Q: For smoke, why not give bb penalty of being spotted only while not affecting smoke and other ships?

A:Because BBs are not the only problem. Crowds and IFHE are problematic too. We considered what you suggest, and it won't work.

Q:对于烟雾，为什么不直接给BB在烟雾内开炮就会被发现的惩罚?这样也不会影响到烟和其他船。

A:因为BB不是唯一的问题。其他人和IFHE也是问题的一部分。我们也思考过你的方法，但是这没有用。

Q: Here's some idea for smoke: increase shell dispersion while firing from smoke, the higher the caliber the higher the dispersion

or just make smoke unable to hide a BB unless it is dead center or reveal BBs that fire, just don't disperse the smoke for other classes or give them that samemechanic

A: Dispersion debuffs won't prevent most players from camping in smoke. People tend to choose the safest way, in shooters they will camp with sniper rifle when the real need is to push, the same pattern is sitting in smoke. All this results in is more frustration. The same issue was with firing range a couple of years ago - some players asked us to leave the ability to constantly shoot at max ranges, just with bad dispersion, but in the end we cut the ranges and introduced spotter plane. There is no need to give people crap weapon, hoping they won't use it - they will, and blame you for it being crappy:) This is why I hope we will remove/rework Shima 20km torps eventually, and I strongly believe it will even buff her stats a bit.

We have the plan how to update the declined 1st version so it hits the goal without hurting those players/ships we don't want to hurt. We're implementing this plan right now, and I believe it has all chances to be final - but we'll see.

Other mechanics, including your proposal, were considered before and after 1st version tests - believe me, this idea is not rushed. For now, the initial mechanics is the best option, but with some meaningful tuning and tweaking.

Q:关于烟雾的一些问题：让在烟里开炮的炮弹散布变差，口径越大效果越明显。或者直接让烟雾藏不住BB，除非BB在烟雾的中心，也可以让开炮的BB直接亮。只是不要让烟雾被吹散或者给其他船相同的机制。

A:散布变差并不会使大多数玩家不蹲烟。人们总是会去选择最安全的方式。在拿枪的时候就算需要你冲上去那些人还是会端着狙击枪趴着，这种事放在战舰里面就是蹲烟。这样做只会让玩家觉得更糟糕。这和几年前的射程问题很像，有些玩家建议我们通过渣散布来阻止那种最远距离黑枪的行为，结果最后我们减少了射程并且加入了水侦。所以别指望给他们不好的武器他们就不会去用，他们只会继续用然后怪你武器太差。这就是我们为什么最后肯定要移除或者重置Shimakaze的20km雷，而且我非常相信这也许还会让她的数据好一些。

我们对如何修改第一版已经有了计划，这应该可以直击问题的根源同时不损害其他玩家利益。我们已经在将这个计划付诸行动。我也相信这次可以完成—但是还是得看看。其他的机制，包括你说的，我们在第一版的时候就已经思考过了，相信我，这个主意还没有被我们抛弃。现在来说，最开始的机制还是最好的选择，当然它需要一些有意义的修改和调整。

Q: Are there any changes for credits in Tier X matches? Just yesterday I had a game with 200k dmg in my G. Kurfurst and i still lost credits. I even run 20% cost reduction and increased credits flags. It's ridiculous that you lose so much credits without premium gear.

A: Playing on TX without premium time / premium camo is tough by design, and always was, but anyways, there were no changes that could really affect this, and all, even minor economy changes are added to patch notes.

I would say if you really think you are getting more normally, with the same conditions, check out other things. Absolute damage is not as important in rewards as relative damage, and there are also additional activities that have big importance, like capping and tanking. Not everything revolves around absolute damage, it's just one of the metrics that is nice to compare and boast, but it does not directly make your team win.

Cheers!

Q:我们在X级战斗中到底有没有机会赚钱?昨天我的大猴打了20W伤害结果还是亏钱，我还带了减维护费用和加银币的旗子。没有高账或者金币涂装会让你亏那么多真的很荒谬

A:在没有高账或者涂装的情况下玩X级本身就被设计的不容易。但是也没什么改动可以真正影响这个。那些小的经济上的改动也一样。我想说的是如果你经常碰到这种情况，你应该关注一下别的东西。绝对伤害并没有连带伤害的价值高，而且还有一些很重要的举动，比如说占点之类的。并不是所有东西都是围着绝对伤害转的。这只不过是个比较容易比较和拿来吹的数据而已，这东西并不会直接给你的队伍带来胜利。

Q: Then why not use Vanguard at T8 since every argument you've just used for Sharnhorst applies equally to her?

A:We have other plans for Vanguard:)

Q:为什么就不把Van♂guard放在8级呢?

A:我们对这艘船有别的计划(WG更衣室摔跤大赛冠军奖品?)

Q: Why don't fire directors get camo applied?A: Technical reasons. As you probably know, ship models consist of many misc objects (including directors) and camo is being applied semi-automatially, so, there are some tech limitations that prevent us from painting directors, including peformance issues. They can be solved by changing 3d content file structure, but right now, the priority is very low for that. Sorry for inconvenience.

Q:为什么火炮指挥仪上没有涂装?

A:技术原因。你可能知道，船只模型包括很多各种各样的物件(包括指挥仪)而涂装是被半自动地添加上去的。所以说一些技术上的限制会让我们没有办法给指挥仪加涂装，限制中也包括表现上的一些问题。这些问题可以通过改变3D模型来解决，然而这个的优先度非常低，对你造成的不便表示谅解。

最新消息，S_O在欧服论坛上确定将Nelson作为第二艘可以通过全局兑换的船，具体所需全局还没有确定，仍然在讨论中

Q: I still call BS on the “Nelson is too strange for regular players, so we make it a premium”.

WHY can’t you JUST make it as an alternative grind ? You did it on WoT for more than one tank (Ferdinand/JP2 is the best example, one is historical, the second is a prototype), that NEVER caused any issue. Just make it so that QE can grind both Nelson and KGV, and if that really is an issue for you, make Nelson 50k XP more expensive. Only players motivated by her would grind her, the other would get the KGV by default, and most players in this game go by the “default” option.

And why is having a different ship an issue anyway ? We already have Warspite and Hood as premium, Hood even already sitting in the tier 7 bracket. Now you want Nelson/Rodney as premium, and you’ll likely follow with Vanguard in tier 8 ? I really can’t call anything but BS at that. Or at least just admit you want money.

A: You may call whatever you want, that’s your right, however, now you are trying to invent a way to squeeze Nelson into the line, without listening to argument. You are ready to make accusations just to validate your point. That’s a way to nowhere.

I will say it one last time.

1.We don’t want to create another Izumo precedent and don’t want to create a pointless 1 ship sub-branch. Gameplay first.

2.Nelson is a fine ship, but won’t go good with general audience gameplay-wise, thus, the access to her will be limited in some way.

3.We are still discussing a way to release it. All community opinions on that were heard and we are truly taking them into consideration.

I know this is important topic for you guys, so I promise I or someone from the team will update you as soon as we have the final decision. This should happen just in a next few days, most likely, even tomorrow.

We’re on it, we know you care about this ship, and we will do our best to find a good solution.

Sorry for inconvenience, and see you very soon

Q:我现在还是认为什么“纳尔逊这艘船对普通玩家来说太奇怪了，所以我们把它做成金币船”是Bullshit

为什么你们就不能把它变成一个替代性的选择吗?你们已经在WOT里面这么做了不止一次了(Ferdinand/JP2就是最好的例子，一个是基于历史的，一个是原型计划)，这也从来没弄出什么问题来。直接这样做那么大家就能同时出纳尔逊和KGV，如果这对你来说还有问题，那就让纳尔逊的研发经验再多个5w，让那些想要这艘船的人才会去研发，其他人就会默认的去玩KGV。而且大多数玩家会去玩KGV。

而且为什么有一艘不同的船就会变成一个问题。我们已经有Warspite和Hood作为金币船了，而且Hood已经占了7级金币船的位置。现在你要把纳尔逊/罗德尼当成金币船，然后你接下来要把Vanguard放在8级。我真的不知道除了Bullshit外我还能叫它什么。要么直接承认你想要钱算了。

A:你想怎么说是你自己的事，这也是你的权利，但是你这样其实是在不顾争议将纳尔逊强行塞到这条线里。你的这些指责只不过是你在试图证明你的观点而已，这根本没有意义。

我最后再说一遍这个：

1.我们不想再弄出一艘Izumo来了，也不想弄出一条没有意义还只有一艘船的分线。游戏体验第一!

2.纳尔逊是艘还好的船，但是从游戏体验的角度来说要是绝大多数人都有肯定不会是件好事，所以获得这艘船必须要有一些限制。

3.我们还在讨论应该怎么放出这艘船，我们会考虑我们从社群论坛听到的意见

我知道这个对你们来说很重要，所以我保证我或者我团队的其他人会在作出决定以后马上通知你们，我们很可能在近几天就做出最后的决定，甚至是明天都有可能。我们已经在做了，我们知道你们很关注这艘船，我们会尽全力找到一个好的解决方案。对你的不便表示歉意。