Link to Old Chinese Stats
Enjoy.
http://i.imgur.com/catYe9t.png

Link to Old Chinese Stats
Major change: AP fuzes. British cruisers got their smoke cloud back and the engine boost was removed – but more info on that will come once Urakaze is better (sick at the moment, everyone cheer him up)
Enjoy.
http://i.imgur.com/Go92cUr.png

Thanks to Takeda92 for taking the time to sort out the relevant answers.
Source:
https://www.reddit.com/r/WorldOfWarships/comments/54vqoz/dev_qa_lets_do_it/
Answered by Sub_Octavian, the best WoWS dev.
Q; Might not be within your ability to answer but misght as well ask.
Any plans to reduce the amount of BBs in game and improve CA/CL to make them more desirable?
A: We would like to make cruisers more popular. This is why they get rudder mod.3 in 0.5.12. Other tweaks will be introduced later.
In our concept of ideal class distribution, BBs should have 25-30% of popularity. It works more or less, but on some realms/tiers they exceeded this limit.
Continue reading “Fluffy WoWS Q&A – 29th September 2016” →

Found by one of our readers, Lefty_BlueHand. Thank you.
http://i.imgur.com/qYdBBPN.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/GriVr2y.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/cca3kYm.jpg

With developer Sub_Octavian.
Source Part 1
Part 2

Q1:
HI Sub_Octavian!
You caught my interest when you said you were an analytics person. Can you say more about the kinds of data and analyses that WG uses to determine whether gameplay changes are needed? Nothing proprietary, of course. For example, it is a very common practice among players to compare average winrates among ships in order to judge their relative effectiveness. However, I would imagine that with the full data set, you could do separate comparisons of effectiveness when, e.g. playing as the lowest-tier ship, or in CV vs. non-CV games. Do you use an internal regression of some sort to account for player skill when looking at balance? Do third-party ratings like WTR come close to approximating the kinds of things WG takes into account? Or do you do mostly analytics on the customer base, rather than the ships?
Regarding gameplay mechanics, I am curious about the penetration mechanic for multiple layers of armor, e.g. turtleback, front bulkhead, citadel wall. I usually see armor described as Layer1(mm) + Layer2(mm) + Layer3(mm), sometimes with effective thicknesses given due to different angling of the layers (i.e. perpendicular to Layer1 will hit Layer2 at an angle). My question is regarding overmatched armor layers — if this occurs, will they still reduce further penetration, and if so, at what effective angle are they assessed? Is it zero (overmatched armor ignored)? Is it assessed at 28mm @ 60 degrees (autobounce angle)? Is it 28mm @ true angle (perhaps as steep is 80+ degrees)? This is of interest currently, because the proposed 28mm bow/aft armor changes to high-tier battleships mean that they could be taking a lot of shells in an overmatched section that subsequently challenges the (angled) citadel wall, and I am interested in understanding what kinds of angling will be viable on different ships (e.g. NC and Iowa have an extremely large bow section, and a very small, thin belt for battleships).
A1:
Helloes. There are tons of data avaliable, and we have a small team that is constantly working to implement new types of server logs, so we always can see what’s up. In addition to different absolute (like avg.damage, win rate, life time) and relative (% damage structure) values, we also have “hands dependance” graphs which allow us to check ship effeciency among players of different skill. We also have some interesting stuff like heat maps for maps balancing purposes. However, we cannot rely solely on statistics and server data, no matter how accurate it is. We also monitor community feedback and try to combine “technical” and “humane” approaches.
Continue reading “Long WoWS Q&A – 27th September 2016” →

Release Notes 0.5.12

The patch is scheduled for 29 September and will be applied on the servers from 05:30 CEST until 07:30 CEST (UTC+2) during which the game server will be offline.

Improved In-game Economics

Team Play

In order to make the calculation of XP and Credits earned in battle fairer, the following factors are now taken into account:

• Enemy ships and squadrons spotted.
• Damage caused by allies to enemies spotted by you.
• Potential damage dealt/received.

The overall logic behind granting Credits and XP per battle was reworked to include the above changes. Consequently, if a player carries out useful actions (causing damage, fighting for control of key areas, supporting allies etc.), their average rewards will not change compared to Update 0.5.11. However, players whose behaviour is mostly “one-dimensional” (for example, battleship players that stay away from the heat of battle and try to only cause damage to the enemy rather than lead the attack, or destroyer players that focus on capturing key areas but do not perform any reconnaissance) will be less generously rewarded.

Continue reading “WoWS: Introducing Update 0.5.12” →

From Redditor shaewyn
The USS Edson’s a Forrest Sherman class DD, built in 1956 (which puts her as a contemporary of the high-tier Russian cruisers in game). She’s got 3 5″ guns, which auto load, and have a rate of fire of 40 rounds a minute and were computer guided. (as a comparison, the Edson’s 3×5″ guns could put 1.6x as many shells down-range as a Benson’s 5×5″ guns could every minute.)
http://imgur.com/a/HRddv