Highest Reputation Content

Dear Community Members,

TLR at the bottom... but please, if possible read the whole thing. I really need community support on these issues.

As an avid fan of anything aviation related, I am very excited to see a free-to-play combat aviation themed game being produced by one of my favorite game studios! I have been waiting for World of Warplanes since I was about 12 years old. World of Warplanes isn't just another air combat game, World of Warplanes is redefining the entire air combat genre. This is why it is important that World of Warplanes be made as awesome as possible.

So, now that that's out of the way, I'll give a short introduction on myself...

I'm (obviously) an aviation nut. I've played everything from Red Ace Squadron to Aces High II. For those of you who don't follow the genre, that is everything from totally arcade to full-real simulator. I am currently working towards getting my Private Pilot's License and have approximately 36 hours of real-world flying experience. I have flown a Diamond DA-20, Piper Cherokee, Piper Archer II, Cessna 152, and a Cessna  172. I have also soloed in a Cessna 172.

I do not wish for this game to become a flight simulator. There are plenty of those out there already. If I wanted to play a flight simulator, I would go play Aces High II or something similar. I want World of Warplanes to become what it was advertised as, the ultimate hybrid of simulator and arcade.

As a tester who has invested a lot of time in World of Warplanes from the earliest stages of Alpha Testing until now; I would like to bring my opinions on the state of the game and the direction the Developers are taking it to both the community and the developers. Please bear in mind as you read this that this is MY OPINION. I am entitled to have my opinions, and everyone else is entitled to have theirs. If you agree or disagree, please state why/why not and make this discussion useful. My last topic like this got closed due to some closed minded people spamming about Warthunder being better. Let's please keep this one alive and helpful!

So, without further ado, we will get down to business!

World of Warplanes' main focus has until recently been on player skill. In many cases it was possible to destroy an aircraft of a higher tier in an aircraft of much lower tier. Not so any more. Some of you may say this is as it should be, however, when we take a deeper look of what makes it work the way it currently works (which I agree a lower tier plane should have a VERY hard time destroying a higher tier plane...) it will quickly become obvious what issues we are running into. In my opinion, there are four main issues we need to look at; Aircraft Tiers, Flight Physics, Control Issues, and Randomization. I will outline each below.

Aircraft tiers - that touchy subject which Wargaming.net really doesn't want us to talk about too much... The aircraft in World of Warplanes were placed in their initial tiers before they were even created. This means they were pretty much abstractly matched at specific tiers. What is the issue with this? The issue is four-fold.

• Aircraft performance is being tweaked to fit the planes into the tiers they were originally set in. This means that some aircraft get a large buff from what they could realistically accomplish, and some are getting massive nerfs to make them stay where the developers want them without being OP. This obviously results in people being disappointed by the aircraft if they knew anything about the real aircraft. While this is secondary, it is a valid consideration and in no way affects my original point on this topic.
  
• Weapon statistics are being changed to try to equalize aircraft which should not be facing each other. Again, this shouldn't be an issue if the planes are matched at the correct tiers.
  
• It perpetuates the false idea that World of Warplanes is supposed to be a 'World War II Game'. The developers are trying to match planes that actually fought against each other in the same tiers for 'historical reasons'. This makes the continuity of gameplay an issue when you get to around tier 8. You begin to see aircraft that feel out of place as until then, the focus has been on World War II.
  
• Military aircraft designs are based on getting a 'one-up' on your opponent. This means that one nation would create an 'OP plane' which would rule the skies until the next nation made an even more 'OP plane' that made the original 'OP plane' under-powered.

Flight Physics - The topic nobody seems to be able to agree on. If you don't agree with me here, that is perfectly fine. I have had disagreements with a lot of people about this topic. I still believe that there is a good balance we can achieve here and that is what I'd like to work towards in this section.

• Altitude compression is really messing the game up. It creates a lot of 'traffic jams' in the combat zone that wouldn't be there if the altitude scaled correctly. It also ends up making vertical maneuvers drastically change your aircraft effectiveness due to the optimal altitude zones being so small which again is due to the whole altitude compression system. Also, if you think about it, we have vertical compression, but NOT horizontal compression. This means that for everything to feel realistic, our aircraft will make MUCH larger loops than they should since they loop, etc at the same scale as they turn... this means that we will go up a lot higher than we should during a loop, and also go down a lot more than we should. This results in a bad trade of energy for altitude as it is much harder to get up than down. Altitude compression really needs to go. (Yes, this means maps need to be larger so they don't look stupid.)

• Roll response should be re-considered. This in my opinion is one of the most frustrating aspects of the current flight model. For some reason, Wargaming.net decided it would be a good idea to make the roll rates very slow. This results in the game not conveying the adrenaline rush of air combat properly in my opinion. Is it realistic? In some cases yes, but in others no. Is it fun? Most definitely not. If anyone has watched the trailers for World of Warplanes, they will quickly notice that the aircraft portrayed in the trailer really convey the adrenaline rush of air combat, and it is through the speed and maneuverability of the aircraft in the trailer that this is properly conveyed. Why would you create a trailer that shows fast-paced action and then make a game that feels like World of Flying Bricks? It doesn't add up. I have been talking to the developers about this for over a year and have only seen backward progress. This needs to change.
  
• Stalls - I should really call them 'loss of momentum/falling out of the sky' because that's pretty much what they are. Stalls are not really effected by the aircraft's center of gravity, which makes them very un-predictable. Seriously, there is something wrong when it is easier to stall/recover a plane in real life than it is in a game which is supposedly taking  the hard parts out of flying. Stalls need to be simplified to a quick drop of the nose when the aircraft stalls. Not very realistic, but it gives the basic idea of a stall and is very easy to recover from. No spins, no snaps, just a simple quick nose drop which would automatically initiate a recovery. Get rid of the 'mush' and control slop just before the stall and just bring the stall on as quickly as possible. Right now it is more a combination of a tail slide and a stall and a hammer-head turn. Any one of these three things could be the main contributing factor in any situation, which makes it very un-predictable which = hard to understand which = not much fun.
  
• Aircraft speed, plain and simple, our planes need to go faster. Nobody likes flying around at what feels like 50 mph. It just isn't fun. When close to the ground (50m and lower) we shouldn't really be able to see what the terrain looks like directly beside us. The terrain should be going by so quickly we wouldn't be able to focus on it very well. I'm not seeing anything like this in World of Warplanes. Wargaming didn't even attempt to make a motion-blur effect to give us the illusion of speed. This also should be changed. Preferably without the blur effect, but even that would be better than nothing. (Just saying that this will not benefit people with lower end computers if the motion-blur effect is used instead of actually speeding the planes up.) Also, increasing aircraft speed would make effective use of the terrain possible as at those speeds a pilot with the skill to fly close to the ground would in most cases be likely to shake his/her pursuer or cause him/her to crash.

Controls, the issue that has been fixed, broken, fixed, broken, and then 'fixed' again...

• Mouse 0.4.1 - I don't really know what is going on with this one, I cannot even begin to imagine how to use it. I have tried it several times and every time gave up in utter frustration. I simply cannot follow what is going on with my mouse while I try to fight other aircraft and evade most of the enemy team which somehow always manages to find out where I like to be.
  
• 'Mouse' - what used to be called 'World of Tanks Mouse'... I really enjoy this mouse mode when flying my ground attack aircraft. It is much more precise than the keyboard or joystick when trying to aim at a motionless target. It is absolutely terrible for air-to-air combat, but is awesome for air-to-ground operations. The automated processes in the controls file do not properly recognize roll/loop inputs and will often combine them in a very un-expected way. This is a very minor issue in the ground attack role (which I'm pretty sure it was designed for) but can cause major issues in air-to-air combat.
  
• Keyboard - the keyboard controls are decent, pretty much what you would expect from a flying game. Unfortunately there isn't really much that can be done to improve the keyboard controls unless somebody designs a vacuum-tube keyboard that could have more than a simple I/O operating method.
  
• Joysticks - joysticks are absolutely horrible. They were improved drastically with the inclusion of custom curves, but the response is still very much sub-par. Anyone who has played any flying game using a joystick will agree that there is no other game out there that does not let you aim properly with a joystick. I think the Developers should get a copy of Microsoft Flight Simulator X, or any other version of Flight Simulator post 1998 and see how the joystick controls the plane with the flight model set as un-realistically as possible. (Because I don't want y'all to think I'm trying to turn this game into a sim...) THAT is how joystick response should feel. Anything else is un-acceptable.
  
• Sadly I have absolutely no experience with a game controller so I will have to leave that out of my topic.

Randomization - probably the single most hated 'feature' of World of Warplanes. Random gun dispersion, random chance to blow a wing/tail/engine off, etc.
What is wrong with randomization? It removes player skill from the game. If I wanted to play a game that had nothing to do with skill, I would go play the lottery. So, I will address my main concerns with randomization.

• Gun Dispersion is a randomization technique Wargaming is using to attempt to either compensate for lag, or to 'even the playing field'. This is extremely frustrating for decent to good pilots as it absolutely ruins a good attack and can even cost your aircraft in some situations. It voids the skill of being able to hold a perfect lead on a target as your bullets do not even go where you are aiming them all the time. This in my opinion is un-acceptable. I believe that the dispersion from your guns should come from the convergence distance of your guns. This should be player-modifiable within a specific range. See the diagram below for details.

What would this accomplish? Implementing a gun-convergence distance that is player-modifiable would create the 'gun dispersion' that Wargaming is looking to implement in a consistent, predictable way that would not affect player skill. It would allow for the customization of play-style to almost anything a player could ask for as it would be completely customizable to the player's style. If a player likes to get in extremely close before shooting at an opponent, they would set their convergence distance to something like 150-200m. If they like to shoot from far out, they would set it to something like 700m. Anything outside of about a 100m buffer zone (50 meters ahead of, and 50 meters behind the convergence point) would have too much gun dispersion to be effective. Players could still achieve hits and deal damage, but the main weight of fire would not be focused on the opponent's aircraft. (Which is what gun dispersion currently effects in-game.) This would create approximately a 50m 'sweet spot' where almost all of your fire hits your target if you aim correctly. This is consistent with real air combat and makes the game more fun.

• Random chance for critical damage is also very frustrating. Just like in tanks, you cannot aim at a module and deliberately destroy it. You have to get lucky with the random number generator to get a critical hit that actually is a critical hit. The odds of getting a critical hit in World of Warplanes is obviously a little better than in tanks, but it is still frustrating nonetheless. Please note, the chances of being able to deliberately aim at a module in World of Warplanes is MUCH lower than in World of Tanks due to the speed of the aircraft relative to each other as well, so there should be less 'random' about this than in Tanks simply because of that fact. The random is already there because of the nature of air combat.

TLR?
So, if the world was perfect, and Wargaming.net would create the game exactly how I would envision it, what would be the result? (sarcasm turned on there about the world being perfect...) World of Warplanes would represent almost all aspects of aviation in an easy to understand package that would give the average gamer a fun game to play that is easy to learn, but hard to master, and it would give the mainly sim guys a fun game to play when they get tired of flying straight-up sims and want some quick action. This would be accomplished by removing the 'slush' from stalls, speeding up all aircraft, re-tiering the aircraft by their capabilities, fixing the control issues, getting rid of altitude compression, increasing roll rates in almost all aircraft (un-realistic, but more fun), and making everything feel more fluid.
If you support any of these ideas, please let the developers know! I have been asking for these changes to be made for about a year now, and I am always being told that we need more support from the community to have stuff like this implemented. I know a lot of you may be comfortable with the way things are now, but the game is not really drawing many people at this point, and there is probably a good explanation for that. Please show some support and post in this thread or +1 this post to show that there is support for this idea!


Cheers!
Glenn

Pilots!

Since many threads were made and some information is hard to find, I decided to make a separate one for the  events from last week..

When do I get my gold?

We will be sent the results for these events on Monday, the 17th.

They will be processed at that time.

Your gold should be delivered 2 weeks from Monday, so around July 2nd.

Sorry, but this is not an automated event, and must be done manually.

Thanks for understanding!

Psyrenn

Ok, this'll be my big all encompassing guide to skinning. To help make it easier to read I'll just go through the process, stopping to explain bits as I go along. Please note: Do read the entire thing, there's some important notes at the end. Anyway, on with the show.


Necessary Software
First off , you'll need some sort of photo editing software that is capable of working with .dds files. The majority of editing software doesn't come WITH the capability of editing .dds files, and for those you will need plugins. Some that come to mind are Gimp, Paint.net and Photoshop, Gimp and Paint.net being freeware and Photoshop costing, well... a lot. Here are a few links to guide you to the proper software:

Gimp (the actual program): http://www.gimp.org/
Gimp (the .dds plugin): http://registry.gimp.org/node/70
Photoshop (the .dds plugin): https://developer.nv...adobe-photoshop
Paint.net (the actual program): http://www.getpaint.net/ (Direct .dds support, does not require plugins)

Obviously I can't link you to the actual program Photoshop, as that's what we call pirating, and that is bad. There may be a trial version however.

You will also need a program to extract the .dds files from the .pkg files that the game uses, as well as repackage your modified .dds files back into the .pkg files. The only ones that come to mind for me are 7zip and Winrar, 7zip being open source software and Winrar being a payed for program, but having a trial time period that you could use. Here's link for those as well:

7zip: http://www.7-zip.org/
Winrar: http://www.win-rar.c...nload.html?&L=0

For the rest of this guide everything you see will be done with Photoshop and Winrar, as that's what I use, though I'd imagine the other programs work pretty similar. Installing everything should be pretty simple so I'm not going to go through that process.

Locating the .dds Files
First off, after you've got your necessary software installed (if you didn't already have it), your going to need to locate the .dds files for the plane you want to skin. For this guide I'll be using the Bf 109 G, since it's the only plane I've FULLY skinned so far.

Navigate to where the .pkg files are located (mine are a little different since I didn't install in the default location, but you'll get the idea) and copy it to, for example, your desktop.


Next, change the file extension from .pkg to .zip, and select yes when it gives you the warning about changing file extensions. (A note on this: Alex mentioned that you do not have to change the file extension, but that you can simply extract the files using whatever extraction software your using.)


Now, using the extraction software we've got we simply extract the files. I always use the "extract to (insert file destination here)" method, as I find it's the easiest, and I can always move the folder/files around afterwards.


Now we've got all those folders with all those .dds files. (Mind you I've got some extra .psd files from previously working on skins.)


Editing the .dds Files
Let's go ahead and open the GR11_BF109G_hangar file (default skin file). You can do that by opening it through your photo editing software or, since we installed the .dds plugins, simply double click the file. (You may have to right click the file, select properties, and make whatever program your using the default for this to work, and if you do if makes life much easier.)


Once the program starts up and the file opens you'll get a little box like this. Make sure you open the file at the default sizes.


Now you've got your skin open in your photo editing software and your free do play with it as much as you want, just make sure you don't rotate it, or it will look all sorts of weird in game because nothing will match up right. Then when your done playing around with it, simply save it over the currently existing .dds file.


When you go to save it you'll get yet another dialogue box like this. Make sure you've got everything set like I do in this picture. (It's all default so I'd imagine Gimp users can just leave everything defaulted.)


Repackaging the .dds Files
Now we go ahead and open our extracting/packaging software, locate, and open the games .pkg archive.


When your locating the .pkg archives within your extracting/packaging software you'll have to make sure it's looking for all file types, as the .pkg files may not show up otherwise. Once you do that you'll be able to see the .pkg file.


Now, still within the extraction/packaging software, we navigate to where the .dds file is located.


Now you'll click and drag the .dds file you modified pretty much anywhere in the folder you have open with your extraction/packaging software, with the exception of into one of those top three folders.


Now you'll get one last dialogue box. Make sure you have everything set like I do. (Aka: The default way.)


That's it, now your ready to go fly your pretty new plane!

Final Notes (Notes with dates have been added at a later time, just putting the dates there to make new ones easier to find.)
Please note that you should not have WoWP open while doing all this. Aside from the demand on your computer, you won't be able to repackage your .dds files if it's open. It should also be noted that you need to back up your original .pkg files in case you mess anything up.

I have heard that some planes are not skinnable. I however have not yet run into this problem, though I have not skinned every plane in the game, so you may come across one that you can't. I have also run into problems with blanking out the country insignia, kill markers, unit numbers, and the other common files. The last time I tried messing with them I broke something or other and had to resort to reinstalling to fix the issue. (My fault for not backing anything up.)

4/15/2013
It does not SEEM that changing the image size of the .dds file affects the skin, at least not increasing it, as long as you go in multiples rather than decimals. For example, I was able to 4x the size of the P-51A skin with no problem, albiet a huge file size. Another note on that as well, keep in mind if you do increase the size of the image, the greatly increases the size of the file, therefore decreasing game performance. Testing it on the 51A, when I 4x'ed the image, the file size shot up to roughly 30mb, though it does look better. Just something to keep in mind.

I take no responsibility for broken games. Modding any game is a risk, but if you do it properly everything should be fine.

Have any questions? Feel free to ask. Also, if there is any way I can improve this guide, please do let me know, as this is an ongoing project of mine.

Lastly, a big thanks goes out to DrSinister for helping me figure out how to get skins to work in WoWP.

StormTroopr

When will the developers create a NEW PR Number for the NEW Hall Of Fame - There are well over 1800 Pilots now on the NEW HOF. Currently there are ONLY 1st, 2nd, 3rd place etc.for each STAT category. By creating a NEW equation they can instantly fix the current Clan Rating system -- Swap out the OLD 1.9 PR numbers for the NEW PR number. Plug that into the Clan Rating equation and voila' - a completely new, and correct rating number is generated AND, all of the existing CLANS that are holding their positions with ABSENTEE/PLACE holders no longer playing, will fall to where they really should be - AT the BOTTOM of the list; Those clans will be replaced with clans who have pilots that stayed to learn and play 2.0 , and will rewarded for their efforts to move their respective clans to the top of the list . IT is time for that to happen to reward the real people who have chosen to stay and play.

This game is unflyable with the mouse in it's current state.
Im a good pilot on BF3, and Im using the exact same configuration as BF3 for controls in WoWP but those planes are uncontrollable.
The weirdest thing is that green vector+dot. You dont control your plane, you make it follow a carrot on a stick which gives a terrible sensation of laggyness and unprecision.
I don't know who had this terrible idea but you need to get rid of that garbage, or at least give us the possibility of controlling our plane like in BF3 with the mouse.
We want our mouse to "be" the plane and respond to it's movement immediatly, not this horrible thing you invented.

im not flying again untill this is fixed.

They are giving away codes for the following:

• Vehicles/Planes:
  • Curtiss P-40 M-105 (U.S.S.R.)
  • Messerschmitt Me 209 V4 (Germany)        
  • Vickers Venom (U.K.)
  • Bell XFL-1 Airabonita (U.S.A.) 
  • Curtiss Tomahawk IIb (China)
• Premium Time: 3 Days
• Credits: 500,000 
  Enjoy ! Link below..
  https://games.steels...de-key-giveaway

Flight Model, What's broke and how to fix it.

Here we go.  Make sure you seat backs and tray tables are in their full upright and locked position...

• There needs to be a sensation of speed, which we're not getting right now.  This may have to do with the relationship of the scale of objects to aircraft.  On National Park, for example, trees feel HUGE compared to the aircraft.  I mean c'mon, they're not Sequoias or Redwoods.  If I'm going over 200mph those trees should be whizzing by like mad, not lazily plodding past like a guy on a bicycle.  At 400mph, low-level, I shouldn't even be able to SEE trees.  It should just be just a green blur.
  
  • Making the plane shake does NOT imply the feeling of an increase in speed.  It's an annoyance.  It throws off my aim.
    
  • The zooming in during acceleration works....kind of.

• Roll inertia is getting better, but it needs to increase more, meaning fighters with "clean" wings should have a more rapid instantaneous roll rate, and bomb- and rocket-laden aircraft should have a drastically reduced instantaneous roll rate.  This would have the side benefit of making people think twice before loading their F4U or La-5 with rockets, bombs, etc.

• As previously stated, the ceiling needs to be raised, and aircraft performance compensated as such.  The fear that the combat will take place at higher altitudes will be negated by the fact that aircraft will still be attacking ground targets at low-level, and therefore fighters will be forced to either fly low to take these aircraft out or suffer their consequences.

• Speed loss in a turn still needs to be more.  In a near knife-edge turn, at full power, with flaps deployed, I should still be losing speed, not maintaining it.  I have been forced to "fly the game" rather than "fly the plane" because of this.

• Stalls need to be abrupt.  Like 1,000% moreso than they are now.  These are big, heavy fighters.  They don't wallow.  They don't "get mushy" when they stall.  They break, and they break hard, and they usually DO NOT break straight ahead when they stall.  Heck, I've had a Piper Arrow break from a stall and nearly spin on me harder than a Corsair stalls in-game (background:  the Piper Arrow III is a notoriously stable single-engine aircraft, whereas the Corsair, improperly flown, could spin very easily).

• Rudder effectiveness needs to increase nearly 100%.  If I tromp on a rudder in a big fighter such as the ones in-game, the nose should displace at least 20-30% immediately, and continue displacing (at a reduced rate) as long as I hold down the rudder.  Currently it displaces about 10% immediately, and then slows down to about 2-3 degrees per second.  This is laughable.  Also, there is no roll due to yaw.  Basic aerodynamics shows that if you increase airflow over a surface (like in an uncoordinated turn caused by rudder deflection), that surface will create an increase in lifting force.  Therefore, the outside wing in a turn receives more airflow (since it's going momentarily faster), and should raise up in the direction of the turn.  THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN.  It can't be hard to implement, and would add an element of realism to the game.

• I'm not sure how else to phrase this, but at extremely low altitude (like below 100ft AGL), the ground sometimes seems to "suck" aircraft towards it.  Make it stop.

• This may not be FM related, but it's frustrating nonetheless.  REDUCE THE BOMB PROXIMITY TIME DELAY.  I cannot count the number of times I've been 500ft AGL or higher, pursuing some aircraft that's equipped with bombs, traililng somewhere around 2,000ft behind it, when all of a sudden...BOOM!....and I'm dead.  Straight from 100% to 0%.  No warning.  Turns out, that aircraft dropped a bomb, and the blast is what got me.  No, it didn't hit me from above - it hit me from below.  I know why the delay was implemented - it was so most GA players didn't kill themselves with the explosion.  However, the delay is SO long that most people are incredibly well-clear of the target when it goes off.  Or re-work the delay where it's 3 seconds OR impact, whichever is longer.

I'm sure there's more.  I'll post more when I think of them.

Dear Developers and Fellow Community Members,

 

After reading a lot of the 'nerf this' threads, and playing a little over 100 battles in the release version of World of Warplanes, I have several suggestions that I think would change the course of the game for the better. Please be aware that some of my suggestions may seem very complicated. This is because I (would like to think) understand a lot of the theories behind advanced air combat tactics, and I see where the game falls short in terms of allowing us to use these tactics effectively. Now, before you say 'World of Warplanes is supposed to be a sim-cade'... I want it to remain a 'sim-cade'. If I wanted to play a simulation, I would go play one of the DCS games. What I want from World of Warplanes is exactly what was advertised, a game that's easy to learn, but hard to master. Originally, it was advertised that this would be accomplished through simplifying advanced flight mechanics to the point where players tell their aircraft what to do, and it would manage all the systems for them. (We wouldn't have to adjust propeller pitch, fuel mixture, etc) According to this vision for the game, player skill should have much more impact than the 'Random Number Generator'.

 

So, with all that, let's get down to business.

 

---

 

How World of Warplanes Plays Now:

 

Currently, World of Warplanes plays like this... Player A decides to fly a heavily armed aircraft, which also happens to have the best climb rate at-tier. Player B wants to fly something with medium firepower, but lots of maneuverability. Player A right off the start uses his advantage in climb rate to move his gun platform approximately 1000 meters higher than Player B is able to climb. Right now, RNG (Random Number Generator) automatically gives Player A a massive advantage over Player B as gun damage from above is increased.

 

Altitude increases gun damage output.

 

This means, not only did Player A start with more firepower than Player B, he also started with the ability to climb higher, and thus grab that all-important firepower boost from RNG. Now, don't get me wrong, Player B still has the maneuverability advantage if Player A decides to try to engage in maneuvering combat. But let's say Player A is a smart player... He will never attempt maneuvering combat with Player B. He's going to use his speed and altitude advantage to avoid Player B's maneuvering advantage. This is how Player A should use his aircraft. This automatically puts Player B at the disadvantage as he has to play a defensive game. Air combat is about grabbing the offensive and keeping it. Traditionally this has been accomplished by gaining an altitude advantage on your opponent.

 

Why is the altitude advantage so important?

 

The altitude advantage is important for several reasons.

• Air combat is based on energy management (you'll see me refer to this as 'Energy Fighting'). A successful pilot balances his Kinetic (airspeed) Energy and Potential (altitude) Energy to manage his situation. 
• Having the altitude advantage gives you a potential energy advantage going into the combat.
• Having the altitude advantage means you get to initiate the combat at the time and place of your choosing. If you're below, you will lose a LOT of kinetic energy to gather potential energy. This leaves you vulnerable to a 'bounce' from the pilot with the energy advantage.
• Holding the altitude advantage means you will be able to perform any maneuver your opponent performs, while having more energy than he does. This gives you a very apparent advantage after the maneuver.

 

So, now that we know why the altitude advantage is so important, let's continue our discussion.

 

We now have Player A who has these advantages...

1. Altitude
2. Firepower
3. Airspeed
4. Durability

...and Player B who has these advantages...

1. Maneuverability

 

It is very obvious from this point who is going to win. Sadly, there are still several more things that Player A has in his favor...

• RNG - Altitude advantage = extra firepower
• RNG - Altitude advantage = extra accuracy

 

So, that is how the game currently plays. Let's get on to what's wrong with that, and then how to fix it.

 

---

 

So, you may say 'Player A worked to gain those advantages and should be rewarded'... However, I just have to say, Player A has a MUCH heavier aircraft (that's why it's called a heavy right? actually... not true, see the notes at the bottom please.) which means he should have a harder time gaining altitude. 'But he has two engines!' you object... While he does have two engines, you have to remember that not only are these engines carrying the added weight of themselves, they are also hauling a heavier airframe around, which means not only do they have to move the weight, they also have to account for the increased drag.

 

---

 

For a quick reference, let's compare the Bf.109 series to the Bf.110 series and Me.410 series.

 

Bf.109 Series:

• Cruise speed: 590 km/h (365 mph) at 6,000 m (19,680 ft)
• Maximum speed: 640 km/h (398 mph) at 6,300 m (20,669 ft)

 

Bf.110 Series:

• Maximum speed: 560 km/h (348 mph)

 

Me.410 Series:

• Maximum speed: 624 km/h (388 mph)

 

As you can see, the 109 is about 17 mph faster than the 110 and 10 mph faster than the 410. The 109, due to the power:weight ratio would be able to maintain this airspeed more easily in a climb than the 110 and 410 as well, which means the 109 should have a better rate of climb... Let's check the stats... (real life)

 

Bf.109 Series:

• Rate of climb: 17.0 m/s (3,345 ft/min)

 

Bf.110 Series:

• Rate of climb: 8 min to 6,000 m (20,000 ft) - That's a 12.5 m/s climb rate.

 

Me.410 Series

• Climb to 6,000 m (19,680 ft): 10.7 min - That's 9.35 m/s climb rate.

 

Yep, suspicions confirmed. So, we come to a very important fact... Heavy fighters can get altitude (service ceiling average of 33,900 ft) but it takes them a LONG time to get there. This is why heavy fighters were generally based further back than light fighters. It gave them more time to climb. Now, let's look at the service ceiling of the Bf.109... a light fighter. 39,370 feet... This is certainly contrasting with the current game mechanics. Light fighters should have a generally higher service ceiling than heavy fighters... 

 

     Here we are gentlemen. I've spent some time reading the forums and have been contacted by many an old timer to this game discussing the current scenario. For all the new and returning players to 2.0, do not feel alone. We understand your plight because we have been there so many times before. As many of you have conveyed to me, new and old, how could they go backwards. Gentlemen, they have always gone backwards, usually in the manner of three small steps up the stairs and then we all tumble down to the bottom.

     To the WG staff and developers, I would really like to understand the thought processes and decision making behind these changes. Being a former business owner and current educator, I simply can not grasp the reasoning and conclusions you made to institute these latest changes. 

     Now 2.0 has been out for nearly nine months, and many old and newer players in this time period have built a very solid game experience and skill to this game. These latest changes remind me so much of all the  numerous attempts in 1.xxxx to  " leveling the playing field." As we recounted before: three man flights removed, mm based on skill level leading to awful wait times, higher rated players getting novice bots versus lower rated players getting veteran bots. We can go on and on about all this, but why should we, it's in the past.

     The developers have never grasped a very simple concept that so many other gaming entities firmly understand. You will have players of many skill levels, therefore, you have to have different scenarios and game mechanisms that accommodate these players. Clan wars and high tier skirmish mode ( 5 on 5 with bonus xp and rewards ) would have given an outlet to your skilled player base. The only outlet they have ever had are player derived tournaments. Your current World of Warships title takes many of these facts into consideration and developed a game with co-op battles, random battles, special operations, ranked battles, and clan battles. 

     I leave you some advice. Several years ago, we were working with Mercedes Truck in Europe. When they received bids on supplied parts, I never saw or heard of them accepting the lowest bid. One day I asked one of purchasing managers about this. He said all suppliers are stringently reviewed by engineering and operations, and the lowest bids are usually determined to be a significant risk to quality and production. They wanted their customers to get the best possible parts in their vehicle because in their analysis the biggest reason customers returned to Mercedes Truck for a purchase was their trouble free experience they had previously. Take it for what it is worth, but there is solid advice and wisdom in that rationale.

Thilix

Tired of getting trolled, somebody is +1 all of my posts, whoever it is please stop. This is getting to be a serious problem, not all of my posts deserve a +1, a few of them deserve -10.                                                           (

Thank you,                                                                                                                             (if you can read this give me a +1)

your favorite bro.

(P.S. sorry for my rant and I know this will get locked soon. I'm just really tired of getting a +1 when I know for a fact I do not deserve it, but somebody has the audacity to go around this wonderful NA that we have and +1 all of my posts.)

I hope no ones offended by this as it's taken from the movie Downfall.

If so I will delete it.

http://youtu.be/NUYUgfPHZ-4

Hello denizens of the forums!

 

Today I'd like to discuss gun convergence vs gun dispersion, and the effects we'd see in-game. First, I'll talk a little about gun dispersion, which we currently see in-game, and then I'll talk about gun convergence which is the way it was IRL. 

 

Gun Dispersion:

Currently we see gun dispersion in-game. Gun dispersion is based on a gaussian dispersion which means your bullets fan out in a 'cone' pattern starting from the moment they leave your guns. This effectively gives you a 'shotgun' effect at mid to long distances.

 

Pros:

Gives players with a little less aiming ability a greater chance of dealing damage over time at longer ranges.

 

Cons:

Results in skill playing less of a role in aiming.

Reduces the effect of maneuvering to avoid gun solutions.

 

Neutral:

Guns are effective from 0m to maximum range.

 

 

Gun Convergence:

Gun convergence is the standard method used to achieve a usable weapons platform for aircraft with wing-mounted weapons. Pilots would find a range at which they liked to open fire, and have their ground crews push the guns in or out to make all of the weapons 'converge' at a certain point for a fixed difference. This gives the weapons a 'triangle' firing pattern at ranges closer than the convergence distance, and an inverted triangle at ranges further than the convergence distance.

 

Pros:

More player customization. Players should be able to set their weapon convergence range to suit their play style.

Weapons are not as effective at ranges greater than convergence.

The  'flat' weapon spread makes evasive maneuvering more viable as bullets will not have any up/down scatter.

Pilots who learn to use their convergence range to their advantage will be able to use their weapons more effectively if they maintain the correct range.

Pilots who pay attention to their opponent's convergence ranges will be able to take better evasive action. (using range as well as maneuvers to avoid an opponent. If you get out of the convergence range, the opponent can only hit you with 1 wing's worth of guns.)

Rewards players for learning a skill in-game.

 

Cons:

This system is a little more complex for the beginner. Nothing a quick 'flight school' episode can't handle though.

Makes aiming equipment irrelevant for wing-mounted weaponry.

 

 

My Suggestion:

Add gun convergence to aircraft with wing mounted weapons. Make it user-customizable. Get rid of dispersion for wing-mounted weapons. Keep dispersion for nose-mounted weapons, but change it to a normal distribution and make the cone a lot smaller. 

 

 

Cheers!
Glenn

Herr_Oberst_Nu

Hello Pilots! 

 

It is with a heavy heart that I announce I will be leaving Wargaming and Admin of this community this Friday.

 

I began working at Wargaming in April 2013, and quickly fell in love with WoWP. In the beginning, I was in Customer Support, then I was the CS WoWP Specialist, and then community.

It has been a fun and crazy ride with Wargaming (especially WoWP) throughout the years, and I will miss you all. 

 

I am Ghostprime in other titles too, and I have a Youtube channel where I review Transformers figures if anyone wants to stop by and say hi. 

https://www.youtube....7SJfEQYDRlMZqJw

 

Until we meet again.

 

o7

 

Through the gaps in the roof War Gaming won't repair,Through cracks in the walls they pretended weren’t there.

 

The trolls have come creeping while the Mod's were all sleeping.

 

Trolls in their chair, trolls in their bed, Is anything worse than troll's in our head?

 

I find it a crime Mod's don't have the time, Nothing but minuses and "soon" proclaimed promises.

 

Many of us think your forums stink.

 

GhostPrime says hold tight, all will turn out alright.

 

We've heard it before and this I deplore.

 

Our community is in despair, get with the program, make a repair.

 

I was drawn so welcoming and warm, I never guessed it would harm.

 

A spark will softly glow, but fed by fuel, it will grow.

 

With that glow comes hope, in the forums we emote.

 

But by the cold of night came shadow's so tall, updates so bad we can't tear down that wall.

 

By midnight’s hour our fire is dead! Our mere ashes will smolder instead.

 

Call me insensitive, I can see that's true. Can you see WG, It's because of you.

 

If we agree, and you know it's true, it's not about me, it's about YOU.

 

Compassion and feelings will spring from me, if you will realize you are not guilt free.

 

If you can understand , this is all about you, not about me.

 

To thine own self be true, it's all about choices you see. Our choices are about us, and certainly not about you, you see.

 

Make your choices spring from our desires, Or watch as we build War Plane's funeral pyres.

 

We have the funds, the money is ours.

 

You want the funds, but your game sours.

 

So when free or forced to make your choices, you’ll understand and know it’s true.To decide what will or will not be, It won’t be at all about me, It will be all about you.

 

What matters isn’t me, while these moments may be few, they’re not about me, not about you.

 

This time WG, it’s all about “We.”

 

 

Vix

DrSinister's Mod Pak Installer v1.11.0

Ready for Patch 1.9.11.0

 

***This mod pak is discontinued***

 

Goto WoWp 2.0 Mod Pak thread

 

 

Auto Installer v 1.11.0

(This link goes to an external site now).

 

For this version of my Auto Installer:

1.  There is no "click/hover of item in list to see full details of the mod," you will have to reference the screenshots/videos on Post 1 of this thread. This will come at a later time (if I can figure it out).

 

To Install:

1. Download the Auto Installer above.

2. Follow the instructions within the Installer.

 

To Uninstall:

1.  An uninstaller for my Auto Installer gets placed into the root directory for WoWp (C:\Games\World_of_Warplanes folder is default).  Do not click on the Uninstaller that has the WoWp logo, that is for WoWp.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Clear Wargaming Cache .Bat file

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------