World of Warships

Developer Q&A on Discord [Part 2]

WorldOfWarships2 - Developer Q&A on Discord [Part 2]

Link to

Question: Can you guys get rid of your automated chatban system. We should be able to communicate to our team mates that what they are doing is counter-productive without the snowflakes having a mental breakdown and reporting us….

Sub_Octavian: No, we definitely can't. The system matches the complaints AND inappropriate words filter. We will double-check everything just in case, but most likely (and judging by your chosen word "snowflake") the problem was that you did not communicate the motivation for your teammates, your strategical and tactical advice, and some tips on playing their ships in appropriately civil way. And while I understand your rage and it's probably still better to get chat-banned for a few days than to break your mouse or screen (at least financially), we still have to maintain a certain level of communication. Also, irrelevant to this particular question, while asking us about chat bans here, don't forget that we can actually check chat logs.

Question: T XI tech tree?

Sub_Octavian: Absolutely. We've already found some blueprints for a good, adequately balanced
Star Destroyer Blueprint SWCT - Developer Q&A on Discord [Part 2]

RU TXI BB, and some good
s l640 - Developer Q&A on Discord [Part 2]
historical reference for German TXI rocket planes!

Question: Is the reasoning from moving the QA from reddit to discord, a censorship reason? i.e. Because you can delete messages etc.?

Sub_Octavian: That's pretty twisted, if not disrespectful to call the fact of having big Q&A on a newly opened platform a "cenzorship". What's next – we won't be supposed to talk to our players on forums? Or maybe stream on our official channel? Reddit is just one of the community platforms our players use, and not among the top popular ones. Still, looking at dozens of Q&A sessions conducted there and tens of thousands of replies by the team members, I can't say Reddit had little attention – in fact, more than many bigger platforms. But now we will concentrate our efforts on this Discord server. We believe Discord as a platform has huge potential of bringing people from all servers and the devs from all offices together. It's modern, it's growing, it's gamer-friendly and ppl use it actively to play with friends. But if you don't like it, sure, it's up to you. Okay, now I will take a break from addressing these near-game questions, and get to the hot :whatflambasscantstand: stuff!

Question: Considering the top level players <...> are generally the most competent at recognizing and exploiting balance issues, are there any plans to get such players more involved in consulting with the dev team, in order to improve the balancing process and gameplay/balance overall <...>? Also related to improving game balance, have you considered implementing the trickle-down balance approach?

shonai: Good morning, Vietnam Discord! We have such groups of highly engaged players, for example, Super Test and Clan Test. They are participating in testing ships, mechanics, maps etc. Both their stats and feedback are taken into account during testing. However, when we talk about trickle-down approach, it doesn't really work quite well in most games with more or less complicated mechanics, and ours is not an exception. Players of different engagement, experience and skill level usually have very different knowledge and perception of mechanics and the game itself. Though technically mechanics are universal for all players, due to these differences players have different interactions with mechanics and different experience. Thus solving balancing questions based only on stats or opinion of a small group of players with roughly the same involvement level won't be the best way to achieve the result, useful for all players.

Thus, when we check ship's performance, we don't look only at values of some limited group. We break down all stats (relative and absolute damage, WR and many others) by players WR, and that helps us understand, for example, whether the ship is too strong in hands of an experienced player, or that the concept is too difficult to grasp, etc. There was a stream last year, where we described this in detail in 2019, you could watch it
461485651?filter=archives&sort=time - Developer Q&amp;A on Discord [Part 2]


So, overall, we do consider highly involved players in our process (both their stats and feedback), but we have to look wider and don't forget about other players and the result of our work being valid for them as well.

Question: What key data points will WG be looking at to determine whether CVs will continue to remain in CBs?


– Audience (relatively to overall game audience of course, not just absolute numbers)

– Retention within Clan Season (basically how consistently the participants continue to play the season)

– Class popularity

– CV winrate

– Team composition popularity and winrate

– Surveys and feedback

These factors will influence the decision making on further CV in CB, and can also lead to balance changes of particular ships.

Question: WG can know How many use shell type? For example Montana use HE 35% , AP 65%. etc. Can we know T10 ships use shell statistics?

Sub_Octavian: These are the stats we have internally – in terms of shell usage and, what's IMO more important, damage structure.

Avg stats for Montana for the last ten days world wide are:

26% of main gun shots are HE

74% of main gun shots are AP

88% of damage is dealt by AP

6,2% by HE

3,8% by fires

1,3% by secondaries

0,7% by ramming

Question: You took the gimmick of Hood away, and didn't put any compensations for that gimmick going away. Did you guys forget about her or are you trying to make her historically accurate by making her obsolete?


It's in our best interest to ensure that all ships are playable and all ships have some solid audience.

Currently Hood has 50,9% of avg winrate; her popularity is very decent compared to other premium BBs on the tier (apart from Shiny Horse. Nothing can beat Shiny Horse), her damage is straight in the middle of all 12 T7 BB.

While I will certainly relay your concerns to the design team, and thank you for raising this question, a brief look at her stats does not indicate that she is obsolete.

Question: Is there an idea to add more boats to the bureau?

Sub_Octavian: We want to keep the balance and ensure tech tree, premium, fxp, coal, steel and other ways of obtaining new ships are updated regularly. But sure, bureau is popular enough, so there will be new ship content for it as well.

Question: Why does Agir NOT have the 60mm extended bow strip?

shonai: We know that there is a source that indicates presence of such armor for the project. However, when you work with historical references, you could not assume that some source is true and all others are not, especially if we speak about some sort of third-party source (e.g. something that is not project documentation). Cross-checks and analysis should be done in order to get proper results. So, when we are designing a ship, we strive to get either the initial documentation, or the source which can be cross-proofed. And in case with Agir project drawings are obviously more trustworthy than scheme from a book, and they lack this 60 mm armor. We would be glad to show these drawings, but regrettably the purchase conditions for this do not permit us to show them.

However, if you're interested in accessing these documents, you could reach out to Bundesarchive. Here is a resource made by German archivists to find docs in Bundesarchive. If you're searching for Schlachtschiff-Typ "O" drawings, you should navigate to "Reichswehr und Wehrmacht 1919 bis 1945/1946" and there choose "Reichsmarine und Kriegsmarine". Next step is "RM25 Hauptamt Kriegsschiffbau der Reichsmariene und Kriegsmarine", and after that the only step left is to choose the document you're looking for. Now you could see how to order the docs, how much they cost, what are the conditions etc.

Question: The EU Wargaming store has no World of Warships stuff like I was lucky to get my WoWS beer stein and Cobi models but when are we hoping to see new merchandise?

Sehales: While we discontinued our presence in the EU WG Store, we are looking into other options and vendors to be able to bring you some buy-able merch again in future.

For the time being our merch is mainly available at offline-events (which are sadly on-hold due to Covid-19), but we are working on getting you some new options if you wish to buy WoWs-related merch.

Cobi's WoWs-branded models are also still available from their selected retailers as well as their own online store.

Question: Gearing's in-game model is disproportionately large compared to Yueyang's, despite her being only 4.3 metres longer than her IRL, other dimensions being roughly the same. Are there any plans to fix this?

Sub_Octavian: Reworking old models is an important, but not first priority process (compared to the new content).

However, I am very happy to confirm that our 3D team is working on a big update to US DD models. It won't be completed super quickly, but the fact it's halfway there means that it WILL happen. Current status is:

1. Sampson: model done, texturing in progress.

2. Wickes: on hold.

3. Clemson: model done, texturing in progress.

4. Nicholas: on hold.

5. Farragut: model in progress.

6. Mahan: model done, texturing in progress.

7. Benson: model in progress (superstructure already, so nearly done).

8. Fletcher: model done, texturing in progress.

9. Gearing: model nearly done.

There are very high chances they all will be finished and released within 2020, unless some sudden complications arise.

According to the status, I believe the first to be fully ready will be Clemson, Sampson, Mahan and Fletcher. I also think we will not wait for the whole batch and most likely will release them as they are completed.

Question: Will you add newer ships that were made like after 2000? <...> It be cool to play with those stealth ships,newer planes, subs, remotely control missiles and more… at least as a different game-mode.

Sub_Octavian: Technically, it is a valid option in very very far future, as the game evolves and develops. However, at the moment, we have ideas and concepts within our current historical era for years to come. I highly doubt that in the following couple of years we will seriously consider expanding the time period like that. Even though every single WoWS dev wants their own nuclear submarine or at least a cruise missile boat.

Question: What does WG think of the current Clan Battles meta?

Sub_Octavian: It's significantly different from the previous seasons. By default, changing and shifting meta should happen from time to time in any competitive online game, but as the season is still going, I would not draw any conclusions about this new meta. I'm pretty sure that some alterations will be required as it's the first CV introduction to the mode. I'm also (looking at the current CB stats) pretty sure that this season will be successful, relative to all previous seasons (and relative to the game audience which has been growing over the past several months). The main question will be, IMO, in various tweaks and changes: from balancing individual ships to addressing some overly popular setups and tactics.

Question: Which tech trees are you currently working on? Whose navies will get expansions?

Sub_Octavian: It's a forbidden question! As I can't answer it properly, I will go take a break, and have my burger. Or shall I eat pasta?

Question: Are there any plans for a WOWS 1.0?

Sub_Octavian: Our updates numbers are purely technical and do not indicate anything special but update size and order. I.e. first update to be released in Jan 2021 will most likely be 0.10.0 .

Question: When you removed Flint from the armory and stated you would be re-adding it later for coal vs steel, will the players who purchased it for steel be refunded the steel value and deducted the coal value instead?

Sub_Octavian: No, as they are not losing anything.

Question: Is Z-35 having 1/4 HE pen an indication to a future buff for the tech tree German DDs?

Do you plan on buffing the german ships anytime soon?

shonai: 1/4 HE pen is a current feature of Z-35 (remember, please, that ship is in testing, and the concept may change). Overall German DDs are fine, and don't need such a buff.

As for German ships as a whole: let's quickly recap some of the last updates:

0.8.6 – Roon and Hinden reload buff, HE pen improved for 105 mm guns

0.8.11 – accuracy of German BBs was improved

0.9.0 – Hindenburg reload buff

0.9.2 – Secondaries HE pen improved for some ships, other had it in 0.8.6

There are also some minor changes planned for T-22 and Ernst Gaede, however, they are about making Hydro available for them (you could read about it in the DevBlog). So, it doesn't look like German ships are missed in the balancing process.

Question: Are there any plans to make mods that some players consider essential into standard features in the base game? Things like side panel health bars, overall team health, Navigator ship angle, Nomogram's reticule, Time until victory by points, etc. that even Kings of the Sea casters use?

shonai: You're totally correct by saying "some players". Some of the mods you've named are useful for some players, but in most cases players play without them despite there is an officially supported (even with the link on the game's site) ModStation. We had several mods that were implemented in the game in past (e.g. smoke screen border, indication of radar/HAS activation, chat mute, etc), but now we don't have such plans for the closest future. Implementing mod as a native part of the game requires more than just "add this mod as "turned on" by default" – the mod as a whole should be in line with all other UI elements of the game, for example. And as of now, there are several other UI/UX improvements that we're working on or have in plans (including changing the order of consumables mentioned earlier in this Q&A).

Question: Will there be a captain skill tree rework or certain skills re-balanced anytime soon, considering some captain skills such as AFT and MAA are outdated, as well as a whole new class being added to the game?

shonai: There could be changes to commander skills in future, but if we touch the topic of subs influence on these, then it's too early to speak about it. Submarines are being tested now (and event in 0.9.4 is, in fact, another step of the test process), and, if they reach the game as a new fully-ready class, then of course there will be a need for some related skills and this will give us a good opportunity to revise the system as a whole. But as was said, now it is too early to speak about it.

Question: What the developers think about the players calling "Russian bias" in the game?


Sub_Octavian: The only RU 'bias' which really exists is the fact that for us is a bit easier, on average, to get to RU archives and receive some RU blueprints + the fact that Russians had a lot of weird and funny paper designs (which gives us a lot of design room). But worry not – Ze Germans and other navies also had decent amount of spicy designs and projects (Kitakami or H-classe WHEN).

The argument about intentional RU bias in the game does not really hold water, from any point of view:

1. WoWS as a product is very diversified, and has many markets world wide. Russia is not the biggest of them, and even on business level it does not make sense to concentrate only on one market so much, endangering others.

2. There was some tinfoil hat conspiracy theory about RU bias meant to help RU server population. To improve the particular situation in RU, we do a lot of local marketing activities, but they are outside of the game, and it has nothing to do with game balance. And there is no need for desperate measures, too, as our game audience has been growing steadily (as I said, we're diversified in audience, which is good).

3. It's pretty naive to think that "RU ships are for Russians, German ships are for Germans", etc. i.e. Yamato, Montana and G.K. are the most popular T10 BBs on RU server, while Republique and Kremlin are almost identical in popularity and share the 4th place. Interestingly, Russian players complain about Tirpitz being weak to the point that there is a meme about "hidden Tirpitz nerf in each update" in RU community. At the same time, Khabarovsk is a bit less popular than Z-52 on RU server. Most players choose ships based on their game-play appeal, perceived power, and the nation, IMO, comes like a third or lower priority.

4. Finally, on personal level, game designers treat different game nations like they would treat Zerg, Protoss or Terran, or Terrorists vs Counter-Terrorists or Warlock / Titan / Hunter, etc – our goal is to make sure all game nations are interesting, viable and playable. Otherwise that would mean we've spent a lot of resources, efforts and hundreds of hours of 3D art team work for nothing.

However, there is a share of balancing mistakes (Kutuzov), over-hyped ships (Smolensk and Satalingrad ) and releases that could have been balanced better (Kremlin). I fully appreciate the fact that some RU ships are strong and some are controversial. However, I also can't notice that every big tech tree in the game has such ships. And yet, people who push for Russian bias agenda tend to conveniently ignore any problematic, controversial or just powerful ships of other nations.. Ignoring Thunderer while complaining about Smolensk, or Massachusetts while bashing Sinop, or Alaska while claiming Kronshtadt is OP. This is a bit…biased?

Anyway, you don't have agree here, but that's our fair position from different angles, and nowhere I see any profit for the game, audience, and eventually, us, to pursue Russian bias in how we design the game.

Question: Do you have plans to release a hentai voiceover/captain any time soon?

Sub_Octavian: What do you mean "anytime soon"? We already have Jingles in the game!

Question: What about homing missiles?

Sub_Octavian: At some point we internally tested 2 prototypes – fully homing missiles and player controlled missiles. AA even could shoot them down! For now it's shelved, and as you see, in terms of new game-play mechanics we're pretty busy with the subs testing. I doubt we will get back to any kind of missile armament in the next 2-3 years. But testing this was hilarious for sure.

Question: Can we have human guided torpedoes for the Japanese line which are controlled similarly to planes in CVs?

Sub_Octavian: We will be tweaking and changing a lot of things during the next testing stages – brace yourselves <:slight_smile: emoji> We still want DD to be extremely dangerous to any sub, and the measure of this danger will be determined during the next tests – PTS data is not reliable enough for this. I can confirm though, that we would like to introduce some more interaction with depth charges apart from being erased by them instantly, that's for sure. On the other hand, they should not by any chance feel weak, given the fact that they require effort and patience to pull off.

Question: Since CV fighters are used for spotting anyways: when will CVs get a consumable that is actually designed for it, like deployable more durable spotting aircraft that have better vision in exchange of not being able to engage enemy planes <...>

Sub_Octavian: I think both within the community and the dev team the discussion is "should CV spot less?", not "should CV spot more?"., I don't think so.

Question: Do you have any plans to lessen the difference between teams in random battles (e.g. Same average winrate on both sides) to prevent "stomps/steamrolls"?

Sub_Octavian: CoD players: remove skill based MM, we don't want to sweat in each round and want to have more carry moments!!!

WoWS players: add skill based MM, we want to less carry moments and more consistent teams!!!

Life is pain.

On a serious note, no, Random battles MM will not take player skill into account. If you want full control over how your team performs and more competitive factor, there are Clan Battles and Clan Brawls for that. If you're fine with a lesser degree, there are Ranked Battles and Ranked Sprints.

This is a rather solid position about Random Battles – the variance in player skill does create more "stomps", but that in general it also increases overall mode variance and creates a lot of epic win (and epic fail) moments. We don't want you all to have 50% WR, forever.

Question: Any plans to limit divisions to only the same tier to "counter" Yuro?

Sub_Octavian: It's a well known fact that Yuro can only be countered by tequila mixed with beer, which, if you're lucky, will result in loss of his passport and temporary immobilization.

As for the divisions, we will consider it, but this solution has a drawback – the social aspect will be hurt, and for some people, it may become harder to play with friends. That said, Yuro managed to make slingshot popular, which resulted in gutting it (the slingshot, not Yuro, of course). We will see what future brings…

Question: Why does the Venezia not get a legendary mod you cant even use the upgraded smoke from the Armory?

Sub_Octavian: She has a different kind of smoke generator with different mechanics, and thus, the special smoke upgrade is not applicable. As for the unique (legendary) upgrade, she will get it in due time, as well as other tier X ships which lack their upgrades.

Question: Can we see some MARVEL or DC things on game as we have anime things?

Sub_Octavian: We do work on a few non-anime collabs ideas, actually. But I can't disclose any details here, as it's very WIP, and, what's more important, I should respect the NDA signed with our potential partners. All I can say is that you will have some news. And then some more, hopefully. And maybe later this year, even more .

Question: Why did WG decide to reverse positions on submarines? Sub_Oct is on record saying that subs wouldn’t come to World of Warships because it’s impossible to balance them, so what’s changed?

Sub_Octavian: We got really good in balancing stuff <:massachusetts_dispersion: emoji> Also, please don't blame just me! I usually said that we currently were not working on submarines. But this

dude back in 2015…

As for the the "What's changed" part:

1. We've fulfilled a lot of plans we had since game launch.

2. Trolling aside, we did get a lot of technical and design experience with the game and established the game firmly.

3. We've conducted an early experiment (Halloween subs) and saw both big interest from the audience confirmed AND the fact that it actually has potential to work.

We'll see how all of this ages in the next months. I'm excited, tbh. That's a huge challenge, but also the biggest addition to the game since launch. Look guys, if you're afraid of subs, don't worry – we're afraid, too <3

Question: Is there a possibility to add "main battery accuracy booster" to the Soviet battleships seeing as they severely suffer from they poor long range dispersion?

FrostVortex: Sure, thank you for your suggestion. It will be set to be done if adding "Main Battery Reload Booster" consumable doesn't help.

Question: How about making Russian ships a bit stronger since developer are Russian?

FrostVortex: As statistics show, Soviet ships are one of the weakest in our game. Thus we are currently working on adding "Smoke Generator", "Surveillance Radar", "Main Battery Reload Booster" and enhanced "Repair Party" consumables to all Soviet ships to make them more or less balanced.

However, currently we do not have the functionality which allows to change the order of consumables, so these implementations are delayed for now.

Sub_Octavian: but we've just announced that we're doing consumable order editing later this year!

FrostVortex: That's why I've written "currently."

Sub_Octavian: You're learning fast.

Question: Any plans to give BB & CA (limited) ASW capabilities, as they're currently rather hopeless against Submarines once your CL/DDs are dead.

Sub_Octavian: Yes.

Question: Have the team considered including blocking of a cap (denying the enemy team capture) in the xp calculation? <...>

Sub_Octavian: Blocking is already included in XP calculation with some game mode specific tuning (i.e. it does not make sense to reward a lot of XP for blocking in Epicenter, most ships are constantly doing it by just not sailing too far away, while in Domination it's more than valid conscious support action). As for the more detailed information, "How It works" video series and game wiki are the sources I'd check.

Question: Why are you so fixated on always being the one who "knows the best"?

No matter what CCs, players or anyone says you will always directly or indirectly say that you know best and your way of doing it is the correct way of doing it.

An example of this is limiting access of "preview ships" for CCs being basically a big slap to all players and making sure you're 100% responsible for all balancing and ship design.

Sub_Octavian: Uh, no, we don't always know the best. We make mistakes from time to time, just like everyone else. But it's our job and accountability to work hard, find and execute what's best for the game and the players (which is not in any way unique to World of Warships) and make sure the game is fresh and evolving for the years to come. I'm also not sure what do you mean by "limiting access". CC have absolutely same time window to test WIP ships as they did before. They have the same window to provide feedback to us directly. The only change is that now, when they get the permission to publicly review the WIP content, this content is much closer to being ready, and thus, the CC reviews will be much more accurate and on par what the players will actually see in the game.

And…we've always been responsible for all balancing and ship design, good or bad, popular or not. Should not be a surprise to be honest. Who else could be?

Question: Is it possible to give super cruisers there own classification? This is to stop a full team of Stalin’s and one CV appearing on the enemy team which my clan found and reddit found too for clan battles?

Sub_Octavian: That's not a proportional solution. The proportional solution to a problem with a specific ship (if there is a problem) would be to nerf this specific ship, or to reinforce the ships that can deal with it, not to introduce a whole sub-class to a game. (Pun NOT intended).

Question: When will German secondary builds be viable again?

Sub_Octavian: They are. BTW have you tried GK after IFHE rework? Pretty spicy.

Question: Are you considering remaking the chance of getting something actually useful other than trash flags from Supercontainers? Opening 7 supercontainers after like 2 weeks of farm just to get u don't detonate or sierra mike flags not really what you are looking for <...>


Who do I need to sacrifice to get 7 supercontainers in 2 weeks?

Question: Do you and the development team enjoy playing CVs?

Sub_Octavian: Depends on person, really. My CV play time spiked after rework, for example, but now it's very moderate compared to BB and DD. Still, I play them occasionally, though pre-rework I did not at all. Some old CV fans/mains in the team have switched to other classes, some adapted and keep playing new CV a lot.

I think in this regard, the dev team is not too different from the game audience, it's eventually to each individual taste.

Question: Are there any plans for a series of new maps/game modes to freshen up the game. because playing practically nothing but Domination, with a light sprinkle of standard and Epicenter is really getting old.

Sub_Octavian: Yes.

Question: if I were to purchase Wargaming, and make my first order of business to demand CVs be removed, how many developers would quit?

Sub_Octavian: I don't know, but I appreciate the dedication!

Question: One of the stated aims of the Research Bureau system was to allow players to revisit lower-tier ships, but the structure of it is no different from grinding a line normally in that the XP required is weighted towards the end of the line – T8 and T9. This is only reinforced by the fact that Research Points are awarded from T6 and up only. The requirement of T5 or higher for Daily Missions has a similar effect. Are there any plans to adjust the Research Bureau to provide some reward for players who wish to spend more time with low and mid-tier ships?

Sub_Octavian: Partially yes, we will try to.

Question: Is it possible to remove the possibility for triple carrier in low tiers, any new players I have tried to teach almost instantly quit the game after these matches?

Sub_Octavian: It's been removed in 0.9.3. Also, I am sorry for your experience, but on the scale of all new players, we did not see any increased churn because of these matches. Still, we agree that they were very questionable, so we got rid of them, and also reduced the chances of 2CV/team matches.

Question: Late game BB-SUB interaction? how?

Sub_Octavian: We're working on it. If all such question were already checked and addressed, the subs would have been already released.

These are all the answers up to 16:30 UTC. If the devs post more, someone is welcome to pick up the thread and continue the transcription. o7

Source: Original link

© Post "Developer Q&A on Discord [Part 2]" for game World of Warships.

Top 10 Most Anticipated Video Games of 2020

2020 will have something to satisfy classic and modern gamers alike. To be eligible for the list, the game must be confirmed for 2020, or there should be good reason to expect its release in that year. Therefore, upcoming games with a mere announcement and no discernible release date will not be included.

Top 15 NEW Games of 2020 [FIRST HALF]

2020 has a ton to look forward the video gaming world. Here are fifteen games we're looking forward to in the first half of 2020.

You Might Also Like

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *