Tpaktop2_1 NA Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 I was watching Flamu on the latest Lesta blog proposals This caught my eyes: Quote Exclusive" upgrades Currently, US battleships have two upgrades that are not available to battleships of all other nations. These are two modifications of the "Central Artillery Post" (slots 3 and 6). In the new system, we want to ensure that everyone is on an equal footing in terms of "pumping" ships. In addition, all this time only US battleships had "exclusive" upgrades - the system of such upgrades did not receive further development. Adding such upgrades for ships of other nations and classes, as well as their support in the new system would be very difficult due to the large number of ships in our game and could potentially lead to balance issues. Therefore, both "Central Artillery Post" upgrades will be removed from the game. However, US battleships will still be able to get -11% to shell dispersion, as well as increase the range of the main guns due to other upgrades, which will be available to all ships. The "Guidance System Modification 0" upgrade available to Katori, Yubari, and Iwaki A will also be removed from the game. The bonuses provided by the upgrade will be fully transferred to the performance characteristics of these three Japanese cruisers. Updated system In the new system, we not only wanted to achieve a solution to the above problems, but also planned to make the system itself more understandable and convenient for players. All current upgrades available for installation will be distributed not in 6, but in 5 slots. At the same time, some upgrades will be removed or moved to another slot, some upgrades will be combined, and the bonuses of some of them will be revised or redistributed to other upgrades. The new system will look like this (in brackets next to each slot is the ship level at which this slot becomes available) Please note: The names for the new upgrades are still in development. Existing names may also be changed in the future to accommodate the new bonuses. Source: blog.korabli.su/blog/552 They are messing with the death pickle! So equipment is being folded into hidden ship parameters. Deadeye is also making a comeback for superships. And all equipment is going the way like the cammo simplification. I hope WG does not follow suit. 1 1 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jakob Knight Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 Well, I guess having national differences is a 'problem' for Lesta. Wonder when USN ships will get torpedoes and UK ships get universal HE rounds? The upgrades they are doing away with are part of how the USN line was designed and balanced in the game, and to just remove it without buffing the ships significantly smacks of design blindness (or worse) by Lesta. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ensign Cthulhu Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 21 minutes ago, Jakob Knight said: and to just remove it without buffing the ships significantly smacks of design blindness (or worse) by Lesta. We want to share with you early the initial design of these changes, as well as the key goals we want to achieve. We would also like to point out right away that if the efficiency of certain ships in the new system changes significantly, we will definitely make the necessary changes on a targeted basis. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdmiralThunder Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 I won't watch Mr. Toxic so no idea what it is all about other than the bit posted here but leave it to Lesta (the old WOWS dev for WG) to mess with something that actually isn't broken. That is classic them and WG overall. Let's mess up something that actually works (overall) and no one complains about while ignoring all the bugs and problems people do complain about and ignore all the QOL stuff players ask for. Is anyone really surprised? Hopefully this doesn't give WG ideas for our version of the game. Leave the upgrade system alone. If anything a few tweaks to some of the existing ones so they actually are worth considering, like the AA ones, but otherwise it is fine as is. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jakob Knight Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 33 minutes ago, Ensign Cthulhu said: We want to share with you early the initial design of these changes, as well as the key goals we want to achieve. We would also like to point out right away that if the efficiency of certain ships in the new system changes significantly, we will definitely make the necessary changes on a targeted basis. The problem here is that they are specifically targeting certain ships to -remove- core aspects that significantly affect their performance, and doing so with the full intention of such changes causing significant changes. Thus, their idea of 'necessary changes' doesn't seem to me to be about restoring what is lost, but making sure it is lost completely. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derf Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 s 16 minutes ago, Jakob Knight said: The problem here is that they are specifically targeting certain ships to -remove- core aspects that significantly affect their performance, and doing so with the full intention of such changes causing significant changes. Thus, their idea of 'necessary changes' doesn't seem to me to be about restoring what is lost, but making sure it is lost completely. "stronk armerican ship not needed anymore... here on RU server we want to bully them out of the water" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ensign Cthulhu Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 10 minutes ago, Jakob Knight said: Thus, their idea of 'necessary changes' doesn't seem to me to be about restoring what is lost, but making sure it is lost completely. Let me guess, you're a US BB main who's raging at the potential loss of your extra-long range and extra-tight dispersion? If that's the case, why not come right out and say it? Declare your own interest up front, so we can have an honest conversation about how much is just OMG LESTA IS CHANGING STUFF and how much is motivated by self-interest. I would remind you that the second iteration of their Signals review plan had MAJOR changes when compared with the first. I wish we had a sub-forum for English-speaking Mir Korably players so they could come here and give us their own take. One positive change I note about the intended new system is that the New Slot 5 rate of fire buff no longer nerfs turret traverse time. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArIskandir Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 Really hopes this stays in Russia 3 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ensign Cthulhu Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 8 minutes ago, ArIskandir said: Really hopes this stays in Russia People on these forums keep asking for shake-ups to the game that don't just involve spamming new ship lines... and then Lesta goes ahead and does it and the same Western players scream blue murder. 🤣 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOBTHEBALL Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 27 minutes ago, derf said: s "stronk armerican ship not needed anymore... here on RU server we want to bully them out of the water" I know this is a joke but do remember the US TT is one of the more powerful ones in-game. Especially USN BBs (Wisconsin, Vermont, Rhode Island and Ohio) On another note, I kind of like these changes to the normal equipment. If I had an account on Lesta I would definitely go try them out. And maybe with the supership upgrades Novosibirsk will be playable lmao. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frostbow Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 27 minutes ago, Ensign Cthulhu said: Let me guess, you're a US BB main who's raging at the potential loss of your extra-long range and extra-tight dispersion? If that's the case, why not come right out and say it? Declare your own interest up front, so we can have an honest conversation about how much is just OMG LESTA IS CHANGING STUFF and how much is motivated by self-interest. Why are you degrading the conversation with your personal attacks? You can still continue to defend Wargaming without resorting to ad hominems. 7 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfswetpaws Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frostbow Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 3 minutes ago, Ensign Cthulhu said: People on these forums keep asking for shake-ups to the game that don't just involve spamming new ship lines... and then Lesta goes ahead and does it and the same Western players scream blue murder. 🤣 You are not the playerbase. Keep that in mind. Everyone has the right to say what they want in the game, in the same manner no one is stopping you from defending WG with every breath you take. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HogHammer Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 At this point, Lesta and WG are on totally different game development paths. For the past year, those differences have really become more and more apparent. For a time, I thought that if things "normalized," the two companies could get back together and have relatively the same game. That time is well past its expiration date. 4 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AncalagonTheWyrm Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 4 minutes ago, Ensign Cthulhu said: People on these forums keep asking for shake-ups to the game that don't just involve spamming new ship lines... and then Lesta goes ahead and does it and the same Western players scream blue murder. 🤣 Because none of the changes actually are what people had in mind? Sure, getting crapped on is a change... doesn't make it a good one. Anyway, while I have no interest whatsoever in playing American battleships, less uniqueness and less customizability is a bad thing. 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArIskandir Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 12 minutes ago, Ensign Cthulhu said: People on these forums keep asking for shake-ups to the game that don't just involve spamming new ship lines... and then Lesta goes ahead and does it and the same Western players scream blue murder. 🤣 I don't like it because I always want more complexity, these moves towards a simplification of the game... maybe it is better for the game given the apparent player base inexperience, but it is not attractive to me. I will always want more challenges and complexity from my games, I stopped enjoying arcades after my teens. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jakob Knight Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 54 minutes ago, Ensign Cthulhu said: Let me guess, you're a US BB main who's raging at the potential loss of your extra-long range and extra-tight dispersion? If that's the case, why not come right out and say it? Declare your own interest up front, so we can have an honest conversation about how much is just OMG LESTA IS CHANGING STUFF and how much is motivated by self-interest. I would remind you that the second iteration of their Signals review plan had MAJOR changes when compared with the first. I wish we had a sub-forum for English-speaking Mir Korably players so they could come here and give us their own take. One positive change I note about the intended new system is that the New Slot 5 rate of fire buff no longer nerfs turret traverse time. Actually, I'm a brawler in my USN BBs. My beef with this is that the things they are removing have been part of the USN design and balancing since the very start of the game, and accounted for some of the things they lacked in comparison to other BBs. That Lesta thinks this is a 'problem' is what really concerns me, especially since they are doing this on the basis of 'fairness'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArIskandir Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 8 minutes ago, Jakob Knight said: That Lesta thinks this is a 'problem' is what really concerns me, especially since they are doing this on the basis of 'fairness'. If you ask me, all that argument line reads 'political'... it is not only 'unfair' but 'unpatriotic' for the USN to have something other's don't. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdmiralThunder Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 (edited) 38 minutes ago, Frostbow said: Why are you degrading the conversation with your personal attacks? You can still continue to defend Wargaming without resorting to ad hominems. Having failed to gain CC status or be hired by WG he has branched out and expanded his efforts to the RU version of the game. Funny how he is now defending a game developer that has nothing to do with this one. Seems to take the opposite view just to be a contrarian. Edited July 19 by AdmiralThunder 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdmiralThunder Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 26 minutes ago, ArIskandir said: I don't like it because I always want more complexity, these moves towards a simplification of the game... maybe it is better for the game given the apparent player base inexperience, but it is not attractive to me. I will always want more challenges and complexity from my games, I stopped enjoying arcades after my teens. And to add to that I don't want WG messing with something that actually works. Their track record in that regard is abysmal. Asking for changes in WOWS can be a very dangerous thing; they might do it! 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jakob Knight Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 22 minutes ago, AdmiralThunder said: Having failed to gain CC status or be hired by WG he has branched out and expanded his efforts to the RU version of the game. Funny how he is now defending a game developer that has nothing to do with this one. Seems to take the opposite view just to be a contrarian. Look, people have long displayed a tendency to try to justify their own ideas for how the game should be changed for themselves as something intended in the interest of the game, so I don't take what he said as completely unfounded, just not applicable in this case. And he and @HogHammer bring up a good point. Lesta's game has diverged from WOWS enough that there is no more direct comparison of changes possible in terms of game balance...the factors of difference have become too great. Mir Korablej is it's own game now, and the changes they are making are within their own environment. If and when these changes come to WOWS, I will be rightfully angry and question WG's decision, but this particular time it's more like discussing changes to a game I never played. I think it may be coming time to diverge any discussions of Mir Korablej into their own section and away from the ones discussing WOWS. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ensign Cthulhu Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 26 minutes ago, AdmiralThunder said: Having failed to gain CC status or be hired by WG There is absolutely no possibility of me going to work for WG, since I'm not a citizen of any country in which they have an office, and I really don't want to go through the emigration process a second time. Nor do I particularly want to give up my day job. As far as being a CC is concerned, one tilt at that was enough. If I try again it will be after I retire, assuming that both I and the game are still here when I'm that old. 33 minutes ago, AdmiralThunder said: he has branched out and expanded his efforts to the RU version of the game + 35 minutes ago, AdmiralThunder said: Funny how he is now defending a game developer that has nothing to do with this one. Regardless of what Hoghammer says, I'm not entirely convinced that we won't get Lesta's changes in the long run (it would not surprise me to see the signals change ring in the new year, for example), so I'm going to start taking a look at them now and seeing how they would change the way I play the game and how I would adapt to them. Yes, it would absolutely be a major shake-up, amounting to a clean slate in terms of mechanics. Nothing that anyone had relied on regarding ship builds would be valid any more, but just take a look at the evolution of the commander skills tree and training system between the start of the game and the commander skills rework (i.e. BEFORE that rework happened) and you will see that there were some seismic shifts there too. For example, BFT used to be one point, but Concealment Expert used to cost FIVE and the sane maximum of commander skill points was eighteen. Those changes made every how-to video and guide obsolete overnight, since it significantly affected the order in which one could take one's skills as one built a captain, and they only retained validity for those who had played enough at that stage to have maxed-out commanders who could take everything. 19 point commanders being affordable (they were nauseatingly expensive before that; wasn't it something like TEN MILLION CXP to get that last point?) and ECXP were game-changers. The landscape has changed and the landscape will change again. If we get the Lesta changes, we will at least get fair warning of how it is going to change. 32 minutes ago, AdmiralThunder said: Seems to take the opposite view just to be a contrarian. Someone needs to play devil's advocate. 13 minutes ago, Jakob Knight said: I think it may be coming time to diverge any discussions of Mir Korablej into their own section and away from the ones discussing WOWS. And to welcome active MK players into that discussion. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel_Allan_Clark Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 1 hour ago, Frostbow said: Why are you degrading the conversation with your personal attacks? You can still continue to defend Wargaming without resorting to ad hominems. It appears to be the EC way. He's done it to me often enough that I have him permanently blocked. Most of us probably should, to be honest. I'm much happier when I don't have to read his stuff. 1 hour ago, HogHammer said: At this point, Lesta and WG are on totally different game development paths. For the past year, those differences have really become more and more apparent. For a time, I thought that if things "normalized," the two companies could get back together and have relatively the same game. That time is well past its expiration date. Indeed. Early on it was interesting to see what MK was doing since everything was so close...but now, they really are diverging into two different games. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jakob Knight Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 7 minutes ago, Ensign Cthulhu said: And to welcome active MK players into that discussion. Of course. The point would be to keep the discussions of one game from overlapping with the other, so discussing what happens in MK isn't taken in the light of WOWS, and vice versa. Just because MK might decide to introduce guided missile ekranoplans would not mean WOWS players would have to scream murder at WG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frostbow Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 29 minutes ago, Ensign Cthulhu said: Someone needs to play devil's advocate. To be very clear and honest about it, you have not been playing devil's advocate. Your posts have long established your online reputation as the Defender of Wargaming and certainly not as a devil's advocate. Remember how you repeatedly tried and yet failed to poke holes on LWM's review of San Diego? How about that time you blamed the entire playerbase for the Makarov fiasco, only to get a Makarov yourself? Or that time you derided a fellow player's experience in CVs only to find out that player's WR in CVs is at least 14% higher than yours? If you desire to be the devil's advocate, the very least you can do is to focus on the discussion, and leave your ad hominems at the door. 4 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts