Purpose of this blog

Dmitry Yudo aka Overlord, jack of all trades
David Lister aka Listy, Freelancer and Volunteer

Friday, December 14, 2012

[WoWS] Answering Questions

So, let us start with the answers on previous World of Warships related post.

First of all, I'd like to say that many questions are already answered in corresponding topics on NA forums:

http://forum.worldofwarships.com/index.php?/topic/36-developer-qa-1/
http://forum.worldofwarships.com/index.php?/topic/322-developer-qa-2/

I'll try to answer all questions, that I consider worth answering.

1. What ships classes will there be in:
Battleships/Battlecruisers, Aircraft Carriers, Cruisers Light/Cruisers Heavy and Destroyers.

2. Maneuvering will be very important, because active maneuvering will help you to dodge incoming shells, like in real life. Of course I mean shells, that were fired from long distances - 20km and more.

3. We will start with WoT-like "capture the base" mode, with one or two bases. There of course will be more game modes at start, but I can't say anything about them yet.

4. Alpha testing of World of Warships will not begin this year. Expect Spring or even Summer 2013.

5. We will use our own matchmaker system, with some limits in quantity of some ship classes per battle.

6. For customization of ship's armament: we will use a preset system, which can be described as a whole bunch of weapons, FCS, etc, that can be researched and installed at once.
There of course will be some player-manually-selectable parts of ship configuration, but the main ship's fighting capabilities will depend on what preset is bought and installed.

7. There won't be upgradeable main caliber guns for Yamato and possibly for Montana and Iowa class BBs.
The reason is that these guns are good and more than enough to sink anything.

8. Players will be able to research and upgrade planes on their CVs; the mechanism will be similiar to research and upgrades of guns/turrets for tanks in WoT.

9. There will most possibly be a limit to at least one type of each plane type squadron on a CV, so that players cannot use fighters only or bombers only CVs.

10. No preliminary tech trees now, sorry. All I can tell, that I'm the person who is actually making the trees with the help of historical consultants, of course :)

11. CAs/CLs/DDs will be able to use torpedoes, of course. The question whether BBs and BCs will be able to use torpedoes is still open among our dev team.

12. Bismarck/Tirpiz class post-Washington BBs will of course be a part of HSF/KM  BB tree.

13. About naval strategies, blueprints and so on - I'll make posts on this topics, of course.

14. No, our gameplay mechanics won't mimic Battlestations game series.

15. We are trying to make a balanced ship trees and a balanced differences between different classes.

16. Our first nations will be the USA and Japan, as nations with biggest navies in WWII.

That is all for today.
Feel free to ask more questions, though my next post will be about ship blueprints.

KGB.

69 comments:

  1. Please for once not be like the other Wargaming models and put a British tech tree in at the start especially the Battleships.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. Sorry for British tech tree, but Britain wasn't the lead shipbuilding country in 1940s. Relax though, because UK will most probably be the third nation to appear in game, a couple of months after release of the World of Warships.

      Delete
    3. Can u name a few that u wl consider for tech tree?

      Delete
    4. The Tier X British BB will most likely be the "Super-Lion" with 4x3x406 guns.

      Delete
  2. interresting for sure, but could u please edit the post to list what all abreviations mean? i know only some, and then a question like "12. Bismarck/Tirpiz class post-Washington BBs will of course be a part of HSF/KM BB tree." is like explaing nuclear fission to me

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's easy:
      BBs mean Battleships,
      HSF - Hoch See Flotte,
      KM - Kriegsmarine.

      Delete
  3. Question 1. what is the time frame or technology limit for Ships?.for eg.no smoothbore n reactive armor for WoT?

    Question 2. What is the ammo for the CV if the planes r modules?

    Question 3. Will the armor be important in WoWS?

    Question 4(WoT).What is the desired Win/Loss% for Premium tanks?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 1. Mostly it is time period from 1905 till 1950
      2. Planes do have ammo themselves.
      3. Of course!

      Delete
  4. I'd like to see your rationale for thinking the Japanese Imperial Navy was bigger than the Royal Navy in WWII.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'd like to see at least one British battleship, comparable to Iowa class battleships, not even naming Yamato class.

      Delete
    2. Maybe you should have said America and Japan were the first in game nations as they had the largest battleships in WWII then, rather than saying or at least inferring that the Japanese Imperial Navy was larger than the Royal Navy in total size by saying "biggest navies" when you meant 'biggest ships'.

      Delete
    3. The vanguard is alot smaller in armament size, due to the usage of old 15' guns.
      You cant compare 15' of the early 20s with new 18,1' of the yamato or the 16' of the iowa.

      Delete
    4. Rodney and Nelson, 9 x 16" guns (and two torpedo tubes).

      Delete
  5. Replies
    1. As in WoT, crew servers as a skill modifier.

      Delete
  6. I figure the Brits will be in before the beta ends. Going by past experience with WOT/WOWP

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I won't say that this is impossible, but making ships and balancing them is much more complex thing, than making tanks or planes.

      Delete
  7. Hey mate, ive already stated a huge interest in your World of Warships project. This comes because in the past i used to be a balancer for Navyfield-Europe.
    Yet because the mentioned game is dead, id apprechiate to see a modern and graphically perfected game in this game-branch.
    (Especially including the Ships of WW1, my personal favourite)


    some questions im really curious about:

    How will the controlsetting be?
    - Are you going to manueer your ship with the mouse by pinging locations to drive to
    - or are you going to use wasd-keys to acieve meovement?

    Especially: How will the guncontrol be?
    -Are you going to swich modes like arty in WoT
    -do you use wasd-keys slightly as one well known navy-mmo so far (my favourite) ;)
    -are you using your mouse from distance (id consider that being worst)


    and: Hows the armorsystem going to be?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The control system will be similiar to WoT system, with exception of having additional cruise control for left and right turns.

      Firing system is like arty in WoT for long distances (20 to 40+km) and sniper view like in WoT for close distance, as well as third person view for very close distances.

      Delete
    2. if you serious about adding satelite view to yet another game
      then I'm done here

      the overhead view is not OK in WoT and has been not OK and discussed ever since CBT and yet you (WG) think it's OK

      Delete
    3. one other issue I just noticed
      you say battles of over 40Km, but is't that over the horizon?! they can't even see eachother because of the curvature of the earth

      Delete
    4. Which is why the satellite view is needed. This isnt a total hardcore navy sim this is just an arcade for everyone to play. If theres no satellite view then how else are you going to hit those out of screen targets? Please provide a better solution if you dont like the current one. And IDK if this fits here but if it aint broken, dont fix it.

      Delete
    5. of screen targets? you aren't even supposed to hit them

      do you even know why SPGs are called "finger of god" in WoT?
      ever heard of indirect fire

      Delete
    6. Zmeul, it does sound like you're looking more something like 1600 era ships of the line style combat from this game. As in don't shoot until you see the eyeballs of the opposing sailors.

      Delete
    7. Then what youre saying is getting rid of SPGs completely. Or rather just use them as TD's, completely removing another good feature of the game. Again I quote myself this isnt a hardcore sim this is just an arcade game for everyone to play.

      On a side note youre also making scouts less useful. Sure they spot enemy positions but thats just about it. Nothing else. Oh wow what a boring game that is. Just point and shoot point and shoot. Might aswell just play Minecraft for the same kind of gameplay.

      Delete
    8. I think I'm done replying here since ppl have a tendency to put words in my mouth and run with it wild

      I never said SPGs should be removed, did I and yet you assume so

      as for the 1600 era ships ...
      again, what is it with this nonesense

      Delete
    9. If SPGs cant use satellite view then theres no use in SPGs at all. Theyre TDs so to say. So if youre not assuming they should be removed then do tell a better way of handling this "issue" of yours. Blaming people is just an excuse of you running out of arguments.

      As for the ships, if you dont like it, dont play it. Easy no? Stop complaining and leave the devs alone.

      Delete
  8. Great, so the British have been screwed over 3 times by War Gaming.

    The rushed tree in World of tanks which is flawed and repetitive (Same tanks are used over and over again, few things change other than the guns and maybe a turret between each variant).

    In World of Warplanes, they were to be the first nation added after the initial 3 (USA, USSR and Germany), but instead the Japanese have been chosen instead and the British are yet delayed.

    And now in World of Warships the British are not even a starting faction. The great navies and fighters of Great Britain are just pushed to the side.

    Thanks WarGaming!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You know, Great Britain? The island nation that invented the tank and produced some of the best tanks in the world (and still does).

      That designed some of the most effective aircraft throughout World War 2 such as the iconic Spitfire and Hurricane.(Not to mention the Battle of Britain)

      That possed arguably the most experienced and proficient navy in the world.

      It was said that we would be the first nation to be added in WOWP and one of the starting nations in WOWS, but clearly not.

      Delete
    2. Great Britain isn't going to be in the ALPHA for the game, but they will very likely be the first nation added afterwards.

      Delete
    3. Samuel Lister,

      Brit tanks are now in WoT, for WoWP we have already modeled 19 planes - now it's the matter of time to add them, WoWS - Brits are going to be the first ones to come after the initial launch.

      Delete
    4. Ahhh, the patience KGB and Overlord must have..

      Delete
    5. British tanks may be in WOT however they are poor beyond belief, not even close to what they are irl, not to mention the FV215b that they have as tank but was actually a tank destroyer, WG the company that likes to make stuff up and claim it's "historically correct" hysterically incorrect would be more accurate.

      Delete
  9. Thank you for answering my question KGB. A preset system for the armament makes good sense. I know most people are excited about the BBs and CVs but I'm personally looking forward to the cruisers. Although I'm interested in hearing how the Alaska class cruisers will be handled. Will it be included in the BB line or possibly be a cross over from the cruiser line? I had thought it might make an interesting end tier for the cruisers.

    ReplyDelete
  10. What about Soviet Union's Aircraft Carrier they didn't have them in World War II are you going to add some prototypes?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, Soviet Navy will get paperships CV.

      Delete
  11. If you state your timeframe to be from 1905 - 1950 then not having the Royal Navy in becomes even more of a travesty. If you wish to include Japan to capture the Asian market by all means do so, as it may well be a commercially justifiable decision. However please do not use an apparently false reason because by that logic Germany should not have been a starting nation in World of Tanks because they never managed to properly build any Tier IX or X tanks (Maus prototype hardly counts).

    ReplyDelete
  12. Question about WoWs: one of the initial things that struck me as very odd is that there is no possibility to actually name your own ship (unless that changed) - why is that? I believe that names of the ships play much bigger role in history than the names of the planes or tanks.

    I understand the concerns about ships named "USS 18adolfhitler18" or some other idiotic names, but for example Star Trek Online has exactly this option and during the few months I spent playing it (casually tho), I have never seen a ship with a really retarded name. Besides, there wouldnt really HAVE to be a decal with the name, if that's too complex...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You named the right reason of not letting players actually naming their own ships: there will be many idiotic, bad and stupid names, which we don't want to let getting into the game.

      But we are also thinking about letting players to choose the name for a ship from one the names of its sisterships.

      Delete
    2. So picking usernames is fine but for every ship is just absolutely idiotic.

      Delete
  13. Fair enough, that makes sense. I just wonder if it would be possible to allow ALL the American names for ALL the American ships (and Japanese for the Japanese ships of coure) available, that would actually make the customisation much broader without too much realism issues, no?

    Either way, thank You for Your answer, KGB

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Allowing all ship names for a certain ship of a correspondent nation is also possible.
      Though it will be funny to see the Iowa named Fletcher or Yamato named Shimakaze ^^

      Delete
  14. "There will most possibly be a limit to at least one type of each plane type squadron on a CV, so that players cannot use fighters only or bombers only CVs."

    I've seen this handled before in mods for Hearts of Iron. There is a base unit called a CAG, which has a very small number of major upgrades to its basic stats. There are then any number of much smaller modifiers that can be added to the CAG's values by researching specific things - be they drop tanks, or particular aircraft. It would actually be an interesting design choice to make the CAG a major research tree in and of itself. It would be a similar balancing item to WoT's SPG tree requiring XP as if it's two tiers higher. Instead of higher XP for the carrier line, you'd need to upgrade both your carrier and your CAG tree.

    ReplyDelete
  15. No PTs and fast attack boats??? :(

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, sorry. These types of vessels are too small :)

      Delete
  16. No German Warships at the start? hmmm not woth me.
    Its an World War 2 Game and without the Germans its useless ;)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's not a WWII game, just like all World of ... series.

      Delete
  17. And submarines? I think there was one in the trailer, it's been taken out?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Submarines are not included in our game.

      Delete
  18. 1. And what with more specialized ships? Escort destroyers, Anti Aircraft cruisers, frigates?
    2. What about mines? Are you planning implement mines and mine laying ships?
    3. What nations are planned? Obvius are US, Germany, Japan, UK. I think France and Italy are a must. Besides any more? Australia? Netherlands? Maybe EU tree? Or South American tree?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Look at http://forum.worldofwarships.com/index.php?/forum/36-questions-to-developers/

      Delete
  19. Why wows eu forum has no active moderator? NA forum is active but EU is dead forum because moderators missing.

    ReplyDelete
  20. If it isn't going to be like the Battlstations series then how will it be? same as WOT? with the same view..i sure don't want a areial view..or rts view..at all

    ReplyDelete
  21. hi, where do we put our name down to try this game wether its alfa or beta,when is it likely to be out to play?

    ReplyDelete
  22. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Which will be look like? Navy field, Warship Gunner ?

    Warship Gunner:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-sV-Mg4zV4

    NF:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x08Uz-PomNs

    ReplyDelete
  24. gw2 gold Life is too short to wake up in the morning with regrets. So, love the people who treat you right and forget about the ones who do not gw2 gold, people who are serious about the relation are moody as they have devoted a lot that makes them worry about gains and losses guild wars 2 gold.

    ReplyDelete
  25. One meets its destiny on the road he takes to avoid it Cheap C9 Gold, If I could rearrange the alphabet, I'd put Y and I together c9 gold, People who are serious about the relation are moody as they have devoted a lot that makes them worry about gains and losses c9 online gold.

    ReplyDelete
  26. It takes strength to resist temptations and distractions Diablo iii Power Leveling, it takes strength to do what is right D3 PowerLeveling, it takes strength to do al these things. And all the while, these are the very things that build even more strength D3 Power Leveling.

    ReplyDelete
  27. All the articles you talked about inside post are extremely good and is very helpful. Let me maintain it in mind, thanks for expressing the information retain updating, excited to get more articles.
    лучший планшет

    ReplyDelete