Russian Q&A 02/03/16, Continued

Well, maybe I spoke too soon in naming that last Q&A article. Let’s have another, shall we? As usual, this was translated kindly by Carnotzet on the EU forums.


 

Q. WoWs is a historical game with realistic ship models faithfully created by a professional team. Programmers spend a lot of time and effort creating each ship. Players spend a good deal of their time farming silvers and xp in order to buy the next ship in line.

My question is the following: why can’t we examine our ships more closely in port, the zoom feature is kinda wonky and we can’t really see every detail on the ship. It wouldn’t be so hard to fix this. Would you consider doing this?

A. Our ships are created with love and particular attention to details. On the other hand, due to scale, we can’t create HD models of every 7.62mm gun since it’d affect performance. Our current “tour” mode – when you click in port on modules on the right side – is, in our opinion, enough to look at ship models. We don’t think it’d make sense to allow a greater zoom. In brief, we don’t plan to change the zooming system in port in the foreseeable future (except for the armor x-ray).

Q. In another Q&A you said: “Firing from smoke is an intrinsic tactic for DD’s. We don’t see anything wrong with it but would like to offer a counter solution to it (radars).”

Here’s my question: Do you plan to add radars to every ship? I like to play with IJN cruisers. So I’d like to know: will they be equipped with radars or will they still be helpless against invis-fire from smoke (since “IJN hadn’t any radars” or something like that)?

A. We only plan to add radars to US and VMF cruisers, and only at high tiers. It’s not so much “they hadn’t radars” as we think about what the game needs. IJN cruisers have good torpedoes and good HE shells. There’s no need to strengthen and diversify this ship class tactics for now.

Q. If a ship AA rating exceeds 100 with the proper modules and perks, does its efficiency still increase or is it capped?

A. It will still increase. Ratings are only here to show the global efficiency of a ship in one field or another. If you want to see the actual values, you need to look at detailed info.

[The following question is a follow up to the question about Aurora and Nikolai missing any significant AA defens]

Q. Does that mean that you’re happy with the fact that any CV that turns its attention to these ships can inflict damage for free? I’m not even speaking about Arkansas, which hasn’t any AA whatsoever. Is is normal to be “food” for CV’s?

A. My previous answer would be weird if most of tier 3-4 ships weren’t “food” for CV’s. By the way, Aurora and Nikolai are performing really well damage, win rate, and ships destroyed per battle wise. Moreover, most of the damage they receive comes not from bombs and torpedoes but AP shells. 

Weak AA is also a feature of nearly all low tier ships. Among tier 4 BB’s, Wyoming is more or less the only one that does well in this regard. Regarding tier 3 cruisers, it’s Aurora but the difference is so small it doesn’t really matter.

From a game balance standpoint, there’s certainly some aspects that need attention, but it’s definitely not our heroes (Aurora, Nikolai). To be honest, both ships are efficient, if not to say “overpowered”. They fare very well.

Q. Do you plan to buff Yorck? In my opinion, the ship needs a buff to her AP damage so she’ll be a logical follow-up to Nurnberg.

A. We have no plans in that regard. She has historical armaments for which were developed good HE shells (used in fact for coastal defense). And she has excellent AP shells. Yorck is still very efficient with HE shells and is sufficiently balanced in that regard. We’re happy with that situation.

Q.1. Why doesn’t the upgrade “Gun fire control system Mod.1 show the accuracy increase? After all, type 2 cammo shows that it decreases accuracy by 4%. Why can’t you do the same with the gun mod?

2. Could you add a hotkey that would lock turrets in their starting position (bow guns aim forward, stern guns aim behind).It would help in situations where you don’t know from which direction a ship might come from and thus turrets would only have to rotate half way.

A. 1. It’s a great idea, I hope we’ll find the time to implement that.

2. We considered this idea a long time ago. We came to to the conclusion that the benefits of such feature would be too small.

Q. 1. What’s the flight radius of spotter and float planes?

2. Does the ship turning radius depend on its speed?

A. 1. Flight radius for spotter planes is 4230m, for float planes: 3240m.

2. Yes, it does. It’s different for every ship (and depends with their size), but generally speaking, the best radius is found at 1/2 speed.

Q. Do you plan to do any file compression to the game files (there’s already more than 200 000 files and 35 000 folders in the game folder)?

A. Yes, of course. I have already said that this problem is quite important in our plans for optimisation. I can’t tell you specific dates but I can give you an overview: we’ve already found a solution regarding file compression and are in the process of developing it. After that, it will be tested by supertesters. If everything works out, it will then be implemented to the game after 2 or 3 major updates and the number of files and folders will be reduced several times over. Until then, I’m afraid you’ll have to wait.

Q. Please explain to me why AP shells penetrate Pensacola’s citadel and break her engines? I understand that they would inflict some damage but citadels and engines damage from the front? How am I supposed to play her?

A. Citadels are, broadly speaking, “boxes” so they also have a front, back and upper limit. So the bow of a ship is not protected, all the more so if you’re hit with high caliber shells.

By pointing your nose to your opponent, you’re basically reducing the area he can hit and increasing the chances of shell bounces. But it doesn’t give you full protection, especially if you’re pummeled with high caliber shells. Especially at short and medium ranges.

Q.  Could you make differences between my aircraft squadrons and those of my teammate more visible? Sometimes, it’s quite hard to see which one is mine.

A. According to our stats, current markers serve their purpose. We may look into making one’s own squadrons more visible but for, truth be told, there isn’t currently a lot of people complaining about this issue.

Q. Lately, there are a lot of DD’s in battles (5-6 per team) and few BB’s (1-2). What do you think about this situation and do you plan to reduce the number of DD’s per battle?

A. My opinion is as follows: 3-4 DD/CA-CL/BB is standard. 5-6 of any class is too much. However, this is not a critic. That said, I can foresee and answer your next question: we also don’t like “torpedo walls” (called “torpedo soup” in RU) from 5 Shimakazes.

Regarding our plans to solve this issue: first, wait for Soviet cruisers, it’s likely they will affect DD population. After that, we still have a couple of ideas but we’d like to implement them bit by bit.

Q. Would you consider reducing the chance of turret destruction? We play the game to shoot stuff and when the first hit we get destroys a turret, it isn’t very interesting.

A. We’re keeping an eye on this aspect of the game, players’ reaction to it and stats about it. We also understand how depressing it can be to sail “without turrets”; even if it happens 1 in 50 games, those battles are remember for a long time. There’s a high chance we’ll make changes regarding this issue.

Q. If I buy a cammo with doubloons and after that, for whatever reason, sell the ship it’s on. And then, I purchase it again, will I have to buy the “premium” cammo again?

A. No, you won’t need to buy it again.

Q. At low tiers, there are many people shooting at friendly ships. Will you change the current punishment system for firing on friendlies?

A. I have already explained that the current system for fighting against players not following rules, in our opinion,  needs to be improved and adapted to the new realities of the game. We have some ideas on the matter. As soon as we are ready, we’ll share them with you and hear your ideas. At the moment, it’s too soon.

In brief, we’re considering the following options:

  • toughen the rules regarding the accumulation of “bad reputation”.
  • progressive ban in TB/RankedB – PvP – PvE modes
  • lower damage inflicted to teammates by intentional teamkillers and trolls – up to “scrape a friendly ship, get blown up”.
  • tune compensation so that it better covers repair costs.

 

I actually mostly like the answers lately, they’re very nice and detailed; it’s just a shame about some of the questions, they’re a bit on the daft side sometimes.

Still, good insights; I’m particularly glad that turret destruction will probably get balanced, hopefully.

Sources: RU Dev Answers threadEU Forums

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s