Ahskance

For those which haven't read it, it is here:

We put out a statement 6 months ago and have been using that as a guidance document since. It's considered extremely important.

Personally, I've been fairly surprised at just how available everyone is in this company. I can send a message to the head of all our regions and expect a response within a day or two. I was definitely not expecting to be as empowered as I actually am.

I won't get into it in this thread, but in a few months we've been able to do things that myself as a player and many others I know would never have thought were possible. As in, we never would have thought there even was a chance for the change desired to happen. However, if there's a will to push something and sensible reason to do it, then initiatives are absolutely possible and encouraged.

There is a reason why I'm still in the office at 8:24pm. It's not because I've been asked to stay here. I just tend to stay because there's stuff going on and I'm genuinely interested in doing the work, perhaps because I lived this game for so long.

The events last year caused a significant internal change to our company. I can report that if there was disdain before, there is not now. We stay in close contact.

This is also a big reason why we were allowed to hire more staff for the Austin office to better keep up with all of the goings on. We're still looking for a Senior Community Manager as well as a 4th Community Manager, so we're not even at full strength yet. That being said, hiring is hard for everyone since labor is so tight everywhere.

Your point doesn't alter that the matchmaker is still picking from a Random assortment of whoever happened to queue at that moment.

You can queue alone or with friends, and that can and likely does directly impact the win rate of your team. However, the matchmaking that happens is still just a collection of people all stuffed into a match. The collection process... is random.

I wanted to reach out and let everyone know that we are aware of very strong player concern over the recent DevBlog which described Stun Bombs undergoing a Concept Test Only.

As a company, we tend to allow a few days for people to make their voices heard after a Dev Blog is published, then we collate feedback to collect it from all of our regions. If there is any update to share after all the information is gathered, we'll certainly let you know.

As for now, please give us time to collect everything and enjoy your weekend after making your voice heard.

-

If you have additional or specific feedback regarding the DevBlog, please leave it on our DevBlog announcement thread as that makes it extremely easy for us to locate.

https://forum.worldofwarships.com/topic/2...

We really do listen to feedback. I realize that it's regarded as a meme, but I am inside the company and see that feedback is received and acted upon. However, acting on something can occasionally take months due to the extensiveness of the pipeline we are actively working on.

There are instances when something goes live and is regarded as problematic, but was the result of 6-8 months of pipeline'd work. While this may be read as the "sunken cost" meme, it just means that if we're working 7+ months in the future that fixes and changes started immediately may end up being 7+ months in the future. Some things are able to cut in line, but we are a "manufacturing plant for content" in a sense, and it's very hard for a manufacturing plant to alter all the machinery on a responsive, short-term of notice.

This is why your have to go into a deeper discussion than just "Buff AA". The primary point I'll respond to in this post is about "viable attack wings"

We can assume that a CV will have approximately 50 Planes worth of resources each match (in terms of planes which can be lost). Depending on the loss-rate of Planes Per Attack, that can be a significant change in what the CV can expect to do.

If Planes are lost at a 2 Planes Per Attack rate, then the CV might field 20+ attacks.


If Planes are lost at a 3 Planes Per Attack rate, then the CV might field 13+ attacks.


If Planes are lost at a 4 Planes Per Attack rate, then the CV might field 10+ attacks.

In higher tiers, a single ship can kill 2-4 planes depending on its level of decent AA as well as positioning situation (kiting away or planes forced into a strange angle of attack). This is just from raw Continuous Damage and does not rely on Fl...

Your time estimates are very off, which is part of why talking about something that's only vaguely in a concept test is so extremely hard.

Moving and Shooting is the core of what people do. Consumables matter and are certainly important, but moving and shooting like normal is not the definition of "helpless".

I've responded to you previously.

Bottom/Top Tier games played is covered under "Ship Tier" as a thing the Matchmaker pays attention to.

Divisions are noted by the matchmaker in terms of a "maximum of 1 Division Difference per side", so I suppose I can reference that. However, the grabbing of those divisions is still providing from the random assortment of players that happened to queue at that time.

I wonder if the angle of your ship contributed. As in if the torps were launched with an up-angle immediately to aid them in rising. Previously I think torps were fired flat regardless of diveplane, but it's been a little while.

Please do remember that this IS a game forum. Correcting people on terminology can be helpful, but it's not ok to be aggressive over it.

I understand your intention is to keep "eyes on the prize" so to speak, but having been actively participating in the entire duration of a 400+ post thread and reading the same thing well over two hundred plus times means that repeating it isn't teaching me anything I'm not aware of.

Mind, these sentiments are also echoed on Reddit, YouTube, and on other forums for other server clusters. We are aware that the Community is very freaked out about "Stun Bombs"

With all due respect, just repeating the same thing over and over isn't changing the situation. It's very apparent that there's an extreme backlash to the Stun Bomb concept on our forum and other forms of active media.

Thank you for the reference!

To my knowledge that's not in the game at present as you can see the damage done by your AA. Whether you are alone or grouped, the damage number ticks are the same.

Again, thanks to the OP for the call-out so we could stop that account from doing bad things.

-

As for the thread, this is getting mildly heated and feeling like it might fall to attacks.

I'm going to lock this before we get to that point.

It is a functional design constraint that our Dev Team has to factor for, though. There is no other aspect in the game that "layers" on top of itself like AA can, therefore they have to be careful with the values that exist because of their ability to be overlapped.

I heard there was a time when there was a consideration of using "diminishing returns" for overlapped AA. This was shot down by angry community sentiment, but it would have allowed for buffed up solo-ship AA that diminished some when overlapped to avoid a similar problem. In effect, it would have allowed for more AA to exist overall.

California's raw Continuous Values are already very powerful. The problem isn't the absence or addition of a consumable but the concept of what "very powerful" means. In the current system, the California can kill multiple planes per strike against it, and cause massive plane loss when paired with another ship's AA. The perception that losing just a few planes doesn't matter is incorrect as plane loss is just like "mana loss" in other games. Planes are a resource mechanic and will be exhausted when used at a significant enough loss-rate.

I've only been here for around 3.5 months, so there's a lot of prior experience that I haven't had. So, referencing previous issues is something that I can't speak to because I really don't have the background on it.

What I can say is that I'm, to my knowledge, the first Post-Rework CV Main that's played at a Hurricane level which has been hired. A big part of what a Community Manager is supposed to do is to translate feedback into an understandable format, which is something I believe that I am uniquely capable of doing when it comes to CVs and CV/Surface Ship interactions. That being said, I've played Thousands of CV games and I am not of the belief that AA is worthless because I've been in a lot of situations where it was NOT worthless. So, this is not a case of preaching to a choir.

I am absolutely interested in having an in-depth discussion about AA mechanics and trying to relay feedback on what results. One-liners and such aren't going to b...

The concept of "Stun Bomb" in the test only stops consumables. It doesn't stop movement or shooting or any other ship characteristic. This is fundamentally different from waiting 5-7 minutes for an opportunity to shoot at or interact with something because the "stunned" ship could just continue to move and shoot as normal.