[最新消息]Sub_Octavian Reddit QA #15

2017-08-13 10:42:21 神评论

17173 新闻导语

战舰世界[最新消息]Sub_Octavian Reddit QA #15

Q: Where is the carrier rework that was promised before "any more premium carriers"? We've gotten Kaga, Enterprise, and Graf Zeppelin is just around the corner.

A: I really doubt there was a promise not to release carriers before rework.

The point was we were not concentrating on new carriers because there were some major issues with them as a whole. This includes: UI problems, in-class balance problems, lack of tutorial/learning curve problems. These things, along with others, lead us to very global and serious question "Are we sure that existing CV/AA concept should be just tuned and tweaked or we need a global overhaul? And if yes, should we try to introduce it in a couple of big updates or to make it gradual?".

For now, we fixed the major part of existing UI problems, which was the main blocker for releasing new CV content. USN/IJN balancing is WIP, and can be expected within several updates. Tutorials are being worked on, however, simpler stuff like movement and basic gameplay should be done first. As for global rework, this is a tricky one. Any major rework will be a stress for old players, so if we are going this way, we must be absolutely sure it is for good. Now, we don't have any concept that we like THAT better, than the existing one, but we keep thinking about it. And in the meantime, we aim to make various smaller quality changes to the existing CV mechanics, in evolutionary, not revolutionary way.

Q:你们以前还保证过在CV修改完成之前不会有“任何的金币CV放出”。结果现在你们已经出了Kaga,Enterprise和Graf Zeppelin这些船。A:我真的不觉得我们那么说过。现在我们关注的并不是新的CV,因为目前所有的CV都存在着一些相同的问题。其中包括:UI的问题,同等级之间的平衡,缺乏教程导致的玩家水平不一。这些以及其他的一些问题将我们引向了一个十分严肃且十分重要的问题:现在的CV和防空设定是应该调整修改还是应该彻底重做。如果是,那我们是应该逐步修改还是应该一步到位?现在,我们已经修复了UI的问题,为我们推出新的改动打开了大门,日航和美航的平衡正在做,预计将于最近几次更新中实装。教程也正在做,但是那些简单的东西,比如说移动或者简单的游戏操作当然应该先做好。至于大的改动,这个就比较复杂了。大的改动肯定会让老玩家感到紧张,所以我们如果要那么做,我们就必须确定这是绝对可行的。现在,我们也不觉得我们觉得那个更好,但我们会一直关注这个问题。同时,我们追求的是以渐变的而不是颠覆性的方式对目前的CV机制作出大量的但是细微的调整。

Q: There were a number if glaring balance problems since last year, mostly about how USN was terrible when compared to IJN due to inflexibility and inconsistency vs key targets like DDs.

Instead, we got ammo buffs... which did not help much when it truly came to winning (it primarily benefited good players when whacking enemy planes since the "less skillful playerbase" normally lost his fighters before using even half the ammo)

A: Well, lack of flexibility is the exact main target for upcoming USN CVs changes.

Q:从去年开始就有很多非常突出的问题,绝大多数都是关于美航的。相比于日航,美航在面对DD这样的关键目标时缺乏灵活性以及一致性。我们也得到过弹药量上的buff,然而这对取得胜利用处也不大(这只帮助了那些玩得好的人打下对面更多的飞机,对有些人来说他们的飞机在打掉一半弹药前就没了)

A:缺乏灵活性这个就是我们接下来修改美航的重点

Q: What determines the krupp value for AP shells? Also, why do British BB's have such low krupp values? ThanksA: Roughly speaking, Krupp value is used in our ballistics model to have the desired armor penetration value for different shells on different distances. And the "desired penetration value" here is the value that is as close to IRL as possible, because this is one of the game aspects we seek to keep realistic. So, this is just a tool for achieving needed shell performance.

Q:什么决定了AP弹的krupp值(弹头硬度)?另外,为什么英国战列的弹头硬度这么低?感谢回答。

A:大致上来讲,我们在***模型中用弹头硬度来计算得到炮弹在不同距离上的穿深数据。并且这个所求得的穿深数据应和实际穿深数据尽可能接近,因为在游戏这方面我们希望尽力保持真实。所以这只是为了让炮弹达到所需弹道性能的一个工具而已。

Q: For your new development blog how much information are you planning on giving with it? Will it be showing only changes for the next patch, or will it be further down the line (like 2-3 or even 5)?

A:I plan to talk about the changes starting from ST phase. Commenting on more distant things does not makes sense, as too many changes can be done even before ST.

Q:在你下一次的开发者博客上,你打算公布多少新的消息?是仅仅展示下次更新的改动,还是会包括之后的一些东西(比如将来2-3次甚至5次更新)?

A:我打算只讨论从超测阶段开始的改动。评论更加遥远的事情没有意义,因为太多东西会在超测前作出改动。

Q: Hi Sub, thanks for taking the time to do this. I'm not sure if this has been officially confirmed anywhere, but can you say whether or not theConquerorwill have the option of both the 419's and 457's?

Bonus if I may: Will theVanguardbe a future premium?

A:We know about some players who want to have 4x2 457 option, and we will consider it.

Bonus: it is a possible option for the future. Thank you for your question.

Q:你好Sub,感谢你在百忙之中抽出时间来回答我的问题。我不确定这个问题是否已经得到官方证实,但能否请你说明征服者是否会同时拥有419mm和457mm两种火炮配置。

Bonus:Van♂guard(前卫)以后会不会作为金币船出现

A:我们知道有些玩家想要4座双联装457mm主炮的选项,并且我们会考虑。

Bonus:它可能在将来成为一个选项。感谢提问。

Q: When using the catapult spotter plane, is the shell trajectory any different from the normal view?A: No, it only naturally differs when you are firing at longer range, no special tweaks are applied to it.

Q:在使用水上侦察机时,炮弹轨迹会和通常视角下有什么不同吗?A:并不会。只是当水侦作用下你在更远的射程上开炮时,炮弹轨迹会自然地有所不同,但并没有被特别调整过。

Q: I thought Scharnhorst put paid to the idea that a BB couldn't be balanced and fun for it's tier with sub-tier firepower? If 9x11 inch works at T7 surely 10x14 inch can be soft statted to work at T8?A: Scharny has much more features than sub-tier firepower to be viable. I do not underestimate the playerbase, but I think if we designed the IJN branch from the start right now, with all past experience, Izumo would be different or wouldn't be there at all. It is a good, but very demanding ship. Thank you too:)

Q:我认为沙恩**特已经证明了,拥有较低级别火力的战列舰可以满足平衡性和娱乐性的要求?如果9门11英寸炮在7级船上行的通的话,那么显然10门14英寸炮在8级船上数据也能凑合?A:沙恩除了拥有较低的火力外,还有着许多其他的特性来让它具有可玩性。我并没有低估玩家群体的意思,但是我认为如果让我们根据过往的经验从头设计日本科技树的话,出云可能会被修改或者根本就不在科技树上。它是艘好船,但是对玩家的要求非常高。感谢提问。

Q:BBs are still massively over-represented in the MM and game line-ups. What are the plans to deal with this? Surely not adding another line of BBs and nerfing smoke? Is it WarGaming's belief that battleships are over-represented because the class is overpowered or because people just enjoy the power of commanding a battleship?

A:There are two questions here, actually: about BBs and about planned smoke changes. Let's take them separately.

High BB population has two main reasons:

1. Big and iconic ships. Not everyone wants to play big ships with big guns, but this really contributes.

2. High survival abilities with high firepower - due to IRL natural specs. Of course if we were making fantasy MMO, we would try to avoid combining high tankiness with high firepower, but hey, we cannot give BBs 127 mm main guns and call it balance - because World of Warships is heavily based on history. We also cannot make them as powerful as they were IRL and limit them in some other way (for example, economically), because the core concept is the interaction of 4 peer game classes with as few artificial MM limitations as possible. Hence the gameplay limitations we have in core design: average accuracy, very limited secondary guns, fire & flooding mechanics, etc, etc.

There are two main directions we are going to keep BB in line and to keep the balance healthy:

1. Paying more attention to other classes. If you go through patch notes history over a year, you will find quite a lot of DD and cruiser buffs, and quite few BB buffs. They were not always direct - for example, new commander skill system actually favoured BBs less, forcing them to spec and be less universal. As for direct buffs, many cruisers were made much more viable.

2. Adding more counters to BBs, especially to passively playing BBs. AP bombs are one of the first implemented weapons, and they have all chances to be introduced on more CVs: Enterprise is kind of testing ground here. We think they are good, because they a). make horizontal armor count more in the game and b). due to stretched ellipse are more efficient against more stationary targets. We have two more BB-specific counters in development, and some other ideas in concept stage. This path seems slow, but healthy and user-friendly, because it can not only contribute to class balance, but also contribute to game diversity and other classes gameplay.

BB population itself is stable, without any growth over last year. To address this question I double-checked the popularity data from August 2016 to this date, and I can say that BB population fluctuates around 35%, depending on server, tier and month. However, even 35% is a bit too high - in our mind, the ideal number is 30%.

Q:现在出现在分房排队里的BB还是很多,你们准备怎么做?肯定不会是加一条BB线同时再去削烟雾吧?你们觉得为什么会有这么多BB,是因为BB太强了还是因为大家只是喜欢控制BB的那种感觉?

A:这里其实有两个问题:关于BB的和关于烟雾改动的,我们分开来回答

BB的数量多主要有两个原因:

1.她们是大而且是具有象征性的船,虽然并不是所有人都想去玩大舰巨炮,但是这是一个很重要的原因。

2.高存活性和强大的火力—这些是基于现实的特点。当然我们在做的是一个大型多人在线游戏,所以我们也会尽量避免出现集厚装甲和强火力的情况,但是,我们也不能给BB127炮当主炮然后说这个叫平衡—因为WOWS这个游戏还是非常基于历史的。我们也不能让她们像现实中那样强然后在其他方面(比如说收益方面)限制她们,因为这游戏的核心理念还是在尽可能少的人为分房限制下四个舰种的作战。所以就有了我们设计的那些机制:比较中等的命中率,被限制的次要武器,起火和进水机制等。

我们保持BB数量和保证分房正常有以下两个方式:

对其他舰种的加强。如果你去看看过去一年的那些更新你就会发现很多的DD和CA的buff和很少的BB buff。这些也不是直接性的—比如说新的指挥官技能让BB的获益减少,使她们专精于某一方面。至于那些直接性的,很多CA现在变得更加适合环境了。

增加更多的对抗BB的武器,特别是对付那些消极作战的BB的武器。AP航弹就是最早被实装的一个武器,而且它们会被装到更多的CV上:Enterprise就是这种武器的一个试验场。我们觉得AP航弹不错,因为a).使水平装甲在游戏中发挥了更重要的作用 b).拉长的散布椭圆使它更适合对抗那些不怎么移动的目标。我们现在还有其他两种对付BB的东西在开发中,另外一些还在概念阶段。这个进程看起来缓慢但是对玩家比较友好,因为这不仅可以促进舰种之间的平衡,也可以保证游戏多样性和其他舰种的游戏体验。

BB的玩家数量是挺稳定的,去年一年没有什么增长。为了确认这个,我检查了两次从2016年8月到现在的BB玩家数。现在BB的人数在35%左右波动,具体会受到服务器,等级和具体月份影响。然而,就算是35%也还是有点高了,我们的理想人数是30%

Sub Q: This is all excellent, and thanks for the detailed reply!

One quick question though, if there are 4 equally important game classes, shouldn't the target population for any given one be 25%? Why target 30% for BBs?

A:By equal I don't mean equal by number, but equal by opportunities and quality of life. We don't expect and don't want 25% of players to be interested in CVs - they are like a game in a game thing for more strategy oriented guys. Cheers!

追问:相当好!感谢这么细致的回答

还有一个小问题,如果四个舰种都同样重要,那为什么不把每个舰种的目标人数都定在25%呢?为什么BB的要定为30%?

A:我说的平衡当然不是数字上的平衡,而是相同的机会和游戏体验。我们不期望也不想有25%的人去玩CV—她们更像是一个为喜爱策略的玩家设计的游戏中的游戏。

Q: Why does the Kagero (and Akatsuki, to a lesser degree) have so little gun range? Up-to-date balancing or a legacy setting from before the stealth fire nerf? Stock gun range progression through her line is as follows:

Fubuki: 10.5 km

Akatsuki: 9.4 km

Kagero: 8.6 km

Yugumo: 10.9 km

Shimakaze: 11.4 km

A:Because basic firing range is calculated by universal formula (with FCS specs in mind), and then altered only if really needed gameplay-wise. Here, it is not needed gameplay-wise. The same reason Fuso stands out in range.

Q:为什么Kagero(还有Akatsuki这样等级低一些的)的火炮射程那么近?这是最近的平衡设定还是在隐身炮移除之前就这样了。这些是这些船的白板射程数据

Fubuki: 10.5 km

Akatsuki: 9.4 km

Kagero: 8.6 km

Yugumo: 10.9 km

Shimakaze: 11.4 km

A:因为基础射程是通过一个通用的公式算出来的(考虑到各种情况的),然后在需要调整的时候才会进行调整。日驱的射程显然没什么问题。也是按照这个算法Fuso的射程才会那么突出。

Sub Q1: Thanks for that information. So both get the same value as if they are spotting alone?

A:Yes.

追问1:感谢你提供的信息。所以一起点亮时,两艘船都得到和单独点亮时相同的收益吗?

A:是的。

Sub Q 2: Does spotting bonus apply only when target is not visible to shooter? For example if enemy you are spotting fires its guns becoming directly detectable by the other ship shooting at it, the spotting bonus no longer applies?

A:Yes, if the shooter can see the target without your help, you don't get a bonus for the damage dealt in this state.

追问2:点亮收益是否是只在开火船只无法点亮目标时才存在?举个例子,如果敌军被点亮后直接开炮亮点,从而被其他开火射击的船只直接发现,点亮收益是否就不再适用了?

A:是的,如果攻击者能够靠自己直接发现目标,你在这种状况下得不到点亮伤害收益。

Q:Are you planning to introduce another premium Polish ship? Possibly Wicher-class destroyer?

A:Not in the near future, but hell, I would LOVE to play Wicher (and also Wicher-II: Assassin of Battleships and Wicher-III: Wild Torpedobeat).

Q:你们是否有计划加入另一艘波兰金币船?比如旋风级驱逐舰。

A:至少最近不会,但是,我乐意去玩旋风级(以及旋风2:战舰刺客和旋风3:狂雷)。(译者注:旋风wicher和巫师witcher谐音。)

Q:With the introduction of AP bombs on US CVs T7 and up, will the Saipan recieve them as well or not given the unique nature of the DB squadron?

A:Saipan, in our opinion, does not need any buffs or additional diversity.

Q:在7级及以上的美航获得AP航弹后,塞班是否也会获得AP航弹或者不再拥有独特的轰炸机中队配置?

A:在我们看来,塞班不需要被buff或增加额外的特性

支持键盘 ← 和 → 分页
17173.com发布此文仅为传递信息,不代表17173.com认同其观点或证实其描述。
日期
游戏
状态
下载
礼包

页游测试表

日期
游戏
状态
评分
礼包