Jump to content


For an Open Test This is a Mess

buggy az client

  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

ArrowZ_ #1 Posted 18 September 2017 - 06:48 AM

    Captain

  • Open Beta Tester
  • 1049 battles
  • 3,274
  • Member since:
    08-04-2013

I mean don't get me wrong. The graphics looks great! An improvement from 1.9. But that's really all that is good about 2.0. Everything else.... WOW

 

Ill start with this. If you're going to do an OPEN TEST, I would have done it in a way where people can test out almost everything if not all the content 2.0 has to offer on the first day. That means all the tech trees unlocked with the currency to purchase and fly them. OR better yet just follow the old CT format of uber high silver and research exp rates where most people can just grind all the lines up to Tier X with no exp or silver walls. Not activate a tier by the the actual days WITH THE SAME OFFICIAL SERVER RATES!!!11!?... who made that crap up? And why did he/they think this was a bright idea? Judging by the participation of the open test you're looking at a sub 30+ prime time and as low as 10 on off peak. Could be more, could be less. Can't tell due to my time zone since this is an east coast server. Limiting the experimentation of planes on the FIRST DAY of open test was a very poor decision and on top of the s&*@storm that all 3 regions have created in negative feedbacks about this new mode just adds to the overall mess of this general public testing. Not to mention the blatantly obvious bugs! Did they do nothing during the closed testing phase?

 

TL'DR = Very. Badly. Managed. Open. Testing.

 

I'm going to leave this open and post my general feedback below and add more later due to the convolution that is presented in this 2.0 common test. I'll start with the basics I guess:

 

Graphics:

 

Great. Enough said. Although I can't help but notice they're putting alot of resources into the presentation of the game and how the new mode looks I wonder if this fascination got in the way of polishing the actualy 2.0 game mode core mechanics...?

 

Sound:

 

Honeslty, the amount of times aircraft sounds, gun sounds, ambience, environment sounds gets changed per X.0 client patch I've become numb to the changes I almost notice no difference. But glad to know they wasted their time with this too!

 

Optimization:

 

From the majority of feedbacks I've read about FPS and max graphics settings (HD) with 2.0, most people have experienced higher FPS than the previous client which is GREAT! This is then a step in the right direction to the 5 year long plague that has affected this game with choppy, fluctuating FPS. But sadly for me, and could possibly be just my dated 980m GPU, I don't receive the same benefits as most have had in this new mode. I can safely say I average around 40-50 fps with dips around 25-30 in mass furballs of up to 10-12 planes in the vicinity. Could just be me. Who knows. But it is still playable.

 

Conquest Mode UI (Ingame):

 

Sucks b&*$#@*(%&#$@*(%$#. You screwed this one up and have no reason to show for it. Considering the amount of testing phases 2.0 has already went through. Major QOL changes to the 2.0 UI could have been addressed & ironed out by the time Open Test was made public. But no. Glad this flew right over your heads. GL trying to release 2.0 with the current craptastic UI. 

 

Hangar Optimization:

 

What happened to the hangar load times and planes switching much faster bugfix in pre 1.9 client? Was it accidentally thrown into the recycling bin?

 

2.0 Conquest Mode:

 

I'm going to have to break this down in sub parts and play abit more to get a good grasp of what the actual F they want from this new mode. As far as im concerned I can still win an entire match just by killing a gazillion bots and the 1 occasional player 2-3 times and the match is over. Seems to be the most effective way to earn points which in turn converts to exp & silvers. This whole trying to play by the mode and capturing points with reloading ordinances doesn't do jack squat. Atleast as far as I can tell I haven't found a gameplay style that makes bombers with insane ordnances turn the tides of the match in a HUGE way, without having to kill any planes. Or even GAs just strafing GTs. From what I've seen just like the old mode GAs are still just as useless as they are down low getting gangbanged by TnB bottards. The only real aircraft roles to play are HFs, MRFs and Fighters. But ill reserve my final feedback for this later.

 

 

More to come........

 

Sigh.

 


Edited by ArrowZ_, 18 September 2017 - 07:05 AM.

That Ozi Client Side Lagger


Lt_Haruhi_Suzumiya #2 Posted 18 September 2017 - 06:55 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 1271 battles
  • 159
  • Member since:
    01-30-2013

Warplanes always does, Comrade.
They mess the game as OBT, 0.5.3->1.0  or  day when NDA has been lifted and going open beta of original game..

 

I didn't surprised..


I guess, This pilot is worst teammate when you are on match, *Facepalm

 

Former 2.0 stat.
7155 matches,  53.12% win rate, Hall of fame 772.

Member Title : Senior Master Sergeant


Steel_bomber_ #3 Posted 18 September 2017 - 08:28 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 1,519
  • [S-S-G] S-S-G
  • Member since:
    12-28-2013

I hope for you they will read your feedback.

I would be surprised if we would see any feedback from WG on the forum. 


THIS PAGE
INTENTIONALLY
LEFT
BLANK
     
 
            

gerr22 #4 Posted 18 September 2017 - 11:32 AM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 4987 battles
  • 598
  • [S-S-G] S-S-G
  • Member since:
    12-27-2013
mine says unable to handle application files contact support 4 days i have given up

pyantoryng #5 Posted 18 September 2017 - 12:57 PM

    Colonel

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 2236 battles
  • 8,456
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012
It is clear that nobody wanted this junk, because nobody are willing to test it...

WoWP makes a great jousting game...especially with the 262 and people busy in furballs...
I am deaf, silent, and fly with unrealistic controls. Do not count on me to carry - my back's already broken from overweight.

BrushWolf #6 Posted 18 September 2017 - 02:47 PM

    Major

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 80 battles
  • 5,907
  • [GWG] GWG
  • Member since:
    06-11-2012
This is really an alpha product which considering how long they have been working on this is disappointing. When I got into the WoWS alpha it was far more polished with graphics needing work and not the base of the game play.

I used to have a handle on life until it broke off.

                             

 

“The church is near but the road is icy, the tavern is far away but I will walk carefully”

Russian Proverb

 


GhostPrime #7 Posted 18 September 2017 - 08:54 PM

    Community Specialist

  • Member
  • 64 battles
  • 2,278
  • [WGA-B] WGA-B
  • Member since:
    04-22-2013

View PostArrowZ_, on 17 September 2017 - 10:48 PM, said:

I mean don't get me wrong. The graphics looks great! An improvement from 1.9. But that's really all that is good about 2.0. Everything else.... WOW

 

Ill start with this. If you're going to do an OPEN TEST, I would have done it in a way where people can test out almost everything if not all the content 2.0 has to offer on the first day. That means all the tech trees unlocked with the currency to purchase and fly them. OR better yet just follow the old CT format of uber high silver and research exp rates where most people can just grind all the lines up to Tier X with no exp or silver walls. Not activate a tier by the the actual days WITH THE SAME OFFICIAL SERVER RATES!!!11!?... who made that crap up? And why did he/they think this was a bright idea? Judging by the participation of the open test you're looking at a sub 30+ prime time and as low as 10 on off peak. Could be more, could be less. Can't tell due to my time zone since this is an east coast server. Limiting the experimentation of planes on the FIRST DAY of open test was a very poor decision and on top of the s&*@storm that all 3 regions have created in negative feedbacks about this new mode just adds to the overall mess of this general public testing. Not to mention the blatantly obvious bugs! Did they do nothing during the closed testing phase?

 

TL'DR = Very. Badly. Managed. Open. Testing.

 

I'm going to leave this open and post my general feedback below and add more later due to the convolution that is presented in this 2.0 common test. I'll start with the basics I guess:

 

Graphics:

 

Great. Enough said. Although I can't help but notice they're putting alot of resources into the presentation of the game and how the new mode looks I wonder if this fascination got in the way of polishing the actualy 2.0 game mode core mechanics...?

 

Sound:

 

Honeslty, the amount of times aircraft sounds, gun sounds, ambience, environment sounds gets changed per X.0 client patch I've become numb to the changes I almost notice no difference. But glad to know they wasted their time with this too!

 

Optimization:

 

From the majority of feedbacks I've read about FPS and max graphics settings (HD) with 2.0, most people have experienced higher FPS than the previous client which is GREAT! This is then a step in the right direction to the 5 year long plague that has affected this game with choppy, fluctuating FPS. But sadly for me, and could possibly be just my dated 980m GPU, I don't receive the same benefits as most have had in this new mode. I can safely say I average around 40-50 fps with dips around 25-30 in mass furballs of up to 10-12 planes in the vicinity. Could just be me. Who knows. But it is still playable.

 

Conquest Mode UI (Ingame):

 

Sucks b&*$#@*(%&#$@*(%$#. You screwed this one up and have no reason to show for it. Considering the amount of testing phases 2.0 has already went through. Major QOL changes to the 2.0 UI could have been addressed & ironed out by the time Open Test was made public. But no. Glad this flew right over your heads. GL trying to release 2.0 with the current craptastic UI. 

 

Do you have anything specific as to what it is about it you do not like? Do you have suggestions on how it could be improved?

 

Hangar Optimization:

 

What happened to the hangar load times and planes switching much faster bugfix in pre 1.9 client? Was it accidentally thrown into the recycling bin?

 

2.0 Conquest Mode:

 

I'm going to have to break this down in sub parts and play abit more to get a good grasp of what the actual F they want from this new mode. As far as im concerned I can still win an entire match just by killing a gazillion bots and the 1 occasional player 2-3 times and the match is over. Seems to be the most effective way to earn points which in turn converts to exp & silvers. This whole trying to play by the mode and capturing points with reloading ordinances doesn't do jack squat. Atleast as far as I can tell I haven't found a gameplay style that makes bombers with insane ordnances turn the tides of the match in a HUGE way, without having to kill any planes. Or even GAs just strafing GTs. From what I've seen just like the old mode GAs are still just as useless as they are down low getting gangbanged by TnB bottards. The only real aircraft roles to play are HFs, MRFs and Fighters. But ill reserve my final feedback for this later.

 

I'm interested in your feedback. 

More to come........

 

Sigh.

 

 



Please read the WOWP Game and Forum rules.
Forum Rules - Game Rules - EULA - TOS
Find us on Facebook!


mnbv_fockewulfe #8 Posted 18 September 2017 - 09:23 PM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 653 battles
  • 3,511
  • [3NIC] 3NIC
  • Member since:
    12-06-2013
  • The gun overheat is at the bottom left of the screen, making it hard to look at.
  • The lack of a target window, which removes the quick reference of the stats comparison and reduces situational awareness of joystick pilots. 
  • Lack of team panels removes my ability to quickly asses the state of the enemy and friendly teams and removes a quick reference to the number of kills or points scored I have.
  • All useful info has to be revealed by by pressing the left alt key
  • The mini map is lacking in detail of the topography of the map and the terrain making it hard to tell where you are
  •  Bombers and defence aircraft have the same markers, making them hard to distinguish
  • The kill notification is on the side of the screen so I have no idea if I got the kill or not and how many points it's worth
  • I'm sure there is more others would like to add but this is a start 

 


Be sure to check your logic privileges before posting on the forum.

 


 


ArrowZ_ #9 Posted 18 September 2017 - 11:27 PM

    Captain

  • Open Beta Tester
  • 1049 battles
  • 3,274
  • Member since:
    08-04-2013

^ That list is a good start. I'll add the removal of the speed and altitude slides (red, bright green, dark green bands) on 2.0 which is currently in standard mode. I'll give them this, there is definitely less clutter around the hud abling you to see more of the "scenery" around the screen. But that's not what 2.0 is about - looking at pretty graphics.... Or is it? You can't really tell with persha tbh.

 

Another underlying issue I've just noticed is the texts are ridiculously small, especially these timers (locked cap after successful capping, missile attacks, squal lines, bombing squad attacks). Half the time I have no idea what's going on in a specific cap area whether we capped it or not or the enemy team did more cap points than we do etc. Basically if you kill more "local" planes = you cap faster. Constantly having to look up the screen just to see how much points you've accumulated just for that one specific cap is becoming more of a chore than the previous mode where we were only concerned about looking at who's got the more superiority points. Spending less time looking at the map and looking at the top of the screen of who's got more points is a bad direction to go for this mode. This is why Hud customizations SHOULD have been FULLY enabled in the settings tab. Why it's disabled - ask persha.

 

@Ghostprime. I'll have to play more of 2.0 to see the different type of maps as it is different for each one and from what I have seen on the tutorial map selection, it gets more complex the higher tiers you go. This is why i'm irratated by the decision to limit the available aircraft to test especially with crap rates. I dont even know how long this testing is going to last (7 days?). Do we even have enough time to test up to t10 before then? I might just put my conquest feedback in the appropriate section that is already made. Thx for taking the time to reply tho.


That Ozi Client Side Lagger


GhostPrime #10 Posted 18 September 2017 - 11:37 PM

    Community Specialist

  • Member
  • 64 battles
  • 2,278
  • [WGA-B] WGA-B
  • Member since:
    04-22-2013

Thanks for the expanded feedback, it really helps. I'll make sure that these points get brought up to the dev team. What do you think of how the battles themselves work? Do you like the capture areas, and that they can change the outcome of battles? 



Please read the WOWP Game and Forum rules.
Forum Rules - Game Rules - EULA - TOS
Find us on Facebook!


ArrowZ_ #11 Posted 18 September 2017 - 11:44 PM

    Captain

  • Open Beta Tester
  • 1049 battles
  • 3,274
  • Member since:
    08-04-2013

I'm having trouble posting these silly images. But what is this? Our Hud custom settings? The russian text doesn't help...

 

https://imgur.com/Mb17TvL

https://imgur.com/yF6iit5

 

 


Edited by ArrowZ_, 18 September 2017 - 11:45 PM.

That Ozi Client Side Lagger


GouIdy #12 Posted 19 September 2017 - 12:41 AM

    First Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 6 battles
  • 2,628
  • Member since:
    11-18-2013

View PostArrowZ_, on 18 September 2017 - 07:44 PM, said:

I'm having trouble posting these silly images.

 

 

 

Ya the forum doesn't seem to like secure links anymore so just drop the "s" from the "https" links. Or you can just copy & paste the imgur image itself into your reply.

 

 

 

 


Edited by GouIdy, 19 September 2017 - 12:45 AM.


MARS_REVENANT #13 Posted 19 September 2017 - 01:21 AM

    Colonel

  • Community Ace
  • 5721 battles
  • 9,486
  • [WG-CA] WG-CA
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostGouIdy, on 18 September 2017 - 07:41 PM, said:

 

Ya the forum doesn't seem to like secure links anymore so just drop the "s" from the "https" links. Or you can just copy & paste the imgur image itself into your reply.

 

 

 

Now even using Copy Image Pasta, I still get the error saying I used a bad link.... have to edit it to remove the 's' out of https.


1.9.x Forum Stats: Colonel; Member; 34638 battles; 7,526 message_img.pngMember since: 11-03-2014

I never lose; either I win or I learn.

TWITCH  |  YOUTUBE  |  FACEBOOK  |  TWITTER


ArrowZ_ #14 Posted 19 September 2017 - 02:08 AM

    Captain

  • Open Beta Tester
  • 1049 battles
  • 3,274
  • Member since:
    08-04-2013

View PostGhostPrime, on 19 September 2017 - 09:07 AM, said:

What do you think of how the battles themselves work? Do you like the capture areas, and that they can change the outcome of battles? 

 

I'll let someone else give feedback on this. But generally from what I've seen most battles end result is whoever racks up the most "thunder" points will win most battles due to the amount of kills disabling the enemy team from more respawns as they eventually run out. As for capturing specific circled areas, depending on the type (factory, missile facility, airfield?), capping the right one will definitely play a big factor in how quickly you can rack up the points. I guess this is where GA's and Bombers play into affect in attacking the ground targets of uncapped areas giving the team a headstart down low with the "local" air forces. But right now, just like with the old standard mode, air kills generate more points/quicker cap times. The quicker you can cap, the quicker enemy/local AA stops doing damage to your aircraft, which in 2.0 they hit HARD. Doesn't take long to go down from AA if left unnoticed. 

 

On the topic of acquiring a cap with the 30sec lock timer. I'm not sure if this is enough to make an impact of increased accumulation of points on the top bar, considering how quickly a few planes can recap an enemy area in less than 1min. With teamwork and flight coordination and comms in mind, this can easily be achievable and can cause upset in point distribution and possible "hogging" or cap spawn camping. This will become more clear the more we play I guess... But judging by how so many of us are very displeased by even the sight of 2.0 i doubt anyone is willing to put the time and effort into this new mode.

 

I tried a few times to solo an uncapped area against all the local forces. While it can be done with diminishing returns it just ain't supportive for your team. Not to mention being far away from your capped areas where you can regenerate health (i think only airfields provide this?). Better to stay grouped with the mass and move from one cap to another or defend and existing one to maintain high accumulating points. The way I see it GA's & Bombers are supportive roles and they don't really make a big impact on the match. It's the other categories: HF, MRF, Fighters that do the real damage. But more on that later on the conquest section. I'll leave it at that.


Edited by ArrowZ_, 19 September 2017 - 03:36 AM.

That Ozi Client Side Lagger


GouIdy #15 Posted 19 September 2017 - 02:57 AM

    First Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 6 battles
  • 2,628
  • Member since:
    11-18-2013

View PostMARS_REVENANT, on 18 September 2017 - 09:21 PM, said:

 

Now even using Copy Image Pasta, I still get the error saying I used a bad link.... have to edit it to remove the 's' out of https.

 

Well I used copy pasta for Arrow's 2 pics, worked just fine.

MARS_REVENANT #16 Posted 19 September 2017 - 03:02 AM

    Colonel

  • Community Ace
  • 5721 battles
  • 9,486
  • [WG-CA] WG-CA
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostGouIdy, on 18 September 2017 - 09:57 PM, said:

 

Well I used copy pasta for Arrow's 2 pics, worked just fine.

 

Whata browsera?

 


1.9.x Forum Stats: Colonel; Member; 34638 battles; 7,526 message_img.pngMember since: 11-03-2014

I never lose; either I win or I learn.

TWITCH  |  YOUTUBE  |  FACEBOOK  |  TWITTER


ArrowZ_ #17 Posted 19 September 2017 - 03:33 AM

    Captain

  • Open Beta Tester
  • 1049 battles
  • 3,274
  • Member since:
    08-04-2013

View Postgerr22, on 18 September 2017 - 09:02 PM, said:

mine says unable to handle application files contact support 4 days i have given up

 

I would guess it's a launcher issue. Chat with GP for a fix.

That Ozi Client Side Lagger


Tapeworm12 #18 Posted 19 September 2017 - 10:57 AM

    Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 4 battles
  • 32
  • Member since:
    03-06-2016

View PostGhostPrime, on 18 September 2017 - 11:37 PM, said:

Thanks for the expanded feedback, it really helps. I'll make sure that these points get brought up to the dev team. What do you think of how the battles themselves work? Do you like the capture areas, and that they can change the outcome of battles? 

 

Ghost Prime,

 

With all respect, 2.0 is a pointless game with a lot of meaningless bells and whistles (numerous medals, fake looking exploding planes, etc.). 

 

The existing game has a simple and engaging formula, kill or be killed. I feel that this is what most players find appealing.

 

If they feel they need to make this sort of change to the game why not simply add a base to the existing game/maps that needs to be taken/held?

 

It is clearly a winning formula in World of Tanks.

 

Additionally, why are they reinventing the wheel when they have already invented it?

 

The existing game is fine in terms of graphics, flight mechanics, etc.

 

2.0 is a major step backwards.

 

 

 

 

 


Edited by Flight_Officer, 19 September 2017 - 11:28 AM.


GouIdy #19 Posted 19 September 2017 - 11:39 AM

    First Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 6 battles
  • 2,628
  • Member since:
    11-18-2013

View PostMARS_REVENANT, on 18 September 2017 - 11:02 PM, said:

 

Whata browsera?

 

 

furfoxy

Shizzywiznut #20 Posted 19 September 2017 - 12:26 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 9322 battles
  • 206
  • Member since:
    07-08-2014

View Postmnbv_fockewulfe, on 18 September 2017 - 04:23 PM, said:

  • The gun overheat is at the bottom left of the screen, making it hard to look at.
  • The lack of a target window, which removes the quick reference of the stats comparison and reduces situational awareness of joystick pilots. 
  • Lack of team panels removes my ability to quickly asses the state of the enemy and friendly teams and removes a quick reference to the number of kills or points scored I have.
  • All useful info has to be revealed by by pressing the left alt key
  • The mini map is lacking in detail of the topography of the map and the terrain making it hard to tell where you are
  •  Bombers and defence aircraft have the same markers, making them hard to distinguish
  • The kill notification is on the side of the screen so I have no idea if I got the kill or not and how many points it's worth
  • I'm sure there is more others would like to add but this is a start 

 

 

Just a couple of thing to note:

The gun overheat is visible with the reticule, it changes color as guns overheat

The planes with same markers, markers become more visible as you get closer to the plane...

Hope this helps 







Also tagged with buggy, az, client

2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users