regarding our plans in that regard.

Some news regarding 0.5.6.

• Regarding new added hulls. If, when the patch is released, you had researched hull B, the new hull C will be researched for free. If you had bought hull B and the ship in question is in your port, hull C will be provided for free.
• AA was improved on ships that were nearly defenseless against planes and those on which AA was the main benefit. The goal is not to nerf CV’s but to give some fighting chance to ships that needed it, to make the fight between them a little more “balanced”.
• No plans to buff IJN planes in the next few patches (HP, 500kg bombs or historical torpedoes).
• Udaloi receives torpedo angles changes: stern launcher angles increased by 7 degrees, broadside launchers angles decreased by 2 degrees and shifted towards the front of the ship.
• 0.5.7. will bring changes to upgrades (modules).
• Mikasa was first released as a ship “not appropriate for all players” and intended for “collectors”. That is why they don’t plan to change it for now.
• Secondary guns accuracy bug should be fixed in this patch.

 

Two pieces of interesting information from the getfun digest:

1. Starting from May 15th, any mod containing a lead calculator will be deemed illegal (rather than undesirable). Making and using such mods will entail sanctions. Initially, such sanctions will not be extreme.

The above may apply (initially) to RU cluster only, as is the case with weekly log sweeps to punish profanity that only exist there.

2. Most of the premium ships will be available for doubloons soon, maybe at the end of May (JamesWhite).

Source: https://www.youtube….h?v=4BE6uP0sBMA

?????

Im not sure if this was covered already but I was watching stream with devs dated 29th of April, re 0.5.5 patch feedback and they were talking in the middle of the stream on release of new lines and how they seem to be having some problems with getting access to ship schematics from Royal Navy museum. Also they initially done soviet ships sooner based the fact that wot audience is mainly in the ex Soviet Union region and in retrospect should have done  RN sooner (since the game has different regional audience from tanks I think)

its a video from Russian wargaming tv app but you can also watch it on their Russian YouTube channel.

?!??!??!

Q. I know you don’t like unofficial resources, but i have noticed that, during last week, Gearing has lost 5-8% [I suppose he talks about win rate] and that is after the buff to turrets survivability.

Her average damage is on par with Omaha’s and Cleveland’s even though HP pools are a lot bigger at high tier.

I concede that this ship is amazing at capturing zones and fighting against IJN DD’s but it is lackluster at dealing damage.

Moreover, a AA focused DD isn’t good at AA. Even under defensive fire, tier 8 planes can come to you and crit every module and start at least two fires. Will this be fixed?

And will you do something to improve Gearing damage capabilities since it’s the lowest among all tier 10 ships?

A. Gearing is a good, multipurpose ship and she doesn’t need major improvements for now. If you’re interested to know, currently, her win rate is 51.1% (on the RU cluster). Her average damage (by the way, your comparison with tier 6 cruisers is incorrect since we don’t think the highest average damage should necessarily be at tier 10) is slightly behind Khabarovsk and ahead of Shimakaze by far. Regarding AA, DD which are focused on AA should not kill planes as fast as cruisers. Their task is to draw enemy planes to them and mess up with their accuracy with defensive fire. Regarding the damage she receives from CV’s in regards to total damage received, 5.7% comes from bombs, 3.7% from torpedoes and 4.3% from fires. Do you consider this is a lot?

More info from the 0.5.6. bulletin thread.

• no plans to change Warspite in 0.5.6. or 0.5.7.
• Atlanta is getting buffed (no release date). She won’t get better torpedoes since it would encourage players to get closer and she’s already very fragile as it is.
• Not all changes appear in the PT patch notes.
• Regarding the previously planned changes to deal with the torpedo soup, they won’t be introduced since the number of DD’s at high tier has decreased, as well as the damage received by BB’s from DD’s (also at high tier). They will now look into more lenient ways to deal with this matter. They are aware that the situation is still not ideal.
• Even though most players play at tier 5-6, they will continue to improve high tier gameplay (and not only by adding new maps).
• The minimap settings are only available in battle since it’s more convenient to be able to change what you want to see directly in battle rather than go into the settings by pressing [Esc]. Moreover, minimap settings are saved from one battle to another.
• There won’t be a free respec for high tier IJN DD’s captains since they won’t implement the “horrible” changes they planned to. Statistics and player feedback show that the changes needed to deal with the issue (torpedo soup) must come in another form.
• New hulls will only be provided (free of charge) if the player own the ship. If he doesn’t own it but has researched the previous hull, the new hull will only be researched and the player will have to buy.
• New matchmaker is being developed and will be available in one of the next major updates.

They explained that public testing is more focused on getting general feedback and detect blatant bugs / errors / problems. For more in-depth testing, they have WG employees, supertesters, special guests, etc.

Team damage will now be paid by the offender in full . Finally. So not just proportion of their income in a match but full starting from 0.5.6